Ask the Scholar
Page 21 of 81
I can add historical knowledge about this page.
Page image
OCR
Page 16
461 S.W.2d 298, *310; 1970 Mo. App. LEXIS 502, **25
and others occurred in Holmes Lounge following the is-
We now reach the merits. In order to sustain the con-
suance of the restraining order at which the restraining
victions here two findings beyond a reasonable doubt
order was discussed.
must be made as to each petitioner -- actual knowledge
of the restraining order and conduct in violation of the
order. The restraining order by its express language re-
strained only specific persons, aiders and abettors, per-
n6 Although the witness testified he was under or-
sons acting in conjunction with defendants and "all other
ders to read the order anytime there was a gathering
individuals who may gain actual knowledge of this Order
of a crowd, there is no evidence the order was read
" We deal first with knowledge. As to petitioners
on the evening of the riot and no explanation of why
Kogan and Mechanic, no problem exists as both were
the order was not read.
parties to the original litigation and had been served with
the restraining order. As to the remaining petitioners
[**28]
some discussion is required of the University's
attempts to bring the restraining order to the attention of
Knowledge of the restraining order, just as other facts,
its students and others on its campus.
can be established by circumstantial evidence. But just
as with any other fact necessary to conviction, the cir-
On March 24, after the issuance of the temporary re-
cumstantial evidence must be consistent with the hy-
straining order, the Chancellor of the University issued a
pothesis of guilt and inconsistent with any reasonable
statement to all students of the University. It referred to
hypothesis of innocence. The proof of the elements of
the restraining order in its main body and stated the or-
criminal contempt must be beyond a reasonable doubt.
der prohibited "the conduct described on the next page."
Curtis V. Tozer, Mo. App., 374 S.W.2d 557 [19]. We
Attached to the statement was a second page entitled
turn to the individual petitioners.
"Conduct Prohibited by Temporary Restraining Order of
the Circuit Court of St. Louis County." Then followed
Margaret Murphy was not a student at the University.
virtually word for word the four numbered paragraphs of
There was testimony, however, that she attended a meet-
the order heretofore set out in footnote one. Distribution
ing at Holmes Lounge on March 24, at which the tempo-
of the Chancellor's statement and the attached sheet was
rary restraining order was discussed extensively. During
made as follows: 1) A copy of each was [*311] placed
the course of the discussion she spoke for approximately
in the combination-lock mailbox of each student resid-
two minutes during which she referred to the restraining
ing in the University dormitories (approximately 2000
order as a "paper pig" and "another form of repression."
copies); 2) copies were placed in the mailboxes for de-
Such evidence was sufficient to warrant the court's find-
partments of the University and fraternities and soror-
ings that she had actual knowledge of the restraining
ities (approximately 1800 copies); 3) copies were dis-
order.
tributed to certain buildings extensively used by students
and there left on tables or other places where they could
Joel Achtenberg was employed by the University but
be picked up by students (Holmes Lounge[ -- 500
was not a student. Captain Abernathy, the University
copies, Olin Library -- 500 copies, Women's Building --
security chief, testified that he knew Joel Achtenberg
150 copies, Umrath Cafeteria -- 150 copies, McMillan
and had known him for some time prior to March
Cafeteria -- 150 copies, Medical School -- unspecified);
26. On March [**29]26, in the R.O.T.C. area Captain
4) the statement and attached sheet were printed in full
Abernathy read twice that portion of the restraining or-
in the student newspaper, Student Life, of March 27,
der having to do with disturbing the property of the
1970, on page 8 and approximately 7000 copies of the
University over his bullhorn to a crowd of approximately
newspaper were distributed. Additionally, copies of the
200 persons. He stated Joel Achtenberg was part of that
restraining order itself were posted on three prominent
crowd. Such evidence is sufficient to warrant the court's
bulletin boards on the campus; the restraining order was
finding that Joel Achtenberg had actual knowledge of the
published in full in the March 27 issue of Student Life
restraining order. The Captain's subsequent statement
on page 8; the campus security chief read paragraph 4
that some attempt was made to shout him down does not
of the order to groups of students on several occasions
prevent the conclusion that those persons in the crowd
through a bullhorn. n6 There was also from March 24
heard the amplified reading of a portion of the order,
through May 4 considerable, repeated newspaper cov-
that portion Achtenberg was found guilty of violating.
