Groll, Richard C.

English

Via Sapientiae: The Institutional Repository at DePaul University

DePaul Law Review Volume 18 Issue 2 Issue 2 & 3 Summer 1969 Article 42 Gertz: Moment of Madness: The People vs. Jack Ruby Richard C. Groll Follow this and additional works at: https://via.library.depaul.edu/law-review Recommended Citation Richard C. Groll, Gertz: Moment of Madness: The People vs. Jack Ruby, 18 DePaul L. Rev. 912 (1969) Available at: https://via.library.depaul.edu/law-review/vol18/iss2/42 This Book Reviews is brought to you for free and open access by the College of Law at Via Sapientiae. It has been accepted for inclusion in DePaul Law Review by an authorized editor of Via Sapientiae. For more information, please contact digitalservices@depaul.edu. DE PAUL LAW REVIEW [Vol. XVIIIrural Georgia mind this was cause enough to readily believe that he was capableof committing murder and rape.The Leo Frank Case is both legal and sociological history. In reading this book,lawyers must be aware of that frighteningly true maxim that those who fail tolearn from history will be condemned to repeat it.MARSHALL WEINBERG** J.D., DePaul University, 1967; Faculty Assistant in English at Northeastern IllinoisState College.Moment of Madness: The People vs. Jack Ruby. By ELMER GERTZ. Chicago:Follet Publishing Company, 1968. Pp. 564. $6.95.Shortly after noon on November 22, 1963, the President of the United States wasassassinated within the courthouse area in the city of Dallas. A short while thereafterLee Harvey Oswald was apprehended, but only after Patrolman Tippitt was killed inan effort to question him. Oswald was placed in the Dallas city jail. Two days lateron November 24, in the basement of the city jail as Oswald was being transferred tothe county jail, he was shot by [Jack Ruby] ...at close range, from which woundhe died. Countless thousands witnessed this shooting on television.1These words briefly describe the occurrence with which the world has nowbecome most familiar-the bloody assassination of President John F. Kennedyand the bizarre events which followed on its heels. With these words, PresidingJudge Morrison of the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals began his review ofthe conviction of Jack Ruby, the man the world saw shoot and kill Lee HarveyOswald. "'The offense is murder; the punishment, death' "2 had been the decisionof the Dallas jury after hearing the most publicized trial in the history of theUnited States. On October 5, 1966, that decision was reversed. Then--once again-death intervened, and a second trial of Jack Ruby was never had.Why did Jack Ruby kill Lee Harvey Oswald? Was the shooting part of a con-spiracy? What was the relationship between the assassination of the Presidentand the shooting of Oswald? These are only a very few of the questions thatlinger after more than five and one-half years. Distinguished Chicago attorneyElmer Gertz represented Jack Ruby after his conviction. In Moment of Madness,Gertz tells his story.Especially for those who have followed the series of speculative accounts ofthe true nature of the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, Moment ofMadness is an absolute must. It represents the necessary link in that series whichbegan with Mark Lane's Rush to Judgment. For those who have read with thirstthe various accounts, this writer submits: Elmer Gertz is to Mark Lane as HenryJames was to Ian Fleming.While a series of authors have conjured fantastic speculative ventures intothe known and the unknown surrounding the assassination, whetting the appetitefor further explorations, Elmer Gertz presents the tedious, clinical chronologyof the life, trial, appeal, and death of Jack Ruby. Every seedy detail is covered.1 GERTZ, MOMENT OF MADNESS 432 (1968).2 Id.BOOK REVIEWSWhile Gertz does tell the reader something of the personality of Jack Ruby,there are three basic themes in the book: the trial, the appeal and the questionof conspiracy. Salted through almost every chapter, however, is a minute descrip-tion of the behind-the-scenes maneuvering of the team of lawyers who representedJack Ruby. The author sets forth, on page after page, a description of the inter-play between the onslaught of lawyers who thought about representing Ruby, orrefused to represent him, or played some part in his representation, and thosewho actually did represent him at one point or another. From an apparent quag-mire of legal machinations, the most celebrated defendant of the twentieth centuryreceived his day in court. As to this day in court, Gertz describes, without theemotional involvement of Melvin Belli, the meaning of "Dallas Justice."5s If thereader has deep faith in the legal profession, he may only be surprised by theaccount rendered. If the reader has no faith, his view will be, at least subjectively,confirmed.Since Elmer Gertz represented Ruby at the appeal level, his account of theappeal is revealing. It is in this portion of the book that something of the man,Elmer Gertz, is revealed. As a civil libertarian, Gertz describes with apparentrelish the manner in which the conviction was overturned. He carefully sets forththe manner in which errors of evidence law, in conjunction with landmark deci-sions of the United States Supreme Court, such as Sheppard and Miranda, securedreversals. For those who are curious as to how (if not why) the United StatesSupreme Court has reached its recent decisions in the area of criminal procedure,Elmer Gertz describes