PDA

View Full Version : Jena 6


Please visit our sponsor:
 

AikiWeb Sponsored Links - Place your Aikido link here for only $10!


Neil Mick
09-21-2007, 11:49 PM
You probably know the general details of the Jena 6...6 black students tried as adults (totalling 100 yrs jailtime btw them), for a fight that was sparked when the white kids hung nooses under a favorite tree for the white kids to gather. The white kids involved weren't tried for anything (to put it very briefly).

I am listening to DemocracyNow! (http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=07/09/21/158225) program, and this snippet was interesting:

AMY GOODMAN: One vocal critic of Thursday’s protest was David Duke, a Louisiana resident, former Grand Wizard of the Ku Klux Klan. In 1991, white residents of Jena overwhelmingly voted for David Duke when he ran for Louisiana governor.

DAVID DUKE: This is David Duke, and this is the David Duke internet web radio broadcast, broadcasting to the entire world with news and information of vital importance to Europeans and people of European descent, no matter where they may live around the world. Today, I have an important program. Today, the city of Jena, Louisiana is being besieged. It’s being invaded by thousands of thugs, demanding that a specific black criminal be let out of jail -- he and his cohorts who committed a vicious hate crime against a white student in that city.

The people of Jena, the people of Louisiana, and I, are not racist. We simply want justice to be done. We understand that white people in America have lost our basic civil rights. Whites are now deprived of human rights by racial discrimination in jobs, promotions, scholarships, college admittance, and in many other programs. More importantly, whites are increasingly victims of black racial violence and hate crimes.

AMY GOODMAN: You’ve been listening to an excerpt of a radio program by David Duke, the former Grand Wizard of the Ku Klux Klan. Reverend Al Sharpton, your response?

REV. AL SHARPTON: Well, I think, clearly, anyone that was the Grand Dragon of the Ku Klux Klan, to say that he is not a racist and that those that think his way are not racist, is so absurd it doesn’t even -- is not even worthy of a reply from me or comment from me. Obviously, David Duke and that whole kind of person is the problem here. You have a Klan mentality that does not feel that the white students should be in any way penalized for the violence that happened, that they perpetrated on these black students, that anything should happen to those that hung the noose.

They clearly have no problem with having a tree in a public schoolyard that only whites could sit under. Let us not forget, race was brought into this when you had a tree only for white students. And when a black student sat under the tree after questioning that, that was responded to by hangman nooses. Race did not come into this from six black students two, three months later. Race did not come into this by those of us that came here for the last several months or the tens of thousands yesterday. It was brought in by the tree and the hangman noose.

And for them to try to in any way change the facts only shows the typical demagoguery the Klan has always played to try to whip up elements in the white community that are not already with them and may not understand the facts.

AMY GOODMAN: Reverend Sharpton, I spoke with Kelly Barker, Justin Barker's mother. Justin Barker is the young white man who was beaten up, the white student, in the Jena schoolyard. She is manager at the Super Wal-Mart in town in Jena. I then talked with her and her husband David Barker on the phone. They were very upset about people saying “Free the Jena Six.” They were saying, “Should they get no punishment for beating up our son?” Your response to that?

REV. AL SHARPTON: The response is very simple. Mychal Bell has done ten months in jail as an adult, that even the Louisiana courts are saying he should not have been tried with. I think that, one, no one ever said that we condone schoolyard fights, but that’s what it was. And the punishment should have been a schoolyard fight. Had these young men been dealt with in juvenile court in a regular proceeding for juveniles like any other juvenile, including the white student that pulled the gun, the shotgun at the school, and the white student that beat up, I believe it was young Mr. Bailey at the party, I don’t think there would have ever been an issue, local or national.

What I think she is not mindful of is that is not the case. It is the imbalance of justice, the imbalance of the charges, that raised the outcry. So I think that if she had said, “Yes, they should be punished, but he’s done ten months in jail as an adult, and even the courts disagree,” I think she would have more credibility. But to have a young man still sitting in jail ten months later in adult jail and to act like there’s been no punishment, I think, takes a lot of credibility away from their kind of outrage that somebody is not paying for a fight in the schoolyard with their son. No one does not in any way condone her son or any other son being beaten up, but we don’t condone Bailey getting beaten up at a party. We don’t condone young black students being confronted with a shotgun. And we don’t condone black students told you can’t sit under a tree or we’re going to hang lynch signs or lynch symbols up on that tree.

Thoughts?

dps
09-22-2007, 06:51 AM
Its okay, the culprit that started this whole thing has been punished. Justice has been served, the tree has been cut down.

David

Qatana
09-22-2007, 10:39 AM
Cool. According to David Duke, I'm not white. Now it's Official!

Mike Sigman
09-22-2007, 11:30 AM
What I like is the Al Sharpton and Jesse "Strongarm" Jackson don't seem to learn from Tawanna Brawley, the Duke LaCrosse fiasco, etc. The Jena 6 thing has been pretty wildly misportrayed by the media. But some of the news orgs are now beginning to catch up with the actual facts, Compare this article with the emotional attempt to start more needless hatemongering in Neil's post:

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

Note that the writer is Black, BTW. Why wasn't Michael Bell's two prior criminal assault records mentioned by the mainstream liberal press and why is that factor never mentioned by Sharpton and Jackson. I think we're about to see the same sort of sudden silence that overcame the liberal lynch mobs when the facts actually started coming out in the Duke Lacrosse fabrication. Note that the woman who brought the false charges in Duke got off scott-free.

Mike

Neil Mick
09-22-2007, 03:44 PM
Its okay, the culprit that started this whole thing has been punished. Justice has been served, the tree has been cut down.

David

Oh, but I beg to differ. The culprit that started this (ie, the prosecutor) is still at large, and trying to ruin the lives of six black youths.

Not content with overreaching his office, he went down to the school with armed police guards and threatened to end the black students' lives, "with the stroke of a pen."

Only someone who thinks that it's OK to charge black students with attempted murder, while letting white students walk, would think that "justice is being served."

Mike Sigman
09-22-2007, 05:19 PM
Oh, but I beg to differ. The culprit that started this (ie, the prosecutor) is still at large, and trying to ruin the lives of six black youths.

Not content with overreaching his office, he went down to the school with armed police guards and threatened to end the black students' lives, "with the stroke of a pen."Yeah, the problem with the "stroke of the pen" comment is that it only comes as something hearsay. The prior assault convictions by the poor languishing Mr. Bell happen to be a matter of record... yet you want to blame some white person on hearsay and somehow correlate the attack on the white kid to a conflict that apparently happened several weeks before. There is conflict in a lot of these rural schools... daily... the is studiously not reported by the media. I'd bet, since I know what goes on in a number of rural schools, that there has been a conflict going on for quite some time and it's not one-sidedly "the white guys". Or "the Jews". Or "Bush". Or "the U.S.". This constant blame directed at the usual liberal enemies gets a little old.

Mike Sigman

dps
09-22-2007, 08:58 PM
The liberals mourn for their victims, the conservatives mourn for their victims, but who mourns for the tree?:(

David

Neil Mick
09-23-2007, 03:26 AM
The liberals mourn for their victims, the conservatives mourn for their victims,

"Victims?" What Conservative "victims?" :confused:

but who mourns for the tree?:(

David

Ah, I suspect you're being glib. But, funny you mentioned it...I was mourning the tree. I kept thinking what a nice tree it was, and why'd they have to cut it down? :(

Taliesin
09-23-2007, 05:57 AM
On this side of the Atlantic we do not have nearly enough information to get a clear idea

We understand that

a) Some black kids sat under a tree
b) Following this nooses were hung from the tree
c) The perpertrators were suspended
d) 6 black kids attacked a white kid.

However it's what we don't know that worries me. Firstly we don't know if there were any white on black attacks that were disregarded or treated by the school internally. If they were whether they were eqivalent.

We don't know whether the charges were disproportionate to the offence

We don't know why the DA decided to get involved - was it the number of attackers, the colour of thier skin - the publicity he would get, the record of the attacker/s

Without this information all we have is a lot of sound and fury.

Mark Freeman
09-23-2007, 08:06 AM
The liberals mourn for their victims, the conservatives mourn for their victims, but who mourns for the tree?:(

David

Cutting down a tree as if it was somehow a part of the human problem, is as daft dousing the flames on a burning cross. It does nothing to address the underlying issues of racism.

Treeism at its very worst:(

regards,

Mark

Mike Sigman
09-23-2007, 11:08 AM
On this side of the Atlantic we do not have nearly enough information to get a clear idea

We understand that

a) Some black kids sat under a tree
b) Following this nooses were hung from the tree
c) The perpertrators were suspended
d) 6 black kids attacked a white kid.

However it's what we don't know that worries me. Firstly we don't know if there were any white on black attacks that were disregarded or treated by the school internally. If they were whether they were eqivalent.

We don't know whether the charges were disproportionate to the offence

We don't know why the DA decided to get involved - was it the number of attackers, the colour of thier skin - the publicity he would get, the record of the attacker/s

Without this information all we have is a lot of sound and fury.There's a lot you don't know, but in your synopsis of what you "know" you neglect to mention the lead perpetrator had a criminal history of physical attacks. You "knew" that be don't seem to want to discuss that side of it.

There was some long-standing alienation between the white and black students. You don't know why that was. Could have been race. Could have been behavior. Who knows? We know that civically, blacks did not respond to jury summonses in this case and probably that's not the first time. Maybe they choose to sit under their own figurative tree and not participate in the community.

I know that if Jena's school system follows the testing patterns of the vast majority of schools in the US, there is a disparity between the scholarship accomplishments of the blacks and whites.... that has to have an effect on relationships.

I say dig into the "Jena 6" debacle.... but equally dig into all the pertinent aspects and let the light shine on everyone. That's equality.

FWIW

Mike

Neil Mick
09-23-2007, 07:09 PM
On this side of the Atlantic we do not have nearly enough information to get a clear idea

We understand that

Hi David,

Let me fill in some of the holes, hopefully give a better perspective.

The Jena 6 story barely received any media attention at all, until DemocracyNow! ran a feature on it, on July 6. After that, national and international media started to take notice.

a) Some black kids sat under a tree

This tree was a meeting-place for the white students at the High School in the mostly-white town of Jena (the tree was known as the "White Tree.") The black students asked the principal if they could also be allowed to sit under the tree. The principal gave his affirmation.

The next day,

b) Following this nooses were hung from the tree

The police decided that it was "a harmless prank," and the students involved were given 3-days' suspension by the superintendent, overruling the initial expulsion ruling by the principal.

The FBI also apparently ran an investigation but found no cause for charging anyone with a hate-crime.

c) The perpertrators were suspended

The next day after that, black football players organized a peaceful protest under the tree. The school freaked, called the cops: and in comes Reed Walters, the local DA, accompanied by armed police escort. He says to the black students: "I can eliminate your lives with a stroke of this pen."

On November 30th, a wing of the High School burnt down. Blacks assumed it was whites; and whites assumed it was blacks. Tensions mounted.

NPR (http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=12353776) has a good accounting of what followed:

The next night, 16-year-old Robert Bailey and a few black friends tried to enter a party attended mostly by whites. When Bailey got inside, he was attacked and beaten. The next day, tensions escalated at a local convenience store. Bailey exchanged words with a white student who had been at the party. The white boy ran back to his truck and pulled out a pistol grip shotgun. Bailey ran after him and wrestled him for the gun.

After some scuffling, Bailey and his friends took the gun away and brought it home. Bailey was eventually charged with theft of a firearm, second-degree robbery and disturbing the peace. The white student who pulled the weapon was not charged at all.

The following Monday, Dec.4, a white student named Justin Barker was loudly bragging to friends in the school hallway that Robert Bailey had been whipped by a white man on Friday night. When Barker walked into the courtyard, he was attacked by a group of black students. The first punch knocked Barker out and he was kicked several times in the head. But the injuries turned out to be superficial. Barker was examined by doctors and released; he went out to a social function (a HS ring meeting) later that evening.

Six black students were arrested and charged with aggravated assault. But District Attorney Reed Walters increased the charges to attempted second-degree murder. That provoked a storm of black outrage.

