Return to My Blog

Thursday, October 20, 2016

The Patricia Hearst Kidnapping (Part 4) / Camilla Hall’s Cat

I never met Camilla Hall or her cat; both had tragic, untimely deaths.

As I think back, the Patricia Hearst investigation often seemed unfocused and disorganized in the FBI’s San Francisco Division.

There were approximately 100 Agents brought in from other divisions to assist, most of them young and, relatively speaking, unfamiliar with the surrounding, radical environment swirling around San Francisco and particularly Berkeley.  We, the twenty Agents, assigned to Berkeley were considered to be the most familiar with the area; and were generally utilized accordingly.  Agents from other field offices were mostly used for stationary or moving surveillances, or in some instances assigned to ‘towers.’  (I will describe ‘towers,’ later).

One evening, I returned to the Berkeley Resident Agency after covering some leads.  I was approached by an older Agent who was responsible for coordinating assignments.  This was rather early in the investigation, and the whereabouts of the SLA members, still at large, was unknown.

The Agent told me that Camilla Hall’s residence had been identified and checked-out.  It appeared that she had left her apartment a week or so previously; but apparently took little or nothing with her except her pet cat.  It was believed that she would try to return for clothing or other abandoned items and we needed to set up a twenty-four hour surveillance on her apartment.  Unfortunately, the older Agent advised, we need someone to start as soon as possible; and he asked if I’d be willing to take the overnight shift – even though he knew that I had been working all day.  I said I would.  He said to get to the apartment as soon as possible, establish a discreet location; and that he’d try and get me some relief about eight in the morning.

I went home to get what I would need – knowing it would be a long night.  At home, I gathered some warm clothes, a pillow and my poncho liner from the military.  I also took some snacks and a thermos of coffee; and an empty plastic bottle to pee in if there was no other option.  More importantly, I had binoculars, camera, a strong flashlight, my .357 and a speed-loader with six additional rounds.

I positioned myself shortly after dark.  I did find a discreet location.  I could see her apartment, but was not sitting directly in front of someone’s residence.  It was a long, mostly uneventful, night.  Cars would pass, even a pedestrian or two, but no one seemed to notice me.  It was hard to stay awake.  This is the nature of real police work – not like in the movies that’s for sure.  I knew, of course, that if I was spotted by a member of the SLA, before I saw them, I would be in serious trouble.  Nonetheless, sometimes, the need to sleep is hard to resist – no matter the circumstances.

Fresh troops, two-man teams, were assigned the following days and nights.  I’m not sure how long they maintained that surveillance, but Camilla never returned.  She had what was dearest to her – her pet cat.  And, in her judgement, there was no reason to risk returning.  As previously noted, the cat died with Camilla in the Los Angeles shootout and inferno.

To be continued…

True Nelson

Monday, October 17, 2016

The Patricia Hearst Kidnapping (Part 3) / Camilla Christine Hall / The Investigative Assignment

This old San Francisco Examiner, dated Monday, May 20, 1974, is kind of interesting.  It does bring old memories back.  This particular issue is largely about the Hearst case which may explain why I kept it.  On the other hand, maybe not; the Hearst kidnapping was covered extensively for months – realize that the Examiner was controlled by the Hearst family.

Prior to May 20th, most of the SLA had been killed in a shootout in Los Angeles.  There were three remaining fugitives – Bill and Emily Harris, and Patricia Hearst.

For perspective, it’s kind of interesting to look over this old issue of the Examiner.  As I’ve said previously, I hadn’t looked at it in decades.  Some of the day to day stuff was kind of interesting.

For example, the Examiner’s daily issue, at the time, cost 15 cents.  Now, Portland’s daily is $1.50 and the Sunday issue is $3.00.

Much of this issue had to do with ‘Watergate,’ which some of you might recall.  President Nixon was still in the Whitehouse, but was under a lot of fire – which ultimately led to his resignation.

