Mr. HALL. Or are you talking about New York?

Mr. SCHIANO. No, central office to me is the Washington office. Mr. HALL. Do you have any belief at this time as to who gave the order or who rescinded that order after 24 hours?

Mr. SCHIANO. No. It would be unfair for me to even speculate. Mr. HALL. What were you told to do or not to do?

Mr. SCHIANO. I think I penned my view as to what I was supposed to do in writing. I don't have any of my memoranda. And, in fact, I gave quite a few of my memoranda to DeVito for safekeeping since I had no place to keep them, and since most of my files were gone through.

Mr. HALL. Well, does Mr. DeVito still have your files that you turned over to him?

Mr. SCHIANO. Well, he had some copies of memorandums that I wrote. He should still have them, I think. He saved them; I don't know. But there was a memorandum I wrote to Mr. Marks as an expression of understanding as to what we were supposed to do, and go ahead and investigate these alleged Nazis.

Mr. HALL. Where is Mr. Marks now?

Mr. SCHIANO. I don't know; he is retired.

Mr. HALL. All right. Going back again to the statement that you have here, on page 4 at the middle of that report you state that nowhere in the GAO report do I see coverage of the complaints of possible impropriety in the memorandum which translates one case for review at the district level. Now, is there something that the GAO report does not have as a part of that report that it should have to make a complete report?

Mr. SCHIANO. Well, I told them about that memorandum from Mr. Burrows. I could read it to you. I think I have an accurate copy of it.

Mr. HALL. That is the memorandum from Mr. Burrows to Mr. Marks?

Mr. SCHIANO. Well, I think it was translated through channels to the region to the district level.

Mr. HALL. All right; telling you what?

Mr. SCHIANO. Well, I think if I read it might speak for itself. Mr. HALL. That might help, yes, sir.

Mr. SCHIANO. The main body of the memo in the original text

says:

Under date of September 30, 1971, I sent you copies of memoranda prepared by the General Counsel under dates April 16, 1971, and August 9, 1971. You will note in the August 9, 1971 memorandum a comment that he regards the obtainment of a consent judgment as a substantial achievement. Further, that the judgment will effectively revoke and set aside the order of the Court admitting the defendent to citizenship and cancel her certificate of naturalization.

In all probability, there is insufficient evidence of a clear, unequivocal, and convincing nature upon which we could initiate deportation proceedings on a charge other than one which be obviated by section 241(f). However, in view of the periodic and highly vocal interest in this case, it is requested that the New York office review the evidence at hand and furnish a memorandum through your office setting forth what evidence is available to support any deportation charge and the manner in which such evidence might to used if deportation proceedings were authorized. Your comment on the recommendation of the District Director, New York, including whether the case should be designated Top Priority, will be appreciated.

Please insure that no Order to Show Cause is issued in this case prior to review by this office of the sufficiency of the evidence proposed to be used and whether as a

33-762 O 79 10

matter of policy, a further attempt should be made to punish subject by deportation for the amnestied offenses of which she was convicted in Europe.

CARL G. BURROWS.

Mr. HALL. Were you speaking of the Ryan case at that time? Mr. SCHIANO. Yes; this was the memorandum written transmitting the Ryan case down from the district to the central office. Mr. HALL. The next question, if I may interrupt, why did Mrs. Ryan consent to be denaturalized?

Mr. SCHIANO. I don't know. If I were her attorney, I never would have.

Mr. HALL. What?

Mr. SCHIANO. If I were her attorney, I never would have agreed as a matter of legal

Mr. HALL. I am from Texas, you from New York, and we don't talk the same way. I didn't understand.

Mr. SCHIANO. I said if I were her counsel I would never have advised her to consent to giving up her citizenship.

Mr. HALL. All right; by doing that she then became subject to extradition to Germany.

Mr. SCHIANO. She became an alien de novo.

Mr. HALL. She was extradited?

Mr. SCHIANO. She was extradited, yes.

Mr. HALL. How long has that trial been going on?

Mr. SCHIANO. Since August 1973.

Mr. HALL. Give me just a thumbnail statement as to what this woman did. She was at Ravensbruck, was she not?

