thumbnail of NET Journal; 269a; Trial: The City and County of Denver vs. Lauren R. Watson. Part 1
Hide -
If this transcript has significant errors that should be corrected, let us know, so we can add it to FIX IT+
i know my name is james warner i'm a professor at harvard law school and a former director of the president's crime commission about to take part in a television first viewing of an actual trial films that happened inside a real courtroom and brought to you by public television the trial took place in the city of denver colorado and field affords a rare glimpse into a process to which our nation is and i think should be committed attempt to resolve its conflicts not by force but by rule of law how ed cherokee an experiment resist erosion causing a disturbance researcher
vision jail and my understanding of it is that show the officer as lauren lewis howes has been warming up here sure sure people there are several he went back to that one week
at stake here is a failure to you misunderstand in the case of city ordinance violations the complaints are prepared by layman in the la police officers therefore city attorneys in prosecuting ordinance violations are trying cases that they didn't commands that they seldom if ever have had a chance to evaluate the evidence before the charges fall another word we take a mistake come and of course there's a case that as a dearth of evidence we dismissed but if there's any credible evidence from that fragmentary notes that the police officer jian xin here's an example of that
city attorneys copy of that ordinance complain that we walk into court and we tried a case based upon the summary once in a while as in the watson case there's even time enough to talk to a witness and find out a little bit more about the case than reflected in the notes he was stopped for a traffic violation led to get out the car i ask him to show in order to see them before or we can return to get my citation and i turned around to use portal for it pursuit in reopened rely start on we would stop at about half a block or by religion dispatches and bald and she's with the louisiana it
will be featuring william the trial the city and county of denver nurses laura mr watson i mean a judges lawyers and law professors have taken a strong position against the filming of trials it's been and continues to be a hotly debated issue the man who made this film feeling did so without disturbing either the decorum of the court process itself perhaps you should reserve judgment that you've watched the four days the trial and enjoy your own conclusions the film follows the course of this trial just as it took place in the order in which i actually happen each day has of course panetta down the five or six actual hours but always in israel chronological order what's left out is the petition much a little lie
conferences over minor letters and sadly some of the strongest language of the lord in a big family consumption in addition to the principles in this case was interviewed before during and after the trial except for the judge who was interviewed only when the case was over those interviews are spread throughout the four days uncertain where they seemed to shed most like say are really in a unique position roughly in the same spot as the various principles will have to be making decisions throughout this trial the tactical legal in fact the actual decisions which will help determine the trials uncle and says this is the first time you might do more than merely watch i hope you will work is no need to think of this trial as a spectator sport ask yourself at every point that anyone makes a decision how would you decide and why alas word before we began in one sense this might look like a relatively unimportant trial the maximum sentence for each misdemeanor count actually charges ninety
days in jail and three hundred dollars and in some respects it's a crucially important case first were about to say is an opportunity for all of us to make some judgments of the trial process itself second it presents one way and certainly most hopeful way that the explosive conflicts in this country are being worked out for the man who brought the charges is a policeman and the defendant defendant was then his most prominent black panther this confrontation is similar in some respects to that the reason chicago conspiracy trial this trial and a small county courtroom may suggest that one can deal with difficult issues in a very different way the key is because many casualties ok we're
on heaven's the purposes me when she's ready and i'm buzzer there and then i make to manage it opponents but if bashir the records show that we are financing a jury trial and he's seeing how you can receive car restored our watson alleged to violations of ordnance going on ladies and gentlemen of the jury panel of the very briefly explained the procedure for picking a jury
in this court's review will fully understand how we do proceed state uses a jury of six that her the jury that will hear this trial will be a jury convicts consisting of six jurors who mattered a method of picking is to have the names of six have you chosen each side will have a total of three a peremptory challenges three chances to excuse if you're you may be not one of those picture may be one of those excused you should not in any way feel as though your time is wasted if you are not a core of you are excused this is the methane leakage areas take a jury panel is absolutely necessary so that the jury system works now before i had any have you called since all of you may be asked questions concerning your competency as jurors and these questions by the way are not to pry into your personal affairs to find out whether in fact you
will be a fair impartial jury as far as one particular besides position is concerned i wanted this time like to have the jury panel as the groups warn to answer all questions truthfully so the whole panoply stan raise their hand and this was a state agencies exchanging genes let me further point out for your information he sees them cameras taking pictures we do have are these gentleman filming this trial for purposes of a young educational our program on the court systems this will not be shown on any new shows in the future but well rather be shown some months from now a national educational television channels i will be asking some of you questions to see whether any of you
might have objections to serving as a juror on a trial is being felt but this is something we will get to in just a little while so that you do understand what the cameras are there not news cameras this for a documentary film at this time i would ask the clerk to call six names in azure name is called have a sea breeze in the jury box the first name closest to the er to the wall ms bisbee questions that you initially then each of the attorneys will be asking
questions and he requested the other members of the panel that are still sitting in the courtroom listened carefully to the questions at some time the procedure you may be asked whether you would have answered questions differently something which are questions about what your answers would be let me also point out that this odd as i stated before is that two charges violation of ordnance is that it is anticipated that this trial will go for longer than one day it is not anticipated that bad that the jurors will be in any way on the rig artist at place for the evening another which will be released to go home the real problem concerning as far as i anticipate being excuse for lunch or too clear on homes the evening let me start out and by asking mr dewayne if i may what's your current address is in your patient twenty seven twenty one cell phones and what you do is to manage the american furniture company on what's called
the mustard wayne and other members of the jury panel i would like to in addition to both attorneys and are going to try this case and hear the witnesses and defendants defend and dan pfeiffer purposes of seeing whether any of you are personally acquainted with the attorneys or with any of the witnesses mr morgan would you introduce yourself it's a really healthy prosecuting this case have two witnesses both denver police officers who are not in uniform in civilian clothes to dave rosser cantwell seek counsel table with me and author of a new cd right behind me think your party mr davis would you introduce yourself that same purpose present witnesses when david kushner for the defendant or watch it at this point only as the rest of
the tour is that a question to do any of you object to the filming of this trial the way i felt when the order at this point over to mr morgan the city attorney to please the court davies members of the prospective jury panel as i'm sure you've had deduced from the preliminary questions asked by the court and addition and shoot the same basis as true for both the city and defense counsel one emphasizes there only purpose of the questions which we're asking is to try to help us determine and maybe even more importantly to help you determine whether or not there are any experiences are formed factors in your background that might make it difficult for you to serve in this particular case first i'd like to tell you what the charge is in this case there are actually two charges from the same ordinance which