stare decisis, and perhaps reveals the approach of thoseworking to generate this series of cases:Anglo-Saxon jurisprudence has as one of its basic tenets the deceptive principle thatlitigants have the right to rely upon the precedents. As the courts have ruled in thepast, so are they supposed to rule in the present and future. In fact, the precedents,particularly where great constitutional issues are involved, change frequently. Thehighest court of the land may conclude that the precedents in a particular situationare wrong or outmoded and should be refined, restated, or overruled. So in every casea lawyer has at least one eye cocked upon the cases pending in the Supreme Court, inthe hope that the uttering there of some magical words will vindicate his position.4As to the question of conspiracy, Gertz admirably attempts to dispel the notionthat Jack Ruby could have been a participant. The account rendered by Gertzin presenting his case is persuasive. It is most persuasive because he analyzes thefacts apart from emotionalism. He challenges the assertions of the long seriesof critics of the Warren Commission (especially Mark Lane) and attempts toshow that Ruby's actions were not premeditated and therefore not part of aconspiracy.Obviously, the overriding ingredient throughout the book is the question ofwhether any defendant in a well-publicized case can receive a fair trial. Cansubstantial justice be done in this type of case? Each of us can hope that moretests will not be forthcoming. However, the cases of James Earl Ray (accusedkiller of Dr. Martin Luther King) and Sirhan B. Sirhan (accused killer ofSenator Robert F. Kennedy) are with us as a constant reminder that the hurdleis still to be cleared. There are no solutions contained in Moment of Madness.3 Supra note 1, at 141.4 Supra note 1, at 374.1969]DE PAUL LAW REVIEWIn fact, it may convince the reader that no solution is possible, but if a solutionis to be found it can only be found from an understanding of the problem.A degree of understanding comes from a reading of Moment of Madness.RICHARD C. GROLL** Associate Professor at DePaul University College of Law. Member of the IllinoisBar. J.D. cum laude, Loyola University, 1964, LL.M., Northwestern University, 1965.Crisis in the Courts. By HoWARD JAMES. New York: David McKay, Inc., 1967.Pp. 267. $5.50.Every age of civilization is favored with a gadfly who compels attention to theailments of society. Not very long ago Ralph Nader told us about our automobilesand we were shocked by his revelations. We may not be as stunned by HowardJames' revelations about our administration of justice, because it is doubtful thatthere are as many in contact with our courts as there are drivers of automobiles.But our shock and resolve to right the situation should be no less. Certainly theadministration of justice is at least as important to a good and just society as oursafety of mobility within that society.This is a disturbing book. We tend to think and believe that our democracy isjust about the most perfect political, social, humane and economic system man hasever known. If there are faults, they are minor. Mr. James makes it obvious that inthe administration of justice the faults are many and not minor. Our complacencysuffers a shock from which, hopefully, it should not recover.The scholar should not expect in this book an exhaustive study in depth. Rather,this is a general "bird's eye view," painted in broad strokes that crash against oursenses. The range of the author's survey carries the reader from the judge whosleeps on the bench to the bail-bond system. Every practicing attorney will identifywith the faults enumerated by Mr. James. Perhaps the practitioner has not seenany judges go to sleep while the evidence was being presented, but not many couldsay they have not witnessed a judge engaging in a whispered conversation with avisitor while a trial was in progress. Nor can many attorneys say that they have notwondered at the juridical ignorance of some judges. These are just a sample ofMr. James' justified criticisms of our judicial system.Our law schools do an excellent job in teaching the law. It is not uncommon,however, to hear experienced advocates say that the law school graduate does nothave a realistic idea of what the practice of law is until he begins his practice. Thelaw school would do well to make Mr. James' book required reading for graduation.The fledgling attorney might then get some small idea of the legal world he is enter-ing. He might then be somewhat prepared for the legally ignorant judge, the stallingcolleague, the frustrations of chokingly clogged calendars, ad infinitum.While this is a very worthwhile book, it too, like its thesis, has its failures. Anyfield of human activity will reflect human nature; it will claim the successes inhuman nature, and conversely, it will display the imperfections in human nature. Soit is with man's administration of justice. Once one admits the frailties and failingsin human nature, one must admit that man's institutions, among them our courts,will reflect those frailties and failings. This need not induce one to the pessimism[Vol. XVIII

Gertz:  Moment of Madness:  The People vs. Jack Ruby

https://via.library.depaul.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3109&context=law-review

Gertz: Moment of Madness: The People vs. Jack Ruby

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Via Sapientiae: The Institutional Repository at DePaul University