Mr. SCHIANO. She was at Ravensbruck, she was convicted, I think, after a course of conduct in Ravensbruck for beating inmates, but she was never tried or convicted, as a course of conduct at Maidanek concentration camp in Poland.

Remember this, the charge against her for deportation was not necessarily a course of conduct during that period of time, but a conviction in Austria for a crime involving moral turpitude.

Now, that was important in light of this memorandum, because if the only charge was that she lied when she got a visa concerning herself, it would have been obviated as she said, as 241(f), which in substance says if you are married to a citizen we automatically excuse you from your fraud.

Mr. HALL. Do you know whether or not the INS ever formally or informally agreed not to deport Ryan if she would consent to denaturalization?

Mr. SCHIANO. NO.

Mr. HALL. Was there a concerted effort made by someone, whether at the central office, or the district office, to hinder and stop the prosecution of this Ryan woman?

Mr. SCHIANO. You mean probably at the deportation level?

Mr. HALL. At any level when you were investigating that case. Mr. SCHIANO. This memorandum, if you read further, represents to me a certain obstruction. It says:

"However, in view of the periodic and highly vocal interest in this case, it is requested the New York office review the evidence at hand and furnish a memorandum through your office setting forth what evidence is available to support any deportation charge, and the manner in which such evidence might be used if deportation proceedings were authorized.

"Your comments on the recommendation of the District Director, New York, including whether the case should be assigned top priority would be appreciated. Please ensure that no order to show cause is issued in this case prior to review by this office of the sufficiency of the evidence proposed to be used, and whether as a matter of policy a further attempt should be made to punish subject by deportation for the amassed offenses of which she was convicted in Europe.

Mr. HALL. Who wrote that?

Mr. SCHIANO. Carl Burrows.

Mr. HALL. Who was that directed to?

Mr. SCHIANO. I think it was through the regional office. I don't have the heading.

Mr. HALL. Is that the memorandum you have referenced to when you say, "The memorandum was written by an officer of the Central Office, and if the suggestions contained therein were followed, the case would have been further delayed, if not altogether shunted aside."

Mr. SCHIANO. Right.

Mr. HALL. That is the memorandum you just read?

Mr. SCHIANO. Yes.

Mr. HALL. Now, you make this further statement: "The memorandum contained carefully chosen words and expressions". What do you mean by that, sir?

Mr. SCHIANO. Well, at the time when I wrote it I was not aware of it. Later I became aware of it. For instance, when it says in all probability there is unsufficient evidence of a clear, unequivocal and convincing nature upon which we can initial deportation proceedings on a charge other than one which would be obviated by section 241(f); now we know under 241(f), while we forgive a fraud, it says provided the person is otherwise admissible or otherwise not, otherwise inadmissible, meaning if you have an additional charge too for forgiveness, 241(f) is not operative.

Mr. HALL. Well, you had an additional charge in Germany, did you not?

Mr. SCHIANO. Exactly. This proves an unnecessary statement unless there was some fear connected with that additional charge. And later I learned, when the attorney brought out for the defense on the extradition claimed that the conviction record was improperly and illegally obtained in Austria through the auspices of the CIA.

He stated that in his court cases.

Mr. HALL. We are talking specifically now about the Ryan case, and I know we can talk indefinitely about it and it's of great interest, but let me ask you this question:

I notice in the biographical sketch you have given to us that you mention other cases that you investigated. Without my enumerating those cases, did you have additional interference, from any people in the district office or the central office with reference to your attempted investigation of these other Nazi war criminals, alleged Nazi war criminals?

Mr. SCHIANO. No; I don't think I listed other Nazi war criminals in my statement.

Mr. HALL. All right. This is the only Nazi criminal

Mr. SCHIANO. The major one at that time.

Mr. HALL [continuing]. That you investigated?

Mr. SCHIANO. Of current interest, yes.

Mr. HALL. Now, you were an employee of the INS at that time? Mr. SCHIANO. Right.

Mr. HALL. And you had been for how long, since 1950?

Mr. SCHIANO. Well, I started in 1951 and I left in 1960. I returned in 1963 and I left on December 7, 1972.

Mr. HALL. All right. During that period of time, was any effort ever made by INS to pursue the location of alleged Nazi war criminals in the United States?

