DIY History | Transcribe | Campus Culture | University of Iowa anti-war protests, January-April 1971 | 1971-01-02 Iowa City Press-Citizen Article: ""Cases Delayed for Half in Mass Trial Here""

Transcribe
Translate

University of Iowa anti-war protests, January-April 1971

1971-01-02 Iowa City Press-Citizen Article: ""Cases Delayed for Half in Mass Trial Here""

Cases Delayed for Half in Mass Trial Here

Others Still May Appear on Monday         2A - Iowa City Press=Citizen - Saturday, January 2, 1971

By MARK F. ROHNER
Of the Press-Citizen

   A mass trial of protesters arrested last spring still is planned for Monday, but the list of defendants has been cut at least in half.
   The trial had been delayed until a higher court could decide whether pre-trial proceedings should be set up for review.  However, the stay order apparently applies only to about half of the 210 defendants -- those represented by attorneys Joseph Johnston and J. New-man Toomey, according to City Atty. Jay Honohan.
   The decision to hold a trial Monday despite the stay order was reached at mid-morning today by Police Judge Joseph Thornton.
   By late this morning, defense lawyers were contacting their clients to decide whether to agree to the Monday trial date, but the defense reported no decisions reached.

  As Monday's trial gets underway, Toomey, Johnston and the approximately 100 defendants they represent will be preparing for a Jan. 11 hearing to determine whether a writ of certiorari, authorizing a review of pretrial proceedings, should be issued.
   The hearing, granted by District Court Judge Ansel Chapman, was asked in a petition filed Thursday afternoon by Toomey and Johnston. They are requesting a review of the legality of a mas trial and of the constitutionality of the city disorderly conduct ordinance the 210 are accused of violating.
   Toomey said he and Johnston are challenging Thornton's denial of defense motions filed earlier this week.
   Those motions asked for separate trials of the 210 and objected to the disorderly conduct ordinance, which the defense called "unconstitutional for vagueness and overbreadth."
   Thornton overruled those motions a few hours before the petition for the writ of certiorari was filed in District Court.

   The petition for the writ lists only those defendants represented by Toomey and Johnston and was the basis for the decision to go ahead with a trial for the balance of the defendants, Honohan said.
   That decision was reached after the city conferred with several other defense lawyers, the city attorney said.
   Chapman said he would probably preside over the Jan. 11 hearing on the writ of certiorari petition and render a d-cision on granting the writ.
   Chapman's stay order pend-

TRIAL      Turn to Page 2A

Trial
From Page 1A

ing the hearing was the first defense victory in three attacks on the form of the mass trial proceedings.

  Thornton's denial Thursday of the motion for separate trials followed his overruling Dec. 21 of a petition for continuance of the mass trial.  In support of both motions, Johnston had argued that the defense has not had enough time to prepare its case.  Honohan has maintained that the defense has had since May 8, when the 210 were arrested, to prepare its case.
   The stay order, and Thorn-ton's decision to hold a trial for some of the defendants, would appear to solve a potential space problem. The courtroom (Council Chamber) at the Civic Center, where the mass trial was to be held, seats only about 130, and obviously would have made it difficult to accommodate defendants, lawyers, newsmen and spectators.

   Still awaiting scheduling of their trials are 15 persons arrested with the 210. They were separated from the mass trial, apparently because the city wishes to prosecute them using evidence different from that it has against the 210. 
   All 225 were arrested early the morning of May 8 as they sat on the steps of Old Capitol to protest the invasion of Cambodia and the killing of four Kent State University students.

Saving...

Cases Delayed for Half in Mass Trial Here Others Still May Appear on Monday 2A - Iowa City Press=Citizen - Saturday, January 2, 1971 By MARK F. ROHNER Of the Press-Citizen A mass trial of protesters arrested last spring still is planned for Monday, but the list of defendants has been cut at least in half. The trial had been delayed until a higher court could decide whether pre-trial proceedings should be set up for review. However, the stay order apparently applies only to about half of the 210 defendants -- those represented by attorneys Joseph Johnston and J. New-man Toomey, according to City Atty. Jay Honohan. The decision to hold a trial Monday despite the stay order was reached at mid-morning today by Police Judge Joseph Thornton. By late this morning, defense lawyers were contacting their clients to decide whether to agree to the Monday trial date, but the defense reported no decisions reached. As Monday's trial gets underway, Toomey, Johnston and the approximately 100 defendants they represent will be preparing for a Jan. 11 hearing to determine whether a writ of certiorari, authorizing a review of pretrial proceedings, should be issued. The hearing, granted by District Court Judge Ansel Chapman, was asked in a petition filed Thursday afternoon by Toomey and Johnston. They are requesting a review of the legality of a mas trial and of the constitutionality of the city disorderly conduct ordinance the 210 are accused of violating. Toomey said he and Johnston are challenging Thornton's denial of defense motions filed earlier this week. Those motions asked for separate trials of the 210 and objected to the disorderly conduct ordinance, which the defense called "unconstitutional for vagueness and overbreadth." Thornton overruled those motions a few hours before the petition for the writ of certiorari was filed in District Court. The petition for the writ lists only those defendants represented by Toomey and Johnston and was the basis for the decision to go ahead with a trial for the balance of the defendants, Honohan said. That decision was reached after the city conferred with several other defense lawyers, the city attorney said. Chapman said he would probably preside over the Jan. 11 hearing on the writ of certiorari petition and render a d-cision on granting the writ. Chapman's stay order pend- TRIAL Turn to Page 2A Trial From Page 1A ing the hearing was the first defense victory in three attacks on the form of the mass trial proceedings. Thornton's denial Thursday of the motion for separate trials followed his overruling Dec. 21 of a petition for continuance of the mass trial. In support of both motions, Johnston had argued that the defense has not had enough time to prepare its case. Honohan has maintained that the defense has had since May 8, when the 210 were arrested, to prepare its case. The stay order, and Thorn-ton's decision to hold a trial for some of the defendants, would appear to solve a potential space problem. The courtroom (Council Chamber) at the Civic Center, where the mass trial was to be held, seats only about 130, and obviously would have made it difficult to accommodate defendants, lawyers, newsmen and spectators. Still awaiting scheduling of their trials are 15 persons arrested with the 210. They were separated from the mass trial, apparently because the city wishes to prosecute them using evidence different from that it has against the 210. All 225 were arrested early the morning of May 8 as they sat on the steps of Old Capitol to protest the invasion of Cambodia and the killing of four Kent State University students.