Acquittals in First Trial Reported in the Vector

Acquittals in First Trial Reported in the Vector

Vector, vol. 1, no. 3, February 1965.

Repository: GLBT Historical Society

Mardi Gras Ball Attorneys Acquitted
On Thursday, February 11, 1965, the trial of Mrs. Nancy May and the three attorneys arrested at the New Year's Even Mardi Gras Ball at California Hall ended abruptly with an acquittal.

Questions Unanswered
The acquittal on Thursday, February 11, of the defendants arrested at the New Year's Eve Mardi Gras Ball at California Hall was but a technical victory leaving many questions unanswered. The most important of these concerns the right of the police to enter the dance hall portion of a building to inspect for possible violations of the ABC act. Another import question involves the right of the police to invade the privacy of the individuals attending dance. The invasion was in the form of harassment, especially by the two police photographers, one of whom was taking still and the other motion pictures of as many people as possible as they entered or left the premises.

At the trial Police Inspector R. Nieto stated that the pictures were necessary for intelligence. In answer to Judge Friedman's "Now, just what is that supposed to mean?", Inspector Nieto explained: "We try to identify these people and pass their names along to other enforcement agencies because of the high incidence of crime these people are involved in which affects national security."

Judge Friedman also asked Inspector Nieto if the police wen to the party specifically to make an arrest. Inspector Nieto's answer was "No." However, on cross-examination by defense attorney Marshall Krause, Nieto admitted that he personally had prepared fifty numbered cards which are used in taking pictures of persons only after they are arrested.

The sad thing about the situation is that legally there is but little one can do about this kind of police harassment. Lawsuits could be brought by persons whose pictures have been taken to compel surrender of the pictures as well as the names of people and organizations supplied with the film. But these suits are costly and the outcome nebulous. Moreover, a lawsuit would focus attention on the person trying to avoid publicity and hence might do the individual more personal damage than could be done by the picture in the hands of the police. The situation, however, is not entirely hopeless, although the the law in this area is in its infancy. Pending before the court at this time is the cases of [illegible] who were also arrested at the Mardi Gras Ball, and it is possible that some of the questions left unanswered in the first case will be settled in the pending cases.

The four defendants were charged with having "willfully resist(ed)... and obstruct(ed) public officers... in entering... California Hall" on January 1st of this year. Police testimony, however, established that fifteen police officers entered the hall without any interference whatsoever. Municipal Judge Leo Friedman therefore recommended to the jury that they bring in a verdict of not guilty, which they did.