The black students were also expelled from the High School after an initial investigation by the school district. At the disciplinary hearing, the school board was not allowed to review the findings of the investigation before they voted to uphold the expulsion of the six. The school board’s lawyer, advising the Board? The very same Reed Walters, DA, pushing the charges for murder.

http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=07/09/19/1621212

BILLY FOWLER: The first meeting that I, as a school board member, sat in on was the appeal hearing of the Jena Six. We were listening -- or we were told at this meeting that we couldn't ask any probing questions about what had happened, because the charges had been filed, and it would violate some legal matter somehow. I’m not sure. And all we could do was ask the boys, “Were your rights violated in any manner?” And all we could do was vote on what we were told. And at that point, we didn't know a whole lot, so we voted to uphold what they had done prior.

AMY GOODMAN: And that was that they should be expelled?

BILLY FOWLER: Right.

AMY GOODMAN: And you didn't talk to the boys?

BILLY FOWLER: No. Well, we couldn't ask them anything.

AMY GOODMAN: Because?

BILLY FOWLER: Because we were told that it would violate the law.

DAVID GOODMAN: By the District Attorney?

BILLY FOWLER: Right.

DAVID GOODMAN: And the District Attorney was acting in what capacity at that meeting?

BILLY FOWLER: He was acting as the lawyer for the school board.

d. The injustice of the rulings (the charges have since been mostly reduced, with appeals going back and forth. Reed Walters has vowed to prosecute "to the fullest extent of the law") brought forth a massive rally (actually, 2 rallies) of 40-60,000 people.

However it's what we don't know that worries me. Firstly we don't know if there were any white on black attacks that were disregarded or treated by the school internally. If they were whether they were eqivalent.

We don't know whether the charges were disproportionate to the offence

We don't know why the DA decided to get involved - was it the number of attackers, the colour of thier skin - the publicity he would get, the record of the attacker/s

Without this information all we have is a lot of sound and fury.

I hope that that info filled in some of the blanks.

There's a little more to it, unfortunately. There's the sad, hateful responses by the bigots in this country.

You have the usual anti-black screeds by notorious bigots like David Duke, quoted in the OP.

You ALSO have ugliness popping up like this...

Protestors Encounter Unthinkable Gesture (http://wkrn.com/nashville/news/local-jena-protestors-encounter-unthinkable-gesture/119429.htm)

After the Jena 6 rally, a group of about 200 from Nashville were in nearby Alexandria, Louisiana, less than 40 miles southwest of Jena, waiting for their bus to come back home when two white teenagers in a red truck pulled up slowly, passing the crowd of Nashvillians.

The truck had two nooses hanging from the back of it.

The group from Nashville said they think the teens were trying to intimidate them, driving by a few more times

and this...

FBI Reviewing Anti-Jena 6 Web Page (http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5g_B895UEtV38cUvZWav9zg08hh3Q)

NEW ORLEANS (AP) — The FBI is reviewing a white supremacist Web site that purports to list the addresses of five of the six black teenagers accused of beating a white student in Jena and "essentially called for their lynching," an agency spokeswoman said Saturday.

Sheila Thorne, an agent in the FBI's New Orleans office, said authorities were reviewing whether the site breaks any federal laws. She said the FBI had "gathered intelligence on the matter," but declined to further explain how the agency got involved.

CNN first reported Friday about the Web site, which features a swastika, frequent use of racial slurs, a mailing address in Roanoke, Va., and phone numbers purportedly for some of the teens' families "in case anyone wants to deliver justice." That page is dated Thursday.

Here's my take on the situation. The massive rally showed that the injustice of the Jena 6 resonates with the incipient racism all across the US. African American's know it; and it seems that the KKK and other hate-groups sense it, as well. Hopefully, the excitement generated by the rallies will transform into real, positive change.

Regarding the case itself: this case, IMO, is a schematic of how racism works within this country. You have a DA who adopts a muscular, draconian policy where he has no actual authority.

He had no right to come into that school and threaten the students with ending their lives.

On the night of the hearing, he should have recused himself and not tried to influence the school board, the way he did...it was clearcut "conflict of interest."

Coupled with the the DA's racism and abuse of power, you have the compliance of much of the school district and the police. It's hard to say how far the compliance went (were they willing accomplices? Or were they like Budd Fowler, who assumed that the DA "must know what he's doing," and was presumably intimidated by Walters' office?

The Jena 6 should have been disciplined, possibly brought up on misdemeanor charges: but even the courts are tossing out the DA's grandstanding attempts.

All the other events (the beating at the party; the white kid pulling a shotgun; etc) should all be taken into account with the hanging of those nooses. IMO, there is a definite one-sidedness to the charges levelled by the DA and the police.

Black students get attempted murder, while white students get, at most, a 3-day suspension? SOMEONE in a high position in Jena is willfully ignoring cause and effect, here. Interesting, how the few whites interviewed in Jena see no problem, while all the blacks see the one-sided justice as plain as day.

It reminds me of an incident that occurred when I worked in a Summer Camp (a lifetime ago). The City boasted a huge, innercity park, with a well-maintained Summer Camp. Most of the students were from poor, innercity families, and black.

Once in awhile, a white kid would sign up for the Camp for a few weeks. Anyway, this one kid was clearly uncomfortable with his newfound campmates. He came from a trendy, upscale surburban neighborhood.

So one day the kids were all playing some boardgame and a question arose as to the rules. Up till that point they were a group of kids who had a friendly disagreement. No group of kids were in total concensus on how to resolve the dispute.

Suddenly, the white kid got frustrated, stood up and yelled, "YOU'RE ALL N****RS!!" Instantly, the group of individuals all stood up as one and were clearly set to pummel the little brat into jelly if I hadn't intervened.

Something about being called that particular term resonated in them all. It was outrageous, and they all simultaneoously felt the same anger at being called that epithet.

Where did that rage originate? I think that we all know the answer...those kids certainly did. No one had to talk about it: they all knew what to do...to lash out against such a hateful word.

The black community feels the injustice, in their collective gut. This is why there was such a large, committed rally in Jena. I'm very glad that the rally was peaceful (notice, tho, how racists like David Duke try to turn the rally into some sort of attack.)

Today, the city of Jena, Louisiana is being besieged. It's being invaded by thousands of thugs, demanding that a specific black criminal be let out of jail -- he and his cohorts who committed a vicious hate crime against a white student in that city.

(Funny, how a schoolyard fight that went too far is a "hate crime," while nooses, white-on-black violence, and threats with shotguns aren't)

Mike Sigman
09-23-2007, 07:55 PM
Where is even the elementary statement about Bell's prior criminal convictions in any of the stories you've told or pointed to, Neil? You don't really care about the truth, I take it, so you don't notice when it's missing? How many other facts are missing from your one-sided tale from 2 liberal sources (other than yourself)?

Mike Sigman

HL1978
09-23-2007, 08:19 PM
Where is even the elementary statement about Bell's prior criminal convictions in any of the stories you've told or pointed to, Neil? You don't really care about the truth, I take it, so you don't notice when it's missing? How many other facts are missing from your one-sided tale from 2 liberal sources (other than yourself)?

Mike Sigman

Perhaps he has you on ignore and can not see your comments in order to respond?

Mike Sigman
09-23-2007, 09:49 PM
Perhaps he has you on ignore and can not see your comments in order to respond?
Well, of course... that's what he did in the past until he found out that it was making a fool of him. ;) In this case, Neil has asserted that the prosecutor is the "culprit", based on hearsay and uncorroborated statements from the same media that haven't mentioned that the "all white" jury was "all white" because blacks didn't bother to show up for jury duty and that the poor imprisoned youth had a prior criminal convictions for assault. NPR and "Democracy Now" don't mind lying a little bit in order to enhance any story. Used to be that one of the best all-around sources for factual news was the Christian Science Monitor, but that's changed, too. The best we can do is print as many of the facts that we can and show who is lying by omission and skew.

One of the interesting things to watch in the last 5 or so years is how massively disrupted the storyline has been among traditionally-liberal journalists (anyone who has been to a college with a journalism school knows that they are mostly radical Left.... often the most leftist place on campus). The reason for that has been the internet.

There's probably a lot more to the story than we're all getting, but the Kansas City Star article pretty much makes Neil's version of the story look like a deliberately-concocted lie which much of the mainstream media is buying into, just as they did the Duke Lacrosse story and the Tawanna Brawley story. I'd suggest that already it looks bad for some of the liberal media and it's going to get worse. Beating someone unconscious isn't "justified"; it's illegal. If everyone wants to set up their own exceptions to the law, please let the rest of us know so that we can play at anarchy, too. ;)

Mike

Neil Mick
09-24-2007, 02:55 AM
Perhaps he has you on ignore and can not see your comments in order to respond?

No, that's not it. It's just that I'm at a loss as to how to respond, with respect. You know, it sometimes may not seem like it, but I take Jun's admonitions to respect each other, very seriously.

I'll be honest and say that the manner in which people are posting here in the Open Discussions forum, especially in the political threads, has been very disappointing. The conduct I see repeated day after day, post after post, really makes me shake my head. Where is your respect? Where is your dignity?

Stop stooping to baiting each other with snide little personal comments. Discuss the issues, not the persons and personalities involved in the discussions. If you can't conduct respectful, mature discussions here on AikiWeb, please do me a favor and take your discussions elsewhere.

I'm really getting tired of it all, folks.

-- Jun

(I quoted Jun here as a reminder: since he clearly is addressing most of the people who respond in these sort of topics)

I really, really would like to respond respectfully in this thread: but how do you respond to someone who's accused you of fostering hatemongering; of lying, or not caring about the truth; of being a fool (all within this thread)...even before you get one word in, in response?? How DO you do that...?

All I want to do here is have a friendly conversation. Some people may agree with my perspectives...some disagree. That's your right. But there comes a time in the dialogue when the arguments start to take a personal bite to them. When that time occurs, I say it's time to back down, to reflect. It might EVEN be time to just shrug and say oh well: a friendly dialogue is impossible, under these conditions. Time to move on. In the meantime, I share Jun's sentiment...enough is enough.

I would like to see a lively exchange of ideas, even should the debates get a trifle heated. But the tone of these chats has to change.

MM
09-24-2007, 06:51 AM
Some information from another source:
http://msn.foxsports.com/other/story/7170510

Well worth reading the whole article. This is just an excerpt.


Before I go any further, let me state this: The prosecutor should've never charged these boys with attempted murder. The entire school board should be replaced for stopping the noose-hanging kids from being expelled.

OK, having said that, much of the mainstream reporting on this story has been misleading, irresponsible and inflammatory.

No one mentions that Mychal Bell's clueless public defender was black. No one mentions that there were no black jurors because of the 50 people who responded to the more than 100 summons, none were black. No one mentions that Bell was already on probation for battery relating to a Christmas day incident in 2005. No one mentions that Bell was adjudicated (convicted) of two other violent crimes in 2006 and one charge of criminal damage to property. No one mentions that Bell's father acknowledged he moved back to Louisiana in February (after seven years in Dallas) to supervise his son because of the "Jena Six" mess. No one mentions that Bell starred on the Jena High football team while constantly jeopardizing/violating his seemingly flimsy probation.

This was all talked about in open court during a bond hearing for Bell, and a newspaper in Alexandria, La., wrote about it. Just about everybody else has pretty much ignored the "other side" of the story. Including the fact that not one witness — black or white, and there were 40 statements taken — connected the jumping/beatdown of the white student (Dec. 4) to the noose incident (Sept. 1).

No one mentions that a black U.S. Attorney, Donald Washington, investigated the "Jena Six" case and held a town-hall meeting explaining that there was no evidence connecting the jumping/beatdown to the noose incident.

Only after the prosecutor overreacted (or tired of letting Bell and others skate once the successful football season was over; Bell wasn't the only football star charged) did the "Jena Six" blame the attack on the nooses and the white shade tree.

Mike Sigman
09-24-2007, 08:21 AM
Excellent point, Marks. Jason Whitlock is the same writer who did the other article I pointed to. I notice Mark is able to bring out more of the facts without stooping to calling the "white D.A." a "culprit" or calling anyone an "alcoholic", or whatever. I really think that it's possible to discuss things, even on AikiWeb, without villifying someone and simply examining the facts.