There is a full page advertisement for “Marlboro Green, Now in the Flip-top Box.”  Don’t see that sort of thing much anymore.  Maybe the ‘Marlboro Man’ dying of cancer took the wind out of their sales - moreover the public awakening I suppose.  Regarding cigarettes, its current reputation as a killer isn’t exactly new.  Sixty to seventy years back, they referred to cigarettes as ‘coffin nails.’  But, I digress.

There was one small quote in the paper which reminded me of a particular investigative assignment given to me:

“Los Angeles Coroner Thomas Noguchi identified the sixth corpse (in the LA shootout) as Camilla Christine Hall, 29.”

As a personal impression, and I got to know much about all of the SLA members, Camilla Hall seemed to have the most redeemable qualities.  It appeared that she joined this group more out of love than any sort of radical, psychotic motivation.  Camilla was a lesbian devoted to Patricia Mizmoon Soltysik who, in my opinion, had few if any redeemable qualities.

But to continue the Examiner quote:  “Near Miss Hall’s body, officials found the incinerated body of her pet cat.  When Miss Hall disappeared from her Berkeley cottage more than three months ago, she left everything except her pet.”

I’d almost forgotten this, but…

To be continued.

True Nelson

Part One

Part Two

Saturday, October 15, 2016

The Patricia Hearst Kidnapping / My memories of the investigation (Part 2) / First Impressions

I’ve been giving some thought as to what I might add to Jeffrey Toobin’s book, ‘American Heiress.’  He did a very thorough job; and although I participated in the Hearst investigation, I found his book interesting and informative.  What more is there to say?  Well, all I might add are my personal experiences – what it was like in the trenches – so to speak.

When Patty was first kidnapped, I felt, and my feeling was not unique, that we, the Agents, would do anything possible to save her – to include, with no reservation, risking our own lives.  Many investigations in the FBI, then and now, are routine, boring, and with little or no motivational spark.  Patty’s kidnapping, that February night in 1974, set a fire among the Agents to work long hours, take risks, and bring her home.  We in the FBI’s Berkeley Resident Agency felt, somehow, especially responsible – that was our turf.

Most of us imagined her to be like a younger sister or other close relative – maybe some of the older Agents imagined her like a daughter.  We were later to be disappointed.  She was not, never was, like most FBI Agents imagined; had little or nothing in common with the vast majority of Agents.  Most Agents were from middle class families, many were prior military, mostly decent people.**

Patty was none of that and proved to be a spoiled rich girl with little or no inherent moral compass.  I know many will say she was ‘brain-washed.’  I later heard that numerous times – in her defense.  My response, as she became more known to us, was then and is now, ‘nonsense.’  I think Mr. Toobin made this point very well.  She was an unrepentant, participating criminal; who committed countless felonies; including driving a getaway car at a bank robbery where a woman (a mother of four) was killed (murdered), shot-gunned to death.  Patty later testified in court, coldly in my opinion and basically to save her own skin, against Emily Harris who actually shot the woman.

Patty Hearst was convicted and sentenced to prison for a few of her many crimes.  President Carter subsequently ‘commuted’ her sentence and had her released from prison after she served a little more than a year.  I voted for Carter prior to him taking that action.  I’ve never voted for a Democrat for President since then.  President Bill Clinton later gave Patty a full pardon.  The Hearst family was very rich – you understand. Just one more example of how ‘when money talks, justice walks.’

I kept an old newspaper (San Francisco Examiner dated Monday, May 20, 1974).  A souvenir so to speak.  It is now wrinkled and yellowed.  Time moves on - more than four decades.  I suppose there is little point in keeping it much longer – not even worth recycling.  I might burn it in the fireplace.  Perhaps, I will talk a little more about this old publication, give you a little glimpse of the 70s for those who might have forgotten, or for those who were not even born.

That said, regarding my ‘first impressions’ of the Hearst investigation, there was a book, an exceptional book, written by General Harold G. Moore and Joseph L. Galloway titled ‘We Were Soldiers Once… and Young,’ about Vietnam.  And, if I might use that splendid phrase in a little different way (regarding the Patty Hearst case), ‘we were Agents once… and young.’

