Decisions

> What recourse do prisoners have when penal discipline goes too far? As punishment for making "noise after hours," three prisoners in the Baltimore city jail were strung up naked from handcuffs, and a fourth inmate was badly beaten when he resisted similar treatment. The quartet sued their jailers for damages, and last week a federal-court jury awarded them $2,000 each. Three-quarters of the total is to be paid personally by Jail Lieutenant Ernest Barbosa and the rest by Guard Donald Brogden. In a joint statement, the inmates' lawyers refrained from trumpeting about a major precedent and said simply: "The verdict shows that prisoners are human beings. Brutalization of prisoners will not be tolerated by members of society."

> Is sex still a valid basis for treating persons differently under the law? Yes, said a unanimous Utah Supreme Court. "We realize that as a court made up of men there is a possibility of masculine bias," conceded Justice J. Allan Crockett for the five-member panel. But noting such "widely accepted" ideas as earlier female maturity and male breadwinning responsibility, the court upheld a state law under which males are considered minors until age 21 and females only until 18. In Georgia, however, Trial Judge Charles A. Wofford struck down the state's laws on alimony because the requirement to pay applied to husbands only. Similarly, State Judge John S. Covington threw out the Louisiana prostitution statute because only the woman -- and not her client -- is subject to penalty. Said Covington: "The state must regulate the conduct of both of those who 'tango.' "

> Can the military be used in civilian police investigations? Just this once, ruled the U.S. Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals. An agent of the Treasury Department became suspicious that Ruby and William Walden, who worked in a department store in Quantico, Va., were selling firearms to minors illegally. He had three young Marines assigned to an undercover investigation that resulted in the Waldens' conviction. The appeals court concluded that Navy regulations and other laws prohibit use of the armed services to enforce civilian laws. "But," said the court, "because this case presents the first [such] instance of which we are aware ... we decline to reverse the judgments." The court made clear that future abuses might prompt it to exclude the evidence gathered. But for the Waldens, their $600 fine stands.

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so viewer discretion is required.