Regards,

Mike Sigman

MM
09-24-2007, 09:07 AM
Found another article and all I can say is wow. Talk about a completely different view than what was given in the media. Again, well worth reading the whole article.

http://www.authorsden.com/visit/viewarticle.asp?AuthorID=17296&id=32967

Some excerpts:


The actions of the three white students who hung the nooses demonstrate prejudice and bigotry. However, they were not just given "two days suspension" as reported by national news agencies. After first being expelled, then upon appeal, being allowed to re-enter the school system, they were sent to an alternative school, off-campus, for an extended period of time. They underwent investigations by Federal and Sate authorities. They were given psychological evaluations. Even when they were eventually allowed back on campus they were not allowed to be a part of the general population for weeks.



The speech given by Reed Walters that included the now infamous statement "I can end your life with the stroke of a pen" was not given to a group of black students. It was given during a speech to the entire student body in an assembly called by the school's principal to calm a community that was pulling their children out of school because there were two fights one day with racial overtones. Two girls, one white and one black fought. Another student was taken to the emergency room to receive stitches.

Mike Sigman
09-24-2007, 09:20 AM
Found another article and all I can say is wow. Talk about a completely different view than what was given in the media. Again, well worth reading the whole article.
Ah, and here's a comment that supports a suspicion I've had from the very beginning, since I went to a fairly rough high school myself:

The “Jena Six” have repeatedly been held up as heroes by much of the race-based community and called “innocent students” by the national media. Some of these students have reputations in Jena for intimidating and sometimes beating other students. They have vandalized and destroyed both school property and community property. Some of the Jena Six have been involved in crimes not only in LaSalle Parish but also in surrounding parishes. For the most part, coaches and other adults have prevented them from being held accountable for the reign of terror they have presided over in Jena. Despite intervention by adults wanting to give them chances due their athletic potential, most of the Jena Six have extensive juvenile records. Yet their parents keep insisting that their children have never been in trouble before. These boys did not receive prejudicial treatment but received preferential treatment until things got out of hand.

So none of this was mentioned but a dignified public prosecutor was smeared as a "culprit".

Mike

David Orange
09-24-2007, 09:50 AM
[QUOTE=Mark Murray;190380]Found another article and all I can say is wow. Talk about a completely different view than what was given in the media. Again, well worth reading the whole article.

http://www.authorsden.com/visit/viewarticle.asp?AuthorID=17296&id=32967
QUOTE]

A few more excerpts:

_____________________________________

There has never been an “all white tree” at Jena High School. Although whites traditionally sit under that tree, whites and blacks traditionally sit in other areas as well. Since integration, there has never been forced segregation on the campus.

There were two nooses, not three.

The actions of the three white students who hung the nooses demonstrate prejudice and bigotry. However, they were not just given “two days suspension” as reported by national news agencies. After first being expelled, then upon appeal, being allowed to re-enter the school system, they were sent to an alternative school, off-campus, for an extended period of time. They underwent investigations by Federal and Sate authorities. They were given psychological evaluations. Even when they were eventually allowed back on campus they were not allowed to be a part of the general population for weeks.

No black children demonstrated the days after the noose incident, as reported by CNN--with the possible exception of an uncorroborated report by one of the "Jena Six" who claims that black students gathered under the tree in a form of protest. This event was not witnessed by any school officials. Therefore, Reed Walters did not come to the school to break it up and send the black students back to class, stating that he could “end their life with a stroke of the pen.” In fact, to this day, there has been no demonstration by the black population of Jena, neither at school or anyplace else, except for the family of the Jena Six and protesters from other cities.

The speech given by Reed Walters that included the now infamous statement “I can end your life with the stroke of a pen” was not given to a group of black students. It was given during a speech to the entire student body in an assembly called by the school's principal to calm a community that was pulling their children out of school because there were two fights one day with racial overtones. Two girls, one white and one black fought. Another student was taken to the emergency room to receive stitches.

The national news media has not mentioned a single time that there was an FBI investigation into the hanging of the nooses and the conduct of Reed Walters that concluded there was no criminal activity or “hate crime” involved. The report is available to the media, along with court records and sworn testimony, none of which has been reported.

There was no “fight” on December 4, 2006 at Jena High School, as the national media continues to characterize the event in question. Six students attacked a single student who was immediately knocked unconscious. According to sworn testimony, they stomped him, as he lay “lifeless” upon the ground.

...the white student attacked, was not the first white student targeted by these black students. Others had been informed they were going to be beaten, but stayed away from school and out of sight until they felt safe.

CNN reported that there were “obviously no witnesses to the fight.” In fact, over thirty eyewitnesses, students and teachers, were questioned immediately following the attack, all of who implicated one or more of the black students arrested in the case. In fact, some of the accused black students did not stop stomping Barker until they were pulled away from him by some of the teachers, according to testimony given in the trial of Mychal Bell.

The media continues ...insinuating that his injuries were not very severe. The Barkers, by no means a wealthy family, face medical bills already over $12,000 from the emergency room visit. ...Justin Barker was advised to remain hospitalized but decided he would not let the event keep him from participating in the once-in-a-lifetime, traditional Ring Ceremony at First Baptist Church in Jena, where class rings are presented to the upcoming senior class.

This was not a fight. This process was taken out of the hands of school officials when the ambulance was called to bring Justin Barker to the hospital for the attack. Both the appearance of the ambulance and Barker’s visit to the emergency room requires an investigation by law enforcement.

National news organizations, which continue to call it a “fight,” suggest that there was no reason to involve the District Attorney’s office. If a young female student had been raped in a bathroom on campus, the school officials would do all the investigations required under their policy, but they would also report the crime to law enforcement. Criminals, adults or students, are not allowed to rape or assault students with impunity simply because it happened on a high school campus.

The “Jena Six” have repeatedly been held up as heroes by much of the race-based community and called “innocent students” by the national media. Some of these students have reputations in Jena for intimidating and sometimes beating other students. They have vandalized and destroyed both school property and community property. Some of the Jena Six have been involved in crimes not only in LaSalle Parish but also in surrounding parishes. For the most part, coaches and other adults have prevented them from being held accountable for the reign of terror they have presided over in Jena. Despite intervention by adults wanting to give them chances due their athletic potential, most of the Jena Six have extensive juvenile records. Yet their parents keep insisting that their children have never been in trouble before. These boys did not receive prejudicial treatment but received preferential treatment until things got out of hand.

The entire black community of Jena is not being heard in this controversy, just the parents, relatives, and close friends of the Jena Six. The black community of Jena has not been involved in the protests and demonstrations called by national race-based organizations. Some state and national race crusaders have chastised them for not “rising up” with the parents to force law enforcement to “free the Jena Six.” Many do agree that the charges seem wrong, but they also know the criminal history of the boys referred to as the “Jena Six.” It is their neighborhood these boys have terrorized. Not even all of the parents claim that these boys should be set free with no consequence for their actions. One of the parents was interviewed, saying that the boys should suffer the fair punishment for their actions. He suggested that simple battery would be an acceptable charge. With one exception, the local black pastors do not support the demonstrations. They have been openly criticized for their lack of cooperation with the national race crusaders. One of them counseled the “Jena Six” families to not stir controversy for controversy’s sake. The black pastor was openly condemned by a local radio personality sympathetic to the cause of the black parents. The rhetoric grew so intense that the black pastor was referred to as Reed Walter’s “house Negro” on the local radio talk show. The pastor is consistently accused on this show of working in cooperation with Reed Walters in a plot to undermine the “Jena Six.”

___________________________________________

Suffice it to say when Al Sharpton is involved, ninety percent of the content will be racially inflamatory fabrication for Sharpton's benefit. Likewise many of the supporters, who tell the lies and omit the truth, are trying to polish their own image (or self-image) as fair-minded people, when they are really racists.

In hopes for the truth.

David

Ron Tisdale
09-24-2007, 09:59 AM
I think this is a good example of what happens when the main stream media starts out ingoring a story. We are left to bloggers and more biased forms of reporting to fill in the blanks.

I think we should also be clear that asking for a fuller picture of the story (as Mike has) does not necessarily mean supporting the racism in that community. While I personally believe the prosecuter is way out of line, and the judicial system there is racially biased, I also think the points Mike raises are good ones.

The African American community cannot be so sensitive toward questions of race that real and serious problems of youth discipline in our own community can go ignored. We cannot afford such a lapse...and Al Sharpton is not helping that situation.

Best,
Ron

David Orange
09-24-2007, 10:08 AM
The African American community cannot be so sensitive toward questions of race that real and serious problems of youth discipline in our own community can go ignored. We cannot afford such a lapse...and Al Sharpton is not helping that situation.

When the local black pastors are villified by people like Sharpton and radio rabble rousers, that should be noticed, but the national media have done us a big disservice by playing only the politically acceptable side.

Best to you.

David

James Davis
09-24-2007, 12:11 PM
"Victims?" What Conservative "victims?" :confused:



Any kid who has to worry about being hurt when they go to school is a victim, regardless of their race or political leanings. Any kid who has to deal with stupid racists instead of spending their time getting an education is being victimized.
The principal's decision to expel the noose hangers should have stuck; The superintendent had no business cutting it down to suspension.:disgust:

gdandscompserv
09-24-2007, 12:11 PM
I think this is a good example of what happens when the main stream media starts out ingoring a story. We are left to bloggers and more biased forms of reporting to fill in the blanks.
Sorry Ron, but your suggestion that the main stream media is less bias than a blogger or anybody else, is to me, a bit comical.

Ron Tisdale
09-24-2007, 12:12 PM
When the local black pastors are villified by people like Sharpton and radio rabble rousers, that should be noticed, but the national media have done us a big disservice by playing only the politically acceptable side.

That's not the only problem...it is compounded by the fact that the main stream press came so late to the table, and then dug so shallowly into the truth. Almost all of the information I have on this issue has come from "liberal" sources. Now, I personally like the coverage that NPR (as an example) gives to issues in general, and for the most part, this one in particular. I also think that in spite of the problems of the Jena 6 and their troubled past, there is still an issue of seperate justice, and harsher justice for AAs in that community (and in my experience, many others). But that does not absolve individuals from paying their due penalty when they break the law. I have no issue with the primary person in question being held accountable for his actions, and I would not advocate for him being released without some serious safeguards.

At the same time, I think that someone can take a gun out in public, and assault others, and not be charged, while they are charged for defending themselves, is criminal. And the DA is not helping the issues. Hearsay or not. His comments at the school not being part of a court proceeding, does not mean they didn't happen. And that they did happen is a pretty serious indictment of the man and his office.

Best,
Ron

Ron Tisdale
09-24-2007, 12:20 PM
Ron Tisdale wrote:
I think this is a good example of what happens when the main stream media starts out ingoring a story. We are left to bloggers and more biased forms of reporting to fill in the blanks.

Sorry Ron, but your suggestion that the main stream media is less bias than a blogger or anybody else, is to me, a bit comical.

Well, perhaps I wasn't clear. The biases are often quite different. Main stream media tends toward superficial analysis, which can be biased in terms of the bent the particular outlet favors. But the standards are clearer, and I think, the biases in question are more easily overcome.

Smaller outlets and bloggers don't have such easy access to fact checkers, editorial staff, etc. So you tend to have a very clear bias, worn on the sleeve, so to speak. Most of the information on this case was originally from far left, AA, or far right sources. Each pushing the information that supported their cause. Finding information that is more down the middle, but still in depth was quite difficult for me.
Best,
Ron

David Orange
09-24-2007, 12:42 PM
That's not the only problem...it is compounded by the fact that the main stream press came so late to the table, and then dug so shallowly into the truth.

They're doing that with everything nowadays. The press coverage really helped Bush's push to war by slanting things to his statements instead of investigating his statements and questioning things. Like the recent headlines of "Bush Announces Troop Withdrawals" when he was basically doing exactly the opposite. Our press is failing us.

Almost all of the information I have on this issue has come from "liberal" sources. Now, I personally like the coverage that NPR (as an example) gives to issues in general, and for the most part, this one in particular.

NPR is all I listen to (aside from CDs and Japanese nursery songs) but sometimes their coverage is pretty slanted and gets irritating. In this case, I find a lot of it shallow and rather flaky. Not that there aren't lots of problems there, but NPR is tending to be a bit one-sided, calling the six-on-one beating a "schoolyard fight."

I also think that in spite of the problems of the Jena 6 and their troubled past, there is still an issue of seperate justice, and harsher justice for AAs in that community (and in my experience, many others).

