Jena prosecutor responds
by Owen Courrèges · 09/27/2007 8:05 amThe D.A. of Jena, Reed Walters, had an op-ed in the New York Times yesterday attempting to explain his conduct during the whole “Jena 6″ debacle. I have a couple of quibbles, but overall I think he defends himself rather well:
I cannot overemphasize how abhorrent and stupid I find the placing of the nooses on the schoolyard tree in late August 2006. If those who committed that act considered it a prank, their sense of humor is seriously distorted. It was mean-spirited and deserves the condemnation of all decent people.
But it broke no law. I searched the Louisiana criminal code for a crime that I could prosecute. There is none.
Similarly, the United States attorney for the Western District of Louisiana, who is African-American, found no federal law against what was done.
A district attorney cannot take people to trial for acts not covered in the statutes. Imagine the trampling of individual rights that would occur if prosecutors were allowed to pursue every person whose behavior they disapproved of.
I disagree on that there was no law broken. What the kids did in hanging the noose was at least arguably “criminal mischief,” which includes “[t]ampering with any property of another, without the consent of the owner, with the intent to interfere with the free enjoyment of any rights of anyone thereto, or with the intent to deprive anyone entitled thereto of the full use of the property.” La. R.S. 14:59.
The tree was “tampered” with when the nooses were hung, and the clear intent was to intimidate black students and therefore “interfere with [their] free enjoyment” of the same. I don’t think a misdemeanor conviction for criminal mischief would have been a stretch, but it would only have meant a $500 fine. Moreover, usually criminal mischief charges are punished by schools themselves. However, there was a crime.
The “hate crime” the protesters wish me to prosecute does not exist as a stand-alone offense in Louisiana law. It’s not that our Legislature has turned a blind eye to crimes motivated by race or other personal characteristics, but it has addressed the problem in a way that does not cover what happened in Jena. The hate crime statute is used to enhance the sentences of defendants found guilty of specific crimes, like murder or rape, who chose their victims based on race, religion, sexual orientation or other factors.
He’s right. Criminal mischief isn’t included in the hate crimes law. I think “institutional vandalism” is (i.e. vandalizing an institution, like a school), but I’m fairly certain that vandalism requires actual damage. Moreover, hate crimes laws are highly dubious — motive is usually not a statutory element of any offense. You’re basically punishing ideas rather than criminal mens rea and actions, which in my mind should be held unconstitutional.
Last week, a reporter asked me whether, if I had it to do over, I would do anything differently. I didn’t think of it at the time, but the answer is yes. I would have done a better job of explaining that the offenses of Dec. 4, 2006, did not stem from a “schoolyard fight” as it has been commonly described in the news media and by critics.
Conjure the image of schoolboys fighting: they exchange words, clench fists, throw punches, wrestle in the dirt until classmates or teachers pull them apart. Of course that would not be aggravated second-degree battery, which is what the attackers are now charged with. (Five of the defendants were originally charged with attempted second-degree murder.) But that’s not what happened at Jena High School.
The victim in this crime, who has been all but forgotten amid the focus on the defendants, was a young man named Justin Barker, who was not involved in the nooses incident three months earlier. According to all the credible evidence I am aware of, after lunch, he walked to his next class. As he passed through the gymnasium door to the outside, he was blindsided and knocked unconscious by a vicious blow to the head thrown by Mychal Bell. While lying on the ground unaware of what was happening to him, he was brutally kicked by at least six people.
Imagine you were walking down a city street, and someone leapt from behind a tree and hit you so hard that you fell to the sidewalk unconscious. Would you later describe that as a fight?
No I would not. This was a brutal beating, the attempts of some to downplay the attack notwithstanding.
Only the intervention of an uninvolved student protected Mr. Barker from severe injury or death. There was serious bodily harm inflicted with a dangerous weapon — the definition of aggravated second-degree battery. Mr. Bell’s conviction on that charge as an adult has been overturned, but I considered adult status appropriate because of his role as the instigator of the attack, the seriousness of the charge and his prior criminal record.
Here, Walters may get some disagreement. He really stretched the law with his trial tactic of bringing attempted second-degree murder charges in order to get Mychal Bell into adult court. On the other hand, he thought he was justified in doing so since Bell already had an extensive violent criminal history. At best, however, you can accuse him of being overzealous. The charges people have brought that he’s racist, on the other hand, don’t seem to have any real basis in fact.
I’m satisfied with this defense, for the most part, although I would argue that Walters probably should have settled for lesser charges given the racially-charged atmosphere following the hanging of the nooses. He may have been able to prevent the firestorm that ensued had he decided not to throw the proverbial book at these students. It also would have been easier to secure convictions that wouldn’t be overturned on appeal.
Thoughts?
Filed Under Uncategorized · · · · 
Print This Post
··
Comments
138 Responses to “Jena prosecutor responds”Search
Our Sponsors
Poll
Loading ...
I agree. The only problem I had was with the attempted murder charge. But, they do this all the time to get the defendant to plead to the lesser charge and save a trial. The noose hanging kids, I thought, were dealt with by the principal, but their punishment was lessened by the school board. That was wrong headed. I don’t think they should have been charged with a crime, as much as being kicked out of the school. But that is what set the whole thing off. Now everyone (me included) gets to Monday morning quarterback them. The worst being the race baiting extortionists from up north coming to save the day. Now it will look like the innocent were the ones that committed a serious assault. All the shouting has drowned out what really happened.
