Legal Defense Fund Intervenes in Behalf of 4,000 Watts Rioters - Suit Filed Against Three Courts and 21 Judges
Press Release
November 30, 1965

Cite this item
-
Press Releases, Volume 3. Legal Defense Fund Intervenes in Behalf of 4,000 Watts Rioters - Suit Filed Against Three Courts and 21 Judges, 1965. fc7c4b7d-b692-ee11-be37-00224827e97b. LDF Archives, Thurgood Marshall Institute. https://ldfrecollection.org/archives/archives-search/archives-item/75e9925c-c3e5-406c-894b-20262351c823/legal-defense-fund-intervenes-in-behalf-of-4-000-watts-rioters-suit-filed-against-three-courts-and-21-judges. Accessed July 20, 2025.
Copied!
10 Columbus Circle New York, N.Y. 10019 JUdson 6-8397 Legal Defense and Educational F und PRESS RELEASE er Allan Knight ‘Chalniets Director- Counsel Jack Greenberg FOR RELEASE Tuesday November 30, 1965 LEGAL DEFENSE FUND INTERVENES IN BEHALF OF 4,000 WATTS RIOTERS Assert California Courts Placed Issue "Under the Rug" SUIT FILED AGAINST THREE COURTS AND 21 JUDGES WASHINGION--The California courts were charged today with sweeping "under the rug" the cases of more than 4,000 Negroes arrested during the Watts riots. The NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc., plus the Los Angeles chapter of the NAACP asked the U. S. Supreme Court to review a suit that names three Los Angeles Courts---the Municipal, Juvenile, and the Superior Courts, along with 21 Los Angeles judges. The two civil rights groups also asked that the cited courts be enjoined from taking further proceedings until there is a hearing. The civil rights attorneys ask the high court to define "the relation between the state and those who, because of poverty and neglect, heave been excluded from society." Negroes, the attorneys continue “who have despaired of proceeding through the lawful process, have now become caught up in the machinery of the law---the enforcer of the standards of that society.” The California Courts are being charged with neglecting their responsibility to inform the Negroes of the charges against them, +o inquire as to whether they could afford legal counsel and to appoint counsel when needed. Negro petitioners named in this suit, and others interviewed, asserted that they had no legal representation at their initial arraignments and the District Attorney argued that bail be set at three times the normal level. (more) Jesse DeVore, Jr., Director of Public Information—Night Number 212 Riverside 9-8487 Legal Defense Fund Intervenes in November ~ Behalf of 4,000 Watts Rioters -2- 1965 c a o h my So f ip a 3) at. an indeterminate number of Watts defendants are fandeent oMepemes placed against them, and will Mot receive the kind of Pp otesen tation which the U. S. Constitutin: guarantees to all defendants, rich or poor, Negro or white, innocent or guilty. ' Two Negro petitioners, both young mothers (one of four, the other of six) remained in jail until their preliminary hearings, although sneither had prior convictions. The civil rights attorneys argue that if the courts had inquired as to the background of these women, both would -have been réleased on their own recognizance, as they later were after their preliminary hearings. More specifically, the suit states that the judicial officials cited "have failed and refused to appoint private counsel not associated with the Public Defender's office." It was noted that the Public Defender's staff had not been expanded sufficiently to "give adequate time for preparation and investigation to defend petitioners." The suit further asserts that "none of the petitioners have been» continuously represented by one Public Defender throuch 3 oer ee ee : c ; : successive proceedings, resulting in each Public Defender saving to freshly acquaint himself with cases." th ce "the Public Defender's office has never been required to handle nearly 4,000 defendants with multiple charges during a six week period such as occurred after the riots began. Legal Defense Fund Assistant Counsel Leroy Clark, joined by local NAACP attorneys Raymond L. Johnson and Herman T. Smith, pointed out that lists of attorneys willing to represent indigent persons were given to judicial officials cited in the suit. However, the officials still failed to appoint private lawyers from this list in sufficient numbers to relieve the over-extended case load of the Public Defender's office. Legal Defense Fund Intervenes In November 30, 1965 Behalf of 4,000 Watts Ricters -3- The Legal Defense Fund, which entered the case upon request the: ‘local NAACP onan eT » filed the original case in California's fe ‘Supreme Court ee than a lower court “because it is a matter of grave public import tance a 1d raised serious questions of constitutLonality and i. rity of respondent officials: to continue with criminal prosecutions of over 4,900 persons, " a to Mr, Clark. ze x # & y ps 4 serious apes raised by this action," the Legal Defens uous li Agni The state. of California has "conspi ars ee asserts, © Wg "Neither the respondent judges nor the State have responsive papers. " roes:! “have beenédenied in both the District Court of 2s ite a 5 . * Appeals and the Supreme Court of California, a hearing at which time they may offer proof and argue the validity of their geggs tettons! claims." Negroes have been denied a hearing summarily, without opinion, e result that "they have not been given a hint of the basis Ree led October 8, 1965, to the District Court of Appeals for the say District. That Court accepted the suit affecting more than 4,990 lives nd sent a post card to the Legal Defense Fund's New York City headquarters saying "hearing denied”. There was no hearing. Legal Defense Fund attorneys, in today's brief for the U. S. Supreme Court argue that "the state of California is merely perpetuating the same injustices which gave rise to the disturbances. "It ig trying thousands of indigents in a rapid, routinized manner, which fails to insure that every individual will have at least the protection of counsel, who-is able to devote the time sf required to consult with his client fully and togprepare © ¢ adequately his defense. (mere) Legal Defense Fund Intervenes In November 30, 19.5 Behalf of 4,000 Watts Rioters “4- "To these defendants," the Legal Defense Fund attorneys continue, “justice can appear only as an impersonal machine, a mere tool of the’ same powerswinm society that have put them and kept them ; “a in their position of poverty." "The civil rights attorneys ask that the California courts: ee . . s : : . 1, Appoint lawyers with adequate preparation, investigation ling before conducting further proceedings 2. WNullify any prior proceedings in which petitioners or members of their class, after securing adequate counsel, can demonstrate that they were disadvantaged ky lack of counsel; 3. Furnish petitioners with names of private counsel if the er's office is found to have an inordinate d (and to pay such attorneys) And, in the alternative, the civil rights lawyers ask that the cited courts be enjoined from taking further proceedings until there is a hearing. Joining attorneys Clark, Johnson and Smith are Jack Greenberg, director-counsel of the Fund; Charles Stephen Ralston of the Fund's New York office and Anthony G. Amsterdam of Philadelphia. == EDITOR'S NO *Complete text of Mr. Greenberg's statement is attached, NAACP Legal Defense Fund" is not the NAACP, o were separated in 1939 and now function in close cooperation as two separate entities.