No question there at all. And some laws are cleverly set up that way, such as the crack/powder cocaine laws that deal very harshly with crack while dealing rather lightly (in comparison) with powdered cocaine, from which crack is made. Seems like they would realize that a little powder will make a lot of crack and "crack down" on the powder. But powder is more likely to be held by whites while crack is more likely to be held by blacks....so....prisons are filled with black kids who had crack and country clubs are filled with white kids sharing powder behind the scenes.

But that does not absolve individuals from paying their due penalty when they break the law. I have no issue with the primary person in question being held accountable for his actions, and I would not advocate for him being released without some serious safeguards.

Absolutely agreed. But the reason he's gone so far down a violent road is mostly because he is athletically talented and has been spared any accountability for his previous violence. When our schools return to teaching and stop being excuses for football and basketball teams, maybe our country will rise in international academic ratings again and we'll stop pushing violent kids into stardom....when pigs fly.

At the same time, I think that someone can take a gun out in public, and assault others, and not be charged, while they are charged for defending themselves, is criminal.

The details on that seem a bit fuzzy. I've read that the kid with the gun was "defending himself" when he was rushed by two or three of the "six". The fact that he wasn't beaten or killed after they took the gun from him would seem to indicate that he over-reacted. But it wasn't just a matter that he pulled a gun on them. He was responding to their actions. Still, if someone pulled a gun on me, I would take it from them if I could and I would not only take it apart, I would throw the pieces in a wide area so that the gun could probably never be re-assembled. So I think it's ridiculous to charge them with "theft of a firearm." That's just stupid, to me.

And the DA is not helping the issues. Hearsay or not. His comments at the school not being part of a court proceeding, does not mean they didn't happen. And that they did happen is a pretty serious indictment of the man and his office.

If he's anything like the Alabama State Attorney General, this would no surprise me. Here we had a case where two guys robbed a pawn shop. The younger shot the clerks. The older guy, who didn't shoot anyone, was condemned to death while the younger, who shot and killed two people, got off because of his age. When the local DA supported lifting the death penalty for the guy who didn't shoot anyone, Troy King, the Alabama AG, removed the local DA from the case and, I think, personally took over in an attempt to prevent the non-shooter from being freed from the death penalty. In his way of thinking, "someone" has to die, whether he killed anyone or not. It's as cold-blooded as anything out on the street.

David

MM
09-24-2007, 01:06 PM
Any kid who has to worry about being hurt when they go to school is a victim, regardless of their race or political leanings. Any kid who has to deal with stupid racists instead of spending their time getting an education is being victimized.
The principal's decision to expel the noose hangers should have stuck; The superintendent had no business cutting it down to suspension.:disgust:

Hello James,
According to other sources, that isn't what happened. Of course, it's a matter of believing in someone who was there as opposed to a national media service. Sometimes, you'll have to dig the facts out for yourself. If what happened below is really what happened, there's going to be a paper trail. Dig it up and you'll know the truth.

Here's the quote again:

The actions of the three white students who hung the nooses demonstrate prejudice and bigotry. However, they were not just given "two days suspension" as reported by national news agencies. After first being expelled, then upon appeal, being allowed to re-enter the school system, they were sent to an alternative school, off-campus, for an extended period of time. They underwent investigations by Federal and Sate authorities. They were given psychological evaluations. Even when they were eventually allowed back on campus they were not allowed to be a part of the general population for weeks.

Neil Mick
09-24-2007, 01:38 PM
Found another article and all I can say is wow. Talk about a completely different view than what was given in the media. Again, well worth reading the whole article.


I'm sorry, but these revelations don't exactly make me change my mind...

The speech given by Reed Walters that included the now infamous statement "I can end your life with the stroke of a pen" was not given to a group of black students. It was given during a speech to the entire student body in an assembly called by the school's principal to calm a community that was pulling their children out of school because there were two fights one day with racial overtones.

It's not a DA's job to calm racial tensions in a school: that's the Asst. Principal's job. And believe me, I have encountered some fierce AP's in my school-days, who could have handled this problem before breakfast, without resorting to calling in the police.

Besides, the defence of the DA's speech sounds a bit specious, to me. Sure, I can take it as given that the whole student body was called together (never really doubted this...if the DA HAD called in "only" the black student body: we'd have heard about it by now) when he said his infamous "stroke of a pen" line, but the statement was clearly a threat. And, I don't know about you: but threats do not make me feel easy, or calm. Since no one here attended the DA's speech, we will never know to whom he addressed the comment (neither, I might add, did Budd Fowler, when he was interviewed). Obviously, many of the black students felt threatened by the remark. It's unclear how the white students felt, or if they even felt that the remark was addressed to them.

The actions of the three white students who hung the nooses demonstrate prejudice and bigotry. However, they were not just given "two days suspension" as reported by national news agencies. After first being expelled, then upon appeal, being allowed to re-enter the school system, they were sent to an alternative school, off-campus, for an extended period of time. They underwent investigations by Federal and Sate authorities. They were given psychological evaluations. Even when they were eventually allowed back on campus they were not allowed to be a part of the general population for weeks

But, so were the rest of the Jena 6. They all had to go to an alternative school and be separated from the student body, as well. Again, it's not about who suffered the most: but was there an abuse of power demonstrated here? Did all sides receive equal justice?

Clearly, the answer is no. But, OTOH, I never said the Jena 6 were innocent: quite the opposite. I said that they deserve some sort of punishment. But, many victims of racist injustice are rarely completely innocent of wrongdoing, themselves. The world is not that black and white (pun again...sorry :uch: )

Any kid who has to worry about being hurt when they go to school is a victim, regardless of their race or political leanings. Any kid who has to deal with stupid racists instead of spending their time getting an education is being victimized.
The principal's decision to expel the noose hangers should have stuck; The superintendent had no business cutting it down to suspension.:disgust:

All true. I think I was getting hung up on this idea that white students = Conservative victims; while black students = Liberal victims. :freaky:

I also think that in spite of the problems of the Jena 6 and their troubled past, there is still an issue of seperate justice, and harsher justice for AAs in that community (and in my experience, many others). But that does not absolve individuals from paying their due penalty when they break the law.

Correct.

I have no issue with the primary person in question being held accountable for his actions, and I would not advocate for him being released without some serious safeguards.

At the same time, I think that someone can take a gun out in public, and assault others, and not be charged, while they are charged for defending themselves, is criminal.

Thank you. Where's the outrage over the other events that occurred in the "quiet 3 months?" It's barely covered in the MSM.

And the DA is not helping the issues. Hearsay or not. His comments at the school not being part of a court proceeding, does not mean they didn't happen. And that they did happen is a pretty serious indictment of the man and his office.

Best,
Ron

Yep. Clear case of "conflict of interest." He had no right coming into that school: and he had no right acting as the schoolboard atty while investigating the case. He should have recused himself.

What ALSO gets me is how this case seems to resonate with the virulent white racist groups (the KKK, etc). They seem intent upon labelling the protestors as thugs and malcontents.

It's funny, but sometimes an event will lay bare the wider underpinnings of racism within the country, and spark greater action (with a little injudicious help of the media)

The Rodney King riots are a good example. Was Rodney King an innocent lamb who was misidentified by the police and stomped into unconsciousness? No, of course not: he was trying to avoid arrest, he was speeding, and the cops got more than a little carried away in their attempts to restrain him. A bystander happened to videotape the whole thing, it got to the media, and the resulting riots became history. But what really sparked the riots was not the aggressive attempt to arrest King or even the resulting video: the resulting riots were a direct response to the acquittal verdict to the officers, which was widely seen as unjust.

David Orange
09-24-2007, 04:03 PM
Suffice it to say when Al Sharpton is involved, ninety percent of the content will be racially inflamatory fabrication for Sharpton's benefit. Likewise many of the supporters, who tell the lies and omit the truth, are trying to polish their own image (or self-image)....

As I was saying....

This thread, in itself, seems designed for something other than mere discussion.

David

Neil Mick
09-25-2007, 05:43 PM
This just in:

National Lawyers Guild (http://nlg.org/news/index.php?entry=entry070924-114458)

NATIONAL LAWYERS GUILD CALLS FOR RELEASE OF MYCHAL BELL, FOR ALL CHARGES AGAINST THE JENA 6 TO BE DROPPED, AND FOR FEDERAL INVESTIGATION INTO JENA 6 ARRESTS AND PROSECUTIONS

The National Lawyers Guild (NLG) calls for the immediate release of Mychal Bell, one of the six high school students who have come to be known as the “Jena 6.” The Guild also calls for all charges against the Jena 6 to be dropped, and for the investigation and disbarment of Judge J.P. Mauffray and District Attorney Reed Walters.

Judge J.P. Mauffray and DA Reed Walters have engaged in a string of egregious actions, the most recent of which was the denial of bail for Bell on Friday. The NLG urges that: 1) The United States Department of Justice convene an immediate inquiry into the circumstances surrounding the arrests and prosecutions of the Jena 6; 2) Judge Mauffray be recused from presiding over Bell’s juvenile court hearings or other proceedings; 3) The Louisiana Office of Disciplinary Counsel investigate Reed Walters for unethical and possibly illegal conduct; 4) The Louisiana Judiciary Commission investigate Judge Mauffray for unethical conduct; and 5) The Jena school district superintendent be removed from office.

“Contrary to what Reed Walters and J.P. Mauffray may think, Jena is subject to the same Constitution that the rest of the United States is,” remarked Kerry McLean, member of the executive board of the NLG.

“There have been numerous, brazen violations of the constitutional rights of the Jena 6.” McLean continued, “In addition to the constitutional violations, Walters and Mauffray have breached the ethical requirements of their offices. They should be made to answer for all of this.”

"The double standard of justice in Jena, one for black students and another for whites, is emblematic of the racism that still permeates many towns throughout the South and the country as a whole. There must be an immediate and full investigation of judicial and prosecutorial malfeasance in Jena, Louisiana," said Marjorie Cohn, President of the NLG.

There is an unequal justice system in Jena, where blacks are routinely the victims of discriminatory and oppressive treatment by officials.

David Orange
09-25-2007, 08:01 PM
This just in:

National Lawyers Guild (http://nlg.org/news/index.php?entry=entry070924-114458)

Sounds like they're an organization of all the lawyers in the nation, doesn't it?

But they're not, are they?

Among their biases, are they also supporters of Hamas and Hezbollah?

David

Neil Mick
10-01-2007, 02:38 AM
Uh huh. Sure it isn't.

But, when asked about his opinions on the historic march, which brought together 10's of thousand's to demand justice for the Jena 6: this is what the DA had to say...

I firmly believe and am confident of the fact that had it not been for the direct intervention of the lord Jesus Christ last Thursday, a disaster would have happened. You can quote me on that.

Give 'em enough rope...(ouch! pun! :uch: )

David Orange
10-02-2007, 11:19 AM
Give 'em enough rope...(ouch! pun! :uch: )

It's so refreshing when a Hamas and Hezbollah supporter lectures the world about racism.

What a laugh.

Ron Tisdale
10-02-2007, 04:05 PM
Reed Walters isn't a Hamas supporter...

Oh, wait {blush}

You meant Neil! :D

B,
R (y'all slay me)

Neil Mick
10-02-2007, 05:01 PM
Reed Walters isn't a Hamas supporter...

Oh, wait {blush}

You meant Neil! :D

B,
R (y'all slay me)

Not me. I don't find it funny, at all. I find this sort of personal attack beyond the scope of discussion. It's why I have David on ignore.

Debate is finished, when someone stoops to calling others "racist." (http://www.aikiweb.com/forums/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=187070) I just wish people would respect Jun's guidelines:

Stop stooping to baiting each other with snide little personal comments. Discuss the issues, not the persons and personalities involved in the discussions. If you can't conduct respectful, mature discussions here on AikiWeb, please do me a favor and take your discussions elsewhere.

But anyways...back to the thread topic.

Ron Tisdale
10-03-2007, 08:30 AM
Hey Neil,

Sometimes ya just gotta laugh. Otherwise, they think they win.

Best,
Ron

Neil Mick
10-03-2007, 01:07 PM
Hey Neil,

Sometimes ya just gotta laugh. Otherwise, they think they win.

Best,
Ron

:cool: True enough. :cool:

MM
10-03-2007, 01:34 PM
Huh? You mean I don't win all the time? :)
(And sometimes you have to laugh at yourself)

Guilty Spark
10-14-2007, 11:39 AM
Uh huh. Sure it isn't.

