Jena 6 deserves more...

[One2Snoop]

I'm outraged and shocked :eek: that this subject hasn't brought more attention and comments to the plight of these 6 young men.

What's up people? :shrug: They're black and deserve what they get? :eek:

That is so, so wrong IMO. We are talking about human beings here whose lives are being ruined forever.

JMO
O2S

[accordn2me]

Snoop, you asked me to take another look at this. So, I'm doing that. Can I give you some homework?

First assignment:
Find me the law that says it's a crime to hang nooses from a tree. :read:

[Results]

Snoop, you asked me to take another look at this. So, I'm doing that. Can I give you some homework?

First assignment:
Find me the law that says it's a crime to hang nooses from a tree. :read:

It doesn't matter where it was hung it was directed to the African Americans and that is a crime. Here are the articles about nooses and the law suits over it.

Three years ago, an African American employee of a construction firm working on a project at San Francisco International Airport found a noose hanging in a trailer. That case prompted an FBI investigation that led to a wider probe of minority contracting practices. July 10, 2000 New York Times Nooses, Symbols of Race Hatred, at Center of Workplace Lawsuits By SANA SIWOLOP -----------------------------------------------------------------------=- Kim Kulish for The New York Times Harold Archuleta, above, a former mechanic for American Airlines, said that before he left the company, he saw three nooses displayed at the Los Angeles Airport maintenance facility. Joe Banks, a Lockheed employee, says a noose was placed in his work area last summer. Ralph Nelson for The New York Times -----------------------------------------------------------------------=- Symbols of Lynching The government's Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, which has received dozens of complaints lately about threats to blacks and other members of minority groups involving the display of nooses in the workplace, has brought racial harassment lawsuits against about 20 companies where nooses were believed to be involved. Nine are currently pending. One is confidential.

Here is the link there is a lot of information about hanging nooses up and it is racial harassment.

http://www.newyork.indymedia.org/en/2003/12/34411.shtml

[Results]

http://www.newyork.indymedia.org/en/2003/12/34411.shtml

This is the same link but I just read this and want to show the punishment of hanging a noose.

The Justice Department considers noose incidents to be federal crimes of intimidation, punishable by up to 10 years in prison. Over all, racial harassment charges have surged over the last two decades, with the E.E.O.C. reporting that it received close to 50,000 such charges during the 1990's, versus roughly 10,000 in the 1980's. The agency considers noose incidents to be among the most egregious forms of racial harassment.

[accordn2me]

http://www.newyork.indymedia.org/en/2003/12/34411.shtml

This is the same link but I just read this and want to show the punishment of hanging a noose.

The Justice Department considers noose incidents to be federal crimes of intimidation, punishable by up to 10 years in prison. Over all, racial harassment charges have surged over the last two decades, with the E.E.O.C. reporting that it received close to 50,000 such charges during the 1990's, versus roughly 10,000 in the 1980's. The agency considers noose incidents to be among the most egregious forms of racial harassment.Thank you for the link. I don't have time to read it all right now, but I will. I didn't mean to imply the location (the tree) had anything to do with it being a crime, or not. My question is...what does the law say about it? I figured it would be a federal law, if there is one, that deals with such a thing. I also would like to know if Louisiana has any laws (state) that would address the nooses being hung from the tree (or anywhere else). If it's only covered by federal laws, would the local D.A. have any jurisdiction to prosecute for that?

Just a quick note about the cases you've cited, they seem to be against employers. This is going to be somewhat different, is it not?

There is a headline posted earlier in this thread that reads something like: 'Blacks go to jail, while whites only get suspension' That's inflamatory, IMO. Things are already bad enough without the media printing headlines that will further inflame and divide. This one in particular is misleading, IMO, because the black students were charged because of a physical attack. The suspension was for the nooses. Granted the nooses "started it." But, did hanging them break any laws?

ETA: the headline is from the sticky "Do you know about the Jena six?" thread:
"Black teens could get prison while whites got suspensions"

[RN1]

Thank you for the link. I don't have time to read it all right now, but I will. I didn't mean to imply the location (the tree) had anything to do with it being a crime, or not. My question is...what does the law say about it? I figured it would be a federal law, if there is one, that deals with such a thing. I also would like to know if Louisiana has any laws (state) that would address the nooses being hung from the tree (or anywhere else). If it's only covered by federal laws, would the local D.A. have any jurisdiction to prosecute for that?

