vol. 39, no. 5

Volume XXXIX

Gt LE et

WIONTS N@GOVa

`June 1974, San Francisco

Defense Department sued

on behalf of homosexual

Allan Rocks' fight to retain his TOP SECRET security

clearance and therefore his job as a managing engineer

moved to the federal courts last month. The latest legal

action on his behalf was prompted by the Defense

Department's final determination to revoke his clearance.

Rock is a deputy division manager at a Bay Area

electronics firm which relies heavily on Defense

Department contractrs. In his position, Rock supervises

over 500 employees and his department generates over -

$35 million annually in sales. Though Rock has held a

security clearance of SECRET or higher for the past 17

years, the Defense Department decided that it shoudd be

revoked after learning that he is homosexual.

ACLU-NC represented Rock before the Industrial

Security Clearance Review Board to appeal the denial of

his clearance. Following those harings, the hearing

examiner concluded that since Rock has admitted

violations of California criminal statues (P.C: Sections

286 and 288a, prohibiting sodomy and_oral-genital

contact), he is untrustworthy. There was no finding that

he is a security risk for being homosexual per se and the

hearing examiner found there was no possibility of Rock

being coerced or blackmailed.

_ Nevertheless, ali appeals within the Pentagon failed to

overturn the hearing examiner 's opinion. Rock must now

leave his job and livelihood until or unless the federal

_ district court enjoins the revocation of his clearance.

Rock has held his TOP SECRET clearance since

- January 25, 1972 when the government first learned of

his homosexual activity to the present time. He has had

continued access to security information on a daily basis

while the various appeals in the Defense Department have

proceeded. Now, all of a sudden, while further appeals

proceed in the courts, the government has decided he

cannot retain his clearance. _

ACLU-NC Staff Counsel Joseph Remcho argued in his

complaint for injunctive relief that "`the only evidence

presented against Rock at the hearings was to the effect

that homosexuals as a general class are less reliable than

heterosexuals as a general class. That evidence was-

directly refuted by expert testimony including that of Dr.

Judd Marmor, President of the American Psychiatric

Association."'

Remcho also pointed out that Rock's immediate

superior testified that ``Rock is doing a difficult job ex-

tremely well-and I believe it is important to our program

and to national defense efforts that he continue in his

position.'

In a separate action, the Victimless Crimes Project of

the ACLU Foundation has previously filed suit in the

state courts on behalf of Rock and a number of taxpayers

seeking to have P.C. Sections 286 and 288a invalidated as

unconstitutional. Such a ruling by the state courts would

remove the Defense Department's rationale for

revocation of Rock's clearance. Remcho is representing

Rock in the federal case. He and Victimless Crimes

Project Director Deborah Hinkel represent him in the

state action.

Rock's case has been assigned to Federal District Coun

Judge Samuel Conti and has been set for hearing on a

preliminary injunction on July 18. Rock will have been

unemployed tor over six weeks by then. Remcho will ask

the court to issue a preliminary injunction restoring

Rock's clearance during the litigation and a permanent

injunction against revoking his clearance at all for

engaging in any private sexual conduct between con-

senting adults.

Commenting on the case, Remcho stated: ``It is ab-

surd to say that it is consistent with the national interest

to deprive the nation of one of its most talented

engineering managers, whose superiors consider his very

retention to be important to the national interest, solely

because he has engaged in sexual activity in private with

consenting adults, when he has engaged in such activity

for nine of the years in which he has held security

clearances; where it has never interfered with his abilitv

to safeguard information and where the hearing examiner

has found that he is not susceptible to blackmail. We

submit that Allan Kocks's termination would damaye ine

national interest rather than improve it.''

E0Lb6 VO AA Waa

ts OOSTINVSS i

are SGqi1 TAILS O/9

{ RIN vd " cent -Sy pound

No. 5

Student protests

at U.C. Berkeley

highlight ACLU case

Student demonstrations have again visited the U.C.

Berkeley campus. Last week, students sat-in and occupied

a building at the university to protest Chancellor Albert

Bowker's decision to discontinue the School of

Criminology and deny tenure to Criminology Professor

Anthony Platt.

ACLU-NC Staff Counsel Peter Sheehan has been

representing Platt for the past two years before several

faculty committees reviewing his tenure. Platt is a radical-

Marxist Professor of Criminology who was recommended

for tenure by his department faculty and two other faculty

review committees in 1970. Then Chancellor Roger

Heyns placed Platt's name on the list of candidates for

tenure to be presented to the Regents. Normally the

Regents simply rubber-stamp these recommendations.

One day before Platt's tenure was to be considered by

the Regents, he was arrested twice during a student

demonstration in 1971. Heyns immediately. withdrew

Platt's name. Platt then sued the City of Berkeley for false

arrest and was awarded damages. Charges against him

were dismissed.