But, when asked about his opinions on the historic march, which brought together 10's of thousand's to demand justice for the Jena 6: this is what the DA had to say...

Give 'em enough rope...(ouch! pun! :uch: )

Justice for the Jena 6?
Aren't they guilty of assault?

Neil Mick
10-14-2007, 04:45 PM
Justice for the Jena 6?
Aren't they guilty of assault?

Um, no, Grant...there's a lot more to this case (which surprises me that you don't know this).



The Jena Six refers to a group of six black teenagers who have been charged with the beating of a white teenager at Jena High School in Jena, Louisiana, United States, on December 4, 2006. The six black students were initially charged with attempted second degree murder and conspiracy to commit second degree murder.

The attack on Barker

On December 4, 2006, 17-year-old Justin Barker, a white Jena High School student, was assaulted at school. He was struck in the head by a black student, knocking him unconscious. A group of black students then repeatedly kicked him.

Some individuals have stated that Barker had mocked Robert Bailey, Jr., who had allegedly been beaten up by a white man the previous Friday. Barker denies that.

Superintendent Breithaupt stated that the attack was no ordinary schoolyard fight. "It was a premeditated ambush and attack by six students against one," Breithaupt said. "The victim attacked was beaten and kicked into a state of bloody unconsciousness."

According to relatives of the accused, the six defendants have all been expelled from school.

The police arrested the six students, eventually dubbed the "Jena Six", accused of the attack. Five of them (Robert Bailey, Jr., then 17; Mychal Bell, then 16; Carwin Jones, then 18; Bryant Purvis, then 17; and Theo Shaw, then 17) were charged with attempted second-degree murder. The sixth student, Jesse Ray Beard, was charged as a juvenile because he was 14 at the time.

Mychal Bell, aged sixteen at the time of the incident, was charged as an adult. The district attorney has stated that he did so due to Bell's criminal record and because he believed Bell initiated the attack.

Mychal Bell proceedings

On June 26, 2007, the first day of trial for defendant Mychal Bell, Walters reduced the charges for Bell to aggravated second-degree battery and conspiracy to commit aggravated second-degree battery. A charge of aggravated battery requires the use of a "deadly weapon". Walters therefore argued that the tennis shoes that Bell was wearing and used to kick Barker with were deadly weapons, an argument with which the jury ultimately agreed.

That tears it...all Nike, Payless and Shoetowns in Mississippi ought to have to apply for licenses to sell deadly weapons!! :hypno:

But it's funny, how 3 nooses hung from a "white tree" were just considered a [url=http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-elf2u1mmay20,1,3301167.story?ctrack=1&cset=true]"harmless prank," (]Jena 6[/url) while a noose hung on a college professor's door gets treated (rightly so) as a hate-crime.

Columbia Professor: Noose Message 'Very Personal' (http://www.abcnews.go.com/GMA/story?id=3716757&page=1)

Madonna Constantine, the Columbia University professor who found a noose on her office door Tuesday morning, said she felt not only angry but embarrassed when she saw the noose.

"I know I don't really have a reason to be embarrassed about it because this was the work of someone who, you know, is not a secure person at some level, but it felt as though it was directed toward me," Constantine said in an exclusive interview today on "Good Morning America."

It seems that the noose is coming back in vogue for haters as the perfect token du jour to present (anonymously, because hatred and cowardice often go hand-in-hand) to the object of their hate.

Fearmongering base, simmered with just a touch of the dregs of history. Add cowardice, and stir. :grr:

Guilty Spark
10-15-2007, 11:27 AM
I thought the jena 6 had to do with those american students that were executed. One girl escaping. Not sure why i thought it was that, and this of course is before reading the article.

Open to argument, I personally feel all violent crimes are hate crimes. Yes I realise the taking into consideration of race, say white kids assaulting white kids vs a hispanic or middle eastern kid, but I think we should hold the same standard across the board.
Assault is assault regardless if sone is doing it due to drugs, alcohol, race or passion.

i wouldn't put too much thought into the deadly weapon tennis shoe approach. To me thats just the bullshit lawyers do. Obviously it's RTFO.

Shane Mokry
10-17-2007, 11:58 PM
I graduated from Jena High School...there is no "white tree". That tree was a bush when I went there, but the atmosphere was the same. Almost all the white students congregated on one side...all the African American students on the other. The administration did not assign trees!

If that tree was indeed the white tree, then the walkway opposite the tree on the other side of the "square" (courtyard bordered by 4 academic buildings) can be called the "black hall" because that's where mostly African American students congregated...by choice.

I cannot repair the damage inflicted by the media, Jesse and Al on my town...but I will say this. Al and Jesse have an agenda that benefits them. The media are selling stories. I believe Jena has a few idiots but is not the racist community it has been made out to be.

Mychal Bell has been in trouble since he began High School and shows no sign of stopping. Yes, he was held without bail as long as the LAW would allow...exactly 14 days to appeal the 3rd district court...and I'm glad they did. They kept a 5 time violent repeat offendor off the streets as long as possible...the same streets my wife and children travel every day. Whether he is 16 yrs old or 40, black or white, makes no difference to me. You won't hear any of this on national or international news.

By the way, he is back in jail. Not only did he violate his probation (for simple battery...3 times) in Lasalle parish when he decided to attack Justin Barker, he violated probation he was serving in the next parish over (Rapides) for previous drug violations. They arrested him last week. They haven't reported that because they don't want you to know he is a thug and everyone has been supporting him without knowing that he is a real criminal with real violent crimes in his past. Most of his juvenile history has been kept out of the media reprots because he is a juvenile. That does not make him less dangerous.

I don't think anyone watching this story from afar has any real idea what has been taking place here or how dangerous this kid is. The only information you have is what the major media...and special interest groups report. This is not a black and white issue. It is a criminal issue. It is only a racial issue on TV and in the paper. For example, during the CNN coverage of the march they repeatedly showed a rebel flag being flown on someone's residence and reported that it was in Jena. I saw the broadcast and recognized the house. It was a home recently built in Grant parish...over 30 miles from Jena. I only recognized it because I pass it on the main highway every 2 weeks when I commute to and from work.

Again, I live in Jena. I watched the march from my front yard. I have seen much of this first hand...I watched as the Red Cross, an emergency relief organization, handed out bottled water to thousands of marchers who showed up to march for the release of a criminal, in 95 degree weather, wearing black, with no water or food at all...thousands of them. I listened on the police scanner as hundreds of people were in need of first aid due to heat exhaustion. The red cross again stepped in. This was not some natural disaster. These people came here of their own free will. You would think they would come better prpared. Finally, when it was all over, I got in my car and went to look around town. There were people all over town, business owners and residents, doing what? Picking up trash. Tons of it. It was everywhere. I was sickened...still am. Needless to say...no more donations to the red cross.

IMO, Mychal Bell was rightly tried as an adult. It has been done all over the US for juveniles who are repeat offendors. He deserves some jail time. I have way too many opinions about this case to put into one post so I'll stop now...

I will check for replies and maybe I can help shed some reality on some of the topics surrounding this case...one at a time...I just had to say something about the infamous "white tree"...

Shane Mokry
10-18-2007, 12:26 AM
I forgot to mention...If you're concerned about the fate of the "white tree", buy a piece off ebay and support capitalism...

Shane

Neil Mick
10-18-2007, 03:11 AM
I graduated from Jena High School...there is no "white tree". That tree was a bush when I went there, but the atmosphere was the same. Almost all the white students congregated on one side...all the African American students on the other. The administration did not assign trees!

Hi Shane,

I'm not sure exactly what you want out of this conversation.

If that tree was indeed the white tree, then the walkway opposite the tree on the other side of the "square" (courtyard bordered by 4 academic buildings) can be called the "black hall" because that's where mostly African American students congregated...by choice.

Umm...OK, no white tree. But, I'm guessing that the tree signified something to 90% of the student body, that it did not, to the other 10%. It certainly was the focal catalyst for the nooses, wasn't it?

I cannot repair the damage inflicted by the media,

No one can. The media distorts everything.

Jesse and Al on my town

"Jesse, and Al??" :confused: :confused: What did they do...knock over a liquor store? What "damage?"

...but I will say this. Al and Jesse have an agenda that benefits them.

Exactly. They go after media stories to suit their agenda. Not far divorced behavior than, say, the way Congress reacted, in regards to Terry Shiavo.

Better, in fact. No one elected Jesse, or Al.

The media are selling stories. I believe Jena has a few idiots but is not the racist community it has been made out to be.

Jena, I imagine, is no more racist than anywhere else, in America. But it is beyond human nature to expect that any place is devoid of its racism.

The racism seen in Jena is indicative of the racism prevalent throughout the US. It's why the whole story of Jena has resonance.

Mychal Bell has been in trouble since he began High School and shows no sign of stopping. Yes, he was held without bail as long as the LAW would allow...exactly 14 days to appeal the 3rd district court...and I'm glad they did. They kept a 5 time violent repeat offendor off the streets as long as possible...the same streets my wife and children travel every day. Whether he is 16 yrs old or 40, black or white, makes no difference to me. You won't hear any of this on national or international news.

But where did YOU get this information...?

From the media, right? Well, there you are. And yes...I DID hear it on the national news.

By the way, he is back in jail. Not only did he violate his probation (for simple battery...3 times) in Lasalle parish when he decided to attack Justin Barker, he violated probation he was serving in the next parish over (Rapides) for previous drug violations. They arrested him last week. They haven't reported that because they don't want you to know he is a thug and everyone has been supporting him without knowing that he is a real criminal with real violent crimes in his past. Most of his juvenile history has been kept out of the media reprots because he is a juvenile. That does not make him less dangerous.

Nor, does it mean that his rights should have been violated.

I don't think anyone watching this story from afar has any real idea what has been taking place here or how dangerous this kid is. The only information you have is what the major media...and special interest groups report.

Do you know this kid, personally? If not, then you're really just getting this from the same, misleading media, as the rest of us (or perhaps, "friend-of-a-friend?" Gossip is an even worse source, than the media...esp in a small town).

And if so: then how, exactly, are you helping "improve the damage," by warning ppl how dangerous, he is? How will that help, exactly?

Look, I think it's well established that he's no saint. But, Mychal Bell's model of citizenry isn't the question. What was the question (since answered) was did he get the due process, that everyone deserves?

Clearly, he didn't. Thus, the marches and the Congressional action.

This is not a black and white issue. It is a criminal issue. It is only a racial issue on TV and in the paper.

Sorry, but agree to disagree. A big part of racism is denial that racism exists. Unless, of course: you're ready to start arguing that tennis shoes comprise deadly weapons; that the DA acted completely properly, and that racial tension was not existant in Jena, before the media made it center stage.

Sorry, but documented accounts differ with your assertion.

For example, during the CNN coverage of the march they repeatedly showed a rebel flag being flown on someone's residence and reported that it was in Jena.

A little media spin, doth not mean that a problem did/does not exist.

I saw the broadcast and recognized the house. It was a home recently built in Grant parish...over 30 miles from Jena. I only recognized it because I pass it on the main highway every 2 weeks when I commute to and from work.

Again, I live in Jena. I watched the march from my front yard. I have seen much of this first hand...I watched as the Red Cross, an emergency relief organization, handed out bottled water to thousands of marchers who showed up to march for the release of a criminal, in 95 degree weather, wearing black, with no water or food at all...thousands of them.

I'm sorry that I couldn't attend the march. Would have been there if I could (but, I awould have been a little more considerate of the neighborhood, certainly. I don't throw trash on the ground when I march).

I listened on the police scanner as hundreds of people were in need of first aid due to heat exhaustion. The red cross again stepped in. This was not some natural disaster. These people came here of their own free will. You would think they would come better prpared. Finally, when it was all over, I got in my car and went to look around town. There were people all over town, business owners and residents, doing what? Picking up trash. Tons of it. It was everywhere.

Tsk. Sounds like a poorly organized parade. The organizers should be fined.

I was sickened...still am. Needless to say...no more donations to the red cross.

Um...the Red Cross has nothing to do with organizing the march...:confused:

IMO, Mychal Bell was rightly tried as an adult. It has been done all over the US for juveniles who are repeat offendors. He deserves some jail time.

Oh, yes...jail time is JUST what this country needs, to set us straight to be law abiding! :freaky: :freaky:

Newsflash, Shane: I live in California, the home of "3 strikes." Hooray, huh? Three serious offences, and it's off to the slammer for you! Only problem is that the prisons are overcrowded, nothing more than warehouses; and 3 strikes has choked the system with these cases.