To be continued…

True Nelson

** As I’ve said before, some of the best people I’ve ever met (war heroes, scholars, athletes, and all manner of professionals) were FBI Agents.  However, as I’ve also said, some of the biggest knuckleheads I’ve ever met were FBI Agents.

Patricia Hearst Kidnapping (Part 1)

Monday, October 3, 2016

The Patricia Hearst Kidnaping / My memories of the investigation (Part 1) / & Jeffrey Toobin’s Book, ‘American Heiress

Recently, I finished a good book – ‘American Heiress’ by Jeffrey Toobin.  I recommend it.

“The wild saga of the kidnapping, crimes and trial of Patty Hearst.”

Of course, as Toobin points out, Patty Hearst preferred to be called Patricia by anyone other than her immediate family.  We, in the FBI’s San Francisco Division, called her ‘Patty.’  We got to know her pretty well.

I actually lived part of this story, but wasn’t mentioned – nor did I expect to be.  I was just one of the many FBI Agents who worked 12 to 14 hour days, six or seven days a week for quite a few months on this case.  It was demanding, tedious and often disorganized.  Actually, Mr. Toobin gave me new insights on the investigation that I was not previously aware of – some of which seemed to explain why, at times, the investigation was disorganized.  However, other things he said in his book (petty perhaps) were kind of silly.  Such as…

Toobin:  “At this point, the Bureau was populated almost entirely by white** male agents who wore white shirts and black shoes and had crew cuts…”

February 4, 1974:  I was assigned to the Berkeley Resident Agency when Patty was kidnapped and don’t recall any Agents dressing as he described.  Oh, some of the older guys headquartered in San Francisco, desk jockeys mostly, might have occasionally worn white shirts and black shoes – but a “crew cut,” not hardly, unless they were attempting to conceal the fact that they were prematurely going bald.  This was San Francisco and Berkeley during the early 70s.  Agents working the streets dressed in accord with the venue so as not be too conspicuous.  Maybe, Toobin is talking about old photos of Charles Bates, Tom Padden or Monte Hall – prominent players in his story.  I will discuss them further in subsequent posts.

Toobin:  “They (referring to the FBI) knew little about the radical underground and had no chance of infiltrating those circles.  Who were the SLA?  Where were they?  Who were their friends and allies?”

Well, yes, that’s true in part.  However, we actually knew quite a bit, generally speaking, about the ‘radical underground,’ the Weather Underground and the Black Panthers.  However, the SLA, the Symbionese Liberation Army, was an instance of ‘spontaneous combustion.’  They were suddenly on the scene.  The SLA was closely knit and had no formal structure.  Infiltrating them would be like infiltrating a socially dysfunctional, psychotic family.  What was there, initially at least, to infiltrate?  The first question needing resolution was:  ‘Who are they?’

We knew, of course, that the SLA had already murdered the Oakland City Superintendent, Marcus Foster – a particularly cold blooded murder; shooting Foster with cyanide-laced bullets as he exited a school board meeting.  It was, at the time, a local crime being investigated by the Oakland PD.

Soon, there was a break in the case when a Concord Police Officer, conducting a routine FI or field interrogation, got in a shootout with Russ Little and Joe Remiro – who were members (later determined) of the SLA.  At that point, the nature of the SLA and who its members were began to come into focus.

The night Patty was kidnapped, I was one of the first Agents to respond to the scene.  I still remember how chaotic it was.  The confusion factor was almost overwhelming.

FBI Agents, including myself, began interviewing anyone in the area they could find.  Often times individuals contacted had already been interviewed by the Berkeley Police Department – and said individuals were understandably irritated by the FBI’s duplication of efforts.  One couple slammed the door in my face.  I made a note to return the next day when, perhaps, they would be in a better mood.  The FBI was not popular in those neighborhoods.  Ultimately, we spread out doing neighbor inquiries, noting license plates, taking photographs, mapping the neighborhood, and coordinating pertinent information that might lead to a quick locate of Patty Hearst.  As the violence involved became better known and the prominence of the victim became increasingly clear, we began preparing for the big push the following morning.

