Sidebilder
PDF
ePub

If we check through each of the elements of the crimes to be suppressed under 8 (g) you will find that none of the grounds will permit the suppression of evidence because it was the contents of communication that was received under the order pertaining to a special crime. Section 8(g), as presently written, would permit the introduction of the contents of intercepted messages even though unrelated to the specific crime for which the order was granted.

Let me illustrate: The Attorney General has an order to tap the lines of a Senator on suspicion of bribery. The tap produces no evidence of "bribery" but does intercept a conversation producing evidence of a violation of the Federal Corrupt Practices Act. As the bill is presently drafted, such evidence would be admissible.

Crimes enumerated in 5 (a), (b), and (c) are very broad in nature and present a great potential for abuse of power, particularly by antiunion judges.

For example, the crime of extortion and bribery-this has a very loose and far-flung meaning-or the crime of racketeering under the Hobbs Act.

While the Hobbs Act is an antiracketeering statute, it has been applied in legitimate labor cases. The most recent example of this is to be found in the indictment of U.S. v. Local 612 of the IBT in Birmingham, Alabama, charging 21 rank-and-file members and officers with extortion under the Hobbs Act, and I quote this is a partial quote from the indictment:

Unlawfully obstruct the delay and affect commerce by extortion, to wit, to gain further benefit of the officers and members of Locals 612 and 991 of the IBT from the Bownu Transportation Co. Certain terms of a proposed bargaining agreement covering wages, hours, benefits, and working conditions in connection with the employed members of Locals 612 and 991 of the IBT, and favorably to terminate a labor strike called by the members of Locals 612 and 991 of the IBT.

I submit for the record a copy of the indictment as exhibit A, which was requested by the Attorney General. In other words, here we have a group of workingmen who are being indicted for the sole reason that they had a disagreement with the employer with reference to wages, hours, and working conditions.

Pursuant to that agreement, they went on strike. There is an allegation of violence and economic coercion. They now are charged with extortion under an antiracketeering statute and they are charged with seeking to extort wages and conditions of employment.

Now, this is a far cry from the intent of Congress when the Hobbs Act was passed. Yet, under the powers the Attorney General is seeking under this statute, he would then have the powers received under the Hobbs Act to request from a Federal district court judge an order to tap the wires of the members of this local union in the course of the strike or prior to the strike, on the mere suspicion that they intend to violate his construction of the Hobbs Act.

Does this shock you, Senator?

You had a puzzled expression on your face.

Incidentally, these 21 men today are incarcerated because the Federal court judge refused to grant an ordinary bond, but required that $250,000 be raised, which would be available to pay damages to the employer which he might have suffered as a result of this strike.

The employees and-and the union was not permitted to raise this money for them. So today they are in jail. An ordinary bond was not granted.

(The indictment referred to, marked "Exhibit A," is as follows:)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT, NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA, SOUTHERN DIVISION

No. 15080

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

vs.

LOCAL 612, INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF TEAMSTERS, CHAUFFERS,
WAREHOUSEMEN AND HELPERS OF AMERICA

4112 10th Avenue, North Birmingham, Alabama

SUMMONS

To Local 612, International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers of America, Its Officers, Agents, or Attorneys:

You are hereby summoned to appear before the United States District Court for the Northern District of Alabama at the Post Office Building in the city of Birmingham at the next regular or special term of court to answer to an indictment charging it with (copy of indictment hereto attached). Dated February 14, 1962.

WILLIAM E. DAVIS, Clerk By: DAN STRONG, Deputy Clerk.

RETURN

on

This summons was received by me at

Defendant.

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA, SOUTHERN DIVISION

NO. 15080-18 U.S.C. 371, 1951 15 USC 1281

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. GEORGE SAMUEL WEBB, JESSIE ELLIOTT Douglas, HOMER TRUETT LANKFORD, HESTON MASHBURN, OLEN RAY LOYD, EUGENE MITCHELL, WILSON EUGENE FOWLER, ELLIE BROWN BISHOP, VICTOR RAY, CARRELL W. NEAL, RAYFORD TAYLOR, COY PAAMER JOHNSON, LEWIS FLOYD WOODALL, A. J. WHORTON, JOHN B. YOUNG, OLIVER H. FOSSETT, AVERY G. MCINTYRE, BILLY J. FINCHER, JACK D. GRANT, JAMES AROL FORSTON, LOCAL 612 INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF TEAMSTERS, CHAUFFERS, WAREHOUSEMEN AND HELPERS OF AMERICA

INDICTMENT

COUNT ONE (18 USC 371)

The Grand Jury charges:

That heretofore, to wit, continuously from, to wit, the 4th day of November 1961, to, to wit, the 11th day of February 1962, in the Southern Division of the Northern District of Alabama, and at divers other places.

