◆ SpookStack

“44 Samerriie-< see ESE Ets wean) Sheppard v. Maxwell No. 16077 “, . . curbstone opinions, not only as to petitioner’s guilt but even as to what punishment he should re- ceive, were solicited and recorded on the public streets: by a roving reporter, and later were broadcast over the local stations. ... These stories [newspaper, radio and T.V.] revealed the details of his background, in- cluding a reference to crimes committed when a juve- nile, his convictions for arson almost 20 years previ- ously, for burglary and by a court-martial on AWOL charges during the war. He was accused of being a parole violator. The headlines announced his police ine-up identification, that he faced a lie detector test, had been placed at the scene of the crime and that the six murders were solved but petitioner refused fo con- fess. Finally, they announced his confession to the six murders and the fact: of his indictment for four of them in Indiana. They reported petitioner's offer to plead guilty if promised a 99-year sentence, but also the determination, on the other hand, of the prosecutor to secure the death penalty, and that petitioner had confessed to 24 burglaries (the modus operandi of these robberies was compared to that of the murders and the similarity noted). One story dramatically relayed the promise of a sheriff to devote his life to securing peti- tioner’s execution by the State of Kentucky, where petitioner is alleged to have committed one of the six murders, if Indiana failed to do so. ... On the day before the trial the newspapers carried the story that Irvin had orally admitted the murder of Kerr (the victim in this case) as well as ‘the robbery-murder of Mrs, Mary Holland; the murder of Mrs. Wilhelmina Sailer in Posey County, and the slaughter of three members of the Duncan family in Henderson County, Ky.’” 366 U.S. 719-20, 725-26. (Emphasis supplied.) Turning then.to the attempt to select an impartial jury, the Supreme Court went on: “The panel corisisted of 430 persons. The court itself excused 268 of those on challenges for cause as having fixed opinions as to the guilt of petitioner; 103 were excused because of conscientious objection to the im- position of the death penalty; 20, the maximum al- lowed, were peremptorily challenged by petitioner.and 10 by the State; 12 persons and two alternates were _ No. 16077 Sheppard v. Maxwell 15 selected as jurors. ... An examination of the 2,783- page voir dire record shows that 370 prospective jurors or almost 90% of those examined on the point (10 members of the panel were never asked whether or not they had any opinion) entertained some opinion as to guilt—ranging in intensity from mere suspicion to absolute certainty.” 366 U.S. 727. “Here the ‘pattern of deep and bitter prejudice’ shown to be present throughout the community . .. was clearly reflected in the sum total of the voir dire exam- ination of a majority of the jurors finally placed in the jury box. Light out of the 12 thought petitioner was guilty.” Ibid. (Emphasis supplied.) Coming to the other case chiefly relied upon by the Dis- trict Court, Rideau v. Louisiana, we find its facts, like those in Irvin v. Dowd, gravely undermine any claim that it supports Dr. Sheppard’s position. Rideau also involved a state court’s denial of a motion for change of venue, made on the ground that public knowledge of the crime in the parish prevented the selection of an impartial jury. The Supreme Court’s following recital of the facts at once exposes its inappositeness here. “On the evening of February 16, 1961, a man robbed a bank in Lake Charles, Louisiana, kidnapped three of the bank’s employees, and killed one of them. A few hours later the petitioner, Wilbert Rideau, was apprehended by the police and lodged in the Calcasieu Parish jail in Lake Charles. The next morning a moving picture film with a sound track was made of an ‘interview’ in the jail between Rideau and the Sheriff of Calcasieu Parish. This ‘interview’ lasted approximately 20 minutes. It consisted of interroga- tion by the sheriff and admissions by Rideaw that he had perpetrated the bank robbery, kidnapped, and murder. Later the same day the filmed ‘interview’ was broadcast over a television station in Lake Charles, and some 24,000 people in the community saw and heard it on television. The sound film was again shown on television the next day to an estimated audi- ence of 53,000 people. The following day the film was again broadcast by the same television station, and this time approximately 29,000 people saw and heard est ST eee