NCJ Number
14822
Journal
Criminal Law Bulletin Volume: 10 Issue: 6 Dated: (JULY-AUGUST 1974) Pages: 516-543
Date Published
1974
Length
28 pages
Annotation
REVIEW OF POST-ARREST LITIGATION AND THE PROBLEMS OF MASS ARRESTS ARISING OUT OF THE ARREST OF SEVERAL THOUSAND PERSONS IN WASHINGTON, D.C. IN MAY, 1971.
Abstract
IN MANY RESPECTS THE COURTS DID PERFORM WELL, THEY REMAINED OPEN TWENTY-FOUR HOURS A DAY. ARRESTEES WERE RELEASED FAR MORE QUICKLY THAN HAD OCCURRED IN OTHER DISORDERS. BAIL AMOUNTS WERE GENERALLY REASONABLE. THE TRIAL COURTS TRIED TO PROTECT THE LEGITIMATE INTERESTS OF BOTH THE GOVERNMENT AND THE ARRESTEES. IN RETROSPECT, HOWEVER, MUCH THAT THE COURTS DID IS OPEN TO CRITICISM. THE JUDGES, USING WIDELY VARYING POLICIES AND PROCEDURES, WERE ARRAIGNING LARGE NUMBERS OF PERSONS ON UNKNOWN OR CLEARLY UNPROVABLE CHARGES. THEY ARRAIGNED PEOPLE WITHOUT REQUIRING ANY REAL PROOF OF THEIR IDENTITY, ALTHOUGH IT WAS CLEAR THAT MANY OF THE DEFENDANTS HAD GIVEN FALSE NAMES (MANY OF THE DEFENDANTS WERE NAMED JOHN DOE OR JOHN SMITH), AND THEY ALLOWED THESE DEFENDANTS OUT ON MINIMAL BAIL, WHICH WAS NOT BEING PROVIDED BY THE DEFENDANT BUT BY A BAIL FUND COLLECTED IN ORDER TO ALLOW PEOPLE TO OBTAIN RELEASE AND FORFEIT BAIL. THE JUDGES DID NOT TREAT PEOPLE INDIVIDUALLY, AS SPECIFIED IN THE PLAN, NOR DID THEY INSURE EQUALITY OF TREATMENT FOR SIMILARLY SITUATED ARRESTEES. (AUTHOR ABSTRACT)