Just a quick note about the cases you've cited, they seem to be against employers. This is going to be somewhat different, is it not?

There is a headline posted earlier in this thread that reads something like: 'Blacks go to jail, while whites only get suspension' That's inflamatory, IMO. Things are already bad enough without the media printing headlines that will further inflame and divide. This one in particular is misleading, IMO, because the black students were charged because of a physical attack. The suspension was for the nooses. Granted the nooses "started it." But, did hanging them break any laws?

ETA: the headline is from the sticky "Do you know about the Jena six?" thread:
"Black teens could get prison while whites got suspensions"

You do know one of the six has been arrested multiple times for assault. Don't have a link, it was published in our local paper a few weeks ago.
Well, maybe I do have a link, lol
Shreveporttimes.com


t

[RN1]

Thank you for the link. I don't have time to read it all right now, but I will. I didn't mean to imply the location (the tree) had anything to do with it being a crime, or not. My question is...what does the law say about it? I figured it would be a federal law, if there is one, that deals with such a thing. I also would like to know if Louisiana has any laws (state) that would address the nooses being hung from the tree (or anywhere else). If it's only covered by federal laws, would the local D.A. have any jurisdiction to prosecute for that?

Just a quick note about the cases you've cited, they seem to be against employers. This is going to be somewhat different, is it not?

There is a headline posted earlier in this thread that reads something like: 'Blacks go to jail, while whites only get suspension' That's inflamatory, IMO. Things are already bad enough without the media printing headlines that will further inflame and divide. This one in particular is misleading, IMO, because the black students were charged because of a physical attack. The suspension was for the nooses. Granted the nooses "started it." But, did hanging them break any laws?

ETA: the headline is from the sticky "Do you know about the Jena six?" thread:
"Black teens could get prison while whites got suspensions"

Not positive, but I don't think Louisiana has a law against hate crimes, although hanging a noose wouldn't be considered a crime. The local D.A. can prosecute for the physical beatings, but I believe Federal would have to get involved to deal with the hanging of the noose.

[Results]

Not positive, but I don't think Louisiana has a law against hate crimes, although hanging a noose wouldn't be considered a crime. The local D.A. can prosecute for the physical beatings, but I believe Federal would have to get involved to deal with the hanging of the noose.

In Louisiana five years is added to any crime if convicted of a hate crime.

Here is one example in Lake Charles, LA:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1459332/posts

[accordn2me]

You do know one of the six has been arrested multiple times for assault. Don't have a link, it was published in our local paper a few weeks ago.
Well, maybe I do have a link, lol
Shreveporttimes.com


tNo. I didn't know. Did I read that one of the six is 22-years old? Was he the one? Was he a student at the school?

[accordn2me]

In Louisiana five years is added to any crime if convicted of a hate crime.

Here is one example in Lake Charles, LA:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1459332/posts(my bold) What is the Louisiana law that addresses this?

[accordn2me]

Not positive, but I don't think Louisiana has a law against hate crimes, although hanging a noose wouldn't be considered a crime. The local D.A. can prosecute for the physical beatings, but I believe Federal would have to get involved to deal with the hanging of the noose.Do you know anything about the allegations that there were black students beaten by white students? If this is true, and there were no charges filed....well, that's a good example of the power a district attorney wields. The decision to prosecute or not to prosecute is his and his alone to make. It would take a constitutional amendment to change that.

[TuscanDreams]

Ok, we need to band together and get the message out that the Jena 6 deserve justice. Where do you all want to start? Here's an idea from me.

A public official once stated that he loved it when people emailed him with complaints. Reason? The automated response sent out a form letter and he never had to read the issues involved that his constitutes sent. Then he stated that he hated snail mail, because his secretary had to open the letter and he had to read it.

My thoughts are for a snail mail campaign, followed with phone calls. Any better ideas?

And, I'd like to add this thought. One of the offenders I've recently dealt with was a victim. Yes, this offender is on Parole for Second Degree Robbery, yet he was recently stripped naked in his yard and people shot at him. His ID was taken, etc. It's noted that the offender committed the robbery when he was 19 and he's now 29 with 2 small kids and his life is together.

