Defense Fund Triumphs in Memphis School Case
Press Release
June 16, 1964
Cite this item
-
Brief Collection, LDF Court Filings. Lankford v. Schmidt Transcript of Proceedings Vol. 3, 1965. 3b2a9b54-ba9a-ee11-be36-6045bdeb8873. LDF Archives, Thurgood Marshall Institute. https://ldfrecollection.org/archives/archives-search/archives-item/91fe5437-106c-4723-9036-e9920c6b82bf/lankford-v-schmidt-transcript-of-proceedings-vol-3. Accessed August 19, 2025.
Copied!
f
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND
SAMUEL JAMES LANKFORD, et al.
vs. Civil No. 16080
BERNARD j, SCHMIDT» iscommissioner
of Police of Baltimore City.
January 18, 1965
TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS
Volume 3
(Page276 to page 381 )
n/
Francis T. Owens
Official Reporter
514 Post Office Bldg.
Baltimore 2, Maryland
1
■)
r~
4
f)
(i
7
s
!)
10
11
12
14
14
15
1(5
17
IS
10
20
21
22
24
24
25
276
I N D E X
Witness Direct Cross Redirect
Terry Boots 278 286
Frankie Bond 287 291 292
Addison D. Warren 296 303
Capt. Joseph A. Mahrer 306 364 372,
377
E X H I B I T S
Plaintiffs' No.
1
2
3-B through 3-J
Recross
292
376,
378
Page
320
326
349
1
• )
4
4
5
ii
7
S
!)
10
11
12
14
14
1.7
1(1
17
18
10
20
21
22
24
24
25
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND
277
SAMUEL JAMES LANKFORD, et al.
vs. Civil No. 16080
BERNARD J. SCHMIDT, as COMMISSIONER :
of POLICE of BALTIMORE CITY :
*
Baltimore, Maryland
Monday, January 18, 1965
The above»entitled matter was resumed for
hearing before His Honor, Roszel C. Thomsen, Chief Judge,
at ten o'clock a.m.
A P P E A R A N C E S
(As heretofore noted.)
1
• >
2
4
5
(i
7
S
!)
10
11
12
i : t
14
15
l(i
17
IS
1!)
20
21
22
22
24
25
278
PROCEEDINGS
THE COURT: Well, I just wanted to find out
whether the discovery proceeding was going along?
MR. NABRIT: Yes, Your Honor. Counsel has
just handed me several sheets of paper, but 1 have not had a
chance to look at them yet. Perhaps my associates can do
that and we can go ahead with some witnesses.
THE COURT: Well, do you have a list of these?
MR. NABRIT: May we approach the bench?
THE COURT: Yes.
(Conference at the bench.)
MR. NABRIT: May I call my witness?
THE COURT: Yes.
MR. NABRIT: Miss Boots.
Thereupon______________ __________ ____ ____ . ___
TERRY BOOTS
was called as a witness for and on behalf of the plaintiffs
and, having been first duly sworn, was examined and testified
as follows.
THE CLERK: State your full name for the recori
THE WITNESS: Terry Boots.
DIRECT EXAMINATION
BY MR. NABRIT:
Q Miss Boots, where do you live?
v 14
1
•)
:{
4
5
(i
7
S
!)
10
11
12
12
14
15
l(i
17
IS
1!)
20
21
22
22
24
25
A
279
2303 Allendale Road.
Q And where do you work?
A Jewish convalescent home, 4601 Pall Mall Road.
THE COURT: What is that?
(Tile last answer.^as read by the Reporter.)
THE CLERK: Talk louder.
BY MR. NABRIT:
Q And what do you do there?
A I'm a practical nurse.
Q And do you have children?
A Yes, I do.
Q What are their names and ages?
A Well, I have Vera. She is fifteen; Prentice,
fourteen; Avis, nine; Scooter, two; Clifton, two; and Nebra,
one.
Would you describe briefly for us the house that
you live in and how many floors it has?
A It is a detached house, wooden frame, and three
stories, broken into three apartments.
I occupy the third floor, me and my kids, and
my sister, Miss Elizabeth Greene has the second floor, and
Mr. and Mrs. Bailey on the first floor.
Q And each apartment has a separate entrance?
A The first floor has a separate entrance; the
second and third lias the same entrance.
kl5
280
Q Describe how you enter when you go in?
A Well, there*8 a side door which leads, that has
steps that leads up to the second and third floor.
Q And is there a door to the second floor going up
into your apartment with steps?
A Yes.
Q And another door up to the third floor for the
steps?
A Yes.
Q Now, do you remember Monday, December 28th?
A Yes.
Q 1964?
A Yes.
Q What did you do that day? What do you remember
about that day?
A Well, it's a day that I'll never forget as long
as I live. I was— I stayed home from work that day. I was
laying in bed reading. My kids was In the living room
listening to the radio, dancing.
Q When was this?
A This was on Monday.
Q About what time of day?
A About 4:15 to 4:30.
THE COURT: p.m.?
THE WITNESS: p.m. <16
1
■>
:t
4
7>
(i
7
s
!)
10
11
12
12
14
1.7
l( i
17
IS
10
20
21
•>2
22
24
27)
THE COURT: The afternoon?
281
THE WITNESS: Yes.
BY MR. NABRIT:
Q All right. What happened? Just describe In
your own words what happened?
A Well, I was laying in bed reading, and as I say
my kids were in the living room listening to the radio, dancii
and my niece came to the bedroom and tells me there's a man
in the yard with a gun pointing at the house.
Well, I didn't pay her any attention. I told
her to forget it and go ahead and dance.
And about two seconds later there was a big
banging on the door, and before I could get to the door to
answer it it came open, a lot of policemen came in, guns in
hand.
They spreaded out and went sll over the apart
ment. I asked them what they were looking for. They said,
"Well, we're looking for people."
I said, "That figures."
Well, my, I was in the bedroom to the left of
my door and my kids were in the living room, and this one
policeman with plain-clothes was standing between me and my
children, and I couldn't get by.
They looked around, underneath the bed, in the
closet, and they left.
.17
1
■J
:{
4
f>
(i
7
S
!»
10
11
12
10
14
1.')
Ki
17
18
1!)
20
21
•>2
20
24
25
Q Now, when the officer was standing there what
were they doing?
A lly children was In the living room screaming.
Q What about Clifton?
A He wa3 hollering, "Mommy, help me, mommy, help
me."
Q How old is he?
A He's two.
Q Now, what happened when the officers left?
A Well, when the officers left, ny girl fourteen,
she was so afraid, so she left. She got her clothes and she
went to my sister's house to spend the night. The rest of
the kids were so upset and myself.
Q Now, did the officers, when the/ came in the
bedroom, what happened when they came in the bedroom, how maty
came in the bedroom?
A Two officers.
Q What did they do in there?
A One got on each side of the bed, got down on
their knees, gun in hand, and looked underneath the bed.
One was on the right side of the bed and looked
in my' wardrobe.
Q Do you know how many policemen came into the
282
apartment?
I SA No, I don't.
283
8
1 Q Did you or any of your children open the door
•) for them?
:i A No.
4 Q Was the door locked?
:> A No.
(> Q Why not?
7 A Well, the kid.-? go in and out all the time; so I
S don't lock it.
!) THE COURT: Which door are you talking about?
10 The one that leads up to the two apartments?
11 THE WITNESS: That one wasn't locked either.
12 BY MR . NABRIT:
12 Q Well, what about the door up to the third floor?
14 A That wasn't locked either.
15 Q Now, did the officers ask you any questions at
10 all?
17 A No.
IS Q Did they show you any pictures?
10 A No.
20 Q Did they show you any piece of paper, any search
21 warrant or anything like that?
•>2 A No.
22 Q Do you remember anything else that they said?
24 A No, they didn't say anything.
25 Q And nothing when they left? < t i )
1
•>
:i
4
i)
<;
7
S
!)
10
1 1
1'2
1.4
14
15
l(i
17
18
10
20
21
22
24
24
25
A
284
Nothing when they left, no.
Q Do you know anyone named Sam Veney?
A No.
Q Earl Veney?
A No.
Q Have you any idea why the police came to your
home?
A No.
Q Now, at the point where the officers left, as
they walked out of the house, what did you do then?
A 1 went to the front window and looked down on
the street.
Q What did you see?
A Well, 1 saw quite a few policemen lined up in
the front of the house with guns pointing at the house.
the search?
THE COURT: Is this during the search or after
THE WITNESS: This is after they had left my
apartment.
BY MR. NABRIT:
Q Now, do you know who— withdrawn.
Did you later come to hear why the police
officers came to your house?
A Yes.
Q What was that?
1
•)
:t
4
f>
(i
7
S
«(
10
11
12
i:l
14
1.')
l ( i
17
18
1!)
20
21
22
22
24
25
285
A That was at eleven o'clock on the eleven o'clock
news; I heard it on the TV.
Q What did you see?
A I saw the pictures of my house and the explana-
tion of why my house was raided.
Q Which was what?
A It was on TV.
Q The explanation was what?
A The explanation--
MR. MURPHY: I object.
MR. NABRIT: Withdrawn.
THE COURT: I think this would be hearsay.
MR. NABRIT: Yes, Your Honor. I won't press
it.
THE COURT: I don't know where they got the
information.
MR. NABRIT: I won't press It, Your Honor.
THE COURT: But you can perhaps get the inforau
tion from the police. It's conceivable they may be able to
testify.
MR. NABRIT: The only explanation was they
were looking for the Veneys. That's the only explanation I
know of, that they were looking for the Veneys.
BY MR. NABRIT:
Q Referring to the third floor door now, was that
286
11
n
12
i:l
14
l'»
1<>
17
18
1!)
20
21
•>2
22
24
2f>
shut?
A Yes.
Q Before the police came?
A Yes.
MR. NABR1T: All right. Your witness.
CROSS-EXAMINATION
BY MR. SAUSE:
Q This happened at four o'clock in the afternoon,
did it?
A No.
Q What time was it?
A It was between 4:15 and 4:30.
Q And you were in bed?
A Yes.
Q Now, have you ever been convicted of any crimes?
MR. NABRIT: Objection.
THE COURT: I'll overrule the objection. I
think it may be relevant not only on the question of credibility,
which would be limited to certain ones, but conceivably could
tie-in with probable cause, and I'll overrule it.
BY MR. SAUSE:
Q Have you ever been convicted of any crimes?
A No.
Q None at all?
A None at all.
222
1
•)
:{
4
5
i;
7
S
!)
10
1 1
12
12
14
15
l( i
17
IS
19
20
21
22
22
24
25
287
MR. SAUSE: All right. No further questions.
(Witness excused.)
MR. NABRITT: Frankie Bond.
THE CLERK: How old are you?
THE WITNESS: Fourteen.
THE CLERK: Do you understand the significance
and meaning of an oath?
THE WITNESS: Yes.
Thereupon
FRANKIE BOND
was called as a witness for and on behalf of the plaintiffs
and, having been first duly sworn, was examined and testified
as follows:
THE CLERK: State your full name.
THE WITNESS: Frankie Bond.
DIRECT EXAMINATION
BY MR. NA3RIT ••
Q Frankie, how old are you?
A Fourteen.
Q Where do you live?
A 917 North Chapel Street,
Q What?
A 917 North Chapel Street.
THE COURT: North Chapel Street?
/CO
1
•»
:t
4
r>
c
7
s
!)
10
11
12
12
14
If)
1«
17
IS
10
20
21
22
22
24
25
THE WITNESS: North Chapel Street.
BY MR. NABRIT:
Q Do you go to school, Frankie?
A Yes.
Q What grade?
A Ninth.
Q What school?
A Fairmount Hill Junior High School.
Q And do you live there with your mother?
A Yes, sir.
Q What is her name?
A Violet Bond.
Q Do you remember the day before New Year1s,
December 31st?
A Yes.
Q In your own words tell the Judge what happened
that day when you got up that morning?
A Well—
Q Talk loud so the Judge can hear you.
A Well, after I got up I didn't have to go to
school, and I got up and got something to eat, and I came
back and my mother cooked my breakfast, and then I eat my
breakfast, and while I was eating ray mother was getting ready
to go to the funeral home,
And then when I got through eating my mother
■<z\
288
1
•>
:i
4
;»
(i
7
S
!)
10
11
12
l.'S
14
15
I d
17
IS
l i t
20
21
•>2
24
24
25
289
was about to leave, and when she left I played some records.
Then after I played some records I went outside
and played with some friends of mine, Samuel Burley.
Q Was anybody else in the house?
A No, sir.
Q Well, go ahead.
A Then later on the police came up the street and
they knocked on my door, and 1 told them that I lived there.
Q Where were you?
A I was across the street but 1 was coming toward*;
my house.
Q You say the police came to your door, what did
you see coming down the street?
A They came up the street.
Q What did you see come up the street?
A The police vans and some more cars behind them.
Q And how many police, do you know?
A What? Went into my house?
Q Yes.
A It was about four or five.
Q Well, where were they?
A They, when they first came in, well, they came
through the living room.
Q Well, let's go back. You were outside?
A Yes.
425
1
•)
4
f)
i;
7
s
!)
10
11
12
12
14
1.7
Hi
17
IS
l i t
20
21
22
22
24
25
290
Q What did you say to them out there?
A That I lived there.
Q Go ahead. You tell us what happened.
A Then they told me to stand back, stand back,
and then they knocked on the door again, and I told them that
I lived there. And then, after he saw that I lived there he
let me push the door open, and he went, the policemen went in
first, and then while the others were searching the house he
asked me some questions, and he asked me did I know Price.
Q Did you know who?
A Price.
Q Price?
A Yes, and then he asked me ray mother's and my
father's name, and I told them ay mother's name was Violet
Bond, and my father's was William Fix, and then, and then he
told me to sit down, and they searched upstairs and downstair
in the cellar, and then they left, and then they left me in
there, and then I came outside.
Q When they left did they say anything to you?
