60 Years Too Late

February 25th will mark the 60th anniversary of the United States Appeals Court’s affirmation of my parents’ conviction for Conspiracy to Commit Espionage. As I have explained before, my parents were convicted of conspiracy- not spying, espionage or treason as the mainstream media usually reports. Prosecutors like conspiracy charges because the law in this country holds everyone involved in the conspiracy responsible for all the acts of any of the conspirators in furtherance of the conspiracy. And all the prosecutors need to show to prove that a conspiracy exists is that two or more people got together, made an illegal plan and took one overt act to move that scheme forward. It could be as simple as agreeing to make a phone call or arranging a meeting.

In order to prove a conspiracy the prosecution must demonstrate that the defendants joined together in a common plan. This is sometimes referred to as the chain of conspiracy. In appealing their conviction, my parents’ attorneys attempted to sever the government’s chain of conspiracy at its weakest link.

This is how they did it. Although my parents’ denied that they conspired with chief prosecution witnesses David and Ruth Greenglass (my mother’s younger brother and his wife) to steal atomic secrets, they could not deny that they knew and met with the Greenglasses on many occasions. After all, they were family. Moreover, my parents’ attorneys did not contest the testimony of a third government witness, Harry Gold. Gold stated he was an espionage courier who transmitted a great deal of material to the Soviet Union about the construction of the atomic bomb from Klaus Fuchs, one of the top atomic scientists working on the Manhattan project. Gold also testified that on one occasion he obtained secret information at David and Ruth Greenglass’s apartment in Albuquerque, not far from Los Alamos where David, an Army sergeant, worked as a machinist fabricating pieces of the atomic bomb. In their appeal, my parents’ attorneys acknowledged that while the Rosenbergs and Greenglasses were connected, and Gold, Fuchs and the Greenglasses were connected, no one testified at the trial that Gold or Fuchs knew my parents or vice versa. In other words, the defense claimed that the government had not established the chain of conspiracy that connected the Rosenbergs to Gold and Fuchs.

The Appeals Court disagreed. The Justices pointed out that the Greenglasses testified that my father had given Ruth a half a Jello box-top as a recognition signal and kept the other half. David testified that when Gold came to his doorstep in Albuquerque he presented the half of the Jello box top that matched the one Ruth had kept. David stated further that my father said the person who came to collect the secrets would use a code phrase with Julius’ name in it. Gold and David both testified that Gold used the name Julius at the meeting to prove his bona fides. Thus, the Appeals Court concluded the jury could infer the connection between the Rosenbergs and Gold through the Jello box top and code phrase.

Of course, we now know a lot more than the Appeals Court did 60 years ago. Over 20 years after their decision, my brother’s and my legal action forced into the public eye secret government files detailing Gold and Greenglass’s initial confessions. Gold first said he used the name Ben in the code phrase, while David testified Gold used the name Dave. Another government file reported that after several months in custody Gold and Greenglass were brought together to iron out this discrepancy, and it was at that meeting that Greenglass “proposed” that “possibly” Gold used the name Julius. Gold responded that he was “not at all clear on this point,” but none of this came out at the trial three months later and both testified that they were certain the name Julius was in the code phrase.

It was not until the 2010 publication of Walter Schneir’s book, Final Verdict, that we learned that Ruth Greenglass, not my father, was tasked with the job of creating the “recognition signal.” Thus, the two pieces of “evidence” upon which the Appeals Court based its decision to uphold my parents’ conviction, have lost their probative value. Harry Gold and David Greenglass inserted the name Julius into the code phrase just a few months before the trial, and Ruth Greenglass, not Julius Rosenberg created the Jello box-top recognition signal. But, of course, once the executions took place on June 19th, 1953, these fatal errors could not be undone.

----------------------------
To receive a notification whenever there is a new post to Out on a Limb Together,
subscribe now.
 

Heading for Brazil

I’m convinced that humans make a big deal out of anniversaries in multiples of 10 because we have ten fingers. The RFC is not immune to this trend. We’ve staged major programs in New York City on the 40th and 50th anniversary of my parents’ execution, and are already beginning to plan for the 60th in June 2013. But for me every anniversary is important, and whether I am marking it quietly at home or on stage before thousands, it is an emotionally laden time.

Next week, for the second time in four years, I will spend June 19th in another country. In 2009, I was in Paris. This year I will travel to Rio de Janeiro to mark the 59th anniversary of my parents’ execution at Midrash, a progressive Jewish cultural center in that city. Following events there on June 18th and 19th, I will move on to São Paulo for events on June 20th and 21st co-sponsored by Livraria da Vila and Casa do Saber. People here may be surprised to learn that in January 1953 the U.S. embassy in Brazil took pains to explain to the Secretary of State’s office in Washington DC that the Brazilian movement to save my parents’ lives was communist inspired. The dispatch also stated, perhaps in contradiction, that the thousands of Brazilian signatures on the clemency petitions “probably reflect the Brazilian antipathy to capital punishment rather than support of the communist campaign or belief in the couple’s innocence.” The U.S. consulate in Porto Alegre noted in a dispatch dated June 16th, 1953 that “the Consulate has been requested by the President of the City Council of Porto Alegre to transmit to President Dwight D. Eisenhower a resolution passed by the City Council asking that the President pardon the Rosenbergs.” [Exoneration: The Rosenberg-Sobell Case in the 21st Century, Emily and David Alman, Green Elms Press, 2010, p. 423.]

