[inaudible conversations] >> i would like to start by thanking paul and in particular thinking the virginia historical society for allowing us to be here today. i saw on a historical society's web site that its mission connecting people to america's past the unparalleled story of virginia and collecting and preserving and interpreting the commonwealth history is the core mission of the historical society in many ways it's the same mission for the united states district court or the historical society for the united states district court for virginia. our society and i'm going to tell you a bit about it as part of the intro was formed in 2006 at the request of the court.

we have a board of directors consisting of judges who sit in three divisions of the eastern district the ox andrea and north which division and we have attorneys to serve on the board as well. by tying the story of the historical society is a story of really some very key people that help society get started in 2006 and i would like to think the specific individuals. the first is u.s. district judge james spencer. he was the chief judge for the same district in 2006 and instrumental in helping our society get it started. there were several judges involved in the project that we will hear about today the society itself but there are a couple that deserve no. u.s. district judge claude hilton who sits in the alexandria division was sentimental and judge henry martin junior who sits in the northern district in u.s. bank bank -- bankruptcy judge just as

the thais who retired in 2013 was a bankruptcy judge in richmond. last but not least on the stage u.s. district judge henry hutson. judge hutson is as many of you may know a long and distinguished public servant. he sat as a jurist on the eastern district of virginia and a published author. another person i have to note is common fight note is, in height. he's sitting in a front row. colin is distinguished trial lawyer who practices what all of us lawyers affection might call the rocket docket. i'm not sure it's always affectionate and everyone across the country knows that. colin serves as the present of our society from 2006 until 2014 and we had term limits of common was their longest distinguished president before passing the torch to steve jackson in 2014. last i would like to mention

chief judge rebecca smith. chief judge smith is a u.s. district court judge and she's a great supporter of the society. in terms of the very brief history before we turn the program over the society started in 2006. we had to incorporate the society. we also went to the process of getting our 501(c)(3) status so we are tax-exempt organization. once that occurred the society once they got project to document the 200 plus turn a year plus the rich history of the united states eastern district court for the district of virginia. we started that project working at the time with the graduate student at the college of william and mary and he was considering using the project as a way to get his thesis. what we quickly discovered was with 200 years of history and an amazing amount of cases and things to talk about we really needed to find someone with a passion for not only the history of the court but understand the

dynamics of the history of virginia that were occurring when these cases were being tried. that is where i was very fortunate that i've reached out to one of my law school professors professor william hamilton brightman asked him his or someone in virginia that can do the job in the first navy said it was john l. peters. we were very fortunate in that 2010 john agreed to come on board with that what i'll call her journey toward getting a published book and it was a journey not only because we had to form a society but we then worked with john and he did an amazing job and in less than two years he wrote her book. we then worked and i had no experience with publishers editors or archivists but now i can say that i do. we had to find all of those books folks to help us and ultimately our friend at d.c. press wordsmith is here today. they agreed to publish our book and happily we now have a

published book and it's been a great project. with that being said i would like to now in judge hutson's case they secede the courtroom but i would love to give -- and talk about "from marshall to moussaoui" federal justice in the eastern district of virginia. [applause] >> thank you very much andy. as you mentioned don peters is not the first author to capture the rich and at times controversial history of the united states district courts in the eastern district of virginia. our court was one of the first courts in america and it's one that has got a history with the tremendous amount of depth. other authors tried to capture that history and found it to be an overwhelming project. so after a couple of years of

frustration we turned to john peters. john is not only a lawyer, he's also an historian and a published author and the book's "from marshall to moussaoui" the history of our court. i'm sure you'll find it exciting exciting. it's rich in history and have a lot of intrigue to it and it's a darn good read. john tell us first knowing other people couldn't handle this project why did you decide to take on this herculean task wax left go you were just a glutton for punishment were you? >> it was no punishment at all. it's fair to say that i jumped at the opportunity to work on this project and i did it for a reason for the reason that any writer would want to do this book. very simply put it's a great story and that's what any writer looks for is a great story. if you are working with something of that nature is both

an honor and not only a challenge but an honor to be able to deal with a history like this. so it was a fairly enjoyable experience. >> now for those out here that enjoyed researching history tell us about how you got a handle on this huge volume of material in such a short period of time? >> most of the books that i've been involved with have involved massive amounts of material and long histories of institutions that have lasted for a long time time. i will just mention hollywood's cemetery the history of richmond bar. all of those required you to work with massive amounts of material covering a long period of time and oftentimes the first subject matter. so you develop certain habits and certain approaches to handling that material that pay

off in the long run. in this case first i will tell you i always work from a detailed chronological outline. while i am doing my research i pin everything on to a chronological outline. just one sentence with a brief reference to the source of that information and what i ended up with in this case i think was 31 single pages single-spaced outline. you then use your outline, and you morph your outline i mean you morph your chronology into an outline. that's where you determine where your chapter breaks are going to be how you are going to break down the material and organize it in such a way that it makes sense to the reader. you group things within subject matters. so the first decision i had have to make and it was a critical one i was charged with writing about the notable cases over 220

or period which gives rise to the question how do you define a notable case and where are you going to find it? i made an arbitrary decision very early on that a notable case would be a case that had been written up or occurred in "the new york times" or the "washington post." i did a search under every judge's name and what i got was literally hundreds if not thousands of newspaper articles. i have this wonderful court librarian who took the names of the parties of the newspaper coverage and match those with reported legal opinions. i had the newspaper coverage and the actual formal opinions of the court that only the trial level but the appellate level. i eventually obtained copies of those opinions and would plug

each one into the chronological outline and cited into law. i think i read over 610 and probably 300 cases finding my way into the book. it was experience frankly. he was having done this before and knowing how to approach it. the glory of it was that i ended up with both the newspaper coverage and the formal legal cases. equally valuable because it's only through the newspaper coverage that you find out the nicknames of the witnesses and the judges comments from the bench, and that sort of thing. you don't find that reporting weekly. >> john in addition to having historical perspective you practiced in that court for many years. did that give you some unique insight to determine what cases are important and which ones are not?