show maybe it's an unlawful for any person to resist any police officer any member of the police department when a person to impart with police authority while in the discharge or apparent discharge of his duty or in anyway to interfere with or hinder him in a discharge or a parent this charge is duty now the court will at the conclusion of the case in the jury instructions or the law that apply in this case among which i assume will be that ordinance is there anything in the subject matter but that ordinance that i just read to you that would make it difficult for any of you to say it and serve are on a jury is there anything whatsoever first about the subject matter of the tribes that would just because of the nature the child would influence you toward either side let me ask mr duan is that
you think and then i was twenty nine and save time that their records or anything whatsoever concerns of the man made you feel you could insert into each of you believe that here in the city and county of denver that we should have laws or ordinances that make it unlawful in the context of this ordinance to resist the police officer in the performance of his duty or interfere with in his or anyone feels we shouldn't have a law such as this the court and now i'm giving instructions to the jury i'm certain will among other things instruct the jury that the city and county of denver the people sitting down in denver are the plaintiff in this week would object that i think the law is clear that it's not the people listening county averages sitting kind of number as a corporate bond charges ninety people are missing and i think that's
important distinction well i'd like to say we can't proceed with the border and that if necessary we will argue that later point i think maybe the question can be asked so that we can avoid a recess now ruling on this i would suggest you i'm a counsel wait until i have completed the question to determine whether or not he has an objection i feel a key question should be completed before there is an objection and complete my question to ask as i started do ms davies oh something else that you want to say before i continue along well if you weren't your risk because it may take a couple minutes before i finish the question as i started to indicate as i'm sure
the court will instruct you the entire burden of proof of each of the material allegations of the charges in this case asked each of them rest entirely upon the plight of the people of the city and county of denver and further the core i'm sure will instruct you that if you find that the city has failed to prove any one or more all of the material allegations of a given charge it would be your duty to return a verdict of not guilty in favor of the defendant as to that charge now is there anything with respect to the substance of such instruction if given that any one of you would feel you could not follow your words dr you are in agreement that this is the law and should be the launch would follow through so instructive you people listening then the question this
is not the people listening and a temper there is a suggestion that all the people in the city and janet demarest mr morgan prosecute mr watts as the case will be visiting county that report provided ringing and the contrary the way it is under state prosecution where is prominent a pugilistic color was not prominently nothing on the show that people are listening have a denver as plaintive says the city of denver as a body corporate and at the very end they charge i think to suggest that it's the people is to somehow while the issue one and somehow prejudiced the defenders of course you're this is so completely insignificant and i think the hour the question of whether it's significant or insignificant from it felt like one that lives in the us now and limiting the words people think i'd ever necessarily have to rule on this the complaint in this case reads in the county court in and for the sink honey again request court realizes the sink honey
of denver is or is not a person who is not a legal entity only let the question being asked without the wording that people in it necessarily or rwanda later i don't think it's that war ii degree your tickets i think it's a question that can't be answered that with this when the substance of the question was not so much the word description of the plaintive as it was whether or not there was anything within the subject matter of the type of instruction i suggested is such an instruction were given to you explaining that the burden of proof of each of the material allegations of the charges rests upon the shoulders of the plaintiffs by whatever word description maybe it what each of you follow such an instruction was the question jim lee yeah some sort of nod yes or no you would fall city by the same token it after hearing all the evidence in the case at a given the charge
is you're convinced the truth of the charge beyond a reasonable doubt that the city had proven each material allegation of that charge would anyone of you as to such a charge hesitate to return a verdict of guilty it's just the reverse the last question what it was doing and done mr mckee and mrs watches anthony geary now is there any reason whether i been quite of you are not why you would any one of you why you would feel you could not say it was a fair objective and impartial jury in this case any reason whatsoever you consider that is a very much an honor the city will present terrific he did this point needed be a good
time to take a recess for lunch before we ackman's or dear mr davies and media the panel some instructions though before you are excused from what my intention is to allow the jurors to have the lunch period free to do whatever you want to shop or you may hit something you care to do i would ask that you not have any communication with anyone concerning this particular trial that you now discuss it with that even any friendly observers maybe the core visitors in other words i do no one any conversation over the lunch hour of power the ordnance referring to interference resistance or about this particular defendant or body the mares which in any way put into this trial that you may have discussions among yourselves you were going to be together there for a few minutes after two and you can discuss the weather you can discuss anything you want to accept this trial i wish that you not discuss this trial i would also arrested two all return to the courtroom in a sober conditions so that your minds are out
fresh and endowed ready to commence with the rest of the case is there anything further that either attorney wants to bring up at this point with these instructions then the jurors prospective jurors that are now on a box the panel members that have not been chosen an hour in the courtroom i will return to the courtroom at two o'clock and meet in the jury deliberation room with us through the meeting room right in back of the courtroom until a chinese court will be in recess because by hello is that picking a jury panel of only six persons is permitted by colorado state law rules vary from state to state but basically what goes on in the wind beards and each side is
permitted to try and persuade the judge that some jurors should be disqualified for cause cause meaning that because of some possible bias or some other reason the judge could rule on it might not be fair to have them sit on that case beyond that each side is permitted three peremptory challenges opportunities to turn down a jerk any reason it chooses any reasonable teenager is excused as a result of challenge another name he's chosen for a larger group of prospective jurors in the back of the court and so each side can try to tailor the jury to its own advantage in addition to screening jurors who might be objectionable this is a point at which the lawyers can begin to try to convey a point of view and effective the juror the impression he's been permitted to remain on the jury on the basis of an understanding between them that the jury will take place there with a lawyer mr morgan did relatively little on his first contact with the jury perhaps he was well satisfied with the jirga perhaps because of the pressure his own daughter of cases he was anxious to get on with the trial to get over with as soon as possible or see what mr
davies approaches when the luncheon break is over the other members of the parents' perceptions yes the morning worrying how it seems clear if the record as the jury because they range of the jury privileged to