Berkeley PD was initially in charge of the investigation for the first 24 hours.  After that, the FBI was the lead agency.  Federal statute states that the victim, if not recovered within the first 24 hours, will create the presumption that the victim had been transported interstate or foreign commerce.  After 24 hours, with certain exceptions, kidnapping becomes a Federal crime (The Lindbergh Law).

February 4th turned into a long night; and the beginning of many long nights and days to come.

To be continued…

True Nelson
Join me on my Blog

**A point needing a little clarification is concerning J. Edgar Hoover.  It is often stated and inferred that he had a bias against Blacks and did not allow Blacks to become Agents.  I entered the Bureau under Hoover’s watch.  There were two Black Agents in my New Agents’ Class.  Both great guys.

Monday, September 19, 2016

Presidential Election 2016 / O+M+G / Observations & Comments (Part Three – Hillary Clinton, Democratic Candidate)

As a FBI Special Agent, working Organized Crime, one of the first things you learn is that the biggest problem facing Organized Crime is how they ‘launder their money’.  This is their weakness.  They aren’t particularly worried about being arrested for their various criminal activities, because they insulate themselves.  They indirectly deal in the sale of illegal drugs, prostitution, extortion, protection, bank fraud, loan sharking and skimming union funds.  But, when arrests are made, it’s usually the underlings that get busted; underlings who know it’s in their best interest to keep their mouths shut.  Most of these types of arrests are made by local law enforcement.

The FBI, however, attempts to take down the organizational structure, the ‘big dogs’ at the top.  And, how do they do that?  They follow the money.

‘Money laundering’ is taking illegally obtained or ‘dirty’ money and converting that money, or ‘laundering’ the money, so crime bosses can use it to buy everything their hearts’ desire:  women, cars, mansions, and even a form of public legitimacy.  But, ‘laundering’ money isn’t as easy as you might first think.  Large deposits to banks are continually monitored by the government.  You could deal in cash, of course; but if you have millions of dollars sitting in your home safe – well, the continual utilization of cash in big number transactions becomes a tip-off too.

So, what has this got to do with Hillary Clinton?  Maybe nothing.  I’m just curious about the Clinton Foundation; and what a cleverly constructed, potential way that said Foundation could be used to ‘launder’ money.  Mind you, I don’t think Bill and Hillary are involved in illegal drugs, extortion, or ‘loan sharking’, etcetera; but they are in a great position to sell access and influence.  It’s clear that hundreds of millions of dollars have flowed into the Clinton Foundation, much of which originated from big corporate or foreign, sometimes dubious, sources for no apparent reason other than it ingratiates them to the Clintons - which equates to access and influence.

Example Tax Avoidance 101:  Let’s just say you were very rich or powerful and some big corporation or foreign government offered to pay you $500,000 for a one hour speech – attended by a few of their chosen colleagues.  What will the speech be about?  Oh, that doesn’t really matter.  It’s just a ruse to pass you money, to have your ear, to be your friend – someone who when they call you, you will pick up the phone.  You give the speech, transcripts of which will never be disclosed; and they pay you the $500,000.  At that point, you are looking at a fairly big tax bill.  So, you donate the $500,000 to your foundation – and it’s all tax deductible – just as if you gave the money to the Salvation Army (who incidentally would have done something meaningful with the money).

Is influence pedaling illegal?  Well, it could be; but it would be extremely hard to prove.  Moreover, the Clintons are in a position to quash any FBI investigations along those lines; unless a ‘source’ within the Foundation came forth.  However, it’s doubtful that would ever happen.  The Clintons are too smart for that.  And if any such thing was contemplated by a source within, the Clintons would unleash a public firestorm that would destroy almost anyone’s reputation and credibility.

