◆ SpookStack

wv being tried as a draft evader % << in a pre-trial hearing, that the F.B.I. produce its reports before trial. This motion was denied, but the judge ordered their production during the course of the trial, The District Attorney refused. The judge dismissed the case, Case #8. - In a Norfolk, Va. case, the defendant was beinz tried for a liquor conspiracy in which the F.B.J. was not involved, The judge granted a defense mocvion for pre-examination by defense ~~nsel of all government investigations, The government refused, Tao judge directed an acquittal even though no witness had been eresented and no evidence taken. This case became res judicata and 59 new indictment can be brought on the same facts against the defen- dant. Case #9. - In Philadelphia, before the Jencks case deci- gion, a defendant was convicted in the Federal District Court of inte state transportation of stolen property. After the Jencks decision, on appeal, the Circuit Court granted a new trial and ordered the production of the minutes of the Grand Jury which indicted him. This latter case upset the tradition and judicial precedent of our Federal courte, that Grand Jury minutes are secret and inviolate, which have stood for 160 years. Earlier in this arti le, the question was asked, "What i¢ | ene explanation for this attitude of our highest court?” ‘For the answer we must review some of the decisions in which only some of the present justices were concerned, and analyze the thinking and philosophy which prompted them. The same philosophy and social thinking responsible for the earlier decisions, still gaturate the veterans of the court, and has gripped the newcomers and has made them fall into line as men following a leader. The Supreme Court leader and strong willed philosopher behind whom the menbers fall in line has gripped them with his philosophy and social sophisti- cation. How important, then, is the philosophy of the justices of our highest court, their social views, their liberalism, their views on life and religion. We can learn what these are from their utterances anc their decisions. The manner in which close or marginal cases are determine way well depend on their philosophical beliefs. The granting of cer- tiorari is within the discretion of the Court; also, questions involvi. life, liberty, and property, may well be decided in accordance with the philosophical beliefs of the human beings sitting on the Court and their decisions are final. Close cases then in determining this philosophical belief of the justices, may be more vital from this all.