The following year, Platt's name again came up for

tenure. At that time, the new Chancellor, Albert

Bowker, refused to recommend Platt's tenure to the

Regents.

The following year, Platt's name again came up for

tenure. At that time, the new Chkanceloor, Albert

Bowker, refused to recommend Platt's tenure to the

Regents.

Bowker claimed that he did not find the faculty

recommendations for Platt's tenure compelling and went

on to say that he did not wish to approve a new tenure

position for Criminology since he was considering closing |

the school. Bowker felt that the criminology program had

abandoned its previous effort to train teachers who would

teach law enforcement people in the community and state

lleges.

colleges Continued on page 2

w

Leftist lawyer faces State Bar disciplinary hearings

Aubrey Grossman, a San Francisco

unless there's a different rule for him than

court, Grossman made a lengthy

attorney known for his defense of leftist

~ and labor clients and most recently for his

vigorous defense of the Pitt River Indians,

faces disciplinary procedures before the

California State Bar which could result in

suspension of his license or disbarment.

He has been charged with two instances of

alleged misconduct which the Bar

describes as a violation of his duties as an

attorney.

`The ACLU-NC Foundation, repre-

sented by General Counsel Ephraim

Margolin (joined by Benjamin Dreyfus of

the California Attorneys for Criminal

Justice; James Larson, President of the

National Lawyers Guild; and, Paul

Alvarado of the Northern California

Criminal Trial Lawyers Association) filed

an amicus curiae brief in support of

Grossman before the local administrative

committee of the bar reviewing his case.

Both incidents of the alleged

misconduct involved trials of Pitt River .

Indians charged with trespassing on

publicly owned lands which the Indians

claimed to be theirs. In the first incident in

Santa Rosa, Grossman stated that the

judge ``exercised different standards of

judgment'' in favor of the prosecution and

accused the judge of ``falsely stating that -

he (Grossman) was a liar.' Grossman was

cited for contempt by the judge and served

five days in jail and paid a five hundred

dollar fine. Nevertheless, the Bar claims

Grossman indulged in ``offensive per-

sonality'' and should be further punished.

The incident - began when the

prosecutor, cross-examining one of

Grossman's clients, said, ``All right. So

you basically travel around the country

aGini property that...'' The witness

objected .to this characterization and

explained his activities in a different

manner. On direct questioning , Grossman

raised the same matter but the judge said

he did not think it relevant. Grossman

protested that "`if he's (the Prosecutor)

willing to open up an irrelevant field, then

I'm entitled to go into the same field,

for me."'

The judge said, ``Mr. Grossman, you

know better than that.'' Grossman

replied, "*I don't know better than that.

Don't say I know better than that. You're

saying that I am a liar.'' The Bar alleges"

that these remarks were made ina ``loud,

disorderly, insolent, contemptuous and

tude voice."

In the second incident, in the Mountain

Justice Court in Redding, Grossman is

charged with the same ``loud, disorderly ,

insolent, contemptuous and rude voice

and manner'' in another Pitt River Indian

trespassing case. Grossman made a series

of complex, pre-trial legal motions in-

volving the constitutionality of the

trespassing statues and Indian ownership

of the land under treaty theories. He was

upset that the Judge was a layman and that

another judge who was an attorney was -

. available for the case but was not assigned

by the Judicial Council.

When the layman judge appeared in the

statement for the record in which he

claimed that the Judicial Council was

"`playing fast and loose with selecting

judges'' who were biased so that the case

would be prejudiced against the defen-

dants. He requested that the judge be

sworn as a witness to testify about the

circumstances under which he took the

case.

Grossman was not cited for pap

for this episode and the judge disqualified

himself. Grossman eventually won the

case. Still, the Bar has called him before a

hearing committee to rule on his conduct.

In his brief to the committee, Margolin

argued that disciplinary action above and

_ beyond normal contempt preceedings will

endanger and deter the vigorous and

energetic defense often necessary when

assisting unpopular or political defendants.

He points out that there is already a

shortage of lawyers willing to take such

cases and that the Bar would be ill-advised

Continued on page 2

June 1974

aclu news

LEGAL

Civil Service revives Tee loyalty question

Since it began, the motto of the American Civil

Liberties Union has been "`Eternal Vigilance."' Today, it

is certainly no less necessary to be constantly suspicious

of the ways of government.

Back in 1972, ACLU-NC was involved in a case

concerning two medical interns at Stanford University

who applied for a rotating training program at Palo Alto

_ veterans Hospital. They both refused to answer the Civil

Service loyalty questionnaire and were denied the

positions. They sued the Civil Service Commission and

the federal court ruled the questionnaire unconstitutional.

