THE NECESSITY DEFENSE ALLOWED:

 DEFENDANTS FOUND NOT GUILTY BY JURY

On November 13, 1984, twenty-two people were arrested for blocking the entrance to the Great Lakes Naval Training Center in Wake Forest, Illinois. The purpose for the demonstration was two­fold: to protest U.S. naval activities in Central America and to protest the Navy’s part in nuclear weapons proliferation, such as stationing nuclear submarines in the Caribbean and supplying artillery with nuclear capability to the Central American region.

All of the twenty-two were charged with mob action—a sort of misdemeanor conspiracy charge that involves knowingly assembling with one or more people to break the law. About half were charged with resisting arrest because they did not get up and walk when arrested. Sixteen of those arrested went to trial but charges against eight were subsequently dropped and a ninth was dismissed. The seven remaining were allowed to present a defense based on the principle of necessity.

After a one-week trial defendants were found “not guilty” by the jury. In his charge to the jury, the judge instructed them to find the defendants guilty of either mob action or resisting arrest if the pros­ecution proved that they did not act out of necessity.

In addition, the judge gave the following instruction to the jury regarding international law:

— International law is binding on the United States and on the Slate of Illinois.

— The use or threat of use of nuclear weapons is a war crime or an attempted war crime because such use would violate inter­national law by causing unnecessary suffering, failure to dis­tinguish between combatants and noncombatants, and poisoning targets by radiation.

NOTE

1.  People v. Ann Jarka. Nos. 002196—2212, 002214, 002236—2238, Circuit Court of Lake City, Illinois, April 1985.

(Source: Robert Aldridge and Virginia Stark, “Nuclear War, Citizen Intervention, and the Necessity Defense,” Santa Clara Law Review 26, no. 2 [Spring 1986]: 324—325.)