Legal Defense Fund Insist Court Enjoin Police Raids
Press Release
February 3, 1965

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 July 01, 2025.
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