What’s on the Shelf?
‘Whirlwind’: Invoice Kurtis memoir tells how regulation college skilled him for overlaying trials
October 2, 2025, 9:08 am CDT
Invoice Kurtis, the voice and face behind “Chilly Case Information,” “American Greed” and “Investigative Experiences,” was in regulation college when he determined TV journalism was the profession for him. (Photograph by Invoice Ward)
On June 8, 1966, when Invoice Kurtis ducked out of his tax overview class within the basement classroom at Washburn College Faculty of Legislation in Topeka, Kansas, to fill in for a colleague on the native tv station, he had no thought a twister would blow away his plans to hitch a Wichita regulation agency.
Then a part-timer at WIBW-TV to help his spouse and little one since he attended regulation college, Kurtis unexpectedly discovered himself to be the voice of purpose when the nation’s most damaging twister on the time destroyed a part of the town, and he stayed on air for twenty-four hours straight.
In Whirlwind: My Life Reporting the Information, Kurtis’ new memoir, the acclaimed newsman tells how being an legal professional constructed the muse for his six-decade profession in journalism, through which he coated main trials and investigated points similar to Agent Orange.
The ABA Journal talked with the retired CBS Information anchor and govt producer of many legal-oriented tv documentary collection—together with Chilly Case Information, American Greed and Investigative Experiences—at his house outdoors Chicago.
It was an enormous accountability for a 25-year-old regulation scholar to ship lifesaving data to your own home state as a twister hit.
To today, I get nervous, nearly tear up. What warning to get folks right into a shelter to save lots of their lives? I considered cussing and crying. However I had a thought, and so [I said] “For God’s sake, take cowl,” which is completely different than the common, “We’d such as you to go to the shelters.” Afterward, folks calling in had dramatic accounts. “You saved my life. I used to be watching tv and watching Invoice Kurtis, and with out that, why, we’d not be right here.” Properly, you discuss making an impression. So I mentioned, possibly God was displaying me a very massive signal that I couldn’t ignore. So I’m going to remain in tv.
Shortly afterward, Chicago’s CBS affiliate, WBBM-TV, provided you a common task job, and also you give up the regulation agency gig earlier than even beginning. In that period earlier than authorized correspondents, your editors noticed your authorized coaching—pondering in your toes, practising in moot courtroom and cautious writing—as a degree of distinction. The truth is, inside weeks of beginning, you have been assigned the case of Richard Speck, who killed eight scholar nurses.
My first story! I’m 26! My first trial had two landmark circumstances delivered [just before it started]. The Miranda case, ever heard of that? And the Sheppard case, which was honest trial, free press. Fortuitously, I had debated that in moot courtroom. My first realization that I had a bonus was the change of venue. They actually couldn’t have held the trial in Chicago. Because the witnesses got here aboard, I noticed, my God, that is like having a scuba masks on and going underwater as a result of I do know what’s taking place. I can see, and nobody actually else can.
In 1968, you witnessed the Democratic Nationwide Conference in Chicago, with all of the protesters and the beatings by the police.
You assume we have now a loopy time? Let me inform you one thing about what I’ve lived by means of. I might go proper to 1968.
Then, you coated the Chicago Seven trial, which began because the Chicago Eight. You write that when defendant Bobby Seale was disrupting the proceedings, the authorized coaching kicked into gear.
I knew there’s bought to be an choice. What’s the choice? I stroll over to Northwestern College to the regulation library, begin going by means of some circumstances. Then I went again and tried to get [chief prosecutor and U.S. Attorney Tom] Foran apart. There was a gag order. I might do issues like say, “Properly, don’t say something, however you nod your head if I’m proper.” And I mentioned, “It appears to be that the seventh Circuit not way back had written up an analogous disruptive defendant downside and sure and gagged the defendant to make him sit and witness his personal trial. “That’s your solely choice.” And Foran didn’t even nod his head as a result of he knew it was the one choice that [Judge Julius] Hoffman had.
And, certainly, Seale was sure and gagged till he handed out.
He goes like this, slumps ahead within the chair. [Defense attorney William] Kunstler screams and mentioned, “My God, we’re suffocating him.” The jury is there, and one lady begins crying. The response is only one of incredulity. That is in our federal courtroom. That is the US of America. So he’s taken out. And the following day they arrive in, and Hoffman does what he ought to have achieved at first—sever [Seale] from the case.
How did you translate all these happenings in that trial in a 90-second report?
How? You simply do your job.
When CBS moved you to Los Angeles to report for the community, you write that you just drew the quick straw to cowl the homicide trial of cult chief Charles Manson. After seeing Manson and his followers with X’s lower into their foreheads, you write you sensed what would possibly occur subsequent.
What if Charlie tries to disrupt the trial just like the conspiracy boys did in Chicago? Charlie realized that he was dropping. So sooner or later the jury was in, Charlie jumps up on the desk, lunges on the decide. The bailiffs all run, seize him, put him again within the chair, and out of the blue we have now a difficulty of disruptive defendants. I’m proper there! Having been skilled nearly with my different trial work, nearly for this very second. The Supreme Courtroom had already dominated within the conspiracy case that you would be able to’t disrupt your personal trial. We’re going to place you within the jury room, we’re going to pipe the sound in, and you’ll trip out the trial there. That’s what they did.
Angela Davis was on trial for her alleged involvement within the armed seizure of a Marin County courthouse in California that ended with 4 folks lifeless, together with the decide. You write that there was proof that the leftist political activist and professor had purchased three weapons used within the crime.
I mentioned, this can be a slam dunk. How on this planet can she get off?
However the trial was moved to Santa Clara County, close to Stanford College, and protection legal professional Leo Branton Jr. had a few new tips up his sleeve, you write.
Everyone on campus, it appeared, wished to assist. So he provides them the voir dire, they usually undergo identify by identify to offer background on every. They undergo a little bit of a mock trial too, the place you will have a jury and also you current your arguments to it. It was the primary time that had been tried. Then, Angela needs to be her personal counsel. Right here’s the orator of the civil rights motion. She may activate a crowd. Opening statements: Up stands Angela Davis with a rip-roaring civil rights: “I’m harmless. I’m a Black lady in a white society, and I’m being tried in a political trial by the state of California, and I’m harmless.” Angela doesn’t should get on the witness stand, so the prosecution doesn’t have a possibility to even ask her, “Why did you purchase the weapons?” She is discovered not responsible, and growth, it was a giant shock.
Your reporting reveals how every of those trials was strongly influenced by its decide.
The decide is the king. He’s the director. And something that occurs in his courtroom, he’s going to manage—going to maintain folks quiet, going to ship them out of the courtroom, going to cost them with contempt of courtroom. And also you’d higher obey the decide. However all of them have completely different personalities.
The throughline in your profession—from regulation college to journalism to now working with comedians on NPR’s Wait, Wait … Don’t Inform Me—is the seek for the reality and clear storytelling.
That’s what I wished to do. I wished to have the ability to inform the authorized factors of a trial in layman’s phrases: What does it imply? The regulation may use much more of that.
Previously, I’ve heard you talk about how the place regulation and journalism intersect is on the First Modification.
The First Modification is the muse of your complete Structure. We now have our rights, and our rights are to precise ourselves. Political discourse, initially, is one thing that needs to be sacred. It comes and goes, doesn’t it, with the pressures from left and proper.
Editor’s Word: This dialog was edited for size and readability.
Write a letter to the editor, share a narrative tip or replace, or report an error.
