CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
Menu
Research dossier · General Reference

Tucson Five

alleged participants in the Weather Underground by the FBI

Cross-disciplinary reference desk with index cards, atlas, dictionary and catalogue
General referenceInterpretive dossier study · Crown Archives visual atlas
Record originEnglish Wikipedia
Text licenseCC BY-SA 4.0
Source revisionJan 19, 2024
Entity authorityQ25313647
Source-derived summary

The Tucson Five was a group of house-mates from Los Angeles who were, despite a lack of evidence, alleged by the FBI to have been participants in the Weather Underground. Their case is notable because of the way in which grand jury proceedings and contempt of court charges were used against the group by Guy L. Goodwin of the United States Department of Justice, ultimately leading to a successful appeal to the Supreme Court by one member of the group. The case is additionally notable because the FBI breached the group's attorney–client privilege via wiretaps and black bag jobs.

Editorial summary

The public source identifies “Tucson Five” as alleged participants in the Weather Underground by the FBI. This brief keeps that definition visible, then builds a research path around Tucson, Five and alleged.

Editorial reviewA dependable orientation record for establishing vocabulary, names and a first evidence trail. The current 99-word lead offers orientation but no explicit four-digit date, so chronology should not be assumed. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. Its value is orientation rather than verdict, with Tucson, Five and alleged providing the first useful test.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

A short description can identify a subject without explaining its stakes. For “Tucson Five”, the useful work is to connect “alleged participants in the Weather Underground by the FBI” to the records capable of establishing context and consequence.

Evidence profile

Named sources, stable identifiers and responsible institutions provide the strongest route from overview to verifiable evidence. The source revision retrieved here is dated Jan 19, 2024. The linked authority identifier is Q25313647. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference.

Critical limits

A concise general-reference account can conceal disagreements about scope, terminology or the weight assigned to individual sources. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.

How to read it

Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.

Best used for
  • Subject orientation
  • Search vocabulary
  • Locating named sources
Verify next

The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.

Three-step research path

  1. Establish the record: confirm the title “Tucson Five”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow Tucson Five primary sources, Tucson Five archive and Tucson research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
  3. Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.

Questions for further research

  1. Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Tucson Five”?
  2. Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
  3. Which institution is responsible for the underlying evidence?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from Tucson Five” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.