OK, I understand that most, if not all, ultra-rich people start foundations.  It is there opportunity to do good works in their area of choice; and, keep in mind, it is a great tax dodge.  You can write off any expense that is even remotely associated with the foundation:  luxurious offices and apartments for ‘work’ or ‘entertaining’; private airplanes and associated travel; fantastic, vastly overpaid jobs for yourself, your children or anyone else who you happen to favor; and the list goes on.

As an aside, isn’t it interesting that Colin Powell, former Secretary of State, was quoted in one of the recently (unauthorized of course) releases of his personal emails in which he commented regarding Hillary’s illegal email server and her irresponsible handling of classified material:  “Hillary’s Mafia keeps trying to suck me into it.”  I realize Secretary Powell never expected his comment to see the light of day; but an interesting turn of a phrase nonetheless.  Probably just joking, I suppose...

Regarding a few other issues of concern for me personally:

+ Democratic Party nominating system was rigged against Bernie Sanders and in favor of Hillary.

+ FBI altering their interview and interrogation rules in the Hillary inquiry to give her a free pass.

+ Bill Clinton will be back in the White House (as Colin Powell phrased it) “dickin” around.

+ National Debt is out of control.

+ Illegal Immigration is out of control.

+ Failure to acknowledge that there is actually “Radical Islamic Terrorism”  And that we need to fight it with every available resource.

I won’t be voting for Hillary for a number of reasons.  Many will vote for her.  Many feel they should vote for someone; and the options to Hillary are not compelling.  I understand that completely.  I actually think that she will win the election.  Unless, and this is a longshot, the so-called ‘silent majority’ decides otherwise and gets out and votes – an American backlash, an American Brexit vote.  If Trump should win, I will be somewhat shocked; but I will not necessarily be dismayed.  Maybe, its time this country had a shakeup.

Tuesday, September 13, 2016

Presidential Election 2016 / O+M+G / Observations & Comments (Part Two - Donald Trump, Republican Candidate)

Let me say a few words about Donald Trump.

To my mind, Trump’s biggest problem is that he was born rich, has always been rich, and that he has never learned or acquired a ‘social filter.’  He has probably throughout his adulthood, possibly even in later childhood, surrounded himself with individuals who are, let’s face it, sycophants – or as many of us would say ‘brownnosers.’  Consequently, Trump often says whatever crosses his mind.  He blurts it out – expecting everyone to approve of his self-supposed cleverness and frankness, laugh at his jokes even when they’re not funny, and praise his many perceived although questionable qualities.  He seems mostly unaware that some of his statements personally hurt people; apparently because no one along the way, his ‘friends,’ business associates or even his family have pointed this out to him.  And, if anyone had dared, he’d probably consider it undeserved; and one way or another he’d strike back.  You often see this same trait in major athletes and some celebrities.  And, I suppose for the very rich this lack of a ‘social filter’ is common.  For the rest of us, Mom and Dad, friendly or not so friendly acquaintances put us in our place.

Example #1:  His disparaging words about John McCain’s military service.  McCain served bravely, enduring torture and surviving under very difficult circumstances.  His behavior during those years has been substantiated by his fellow captives who have praised his courage and leadership.  Trump’s words, incredibly, emanated from a man who had never even served in the military.  It really is unconscionable.  Why did he say it?  Well, he probably regrets it now.  I hope he does.  The point is he opens his mouth and he just lets fly – no ‘social filter.’

Example #2:  Trump’s description of what he considered to be John Kasich’s “disgusting” eating habits.  Why would Trump say such a thing?  I suppose he feels that if he can think it, he can say it.  He always has and probably always will.  Shouldn’t someone close to Trump advise him that decent people just don’t talk like that?  No one?  How about Melania?  Or would that mean, for her, a one-way ticket out the front door of her current, very luxurious mansion?

Example #3:  Is Trump a ‘Racist?’  Come on, let’s be honest here.  Black, White, Asian, everyone is a ‘racist’ to some degree.  It’s instinctive, tribal, part of our evolution.  Is Trump worse than the rest of us?  I don’t think there is any real evidence of that.  But, once again, Trump has opened his mouth and speaks what others might be thinking.  But, those others usually have the decency and the civility not to say it.