erage in the St. Louis daily press of the occurrences
at Washington University including the issuance of the
As to petitioners Bothwell, Ryan and Winkler we are
restraining order. Frequent large meetings of students
confronted with a different situation. In their brief here
Page data
- Page
- 21
- Source index
- 0
- Type
- photo
- Media ID
- a70888d28aa34623
- Size
- unknown
Document data
- ID
- 40435733
- Core
- doc
- Type
- document
DTO data
{
"id": "40435733",
"sourceUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/40435733",
"contentType": "document",
"title": "Howard Mechanic [1]",
"citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/40435733",
"collections": [
"Records of the Office of the Counsel to the President (Clinton Administration)",
"Meredith Cabe's Files"
],
"iiifBase": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/opastorage/live/33/4357/40435733/content/presidential-libraries/clinton/foia/2006/2006-1704-F-Seg-1-PDF/2006-1704-F-Meredith-Cabe/Box_035/42-t-7422579-20061704F-035-002-2016/42_t_7422579_20061704F_035_002_2016_Page_001.JPG",
"thumbnailUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/opastorage/live/33/4357/40435733/content/presidential-libraries/clinton/foia/2006/2006-1704-F-Seg-1-PDF/2006-1704-F-Meredith-Cabe/Box_035/42-t-7422579-20061704F-035-002-2016/42_t_7422579_20061704F_035_002_2016_Page_001.JPG",
"largeImageUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/opastorage/live/33/4357/40435733/content/presidential-libraries/clinton/foia/2006/2006-1704-F-Seg-1-PDF/2006-1704-F-Meredith-Cabe/Box_035/42-t-7422579-20061704F-035-002-2016/42_t_7422579_20061704F_035_002_2016_Page_001.JPG",
"imageCount": 81,
"hasImages": true,
"source": "import",
"hasTranscription": false
}
Context sent to Scholar
Document identity
{
"localId": "40435733",
"label": "Howard Mechanic [1]",
"core": "doc",
"dtoType": "document",
"citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/40435733"
}
Document source metadata
{
"id": "40435733",
"sourceUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/40435733",
"contentType": "document",
"title": "Howard Mechanic [1]",
"citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/40435733",
"collections": [
"Records of the Office of the Counsel to the President (Clinton Administration)",
"Meredith Cabe's Files"
],
"iiifBase": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/opastorage/live/33/4357/40435733/content/presidential-libraries/clinton/foia/2006/2006-1704-F-Seg-1-PDF/2006-1704-F-Meredith-Cabe/Box_035/42-t-7422579-20061704F-035-002-2016/42_t_7422579_20061704F_035_002_2016_Page_001.JPG",
"thumbnailUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/opastorage/live/33/4357/40435733/content/presidential-libraries/clinton/foia/2006/2006-1704-F-Seg-1-PDF/2006-1704-F-Meredith-Cabe/Box_035/42-t-7422579-20061704F-035-002-2016/42_t_7422579_20061704F_035_002_2016_Page_001.JPG",
"largeImageUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/opastorage/live/33/4357/40435733/content/presidential-libraries/clinton/foia/2006/2006-1704-F-Seg-1-PDF/2006-1704-F-Meredith-Cabe/Box_035/42-t-7422579-20061704F-035-002-2016/42_t_7422579_20061704F_035_002_2016_Page_001.JPG",
"imageCount": 81,
"hasImages": true,
"source": "import",
"hasTranscription": false
}
Document source extras
{
"url": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/40435733",
"naId": 40435733,
"levelOfDescription": "fileUnit",
"otherTitles": [
"42-t-7422579-20061704F-035-002-2016"
],
"recordType": "description",
"ocrSource": "nara-archive"
}
Page context
{
"seq": 21,
"pageIndex": 0,
"type": "photo",
"url": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/opastorage/live/33/4357/40435733/content/presidential-libraries/clinton/foia/2006/2006-1704-F-Seg-1-PDF/2006-1704-F-Meredith-Cabe/Box_035/42-t-7422579-20061704F-035-002-2016/42_t_7422579_20061704F_035_002_2016_Page_021.JPG",
"mediaId": "a70888d28aa34623",
"ocrText": "Page 16\n461 S.W.2d 298, *310; 1970 Mo. App. LEXIS 502, **25\nand others occurred in Holmes Lounge following the is-\nWe now reach the merits. In order to sustain the con-\nsuance of the restraining order at which the restraining\nvictions here two findings beyond a reasonable doubt\norder was discussed.\nmust be made as to each petitioner -- actual knowledge\nof the restraining order and conduct in violation of the\norder. The restraining order by its express language re-\nstrained only specific persons, aiders and abettors, per-\nn6 Although the witness testified he was under or-\nsons acting in conjunction with defendants and \"all other\nders to read the order anytime there was a gathering\nindividuals who may gain actual knowledge of this Order\nof a crowd, there is no evidence the order was read\n\" We deal first with knowledge. As to petitioners\non the evening of the riot and no explanation of why\nKogan and Mechanic, no problem exists as both were\nthe order was not read.