chat with you will review possible about some of the things that may or may not remember all egyptians to sit in this particular case because quality of examination of the characters and of course that's the idea is that you and the euro will tell us so much rather tucson so forth with no design our part to embarrass you in any way but rather to get for this person as their acute injury as he possibly can pose history the real mainstay of our system of justice is the fair jury trial ms mckinney i like to direct these questions too because i want someone to answer them but i want all of you
to listen to them and i think i don't think very seriously about how you might imagine because it's very important to us now mr mckay is not true sir that you as an individual right now have an opinion as the guilt or innocence of this man i was think about that a moment with any of us that question it differently throughout if you have an opinion as to his guilt or innocence the peace bell it may come as some surprise to you that you should have an opinion and that builders and i think you see why animals of any if you serve on a jury before when you announced this was to cast and mr mckay or investigate
claims that imus it when it ever served on a criminal jury before your call and tell you that the defendant was presumed to be innocent or has a very they sit down in our system of justice that a person is presumed to be innocent when it comes to ct is not correct though an interview with marcia preparation for this we would all of you wish to have that rule of law why do you when you came to court which are presumed to be innocent and the people have to prove you're guilty on racial about what if you have a objection to that local girl is a religion like to have applied do you have your intro basic guarantees our system so that the defendant is presumed to be innocent annual consider him to be innocent until you have been
convinced that they've convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that ethiopia's natural and if they dont convention the arteries without then you will return a verdict of not guilty is that accurate in your understanding and if you quarrel or that why now if the ban was presumed to be innocent and at this moment you're sworn in as jurors and you're required to go back into the jury room and deliberate what would your very very tricky so at this moment without knowing anything more you have the opinion that this man is innocent is not guilty in fact under our system of law you have to feel ugly dog so you have made
up your mind about this man's builders and you made up your mind that he is innocent and you're going to continue in that view until that person has gotten to be guilty beyond a reasonable doubt ms mater i would add you quarrel with that crunchy again allies he was a concept you'd like to have applied to you if you're on trial and we'll all of you fisher this man but you won't fall of conservation education i give him the benefit of concept just as you would wish to have been given to you by nature is that right but you do and how you do have
is boiling river right here as gary cho <unk> three daughters one twenty one and one twenty two and maybe spent their ears and over there it clear for instance of lincoln man kennedy ask you jonah the same question jerry rice are still alive you in the two years that a very political figures or c done
for sure yeah and if you're going through in twenty five years you all realize that while in a civil case one side may prevail over the other side by showing more by showing greater evidence just couldn't scale of the best entrepreneur plays in a criminal case that they must prove the city must prove beyond reasonable bow that the defendant in fact committed the alleged crime he doesn't have to do it then he doesn't have to say a word he does not go forth with any evidence whatsoever who have you or worse but he's been pretty
careful you know as i'm sure you've noticed that the defense department you'll see that all the jurors' roy now the question is if you're on trial in the chair would you have any objection to be tried by don't like you're an incumbent question and i think the question that necessarily deals any suggestion of bias on the part of the euro i think the substance of the question can be asked in a proper formally in the form of a question of guilt in order to cash
you feel that there would be no promise far as you're concerned and being tried by an all white jury if you have no qualms about it sam how about the rest of it with any of you have any a list for moment wooden that perhaps they give you start to sweat has done well either pneumonia or parents loving someone you wonder sometimes use things that we've lived with for a long time or difficult to set aside all the slang can do through may is rely upon your honesty and your can get and i think the only thing to do is you know you have that
possible if you're on trial and someone who felt that way is the way you feel of it they were sitting in that chair would you turn to me and say davies enter offer you think that even though there are now you understand and freshly printed posters or if you have the authority and and ability and were permitted to either keep yourself are mature take yourself off the jury at this point what would you do i'm unhappy objective this i don't think this is a question that the parent company the answer it's a matter for the court to rule in the exercise of his discretion when they're not be
attitudes and the responses of the german of the jury incompetent for cause and i don't think that you're convinced have already made sure i really understand the question are you still asking her whether she would do this where she the defendant are you just ask your jeans sits up there and says i have a certain that condition the judge doesn't inquire make medical examination asked the jurors is so bad is the pain so bad that you can't sit on the jury and i'm asking her her mental state is so bad that she feels she couldn't say it render a fervor about it or without you know if you were a stage or was that they didn't get the additional be sustained is a question its original iss that's quietly asked me be answered until you
members of the jury have and a palatial nachos or failings that are based upon our strong a couple dozen on racial lines and ambiguous the answer would be susceptible to many different possible interpretations of the question his brother had no objections two councillors he may probably do inquiry if any member of the jury would allow any feeling of racial bias if they had made in early cases very proper form the question was so broad the insignia nothing on the question of the apps uncertainty cures cancer you belong to any club sort of station sure something like that that practice as a matter of
rules and unfair he's been pushing for permission to do fb pics and where some men from your answers that there will be no consideration in educational based upon if you're on trial today which you're going to have a person that shares your pram mind that thinks the way you think you're going to have a person who has done it up as you say that will cast
a pall but work from home well you know if you are on trial today and there was someone in your state with the same attitudes and feeling some frame of mind that you have today would you be willing to have that person try your case well you know an asshole animal as important thing and that's all i'm trying to do is find out what you think of the word that has one about this idea about the idea that a lot of people have
that and then something wrong he wouldn't be handed you know that's exactly what we're trying to get to fail a person isn't brought into court in charge of us to get something wrong basically isn't that how you feel generally firefighters band the first question how about clothes is you're a law is very clear that even if they suspect that your head and opinion concerning the guilt or innocence of a defendant is
testimony on board it is that he would set aside any such opinion and decide the case on the law and the evidence is not incompetent to serve and there hasn't been anything new year like that's sort of testimony with respect to this journey the only thing that he has done so far is to state that he could not give an answer to councils question as to whether or not he would like to have a juror with his frame of mind saying so when asked not the same thing as indicating any opinion as to the guilt or innocence of the defendant is let me ask you to cast because they're not quite sure what he's saying is to guess the question was asked of you that is an important question mark of whether you think they have done a defendant must have done something wrong or i wouldn't be here you have honestly this year well right because he's done something wrong or because he's been charged with doing something