“extortionists”
But they were only concerned about the children (and 25% of the vendor’s take).
I think that if the boys doing the beating were white and the bot being beaten was black these same people protesting the charges would be demanding that the white boys be tried as adults for attempted murder and anything less would have been unacceptable. Just my two cents of the situation and those of the past.
Fasternu,
The noose hanging kids, I thought, were dealt with by the principal, but their punishment was lessened by the school board. That was wrong headed. I don’t think they should have been charged with a crime, as much as being kicked out of the school.
The punishment provided by the board was a month at an alternative school followed by two weeks in-school suspension (it was widely misreported as having been reduced to three days of in-school suspension). That sounded reasonable to me, provided that they didn’t have much in their disciplinary file. Expulsion does sound somewhat extreme for a non-violent offense, and you’d probably have the parents sue the school to get that overturned.
That’s not to minimize what they did — it was despicable — but there are limits to what the school can legally do without inviting litigation.
I was still under the impression of the three day suspension being the result. The month at an alternative school and in-school suspension sounds reasonable.
Wasn’t there a three month interval between the noose incident and the beating? And if the victim of the beating was not involved in the noose incident, why are the two incidents linked? What was the reason that this particular boy was chosen to be beaten?
I appreciate your posting the DA’s remarks. The facts of this case have been ignored by the race pimps to further their cause - perpetuating racism.
Sad to observe this entire situation - the DAs words seem to be as reasonable as one might expect.
I’m completely and totally against the term ‘hate crime’ - crime is CRIME plain and simple.
I do feel if the victim of the assault had absolutely nothing to do with the noose incident that does exacerbate the heinousness of the subsequent assault, but that is fodder for a jury to digest and act upon acccordingly.
The DA is spinning his role in this as best he can. He is a major player in the whole affair. Had he not stood up in front of the students and shook his pen at them, telling them he could ruin their lives with it, who knows what would have happened.
The actual suspension, according to the superintendent that over-ruled the principal, was 9 days at an alternative school, two weeks in-school (couldn’t go to lunch) and Saturday detention. If he would not have over-ruled the principal, who knows what would have happened.
There is much eyewitness discrepancy about the cold-cocking of Mr. Barker. Most say that he hit his head and was knocked unconscious. Only the DA says that he was merrily going between classes. Most say that Mr. Barker was mocking the black kid that got beat up at a party that he was trying to crash.
There’s a lot that went wrong here. But Owen said it best above:
And as Professor Gerald Treece said on the Dan Patrick show Monday, there is a racial bias in the application of law in that parish and others in middle Louisiana. He said on the air that he and his students had studied actual cases and concluded that blacks were more likely to be charged into the adult system than whites. I’m sure there is a podcast of this somewhere.
I do not think that law enforcement should be subjected to poll results in determining what charges should be brought or how the case is tried. The legal system is hanging by a thread in this country and being subjected to political pressures more and more all the time. If the legal system is forced to bow to political pressures then Ronnie Earles should be Chief Justice of the Supreme Court.
The young man that was attacked by the six other young men was not a part of the original event.
Just my humble opinion, I believe these 6 kids were looking for trouble and used the noose hanging event as an excuse. They viciously attacked this person without cause, they have a criminal history, and they have used the race card in an attempt to avoid responsibility of this latest act.
I also think we will hear more about the 6 young men in the future as our racist white society continues to beat them down and forces them to commit even more vicious acts of crime.
bigjolly,
What was wrong with that? He was threatening any students who would step out of line when there was already discord. I also don’t see how you could argue that his threats of severe punishment towards the student body could be construed as causing the incident in question. If anything, they were an attempt to prevent it.
I know what would have happened — a lawsuit. I also know that investigations have shown no link whatsoever with the attack on Baker and the noose-hanging incident.
There’s no discrepency. From what I understand, Barker made some mocking comments, which were overheard by the Bell and the others. Afterwards, while Barker was going to class, he was attacked. However, there was no provocation there.
Treece can show racial discrepencies, but those don’t equate to racism. Other factors can influence sentencing. Perhaps blacks teens were more likely to have extensive juvenile records — without a study that corrects for these factors, I wouldn’t draw any conclusions.
However, you seem way to comfortable throwing around accusations of racism, even before having all the facts.
Well, why not listen to Professor Treece’s description of his study? I thought it was interesting.
I agree with trl3 #10. This “race card” thing is just an excuse to justify criminal behavior by a group of kids. I, for one, do not think that the first charge was overreaching. What if someone hadn’t stepped in and the kid was beaten to death? The fact that these thugs were stopped does not make what they tried to do any different. Do you call someone anything other than a terrorist simply because someone stopped them before they were successful? The shoe bomber is an example. Just because he was unsuccessful, does anyone think that he wasn’t trying to murder everyone on that plane?
I just called KSEV and they do not have podcasts of Dan’s show available. Maybe someone else recorded it.
bigjolly,
I don’t know where a recording is, and I can’t listen to it at work. However, suffice to say that there are a multitude of non-racial reasons as to why there would be a discrepency.
