University of Virginia Library

Law Students Criticize Bill
To Strengthen Riot Control

Led by second-year man Reed
Wasson, a group of interested law
students has protested the Anti-Riot
Control Bill ponding before
the Virginia State Senate. In a
memorandum submitted Monday
by Assistant Dean of Law Peter
Low and Professor Peter Manson,
the group attacked the bill on
three points.

The bill was passed by the
Virginia House of Delegates last
week after little discussion. Consideration
of the bill by the State
Senate has not yet been completed,
and the law students want
to stimulate sufficient discussion
in that chamber by submitting to
the Courts of Justice Committee.

The students criticize the statute's
definition of the range of
activity to be understood as a
riot as far too broad. They suggest
as more acceptable guidelines
those set up by the New York
Penal Law and the Model Penal
Code, to avoid bringing relatively
unharmful action under the law.

The second ground of the
group's attack is the bill's extension
to any participant in the
riot of criminal responsibility for
a capital offense by any other
participant in the riot. The students
point out that the bill further
provides that any person refusing
to aid in the arrest of a
rioter be considered "one of the
rioters," to "be punished accordingly."

Finally, the students claim
that, by making mass arrests
mandatory, the bill contributes to
the possibility of increased racial
violence. They also criticize
the authority given any officer to
form a posse whenever he deems
necessary.

Aiding in Mr. Masson's research
were third-year students John Lee
and William Turnier and second-year
students Mary Voce and
Thomas Wheeker. According to
Mr. Wasson, "the bill received little
consideration by the House before
passage, and we hope that
this memorandum will stimulate
greater discussion in the Senate."

The formulation and submission
of the memorandum was reported
yesterday in The Virginia
Law Weekly. Neither Mr. Wasson
nor any of those who assisted
him in the research for the memorandum
could be reached for
further comment yesterday.

Whether the group has received
any response to their remarks
and whether the Committee of
the Courts of Justice has submitted
their remarks to the Senate
for discussion is as yet unknown.