\nparties to the original litigation and had been served with\nthe restraining order. As to the remaining petitioners\n[**28]\nsome discussion is required of the University's\nattempts to bring the restraining order to the attention of\nKnowledge of the restraining order, just as other facts,\nits students and others on its campus.\ncan be established by circumstantial evidence. But just\nas with any other fact necessary to conviction, the cir-\nOn March 24, after the issuance of the temporary re-\ncumstantial evidence must be consistent with the hy-\nstraining order, the Chancellor of the University issued a\npothesis of guilt and inconsistent with any reasonable\nstatement to all students of the University. It referred to\nhypothesis of innocence. The proof of the elements of\nthe restraining order in its main body and stated the or-\ncriminal contempt must be beyond a reasonable doubt.\nder prohibited \"the conduct described on the next page.\"\nCurtis V. Tozer, Mo. App., 374 S.W.2d 557 [19]. We\nAttached to the statement was a second page entitled\nturn to the individual petitioners.\n\"Conduct Prohibited by Temporary Restraining Order of\nthe Circuit Court of St. Louis County.\" Then followed\nMargaret Murphy was not a student at the University.\nvirtually word for word the four numbered paragraphs of\nThere was testimony, however, that she attended a meet-\nthe order heretofore set out in footnote one. Distribution\ning at Holmes Lounge on March 24, at which the tempo-\nof the Chancellor's statement and the attached sheet was\nrary restraining order was discussed extensively. During\nmade as follows: 1) A copy of each was [*311] placed\nthe course of the discussion she spoke for approximately\nin the combination-lock mailbox of each student resid-\ntwo minutes during which she referred to the restraining\ning in the University dormitories (approximately 2000\norder as a \"paper pig\" and \"another form of repression.\"\ncopies); 2) copies were placed in the mailboxes for de-\nSuch evidence was sufficient to warrant the court's find-\npartments of the University and fraternities and soror-\nings that she had actual knowledge of the restraining\nities (approximately 1800 copies); 3) copies were dis-\norder.\ntributed to certain buildings extensively used by students\nand there left on tables or other places where they could\nJoel Achtenberg was employed by the University but\nbe picked up by students (Holmes Lounge[ -- 500\nwas not a student. Captain Abernathy, the University\ncopies, Olin Library -- 500 copies, Women's Building --\nsecurity chief, testified that he knew Joel Achtenberg\n150 copies, Umrath Cafeteria -- 150 copies, McMillan\nand had known him for some time prior to March\nCafeteria -- 150 copies, Medical School -- unspecified);\n26. On March [**29]26, in the R.O.T.C. area Captain\n4) the statement and attached sheet were printed in full\nAbernathy read twice that portion of the restraining or-\nin the student newspaper, Student Life, of March 27,\nder having to do with disturbing the property of the\n1970, on page 8 and approximately 7000 copies of the\nUniversity over his bullhorn to a crowd of approximately\nnewspaper were distributed. Additionally, copies of the\n200 persons. He stated Joel Achtenberg was part of that\nrestraining order itself were posted on three prominent\ncrowd. Such evidence is sufficient to warrant the court's\nbulletin boards on the campus; the restraining order was\nfinding that Joel Achtenberg had actual knowledge of the\npublished in full in the March 27 issue of Student Life\nrestraining order. The Captain's subsequent statement\non page 8; the campus security chief read paragraph 4\nthat some attempt was made to shout him down does not\nof the order to groups of students on several occasions\nprevent the conclusion that those persons in the crowd\nthrough a bullhorn. n6 There was also from March 24\nheard the amplified reading of a portion of the order,\nthrough May 4 considerable, repeated newspaper cov-\nthat portion Achtenberg was found guilty of violating.\nerage in the St. Louis daily press of the occurrences\nat Washington University including the issuance of the\nAs to petitioners Bothwell, Ryan and Winkler we are\nrestraining order. Frequent large meetings of students\nconfronted with a different situation. In their brief here"
}