A No, sir. Then I came outside, and Mr. Warren,
he asked me what was going on, and I told him that
ch Who is Mr. Warren?
A He's, he lives on Washington Street.
Q Where did you see him?
A He was coming down the street when 1 came out.
<
291
16
2
4
(i
7
S
!)
10
11
12
12
14
IT)
1(1
17
IS
1!)
20
21
22
24
27)
Q Were the police still there?
A Yes, sir. Then he asked me what was going on,
and 1 told him that there was a raid in our house, and he
asked me my name, and 1 told him, and then after that he left,
and I went on and played some football.
Then after that 1 had to go in the house again,
but, I was, oh, yes, you asked me was I scared, and 1 told hint
yes, sir, I wasn't going in the house no more, and then when 1
had to go in and change my shoes, well, I went, 1 brought a
friend in with me, Albert Young, end then I went in to change
my shoes and put on a heavy sweater, and 1 came back outside
and played some more football, and then my mother came, and 1
told my mother that I had some tiling to tell her, and I told
her to sit down before I told her.
MR. SAUSE: Well, 1 object to what he told her
MR. NABRIT: I have nothing further, Your Honor.
CROSS-EXAMINATION
The police didn't hurt you in any way, did they?
No, sir.
You opened the door for the policemen, didn't
Yes, sir.
MR. SAUSE: No further questions.
MR. NABRIT: Frankie, just one moment, please.
BY MR. SAUSE:
Q
A
Q
you?
A
£7
292
17
l
:t
4
.)
<;
REDIRECT EXAMINATION
BY MR. NABRIT:
Q Did the officers ask you if it was all right if
they went in the house or anything like that?
A No, sir.
(The witness left the stand.)
!»
10
11
12
14
14
IT)
l( i
17
15
10
20
21
22
24
24
25
MR. SAUSE: Just a minute, please. Go back up
there.
(The witness returned to the stand.)
RECROSS-EXAMINATION
BY MR. SAUSE:
Q What did the policeman say when he came to your
door?
A Well, after he had knocked the first time I tol<jl
him I lived there, and then he told me to stand back. Then
after he knocked again, I told him that I lived there, and he
said, "Oh,'’ and then I pushed the door in.
Q Well, he didn't have to ask you to open the doofr?
You did it all by yourself, didn't you?
A Yes, sir.
MR. SAUSE: All right. No further questions.
THE COURT: Did he tell you why he wanted to
go in the house?t w
THE WITNESS: No, sir.
<-.<H
THE WITNESS: No, sir.
1
■)
:i
4
5
(i
7
S
!)
10
11
12
111
14
15
1<>
17
IS
1 ! )
20
21
22
20
24
25
THE COURT: You are sure of that?
293
THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.
BY MR. NABRXT:
Q Old he have any equipment with him?
A Yes, sir.
Q What was that?
A They had some rifles.
Q Now, where were you when you pushed the door
open?
A
door open I
Q
A
Q
A
X was, I was by nry steps. Oh, when I pushed tb
was on the steps.
Outside, that's outside the house?
Yes, yes, sir.
And the policeman was standing there with you?
Yes, sir.
MR. NABRIT: I have no further questions.
BY MR. SAUSE:
Q You say the police officer told you to stand
back?
A Yes, sir.
Q What did you do then?
A He knocked again then X told him that X lived
there.
Q So you didn't stand back; you came back again;
is that right?
1
•>
:{
4
■’>
(i
7
s
!)
10
11
12
14
14
To
1<>
17
IS
l i t
20
21
22
24
24
2.')
294
A I did and he knocked on ay door.
Q But you didn't stand back the way he told you to'
You came back despite the fact that he had this rifle; is that
right? Is your answer yes?
THE COURT: The testimony was that he knocked
and the boy approached, and the officer said, ’Stand back,"
and he knocked again, and the boy said he told him he lived
there, and then without the officer saying anything why the
officer wanted to go in, he apparently pushed open the door,
which are the facts, as I gather it from the testimony.
MR. SAUSE: Well, the point also being, if Your
Honor please, that there is testimony about guns, and the
police officer told him to stand back, and he was so afraid,
but even when the policeman told him to stand back he didn't
stand back but went back up with the police officer.
THE COURT: I don't remember he said, 1 don't
remember the testimony that he was afraid at that time. 1
don't remember that he opened the door because he was afraid.
I don't remember the affirmative evidence to that effect.
Maybe he said it and I missed it but I don't remember him
saying that one way or the other. The evidence, as I recall
it, or the ‘substance of it is what I just summarized.
MR. SAUSE: All right. I interpreted it as
Your Honor did.
That's all. Thank you.
<^0
295
20
l
•)
:{
4
(i
i
s
!)
10
11
12
13
14
15
Hi
17
IS
l!l
20
21
23
24
BY MR. NABRIT:
Q Now, when you were standing up there, how many
policemen were there?
A I don't know.
THE COURT: Well, he said four or five went in
the house when you asked him how many policemen came up the
street, and he answered it four or five went in the house.
Did more come up the street thun went in the
house?
THE WITNESS: No, sir.
THE COURT: All right.
BY MR. NABRXTT:
Q And when did you get or at what point did you
get afraid, do you know?
MR. SAUSE: Object.
THE COURT: Well, I think there was some
testimony somewhere that he was afraid.
MR. NABRIT: Yes.
THE COURT: All right. At what point did he
become afraid?
BY MR. NABRIT:
Q When did you become afraid?
A Well, what tanas me afraid? Well, seeing all
these guns and rifles, seeing the rifles.
MR. NABRIT: You may step down.
<51
1
■>
2
4
5
<i
7
S
!)
10
11
12
12
14
ir>
1<i
17
18
l i t
20
21
22
22
24
25
296
MR. SAUSE: I have no more questions.
(Witness excused.)
MR. NABRIT: Addison Warren.
Thereupon
ADDISON D. WARREN
was called as a witness for and on behalf of the plaintiffs
and, having been first duly sworn, was examined and testified
as follows:
THE CLERK: State your full name.
THE WITNESS: Addison D. Warren.
THE CLERK: Addison D. Warren.
THE WITNESS: That’s right.\
DIRECT EXAMINATION
BY MR. NABRIT:
Q Mr. Warren, where do you live?
A 908 North Washington Street.
Q And what is your occupation?
A I am a supervisor.
Q At what place?
A The American Agricultural Chemical Company.
Q How long have you been with that company?
A Thirty-six years.
Q Thirty-six years?
A Yes, that's right.
1
•>
:t
4
il
(i
7
S
!)
10
1 1
12
1 :i
14
15
lti
17
18
19
20
21
22
24
24
25
Q How long have you lived on North Washington
Street?
A I think it's twenty years I’ve been living at
that address.
Q Do you know where Frankie Bond lives?
A Yes, X do.
Q Where is that house with relation to your housei
A Well, my back, my back yard is facing their bad
yard about three houses south, to the south.
Q Now, did you observe something there on
December 31, 1964?
297
A Yes, X did.
Q Tell the Court what you saw?
A Well, X think it was about, somewhere between
twelve and twelve-thirty that ray daughter-in-law called ray
attention to the policemen in the alley with guns, and this,
she then called me to the back door and asked me what the
trouble was.
X told her X didn’t know. So at that I left
and went out front, through the front entrance of my house
A s h l a n d
and walked around / Avenue to Chapel Street, and upon
entering Chapel Street I noticed the police vans and probably
one or two cars in the rear of the police vans facing south
on Chapel Street.
This is a one-way street going the opposite
1
•)
2
4
7>
(i
7
S
!)
10
11
12
12
14
17)
i<>
17
18
l i t
20
21
22
22
24
27>
298
direction, and I was wondering just what was taking place.
So I continued to walk down toward 917 or in the area o£ the
house, and upon ury approach I noticed the policemen standing
in the middle of the street with the bulletproof vests on and
the rifles. So as I approached I met another boy standing
directly across the street or at an angle, and I stopped.
Q What was the age of the boy?
A What?
Q Approximately a 3raall boy or what?
A Well, he's a boy of about fourteen years of age
old, oh, I suppose he's about this tall (indicating), and I a
I approached him I saw the officers coming out of the door,
the one with the rifle, and there was another plain-clothes
man standing on the pavement. So I asked Samuel--
Q What boy?
THE COURT: Is the boy you spoke to this
Frankie Bond?
THE WITNESS:
THE COURT:
THE WITNESS:
THE COURT:
THE WITNESS:
No, sir.
Did you know him before?
Frankie Bond?
Yes.
Only from seeing him in the
neighborhood.
Shall I continue?
1
•)
4
5
(i
7
S
!>
10
11
12
i:l
14
15
l( i
17
18
1!)
20
21
•>•>
22
24
25
299
BY MR. NABRIT:
Q What door were you describing where the police
came from?
A From 917, at Frankie's house, and the officer at
that time, one of the officers was standing on the steps. 1
suppose he was coming out, and there was a plain-clothes man
standing to his left, and the door was closed at this time,
and I asked Samuel what the trouble was.
And at that time the officer had moved when
Frankie came out of the house. So he told me to ask Frankie,
and this was Frankie Bond.
So Frankie came over to where I was, and 1 said,
"Frankie, what happened?"
He said, "Iftey raided my house."
I said, "What?"
He said, "I don't know, sir."
I said, "Well, are you afraid?"
He said, "Yes, sir." He said, "I'm never going
in that house anymore by myself," and he was actually
trembling.
So then I asked Frankie, I said,"Is anyone home?
He said, "Ho, sir."
So 1 made the statement there that I thought
this was ridiculous.
Q How, was there an officer standing there?
\
1
•)
4
4
f>
(i
7
s
!l
10
11
12
14
14
17>
i<;
17
18
10
20
21
22
24
24
2.')
300
A There was a plain-clothes man standing within
hearing distance of me, and I suppose he heard me, and he
asked me was I looking for trouble, end I told him no, 1
weren't looking for trouble, but apparently you wouldn't have
to look too far under the circumstances, and I didn't say any
more.
Another one, another officer came up the street,
and he kind of took this fellow by the arm, and what he said L
don't know, but they went on, and I didn't see them anymore.
Q How wide is this street?
A Well, I suppose Chapel Street must be—
Q In front of the house?
A Twelve feet I guess. It's a small street, tweL
or fourteen feet wide from curb to curb.
Q How wide is the sidewalk?
A Well, I'd say the sidewalk is probably between
five or six feet, something like that.
Q Are you connected with the HAACP?
A Yes, 1 am.
Q What capacity and how long?
A I'm a member of the board.
Q Of what?
A Of the Baltimore branch.
Q For how long?
A Oh, I suppose twenty-five years or more.
301
26
l ' t
20
21
22
24
25
Q Can you give us an account or an estimate of how
many policemen you saw there?
A Well, looking out of my back window I was able
to see two policemen in the alley, and there were several what
I'd taken to be photographers, and as I got into Chapel Street
I noticed at least about six policemen. Now, whether they
were in the house or no I don't know. They were all in the
street, and there were several men there with plain-clothes,
and of course there was quite a few reporters. I would
imagine they were reporters or photographers.
HR. SAUSE: If Your Honor please, I object to
his imagining.
BY HR. NABRXT:
Q Tell us the basis of your observation?
THE COURT: You say there were several people
you took to be reporters. Tell us what you saw that made
you think they were reporters?
THE WITNESS: Well—
THE COURT: And what you heard?
THE WITNESS: Well, they had cameras. Lome oJ:
them had cameras, and there were several men there in plain
clothes. Some of them had badges on, and some of them had
their backs turned to me; so 1 had no way of distinguishing
just what it was; but the officers that were there with
bulletproof vests on, 1 noticed them in the street. One of
1
•»
:{
4
5
(i
7
S
!l
10
11
12
12
14
15
i<;
17
i s
1!)
20
21
22
22
24
25
them was standing in the street but it weren't the ones that
I saw in the alley.
BY MR. NABRIT:
Q Did you see any weapons?
A Oh, yes, the officer that was on the steps,
when I reached Chapel Street he had what appeared to me to be
a rifle, and the officer in the middle of the street with the
bulletproof vest on, he definitely had a rifle. I suppose
it was a rifle.
And the officer that was in the alley he had a
gun similar to what these other men had.
Q What were they doing with the weapons? Were
they pointing them in any direction?
A Well, the officers that were, that I first
detected or noticed in the rear alley, he had the gun and
was holding it in a position such as this (indicating).
Q Describe that?
A Toward the back of the house as if, for
covering the back of tne house, and then when I got to the
front on the house on Chapel Street, the officer that was in
the street there he had the gun in the same position about
waist-high like this (indicating).
Q Pointed where?
A Pointed towards the front of the house.
302
MR. NABRIT: You may inquire.
303
CROSS-EXAMINATION
BY MR. MURPHY:
Q Mr. Warren, the individual, the officer that
you say was somewhat rough with you, was he a plain-clothes
man?
A Yes, he was.
Q And the gentleman you say got him by the arm,
was he a uniformed officer?
A No, he was plain-clothes too.
Q Two plain-clothes men there?
A Yes, sir.
Q Now, you say that Frankie told you that they
raided his house?
A That was his means of describing it to me.
Q Did he use that word "they raided it"?
A That's right.
Q He actually said "they raided my house"?
A That's right. That was his words to me.
Q His exact words?
A Yes.
Q Did you make a complaint, Mr. Warren, on your
own behalf to the police or anyone else concerning this
incident?
A I did.
Q To whom?
1
•>
:{
4
.”)
(i
7
s
!)
10
11
12
i:i
14
l.")
l( i
17
18
1!»
20
21
22
24
24
2.7
304
A To the NAACP.
MR. MURPHY: Thank you, very much, sir.
THE COURT: I would like to ask a question.
Did you ask the police why they raided the
house?
THE WITNESS: No, I didn't, Your Honor.
THE COURT: Or not?
THE WITNESS: No, I didn't, Your Honor.
THE COURT: You say you told them, you say you
chought something was ridiculous?
THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.
THE COURT: I didn't know what it was that you
thought was ridiculous?
THE WITNESS: I probably didn't finish that.
I probably, 1 should have. I made the statement that I
thought it was ridiculous that they would go into the home
with no one there, the boy there by himself.
in?
THE COURT: But you didn't know why they went
THE WITNESS: No, sir, I didn't.
THE COURT: And you didn't know what reasonabl
grounds they might have had to believe that a felon was in
the house?
THE WITNESS: No, I didn't.
THE COURT: Well, what was ridiculous?
1
■>
:{
4
5
(i
7
S
!)
10
11
12
10
14
IT)
l(i
17
18
1 !•
20
21
22
20
24
25
305
THE WITNESS: Well, I thought that this was a
continuation of the raids or the searches that had been going
on for this particular pair of boys, which is why I formed
that opinion.
BY HR. MURPHY:
Q Well, what's so wrong? You think it was
ridiculous for the police to look for the two Veney brothers?
A 1 absolutely do not, no, sir. 1 don't condone
such actions that these boys did, no, sir. 1 absolutely do
not.
Q Then you feel they should be looking for them?
A I do indeed.
Q Now, you know now that they were looking for
the Veney brothers in this particular house, do you not?
A I do.
Q You felt that if they were in there it would
be better for the parents to come home to go in alone?
MR. NABRIT: Objection, Your Honor. This
line of inquiry is about the witness in the case and is
totally irrelevant, probable cause.
THE COURT: I think there's no use arguing.
It can be argued to the Court rather than with the witness.
MR. MURPHY: Well, as a member of the NAACP.
THE COURT: Unless there's any further
explanation.
1
•>
2
4
(i
7
S
!)
10
11
12
l.'l
14
15
l(i
17
18
10
20
21
22
22
24
25
MR. MURPHY: Well, as a member of the NAACP—
MR. NABRIT: I press my objection.
THE COURT: If you press the objection I’ll
sustain the objection.
MR. MURPHY: No further questions.
MR. NABRIT: That is all. No further questioi|i
(The witness left the stand.)
MR. NABRIT: May I have the Court's indulgence
THE COURT: Yes,
MR. NABRIT: Captain Joseph Mahrer.
Thereupon
CAPTAIN JOSEPH A. MAHRER
was called as a witness for and on behalf of the plaintiffs
and, having been first duly sworn, was examined and testified
as follows:
THE CLERK: State your full name for tne recorjj
Captain.
THE WITNESS: Captain Joseph A. Mahrer.
THE CLERK: Take the stand, please.
DIRECT EXAMINATION
BY MR. NABRIT:
Q Captain, what is your position and occupation?
A I am the Commanding Officer of the Northeastern
Police Station.
306
£32
1
•)
:t
4
5
(>
7
S
«)
10
1]
12
l . ' l
14
15
1(>
17
18
111
20
21
22
24
24
25
307
Q And with what police force?
A Baltimore City Police Department.
q And how long have you worked on the Baltimore
City force?
A Twenty-seven years.
Q Ansi have you participated in a search for the
Veney brothers, Earl Veney and Sam Veney in any way, direct it
at all?
A 1 did.
MR. NABRIT: 1 request permission to examine
the witness as an adverse witness?
\
MR. MURPHY: I object to that until it is so
demonstrated that he is hostile. As a public servant he
simply cannot be hostile. He's expected to be entirely
impartial.
MR. NABRIT: If it please the Court, may I be
heard on that?
THE COURT:
MR. NABRIT:
MR. MURPHY:
MR. NABRIT:
witness is the principal
THE COURT:
MR. NABRIT:
Yes.
Are you through?
Yes.
If it please the Court, the
officer of the defendant.
What rule makes him adverse?
He's an employee of the defendant,
superior officer.
1
■>
:<
4
">
(i
7
S
!)
10
11
12
i:4
14
1.7
l(i
17
18
10
20
21
22
20
24
25
308
THE COURT: Will you get the rules?
MR. NABRIT: I don't nave the copy with me.
THE COURT: Just tell me what rule makes him
adverse. I think with respect to certain things you can lea<
him in matters of that sort, and I don't think the problem is
going to arise, and I don't think Mr. Murphy will object to
your leading him.
MR. MURPHY: Within reason.
THE COURT: And we can see where the bounds of
reason stop. Just get ray red book.
MR. NABRIT: It's Rule 43(b). Shall I read
it?
THE COURT: Just read the part—
MR. NABRIT: "A party may interrogate any
unwilling or hostile witness by leading questions.
A party may call an adverse party or an officer, direcjc
or managing agent of a public or private corporation
or of a partnership or association which is an
adverse party, and interrogate him by leading question^
and contradict and Impeach him in all respects as if
he had been called by the adverse party, and the
witness thus called may be contradicted and impeached
by or on behalf of the adverse party also, and may be
cross-examined by the adverse party only upo*i the
subject matter of his examination-in-chief."
1
•)
3
4
r>
(>
j i
s
!)
10
11
12
13
14
15
1«
17
18
1!)
20
21
22
23
24
25
309
THE COURT: Well, I would think this might be
a matter upon which the authorities have some douot. 1 see
no reason why you shouldn't lead the witness certainly up to
the point where Mr. Murphy objects, and perhaps beyond.
We'll cross the bridges when we come to tnem.
MR. NABRIT: Very well, Your Honor.
BY MR. NABRIT:
Q Captain, isn't it substantially correct that on
or about December 23, 1964, s police officer, Sergeant Cooper
was a victim of a homicide in your district? -<. >4
A That is correct.
THE COURT: Just a minute. Have you done any
work on this?
MR. NABRIT: No, sir.
THE COURT: I want to get my boys working on
this.
I think it may make a difference whether he is
a man on the street or a man of the rank of inspector, and so
on, and it's the question of an analogy to a public corpora
tion where a patrolman or a sergeant might not be, and a
captain or an inspector might be, and Mr. Schmidt is, I take
it, the Police Commissioner of Baltimore City.
MR. NABRIT: Yes, sir.
THE COURT: Commissioner of Police of Baltimor
City. So it's in an official capacity.
1
•)
:{
4
5
<>
7
8
!)
10
11
12
i:t
14
15
l(i
17
18
10
20
21
22
24
24
25
310
Now, would you start again because 1 wanted to
get t̂ hem working on this. I don't think there's much ques
tion with respect to the leading, and you're not bound by wha
he says, of course, but it's evidence in the case.
\
BY HR. NABRlt;
Q Well, just to sum up, the--
MR. SAUSE: Could you clarify what Your Honor
meant that they are not bound by what he says?
THE COURT: Well, they are not bound, whatever
he say8 is evidence, but it's evidence put in as part of the
plaintiffs' case. A plaintiff is not bound by evidence that
he puts in unless it is uncontradicted evidence. If he
wishes to impeach the witness on conflicting statements or
something like that then we come to the problem of whether he
is an adverse witness or not.
The case that I remember in which the Court
discussed the fact of calling a witness an adverse witness
and the extent to which you are affected by his testimony is
a damage suit, which was a case that was decided certainly
more than ten years ago because I argued it to the Court of
Appeals of Maryland. So that's about the best I can say for
it, and that discusses the Maryland rule as to what happens
when you call a man an adverse witness. \
BY MR. NABRIT:
Q Captain, you've been on the force twenty-five
V
<35
311
36 years, 1 believe you stated?
A Yes, going on twenty-seven.
Q Going on twenty-seven?
A Yes.
Q And you're Commander of the Northeast District.
What is that, the Northeast District?
A What is it?
s
!)
10
11
12
111
14
1 r>
i<;
17
18
1!)
20
21
22
24
2o
Q Yes.
A Oh, you mean the boundary lines?
Q No, no. 1 mean, the City, does the Police
Department have districts and what are they?
A They are divided into nine different districts
and this is one of the nine.
THE COURT: What is thi3 Northeast?
THE WITNESS: Northeastern goes from North
Avenue on the south to the City line on the north, and from
Greenmount Avenue on the west to Belair Road on the east.
BY MR. NABRIT:
Q And who is your immediate superior officer in
the department?
A Inspector Clarence German.
Q Inspector German?
A Yes.
Q And is he the highest ranking uniformed officer?
A He's—
<236
1
•)
4
5
li
7
S
0
10
11
12
12
14
17)
1<)
17
IS
1!)
20
21
■>2
22
24
25
312
Q Or does he have a superior?
A Oh, yes, he has a superior. The Chief Inspecto
Inspector George Murphy is his superior.
Q And the Consulssloner over the Chief Inspector?
Yes, sir, that's correct.
Commissioner Bernard C. Schmidt?
Yes.
James Schmidt.
Pardon me for misstating his name.
3 7
Commissioner Bernard J. Schmidt.
MR. SMOUSE:
MR. NABRIT:
What is his name?
THE WITNESS:
BY ME. NABRIT:
Q Thank you.
Now, when this homicide occurred in your dlstri4
on December 25th and shortly thereafter and during that perlO(
did you receive any instructions or orders from any of your
superior officers with respect to investigations?
MR. SAUSE: If Your Honor please, I can't
imagine how the Captain can answer that question?
THE COURT: Well—
MR. SAUSE: It's entirely too broad.
THE COURT: Well, yes, it's a very broad ques
tion, and perhaps you could work it out as to anything that h^
may have received in writing and received orally.
1
•)
2
4
5
(i
7
S
!)
10
11
12
12
14
15
10
17
18
19
20
21
22
22
24
25
313
BY MR. NABRIT:
Q Well, were there any written orders with respect
to the Veney investigation at the beginning of it, limiting it
to that, near the beginning, the first few days?
V THE COURT: What was the date of it? What was
the date of the shooting?
MR. NABRIT: Yes.
THE COURT: And the date of death?
BY MR. NABRIT:
Q Perhaps, do you know the general background of
this, what happened on December 24th and 23th with relation tc
this?
MR. SAUSE: And now, if Your Honor please—
BY MR. NABRIT:
Q Tell us about this?
THE COURT: He can give a very brief statement
of the facts as reported to the defendant so he won't have to
so that the parties may be able to agree, that it was either
during or following a robbery, one policeman, two policemen
were shot, and one of them died, as I understand it.
Perhaps it may be alleged in the complaint.
MR. NABRIT: I think it may be or the answer
rather.
THE COURT: It ought to be stated just as
briefly as possible and that warrants were issued for certain
1
•)
2
4
5
(i
7
M
9
10
11
12
12
14
If)
10
17
18
19
20
21
•>•>
22
24
25
314
people on certain daces.
MR. SAUSE: Well, if Your Honor please, Che
Ching thaC we fear, of course, is Che case of uncried defendant
of any shading or any use of words by Che CapCain.
THE COURT: ThaC's why I've been careful Co say
somebody, and chore's no doubc Che policeman died.
MR. SAUSE: Yes.
THE COURT: Everybody in BalCimore knows ChaC.
MR. SAUSE: That's correcC.
THE COURT: And 1 think that everybody in
BalCimore knows Chat another policeman was shot. Now, a
robbery was reported at where?
MR. SAUSE: Well, if Your Honor please, in
Paragraph 10, and Mr. Nabrit seems to agree that 10(a) —
MR. NABRIT: I didn't say that 1 agreed with it
MR. SAUSE: Well, he seems Co agree with Che
idea that we might get it, use Chat statement there, 10(a) of
the answer, sir, on page 4 of Che answer.
THE COURT: What?
MR. SAUSE: Page 4 of the answer.
THE COURT: Of the answer.
Well, it seems to rae that the first long
sentence ought Co take care of the situation very nicely. 1
think we ought to have the dates of the warrants.
MR. SAUSE: Well, if Your Honor please, they axle
1
•>
:{
4
5
(i
7
S
!)
10
11
12
15
14
15
Id
17
18
10
20
21
22
2.4
24
25
315
in the filing of the papers, the warrants for the assault and
oting of Lieutenant Maskell and the assault and robbery
which were issued on December 25th.
THE COURT; I see, and they are attached.
MR. SAUSE: They are attached as parts of the
exhibit.
The grand jury presentment, if Your Honor plea
as opposed to the indictment, the presentments were returned
on the 28th of December, at which time whatever the plural of
capias is, were issued, and the capiases or cepii are also a
part of the file there.
THE COURT: All right.
And the indictments were thenMR. SAUSE:
returned based upon the—
THE COURT:
the 28th?
MR. SAUSE:
THE COURT:
The presentments were returned on
Yes, sir.
The presentments were on the 28th
of December, and a capias was issued?
MR. SAUSE: Yes, Your Honor, and that's the
Criminal Court of Baltimore City as opposed to the Municipal
Court, as the indictments which are there were returned by tij»
grand jury on, I believe it was January 6th.
THE COURT: All right. Well, I think that
clears that up.
\
1
o
:t
4
:>
(i
7
s
!)
10
11
12
12
14
IT)
l( i
17
18
1!)
20
21
■>2
22
24
25
316
Mow, with that background do you have any
objection to the question with respect to whether he received
any instructions froia his superiors, and his superiors are the
Commissloner, and the Chief Inspector, and the Inspector?
The answer to that would be yes or no, and we'll
go on from there.
At any time on December 24th or afterward, did
he receive instructions from your superiors with respect to
the search for or with respect to--
MR. NABRIT: With respect to the search for the
alleged perpetrators.
THE COURT: The search for the alleged
perpetrators of the robbery.
THE WITNESS: Well, during the early stages of
the investigation 1 had many, many meetings with my superior
officers. As a matter of fact the Commissioner was there
the morning that the Sergeant was killed, and my Inspector
was there.
I had meetings with the Captains of the Detectiv
Bureau, the Captain of the Homicide Squad.
I had many meetings and we discussed many thing*
Now, I don’t know specifically what you want. If you ask me
I'll probably be able to tell you.
