Trial by Newspapers

Dr. Sam Sheppard was a free man last week. Almost ten years after his conviction for the bludgeon-murder of his wife, the Ohio osteopath was ordered released from prison-by U.S. District Judge Carl A. Weinman on the ground that his constitutional rights had been violated because he had not been given a fair trial. State authorities wasted no time getting a stay order from the Court of Appeals, but technical difficulties with the necessary arrest order kept Sheppard out of prison. He thanked his lawyer, joined some relatives at a motel, and held an impromptu press conference. Calm and smiling, he said he might like to work for the Peace Corps or a clinic in India. When a reporter remarked that he looked fit, he snapped bitterly: "I understand Dreyfus looked fit when he left Devil's Island."

A Prejudicial Press. According to Judge Weinman, Sheppard has much to be bitter about. In a stinging rebuke to the Cleveland press and Sheppard's trial judge, Weinman's 86-page decision termed the trial a "mockery of justice." The "inflammatory and prejudicial reporting" of all three Cleveland newspapers--the Cleveland Press, the Cleveland Plain Dealer and the Cleveland News (since purchased by the Press)--continually implied that Sheppard was guilty; one "cheap sob-sister editorial" in the Press, said the judge, "literally screamed" for his conviction. The papers kept running pictures of Trial Judge Edward Blythin (who was up for reelection) and gave him pointed advice on how to conduct the trial. Blythin, wrote Weinman, should have ordered a change of venue; instead, he handed over most of the courtroom to the press. "If ever there was a trial by newspapers," he said, "this was a perfect example. Public officials, the courts and the jury are unable to perform their proper functions when the news media run rampant, with no regard for their proper role. Freedom of the press cannot be permitted to overshadow the rights of an individual to a fair trial."

Blythin showed clearly that he was prejudiced against the defendant, Weinman concluded, and he should have disqualified himself. While the trial was under way, the presiding judge confided to Columnist Dorothy Kilgallen, among others, that Sheppard was "guilty as hell." Contrary to settled law, he allowed the Cleveland police to testify that Sheppard had refused to take a lie-detector test, then failed to instruct the jury that they should disregard this testimony in their decision. Finally, even while the jurors were deliberating, they were allowed to phone their friends. No court official knew what was said.

Hazard of Retrial. During a decade of legal maneuvering, Sheppard's lawyers tried a variety of appeals. They brought up claims of new evidence, argued that their client's rights had been violated, said that there had been judicial error. But not until they had exhausted all possible remedies in the state courts were they free to bring a habeas corpus proceeding in a federal court. But even this successful petition leaves the doctor's legal battles far from over.

For all his thorough review of the case, Judge Weinman was careful to point out that the one thing he was not considering was the question of Sheppard's guilt or innocence. At week's end, Sheppard went to Chicago, married Mrs. Ariane Tebbenjohanns, a German divorcee, whom he first met by correspondence while he was in prison. The honeymoon may be brief. A hearing on the stay order is scheduled for this week and Sheppard may have to face a retrial, if Cuyahoga County Prosecutor John T. Corrigan can rebuild the case against him.

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so reader's discretion is required.