>> i had written about the courts in bits and pieces over long period of time perhaps going back as far as 40 years but i didn't have a comprehensive picture except for the critical cases the bird treason trials the segregation cases and the recent cases regarding the westinghouse uranium contracts and the pollution of the james river. i was aware of those cases but frankly it was my experiences as a lawyer that probably helped me more in reading and understanding the cases themselves. when i was in law school i really didn't understand why my professors were asking me to briefcases. anybody who is a lawyer out there remembers the girl from law school. i always wondered why they asked me to do that and i didn't understand it. after i began working on this

book i learned took me over 50 years but i learned why i was doing briefcases. that was one of the critical skills. >> i know one of your observations has been john that writing the history of u.s. district court of eastern district of virginia you that was a very effective vehicle for talking about the history of jurisprudence in america. >> i think it's more than that. i think they're writing about the eastern district of virginia or the history of any court is probably the most viable ways to teach virginian or american history. the reason for that is ultimately the most important issues in our culture are in our society find their way to court. i mean just think about it for a while.

abortion gun rights, health care, enemy combatants public corruption. we have had a healthy dose of that recently. but the important thing is and this is why experience with virginia and american history becomes the history of an institution but especially a court is only important if you place it in context. you have got to be able to tie those cases to events that were taking place in issues that were alive in the culture and society in which you are writing about. as an example if you're going to be writing about the admiralty cases in the eastern district of virginia it's absolutely essential that you know about the wars in europe and the activities of the french and the

spanish and english fleets in the west indies and the emerging latin american republic. you cannot understand the cases in the eastern district without that context. so you've got to be able to tell that story. >> most people were viewing the history of 18th and 19th centuries tend to focus more on prominent members of the executive or legislative branch rather than the judicial branch. why has the judicial branch been so overshadowed -- overshadowed by the other branches in the reporting of the history of virginia? >> i think in the history of virginia well number one unless you are talking about the federal courts it's rare that the virginia cases, the state court cases have really had a great impact on society as a

whole. the cases in the federal courts have but i think during the early days of the republic particularly when they were adopting the constitution promulgating the first judiciary act, people naturally look to the founding fathers who were essentially legislative people. statesmen. they were not judges. now we are getting close to a tie in with the eastern district of virginia now because the one judge in american history who probably had the most impact in making the judicial branch of government equal with the executive and legislative branches was john marshall. do you want me to start talking about martial? [laughter] >> that's the most in convenient place to begin since he was the one that inspired so much of the

basic principle of lot in america today. let's start talking about john marshall. he was on the u.s. supreme court but he was also a trial judge was he not? >> that's something that i realized the first time i was writing this book and it's something i think most laymen and most lawyers realize today. john marshall was appointed the fourth chief justice in 1801 and he died in 1835. he was chief justice of the united states for those 34 years years. as they say it was probably an individual who in the history of this land have the most germanic impact on the powers of our federal government today. thomas jefferson appointed date chief justice the united states we would be looking at a very different government today, very different federal government. but at the same time the thing

that people don't realize is the entire time john marshall sat on the supreme court is chief justice he also sat as a trial judge in the eastern district of what was then the circuit court for the eastern district of virginia. it was named the circuit court because every supreme court justice road circuit in those days you rode the circuit. horses and inconvenience and all of that. when he was chief justice marshall typically spent two months a year in washington and 10 months a year either in virginia or north carolina writing circuit as a trial judge. that meant he and panel jury is instructed juries sentence criminals rule the mission of evidence all the things trial justice is due today and in the course of that he wrote a number of opinions. you get a very different view of marshall as a trial judge from the view that you receive as

what i'm about to refer to now is the great chief justice. he sat said on a number of very critical cases while being a judge in the eastern district. >> tell tells about the structure of the federal courts back in those days. in addition to the supreme court you have circuit courts that were trial courts but explained the dynamics of the two. >> there were three levels of courts under the first judiciary act. there were district court which had very limited jurisdiction. one important aspect of their jurisdiction was the admiralty case. then you have the circuit courts which were the primary federal trial courts. there was nothing between the circuit courts and the supreme court. there were no federal appeals courts in that day. we all know now the fourth

circuit court of appeals in the eighth circuit court of appeals, there were no circuit court of appeals. there were no appeals courts and in the federal system. cases went directly from the circuit courts to the united states supreme court. the supreme court justice was assigned to every circuit court and sat on the circuit court with the district judge for that circuit. and so here you have the chief justice of the united states spending most of his time as a trial judge. >> like today for supreme court justices pretty cushy to say the least. [laughter] is also accommodations and lifestyle of a supreme court justice in the age of john marshall. >> first you have to understand during the first decade of the supreme court it was a very weak institution. i think there were some years

during the first decade where the supreme court only rendered one opinion per year which today seems unimaginable. it was not totally clear at that point whether the supreme court had the power of judicial review of not only statutes but also federal statutes that state statutes. so it was recognized generally as an extremely weak institution institution. the justices when they met in washington and even that well all the justices during the first decade wrote separate opinions what are called sterry optim opinions. so you didn't have any unified opinion of the court that you could look to. marshall when he became chief justice not only under his

leadership, the court adopted a number of rulings that have affected our lives to this day in very dramatic fashions but during marshall's day the two months if they were in washington they'll stay together in the same rooming house and scarcely engaged in outside social activities. it was all introspective and they began to write collective opinions for the first time. in other words he would have an opinion of the united states supreme court not a half-dozen separate opinions on individual judges. >> i assume in those days it was in the highly compensated position. >> no and while in fact i have been -- you may have something to contribute. >> maybe my wife would come i don't know. [laughter]

but federal judges and supreme court members have perceived meager compensation for years and years. in fact it was oftentimes a tossup as to whether a politician would offer to become a federal judge or elect a member of congress again. it was not particularly lucrative than those days. >> john latta cases that the supreme court will hear this session as well as our sessions turned to principle that originated with john marshall when it comes to separation of powers and the constitutional authority that each of the branches of government have. talk about that for a minute. >> i feel like i hold myself out as a supreme court scholar or even a marshall scholar but i think i did list six cases in the book that i have led to him martial being -- first thing

marbury disburses madison. the supreme court didn't have the right to review statutes adopted by congress. you have gibbons versus ogden case which solidifies congress's rights to regulate interstate commerce. you have the cola v. maryland which in essence said that congress had the implied power to implement the express powers of the constitution and you had collins versus virginia which upheld the right of the supreme court to review state criminal cases in which a constitutional issue was alleged to arise. >> and of course we have marbury versus madison and the separation of powers between