My point is this- even if one of the Jena Six has been arrested for assualt, etc, they still don't deserve to be treated like this. :flamemad:

[Luke Davis]

Thank you for the link. I don't have time to read it all right now, but I will. I didn't mean to imply the location (the tree) had anything to do with it being a crime, or not. My question is...what does the law say about it? I figured it would be a federal law, if there is one, that deals with such a thing. I also would like to know if Louisiana has any laws (state) that would address the nooses being hung from the tree (or anywhere else). If it's only covered by federal laws, would the local D.A. have any jurisdiction to prosecute for that?

Just a quick note about the cases you've cited, they seem to be against employers. This is going to be somewhat different, is it not?

There is a headline posted earlier in this thread that reads something like: 'Blacks go to jail, while whites only get suspension' That's inflamatory, IMO. Things are already bad enough without the media printing headlines that will further inflame and divide. This one in particular is misleading, IMO, because the black students were charged because of a physical attack. The suspension was for the nooses. Granted the nooses "started it." But, did hanging them break any laws?

ETA: the headline is from the sticky "Do you know about the Jena six?" thread:
"Black teens could get prison while whites got suspensions"

I thought the nooses were a reaction.

[accordn2me]

Ok, we need to band together and get the message out that the Jena 6 deserve justice. Where do you all want to start? Here's an idea from me.

A public official once stated that he loved it when people emailed him with complaints. Reason? The automated response sent out a form letter and he never had to read the issues involved that his constitutes sent. Then he stated that he hated snail mail, because his secretary had to open the letter and he had to read it.

My thoughts are for a snail mail campaign, followed with phone calls. Any better ideas?

And, I'd like to add this thought. One of the offenders I've recently dealt with was a victim. Yes, this offender is on Parole for Second Degree Robbery, yet he was recently stripped naked in his yard and people shot at him. His ID was taken, etc. It's noted that the offender committed the robbery when he was 19 and he's now 29 with 2 small kids and his life is together.

My point is this- even if one of the Jena Six has been arrested for assualt, etc, they still don't deserve to be treated like this. :flamemad:(my bold) :shrug:

May I ask, what is your idea of justice for their crime?

[accordn2me]

Under Penal Code Section 422, a criminal threat has five elements:1. the accused willfully threatened to commit the crime that will result in death or great bodily injury; and 2. the accused made the threat with the specific intent that it be taken as a threat; and 3. the threat is so unequivocal, unconditional, immediate, and specific as to convey a gravity of purpose and the immediate prospect of execution; and 4. the threat actually caused sustained fear in the victim; and 5. the sustained fear was reasonable.


Does the noose incident fit?My opinion is no, the noose incident does not fit.

Is Penal Code Section 422 a federal law, or state?

Just curious, do you think it fits? If yes, please elaborate. TIA

[Results]

Ok, we need to band together and get the message out that the Jena 6 deserve justice. Where do you all want to start? Here's an idea from me.

A public official once stated that he loved it when people emailed him with complaints. Reason? The automated response sent out a form letter and he never had to read the issues involved that his constitutes sent. Then he stated that he hated snail mail, because his secretary had to open the letter and he had to read it.

My thoughts are for a snail mail campaign, followed with phone calls. Any better ideas?

And, I'd like to add this thought. One of the offenders I've recently dealt with was a victim. Yes, this offender is on Parole for Second Degree Robbery, yet he was recently stripped naked in his yard and people shot at him. His ID was taken, etc. It's noted that the offender committed the robbery when he was 19 and he's now 29 with 2 small kids and his life is together.

My point is this- even if one of the Jena Six has been arrested for assualt, etc, they still don't deserve to be treated like this. :flamemad:

Hey TD. I will be willing to try any suggestions to help out!

[odette]

Official sought to clear up 'Jena Six' 'misinformation'

By Abbey Brown
abrown@thetowntalk.com

It has been called a "schoolyard fight," a "brutal attack" and even an "incident."

But whatever it has been called, what happened at around noon on Dec. 4 in Jena has definitely been talked about.

