written supplement, page 8

The case of Sara Baldinger in Los Angeles (In re Baldinger, 356 F.Supp. 153 (C.D. Cal. 1973) reveals another way in which government "grand jury skipping" violated the integrity of

the grand jury process. Ms. Baldinger appeared before a grand jury that contained jurors who asker her questions of their own. The government responded by discontinuing Ms. Baldinger's appearance and taking its investigation to another presumably more apaetic set of jurors. We do not know exactly how often this scenario occurs, but even the possibility that it can transpire should be motivation for

reform.

United Methodist Board of Church and Society, Dept. of Law, Justice and Community Relations

Unitarian Universalist Association

Church of the Brethren

Jesuit Conference Office of Social Ministry

United Methodist Board of Global Ministries (Womens National

Divisions)

American Friends Service Committee

International Longshoremen's and Warehousemen's Union

Womens International League for Peace and Freedom

Association of Trial Lawyers of America (Criminal Section)

National Legal Aid and Defender Association

National Conference of Black Lawyers

Southern Christian Leadership Conference

Amalgamated Meat Cutters and Butcher Workmen of North America

National Student Association

National Organization for Women

National Bar Association

written supplement, page 10

Coalition to End Grand Jury Abuse

Examples of cases in which the grand jury process has been

abused.

The following is a list of some of the areas in which

the grand jury process has been misused with a typical

case cited for each category. The description of each case

is either in the court citation or one of the articles attached.

The members of the subcommittee should be aware that many of these cases fall within several categories, and that this sample listing should not be taken as an exhaustive compilation. In fact we would submit that the cases we know of represent merely the tip of the iceberg. These cases do, however, present a horrifying picture nonetheless.

Use of the grand jury:

--to gather domestic intelligence (Leslie Bacon, Seattle,
see attached article from the Washington Post, 10/17/75).
--to discredit "non-mainstream" groups (Lurieda Torres
and the Puerto Rican Socialist Party, see testimony
of Representative Conyers before this subcommittee
on 29 July 1976).

--to frighten citizens from political activity (Sylvia Brown, Tuscon, see attached "Where Did the Grand Jury Go," by Charles Goodell. p. 2).

--to disrupt legal dissent (Vietnam Veterans Against the War, Gainsville, see attached "Kangaroo Grand Juries, " by Frank J. Donner & Richard L. Lavine, p. 530).

--to embarass political rivals (John Swainson, Detroit,
see attached""The Perverted Grand Juries," by Sam
Pizzigati, p. 1).

--to further political careers (See the cases discussed
in Abuse of Power, a Report of the New York State
Assembly Codes Committee with respect to former

written supplement, page 11

special prosecutor Maurice Nadari, pp. 47-71).

--to disrupt the news-gathering process (Branzburg v. Haves, 408 U.S. 665 (1972)).

--to cover-up official wrong-doing (Watergate, see

"A Report to the Special Prosecutor on Certain Aspeds

of the Watergate Affair," prepared by Charles Morgan. Esq.
on behalf of the American Civil Liberties Union and
the Association of State Democratic Chairmen, 18 June
1973).

--to break the attorney-client privilege (In re Stolar,
397 F.Supp. 520 (S.D.N.Y. 1975); see also testimony
given on behalf of the National Association of Criminal
Defense Lawyers by Professor Melvin B. Lewis before
the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Constitutional
Rights, 28 September 1976, pp. 13-18).

--to assist management in a strike situation (Washington
Post Pressmen strike, see attached "Strikebreaking From
the Grand Jury Chamber," by Representative John L. Burton).

--to punish citizens for their refusal to answer F.B.I.
questions (see report of the grand jury investigation
around the disappearance of Jimmy Hoffa attached
New York Times article. 12 August 1975).

--to punish witnesses for exercise their Fifth Amendment
rights (Terri Turgeon and Ellen Grusse, see attached
"Taking the Fifth," by Richard Harris).

--to bring an accused to trial on insufficient evidence
(the charging of the Chicago 7, see "Demythologizing
the Historic Role of the Grand Jury," by Helene
Schwartz, 10 American Crim. L. Rev. 701, 750-755 (1972)).
--to chill scholarly research (U.S. v. Doe (Popkin),
460 F.2d 328 (1st Cir. 1972)).

-

to launder illegal wiretaps (see discussions inattached
"Kangaroo Grand Juries, "supra., and "The Grand Jury
Network," by Frank J. Donner and Eugene Cerruti).

--to "reward" illegally seized evidence (U.S. v. Calandra,
414 U.S. 338 (1974)).

--to entice the commission of perjury (U.S. v. Nickels,
502 F.2d 1173 (7th Cir. 1974).

written supplement, page 12

-

as a tool of prosecutorial pre-trial discovery (In re National Window Glass Workers, 287 F. 219 (N.D. Ohio 1922)).

--to hide failures of law enforcement agencies (Cynthia
Garvey, see attached "Use Immunity: Jail for Those
Who Refuse to Play," by Judy Avner and Kathleen
Johnson; testimony of Representative Conyers before
this subcommittee on 29 July 1976).

--to trap criminal suspects into jail without having to
prove them guilty of a crime (Salvatore Giancana,
see attached "The New Grand Jury," by Paul Cowan).

--to chill the defendant's right to a public trial (the
trial of members of the Black Liberation Army, see
courtroom spectators' affidavits and memoranda filed
with the Supreme Court of the State of New York:
Part 30, 1 July 1975).

-- (grand jury) reports to smear reputations with no
individual remedy (see Report of the January, 1970
Grand Jury, United States District Court, Northern
District of Illinois, Eastern Dividion, 1-5: report
of the grand jury investigating the 1969 police raid
which resulted in the death of two members of the Black
Panther Party. No indictments were ever handed down
in the case).

--to locate already indicted fugitives (Jill Raymond, Lexington, Kentucky, see attached "Taking the Fifth, " by Richard Harris).

--to substitute for a search warrant (see cases cited by
Professor Melvin Lewis in testimony before the Senate
Judiciary Subcommittee on Constitutional Rights,
28 September 1976).

--to deny handicapped persons effective assistance of counsel (Claire Gibson, Anne Arundel County, Maryland, 19 Cr. L 2483 (8/26/76)).

--to intefere with an individual's choice of counsel

(In re April 1975 Grand Jury (Washington Post Pressmen's
strike) 18 Cr. L. 2401 (D.C. Cir. 2/11/76) reversing
the District Court decision).

--to disrupt personal lives by unwarranted abrupt geographical removal (Fort Worth 5, Texas, see attached testimony of Senator Edward Kennedy before this