Transcripts

text | pdf |

---

SPEAKER: Kevin, give us a rundown on what's happened in this eighth day, I guess, of the Wounded Knee proceedings.

KEVIN: About five jurors were excused this morning, ones who had jobs or small children and had some other reason for not being able to attend a trial that would last this long. The trial, as you know, is expected to last at least four months. Three jurors were accepted. They were passed for cause. That is past for a lack of prejudice.

They are the 20th juror, Mary Gupta, a 22-year-old Minneapolis secretary. Mrs. Gupta told the court that she had been married only 18 months, and she really didn't look forward to a trial that would last as long as four months. But if she were called, she'd try to be fair in deciding on a verdict.

The 21st juror, Milo Tupy, a 47-year-old St. Paul resident, an employee of Northwestern Bell. Tupy is a switchman there. He's also a veteran of World War II and of the Korean War. And the 22nd prospective juror thus far chosen, a Dennis Beaudoin, a 32-year-old St. Paulite, an engineering technician for Ramsey County.

The questioning in the court today really showed that Mr. Beaudoin had the most knowledge of the American Indian Movement of Wounded Knee, the occupation there last spring of the defendants, Russell Means and Dennis Banks of the Bureau of Indian Affairs and of the defense lawyers. And that produced some lengthy questioning by Judge Nichol regarding, in particular, Mr. Beaudoin's reading of Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee. But after all that questioning, it was decided that he, too, could be passed for cause.

SPEAKER: You're indicating, Kevin, that some of the people who have been questioned in the last week or 10 days that most of them didn't have anywhere near the knowledge of the whole situation that this gentleman did.

KEVIN: I think in most people's minds, the Wounded Knee occupation last spring is very vague at best.

SPEAKER: But he had some fresh details in mind on the whole thing.

KEVIN: He did, and I think that produced the questioning several times. The prosecution and the defense attorneys went up to the bench, conferred with Judge Nichol. The US Marshal came and turned off the microphones, so their conversations were kept quiet. And then everyone returned to his seat and the judge continued questioning. And finally, late this afternoon, Beaudoin was selected as the 22nd prospective juror.

SPEAKER: That puts us a little past the halfway point. Then about 38, I guess, are needed. So 19 would be half. So we've gone three past that now. I suppose it'll take probably most of next week then to fill out the roster.

KEVIN: I would guess so, perhaps even into the following week. 50 jurors have been interrogated so far. And a new slate of 50 will be interrogated beginning tomorrow. In fact, we had an early recess this afternoon. We ordinarily go until 4:30. And a Mrs. Jane Ritter, who is the wife of the publisher of the two St. Paul newspapers, had been expected to be in the group of the first 50.

And she had called from Houston, saying that she had been at the Super Bowl, and she was having a problem getting back. And so chances are that the questioning may pick up with her tomorrow.

SPEAKER: OK. Now, there were some motions, and you reported on our Midday program earlier today. Kevin, maybe you can review some of that for us just what happened. And there have been lots of motions already in the course of the eight or nine days so far.

KEVIN: The primary motion that was responded to by the government today is a jurisdictional motion, a very complicated one. Legally, I'll try to break it down as simply as I can. Essentially, the defense on the 7th of January brought a motion in the federal court here in St. Paul asking that 7 of the 10 indictments against Means and Banks be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

Now, the government responded today saying that the United States does have jurisdiction over these two defendants in all 10 indictments. And they base that on the general laws of the United States as they apply to crimes committed even on Indian reservations. Now, the defense, of course, had contended that the United States law does apply to Indian reservations, but it lists three exceptions.

And these exceptions are offenses committed by one Indian against a person or property of another Indian. Secondly, any Indian committing any offense in Indian country who has been punished by the local law of the tribe already. And thirdly, whereby treaty stipulations, the exclusive jurisdiction over said offenses is or may be secured to the Indian tribes respectively.

Now, what this means-- essentially, is that the jurisdiction question has come to play in this regard. The defense is asking that 7 of the 10 counts be dismissed because there is no jurisdiction. The government cannot try them on these cases. Only the tribe itself can.

And they cite a famous case on the Rosebud Reservation in 1883, the murder case. Crow Dog, a Rosebud Sioux had assassinated an Indian leader named Spotted Tail. He was censured by the tribe. He was forced to pay for the upkeep of the victim's family for the rest of his life.

But this was apparently not sufficient for the territorial powers in the territory of South Dakota. And so they brought Crow Dog to court and tried him for murder, and he was sentenced to death. The case went to the Supreme Court. And the Supreme Court in 1885 ruled that the tribe had jurisdiction over Crow Dog and that the territory could not bring him to court.

And so essentially, what the defense is saying now is here you have an 1883 Supreme Court case recognizing the 1868 Fort Laramie treaty, which gave self-government to the Sioux. Now, this Supreme Court case has never been overturned. It's never been challenged. And so it should exist today.

SPEAKER: And so the judge has-- what? Taken this whole matter under advisement then or where does it stand?

KEVIN: He has. The defense would like to bring oral arguments. And Judge Nichol said at the close of today's session that he expects to rule on the motions, both by the government and-- rather the government's response to the defense motion before the end of jury selection. But he doesn't-- he's not in favor of oral arguments.

And he said in the case in St. Louis yesterday, where Paul Boe, the Lutheran minister's conviction was overturned, the defense prevailed there. And that court did not allow oral arguments. And I'm not going to allow oral arguments here.

SPEAKER: OK. I noticed one other note on a Russian TV team here. What is that, Kevin?

KEVIN: Well, two members of the Russian press showed up in court today. And I think that brings the number to three. I saw a man from a New Times magazine in Moscow on the first day of the trial. I haven't seen him since. Today, I saw the official representative of TASS, the Moscow news agency, and also a man from Russian TV and radio.

SPEAKER: So the situation here in St. Paul is getting some worldwide attention then.

KEVIN: I think it is. I think I've mentioned before that a German television team has been here filming around town and about the trial. So I think that this case is a very historic one. And I think it's receiving quite a bit of news play, especially in the European press.

SPEAKER: You noted on your noontime report today, Kevin, that the courtroom or the press gallery, at least for the first time, was not filled this morning. And that's unusual because people were crowding to get in early in the proceedings. Did it fill up by afternoon, or did that prevail?

KEVIN: Yes, it did. There's room for about 40 newsmen. And by this afternoon, the gallery was almost filled.

SPEAKER: How about the spectator seats in the court?

KEVIN: The spectator seats were all taken by this afternoon. The choice of the jury is a slow and tedious process. It's very interesting, but I don't think that as many people want to come now as will want to come later.

SPEAKER: Once the actual issues begin to go before the--

KEVIN: This jury selection process is taking a long time. I spoke with US Deputy Attorney RD Hurd this afternoon, and he told me that-- this man, of course, is one of the prosecution team. He told me that Judge Nichol had told him to be prepared to start his evidence presentation on the 15th of January. He told him that before the trial started. The 15th of January is two days ago.

SPEAKER: It's come and gone, yes.

KEVIN: So Judge Nichol must have felt that the jury selection would only last a week. And we're into the end of the second week. And I would anticipate a minimum of another week and a half before that process is finished.

SPEAKER: Kevin, thanks again for another very comprehensive report on proceedings today in the Wounded Knee trial.