{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03425196850393701, 'fraction_numerical': 0.006299212598425197, 'mean_word_length': 4.992924528301887, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
‘Until I talked with you’: Silence, Storytelling, and Black Sexual Intimacies in the Johns Committee Records, 1960–5

As W. J. N. walked into the Superintendent of Public Instruction’s office on a fall day in 1960, the black music instructor at Gibbs Junior College was probably nervous.1 His subsequent questioning by St Petersburg, Florida police officer Don McQuaig and special investigator Remus J. Strickland (both white) is preserved in the records of the Florida Legislative Investigation Committee. Created by the Florida State Legislature in 1956, this surveillance entity was charged with investigating ‘organizations, persons or groups whose activities would constitute violation of Florida laws, violence, or be inimical to well-being and orderly pursuit of business and personal activities of a majority of citizens’.2 For state legislators, the modern civil rights movement fell squarely within this category of subversive groups. Known as the Johns Committee after state senator and committee chairman Charley Johns, this entity formed the vanguard of Southern white resistance to civil rights activism and federal mandates to desegregate public educational institutions. That fall day, however, investigators inquired not about W. J. N.’s political affiliations but another perceived menace to the Sunshine State: homosexual educators.3 The two men pelted the instructor with questions: ‘Have you ever participated in any homosexual activity?’ ‘Have you within the past two years . . . had any homosexual experiences in the state of Florida?’ ‘Since having come to St Petersburg, have you had any homosexual experiences . . . ?’ W. J. N. resisted this barrage of questions in various ways: repeating queries, requesting clarification of inquiries and terms, issuing denials. Attempting to force a confession, Strickland shifted tactics, asking ‘are you willing to submit yourself to a polygraph test [using] the questions that have been propounded to you here? On the record?’. Upon W. J. N.’s agreement, there is a clear omission or void in the transcript. This moment beyond the archival record shifted the tenor and tone of the remaining interrogation. W. J. N.’s transcribed voice reemerges after this break, admitting to two sexual encounters with men in New York City. What prompted this admission? Perhaps the interrogation process wore him down. Perhaps he assumed the police had some kind of evidence that might result in his termination or prosecution. Perhaps the revocation of his teaching licence was preferable