THE COURT: Wall, the answer is that you had
many meetings. It doesn't answer still whether they were
:<ss
1
• >
4
4
5
(i
7
,s
I)
10
11
1 Li
1.4
14
15
.ltt
17
IS
15)
20
21
22
24
24
25
317
general discussions or whether any o£ those--the question was
orders or whether any of them were in the form of orders,
whether oral or written or were they general discussions of
what should be done?
that I can tecall offhand is the one Teletype message which
was put out for all districts and if an investigation or an
inspection was made of any premises.
THE COURT: When was that? 1 think we ought
to have written orders.
written order.
THE WITNESS: Offhand I don't know. I can
probably find out.
THE COURT: Was it a recent one, within the
last--about a week ago or was it one in the early stages?
THE WITNESS: This was in the early stages,
I'm quite sure.
THE WITNESS: The only, the only written
MR. NABRIT7: Yes
THE COURT: When was it? You only recall one
THE COURT: Well, if it's a written order
MR. NABRIT: Ye3.
THE COURT: And you want to aak the defendant
to produce it—
MR. MURPHY: The Teletype messag
THE WITNESS: The Teletype messa
1
■)
:{
4
.”)
(i
7
S
!)
10
11
12
l:l
14
i r,
k;
17
18
1!)
20
21
22
2-'l
24
2 5
BY MR. SAUSE:
318
Q Do you have it with you, Captain?
\ A I have it in my folder, file.
MR. MURPHY: All right. May 1 have the
Captain'd folder?
THE COURT: I think you had better let him hav
his folder so that he can use and produce any written papers.
Have you made a request? Well, you made a
general request, and of course, you wouldn't know.
MR. NABRIT: I haven't seen this.
THE COURT: So that we may have to take time
unless it is undesirable at some time.
MR. NABRIT: Well, why don't we go on, Your
Honor?
THE WITNESS: This is the one I had in mind.
BY MR. NABRIT:
Q Well, was it decided at any point, was it
decided at any point what-**
MR. MURPHY: Would you indulge us a moment, Yi
Honor?
BY MR. NABRIT:
Q Would you read this?
THE COURT: Are you going to offer it in
evidence? We are going to have a lot of documents offered
in evidence and we might as well work out the mechanics of
V
1
■ )
4
5
(i
7
s
<»
10
11
12
l:5
14
15
1<>
17
18
10
20
21
22
20
24
25
319
them. .
Of1 the record.
(Discussion off the record.)
MR. NABRIT: Well, I plan to offer them and
will ask the question to have them identified.
IKE COURT: All right.
BY MR. NABRIT:
Q Is the message that you referred to the one on
this piece of paper which was encircled?
A Yes, it is.
Q Can you tell from that date that is on there?
A This is issued on December 25th.
Q 1964?
A Yes, 1964 at 6:44 a.m.
THE COURT; Do you want this in?
BY MR. NABRIT:
Q And would you describe generally what it is, as
it's a message from who to who?
A This is a message to all, all districts and
divisions.
Q From?
A And it was from Inspector Clarence German.
Q And it was received in your district on the
police Teletype?
A Yes, sir. 40
320
MR. NABRIT: Counsel has requested that 1 read
it. I have no objection to it, Your Honor.
THE COURT: All right.
MR. NABRIT: 12/25/64.
"Any post officer or radio car turning up a
house for anyone of the subjects wanted in the
Northeastern District for homicide of a police
sergeant will notify the 'emergency vehicle' to meet
then at the said location before doing so.
"Signed,
"Inspector Clarence German'
THE COURT: Well, now, off the record.
(Discussion off the record.)
THE COURT: Do you want this marked?
MR. NABRIT: 1 would like to have this marked
as Plaintiffs' Exhibit 1.
THE COURT: Yes, and you can have a photostat
made.
THE CLERK: Plaintiffs' Exhibit No. 1 marked
in evidence.
(Document above referred to was marked
Plaintiffs' Exhibit No. 1.)
THE COURT: May I see it?
Well, I notice, and I don't know that it's
particularly important, but there are sane notes, penciled
<41
1
•)
2
4
5
(i
7
S
!t
10
11
12
12
14
15
1<>
17
IS
1!)
20
21
22
22
24
25
321
notes on it, for instance, the word "must", and then something
about "special", and 1 don't know whether these notes have any
particular importance or not, but it may be that the notes the
appear on these things may in certain cases have importance.
All right.
BY MR. NABRIT:
Q Captain, was it determined who would be in
charge of this investigation, and who was that?
A This was a joint*investigation by the Detective
Bureau and the Homicide Squad and the officers of the
Northeastern District.
Q Can you tell me who were the principal officers
who were in charge of conducting the investigation for the
various departments?
A Well, of course—
Not the top man, but one or two of the top men.
The ones who were actually on the scene most of
Q
A
the time?
Q
A
Yes, sir.
Lieutenant Glover and Lieutenant Cadden from
the Homicide Squad.
THE COURT: What are the names?
THE WITNESS: Lieutenant Glover, G-l-o-v-e-r,
and Lieutenant Cadden.
THE COURT: They are not the heads of Homicide
1
•)
:{
4
<i
7
S
I)
10
11
12
i:s
14
15
1(4
17
18
10
20
21
22
22
24
2o
322
THE WITNESS: No, they are not the heads of
Homicide, Your Honor.
THE COURT: They are the men—
THE WITNESS: They were the senior ranking
officers from that Bureau on the scene most of the time.
From the Detective Bureau I think it was,
Lieutenant Manuel would be the senior ranking officer from th
Detective Bureau from the Robbery Squad.
BY MR. NABRIT:
Q From the robbery that was committed that was
thought to be connected with this homicide; is that correct?
A Well, of course, the robbery that occurred on
Greenmount Avenue at the time Lieutenant Haskell was shot,
and of course, the Robbery Squad was brought into the
investigation.
Q And from your district were there officers else
involved?
A Yes.
Q I mean were some senior officers involved?
A The only officer that I, that is, the only
senior officer that I had assigned to this particular squad
was Sergeant Hartmann, and Sergeant Hartmann was assigned to
the squad the entire time, I think.
THE COURT: Assigned to the squad?
<43
1
■)
:{
4
’)
(i
7
s
!)
10
1 1
12
1.!
14
ir>
l ( i
17
18
1!)
20
21
22
28
24
27)
323
THE WITNESS: To Che squad making this
Investigation.
BY HR. NABRIT:
Q Now, was there organized at some point during
this period, something either colloquially or actually called
the "flying squad"?
A I think it was referred to as the flying squad
by the newspapers, but we never used the term ourselves.
THE COURT: Did you use the term "squad"?
THE WITNESS: Yes, squad, yes.
THE COURT: Who were making the investigation.
THE WITNESS: Yes.
THE COURT: And the squad making the investiga-
tion contained representatives of the Detective Bureau, the
Homicide Bureau at Northeastern?
THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.
Your Honor, if 1 raay, I would like to say that
I had lieutenants working on this investigation at all times.
1 had lieutenants working around the clock, whatever lieutenan
was working at that particular time would assist with it in
any way that he could.
BY MR. NABRITT:
Q Now, were you the person that was, at least in
tactical command of the search to apprehend these people?
A I would say that most of the time I was the
324
49 i
:!
4
(i
s
!)
10
11
12
18
14
1o
l( i
17
18
1!)
20
21
20
24
25
senior ranking officer.
Q On Che scene?
A On the scene, yes--not on the scene, but outside.
Q At headquarters?
A Yes, in headquarters, at the Northeastern.
Q Now, what was the size of this squad in the
search for the alleged perpetrators of the crime?
A Oh, 1 suppose that at times we had as high as
fifty to sixty men working at one time or another.
THE COURT: You mean at once or at different
times?
THE WITNESS: Well, at different times, the
entire number of men that worked on the case in one way or
another is approximately, is approximately sixty.
BY MR. NABR1T:
Q And were there other men in other parts of the
City who were also working on the case independently of your
command?
A Yes.
Q Now, were they also--did your men conduct
investigations and searches in an attempt to find the alleged
perpetrators?
A Oh, yes.
Q And they were, these alleged perpetrators were
believed to be Samuel and Earl Veney; is that correct?
1
•)
:{
4
.")
(i
7
S
!)
10
11
12
1.1
14
15
1<>
17
18
1!)
20
21
22
2'1
24
2f>
325
person who was being sought?
\ MR. SAUSE: Now, if Your Honor please—
THE WITNESS: Yes.
BY HR. NABRIT:
Q Can you state that?
THE COURT: I thought that was agreed that the
description was the one which was referred to.
MR. NABRIT: I think there's more to it, Your
Honor. I think that one that was presented may not be clear
MR. SAUSE: 1 can't conceivably, Your Honor,
see the relevancy of this, of this to probable cause for look
at this, because I think that this business of going into and
prejudicing the Veneys and the problem of criminal discovery
of what went on in the Veney case--
THE COURT: Haven't the Veney pictures been in
A Yes, that's correct.
Q Do you have a description of Samuel Veney, the
the papers?
MR. SAUSE: May be. I haven't seen them.
MR. NABRIT: A description of them.
THE COURT: Do you have photographs of the
Veneys?
MR. SAUSE: I? No, sir.
THE COURT: Don't you have any photographs of
• nthem? Can't that be put in ?
1
•>
4
f>
(i
7
s
!)
10
11
12
14
14
IT)
Ifi
17
IS
1!)
20
21
•>2
24
24
25
326
MR. MURPHY: I think the Captain has photograph
of them.
1
THE WITNESS: Yes, there's an official lookout
sheet that was put out to the districts.
THE COURT: Why not just offer that. Take a
look at it and see if it answers your purpose in order to
avoid any further discussion. I think the State is anxious
to protect them with respect to further publicity about this
except in so far as it may be necessary.
MR. NABRIT: Are you ready Your Honor?
THE COURT: Yes.
BY MR. NABRIT:
Q Captain, what is that sheet?
A This is what we refer to as a lookout sheet,
and each officer on the force has a booklet that holds this
size page and all important information is printed on these
lookout sheets daily, and when we have something special like
thi6 we always make them up so that every officer will have
one in his pocket at all times.
MR. NABRIT: I offer this as Plaintiffs'
Exhibit No.—
THE CLERK: Exhibit No. 2.
MR. MURPHY: No objection.
THE CLERK: Flaintiffs' Exhibit No. 2.
(Lookout sheet was marked Plaintiffs'
Exhibit No. 2.)
1
•<
:t
4
f>
(i
7
S
0
10
11
12
12
14
IT)
l(i
17
IS
1!)
20
21
22
22
24
2")
v THE COURT: This is not secret in any way?
MURPHY: I don't believe so, Your Honor.
THE COURT: Anything that you feel is secret,
it can be sealed. \
HR. MURPHY: I don't tnink that this prejudices
the case in any fashion, Your Honor.
BY MR. NABRIT:
327
Q Well, sir, was tliere a—
THE COURT: The only thing is, this should not
be reproduced for an obvious reason to get into the newspapers
Let me speak to counsel.
(Conference at the bench.)
BY MR. NABRIT:
Q Captain, on the 27th or the 26th did you issue
a statement or make the statement to the members of the press
that the Coromissloner, It was something like this, that "The
Commissioner has given us a free hand to call in as many men
or cars as you need for each shift? ’
A Yes, I did.
Q And was that true?
THE COURT: What is that? I didn't hear that.
1 wasn't sure that I got all of that.
(The last question was read by the Reporter.)
MR. NABRIT: Tip.
THE WITNESS: I misunderstood the question.
<47
1
• )
:i
4
7
(i
7
s
!)
10
11
12
12
14
1.7
l(i
17
1H
lit
20
21
22
22
24
27
328
THE COURT: As many men as he needed for each
tip. Are you reading from something?
MR. NABRIT: I'm reading from my notes.
THE COURT: Or are you making up this as you go
along?
MR. NABRIT: Yes, Your Honor, I'm reading from
my notes, a copy of the quote from a newspaper article,
December 27th in the Sun.
THE COURT: And this is a statement that the
witness made to whom, to a reporter or to whom?
MR. NABRIT: This is not indicated. It's a
quote attributed to him.
MR. MURPHY:
it.
MR. NABRIT:
MR. MURPHY:
THE COURT:
MR. NABRIT:
The Captain doesn't remember sayii
The Captain is not saying this.
He's modifying that.
I thought he said that he did.
I thought he said he misunderstood
my question.
THE COURT: Would you read the question.
THE WITNESS: I misunderstood the last word.
MR. NABRIT: The last word, which was tip.
THE WITNESS: Tip, no, I didn't say tnat.
BY MR. NABRIT:
Q Can you tell us as best In your own words
V4.8
329
54
l
:{
4
.)
(i
s
!)
10
1 1
12
10
14
lf>
Ki
17
IS
10
20
21
24
24
25
substantially what the Commissioner told you?
A 1 said the Comnissioner gave us the authority tc
call as many men and as many cars as we need at any time.
Q I see.
THE COURT: At any time. You mean for any, do
you mean for any search or what you felt you needed?
THE WITNESS: For any purpose that we may need,
any additional men, we had the authority to call.
BY MR. NABRIT:
Q And this was a special authorization for this
particular investigation of the alleged perpetrators of this
homicide?
A I would say that that would be for me because
ordinarily a Captain is not given that authority.
Q And what is the largest— do you have any idea
what is the largest number of men that you called on? You
told me sixty, and I wasn't sure what that figure was.
A Well, we had sixty. That's the total number
of men that 1 have a record of that actually participated in
the case working out of Northeastern District. I have the
record of approximately sixty. Now, I may be a few off
either way. I don't think I counted them;but I would say
approximately sixty.
We use--excuse me.
Q Go ahead.
^ 4 9
1
•)
2
4
5
(i
7
s
!)
10
1 1
12
12
14
ir>
i<;
17
is
1!)
20
21
•>•>
22
24
25
330
A We used many more men in the districts when the
men went out to inspect the premises and they would call for
two or three radio cars depending upon the number of men they
had with them. If they thought they needed more help they
would call for two or three radio cars. So therefore there
were many more men in the districts.
