◆ SpookStack

Nos. 77-1698, 77-1210 & 77-1370 45 need to allege this redundant theory of recovery, we hold that plaintiffs have presented sufficient evidence to sup- port their joint activity claims.26 V. CLAIMS OF LIABILITY FOR POST-RAID ACTS On the basis of the post-trial facts, plaintiffs claim that defendants conspired to cause the false arrest, imprisonment, and prosecution of the survivors of the raid. All defendants are named as participants in the post-raid conspiracy. As a further result of the con- spiracy, plaintiffs allege that the Cook County criminal prosecution against them was prolonged to May 8, 1970 and that they incurred unnecessary legal expenses and suffered mental anguish and injury to their reputations. Relief is sought under sections 1988 and 1985(3). A. Hanrahan, Jalovec, the raiders and _ the federal defendants We hold that plaintiffs have presented sufficient evidence to establish a prima facie case that Hanrahan, Jalovec, the raiders, and the federal defendants partici- pated in a post-raid conspiracy to harass the survivors of the raid and to conceal the facts surrounding the raid, thereby injuring plaintiffs.2’ 26 In Count 4 of their complaint, plaintiffs allege under sec- tion 1986 that Hanrahan, Jalovec, the raiders, and the federal defendants neglected to preyene the wrongs perpetrated in violation of section 1985(3). Section 1986 states in part: Every person who, having knowledge that any of the wrongs conspired to be done, and mentioned in section 1985 of this title, are about to be committed, and having power to prevent or aid in preventing the commission of the same, neglects or refuses so to do, if such wrongful act be committed, shall be liable to the party injured, or his legal popbebeutnsinss, for all damages caused if such wrongful act, which such person by reasonable diligence could have prevented. On the basis of our examination of the evidence supporting plaintiffs’ conspiracy claim, we conclude that ns es- tablished a prima facie case of section 1986 liability. 27 We read Counts 6 and 8 of plaintiffs’ complaint as describ- ing the post-raid conspiracy.