various branches of government. >> yes. >> one of the more intriguing part of your book deals with the relationship between john marshall and thomas jefferson and they have somewhat of a strained relationship to be mild about it. talk a little bit about the genesis of that and what kind of a relationship that they have both familiar as well as professional? >> one of marshall's leading biographers describe the relationship and i haven't forgotten the term and i hope i can quote it correctly. he described it as an unrelenting mutual patron. [laughter] and there may be even a little understatement there. they hated each other. they were cousins, they were distant cousins but they hated each other and it was largely a measure of political and a large measure of personal. they just simply did not like each other. the political part of it is we

tend to look at the founding fathers as a homogenous group. nothing could be farther from the truth. this replica of marshall madison they were federalist and preferred a strong national government. jefferson and henry and mason were anti-federalists. they were states rights weak federal government people and the political battles were not fought only in the constitutional convention but in the courts and the congress and let me alert you to the fact that the battle between the federalists and the anti-federalists still rages today. i mean we see it in the federal courts of this country every day day. so it is the one constant is the difference between these two philosophies of strong federal government, central government

limited federal government more powers to the state and it was that way in the 1790s and it's to a large degree that way today. >> we will will turn him onto the historical trial of aaron burr but you mention your book that the tension between jefferson and marshall came to the forefront during that trial and the run-up to it. follow-up on that john. >> two things i would like to mention first that the trial of aaron burr for treason and i think it's important to do this because to a large degree the trial of aaron burr has been i think overlooked in history. and particularly where it took place here in richmond. first, the trial of aaron burr

for treason is probably the most important single event ever to take place in the city of richmond. you could mention this rendered the city to the yankees in 1865 but the burr trial ranks right up there at the head of the batch. with due apologies though to o.j. simpson. [laughter] i think the burr trial may well be the most important trial that ever took place in the united states. here you have a former vice president of the united states being prosecuted for treason. the prosecution being initiated by thomas jefferson president of the united states but john marshall his archenemy sitting on the bench as the trial judge. i wonder how many satellite trucks that would bring. [laughter]

would bring to capitol square. it took place in the capitol building and the world was here to watch. the grand jury was composed entirely of jefferson's political friends including the speaker of the house john randolph. senators, former governors, the legal talent in the case was probably the greatest story of legal talent ever gathered in one courtroom in america. now what did aaron burr do to deserve all this attention? no one knows exactly but what he was accused of number one jefferson blamed her for not withdrawing when the election of 1800 and the house of representatives. burr had run as the vice presidential candidate with

jefferson and because of the quirky way in which the electoral college votes were counted in those days they passed and election was thrown into the house of representatives. it took over 30 ballots to decide that jefferson was president of the united states. jefferson never forgive burr. he felt that burr should ever sign anything. he also kills alexander hamilton in duel in 1804 so when jefferson heard from his commander general wilkinson in new orleans that his city was under threat from a force led by burr he seized the opportunity to have burr prosecuted. very little is known about what burr actually did. the one thing that was known is that he and irish nobleman

plotted to have what turned out to be fewer than 100 men get on the island in the middle of the ohio river which was in northern virginia. they were provided with provisions and arms and left some place in the west. the thinking was that today the reputation and power after the the toole with hamilton he left for the west in an effort to rehabilitate himself. the critical fact factor here is that burr was never on the island. the definition of treason which is set forth in the constitution very precisely and i'm not quoting exactly here but essentially it's waging war against the united states or its hearing to its enemies with aid and comfort. so there is this element of waging war and they are.

the main issue in the burr trial as it turned out was whether the united states was going to adopt the british doctrine of constructive treason. now under the british doctrine anyone who had been engaged in the plot who had been engaged in a conspiracy would have been considered a participant in the crime. even though they had not taken up arms or done anything of that sort sort. just the planning of treason would have made them guilty of treason. marshall ultimately ruled in the burr trial that because of the definition in the constitution of waging war, we cannot say that you can be found guilty of treason when you weren't even

present on the island when the plot was alleged to have taken place. there was an emotion to exclude large portions of the evidence in the trial. the evidence was included in the jury had to conclude that they didn't have enough evidence in which to convict burr. let me assure you it that did little to enhance the relationship between marshall and jefferson. [laughter] in fact it had been bad but it got even worse. within a few years jefferson was sued personally in the circuit court of the eastern district of virginia. in this case marshall actually ruled in jefferson's favor so all is not lost. >> put this into context john. back in those days and the dialogue between the federalist and anti-federalist the charge of treason was fairly common was it not?

>> i don't know the answer to that. i don't know whether there were many charges of treason. >> turned to the civil war era it's plain how the structure of the federal courts in virginia virginia -- >> it affected it about as drastically as it could be affected. it's very interesting. virginia was one of only two states that have both confederate and federal courts sitting within its borders. the federal judge in richmond james halliburton when the south seceded he resigned as federal judge and became the confederate judge. he ultimately swore in jefferson davis. norfolk fell to union forces in 1862 and alexandria was always

in union hands. the loyalist government of governor pierpont was sitting in alexandria throughout the war and president lincoln appointed a federal judge their to begin sitting in 1863. so you had both confederate and federal courts sitting within the boards. explain to them what the last battle of the civil war was all about. >> it occurred 14 years after the war so it's a very appropriate description. general custis lee, robert e. lee's son sued the federal government for possession of the arlington estate in northern virginia in 1879 in federal district court. can you imagine the emotions that generated? by then the arlington estate was

the hollowed grounds of arlington national cemetery with many burials of union dead from the civil war. the arlington estate had been seized by the federal government for nonpayment of taxes. the catch was that it was tough to pay the taxes because you had to pay them in person. [laughter] there were not many lee's who wanted to show up in burlington to pay their taxes at the time so they went unpaid in the federal government seized the property. in actuality the court ultimately ruled in favor of the lee family but congress found out in ultimately it resulted in a congressional settlement where the federal government acquired

title after paying the lee family a sum in compensation for the property. >> john fares discussion eastern district of virginia wouldn't be complete without talking about john curtis underwood. >> you know we have federal judges who have been real heroes and we have got federal judges who have been controversial but no federal judge in the history of the state of virginia has been more controversial than john curtis underwood. john underwood was appointed by lincoln to be the federal judge in alexandria and throughout the war he was engaged mostly in cases to confiscate the property of the rebels whose property the union could reach. after the war john curtis underwood was the federal judge who spearheaded the efforts to