With victory in hand, the two young doctors went off

to again apply for the same positions at the same hospital.

Sure enough, there was the same loyalty questionnaire

with a few minor changes. Again they refused to answer

and again they were denied employment. They again sued

the Civil Service Commission and they again won their

case.

This time however, the government aie to the

Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. Civil Service had decided

to fight for the loyalty questionnaire that had already been

ruled unconstitutional twice.

The questions in question were two:

(1) Are you now or within the past ten years have you

_ been a member of the Community Part, USA, or any

subdivision of the Communist Party, USA?

(2) Have you ever organized, or helped to organize, or

become a member of any organization or group of persons

which, during the period of your membership or

association, you knew was advocating or teaching that the

Government of the United States should be overthrown

or overturned by force, violence, any other' unlawful

Means?

The Ninth Circuit upheld the lower court rulings that

the loyalty questions are unconstitutional. The court said

that ``the first question dispenses with any requirement of

knowledge or specific intent. While the second question

does require knowledge, it makes no mention of specific

intent.'' ""Knowledge'' and ` `specific intent'' have been

recognized as essential ingredients for lawful loyalty

questions in past Supreme Court decisions.

With the Ninth Circuit victory in hand, our two

Stanford interns finally got jobs at the V.A. hospital

without answering the questions.-Problem solved and

First Amendment fortified.

And then along comes Civil Service Commission Form

GC 51.

parently thought that no one was watching them a full

year after the saga of the two doctors.

Dated December, 1973, the government ap- |

A paragraph at the topof the new loyalty questionnaire

says that these questions replace the old ones and that

applicants filling out the old forms should line out the old

questions and answer the new ones on form GC 51. In

truly helpful fashion, the new form says: ``If you have

difficulty in determining which questions should be

crossed out, please telephone, toll free, your nearest

Federal Job Information Center.'' It is understandable -

that many people would have such difficulty.

Believe it or not, the all new 1974 Civil Service loyalty

~ Questions read:

(1) Are you now a member of the Communist Party,

USA, or any subdivision of the Communist Party, USA? .

(2) Are you now, or within the last ten years have you

been a member of any organization, or group of persons,

including but not limited to the Communist Party, USA,

which during the period of your membership you knew

was advocating or teaching that the Government of the

United States should be overthrown or ous by

force, violence, or any unlawful means?

Apparently, some government bureaucrat in charge of

writing loyalty questions is better suited to divising varied

sentence structure than original prose. See you in court.

If you: apply for a federal job and are asked these _

questions, call ACLU.

Two chancellors improper

Continued from page 1

He noted, ``Previous attempts to

abolish Criminology at Berkeley have

failed because of strong support within the

law enforcement profession. Such strong

support would not be forthcoming at the

present time.'' In other words, since the

study of criminology has led to criticism of

law enforcement, it is no longer needed at

Berkeley.

Bowker's denial of tenure also raised

issue with Platt's "`citizenship on the

campus.'' The Chancellor said he is

troubled by ``the very active role (Platt)

took in speaking at rallies, testifying

before the City Council, and agitating on

the police decentralization issue.''

Bowker also complained that Platt had

actively opposed acquisition by the

Berkeley Police of patrol helicopters. Platt

had said that the helicopters would be used

""selectively and discriminatorily against

members of the Third World and campus

communities.' Bowker called this

comment ``unprofessional,

demogoguery.'' He added that ``the

decline in morale and reduction in size of

the Berkeley Police Department is

sheer

seriously hurting the campus."'

Bowker concluded that one of the

troublesome aspects of the School of

Criminology is that it does not foster good

relations with law enforcement and that ~

Platt's appointment to tenure would not.

improve that situation.

With that, Platt appealed to the Faculty

Committee on Privilege and Tenure. In

October, 1973, a majority of the com-

mittee concluded that Platt's privileges

had been violated by Chancellor Heyns

when his name was deleted from the

tenure list following his arrest and by

Chancellor Bowker because he relied on

political reasons. The remedy offered by

the Committee was that Platt's whole

tenure process should start at the

beginning again. :

Platt found this unsatisfactory and

appealed to the Representative Assembly

of the Berkeley Academic Senate. That

body agreed that the remedy was

inadequate and said that he must be placed

on the tenure list again to be presented to .

the Regents. The whole matter was also

referred to the Academic Freedom

Committee which concluded that Platt's

Women's Rights Positions

The Women's Rights Project of the

ACLU Foundation of Northern California -

| has now received partial funding from the

| San Francisco Foundation. As soon as

matching funds are granted, the litigation

| and education project should be ready for

| operation. In anticipatin of full funding,

applications for the positions of Project

| Attorney and Program Developer arenow

being accepted.