I just emailed Professor Treece to inquire about his report and to see if he would comment on it for LST. I’ll let you know if he responds.
But Owen, that was not his point. He specifically said there was a racial bias, he also talked about the general race relations in that are and he said that these people need to come out of the 1950’s. For Professor Treece to say that means something, he is very highly regarded and respected.
You are quick to deny race ever plays a role. My relatives still live about an hour and a half south of Jena, I visit there yearly, my last visit was 2 months ago. It is a different way of life.
bigjolly,
I have no doubt that Professor Treece is respected, but you’re lodging claims of racism against a person without any specific evidence against him. That’s a very strong accusation and demands equally strong evidence — but you seem to have judged Walters, the superindendent, basically everyone a racist from the outset.
Jena may well be Louisiana’s Vidor, and of course I know that racism is a great deal more prevalent in rural counties and parishes, but we’re not dealing with generalities here.
Actually, we are dealing with generalities. And I think that if the men and women of Jena would clean up their act, there would be no forum for the likes of Jesse and Al to spew their nonsense.
And I’ll stick with what I actually said from the gitgo. The DA should resign. The superintendent should be fired.
bigjolly says:
What is your point? Are you implying that Mychal Bell was justified in assaulting someone because he was mocked?
Mychal Bell is a violent thug who needs to be kept behind bars. Period.
Bottom line: A young man was attacked and brutalized by a group of other men, and they should have to answer for their actions.
And they are having to answer for their actions. The question is, should they have to answer for more than what they actually did?
bigjolly,
Why should the DA resign? Because he tried but failed to maintain Mychal Bell’s adult conviction on appeal? Bell had an extensive record, and Walters wanted to try for an adult conviction. He recently decided to drop an appeal to the state supreme court, and pursue a juvenile conviction instead. That’s hardly the type of thing that merits resignation and disgrace.
The superintendent should be fired? Why? For reducing a punishment on a non-violent, non-destructive offense? Although the message implied by the nooses was clearly despicable, it was still merely a message and barely a crime. Moreover, maintaining the expulsion would have likely resulted in a lengthy court battle aimed at overturning it.
Again, you play it far too fast and loose with the racial accusations for my tastes.
bigjolly,
The question is, should they have to answer for more than what they actually did?
As I explained before, a conviction for aggravated second-degree battery was warranted under Louisiana law. That’s the crime Bell committed. The conviction was only overturned because it was an adult conviction.
The DA should resign because he clearly over charged these guys. He dropped the appeal under pressure from Gov. Blanco.
The superintendent should resign for not being effective at his job. He gets paid to manage - his results in this case suck.
And they can thank the intervener for their stroke of luck in not actually being able to kill this poor young man. The former charge was “Attempted” murder and that is exactly what they tried to do. When you know someone unconscious and then kick and beat him about the body and head, you are TRYING TO KILL HIM!
Owen, you are playing fast and loose with your interpretations. He should never have been in the adult system and you said as much above.
bigjolly,
You still didn’t answer my question. Are you suggesting that because Mychal Bell was mocked it justifies his assault of Mr. Barker?
bigjolly, just to be clear, do you think think the attempted second degree murder charge was justified, and it is just being charged as an adult that you have a problem with, or do you think the attempted second degree murder charge itself was over the top?
bigjolly,
Lots of D.A.’s try to get juveniles with violent backgrounds into the adult system as soon as possible — I know of no D.A. who has been asked to resign for doing so.
As for the superintendent — yes, the outcomes were horrible. I don’t know how much of that you can attribute to him, though (hindsight is 20/20). The worst thing you can point to that he did was reduce the white students’ punishment.
It might be that he should be replaced in order to restore confidence in the schools by providing new leadership. That would more than make sense to me. However, as far as his personal blame goes, I wouldn’t say it’s substantial enough to warrant throwing him out on his ear.
25. dcgirl
Exactly. They could have killed him. That is the ugly truth that bigjolly and the others are trying to cover up.
duhmoose,
The attempted second-degree murder charge WAS a stretch. Walters was only using it as a trial strategy to get into adult court. That’s where the court of appeals slapped him down.
Maltboy, I believe bigjolly said that in response to the proposition that the victim was simply walking to class. In my opinion it does not change the guilt of the assailants, but could be used to lessen the sentencing or the charges, ie it could go to whether or not their was premeditation, etc.
And in flys Maltboy! with his bigjolly the liberal is trying to cover something up. Dude you need a new line.
Can I borrow that line sometime in the future?
Thanks in advance. :>)
duhmoose,
I think both were over the top. There is no way that a second degree attempted murder charge should ever have been filed by the DA. It was a legal trick to get him into the adult legal system.
And I think it was wrong to get him into the adult legal system. He was 16 at the time. He is not a nice boy. He is not an angel. He was on probation at the time. He should have been put into whatever Louisiana calls their juvenile justice system.
Shannon,
Sure. I think it’s an important point.
So let me see if I get this straight, everyone here thinks the attempted second degree murder charge was a stretch at best, and more likely a ploy just to get the juvenile in the adult system. Most seem to agree that the juvenile should be prosecuted in the juvenile system. Everyone thinks he has a history of violence and needs to be dealt with. There is some disagreement as to whether there was some provocation, but most say there is no direct link to the noose hanging. Owen and bigjolly both think there are grounds for the dismissal of the Superintendent, but disagree on the reasons, and there is disagreement on whether or not the DA over reached enough to lose his job. Am I right so far?
duhmoose for President!!!
