- Did CIA have any relationship or dealings with Ross, Blandon or
Meneses? No information has been found to indicate that any past or present
employee of CIA, or anyone acting on behalf of CIA, had any direct or indirect
dealing with Ricky Ross, Oscar Danilo Blandon or Juan Norwin Meneses.
Additionally, no information has been found to indicate that CIA had any
relationship or contact with Ronald J. Lister or David Scott Weekly. No
information has been found to indicate that any of these individuals was ever
employed by CIA, or met by CIA employees or anyone acting on CIA's behalf.
- Was the drug trafficking of Ross, Blandon or Meneses linked to CIA or
Contra activities? No information has been found to indicate that Ross
provided any money to any Contra group at any time, or that he had any contact
or connection to the Contras or CIA.
- No information has been found to indicate that the drug trafficking
activities of Blandon and Meneses were motivated by any commitment to support
the Contra cause or Contra activities undertaken by CIA.
- Blandon and Meneses claim that they each donated between $3,000 and
$40,000 to Contra sympathizers in Los Angeles. No information has been found to
substantiate these claims. Moreover, no information has been found to indicate
that Meneses or Blandon received any CIA or Contra support for their drug
- Blandon did have a personal relationship with Eden Pastora and provided
him with financial assistance in the form of rent-free housing and two vehicles.
Much of this assistance was provided to Pastora after he left the Contra
- Did CIA intervene or otherwise play a role in any investigative and
judicial processes involving the drug trafficking activities of Ross, Blandon or
Meneses? No information has been found to indicate that CIA hindered, or
otherwise intervened in, the investigation, arrest, prosecution, or conviction
of Ross, Blandon, or Meneses. CIA shared what information it had--specifically
on Meneses' 1979 drug trafficking in Nicaragua--with U.S. law enforcement
entities when it was received and again when subsequently requested by the FBI.
- Did any of the individuals who were arrested in "The Frogman
Case" have any relationship with CIA? Were the drug trafficking activities
of any of those individuals linked to the Contras? No information has been
found to indicate that CIA or individuals acting on behalf of CIA had any
relationship with Julio Zavala, Carlos Cabezas or others who were arrested or
charged in connection with the 1983 Frogman Case, though a relative of one of
them did have a relationship with CIA until mid-1982.
- No information has been found to indicate that Julio Zavala, Carlos
Cabezas or other Frogman Case defendants were connected to the Contras or that
the Contras benefited from their drug trafficking activities. No information
has been found to support Cabezas' claim that he provided financial assistance
to the Contras from his drug trafficking activities. While two individuals who
were active in the Contra movement wrote letters indicating that the money
seized from Zavala belonged to the Contras, it appears this was done though
Zavala's wife's connections with old family friends and not because Zavala was
active in the Contra movement.
- Was CIA involved in the investigation of The Frogman Case? No
information has been found to indicate that CIA or anyone acting on behalf of
CIA was involved in the criminal investigation of Julio Zavala and his
associates, though a relative of one of those who were arrested or charged did
have a relationship with CIA until mid-1982.
- To what extent and why did CIA become involved in the prosecution of
The Frogman Case? CIA did make contact with prosecutors in the Zavala
prosecution in order to protect what CIA believed was an operational equity,
i.e., a Contra support group in which it had an operational interest. A CIA
cable indicates that approximately $36,000 seized from Zavala at the time of his
arrest was returned to Zavala--based on the claim they were Contra funds--by the
prosecutors at CIA's request. However, the prosecutors state that the decision
to return Zavala's money was based on other considerations, not CIA's
representations, and that there was no evidentiary value to retaining the money.
In any event, the actions taken by CIA to have the cash returned did not appear
to be intended to influence the outcome of Zavala's trial, which resulted in his
A. R. Cinquegrana
Frederick P. Hitz Date