Q For your men from Northeastern?
A The Northeastern District.
Q Were called to investigate premises in other
districts in the City?
A That's correct.
Q How many of them of the districts?
THE COURT: Of this squad?
You said sixty men working out of the Northeast€
District. Does that include some of the homicide men as well
THE WITNESS: That included--
THE COURT: And some of the detective men?
THE WITNESS: Yes.
THE COURT: Detectives also?
THE WITNESS: Yes.
THE COURT: So you meant that sixty men at one
time or another had been on the squad?
THE WITNESS: Yes.
THE COURT: And if the squad would go to the
Northern District, for instance, they would likely ask for a
>60
1
•)
2
4
c
7
S
•)
10
11
12
12
14
1.')
1<>
17
18
1!)
20
21
•>2
22
24
2.7
331
couple of radio cars from Northern to join them in the activic
or they might not, but you had a right to do it?
THE WITNESS; Yes, that's right.
BY MR. NABRIT:
Q Now, did this squad have certain special
equipment for this type of investigation, like weapons and
automobiles and rifles and things like that?
A At all times they had with them the emergency
truck, which is mentioned in the Teletype, one, and sometimes
two depending upon whether there was a call.
Q Does that emergency truck carry weapons?
A Yes, every emergency truck carries all sorts of
protective devices, guns, riot guns, machine guns, tear gas,
and many other articles and equipment that we may need.
Q Now, I guess the Investigation is still going
on up to this date?
MR. SAUSE: Now, if Your Honor please, we
object to that after the time of the bringing of this suit,
and one, and two, and what the police are presently doing is
something that is not relevant.
THE COURT: I think the present activities of
the police--
MR. SAUSE: Present activities of the police.
THE COURT; --as such as it may be conducted,
in any raids, you have a statement that no houses have been
<51
1
■>
:{
4
ft
(i
7
S
!)
10
11
12
14
14
If)
10
17
18
10
20
21
22
24
24
2f>
332
raided, I believe you said.
MR. MURPHY: Not raided.
THE COURT: No houses?
MR. MURPHY:
THE COURT:
MR. MURPHY:
believe, since then.
THE COURT:
Not raided, not that term.
No houses have been raided.
No premises have been entered, 1
That no premises have been entered
since the eleventh and if any are entered will you bring this
report up to date?
Yes, sir. That's in the informaMR. MURPHY:
tion I have.
THE COURT: As the case goes along. Won't
that take care of it?
MR. NABRIT: Well, if Your Honor please—
THE COURT: Well, of course they want to find
people, but whether it's going on in Baltimore or some other
city is something that we can discuss later.
MR. NABRIT: I wasn't trying to inquire into
anything like that at all, Your Honor. What I want to know
is have they caught the people they are looking for yet and
are they still looking?
THE WITNESS: We are still looking.
BY MR. NABRIT:
Q Well, from the beginning to now, have you, do
you know of any attempts by either your superiors or you
<52
1
■)
2
4
f>
<i
7
S
!»
10
11
12
12
14
15
1(1
17
18
111
20
21
22
28
24
25
or officers under your command to obtain a search warrant to
enter premises in the search for these alleged perpetrators?
A There were no search warrants applied for in an>
<53
Did you go to any houses personally, sir?
Yes, I went to 1608 Lamont Street, this night
they arrested Taylor alias Red Cap.
MR. NABRIT: If Your Honor please—
MR. SAUSE: You see, Your Honor, this is what
we get into.
THE COURT: All right. Let's not give names.
The Officer went to 1608 Lamont Street where a
man was arrested or someone was arrested. All right.
MR. SAUSE: Well—
THE COURT: What? \ Why shouldn't he?
MR. SAUSE: If Your Honor please—
THE COURT: Well, come up and make a proffer.
Let's find out what the problem is.
(Conference at the bench.)
THE COURT: I don't think there is anything,
any motion to strike. There was some sort of a protest, but
I don't think there's anything before the Court to rule on at
3JJ
the moment.
MR. HABRIT: Shall I proceed, Your H
THE COURT: Yes.
1
•)
:i
4
5
(i
7
S
!)
10
11
12
14
14
15
1<>
17
IS
1<)
20
21
22
24
24
25
3J4
BY.<MR. NABRIT:
Q \ Now, when the flying squad was—
MR. CAUSE: I object.
THE COURT: No, don't call it flying squad.
MR. NABRIT: Withdrawn.
THE COURT: When the squad—
MR. NABRIT: That was inadvertent, Your Honor.
BY MR. NABRIT:
Q When the squad that you are referring to would
go to a place to investigate would they customarily surround
the place?
A Yes.
q With their weapons pointed in the direction of
the place?
A Yes.
Q And wearing the protective equipment if it was
available?
A The men who entered the premises first always
wore some sort of protective equipment, yes.
Q And they would proceed with or try to enter
carrying weapons? I mean the people who entered would carry
their weapons?
A Oh, yes.
Q And if it was during the nighttime did you use
searchlights routinely or on occasions or what?
<54
1
■)
:{
4
5
(i
7
S
!)
10
11
12
12
14
15
lfi
17
18
1!)
20
21
22
22
24
25
335
A Any time we needed lights we'd use them if they
were available.
Q And the officers conducting this were both plain
clothes and uniforms?
A That is correct. ,>£>
THE COURT: We will have to take a break at
some time during the morning. Will this be a good time?
HR. NABRIT: Yes, Your Honor. I think it wou
help me if I could have a very few moments to collect ray
thoughts.
THE COURT: Well, all right. Let's do that.
(Thereupon, there was a recess taken, after
which the following occurred:)
THE CLERK: You are still under oath.
THE WITNESS: Yes.
MR. NABRIT: If Your Honor please, this
morning counsel furnished us with some yellow sheets of paper
which we would like to liave as an exhibit in the case.
MR. SAUSE: I couldn't hear a word he's saying
I haven't been able to hear him all morning.
THE COURT: Well, do you want to explain it to
him off the record? \
HR. NABRIT: I beg your pardon?
THE COURT: Let's work :Lt out\
MR. SAUSE: Well, if this is going in for any
\
326
61 l
:{
4
(i
S
•)
10
11
12
l.l
14
15
1<>
17
18
10
20
21
22
24
25
purpose I think that i£ there is probable cause in this case
or if there is consent, it doesn't make any difference if we
have two million of them, but if the plaintiffs are attempting;
to--the plaintiffs can not, of course, escape their burden of
proof by putting in a document such as this, and this simply
is not proper.
How, they wanted it for discovery.
HR, NABRIT: Well, Your Honor, if he has no
objection to its admissibility or the accuracy of the document,
we can argue what it means later.
THE COURT: Well, they are entitled to prove
the facts and you are entitled to prove probable cause if you
wish to. I hope we don't have to go into all these phases,
all these different places, and I hope it can be broken down
in some way.
MR. SAUSE: Well, I hope so too but, if Your
Honor please, 1 think the Court knows that I am confident to
the point of almost absolute certainty that as soon as a
document like that gets in we'll start talking about how many
in number there are in there, raids and so forth without
breaking them down, and if they're willing to stipulate which
ones in there are probable cause and which ones weren't, we
can work it out, we can do that.
THE COURT: And if yo\i want them to do that
\
that will take a long time and I am not sure the Court will\
\Y
YY\
1
•>
:i
4
5
<;
7
S
I)
10
11
12
i:i
14
15
1(i
17
IS
10
20
21
22
22
24
25
337
allow you to prove it, and if you want to ask the Commissioner
or whoever got this information whether these facts are true,
every fact here is relevant and material, and it can be
coupled with additional facts, and if you wish to couple them
with additional facts you may do so.
MR. SAUSE: That's our burden, Your Honor?
THE COURT: What is that?
MR. SAUSE:
don't understand.
That’s our burden, Your Honor? I
THE COURT: I think they can rest on the first
page, just let it go on the first page.
HR. NABRIT: If Your Honor please, in as much j
the rasteriality of their objection is not to admissibility
or authenticity and that it: is acknowledged, and this was
written out in his own handwriting and he plotted the figures
MR. SAUSE:
it.
Well, we'll be happy to have him mi
THE COURT: This has been furnished in respons
to the request on the theory that it's a fair suoanary of this
information which the Court said should be supplied. It is
not a summary of the information; it's information which the
Court required to be supplied.
Now, there is no presumption of lack of probabl
cause simply because a home has been entered. There is one
factor on this first page that may change the burden of proof
1
• >
4
5
(i
7
s
!)
10
11
12
l.'S
14
ir>
IK
17
IS
1 !•
20
21
°2
22
24
25
338
with respect to it or which may change the burden of proof of
going forward with the evidence. I am not making a ruling at
this time though.
MR. SAUSE: Well, if Your Honor pleases, I have
great difficulty in using the discovery rules to force any
party to enter into a stipulation, which is what this amounts
to.
THE COURT: Well, if you want him to ask the
question, how many places were investigated and how many of
the investigations were instituted as a result of anonymous
phone calls alone, now those two questions cau be asked, I'm
going to let the plaintiffs prove it however long it takes.
MR. SAUSE: Yes, sir.
MR. NABRIT: Your Honor, if this witness did
not prepare that document, but counsel did; so I'm not going
to ask the witness questions about it.
THE COURT: I think you will have to find out
what the State knows. I don't know Who can answer the ques
tion as to who is the one who can answer that question.
Now, I think that the case ought to be tried on
reasonably broad grounds, it seems to me with special atten
tion to the particular facts to be proved.
MR. SAUSE: If Your Honor please, my theory of
that is that they are trying this case on broad lines which
assumes the result, and that is that the police were acting
1
■)
4
.-)
(i
7
S
<)
10
11
12
12
14
17)
10
17
18
1!»
20
21
22
22
24
2.7
339
on broad lines and that they were not acting properly in each
case and weighing each case and the facts in each case, and 1
regret as much as anybody.
THE COURT: Hvae you read the most recent
Supreme Court case, the Texas case, Aquilar v. Texas? That's
a search warrant case and not an arrest warrant case. It is
the most recent expression by the Supreme Court, a six to thre
decision, with a very unusual alignment of Judges with respect
to anonymous information.
MR. MURPHY: I don't think it was anonymous; I
think it was Just not recorded. It was the request for a
search warrant, wasn't it?
THE COURT: Well, this information has been
furnished to the plaintiffs by Mr. Murphy pursuant to the
instructions which the Court gave to him, to the State to
supply it. Now, I don't want to dictate to either side how
it shall be proved. Each side must know what it thinks it
needs to prove in connection with this information. Now, the
information that has been supplied I have said in these limits
is relevant and material.
Now, how the State wants to qualify it or
explain it, and I'm not making any rulings on the necessity;
I was calling attention to a recent case, and the Court is
certainly of the opinion that when you are hunting for men
who have been charged with murder there is certainly some
1
•>
:i
4
5
<;
7
S
!)
10
11
12
i:l
14
15
1(»
17
18
1!)
20
21
•>■>
22
24
25
340
reason Co tnink that you are entitled to do certain things
f
which do not apply when you are looking for a still, which is
probably going to stay in the house overnight.
Now, 1 don't want to make any rulings at this
time beyond saying that the plaintiffs are entitled to prove
these facts that you have given them. You are entitled to
explain them in any way that you can, and I'm anxious to have
it done on broad lines and in categories as far as possible;
out there will have to be some way of getting this evidence it,
That is what the case is about.
MR. SAUSE: Well, if Your Honor please--
MR. NABR1T: Go ahead.
MR. SAUSE: All right.
MR. NABRIT: If the Court please, if counsel
refuses to stipulate to the document that they prepared as a
substitute for the production of the documents, then I'd have
to go back to my original position and request permission that
every document used in the preparation of this motion shall bn
brought in.
MR. SAUSE: Well, if Your Honor please, if Mr.
Nabrit, if he wants to scare me, I'm not, I don't scare quite
that easily, and if Your Honor rules that he is entitled to
these documents 1 know that we have no choice and I will
gladly turn them over.
THE COURT: 1 can't believe that it's to the
1
•)
:i
4
5
(i
7
S
!)
10
11
12
12
14
15
1(1
17
IS
1!)
20
21
22
22
24
25
341
public interest that the entire file be made available to the
plaintiffs, and I thought tnat the information can be
summarized.
Now, Mr. Murphy must have some work sheets from
which this was prepared.
MR. NABRXT: Your Honor, this entire argument
is on Che weight of the evidence, and it's a question of the
admissibility, and if they won't stipulate it's authentic, if
they won't stipulate that they, the file's right, then 1 don'
know what they want to do.
THE COURT: I think the defendant's counsel ha
better discuss it among themselves and decide what they are
willing to do. The Court, as I say, is going to allow them
to prove somehow or other roughly a number of cases in which
investigation was initiated by an anonymous phone call in
which the anonymous phone call was suostantially the only
thing.
Now, that is not a ruling that an anonymous
phone call is not sufficient, and I call attention to a very
recent case, with which 1 suppose you were familiar anyhow,
which is not pat, but which is certainly something that the
Court must consider.
MR. MURPHY: May we have just one minute, Your
Honor?
THE COURT: Yes, certainly. 1 think it's
1
•)
:{
4
5
(I
7
S
!)
10
11
12
l.'i
14
1.7
l(i
17
IS
10
20
21
22
20
24
25
342
very important as to how long the time is going to be. Take
as long as you wish.
MR. SAUSE: Your Honor, Mr. Murphy and I have
discussed this, and it is our feeling that this document whic
has been produced as perhaps in lieu of temporarily the motio:
for discovery is not a discovery document, and plaintiffs hav
been furnished with their discovery and it's their burden to
proceed.
THE COURT: Well, they subpoenaed the records;
they subpoenaed the records.
MR. NABRIT: There's a motion before the Court
THE COURT:
are the records here?
They subpoenaed the records. Now
MR. MURPHY: I'm sure he has them.
