# Jena 6



## MJS (Sep 21, 2007)

Thoughts on this.
http://www.courant.com/news/nationworld/nation/wire/chi-jena-witt_websep21,0,888104.story


----------



## Big Don (Sep 21, 2007)

> six black high school students who were initially charged with attempted murder for beating a white student last December, even though the student was treated and released at a local hospital.


 Even though? That seems a little biased right there, is it not possible to try to kill someone and just be incompetent? Democrats sure seem perpetually ready to tell all and sundry that blacks, and other minorities, can't help but be victims.
Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton and Martin Luther King III should have spent more time on applying the ideal expressed in Martin Luther King Jr's "I have a dream" speech and start judging people by not by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.  Neither Sharpton nor Jackson should be held up as some kind of  hero as BOTH are shameless race baiting shysters. Everytime  Al Sharpton speaks on anything Tuwana Brawley ought to be mentioned, likewise,Jesse Jackson ought to have his "Hymie town" and other idiotic racist comments thrown into his teeth at every turn. 
These are but a small part of my thoughts.


----------



## Kreth (Sep 21, 2007)

I read about this when the story first came out. Funny how most media outlets omit the fact that the first kid sentenced has an arrest record dating back to when he was 12.


----------



## Lynne (Sep 21, 2007)

Well, that's a hot one.  I don't live in Louisiana but I don't doubt racism.  I would like to see the facts and histories though.  One kid had an early arrest record.  Once again, it is Louisiana, the deep south and racism is alive and well.  But is this racism, singling out certain individuals?  Change comes slow in the south.

And just to be clear, racism exists heartily regardless of race.  I grew up in the south, so I know.


----------



## Mark L (Sep 21, 2007)

The local news last night (NBC TV in Boston) cast the rally in Jena as the new face of the civil rights movement in the 21st century, what a load of crap.  They omitted the fact that the salient issue is six guys beating the crap out of one guy, I don't see the civil rights implication at all.  They made a passing reference to the fact that there was a (white) victim, but didn't point out that the (black) attackers beat the guy unconcious, then continued to stomp him.  I recognize that this attack was race related based on the reported tensions in Jena over the past few months, and further condemn the actions of those white guys that hung a noose from a tree.  Whoever did that should be punished, though I don't know that their action was criminal, while the assaulters' clearly was.  The reality is that the assault was black on white, so I don't understand why Sharpton, Jackson, et al are playing the race card in the wrong direction.  Probably because they won't let the facts get in the way of their own divisive agenda and self-promoting habits.


----------



## Lynne (Sep 21, 2007)

Mark L said:


> The local news last night (NBC TV in Boston) cast the rally in Jena as the new face of the civil rights movement in the 21st century, what a load of crap. They omitted the fact that the salient issue is six guys beating the crap out of one guy, I don't see the civil rights implication at all. They made a passing reference to the fact that there was a (white) victim, but didn't point out that the (black) attackers beat the guy unconcious, then continued to stomp him. I recognize that this attack was race related based on the reported tensions in Jena over the past few months, and further condemn the actions of those white guys that hung a noose from a tree. Whoever did that should be punished, though I don't know that their action was criminal, while the assaulters' clearly was. The reality is that the assault was black on white, so I don't understand why Sharpton, Jackson, et al are playing the race card in the wrong direction. Probably because they won't let the facts get in the way of their own divisive agenda and self-promoting habits.


 
They are definitely stirring the pot in the wrong direction.


----------



## Kreth (Sep 21, 2007)

I'm not a big fan of hate crime legislation. Why is it more of a crime to assault someone because of race or sexual orientation? Violence is violence.
Gun crime legislation is similar. Why is is more of a crime to shoot a cop than say, a single mother? It's wrong either way.


----------



## Big Don (Sep 21, 2007)

Action 1
Guy walks up to other guy, proceeds to beat the hell out of him, never says a word. Crimes: State level, Agravated assault, assault and battery, etc
Action 2
Guy walks up to other guy, proceeds to beat the hell out of him, says mean and nasty things while doing so. Crimes: Federal Hate Crime + all the state charges
how is calling someone names, or saying mean things such a worse crime?
Have we really come to the point that hurting someone's feelings is a federal offense?


----------



## michaeledward (Sep 21, 2007)

These discussions seem to always ignore the nooses hanging from the tree ... It's not as if the South has a history of lynching black youths. 

On an emotional level, when I see a noose, I think of Saddam Hussien, or the Wild West. On an intellectual level, I can understand that a noose - or three of them hanging from a tree in the school yard - has a very different connotation for young black men.


----------



## CoryKS (Sep 21, 2007)

Nothing to say about this that hasn't been said before.  I think that all players in this acted exactly as one would expect.  I've read statements on both sides that gave this kind of a Rashomon-y feel.  It's a sad thing for all the kids.

Couple of thoughts:

I can see Sharpton being all over this, but Jesse?  There's no corporation to shake down here.  

The decision to cut down the "white tree" was stupid.  

Did you see the pictures of the kid who got beaten?  Good grief, how many years has he been a freshman?  Freshman are supposed to be like 14, not 28.


----------



## MJS (Sep 21, 2007)

Well, I'll admit, that this story is fairly new to me.  The first time I heard about it was recently in the paper and on the news.  Like others have said, I'm sure racism is on a high level there.  It does seem to me though, that this rally is more in favor of the support for the 6, with little regard for the person that was beaten.  Was that student even one of the 3 that hung the noose?  People seem to be forgetting that these 6 youths came very close to killing someone.  Aside from pride, who was physically hurt from what the other 3 did?

By no means, am I condoning what happened, but IMO, it seems that things are being a little distorted.


----------



## Mark L (Sep 21, 2007)

michaeledward said:


> These discussions seem to always ignore the nooses hanging from the tree ... It's not as if the South has a history of lynching black youths.
> 
> On an emotional level, when I see a noose, I think of Saddam Hussien, or the Wild West. On an intellectual level, I can understand that a noose - or three of them hanging from a tree in the school yard - has a very different connotation for young black men.


I didn't ignore it, I condemn it.  It was an incredibly ignorant and inflammatory act, but not a crime.  If those that did it can be identified, I'd expose them before their peers and expel them from the school.


----------



## michaeledward (Sep 21, 2007)

MJS said:


> Aside from pride, who was physically hurt from what the other 3 did?


 
Terrorism. 

There are certain actions that people can take that are designed to incite fear. When a suicide bomber detonates a bomb in a market place, the resulting casualties pale when compared to the fear they inspire in the population as a whole. All markets become unsafe for normal commerce. 

To suggest that nooses hanging over the head of a black youth in the South is only injurious to the Southern Black communities 'Pride', seems to willfully ignore 400 years of Southern history; much of it very dark indeed.

I believe that hanging nooses from the tree branch was an act of terror. Or was it really just like yelling "your mother wears army boots"? 

If the act of hanging nooses in the tree was terrorism, what would be the appropriate response?


----------



## michaeledward (Sep 21, 2007)

Mark L said:


> I didn't ignore it, I condemn it. It was an incredibly ignorant and inflammatory act, but not a crime. If those that did it can be identified, I'd expose them before their peers and expel them from the school.


 

I guess,  Mark L, the question is "to what extent is the act of hanging nooses in the tree condemned?"

Are we certain it is not a crime? 

If I were to take a loaded firearm and point it, in a threatening manner, at another person, is that a crime? 

If I were to threaten the life of a fellow citizen with a firearm, what would be the appropriate response of the law enforcement officials? Did those law enforcement officials take the same actions with the threatening exhibited in hanging of the noose?


----------



## Mark L (Sep 21, 2007)

michaeledward said:


> I guess,  Mark L, the question is "to what extent is the act of hanging nooses in the tree condemned?"
> 
> Are we certain it is not a crime?
> 
> ...


Michael,
No, I am not certain it is not a crime.  Yes, pointing a loaded firearm is a crime. The level of condemnation for the act, in this case, is a matter for the District Attorney for Jena, LA.  If it was solely up to me, they'd go away for a similar amount of time as accorded those who stalk, intimidate witnesses, threaten, etc.

One of your prior posts attempted to equate the display of nooses with an act of terrorism.  I'm inclined to agree with you.  My opinion is that the laws of the jurisdiction should be enforced, and if those laws are deemed inadequate the citizenry should demand of its' legislature a correction.  I think the Jena 6 took the law, or lack thereof, into their own hands.  That's wrong no matter what color you are.


----------



## crushing (Sep 21, 2007)

Pointing a loaded firearm at a person and threatening them would be equal to physically having someone's neck in a noose.  

The noose is a very powerful and disturbing symbol, but where is the noose argument is going in relation to beating unconscious a student a year later.  Was the beaten student one of those that hung a noose?  Can it really be considered a mitigating factor for the near beating to death of a fellow person so many months later?


----------



## michaeledward (Sep 21, 2007)

Mark L said:


> Michael,
> No, I am not certain it is not a crime. Yes, pointing a loaded firearm is a crime. The level of condemnation for the act, in this case, is a matter for the District Attorney for Jena, LA. If it was solely up to me, they'd go away for a similar amount of time as accorded those who stalk, intimidate witnesses, threaten, etc.
> 
> One of your prior posts attempted to equate the display of nooses with an act of terrorism. I'm inclined to agree with you. My opinion is that the laws of the jurisdiction should be enforced, and if those laws are deemed inadequate the citizenry should demand of its' legislature a correction. I think the Jena 6 took the law, or lack thereof, into their own hands. That's wrong no matter what color you are.


 
Locally, Jay Severin was making all sorts of noise about the local legislation yesterday. His unspoken assumption is that the written and passed legislation was being equally applied to all citizens. 

The idea that the young men in question "took the law into their own hands" begs the question, did the local law enforcement officials act appropriately at the initial incident? 

Did law enforcement / school administration view the placing of lynch nooses in a schoolyard tree as seriously as pointing a loaded firearm in a threating manner? Or was it viewed as a harmless prank, wherein only the 'pride' of the young black man was injured?

As I understand it, little or no action was taken in regard to the initial offense; the hanging of the nooses. If I recall, there were stories about the racial tensions in Jena being put aside during football season. I imagine that those stories originated in the caucasion communitiy. 

If an act of terrorism against a community took place .... and if the local law enforcement and civic leaders took little or no action .... does 'taking the law into their own hands' assume a different tenor?


----------



## Kreth (Sep 21, 2007)

The school's response was pathetic, I'll give you that, but where does this slippery slope lead? If a Christian calls someone a witch or heretic, is that hate speech?


----------



## michaeledward (Sep 21, 2007)

crushing said:


> Pointing a loaded firearm at a person and threatening them would be equal to physically having someone's neck in a noose.
> 
> The noose is a very powerful and disturbing symbol, but where is the noose argument is going in relation to beating unconscious a student a year later. Was the beaten student one of those that hung a noose? Can it really be considered a mitigating factor for the near beating to death of a fellow person so many months later?


 
Why do you believe the noose would have to be around the black man's neck to equate with pointing a weapon at a person? 

For the record, Justin Barker, the young white man attacked by the Jena 6, was not one of the persons who hung a noose over the "White Tree" ~ the informal nickname of the tree. The tree has since been cut down. 

The repeated descriptions of being "near beating to death" is completely not true. From the court record:



> Justin Barker was taken by ambulance to LaSalle General Hospital&#8217;s emergency room, arriving at 12:25 p.m., according to court documents. A report from the ambulance company stated Barker &#8220;denies any pain other than his eye.&#8221;
> Once in the emergency room, Barker told medical personnel that he had been &#8220;jumped by 15 guys&#8221; and was unsure of what he had been hit with, according to the emergency physician&#8217;s record in the court file. The record noted an injury to Barker&#8217;s right eye requiring follow-up medical attention and injuries to his face, ears and hand.
> A Computed Tomography scan of Barker&#8217;s brain showed no abnormalities, but there were reports of him losing consciousness during the attack, according to hospital records.
> Barker was discharged about 2½ hours after being admitted to the ER. Later that night, he attended a ring ceremony at the school, where he was presented his class ring by his parents, something Kelli Barker said her son really wanted to be a part of, even though he was still in pain.
> ...



​I don't think a two and a half hour emergency room visit qualifies as near beaten to death. 

And, apparently, a group of white students had, beaten a young black man in the town of 'Fair Barn', shortly preceeding the Jena attack. Mr. Barker was attacked immediately after taunting the young black men about a prior '*** whippin'. It is unclear if this '*** whippin' referrred to the Fair Barn incident, or not.


----------



## MJS (Sep 21, 2007)

michaeledward said:


> Terrorism.
> 
> There are certain actions that people can take that are designed to incite fear. When a suicide bomber detonates a bomb in a market place, the resulting casualties pale when compared to the fear they inspire in the population as a whole. All markets become unsafe for normal commerce.
> 
> ...


 
Just for clarification here, as I said in my closing post, I do not condone what happened.  My point was this...nobody got a busted lip, black eye or put in the hospital from the noose hanging.  The retaliation for this was putting someone in the hospital.  Were people angry?  I'm sure they were pissed!  Then again, beating the **** out of someone really isn't solving a problem here now is it?

I have a number of friends who are African American and Hispanic, so being a racist is something I am not.  

I also believe that there is an issue, that being race, that needs to be addressed in that area, and hopefully, it'll be resolved in a peaceful manner.


----------



## crushing (Sep 21, 2007)

I understood from the reports he was beat unconscious.  For expecially a defensless person in that position with several people allegedly beating on him, death may have been just one more strike away.  I guess we can't really know how close to death he really was.  We can make guesses based on the reports of the emergency room visit.  I can definitely see your point though.  If some goes to shoot you in the head, and miss by only centimeters, were you really any closer to death?

Obviously, a lot of things are unclear.


----------



## CoryKS (Sep 21, 2007)

First time could be stupidity, but the second time is definitely malice:

Two arrested in noose incident near Jena, Louisiana


----------



## MJS (Sep 21, 2007)

michaeledward said:


> [/indent]I don't think a two and a half hour emergency room visit qualifies as near beaten to death.


 
Hmm...taken from todays paper.
http://www.courant.com/news/nationworld/hc-jena0921.artsep21,0,6851604.story



> Then, in December, a white student was beaten up by six black schoolmates outside the school gymnasium. The black students were charged with attempted murder.


 


> The victim in the case, Sharp says, was a white student who was beaten unconscious. "Protesters don't want to talk about him


 
For what its worth, as we all know how the media is, but nonetheless, I figured I'd post it anyways.


----------



## Brian R. VanCise (Sep 21, 2007)

Kreth said:


> I'm not a big fan of hate crime legislation. Why is it more of a crime to assault someone because of race or sexual orientation? Violence is violence.
> Gun crime legislation is similar. Why is is more of a crime to shoot a cop than say, a single mother? It's wrong either way.


 
Kreth as always speaking along the line of reason.  Sometimes we as a country get things really messed up.


----------



## michaeledward (Sep 21, 2007)

crushing said:


> I understood from the reports he was beat unconscious. For expecially a defensless person in that position with several people allegedly beating on him, death may have been just one more strike away. I guess we can't really know how close to death he really was. We can make guesses based on the reports of the emergency room visit. I can definitely see your point though. If some goes to shoot you in the head, and miss by only centimeters, were you really any closer to death?
> 
> Obviously, a lot of things are unclear.


 
Yes, he did lose conciousness. But, we study martial arts. Don't we all know that at any given point in time, death may only be one strike away ... not just one 'more' strike away. And that is true whether we are concious or not. 

In much of what I have heard regarding this ... and I have been aware of this for quite some time due to blog posting (albeit only cursorily aware) ... those things that are 'unclear' are just being ignored. It is so much easier to prove a point when unclarity is swept under the rug. 




> a white student was beaten up by six black schoolmates outside the school gymnasium. The black students were charged with attempted murder.


 
As others, elsewhere, have observed ... how often do high school fights, end up with felony attempted murder charges?


----------



## Mark L (Sep 21, 2007)

michaeledward said:


> Locally, Jay Severin was making all sorts of noise about the local legislation yesterday. His unspoken assumption is that the written and passed legislation was being equally applied to all citizens.
> 
> The idea that the young men in question "took the law into their own hands" begs the question, did the local law enforcement officials act appropriately at the initial incident?
> 
> ...


I didn't listen to Severin yesterday, so I can't comment.

I don't know if the local cops acted appropriately according to their statutes, since I have no intimate knowledge of LA law.  If we assume for the sake of argument that they didn't, that in no way should be taken as a license for vigilante justice.  Do you agree?

The only anecdotal knowledge I have of the actions of local officials is that the DA came before the assembled student body and threatened to ruin their lives with the stroke of a pen if the prevalent behavior continued.  I don't think that was enough, the noose hangers should have been dealt with sternly.

What tenor are you referring to in "taking the law into your own hands"?  Are you suggesting that the Jena 6 acted appropriately?  That there was no other recourse they could take?  An eye for an eye, given the attack in a neighboring community?


----------



## MJS (Sep 21, 2007)

michaeledward said:


> Yes, he did lose conciousness. But, we study martial arts. Don't we all know that at any given point in time, death may only be one strike away ... not just one 'more' strike away. And that is true whether we are concious or not.


 
IMHO, I think there is a difference.  While I acknowledge that the MAs can be capable of delivering lethal shots, the difference IMO, with that is that most people, at least if you're keeping the legal consequences in the back of your mind, will use enough force to end the situation and then stop.  If someone attempted to mug a MAist, pulling a knife on him, and the MAist broke the guys arm, ending the situation, would he be in the right to keep beating the guy?  IMO, no.

In the J6 scenario, these kids apparently didn't stop once the white youth was down, but instead, continued to beat him until he was unconscious.


----------



## MarkBarlow (Sep 21, 2007)

Lynne said:


> Well, that's a hot one.  I don't live in Louisiana but I don't doubt racism.  I would like to see the facts and histories though.  One kid had an early arrest record.  Once again, it is Louisiana, *the deep south* and racism is alive and well.  But is this racism, singling out certain individuals?  *Change comes slow in the south.
> *
> And just to be clear, racism exists heartily regardless of race.  I grew up in the south, so I know.



There have been severe race problems in New York, Boston, Detroit, etc... Bloodshed and hatred on both sides in those northern cities.   Los Angeles erupts every 10 to 15 years into full blown race riots.  Why is it so easy to point to the South as a problem area?  Whatever problems we have here, I'm willing to bet that our day to day interaction is a lot smoother and friendlier than "up north".


----------



## Kreth (Sep 21, 2007)

michaeledward said:


> As others, elsewhere, have observed ... how often do high school fights, end up with felony attempted murder charges?


How often are school fights 6-on-1 stompings?


----------



## crushing (Sep 21, 2007)

michaeledward said:


> As others, elsewhere, have observed ... how often do high school fights, end up with felony attempted murder charges?


 
I certainly don't disagree with that and it may be harsh and excessive.  What I don't understand are the apparent attempts rationalize the beating and try to make it acceptable because of the noose and other incidents.


----------



## Blotan Hunka (Sep 21, 2007)

How have hanging nooses become the equivalent of a gang assault? While tasteless and deserving of suspension, I cant think of a law hanging nooses breaks. Hanging a noose is nowhere near pointing a weapon at someone. Nowhere near it. Its a ridiculous comparison. Yes its bigoted, racist and wrong. But being bigoted isnt illegal. and a noose is not a weapon. Those idiot skinheads/KKK guys can have parades legally under the protection of the 1st amendment for gods sake and look at the hate they spew.

If the uproar was over the extremity of the charge (which I kind of agree with "attempted murder"? Thats a bit extreme), thats one thing. Saying that the 6 should be freed because a beating isnt as bad as hanging nooses. Or the nooses somehow justifies beating someone almost to death, thats plain stupid. Or is it implied that any white person can take a beating without reprucussions in repayment for an offence against a black person? 

But wait..OJ got off because a detective used the "N" word. So I guess I know the answer.


----------



## michaeledward (Sep 21, 2007)

Mark L said:


> I don't know if the local cops acted appropriately according to their statutes, since I have no intimate knowledge of LA law. If we assume for the sake of argument that they didn't, that in no way should be taken as a license for vigilante justice. Do you agree?
> 
> ....
> 
> What tenor are you referring to in "taking the law into your own hands"? Are you suggesting that the Jena 6 acted appropriately? That there was no other recourse they could take? An eye for an eye, given the attack in a neighboring community?


 
Mark L .... I have no doubt that many here are going to misunderstand what I am about to say. So I must try and be delicate, and perhaps, less accurate than I would like. 