wrong i think this is the difference that the attorneys tried to draw for mystery guest you understand that people may be charged with doing something wrong i do feel that this does not mean that their daily communications problem mr davies and i will laugh at this point at least nine year challenged as to continue with the order but castillo i'm sure just one more question there isn't any question in your mind about the value of the rule of law that says a man is presumed to be innocent like soldiers saying as i understand it is that
obviously there were some set of circumstances back because somebody the charges to arrest was something that doesn't necessarily mean that he did whatever or was responsible was guilty of the citizen to prove useful for a lot in so a refuge from earlier with mr watson and through radio television practically write about him or her about him in return he didn't know and then the vessel from europe maybe for it is that you feel better about this specific at the daily events was the sixth day of the november of nineteen sixty eight after election day mr dunn some the concepts that we talked
about here for the convention street without resolving questions in favor of the senate when you have some question about all of these things may come as any surprise to you know questions that you asked it so i have one last question that's been asked before but do any of you as for an american born prospective jurors and without open my answer your cautions your background from what is there any reason why any one of you to be oh now i get you couldn't set misbehaves but maybe that you shouldn't in all honesty and a lot of you i won't go into it but i would like to do a good deal that maybe it shouldn't name for something knowing that maybe you shouldn't say they'll
accept the church's problems as billy mullins be any contamination and has been tricky but your number two majority
mr schardt if you would please resume they see that they can mr schama ask your current address and occupation or you know or what i'm a chipper off in the foundry a general or which which boundaries generally the general area mr shaw you're acquainted with your attorney or with any of the parties well i have your voices lahore so you have of course this was nothing which would
sell to beside the case because you might form either a strong liking or dislike for not say either the attorneys on either side or any of the witnesses on either side are that mr davies has emphasized on the color of any witnesses skin or any other factors other new orleans you understand this scene you are in agreement with the spirit of this whole thing thank you so much we should take a short
break i mean really a moment or two to stretch their legs before we continue without more for deer this may take down considerably more time with me and so at this time we are going to on i'm just wondering gentlemen if we should take a long enough break so many of the features of a desire to go down and have a quick cup of coffee individuals into wind changes absolutely different and apart from the judge in the black robe and yesterday someone once said that dan preps the black vote should be discarded it has been argued that it's a good idea to have a black girl because it lets the other people know that you're a judge that a symbol i am perhaps the real reason
for wearing a black robe is not so much streamline other people the trajectory mind yourself the qr symbol and you have to divorce yourself as a judgment yourself as an individual again the same old questions remain very well feel very sympathetic toward the defendant may feel very strongly hour incidentally with person and yet case must be decided according to the law the matter how you feel as an individual law is as regina rich still are or to lie to state that only the greats have any judges and court says they're courting you worry
worry antitrust lawyers who brought the people of amazing the trustee as big corporations who are being invaded but today it's maybe your probation so that means people won't walk over their lives and not the losses well it doesn't say that people are not quite as well the wire service is so determined to get justice in court justice league and so that caused them does the fact that the negro or lack thereof and a very official
or that the officers wide religious meetings with me he'd be like any organizations or clubs a practice or have a policy of racial discrimination that if you were going to join a club and you can out of it and that policy which is on trial for that region yes it's been apparent chemical weapons ban
reformist protest demanding a point out that if you were excused please don't feel your time has been wasted this is extremely important to him the panel available which you call a new term for this is as black men would you use in the seat left ballet amidst the chaos the piece because barrel ms blackmon let me i'll start out by asking you some questions the first law at your current address and your occupation place you know any reason why you could not serve a
secure art mr morgan out of the border rick you explain you understand the city is not required to prove beyond a reasonable doubt every fact that may be alluding to during a job that required proof pure satisfaction beyond a reasonable doubt the material elements of the journey right now if you are convinced beyond a reasonable doubt as to those material elements you believe that they're true beyond reasonable doubt even though you might entertain some doubters to collateral matters that were not material elements would you have any hesitation whatsoever in return a verdict of guilty as to that charge concerning which you are convinced beyond reasonable doubt that hesitation well then i think i've asked this question of the other jurors but i'd like to ask specifically again of humans is a black man may i safely assume that you'll make a conscious effort to refrain
from deciding the case on any collateral matters other than along the evidence and as i illustrated previously this could encompass all sorts of things such as well you like the way mr davies it myself calmer don't call my hair the color shirt we wear whatever so the long and zachary our right is there any reason that you can think of why you could not serve as a completely fair and objective impartial juror in this case any reason whatsoever and you could not so sir thank you so very much on a sioux mr parker as eric as far as you know then your background that would lead you to place a new emphasis on a place out to test in this
because in and vice versa he wouldn't detract from just let me ask you this question once again summon question as a nasa and four so there is some answer andrea like to hear from all of you going to a jury room you take of all its five to one lead say in his case for conviction or quote doesn't matter because five to one and you're the one would you say well right or wrong or with us require the rest of the book convention and that's been raised about it is that he is not guilty or not or you're not convinced them written about that he is guilty or proper and the vote is five to one would you change your vote just because the vote was five to one if you think you can stick with your conviction still it was
overcome by the discussion you're really contains substantial portion of young man like it's more important than a day and you not been a lot of extraneous you commit yourselves and you're going to blow it we want to try to record years except for cars morgan to have a protective services like mr davies used her privilege
ms rivers because it's big unique generation has been keen to jupiter very short resisted chambers before we recess let me out
let me very specifically pointed out voters will understand that the jury there will be people be the finders of fact the court determines questions of law on all motions referring to questions of law these are heard out hearing of the jury a perspective jury just go ahead and make a motion that has won his most well i think on the record that their informant who was the motivation that remote renew emotion following true to the jury panel i'll mention first
motion and the entire jury found was so un representative of the community that just wasn't like richard pierce an on our emotions to the fact that after viewing finding out who the panel of the system and not having been privy to the actual selection of this alan not knowing how selective sense that wasn't going to be for and we think the court can take additional notes one from saying the panel that they'll consider will depend among other thing just from patients and from those who've been on the panel knows who remain but who have been designated to numbers rep nadler oh really obviously from relatively high socioeconomic none are from a geographic location from which mr in which mr watts