THE COURT: Are they the records of all of the
investigations? \\
THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.
THE COURT: How many investigations were there
or how many places were investigated?
THE WITNESS: According to the information
supplied to me by the investigating officers, 230. That is,
you're talking about the number of dwellings?
THE COURT: 230 dwellings.
THE WITNESS: That is not dwellings. I dicin'
break that down. That's all types of dwellings. That woul
1
• )
:{
4
5
(i
7
S
!)
10
11
12
l.'S
14
15
l( i
17
18
1!1
20
21
•>2
24
24
25
343
churches, hospitals, other buildings, farmhouses.
THE COURT: Well, now, Mr. Murphy had a slightl
different figure. Can't: you work out with your witness the
difference between your figures? Mr. Murphy’s figures are a
different figure. Mr. Murph>'s figures are a slightly
different figure from that. It covers residences, vacant
houses, and everything.
MR. MUIU’HY: And some in other districts.
THE COURT: Yes, some in other districts, and
there are 230 ones that you know about.
THE WITNESS: 230, the ones that were reported
to me.
THE COURT: All right, and Mr. Murphy are you
willing to stipulate that they are the others, the thirty?
MR. MURPHY: That's the best count I can make.
THE COURT: And about 31 others. All right.
Now, Mr. Murphy, do you wish to qualify that
statement or to qualify the breakdown of the places as shown
on your sheet or do you want them to go over all of the record
in order to breakdown.
I don't see any point of putting into evidence
all of the places searched or making it public unless one side
or the ether wants it to be made public; but it is important,
1 think, to breakdown the number of places that are not
residences, and the number of residences that are vacant
1
•>
4
4
.7
(i
7
s
!)
10
1 1
12
14
14
15
l ( i
17
IS
15)
20
21
22
24
24
27
344
shown on Mr. Murphy's sheet.
that information?
Id. MURPHY: No, Your Honor. I have listed
residences, vacant houses, schoolhouses, junk yards, taverns,
bars, poolrooms, churches, hospitals, garages, alley ways,
parked cars, apartment houses, stables, restaurants, hotels,
and public dance halls.
THE COURT: My understanding is that the ones
you turned in, those which are not residences are indicated.
MR. MURPHY: Are so indicated.
Now, is there any question about the accuracy of
THE COURT: bo that the majority of the places
investigated were residences.
MR. MURPHY: I think that's fair, Your Honor.
THE COURT: And the details are on the sheet.
Id. NABRIT: It's understood that the sheet, th
group of sheets are to be marked as a plaintiffs' exhibit.
'HIE COURT: Now, wait a minute. Let's take a
minute. We haven't got them all in. We’ve gotten down to
the last or the middle of the first page and all of everything
else. Now, we're moving on as to the times in which the
investigations were conducted.
Can that be agreed on?
MR. MURPHY: I think perhaps Captain Mahrer cab
testify to that, Your Honor.
345
70
!»
10
1 1
12
l.i
14
15
Hi
17
18
1!)
20
21
22
20
24
25
it.
THE COURT: Do you have that breakdown?
THE WITNESS: No, Your Honor, I have never seen
THE COURT: Well, now, do you want to stipulate
or do you want them to draw it out from the various members of
the department who know?
MR. MURPHY: Let me refresh the Captain's
memory.
BY MR. MURPHY:
Q Did you prepare a memorandum transmitting this
material to the Chief Inspector concerning the number of
investigations made?
A Yes, I did.
Q Do you have that memorandum present?
(Witness referred to document.)
Q In the 230 cases that you've just mentioned what
period of time did they cover?
A They covered the period from December 25, 1964
to January 9, 1965 inclusive.
THE COURT: Now, Mr. Murphy, are you willing tcf
stipulate? Plaintiffs, 1 gather, are willing to stipulate
to the facts of the next two lines, of the breakdown of the
261?
Is there any dispute about that? It seems to
me that it tends to help the State on certain points at least,
1
•>
:{
4
r>
(i
7
s
!)
10
11
12
i:l
14
15
ltt
17
18
1!)
20
21
22
24
24
25
346
if not on others as to how many there were between the date of
che filing of the suit and the date of the order of January
11th and how many there have been since January 11th.
\ Is there any reason not to?
MR. MURPHY: Your Honor, Captain Mahrer's
testimony and that's the basis of the decision that we have
arrived at, is to proceed on that basis. He testified to
230 between the Jates that he's just mentioned, and for the
time at least 1 think we should continue with his testimony.
THE COURT: And then you'll work out the rest
of it?
MR. MURPHY: Yes, sir, without assurances but t
see what additional facts Captain Mahrer has.
THE COURT: Well, you are objecting then to
the breakdowns that you have here on time, on those periods,
the periods suggested by tne plaintiffs?
MR. MURPHY: No, he's just testified about it.
THE COURT: Well, I mean with respect to the
periods which seem possibly relevant and material with respec
to the breakdown.
MR. MURPHY: There's a basic conflict in couns^
as Your Honor can see. This was not prepared with the thougr
that this would be introduced as an exhibit. 1 certainly
didn't prepare it in that fashion.
THE COURT: Well, I understand that.
1
•>
:t
4
5
(i
7
s
!)
10
11
12
12
14
15
1<>
17
18
If)
20
21
22
22
24
25
347
MR. MURPHY: And now I find myself and Mr.
Sause, as I state to the Court—
THE COURT: It only purports to be a suninary,
and if 1 grant the subpoena and don't quash the subpoenas, he:
you would have to have a record for 261 investigations which
somebody has to look over, get the dates, and the basis on
which the investigation was made.
Now, I have suggested that instead of getting
the basis for every one of those investigations that the
public interest might be better served by the information
which Mr. Murphy supplied.
I thought that Mr. Murphy agreed and would be
willing to have this come in. If you are not I will have to
arrange to have the information. In the first place I want
to know if you have any reason why in public interest, why
the plaintiff shouldn't see every file?
MR. MURPHY: Yes.
THE COURT: All right. Then I am supposed to
agree with that.
Now, I propose, if I have to hire somebody, to
look at these 290 or 261 files and report to me how many of
them were based on anonymous phone calls alone, how many of
them were based on anonymous phone calls plus something else
and how many of them were based on facts other than anonymous
phone calls.
1
■>
:{
4
5
(i
7
s
!)
10
11
12
12
14
15
1«
17
18
10
20
21
22
22
24
25
348
Now, I am prepared to appoint a Master or an
Auditor or somebody wdo can go through every scrap of paper in
che police files to give the Court that information and any
other information which the Court thinks is pertinent if you
want me to.
1 have heretofore said, and the plaintiff has
agreed, that if you will stipulate essentially the last two
lines, the last five lines on your first page, that that will
not be necessary.
Isn't that right?
MR. NABRIT:
entire memorandum.
1 think we are agreeable to the
THE COURT: Well, that's everything. You've
got everything in already stipulated and admitted. It's the
top of the page down to the last five lines and this list,
and the only problem is I'm not going to make the list public.
MR. NABRIT: Yes.
THE COURT: I'm going to seal the list.
MR. MURPHY: The list will be sealed?
THE COURT: Yes. The list will be sealed, anc
1 instruct counsel for the plaintiffs not to make the list
public and not to use the list for any other purposes other
than this case, and it's furnished on that basis.
MR. MURPHY: Your Honor, one of the difficulties
here is that this information is so broad that we ourselves in
1
■>
■■{
4
5
(i
7
s
!)
10
11
12
l.'i
14
15
1<>
17
IS
1!)
20
21
22
20
24
25
349
order to do a proper job--
THE COURT: Well, let's come up and see if we
can find some way of wording this, if 1 can suggest some way
in which you can get around this difficulty.
(Conference at the bench.)
THE COURT: Of the sheets furnished by the
Deputy Attorney General as counsel for the defendant pursuant
to the understanding after court on Friday, the first sheet
has not been admitted in evidence, although certain figures
appearing on it have been either testified to by the witness
or stipulated by Mr. Murphy as additions thereto.
Certain of the figures on it are still subject
of possible agreement.
The main sheet being a list of the various
premises which were investigated, there being one, two, three,
four, five, six, seven, eight, nine sheets in all are
numbered Plaintiffs' Exhibit 3-B to -J inclusive are admitted
in evidence in connection with the statement that Mr. Murphy
made into the record with the understanding that they will be
sealed and that they will not be used by counsel for the
plaintiffs for any purposes except for the purposes of this cc
and that they will not be made public by counsel for the
plaintiffs.
All right.
(Documents above were marked Plaintiffs'
Exhibits 3-B through 3-J.)
\ 1\
4
f>
(i
7
S
!)
10
11
12
1.1
14
la
1(1
17
18
19
20
21
22
24
2a
350
THE COURT: Now, we only have ten minutes left
and l'm having a meeting of Judges in connection with the
Criminal Justice Act because our plan has to go out in the
next day or two, and Mr. Bowen is supposed to be on his way
over, and I would like to speak to him before they come.
1 think it's desirable, Hr. Murphy, if you see
if you can agree on at least, not the last two lines but the
three lines, that breakdown so that we can go ahead.
Can you do that now?
MR. MURPHY: If the Court adjourns, we will.
BY NABRIT:
Q Captain Mahrer, were you aware or is it true
that there is a fugitive warrant out, that is a federal
warrant for the arrest of the alleged perpetrators of this
murder?
A I have been told that the FBI has secured it,
but I'm not too sure about it.
Q Did you participate at all in—
A Ho.
Q -~in bringing that about?
A No, I did not.
THE COURT: Can that be stipulated? Do you
know that as a fact?
MR. NABRIT: I understand that Lieutenant
Caddea is in the courtroom and might know about it.
351
10
i i
12
i:S
14
15
Hi
17
18
19
20
21
22
20
24
HR. MURPHY: If it's important, Your Honor, but
it doesn't have any bearing on this case whether they do or do
not have such a warrant.
MR. NABRIT: I'll inquire later.
THE COURT: I Chink its relevancy and materiali|ty
are something which can be debated later. You can find out
from Lieutenant Cadden whether it can be proved, and we'll
come back. 1 don't want to cake any longer now, and we'll
take a recess now until two o'clock except for the conference
between Mr. Bowen and counsel for both sides.
(Thereupon, at 12:50 o'clock p.m., a recess was
taken until 2:00 o'clock p.m.)
25
1
•)
:{
4
5
(i
7
S
!»
10
11
12
1:1
14
15
Hi
17
18
10
20
21
22
2'1
24
25
352
AFTERNOON SESSION
(The Court reconvened at two o'clock p.m.)
MR. MURPHY: Can we approach the bench, Your
Honor?
THE COURT: Yes, come along.
(Conference at the bench.)
THE COURT: So that people may know about it,
the question ha3 arisen with respect to the information upon
which the police acted. Counsel for the plaintiffs subpoenae
all of the police records. The Court felt, and I think
counsel for both sides agreed, that it might not be in the
interest of justice generally to make all the police records
available to any counsel in the case.
Arrangements have therefore been made by the
Court with the president of the Junior Bar that a team of
Junior Bar lawyers will each examine a certain number of policj
records and extract from those records information which
counsel for one side or the other or the Court deens important:
and that a compilation of the records so made by the members
of the Junior Bar, who will be in effect Special Masters for
the Court, may be offered in evidence by either side subject
to the usual objections of relevancy and materiality and
subject to possible questions of the men to clarify any
ambiguous things.
<56
1
•>
:{
4
5
(i
s
!)
10
11
12
l.'i
14
IT)
1<»
17
18
10
20
21
22
24
24
25
353
This will not prevent either side having the
right to call any evidence; but it is an effort to get the
substance of the essential facts of the case into the record
in as short a form as possible.
Is that a fair statement for both sides?
MR. MURPHY: Yes, sir.
MR. NABRIT: Yes* sir.
Thereupon
CAPTAIN JOSEPH A . MAHRER
resumed the witness 3tand and testified further as follows:
THE CLERK: Captain, you are still under oath.
THE WITNESS: Yes.
DIRECT EXAMINATION (Resumed.)
BY MR. NABR.IT:
Q Captain, you have testified earlier that you do
not know of any search warrants being applied for in
connection with this investigation.
I was wondering whether you could tell me
whether or not there was a specific decision not to seek
warrants in this case or whether or not this was more or lest
following general orders or general policies?
A To the best of my knowledge, it was never
discussed, obtaining search warrants. We just followed the
normal operating procedures.
q Now, am I correct in u n d e rstanding that your
<57
1
•)
:t
4
5
(i
7
s
!)
10
1 1
i:i
14
IT)
1(5
17
IS
1!)
20
21
22
24
24
25
354
men on the squad were, that you attempted to have them ready
for an almost immediate response that you received informatio
that you would have men placed about waiting for instructions
to proceed? Is that a fair way of saying it?
A That’s correct.
Q Exactly how did you work that so that they could
respond quickly?
A Well, most of the time they operated out of the
Northeastern District; they were working right from my distric
and if we had information that the Veneys may be located at a
certain address or location they, the squad went out.
Q Were there occasions when teams of officers
would be assembled, located in automobiles or trucks or cars
in a neighborhood waiting for further instructions to go to
the next raid during the— I don't mean to use the word "raid",
but I mean for the next investigation?
A We don't station any cars at certain locations,
if that's what you mean, and the only time that we would do
something like that is where we have a certain house or build
ing under surveilance, and then we would take the car there.
Q Well, were there times, well, were there times
in the periods during the investigation when the important
part of the investigation was waiting for leads or tips or
phone calls?
A Oh, yes.
<58
355
$ Q And I think you said one day it was just working
on tips, at one point in the investigation; is that right?
A I'd say the first two days we received very little
in tiie form of tips. Most of our information that we had to
develop during our investigation as to the friends and families
of the Veneys, and most of our investigation was almost from
the first, I'd say the first or uay-and-a-half was entirely on
information developed in our investigation.
Q And then after that?
A After that we worked on tips. We got a lot of
them.