If we accept the hanging of nooses was an act of terror ... 
and, if we accept that local authorities did not handle that terror threat appropriately ... 

What action is acceptable? 

In Israel, when a Palestinian straps a bomb around his waist and detonates it in a pizza shop, it is apparently acceptable for Israel to launch missles from airplanes into the offices of the leadership organizations among the Palestinians. They take strong action, and many in this country vigorously defend their right to do so. 

I am not a fan of vigilante behavior. But the threat against blacks in Jena had been rising for some time. Very real and serious threats against blacks were apparently being disregarded by authorities. Racial tensions were being enflamed. 

I believe it is the very nature of the 'soft racism' that continues to exist in our society that allowed the repeated infractions to go unheeded by authorities. 'The System', such as it is in Jena, LA, perceived that it was working fine; when it was failing the young black men in the town. 

I believe a wise man once put it thusly:



> when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.


 
Mr. Barker taunted the Jena 6. I believe Mr. Barker taunted them with the knowledge that the cards were stacked against them, and for him. I can certainly understand how these six young black men could feel they had no other option, but to 'throw off' the Mr. Barker, as a symbol of the 'repeated injuries and usurpations ... of absolute tyranny'.


----------



## michaeledward (Sep 21, 2007)

Kreth said:


> How often are school fights 6-on-1 stompings?


 
I have referenced one fight ... Fair Barn, LA, - albeit not taking place in a school ... where multiple white men - (men, aged over 20) - attacked several black studets . The resulting legal remedy was "probation" for a Mr. Justin Sloan, one of the white attackers.


----------



## michaeledward (Sep 21, 2007)

Blotan Hunka said:


> How have hanging nooses become the equivalent of a gang assault?


 
If one is willing to disregard the complexity of the black experience over the past 500 years on this continent, then, no. Not at all. 

But, if one looks at the history of blacks in America from the Emancipation Proclamation through the late 20th century, I think nooses are, in fact, far, far worse than a gang assault. 

In Israel, the phrase is "Never Again". The icon is the swastika.

In the American South, the phrase is "I have a dream". The icon is the noose.


----------



## Blotan Hunka (Sep 21, 2007)

michaeledward said:


> But, if one looks at the history of blacks in America from the Emancipation Proclamation through the late 20th century, I think nooses are, in fact, far, far worse than a gang assault.


 
Im sorry. This may break a rule, but THAT is probably the scariest and stupidest thing I have seen on this forum to date. That includes the 9/11 conspiracy stuff.

And that poor white trucker in LA beaten close to death on TV during the Rodney King riots in LA. Thats just what he deserved for the years of black angst?


----------



## crushing (Sep 21, 2007)

michaeledward said:


> In Israel, the phrase is "Never Again". The icon is the swastika.
> 
> In the American South, the phrase is "I have a dream". The icon is the noose.


 
Interesting take, and could be upsetting to many.  I would have never linked Martin Luther King Jr.'s words with this racially motivated 6 on 1 beatdown (hate crime?).  I can't speak for the great man, his words are more than enough on their own, but I have a feeling that isn't what he had in mind.


----------



## Lynne (Sep 21, 2007)

MarkBarlow said:


> There have been severe race problems in New York, Boston, Detroit, etc... Bloodshed and hatred on both sides in those northern cities. Los Angeles erupts every 10 to 15 years into full blown race riots. Why is it so easy to point to the South as a problem area? Whatever problems we have here, I'm willing to bet that our day to day interaction is a lot smoother and friendlier than "up north".


I wasn't thinking, Mark, and you are right.  My personal experience has been in the south and I'd forgotten about the race riots and racial problems in northern cities.

I just remember how rough it was when I was growing up.  We had forced racial integration and riots in my high school every year.  On top of that, when I was 15, I was gang-raped by 8 members of another race.  Sometimes, if things aren't in your own backyard, it's easy to glaze over the facts - they just don't seem real.


----------



## Mark L (Sep 21, 2007)

I just heard that the ring leader of the Jena 6 has been denied bail.


----------



## MJS (Sep 21, 2007)

michaeledward said:


> If one is willing to disregard the complexity of the black experience over the past 500 years on this continent, then, no. Not at all.
> 
> But, if one looks at the history of blacks in America from the Emancipation Proclamation through the late 20th century, I think nooses are, in fact, far, far worse than a gang assault.
> 
> ...


 
So basically you're saying that the assault on the white youth was justified or comparable to the noose?

Additionally, I can't recall ever hearing the word 'terror' being used when swasticas have been painted on buildings, schools, etc.  Vandalism is what is usually said.


----------



## Kreth (Sep 21, 2007)

michaeledward said:


> I have referenced one fight ... Fair Barn, LA, - albeit not taking place in a school ... where multiple white men - (men, aged over 20) - attacked several black studets . The resulting legal remedy was "probation" for a Mr. Justin Sloan, one of the white attackers.


That seems quite lax. Were there extenuating circumstances? Did he have a prior record? We know that a least one of the Jena 6 had a lengthy rap sheet.


----------



## Blotan Hunka (Sep 21, 2007)

Can I beat a skinhead with a swastica to death and get away with it (if I was Jewish that is)?


----------



## Mark L (Sep 21, 2007)

michaeledward said:


> Mark L .... I have no doubt that many here are going to misunderstand what I am about to say. So I must try and be delicate, and perhaps, less accurate than I would like.
> 
> If we accept the hanging of nooses was an act of terror ...
> and, if we accept that local authorities did not handle that terror threat appropriately ...
> ...


I understand your analogy, though I think the scale is dramatically different.  It's clear to me that high schoolers in LA are governed by the same set of laws, I don't know that nation states are (correct me if I'm wrong).  I know, whether the common set is uniformlly enforced is a subject for debate ...

I wonder if those young black men in Jena have made an earnest effort to thwart the 'repeated injuries and usurpations ... of absolute tyranny', or whether they simple wanted and took an opportunity to beat up a white kid.

Do you assume the DA was only speaking to the black kids, and not the white?  Is there any evidence to support that assumption?


----------



## michaeledward (Sep 21, 2007)

MJS said:


> So basically you're saying that the assault on the white youth was justified or comparable to the noose?
> 
> Additionally, I can't recall ever hearing the word 'terror' being used when swasticas have been painted on buildings, schools, etc. Vandalism is what is usually said.


 
Michael, if that Swastika is painted on a building in Haifa, Nazareth, or Tel-Aviv Jaffa, I think, it would be considered more than just vandalism.



What I am saying is that the noose, in Louisiana, when directed at a black person, is far more than a piece of rope. It is symbolic of a long, and dark history. Take a look.

http://academic.evergreen.edu/p/pfeiferm/Louisiana.html

And, what I am saying is that it appears the 'powers that be' in Jena, were unwilling or unable to redress the grievences of their constituents.


----------



## michaeledward (Sep 21, 2007)

Kreth said:


> That seems quite lax. Were there extenuating circumstances? Did he have a prior record? We know that a least one of the Jena 6 had a lengthy rap sheet.


 
There are extenuating circumstances of all sorts of incidents in Jena over the past two years. Circumstances that many are willing to disregard when addressing the young black men, but look to as justification when addressing the young white men.


----------



## michaeledward (Sep 21, 2007)

Mark L said:


> I understand your analogy, though I think the scale is dramatically different. It's clear to me that high schoolers in LA are governed by the same set of laws, I don't know that nation states are (correct me if I'm wrong). I know, whether the common set is uniformlly enforced is a subject for debate ...
> 
> I wonder if those young black men in Jena have made an earnest effort to thwart the 'repeated injuries and usurpations ... of absolute tyranny', or whether they simple wanted and took an opportunity to beat up a white kid.
> 
> When you speak of Mr. Barker, do you assume he was only speaking to the black kids, and not the white? Is there any evidence to support that assumption?


 
At what "scale", does action against injustice become justified? 

According to reports that I have seen, which I believe to be court documents, it seemed clear that Mr. Barker was taunting the black youths outside the school gymnasium.


----------



## MJS (Sep 21, 2007)

michaeledward said:


> Michael, if that Swastika is painted on a building in Haifa, Nazareth, or Tel-Aviv Jaffa, I think, it would be considered more than just vandalism.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
Ok Mike, I'll tell ya what...lets go with your analogy for a moment.  If in fact this was terrorism, were the beatings a justifiable act in response to the noose?  If someone were to steal my car, should I seek the person out and beat them over the head or call the cops and let them arrest the person?  IMHO, this situation seems like it took more of an "eye for an eye" outcome.


----------



## Kreth (Sep 21, 2007)

michaeledward said:


> Circumstances that many are willing to disregard when addressing the young black men, but look to as justification when addressing the young white men.


You might want to trade your brush in for a thinner one. At least one of the Jena 6 had a lengthy criminal history, hence my question.


----------



## michaeledward (Sep 21, 2007)

MJS said:


> Ok Mike, I'll tell ya what...lets go with your analogy for a moment. If in fact this was terrorism, were the beatings a justifiable act in response to the noose? If someone were to steal my car, should I seek the person out and beat them over the head or call the cops and let them arrest the person? IMHO, this situation seems like it took more of an "eye for an eye" outcome.


 

I think the one-to-one analogy may be out of place. Many are trying to see the attack on Mr. Barker as a stand alone event; which I believe it was not. From the time the nooses were presented on the "White Tree", until the attack on Mr. Barker, there were, apparently, many incidences of racial tension. Many of which went unaddressed. 

Michael, you work as a police dispatcher, don't you? or didn't you? What if the police didn't respond to a request? What if the police don't travel to certain parts of town, at certain times of day? What if when the requests were addressed the little black boys got severe punishments, and the little white boys got light punishments? 

And to equate car theft with lynchings is a bit of a stretch, don't you think?


----------



## michaeledward (Sep 21, 2007)

Kreth said:


> You might want to trade your brush in for a thinner one. At least one of the Jena 6 had a lengthy criminal history, hence my question.


 
And what is the criminal records of the white persons involved in the racial conflicts in Jena? And, by looking only to criminal history ... what of prosecutorial discretion, where someone decides whether an incident gets recorded into criminal records of not. Do you know if white persons are charged proportionally as often as black persons? 

You have one data point, which by itself, is completely irrelevant. But you wield it with conviction.


----------



## Mark L (Sep 21, 2007)

michaeledward said:


> At what "scale", does action against injustice become justified?


Action is justified at any scale, violence IMO is a last resort.  The question I have is whether those on the receiving end of the injustice (black high schoolers in Jena, LA in this case) have sought all avenues at their disposal before resorting to violence.  I wouldn't equate the options available to these young men in our society with those available to Israel to thwart the attacks of a state known to sponsor terrorism.


----------



## Kreth (Sep 21, 2007)

Mark L said:


> Action is justified at any scale, violence IMO is a last resort. The question I have is whether those on the receiving end of the injustice (black high schoolers in Jena, LA in this case) have sought all avenues at their disposal before resorting to violence. I wouldn't equate the options available to these young men in our society with those available to Israel to thwart the attacks of a state known to sponsor terrorism.


Give it up, Mark. Apparently you are unaware, as was I, that "racial tension" justifies violence.


----------



## MJS (Sep 21, 2007)

michaeledward said:


> I think the one-to-one analogy may be out of place. Many are trying to see the attack on Mr. Barker as a stand alone event; which I believe it was not. From the time the nooses were presented on the "White Tree", until the attack on Mr. Barker, there were, apparently, many incidences of racial tension. Many of which went unaddressed.


 
News to me.  Like I said, this is all new to me, as I just heard about it from the paper and tv.  



> Michael, you work as a police dispatcher, don't you? or didn't you?


 
Yes I do.



> What if the police didn't respond to a request?


 
Actually, it just happened last night.  People complain about the cops all the time.  I however, am not usually privy to every detail of the outcome.



> What if the police don't travel to certain parts of town, at certain times of day? What if when the requests were addressed the little black boys got severe punishments, and the little white boys got light punishments?


 
I'm sure if someone complained, the supervisor would address the issue.  I don't take care of citizen complaints agains the cops.  I direct the citizen to a Sgt. or someone in charge.  



> And to equate car theft with lynchings is a bit of a stretch, don't you think?


 
Maybe my analogy wasnt the greatest.  However, you still seem to be avoiding the question I asked earlier.  Does hanging a noose justify a beating?  My point with the stealing of the car was simple...someone stole my car/someone hung a noose.  I beat the **** out of the thief/the black youths beat the white youth.  I call the cops and let them deal with the theft/if someone was offended at the noose, contact the authorities and report a hate crime.  All that ranting being said...what did beating this kid solve?


----------



## Mark L (Sep 21, 2007)

MJS said:


> All that ranting being said...what did beating this kid solve?


Nothing.


----------



## terryl965 (Sep 21, 2007)

michaeledward said:


> I guess, Mark L, the question is "to what extent is the act of hanging nooses in the tree condemned?"
> 
> Are we certain it is not a crime?
> 
> ...


 

Michael I'm not trying to justify anything but pointing a gun at someone is intent in the eyes of the law. Hunging a noose in a tree is not threating anybody, bad taste, lack of respect and damm right rude. But it did not have anybody name on the noose, never said for Blacks only, maybe it was intended for the Jewish community. We do not know for sure. What we do know is the Jenna six violated the law with assualt and that is a fact, which means they broke the law and need to pay for there crime.

I do not find it in anyway funny or anything it is shameful that in today times that this type of stuff keeps happening.


----------



## Blotan Hunka (Sep 21, 2007)

This has to be one of the longest "reaches" to justify someones opinion on a topic. A symbol justifies physical violence?

Dr.King is spinning in his grave.


----------



## michaeledward (Sep 21, 2007)

MJS said:


> . However, you still seem to be avoiding the question I asked earlier. Does hanging a noose justify a beating?


 
Answer - No. 

But, there is a hell of a lot more going on than just a noose. 

Did you see the references to the "White Tree"? That was the name of the spot, on the school grounds. Black students were not allowed to sit under the shade of that tree. It may not have been written in the student handbook, but the unspoken rule was so clear, that a young black man had to ask the Administration if he was permitted to sit in the shade of the "White Tree". 

Some students, apparently took offense to uppity young black man. They sent a message ... a very clear message .... And it was viewed by those in authority, and by some here, as a prank, in bad taste but a prank. 



> We can never be satisfied as long as the Negro is the victim of the unspeakable horrors of police brutality. We can never be satisfied as long as our bodies, heavy with the fatigue of travel, cannot gain lodging in the motels of the highways and the hotels of the cities. We cannot be satisfied as long as the negro's basic mobility is from a smaller ghetto to a larger one. We can never be satisfied as long as our children are stripped of their self-hood and robbed of their dignity by a sign stating: "For Whites Only.*


----------



## MJS (Sep 21, 2007)

michaeledward said:


> Answer - No.
> 
> But, there is a hell of a lot more going on than just a noose.
> 
> ...


 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosa_Parks

History wasn't one of my better subjects in school, but apparently Rosa Parks refused to give up her seat, so going along those same lines, why should this kid not be allowed to sit where he wants?  Rosa sat where she wanted.


----------



## michaeledward (Sep 21, 2007)

MJS said:


> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosa_Parks
> 
> History wasn't one of my better subjects in school, but apparently Rosa Parks refused to give up her seat, so going along those same lines, why should this kid not be allowed to sit where he wants? Rosa sat where she wanted.


 
Michael, that is the point. 

A significant difference, is that Rosa Parks was supported by a movement; a civil rights movement, if you will. It seemed that not all of the people in Jena got the message of that era. 

Perhaps, the line in Jena moved a little, but not to where a young black person can sit under the shade tree of his choosing,  not to where a white youth commiting violence against a black youth recieves the same punishment as a black youth who commits violence against a white youth, not to where a white man wielding a shot gun, but disarmed by a black man gets charged for threatening with a firearm, but the black man gets charged with stealing the gun.

I believe that here in the Northeast, we see far fewer blatant examples of racism and bigotry, and so, perhaps we think that the rest of the country shares our attitudes and opinions. I think, however, that is not true. Perhaps a vivid example would be to see which Republican President Candidates are going to attend the debate at Morgan State University, in Baltimore Maryland.

What does it say about our nation when those who wish to lead the country, Misters Thompson, Guiliani, Romney and McCain, won't attended a debate at a black college. Are they trying to push away black voters, or, more insidiously, are they trying to attract a different constituent?


----------



## MJS (Sep 21, 2007)

michaeledward said:


> Michael, that is the point.
> 
> A significant difference, is that Rosa Parks was supported by a movement; a civil rights movement, if you will. It seemed that not all of the people in Jena got the message of that era.
> 
> ...


 
Like I said, history wasnt my best subject, but did Rosa Parks beat the bus driver or the person who attempted to take her seat?  AFAIK, no.  I guess my point is..we have a case here of someone hanging a noose from a tree.  Call it racial, call is terror, call it whatever, as far as I can see, there was no physical harm done to anyone.  Did it freak people out when they saw it?  Possibly, who knows.  The black youths physically assaulted someone, someone who very possibly was not even involved.


----------



## Skip Cooper (Sep 21, 2007)

Kreth said:


> How often are school fights 6-on-1 stompings?


 
At a high school I attended in Michigan...about once a month. That is only counting the stompings at school. It would be more often outside of school. I myself was jumped by several black kids my Freshman year because of something some other ignorant white kid did to a defenseless black youth. Now, mind you, this did not turn me into a card carrying Klan member nor did I join the local chapter of skinheads. My friends: black, white or otherwise, supported me through this phase in my life.

Where you grew up determines your perception of school violence and race relations. If you come from the inner city, then you know that it is a struggle not to fall into bad influences. If you are fortunate to come from a middle-class family in the 'burbs, then you have a completely different interpretation of what struggle is. Your life isn't all that bad if all you had to worry about was your SAT scores, going to the movies with your girlfriend, or wondering if dad will let you take the car out tonight. Try walking home from school through gang infested parks, where fights can erupt without warning. What would you do when the power is shut off because Mom can't pay the bill because your dad hasn't paid his child support and you are eating jelly sandwhiches (on one slice of bread, folded in half) for dinner? I saw alot of this happen to friends of mine. I was fortunate that my parents were still married, but we were poor like everyone else. 

I think it all boils down to ignorant and intolerant parents on both sides of the racial divide. These parents raise ignorant and intolerant children who in turn grow into ignorant and intolerant adults who raise their own ignorant and intolerant children. I am afraid this will always be with us in one form or another. This doesn't make it right, it's only reality.

I apologize for hijacking this thread, but it always lights a flame within me when I hear others assume that their life experience is universal.


----------



## Skip Cooper (Sep 21, 2007)

michaeledward said:


> Are they trying to push away black voters, or, more insidiously, are they trying to attract a different constituent?


 
If you listen to the right wing rhetoric, then you already know the answer to that question. There is no question that the Latin American community is the fastest growing minority group. The politicans are whores and they will court whomever will put them into office. 

The Republicans will not do anything about illegal immigration because they worry about the bottom line...the almighty dollar.  The "undocumented workers" of our era are the Irish, Blacks, Native Americans and Chinese of earlier eras.  Capitalism exploits the lower class, while Socialism exploits everyone regardless of class.

The Democrats want the immigrants because they can put them in office, evidence of this by liberal attempts to pass legislation that would not require voters to present valid identification at the ballot. They create social programs so that the poor, most likely of the minority group, will depend on forever. By doing so, they endear themselves to these groups so that they will keep them in office.

Call me cynical, but that's just the way I see it.


----------



## michaeledward (Sep 21, 2007)

MJS said:


> Like I said, history wasnt my best subject, but did Rosa Parks beat the bus driver or the person who attempted to take her seat? AFAIK, no. I guess my point is..we have a case here of someone hanging a noose from a tree. Call it racial, call is terror, call it whatever, as far as I can see, there was no physical harm done to anyone. _Did it freak people out when they saw it? *Possibly, who knows*._ The black youths physically assaulted someone, someone who very possibly was not even involved.


 
Is there no empathy for the experiences of a repressed minority? People were lynched by mobs in this country, and not so long ago. Those who were lynched were usually black, and those doing the lynching were usually white.

But it seems to be your claim that no one can know if the symbol of lynching might upset a black person, who had the tenaciousness to sit in a place that custom, and name, reserved for whites? 

It is history. It is important. For those who fail to learn the lessons of history are doomed to repeat them. 

And for the record, Mrs. Parks had tremendous community support in 1955. In fact, from December 5, 1955 and for the next 381 days, black citizens of Montgomery, Alabama did not ride the public transportation buses. This, in a city where public transportation was 75% black citizens. 

