Jaworski: Seeing It Through

Outwardly composed, Special Watergate Prosecutor Leon Jaworski was nevertheless seething after his heated meeting last week with James St. Clair, President Nixon's chief Watergate counsel. In an interview with TIME Correspondent Hays Gorey, Jaworski complained that St. Clair had unfairly criticized him for having attested to the veracity of John Dean, the President's main accuser on Watergate, in an ABC-TV interview. Jaworski protested that the issue had been raised in open court and that, besides, the White House had released statements discounting Dean's value as a witness. "It was as if it is O.K. for the White House to comment on the credibility of a witness," said the prosecutor, "but it is improper for anyone else." Other excerpts:

Are you back in square one? Are you in the same position Archibald Cox was in before he was fired?

No, I don't think this is square one.

There has been considerable progress. We have obtained a great amount of evidence. We have been able to move ahead with our investigations.

If you do not prevail in your current struggle with the White House over documents, will this affect your pending indictments?

The question really is not one of indictments. The issue is that I am charged with making a full investigation with care and thoroughness. Those are two important words-care and thoroughness. They require that all available evidence be obtained and studied.

What are your alternatives if you do not get all the White House evidence you need?

One is to go to court. That is what we will do if we feel we cannot do without the evidence.

What are you still seeking?

Many documents. And we have asked for some additional tapes as well.

Concerning what areas of your investigation ?

Mainly Watergate-the break-in and the coverup. There are also some documents in other areas.

Such as "the plumbers" ?

Yes.

Any others?

Well, as you know, I have removed myself from the milk-fund investigation. That is being directed by [Deputy Special Prosecutor] Henry Ruth. There may be some other tapes or documents in that area that are being sought.

Were some of your earlier requests to the White House slow to be answered?

Oh, yes. Some of them were outstanding for more than a month.

The President indicated last week that "one year of Watergate is enough." Do you agree?

No one wants it to end sooner than I do.

Yet evidence that you want apparently will not be forthcoming.

The President has agreed that I can go to court. Before I take that step, however, I will probably file a report with the Senate Judiciary Committee. I am obliged to do that from assurances I gave in testimony before that committee.

Are you determined to see this through?

I am firmly determined to discharge my responsibility. I confidently expect the grand juries to return major indictments before the end of this month. They will not be delayed or impeded by whatever difficulties we are having extracting evidence from the White House.

On Watergate in general, do you find the country ready to forget?

I think all people would like to put Watergate behind. But I think the public would be totally disenchanted if the problems created by Watergate were not adjudicated and that those who should be were not brought to justice.

Would you resign if the President should demand of you, as he did of Cox, that you accept some "compromise" on White House tapes and documents?

As I said before, I am firmly determined to discharge my responsibility.

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so viewer discretion is required.