Duhmoose - I don’t think that the attempted murder charge was stretch at all. And Bell belongs in the adult system as it is evident that the juvenile system has not worked its charms with this thug. I don’t “think” he has a history of violence, it is a proven FACT. DA stays where he is, superintendent demoted.
Frankly I don’t think that this sneak attack that these thugs committed had anything to do with the nooses. That is just their excuse to get out of trouble.
Because the race-hustling lickspittles who write about these things for the newspapers decided it would make a better story.
duhmoose,
That’s about right. However, I would say there is no disagreement about provocation. Barker was probably mocking Bailey (the kid at the party who was struck) but that’s not provocation. At best that’s just a reason for the attack, but Barker didn’t do anything that anyone could reasonably expect would cause an old fashioned beat down. It doesn’t even have anything to do with premeditation, since there was a time lapse between the mocking comments and the beating.
#37 -
The juvenile system is probably more appropriate for the 5 who haven’t gone to trial yet. I do NOT think Mychal Bell should be tried as anything other than an adult because of his 4 prior convictions, and his role as instigator of the attack.
Keep in mind that at the time of this attack, Bell was still on probation for two previous battery convictions and two other vandalism-related offenses. He had already violated that probation with the second prior battery. Then he goes and attacks Barker. Obviously, this thug didn’t learn anything from his multiple previous encounters with the juvenile system. Given his rap sheet and the fact that he was only a year removed from the age of majority, it was perfectly reasonable for a prosecutor to try him as an adult.
The prosecutor’s threatening of the students, or at least the words he is said to have chosen, seem to me to be unnecessarily inflammatory, given how charged the atmosphere was at the school at the time.
bigjolly says:
And out flies bigjolly’s credibility because he still refuses to answer the question (asked for the third time): Are you suggesting that mocking someone is a justification to be beaten senseless?
How about this for a new line: You are trying to whitewash (pun intended) the violent assault of a human being by playing the race card and floating other ridiculous red herrings. And you accuse me of needing a new line? Heal thyself, doctor.
43 - Sounds like a perfectly good reason to kick the crap out of a student - NOT.
I’m not trying to whitewash anyone. Read what I said above. And no, I didn’t play the “race card”.
45 - I’m not saying it justifies the attack at all. Or that it even led to the attack. The kid should be prosecuted for the battery, period. My point is that when the first noose incident happened, the grown-ups had an opportunity to have an honest conversation about race relations in the town, and they blew it.
#43 - I used to threaten the heck out of my kids about what would happen to them if they got out of line! I would say it to them AND their friends. Guess what. Have one Marine vet, one girl in college for her CJ degree (to the chagrin of her policeman father) and the last one in the Navy Nuclear DE progam. I guess they turned out okay (so far!).
#35 -
The problem with that argument is he committed three additional offenses while on probation. Bell was placed on the original probation after a battery conviction in December 2005. Probation was set until his 18th birthday (1/18/08). In July 2006 Bell was convicted of a criminal vandalism charge. In September 2006 Bell was convicted of another battery charge and another vandalism charge.
That’s 4 crimes in total, 3 of them committed while he was already on probation for the first battery. The attack on Barker was number 5. If it had been his first offense, then yes - trying him as an adult would seem unreasonable. But this was a kid with a long rap sheet of violent criminal offenses. He had already been through the juvenile court system FOUR DIFFERENT TIMES and it didn’t seem to phase him one bit. He was put on probation and he continued to do the exact same stuff as if he had never been convicted.
You’re right that Bell was 16, but even then only barely. He only a month shy of his 17th birthday at the time. 16 year olds are capable of doing very violent and very evil things that merit long prison sentences.
48 - And if there were more parents like you in Jena, white and black, we wouldn’t be having this conversation right now!
To put things in perspective, only a couple of months in age separated Bell at the time of the Barker attack from the age of Keith Turner at the time of the PVC pipe attack in Spring last year.
Though the media has done it throughout this entire episode, treating a violent thug like Mychal Bell is if he were a simple “child” involved in a “schoolyard fight” is deceptive.
bigjolly said:
Oh really? Then how would you characterize this post of yours from above?
I take it back. No race card being played there. No sirree!
JohnRH,
That’s true. When kids are going around hanging nooses in an obvious reference to lynching of blacks in the Jim Crow era, there’s more likely than not some very racist parents around. There needed to be more done to prevent these outbreaks of violence before they happened.
However, the connection between this attack and the noose-hanging incident is pretty tenuous.
Why were the rest of those involved charged to get them into the adult system? All but one.
I would say that I was paraphrasing a very well respected law school professors words.
Phil,
I agree with you there, except that Walters knew he was pushing the law by intentionally over-charging the students in order to get them in an adult courtoom, only to lower the charges later to offenses he couldn’t have gotten initially.
It’s understandable why he did it — Bell probably does belong in an adult prison cell given his rap sheet. However, the law is more restrictive on sentencing juveniles as adults, at least in Louisiana.
bigjolly,
Do we know the rap sheets on the others? It could also be that the D.A. was trying to scare the others into flipping on Bell.
