DIY History | Transcribe | Campus Culture | University of Iowa anti-war protests, 1970 | 1970-12-30 Iowa City Press-Citizen Article: ""Separate Trials Asked for 210 'Protesters'"" Page 1

Transcribe
Translate

University of Iowa anti-war protests, 1970

1970-12-30 Iowa City Press-Citizen Article: ""Separate Trials Asked for 210 'Protesters'"" Page 1

1 (of 2)
2 Sections — Section A   Iowa City, Iowa, Wednesday, December 30, 1970   10 cents

Separate Trials ASked for 210 'Protesters'
By MARK F. ROHNER
Of the Press-Citizen
Police Judge Joseph Thornton has taken under advisement a defense motion asking separate trials for persons arrested in an anti-war demonstration here May 8.
The defendants—now numbering 210—are scheduled to be tried en masse Monday on disorderly conduct charges.
In their motion, defense lawyers Joseph Johnston and J. Newman Toomey claim that:
—"Defendants cannot properly prepare a defense to the charges filed unless they. . . are tried separately."
—Defense attorneys "will not have time to separate the individual facts in each case so that a proper defense will be possible." —"Joint trials will work an undue and unnecessary burden on defendants, and will deny a fair trial in violation of due process."
The separate trial motion was one of four filed by the defense Tuesday afternoon. A hearing on all four motions was held in Police Court this morning.
The defense motions also challenge the wording of informations filed against the defendants and the constitutionality of the city ordinance they are accused of violating.
At this morning's hearing, City Atty. Jay Honohan told Judge Thornton that "the motions should be overruled in their entirety," calling them "delay tactics by the defense in order to avoid a trial for which they have had seven to eight months to prepare."
Johnston countered angrily that "Honohan knows full well there had always been some question whether these cases would come to trial" until Dec. 15, when the Jan. 4 mass trial date was set.
However, Honohan said after the hearing that it should have been clear to the defense that the cases would be tried after a Nov. 18 meeting he and Thornton had with defense lawyers to discuss possible consolidation of the cases.
In their motions challenging the informations filed against the defendants, Johnston and Toomey claim that the "defendants cannot reasonably be expected to prepare a defense when they have not been informed of the specific acts  alleged to have been committed" and said that the infomations are unreliable because some were not signed by eyewitnesses.
Honohan argued that a city motion amending the informations is 'what the defense asked
TRIAL  Turn to Page 2A

Saving...

1 (of 2) 2 Sections — Section A Iowa City, Iowa, Wednesday, December 30, 1970 10 cents Separate Trials ASked for 210 'Protesters' By MARK F. ROHNER Of the Press-Citizen Police Judge Joseph Thornton has taken under advisement a defense motion asking separate trials for persons arrested in an anti-war demonstration here May 8. The defendants—now numbering 210—are scheduled to be tried en masse Monday on disorderly conduct charges. In their motion, defense lawyers Joseph Johnston and J. Newman Toomey claim that: —"Defendants cannot properly prepare a defense to the charges filed unless they. . . are tried separately." —Defense attorneys "will not have time to separate the individual facts in each case so that a proper defense will be possible." —"Joint trials will work an undue and unnecessary burden on defendants, and will deny a fair trial in violation of due process." The separate trial motion was one of four filed by the defense Tuesday afternoon. A hearing on all four motions was held in Police Court this morning. The defense motions also challenge the wording of informations filed against the defendants and the constitutionality of the city ordinance they are accused of violating. At this morning's hearing, City Atty. Jay Honohan told Judge Thornton that "the motions should be overruled in their entirety," calling them "delay tactics by the defense in order to avoid a trial for which they have had seven to eight months to prepare." Johnston countered angrily that "Honohan knows full well there had always been some question whether these cases would come to trial" until Dec. 15, when the Jan. 4 mass trial date was set. However, Honohan said after the hearing that it should have been clear to the defense that the cases would be tried after a Nov. 18 meeting he and Thornton had with defense lawyers to discuss possible consolidation of the cases. In their motions challenging the informations filed against the defendants, Johnston and Toomey claim that the "defendants cannot reasonably be expected to prepare a defense when they have not been informed of the specific acts alleged to have been committed" and said that the infomations are unreliable because some were not signed by eyewitnesses. Honohan argued that a city motion amending the informations is 'what the defense asked TRIAL Turn to Page 2A