halt the political investigations of the cincinnati radiation experiments if the contract between the uc researchers and the department of defense was terminated. renewed press coverage and congressional hearing (1993-1994) although initially fading from public eye after the termination of the dod contract and the discontinuation of the kennedy investigation, the cincinnati radiation experiments resurfaced in november 1993 as a result of eileen welsome's investigative journalism in the albuquerque tribune. while primarily concerned with the cold war tests at los alamos, welsome's articles prompted the department of energy to renew investigations of cold war human experimentation, and in january 1994, cincinnati's wkrc channel 12 news contacted martha stephens, the original author of the jfa report. wkrc then aired a program featuring a debate between stephens, who attacked the experiments, and congressman david s. mann, who defended the experiments and the cincinnati general hospital. following this televised program was a tide of local press coverage which led to the cincinnati radiation experiment's story being covered in the new york times. according to martha stephens, the widespread publicity forced david mann to reverse his political position on the experiments to appeal to his constituents in the upcoming 1994 congressional democratic primary election, and david mann soon called for a congressional hearing on the experiments. occurring on april 11, 1994 in cincinnati, the hearing before the subcommittee on administrative law and government relations of the committee on the judiciary provided information on the experiments to president bill clinton's advisory committee on human radiation experiments, and featured testimonies of the relatives of the patients as well as dr. saenger's only public testimony on the experiments. a primary concern of the hearing was to evaluate whether or not the families of the patients should be monetarily compensated. trials (1994-1999) the renewed publicity also prompted martha stephens and laura schneider, a graduate student at the university of cincinnati, to investigate the identities of the patients and their family members. bob newman, a human rights attorney, agreed to represent the identified families in a class action lawsuit filed on february 17, 1994 against the individual researchers, the university of cincinnati, and the city of cincinnati. in the lawsuit, the families alleged that the experiments violated the patients’ rights to due process of law, equal protection under the law, privacy, and access to the courts. although the individual researchers sought immunity as “publicly employed physicians,” district court judge sandra beckwith dismissed the defendants’ claims, citing the nuremberg code's ethical guidelines for human experimentation established in the nuremberg nazi doctor trials following world war ii. after numerous hearings in in re cincinnati radiation litigation, on may 4, 1999, judge beckwith settled the case for over $4 million, paid by the university, the city, and the individual researchers. in addition to the settlement, the trial demanded the creation of a memorial plaque for the patients of the cincinnati radiation experiments. in october 1999, the plaque with the words “in memoriam: radiation effects study 1960-1972” was erected near the building of the cincinnati general hospital where the experiments were performed. however, in june 2001, the building housing the general hospital was demolished to construct a parking garage, and the plaque was moved to a courtyard near the current university hospital's outpatient treatment clinic.