I don’t know the rap sheets on the rest of them but then again, I’m not the one saying that they should have been charged as adults.
Well for starters, one of them (Carwin Jones, age 18) already was an adult. So he was charged exactly where he should have been.
The one who was charged as a juvenile was 14, so that’s probably appropriate too.
That leaves the other four. I’ve already indicated that I believe Bell should be tried as an adult given his extensive violent rap sheet. I take it that you either agree with this or at least see it as a reasonable argument.
That leaves us with the other three: Bailey, Purvis, and Shaw. They were all 17 at the time. Most likely, the prosecutor tried them as adults because they were less than a year away from the age of majority. It’s debatable that this was overreaching, but it is also a tactic that prosecutors use all the time.
At best, the “juvenile vs. adult” argument only applies to 3 of the so-called “Jena 6″ and since those 3 were all less than a year away from majority, it could legitimately be argued either way.
Prediction:
Mychal Bell will assualt someone else in the near future. The Rev. Jackson and Sharpton etal will come to his defense again claiming racism.
I freely admit I probably only believe this because I am a white racist individual and it would have nothing to do with the FACT the Mychal Bell is an out of control individual with a growing history of attacking people withg little or no cause.
If this had of occurred in Texas, all of the young men 17 and up would have been charged as adults.
#56 - Owen - I think you’re absolutely right about the prosecutor’s strategy of overreaching so he could then reduce the charges in the adult system. And that’s often what prosecutors do.
I guess what I’m saying is that I believe this strategy was meritted in Bell’s case given his rap sheet.
It is a case of the prosecutor using the system to his advantage, but he did do it within the system and he did do it on a case where the more severe punishment he sought clearly fits the criminal record of the defendant.
If the Jena 6 had been white…and the victim black…then and only then it is a hate crime. You see…only whites can commit hate crimes. The fact one of the “children” is 18 and has some priors is not important…the fact that the beating had nothing to do with the nooses is not important. The fact that Revs Al and Jesse had another chance to pimp their race-baiting skills is important.
#61 -
I’m admittedly not versed in Louisiana law, but this article seems to indicate that it is permissible to charge 17 year olds as an adult there.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20779755/
If that is the case then the charges against the three 17 year olds and one 18 year old should stick.
That would leave only Bell, 16, and the 14 year old who is being charged as a juvenile regardless.
Bell was only a month shy of his 17th birthday and had a clear criminal rap sheet, so it doesn’t seem at all unreasonable to argue that he should have been tried as an adult.
Purvis????
Phil_M, however there is a difference in what is reasonably merited and what is statutorily merited. I think someone stated that the statutes make charging Bell questionable.
What the whiners don’t want you to know:
1) The so-called “white tree” at Jena High, often reported to be the domain of only white students, was nothing of the sort, according to teachers and school administrators; students of all races, they say, congregated under it at one time or another.
2) Two nooses — not three — were found dangling from the tree. Beyond being offensive to blacks, the nooses were cut down because black and white students “were playing with them, pulling on them, jump-swinging from them, and putting their heads through them,” according to a black teacher who witnessed the scene.
3) There was no connection between the September noose incident and December attack, according to Donald Washington, an attorney for the U.S. Justice Department in western Louisiana, who investigated claims that these events might be race-related hate crimes.
4) The three youths accused of hanging the nooses were not suspended for just three days — they were isolated at an alternative school for about a month, and then given an in-school suspension for two weeks.
5) The six-member jury that convicted Bell was, indeed, all white. However, only one in 10 people in LaSalle Parish is African American, and though black residents were selected randomly by computer and summoned for jury selection, none showed up.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070922/ap_on_re_us/a_place_called_jena
After all is said & done, the fact remains that the black troublemakers (jesse jackson, al sharpton, jackson-lee & maxine waters) are NOT helping their own race - they are using them. Plain & simple. By string together unrelated incidents they came up with a storyline that fit their agenda (per both the black & white residents of Jena).
#66 - I don’t know the statutes of Louisiana enough to comment on them.
I will say this though: if the statutes unambiguously prevent charging somebody like Bell - only a month shy of 17 - as an adult then they are severely flawed…flawed to the point that a 16 year old could commit a premeditated homicide in that state and end up with a severely diminished punishment through a juvenile court system.
What I gather suggests to me that there may be ambiguity in the statute though, and the prosecutor took advantage of that to charge Bell as an adult. As I said, I have no problem with him doing so given Bell’s record and rap sheet if that’s what is necessary to bring this thug to justice.
Put another way, I have absolutely zero sympathy for the argument being forwarded by some that claims Bell was a “child” at the time of this crime.
67 has said it well, with reasoned facts to show that this had nothing to do with racism, but pandering to try to get off (once again) when caught committing crimes.
The original incident may have had nothing to do with racism.
It is now all about race, Jackson, Sharpton, etal made sure of that. They are implying that all the young men must be excused for what happened, regardless of the circumstance, because it would be racist to hold the thugs accountable.
52.
If “playing the race card” means bigjolly referred to factual information showing a disparity in the treatment of blacks and whites, then you are right. (Though most of us don’t use the term in that sense.) By this definition, saying “Jim Crow laws were passed and maintained to suppress black people” would be “playing the race card.”