Mrs. Parks received the Medal of Freedom, our country's highest civilian honor. Reverend King received the Nobel Peace Prize. 



			
				Martin Luther King said:
			
		

> If you will protest courageously, and yet with dignity and Christian love, when the history books are written in future generations, the historians will have to pause and say, `There lived a great people--a Black people--who injected new meaning and dignity into the veins of civilization.' This is our challenge and our overwhelming responsibility.


----------



## Blotan Hunka (Sep 21, 2007)

None of those kids give a damn about what happened in the history of the black struggle. Hell with the educations of kids today they probably dont know (or remember if they were taught) who Rosa parks was. One of thes kids has a rap sheet longer than my arm already and hes just over a quarter of my age! This was about "respectin" and street creds if you ask me. Nothing so noble as righteous anger over a symbol of white repression.

I still cant get over the "give them a break they were upset over the nooses" tone. Lets start justifying physical violence over a symbolic gesture and see where THAT takes us.


----------



## MJS (Sep 21, 2007)

michaeledward said:


> Is there no empathy for the experiences of a repressed minority? People were lynched by mobs in this country, and not so long ago. Those who were lynched were usually black, and those doing the lynching were usually white.
> 
> But it seems to be your claim that no one can know if the symbol of lynching might upset a black person, who had the tenaciousness to sit in a place that custom, and name, reserved for whites?
> 
> ...


 
I'm sure that the noose upset people.  I thought I addressed that in another post.  I'm sure a swastica painted on tombstones in a Jewish cemetary upsets them as well.  My point is, you don't see people dishing out vigilante justice.  They report it to the cops.  Was any of this reported to the cops?  If it wasn't, shame on the 'victims' of this noose incident.  If it was and nothing happened, shame on the cops.  But this still doesn't excuse people beating the hell out of someone.  Were any rallies taking place when this first happened, or did it take a beating to get the rally started?



Blotan Hunka said:


> None of those kids give a damn about what happened in the history of the black struggle. Hell with the educations of kids today they probably dont know (or remember if they were taught) who Rosa parks was. One of thes kids has a rap sheet longer than my arm already and hes just over a quarter of my age! This was about "respectin" and street creds if you ask me. Nothing so noble as righteous anger over a symbol of white repression.
> 
> I still cant get over the "give them a break they were upset over the nooses" tone. Lets start justifying physical violence over a symbolic gesture and see where THAT takes us.


 
You and I are on the same page here.  This is exactly the point I've been trying to argue as well.


----------



## RED (Sep 21, 2007)

Skip Cooper said:


> ....I think it all boils down to ignorant and intolerant parents on both sides of the racial divide. These parents raise ignorant and intolerant children who in turn grow into ignorant and intolerant adults who raise their own ignorant and intolerant children. I am afraid this will always be with us in one form or another. This doesn't make it right, it's only reality.
> 
> I apologize for hijacking this thread, but it always lights a flame within me when I hear others assume that their life experience is universal.


 
I'm glad someone gets it. If it isn't "black and white" it will be "rich and poor" (insert whatever) because a child will carry on the values set before them. 

Why hasn't the school stepped in before it got this bad? This is something that has been going on for months maybe years before this violent incident happened. Where was the school didn't they see the writing on the wall? The black students involved even went to the principle and asked if they where alowed to sit under the "white tree". come on do you really need a sign that says there is racial tention here?

Take it a step further; why aren't the colleges teaching future teachers to recognize these type of tentions?

I think Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, David Duke KKK members , nazis and black panther types should be thrown into a tank and left to fight it out. They are all one in the same. Jimmy Hendrix ,CSN, Lenny Kravits, and Bob Marly, did more to end racism than all of them combined. Even Toby Keith does more. The political types make a pile of money off of racism and it's sick.


----------



## MJS (Sep 21, 2007)

RED said:


> Why hasn't the school stepped in before it got this bad? This is something that has been going on for months maybe years before this violent incident happened. Where was the school didn't they see the writing on the wall? The black students involved even went to the principle and asked if they where alowed to sit under the "white tree". come on do you really need a sign that says there is racial tention here?


 
Good question.  Its just like parents that are totally clueless to what their kids do.  And then, when their child does do something wrong, they act completely surprised.  Considering that the tree was most likely not white in color, you'd think that someone would have inquired when they said 'white tree.'


----------



## michaeledward (Sep 21, 2007)

One possibility as to "why the school didn't step in sooner" ... could it be because there is a measure of racism left in our society.

Michael, what if it was reported to the authorities ... and they did nothing? What recourse then? Why does nothing happen until after it is so bad that Reverends Jackson and Sharpton have to get involved? 

Why wasn't the Hartford Courant reporting this story for the first nine months of Mr. Bell's imprisonment? Why did his trial as an adult, even though the offenses were committed when he was a minor make news anywhere? Where were the stories and awareness when the court of appeals reverse the decision on this technicality, but the state chose to keep Mr. Bell in prison? 

The story doesn't make any news until Mr. Jackson and Mr. Sharpton show up, and then come the predictable attacks about how Mr. Jackson and Mr. Sharpton don't do anything to advance the cause. It certainly seems that no one and nothing was helping 'the cause' before they showed up either.


----------



## MJS (Sep 21, 2007)

michaeledward said:


> One possibility as to "why the school didn't step in sooner" ... could it be because there is a measure of racism left in our society.


 
Who knows.



> Michael, what if it was reported to the authorities ... and they did nothing? What recourse then? Why does nothing happen until after it is so bad that Reverends Jackson and Sharpton have to get involved?


 
Is holding a march with the Revs. getting anything resolved though?  People can march all day long, doesnt mean a change is going to happen.  Look at that mother of one of the soldiers in Iraq.  Forgot her name, but shes the one that camped out near the White House, wanting to talk to Bush.  The Iraq war is still going on.



> Why wasn't the Hartford Courant reporting this story for the first nine months of Mr. Bell's imprisonment? Why did his trial as an adult, even though the offenses were committed when he was a minor make news anywhere? Where were the stories and awareness when the court of appeals reverse the decision on this technicality, but the state chose to keep Mr. Bell in prison?
> 
> The story doesn't make any news until Mr. Jackson and Mr. Sharpton show up, and then come the predictable attacks about how Mr. Jackson and Mr. Sharpton don't do anything to advance the cause. It certainly seems that no one and nothing was helping 'the cause' before they showed up either.


 
If the papers kept up with everything, they'd be 10 times the size.  Its just like the arts...whatever the new flavor of the moment is, gets the most attn.  Once the thrill of the story dies out, it no longer gets printed.  Don't know what to tell you.


----------



## michaeledward (Sep 21, 2007)

Throughout this thread, there have been several statements concerning the previous criminal record of the convicted and accused. 

According to this story, in the Washington Post, there is no prior criminal activity among any of the six. 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/08/03/AR2007080302098.html



> Mychal Bell, the first of the six to be tried, is scheduled to be sentenced in September. He was convicted in July by an all-white jury on reduced charges of aggravated battery and conspiracy to commit it. Like his co-defendants -- Robert Bailey, Carwin Jones, Bryant Purvis, Theodore Shaw and Jesse Beard -- Bell had no prior criminal record.


 
Anyone who claims knowledge of prior criminal acts by any of the six, please cite your sources.


----------



## Cruentus (Sep 21, 2007)

michaeledward said:


> Anyone who claims knowledge of prior criminal acts by any of the six, please cite your sources.


 
I haven't been watching this case enough to wiegh in on this issue or anything, but they did say on CNN that one of them, Bell I believe, had a prior record. It was on in the background while I was doing some work. I know for a fact that is what they said, just don't know how accurate.


----------



## michaeledward (Sep 21, 2007)

MJS said:


> Is holding a march with the Revs. getting anything resolved though?


 
There are 75 posts on this thread. 

I was aware of the story prior to yesterday's news, but, in searching about for this discussion, I have learned much more today. You, yourself, said you had not heard of these events. 

Apparently, the Reverands' involvement is accomplishing something. 

It does seem unfortunate that regardless of the merit, or lack thereof, some people will immediately write off any event or situation they are involved in. I wonder if there is a word for that?


----------



## michaeledward (Sep 21, 2007)

Cruentus said:


> I haven't been watching this case enough to wiegh in on this issue or anything, but they did say on CNN that one of them, Bell I believe, had a prior record. It was on in the background while I was doing some work. I know for a fact that is what they said, just don't know how accurate.


 
This is interesting ... a bit more searching.  It seems that a LaSalle Parish deputy clerk, one Cynthia Bradford, has released information about Mr. Bell's juvenile record. Confirmed in court transcripts by the District Attorney.

A battery adjudication on 12/25/2005
A criminal damage to property on 7/25/2006
A battery adjudication on 9/2/2006
A criminal damage to property on 9/3/2006

In Louisiana law: 
_Battery is the intentional use of force or violence upon the person of another; or the intentional administration_ _of a poison or other noxious liquid or substance to another._

and

_Simple battery is a battery committed without the consent of the victim._

Further :

_Aggravated criminal damage to property is the intentional damaging of any structure, watercraft, or movable, wherein it is foreseeable that human life might be endangered, by any means other than fire or explosion._

and 

_Simple criminal damage to property is the intentional damaging of any property of another, without the consent of the owner, and except as provided in R.S. 14:55, by any means other than fire or explosion._​I find it interesting that this record was released by a 'deputy clerk'. Is that normal when dealing with minor children? 

And, it is interesting that a youth with such a horrible past would continue to be an honor roll student and star on the High School Football team. I wonder what that all says about society.


----------



## Big Don (Sep 22, 2007)

> He was convicted in July by an all-white jury on reduced charges of aggravated battery and conspiracy to commit it.


All white jury? Why should this matter? Since discrimination based on race is illegal, shouldn't such things as all white, all black, 75% green juries be a non issue? I'm a white guy, I neither chose that, nor can I change it. It is impossible to tell a bad person by looking at them, and it is worse than stupid to try.
The implication given by the All-White jury remark in the article is that white people cannot help but screw over black people, gee, isn't that a racist assumption?


----------



## Big Don (Sep 22, 2007)

> Simple battery is a battery committed without the consent of the victim.


Battery committed with the consent of the victim would be? Kinky? Not a crime?


----------



## RED (Sep 22, 2007)

An all white jury...Why?

great article:

http://www.kansascity.com/sports/columnists/jason_whitlock/story/284511.html

After reading this I think I'm going to look into Big Brothers.


----------



## michaeledward (Sep 22, 2007)

The language 'all white jury' was from a Washington Post article. That is a question that is best directed to them. 

What is interesting, is that the convicting jury was comprised of six citizens. I thought juries were typically comprised of twelve or fifteen citizens. 

If one searched for 'ineffective council mychal bell', one could learn that one of those jurors was a classmate with Mr. Barker's father. One wonders if that shouldn't have been cause for a pre-emptive dismissal. (From personal experience, during one enpanelling session, I was read a list of possible witnesses. Just the fact that I _might_ know someone on the witeness list was sufficient to get me dismissed). 

Of course, I must warn against doing that search for ineffective council. The reading becomes quite disturbing. The court appointed lawyer ~ a right guaranteed by our Supreme Court, by the way ~ is reported to be grossly incompetent at Mr. Bell's defense; relevant witnesses not called to the stand, witnesses on the stand not challenged appropriately, the 'green jacket', juvenile charges brought in the adult court system, refusal to allow jurors to consider lesser charges, etc. 

I wonder if we have heard about other 'overzealous District Attorneys' anywhere recently, Hmm> 

Big Don ~ as to the language of Louisiana law, ~ it does raise some interesting questions. Basically, it sounds as if it is an unwelcome touch,  one could bring charges. It seems it would be possible for a non-violent touching incident to result in a criminal charge. In my limited searches so far, I have been unable to find descriptions of Mr. Bell's crimes in these cases (not unexpected considering juvenile court systems and reporting). 

Some here have used the prior adjudications to indict Mr. Bell in this incident. (He's a bad apple that can't be fixed - of course some of those making this argument continue to support trying to help the Shi'ite and Sunni's in Iraq - their prior bad acts go back hundreds of years, but we're still trying to fix them. - I digress). There has been discussions about 'why didn't they step in sooner'. I have argued that racial tensions were reported to be high throughout Jena preceeding attack on Mr. Barker. A thoughtful person would wonder if these prior charges indicative of those racial tensions. 

Also, the unspoken assumption when mentioning Mr. Bell's prior record, is that Mr. Barker was a 'nice boy', who played no part in the racial tensions in the community. I will point out that Mr. Barker was expelled from the High School for bringing a gun onto the school campus. 

In Louisiana Law:
_95.2.  Carrying a firearm, or dangerous weapon, by a student or nonstudent on school property, at school-sponsored functions or firearm-free zone_
_A.  Carrying a firearm, or dangerous weapon as defined in R.S. 14:2, by a student or nonstudent on school property, at a school sponsored function, or in a firearm-free zone is unlawful and shall be defined as possession of any firearm or dangerous weapon, on one's person, at any time while on a school campus, on school transportation, or at any school sponsored function in a specific designated area including but not limited to athletic competitions, dances, parties, or any extracurricular activities, or within one thousand feet of any school campus._​Further, Title 17 mandates that schools make students aware of this law, and its consequences,  in the first week of each school year, since its inception in 1999.


----------



## Blotan Hunka (Sep 22, 2007)

Mychal Bell

Battery - 12/25/2005 
Criminal damage to property - 7/25/2006 
Battery - 9/2006 
Criminal damage to property - 9/2006


----------



## michaeledward (Sep 22, 2007)

Blotan Hunka said:
			
		

> One of thes kids has a rap sheet longer than my arm already and hes just over a quarter of my age!


 


Blotan Hunka said:


> Mychal Bell
> 
> Battery - 12/25/2005
> Criminal damage to property - 7/25/2006
> ...


 
It would seem that your arms are very short.

Oh, I guess that first statement was hyperbole, right?


----------



## Makalakumu (Sep 22, 2007)

What kind of message does hanging a noose send?

What kind of message does hanging a noose send?

What kind of message does hanging a noose send?



What kind of message does hanging a noose send?



What kind of message does hanging a noose send?



What kind of message does hanging a noose send?



What kind of message does hanging a noose send?

Check out the lower right hand corner of this picture.  I think they caught that message.

In certain areas of this country, because of the history, hanging a noose is akin to threatening someone with death.  How many more pictures do we need to see of it being put to use before we get it?  Imagine if your family lived with this hell every single day of their lives for generations?

*A Dream Deferred*
By Langson Hughes

What happens to a dream deferred?

Does it dry up 
like a raisin in the sun? 
Or fester like a sore-- 
And then run? 
Does it stink like rotten meat? 
Or crust and sugar over-- 
like a syrupy sweet?

Maybe it just sags 
like a heavy load.

Or does it explode?


----------



## Brother John (Sep 22, 2007)

MJS said:


> it seems that things are being a little distorted.


Yes indeed! In more ways/directions than one!
For any side you're on......there's political fodder to be had, and everyone's rushing in to get some.

...which is REALLY too bad, because there's issues that should be addressed, now they'll just be trampled over by the camera crews. 

Your Brother
John


----------



## Mark L (Sep 22, 2007)

Those images are quite disturbing.  They are also decades old, at least 4 and probably more based on the dress.  Please don't misunderstand me, I think the placement of nooses in that tree was a despicable act.  I just don't believe that it was a serious threat, one that carried the possibility of an imminent hanging.


----------



## Brother John (Sep 22, 2007)

michaeledward said:


> It would seem that your arms are very short.
> 
> Oh, I guess that first statement was hyperbole, right?


True, those aren't very many charges.
But might want to bear in mind that those are his adult charges ONLY. According to what I'd read (don't remember where to be honest) he had an extensive juvenile record as well, though of course we'd not be able to dig up those records now.

The fact that he has a previous record, long or short, violent crimes or not, doesn't mean he's guilty in this or future crimes...
it just reflects on the judges choices in sentencing. 

Your Brother
John


----------



## Blotan Hunka (Sep 22, 2007)

Mark L said:


> Those images are quite disturbing. They are also decades old, at least 4 and probably more based on the dress. Please don't misunderstand me, I think the placement of nooses in that tree was a despicable act. I just don't believe that it was a serious threat, one that carried the possibility of an imminent hanging.


 
Exactly, all very dramatic but how does any of it justify cold cocking a kid from behind and stomping him into unconscious? Very disturbing interpretation of justifiable use of force on a martial arts board.


----------



## Blotan Hunka (Sep 22, 2007)

So whats the debate here? Are you saying these kids didnt commit a crime. That 6 guys didnt stomp a victim into unconsciousness? If they DID do this are you saying there should be no repurcussions? Just "Free the Jena 6" the beaten kid deserves no justice?


----------



## Skip Cooper (Sep 22, 2007)

Mark L said:


> Those images are quite disturbing. They are also decades old, at least 4 and probably more based on the dress. Please don't misunderstand me, I think the placement of nooses in that tree was a despicable act. I just don't believe that it was a serious threat, one that carried the possibility of an imminent hanging.


 

What is disturbing to me, is that you so easily write off the pictures because they seem to be decades old.  Who cares how old they are? 

The problem lies in the fact that you are removed from the situation. If you are not living under the racial tension that exists in Jena, then how can you determine what is a serious threat? 

What we have here in Jena seems to be the acts of juveniles on both sides. Why are we not looking at the parents and questioning their motivations? I am sure they are good church going people, have they forgotten the lessons they learn on Sunday?


----------



## Makalakumu (Sep 22, 2007)

Blotan Hunka said:


> So whats the debate here? Are you saying these kids didnt commit a crime. That 6 guys didnt stomp a victim into unconsciousness? If they DID do this are you saying there should be no repurcussions? Just "Free the Jena 6" the beaten kid deserves no justice?


 
Let me clarify.  The Jena 6 committed a crime, but I think the provocation needs to be taken into account when justice is applied.  

Perhaps, the image of a noose hanging in a tree is just not something that we can understand.  I will speak for myself.  I am white.  When I see a noose hanging in a tree, intellectually, I am repelled.  Emotionally, I am incensed.

But I know that the image will never convey the "punch in the stomach" feel it must transmit to a black man.  The lack of visceral reaction is because I just don't have the experience that a black man does.  I and my family never had to live with that terror.

Does that make more sense?


----------



## michaeledward (Sep 22, 2007)

Brother John said:


> True, those aren't very many charges.
> But might want to bear in mind that those are his adult charges ONLY. According to what I'd read (don't remember where to be honest) he had an extensive juvenile record as well, though of course we'd not be able to dig up those records now.
> 
> The fact that he has a previous record, long or short, violent crimes or not, doesn't mean he's guilty in this or future crimes...
> ...


 
John, you are incorrect with your ascertions. 

Those charges are his juvenile charges, not his adult charges. Which is why I find it curious that they were first released by a Deputy Clerk, and that they were used as part of a Bond Hearing in this trial. 

Mr. Bell was a juvenile when the incident in question occurred. 

The District Attorney brought charges of Attempted Murder. In Louisiana, the crime of attempted murder, if charged against a person 15 years or older, must be brought before an adult court. 

Before the trial commenced, the charge of Attempted Murder was reduced. With the reduction of the charge, the legal proceeding should have been referred back to the juvenile court. 

I believe the Louisiana 3rd Circuit State Court of Appeals has ruled that it was inappropriate to continue the case in the adult court, and has overturned the conviction. Mr. Bell remains in custody awaiting further appeals/reviews. 

Mr. Bell will not turn 18 until January of next year.


----------



## michaeledward (Sep 22, 2007)

Blotan Hunka said:


> Exactly, all very dramatic but how does any of it justify cold cocking a kid from behind and stomping him into unconscious? Very disturbing interpretation of justifiable use of force on a martial arts board.


 
According to testimony, the blow from behind knocked Mr. Barker unconcious. The evidence of "stomping" is minimal.

I guess hyperbole works well for you.


----------



## michaeledward (Sep 22, 2007)

Blotan Hunka said:


> So whats the debate here? Are you saying these kids didnt commit a crime. That 6 guys didnt stomp a victim into unconsciousness? If they DID do this are you saying there should be no repurcussions? Just "Free the Jena 6" the beaten kid deserves no justice?


 
I'm not certain that anyone in this thread has said "Free the Jena 6". It might be interesting to see ... why did you put quotes around that? 

From my point of view, the debate is injustice in the charges, injustice in the trial proceeding, and injustice in the sentencing.