The Project Attorney and the Program

Developer will share the responsibility for

the operation of the Project. The attorney

should be a member of the California Bar

with some litigation experience,

preferably in the area of civil rights. A

deep commitment to civil liberties as well

as a sensitive concern for securing and

enforcing the rights of women are

necessary. Experience in coordinating or

| managing a legal services agency or law

office is helpful. The attorney should also

be willing to share some of the clerical and

secretarial duties. The salary will be up to:

$12,000 per annum.

The Project Program Developer must

also have a basic understanding of the

feminist movement as well as a deep

commitment to civil liberties. Experience

in organizational work will be helpful,

especially in women's organizations or

coalitions. Writing, public speaking and

public relations skills will be useful and

clerical and secretarial skills are necessary.

Some understanding of legal research

would also be helpful. The salary for

Project Program Developer will be up to

$12,000 per annum.

Applicants for both positions should

send resumes to Jay A. Miller, Executive

Director, ACLU, 593 Market Street,

Suite 227, San Francisco 94105.

academic freedom had been seriously

violated. Nevertheless, the Committee on

Privilege and Tenure refused to alter its

recommendation that the tenure process

begin from scratch.

With an unprecedented resolution

passed three weeks ago, the Represen-

- tative Assembly voted to override the

Committee on Privilege and Tenure and

to recommend that Platt be granted.

tenure. The matter is now once again on

Chancellor Bowker's desk.

"Meanwhile, peaceful student demon-

strations continue. The demands are:

retention of the School of Criminology and

tenure for Anthony Platt. Should Bowker

decide to forward Platt's name to the

Regents for tenure, and the Regents break

all precedent and deny him, the case of

Anthony Platt will rapidly move to the (c)

courts.

Grossman

Continued from page 1

_to further restrict or inhibit those who are

willing to act. He states that ` `imposition

of discipline would be not only grossly

unwarranted and unfair to him

(Grossman), but would dangerously

menace the independence of the bar so

necessary to insure the availability of

competent lawyers in difficult cases.''

In addition, Margolin charges that the

Sections of the Business and Professions

Code, which Grossman is alleged to have

violated, are unconstitutionally vague and

overbroad to permit imposition of

discipline. Margolin stresses that they are

certainly too vague to proscribe First

Amendment activity. Finally, Margolin

argues that much of Grossman's behavior

constituted First Amendment expression

of criticism against governmental in-

`behind them -

Impeachment Ball .

An "Impeachment Ball'' to demon-

strate support for "`giving Richard Nixon

a fair and open trial'' will be held in San

Francisco at the Sheraton Palace Hotel on

June 22, sponsored by a group of private

citizens.

""We're parodying the Inaugural Ball

with a serious purpose,'' said Garth

Bockams, Jr., a member of the ad hoc

committee organizing the event. `"We

want Congressmen' to "know people `are

if they vote for im-

peachment."'

Proceeds of the $10-per person event

are being donated to the American Civil

Liberties Union for its pen

campaign.

Tickets are available to the public at

$10 each from the Committee for the Ball,

Box 2378, Stanford, California 93405.

All ACLU members are invited to attend.

stitutions which is clearly protected by

both the U.S. and California. Con-

stitutions.

Should the Bar hearing committee

decide to discipline Grossman, the case

will go directly to the state Supreme

Court.

: Pricon film

ACLU members are invited to attend a

screening of the film ``3000 Years and

Life'' which was made by the Unitarian

Universalist Service Committee and which

documents what occurred at Wadpole

State Prison in Massachusetts during a

wildcat guard strike. The film will be

`shown on Thursday June 13 at 8 p.m. at

the Unitarian Fellowship, 300 East Santa

Inez (at Ellsworth) in San Mateo.

9 issues a year , monthly except bi- -monthly i in March-April, July-August,

and November-December

Published by the American Civil Liberties Union of Northern California

Second Class Mail privileges authorized at San Francisco, California

Richard DeLancie, Chairman of the Board Jay Miller, Executive Director

Mike Callahan, Editor and Public Information Director

593 Market Street, San Francisco, California 94105 - 433-2750

Membership $15 and up of which $2.50 is the annual subscription fee for aclu News.

ountain pair fight

public defender bill

By Harriet Berman

Surrounded by the piercing crags and

backwoods pines of the eastern slopes of

the High Sierras, a strip of high plateau

has been paved over and fenced in. A

cinder-block building sits there, with

mobile home units installed at the rear.

This is the Mono County Sheriff's

Substation at Mammoth Lakes. Justice

Court sessions are held here, in a 12' x

15" cinder-block and fake-pine-panel room

whose windows give a direct, unob-

. Structed view of Mammoth Mountain.

