◆ SpookStack

6-TY (Rev. 3-2-62) gE CPS tea EES C aliahan ___ ro T eons Malone Rosen “~~ Sullivan Tavel v4 jo _/ Trotter _ Tele Room ty Holmes ————— Gand that they were based on information obtained 8s Ce :, through the Bugging jn ‘violation, af & Fight of ott : ia * privacy guaranteed to him ‘through . ; Amendment. The Supreme Court concluded that “at least two of the questions were not related to. fi ‘the intercepted conversation and sustained Lanza's & "* eonviction for contempt ¢ on this ground alone. .. * 4 But Mr. Justice Stewart, after acknowledging that the Fourth Amendment’s protection may ex- ¢ * tend not alone to a home but plso to a business — “office, 4 store, a ‘hotel eater on ae hin an‘ “automobile re taxicab, Be a jail dhares none ef tet stribokea ‘a bebe vacy” to be found in such places. This seems bed fe far from obvions, jam wae Bay ores ‘ To be sure, as Mr. Justice Stewart put it, M49) é ay that a public jail is the equivalent of a man’s ‘house’ or that‘lt {.avplace where he can claim’ A ‘ constitutional immunity from search. or. seizure ig, The Washington Post and ae novel ergunient™ But that is not the argument Times Herald : offered here. The rules of a jeil may. of cqurs¢ The Washington Daily News F anvolwe serious infringements on the privacy of . inmates or those who visit them. But. when jail r authorities set aside an area where inmates and The Evening Star New York Herald Tribune New York Journal-American » Visitors may talk in Presumed privacy and then New York Mirror - eavesdrop on their conversation, they engage in New York Daily News ‘an ugly and unworthy and perhaps unconstitu- York Post +; iomal sort of Aeception. ‘The Lanea Juntice | ew York Pos E Stewart said, bears fo resemblance to the Leyra | you ATELS 4. enSw York Times “and Spono cases in whicl the Supreme Court aet - NOT RECORDED The Worker aside state convictions because they were based 199 JUN 19 1962 The New Leader _____- yen eonfessions elicited by trickery. On the con | - The Wall Street Joumal —____—— trary, this is very like them. we LO The National Observer —————— ,. The New York, Appellate Division called the — er Date conduct at the jail‘ ‘reprehensible and offensive,” aobe “atrocious -and inexcusabie,”.. The. condemnation ls not too severe. Why should the Supreme . JUN 1 2 1962 {Court of the Walid Stalag go ot of 8, wry — , Statultously te leok gt such conduct more ce comp " ‘placently? oo, Lege . a a i ou 62 wu rr?