----------



## Blotan Hunka (Sep 22, 2007)

http://www.snopes.com/politics/crime/jena6.asp



> The "Jena 6" attack took place on 4 December 2006 at the high school. During a fight that broke out in the lunchroom between a white student and a black student, *the white student was hit from behind, knocked out, then set upon by other black students who proceeded to kick and stomp his "lifeless" body as he lay unconscious on the floor.* The victim, Justin Barker, spent about three hours in an emergency room being treated for injuries to his head and face.
> 
> That assault resulted in five of the black teens involved being charged, as adults, with attempted second-degree murder and given bonds ranging from $70,000 to $138,000. A sixth teen was charged as a juvenile.  Two of the Jena 6 defendants had been part of the threesome involved in the Gotta-Go Grocery incident, which is why their bonds were significantly higher: the bonds so assigned covered both sets of charges.
> 
> ...



Hyperbole ? The stomping seems pretty well established to me. And perhaps my arms are "short" but considering my "history" is a few traffic tickets.....I guess 4-5 violent crime arrests arent significant to some folks. And since hes the only one tried so far, we dont know anything about anybody else yet.

The quotes are what the protesters in Jena are chanting.


----------



## Blotan Hunka (Sep 22, 2007)

upnorthkyosa said:


> Let me clarify. The Jena 6 committed a crime, but I think the provocation needs to be taken into account when justice is applied.


 
"provocation" when what happens is a few punches thrown? Perhaps. "provocation" when an unconscious kid is kicked by 6 people? What sort of justifiable force training do you teach your students?


----------



## Mark L (Sep 22, 2007)

Skip Cooper said:


> What is disturbing to me, is that you so easily write off the pictures because they seem to be decades old.  Who cares how old they are?
> 
> The problem lies in the fact that you are removed from the situation. If you are not living under the racial tension that exists in Jena, then how can you determine what is a serious threat?
> 
> What we have here in Jena seems to be the acts of juveniles on both sides. Why are we not looking at the parents and questioning their motivations? I am sure they are good church going people, have they forgotten the lessons they learn on Sunday?


You don't know anything about me, so don't _ever_ assume I'm writing off lynchings (no matter when they occured).  That is the epitomy of arrogance, to feign knowledge of anothers' thoughts.  Why don't you tell me when the last lynching of a black man by a white man occured?  Then we can talk about how imminent the threat was.

You, too, are removed from the situation.  Your bio says you're in La Porte, TX.  Jena, LA is 263 miles away (according to mapquest), so perhaps _your_ not as in tuned as you think.  NYC is 205 miles from me, I wouldn't pretend to be more in touch with what's going on in the Bronx than you, simply because I'm geographically closer.

I will agree, vigorously, with your point on the parenting of both the black and white kids involved.  I would extend the criticism to the teachers, administrators, school board, town administration, community leaders, and the police


----------



## michaeledward (Sep 22, 2007)

Blotan Hunka said:


> http://www.snopes.com/politics/crime/jena6.asp
> 
> Hyperbole ? The stomping seems pretty well established to me. And perhaps my arms are "short" but considering my "history" is a few traffic tickets.....I guess 4-5 violent crime arrests arent significant to some folks. And since hes the only one tried so far, we dont know anything about anybody else yet.
> 
> The quotes are what the protesters in Jena are chanting.


 
A visit to www.pursuingholiness.com offers some interesting observations, that seem to be pretty free from rhetoric. This link that follows shows the source of some of those comments you are relying on. It appears that snopes article may not actually be witnessed by reliable sources. 

http://pursuingholiness.com/2007/06/27/jena-six-justin-barker-testifies-at-mychal-bell-trial/

This link actually shows the injuries suffered by Mr. Barker.

http://pursuingholiness.com/2007/09/04/the-jena-6-photo-of-justin-barkers-injuries/



As for the 'free the Jena 6' ... the six young men have apparently spent the last nine months in jail, being unable to post bail or bond for the charges of attempted murder. 

If the charges are changed from attempted murder and conspiracy to commit murder (conspiracy, really?), would the bail requirements be so high?


----------



## Makalakumu (Sep 22, 2007)

Blotan Hunka said:


> "provocation" when what happens is a few punches thrown? Perhaps. "provocation" when an unconscious kid is kicked by 6 people? What sort of justifiable force training do you teach your students?


 
Not that, of course!  The six people who attacked the one are clearly in the wrong.  However, there ARE extenuating circumstances.


----------



## Makalakumu (Sep 22, 2007)

Mark L said:


> I will agree, vigorously, with your point on the parenting of both the black and white kids involved. I would extend the criticism to the teachers, administrators, school board, town administration, community leaders, and the police


 
:yoda:


----------



## Brian R. VanCise (Sep 22, 2007)

*ATTENTION ALL USERS:

Please keep the discussion at a mature, respectful level. Please review our sniping policy **http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/sho...d.php?p=427486**. Feel free to use the Ignore feature to ignore members whose posts you do not wish to read (it is at the bottom of each member's profile). *

*Thank you.

-Brian R. VanCise
-MartialTalk Super Moderator-

*


----------



## Blotan Hunka (Sep 22, 2007)

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2007/09/04/charges_reduced_in_jena_6_attack/


> The six black students were accused of *beating and kicking *Barker on Dec. 4. A motive for the attack was never established. Barker was treated at a hospital emergency room and released after about three hours



http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20218937/site/newsweek/page/0/


> In the ensuing months, black and white students clashed violently, the school's academic wing was destroyed by arson and six black kids were charged with attempted murder for beating a white peer. (*The "deadly weapon": tennis shoes they supposedly used to kick the white student knocked unconscious by the first punch.*)



http://www.shreveporttimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070825/NEWS03/708250353


> LaSalle District Attorney Reed Walters pointed out that *Bell was placed on probation until his 18th birthday &#8212; Jan. 18, 2008 &#8212; after an incident of battery Dec. 25, 2005. After being placed on probation, he was adjudicated of three other crimes*, the two in September and another charge of criminal damage to property that occurred on July 25, 2006.


----------



## Blotan Hunka (Sep 22, 2007)

I do agree with one point though. "Attempted murder"? I would think that would hinge on proving that these kids INTENDED to kill someone. I could see assault, gang assault, some sort of reckless injury charge. Murder is a reach. BUT I believe that those charges have all been reduced right?

MY issue is how these hooligans are being held up as some sort of modern day Rosa Parks. If you are going to hold up someone as an example of racial injustice and make Icons out of them THESE are NOT the people I would choose. And I wouldnt be trying to minimize the seriousness of implication that a gang assault is proper repayment for a symbolic gesture (nooses). From Rosa and MLK, we have degenerated to Tawana Brawley and the Jena 6.


----------



## michaeledward (Sep 22, 2007)

Blotan Hunka said:


> MY issue is how these hooligans are being held up as some sort of modern day Rosa Parks.


 
I think the comparison is to the injustices suffered. 

Would you agree that Mrs. Parks suffered an injustice for not moving when additional whites got on the bus? 

She was sitting in the section of the bus that allowed black persons. When the 'White Only' section of the bus got filled, it was custom for the black persons on the bus to move further back, or stand. For refusing to move or stand, Mrs. Parks was arrested. 

In this instance; white boys who beat up black boys got probation. Black boys who beat up white boys get a possible twenty-two year jail sentence. Is that "Equal Justice Under the Law"? 

Can you agree that the inequity of treatment is an injustice? 

14th Amendment to the United States Constitution
_Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws._​


----------



## Tez3 (Sep 22, 2007)

I don't want to detract nor sidetrack from the seriousness of this thread but there is one thing that really quite horrified me that has nothing to do with the case but I do have to wonder about it. Americans are obviously used to it but one of the statements said the victim went to the casualty department and was there for 2 and half hours and  " the initial trip to the emergency room cost *$5,467*" That's nearly *£3000*, a fortune, approx 2-3 months pay for people here, for those working anyway. If you're not working and can't afford insurance life must be hard.

Didn't put this in for discussion really, just with everyone getting het up about human rights it horrified me that medical care could cost so much and good medical care is as much about human rights as anything. 

Just a thought, you can carry on getting mad at each other now!


----------



## MJS (Sep 22, 2007)

michaeledward said:


> There are 75 posts on this thread.
> 
> I was aware of the story prior to yesterday's news, but, in searching about for this discussion, I have learned much more today. You, yourself, said you had not heard of these events.
> 
> ...


 
Well, Mike I guess all we can do is wait and see what happens.  As we all should know by now, unless we have the ful story, there will always be speculation.


----------



## michaeledward (Sep 22, 2007)

Tez3 said:


> I don't want to detract nor sidetrack from the seriousness of this thread but there is one thing that really quite horrified me that has nothing to do with the case but I do have to wonder about it. Americans are obviously used to it but one of the statements said the victim went to the casualty department and was there for 2 and half hours and " the initial trip to the emergency room cost *$5,467*" That's nearly *£3000*, a fortune, approx 2-3 months pay for people here, for those working anyway. If you're not working and can't afford insurance life must be hard.
> 
> Didn't put this in for discussion really, just with everyone getting het up about human rights it horrified me that medical care could cost so much and good medical care is as much about human rights as anything.


 
Yes ... we of the leftist, socialist type of persuasion think that such costs should constitute a crime. As I understand, approximately half of that total was the combination of the ambulance trip, and a CT scan. 

What makes the number so much more tolerable, is that 1 in 6 Americans has no health insurance. So, with 48 million or so fellow yanks without health insurance ... incredibly obscene numbers, such as those you list, are the least of our worries.


----------



## MJS (Sep 22, 2007)

michaeledward said:


> It would seem that your arms are very short.
> 
> While it may seem that the rap sheeet is short, whats really sad, is a kid his age is already starting off on the wrong foot.


----------



## michaeledward (Sep 22, 2007)

MJS said:


> michaeledward said:
> 
> 
> > It would seem that your arms are very short.
> ...


 
Although I recognize it is very inappropriate to ask, I would dearly like to know about these incidents. 

Recall that the battery law says battery is "without the consent". So, was this battery as in Mr. Bell beating the crap out of some girls father? Or was he trying to put some moves on a white girl (Jena is 85% white), and have a suit thrown at him? The District Attorney claimed there were five "violent crimes" n the preceeding year, but I wonder if a 'criminal damage to property' qualifies as 'violent'? 

Hell, I had my car vandalized last month. Certainly, it is a crime, but it is hardly violent. If I found the person who keyed my car, however, there might be some violence.


----------



## MJS (Sep 22, 2007)

michaeledward said:


> Although I recognize it is very inappropriate to ask, I would dearly like to know about these incidents.
> 
> Recall that the battery law says battery is "without the consent". So, was this battery as in Mr. Bell beating the crap out of some girls father? Or was he trying to put some moves on a white girl (Jena is 85% white), and have a suit thrown at him? The District Attorney claimed there were five "violent crimes" n the preceeding year, but I wonder if a 'criminal damage to property' qualifies as 'violent'?
> 
> Hell, I had my car vandalized last month. Certainly, it is a crime, but it is hardly violent. If I found the person who keyed my car, however, there might be some violence.


 
No idea Mike, I honestly have no idea.  Without actually seeing the reports, the rap sheet, and knowing at least what the surrounding circumstances are, it'll be a mystery.


----------



## Big Don (Sep 22, 2007)

The way I see it, unless someone has actually harmed people, there is NO excuse for attacking anyone. I haven't heard anyone accuse the white kid that was beaten by the SIX cowards of hanging any of the nooses. By that fact alone, the idea that the nooses should gain the six cowards any leinency should be out the window. Yes, it is sad that some people are *******s, but, that doesn't give us the right to beat them. If it did, there would be a hell of a lot of beaten people.


----------



## michaeledward (Sep 22, 2007)

Mr. Barker was not one of the three who hung the nooses. He was friends with those who did. 

Fights take place in schools every day. Are you suggesting that when a fight in a school occurs, that the possibility of a 22 year jail sentence is appropriate?

And, in this case, the alleged assailants have bail and bond requirements ranging from $70,000.00 to $130,000.00 ... A hundred grand bail, for a school yard fight. This is appropriate?


----------



## MJS (Sep 22, 2007)

michaeledward said:


> Mr. Barker was not one of the three who hung the nooses. He was friends with those who did.
> 
> Fights take place in schools every day. Are you suggesting that when a fight in a school occurs, that the possibility of a 22 year jail sentence is appropriate?
> 
> And, in this case, the alleged assailants have bail and bond requirements ranging from $70,000.00 to $130,000.00 ... A hundred grand bail, for a school yard fight. This is appropriate?


 
I'm not saying whether its right or wrong, as I, nor does anyone else really know the full details, but its very possible, and this is only a guess here, that jail time and bond is determined upon the nature of the charges.  IMHO, this was not your typical school yard fight.


----------



## michaeledward (Sep 22, 2007)

MJS said:


> I'm not saying whether its right or wrong, as I, nor does anyone else really know the full details, but its very possible, and this is only a guess here, that jail time and bond is determined upon the nature of the charges. IMHO, this was not your typical school yard fight.


 
Why do you believe this was not a typical school yard fight?


----------



## MJS (Sep 22, 2007)

michaeledward said:


> Why do you believe this was not a typical school yard fight?


 
Lets see...in post 25 you stated this:



> As others, elsewhere, have observed ... how often do high school fights, end up with felony attempted murder charges?


 
And in post 29, Jeff said this:



Kreth said:


> How often are school fights 6-on-1 stompings?


 
I think its pretty self-explanitory Mike.  IMHO, this was not a fight, this was an assault.  I've seen a few when I was in school, and I've taken calls for some at the high school in the city in which I work and I have yet to hear about one resulting in the injuries that were mentioned in the J6 case.

You may view this differently and thats fine.  Everyone is entitled to their opinions.


----------



## Blotan Hunka (Sep 22, 2007)

"Fights" in school are one thing. 6 guys kicking an unconscious kid is entirely another. And accused/charged is worlds away from convicted. And the charges have already been reduced, which isnt unusual in ANY court case. Minus the whole noose/tree thing this story would have gone nowhere.


----------



## MJS (Sep 22, 2007)

Blotan Hunka said:


> "Fights" in school are one thing. 6 guys kicking an unconscious kid is entirely another. And accused/charge is worlds away from convicted. And the charges have already been reduced, which isnt unusual in ANY court case. Minus the whole noose/tree thing this story would have gone nowhere.


 
Agreed.  There are disturbances everyday, many of which do not even end up on tv, let alone paper.  Like you said, if the noose was never brought into play, this would most likely be an open/shut case.


----------



## michaeledward (Sep 22, 2007)

Could the felony attempted murder charge be the result of a bigotted, racist District Attorney? Maybe there is an election coming up? The DA charged 'conspiracy to commit murder'. Didn't we just go through more than a year of personal destruction in North Carolina at the hands of an overzealous District Attorney? I bet multiple murder convictions would look real good on District Attorney Walters resume. 



			
				District Attorney Reed Walters to Jena students said:
			
		

> See this pen? I can end your lives with the stroke of a pen.


 
As for the six-on-one charges ... six people were arrested ... it does not follow that six people were involved in the fight. 

What was the victims testimony, under oath? He claims he does not know who hit him, nor how many. (At the hospital, he claimed he was jumped by 15 guys - was he lying then, or is he lying now?)



			
				Justin Barker said:
			
		

> I turned my back and somebody hit me, that's all I remember,


 
Ten supporting witnesses were called by the District Attorney. According to this report, there is some interesting conflicts among these witnesses. 

http://www.katc.com/Global/story.asp?S=6719374



> Ten white high school students appeared on the witness stand. Some said Bell was the one who struck Barker, others said they could not identify the person who knocked Barker down but that the attacker wore a green hooded jacket. The last of the 10, Jacob Hooter, said the person who struck Barker wore a red shirt. Hooter said Bell was present, but he did not see Bell hit or kick Barker.


 
Incidentally, Mr. Bell was wearing a black jacket that day, according to the reports I have read. 



One of the charged students, Mr. Robert Bailey, has stated this ...  



> It was a rowdy day at school because of what had happened over the weekend, {Bailey said of earlier fights at the Fair Barn and Gotta Go convenience store.} The fight (with Justin) happened so quick. But those of us arrested werent even around. Once the fight broke out, we all ran to see what happened, but I wasnt around when the fight happened.


 
Again, racial tensions were running very high. A bunch of white kids accuse a bunch of black kids of beating up one of their own ... but under oath, and on the witness stand, they can't even agree the color of clothing the instigator was wearing. 


As for the injuries ... please look at the images linked to upthread. Mr. Barker took some licks, no doubt. But, second degree aggrevated battery which requires a dangerous weapon; in this case, it is argued that a tennis shoe was that weapon (we can only assume that the tennis shoe was on a foot) ... I guess one needs to show up barefoot, if one wishes to avoid 22 years in jail.


----------



## MJS (Sep 22, 2007)

michaeledward said:


> Could the felony attempted murder charge be the result of a bigotted, racist District Attorney? Maybe there is an election coming up? The DA charged 'conspiracy to commit murder'. Didn't we just go through more than a year of personal destruction in North Carolina at the hands of an overzealous District Attorney? I bet multiple murder convictions would look real good on District Attorney Walters resume.


 
Mike, with all due respect here, this is getting a bit silly now, dont you think?  I mean really, we can what if, maybe this, maybe that, blah blah all day long.  This is pure speculation at this point, I'm sorry to say.





> As for the six-on-one charges ... six people were arrested ... it does not follow that six people were involved in the fight.


 
Did you see post 96?



> What was the victims testimony, under oath? He claims he does not know who hit him, nor how many. (At the hospital, he claimed he was jumped by 15 guys - was he lying then, or is he lying now?)


 
Again, I refer you back to post 96.  It states:



> The "Jena 6" attack took place on 4 December 2006 at the high school. During a fight that broke out in the lunchroom between a white student and a black student, *the white student was hit from behind, knocked out, then set upon by other black students who proceeded to kick and stomp his "lifeless" body as he lay unconscious on the floor.* The victim, Justin Barker, spent about three hours in an emergency room being treated for injuries to his head and face.


 
If he was in fact hit from behind, and lost consciousness, how can he know how many people?







> Ten supporting witnesses were called by the District Attorney. According to this report, there is some interesting conflicts among these witnesses.
> 
> http://www.katc.com/Global/story.asp?S=6719374
> 
> ...


 
Please tell me Mike that you're not using this as reliable evidence are you?  Interesting how I can take a call for a large disturbance involving 30 people, someone else takes a call saying there are weapons, someone else says there are no weapons, someone else says its only 10 people.  





> Again, racial tensions were running very high. A bunch of white kids accuse a bunch of black kids of beating up one of their own ... but under oath, and on the witness stand, they can't even agree the color of clothing the instigator was wearing.


 
See my above comment.




> As for the injuries ... please look at the images linked to upthread. Mr. Barker took some licks, no doubt. But, second degree aggrevated battery which requires a dangerous weapon; in this case, it is argued that a tennis shoe was that weapon (we can only assume that the tennis shoe was on a foot) ... I guess one needs to show up barefoot, if one wishes to avoid 22 years in jail.


 
This discussion has really gone south.  As I said many times, its ALL speculation.  Unless we were there, relying on things that were linked here, is really not 100%, yet it seems that some people insist on using that evidence as fact.  

I give up.


----------



## michaeledward (Sep 22, 2007)

Why is it that every thing that points to complete and total guilt of the young black men is beyond question, and every point that addresses the credibility and claims of the accusation is 'a bit silly' and 'speculation'?  

EDIT - Incidentally ... much of what I am presenting is not, in any way ~ speculation. It is from the trial transcripts and records. Where I speculate, and hypothesis, I believe I have made it clear that they are my suggestions of possibilities.  END EDIT



The news report that you question as un-'reliable evidence', was a report of conflicting witness testimony at the trial. 



Do you know how many defense witnesses Mr. Bell's court appointed attorney called on behalf of his defense?


----------



## michaeledward (Sep 22, 2007)

MJS said:
			
		

> > Quote:
> > The "Jena 6" attack took place on 4 December 2006 at the high school. During a fight that broke out in the lunchroom between a white student and a black student, *the white student was hit from behind, knocked out, then set upon by other black students who proceeded to kick and stomp his "lifeless" body as he lay unconscious on the floor.* The victim, Justin Barker, spent about three hours in an emergency room being treated for injuries to his head and face.
> 
> 
> If he was in fact hit from behind, and lost consciousness, how can he know how many people?