If “playing the race card” means bigjolly tried to invoke race for an emotional and unfounded purpose, you are wrong.
As we know, facts are stubborn things.
70.
Well, I would be very interested in knowing how hanging nooses from a tree in the deep south has no racial component.
#67 w_r_ranch
That may all be true, but the young man was mocked for crying out loud! That merits a beating, and if the one being mocked happens to be black, that merits an evenbigger beating. None of that other stuff matters –just ask bigjolly.
RickG, that was funny. #72 that is.
Yeah, Maltboy! never got his arse whupped in high school for making fun of people. Whenever he made fun of people for getting beaten up by some kids at a party, everyone just laughed. What a card!
RickG
The hanging of the nooses did not, IMHO, have anything to do with 6 young men attacking 1 young man 3 months later.
Bigjolly
What do you find funny about #72, the fact that 6 guys stomped another into unconciousness and are now using an earlier incident that happened 3 months prior to their assaulting this young man as an excuss?
I doubt the Young man being stomped found it funny at all.
trl3,
Here is what the prosecutor said about it:
I think that he thinks it had something to do with it.
I thought this was funny (and observant):
bigjolly:
Please tell me you are not making excuses for 6 guys assualting 1 guy, beating him unconcious and then continuing to kick and beat him until an outsider intervined to stop it. There is NO EXCUSE for that.
Bigjolly
The hanging of the nooses was terrible no matter the excuse used or any lame attempt to say it was poor humor.
What does that have to do with 6 guys assaulting 1 guy 3 months later other than it became a convienent excuse for the 6 thugs.
And I’ve never, not even for an instant, said that there was an excuse for it. People here like to twist words to get their point across.
What I said, clearly, is that the DA overcharged in an effort to get these guys into the adult system, that the DA should resign, that the Superintendent should be fired and that race was an issue in all of their decisions. And I’ll stand by that.
Charge the crime for what it was - btw, I don’t know what the proper charges should be and never said I did. Attempted murder is over charging.
And if you go back to the original post I did on this, I said that it wasn’t only about race, that the black teens did break the law.
My last thought on the matter;
Let us hope that who ever these guys assault next for whatever excuse they come then doesn’t die.
And yes, I absolutly believe that they will do it again because the history indicates that they will.
#74
Six young men savagely attacked another young man who was not threatening their safety. They knocked him unconscious and proceeded to kick him violently while he was lying on the ground. There are laws against that, and people who break them should be severely punished. Everything else presented here regarding this incident is obfuscation in an attempt to cover up this plain and simple fact.
It is reasonable and customary to certify 16 year-olds as adults, especially if they have prior convictions and if their crime is severe. This young man fits both of those criteria. Mychal Bell was rightly certified to stand trial as an adult because he was accused of a violent crime and because of his prior convictions and probation violations, not because he was a black victim of a racist prosecutor, as others would have us beleive.
Bigjolly played the race card in at least two posts above (8 & 17), and insinuated that the beating was justified based on the fact that the perp was mocked. I’m not wrong about that.
bigjolly, your #75 sounded like excuse making to me, no twisting of anything.
trl3,
You have to follow the events for three months. If racism had been addressed then, it might not have come up in the week prior to the assault. It was not addressed because the DA chose to be a wise ass, wagging his pen at the blacks and the superintendent over-ruled the principals judgment.
Then again, it might have occurred the same regardless. We will never know. What we do know is that the noose incident was handled wrong. And that the black teens were overcharged.
bigjolly,
You shouldn’t. You have no evidence whatsoever that race had anything to do with their decisions, particularly with regards to the superintendent.
This is a big problem I have with your commentary on this — you assume officials are racists based on very weak evidence. This is precisely what the left does each and every day. They may or may not be racist, but you don’t have any grounds for saying so based on what we currently know.
#75 bigjolly says:
Thank you for putting the final nail in your own argument. By any chance are you a year older today? Anyone getting spanked as much as you should be having a birthday.
Owen,
When the superintendent of the school district says “Adolescents play pranks” about nooses hung in a tree in middle Louisiana, racism is involved. You can spin, you can wash it, you can do anything you want with it. Denial doesn’t help anyone.
That Maltboy! is so funny. What a card!
Gotta run and see my wife in the hospital. It was fun! Y’all make sure not to mock anyone or hog any microphones, unless you like being beaten and/or tased for no good reason!
BJ sez:
At least I’m not a race card!
You still defending taser boy?
Hope all is well at the hospital. Mine is having a biopsy as we speak. Maybe that’s why I’m so crabby today.
bigjolly,
The “prank” statement by the superintendent comes off as very flippant and soft on racism, but I know of absolutely no context for those remarks. It’s always a bad idea to cling to a single phrase and draw conclusions from there.
For all I know he said something fairly reasonable, like: “However horrible the message, this adolescent prank was non-violent and committed by kids with clean records. I can’t justify explusion based on this alone.”
Now, the context could also make it much worse: “These are good ‘ol boys and it wuz nothin’ more than a meaningless adolescent prank, like those little rascals always messin’ round on the tee-vee. Hangin’ nooses is good ‘ol fun.”
With all the misinformation going around, there’s not much basis for reaching a conclusion.
