Juan Corona Convicted: AP Newsreel with Defense Attorney Richard Hawk, January 1973

Name: Juan Corona Convicted: AP Newsreel with Defense Attorney Richard Hawk, January 1973
Uploaded: 2015-07-21T00:00:00Z
Duration: 1 min 46 s
Description: AP newsreel from the day Juan Corona was found guilty of 25 murders in Fairfield, California, in January 1973, ending with his defense attorney, Richard Hawk, answering reporters. Corona is not heard.

AP newsreel from the day Juan Corona was found guilty of 25 murders in Fairfield, California, in January 1973, ending with his defense attorney, Richard Hawk, answering reporters. Corona is not heard.

Subject: Juan Corona
Recorded: about January 18, 1973
Runtime: 1:46

Content warning: Concerns the murders of 25 men; no detail of the killings is spoken in the video.

The Report

This is a 1-minute-46-second Associated Press syndicated newsreel about the day Juan Corona was convicted of murdering 25 men, posted by AP on its own archive channel. For its first minute or so the item carries pictures with music and natural sound and no narration. It ends with about 40 seconds in which reporters question Corona's defense attorney, Richard Hawk, about the verdict and about what he would do at a new trial. Corona himself is not heard.

Historical Context

In May and June 1971 the bodies of 25 men, most of them transient farmworkers, were found buried in orchards along the Feather River in Sutter County, California. Juan Corona, a labor contractor from Yuba City, was arrested on May 26, 1971. His trial was moved to Fairfield, in Solano County, and opened on September 11, 1972, before Judge Richard Patton, with Sutter County District Attorney G. Dave Teja prosecuting. Richard Hawk, whom Corona had retained in June 1971, rested the defense without calling any witnesses, and Corona did not testify.

Circumstances

The case went to the jury on January 11, 1973. After about 45 hours of deliberation, the jury found Corona guilty on all 25 counts on January 18, 1973. He was sentenced on February 6, 1973, to 25 terms of life imprisonment.

What the Report Covers

A reporter reminds Hawk that he had been speculating the jury stood "11 to 1 for acquittal" and asks why he was so far off; Hawk answers that he "was fooled about the level of intelligence" of the jury. Asked whether he would present evidence and witnesses at a new trial, he says he does not think he would try the case much differently: "there's nothing I would do any differently, no major decisions I would make any different," adding, "all I need is 12 intelligent people."

What Makes the Recording Significant

The item records the defense attorney's same-day reaction to the verdict. His statement that he would make no major decisions differently stands out in light of what followed: on May 8, 1978, a California appeals court ordered a new trial, finding in part that the defense investigation had been inadequate and that Hawk had a conflict of interest arising from his fee agreement, which gave him literary rights to Corona's story.

Archival Importance

A short piece of agency footage from the verdict day of what was then reported as the largest mass murder case in U.S. history. A longer KPIX-TV newsfilm of the same day, including a Hawk press conference, is held by the San Francisco State University Bay Area Television Archive (not part of this record).

Important Caveats

Corona does not speak in this video. Hawk is identified from the form of address "Dick" and from what he says; his name is not otherwise spoken. His "11 to 1 for acquittal" was his own earlier prediction; Crime Library reports that the jury's first ballot was 7 to 5 for acquittal. Corona's 1973 conviction was overturned in 1978; he was convicted again of all 25 murders on September 23, 1982, in Hayward. AP's title date "20-1-73" is its story date; the verdict was on January 18, 1973.

Reporter: You were speculating it was 11 to 1 for acquittal up until the jury came back today. Why do you think you were so far off?

Richard Hawk: Because I was fooled about the level of intelligence of the [unclear: "jury" / "juries"].

Reporter: If you go to appeals, Dick, [unclear: "will" / "would"] you then present a case?

Richard Hawk: If I what?

Reporter: Will you present a case, i.e., evidence, witnesses, if you go to appeals on this?

Richard Hawk: You mean if I went to a new trial?

Reporter: If you get a new trial, yeah.

Richard Hawk: Oh, no, I don't think I [unclear: "tried" / "'d try"] this case much differently than I did this time. Uh, I don't think, there's nothing I would do any differently, no major decisions I would make any different. Uh, I would hope to be somewhere where I would get, all I need is 12 intelligent people, and I'll have one [unclear: "of them" / "out"]. [Clip ends at 01:46.] ---