 
So, based on what are you arging that all six arrested were involved? There is no claim in this paragraph of the number of students involved in the attack. 

It appears that the arguement being made is that the young men were arrested and charged, and therefore they must all be guilty.


----------



## Tez3 (Sep 22, 2007)

Sorry for popping up again but the odd thing I notice is that no one uses the word "alleged". Over here the presumption is of innocence until proved guilty as I know it is over there so when anyone talks of something like this and that would include all the posters here they _have _to use the word alleged. The 'alleged' attack, the 'alleged' attackers even the 'alleged' victim.  

This is done to indicate that it is for the court to decide the truth not the media or people stirring things up for either side. It's to indicate that eveidence has to be presented to prove guilt not for anyone to presume it. It's also to indicate that the public and the media have no way of knowing the truth until all the evidence is presented. It's used to indicate that we are being fair or at least trying to be.


----------



## MJS (Sep 22, 2007)

michaeledward said:


> Why is it that every thing that points to complete and total guilt of the young black men is beyond question, and every point that addresses the credibility and claims of the accusation is 'a bit silly' and 'speculation'?
> 
> EDIT - Incidentally ... much of what I am presenting is not, in any way ~ speculation. It is from the trial transcripts and records. Where I speculate, and hypothesis, I believe I have made it clear that they are my suggestions of possibilities. END EDIT
> 
> ...


 
Mike, my point, in cases like this, in cases like the Taser incident of the student at the John Kerry function, is this:  unless we have something that is original, the weight it holds is cut in half right off the bat IMO.  Are you saying that you rely on a police report that was given to the press, which they publish, as the solid proof of what happened?  How do we know that things were not edited?  We dont and thats my point.  



michaeledward said:


> So, based on what are you arging that all six arrested were involved? There is no claim in this paragraph of the number of students involved in the attack.
> 
> It appears that the arguement being made is that the young men were arrested and charged, and therefore they must all be guilty.


 
If I was in a car with 3 other people and they decide to rob a bank, while I sit in the car, we get pulled over by the cops and I swear on a stack of bibles that I never went into the bank, do you think they're going to take my word?

Like I said Mike, this thread is 8 pages of back and forth, back and forth.  We all have our opinions and I stand by mine.  Simply hanging a noose does not constitute a beating.  Nobody was physically hurt from that, but someone sure was hurt in that beating.  People can march until their legs fall off, but until the state, the politicians or whoever, does something, nothing will change.  I have to wonder if all these people that are marching, knew the full story.

On that note, I think I'm going to bow out of this thread for now.


----------



## Big Don (Sep 22, 2007)

Tez3 said:


> Sorry for popping up again but the odd thing I notice is that no one uses the word "alleged". Over here the presumption is of innocence until proved guilty as I know it is over there so when anyone talks of something like this and that would include all the posters here they _have _to use the word alleged. The 'alleged' attack, the 'alleged' attackers even the 'alleged' victim.
> 
> This is done to indicate that it is for the court to decide the truth not the media or people stirring things up for either side. It's to indicate that eveidence has to be presented to prove guilt not for anyone to presume it. It's also to indicate that the public and the media have no way of knowing the truth until all the evidence is presented. It's used to indicate that we are being fair or at least trying to be.


That the six are the attackers has been alleged, that the victim was attacked is not alleged.


----------



## Mark L (Sep 22, 2007)

michaeledward said:


> Why is it that every thing that points to complete and total guilt of the young black men is beyond question, and every point that addresses the credibility and claims of the accusation is 'a bit silly' and 'speculation'?
> 
> EDIT - Incidentally ... much of what I am presenting is not, in any way ~ speculation. It is from the trial transcripts and records. Where I speculate, and hypothesis, I believe I have made it clear that they are my suggestions of possibilities.  END EDIT
> 
> ...


What about the victim?  What did he do to deserve being beaten by 1, 2, 3, or more? You're well informed, right?  So tell me why this kid shouldn't expect the justice system to put these dickheads away for a long, long time.  You posted links to photos of his injuries, right?  Maybe they don't look severe enough to warrant 22 years, at least to you.  What about the concussion he sustained?  Do you know that his brain has not been affected?  Now or in the future? 

There have been discussions on this and other MA forums about what we as trained fighters can and can't do when confronted with violence.  The prevailing advice I've gleaned is that if you are confronted by multiple attackers your life is in grave danger, do what it takes to survive the encounter.  Those six black kids put their victim in grave danger, they should  get exactly what they deserve.   Their race is entirely irrelevant.


----------



## Skip Cooper (Sep 22, 2007)

Mark L said:


> You don't know anything about me, so don't _ever_ assume I'm writing off lynchings (no matter when they occured). That is the epitomy of arrogance, to feign knowledge of anothers' thoughts. Why don't you tell me when the last lynching of a black man by a white man occured? Then we can talk about how imminent the threat was.
> 
> You, too, are removed from the situation. Your bio says you're in La Porte, TX. Jena, LA is 263 miles away (according to mapquest), so perhaps _your_ not as in tuned as you think. NYC is 205 miles from me, I wouldn't pretend to be more in touch with what's going on in the Bronx than you, simply because I'm geographically closer.
> 
> I will agree, vigorously, with your point on the parenting of both the black and white kids involved. I would extend the criticism to the teachers, administrators, school board, town administration, community leaders, and the police


 
The last lynching that occurred was in 1998 in Jasper, TX. Maybe you heard about it. A few racist white guys chained a black man to the back of their pickup truck and dragged him to his death. This may have not been a lynching with a noose, but a lynching nonetheless.

Yes, I am fortunate to live in a city where there is little or no racial tension, but I have lived in other cities where the tension was greater. And yes, I am myself removed from what is happening in Jena, however, I am not the one writing off pictures of lynchings because they are "decades old". Your comments lead me to believe that you are not sensitive to the stigma that comes from a past of hanging nooses, burning crosses, and men with pointy hats blowing up black churches. 

I have agreed with much of what you have posted up until this quote. Perhaps I misunderstood your or perhaps you did not mean to write in your own words:



Mark L said:


> Those images are quite disturbing. They are also decades old, at least 4 and probably more based on the dress. Please don't misunderstand me, I think the placement of nooses in that tree was a despicable act. I just don't believe that it was a serious threat, one that carried the possibility of an imminent hanging.



I find that your questioning my geographic location almost comical. In terms of removed from the situation, I was not referring to where you reside on good ol' Rand McNally, I am sure you understood that. You don't have to live in Jena to know what is going on there. Also, I find it odd that you would attack me and then find a way to agree with me to end your post. Of course, you one upped me, but I'll let you have it.

Since we don't know everyones biography and their life philosophies, all we have to go on is the content of a person's posts. If you don't want people to make assumptions upon you, take care in what you post. Like good ol' dad used to say "think before you speak".


----------



## Mark L (Sep 22, 2007)

Skip Cooper said:


> I find that your questioning my geographic location almost comical. In terms of removed from the situation, I was not referring to where you reside on good ol' Rand McNally, I am sure you understood that. You don't have to live in Jena to know what is going on there. Also, I find it odd that you would attack me and then find a way to agree with me to end your post. Of course, you one upped me, but I'll let you have it.


Your words from post #91 "The problem lies in the fact that you are removed from the situation. If you are not living under the racial tension that exists in Jena, then how can you determine what is a serious threat?"  Then you say you don't have to live there to know?  You are as equally removed as I.  I disagree with you, I do think you need to live in Jena to know what is going on there.  The fact that some are attempting to justify a heinous assault in the name of racial tension is repugnant to me.

I'm not attacking you, I'm cautioning you to not read into my posts meaning that is not there.  If you'd prefer that we agree on all, or nothing, I can do that.

Let me have it?  Gee, thanks.


----------



## Mark L (Sep 22, 2007)

Skip Cooper said:


> The last lynching that occurred was in 1998 in Jasper, TX. Maybe you heard about it. A few racist white guys chained a black man to the back of their pickup truck and dragged him to his death. This may have not been a lynching with a noose, but a lynching nonetheless.


No, it's not (according to good 'ol Webster).  I hope the guys that did that were arrested, tried, convicted, and sentenced.  My wish is that they suffered greatly before being put to a slow, painful, humiliating death.

We're talking about the credibility and imminence of the threat attached to nooses hung from trees in Jena, not pick-up trucks.


----------



## Skip Cooper (Sep 22, 2007)

Mark L said:


> Your words from post #91 "The problem lies in the fact that you are removed from the situation. If you are not living under the racial tension that exists in Jena, then how can you determine what is a serious threat?" Then you say you don't have to live there to know? You are as equally removed as I. I disagree with you, I do think you need to live in Jena to know what is going on there. The fact that some are attempting to justify a heinous assault in the name of racial tension is repugnant to me.
> 
> I'm not attacking you, I'm cautioning you to not read into my posts meaning that is not there. If you'd prefer that we agree on all, or nothing, I can do that.
> 
> Let me have it? Gee, thanks.


 
In my post, I was not referring to the town of Jena itself, but of the racial _conditions_ that are found in many communities similar to Jena . If one needs to live in Jena to understand racial tension, then why are we discussing this topic. Since not one among us posting on this thread live in Jena, LA then this has all been a colossal waste of time.

I am not among those who justify the attack based on the racial tension, like you, I condemn it. I just understand the racial overtones of a noose and what it may mean to a young black man in the south. Now the young man who sees a noose as a threat still has to make a choice. To act on such a threat in a violent manner is criminal. He could choose to ignore the matter and this will place him on an intellectual plane above those who hung the noose in the first place.

If you are suggesting that we agree to disagree, then fine I agree to disagree with you. I agree that the boys who hung the noose was in error, not criminal, but in error nonetheless. I agree that the beating was criminal and the ones who participated in this crime should be prosecuted to the fullest length of the law. I agree that those who seek to justify this beating because of the racial tension is repugnant. What has happened to personal responsibility? It seems the only thing we disagree on is the concept of a noose being a threat, whether the last public hanging of a black man happened 40 years ago or longer. 

I believe we can live together in peace while disagreeing on one topic concerning the Jena 6. Should we even be discussing the Jena 6, since we don't even live there?

By the way, your welcome


----------



## Skip Cooper (Sep 22, 2007)

Mark L said:


> No, it's not (according to good 'ol Webster). I hope the guys that did that were arrested, tried, convicted, and sentenced. My wish is that they suffered greatly before being put to a slow, painful, humiliating death.
> 
> We're talking about the credibility and imminence of the threat attached to nooses hung from trees in Jena, not pick-up trucks.


 
This discussion is deteriorating...now it seems we are arguing semantics.

According to _Merriam-Webster's Dictionary of Law_ the word lynch is defined as a transitive verb meaning to put to death (as by hanging) by mob action without legal sanction. The words in parenthesis are given as an example of a lynching.

Moreover, according to the _American Heritage Dictionary_ again the word lynch is defined as a trasitive verb meaning to execute without due process of law, especially to hang, as by a mob. Again the suggestion of hanging is an example.

It seems to me that the accepted meaning to lynch is defined as the unlawful execution of another human being. It just so happens that in the good ol' days hanging was popular among mobs.  I am sure that the word "lynch" would not be excluded in the horrible draggin death that James Byrd, Jr. suffered at the hands of three seriously racist white boys in a tiny east Texas town. And yes, they were convicted in his death. I would have to research the story to learn of their sentences.  Since the crime happened in Texas, where everyone knows how much we love to execute criminals, I am sure that one if not all recieved the death penalty.

If you were a racist black youth, raised by racist black parents, living in a racist community with racist white youths, raised by racist white parents, then a noose hung from a tree in Jena could be viewed as a credible and eminent threat. And I don't have to live in Jena to know that.


----------



## Mark L (Sep 22, 2007)

Skip,
I, too, think we are largely in agreement.  I'm simply vexed by excuses offered in defense of felons, it's maddening to me.  I do hope justice (blind as advertised) is served.  

And yes, we should be discussing events that lie beyond our front door.  Always.


----------



## Mark L (Sep 22, 2007)

Skip Cooper said:


> Your argument is deteriorating...
> 
> According to _Merriam-Webster's Dictionary of Law_ the word lynch is defined as a transitive verb meaning to put to death (as by hanging) by mob action without legal sanction. The words in paranthesis are given as an example of a lynching.
> 
> ...


You got me, you win.  Have a nice night.


----------



## Doc (Sep 22, 2007)

Big Don said:


> Even though? That seems a little biased right there, is it not possible to try to kill someone and just be incompetent? Democrats sure seem perpetually ready to tell all and sundry that blacks, and other minorities, can't help but be victims.
> Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton and Martin Luther King III should have spent more time on applying the ideal expressed in Martin Luther King Jr's "I have a dream" speech and start judging people by not by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.  Neither Sharpton nor Jackson should be held up as some kind of  hero as BOTH are shameless race baiting shysters. Everytime  Al Sharpton speaks on anything Tuwana Brawley ought to be mentioned, likewise,Jesse Jackson ought to have his "Hymie town" and other idiotic racist comments thrown into his teeth at every turn.
> These are but a small part of my thoughts.


Well then, I guess I don't have to say anything. My only complaint is you missed a few.


----------



## michaeledward (Sep 22, 2007)

Tez3 said:


> Sorry for popping up again but the odd thing I notice is that no one uses the word "alleged". Over here the presumption is of innocence until proved guilty as I know it is over there so when anyone talks of something like this and that would include all the posters here they _have _to use the word alleged. The 'alleged' attack, the 'alleged' attackers even the 'alleged' victim.
> 
> This is done to indicate that it is for the court to decide the truth not the media or people stirring things up for either side. It's to indicate that eveidence has to be presented to prove guilt not for anyone to presume it. It's also to indicate that the public and the media have no way of knowing the truth until all the evidence is presented. It's used to indicate that we are being fair or at least trying to be.


 
You are correct, Tez3. Our language has been inadequate in describing the situation. 

If one was so inclined, the legal defense that was offered to Mr. Bell appears to have been every bit as inadequate for such a serious charge. Here in the States, a defense council is provided to charged defendants, if the defendant is unable to secure council for himself/herself.

Mr. Blane Williams was the appointed defense attorney working on Mr. Bell's behalf. In defense of Mr. Bell, Mr. Williams apparently called zero defense witnesses at trial. 

http://friendsofjustice.wordpress.c...ounsel-what-blane-williams-should-have-known/

Mr. Bell has acquired new, and hopefully better, council.


----------



## Brother John (Sep 22, 2007)

michaeledward said:


> John, you are incorrect with your ascertions.
> 
> Those charges are his juvenile charges, not his adult charges. Which is why I find it curious that they were first released by a Deputy Clerk, and that they were used as part of a Bond Hearing in this trial.
> 
> Mr. Bell will not turn 18 until January of next year.


 
WOW!!
.....I did not know that Michael. THAT's not supposed to happen, juvenile records published!! That's why I assumed those were adult charges! 

hmmm...


regardless: 
my take...
The nooses, should have legal action taken against whomever did it!
The beating, should also be prosecuted...
*NEITHER* is justified.
..once *past* these issues, there are important social circumstances that need delt with!!

It's REALLY too bad that this is being turned into a media circus! Once that happens, _NO good will come of it_, and important issues will not get addressed in an even handed way.

Your Brother
John


----------



## Doc (Sep 22, 2007)

MJS said:


> If I was in a car with 3 other people and they decide to rob a bank, while I sit in the car, we get pulled over by the cops and I swear on a stack of bibles that I never went into the bank, do you think they're going to take my word?


For the record, you're no different than those that physically went into the bank according to the law. Likewise if they killed someone, you'd be charged with murder. So it goes back to the things our parents taught us. Choose your friends carefully, and walking is sometimes beter than riding. 


> Like I said Mike, this thread is 8 pages of back and forth, back and forth.  We all have our opinions and I stand by mine.  Simply hanging a noose does not constitute a beating.  Nobody was physically hurt from that, but someone sure was hurt in that beating.  People can march until their legs fall off, but until the state, the politicians or whoever, does something, nothing will change.  I have to wonder if all these people that are marching, knew the full story.


I doubt it. These things always begin with emotion first, and rational thought later. I remember not too long a go a bunch of white guys were presumed guilty of raping a black stripper, even though there was no evidence. People marched, teams were suspended from athletics, etc. It was all a lie and now the prosecutor has been disbarred and is facing crimnal charges himself. When I discussed the case after looking into it, some people didn't want to hear it. There's an old law enforcement story about officers trying to tell some people what happened in an incident. The complaining person said, "Don't confuse me with facts, I already know what happened."


> On that note, I think I'm going to bow out of this thread for now.


I hear you. Rational thought rarely prevails. People tend to have what I call "selective outrage." I went around with a neighbor of mine who was fuming about the "Jena 6." I asked him what he knew about the incident. All he knew is that some young blacks were being "wrongly prosecuted." I said are any of them dead? He said, "No, why do you ask me that?" I said, "Well, as long as you're worked up, you might also want to get angry about the 300 plus homicides in south central this year of blacks killing each other. Just a thought." I walked away. Selective Outrage strike again.


----------



## Brother John (Sep 22, 2007)

Doc said:


> I doubt it. These things always begin with emotion first, and rational thought later.
> 
> "Don't confuse me with facts, I already know what happened."


 
*Exactly Doc!!!!* 
People won't want to THINK about what happend, they'll only _FEEL_... and those who've made a living and a legacy on playing upon these sentiments to their political/social advantage (Sharpton et. al.) will drum it up to a fine frenzy. All rational thought will go out the window, the white racists beliefs will be reinforced and the society that NEEDS healing will have it's fresh wounds held open wide! 

People should feel outrage about the nooses! It's VERY despicable! It shouldn't end at 'emotion'. The circus will only work on OLD fears & pains, there won't be reconciliation and even justice will take a backseat.
People should feel outrage about the beatings as well!

...sorry, rambling here....


> Rational thought rarely prevails. People tend to have what I call "selective outrage." I went around with a neighbor of mine who was fuming about the "Jena 6." I asked him what he knew about the incident. All he knew is that some young blacks were being "wrongly prosecuted." I said are any of them dead? He said, "No, why do you ask me that?" I said, "Well, as long as you're worked up, you might also want to get angry about the 300 plus homicides in south central this year of blacks killing each other. Just a thought." I walked away. Selective Outrage strike again.


 
sad, but true!



Your Brother
John


----------



## Big Don (Sep 23, 2007)

Doc said:


> Well then, I guess I don't have to say anything. My only complaint is you missed a few.


I'm sorry, I am a poor (at best) typist and I am aware that websites have to worry about memory usage, else I'd have laid it all out...


----------



## Tez3 (Sep 23, 2007)

People will always get emotional about things like this, I'm not about this one because I've not read or seen anything about it and am distanced from it.I've been reading it out of interest.

The victim is an 'alleged' victim because it has to be proved that he was beaten up and the injuries not inflicted by someone or something else, false acusations aren't unknown, I believe someone mentioned a false rape allegation before. That may seem odd when you think he was injuried and it seems obvious to everyone what happened but if you were on a jury that's how you should start off thinking.It's probably a good place to start a discussion on the internet too. 

I do think it's odd though that emotions have run high on this thread which in it's self isn't a bad thing but people have been attacking each other personally! Some have decided who is guilty and why, others have tried to provide a wider perspective and been attacked for it. I think the truth is that no one knows the truth nor is likely to now it's become a circus.  

Righteous anger is fine, if you have all the facts. If what some have said on here is a reflection of the feelings of the local people who will presumably sit on a jury hearing this case I fear that justice will be not be done.


----------



## Cruentus (Sep 23, 2007)

Brother John said:


> WOW!!
> .....I did not know that Michael. THAT's not supposed to happen, juvenile records published!! That's why I assumed those were adult charges!


 
Well, now as I tell the local teenagers that I often have the chance to interact with for some of the community services that I do, you ALWAYS have to be concerned about your record, Juvenile or not. Young teens often don't think about how their actions will impact them down the line, and often need to be reminded. 

Your juvenile record isn't wiped clean, despite what people commonly think, in that all that stuff will show up on background checks if you need any type of security clearance for any job, or if you apply to be a police officer, or military, etc. It's stored somewhere. You can expect that your record has been tracked for at least 10 years, juvenile or not.

So, the information on their juvenile records is available and usable for certain things, particularly security clearances and certain jobs. I just don't know the legalities or ethics behind publishing their records, or to what extent it can/should be usable in this case.

C.