Moreover, as for the D.A., you’re still focusing on the assembly, in which all of the students were present, black and white, and the fact that he tried to get them into adult court. The evidence that he’s racist is extremely weak — you’re still basing everything on a string of assumptions.
I’m certainly not ruling out racism on the part of anyone involved — that’s just not an accusation I support rolling out unless there’s some pretty solid evidence behind it.
bigjolly,
Scratch that, I found a little bit of context I’d never read before:
I agree that’s still pretty flippant; he could be very stupid, an apologist for racism, or a racist himself (likely combination of the three).
I’ll grant you the superintendent then. He’s got a bit of explaining to do.
No, Owen, I happen to believe the black students when they say the prosecutor turned to their side (don’t you find it interesting that they have a side?), pointed his pen at them and told them he could ruin their lives with a single stroke of it.
I believe that this happened. I believe the version told by the black students.
No racism in North Louisiana - Geez I’ve heard everything argued form the making of a real ham sandwhich to the bloody obvious argued on LST
Weeping slowly into hands at the lost opportunities……..
bigjolly,
You don’t believe the school board member that was present, or the D.A. himself, both of whom claim that the statement was directed at the assembly generally?
Ok. Why do you believe the students more? What’s the basis for that? Considering the conflicting accounts, it sounds like you’re resting accusations of racism on very weak evidence, which I find improper.
Improper or not, that is what I believe. You didn’t answer the question: Don’t you find it strange that the black students have their own side of the assembly room?
bigjolly,
It was my understanding that due to racial tensions, the students were self-segregating. Sadly, that probably happens in a lot of schools nationwide. If there was some bizarre school policy mandating this, I haven’t heard of it.
And it is improper for you to base accusations of racism on a single disputed story. It makes me wonder who else you believe is racist based on your perceptions — do you think I’m racist for opposing your version of this narrative?
But, but….
I thought it had nothing to do with race????? AYYYYY, HELP ME!
Owen, bigjolly was trying to place the context by invoking the study that Professor Treece had used on air with Dan yesterday. Having not read the study myself, but trusting that the prof. is fairly intellectually honest, it seemed to him that there was a historical context for assuming that race played at least a small part in the decisions that were made.
Owen, I’m not basing anything upon one disputed story. As I mentioned above and elsewhere, I’ve been to that part of the country. Many times. Matter of fact, I’m going back there in two weeks for the big family reunion. I KNOW the backwoods of Louisiana.
Never said you were racist. Matter of fact, I never said the DA or the super were. What I did say and stand by is that race was an issue and a factor in everything to do with this case. If you don’t buy it, then you don’t buy it.
Oh yeah, haven’t received a reply as yet from Professor Treece, I’ll post it if I get one.
bigjolly,
I’ve never disputed that there were strong racial tensions at the school, which no doubt led to the noose-hanging incident and the Jena 6 attack alike. Where are you going with this? I’m just disputing your accusations against the D.A. and your overall characterization of the narrative.
bigjolly,
You said that race was a motivation in all of their decisions — meaning the superintendent and the district attorney. Were you not implying racism with that?
I’m not going anywhere. I’ve explained my accusations and characterizations. It’s like a trial. As a juror, you believe who you believe. If the DA and superintendent’s actions were different, perhaps I would believe them.
I don’t.
Alright. I think we can leave it at that.
I said that race was a factor. There may have been other factors that I don’t know about. But I’m confident that race was a factor. In all of their decisions.
Does that mean that they are Grand Wizards of the KKK? Of course not. But until people stop denying that race is a factor in this, no change will occur, and the Jesse’s and Al’s of the world will get to continue running around hollering about nothing, collecting a check and moving on.
While the town sits in their wake, having changed nothing.
bigjolly,
Well, so long as there are race-neutral explanations for the actions of the officials involved, I’m not about to argue that acted out of prejudice against blacks. I don’t know them personally, the facts here are horribly muddled, and racism is an ugly accusation to throw around. So even if there are suspicious factors and the town clearly has racial problems, I think it’s wrong to make suppositions about what was on their minds when they made their decisions.
The town of Jena clearly has some serious racial problems to work through, but I don’t think it can be solved by assuming racial motives.
One of the problems I have observed in these situations is the almost complete naivete of small (or even larger) town officals when confronted with situations like the one in Jena. They have no clue how an innocuous gesture or seemingly inconsequential comment can be siezed upon and twisted into an unrecognizable event. They may, in fact, harbor racial prejudices or they may not.
From their perspective, they have a local problem and they are trying to handle, solve or, perhaps, bury it. The one thing they haven’t learned is the the bland, opaque, slippery tongue of the professional, high-profile politician or bureacrat.
Okay, like you said above, we can leave it at that.
Geez let’s keep this simple shall we? FIRE both the Stuporintendent AND the D.A. and sign em up for FEMA relief - problem solved! (oh and give those 6 lovely young gentlemen free passes to the NBA games of their choosing including round trip air fair)
That oughtta be treating them nice enough to suit even the Revvvvvvvvvvverund Jahkkkkkson
*NEXT*?
fare* even
101 -
Do they though? Or did it just so happen that a couple of small groups of black students (though by no means all black students at the school) happened to be sitting together when the school told everybody to report for an assembly?
