The recent disclosures of secret U.S. government surveillance programs have brought to the forefront how intelligence agencies should manage the gathering and analysis of intelligence collected and when and how best to pass that information on to law enforcement. What is first collected for national security purposes can now potentially be used in a criminal trial. Law enforcement agents are said to utilize “parallel construction” to hide the original source which initiated the criminal investigation and develop their own evidence independent from this original source. Since the “wall” between intelligence agencies and law enforcement agencies fell down post-9/11 and intelligence information is now provided to law enforcement, should defendants have the right to review this evidence and are they entitled to this information (e.g. NSA wire intercepts) via discovery obligations? This article explores the constitutionality of “parallel construction,” the relationship between the intelligence community and law enforcement, and whether the non-disclosure of how a criminal investigation was initiated constitutes a violation of a defendant’s right to discovery pre-trial and right to a fair trial.