prosecute jefferson davis and approximately 30 other confederate leaders including many generals including jubal early and james longstreet and a number of others for treason. he was the one who forced through the indictments. as you all know the proceedings against jefferson davis lasted for several years. ultimately they went away. they were not all prosecuted by the federal government. the proceedings against robert e. lee and the other confederate leaders went nowhere because we appeal to general grant on the basis that it was his understanding and grants as well that the terms of surrender had incorporated a provision that there would be no retribution. to make a long story short general grant interceded with

president johnson and he threatened to resign his commission if those proceedings were pursued and they were not pursued. there's no record of any further proceedings beyond that point. john curtis underwood during the course of reconstruction was what was known as a radical republican. in order to regain full admission to the union and get out from under military rule for jenny had to adopt a new constitution. i think the convention began in 1868 and was ultimately ratified in 1870. but the chairman of the convention that adopted the new virginia constitution was john curtis underwood and to this day it remains none as the underwood constitution. now among white virginians -- virginians at this day he was the most reliable person in the state of virginia and it stayed

that way for well over half a century. in fact virginia politicians for over half a century set about -- their major life's work was to undo what john curtis underwood had done. in referring to his court john curtis underwood described his court, and this is telling, he described it as an advanced judicial ticket station in a foreign country. and so that's the way things look to him at the end of the civil war. to show you have to read this because i can't remember it all but there's a great quote and it's one of those quotes that when an author finds them he jumps for joy and says eureka. william cameron the editor of

the petersburg newspaper in writing about the future government -- governor virginia instantly summoned his journalistic skills when he called underwood and i'm quoting absurd blasphemous howard lee devilish goulish ignorant yankees euros. [laughter] the great man a virginians view john curtis underwood precisely that way. [laughter] >> john it sounds like some of the letters we get from litigants today. not every decision made by the u.s. district court in virginia were breaux perceived by the republic and in that vein let's move to the desegregation era. talk about the impact that had in some of the major decisions. >> well it all happened during

my lifetime and the lifetimes of a number of you in the audience. it began in 19, while the began before that but the constitution of virginia provided in so many words and no white or black child will be educated at the same schools. that had been a way of life in virginia so let's keep in mind a couple of things when we are talking about the segregation cases. the desegregation cases change the face of america and virginia's way of life. it was just that simple. before the brown decision in 1954 separate but equal was the established doctrine by which all virginians relied for determining the legal relationship of the relations of the races and their schools.

separate but equal was always a myth in virginia. i mean schools were separate but they were by no means equal and there's a long line of litigation in the federal district court in the district of virginia that says just that. the schools are not equal. a new generation of more aggressive relatively young african-american attorneys including richmond or oliver hill and spotswood robinson decided to approach desegregation from a different perspective. they were no longer to accept separate but equal as the appropriate doctrine for determining the legality of the separation of races in the schools. and they attacked segregation on a constitutional basis saying the separation of the races

itself is unconstitutional. that led well the first significant case in virginia that involved that attack was the davis case from prince edward county. it was decided by a three-judge panel in the district court in 1972. it found segregation to be perfectly lawful. you had anthropologists and psychiatrists and psychologists and educators all justifying for both sides and ultimately the court decided that no segregation is legal because and again i'm going to paraphrase here because it declares a way of life in virginia and two is

part of the mores of the people. so what's involved in the davis case? a way of life in virginia and the mores of the people. but then they case one after the supreme court with the brown case. it's an alphabetical accident that it wasn't davis versus prince edward county instead of brown versus board of education in topeka kansas. they were all decided in one day by the supreme court in the supreme court and a relatively unanimous opinion said this is unconstitutional. you can do this. the first line of attack in virginia was mass resistance. once separate but equal was gone there was nothing left. you were either going to integrate the schools or you were going to massively resist. massive resistance was a

doctrine that was promulgated essentially by the burr political machine and brown was decided and 54 and a year or two later the virginia general assembly adopted a package of massive resistance legislation. one element of which was a people placement plan whereas you could have a board that were placed in some schools. at this time the burden was on the black parents to achieve integration. they would have to bring suit. i have got to say here that it was up to the federal judges to do it. ..

>> >> and in that case will to lead the supreme court said freedom of choice does not work for you have to integrate to make affirmative action. there is a vast difference making segregation in unlawful in telling people to integrate their schools. this led to the bradley case in richmond.

to rule to let the chesterfield school system should merge with the 71 or 72 school year. and it went up to the supreme court and the supreme court one on a tie vote those inept and a former chair the richmond school board nobody knows how he would have voted if you voted to reverse that circuit to reinstate the rulings we would live a different community right now. but it went on 22 years. from freedom of choice to

segregated schools, and a constitutional. and people placement ruled unconstitutional, a freedom of choice, ultimately with the unitary school system. in the think that is it. >> i am proud to say a personal friend of mine and whether or not you agree with this decision for him and his wife to describe what they with through. with the reverberations and

then someone killed his precious dog. and then the principal said he stood for. so talk about the maritime majestic shipping for finlay's at a preferred venue of for the national security cases? >> it is from geographic reasons because number-one they are important cases and

the reason i mentioned the current day with the small submersibles to have all the litigation in to pertain to the rights with the spanish gold in the bottom of the sea has taken place in the district of virginia he had the trial of conviction of a somali pirates but i'd noticed today to be back in the headlines again because

during world war ii and the defense did intelligence community for northern virginia every ended up trying the most sertorius spies as well as the most mature it would dash vittoria's terrorist as ever certainty of you know, became the 20th hijacker. undead was jailed. said he missed the plane. >> sorry to have the reputation. [laughter] we do take pride to be one of the fastest districts in the country. there is one difference the

claims they process case says faster. but every one questions their statistics. is that help or hindrance or a draw to litigates elsewhere? >> certainly all those people what the cases adjudicated probably. including certain consumer patent litigation to stake out the eastern district of virginia. i always get asked about the rocket docket when you hear that they assume it is wonderful but players didn't think it was wonderful when it was imposed on them. it was a joke there was only one reason to play at a

continuance or extension of a bed trial date in the eastern district was a death in the family, your old. [laughter] and that is a when the rocket docket is imported from legal history perspective. when i started to practice law lawyers for controlled the pace of litigation. the judges never injured if they've let it sit for months or years they could put it that was the english common-law practice lawyers controlled the pace. the with the federal judges discontinued that they were waiting -- wittingly changing centuries of

jurisprudence to control the pace and to their credit the district of virginia cave mouth justice delayed is justice denied. there was a great presentation for it scared the lawyers out of their wits along the way but you cannot talk about the eastern district without the rocket docket it civic sometimes they say we would like to have a quick trial in in the olden days they would say 930. [laughter] the book, john peters is the author and we have time for a few questions?

