◆ SpookStack

my REPORT OF THE SPECIAL GRAND JURY TO THI TONORADLLE edwin W. Jones, Judge of the Court of Connnoan Meas. Pertage County, Obig. The Special Grand Jury of the Cuurt of Common Pleas of said County of (he September term, AD. 1970, hereby report lo tie Court that they have beon in session 25 davs, and herewith by their foreman present to the Court the eee Indictments fonad by said fury. We have carefully examined atl such matters as have “legitimately caine to aur notice and within our charge, having examined over 300 witnesses, and presented 3 true bills covering 25 defendants and 43 offenses cunsidered by us. The business cl this Special Grand Jury has been truns- acted in as expeditious a manner as possible. As has already been reported bere, this Special Grand Jury received tesiimeny from ingore than 380 witnesses who have fairly represented every aspect, allitude. and point of view concerning the events which occurred in the city of Rent. Ohio avd oon the annus af Rent State Uni- versity during the ported from May 1. Lu70, to May 4. 1970, inclusive. The petaoss called as wiinosses the order af their appearance, and the questions presented. clearly ine dicated un effart atcomplete iroeparliality with a full and complete disclisuve of all usalluole evidence. We are fied that each of these obfectives was accomplished. Many persons. somelof whem claimed publicly to be in possessian uf sariinget indertoatioal amd vena wers not cul ject Ia subpoena were invited to testify. Same of those invited did appesr, while others declined, All persons who requested to testify Were permitted to do so, in addition to the many witnesses summoned to testify, this Grand Jury viewed and ickerwise received all phy- sical evidence believed to have any probative value, includ- ing numerous audio tapes. photmgraphs. motion picture films, and physical evidence recavered at the scene. All requests for ferther information made by this Grand Jury have been compiicd with by the Special Counsel for the Atlorney General as to the faw applicahte and the facts. satis- The Grand Jury has had available the independent inves- tigalive reports of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Chio Highway Patrol, Ohi Bureaa of Criminal Identifiea- lien and Investigation. and all other police agencies in- volved. ‘Their ceporis. and all pertinent: information and evidence have beer examined in detail. The Grand Jury expresses i{g appreciation to all investizative agencies for their cooperation, In addition. the Grand Jury has received a substantial amount of additienal information and evidence that was not available io the police agencies at the time of their in- vestigations. Some facts were discovered subsequent to the investigation of other agencies, This Grand Jury expresses its appreciation to Judge Ed- “with W. Jones for nis leadership and guidance during our ‘deliberations. We further commend the Court fur its [are- sight in providing an aumosphere of judicial dignity within which ovr work could be accomplished, it is our sincvere be- lieft that the Court's order restricting publicity in no small measuis provided this atmosphere. The Grand Jury wishes further to express its anpreciation to the radio. TV. ress inedia for following not only the letter, but the “ot the Court's order, wand The Geand Jurors have determined numerous questions of fact relative to the issues presented. The Grant turcn- wish to stress the fact (hat aur findings are entirely our own and no outside influences were exerted. In view af the mary contieting and contradictory gecuunts previously published concerning these events, we feel i aporopriiae lo report those Jindings at this time, They are as follows: 1. s The incidents origineting on North Water Street in Kent, Ohic on Friday. May 1. 1970. and which spread to other parts of the downtown areca and the Universily, constituted a riot. . We find that no provecalion existed for the acts commit: ted there and that muny persens participating in thts riot were not students, but were of a ivpe who always welcome the opportunity to purticipate in the unjustified destruc- tion of property. . The investipative techniques utilized by law enforce- ment agencies in connection with the suppression of the riotous cunduect of May 1. 1970. Were not adequate tou permit the successful prosecution of :nany of the persons who par- icipated, Tt is apnarent that new methods and techniques designed to jwveserve Ue idvntity. of future participants (rioters, ete.) must be inde available to our law entoree- ment agencies. Phat those responsible far riots, etc. be held accountable, without ¢xeeption, and to the maximum extent pravided by law, is obvious. il. We find that the rally on the Commons on 1 Saturday. May 2, 1970, which resulted in the burning of the R.O.T.C_ buiid- ing, constituted a riot. ‘There can never exist any justifi- cation or valid excuse for such an act. The burning of this building and destruction ot ils contents was a dehberate eruminal acl conimitted by students and uen-studcents. Nor did the rioters stop with the hureing of the B.O.T.C. building. They also set fire to the archery shed and moved from there to Mast Mut Street on the front canipus where they engaged ig further acts of destruction and stensd the members of the National Goard as they enfeced Kent. Arson ds arsen, whether committed on a college campers or elsewhere. The fict that some of the pirlicipants were collere students changes nothing. except perhaps to further ageravate the seriousness of the offense. . fee “TT stuiild also be said that t the many hundreds of students who described themselves as merely’ ‘observers’ oor “cheerleaders” are not totally free af responsibility for what occurred there. It seems lo us that many stadents are quick lo say that “this is our campus.” but stow to realize that this carries with it a responsibility to care for and protect that campus and the burtldings situated there, 1 oe ee cH