Three Strikes Law (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_strikes_law)

Some unusual scenarios have arisen, particularly in California — the state punishes shoplifting and similar crimes as felony petty theft if the person who committed the crime has a prior conviction for any form of theft, including robbery or burglary. As a result, some defendants have been given sentences of 25 years to life in prison for such crimes as shoplifting golf clubs (Gary Ewing, previous strikes for burglary and robbery with a knife), nine videotapes (Leandro Andrade, previous strikes for home burglary), or, along with a violent assault, a slice of pepperoni pizza from a group of children (Jerry Dewayne Williams, four previous non-violent felonies, sentence later reduced to six years). In one particularly notorious case, Kevin Weber was sentenced to 26 years to life for the crime of stealing four chocolate chip cookies (previous strikes of burglary and assault with a deadly weapon. However, prosecutors said the six-time parole violator broke into the restaurant to rob the safe after a busy Mother's Day holiday, but he triggered the alarm system before he could do it. When arrested, his pockets were full of cookies he had taken from the restaurant

I will check for replies and maybe I can help shed some reality on some of the topics surrounding this case...one at a time...I just had to say something about the infamous "white tree"...

Um...thanks. But, last time I checked: there were specific circumstances under which a minor could be charged with 2nd degree murder. Willful intent to batter with a deadly tennis shoe is not one of them.

Frankly, if Mychal Bell is as dangerous as you describe: I'm sure that he'll get his due. But, it should be what he's due: not because you (or others) think that this is what he deserves. Luckily, the rule of law still runs the courts.

For now. :eek:

Still, if the big reality-shedding came from the white tree remark...thanks again, but that was already established, in an earlier post.

Tom Fish
10-18-2007, 10:10 AM
Hi Niel,
My understanding from Shane's post is that his community is not the racist hell-hole portrayed in the national news. I agree also that Jesse and Al have their personal agenda that mostly benefits themselves rather than their race, truth, or justice. It's easy to look through a prism and see only the light that you want. All you need to do is select the agenda you want, filter out anything that doesn't fit, shout out the "proof" gained from the evidence that fits, and presto!!! The truth as you want to know it.
I think we can agree that there is racism in this country. I don't like it anymore than you do. I have seen a big change in our culture though, that makes racism unacceptable. Bigotry, hatred, and discrimination are no longer accepted in our society. It is not normal or common to hate people because of their race today. What is too common, are people who try to use fear, hatred, and misrepresentation to further their own personal agenda. These people don't care who gets caught in the middle. Unfortunately, the people of Jenna, all of them, are painted as racists with one big stroke of the brush. Shane was just trying to show some one else's perspective. Let's don't let him off of the hook though. His location proves he is racist.

Shane Mokry
10-18-2007, 10:15 AM
Wow!

Thanks for the reply Neil. I got exactly what I expected to from this post.

Shane

Shane Mokry
10-18-2007, 12:05 PM
Tom,

I believe you understand my point. I agree that racism is alive and well in America. There are bigots here in Jena. Most of the people here are not.

I thought that anyone interested in this case might want to hear some things about Jena from someone who lives here. Everyone knows everyone else...we all shop at the same wal-mart. We all went to the same high school and now...all our kids go to school together. This is a very small community.

The abuse of power by the judge and DA is not necessarily racist. It could happen to anyone he has a personal grudge aginst. I've seen it. Black and white...maximum charges if they don't like you...reduced or dropped charges and probation for friends. Don't get caught doing something stupid during election year...Mychal Bell was not shown any sympathy; probably because the DA and Judge were tired of seeing him appear in court for violent crimes and figured the probation was not turning his behavior around. (My well informed opinion)

I have seen changes here since all this started and not for the better. AA and white people who were part of each others' lives on a daily basis have become distant. They are still working together and interacting but there is a lingering tension that's almost as if they don't know what to say to each other anymore. It's sad...Thanks Al. Thanks Jesse.

The nooses...I can remember when we hung nooses from another tree at our school to signify the "Hang 'em High" slogan we used as a battle cry for an upcoming football game with a rival school. No one seemed to mind then. Everyone knew what it meant and the school was unified in our effort to defeat our rivals. From what I understand in this case, from actually speaking with school faculty, these were the same circumstances surrounding these hanging nooses. They were even painted with the school colors. I do not believe the intent behind those nooses was racist. I may be wrong. I did not hang them.

You're right Tom. All we have to do is pick and agenda and filter the info. It's sad to see that behavior turn into what we see now. I just hope some good will come of this...it has to.

Shane

Shane Mokry
10-18-2007, 04:01 PM
Neil,

After thinking on your post for a while I have decided to answer one of your questions/assumptions.

The answer is no.

Shane

Neil Mick
10-18-2007, 06:35 PM
Hi Niel,
My understanding from Shane's post is that his community is not the racist hell-hole portrayed in the national news. I agree also that Jesse and Al have their personal agenda that mostly benefits themselves rather than their race, truth, or justice.

I think it's awfully funny that I hear this refrain, a lot. "Oh, if Jesse and Al are on the camera...why they MUST be doing it, solely for their narrow agenda:" not once considering that EVERYONE on the MSM has an "agenda."

How about maybe they have BOTH an "agenda;" AND they are standing up for racial equality, truth and justice?

Naah...couldn't be. :freaky: But the facts speak for themselves. The Jena 6 were not given a fair due process. Not you, nor Shane, nor anyone else has denied that fact.

To me, this says it all.

It's easy to look through a prism and see only the light that you want. All you need to do is select the agenda you want, filter out anything that doesn't fit, shout out the "proof" gained from the evidence that fits, and presto!!! The truth as you want to know it.
I think we can agree that there is racism in this country. I don't like it anymore than you do. I have seen a big change in our culture though, that makes racism unacceptable. Bigotry, hatred, and discrimination are no longer accepted in our society.

And yet, here we are: arguing about whether or not these kids were the victims of racism. Family members of the Jena 6 now have their personal contact information published online by hate groups. Sorry, Tom: but the empirical evidence suggests that racism is indeed alive in this country. It may not be so blatant as water cannons and police dogs: but all you have to do is consider David Duke's diatribes against the march (that I linked earlier), to prove my point.

It is not normal or common to hate people because of their race today.

Correction: it is not normal or common to express racist beliefs or ideas in general discussion. Racism is alive and well in contemporary society. The evidence is too broad to ignore.

What is too common, are people who try to use fear, hatred, and misrepresentation to further their own personal agenda. These people don't care who gets caught in the middle. Unfortunately, the people of Jenna, all of them, are painted as racists with one big stroke of the brush. Shane was just trying to show some one else's perspective. Let's don't let him off of the hook though. His location proves he is racist.

Whatever. Your post utterly ignored the question of due process, for the Jena 6. Shane might not have made the same mistake: but he is all for denying Mychal Bell his due process, just because he thinks that Mychal Bell is a "menace."

You think that racism is dead, Tom? I've got one word for you:

KATRINA

Think about it.

Wow!

Thanks for the reply Neil. I got exactly what I expected to from this post.

Shane

Happy to oblige. Too bad you cannot/will not respond, in depth.


The abuse of power by the judge and DA is not necessarily racist. It could happen to anyone he has a personal grudge aginst. I've seen it. Black and white...maximum charges if they don't like you...reduced or dropped charges and probation for friends. Don't get caught doing something stupid during election year...Mychal Bell was not shown any sympathy; probably because the DA and Judge were tired of seeing him appear in court for violent crimes and figured the probation was not turning his behavior around. (My well informed opinion)

Riight. That's not "racism," or "conflict of interest." That's just a good ole' American personal grudge. The DA just doesn't LIKE Mychal Bell, and so he decided to threaten the student body, as a means to calm them down.

Yeah. That always works. As a teacher, I often find that threatening to end my students' lives solves all disciplinary problems.

Personal grudges, an obvious conflict of interest (the DA is ALSO the attorney for the school board: who advised the disciplinary hearing not to interview the boys), had EVERYTHING to do with the DA's fervor. Racism had NOTHING to do with it. :rolleyes:

Sure it didn't.

Until you consider Walters' remarks about the marchers... (http://www.nydailynews.com/news/wn_report/2007/09/28/2007-09-28_jena_6_teen_mychal_bell_freed_on_bail.html)

Had it not been for the direct intervention of the Lord Jesus Christ last Thursday, a disaster would have happened," District Attorney Reed Walters said. "You can quote me on that."

I guess the DA just has problems with people marching against his attempts to rework the justice system, down in Mississippi. The skin-color of the marchers had no effect on the DA's remarks at all! :rolleyes:

Anyone with bridges to sell...now's the time to pipe up! :hypno:

This is why racism needs denial so badly: so that generally hostile remarks like this can slip "under the wire."

I have seen changes here since all this started and not for the better. AA and white people who were part of each others' lives on a daily basis have become distant. They are still working together and interacting but there is a lingering tension that's almost as if they don't know what to say to each other anymore. It's sad...Thanks Al. Thanks Jesse.

Yeah...that mean ole' Jesse n' Al gang...putting guns and nooses in kids' hands; telling DA's to do the jobs meant for school superintendents. Gods, when will these malcontents be stopped!!! :hypno: :hypno: :crazy: Frankly, Shane: I'd say that Jena had a problem, even before the arrival of the dreaded Jesse 'n Al Gang. Continued denial will insure that that problem stays around, long after the world forgets about Jena, and Mychal Bell.

The nooses...I can remember when we hung nooses from another tree at our school to signify the "Hang 'em High" slogan we used as a battle cry for an upcoming football game with a rival school. No one seemed to mind then.

That first sign of racism rears its ugly head again. And, it's not a river in Egypt (denial). :freaky:

I do not believe the intent behind those nooses was racist. I may be wrong. I did not hang them.

Thank you for that acknowledgement. See that's the thing: you don't really know. Neither do I. We cannot get inside those kids' heads. But all the rest of the story (the shotgun threats; the violence at the party; the DA's comments and behavior) stinks of the "r"-word.

Neil,

After thinking on your post for a while I have decided to answer one of your questions/assumptions.

The answer is no.

Shane

Thank you for that enlightening non-answer. Now, onward and upward. NEXT!

David Orange
10-18-2007, 07:05 PM
Wow! Thanks for the reply Neil. I got exactly what I expected to from this post.

You know, Shane, we're taught as martial artists to inflict severe damage with the bare hands and feet. A boxer can kill a strong, healthy man while wearing a big, puffy boxing glove on his hand. So the fact that six athletes happened to be wearing tennis shoes while kicking an unconscious boy in the head does not lessen the deadliness of the attack or the hate content of their actions.

Those who try to minimize that fact are acting out of a racism of their own. Further, to equate nooses hung on a tree, touching no one, with a six-on-one attack (and calling that a "schoolyard fight") is a kind of "hate crime" in itself.

Jun restricted my access to this site for two days after I posted # 35, not because of the content, he said. He didn't dispute that. He said the problem was my "tone," though I don't see how the tone of Post #35 was worse than Neil's statement in Post #42:

Neil Mick wrote:

"That tears it...all Nike, Payless and Shoetowns in Mississippi ought to have to apply for licenses to sell deadly weapons!! :hypno: "

Or his comment in Post #46:

Neil Mick wrote:
""Jesse, and Al??" What did they do...knock over a liquor store? :confused: :confused: What "damage?" "

But "tone" is hardly the worst aspect of his posts. He supports Hamas and Hezbollah in their efforts at genocide and starts threads like this to cover his own racism.

David

Shane Mokry
10-18-2007, 07:32 PM
Neil,

Until you can figure out what state this all has taken place in...none of your replies will be taken seriously.

Shane

Neil Mick
10-18-2007, 07:53 PM
Neil,

Until you can figure out what state this all has taken place in...

...ooh...condescension! :rolleyes:

none of your replies will be taken seriously.

Shane

By you...I've no doubt. But, I don't need your "serious consideration." You've already come here with your own agenda...

I will check for replies and maybe I can help shed some reality on some of the topics surrounding this case

And so, the idea that you would take an alternative view "seriously," when you're here to give us all a "reality"-check never entered my mind. You obviously have it all figured out. :rolleyes:

Now, OK: I'll grant you that the MSM botched the reporting of the whole thing.