Whenever I speak about my parents’ case outside of the United States I meet people who tell me stories about what they, their parents or even their grandparents were doing when they learned of the executions. Up until now I have only spoken on this topic internationally in Canada, Europe, Japan and Taiwan. This will be my first opportunity to address people in South America. In fact, this will be the first time in my life that I have ventured south of the equator.

I look forward to encountering another culture. There is so much to learn, and I will barely scratch the surface of such a vast and complex nation in the eight days I will be in Brazil. I expect to return with experiences worth recounting, and I hope to share them with you in a couple of weeks.

[Information about Robert Meeropol's events in Rio De Janeiro on June 18th and 19th, and São Paulo on June 20th and 21st, is available at http://www.rfc.org/pressreleases and http://www.rfc.org/events.]

------------------------------

To receive a notification whenever there is a new post to Out on a Limb Together, subscribe now.
 

"The Buck Stops Here" and Other Distortions

President Harry S. Truman was famous for the sign on his desk that read, “The buck stops here.” But when it came to my parents’ case this proved just as false as so many other truisms about our government - such as that all citizens be afforded due process before the law, be presumed innocent until proven guilty, or that our constitution’s “separation of powers” would prevent the judicial branch of government from conspiring with the executive branch to speed an execution.

My parents’ First Petition for Executive Clemency reached President Truman’s office on January 10, 1953, but he “vacated the Presidency on January 20, 1953, without acting on the Rosenbergs’ clemency appeals” (Invitation to an Inquest, Walter and Miriam Schneir, Pantheon, 1983, p. 192). In a few days we will reach the 60th anniversary of the day Truman passed the buck to Eisenhower.

Three weeks after entering office, the newly inaugurated President denied the petition. Eisenhower explained his denial of their request as follows:

“The nature of the crime for which they have been found guilty and sentenced far exceeds that of the taking of the life of another citizen: it involves the deliberate betrayal of an entire nation and could very well result in the death of many, many thousands of innocent citizens.” [This presumes my parents stole what prosecutors called valuable atomic secrets, but now we know that this was not the case.]

“All rights of appeal were exercised and the conviction of the trial court was upheld after four judicial reviews, including that of the highest court of the land.” [Another error, since the Supreme Court never reviewed my parents’ case.]

“I have made a careful examination into this case and am satisfied that the two individuals have been accorded their full measure of justice.’ [Eisenhower only consulted with those involved in my parents’ prosecution.]

Eisenhower received my parents’ Second Petition for Executive Clemency on June 16, 1953 just a few days before their execution. He denied that one as well. On June 16th he explained in a letter to his son, John, that although it might seem harsh to execute a woman, if he commuted her sentence it would only encourage the Soviets to recruit more female spies. Eisenhower’s rationale for executing my mother was that the Soviet Union would recruit more female spies because, if captured, they’d be imprisoned, rather than executed. This doesn’t make much sense, but as Truman’s “The buck stops here” plaque and Eisenhower’s statements denying my parents’ first clemency petition indicated, accuracy and logic were in short supply during the McCarthy era hysteria.

----------------------
To receive a notification whenever there is a new post to Out on a Limb Together, subscribe now.

 

Wounded Knee 40 Years On

Guest post by Amber Black, RFC Public Relations & Technology Coordinator

Honoring resistance is at the core of what we do here at the RFC.  A lot of our focus right now is on the lead-up to the 60th anniversary this June, of the executions of Ethel and Julius Rosenberg - our namesake and inspiration, and a mighty symbol of resistance.

But this week we’re marking other anniversaries, and standing in solidarity with other resisters.  We’re thinking about Bradley Manning, who last weekend reached the shameful milestone of 1000 days in prison without trial.

We’re remembering Russell Means and other AIM leaders and fighters, who 40 years ago today rose up at Wounded Knee.

And we’re thinking about how the torch of resistance has been passed through generations and across movements.  It's still burning in the care of activists like those with Idle No More and the Overpass Light Brigade, and Parents for Occupy Wall Street, and grand jury resisters, and countless others.

In the last few hours of their lives, the Rosenbergs wrote in a letter to their sons that they were “comforted in the sure knowledge that others would carry on after us.”  To Bradley, and Russell (shown here at a rally in NYC in 1978 commemorating the 25th anniversary of the Rosenbergs’ deaths), and all the other principled and courageous people who have carried on as days, months, and years pass in the struggle, we stand with you.

------------------------
To receive a notification whenever there is a new post to Out on a Limb Together, subscribe now.