resides and spends most of his time and that this panel and our view is because of its construction of thousands of his background there is really is totally opposed to the cost of the group won hers in this particular case that in essence is is the motions just simply not untrue this man through translation with respect to the now our argument which is similar in substance to the original challenge to the radio i don't really recall to the court the rule in the latest cases that we have digestive in colorado our water versus us into twelve federal second to seventy five which was only a court of appeals from the district of colorado i'm reading just firmly
digester a defendant who has been charged with the cruel prince is not entitled to any particularly jury so long as a fair and impartial jury of qualified jurors has selected independent is not deprived of his right to exercise its peremptory challenges now you're under the mere fact that in this particular kale there were no members of the negro league race does not imply that there was any unfair selection the panel in itself i don't think there's any law how the council could find anywhere that recites that a member of a given major ethnic group or just loosely call race by is entitled to any percentage or proportion from zero to
one hundred of members of his own ethnic group i think that probably that we've been using the term maybe i have the term race somewhat loosely i we understand that carries the human race and there are three major identifiable ethnic groups caucasian mongoloid need right but regardless of that i don't know and i think the burden is upon ms davies to show to the court some law support his proposition which i think the renewed motion should be denied for similar reasons that those already gone to a previously coverage of the evidence against me original motion picture eligibility request for a four point plan to make
first well mr moren join about the court should go without law that would taste i suppose education figures wainwright who have never been decided because it was new law case it matters ohio would never have been decided because it was new law case of escondido a miranda would never been decided case of weight in case your word would never have been decided because they were they made law well intended we should have why people here sir we think that a fair sample of the welfare system there would be some white people here but that's not but you know there were going to wally other factors seem to be involved in that particular now i can't believe that this court could say that they are but this isn't the panel does not that in fact reflex actor cross section the comedian and amazon in any way a peer group most important ones so
i think you should leave this panel what this plan will do is deny that because the defendant a writer director that an objective jury trial a jury of his perry because of that the way this year carrie thank you there is at least one of those prospective jurors who is a rather young man but in all honesty that even though i perhaps agree with your statement of fact that by chancellor of the chances are we do have our people on the prospective jury panel lot geographically are now from the northeast and there and i'm just looking at the besieged lots of state owned plane who for the most part are older women mr watson or not black who are perhaps oh i don't know what his economic situation on abortion
them are perhaps a middle class or working people nevertheless the cornfields a lot is unstated by the attorney in arm who went further say this larger setting of the sea a new law created by courts sometimes it does make a difference whether one sits in a position to file a mechanic for the trial judge or winter when seven supreme court decision is in a position to follow what the law is estimated by the supreme court of the state i feel a lot is their stated by the city attorney on this point and therefore there is no sufficient grounds to quash the jury panel for these reasons or motion will be denied your objections emotion is on the record and
will be preserved for whatever purposes record is at this point i would like to or reconvene in the courtroom and recently final thinking of the jury and they're the two decide whatever you desire to do in this case i think probably already have some time to think about it because i don't think we've been striking evidence this evening will probably just pick the curia resistant more morning i mean i would like to see if we can complete the uptick in a victory i think our jewelry says this recession and will reconvene to the court or to german short period is to gary mead excuse and have received has
been mr gable may i ask your address and occupation place or that it's often now go from what is a stationary engineer these are all outsiders involvement with religion when maintenance do you believe that after you shall have been instructed upon the law if there should be some aspect of the law with which you might be in very strong disagreement such is the substance of the ordinance or any other of the instructions of a lot to the point where you felt that if you had the power to pronounce the law you'd say the law should be just the exact opposite of what you'd been instructed upon do you believe sir that having taken an oath to do so that you would be able to follow the law as you shall be instructed upon an even if you disagreed with that strongly could you do that sir arthur that's really what we're talking
about now the question is if he had any such contact with law enforcement officers either way that would make you accept his gospel anything a police officer because he has a badge beetle whose son was shining at midnight knew it wasn't so you believe it anyhow side ridiculous example for the other way juanita where he said because i asked her this is a type of thing we're talking about you have any such of contacts or feelings know either way and three point one one it's been two years is at
boys are boys over a visible you are like our own while we were talking with the other jurors were in a yale graduate here we able to hear all of the question did you feel as many different answers that you might do differently than anything you feel differently about it you know mr gable if you were instructed to one can resist an unlawful arrest which you river that you follow where the go along with it or not we're all if you were instructed that person and interfere with the unlawful arrest than other worthy brewing out which you follow if you object to this and maybe we could solve his problem by a momentary approach
the bench by counsel i think that there is a way and witness today he's asked this question without objection the unit's former must object mr eugenides situation in this case this facility was in service to community is that parents instilled fear in the system
is making cuts or trains question along those lines have no objection but you see one could write a work at the words not in the current war i i i would like your yard of course later point to the questions which are asking me can really disappointed to a clear message to instruction or heat in if there's opposition factions it's not as though you know i am going to speak with the refreshments up a lot of opposition as always an encore to victory that you may ask for certain instructions given the gift is contested between trees whether or not that exact statement he needs to get one question to be asked of the egyptian be sustained i think at
least take questions from the fbi or with us a moment you have a conclusion about the guilt or innocence of the defendant will notice right now you're convinced of the defendant's innocence and he'll continue to feel that way they won't tell you convince valery to go as teenagers if you are on trial here won would you be willing to have a person doing the way you do sit in that box
and if you're sitting on trial here today would you be perfectly happy to have sex by people sitting as here during absolutely no difference whatsoever and without you can say that without hesitation but if you're in a country where five percent of the people live at present just don't do it that would be you know dejected this question of this goes into it into a hypothesis which you know i was a twenty percent of people who are black and eight percent why not make a question about what we think what we have to tell you i had an injection my objection was very sick the question imposes a hypothesis not involved in this case the council asked the question of the german dual country wore
a certain hypothetical percent of the population more as proposed this is a hypothesis not involved in this case in the question does not touch upon the competency of the juror a question maybe ask voter education is because that occurs yesterday which and all that as a white man you can sit in judgment of a black man without any degree of influence by virtue of fracture whitey life as i was out when you believe they'll reverse would be true to write christian says he's a man they will always know where