>> very interesting with some great stories. tell us quickly about the impact the sentencing guidelines in the federal system. >> day you have in our? >>. [laughter] it has taken away a lot of discretion of the trial judge's. it does create uniformity but for those who don't know they are about to this stick it till you how to compute the range of sentencing but the practice of sentencing guidelines with the topic:to itself 23% of those heard

were with the sentencing guidelines to overshadow and overtake the entire system. a was united states attorney at the time. >> if you observed many years of a judicial actions does it appear that judges that were very separate what was going space in society does it appear they have had any influence what is going on and culturally? or have they been able to

separate themselves analog? >>. [laughter] we are grateful for that. is a complex question. and arnold via cable of addressing that. there is a tendency for us to think of what we have in our ditches for the most part are pretty good and separating themselves but the one problem is the lot and judicial cases is such a prominent part of our headlines today that people did not consider the edges

to be the ordinary politicians. it seems to be that the good judges for the most part still remain capable to keep themselves separate in the era of culture or society. but it is a wonderful question that deserves serious attention. cpac i will just add it to read the paper you keep up

culturally. but it isn't dominant but whether the issues today are resolved by the judiciary left to the democratic process. i will leave it there. >> i will ask you to adjourn [laughter] [applause] [inaudible conversations]

>> [inaudible conversations]

civic good morning and happy valentine's day. in welcoming you to the eighth savannah of book festival georgia power we're blessed to host said j. celebrated author at trinity united methodist church of native possible by the generosity of the international paper foundation the savannah morning news and magazine. proselyte to sink c-span2 come to the festival. we would extend special

thanks to our members' individual donors to make this saturday free festival even a possible. and we have a box for books buckets at the door as you exit. make sure your phones are off and you ask you not use flash photography. in one of the volunteers will be there with microphones. be sure to note if you, tomorrow christopher rice the time is 3:00. redo the after this presentation carl hoffman will sign it festival purchased copies of his book at telfair square. please join me to thank alan

and susan to sponsor his appearance today. [applause] >> he has shared meals and has been traveling and has a lot of golf mysteries however he does not take these adventures for fun or thrills for it to understand the eccentricities of little though parts of the globe. a contributing editor to "national geographic" traveler mr. hoffman is the fourth time winner as well as north america at travel journalism award with the

warrants from numerous magazines, he has also published two books. diluted to express with dash so did tick express and savage harvest the he investigates the enduring mysteries of the disappearance of michael rockefeller in their rivers that he died at billions of cannibals. please welcome mr. carl hoffman. [applause] >> thanks for coming now today. always wanted to give a sermon in a church. [laughter]

>> when i was said kidd 11 or 12 i lived in the house with a big fur porch that if you open the window to my bedroom you going to the roof of the front porch and for a kid that seemed really daring to go up there on a summer afternoon with your bare feet and your show -- your shirt off. that was pretty wild thing to do. is in my neighborhood he was sitting there on the roof feeling very daring and he said what's up? then the next thing that i knew his head cop dealt the

window he never asked permission engaged started to climb out and then said had you ever jumped off the roof? i was like are you kidding? i almost fell off. [laughter] but a way to get close to the edge. raleigh close so and get on my hands and knees. benghazi says that he starts walking to the edge. and then just walk right off the edge without missing a beat in the all went running over then the next thing you know, his head pops out the window again in this time he did not even paul is and he

runs a hand with the coffee and a did a five times in a row. and ahmad was sitting in the living room. [laughter] she dishonor the neighborhood for a defying the laws of physics just keep coming through the did not go down. my mom came running out and she was horrified. are you jumping off the roof? actually was just him. she got mad and betas promised to get all for not jump to and we did soon after he went home and my friends did but he was younger than i was in i had to jump off the roof. i could not leave it at that.

everybody went home in i was standing on the edge of the roof. i will go into long details this story is a did jump off and i lived to tell the tale. mother did find out but that story is a metaphor it with my professional life when people ask me if i went around the world 50,000 miles in to take up a bus across afghanistan where i went to live with very remote people end former head hunters they always say were too scared?

with user is always what is there to be scared of? but that is a lot. the reality is i am petrified all the time. but i am not scared of bodily injury. that day on the roof was not part worried i would die or break my way to it was not that high. a and obviously he had done it a bunch of times this note till he fax but what i am scared of is the total commitment necessary for doing what i do to get under the skin in for me in order

to do what i have to do in to have to give up everything else with the whole entire center of the universe. you cannot jump off the roof halfway behalf gillette co is rendered completely and that is always frightening to me. the best example is my book but in 1961 michael was the son of nelson he was a governor of your. into your belt that has mitt people -- the house met

people -- that this material people that hat of a very complex people that was then the museum opened in 1957. just like they are brought up in to hear about that any end in the spring of 1961 and liked what he saw in then crossing the mouth of a river with the dutch colleague the bulls got into a trouble and then violated the first role in the swim

to shore with two empty gasoline cans strapped to his waistband disappeared forever. there was a vague search rockefeller and his sister mary flew to new guinea and spent two weeks about 150 miles away there is no place to stay and there was no sign of him. after that they went home after two weeks the dutch and canceled the search key and that was it. not long after the rumors began to surface that michael mated to sure -- made it to shore and was consumed by locals in the

village this was one of many creasy rumors that existed 50 years. when i started to poke around in a haunted me for years, for decades really. is then it was the former dutch colony started to lick the archives period we found hundreds of pages of documents for never seen before the with the incredible story in today's a complicated story that they practiced head hunting it cannibalism with constant

in your village warfare. with a struggle and the battle of wounded to 24 men that set out in 1957. is then to teach them a lesson. the dutch were trying to pacify them. . .