Can Trump be a good President?  Maybe, if he surrounds himself with strong advisors, both men and women who feel free to speak their minds.  But, I just don’t think he has it in him to allow straight talk from subordinates.  It’s not his nature.

What Trump needs is a modicum of humility (even if he has to fake it), and a crash course at a good ‘finishing school.’

On the other hand:  If I read one more article from Eastern liberals (who incidentally seem to have infested the New York Times) about how incredibly stupid, bigoted and uninformed Donald Trump supporters are, I may end up voting for him.

True Nelson

Friday, September 9, 2016

Presidential Election 2016 / O + M + G / Observations and Comments (Part one – Gary Johnson, Libertarian Candidate)

Oh my God, as a Nation, what have we become?  This is an election like no other in my lifetime.  Hard lines have been drawn.  No one really wants to discuss political issues, and rightfully so.  ‘Issues,’ what’s that?  Issues are apparently not particularly relevant, when you have candidates like Hillary and Donald.  It’s about candidate dislike, even hate.  It is about name calling.

The previous widely circulated recommendation to potential voters was ‘vote for the candidate you dislike the least, but vote.’  Now, the advice seems to be ‘vote against the candidate you hate the most, or butt out.’  There is no nice alternative I’m sorry to say.  I’m leaning toward the ‘Butt-out’ option.

There is, of course, Hillary Clinton (the pathological liar married to the convicted and disbarred liar) vs. Donald Trump (the egomaniac).  Choose your poison.  As an aside, perhaps an alternative position, might be Gary Johnson (I thought about this), Libertarian or Jill Stein (don't think so), Green Party; but really, why bother.

Nonetheless, I will be offering you some observations / advice as the election season progresses.  I’ll try to keep it succinct.  This will be the first of a series of very astute (and then again maybe not) political observations – many of which you’ve tried to block out of your mind.  I realize reading my comments might be tough on you, but it gives me an outlet.  I need some help with this.  Readers’ comments or counter arguments are always appreciated – at least those that are not immediately deleted.

First up is Gary Johnson.  Have you read the Libertarian platform?  You probably should before you cast your vote.  Some things I like.  Some I don’t.  However, I don’t plan to drone-on about that at the moment.  Let’s talk about Aleppo.  Say what?

Gary Johnson was thrown a floating-curveball (a question) by one of the co-hosts on the ‘Morning Joe’ program on MSNBC.  Does anyone watch MSNBC?  I’m serious does anyone?  Anyway, Gary whiffed the ball.

As a result of said question, there arose an embarrassing situation for Gary Johnson and it is getting a lot of press coverage.  The pitcher (questioner) was Mike Barnicle.  Personally, I think the question was a bit obscure; but Gary managed to make the worst of it.

Question to Johnson:  “If you were elected what would you do about Aleppo?”  Now, when you really think about it, this was kind of stupid question – at least in my opinion.  A question to which no one, and I mean no one, including our current President, would have a coherent answer.”

But, Johnson, to his discredit (I suppose) really blew it when he said:  “And what is Aleppo?”  Yes, he was serious – oh boy – and the look on his face.  If he had missed the general meaning, or didn’t know that Aleppo is a war-torn city in Syria, he should have just said:  ‘I’m not sure what you are referring to.  Could you rephrase the question?’  But, he didn’t and it was pretty dog-gone embarrassing.

Is this a big deal?  No, not really.  However, if you are a Johnson supporter, brace yourself; you will automatically be ridiculed on the basis that your chosen candidate doesn’t even know where Aleppo is, or has the slightest idea what is going on in Syria.  Although, let’s be honest.  Most people, up to now, didn’t know who, what or where is an Aleppo – and still don’t.

Good news though – more of the public, including Johnson, now know where Aleppo is.  If you don’t know, look it up - so that someone doesn’t pull a ‘Johnson’ on you.

True Nelson