her sister or so don't you sit there is presently constituted will be the period here's the trial at this point since there is passed find where recess i would like to instruct the prospective jurors without borders where you tomorrow morning we report back and i would ask each of you to report to the sport of bike ten o'clock which are pointy and the starling of a bailiff i'm a fair even in this room freedom are sweeping him just to me i think the easiest thing to do is to me directly in the what will be the jury deliberation room which is the room where you met him today it further and struck you again very carefully that your nine anyway the gate with either attorney with a new witness and then and then i mean there's no communication at this point with a near the involve people
i went i asked you not to attack in any way to do a reading or research concerning is the defendant are the facts of the case or should not heard anything about it i would ask you also this evening not to read in the newspapers and not to listen to any news broadcasts we want your mind for a hand ready to hear this particular case tomorrow timing for what the acs ms bishop he's been he's been thank
you ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha my client i are debating very seriously the idea that we were jostled challenges when i have frequently challenges to structures that we feel that we have and there were select a jury of his peers and we're very seriously debating the question of tomorrow waving the jury and trying the case to court one of the reasons that my client mr watson agrees with this is that without feeling that we don't have a jury of our peers than to go ahead and nevertheless try to that jury would
at least implicitly saying that that we really aren't convinced the manager of workers were willing to go ahead with it i'm not sure we would and others say we don't have at your workers if we don't have it your purse or may not have it may as well not have a jury of all i will go to the court as well as far as the manner in which the day went i was rather pleasantly surprised from prior experience that we were able to achieve a jury selection as rapidly as we did it do not feel that i am competent passed upon the quality of the jury in the first place i'm not sure what is meant by this they were all legally competent there were as you can see none whom i felt were incompetent by virtue of any bias or prejudice as
you noticed i challenge none of them in this particular jury i didn't frankly notice any jurors that stood out is as being extremists in from any point of view i think i thought they were very air breach extremely random a jury i would characterize them as not examples of any sort of extremism and of course iowa i would think that either side would not want extremists we obviously don't agree because i know you probably are scenic a scumbag building or not building new or you're you know for us you know family around silicon valley girl like this is so we're not saying we don't know what the facts were in that they have the facts and i think that if i was a judge and a jury and wouldn't turn right to me it's a near the jetty make the decision learn more than just one and more
judges that are if you will to be to be a bit older and you go down there and she hears it here just gotten through the taxi on both sides and he makes decisions that blacks law dictionary say this is a law dictionary that many many lawyers say ah here is pearce people's bills for man's equal equals and rank and station that struck by a jury of his peers means trout might curious citizens judgment of his peers i suppose i'm being tried by your fellow citizens nine lawyers rather than being tried there by the judge train in the wall you know a very interesting thing about the watson case the jury selection is that on his particular panel in fact insisted of all white middle class middle aged people
but the average jury does not as very seldom that i get a jury panel on a jury case that does not have at least one neat row one has an hour we had a jury yesterday or the day before without to minority people on a lot is the usual thing but you can now on let us discuss to say i'm happier to have a curious six of his peers and his white peers decided rather than one judge without getting too tangled up on what the word peer means it is worth asking what kind of jury do we think lorne watson should have acted strains i suppose it looks easy you should have a jury of friends and supporters of people of active hostility a bias against them and we have a mix of those groups we can confidently predict a hung jury and the need for a new trial that's the obvious answer is to get
citizens of denver who simply have no commitments are biases at all of this fails to take account of the growing sense of division and bitterness that tripoli niceties the defendant believes that if you're not for me or against me and if he feels that the white man can fail a judge a black man or that no one over thirty can judge a young person is unlikely to accept the notion that the so called uncommitted group can give them a fair hearing it's a serious dilemma for a system of justice that even without facing this ultimate dilemma one cannot help noting that for mr watts whose point of view the courtroom us look pretty darn white kamala mr davies decides whether or not to waive the jury and mr morgan begins to prosecute the city's case the next stage of the trial begins it's because because patients needs
but it is baby no no no
NET Journal
Episode Number
Trial: The City and County of Denver vs. Lauren R. Watson. Part 1
Producing Organization
Educational Broadcasting Corporation. NET Division
Contributing Organization
Library of Congress (Washington, District of Columbia)
If you have more information about this item than what is given here, or if you have concerns about this record, we want to know! Contact us, indicating the AAPB ID (cpb-aacip/516-r785h7d00p).
Episode Description
The first day - selection of the jury. In the selection of a six-man jury, each attorney can make only three peremptory challenges. Davies, in the judge's chambers, has argued that Watson cannot receive a fair trial since he will not be judged by a jury of his peers - no blacks appear on the entire panel from which the jury is to be selected. (The panel consists primarily of people who differ from Watson not only in color but in age, economic standing, and environment.) Davies' argument is denied. Therefore, he utilizes his three peremptory challenges in an effort to eliminate jurors who he feels might be prejudicial to Watson; at the same time, he attempts to impress the jurors with the fact that "At this moment, without hearing more, you have made up your mind that this man is innocent." Watson, meanwhile, in one of several interviews interspersed throughout the trial, states that "people who are not white in a white nationalist country are subjects" and therefore "can't get justice." (Description adapted from documents in the NET Microfiche)
Episode Description
For the first time on American television, a documentary examines the judicial system through a detailed presentation of a single trial. The case is set in Denver (only Colorado and Texas allow cameras inside a courtroom). It pits The City and County of Denver vs. Lauren R. Watson. The charges: resisting a police officer (Officer Robert C. Cantwell) in the discharge of his duty,' and interfering with a police officer in the discharge of his duty." The larger implications of the case involve the conflict between police and Black Panthers (Watson, a member of the Black Panniers at the time of the trial, has recently been purged from the Party), and the system of legal justice as it applies to blacks and other traditionally underprivileged groups. The other "principals" are Judge Zita Weinshienk, an attractive and sympathetic young woman; Defense Attorney Leonard Davies, a 28-year-old local lawyer; Wright Morgan, assistant city attorney, who offers a sharp contrast to Davies in both age and style; and police Officer Robert C. Cantwell, Watson's antagonist. Each of these principals comments on the trial and on critical factors involved in it during a series of interviews, which are interspersed into the trial. The charge against Watson stems from an incident that occurred on November 6, 1968 - the day after President Nixon's election. Cantwell contends that he attempted to stop Watson for speeding, but was repeatedly thwarted after twice entering his car and notifying him that he was under arrest. Finally, at a service station, Cantwell says he was able to subdue Watson with assistance from three other policemen. Watson's story conflicts in almost every detail with that of Cantwell. He states that the policeman had driven past his house early in the day, gloating about Nixon's victory, waving a fist at him and shouting "White Power." He also swears that Cantwell never formaladly arrested him and that he submitted