i was talking about and i had the longest i had spent had been four days at a stretch and i had violated a cardinal sin of journalism in that i was parachuted into a place and expected too much from people. i wasn't even asking if winded fire started? i was asking people about something that they understood was transgresssive and had had a huge impact on the village and its history since, and then really didn't understand at all and i didn't understand the culture and i had been there with this entourage. the translator had an assistant, and my boat captain had an

assistant, and i had flown in another translator to help themy translator, and every question i asked. i didn't know if that was the question that they heard -- you wave to people when you're leaving and they wave back and i have this incredible photograph to me waving to guys on the bank and this is what they're doing. [laughter] >> i didn't have much rapport with them and rapport is everything. and so i decided i needed to go back. and then i needed to go back in

a very very different way. and that i needed to go book alone, and i needed to speak the language. i needed to not have to depend on translators. i needed to live there. i needed to stay there longer. and i needed to do it in a completely profoundly different way, and i was afraid to do it. i mean, honestly, i was afraid. because it's a hard place to be. but i found a teacher of -- speak indonesian. it would have been impossible to learn. i found a teacher of san indonesian in any home in washington, dc, and every other day we get together, and seven months after i left -- i was texting the boat guy, and he didn't speak any english, and i'm texting him

and one day i get this text back and it said, mr. carlos speaks indonesian and my indonesian was pretty bad and pretty limited at that time. it was true, i could never communicate with him before. he met me the crazy ship when we arrived, and i'm talking to him and it's one thing to go to a place and leave, and it's completely different to go there again to return to someplace. it makes all the difference in the world. i mean, not that many tourist goes to aga, and the ones who do very few come back. but i came back and everybody -- walking down the streets, people were waving at me and recognized me. my hotel recognized me.

seven months later. and this time i could speak to them and i could understand them and i didn't really have a plan for what i was going to do. i just wanted to good to -- i wanted to live there, i wanted to stay with somebody. i needed to stay with an elder someone who had some power, and who knew the history. and i william said to me the first day, kokai was here, and he was an elder who i had met several times before, and he was this kind of brusk, powerful guy, a hole in his septum and his hair was speaking out and faithers sticking on it, bare feet and he said i'll bring kokai by you hotel. i get to up early the next

morning, it was dawn, walking along. there's no streets. it's sort of these moldy boardwalks because it's a swamp. and i'm walking along and i see this man passes me and does a double-take, and i do a double-tabling and it's kokai, and step months late her recognizes me and said what are you doing here? i said, what are you doing here like i could understand him? he said, i'm here to see my kids he has a bunch of different kids with a bunch of different wives. and i said i want to come to -- can i come live with you? and he goes live with me? i said, yes, he goes, sure why not. anyway long story, i -- will lummum and me and kokai -- he had no money no way to get back to his village.

i had the money. so i said i'd pay for the trip back. so he went back to the village. we climbed out -- i had a satellite phone issue said to willum, i'll call you when i want you to pick me up. of you don't hear from me in a month, come get me. anyway. and was incredibly intimidated and i felt like i cooperate pierce it at all and people were really -- everywhere i've been in the world people are incredibly gracious and friendly, and this was a place where i didn't feel that. and i was trying to investigate their deepest -- these people's deepest, darkest secrets. i was pretty nervous about it all, and not to mention it's just difficult -- i mean to be living in this house with no furniture. nothing. there's no plumbing no electricity, there's no store whatsoever, just mud really. mud and rain and trees and

smoking. you got to smoke a lot. so willum climbed in his boat and he was gone, and i was there all by myself. but it was completely different in every way. all -- because i committed to live there, all the old men in the village came and sat down in the room and patted me on the shoulder. i broke out the tobacco. we're all smoking. and patted me on the shoulder and that's what it was like for a month i didn't -- i just sat there. there's not much to do in the town. and i didn't ask questions, like a reporter. i didn't -- all i did was wake up and smoke a cigarette and drink any coffee with kokai in the morning, and they were building a new men's house, long house, incredible 12 20-foot structures no nails or blueprints. and they -- and building that is

a time of great feasting and celebration, and i just sat there and gradually they said, come on, sit down, in the long house, and they start -- they were drumming and singing and sometimes they would drum and sing for 24 hours a day in this amazing, beautiful sort of trances almost. and i gave myself over to the experience completely. i had no connection to the outside world at all, and it was a tremendously weird beautiful experience and only sort of toward the end after about three weeks, i started asking certain questions, but the questions i was asking by then were very, very different than the questions that i'd asked before. it wasn't what happened to michael rock or did you kill

him? which part did you eat? it was like trying to find a black -- you know, you don't investigate a black hole by looking at the black hole because you can't see anything. you have to look around the black hole. so i started asking questions, who were the men who had been killed by max. who were they? what were their positions in the village? it turned out they were five men's houses and the men's house is a physical thing and also a clan essentially, five clans in the village and the head of those clans, the war leader the spiritual leader, the most important person in the village, and the clan, there were five of them, five jeu is what they're called leaders, and max killed four out of the five. the most important men in the whole village. and then i wanted to know who

the men who were named in the priest's report who had actually killed michael and -- or allegedly killed michael and had taken the most important body parts and those men were related to the men killed by max by blood, and they had taken over their positions in the men's houses and those men cared a sacred obligation, in the way -- this idea of sacredness is not something that is easily understood to us in the -- here in the western world now, but for the -- especially in those days this was something incredibly powerful and they carried this obligation to reciprocate michael's death, and there were other questions and other things like that i asked and that they told me, and stories and songs and it was really ultimately -- even though

there was all this evidence, even before i started that michael had been killed, it was my experience living in the village and staying with them and really getting to know the people and their culture, that convinced me that michael had been killed and that their fathers had -- kokais father was listed as one of the people present at michael's death and many other of the men who i was hanging out with. convinced me without a doubt other. things too. one story in turk i won't tell you because it's in the book and you have to read the book, but it -- those two experiences of going there were 180 degrees different, and once again it re-affirmed to me the importance of -- that even though it's real ly really scary sometimes, you have to dive in really really

deeply and as a writer that's the most important thing of all and that sometimes i have to give up myself in order to really understand the rest of the world. so, thank you very much. [applause] i'm happy to take any questions you have. there's a process. you're supposeed to talk into the mic. sorry. [inaudible question] >> it's a good question. partly yes. but there were other -- actually michael was -- not michael -- the five deaths were actually part of a larger -- about 17 deaths that had taken place over a few years, and he was one of