Inside the tiny courtroom, on May 20,

ACLU staff counsel Joseph Remcho was

challenging a California statute passed in

1972 authorizing assessment after trial of

a defendant's ability to pay for the cost of

representation by the public defender. -

A year ago, Sherry Bono and Neil

Smith, two young people from Los

Angeles who had moved to the mountain

town of June Lake because they loved the

serenity of the setting, were convicted in

Mono County on charges stemming from

a fight with the local dogcatcher over

_ Neil's dog, Hank.

Mono County, with a total population

of 5,200, has a leash law; fines are a

source of revenue. One day last year, Neil

returned home to find Hank gone; the

dogcatcher's truck drove by, and Hank.

_ was in it. ``I was so-fed up,'' Neil recalled.

and

**I'd already paid over $100 in fines for

the dog, and I didn't have any money.

When the dogcatcher leaned out saying,

"You can't get your dog back unless you

pay,' I saw red.*' Neil started wrestling

with the tailgate of the truck to get his dog

out, and then started wrestling with the

dogcatcher.

Sherry came to Neil's aid. ``If-we could

have yelled, got all the hostility out,'' she

thinks now, "`it would have ended."'

Instead, a deputy sheriff urged the

dogcatcher - who refuses to discuss his

current reflections on the incident without

permission from his supervisors because

"*T wouldn't want to say anything I'm not

supposed to'' - to press charges.

Neil and Sherry were convicted last

spring after a three-day jury trial and

sentenced to jail. ACLU successfully

Oakland Garage Sale

Oakland Chapter 's Garage Sale is set for

Sunday, June 23 at 6036 La Salle in

Oakland's Montclaire District. ACLU

members and friends in the Bay Area are

| asked to participate by coming to the sale

and picking up some bargains.

The Chapter also needs more items to

sell. Members are asked to look around

their homes for things they would like to

donate to the garage sale. Items for sale

`may be brought to 6036 La Salle on

Saturday, June 22, or if you wish call

Davis or Louise Riemer at 547-1267 to

have items picked up. On June 22, call

339-9781.

Lots of good, saleable, tempting items

are needed to make the event a success.

The Chapter desperately needs your

support to finance the ambitious civil

liberties projects for this year and next.

The Chapter is also looking for a file

cabinet to be donated to the Chapter for

use in their new office. Wine and refresh-

ments will be served the day of the sale.

challenged several irregularities in their

sentences, resulting in a reduction of the

number of days they had to serve. As a

condition of probation, they were ordered

to pay $400 apiece in $50-a-month in-

stallments for the costs to the county of

their public defender. ACLU appealed,

arguing that assessment for the public

defender 's services is unconstitutional and

in any event that such assessments cannot

be a condition of probation. An appellate

court agreed with the second point only,

and ordered the case back to the justice

court for a separate hearing on the

defendants' ability to pay, a procedure

prescribed in the 1972 statute.

That hearing was finally held last

month. Remcho argued that any scheme

to assess afterwards a defendant found

unable to afford a private attorney at the

time of prosecution is an unconstitutional

interference with the right to counsel

guaranteed by the Sixth Amendment.

The judge and district attorney,

however , were most interested in Neil and

Sherry's respective ability to pay. A

challenge to the statute is pending before

the California Supreme Court. Judge

Garfield McDaniel said that meanwhile he

would `"go by the law as it appears on the

books.'' But much of that is in dispute

too. The statute says the assessment

should be based on ``present ability to

~ pay.'? ACLU contends that ``present

ability to pay'' means at the time of

sentencing, and means actual, as opposed

_ to potential, assets on hand. The judge

disagreed.

Neil was subjected to a microscopic

grilling as to the exact state of his financial

affairs and whether he had been making a

**good faith effort'' to find work. Both he

and Sherry now live in Los Angeles,

where Neil is a member of a local of the

United Brotherhood of Carpenters and

Joiners and is collecting unemployment.

Questioned as to why he hadn't gone on

many jobs through the union, he ex-

plained that construction work is

seasonally slow in winter months and that

the economy of the entire construction

industry in Los Angeles has been in a

recession. Asked if he had inquired as to

where he stood on the union's list for job

June 1974

aclu news

3

Legislative proposals

Of the many bills to be heard by the Assembly Criminal Justice Committee in

June, the following are a sample: ee :

AB 2789 (Assemblyman Mike Cullen, D-Los Angeles) provides for the sealing of

. certain records relating to arrest or conviction for soliciting or engaging in

prostitution. In order to make the bill more palatable to law enforcement, an

amendment provides that records otherwise sealed shall be available to government

entities desiring information about applicants for peace officer positions or about

persons employed as peace officers.