And, I'll even go so far as to acknowledge that Al/Jesse grandstanded for the crowd...as do many media and political types tend to do.

But, your "reality" ignores a lot of other factors surrounding this incident...the response from the fringe, the remarks by Walters, the significance of the noose symbol, and how it is being repeated. If it wasn't racist, what happened in Jena...it sure is now; because it's being picked up by the rightwing fringe types as a weird rallying point.

Reality has proven my point, effectively enough. The Jena 6 charges were reduced: and all but Mychal Bell are out of jail. The incident is now going through Congress (a little overkill, but the racist elements of this situation are plain enough that even CONGRESS is lifting its dinosauric head, to do something).

But,,,take me seriously? Methinks some here take THEMSELVES too seriously.

Personally, I'll take a cue from Mark, here...

Huh? You mean I don't win all the time? :)
(And sometimes you have to laugh at yourself)

...chuckle at the foibles of my fellow aikidoists, and move on (not before offering a short laugh, at myself).

NEXT!

Shane Mokry
10-18-2007, 08:22 PM
David,

As much as I disagree with Neil because I feel he is hopelessly misguided, he still has the right to his opinion.

I also think he called me a racist in denial...in so many words. He can think what he wishes...this is America.

I do agree with you however. After Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton repeated over and over phrases about nooses and shotguns, everyone lost sight of the real victim. These people strung together a bunch of unrelated events and now it is "Free the Jena six".

There is no doubt in my mind that Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton are racists. If they were unable to continue distinguishing "African Americans" from just "Americans", they would have to go apply for a job at the local wal-mart.

At some point, and I hope it is soon, we should all see each other...and ourselves, as fellow countrymen...including Neil :D . This separation has to stop. It fans very old flames that should not be burning. We are all just "Americans".

Regards,
Shane

David Orange
10-18-2007, 08:45 PM
As much as I disagree with Neil because I feel he is hopelessly misguided, he still has the right to his opinion.

Yes, as do Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson and David Duke--three of the biggest racists in America. Racist profiteers. Remember Jesse Jackson calling New York "Hymietown"? Remember how Shaprton referred to "bloodsucking Jews"? Can any good come of having those two in the country--much less in your own town?

What "damage" did they do?????

Precisely twice as much damage as having "one" David Duke in your town. They're racist "BUT" they're also "fighting for Justice"???? There is no justice in racism, no matter where it comes from.

I also think he called me a racist in denial...in so many words. He can think what he wishes...this is America.

Yes, he called you a racist.

There is no doubt in my mind that Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton are racists. If they were unable to continue distinguishing "African Americans" from just "Americans", they would have to go apply for a job at the local wal-mart.

But they wouldn't be hired even if the hiring manager were black.

Best to you.

David

Neil Mick
10-18-2007, 09:27 PM
David,

As much as I disagree with Neil because I feel he is hopelessly misguided, he still has the right to his opinion.

Thanks for that. :freaky:

I also think he called me a racist in denial...in so many words. He can think what he wishes...this is America.

Pardon me for interrupting this conversation btw you and someone I have on ignore, Shane: but I did NOT call you a racist in denial. I apologize if you got this idea...my own fault. I've had this misunderstanding before.

But what I said, was that denial was an element of racism.

I also said that a part of your argument is denying of certain very clearly stated facts. But, to be clear...no: I don't think (based upon what you've wrote) that you're a racist. Sorry, again: If I gave that impression.

I think you're somebody who's pissed off at the way the media treated your neighborhood; and the way some people used an incident to grandstand.

Makes perfect sense to me. Under a different context, I might even feel the same.

There is no doubt in my mind that Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton are racists. If they were unable to continue distinguishing "African Americans" from just "Americans", they would have to go apply for a job at the local wal-mart.

This statement utterly ignores history. Specifically, THEIR history.

At some point, and I hope it is soon, we should all see each other...and ourselves, as fellow countrymen...including Neil :D .

Thanks again for that. It's so nice to be wanted. :freaky:

...I'm feelin' a lotta love, on this thread.

Stop me...I think I'm gonna cry...:D

This separation has to stop. It fans very old flames that should not be burning. We are all just "Americans".

Regards,
Shane

Hmm...a good sentiment. But, it assumes that I thought otherwise.

Shane Mokry
10-18-2007, 11:29 PM
Neil,

I haven't assumed anything about you except that you are a thinker.

Exactly what do you mean by "their history" that I am ignoring.

Shane

Neil Mick
10-18-2007, 11:50 PM
Neil,

Exactly what do you mean by "their history" that I am ignoring.

Shane

"their history" = the history of Jesse Jackson's and Al Sharpton's, work, in the Civil Rights movement. For starters.

Of course they have a dog in this fight. It's what they do.

But, there are undercurrents going on here that are beyond the scope of this debate.

Thanks for your viewpoint, Shane...I'm outta here.

Hey, maybe we'll meet on the mat someday!

Shane Mokry
10-19-2007, 09:40 PM
Although I have not said all I have to say about this issue I, think will log off again for a few months. I usually do not have much time for internet discussions...this one really means something to me...

Thanks for your views and inputs...I learned volumes as always.

I hope we can all meet on the mat someday. Unlikely but there's always a chance....take care of yourselves.

Shane

David Orange
10-19-2007, 10:39 PM
Although I have not said all I have to say about this issue I, think will log off again for a few months.

Your input has been interesting and valuable. It took some courage and you weathered the responses quite well.

Jackson and Sharpton both made a joke of their "history in the Civil Rights movement" with profound lies and racial slurs against white people and particularly Jews. They have as much credibility in the Jena situation as does David Duke.

I usually do not have much time for internet discussions...this one really means something to me...

I was eight years old when the riots happened in Birmingham. Even though we have had black mayors and majority-black city councils for the past 25 years or so, the riots and "racial injustice" are still the images people see when they hear of my city. So I have some inkling of how you feel about having your city painted as the center of the racist empire. Hope things get better down there in time. It takes plenty of that.

Thanks for your views and inputs...I learned volumes as always.

Thanks for your input.

I hope we can all meet on the mat someday. Unlikely but there's always a chance....take care of yourselves.

Best to you.

David

Taliesin
10-22-2007, 06:11 AM
Sorry just trying to catch up

Can someone clarify if these are the questions are still relevant to this issue.

1. Did the 6 committ a crime?

2. Was the prosecution disproportionatly harshly because of racist motivation?

3. Were perpertrators of equivalent offences not prosecuted or prosecuted disproportionately lightly because of their racial make up?

I'll take it the answer to question 1 is 'yes'

I'm now interested in whether the answers to 2 & 3 are either yes or no and why

Tom Fish
10-22-2007, 07:58 AM
Sorry just trying to catch up

Can someone clarify if these are the questions are still relevant to this issue.

1. Did the 6 committ a crime?

2. Was the prosecution disproportionatly harshly because of racist motivation?

3. Were perpertrators of equivalent offences not prosecuted or prosecuted disproportionately lightly because of their racial make up?

I'll take it the answer to question 1 is 'yes'

I'm now interested in whether the answers to 2 & 3 are either yes or no and why

Unfortunately, in response to question #2, the DA was also a school administration official as well, and made threatening comments to the student body that were taken out of context to make this a racial incident.
As for question #3, I think that the term "justice" is pretty ambiguous in American law. I think there is some ongoing prosecution still being attempted but it is completely unlikely that the resolution will satisfy anything.
Tom

Mike Sigman
10-24-2007, 10:47 AM
As in many cases, it's probably worthwhile to look at the facts and consider how many people emoted because the initial facts were wrong:

http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/1024/p09s01-coop.html

sutemaker17
10-30-2007, 09:18 AM
Tom,
To answer question one I agree and believe a crime was committed. So...yes.

Question 2: Were they charged too harshly? You decide. Here are the Louisiana revised statutes. Also, keep in mind that a DA in this state has the power to charge you with anything he wants whether he has evidence or not. A DA is also shielded by law from civil lawsuits brought against him for alleged abuse of powers.

§27. Attempt; penalties; attempt on peace officer; enhanced penalties

A. Any person who, having a specific intent to commit a crime, does or omits an act for the purpose of and tending directly toward the accomplishing of his object is guilty of an attempt to commit the offense intended; and it shall be immaterial whether, under the circumstances, he would have actually accomplished his purpose.

B.(1) Mere preparation to commit a crime shall not be sufficient to constitute an attempt; but lying in wait with a dangerous weapon with the intent to commit a crime, or searching for the intended victim with a dangerous weapon with the intent to commit a crime, shall be sufficient to constitute an attempt to commit the offense intended.

(2) Further, the placing of any combustible or explosive substance in or near any structure, watercraft, movable, or forestland, with the specific intent eventually to set fire to or to damage by explosive substance such structure, watercraft, movable, or forestland, shall be sufficient to constitute an attempt to commit the crime of arson as defined in R.S. 14:51 through 53.

C. An attempt is a separate but lesser grade of the intended crime; and any person may be convicted of an attempt to commit a crime, although it appears on the trial that the crime intended or attempted was actually perpetrated by such person in pursuance of such attempt.

D. Whoever attempts to commit any crime shall be punished as follows:

(1)(a) If the offense so attempted is punishable by death or life imprisonment, he shall be imprisoned at hard labor for not less than ten nor more than fifty years without benefit of parole, probation, or suspension of sentence.

(b) If the offense so attempted is punishable by death or life imprisonment and is attempted against an individual who is a peace officer engaged in the performance of his lawful duty, he shall be imprisoned at hard labor for not less than twenty nor more than fifty years without benefit of parole, probation, or suspension of sentence.

(2) If the offense so attempted is theft or receiving stolen things, and is not punishable as a felony, he shall be fined not more than two hundred dollars, or imprisoned for not more than six months, or both. If the offense so attempted is receiving stolen things, and is punishable as a felony, he shall be fined not more than two hundred dollars, or imprisoned not more than one year, or both. If the offense so attempted is theft, and is punishable as a felony, he shall be fined not more than five hundred dollars, or imprisoned not more than one year, or both;

(3) In all other cases he shall be fined or imprisoned or both, in the same manner as for the offense attempted; such fine or imprisonment shall not exceed one-half of the largest fine, or one-half of the longest term of imprisonment prescribed for the offense so attempted, or both.

E. For the purposes of Subsection D of this Section, the term "peace officer" means any peace officer, as defined in R.S. 40:2402.

Amended by Acts 1970, No. 471, §1; Acts 1975, No. 132, §1; Acts 1989, No. 609, §1; Acts 1995, No. 988, §1; Acts 2003, No. 166, §1; Acts 2003, No. 745, §1.

§30.1. Second degree murder

A. Second degree murder is the killing of a human being:

(1) When the offender has a specific intent to kill or to inflict great bodily harm; or

(2)(a) When the offender is engaged in the perpetration or attempted perpetration of aggravated rape, forcible rape, aggravated arson, aggravated burglary, aggravated kidnapping, second degree kidnapping, aggravated escape, assault by drive-by shooting, armed robbery, first degree robbery, second degree robbery, simple robbery, cruelty to juveniles, second degree cruelty to juveniles, or terrorism, even though he has no intent to kill or to inflict great bodily harm.

(b) When the offender is engaged in the perpetration of cruelty to juveniles, even though he has no intent to kill or to inflict great bodily harm.

(3) When the offender unlawfully distributes or dispenses a controlled dangerous substance listed in Schedules I or II of the Uniform Controlled Dangerous Substances Law* which is the direct cause of the death of the recipient who ingested or consumed the controlled dangerous substance.

(4) When the offender unlawfully distributes or dispenses a controlled dangerous substance listed in Schedules I or II of the Uniform Controlled Dangerous Substances Law* to another who subsequently distributes or dispenses such controlled dangerous substance which is the direct cause of the death of the person who ingested or consumed the controlled dangerous substance.

B. Whoever commits the crime of second degree murder shall be punished by life imprisonment at hard labor without benefit of parole, probation, or suspension of sentence.

Added by Acts 1973, No. 111, §1. Amended by Acts 1975, No. 380, §1; Acts 1976, No. 657, §2; Acts 1977, No. 121, §1; Acts 1978, No. 796, §1; Acts 1979, No. 74, §1, eff. June 29, 1979; Acts 1987, No. 465, §1; Acts 1987, No. 653, §1; Acts 1993, No. 496, §1; Acts 1997, No. 563, §1; Acts 1997, No. 899, §1; Acts 2006, No. 53, §1.