them yes. unfortunately, in a venue like this it's really -- cosmology is really complicate and i would wish i could explain more here but i don't have the time. yes, the short answer to your question is yes. next one. >> i had a question about -- they understood eventually you were there writing a book. what was their understanding -- i assume they had a story-telling tradition. what was their understanding of what a book was? did they have books there and do you think they understand the physical object? >> the question was what did they understand of my being there. i was writing a book there. do they have books? and do they have a story-telling tradition. on the one hand i'm not sure i can answer your question. they're amazing story-tellers. they live in a world where everything is live because there's no electricity, so if

you want to hear a song, you have to sing a song. if you want to hear music, you have to may music. if you want to hear a story you have to tell a story. so everybody is an amazing story-teller. they're incredibly graphic. they'll talk about a canoe and you can see the canoe, and talk about war and getting head has chopped off. i told them always i was honest. i said i'm a journalist and i'm a writer and i'm writing this book and everything. i don't know how much they really understood of that. there are schools and every village and people are lit tool a certain degree and they're --s' people are completely -- some complete college. but they're funny. they just don't -- never happen been in a place where people don't ask -- say, do you have a family? that's it. they don't -- they didn't really ask me many questions and i

didn't -- the subject -- nobody really asked me very detailed and the subject never came up. it's a good question ultimately what -- i think they understood and knew what i was doing. they're pretty smart. >> i maybe should know the answer to this. i apologize. you said 1961 michael disappeared. when did you go back to investigate? >> i went in 2012. twice in 2012. >> okay. >> the question was, michael disappeared in 1961 and when did i go back. i went back twice in 2012. >> could you describe your first night at kokai's? i'm trying to imagine the feeling when it got dark. >> the question is can i describe my first night at kokai's house, and it gets -- it's on the equator so gets dark every evening around 6:00 6:30.

there's not a long twilight. gets dark pretty quickly. the sun drops and the -- for a little while there are lot of mosquitoes. it's very, very hot. a huge incredible number of bats come out of the eves. they sort pouring out of the house. and then you just sort of sit there in the darkness. there's one like little kerosene lantern or candle sometimes. that all and it's pretty random. even today they don't have quite the same sense of time that we do because they don't need to. sometimes they were awake 24 hours a day drumming and singing and doing what they do, and sometimes at 7:00 they all fall asleep and kokai -- there were 20 of us living there he was the patriarch of 50 and if

you're just sitting around, everybody just falls over and goes to sleep. there's no beds. nobody has a bed or anything. and they just go to sleep, and then at 4:30 in the morning they sit up. the babies start crying. and sometimes they'll be up to 11:00 telling stories. the first night -- honest ily, when i was first there every hour felt like a week. time moved very slowly and, i thought, -- the last american missionary, a priest named vince coal, told me before i went in the village, this is the hardest month of your life and he had been there for 37 years. and a remarkable and admirable man, and at first it was hard ultimately. i felt sad to leave. time did start to pass and i

felt more at home there even though i was never really at home. and that very first night, it was just a very long sort of awkward -- you're sitting there, you don't know what to too. part of the reason when i say that i -- i get scared to go to these places because i don't -- i try not have any needs. i try not to make my needs -- i try not have in. i don't sit there and looking at my watch, when aim going to bed where is my dinner, where is my toilet paper. i just wait. when they go to bed issue go to bed. what they eat i eat. if they're eating worms i'm eating worms. they're really delicious. so that's a long-winded answer to your question. >> i wondered if you could tell us -- you made the leap from --

to your adventure. how did you get there? what made you -- what did you do first? how did you get? >> the question was how did i make the leap from a 13-year-old who was afraid to leap off the roof to doing what i do. i don't know. just sort of a slow process. continuous -- i have a huge curiosity. really. and i think -- and a need to understand things. a huge desire to really try to understand things, and so as a writer and as a reporter, i'm constantly battling with that fear of like you kind of want to go in -- plus it's a money element. the faster you do it, the more -- then you dock another one to make more money. i'm trying to support a family and everything or all these years. so it's constant battle sort of wanting to go in and wanting to rush out and realizing, over

and over again, it's not enough. that you are not going to get what you need unless you go deeper and pushing myself always always always, hitting myself in the head go back go deeper jump off that roof. so it's not an easy thing for me but here we are. >> i loved your book and when i went to see the exhibit, the michael rockefeller wing at the met, had started reading your book. i hadn't finished but started reading enough that it -- and my friend, devoured the book. so it meant so much more to me when i started seeing that -- that room is just staggering. and then i'm reading all the little placards that say -- what? it's interesting. the way museums operate but from

my experience that exhibit and that exhibit would be so much more meaningful because of your work and informed by what you know about them, and i'm just wondering, has there been any possibility of trying to enhance that exhibit in the way it's presented or in terms of the rockefeller family, and what your findings -- >> that was a long question. everybody hear that? i don't want to repeat it. the answer to the question is, no the rockefellers wanted nothing to do with the book. there are a lot of sensitivities there. really the essence of those descriptions that you talk about that are in the met, they -- they're sort of hint that this is ceremonial, that was -- these big 20, 23-foot high totem poles

the essence of the -- the largest, moch spectacular piece of art and they're promises to reciprocate a death, and the polls -- the ceremonies are incomplete until the death has been reciprocated, not literally the blood of the dead is rubbed into the polls and the polls are then put out in the field, to rot and feed the sago and complete this cycle. it's sort of hinted at. it's there but it's not -- it's a little anesthetized. >> a lot. i friend said, look at the red there. >> the red isn't the blood. but the most amazing thing about the exhibit is really understanding -- it is phenomenal to go. anybody who can should go and -- to the michael rockefeller wing

of the met. the most amazing thing is the back story. those poles -- some of them -- the ones that he got from -- were carved by a man named finiptis, and you look at that and it's like okay, carved by john. but he is incredibly important to the story of michael rockefeller. he is the leader of the -- who came there in 1957 and they were at war and he came but they had these complex connections and he convinced a bunch of men to go on this voyage to this sacred pool and about 50 miles south, and those -- that -- it was just a lure because they wanted these men's heads. so he convinced the men to go and then they massacred them all. which led to the max razz raid which led to the killing of

michael. when you look at that you go, whoa and mike what didn't know that when he collected those poles. obviously -- he didn't know the relationship. there's absolutely no -- it's interesting. there's no reference in michael's journals or any letters i've seen dish haven't seen all of them -- that refer to a knowledge of this -- of those events. that were just three years before him. max was in 1958, so knowing all that makes the story on all sides more powerful. >> thank you for your great story. >> thank you. >> wonderful. michael rockefeller was an innocent victim. how did you know that you might not be the next one?

