The Jena 6 Case

[melliedee]

Originally Posted by PlayadelSoul

In other words, I am not as enlightened as you. I should accept the situation as "racist" because it is the racial causa del dia and the professionals tell me it is so.

I understand, perfectly, that racism exists and that it is behavior that should be condemned. I also understand that racism, to some degree, exists in us all as a part of our human nature.

The nooses were wrong. Find out who did it and charge them, if it was deemed to be done as a threat. The nooses do not mitigate the attack on the young man who had nothing to do with them.

Why anyone would follow Al Sharpton into the abyss of a situation that is so unclear, without at least questioning, is beyond me. I heard all of this before when it came to Tawana Brawley. There are enough real episodes of racism in the world to not have to wait for the good Reverend to lead the way.

1) They know who hung the nooses. They were suspended despite a community outcry that the kids be expelled.

2) A noose doesn't need to be "deemed as a threat" by our interpretation. It is one, especially given the context. You refuse to take it out of the context of high school kids and what table they sit at; I submit it has a far deeper history in this country than that.

3) If you do not consider the events leading up to and following the Jena case an episode of "real" racism, I dont' think anymore additional haggling on my part can change your mind, so I'll agree to disagree.

[roni]

On the one hand, the history and culture of the high school is all the context we need and the criminal incident should be treated without regard for skin color.

On the other hand, let us go back into history and pull Ms. Brawley out of the past for the discussion

You make me laugh on a regular basis, PdS, and for that I thank you.

Ron

Originally Posted by PlayadelSoul

In other words, I am not as enlightened as you. I should accept the situation as "racist" because it is the racial causa del dia and the professionals tell me it is so.

I understand, perfectly, that racism exists and that it is behavior that should be condemned. I also understand that racism, to some degree, exists in us all as a part of our human nature.

The nooses were wrong. Find out who did it and charge them, if it was deemed to be done as a threat. The nooses do not mitigate the attack on the young man who had nothing to do with them.

Why anyone would follow Al Sharpton into the abyss of a situation that is so unclear, without at least questioning, is beyond me. I heard all of this before when it came to Tawana Brawley. There are enough real episodes of racism in the world to not have to wait for the good Reverend to lead the way.

[melliedee]

Originally Posted by MWC

But can the typical high school boy (especially a jock in a not particularly note-worthy schol district) really differentiate the historical import of symbols such as nooses? There have been instances up here in the north with anti-semitic graffiti, derogatory anti-black graffiti ... and an awful lot of it is simply testosterone acting out in anger. Yes, we could get into why the anger would take that particular tack (which is where home and community values would come in) ...

I have a nephew down in Virginia who is a lovely kid, not a mean or racist bone in his body. But he defends very strongly the right of white southerners to wear and show the Confederate Battle Flag -- based on history and culture. He is totally deaf to why blacks may have a problem with that -- saying that they are the ones who need a history lesson. Which, is correct, once you see where my nephew is coming from. But boys that age only know what THEY want to communicate.

Well, since adults cannot even agree on its symbolism, you might have a point there, MWC. IMO, the "kids will be kids" argument is dangerous and too easy an excuse to sweep discussions of racism under the table. I'm not implying you were suggesting this, I just find it disheartening that no one can even agree that a noose represents a threat and carries with it the weight of so much hatred and violence.

[PlayadelSoul]

The beating of the white kid by six black kids is not based on the nooses incident. It is a separate issue. You cannot, legally (and we are talking the law, here), connect the two and use the noose incident to mitigate the assault.

The nooses do need to be deemed as a threat. Research the decision by the Supreme Court regarding cross burnings.

I see a lot of racism involved in this case. A lot of it coming from both sides.

Using a group of thugs as poster children for Racism in 2007 disturbs me. The victim is being blamed here, because he was white in a community where racism exists. It is akin to blaming a rape victim because she dressed in a skimpy outfit in a part of town known for prostitution. As if the very fact that he was white and knew some other whites who took part in racist activities, he deserved the beat down.

The trial court was deemed to be in error. The system worked.

