Free The Real Watergate Scandal: Collusion, Conspiracy, and the Plot That Brought Nixon Down by Geoff Shepard Page B

goal.
    Jaworski’s memorandum summarizes his discussion with Sirica of the prosecutors’ expected grand jury report about President Nixon:
               The Judge commented upon the status of matters before the grand jury which led into further comments on the possibility of the grand jury considering some type of special report or presentment. He considered this a very touchy problem and cautioned as to what the public’s reaction would be to a grand jury stepping out with something that was beyond its normal bounds. He cautioned that the whole effort could be tainted by something irresponsibly being done by the grand jury. He stated that the public would rightfully conclude that the entire proceeding had not been judicious but simply one of wanting to hurt the President. He further said that it was not the function of the grand jury but that of the House Impeachment Committee to express itself on that point. He then told me that in the event that I observed anything along that line being considered by the grand jury that he thought it would be appropriate for him to meet with the grand jury in camera . I expressed the belief that it was appropriate for the grand jury to refer to having in its possession evidence that it believed to be material and relevant to the impeachment proceedings and to suggest to the Court that it be referred to the House Committee for that purpose. He countered by stating that he believed he should be informed of the discretion that he could exercise in matters of that kind and further requested that I have a memorandum prepared for him that covers this subject. I agreed to have this done.
    This memo confirms that the ex parte discussion that Lacovara had urged in his February 21st memo did, in fact, occur. Yet it is more than a record of Sirica’s being informed of an anticipated grand jury report. It is also a record of Sirica’s reactions upon learning of the proposed report, along with details of the give and take that followed, as Jaworski sought to bring him to the prosecutors’ point of view. In short, Jaworski’s memo describes a prosecutor seeking advance concurrence on matters that are certain to come soon before that very judge for rulings—conduct that is indefensible as a matter of law. It is equally disturbing that Sirica’s initial reactions—that such a grand jury report was improper—were somehow overcome between this particular meeting and the time the grand jury report (later called the “Road Map”) was presented for his disposal.
    We should jump ahead for a moment, since Sirica would later dismiss their discussion of the grand jury as but a minor allusion to a possible action. John Wilson, Haldeman’s criminal defense attorney, was so incensed at the surprise (and sealed) grand jury report that he submitted a formal letter to Sirica demanding to know if the judge had met with WSPF prosecutors in advance of the report’s submission (see Appendix F ). This letter, which is to be found among Sirica’s papers in the Library of Congress, was never answered directly. Indeed, Jaworski’s memo reveals why any honest answer would have been difficult to write.
    What Sirica did do, in his order approving of the grand jury transmittal, was simply to state, “The Special Prosecutor notified the Court shortly before delivery of the Report that the Grand Jury intended to take such action.” Readers can judge for themselves whether this was a full and fair description of the February 11th ex parte meeting that Leon Jaworski memorialized, whether Sirica’s allusion was intentionally misleading, or whether this could refer to a separate ex parte communication between them.
    FEBRUARY 19, 1974
    In response to a one-page memo from his deputy regarding the Vesco case in New York, Jaworski hand-wrote a response that included thefollowing sentence (emphasis in original): “We know that barring unforeseen circumstances the indictment will be in Wed or Thurs of next week &