Mr. SCHIANO. On an organized basis?

Mr. HALL. Yes.

Mr. SCHIANO. Not that I know of.

Mr. HALL. Do you recall whether or not any letters or any correspondence of any kind was submitted to INS by this committee or any prior committee suggesting that such an investigation should commence?

Mr. SCHIANO. No; I became aware of that through Chuck Allen who testified here. And that they had made complaints to the Service about the presence of Nazis in the United States. I was not aware of how widespread the question was or how many there were. I was shocked even when I got the list from Dr. Oscar Karmach that there were many more than we had originally suspected.

We had suspected further publicity in the case, other complaints, and I was frankly a little taken aback at how many there were. Mr. HALL. Now, where were you stationed during all of that period of time?

Mr. SCHIANO. Mostly in New York. I was on detail in two other districts in specific cases.

Mr. HALL. You were into more or less organized crime and that sort of thing?

Mr. SCHIANO. I was chief trial attorney, but they have used me on some troublesome cases in different areas.

Mr. HALL. When you heard this information from Mr. Allen about the number of alleged Nazi war criminals in the United States, was that this week when this testimony-

Mr. SCHIANO. No; this was after I left the Government, after I think we appeared on the television show, I think it was the Susskind show when I became more closely acquainted with Mr. Allen and talked to him and he made available certain publications.

Mr. HALL. I believe a lot of that information Mr. Allen had and still has dealt with alleged Nazi people who were living in the area around New York City. Is that correct, sir?

Mr. SCHIANO. I think so.

Mr. HALL. All right. Does it appear strange to you that if Mr. Allen knew this information and had this information at his fingertips, is it not strange that the INS did not likewise have this information during that same period of time?

Mr. SCHIANO. I don't know if they did not. Perhaps they did. Mr. HALL. If they did they were doing nothing about it so far as you knew?

Mr. SCHIANO. So far as I knew.

Mr. HALL. All right, and you would have been one of those people that they would have contacted, I would assume, at some investigative stage of those proceedings.

Mr. SCHIANO. I would like to think so, but not necessarily so. I said I was a trial attorney. I would like to think so, because I think the investigation and prosecution of these cases should be under the auspices of a trial attorney who directs the investigation and marshals the evidence and evaluates what further steps are to be taken.

Mr. HALL. In your investigation of the Ryan case, did you uncover evidence of additional alleged Nazi war criminals who were in the United States?

Mr. SCHIANO. Now, as I said, during the case itself we got phone calls, information, we were almost being deluged and we were not in a position to organize the material. As I said, we were handicapped. We didn't even have enough money for our witnesses. We didn't have enough money to take care of them. There were 14 witnesses, I think, that were mentioned during the denaturalization case investigation which were possibly to be brought over in case they would have to go to trial.

Mr. HALL. During the time this woman was being tried and investigated, you were an arm of the U.S. Government?

Mr. SCHIANO. That is right.

Mr. HALL. And you were shunted to a very small area, as you state in your statement?

Mr. SCHIANO. Technically, I was probably the second highest ranking officer in New York.

Mr. HALL. Does it appear strange to you as to why your office and why your people were shunted into a cubicle there that was of such smallness as you have mentioned here?

Mr. SCHIANO. I cannot claim credit for my people. I didn't have any except Mr. DeVito concerning this case, and my other people were busy working my section. I said I had some 2,000 cases to control as well.

Mr. HALL. Did you not say at one time you had to go across the street to get a phone call?

Mr. SCHIANO. That's right.

Mr. HALL. That seems rather strange to me that you had to climb over each other to get to the desks.

Mr. SCHIANO. That's right.

Mr. HALL. Because you were prosecuting an infamous matter, were you not?

Mr. SCHIANO. I don't know if that was the cause.

Mr. HALL. Have you always had that kind of treatment when you were with the agency, did they always give you on any case you tried, those accommodations?

Mr. SCHIANO. No; most of the times they gave me whatever I wanted.

Mr. HALL. I wonder why the accommodations were so bad during this trial of the investigation of this case?

Mr. SCHIANO. You might have to ask someone else.

Mr. HALL. Do you have any ideas about it?

Mr. SCHIANO. Some, but I do not care to express them now.