[PlayadelSoul]

Supreme Court upholds Virginia ban on cross burning

Rejected free speech arguments

Monday, January 26, 2004 Posted: 12:09 AM EST (0509 GMT)

Story Tools
window.onerror=function(){clickURL=document.locati on.href;return true;} if(!self.clickURL) clickURL=parent.location.href; RELATED
• U.S. Supreme Court to hear cross burning arguments

• FindLaw analysis: Cross burning and the First Amendment



WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The Supreme Court Monday upheld key portions of a 50-year-old Virginia law banning cross burnings where the intent is racial intimidation.
But it struck down a provision of the law which declared that any cross burning is on its face evidence of intimidation.
The closely divided court rejected arguments that the practice of burning crosses is a constitutional form of free speech.
The 5-4 decision written by Justice Sandra Day O'Connor splintered both the more liberal and conservative wings of the Supreme Court.
O'Connor was joined by Chief Justice William Rehnquist and Associate Justices Antonin Scalia, John Paul Stevens and Stephen Breyer in key portions of the ruling.
"We conclude that while a state consistent with the First Amendment may ban cross burning carried out with the intent to intimidate, the provision in the Virginia statute treating any cross burning as prima facie evidence of intent to intimidate renders the statute unconstitutional," the ruling said.
SPECIAL REPORT
• Gallery: Supreme Court justices profiles
• Interactive: Supreme Court's notable cases
• Interactive: Tour of the Supreme Court
• Supreme Court preview
• The U.S. Supreme Court: How it works
• Justices' long tenure brings stability, speculation on retirement


In dissent, the court's only African-American justice, Clarence Thomas, said he agreed with the majority that states may ban cross burnings, but disagreed they could ever represent free speech.
Thomas said cross burning already constitutes an illegal act of intimidation, and therefore does not need to be seen as a test of free speech.
"This statute prohibits only conduct, not expression," Thomas said. "Just as one cannot burn down someone's house to make a political point and then seek refuge in the First Amendment, those who hate cannot terrorize and intimidate to make their point," he said.
The Ku Klux Klan and its sympathizers, during what Thomas described as "a reign of terror," for decades set crosses ablaze in ceremonies.
Fourteen states and the District of Columbia have passed statutes that prohibit cross burning.

[kayt707]

Originally Posted by PlayadelSoul

The beating of the white kid by six black kids is not based on the nooses incident. It is a separate issue. You cannot, legally (and we are talking the law, here), connect the two and use the noose incident to mitigate the assault.

The nooses do need to be deemed as a threat. Research the decision by the Supreme Court regarding cross burnings.

I see a lot of racism involved in this case. A lot of it coming from both sides.

Using a group of thugs as poster children for Racism in 2007 disturbs me. The victim is being blamed here, because he was white in a community where racism exists. It is akin to blaming a rape victim because she dressed in a skimpy outfit in a part of town known for prostitution. As if the very fact that he was white and knew some other whites who took part in racist activities, he deserved the beat down.

The trial court was deemed to be in error. The system worked.

I gotta agree. While the nooses were obviously the wrong thing to do and should be dealt with. It is not the same thing as beating someone to a bloody pulp. I dont care what color skin you have that should be punished. Much as the Matthew Shepard incident in Laramie. It is unacceptable to beat someone to that extent. It is a crime and these kids dhould be tried and punished for it. If it was a bunch of white kids who did that to a black student I would believe the same thing.

[melliedee]

Originally Posted by PlayadelSoul

The beating of the white kid by six black kids is not based on the nooses incident. It is a separate issue. You cannot, legally (and we are talking the law, here), connect the two and use the noose incident to mitigate the assault.

The nooses do need to be deemed as a threat. Research the decision by the Supreme Court regarding cross burnings.

I see a lot of racism involved in this case. A lot of it coming from both sides.

Using a group of thugs as poster children for Racism in 2007 disturbs me. The victim is being blamed here, because he was white in a community where racism exists. It is akin to blaming a rape victim because she dressed in a skimpy outfit in a part of town known for prostitution. As if the very fact that he was white and knew some other whites who took part in racist activities, he deserved the beat down.

The trial court was deemed to be in error. The system worked.