AB 2871 (Assemblyman Bob McLennan, R-Los Angeles) gives the district. at-

torney concurrent authority with probation officers to file certain juvenile court

petitions. The ACLU has consistently opposed making the juvenile justice system

more like the adult system, such as by the further intrusion of the district attorney,

unless juveniles are also afforded rights, such as bail and jury trial, now available only

to adults.

AB 3333 (Assemblyman Leon Ralph, D-Los Angeles) prohibits theatrical per-

formances which depict "`any act of violence which if committed would constitute a

felony'' or which contain any ``ethnic slur'' or ``detrimentally'' portray any ethnic

group. The ACLU opposes this bill, which would, for example, preclude the per-

formance of much of Shakespeare. While we favor neither felonies nor ethnic slurs,

we believe that the First Amendment precludes the restrictions this legislation seeks

to impose.

AB 3619 (Assemblyman Richard Alatorre, D-Los Angeles) deletes a section of

the current law providing that the use of ``any vulgar, profane, or indecent language

within the presence or hearing of women .. . in a loud and boisterous manner'' is.a

misdemeanor. Apparently the equality of women is being recognized by the bill, not

an overwhelming concern for free speech, for the bill retains the proscription against

the use of such language in the presence or hearing of children.

calls, Neil explained that his position was

subject to change because of the union's

seniority system.

He answered detailed questions ranging

from utility bills to new tires to eating

habits. The judge, apparently oblivious to

the rise in gas prices and the notorious

lack of a rapid transit system in the huge

sprawl of Los Angeles, seemed critical of

Neil's estimated expense of $30 a month

on gas.

Neil's testimony, the judge ruled,

""doesn't satisfy the court that he has

made a conscientious effort to find em-

ployment.'' Neil was again assessed

$400, based on a "`present ability to pay

$189.07 (the amount he has in a bank

account) and to borrow.'' In effect, it

seemed he was on trial because his lifestyle

enables him:to be calm and joyful though

unemployed, at a time when jobs are

scarce, the economy shaky, and millions

of people are out of work.

Then it was Sherry's turn. She had

recently quit a job as a salesclerk. "`I could -

not mentally stand going back to that job. I

hated it.'' Was she looking for work now?

feiffer

2% a MU ee, ar nee

Pe SHE OS, 5 hy 5.

ERAS eon.

**I wouldn't want to work in a Jack-in-

the-Box. It would make me sick.'' Did she

think she could pay monthly reim-

bursements to the county?.``No. I want to

go to school in September, so I want to

save some money up to go to school. |

started working in the first place in order

to go to school. I got sidetracked into just

plain working.''

In Sherry's case, the judge ruled that

she ``does not have a present ability to

pay.'' The assessment against Neil will be

the basis for an ACLU appeal.

As Neil and Sherry left the courtroom

after having spelled out the minutest

details of their personal financial lives, a

lawyer waiting for another case com-

plimented them on their patience.

Later, drinking beer and eating popcorn

at the base of Mammoth Mountain,

Sherry shook her head thinking about the

sheriff's substation. ``In this vast beauty,

to live on asphalt.'' ee

Meanwhile, Hank is alive and well and

living with Neil in Los Angeles. Neil and

Sherry did not bring him along for their

final day in court in Mono County.

GEMSE 12 O00 TAR a

TH COUNTRY APART I~... SAMI

3 June 1974

aclu news

CHAPTERS

Oakland

Guest speaker Amitai Schwartz ad-

dressed the monthly board meeting of the

Chapter to discuss the Tyron Guyton

slaying case, and the Northern California

Police Practices Project which is

specializing in police policies and

regulations. Ira

Supervisor Tom Bates' office also spoke,

reporting on the proposed Alameda

County jail complexes. Oakland Chapter's

Jail Committee said questions regarding

new jail construction have been directed in

writing to candidates for local office in

hopes their replies can be published before

election time. The Kaiser Study report on

jail construction is also expected soon.

The Rape Issue will be the topic of the

Chapter's June 19th meeting. This special

session will be held at Hillcrest

Elementary school in the Upper Rockridge

District off Broadway Terrace at .the

corner of Mandalay and Marguerite. The

Rape issue will have speakers supporting

the ACLU position as well as those

positions to the left and right of it. The

session will begin at 8 p.m.

San Francisco

The Chapter has hired Mrs. Esther

Faingold as a part-time coordinator to

assist the Chapter in staying on top of local

problems and issues. She will help develop

a volunteer corps; raise additonal funds

through organized chapter activities and

enlarge the community's awareness of the

work of the ACLU. Mrs. Faingold's

experience in public relations and in

community activity as a paid professional

and as a volunteer has been extensive. She

_will usually be at the Chapter office at 593

Market Street on Monday's and Wed-

nesday's and on other days when events

require. Chapter members should feel free

to call her with ideas and suggestions. The

phone is 433-2750, ext. 24.