----------



## Doc (Sep 23, 2007)

Cruentus said:


> Well, now as I tell the local teenagers that I often have the chance to interact with for some of the community services that I do, you ALWAYS have to be concerned about your record, Juvenile or not. Young teens often don't think about how their actions will impact them down the line, and often need to be reminded.
> 
> Your juvenile record isn't wiped clean, despite what people commonly think, in that all that stuff will show up on background checks if you need any type of security clearance for any job, or if you apply to be a police officer, or military, etc. It's stored somewhere. You can expect that your record has been tracked for at least 10 years, juvenile or not.
> 
> ...



Well I can tell you, records can be sealed, but that doesn't mean they won't get looked at. They do not destroy criminal records ever.


----------



## MJS (Sep 23, 2007)

Doc said:


> For the record, you're no different than those that physically went into the bank according to the law. Likewise if they killed someone, you'd be charged with murder. So it goes back to the things our parents taught us. Choose your friends carefully, and walking is sometimes beter than riding.
> 
> I doubt it. These things always begin with emotion first, and rational thought later. I remember not too long a go a bunch of white guys were presumed guilty of raping a black stripper, even though there was no evidence. People marched, teams were suspended from athletics, etc. It was all a lie and now the prosecutor has been disbarred and is facing crimnal charges himself. When I discussed the case after looking into it, some people didn't want to hear it. There's an old law enforcement story about officers trying to tell some people what happened in an incident. The complaining person said, "Don't confuse me with facts, I already know what happened."
> 
> I hear you. Rational thought rarely prevails. People tend to have what I call "selective outrage." I went around with a neighbor of mine who was fuming about the "Jena 6." I asked him what he knew about the incident. All he knew is that some young blacks were being "wrongly prosecuted." I said are any of them dead? He said, "No, why do you ask me that?" I said, "Well, as long as you're worked up, you might also want to get angry about the 300 plus homicides in south central this year of blacks killing each other. Just a thought." I walked away. Selective Outrage strike again.


 
Agreed with everything you said sir.  Thank you for your feedback.  A voice of reason is always nice. 

Mike


----------



## michaeledward (Sep 24, 2007)

Doc said:


> I hear you. Rational thought rarely prevails. People tend to have what I call "selective outrage." I went around with a neighbor of mine who was fuming about the "Jena 6." I asked him what he knew about the incident. All he knew is that some young blacks were being "wrongly prosecuted." I said are any of them dead? He said, "No, why do you ask me that?" I said, "Well, as long as you're worked up, you might also want to get angry about the 300 plus homicides in south central this year of blacks killing each other. Just a thought." I walked away. Selective Outrage strike again.


 
And I believe Philadelphia has had 400 black youths killed so far this year. And Baltimore is about 200 - maybe 250. This is horrible and should stop. There is, however, a difference between the human wreckage in South Central, and elsewhere, and what is taking place in Jena.

The 'system' is supposed to treat all of us the same, if we ever encounter it. In Jena, it seems that the system is being unusually aggressive toward these youths. 

Now, it may be appropriate to find a way to have the system to become more proactive in South Central; or to at least find a way for the reactive nature of the system to be more effective at getting the bad guys off the streets; or the weapons out of their hands. Or, hell, just get the system working in that part of town again.

While we could be talking about two sides of the same coin, I think actually, we are talking about two different coins, all together.


----------



## Doc (Sep 24, 2007)

michaeledward said:


> And I believe Philadelphia has had 400 black youths killed so far this year. And Baltimore is about 200 - maybe 250. This is horrible and should stop. There is, however, a difference between the human wreckage in South Central, and elsewhere, and what is taking place in Jena.
> 
> The 'system' is supposed to treat all of us the same, if we ever encounter it. In Jena, it seems that the system is being unusually aggressive toward these youths.
> 
> ...



Not exactly. The system in South Central works just fine. The system doesn't kill, it controls and punishes. It is a statistical fact that 98% of all crimes against an ethnic group are committed by that same ethnic group, and that includes whites.

Therefore even with significant crime, we're only talking about a 2% variance outside the group. When people who commit crimes come in contact with the system, usually the witnesses against them are of the same ethnicity.

My problem is how people get worked up about 6 guys who are still alive who participated in the precipitation of their contact with the system. How that system is treating them is a matter of debate, but save some "outrage" for the hundreds of dead ones who died by the hand of someone from their own group, instead of being so outraged over what "might" be a problem with the system in that local. When someone young and innocent minding their own business gets killed standing at a bus stop, or walking home from school, simply because they were in the wrong place - start the outrage there. Until then the Jena 6 are on their own. Get pissed about the innocent first. Whatever they are, they are not "innocent."

When you kick the system, (do something to propel yourself into it) you take your chances. The system has a reasonable level of procedure under which it operates. It is not perfect. It, like life, has never been fair, and never will be. My Mom used to say, "When you go into Lions Den, you don't knopw the size of the lion. He may be a cub, or full grown. He could be sick or well. The best chance you have is to not go in."

I guarantee there has been crime in that area committed by blacks against blacks. Those victims don't seem to be as important as the Jena 6. Some are talking about the system and how it treats blacks. I'm talking about why blacks can only get outraged when they perceive an injustice from someone else. Injustice is injustice, no matter what the color, or where it comes from.


----------



## michaeledward (Sep 24, 2007)

I don't know, Doc. If you think the system is working, after telling us of three hundred funerals for young black men in South Central, you and I have different definitions of working. 

I am in no way pleased with those numbers ... but as you said, it is not the system killing those young men. But, neither is the system controlling or punishing appropriately in the community, apparently. 

In Louisiana, the system seemed to be operating differently for the white folks. Mr. Sloan (white guy) got probation for cracking a guy over the head with a bottle. Mr. Bell (black guy) got 22 years (reduced from a possible 100 years) for throwing a punch that knocked a guy unconcious. Both preciptiated in their own participation in the system. 


If you have an idea about what a white northeast liberal can do to help stop the killing in South Central or Philly, please let me know. Last time I heard, even a black Northeast Liberal (Mr. Bill Cosby) got grief for suggesting black-on-black crime and black culture needed serious attention.


----------



## Doc (Sep 24, 2007)

michaeledward said:


> I don't know, Doc. If you think the system is working, after telling us of three hundred funerals for young black men in South Central, you and I have different definitions of working.


The system doesn't stop people from killing, it merely punishes those that do. There is nothing in any system anywhere that can stop people from kiling other than a "Police State," with confews, control of your every movement, and instant justice." And that doesn't stop people from killing either. What I speak of is not part of the sysytem. There is no amount of police that can stop crime without the cooperation and support of the people they serve.

People have to be "outraged" when there are those in their community that break the law. They have to make fliers, get on the internet, and march when one black child is accidentally killed in a drive by. They have to get off their butts and support the police being proactive to keep their community safe, instead of being outraged everytime some 13 year old in a stolen car evades the police, then tries to run down the cop, and gets shot because the cop happens to be white.


> I am in no way pleased with those numbers ... but as you said, it is not the system killing those young men. But, neither is the system controlling or punishing appropriately in the community, apparently.


I've come to learn a community gets the kind of law enforcement they want and deserve. There are areas of Southern California where this is not an issue because the community calls the police and expects to get an appropriate response.  What do you do with a community that thinks the police are an occupation force because some race baiting self serving half-*** "reverend" says so? What do you do with people that don't want the police to stop people in their neighborhood. What do you do with people who can get outraged at the Jena 6 thousands of miles away, but don't care about the 6 guys standing on the corner at 3 o'clock in the morning, and won't call the police and demand to see what they're doing?


> In Louisiana, the system seemed to be operating differently for the white folks. Mr. Sloan (white guy) got probation for cracking a guy over the head with a bottle. Mr. Bell (black guy) got 22 years (reduced from a possible 100 years) for throwing a punch that knocked a guy unconcious. Both preciptiated in their own participation in the system.


I don't know the facts and I'm sure neither do you. We're all listening and reading what someone else says. I usually read the court records and police reports in these issues, but truthfully, I'm not even interested. It could be possible, and if the circumstances warrant it, should be addressed. But if they both had kep their hands in their pockets it wouldn't even be an issue.


> If you have an idea about what a white northeast liberal can do to help stop the killing in South Central or Philly, please let me know. Last time I heard, even a black Northeast Liberal (Mr. Bill Cosby) got grief for suggesting black-on-black crime and black culture needed serious attention.


Don't try to help people who aren't interested in helping themselves. Find the ones that are, and help them in anyway you can. The rest will have to develop a decent amount of "outrage" for circumstances of their own making first, and take responsibility for it. Lifes not fair never has been. Some are born of two well educated parents with money in the bank. Some don't know who their father is, and their mothers on crack. There is no system anywhere that can even that out. Sooner or later, you do the best you can do in a "system" that gives you all the opportunities in the world. You just have to recognize them. Or you can continue to blame others, and stand around with your hand out. 

Funny thing, if you are poor and black, and you work and go to school and become successful, unless you're giving them something directly, you're treated no different than other "outsiders." You become a part of the system, the establishment, because of your work ethic and acquired accent called English.


----------



## Doc (Sep 24, 2007)

Looking at the crime stats for Eagle Rock, may be you should concern yourself about that first.


----------



## Jade Tigress (Sep 24, 2007)

*ATTENTION ALL USERS - SECOND AND FINAL WARNING

Martial Talk does not tolerate rude, insulting, inflammatory, and outright disrespectful posts. General posting rules can be found here. Disregard for posting rules could result in infraction cards, suspension, or ban. 

PLEASE REFRAIN FROM ALL SUCH POSTING HABITS AND KEEP THE CONVERSATION AT A MATURE AND RESPECTFUL LEVEL.

Pamela Piszczek
MT Super Moderator*


----------



## Brother John (Sep 25, 2007)

Cruentus said:


> Well, now as I tell the local teenagers that I often have the chance to interact with for some of the community services that I do, you ALWAYS have to be concerned about your record, Juvenile or not. Young teens often don't think about how their actions will impact them down the line, and often need to be reminded.
> 
> Your juvenile record isn't wiped clean, despite what people commonly think, in that all that stuff will show up on background checks if you need any type of security clearance for any job, or if you apply to be a police officer, or military, etc. It's stored somewhere. You can expect that your record has been tracked for at least 10 years, juvenile or not.
> 
> ...



I'm a correctional officer with the JJA (Juvenile Justice Authority)..
Juvenile records are not wiped clean, but once a person turns 18 they can hire a lawyer and sue to get their juvenile record expunged. The common mistake is that many think this is an automatic process upon turning 18. It isn't. It costs!
Even still: Expunged records can be viewed by correctional and LEO, but not schools or future employers.
..and not ALL records can be expunged. Rape, sodomy, indecent liberties and murder....NOPE........*etched in stone*.

Also: even if he is an adult now, his juvenile records SHOULDN'T ever be published. That's every state.
Exception: Unless he offered it! Then it's up for grabs.

Your Brother
John


----------



## Big Don (Sep 25, 2007)

somewhat Off Topic:
How is Jena pronounced? I have heard it pronounced like "Gina" and like "Jenna"
is one correct, or is it tomato tomAHto type of thing?


----------



## CoryKS (Sep 25, 2007)

Big Don said:


> somewhat Off Topic:
> How is Jena pronounced? I have heard it pronounced like "Gina" and like "Jenna"
> is one correct, or is it tomato tomAHto type of thing?


 

It's the first one.  I found it in this article, which is pretty interesting:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070922...lled_jena_3;_ylt=ApvcexcbjCKgxnvxcvoZglwkeedF


----------



## Brother John (Sep 25, 2007)

Here is a clip of a rally, in front of the Jena courthouse. (which he pronounces Gina, btw)

It's a man who's a lawyer and came from the ACLU (I think, might be NAACP, he speaks of both.....and i'm tired) in New York to Jena to give speeches and to open a new chapter of his organization.

There's bongo's and tambourines and a whistle (like a ref's whistle) and he keeps leading his crowd to chant "NO JUSTICE - - NO PEACE".
I kind of thought that the NACCP and/or the ACLU was about seeking justice and peace, didn't know they weren't peaceful.
Doesn't that kind of seem, I dunno,....to incite civil unrest?

_HERE's THE LINK_

Just thought you'd like to see it and maybe add to the discussion.
Your Brother
John


----------



## CoryKS (Sep 25, 2007)

Brother John said:


> I kind of thought that the NACCP and/or the ACLU was about seeking justice and peace, didn't know they weren't peaceful.
> Doesn't that kind of seem, I dunno,....to incite civil unrest?


 
Yes, I think it does. 

Here's an article from Thomas Sowell regarding the "NJNP" slogan.  I think this is maybe not a good part of the country to start proposing that sort of thing.

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MGIyZTNmOGEzNTg0OTUyODNkNzhiNDVjMWE3MDk0NzA=


----------



## Doc (Sep 25, 2007)

CoryKS said:


> Yes, I think it does.
> 
> Here's an article from Thomas Sowell regarding the "NJNP" slogan.  I think this is maybe not a good part of the country to start proposing that sort of thing.
> 
> http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MGIyZTNmOGEzNTg0OTUyODNkNzhiNDVjMWE3MDk0NzA=



That's Dr. Thomas Sowell  My mentor.


----------



## michaeledward (Sep 25, 2007)

CoryKS said:


> Yes, I think it does.
> 
> Here's an article from Thomas Sowell regarding the "NJNP" slogan. I think this is maybe not a good part of the country to start proposing that sort of thing.
> 
> http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MGIyZTNmOGEzNTg0OTUyODNkNzhiNDVjMWE3MDk0NzA=


 
I believe Mr. Sowell mischaracterizes the arguments to benefit his position. 

Example

_The issue is the prosecution of a black high-school student accused of stomping on an unconscious white student  and the lack of criminal prosecution of white students who hung a noose on a tree, who were disciplined by the school_​As I understand it, that is not exactly the case being discussed. Most of the arguments I have seen ... and those I have made, is that hanging of the nooses on the tree is racist, mean and derogatory. I don't think I have made an argument that it is a criminal act. (Although, if burning a cross on a public property is a crime, so too should be the noose.).

The inequity being argued is the difference in treatment of Mr. Sloan, who when found guilty in a criminal proceeding received probation for assaulting the black student. Compared to the attempted murder charge - a felony, against Mr. Bell (et al) for assaulting a white student. 

I suppose if you alter the actual facts you can make any arguement seem reasonable.



Or how about this. _The black student was found guilty but the verdict was overturned on appeal  not on grounds that he was not guilty, but on grounds that the appellate court did not think he should have been tried as an adult._​The appellate court did not think? WTF? It was not the attitude or the opinion of the appellate court that the defendant should not be tried as an adult, but rather the law of the State that says so. (I've been over this before). In Louisiana, certain crimes are required to be tried in front of the adult system, if the accused is older than 15 years of age. One of those crimes is attempted murder. When the prosecutor lowered the charges from attempted murder to aggravated battery, the trial should have been moved to the juvenile system. 

I suppose if one's default position is all courts are filled with 'activisit judges', then legal doctrine becomes irrelevant. 

Or - alternate theory of the crime here - Could it be that an overzealous, racist District Attorney over-charged the accused in order to place the crime before the adult system, knowing he would be unable to meet the burden of proof of 'Attempted Murder' and 'Conspiracy to Commit Murder'. Then he gambling that reducing the charges would slip by, unnoticed? As I said earlier, we've never seen an over aggressive DA in this country, have we. 

_The usual legal procedure would be to try the student again, but this time not as an adult. However, the usual legal procedures are not good enough for those who have once again seized the opportunity to hype race  and to hell with questions of guilt or innocence or legal procedures._​ 
While there are some - such as those in the you tube video - who are arguing for an immediate release of the accused. Most of the comments I have seen are not for a Pardon: wipe the slate completely clean. The students have spent the last nine months in jail, being unable to post bond. Those who are arguing 'Free the Jena 6', I believe, are saying that 'Time Served' is an appropriate punishment to fit the crime. 

Second Degree Aggrevated Battery is a pretty severe crime in Louisiana. From what I could find in sentencing issues for the State, usually the sentence is in the five year range. Of course, those sentences have been focused on adult convicts, and usually associated with other crimes (drug possession, weapons charges).

I'm not certain that Second Degree Aggrevated Battery with a juvenile would match that five years. I am not certain that it is the appropriate charge for the students, if they are to be treated as juveniles.

But, let's get a fair charge. Let's have a fair trial, and see what the results lead us. 

I think Dr. Thomas Sowell has created an article filled with lies and misrepresentations in order to prove a point to himself. I don't believe he he lending clarity to the subject. Now, some of my differences of opinion with this article may be a different philosophical/political attitude. But some of those differences are not so easily dismissed. He is wrong on facts. He builds straw men to tear them down.


----------



## Doc (Sep 25, 2007)

michaeledward said:


> I believe Mr. Sowell mischaracterizes the arguments to benefit his position.
> 
> I think Dr. Thomas Sowell has created an article filled with lies and misrepresentations in order to prove a point to himself. I don't believe he he lending clarity to the subject. Now, some of my differences of opinion with this article may be a different philosophical/political attitude. But some of those differences are not so easily dismissed. He is wrong on facts. He builds straw men to tear them down.



Then you should email him horaney@hoover.stanford.edu with your assertions. But I warn you to bring your "A" Game. He is a world renowed educator and economist who's research is ALWAYS unbiased and pragmatic as you would expect from an economist. He a Senior Fellow at the Hoover Instittue at Stanford Unversity. He is best able to argue his positions.


----------



## Blotan Hunka (Sep 25, 2007)

Doc said:


> Then you should email him horaney@hoover.stanford.edu with your assertions. But I warn you to bring your "A" Game. He is a world renowed educator and economist who's research is ALWAYS unbiased and pragmatic as you would expect from an economist. He a Senior Fellow at the Hoover Instittue at Stanford Unversity. He is best able to argue his positions.


 

Taking bets?


----------



## CoryKS (Sep 25, 2007)

Doc said:


> That's Dr. Thomas Sowell  My mentor.


 
Yeah, I'm a huge fan.  I have all of his stuff except a couple of the older ones and the new letters compilation.


----------



## michaeledward (Sep 25, 2007)

Doc said:


> Then you should email him horaney@hoover.stanford.edu with your assertions. But I warn you to bring your "A" Game. He is a world renowed educator and economist who's research is ALWAYS unbiased and pragmatic as you would expect from an economist. He a Senior Fellow at the Hoover Instittue at Stanford Unversity. He is best able to argue his positions.


 
I'll take it under advisement.

However, his words are plain, and his logic is flawed. 

Part of the big challenge in our culture today, is that we Americans are generally unable or unwilling to critically review articles like this.

My question is ... are my criticisms of his article flawed? I whipped them off the top of my head at a quick glance. I would assume his article suffered through several drafts and a publisher before being released. It would be far easier for me to make a mistake in reasoning. If so, point it out. Not a difference of opinion, to which we are all entitled, but rather an flaw in logic. 

_the usual legal procedures are not good enough for those who have once again seized the opportunity to hype race _​Is this, or is this not a straw man argument? 

I certainly have argued that race is a component of the injustice in Jena. I'm not certain I have 'hyped' race. Point to some reasonable arguments by people like me who claim that a re-trail should not be considered.

_The black student was found guilty but the verdict was overturned on appeal  not on grounds that he was not guilty, but on grounds that the appellate court did not think he should have been tried as an adult._​Was the argument of the appellate court based on attitudes and opinions, or was it based on law. If it was based on the feelings of the 3rd Circuit, and not the law, show me. 

I've done my part to demonstrate the errors in reasoning. If I missed some reasoning, then point it out here. Don't just appeal to a higher authority. For that is a logical error, as well.


----------



## Doc (Sep 25, 2007)

michaeledward said:


> I'll take it under advisement.
> 
> However, his words are plain, and his logic is flawed.
> 
> ...


Maybe you didn't understand. Why are you arguing with us about something someone else wrote? He's dome the research and is in a better position to defend his point of view. So what's your point? If you are unwilling to confront the source of your discourse, than what am I to say? I gave you the opportunity. You may take it or not. Until you do, that part of the discussion is closed and you are debating with the wrong people.


----------



## crushing (Sep 25, 2007)

Brother John said:


> Here is a clip of a rally, in front of the Jena courthouse. (which he pronounces Gina, btw)
> 
> It's a man who's a lawyer and came from the ACLU (I think, might be NAACP, he speaks of both.....and i'm tired) in New York to Jena to give speeches and to open a new chapter of his organization.
> 
> ...


