Legal Defense Fund Insist Court Enjoin Police Raids

Document text

The following text has been generated automatically during the document scanning process. It may contain errors, omissions, or incorrect formatting. Please refer to the PDF document if this text is not usable.

Download

By downloading, publishing, or reusing the Materials outside of the Website, you hereby confirm and attest that you have read and agree to the LDF Archival Collection Terms of Use linked below. We draw your attention to the following:

For those Materials owned by LDF, your use of the Material outside the Site is solely for one or more of the following (the “Permitted Purposes”):

Non-commercial research and private study;
Teaching, scholarship and instruction (including distance learning);
Non-commercial print and non-commercial online use;
Criticism, comment or news reporting; or
For people with visual disabilities (See Section 121 of the Copyright Act).
For those Materials not owned by LDF you understand that:
- It is your responsibility to determine whether the way you plan to use the materials falls within the copyright exception of Fair Use.
- For any use outside of Fair Use, it is your responsibility to seek and obtain all required permissions from any existing rights holders.

LDF hereby grants you the right to use LDF owned Materials for the Permitted Purposes without seeking further permission from LDF.

If you publish or redistribute any Materials (including excerpts and quotes), you must include a credit line and/or proper citation to the source of the Material. However, you may not use the name of LDF in any manner which creates any false association between you and LDF or that incorrectly implies any sponsorship or endorsement of you by LDF.

NOTICE: Uses that do not comply with these Terms or that do not fall under Fair Use (or another exception) may make you liable for copyright infringement.

Read the full LDF Archival Collection Terms of Use Here.

I agree to the terms and conditions for use of this content.

If you would like to use this content in other ways, contact us at .

Collection
- Press Releases
Creator
- LDF
Taxonomy
Identifier
- 5024faa2-b592-ee11-be37-00224827e97b

Cite this item

Press Releases, Volume 2. Legal Defense Fund Insist Court Enjoin Police Raids, 1965. 5024faa2-b592-ee11-be37-00224827e97b. LDF Archives, Thurgood Marshall Institute. https://ldfrecollection.org/archives/archives-search/archives-item/6799a3a6-f3e3-4531-b23f-6b8f3a5fe2ef/legal-defense-fund-insist-court-enjoin-police-raids. Accessed January 07, 2026.

Copied!

    fy 

10 Columbus Circle 
New York, N.Y. 10019 
JUdson 6-8397 

NAACP 

Legal Defense and Educational Fund 
PRESS RELEASE 
President FOR RELEASE 

Dr. Allan Knight Chalmers Wednesday 
Director Connest a February 3, 1965 

Jack Greenberg 
Associate Counsel 

Constance Baker 

LEGAL DEFENSE FUND INSIST 
COURT ENJOIN POLICE RAIDS 

BALTIMORE, MD,---,Civil Rights Attorneys have moved to stop what they 
consider insufficient action to halt police from returning to "their 
old way" of conducting searches. 

NAACP Legal Defense Fund attorneys, representing several 
plaintiffs, have asked the District Court not to issue a "declaratory 
judgement" in the place of an "injunction". 

The attorneys assert that a "declaratory judgement" restating 
that police may search, without a warrant, only if there is > 
"reasonable" and "probable" cause, will not remedy the present 
injustices, bi 

Over 300 warrantless searches were conducted by the Baltimore 
Police after Police Lieutenant Joseph Maskell was shot and Sergeant 
Jack Cooper was jukked after a Christmas Eve holdup of Luxie's 
Liquor Store. Samuel and Earl Veney were the objects of the great 
manhunt which followed the crime. 

Many searches of Negro homes were made on the basis of anonymous 
phone calls to the police. The Veneys have not been found, and there 
have been no raids since mid-January. 

The Legal Defense Fund attorneys argue that the Baltimore 
police, unknowledgeable in law, have already abused such guidelines 
as created by this type of declaration. Moreover, they say, Police 
Commissioner Bernard C, Schmidt has stated his intentions to 
continue authorizing searches of the nature complained of by the 
Pigag itis. 

The complaint before the District Court for District of Mary- 
land terms such searches as “arbitraty and unreasonable and in f! 
violation of citizens' rights to due process of law" 

Although the lawsuit was provoked by police conduct during#the 
search for the "Veney Brothers", the Legal Defense Fund is also 
‘concerned with the broader question of preventing a repetition of the 
raids in the future. 

In this context, Legal Defense Fund attorney, James M, Nabrit, 
III, contends: "Nothing imposed by a totalitarian regime could be 
more effective in destroying individual liberty than these tactics. whi 
which have rendered every man's dwelling subject to armed invasion.on 
the suspicions of petty officers." 
ae In order to protect the rights of people when searches are 
being made, Legal Defense Fund attorneys have spelled out what should 
and should not be allowed, The highly detailed requests strongly 
urged the requirement of search warrants in most cases. 

Also, the attorneys listed several acts that the Baltimore 
police should be enjoined from doing. Such as: 

* Breaking doors or otherwise forcing entrance in vacant noid 
* Making arrests for “investigation” or "suspicion" 
* Unwarranted personal searches, etc, 
The prolonged trial ended on Thursday, January 28th. Attorneys 

for both ‘sides will file further written briefs arguing legal points 
and then return to court to argue orally before a decision is 
announced, 

A iene for the NAACP Legal Defense Fund are Juanita Mitchell, 
Tucker Dearing, and W.A.C. Hughes of the Baltimore NAACP, and 
James M. Nabrit, III, Melvin Zarr and Di unset Jack Greenberg, 
New York City. 

=d0s 

Jesse DeVore, Jr., Director of Public Information—Night Number 212 Riverside 9-8487 * a

Copyright notice

This collection and the tools to navigate it (the “Collection”) are available to the public for general educational and research purposes, as well as to preserve and contextualize the history of the content and materials it contains (the “Materials”). Like other archival collections, such as those found in libraries, LDF owns the physical source Materials that have been digitized for the Collection; however, LDF does not own the underlying copyright or other rights in all items and there are limits on how you can use the Materials. By accessing and using the Material, you acknowledge your agreement to the Terms. If you do not agree, please do not use the Materials.

Additional info

To the extent that LDF includes information about the Materials’ origins or ownership or provides summaries or transcripts of original source Materials, LDF does not warrant or guarantee the accuracy of such information, transcripts or summaries, and shall not be responsible for any inaccuracies.

Legal Defense Fund Insist Court Enjoin Police Raids

Collection

Creator

Taxonomy

Identifier

Cite this item

Copyright notice

Additional info

You may also be interested in