At their May meeting, Chapter Board

members were privileged to hear Edison

Uno relate his experiences as a member of

ithe San Francisco 1970 Grand Jury. His

remarks provoked much discussion about

the purpose and usefulness of the Grand

Jury system. He recommended that the

ACLU involve itself in the selection of

jurors and inform the public of its

procedures. :

A brand new membership committee

has been organized. The Board has

decided to bring a more personal approach

to new membership recruiting and to try

to involve more members in it.

Development of a chapter Speaker's

_ Bureau will be given high priority. This

roster, when completed, will be sent to

San Francisco organizations, schools, -

groups who often seek personnel to speak

on Civil Rights. Chapter President Ruth

Jacobs will be attending the Biennial

Conference in Milwaukee.

An Essay Contest for Sr. High School

students will be initiated in the fall. The

Chapter will-work cooperatively with the

Board of Education in promoting this new -

project.

Berkeley

Last month, the Chapter co-sponsored a

mock trial jury selection with Boalt Hall

Law School which drew a capacity

audience. Black Panther attorney Charles

Garry served as counsel for the defense

and Berkeley attorney Penny Cooper was

the prosecuting attorney. Alameda

County Superior Court Judge George

Kalinsky of County -

Phillips presided over the trial.

The event focused on how trial

lawyers go about selecting jurors.

Members of the audience were selected at

random, summoned, interrogated and

sworn in aS prospective jurors.

Examination of the candidates by the

lawyers or the judge is called voir dire.

A fact situation of a purse snatching was

the trial problem. The victim was a nun;

the defendants a black woman and a

Chinese man. As prospective jurors were

called up for questioning, Garry and

Cooper alternated their examinations.

Whenever one of them received an un-

satisfactory response to one of their

questions, they would challenge the juror.

The judge would then rule on the

challenge to determine whether the juror

should be dismissed.

Garry and Cooper asked often intense

questions on matters that had potential

bearing on the case including occupations,

organizational memberships, racial at-

titudes, sexual attitudes, political beliefs

and others. Garry even asked one juror

whether he had ever watched Perry

Mason. Garry explained that a trial lawyer :

has to watch out for the "`Perry Mason

Syndrome'' among jurors. ``They always

expect that the defense will not only

devastate the prosecution, but bring in the

guilty party.'?

Fresno

The Chapter held its Annual Dinner

and Nominating Meeting on May 20. The

Armenian dinner was enjoyed by a lively

crowd who heard Jack Osterhaus,

President of the Fresno Teacher's

Association, talk on Teachers Rights and

Civil Liberties.

The Nominating Committee named six

persons for the six vacancies on the Board.

Since there were no further nominations,

the six were declared elected. They are:

Ann Leavenworth, former member of the

Fresno Board of Education; Donald

Albright, Counselor at Cal State Fresno;

Howard Watkins, local attorney; Max

Cheeseman, a local political leader; and

Jim Smith and Lenore Schreiber, the

President and Vice President of the

current Board. The new members will be

installed and new officers elected at the

June meeting, Monday the 10th at 7:30

in the First Christian Church.

Santa Clara

A committee has been set up to in-

vestigate a report of programs concerning

behavior modification of juveniles which

are presently being considered for use in

Santa Clara County. The investigation will

hopefully cover any programs of this

nature in use at present, their origins and

connections if any with state and federal

programs. Dr. Al Rutherford will head up

the committee.

The Chapter is protesting section 145.2

of Title 19, Code of Federal Regulations

which gives custom officials the right to

open any foreign mail coming into the

US. Section 145.3 prohibits the reading of

the contents by any custom officials who

opens the mail. Section 145.3 not

withstanding, the Chapter sent letters of

protestation to Congressman Don Ed-

__ wards and the Treasury Department.

The original complaint came from a

Chapter member whose son is in the Peace

Corps in Latin America and who, coin-

cidentally or not, is on the President's

Enemies List. -

Attorneys Jim King and Joyce Sogg

helped cool a _ potentially violent

forcement

demonstration at the Republican Pre-

Election Conference in San Jose. Secret

Service people in attendance upon Vice

President Ford didn't want any possible

demonstrations and so no parade permits

were given. King and Sogg attended a

meeting with police officials and some of

the demonstrators and helped bring about -

a compromise between the two groups.

The demonstrations were held sans rotten

fruit, etc. and the police were able to keep

a busy intersection clear.