in the service station without a struggle. The four ninety-minute parts correspond with the trial's four days which took place in March 1969. The trial involves a charge of resisting a police officer in the discharge of his duty and interfering with a police officer in the discharge of his duty. Watson, the defendant - at the time of his arrest a member of the Black Panther Party - counters with charges that he is a victim of police harassment. On the day of Watson's arrest - November 6, 1968 - he testifies that Patrolman Robert Cantwell shook his fist at him and shouted "white power" - a reference to Richard Nixon's election victory. The antagonism between Watson and the Denver police forms an undercurrent within the trial and is a basis of attorney Leonard Davies' defense of Watson. "The issue has national implications, involving police and Panthers, the American system and the black man," says Don Dixon, NET's director of public affairs programming. "The case is really a microcosm, reflecting one of our country's most critical concerns." Each of the four programs will contain legal analysis by James Vorenberg, professor of law, Harvard Law School. Vorenberg is also director of the Center for Criminal Justice at Harvard Law School. He was executive director of President Johnson's Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice (1964-67) and director, Office of Criminal Justice (1964-65). From 1954 to 1962 he was a member of the firm of Ropes and Gray, after clerking under Supreme Court Justice Felix Frankfurter from 1953 to 1954. He received his LL.B. from Harvard in 1951, after graduating from the same school in 1948. During each program, Vorenberg will comment on legal subtleties and legal protocol, as defined within the trial. "Trial: The City and County of Denver vs. Lauren R. Watson" is a production of NET Division, Educational Broadcasting corporation. A film by Robert H. Fresco and Denis Sanders. Additional Information from NET Press Release on Judge Zita Weinshienk: Zita Weinshienk is Denver's first - and only - woman judge. She is also the only judge - male or female - to preside over a case filmed in its entirety for national television. The documentary, "Trial: The City and County, of Denver vs. Lauren R. Watson," will be presented on NET Journal each night - an unprecedented use of prime time for a single program. Recalling the case, which occurred March 1969, Judge Weinshienk reaffirms the value of allowing it to be filmed. She felt that it would be an excellent way to show viewers - many of whom have never been inside a real courtroom -- how an actual trial is conducted. At the time of the trial, her only scruple was that a more experienced judge should have had the honor of presiding for this television first. She also recognized that "The City and County of Denver vs. Lauren R. Watson" would be a difficult trial. One key factor was the defendant's membership in the Black Panther Party -- a detail that was irrelevant to the case but potentially prejudicial. Since a jury's verdict could be influenced by this information, she reveals that she would have declared a mistrial if it had been divulged during proceedings. She feels that the trial of Watson brought out deep feelings about the way blacks feel toward the police. The mutual fear and distrust of blacks and police was evident throughout, she observes. Judge Weinshienk dismisses the importance of sex in her job. The robes divest her of sexuality and make her simply "judge." She was appointed to the municipal bench by Mayor Tom Currigan on June 15, 1964, and became a county judge the following January. Her prior experience includes five years with the juvenile court as probation counselor, legal adviser, researcher, and finally referee. Her involvement with this court stemmed from a paper on juvenile correction in Denmark, which she had submitted, in an effort to spread her knowledge of such procedures in foreign countries. She had, at that time, just returned from a year's graduate study as a Fulbright Scholar, receiving her diploma in law from the University of Copenhagen. In 1958, she received her LL.B, cum laude, from Harvard Law School. Her undergraduate study was divided between Colorado University and the University of Arizona, from which she graduated magna cum laude in 1955. It was during her undergraduate years that she switched her interest from journalism, after having served as editor of her high school literary magazine. An aptitude test indicated that she had the potential to justify her in becoming a pre-law student. Since 1960, she has given a series of lectures on legal ethics to students at Denver University Law School. In 1969, she was selected as Woman of the Year by Denver Business and Professional Women. She is member of the Denver, Colorado, and American Bar Association, Harvard Law School Association, North American Judges Association, Colorado Association of County Judges, American Judicature Society, Denver League of Women Voters, and Soroptimist Club of Denver; also, she sits on the board of directors of the Legal Aid Society of Metropolitan Denver, and executive committee, National Conference of Special Court Judges. Born in St. Paul, Minn., she was raised in Tucson, Ariz. She presently lives in Denver with her husband, attorney Hubert T. Weinshienk, and their three daughters. Additional Information from NET Press Release on Wright J. Morgan: For prosecutor Wright J. Morgan, the case of "The City and County of Denver vs. Lauren R. Watson" was an ordinary assignment - one of the heavy case load that confronts a city attorney. But the case - first to be filmed in its entirety for national television - sharpened his faculties by pitting him against a dynamic young defense attorney, Leonard Davies. The legal confrontation between Davies and Morgan highlights NET Journal - "Trial: The City and County of Denver vs. Lauren R.Watson." "I enjoy being pitted against lawyers like Davies," says Morgan. "For one thing, it keeps you on your toes and sharpens you. It's a pity there aren't more like him. With Davies, you know you've got a fight on your hands right down to the wire." In terms of the general audience for the television trial, Morgan says: "There was a lot of law practiced in the Watson case, and it's an excellent example for people to see. I think it will bring home to many viewers just how important and dear our system of justice is." However, he disputes Davies' argument that the jury for the Watson case was unrepresentative. Racial composition is unimportant no matter who is being tried, according to Morgan. (Watson is a Negro; however, no blacks were among the panel from which the jury or six was chosen.) More importantly, says Morgan, the economic and educational backgrounds of the jurors insured a fair trial for Watson. "It's interesting. Most people selected to a jury will bend over backwards to be fair. Someone who doesn't necessarily like blacks will want to prove to himself and his friends that he is not prejudiced. He may even look for a reason not to convict, though he won't admit it to himself or to either attorney." Morgan was born in Trinidad, Colorado. He received his BA in 1951 and his LL.B. in 1957 from Denver University. After being admitted to the bar in 1958, he practiced law for a year, then became a city attorney - though he returned to private practice during portions of the next four years. He was also employed as a legislative referee, taught intelligence as a civilian at Lowry Air Force Base, and was assistant attorney general for the State of Colorado. Since October 1963, he has been assistant city attorney - one of seven assigned to the Denver district court. He is also deputy district attorney, with authority to act as prosecutor in cases involving the district. Additional Information from NET Press Release on Leonard Davies "The defense of the unpopular client is the highest service a lawyer can perform. There cannot be a system of class justice." Leonard Davies, a dynamic young attorney, found that his credo was put to the test when he undertook the defense of Denver Black Panther Lauren R. Watson. For four evenings viewers of NET Journal follow this trial - and with it an unparalleled TV exploration of the American judicial system. In "Trial: The City and County of Denver vs. Lauren R. Watson" attorney Davies demonstrates how in the relatively short time he has been practicing law - three and a half years - he has built an amazing reputation for himself as the defender of the underdog. Davies believes that any trial lawyer worth the title should want to handle those cases and individuals who are unpopular with the public, not because the victory is so much sweeter when you win but because defending the unpopular cause or individual proves the fact that our system does work. "I abhor violence, I abhor violent people, but I would represent anyone - even a member of the KKK - because he deserves a fair and honest trial just as much as a respected