*NOTE: R.S. 40:961 et seq.

§26. Criminal conspiracy

A. Criminal conspiracy is the agreement or combination of two or more persons for the specific purpose of committing any crime; provided that an agreement or combination to commit a crime shall not amount to a criminal conspiracy unless, in addition to such agreement or combination, one or more of such parties does an act in furtherance of the object of the agreement or combination.

If the intended basic crime has been consummated, the conspirators may be tried for either the conspiracy or the completed offense, and a conviction for one shall not bar prosecution for the other.

B. Whoever is a party to a criminal conspiracy to commit any crime shall be fined or imprisoned, or both, in the same manner as for the offense contemplated by the conspirators; provided, however, whoever is a party to a criminal conspiracy to commit a crime punishable by death or life imprisonment shall be imprisoned at hard labor for not more than thirty years.

C. Whoever is a party to a criminal conspiracy to commit any other crime shall be fined or imprisoned, or both, in the same manner as for the offense contemplated by the conspirators; but such fine or imprisonment shall not exceed one-half of the largest fine, or one-half the longest term of imprisonment prescribed for such offense, or both.

Amended by Acts 1977, No. 538, §1.

You know Tom, I wasn't there and did not witness the incident but from the information I have about it, these charges actually fit what allegedly happened. Were I the DA would I choose to "throw the book" at em'? That's hard for me to say.

I don't believe anyone else committed any offenses that have been considered, by Mr. Walters, to be equivalent to the one leading to these charges. However, it seems that every other incident leading up to this one involved one or more of the gentlemen now being referred to as the "six". Maybe he got tired of fooling around with em'. I could be wrong.

Anyway, the main point of this post is to let everyone who may not be familiar with La laws to get a look themselves. Hope this sheds a little more light. Oh BTW the Louisiana revised statutes can be found here: http://www.legis.state.la.us/lss/toc.htm

David Orange
10-30-2007, 02:14 PM
Can someone clarify if these are the questions are still relevant to this issue.

1. Did the 6 committ a crime?

2. Was the prosecution disproportionatly harshly because of racist motivation?

3. Were perpertrators of equivalent offences not prosecuted or prosecuted disproportionately lightly because of their racial make up?

David,

It looks like "the 6" have committed many crimes in that little area.

Was the prosecution disproportionately harsh because of racism???

Hard to say. If you knock a boy unconscious, then six people kick him in the head and body until someone drags them off the unconscious victim who cannot defend himself in any way....that sounds like intent to murder. You can kill a person with bare feet and hands. I don't think that wearing sneakers does much to diminish the deadliness of the attack. Seems to me, the victim was lucky someone was there to pull the attackers off him or he would now be dead.

The third question, as to "equivalent offences".....I don't even know where that comes from. I mean, I know a lot of people have tossed it back and forth, but I haven't heard of any offences in this case that even come close to six people (large athletes) physically beating a single, unconscious victim on the ground. Do you?

Some people have compared the display of the nooses on the tree as "equivalent" to the beating, but who really believes that?

If a beating by six people against one boy is equivalent to the display of the nooses, then what if, instead of hanging nooses, the original offenders had beaten one of "the six"? Would "the 6" then have to kill someone to be equivalent? To me, the "equivalence" argument was a Sharptonism from the beginning.

Hope all is well on your side.

David

David Orange
10-30-2007, 02:17 PM
Jason, are you related to Shane?

David

Michael Douglas
10-30-2007, 02:23 PM
The first punch knocked Barker out and he was kicked several times in the head.
Attempted maiming, happens all the time.
Bad people do that, good people do not.
Nothing about race/colour/class/academics.

sutemaker17
10-30-2007, 02:39 PM
David,
I most certainly am related to Shane. We are identical twins.
Regards,
Jason Mokry

David Orange
10-30-2007, 08:09 PM
David,
I most certainly am related to Shane. We are identical twins.
Regards,
Jason Mokry

I thought you guys looked a lot alike...

Hope your town gets happy real soon.

Best to all.

David

Taliesin
10-31-2007, 09:03 AM
David Orange

I do believe that it is my questions 2 & 3

2. Was the prosecution disproportionatly harsh because of racist motivation?

3. Were perpertrators of equivalent offences not prosecuted or prosecuted disproportionately lightly because of their racial make up?

That are the core of the issue. It is difficult to see how it is possible to give different answers to these two questions, but you seem to be missing my point

For those who wish to argue that this is a case of racially motivated prosecution - the onus must be on them to demonstrate an equivalent offence did occur and was either not prosecuted or was prosecuted disproportionately lightly. Without that evidence then all allegations fail the 'he who asserts must prove' test. And this whole matter is all 'sound and fury signifying nothing'

Equivalence is an element that must be considered because treating 'A' different to 'B' for materialy the same sort of actions.

In this case is there any record of white student or students physically attacking a black student being reckless as to whether they cause what we on this side of the pond call Grievous Bodily Harm or death and were either not prosecuted or charged with a lesser offence

David Orange
10-31-2007, 09:19 AM
2. Was the prosecution disproportionatly harsh because of racist motivation?

I think what we have here is that a lot of people want to use this case to attack the racist phenomenon we do frequently see in the American justice system. Many blacks are railroaded in America, if you know what I mean--shoved into a cell when they aren't really guilty, or blowing up the level of what they did to "justify" a harsher term than they really earned. Unfortunately, this particular case seems not to deserve to be the rallying point against that. I think if any special treatment was given in this case, it was that Mychal Bell (?) was let go so many times before without rightfully harsh treatment. And that was not racially motivated, but sports motivated. I think the judge here was finally fed up with Bell's acting like no one could touch him, no matter what he did.

So I'd have to say, no, the prosecution was not unjustifiably harsh because of race.

3. Were perpertrators of equivalent offences not prosecuted or prosecuted disproportionately lightly because of their racial make up?

For those who wish to argue that this is a case of racially motivated prosecution - the onus must be on them to demonstrate an equivalent offence did occur and was either not prosecuted or was prosecuted disproportionately lightly. Without that evidence then all allegations fail the 'he who asserts must prove' test. And this whole matter is all 'sound and fury signifying nothing'...In this case is there any record of white student or students physically attacking a black student being reckless as to whether they cause what we on this side of the pond call Grievous Bodily Harm or death and were either not prosecuted or charged with a lesser offence

And I have to say, I don't think so. My previous response wasn't so much to you as to those who are trying to make this case into an example of the whole American justice system by crying equivalence. If a mass beating is "equivalent" to the display of nooses, then what would be equivalent to a mass beating?

Those who would like to correct the racial bias in American justice would do well not to focus on cases like this or OJ Simpson's. There are plenty of black people in prisons who really don't deserve to be there and who are there because of racist prosecutors. As I cited earlier in Alabama, our Attorney General insists that a man who was involved in a double murder should die by lethal injection even though he was not the one who killed the people and the one who did kill them will not be executed.

He's letting the shooter live, but executing the guy who didn't know the shooter was going to kill the victims.

How is that justice?

It's good-old American, spit-in-your-eye, someone has to die justice. It's a lawyer-politician who will execute his way to the governor's office if he can.

Those are the kinds of cases that should get national attention--not the Mychal Bells and OJs.

But whatever is done, we do NOT need Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton sticking their money-sniffers in on it.

Best to you.

David

Taliesin
10-31-2007, 12:30 PM
Thanks for your comment. I appreciate that there may be a lot of racially motivated prosecutions occurring but to claim so without anything solid to back it up - undermines any attempt to tackle the problem and indeed undermines it.

Likewise OJ - needed to be found not-guilty because the police were caught, 'guilding the lily' (An old fashioned British phrase for framing someone they believed to be guilty)

Taliesin
10-31-2007, 12:36 PM
PS

Letting the shooter live whilst executing the person who was with him isn't - has reflections over here in the Craig-Bently Case (Dramatised in the film 'Let him have it'). In this 17 year old Christopher Craig was accompaned by Dereck Bently on a burglary when they were found by the police. Craig was armed. The Officer asked for the gun asnd Bently said 'Let him have it. Chris'. - Craig was a minor and so not executed, Bently was an adult and an accomplice ont he basis of 'joint enterprose' - Bently was hanged. (It is a very famous British Case)

Mike Sigman
10-31-2007, 12:54 PM
Likewise OJ - needed to be found not-guilty What did OJ's wife and her boyfriend deserve, then? Actually, as Johnny Cochran, OJ's lawyer, observed, if he could just get a couple of blacks on the jury (and he did), he could get OJ off. It happened. Was that "racist"? I'm never sure what the term "racist" means, since different people seem to imply different meanings to it, depending on their whim. But usually "racist" tends to indicate that someone has a one-sided view of "equality" and "responsibility". I'm all for equal treatment of everyone, depending upon the acceptable social standards of course, but I want that applied equally and I think everyone should then be responsible for their own decisions after that.

For instance, if someone decides to drop out of school and become a street-magician, I don't think that the rest of society should be held responsible for that person's well-being and retirement planning. At sometime someone is either "equal" or they're "not equal"... it can't be both. Apply that to everyone and let the chips fall where they may.

One of my greatest enjoyments is watching the number of Asian-Americans who get into colleges, etc., proportionately, on the west coast. If they worked for it, they deserve it. When you start taking those college placements away from the people who worked hardest for it (or were most qualified), then you take away the whole reason for any group(s) of people to even bother to work for things. And society begins to crumble. US society has crumbled.... if you don't believe it, look at the inner cities of every major metropolitan city in the US. Oops... was that a "racist" remark?

My 2 cents.

Mike Sigman

Taliesin
11-01-2007, 05:18 AM
Mike, Mike, Mike, -

What I said was "Likewise OJ - needed to be found not-guilty because the police were caught, gliding the lily' (An old fashioned British phrase for framing someone they believed to be guilty)". - It's not that long or complicated a sentence.

You should also be aware that choices are not made in a vacuum.

BTW - your selective quoting shows that your two cents aren't worth nearly that much (even at the dollars current rate)

Mike Sigman
11-01-2007, 07:50 AM
What I said was "Likewise OJ - needed to be found not-guilty because the police were caught, gliding the lily' (An old fashioned British phrase for framing someone they believed to be guilty)". - It's not that long or complicated a sentence. Actually, I've very familiar with the term "gilding the lily", since it's not an uncommon phrase. Whatever irregularities there were in the trial, the judge handled that part and did not declare a mistrial, so your reasoning is incorrect and your emotional feelings about the system seems to cause you to overlook the fact that OJ was let off by some "racist" members of the jury. There's a lot of "racism" to go around, if you really want play with the numbers and start loosely applying terms.

Without allowing *another* digression to lead away from the topic, the "Jena 6" were thugs who played (with the help of liberal media and the usual race-hucksters) the race card. They play the race-card because there are the usual hate-America crowd willing to take up their cause for them. Let me see some comments pointing out the good that America does and I won't be so cynical about those usual few and their motives.

Regards,

Mike Sigman

Taliesin
11-01-2007, 08:52 AM
Mike

It really isn't complicated. In fact it is very simple.

1. You abandon all of your firmly held belief in your own infalible telepathic powers.

2. You identify the issues. Which as you've failed to grasp are -

a) the police were caught trying to frame the accused.

b) the credibility of the investigation, evidence anmd prosecution was fatally flawed because of this.

3. You ask the key question - in this case were the jury right to acquit someone prosecuted on the basis of manufactured evidence.

4. You give the reasons for your conclusion. Mine are convicting people on the basis of manufactured evidence (such as a blood stained sock) is encouraging a culture of arrests of the convienient suspects - rather than proper investigation. Something that makes things worse for everyone.

I appreciate this line of reasoning takes a little bit more intellectual effort than your own charmingly simple - 'OJ was acquitted becasue of racist jurors' and concede that in your eyes such reasoning 'proves' I am 'Anti-American.

Mike Sigman
11-01-2007, 09:24 AM
Well, David, it appears you're still not very interested in the murders of OJ's wife and her friend, Ron Goldman. Nor do you seem very concerned about the obvious/overt "racist" attack/ambush by 6 blacks against 1 white. You're looking for scandal, but you're only looking to your left side.

Regards,

Mike Sigman

akiy
11-01-2007, 09:57 AM
Thread running off-topic and too personal. Closed.

-- Jun