The Board and Care Committee headed

by Murray Whittaker, has been in-

vestigating the Board and Care homes in

San Jose where former patients have been

placed since the closing of Agnew State

Hospital. Evidence of wholesale violations

of the Civil Liberties of people living in

these homes is being invewstigated by

Whittaker's committee. A Boardand Care

hearing panel is being held July 22 and 23

at the Student Council Chambers of the

Student Union at San Jose State

University.

Sonoma

The annual ACLU picnic will be held

Sunday, July 7 at the Warnick Apple

Ranch at 10650 Green Valley Road,

northwest of Sebastopol. Starting time,

according to Chairman Mel Hildreth, will -

be noon.

Hildreth and committee members are

currently working on the menu, and

- promise plenty of other goodies to go with

the main course. The annual art auction,

~ featuring the works of North Bay and Bay

Area artists, will also be featured.

Bay Area ACLU members are cordially

invited to make a day of it in the country

and attend the annual affair. Further

information may be obtained by calling

Jack Warnick, 823-4346, or Lee Torliatt,

547-7507.

A large turnout attended the ACLU

board meeting in May to hear district

attorney candidate Gene Tunney discuss

his views. His is running against in-

cumbent John Hawkes. Tunney

responded to a number of questions. On

matters of ACLU interest, he said:

- He was concerned too many cases

were currently being charged as felonies

without adequate justification and then

plea-bargained down to misdemeanors.

_- Sonoma County's Special En-

Detail has used some

questionable tactics in stopping people

without sufficient cause.

- The idea of an ombudsman for the

Sonoma County Jail is ``a great idea' but

he's ``not sure it would happen'' because

of resistance by county officials.

The board also heard new information

from Legal Coordinator Martin Speigel -

regarding students attempting to form a

Christian Club on the Santa Rosa High

School campus. He said that conflicting

constitutional points made it difficult for

ACLU to take a stand. -

Mel Hildreth presented a report on the

~ ACLU meeting at Los Gatos with a series

of recommendations for board action.

Monterey

The Monterey County Chapter met at

the offices of Francis Heisler on Monday,

June 3. The following three items brought

up were of special interest:

The Chapter had a meeting at Monterey

Peninsula College at which 100 students

attended. Francis Heisler, President Pearl

Carey and Membership Chairman

Ephraim Doner spoke. The recetipn was

very enthusiastic. and there is a good

chance that a chapter at the college will

materialize.

Francis Heisler spoke of a number of

civil liberties cases he had handled

recently and pointed out that they are but

a sampling of many others erhaps equally

worthy that could not be taken for lack of

people to do the work. Heisler pointed out

that at least half the work in these cases

could be done by paralegal assistants.

Volunteers willing to do this type of work

already exist and could handle it. Par-

ticularly needed at this time is a military

counselor, as the VOLAR continues to

disappoint those who have volunteered. It

appears that the Chapter may be on the

verge of expanding its load of civil liberties _

cases handled free as the use of volunteer

paralegal assistants is further developed.

President Pearl Carey, who was fired -

from her job with the California Depart-

ment of Human Resources for attending _

the Democratic National Convention in

1972, is pursuing a campaign to get the

Hatch Act amended or repealed. After ten

days spent in Washington several months

ago on this mission, she is now trying to -

get a bill reported out of a House Com-

mittee where it is bottled up that would

remedy some of the present Act's defects.

Mt. Diablo

The Annual Fourth of July Mem-

bership Picnic and Board election will be

held from 11 a.m. until dusk at Layfayette

Reservoir Park. Bring your own lunch.

Popcorn, beer, and wine will be available

for a donation. There may also be a

``surprise."' All ACLU members are

invited to attne dand see. oo.

Sacramento

On June 26 at 7:30 p.m. in kRoom 101

of the County Administration Bldg., a

special membership meeting will be held

at which Mr. Robert Simpson will present

his complaints against both the

Sacramento Chapter and ACLU-NC.

These arise out of his contentions that he

has been denied the right to speak at

various ACLU functions and that the

Affiliate has conspired to deny him

adequate legal representation in his

defense against arrests for picketing at the

capitol.

ACLU-NC has litigated on Simpson's

behslf six times since 1970 with two of the

cases going to the California Supreme

Court. This litigation has not been.

successful in invalidating thepenal code

section which prohibits picketing at the -

capitol and which was intended especially

for Simpson. ACLU-NC Legal Director

Charles Marson has concluded that no

further action on his behalf would-be

fritful.

All chapter members are invited to

attend and discuss these matters with Mr.

Simpson.

Typewriter needed

The San Francisco Chapter needs a gift of

an electric typewriter in good working

condition and of recent year. If you have ~

one you wish to donate, please contact the

office 433-2750, ext. 24.