 
His threats of 'no peace' feed the racist stereotype, the very same one some have tried to use to defend the Jena 6, that violence is acceptable when things aren't going how they are should go.  That there will be violence should the courts decide _wrongly_.  That violence is ok when presented with despicable symbols of racism, such as a noose.  That violence is the answer when confronted with some ignorant fool that doesn't like you because of the color of your skin.


----------



## michaeledward (Sep 25, 2007)

Doc said:


> Maybe you didn't understand. Why are you arguing with us about something someone else wrote? He's dome the research and is in a better position to defend his point of view. So what's your point? If you are unwilling to confront the source of your discourse, than what am I to say? I gave you the opportunity. You may take it or not. Until you do, that part of the discussion is closed and you are debating with the wrong people.


 
I understand perfectly. 

Is his logic flawed? 

Is his languaged flawed? 

The practice of critical thinking does not require confrontation, nor arguement, nor discussion. As I recollect, you often encourage people here to exercise critical thinking when it comes to kenpo.


----------



## Doc (Sep 25, 2007)

michaeledward said:


> I understand perfectly.
> 
> Is his logic flawed?
> 
> ...


HE'S done the research. HE knows the background. I don't. I prefer to argue from positions that I can defend because I have the correct information. In this case, I acknowledge I have not done the investigation on the circumstances surrounding the incidents. I defer to those that have, and I don't consider looking at internet rants.


----------



## Ray (Sep 25, 2007)

michaeledward said:


> The practice of critical thinking does not require confrontation, nor arguement, nor discussion. As I recollect, you often encourage people here to exercise critical thinking when it comes to kenpo.


When i think of critical thinking and Doc, I think of the many people who argue with him on the web kenpo-wise. They perform all kinds of "thought experiments" and talk from their point of reference. Having had a couple of ops to see for myself what he does, it makes sense to seek out the source and see it for yourself. 

Using the same line of logic, it makes sense to talk directly with the person you're disagreeing with if possible. He might be able to have a better dialog with you, answering your questions and both of your (perhaps) gaining insight.


----------



## michaeledward (Sep 25, 2007)

Ray said:


> When i think of critical thinking and Doc, I think of the many people who argue with him on the web kenpo-wise. They perform all kinds of "thought experiments" and talk from their point of reference. Having had a couple of ops to see for myself what he does, it makes sense to seek out the source and see it for yourself.
> 
> Using the same line of logic, it makes sense to talk directly with the person you're disagreeing with if possible. He might be able to have a better dialog with you, answering your questions and both of your (perhaps) gaining insight.


 
Ray, does this mean I can only learn a Martial Arts technique from Mr. Parker? 

Or is it possible to apply logic, body mechanics, and practical application to measure the effectiveness of an idea?


----------



## Doc (Sep 25, 2007)

michaeledward said:


> Ray, does this mean I can only learn a Martial Arts technique from Mr. Parker?
> 
> Or is it possible to apply logic, body mechanics, and practical application to measure the effectiveness of an idea?



Of course, IF you have the underlying knowledge and basic skills acquired from someone else to make an informed decision of efficacy. But if Mr. Parker is available .... why trip?

With pardons to Ray.


----------



## Ray (Sep 25, 2007)

michaeledward said:


> Ray, does this mean I can only learn a Martial Arts technique from Mr. Parker?
> 
> Or is it possible to apply logic, body mechanics, and practical application to measure the effectiveness of an idea?


If it were possible for humankind to apply logic, reason and application to come up with the right answer then we should have saved centuries in darkness.

Most of us learn from someone and spend our lives regurgitating it.  The smart ones, and there are few, will revolutionize the world.  Just as you and I learned martial arts from someone else...

What does it hurt to talk to the person with whom you disagree?  Rather than apply logic and reason to what you think he says, you could converse to ensure a proper transfer of ideas has taken place.


----------



## michaeledward (Sep 25, 2007)

Ray said:


> If it were possible for humankind to apply logic, reason and application to come up with the right answer then we should have saved centuries in darkness.
> 
> Most of us learn from someone and spend our lives regurgitating it. The smart ones, and there are few, will revolutionize the world. Just as you and I learned martial arts from someone else...
> 
> What does it hurt to talk to the person with whom you disagree? Rather than apply logic and reason to what you think he says, you could converse to ensure a proper transfer of ideas has taken place.


 
Ray, we don't need to be concerned with all humankind learning and applying logic; just the individual. I don't believe that logic, reason, and application are a panacea for all that is wrong in the world. I am wondering however, is there is a ground between those stumbling in the darkness and those who revolutionize the world. 

In this instance, I believe the the tools of reason and logic can be applied by any individual on the material in question. I don't think we need to worry about what we think he says; his words are written down. They have been published with his name attached. His words are there for our considered and thoughtful review.

If my reasoning is incorrect, it can be analyzed by everyone right here, in the context of this thread. I have asked if I am misinterpreting the language he has written? We all share a common tongue here. No one has indicated any flaw in my logic and reasoning. 

Instead, the conversation has turned to 'I must go to the source'. But, what if a source is not available, and the only thought they have left us is written (Mr. Shakespeare?) 

My arguement is not that talking to the source would 'hurt'. It is that it is not necessary. The conversation is taking place here, on Martial Talk. One involved in the conversation used this article as a support for his position. To me, it is not a terribly strong argument. I don't know why that can't be discussed here, in our conversation. As opposed to starting a new conversation with someone not involved here.


----------



## michaeledward (Sep 26, 2007)

It was just announced that Mr. Bell's overturned conviction will be re-tried in the juvenile court system. This is where it belonged to begin with. 

I am curious what charges are going to be brought against Mr. Bell with the new trial, and if there are any differences between the juvenile court system and the adult court system. 

http://blogs.usatoday.com/ondeadline/2007/09/jena-6-defendan.html


----------



## Brother John (Sep 27, 2007)

michaeledward said:


> It was just announced that Mr. Bell's overturned conviction will be re-tried in the juvenile court system. This is where it belonged to begin with.
> 
> I am curious what charges are going to be brought against Mr. Bell with the new trial, and if there are any differences between the juvenile court system and the adult court system.
> 
> http://blogs.usatoday.com/ondeadline/2007/09/jena-6-defendan.html


Thanks for notifying us on that.

Yeah, there _Should _be a difference. MOSTLY just in the sentencing phase though. I WOULD say that the 'media circus' should be disappointed that they'll not be let into the court-room and there won't be a 'court reporter'... but I also wouldn't have thought that a juvenile's court records would be published...
so I'll just bite my tongue on that and wait.

But anyway, THIS is how it should be handled! Those guilty need to face appropriately leveled charges in a court appropriate to their age! Now, will the community that's gathered to "Free" him accept whatever the judge decides??
also: Now...those responsible for the nooses need to face charges of criminal or terroristic threat! They would in my state at least.

Your Brother
John


----------



## michaeledward (Sep 27, 2007)

District Attorney Reed Walters issued a statement today that he will not appeal the decision to re-try the case in the juvenile court. 

Earlier, he had said that there were no laws in Louisiana that could have been brought against the students who hung the nooses on the tree. He also stated that the Louisiana area United States Attorney could not find sufficient cause to bring charges against those who hung the nooses. And, that the U.S. Attorneys and the Department of Justice would not, normally, bring charges against juveniles even if there was evidence appropriate for an adult charge. 

If the former is true, it would seem the Louisiana legislature has some things it should put on their agenda. 

If the latter is true, I am not certain there is anything inappropriate in those stipulations. 

As for those who have called to 'free' them, and how they may react to re-trial, and adjudications, I would hope that no one would pre-judge the situation. The actions and decisions of the juvenile court will be weighed when they are presented. To state now that a judges ruling will be accepted, no matter what would be inappropriate, wouldn't it?


----------



## Doc (Sep 27, 2007)

Listen, Mychal Bell is free on bail. Everybody OK now?


----------



## michaeledward (Oct 2, 2007)

Mr. Mellencamp

http://relative-way.com/jenastream/


----------



## MJS (Oct 7, 2007)

Thoughts?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21137111/

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21158289/


----------



## Big Don (Oct 7, 2007)

Of course the Mellencamp song is inflammatory, that is its whole purpose, that and getting his name out there again... not like John has done much in the last few years...

Hip hop artists use the "N" word far to often to be heard on any racial issue. Ice T, as much as I like him, is tainted by the "**** the Police" controversy, which, is mildly amusing, now that he plays a cop on TV...


----------



## michaeledward (Oct 8, 2007)

Artists generally have an eye toward the emotional impacts in the community. Certianly there is opportunity for the artist community around these events. 

I think that Melloncamp's song missed the mark. I think he has distilled too much out of the events of the fall of '06. I think he reaches too soon to the civil rights movement of the 60's. Maybe a 3 minute pop-song is an insufficient medium for these events. 

If that is what the mayor was saying, I think he is on the right track. 

If he was saying there is no racial problem in Jena, events have been 'mischaracterized',  then he really needs to get back to school, himself. 

I guess I would like to see what actions the mayor has taken over the past year that were intended to stop racial conflict. Has he been attempting to bring the community together? Or has he let the conflict play out and build? Did it really take him a year to create a committee to begin to study the racial problems in town? 

There may just be a bit of 'methinks he doth protest too much' going on with Mayor McMillin.


EDIT - This article, with Mayor McMillin, is an interesting read.

http://www.nationalist.org/alt/2007/091901.html

I think it is important to note that Mayor McMillin initiated the conversation by returning a phone call to this white supremecist organization. END EDIT


----------



## CoryKS (Oct 8, 2007)

Big Don said:


> Of course the Mellencamp song is inflammatory, that is its whole purpose, that and getting his name out there again... not like John has done much in the last few years...
> 
> Hip hop artists use the "N" word far to often to be heard on any racial issue. Ice T, as much as I like him, is tainted by the "F&^k the Police" controversy, which, is mildly amusing, now that he plays a cop on TV...


 
To be fair to Mellencamp, I don't think this was a cynical ploy to get his name out there.  He has a pretty loyal following and does well in cd and ticket sales.

I think he falls into the category of "people who think with their heart" - high on emotional value but sorely lacking in logic.  The problem is that it leaves the brain little to do, and without meaningful work to keep it occupied the brain tends to atrophy.


----------



## MJS (Feb 9, 2008)

While surfing the web today, I came across this.



> (AP) A defendant in the Louisiana "Jena Six" case was arrested after allegedly slamming a student's head into a bench at his new school in Texas, police said.
> The defendant, Bryant R. Purvis, 19, was arrested on a charge of assault causing bodily injury Wednesday after an altercation at Hebron High School. It began because Purvis believed a student had flattened his tires, Sgt. John Singleton said.


 
Thoughts?


----------



## Kreth (Feb 9, 2008)

MJS said:


> Thoughts?


The poor kid's probably still traumatized from the events in Jena.


----------



## michaeledward (Feb 9, 2008)

MJS said:


> Thoughts?


 
Were the tires flat? 
How many tires were flat?
How were they flattened? 

It would seem to me that reporter should determine the answers, and included them in a news story. Instead, all we get is a heresay report about what the young man 'believed'.


----------



## Ray (Feb 9, 2008)

michaeledward said:


> Were the tires flat?
> How many tires were flat?
> How were they flattened?
> 
> It would seem to me that reporter should determine the answers, and included them in a news story. Instead, all we get is a heresay report about what the young man 'believed'.


Reported as fact: The person {allegedly} committing an assault was arrested.

The story does not indicate that the young man discovered the vandal in the process of flattening the tires.  If not, he was not acting to protect his property from being damaged--So it would appear to have been an illegal assault.

No mention was made to indicate how many flattened tires makes assault a legal option in that state.  So unless the number is greater than zero the quantity and manner is irrelevant.  It {the flattening of the tires} probably can be considered in the sentencing phase to reduce the punishment.  And, if the tires were flattened then there may be the option for a civil case for property damage.

We can't just go around hitting people.


----------



## michaeledward (Feb 9, 2008)

Ray said:


> Reported as fact: The person {allegedly} committing an assault was arrested.
> 
> The story does not indicate that the young man discovered the vandal in the process of flattening the tires. If not, he was not acting to protect his property from being damaged--So it would appear to have been an illegal assault.
> 
> ...


 
So much for the imploring, eh?


----------



## Ray (Feb 9, 2008)

michaeledward said:


> So much for the imploring, eh?


I don't see any reference to "imploring" in any of the previous posts relating to this assault.


----------



## Doc (Feb 9, 2008)

All reports indicate someone told him the victim of his assault had flattened two of his tires the previous evening, and he confronted and assaulted the person the next day. 

Whether the person had actually flattened the tires is yet unknown, but the assault does not seem to be in dispute, only the "justification" given by the suspect. It is a fact that the defendants all have a history of violence. Why is it a surprise?

"When you glorify thuggery, and support the violent, it tends to repeat itself."


----------



## michaeledward (Feb 9, 2008)

Well, we certainly can guess what lessons he has learned from interacting with the police department and the justice system, can't we?


----------



## Doc (Feb 9, 2008)

michaeledward said:


> Well, we certainly can guess what lessons he has learned from interacting with the police department and the justice system, can't we?



Apparently, none.


----------



## michaeledward (Feb 9, 2008)

Oh, I think there were many lessons.


----------



## Doc (Feb 10, 2008)

michaeledward said:


> Oh, I think there were many lessons.



Yeah but, apparently he isn't learning any of them.


----------



## Doc_Jude (Feb 10, 2008)

Question: If six black individuals stomp a white individual into unconsciousness and beyond, is it a hate crime? 



			
				 School Superintendent Breithaupt  said:
			
		

> "It was a premeditated ambush and attack by six students against one. The victim attacked was beaten and kicked into a state of bloody unconsciousness."


----------



## Doc (Feb 10, 2008)

Doc_Jude said:


> Question: If six black individuals stomp a white individual into unconsciousness and beyond, is it a hate crime?


Some don't seem to think so, but reverse the circumstances and Oh my God. Some seem to think that Blacks cannot be "racist," only the victims of racism. Question: Whose more racist, Black or Whites? Oops!


----------



## Doc_Jude (Feb 10, 2008)

Doc said:


> Some don't seem to think so, but reverse the circumstances and Oh my God. Some seem to think that Blacks cannot be "racist," only the victims of racism. Question: Whose more racist, Black or Whites? Oops!



I'd say it's entirely subjective (individuals or groups). Of course, there's a difference between Racial Pride, Racialism and Racism.


----------



## michaeledward (Feb 10, 2008)

Doc said:


> Yeah but, apparently he isn't learning any of them.


 
I think Mr. Purvis learned, plenty.
It may not have been the lessons we thought we were teaching.

Unintended consequences, and all that.


----------



## 5-0 Kenpo (Feb 11, 2008)

michaeledward said:


> I think Mr. Purvis learned, plenty.
> It may not have been the lessons we thought we were teaching.
> 
> Unintended consequences, and all that.


 
What were the lessons that he learned???


----------



## michaeledward (Feb 11, 2008)

5-0 Kenpo said:


> What were the lessons that he learned???


 
5-0 Kenpo, I sort of doubt that this is a serious question of my opinion; but I am going to treat it as a serious question anyway. 

This story is true: 

Last fall, I went out to my drive way, and found that someone had vandalized my car. Along the door, quarter panel, and hardtop of my Jeep, someone had scratched the words "Fag" and "Biggot" through the paint. 

My step daughter had earlier made a ranting post on her myspace page about how her father is a bigot. Apparently, someone who knows my girl, thought that she was ranting about me, and not her biological father. 


Well, I was pretty upset. The repair on my vehicle cost me close to $800.00. But, when I discovered the vandalism, I was pretty hot. 

You know what I did? 

I called the police. A nice young man came by, and took a statement. He asked if I was gay; apparently being gay might have qualified the vandalism to be considered a 'hate crime'; because of the use of the term 'fag'. That was a bit puzzling to me, because if the vandal hated homosexuals; does it really matter if I am or not? 


Now ... Let us turn to young Mr. Purvis. What interactions has he had with the police department? What interactions has he had with the legal system?  

He may (or may not) have been invovled in a school yard fight. 
He was thrown in jail for months, because bail was set prohibitively high.
He was charged with murder and faced decades of time in jail. 

So, when somebody vandalises his automobile ~ for the second time in a week ~ do you honestly believe he is going to call the police? 

I think one of the lessons Mr. Purvis may have learned; is that the police are not part of the community to protect and to serve; the police are not going to help you, even when you are wronged.

The whole situation is incredibly sad.


----------



## MJS (Feb 11, 2008)

michaeledward said:


> 5-0 Kenpo, I sort of doubt that this is a serious question of my opinion; but I am going to treat it as a serious question anyway.
> 
> This story is true:
> 
> ...


 
In the case of Mr. Purvis, according to the story, he assumed that the person he assaulted was the one who damaged his car, yet he really didn't know. In your situation, it seems that while you've narrowed it to someone who read the myspace page, you don't know who did the damage to your jeep. Now, you may know, I don't know, as you didn't say.

In any case, being angry is certainly a normal response. But, whether we know or don't know, the point is, is it right to take our actions to the point of what Purvis did? Now, if we look at this:



> He may (or may not) have been invovled in a school yard fight.
> He was thrown in jail for months, because bail was set prohibitively high.
> He was charged with murder and faced decades of time in jail.


 
Do we know for a fact that we was/wasn't involved in the initial schoolyard fight?

I'm no legal expert, but I'd think that looking at the victims injuries in that case, I can see why bail was set high. 

He controls his life. He chose to beat someone close to death. 

Now, the reality is, vandalism on a small scale such as this...chances are, even if its reported, the odds of catching the accused is slim to none. I take calls all the time with people reporting their cars egged. I send a cop, but what is he going to do? A full scale investigation into an egging? Of course not. So, the common sense thing to do is to chalk it as a stupid thing done by someone with too much free time on their hands, and wash the car. 

Purvis had 'bad' run ins with the police because of his own actions. He seems to feel the cops don't like him, and I'm sure that feeling is going to grow now that he's had another run in. 

Sure, I'd be pissed off too, had that been my car, but would I beat them? Well, as tempting as it may be, where is that going to get me? This is along the same lines as trying to talk your way out of a fight first, before blows are exchanged. I'm not going to go to jail if I talk my way out, but I'll probably have to take some time off from work, if I elbow the guy and knock a few teeth out.


----------



## michaeledward (Feb 11, 2008)

Mike, the accusations around the original six involved in Jena are sketchy, at best. While there is little doubt about six young men were arrested and charged, there was quite a bit of doubt about how those six were originally named. 

At this point, people's opinions have been formed, and solidified. New facts don't have any point of entry on that issue. 

I'm just saying, more and more, I am coming to believe that calling the police for help is a bad idea.


----------



## MJS (Feb 11, 2008)

michaeledward said:


> Mike, the accusations around the original six involved in Jena are sketchy, at best. While there is little doubt about six young men were arrested and charged, there was quite a bit of doubt about how those six were originally named.


 
Looks like my original link the the story has expired, and I hate the thought of combing thru all these pages to find another, but out of curiosity, do you or anyone else happen to recall how they got named?  I can only assume from witnesses or the victim(s) themselves.



> I'm just saying, more and more, I am coming to believe that calling the police for help is a bad idea.


 
Trust me, many times I field calls from citizens that either were not happy with the actions or comments of the officer that was sent to take their complaint and from those that try and try and try to get in touch with an officer investigating their case, yet they avoid the citizens call like the plague.  Sure, some citizens can be major PITAS, but nonetheless, the cop took that job and he should do it to its fullest.  

So it looks like there are 2 options then:

1) Call the cops or..

2) don't call and take your own action.


----------



## Doc (Feb 11, 2008)

michaeledward said:


> 5-0 Kenpo, I sort of doubt that this is a serious question of my opinion; but I am going to treat it as a serious question anyway.
> 
> This story is true:
> 
> ...



Yes it is sad. Sad that somehow you think your story has something to do with the situation of Mr. Purvis. You're as much of a problem as he is. People like you who make excuses for thugs reinforce their warped since of justice, and right and wrong. Its support of people like you that allow them to not feel accountable for their own actions.

Purvis has a problem with authority of any kind, not just the justice system. He finds himself involved with the justice system because of his own repeated behavior. Yes, he had priors even before the Jena incident. It's called a "pattern." A pattern of behavior that apparently according to you is not his fault.

Bad behavior is without color. I grew up in those neighborhoods, and I knew the thugs that preyed on other people. Color didn't matter to them, as long as they got what they wanted and did what they wanted to do, and always passed the blame to "the system." "It's the man's fault I steal." "It's the systems fault I'm a criminal." "I'll beat down anyone who gets in my way, and its their fault."