The "Jena Six" and the incidents surrounding their cases have made headlines across the world. However, the story about the attack at the school that left one white student -- Justin Barker -- unconscious and six black students -- Robert Bailey Jr., Mychal Bell, Carwin Jones, Bryant Purvis, Theo Shaw and an unnamed juvenile -- initially charged with attempted murder -- hasn't always been right, U.S. Attorney Donald Washington said.
He spent much of his time during last week's Department of Justice education forum helping to clear up some of the "misinformation flying about." He also focused on some of the civil rights laws those in the community wanted to learn more about.

Washington and the other forum presenters -- Lewis Chapman, assistant special agent in charge of the New Orleans FBI office, and Carmelita Freeman, regional director of Justice's Community Relations Service -- had two goals during the forum. The first was to lay out what the federal government does and can do to help residents, and the other was to come up with a list of concerns so a plan can be made to address them.

Washington stressed that his office has been keeping an eye on the events in Jena but that it does not currently have a case at all -- either under investigation or awaiting prosecution. ....

excerpt
These are some of the other things discussed by Washington during the nearly four-hour forum Thursday night:

Selective prosecution and arrest
You have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the district attorney decided to treat one group of people different than another, which is hard to prove, Washington said. He said he would have to have proof of Walters' intentions, such as a record of Walters' spoken words or somewhere that he had written that intention down.

There have been no complaints of misconduct on the part of the Jena Police Department filed in connection to any of these incidents.

The nooses
There was no public denouncement of the noose incident, something Washington said he "sincerely, sincerely apologizes for."

The nooses weren't reported to the police, Sheriff's Office or District Attorney's Office by the school or any of the parents who were aware of it. It was handled by the school authorities, who conducted an investigation into members of the rodeo team. According to the school, the nooses were hung as a prank in response to a question asked in a "jocular fashion" by a male student at an orientation assembly, Washington said.

The three students found responsible for hanging the nooses have no history of violence. The principal recommended expulsion, but a school district committee overruled that decision and decided to suspend them instead, a decision approved by Superintendent Roy Breithaupt. There were no other problems noticed by the school officials.

Although proving all of the elements of a hate crime can be difficult, Washington stressed that isn't the biggest issue.

"First of all, as the FBI said (during the forum) hanging a noose under the circumstances these nooses were hung is a hate crime," Washington said Monday. "... If these were adults who hung the noose, there would be less of an issue with moving forward with the investigation and prosecution."

He said hanging the noose after a student asks about being able to conduct some kind of activity around school tends to indicate strongly that the white students who hung it were intending to send a message. But because those who hung the nooses were juveniles, it makes the process much more difficult.

He said the federal government rarely prosecutes juveniles, and even if it does, it would be in a juvenile delinquency hearing that would be closed to the public and conducted in a manner that the public would be unaware that it even occurred. ...

Continued: Official sought to clear up 'Jena Six' 'misinformation' (http://www.thetowntalk.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2007707310322)

[odette]

Legal Debate

Laws discussed during "Jena Six" forum:

# Civil Rights conspiracy statute: Makes it unlawful for two or more persons to agree together to injure, threaten or intimidate a person in any state, territory or district in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or the laws of the Unites States

Punishment is imprisonment of not more than 10 years and a fine.

# Deprivation of rights under color of law: Makes it a crime for a person acting under color of any law to willfully deprive a person of a right or privilege protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States. Persons acting under color of law within the meaning of this statute include police officers, prison guards and other law enforcement officials, as well as judges, care providers in public health facilities and others who are acting as public officials. It is not necessary that the crime be motivated by animus toward the race, color, religion, sex, handicap, familial status or national origin of the victim.

Punishment is a fine or no more than one year imprisonment.

# Exclusion of jurors on account of race or color: Makes it a crime to disqualify a citizen possessing all other qualifications which are or may be prescribed by law shall for service as grand or petit juror in any court of the United States, or of any State on account of race, color or previous condition of servitude; and whoever, being an officer or other person charged with any duty in the selection or summoning of jurors, excludes or fails to summon any citizen for such cause.

The punishment is a fine of not more than $5,000.

