
|
F. Lee Bailey was a renowned trial
attorney, having made history with Sam Sheppard's acquittal, arranged
a deal for Albert DeSalvo (the Boston Strangler), and successfully
defended Captain Ernest Median in the 1968 My Lai massacre in Vietnam.
(However, he'd also thrown one client, Charles Schmidt, a.k.a., the
Pied Piper of Tucson, to the wolves, and been accused by DeSalvo of
swindling his movie money.) Bailey never hesitated to exploit
the media to his advantage.
Having had a bestselling book, he
accepted the Hearst case with the stipulation that he get the book
rights and that Patty not pen a memoir for at least 18 months after
the publication of his. In this he was overly confident.
This would not be his shining hour.
The presiding judge was Oliver Carter,
who defied legal ethics by granting interviews to Time and the New
York Times. He claimed to have known Patty since she was
five, which was not true, and to have been in the Hearst home, also
untrue. Patty requested another judge, but her lawyers refused
to pursue it.
 |
District
Attorney James Browning (CORBIS) |
The prosecutor was James Browning, the
U. S. Attorney for Northern California, who had not tried a case in
seven years. He wanted this one all to himself.
Beginning on February 4th,
1976---exactly two years to the day that Patty had been
kidnapped---the trial lasted 39 days, generating a barrage of
unsympathetic commentary. Many Americans could not understand
how an educated, privileged young woman could join a band of cutthroat
revolutionaries and do the things she did. |
 |
Stephen
Soliah in custody (CORBIS) |
While her trial was in session,
Kathleen Soliah was indicted in absentia for conspiracy to commit
murder with explosives. Her brother Stephen, arrested with
Patty, also went on trial.
Bailey hired medical and psychiatric
experts to listen to Patty describe her ordeal, wherein SLA members
abused her, kept her blindfolded, and threatened her with death, while
also subjecting her endlessly to their ideologies. Using those
details, the experts were to explain to the jury the notions of mental
deterioration and brainwashing. |
|
Psychologist Margaret Singer indicated
how Patty's IQ had fallen drastically, while Dr. Louis Joloyn said
that she'd been in a state of extreme physical stress. Several
experts in mind control—Dr. William Sargant. Dr. Martin Orne, and
Dr. Robert Jay Lifton---affirmed that Patty had been brainwashed into
accepting the SLA's political ideology. However, their details
were inconsistent and they failed to apply the research adequately to
Patty's rather unique situation.
To counter this, the prosecution
called on Dr. Joel Fort, a man who went from one trial to another but
appeared to have no clear credentials (which Bailey was not allowed to
challenge). Fort claimed that Patty was a willing participant
and a "rebel looking for a cause."
Emily and Bill Harris refused to
testify against Patty, but offered damning information via media
interviews. Browning exploited this and also used video footage
to show Patty's apparent delight in participating in the armed robbery
with her comrades. A witness indicated that she had smiled at
DeFreeze before exiting. The prosecution also pointed out that Patty
was unwilling to testify against the other captured members of the SLA,
which showed her sympathy for them.
What really hurt her case, in Patty's
estimation, was Bailey's closing argument. As he grabbed his
notes, she could see that his hands were shaking and his face was
flushed. She had the impression that he'd been drinking.
His comments to the jury were rambling and irrelevant. Then he
knocked a glass of water off the podium and the water hit his crotch.
For the rest of his closing, it appeared that he'd wet his pants.
Later Patty was to write about how jury members giggled: "It was,
to say the least, distracting." To make matters worse, he
had flown each evening to Las Vegas to conduct a seminar, and had then
flown back for the trial. It was the feeling of many that
Bailey's inability to make a forceful statement, whether he was
exhausted or inebriated, decided Patty's fate.
On March 20, after a twelve-hour
deliberation, the jury returned a verdict of guilty. She
received the maximum sentence: 25 years for the robbery, plus ten on
the firearms charge. However, a judicial review---which occurred
after Judge Carter died---shortened that to seven years. In a
second trial on the charges involved in the incident at the sporting
goods store, she was given five years probation. An appeal to
the Supreme Court was declined, and Patty ended up in the Federal
Correctional Institute in Pleasanton, California.
The verdict was argued as fiercely in
the American public as the O. J. Simpson verdict in the 1990s, in part
because the brainwashing defense was so unusual and so difficult to
prove or disprove.
Let's have a closer look.
|
|

|