Funny how no one heard from you when they were railroading the students from Duke University, but then they were white. I am utterly, totally, and completely insulted by your idiotic statements. 

Perhaps your position will change when one of these thugs you excuse, bangs one of your children's head into a bench, because of something someone told him. At least then, you'd be on the moral high ground, but making excuses when other people are being physically injured, makes you just as much of a problem as the thugs that do it in my book. I'm in the trenches with these people you support everyday, and it's absolutely condescending garbage.


----------



## michaeledward (Feb 11, 2008)

Mike, 

http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showpost.php?p=855152&postcount=113

This post has a link to some of the discrepencies in witness testimony. Certainly, the victim in the Jena 6 case clearly stated that he did not see who hit him. 

I'm sure there are other stories that reflect the discrepencies as well.



If there are two options ... I would say that Mr. Purvis learned that the second option was the best option for him. That may or may not be a good lesson ... but, I think denying that it was a lesson learned is difficult, at best.


----------



## Grenadier (Feb 11, 2008)

_*ATTENTION ALL USERS:*

_Please keep the discussion at a mature, respectful level. 

Please review our sniping policy http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/sho...d.php?p=427486. 

Feel free to use the Ignore feature to ignore members whose posts you do not wish to read (it is at the bottom of each member's profile). 

Thank you.

-Ronald Shin
-MT Super Moderator


----------



## MJS (Feb 11, 2008)

michaeledward said:


> Mike,
> 
> http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showpost.php?p=855152&postcount=113
> 
> ...


 
Thanks for the link.  Yes, like anything, there're always going to be discrepencies.  Look at how many times someone is wrongfully accused and spends time in jail for a crime they didn't do.  

Now, it does seem in this case that some of the parties involved were in fact guilty of the assault.  

As for whether or not this was the best option for Purvis...I still have to disagree.  In the original story, I don't recall ever reading if they found out who hung the nooses from the tree.  So, did they just assault the first white student that they came across?  Just like in this case, Purvis obviously assaulted the first person he thought was guilty.


----------



## SageGhost83 (Feb 11, 2008)

I am a minority, so you can guess that I have been forced to hear this story over and over and over...you get the point. I am sorry - if you put your hands on someone then you have crossed the line and you are guilty of assault, no bones about it. Hanging nooses was a very stupid and offensive thing to do, and whoever did it should be charged with a hate crime. However, putting your hands on someone when they didn't put their hands on you is a definite no-no and can even be considered a hate crime in and of itself due to the high probability that they did go and beat the first white kid that they could find. A gesture versus an actual assault? Which is more serious? someone's pride or someone's physical well-being? I hope that they get punished to the fullest extent of the law, and I hope that whoever hung the nooses get charged with a hate crime.


----------



## Doc (Feb 11, 2008)

SageGhost83 said:


> I am a minority, so you can guess that I have been forced to hear this story over and over and over...you get the point. I am sorry - if you put your hands on someone then you have crossed the line and you are guilty of assault, no bones about it. Hanging nooses was a very stupid and offensive thing to do, and whoever did it should be charged with a hate crime. However, putting your hands on someone when they didn't put their hands on you is a definite no-no and can even be considered a hate crime in and of itself due to the high probability that they did go and beat the first white kid that they could find. A gesture versus an actual assault? Which is more serious? someone's pride or someone's physical well-being? I hope that they get punished to the fullest extent of the law, and I hope that whoever hung the nooses get charged with a hate crime.


Hanging a noose can be offensive, but it is not against the law. The students that did it were suspended, and were only allowed to return after 10 days in a transition school. The incident with the nooses was two months prior, and was only brought up to justify the actions of some who acted badly. There were other circumstances as well. Bottom line, when you put your hands on another person, you have to accept the consequences whether you like them or not. People don't get to choose their own punishment for their actions. When you commit crimes, you put yourself in the hands of others. No system is perfect because it's made of human beings, and therefore are flawed. The cure, is to keep your hands in your pocket and your feet on the floor.

I also stand by my previous statement and found nothing wrong with expressing my opinion in a respectful manner.


----------



## 5-0 Kenpo (Feb 11, 2008)

michaeledward said:


> 5-0 Kenpo, I sort of doubt that this is a serious question of my opinion; but I am going to treat it as a serious question anyway.


 
It is a serious question. You made a statment that Purvis had learned lessons, but did not express what you had though he had learned. In order to agree with or refute your statement, I have to know what lessons you believe that he had learned. 



			
				michaeledward said:
			
		

> This story is true:
> 
> Last fall, I went out to my drive way, and found that someone had vandalized my car. Along the door, quarter panel, and hardtop of my Jeep, someone had scratched the words "Fag" and "Biggot" through the paint.
> 
> ...


 
This statement is telling of your knowledge not only of police, but of the legal system as well.

"Fag" is a term in general usage. It is used in jest, it is used as a general insult, and it is also a derogatory term for homosexuals.

Now, for it to be a hate crime, per the legal process, the person making the statement of "fag" must know that you are in fact a homosexual. That was the necessity for the officer asking the question. Legally, it is not a hate crime if it was not done with the specific task of making you fear for your safety for being a part of that particular group. Therefore, if you are not gay, he was simply being insulting, akin to him scratching "a**hole" on your car. 

Now, if you have a problem with this, your beef is with the legislators and the court system, not the police. 

As an aside, this is why I despise hate crime legislation in the first place. It is too arbitrary and capricious.

I also understand that you are using this story to show an example of "lessons learned." But I am also going to assume, correct me if I am wrong, that you do know the significant differences in the two cases.



			
				michaeledward said:
			
		

> Now ... Let us turn to young Mr. Purvis. What interactions has he had with the police department? What interactions has he had with the legal system?
> 
> He may (or may not) have been invovled in a school yard fight.
> He was thrown in jail for months, because bail was set prohibitively high.
> ...


 
As has been stated, Purvis had been involved in the wrong side of the law before the Jena incident. He has already shown the propensity for being violent and and a criminal. This is merely a continuation of his behavior in this regards.

Do I believe that Purvis has learned lessons of not calling the police? Absolutely. And it is based on his own actions, criminal actions. Criminals are not likely to call the police, even if they are victims. 

As an example, in the metropolitan Los Angeles area, I have been involved in the investigation of many gang shootings / homicides. Even when the suspects are known by them, the gangsters refuse to give information as to their identity. They would rather take matters into their own hands. Street justice, if you will. Purvis' case is yet another example of this.

And it is very sad that people do not change their negative behavior when confronted with the consequences. You may be correct that he may have learned the lesson that "is that the police are not part of the community to protect and to serve; the police are not going to help you, even when you are wronged..." but he learned the wrong information. 

If I tell you 2+2 = 4, and you continue to believe that it is 5, there is nothing anyone can do for you.


----------



## SageGhost83 (Feb 12, 2008)

Doc said:


> Hanging a noose can be offensive, but it is not against the law. The students that did it were suspended, and were only allowed to return after 10 days in a transition school. The incident with the nooses was two months prior, and was only brought up to justify the actions of some who acted badly.


 
I see, and you are definitely correct. I stand corrected, myself. I was thinking more along the lines of that whole hate speech thing, but the action isn't exactly "speech". We are in agreement that regardless of the noose, what those guys did was criminal no matter how you slice it. You cannot put your hands on someone just because they offended you. There is no way to justify what they did, and thus, I believe that the guys should be punished to the fullest extent of the law. Whoever hung the noose received their punishment, so it is only right that the assaulters receive theirs.


----------



## Doc (Feb 12, 2008)

SageGhost83 said:


> I see, and you are definitely correct. I stand corrected, myself. I was thinking more along the lines of that whole hate speech thing, but the action isn't exactly "speech". We are in agreement that regardless of the noose, what those guys did was criminal no matter how you slice it. You cannot put your hands on someone just because they offended you. There is no way to justify what they did, and thus, I believe that the guys should be punished to the fullest extent of the law. Whoever hung the noose received their punishment, so it is only right that the assaulters receive theirs.



Hanging the noose is a form of "protected speech" or freedom of expression, but can be regulated in public and within public entities, much like "silence" may be compelled in a public library, or speech that would incite violence at a public rally.

During the Civil Rights Movements people rejected unfair laws with sit-in's and civil disobedience. However the difference then was it was done with an expectation of punishment, and it was accepted to show the wrongness of those laws. People accepted beatings, dogs, water hoses, and teargas willingly and went to jail in protest. (Some never made it to jailed and were killed). 

Today when you don't like something or someone, you commit a crime, decry the system as being unfair, and expect to receive a pass. If they truly believed, they'd stand up like those before them and say, "Yeah, I did it and I'm willingly to accept punishment to bring attention to the injustice and make my point." 

Today, nobody in jail is guilty. They are all a victim of a mistake, or circumstances. There is no justification for six people kicking an unconscious person who had not engaged in any physical confrontation, and I guarantee most of their previous victims were black. To cry the punishment is unfair after-the-fact, is to ignore the history of the individuals, and the serious life-threatening violent nature of the attack itself. 

It is attempted murder at its worse, and conspiracy to commit attempted murder and assault with a deadly weapon at its least in California. Think the charge is too severe? Like they say on the street, "If you can't do the time, don't so the crime."

Never make excuses or support bad behavior, - unless you want more of it, and color has nothing to do with it.


----------



## michaeledward (Feb 12, 2008)

5-0 Kenpo said:
			
		

> As has been stated, Purvis had been involved in the wrong side of the law before the Jena incident.


 
Show me, don't tell me. 

I have not seen evidence that this statement is true. It seems apparant that many posting believe it to be true. 



5-0 Kenpo said:


> If I tell you 2+2 = 4, and you continue to believe that it is 5, there is nothing anyone can do for *you*.


 
Why is this discussion being directed at me. 

I did not ask you to do anything for me. I do not wish for you to do anything for me.

And I do not believe the situation surrounding this young man is as simple as first grade math.


----------



## Cryozombie (Feb 12, 2008)

michaeledward said:


> I did not ask you to do anything for me.


 
Ummm...



michaeledward said:


> Show me, don't tell me.


 
yeah you did.


----------



## 5-0 Kenpo (Feb 12, 2008)

cryozombie said:
			
		

> yeah you did.



Now to be fair, he didn't.  He told, not asked, me to show him.  :wink:



michaeledward said:


> Show me, don't tell me.
> 
> I have not seen evidence that this statement is true. It seems apparant that many posting believe it to be true.
> 
> ...



Here we go again.

The discussion is not directed at you, but the comments are.  They are a response to your statments.  

Here's what I'll do.  Everytime that I mean michaeledwards, I will say you in bold:  *you*.

Everytime I mean an abstract you, I will leave it as is.  That way, there won't be an issue as to what you I am referring too.  

But then again, I feel *you* seem to try to obfuscate the issues by trying to make it out as though someone is attacking you personally, when it really is not.

So now, let me ask *you*, michaeledwards, what sort of evidence would *you* take as a reliable source as to Purvis' past run-ins with the law?  I have provided evidence in the past that *you* choose to ignore, so I want to make sure I get it right this time.


----------



## Doc (Feb 12, 2008)

5-0 Kenpo said:


> So now, let me ask *you*, michaeledwards, what sort of evidence would *you* take as a reliable source as to Purvis' past run-ins with the law?  I have provided evidence in the past that *you* choose to ignore, so I want to make sure I get it right this time.



Doesn't matter. The fact that there is even a discussion about the previous history is telling. It is a fact, absent other "acceptable" evidence, he has been arrested twice for physically attacking other people. When someone ignores that, and chooses to focus on what amounts to the immaterial, it is clear they're only interested in attempting to mitigate the circumstances, and creating excuses. His prior history is only relevant in sentencing. About the latest incident, even his mother is quoted as saying, "I wish he would make better decisions." People who make excuses for those that do these type of things are part of the problem, and somehow think the solutions are with the "system" instead of the idiots that commit crimes. They should share cells together in my book, and they all along with jesse and al can sing warm and fuzzy songs together.


----------



## Ray (Feb 12, 2008)

Doc said:


> His prior history is only relevant in sentencing.


This is really a bad thing for me to say and it is not the result of a scientific study but it has been observed in people all around in different places a different times: A person's history is often an indication of their future.


----------



## Doc (Feb 12, 2008)

Ray said:


> This is really a bad thing for me to say and it is not the result of a scientific study but it has been observed in people all around in different places a different times: A person's history is often an indication of their future.



Actually sir, you are correct and we use it in our daily lives to determine the viability of contacts with persons we do not know. People with pass bad credit, tend to maintain bad credit. People who have a dishonest history tend to not be trustworthy. People with violent tendencies, tend to stay that way. In other words, the best predictor of future behavior, is the recent relevant past behavior.

I took the position of its irrelevancy for the purposes of getting the conversation back on track, for those who would choose to argue discrepancies in his previous history, while ignoring his present behavior.

For reasonable, rational people it obviously has a bearing, and will indeed rear its ugly head upon sentencing for his latest escapade, while some will continue to blame "the system," which for me is itself disgusting behavior - and will probably continue.


----------



## michaeledward (Feb 12, 2008)

MJS said:


> While surfing the web today, I came across this.
> 
> Thoughts?


 
You know what folks ... 

Mike asked for thoughts. I offered mine. I explained them. I explained them again. 

And in return, I have been attacked, belittled and insulted. I can read, and discern the difference between the singular and plural versions of the 2nd person pronoun.

From those posting, there has been little seeking to understand; requests for explanations so you can further the attacks. When I request facts, I am accosted with opinions; when I present opinions they are accosted as fact. 

I state clearly and loudly my opinions and my politics. I believe I can disagree without belittling the opinions of others. Maybe I don't succeed at that as often as I would like; but, I am attacked for my opinions, just far too frequently. 



			
				Doc said:
			
		

> You're as much of a problem as he is.


 
Doc, if you think that is a respectful reply; we grew up in cultures with very different understanding of what respect it. 

Good Evening. Gentlemen.


----------



## Doc (Feb 12, 2008)

michaeledward said:


> Doc, if you think that is a respectful reply; we grew up in cultures with very different understanding of what respect it.



Well the different culture part is obvious from your perspective. However if I truly believe you're as much a part of the problem as he is, (clearly people like you think you're helping someone), and I do - how else would I say it?

You *ARE* part of the problem. The culture I grew up in was poor, and Black, but never made excuses for people that did wrong things. You see things differently. But then I'm not an expert on poor Black culture, I just live it. Until you can do that, my perspective trumps yours.


----------



## SageGhost83 (Feb 19, 2008)

Doc said:


> Hanging the noose is a form of "protected speech" or freedom of expression, but can be regulated in public and within public entities, much like "silence" may be compelled in a public library, or speech that would incite violence at a public rally.
> 
> During the Civil Rights Movements people rejected unfair laws with sit-in's and civil disobedience. However the difference then was it was done with an expectation of punishment, and it was accepted to show the wrongness of those laws. People accepted beatings, dogs, water hoses, and teargas willingly and went to jail in protest. (Some never made it to jailed and were killed).
> 
> ...


 
Amen! I couldn't have said it better myself!


----------



## SageGhost83 (Feb 19, 2008)

I, for one, am also tired of watching society's dumbasses of any and every color get off of the hook by blaming the system all of the time. The truth is, blaming the system is just another attempt at avoiding personal responsibility for one's actions. The system has many faults, but damn - it isn't as bad as some people would make it out to be, either. If you physically assualt someone just because they offended you, then you are in the wrong and you should receive your just punishment. How exactly is it the system's fault that somebody wasn't taught basic respect for human life or common sense that if you aggressively harm someone then you are in the wrong? It is downright repulsive to see the amount of excuses that are being made for the party in question. If it is anybody else, then it is an open and shut case, but because they just happen to be a certain color and they cry "civil rights! civil rights!" then an exception should be made!? Just like the boy who cried wolf, if this line is continuously used, then when there actually is a real slight of this nature, then all attempts speak out about it will fall on deaf ears.


----------



## MJS (Aug 3, 2008)

This thread resulted in some interesting debate.  I came across this today, so I thought I'd bump this thread back up. 

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25969482/


----------



## Doc (Jan 6, 2009)

MJS said:


> This thread resulted in some interesting debate.  I came across this today, so I thought I'd bump this thread back up.
> 
> http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25969482/


Let's add this update from a online mag I contribute to regularly.

*Jena Six Teen Shoots Himself Out of Despair*
Associated Press
2008 Dec 31

NEW ORLEANS -- One of the central figures in the 2007 Jena Six civil rights case never gave up pursuing his football career, even after his well-publicized run-ins with the law. 

Mychal Bell, an 18-year-old high school running back, clung to the hope that he could earn a college football scholarship. Then came another legal scrape this Christmas Eve. 

*After news broke of his arrest on a shoplifting charge, Bell shot himself in the chest Monday with a .22-caliber handgun. He remained hospitalized Tuesday but police said his chest wound was not life-threatening. 

"When it was broadcast that he was charged with shoplifting he just felt that the whole year had been wasted and that he had worked all of that time for nothing," said Louis Scott, who represented Bell in the case where Bell and five other black teenagers were charged in the 2006 beating of a white classmate. *

Bell's grandmother, Rosie Simmons, and mother, Melissa Bell, told police that "Mychal had made comments over the past two days that, because of the current media attention he had because of the shoplifting arrest, he didn't feel like he could live anymore," Monroe Police Lt. Jeff Harris said, reading from a police report. 

Bell and the other members of the "Jena Six" once faced attempted murder charges in the beating at Jena High School, in north central Louisiana's Lasalle Parish. The charges for all the defendants were eventually reduced. But the severity of the original charges brought widespread criticism and eventually led more than 20,000 people to converge in September 2007 on the tiny town of Jena for a major civil rights march. 

After being sentenced to 18 months following his guilty plea to juvenile charges, Bell moved from Jena to Monroe, where he was in foster care. He was released from state supervision on Dec. 4, said Bill Furlow, a spokesman for Reed Walters, the district attorney for LaSalle Parish.   

(In less than a month he was arrested again for shop lifting. "They" must be out to get him.)

A football star at Jena High until the Barker beating, Bell had hoped to play for Monroe's Carroll High School, where he is on track to graduate in the spring. But the Louisiana High School Athletic Association wouldn't grant him a fifth year of eligibility to play. Bell had spent 10 months in prison awaiting trial after his 2006 arrest in the beating case. 

"He had kept his grades up and he had worked out the whole year even though he couldn't play. He had dealt with the fact that the state athletic association would not let him play high school ball," Bell's lawyer, Louis Scott said Tuesday. 

It was unclear whether his dreams of a college football career were realistic. According to Scott, family members believed Bell was having encouraging discussions with the University of Louisiana-Monroe. 

The school's director of football operations, Peter Martin, said in an e-mail that the school had not evaluated Bell as a prospective student-athlete and would not speculate on his potential at the college level. 

Police said Bell's Christmas Eve arrest came after he allegedly tried to steal several shirts and a pair of jeans from a department store and fled when a security guard and off-duty police officer tried to detain him. After they found him hiding under a car, Bell "swung his arms wildly" and one of his elbows struck the security guard with a glancing blow, according to a police report. He was freed on $1,300 bond. 

Scott said he believed the arrest likely resulted from a *misunderstanding.* 

(Yeah he though the stuff was free. That's why he was hiding underneath a car.)

"I would be very surprised if he was shoplifting," Scott said. "I had seen him working out every day even though he knew he wasn't going to be able to play high school football."  

(Naw, he was chillin' under the car with merchandise from the store, when he ran from the cop.)

Monday's shooting was reported at 7:40 p.m. According to the police report, Bell was staying at his grandmother's home and his mother was visiting at the time. Melissa Bell told police she and Simmons heard a gunshot coming from Mychal's room. They found him on his bed, wounded in the chest. It was not clear Tuesday who owned the gun.

Comments?


----------



## Carol (Jan 6, 2009)

Mebbe he shouldn't have committed a crime if he didn't want all the negative press.  But, there I go thinking again.


----------



## Doc (Jan 6, 2009)

Carol Kaur said:


> Mebbe he shouldn't have committed a crime if he didn't want all the negative press.  But, there I go thinking again.



Same on you. You know its the media's fault for reporting the news.


----------



## Carol (Jan 6, 2009)

I'd feel sorry for him but I think I have a sock drawer to rearrange.


----------



## Twin Fist (Jan 6, 2009)

4 words

aim small, miss small


----------

