At 9:55 a.m. on August 17, 1912, twelve jurors in Los Angeles delivered a verdict that sent shockwaves through America’s legal establishment: Clarence Darrow, the nation’s most celebrated labor attorney, was innocent of bribing jurors in the explosive McNamara murder case. The jury needed just 37 minutes to clear Darrow’s name, ending a two-month ordeal that had threatened to destroy the career of the man known as the “Attorney for the Damned.”

Background

The case stemmed from Darrow’s defense of the McNamara brothers, James and John McNamara, who were accused of bombing the Los Angeles Times building in October 1910. The explosion killed 21 people and injured many more, making it one of the deadliest acts of domestic terrorism in American history. The bombing was part of a bitter labor dispute between organized labor and the militantly anti-union newspaper owned by Harrison Gray Otis.

Darrow, already famous for defending labor leaders and unpopular causes, took on the McNamara case despite its seemingly impossible odds. The evidence against the brothers was substantial, and public opinion in Los Angeles ran heavily against organized labor. When the McNamara brothers ultimately pleaded guilty in December 1911, it stunned the labor movement and led to accusations that Darrow had orchestrated the plea bargain through corrupt means.

The Event

The bribery charges against Darrow centered on allegations that he had attempted to corrupt potential jurors in the McNamara case. Prosecutors claimed that Darrow’s associates had offered money to influence jury selection and deliberations. The trial began in May 1912 before Judge Hutton of the superior court, with the prosecution arguing that Darrow had crossed ethical lines in his zealous defense of the McNamara brothers.

For two months, the courtroom in Los Angeles became the stage for a drama that captured national attention. The prosecution presented evidence of alleged payments and corrupt communications, while Darrow’s defense team argued that the charges were politically motivated attacks on a lawyer who had made powerful enemies by defending unpopular clients. The case attracted widespread media coverage, with newspapers across the country following every development.

When the jury retired at 9:18 a.m. on August 17, few expected such a swift resolution. The rapid verdict suggested that jurors found the prosecution’s case unconvincing. As one newspaper reported, “Clarence S. Darrow is innocent of the charge of bribing jurors in the McNamara murder case” was the clear message delivered by the twelve citizens who had heard all the evidence.

Significance

The acquittal represented more than just a personal vindication for Darrow—it was seen as a victory for the principle that attorneys should be free to zealously defend their clients without fear of criminal prosecution for their advocacy. The case highlighted the tensions between legal ethics and aggressive defense tactics, questions that would continue to challenge the legal profession for decades to come.

The verdict also had broader implications for the labor movement, which had been demoralized by the McNamara brothers’ guilty pleas and the subsequent attacks on their attorney. Darrow’s acquittal helped restore some credibility to organized labor’s legal strategies, though the damage from the Los Angeles Times bombing would take years to overcome.

Legacy

Darrow would go on to achieve even greater fame in subsequent cases, including his defense of Leopold and Loeb in 1924 and his confrontation with William Jennings Bryan in the Scopes “Monkey Trial” of 1925. The 1912 acquittal proved to be a turning point that allowed Darrow to continue his career as America’s most prominent defense attorney for controversial causes.

The case also established important precedents about the limits of prosecutorial power over defense attorneys. It reinforced the principle that lawyers must be free to advocate vigorously for their clients within the bounds of the law, even in highly charged political cases that generate public hostility.

Sources

• The Milwaukee Leader, August 18, 1912 — Library of Congress