Q And some of these tips come to you through the
News, American-News newspaper which offered rewards?
A Yes, we got quite a few.
Q And other newspapers as well I suppose, or press
people, do you know?
A 1 don't know; 1 have no knowledge.
Q Now, did there come a time in this investigation
when you had a problem or realized that you had a problem of
false tips or might obviously be false tips that might be
caused by spite or things like that?
A That's a problem we face in all investigations,
especially the ones that have a lot of publicity.
Q And this one included, I suppose?
A Yes.
1
•>
4
4
5
(i
7
S
!)
10
11
12
14
14
15
l(i
17
IS
1!*
20
21
22
24
24
25
356
Q And Isn'c that kind of problem particularly
associated with a phone call where the caller doesn't give his
name?
A It's in most of them, yes.
Q Now, there were some such calls in this investig
tion, were there not?
A Oh, yes.
Q And wouldn't you think that this is a general
problem in widely publicized crime, that the police get bar-
raged with these?
MR. SAUSE: He already said he did, if Your
Honor please.
MR. NA3RIT: When he nodded his head, if he
nodded his head, but he didn't answer.
THE COURT; He said that, at least my note is
that false tips are always a problem in investigations
especially ones that are widely publicized.
MR. NA3RIT: Yes, sir.
MR. SAUSE: Yes.
ME. KA3RIT: Withdrawn, withdraw the question.
Thank you.
THE COURT: That's not exactly what he said
but 1 thought that was the substance of the couple of questioî i
that you asked, a couple of questions and answers.
BY MR. NABRIT:
Q Did there come a point in this investigation
S O
1
•>
:i
4
r>
(i
7
S
!)
10
11
12
12
14
ir»
i<;
17
18
1!)
20
21
22
22
24
25
357
where there wes a decision made to change the method of
investigating these tips because there were so many false
phone calls or something?
A As the number of tips and information subsided
we, of course, reduced the number of our squad, and as a
matter of fact during the last two days we only had four men
on each shift working.
Q Now, 1 think you told me that— well, do you have
any idea of what was the largest amount, what was the largest
raid in terms of the number of officers involved? Was
Preston Street, was that one of the larger ones?
A Preston Street was rather large, yes. We had
a large number of policemen from the Northern District and thci
Central District showed up on that particular raid.
Q You call it a rather large one. How many
officers would be there? That's what 1 want to know?
A Do you want me to guess?
Q Well, can you give us sort of an informed guess
or educated guess, to try to calculate it for me?
A I would say approximately twenty-five.
THE COURT: Do you think there were more than
twenty officers present in five entries? 1 don't mean all
went in the house but present in the investigation at
particular locations, was it five or twenty-five or fifty or
a hundred or more?
<61
1
■ )
:{
4
’>
(i
7
s
!)
10
11
12
i:i
14
1.')
1<>
17
IS
10
20
21
22
22
24
2.7
358
THE WITNESS: At that particular location?
THE COURT: No, at any location, all locations?
How many times did you have as many as twenty officers?
THE WITNESS: To my knowledge, and I was only
on three or four of these myself, but on 1634, going to 1634,
where we had information, going to 1634 that on arrival we had
information that they were running over the rooftops, and I
think on that raid we probably had twenty or twenty-five.
BY MR. NABRIT:
Q Well, was Lieutenant Cadden—
THE COURT: You wouldn't always know how many
men from other districts were involved, would you?
THE WITNESS: No, sir, I would not.
BY MR. NABRIT:
Q Lieutenant Cadden or Glover were on most of thee
raids, Captain, were they?
A They were on quite a few.
Q Now, during the investigation were there cases
where people were stopped on the street and searched as a part:
of this investigation?
A There could have been; I have no personal
knowledge of it.
Q How about public establishments such as bars,
taverns, pool halls, searching the patrons?
A The men had reported to me that they had searchc
< H 2
1
•»
4
4
5
ii
7
,s
!)
10
11
12
14
14
15
l(i
17
18
1!)
20
21
22
24
24
25
359
the patrons in a pool hall, 1 think, in Walbrook.
Q Walbrook Avenue? Is that it or is that the
name of the section?
A 1 think it's Walbrook Junction; Walbrook Junctio
as I recall it. Clifton Avenue, I think it was.
Q How, sir, would you know the names of the
magistrates or other officials normally available in the
Northeast District who would issue search warrants?
MR. SAUSE: How, if Your Honor please, I object
to that; 1 don't see what relevancy that has to this case.
MR. NABRIT: As to their names.
THE; COURT: Well, the Court doesn't know how
often magistrates sit. On plaintiffs' theory the availabili
of a magistrate would be an essential fact. I've got to loo<
at the decisions of law before I can say whether it is materi:
or not.
I think I'll take it subject to exception. It
a question of how often ox* at what times of the day a
magistrate is normally at Northeastern, and if not at
Northeastern whether there is always at all times some
Municipal Court Judge available somewhere. Not magistrates;
I mean Municipal Courc Judges.
Can that Le stipulated? I guess the officer
would know as well as anybody.
MR. MURPHY: I think the Captain can testify tic
63
1
•)
2
4
f)
(i
7
S
!)
10
11
12
i:i
14
IT)
1 (5
17
18
1!)
20
■21
22
2'f
24
2.7
360
that.
BY MR. NABRIT:
Q Can you enlighten us on this, Captain?
A The Judge at Northeast sits daily at nine a.m.
seven days a week, and he is there until he finishes his case
load, and then he leaves.
There are no hours where he must stay there
until eleven o'clock or twelve o'clock. He leaves after his
work is completed in the morning.
Q Which is usually about when? Do you know?
A It all depends upon the amount of cases he has
assigned for the day.
Q Sometimes into the afternoon?
A No, no, I'd say most of the times he is out of
there by ten-thirty at the latest.
THE COURT: But suppose you need a search
warrant to search a house, not connected with this case, but
a search warrant where you haven't got an arrest warrant, and
you want to get a search warrant, what do you do?
A If our Judge is not in the station house we can
probably call Judge Harrington, the Chief Judge, who I think
is available most of the time during the day from nine until
five, and if he didn't want to handle it himself he would
probably make arrangements somewhere to get one for us.
BY MR. NABRIT:
Q Does your Judge come to your precinct in the
1
•)
:i
4
:>
(i
7
S
!)
10
11
1-2
111
14
1.7
1(1
17
18
1!)
20
21
•>•>
21
24
25
361
afternoons or another Judge?
A He is there from Monday until Friday, There
are no afternoon sessions ou Saturday or Sunday or holidays.
THE COURT: But he's back there on Monday to
Friday afternoons?
MR. NABRIT: In the afternoon?
THE WITNESS: At three p.m.
THE COURT: What?
THE WITNESS: At three p.m., Monday to Friday.
THE COURT: And how long does it last?
THE WITNESS: And the same rule applies, when
he's finished his work he leaves.
BY MR. NABRIT:
Q Well, during this--have you ever had occasion
at which you have been commander there when you tried to get
in touch with a magistrate at night?
A I have had no occasion, no, sir.
Q Did you attempt in connection with this--well,
am I correct in understanding that for a given number of days,
and I don't know how many days it would be that this was a sox
of around-the-clock police investigation that you worked, had
some men working constantly?
A That's correct.
Q Was there any attempt to, did you make any effox
to have a magistrate available around-the-clock or a Judge?
65
1
•>
:{
4
.")
(>
7
s
!)
10
1 1
12
14
14
15
1<>
17
IS
1!)
20
21
24
24
25
362
THE COURT: For what purpose? For what purpos
MR. NABRIT: For the— I beg your pardon, sir?
THE COURT: For what purpose? I don't under
stand. For what purpose?
If they arrested a man they can bring him in and
they might or might not have to take him before a magistrate
at a certain time, and that would have been a problem.
It's their understanding that when they have an
arrest warrant they don't have to have a search warrant to go
into any house that they think they have probable cause to go
in.
MR. NABRIT: Yes.
THE COURT: 1 understand that's the p lice
position and there was no need to have a magistrate available
on their theory.
Now, if their theory was wrong, obviously with
a Municipal Court with— what is it? Sixteen or more Judges,
you can find a Judge somewhere most any time.
MR. NABRIT: Yes, Your Honor.
THE COURT: I would think there can't be much
doubt about that.
MR. NABRIT: I have nothing further. Your
witness.
THE COURT: Mr. Murphy, there's one question
that I think ought to be asked. I usually don't intervene ih
m
1
•)
:t
4
f>
<;
7
S
!)
10
11
12
l.'l
14
ir>
1(1
17
18
1!)
20
21
22
22
24
25
363
a case except after the examination and the cross-examination,
hut this is somewhat unusual.
I haven't seen the manual, and 1 don't know
whether you have given it to counsel for the plaintiff, but 1
should like to know in some appropriate way the normal procedu
for authorizing entry of the house to look for a felon for
whom you have a warrant of arrest and whether there was any
variation from procedures in this case.
I understand in hot pursuit, of course, when
any officer can go in chasing after a man but not in a situa
tion where you have a warrant for the arrest of a man and say
at least twenty-four hours have passed since the commission o:
the felony, does an individual officer have the right to go
into a house to search for the felon? Does he have to get
authority from somebody, and if so from whom, and whether
there was any variation from the usual procedures in this
case?
Now, I don't know. I would think this Officer
was as capable as any man of answering the question, perhaps
better able than anyone to answer whether there was any varia
tion.
Would you like to bring it out in your way?
MR. MURPHY: Well, perhaps we can do that if
we can stipulate into evidence the manuals of procedure of
< i> 7
1
•)
:t
4
l»
<;
7
S
!)
10
11
12
12
14
17)
1<>
17
18
1!)
20
21
22
22
21
27)
364
the Police Department that they have here it might be helpful.
MR. NABRIT: What's this?
MR. MURPHY: Well, these are the manuals with
the supplementations which appear in the back, and 1 have one
of these.
One of them is identified as the rules and
regulations and manual of procedures of the Police Department
of Baltimore City, 1939 edition as supplemented, the supplemei
are in the back, and we can perhaps introduce this into
evidence as a joint exhibit.
The other is designated as Digest of Laws of th<
Police Department of Baltimore, 1961. That also, I believe,
is supplemented, and in that volume, Your Honor, there is the
Digest of Laws on page 11 of that digest.
CROSS-EXAMINATION
BY MR. MURPHY:
Q Captain, an Officer, each officer has a copy
of these two documents that I've referred to?
A Yes, they do.
Q When do they get them?
A When they are appointed, or when a book, when
a new book is issued, of course they are issued a new book.
MR. MURPHY: Your Honor, page 11 of this, of
this work talks about force in making an arrest, breaking d
Doors may be broken open by an officer under No. 1 for the
1
■ )
2
4
.’)
(i
7
S
!»
10
11
12
12-
14
ir>
i<;
17
18
lit
20
21
•>2
22
24
22
365
purpose of arresting for any offense upon a warrant when
entrance is denied him, that demand of entrance must first be
made.
Then it cites 120 Massachusetts 190.
MR. NABRIT: Identify the book, will you, pleai
MR. MURPHY: I have.
On page 11, it talks about force in making an
arrest.
MR. NABRIT: We have no objection to the
admission of the two books as instructions given to the offic
or the booklet furnished to the officers, but we don't agree
with all the law in that law manual.
THE COURT: Well, that is very helpful to know
what is in the manual, but what I wanted to get clear was
when there is a warrant for arrest, and the time, some time
has expired, and the officer is not in hot pursuit of someone
who he is following, is it customary for any officer to break
into a house if he is refused admission if he thinks he has
probable cause that the man is there or does he generally get
authority from somebody higher up?
THE WITNESS: The patrolman would have to get
authority. He would have to get it either from the sergeant:
or the lieutenant.
THE COURT: A sergeant or lieutenant has
authority to authorize It?
;69
1
•)
:i
4
5
(i
7
s
!)
10
11
12
12
14
15
1<>
17
I S
1!)
20
21
22
22
24
25
366
BY MR. MURPHY:
Q In this specific case, Captain Maurer, when the
situation arose where the police felt that they had probable
cause to enter any premises, what procedure was followed?
A In these particular cases?
Q In these particular cases of which we are
speaking now?
A We follow the same procedure in all cases. We
knock on the door and we gain admittance by whoever opens the
door. I never went in first to any of the places thst I wen
to, so I don't know the conversations that took place but I
knew they were instructed to talk to the people, tell then
why they were there and get their permission.
THE COURT: Well, what I was trying to get—
they were the general instructions— but what I was trying to
get at was who authorized people to go into a specific house
in order to search as a result of information received in
connection with this case?
THE WITNESS: Whoever was in charge of the
squad at that particular time.
THE COURT: Whoever was in charge of the squad
at that time did it.
THE WITNESS: Yes.
Now, it is unusual, I suppose, to
THE WITNESS: Yes, they have.
<70
'THE COURT:
1
• )
2
4
5
(i
7
s
!)
10
11
12
1 !
14
15
l ( i
17
18
1!)
20
21
22
28
24
25
367
have such a squad?
THE COURT: 1 suppose the person in charge of t
squad would usually have been a lieutenant or higher?
THE WITNESS: Most of the times it was a
lieutenant.
THE COURT: Most of the time a lieutenant, it %
a lieutenant.
Now, in the ordinary case where you don't have
a special squad set up for a particular case, and let us say
you have a homicide case and you get a telephone call to the
district, to your district where the crime occurred in your
district today and the person is supposed to be in your distr4
who authorizes the search of the house routinely? Not this
case but a routine case?
THE WITNESS: Ordinarily it would be the
district, the division commander who would be the lieutenant
or the bailwick sergeant if they couldn't reach the lieutenant:
THE COURT: The divisional lieutenant.
THE WITNESS: The division commander. That
would be the lieutenant or the bailiwick sergeant.
THE COURT: Or the bailiwick sergeant.
THE WITNESS.: Yes, sir.
THE COURT: Ry the bailiwick sergeant you mean
the sergeant in charge of a particular area less than a
THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.