George Samuel Webb

Jessie Elliott Douglas

Homer Truett Lankford
Heston Mashburn
Olen Ray Loyd

Eugene Mitchell

Wilson Eugene Fowler

Ellie Brown Bishop
Victor Ray

Carrell W. Neal

Rayford Taylor
Coy Parmer Johnson
Lewis Floyd Woodall
A. J. Whorton
John B. Young
Oliver H. Fossett
Avery G. McIntyre

Billy J. Fincher

Jack D. Grant
James Arol Forston

Local 612, International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers of America, whose names are otherwise unknown to the Grand Jurors, did unlawfully, knowingly and willfully conspire, combine, confederate and agree together, with each other and with James Cecil Fox, who is not, however, made a defendant, and with other persons unknown to the Grand Jurors, to commit the acts made offenses and crimes against the United States by Section 1951 of Title 18 of the United States Code and Section 1281 of Title 15 of the United States Code, in this, that at the time and place aforesaid, the abovenamed defendants did unlawfully, knowingly and willfully conspire, combine, confederate and agree together, with the persons above named as coconspirators but not made defendants herein, and with other persons unknown to the Grand Jurors, to:

I. Unlawfully obstruct, delay and affect commerce and the movement of articles and commodities in commerce, by extortion, and to commit and threaten physical violence to persons and property in furtherance of a plan and purpose unlawfully to obstruct, delay and affect commerce, as that term is defined in and by Section 1951, Title 18, United States Code, to wit: interstate commerce, and the movement of articles and commodities, by extortion, to gain for the benefit of the officers and members of Locals Number 612 and 991 of the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers of America, from the Bowman Transportation Company, a corporation of the State of Alabama, certain terms of a proposed bargaining agreement, covering wages, hours, benefits and working conditions in connection with the employment of the members of Locals Numbers 612 and 991, of the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers of America, by the Bowman Transportation Company, and favorably to terminate a labor strike called by the members of Locals 612 and 991 of the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers of America, such strike to be effective from and after the 4th day of November 1961.

II. Unlawfully and willfully destroy and injure property moving in interstate commerce in the possession of a common carrier by motor vehicle, in that they would shoot, injure, and otherwise disable the operators, the trucks and their cargoes from moving normally in interstate commerce, and destroy the said property.

The Grand Jury further charges that in pursuance and furtherance of the said conspiracy, and to effect the objects thereof, the defendants and their coconspirators did commit, among others, in the Northern District of Alabama, and elsewhere, the following overt acts:

1. That on or about January 8, 1962, Jack D. Grant, Heston Mashburn, Wilson Eugene Fowler, Homer Truett Lankford, and James Arol Forston met with each other at the residence of Joseph D. Mashburn, 304 Shirley Drive, Kennesaw, Georgia.

2. That on or about January 8, 1962, Jack D. Grant and Olen Ray Loyd arranged accommodations at Fordes Motel, Kennesaw, Georgia, for themselves and Ellie Brown Bishop, Wilson Eugene Fowler, Heston Mashburn, Victor Ray, and James Arol Forston.

3. That on or about January 11, 1962, James Cecil Fox, one of the conspirators named, but not indicted, herein, furnished at Forrest Park, Georgia, his personal vehicle license plates of Georgia for the use of Olen Ray Loyd upon his personal vehicle.

4. That on or about January 11 and 12, 1962, Olen Ray Loyd, Ellie Brown Bishop and Wilson Eugene Fowler, traversed Georgia State Highway Routes from and near Kennesaw, Georgia.

5. That on or about January 12, 1962, at Gay, Georgia, Olen Ray Loyd, Wilson Eugene Fowler, and Ellie Brown Bishop, fired upon a truck and trailer moving in interstate commerce, owned or operated by the Bowman Transportation Company.

6. That on or about January 17, 1962, George Samuel Webb accompanied Olen Ray Loyd and Jessie Elliott Douglas to the West Bros.-Moulter Express truck terminal, 1430 West 3rd St., Birmingham, Alabama.

7. That on or about January 17, 1962, in Birmingham, Alabama, George Samuel Webb purchased gasoline, at Winfield-Norris Texaco Station, Birmingham, Alabama, for the vehicle owned by Olen Ray Loyd, using funds of Local 612, International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers of America.

8. That on or about January 18, 1962, near the intersection of Highway 5 and Highway 80, at Selma, Alabama, Jessie Elliott Douglas fired upon a vehicle owned by Bowman Transportation Company and operated by Charles Layman Warren.

9. That on or about January 29, 1962, John T. Pierce, secretary and treasurer of local 612, International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers of America, did knowingly expend funds of the said local 612, unlawfully by payment of bail bond premiums for George Samuel Webb, Olen Ray Loyd, and Jessie Elliott Douglas, at Selma, Alabama.

10. That on or about December 18, 1961, at Heflin, Alabama, Wilson Eugene Fowler, Eugene Mitchell, Victor Ray and Ellie Brown Bishop fired upon a vehicle moving in interstate commerce, owned by Bowman Transportation Co. and operated by Herman Osborne.

11. That on or about December 10, 1961, in Centre, Alabama, Oliver H. Fossett and John B. Young fired upon a vehicle moving in interstate commerce, owned by Bowman Transportation Company.

12. That on or about December 21, 1961, in Piedmont, Alabama, A. J. Whorton, Avery G. McIntyre and Billy J. Fincher fired upon a vehicle moving in interstate commerce, owned by Bowman Transportation Co.

