these ends Moore's telephone was tapped, his apartment was fitted with concealed radio transmitters, and a one way mirror was installed through which video tape pictures could be taken from the apartment occupied by the DEA.


5
Through the course of several telephone conversations, all of which were recorded, Moore learned that the appellant, Barnes, was a seller of drugs.  So that he might purchase drugs, Moore arranged for Barnes to visit his apartment.  Upon entering Moore's apartment Barnes sat down at a table across from Moore.  He then reached into his trousers and took out a clear plastic bag which he placed on the table.  In exchange for this plastic bag and its contents Moore gave Barnes a packet of money.  The entire transactionon the second day of trial that the government decided to use the business records as evidence.  That afternoon counsel for the government made the records available to defendant.


16
On the afternoon of the third day of trial the records were offered in evidence and received over the defendant's objection.  There was no request for a continuance.


17
Essentially the same subscriber information contained in the business records connecting appellant with the telephone number 367-5524 had been available to appellant through other sources.  He had been furnished taped telephone conversations involving that number several weeks before trial; early in the trial he had Jencks Act material; and he had the testimony of Agent McDowell, all of which tended to connect appellant with the address and number in question.


18
Discovery