<71
1
•)
:{
4
f>
(i
7
s
!)
10
11
12
1.5
14
IT)
1<>
17
18
1!)
20
21
22
22
24
25
368
district.
is divided into five, six, or seven bailiwicks and we have a
sergeant in charge of eacn area.
THE COURT: Is that sergeant usually in the
Central or usually in the district station or is he out?
THE WITNESS: Of that, yes, sir. The district
THE WITNESS: No, he's usually out.
THE COURT: But you would normally get in touch
with him?
THE WITNESS: Yes.
THE COURT: If the lieutenant was not available
THE WITNESS: Yes.
THE COURT: I wanted to get the general procedu
and that was helpful to me.
If either side wishes to develop that further, o
course, they may do so.
BY MR. MURPHY:
Q Captain Mahrer, you referred to the fact that
there are approximately sixty men on the squad involved in
case?
A I'd say that was the total number of them.
Q Do all of them go out on each case?
A Oh, no, no.
Q Did they go out in teams?
A Most of the time we went out in teams, yes.
72
369
94
i
i
s
10
11
12
12
14
15
1<>
17
18
1!)
20
24
25
A
Q
Q
Most: of the time we went out in teams, yes.
What is— strike that. Is there any— strike tha
Teams?
t
also.
In each case did the officers carry guns?
A The only officers who carry, that is, shotguns
or machine guns were the officers who were specially trained
in their use, and they are always members of the Riot Squad
or have special training in the use of that particular weapon.
Q Then why do they carry guns, Captain?
A For their protection.
Q For their protection?
A Yes, and the protection of everyone, and a place
like Preston Street where you have thousands of people around,
and you need a lot of guns around to protect not only the
police officers but the citizens.
You never know what moment the Veneys may come
running out the door or start shooting out the window, and
they wanted to protect everyone.
Q Did you have any information that at any time,
Captain, to suggest that there might be others with the Veney
brothers at any given location?
A Do I have any information as to that there were
others with the Veneys?
Q Yes.
< 7 3
1
• )
:{
4
5
(>
7
S
!)
10
11
12
12
14
15
1(5
17
18
19
20
21
22
22
24
25
370
A I can't think of any specific case, no, sir.
Q Captain, what if any other protection did you ha
with you other than guns?
A The men who entered the premises first in all
cases were, wore bulletproof vests. That was done under
instructions, only men going in first.
Q How many people would that be, Captain, generall
A Usually four. 1 think they only carry six
vests on the trucks, to the best of my knowledge, and usually
they use about four of them at one time.
Q You referred to the Preston Street investigatior
How many houses did you enter on Preston Street?
A I think six on Preston Street and one on Linden
Avenue.
Q Were they vacant or occupied?
A They were all occupied, so far as I know.
Q Would you describe the procedure in any one of
those cases, the police procedure from the time that you got
the information, from the time that you went to the particulai
location, what did you do?
A Before going there we sent a car and men in
plain-clothes to look the area over, and when they carae back
we planned just where each car, where each car would cover,
such as the back of the Preston Street houses, the sides and
the fronts, and the Linden Avenue house, and when everyone
'<274
371
96
22
24
2.'>
was in readiness, when everyone knew their assignment, we
converged on the scene.
The men wearing the bulletproof vests entered
each house separately while the rest of the men stood around
the area covering the roofs, roofs, windows, and alleyways.
Q Captain Mahrer, why did the police officers
search the patrons in the poolroom, if you know? Why did the
police officers search the patrons in the poolroom that you
referred to a moment ago?
A I know from the information received from the
officers when they came back.
Q Would you tell us what it was?
A Yes, it was a phone call supposedly from the
man who owned the poolroom--I don't recall his name offhand—
but he claimed that the Veneys were in the poolroom with, and
they were armed, they had guns, and went in the men's room.
When the officers got there they searched the
men'8 room and found no one, but they searched everyone in this
poolroom looking for weapons.
Q Now, at what time of the day was that or night?
A Offhand 1 don't know.
Q Did you find any weapons?
A X don't think so. It may have been but I don' :
recall.
Q Is that standard procedure that in any place
1
•)
:{
4
r>
<i
7
s
!)
10
1 1
12
1 :i
14
is
l(i
17
IS
1!)
20
21
22
24
24
2.7
372
you went in you searched the occupants?
A As far as 1 know the occupants weren't searched
anywhere.
Q Except in the poolroom?
A Except in a place like this where they, someone
was supposed to have a weapon.
MR. MURPHY: I have no further questions.
REDIRECT EXAMINATION
BY MR. NABRIT:
Q Captain, this poolroom incident did you also
subsequently learn later that the man who owned the poolroom
denied calling?
A I think he told the officers that that very same
day, he told them--
Q That's right.
A That he had not made the phone call.
Q 1 think, Captain, in answer to some questions at
least you agreed with the suggestion or didn't contradict the
assertion that this was an unusual investigation, search for
the Veneys. What were the things about it that were unusual,
would you say?
MR. SAUSE: First ask him if he thought it was
unusual?
MR. NABRIT: Yes.
THE COURT: That's why I thought it was unusual
< ?G
1
•>
4
4
5
i;
7
S
!)
10
11
12
1.4
14
15
10
17
1.8
1<>
20
21
22
24
24
25
373
Co set up a separaCe squad, and I may have led him into it.
Is it unusual to have a separate squad, a
representative squad?
THE WITNESS: Any time we have a murder case w<
always have a squad of detectives and district men working
»
together on it.
BY MR.. NABRIT:
Q Were there any features about this particular
squad or the investigation of this case that was unusual eith<
in size or length of it?
A Except that it was large, the largest group of
men working on it. I think it was unusual in the fact that
we had two police officers 3hot in one night, and it's the
first time it has ever happened in, so far as I know, as far
as I can remember that we had one man killed and one man shot
very seriously wounded in one night by the same persons.
Q Were there off duty officers who volunteered in
any of these searches?
A Yes.
Q On their own time, on their off time?
A On their own time, yes,
Q And I suppose many of them were friends of che
injured and deceased officer?
A Most of the volunteers were from my district
and both of the men were their superiors.
1
•>
:{
4
f)
(i
7
S
!)
10
11
12
i : i
14
IT)
10
17
IS
10
20
21
22
20
24
2.7
374
Q Has the number of tips or leads dwindled as tiaui
went on?
A Well, in this last week we have not, to my
knowledge, gotten over three of them.
Q In the last week?
A It's dropped down.
Q Well, what was it at the peak period, at the
beginning of it? You don't remember?
A 1 couldn't answer that.
Q Do you know what's the largest number of raids?
I'm sorry; I don't mean to use that word "raids" in any invid-
ious sense but the largest number of places visited in sny
single day?
A No.
Q On any single piece of information?
A No, I don't know offhand.
Q Can you find out swiftly or by just a glance at
your record or would it take you a long time?
A I don't think so.
I'm sorry. I thought I had them down on a
sheet but I don't and I don't know just where I can find it.
MR. NABRIT: All right. Thank you for looki
THE COURT: 1 would think that would be somet
we could hope to get from the investigation on this.
MR. NABRIT: Thank you. Thank you for looki
.<78
1
•)
2
4
5
(i
7
S
!)
10
11
12
12
14
15
1<>
17
IS
10
20
21
22
22
24
25
375
MR. MURPHY: Had you finished?
MR. NABRIT: No, 1 had not quite finished.
BY MR. NABRIT:
Q Have you had reported to you by any of your
subordinate officers any violations of your instructions by
officers in the course of these raids, about officers who
disobeyed orders?
A None.
THE COURT: Well, there is one thing. We won'
get this business about tips because we are only getting the
ones where there was an entry made, and I imagine there were
tips. Were there any tips received which were not followed
up?
THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.
THE COURT: --by entries?
THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.
THE COURT: So that they wouldn't show here
unless we have some separate record.
Do you have any record made of that, Mr. Murphy"
MR. MURPHY: Of those that were not, no, Your
Honor. 1 think there is a record showing the total number
of calls made, but we have to get that off the tapes or the
cards.
THE COURT: Well, perhaps it would be well to
develop that from your point of view as to how many tips came
7 9
1
•)
4
(i
7
s
!)
10
11
12
i:l
14
lf>
lfi
17
18
1 ! )
20
21
•>2
28
24
2.7
376
in chat they didn't enter on.
MR. NABRIT: You may inquire?
THE COURT: You say you have no reports of any
violations of Instructions?
THE WITNESS: No, sir.RECROSS-EXAMINATION
BY MR. MURPHY:
Q Captain, did you confine your Investigation to
the houses or other premises occupied by colored persons?
A I don't think we knew the race of anyone when we
went there but just went because we had information about a
particular location and we had no idea whether they were white
or colored.
Q Did you make any record as to whether a particul
house was occupied by colored or white persons?
A Not to my knowledge. It seems to me like I
read one report where it was mentioned that the family was
white. I think it was a Jewish family on Reisterstown Road,
if I'm not mistaken.
I think we investigated that by phone, that we
didn't bother to go out there.
Q Captain, did you actually Investigate any
premises occupied by white persons during your investigation?
A There could have bden; 1 wouldn't know.
MR. MURPHY: No further questions.
<80
377
FURTHER REDIRECT EXAMINATION
BY MR. NABRIT:
Q In your description of the Earl Veney and the
Sam Veney to the officers, did that indicate that they were
Negro?
A I'm sure it was.
Q And was that description made public, that is,
made available to the press to try to aid in the capture of
them?
A I think the press published their pictures.
Q The press published their pictures?
A Yes.
Q Were you aware that any of the leads to you or
is it true that any of the leads or tips that were received
were of this nature that someone saw men who resembled the
Veneys at a given location and that type of tip?
A Yes.
Q Can I cake it from your answer to Mr. Murphy's
question that certainly most, a large majority of the premises
visited were occupied by Negro people?
A Yes, that's correct.
Q Is that correct?
A Yes.
Q And that you are not aware of any particular
ones at least that were occupied by white people although you
, a -?
1
•>
:!
4
7>
(i
7
S
!(
10
11
12
14
14
r>
k;
17
18
l i t
20
21
22
24
24
24
378
Chink there might have been some?
A I think there may have been some but I'm not
aware of them.
MR. NA3RIT: Thank you.
FURTHER RE CROSS-EXAMINATION
BY MR. MURPHY:
Q Captain, what reason, if any, would you have for
going into a colored house or investigating more colored
houses than opposed to white?
A Well, the friends and relatives of the Veneys
were colored, and certainly they were the houses that we gave
the most attention to from the beginning.
MR. MURPHY: No further questions.
THE COURT: Any other questions?
MR. NABRIT: No, I have no further questions of
the witness.
Thank you.
(Witness excused.)
MR. NABRIT: May it please the Court, counsel
have indicated that they are willing to stipulate that the
witnesses who testified in this hearing with the exception of
the last witness, the Captain, were colored people. This is
something I didn't bring out.
13 that agreeable to counsel?
4H2
1
•>
:{
4
5
(i
7
S
it
10
11
12
i : i
14
1;»
1(>
17
18
19
20
21
•>•>
24
24
25
379
HR. MURPHY: Yea. 4 S S
MR. NABRIT: If Your Honor please, at this point
we Would rest the plaintiffs' case except for the report on the
investigations by the Special Master that we are awaiting, and
V
the suggestion that Your Honor made to me that 1 clear up
\\
something, but 1 can't recall at the moment what it was.
Perhaps 1 didn't understand it.
THE COURT: Well, let's see.
MR. NABRIT; Perhaps 1 might say this or make
inquiry whether counsel for the defendant wanted to go ahead
and put on their case today or Wednesday, and if they didn't
want to go ahead today whether 1 might rest on Wednesday,
whether I might formally rest on Wednesday.
MR. SAUSE: Judge, Your Honor, up until
immediately before lunch, as Your Honor knows, we again asked
how the plaintiffs' case was going to go, and they said they
didn't know.
We couldn't be more surprised that in any sense
of the word that at three o'clock today they decided to rest
their case.
Obviously, sir, we are not at all prepared to go
ahead at this time.
V
THE COURT: You will be prepaid to go ahead
on Wednesday? \
\
\MR. SAUSE: Yes, sir.
1
•>
:{
4
5
(>
7
S
!)
10
11
12
lit
14
15
1<>
17
18
10
20
21
22
24
24
25
380
THE COURT: Whether or not this investigation
that we have been talking about has been completed?
MR. SAUSE: Well, 1 would think that if they ax
going to rest today, Mr. Nabrit is now talking about holding
this in abeyance until he thinks it ever until Wednesday
morning and decides when he wants to rest.
THE COURT: No.
MR. NABRIT: Only formal matters such as puttir,
in exhibits and stipulations and trying to summarize the
Master's report.
THE COURT: Except for that they're closing,
as I understand it.
MR. NABRIT: Yes, I might say, Your Honor, that:
the reason I think it would be apparent, that I couldn't make
a commitment to rest earlier was that in examining an adverse
witness you don't know what answers you are going to get, and
you might be taken by surprise as by some of the answers I
got from the Captain.
MR. SAUSE: Well, we can't proceed now.
THE COURT: No. I think we might just as
well adjourn then, but I want to be sure that we are prepared
to move ahead as fast as possible on Wednesday.
I have a one day case tomorrow which has been
MR. MURPHY: Mr. Sause and I are going to be
assigned.
1
•_)
:i
4
5
(i
7
S
!)
10
11
12
1.1
14
15
1<>
17
18
1!)
20
21
22
20
24
25
381
In Che Court of Appeals tomorrow, and this does not give us a
whole lot of time for preparation, but we'll do the best we
can, but we were working on the assumption that this was going
to go on for the better part of the day.
\THE COURT: Well, let's talk off the record.
(Thereupon, there was a discussion off the
record, after which the Court adjourned at 3:05 o'clock p.m.
to Wednesday, January 20, 1965 at ten o'clock a.m.)