The Law: How to Control the Court

• Share

"I've been called a pig once too often," said New York Supreme Court Justice John M. Murtagh last week. With that he recessed the pretrial hearings of 13 Black Panthers accused of plotting to blow up department stores, police stations and the New York Botanical Garden. Murtagh's ire was understandable. For 13 days the defendants directed streams of verbal vitriol at the bench and the prosecuting attorneys, bringing courtroom proceedings to a virtual standstill. Murtagh's solution: let the Panthers cool off in jail until they agree in writing to follow the traditional rules of courtroom decorum. He may have a long wait.

The shouts and curses and laughter of the Panthers are tactics of confrontation that were developed in the street. As the Chicago Seven ably demonstrated, determined men can disrupt a trial at will. And many defendants' apparent disdain for punishment has rendered the traditional judicial fetters—contempt citations, gags and shackles—largely ineffective.

TV Trial. Obviously a judge has to maintain order in his court, but ordering physical restraints is often futile. Bound and gagged, Bobby Seale still managed to squeal and squirm enough to disrupt the Chicago proceedings. Besides, the sight of a bound prisoner is repugnant to most Americans. And a gag only supports defendants' claims that they are being silenced for their political views. Judge Julius Hoffman finally ordered Seale to jail to await trial alone.

Jurists are now pondering new ways to restrain unruly defendants without violating their constitutional rights. Judge Murtagh's approach is simple but still may prove ineffective. Like Judge Hoffman in Chicago, Murtagh believes that the defendants will eventually play by the rules if they are punished enough. But the Panthers may well choose to remain in jail while they petition the federal courts for release on constitutional grounds. At the same time, lengthy incarceration will enhance their image as martyrs to judicial prejudice. That image is already well formed; twelve of the 13 have been in jail since last April because they were unable to raise high bail.

To bring order to the court, a committee of lawyers and architects is investigating the use of glass isolation booths in which a defendant can hear the proceedings but not be heard himself. Such a booth was employed in the 1961 trial of Adolf Eichmann. But in that case the Israeli prosecutors used it to protect Eichmann from possible assassination—not as a muzzle. Even so, the booth smacks of suppression like the gag.