13. That on or about December 3, 1961, in Gadsden, Alabama, Wilson Eugene Fowler, fired upon a residence occupied by Claude Eidson, an employee of the Bowman Transportation Co.

14. That on or before December 10, 1961, at places unknown, Rayford Taylor fired upon a vehicle in interstate commerce owned by Red Ball Transportation Co.

The Grand Jury charges:

COUNT TWO (18 U.S.C. 1951)

That, heretofore, to wit, on or about January 18, 1962, in the Southern Division of the Northern District of Alabama, and at divers other places, the defendants, George Samuel Webb, Local 612, Birmingham, Alabama, a Labor Union and Voluntary Association of workingmen affiliated with International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers of America, Olen Ray Loyd and Jessie Elliott Douglas, did unlawfully and wilfully obstruct, delay, and affect, and attempt to obstruct, delay, and affect commerce as that term is defined in and by Section 1951 of Title 18, United States Code, to wit, interstate commerce and the movement of articles and commodities in such commerce by extortion, as that term is defined in and by said Section of said United States Code, that is to say, by then and there attempting to obtain from another, to wit, one Ralph Bowman, and the Bowman Transportation Co., a corporation of Alabama, certain property of the said Ralph Bowman, and the said Bowman Transportation Co., to wit, his, its, or their money, in the form of wages, and other benefits, to be paid according to the terms of a proposed collective agreement for the benefit of the employees of the Bowman Transportation Co., the attempted obtaining of said property from said Ralph Bowman and said Bowman Transportation Co. as aforesaid being then intended to be accomplished and accomplished with the consent of said Ralph Bowman and said Bowman Transportaiton Co., induced and obtained by the wrongful use, to wit, the use for the purpose aforesaid, of actual and threatened force, violence, and fear, made to said Ralph Bowman and said Bowman Transportation Co. and their employees and agents then and there being, in that they, to wit, the said defendants, Olen Ray Loyd and Jessie Elliott Douglas, aided and abetted by the said defendants, George Samuel Webb and Local 612, International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers of America, fired upon a vehicle moving in interstate commerce, owned by Bowman Transportation Co., and operated by Charles Layman Warren and, then and there, injured the person of Charles Layman Warren and the property of the Bowman Transportation Company.

COUNT THREE (15 U.S.C. 1281)

The Grand Jury charges:

That, heretofore, to wit, on or about December 18, 1961, in the Southern Division of the Northern District of Alabama, the defendants, Wilson Eugene Fowler, Victor Ray, Ellie Brown Bishop and Eugene Mitchell, did wilfully destroy and injure and attempt to destroy and injure, property moving in interstate commerce in the possession of a common carrier by motor vehicle, to wit: miscel

laneous articles transported by Bowman Transportation Company from Birmingham, Alabama, to Atlanta, Georgia, by firing upon the vehicle transporting the said property, and operated by Herman Osborne, in violation of the Act of September 13, 1961, Public Law 87-221, 75 Statutes at Large, page 494, 15 U.S.C. 1281.

A true bill:

(S) LAWRENCE DEATON, Foreman of the Grand Jury. (S) MACON L. WEAVER, U.S. Attorney.

Mr. ZAGRI. Wiretapped evidence before State and Federal grand juries and courts raises the problem of duplication of prosecutions where there are State and Federal laws on the same subject.

With about 2,500 new prosecutors in the States authorized to seek wiretap orders, it will present serious problems to labor, particularly in the right-to-work States where there will be a tendency to broadly construe extortion and bribery.

This will be a particularly dangerous power in the hands of an antiunion prosecutor and an antiunion judge.

(1) Could be used as union-busting weapon particularly in the right-to-work States.

(2) Interchangeability of evidence in State-Federal courts could result in State prosecution and Federal prosecution for the same crimes.

(a) For example, Landrum-Griffin establishes a duplicate system of criminal sanctions at the Federal level and State level.

As you know, there is no res judicata where the same act is prosecuted under two separate statutes.

Senator LONG. Mr. Zagri, would it be possible under this wiretapping procedure for a wiretap to be placed on the attorney's telephone and get all the information as to the trial of the case and the information that could be drawn from the conversation between the defendant and the attorney?

Would there be any way that the defendant or the attorney would know during the trial of the case that information had been gained that way?

Mr. ZAGRI. The only time he would know is if there was an attempt made to introduce the evidence.

Senator LONG. But they would never have that information otherwise?

Mr. ZAGRI. That is right; they would have no way of knowing it. Senator LONG. And even though you would subpena the Federal officials, it would be possible for the tap to be placed under a State tapping law and there would be no record in the Federal files or vice versa?

Mr. ZAGRI. That is right, and of course it would be compounded because you would have approximately 2,500 prosecutors authorized to make these taps and there would be cooperation among these 2,500 at the State level with the 50 at the Federal level.

Senator LONG. The average prosecutor would not hesitate to keep the information from the defendant that his wires had been tapped, so he would have all the details for his defense.

« ForrigeFortsett »