Infamous civil rights lawyer

February 19, 2010
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
From IL reporter Rebecca Berfanger:

A documentary film about the life and civil rights cases of William Kunstler by his daughters was well attended at the Indianapolis Museum of Art Thursday night, and I’m happy I was able to be a part of it.

If you’re unfamiliar with the name Kunstler, you might have heard of some of the people he represented: revolutionaries who protested at the 1968 Democratic National Convention in Chicago; inmates who started an infamous riot at Attica prison in New York in 1971; the American Indian Movement members who demonstrated at Wounded Knee, S.D., in 1973; a man convicted of and later exonerated for allegedly beating and raping a jogger in Central Park in 1989; a house cat named Tyrone who was held for crimes against humanity in a mock trial on TV in 1989; and those accused of bombing the World Trade Center in 1993.

Maybe you didn’t know about Tyrone, but the facts of the other situations continue to resonate among those who follow civil rights issues.

The film was made by his two daughters, both born in the late 1970s. They revered him growing up, but ultimately disagreed with some of the clients he chose to represent.

Following the film, civil rights attorneys JauNae Hanger and Richard Waples of Waples and Hanger in Indianapolis answered questions moderated by Fran Quigley, former executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Indiana.

Quigley only asked the first question – what would Kunstler do if he was a civil rights attorney in Indianapolis in February 2010?

Hanger and Waples suggested he’d likely still work with prisoners, and would probably be a criminal defense attorney who would make sure all people would have their day in court.

Hanger also discussed her work with juvenile justice issues, including the recent Senate approval of House Bill 1193, which will create a study group to look at best practices for how schools and police handle situations involving students.

For this reporter, born around the same time as Kunstler’s daughters, I was somewhat ashamed for not knowing more about the cases he worked on, which may be why the film seemed so powerful to me. Then again, there seemed to be some details the daughters mentioned that news reports of the time didn’t, and as a reporter, that might have also riled me up because those other reporters either weren’t given the right information or they chose to report things in a way that put Kunstler’s clients in the worst light possible.

The film is not in wide release at this time and Indianapolis was one of the first cities to show it, thanks to sponsorship from the Indianapolis International Film Festival, the law firm, and the IMA, but attorneys with an interest in this area should make a point to rent it or see if it ever is in a theater nearby.
ADVERTISEMENT
  • I wished I would have known about this program as I would have attended. Was a recording made of the discussion afterwords and can one buy (if reasonably priced) a copy of the film for home viewing?

    Thanks.

    Glenn
  • If you go to http://www.disturbingtheuniverse.com/ you can get more information on the movie and pre-ordering a DVD. Looks like a DVD will cost you $25-$35, depending on which one you want.
  • I\'m not aware of a recording of the discussion, but the organization hosting it, the Indianapolis International Film Festival, has a newsletter of films and discussions similar to this one. You can go to their Web site, http://indyfilmfest.org/, and sign up. It\'s how I heard about this event.

    Thanks for reading!
    Rebecca
  • Sorry -- just noticed the Web link didn\'t work for me. Here it is again:
    http://indyfilmfest.org/

    Thanks!

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
  1. Such things are no more elections than those in the late, unlamented Soviet Union.

  2. It appears the police and prosecutors are allowed to change the rules halfway through the game to suit themselves. I am surprised that the congress has not yet eliminated the right to a trial in cases involving any type of forensic evidence. That would suit their foolish law and order police state views. I say we eliminate the statute of limitations for crimes committed by members of congress and other government employees. Of course they would never do that. They are all corrupt cowards!!!

  3. Poor Judge Brown probably thought that by slavishly serving the godz of the age her violations of 18th century concepts like due process and the rule of law would be overlooked. Mayhaps she was merely a Judge ahead of her time?

  4. in a lawyer discipline case Judge Brown, now removed, was presiding over a hearing about a lawyer accused of the supposedly heinous ethical violation of saying the words "Illegal immigrant." (IN re Barker) http://www.in.gov/judiciary/files/order-discipline-2013-55S00-1008-DI-429.pdf .... I wonder if when we compare the egregious violations of due process by Judge Brown, to her chiding of another lawyer for politically incorrectness, if there are any conclusions to be drawn about what kind of person, what kind of judge, what kind of apparatchik, is busy implementing the agenda of political correctness and making off-limits legit advocacy about an adverse party in a suit whose illegal alien status is relevant? I am just asking the question, the reader can make own conclsuion. Oh wait-- did I use the wrong adjective-- let me rephrase that, um undocumented alien?

  5. of course the bigger questions of whether or not the people want to pay for ANY bussing is off limits, due to the Supreme Court protecting the people from DEMOCRACY. Several decades hence from desegregation and bussing plans and we STILL need to be taking all this taxpayer money to combat mostly-imagined "discrimination" in the most obviously failed social program of the postwar period.

ADVERTISEMENT