I find this reasoning ironic, since you started posting on this very thread with claims that the black kid who sat so provocatively under the tree perhaps was "in the wrong part of town" and just trying to cause trouble? I have never said that the white kid deserved the beat down. I have repeatedly stated that I am not for exonorating the crimes on either side.

Where we disagree is that you do not see the nooses as part of the context leading up to and following the incidents. I cannot cast them so lightly to the realm of high school high jinx, so sue me.

If the system has worked so beautifully where are the charges for the the gun pulled at the gas station? The gun brought on school property? The DA going so adamently for the highest sentence, enough so that he is now being investigated by Congress?

[PlayadelSoul]

Originally Posted by melliedee

I find this reasoning ironic, since you started posting on this very thread with claims that the black kid who sat so provocatively under the tree perhaps was "in the wrong part of town" and just trying to cause trouble? I have never said that the white kid deserved the beat down. I have repeatedly stated that I am not for exonorating the crimes on either side.

Where we disagree is that you do not see the nooses as part of the context leading up to and following the incidents. I cannot cast them so lightly to the realm of high school high jinx, so sue me.

If the system has worked so beautifully where are the charges for the the gun pulled at the gas station? The gun brought on school property? The DA going so adamently for the highest sentence, enough so that he is now being investigated by Congress?

Maybe my analogy about the tree was not well stated. I thought the "its my chair because I have been sitting in it all year" analogy was a good one, though. Especially given that it is a high school we are talking about.

If you have no wish to see the young man exonerated, then the uproar about his case should be over. The decision was vacated and remanded back to juvie court. End of story.

The nooses, the shotgun story, the gun in the school story, etc, are all separate issues. If you can't use them, legally, to mitigate the assault, they are moot (whether you think so or not). As I said before, I am pretty sure that Revs. Sharpton and Jackson are not going to settle for the case being sent back to retry. They want total exoneration. This is where I draw the line, personally. If the Jena 6 are allowed to go free, there is no justice.

[kayt707]

Originally Posted by PlayadelSoul

Maybe my analogy about the tree was not well stated. I thought the "its my chair because I have been sitting in it all year" analogy was a good one, though. Especially given that it is a high school we are talking about.

If you have no wish to see the young man exonerated, then the uproar about his case should be over. The decision was vacated and remanded back to juvie court. End of story.

The nooses, the shotgun story, the gun in the school story, etc, are all separate issues. If you can't use them, legally, to mitigate the assault, they are moot (whether you think so or not). As I said before, I am pretty sure that Revs. Sharpton and Jackson are not going to settle for the case being sent back to retry. They want total exoneration. This is where I draw the line, personally. If the Jena 6 are allowed to go free, there is no justice.

this may piss a lot of people off but in my opinion and experiences....You can not seem to have a racial case if the victim is white. Of course the nooses should be punished but the black kids were protecting themselves or justified in their actions. How can a hate crime be perpetrated against a white person. Im sorry but that way of thinking is stupid and ignorant. And knocks the whole civil rights movement back. Im sick of Jesse jackson he seems to be undoing what people like Martin luther king jr stood for. MLK was about equality not we can do whatever we want cause weve been victimized in the past. oh and if you disagree with Jacksons way of thinking you are a racist.

[PlayadelSoul]

Two things disturb me about this case.

1) When I think back to civil rights marches and the struggle for equality, I think of the freedom riders and MLK. I think of those three volunteers who were pulled over in Miss., killed and buried in the woods. I think of those others who gave up their lives in order to end a system that was, basically, evil. Then, I look at how 6 young men who beat the shit out of one, are being held up as some sort of victim. In some cases, even being made out to be heroes (as evidenced by some of the signs, at the rally). Sad.

1) Al Sharpton and the timing. Presidential election coming up, need some reminder of who to vote for, need to build up his king-making support. Typical.

[kayt707]

Pds ...gmta:d

[PlayadelSoul]

Originally Posted by kayt707

Pds ...gmta:d

katy, wuh?

[kayt707]

Originally Posted by PlayadelSoul

katy, wuh?

my smilie things are broked

[Cosmo]

Just heard that a person was arrested for driving with two neese hanging from his pickup mirrors...

[PlayadelSoul]

Originally Posted by kayt707

my smilie things are broked

And, I called you by your dyslexic name, katy.