When you say that the blacks “have their own side of the assembly room” you make it sound like there’s a line down the middle of the floor that they can’t cross. You make it sound as if there are assigned portion of the the bleachers for black students and white students. In reality, you have evidence of nothing even remotely close to that.
In all probability, the only people who claim the prosecutor pointed at the “black section” are the students who happened to be sitting by their own choice in whatever non-existant demarcation that they themselves considered to be the “black section.”
High school students are notoriously clique-ish. They hang out in their own little groups of friends at lunch and in the cafeteria. And as unfortunate as it may be, those cliques often break down on racial lines. Walk in any high school cafeteria in America. There will be a table with the band kids, a table with the football players, a table with the cheerleaders, the math club nerds, the drama kids, the goths, the rednecks, and - yes - the mexican kids and the black kids. They sit together by choice in little self-segregated groups. Nobody says “this table is assigned to group X.” High school kids hang out with other people in their little cliques and those cliques sit together as a group at lunch and in school assemblies.
Town is 85% white.
DA is white.
DA is elected.
DA gets tough on part of the 15%
DA gets slapped on back by the 85%
DA gets hissed by a small group of “loud mouths.”
Hmm, no reason to believe he might lean to one side, now is there?
RickG,
That’s funny.
Again.
Uh-oh, I’m gonna get slapped again.
Yes, Phil_M, it is all a student’s problem. The DA, Super, School Board, etc., have exactly nothing to do with anything.
Can you tell me why the DA would be so arrogant as to proclaim that he could ruin a teenagers life with the stroke of a pen?
Of course they do! (slapping myself upside the head) Why didn’t I know that? Sheesh, my bad.
Hmm. Let’s see. Using your example. What happens if a black kid is in the band? Or a white kid is on the football team? How’s about a Mexican nerd? What does he do?
This is like some weird acid flashback.
#118 - One small problem. The DA isn’t elected from Jena alone. He’s elected in a parish-wide vote. The town of Jena is only a quarter of the LaSalle Parish population.
Your usual hyperbole aside, would you mind showing me where I ever said that the superintendent or school board had nothing to do with the problems there?
While you’re busy searching, I’ll take the time to endorse Owen’s point about the flimsy nature of the evidence you have used to brand the DA as a racist.
Phil_M,
Thank you for pointing that out.
RickG, please update your #118. It is 86.13% White, not 85%. And it is 12.2% Black, not 15%.
Sheesh, man, don’t you fact check?
I would never set aside my usual hyperbole, that would just be wrong!
I would love to stay and play, you know, find out where the snakes come in, but I have a date with a beautiful woman. Enjoy and have a great evening.
Then I guess he’d have to choose which clique he hangs out in. Surely some of them would pick the social clique over the racial one, ensuring that some of the black kids mixed in with the white kids, and the mexican kids, and so forth…which means there couldn’t be a defined “black section” of the assembly room that all blacks sit in as you previously suggested.
Thanks, bigjolly. You’ve just inadvertently illustrated my point.
Dang…gonna be late.
Except…this school is not large enough for your observations to be valid.
And if all the students interviewed say, yep, there is a white side and there is a black side, well, there just isn’t a point for you to make. See ya.
#124 - So I take it then that the voters of Olla and Tullos, also in LaSalle Parish, are gonna base their votes for DA on whether or not he prosecutes enough black high school students for crimes in another town some 25 miles up the highway?
Except…this school is not large enough for your observations to be valid.
If the media reports are correct Jena High School has about 600 students…not too atypical for an average small town high school in the United States.
In Texas terms, that means a 3A football team. It’s also plenty of students to form several dozen cliques.
124. bigjolly
124 bigjolly
(Sorry about the false start).
Thanks for correcting me. Seems I underestimated the whiteness of his constituency.
That’s okay, RickG, everyone makes serious mistakes once in a while. I’m sort of disappointed, I thought I would come back to a major smackdown. Bummer.
Violent unprovoked attack… Violent history… 13 months from age 18… If a 12 year old can be charged as an adult then a 16 year old repeat violent offender should definitely be charged as an adult. Otherwise he will be out on the streets shortly and the next time probably be a successful killer. Maybe not attempted murder charges unless there is evidence of intent but Assault at the least. What are you going to tell the family of his next victim? ‘Someone made fun of the poor kid and he took it out on them… so we had to treat him as an innocent little kid.’ You cannot tell me that he did not know he was committing a crime… He already had experience with the criminal system and skated repeatedly. If he skates again, I would expect the next crime to escalate in violence.
In case you missed it, Mychal Bell has been released.
Uh oh. Louisiana better be on the lookout for a sudden spike in assault and battery over the next 24 hours.
Forget three strikes, this kid’s coming up on #5.
Here’s exactly why Mychal Bell SHOULD have been tried as an adult:
http://www.abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=3662083
Did everyone catch that? In the regular criminal justice system this violent 5-time repeat offender would have been looking at serious jail time. Note that he was NOT an excessive sentence, but a serious sentence of 10-15 years that is very fitting for a repeat violent criminal.
In the juvenile system he’s now looking at only a couple years maximum, and more likely a very minor sentence that’s less than that and includes “time served” or something.
#132
According to the same census, Utah is 95% white and less than 2% black. Does that make Orrin Hatch a closet klansman who only gets elected by being tough on the 2% at the behest of the 95%?