The Catonsville Nine File
About the siteAbout the collections
HomeThe planning and consequences of the Catonsville Nine actionThe trial of the Catonsville NineHistorical context of the Catonsville Nine actionProfiles of the Catonsville NineBrowse the collections
Some pertinent facts: Catonsville 9 action

Previous 2 / 4 Next
Some pertinent facts: Catonsville 9 action
View larger version of imageDivision of Rare and Manuscript Collections, Cornell University Library
Collection: Cornell University Library
Date: 1968
Date of Digitization: 2004
Source: Daniel and Philip Berrigan Collection at the Division of Rare and Manuscript Collections, Cornell University Library
Original Dimensions: ?
Creator: ?
These are some notes pertinent to the trial of the Catonsville Nine in Baltimore in October 1968.


According to William C. Kunstler, head of the defense team of 5 lawyers:

	  This case brought out:
                      1). Juries ought to be informed that they 
                          have power to aquit when defendents are 
                          clearly guilty. (defense lawyers told 
                          Jury they could decide case on conscience 
                      2). Principle in conscience cases - Jurys 
                          should be permitted to use their conscience 

                        (Jury many times doesn’t realize they have 
                       absolute power to aquit)

	This is our major Appellate point: and an answer to 
           Civil Disabedience.

      Our Point:    only civil disobedience that Jurys will convict 
                  will be punished (called Jury nullification 
                  principle)   - done in the slave days where Jury 
                  wouldn’t convict people in North who helped the Slaves.

         People on conscience grounds don’t have ipso facto to
              be freed but the Jury can free them.

              but if no conviction the law dies e.g. prohibition 
                   and the Slave days. You can put all sorts of 
                   laws on books but if Jury doesn’t convict law 
                   dies.. It is nullified.

    Another point of the trial was the waive of Jury selection by 
              the defendents. because they didn’t believe in the 
              legal forum is going to Justice

All defendents are Catholic Christians “who 
   take the Gospel of Faith Seriously” and in 
   “with fidelity to our faith, in Christ the 
   religious leaders as their followers for their 
   silence & failure ro respond to the social 
   issues of our times”