community leader who has been accused of improper handling of funds. I don't pursue or practice any political or social philosophy that would set me against any group or individual." The young attorney first met Lauren Watson when he was asked to handle a few legal matters for a small black community theatre group known as Points East (now defunct). And when Watson first had trouble with the law he asked Davies to represent him. He has been his legal advisor and attorney ever since. Davies is a firm believer in our system of justice. He admits that there are many things wrong with it and that changes should be made -- especially in the area of jury selection. In the particular case represented by the NET film, jurors were selected from the city directory, and in that, instance none of them could be considered to be anywhere near Watson's peers. They did not live in his part of town, nor did they know anything about black people. Davies felt sincerely that Watson could not get a fair trial. Still, he maintains that it is important for men and women to serve as jurors, because if nothing else, it makes them think. Born in England and raised in Albuquerque, New Mexico, and Durango, Colorado, a small town in the southwest corner of the state, Davies received his undergraduate degree from San Francisco State in August 1962, and graduated Denver University Law School in December 1965. He began practicing law in May 1966. He is an equal partner in the firm of Davies and Dikeou. Davies is married; the couple has two children; they moved to Denver in November 1962. Additional Information from NET Press Release on Robert C. Cantwell: "... No one - no matter who he is - is above the law." For police officer Robert C. Cantwell this strongly held belief became one that involved him personally when he arrested Black Panther Lauren Watson. The legal aftermath of what followed is recounted for four evenings on NET Journal when Channel "Trial: The City and County of Denver vs. Lauren R. Watson." In these four evenings the course of the trial - and the entire American system of jurisprudence - are illuminated for a television audience. Officer Cantwell also believes that "no group has a special privilege when it comes to the law. Then a law is broken the police are going to arrest that individual or group and prosecute." Cantwell is a "spit and polish" police officer and a 100% believer in upholding law and order. Born in Fort Lupton, Colorado, and raised in Breckenridge, Texas, Cantwell came to the Denver area in 1958, and was graduated from Thornton High School in 1960. He wanted to be a police officer as far back as he can remember, "Because it's a very important job and it should be done by someone who firmly believes in what he's doing." After finishing high school young Cantwell went to work for the Denver Water Department and dug ditches for a period of four years. In 1964 the police department lowered the age limit and height requirements from 24 years and 5'9" to 21 years and 5'8". Cantwell stands right at 5'8". He enrolled in the first class for 21-year-olds and upon completion of his training was assigned as walking patrolman. He remained a patrolman for three years and then was assigned to the intelligence and vice squad. When a new police chief took over and the department was reorganised in 1968 Cantwell was reassigned to a patrol car where he remained for approximately 11 months. It was during this period that he made the Watson arrest, (prior to the Watson trial Cantwell was promoted to detective and assigned to narcotics). The young officer sees his duty as a limited one. To him the jury must decide guilt or innocence. "I've done my job when I arrest the person. We don't go around arresting people just because we don't have anything else to do. We arrest him because he broke a law." But Robert Cantwell is not disinterested in the fate of those around him. During an NET reporter's interview with him the phone rang. It was a narcotics user asking for help. The young man was on parole from the state prison and he was due to see his parole officer the next day. He had been sent up as a user and was out just a little over a month and didn't want to go back on the hard stuff. So called Cantwell because he knew he could trust him. He needed a fix, but he knew his parole officer would have him sent back to prison if he found signs of drugs in the urine sample. (Urine samples are taken from drug users whenever they report to their parole officer.) Cantwell told the young man he would make arrangements for him to go into the city hospital where they would give him something to quiet him down and help him get over the hump. "I'll see you in about 20 minutes," he said, "and we'll go over together. You meet me in my office." Asked why he did this he answered, "We're not out to make trouble for these guys. This kid is out less than a month. He's trying to stay off the stuff. If we can help keep him clean maybe he'll stay off for good. One thing he doesn't need now is to be sent back." Concerning Denver's black community: "In all honesty I really couldn't say that the Denver police have any more trouble with the blacks than the whites. There aren't too many people who go around looking for trouble blacks or whites." Random comments: "One thing I would like to say, and that is that every time a policeman has to go and testify about a case he's involved with, he's on trial just as much as the defendant. His emotions are strained because he knows that both his reputation as a good officer and his competency in making decisions are being weighed. Every time you lose a case it hurts you in your work." Cantwell is married and has two children. He is currently attending Regis College and hopes to get a degree in Social Science. This set of 4 episodes aired as NET Journal episode 269A-269D in 1970. PBS later rebroadcast them in 1971. (Description adapted from documents in the NET Microfiche)
Episode Description
Trial: The City and County of Denver vs. Lauren R. Watson consists of four 90 minute episodes produced for NET Journal and broadcast in 1970. Originally produced in black and white on videotape.
Broadcast Date
Broadcast Date
Asset type
Social Issues
Race and Ethnicity
Public Affairs
Media type
Moving Image
Embed Code
Copy and paste this HTML to include AAPB content on your blog or webpage.
Camera Operator: Fresco, Robert M.
Camera Operator: Sanders, Denis
Director: Sanders, Denis, 1929-1987
Editor: Silver, Harold
Interviewee: Davies, Leonard
Interviewee: Cantwell, Robert C.
Interviewee: Morgan, Wright
Interviewee: Weinshienk, Zita
Interviewee: Watson, Lauren R.
Producer: Sanders, Denis, 1929-1987
Producer: Fresco, Robert M.
Producing Organization: Educational Broadcasting Corporation. NET Division
AAPB Contributor Holdings
Library of Congress
Identifier: 2420669-1 (MAVIS Item ID)
Format: 2 inch videotape
Generation: Master
Library of Congress
Identifier: 2420669-1 (MAVIS Item ID)
Format: 2 inch videotape
Generation: Master
Library of Congress
Identifier: 2420669-1 (MAVIS Item ID)
Format: 2 inch videotape
Generation: Master
Library of Congress
Identifier: 2420669-1 (MAVIS Item ID)
Format: 2 inch videotape
Generation: Master
Library of Congress
Identifier: 2420669-1 (MAVIS Item ID)
Format: 2 inch videotape
Generation: Master
Library of Congress
Identifier: 2420669-1 (MAVIS Item ID)
Format: 2 inch videotape
Generation: Master
Library of Congress
Identifier: 2420701-1 (MAVIS Item ID)
Format: 2 inch videotape
Generation: Master
Library of Congress
Identifier: 2420701-1 (MAVIS Item ID)
Format: 2 inch videotape
Generation: Master
Library of Congress
Identifier: 2420701-1 (MAVIS Item ID)
Format: 2 inch videotape
Generation: Master
Library of Congress
Identifier: 2420701-1 (MAVIS Item ID)
Format: 2 inch videotape
Generation: Master
Library of Congress
Identifier: 2420701-1 (MAVIS Item ID)
Format: 2 inch videotape
Generation: Master
Library of Congress
Identifier: 2420701-1 (MAVIS Item ID)
Format: 2 inch videotape
Generation: Master
Indiana University Libraries Moving Image Archive
Identifier: [request film based on title] (Indiana University)
Format: 16mm film
If you have a copy of this asset and would like us to add it to our catalog, please contact us.
Chicago: “NET Journal; 269a; Trial: The City and County of Denver vs. Lauren R. Watson. Part 1,” 1971-04-21, Library of Congress, American Archive of Public Broadcasting (GBH and the Library of Congress), Boston, MA and Washington, DC, accessed March 2, 2024,
MLA: “NET Journal; 269a; Trial: The City and County of Denver vs. Lauren R. Watson. Part 1.” 1971-04-21. Library of Congress, American Archive of Public Broadcasting (GBH and the Library of Congress), Boston, MA and Washington, DC. Web. March 2, 2024. <>.
APA: NET Journal; 269a; Trial: The City and County of Denver vs. Lauren R. Watson. Part 1. Boston, MA: Library of Congress, American Archive of Public Broadcasting (GBH and the Library of Congress), Boston, MA and Washington, DC. Retrieved from