Scanned image of the page. Keyboard directions: use + to zoom in, - to zoom out, arrow keys to pan inside the viewer.

Page Options

Download this Issue


Something wrong?

Something wrong with this page? Report problem.

Rights / Permissions

This collection, digitized in collaboration with the Michigan Daily and the Board for Student Publications, contains materials that are protected by copyright law. Access to these materials is provided for non-profit educational and research purposes. If you use an item from this collection, it is your responsibility to consider the work's copyright status and obtain any required permission.

June 04, 1974 - Image 1

Resource type:
Michigan Daily, 1974-06-04

Disclaimer: Computer generated plain text may have errors. Read more about this.

Michigan Daily

Vol. LXXXIV, No. 19-S

Ann Arbor, Michigan-Tuesday, June 4, 1974

Ten Cents

Twelve Pages


pleads guilty

to obstructing justice

Promises to tell full W'ga

DISAGREEMENT -RIPS the White House's team of Watergate defense attorneys yesterday as they leave the U.S. District
Court in Washington, D.C. James St. Clair, the President's chief lawyer, flanked by two assistants, cannot agree on where
they parked their cars. Right now that's probably one of the least important things on their minds.
Court backs-'U' position
on tuition rebate issue

te story
WASHINGTON Al-Charles Col-
son, saying he wants to tell the
full Watergate story, pleaded guilty
yesterday to obstructing justice.
In return, he won agreement that
he will no longer be prosecuted for
the Watergate cover-up or plumb-
ers' cases.
The former special counsel to
President Nixon said he hadn't
been able to testify fully because
he was under indictment in the
two cases.
"TO HAVE fought the two indictments
might well have resulted in my eventual
exoneration," he said. "As a defendant,
I would have been necessarily concerned
with protecting my position in the trials.
That would have limited my ability to
tell everything I know about the Water-
gate and Watergate-related matters."
Colson pleaded guilty to a newly drawn
:harge: that in 1971 he concocted and
:arried out a scheme to "defame and
destroy the public image and credibility"
of Daniel Flsberg and his attorney, then
nearing trial in the Pentagon Papers
The 42-year-old Colson, a lawyer who
now faces disbarment, will be sentenced
June 21 by U.S. District Judge Gerhard
Gesell. The maximum penalty on the
felony charge is five years in prison
and a $5,000 fine.
DISMISSAL of three previously-leveled
:harges, which could have brought a
maximum sentence of 20 years in prison
and $20,000 in fines, is just a formality
awaiting separate court proceedings.
Colson was one of five defendants in
the White (louse plumbers case, each
:harged with conspiring to violate the
rights of Dr. Lewis Fielding, Ellsberg's
psychiatrist, in the break-in of Fielding's
office. The remaining four, including
former presidential aide John Ehrlich-
rman, are tentatively scheduled for trial
June 17.
Colson also was one of seven de-
fendants in the Watergate cover-up trial,
set for Sept. 9, where he faced prosecu-
tion for obstructing justice and conspir-
ing to obstruct.
ski told Colson's lawyer in a letter that
the plea will "dispose of all potential
:harges against your client which might
atherwise arise out of those matters
which are or have been under active
Jaworski's letter of "understandings"
spelled out that Colson would now agree
to testify under oath, product all rele-
vant documents and be a prosecution
witness against others.
Meanwhile, the chairman of the na-
tion's governors said yesterday the
states are the ones responding to the
problems of the Watergate era, while
congressional leaders squabbled over
who is responsible for a leadership
vacuum in Washington.

The State Court of Appeals yes-terday
struck down a lower court ruling t h a t
would have required the University to
rebate the difference between resident
and non-resident tuition to a number of
students enrolled from May 2972 to May
In reversing part of a year-old Wash-
tenaw County Circuit Court decision, the
appeals -court saved the University "a
considerable amount of money" - per-
haps millions of dollars - in refunds,
according to University General Coun-
sel Roderick Daane.
THE CIRCUIT COURT opinion, releas-
ed in May 1973, declared the University's
old residency rules unconstitutional and
stated that students who were not pre-
viously considered in-state residents but
who would fall in that category under the
criteria subsequently adopted be given
tuition rebates retroactive to May 1972.
While invalidating the rebate portion of
the order, the Court of Appeals yester-

day did not make mention of the other
sections of the original decision.
The University chose to institute new
residency guidelines, rather> than chal-
lenge the ruling that the former regula-
tions - which required students to drop
out of school for six months betcre be-
ing declared residents - were illegal.
"THIS IS A clear victory for the Uni-
versity," Daane said of yesterday's
Court of Appeals action.
However, the plaintiffs - six former
out of state students who filed suit
against the University climing the
former residency rules violated their
constitutional rights - apparently ssill
appeal the decision.
The students' attorney Arthur Car-
penter said he will file a motion for ap-
peal with the state Supreme Court, but
conceded it "will be tougher" to win
a favorable ruling in light of- the most
recent decision.
"I CANNOT follow the Court of Ap-
peals' reasoning on this at all," Carpen-
ter said. "Theirs was a status-quo pro-

tect-the-establishment ruling."
Had the Circuit Court rebate decision
been upheld, the University would have
been forced to rebate tuition money -
amounting to $800 per student per terra
to those persons who were judged to be
residents under the present criteria but
who had paid the higher out-of-state fees
during the 1972-73 academic year.
Conceivably, the total amount paid in
rebates could have topped $12 million,
according to University offictla.
IN ITS DECISION, the Court of Ap-
peals felt that "as a matter of fair-
-ness" because the University had al-
ready budgeted and spent the funds," the
tuition revenue "should not be rebated"
The court added that paying out that
much money would "take away from
the quality of present programs at the
Yesterday's ruling in no way affects
the current residency rules at the Uni-

Back to Top

© 2022 Regents of the University of Michigan