>> everybody can hear them now? they do not practice cannibalism any longer. the dutch were making a concerted effort to stamp it out, hence max's raid in 1961 and there are stories of battles, up until 1980 '79 in some of the remoter parts of a a very remote place. but indonesia took over in 1962 and they were incredibly -- they were worse than the dutch. they went in and burned all the long houses and forbid all ceremony, all feasting and carving for years. actually american missionaries -- the americans pretty much took over from the dutch, and were there for years and years and years, and they slowly brought carving and feasting back. so, it's a pretty remarkable place, and you can feel like you're in a place that's very

different, but i was never afraid i would be a vic. you are afraid a little bit you might cut yourself and get an infection in the tropical mud that might end your leg or something, but not -- not worried about getting consumed. >> thank you very much. >> thank you. >> the rockefellers have had no reaction to the book? >> no. i tried to communicate -- the rockefellers, the big family. the important one is mary, michael's twin sister, who is alive and well, and was deeply affected by his death. i tried to communicate with her prior, as i was working on the book and never hear from her. we dead have some communication just before the book came out but ultimately she never really responded, and cbs sunday morning did a segment in april right after the book came out,

and she tide appear on air for that. she didn't really say much. she says we prefer to celebrate how he lived, not how he died. and that pretty much it. i think they -- one of the mysteries is what they know among themselves and privately. it's an open question. but publicly they prefer that he drowned. >> aside from the michael rock fell are story, and -- it's been a while. i want to re-read the lunatic express. other than what is outlined in this story what is the most intriguing and memorable place you have been to and why is that? >> i don't know if you heard the question. the most intriguing and memorable place i've been to and why. that's a tricky question.

i'd say asma, and it trumps everywhere. i went all kind of crazy places for lunatic. i took a bus across northern afghanistan. i was doing ferries through bangladesh and went to this island in snowshower ya i never heard of that nobody knew where it was i and i went -- i didn't talk any food, didn't take any water with me. i didn't know where the ferry was going or coming back. i had no idea of those things but they're all just trumped by asma and my experience there. and then one of the problems -- this is me own book but one of the problem with lunatic i'm traveling at fairly high rate of speed and i didn't settle down as much and go as deeply as i would have liked to which i did in asma. >> thank you. >> thank you.

>> how did indonesians feel about their poles in new york city? >> that's a good question. no one ever said. i found -- i don't know about that, the indonesians. that's a good question. they've never -- i have to be careful what i say, how i say i it. indonesians are much, much more protective of javen culture than they are some of the other indigenous people of indonesia of the archipelago and the asma themes -- there's a museum of culture and progress that has lot of really great stuff in it, and one day i was in the museum, and there's -- the man who was sweeping the floor, i started talking to him he was kind of

the janitor there, and he said my grandfather built the -- carved the canoe in the met. and we cheated about that. he had -- he didn't say -- i can't remember what exactly he said. don't think he knew it was in the met. somehow it came came out that was the canoe. one of the things i say in the book is that michael and others before him and after wasn't just him -- he is buying this stuff for a pittance fish hooks and nylon fishing -- filament fishing line and steal axe heads and things, and his total expenses amounted to $7,000. that included not just the -- that included his food and his boat and everything else when he was there, and all the stuff was

shipped home very quickly. he wasn't just putting in the boat. it was too much. most of what he collected survived and was shipped home fast. there was an exhibition in the museum of primitive art in september, i think, of 1962 and the first insurance appraisal was in august of 1962, and that was for $286000. so the value -- i don't know where they come up with that number but -- so you can question. if you had again and bought mineral rights for fish hooks, people would be all over you, but not with art. >> you haven't mentioned when -- what were the women like? what was their role.

>> the question was women. there's a reason for that, didn't mention women. it's a very, very traditional patriarchal society. more so done the stream end of things. it's so interesting and so complicated. there's this whole sort of appropriation of female fertility by male. male semien exchanged. there's all this stuff, even as they have multiple wives. but women are very -- it's hard to talk to me. i really had no interaction with them whatsoever except to bring me food and kokai got mad at me when i washed my clogs in the riff. his like my wife will do that. i get -- the women do all the work. men just sit around and smoke and -- then they do ceremonial

stuff. they'll drum and sing but the women get up at dawn and they get the fires going and feed everybody and then they all get a canoe and paddle three miles down to the ocean where they walk through neck-deep ocean water dragging nets all day catching shrimp these tiny little shrimp and little fish, and then they go into the woods into the jungle and chop wood and get these huge bundles of a wood which they put on their backs and paddle three miles back upriver and then they have the kids too a lot of types. then they have to prepare food and it's a hard life to be a woman. i always say that it just -- just because i don't know anything and because not much has been written about the women, doesn't obviously mean -- what appears to be a culture in which women have very little importance or power, isn't necessarily true. it's just that we -- we men are

privy to men's worlds and we're the writers. so, i always say that if a woman -- if you know of any ph.d candidates or women who were looking for a thesis, a woman could go live in asma and probably come up with really remarkable stuff. the role of the women and how really what their role was and obviously it's much greater than we -- than my interactions with them would indicate but it's cut off to me honestly. thank you. i that that was it. thank you-everybody. i appreciate it. [applause] >> if you like to meet mr. hoffman in person and to get your book signed, please allow him to quickly exit the

sanctuary so he can head straight to the author signing tent. our next author will be lynn sheer, and she'll be joining us at 10:20. [inaudible conversations] ...

[inaudible conversations] >> this is booktv live coverage of the eighth annual set and a book festival in savannah, georgia. you have been listening to carl hoffman talking about his new book "savage harvest," a tale of cannibals colonialism and michael rockefeller's tragic quest for primitive art. in a few minutes our next author will be talking about the elephant company. >> ladies and gentlemen. very pleased to be here. she had