# Damage to religious property: Prohibits anyone from intentionally defacing, damaging or destroying religious real property because of the religious nature of the property, so long as the crime is committed in or affects interstate commerce. The statute also prohibits anyone from intentionally obstructing or attempting to obstruct, by force or threat of force, a person in the enjoyment of that person's religious beliefs, where the crime is committed in or affects interstate commerce. Finally, the statute prohibits anyone from intentionally defacing, damaging or destroying any religious real property because of the race, color or ethnic characteristics of any individual associated with the property, regardless of any connection to interstate or foreign commerce.

Punishment for violating this law is a fine and no more than one year imprisonment.

# Civil action for deprivation of rights: Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom or usage of any state or territory or the District of Columbia, subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity or other proper proceeding for redress, except that in any action brought against a judicial officer for an act or omission taken in such officer's judicial capacity, injunctive relief shall not be granted unless a declaratory decree was violated or declaratory relief was unavailable.

# Louisiana Hate Crime statute: Makes it unlawful for any person to select the victim of the following offenses against person and property because of actual or perceived race, age, gender, religion, color, creed, disability, sexual orientation, national origin or ancestry of that person or the owner or occupant of that property or because of actual or perceived membership or service in, or employment with, an organization: first- or second-degree murder; manslaughter; battery; aggravated battery; second-degree battery; aggravated assault with a firearm; terrorizing; mingling harmful substances; simple, forcible or aggravated rape; sexual battery; second-degree sexual battery; oral sexual battery; carnal knowledge of a juvenile; indecent behavior with juveniles; molestation of a juvenile; simple, second-degree or aggravated kidnapping; simple or aggravated arson; placing combustible materials; communicating of false information of planned arson; simple or aggravated criminal damage to property; contamination of water supplies; simple or aggravated burglary; criminal trespass; simple, first-degree or armed robbery; purse snatching; extortion; theft; desecration of graves; institutional vandalism; or assault by drive-by shooting.

If the underlying offense is a misdemeanor, the offender can be fined no more than $500 and imprisoned no more than six months. If the underlying offense is a felony, the offender can be fined no more than $5,000 and imprisoned for not more than five years. With both, the sentence will run consecutively to the sentence for the underlying offense.

Source: U.S. and Louisiana code

continued: Laws discussed during "Jena Six" forum: (http://www.thetowntalk.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2007707310322)

[TuscanDreams]

I feel that the nooses being hung from trees are the equilivant of a burning cross in the yard of a black family. Both are based in harassment, specifically racial intimidation.

[accordn2me]

I feel that the nooses being hung from trees are the equilivant of a burning cross in the yard of a black family. Both are based in harassment, specifically racial intimidation.I know what you mean. However, the tree was in the school yard.

[Luke Davis]

I haven't been following this case closely. I watched CNN last night and they did a report on it. As part of the report, they interviewed the parents of the boy who was attacked. Their view was that their son doesn't remember much because the first blow was to the back of his head.

He went to the hospital and was treated and released about two hours later. Since then he has had follow up treatments amounting to $12,000. There was more to the report but it was similar to what I read here.

MOO

[TrueSeeker]

Do you know anything about the allegations that there were black students beaten by white students? If this is true, and there were no charges filed....well, that's a good example of the power a district attorney wields. The decision to prosecute or not to prosecute is his and his alone to make. It would take a constitutional amendment to change that.

One black student was in a fight with one white boy. Yes, he was charged. IIRC, he was charged with simple battery because the fight was one on one.

[TrueSeeker]

Under Penal Code Section 422, a criminal threat has five elements:1. the accused willfully threatened to commit the crime that will result in death or great bodily injury; and 2. the accused made the threat with the specific intent that it be taken as a threat; and 3. the threat is so unequivocal, unconditional, immediate, and specific as to convey a gravity of purpose and the immediate prospect of execution; and 4. the threat actually caused sustained fear in the victim; and 5. the sustained fear was reasonable.


Does the noose incident fit?

I am not sure, I do know the FBI is all over this case. They did not file charges. I was told they were in Jena again a few days ago. Maybe we will hear something soon.

[TrueSeeker]

I feel that the nooses being hung from trees are the equilivant of a burning cross in the yard of a black family. Both are based in harassment, specifically racial intimidation.

I do not know if it is as bad as a burning cross, but it is very close to that, IMHO. It might have been a prank to the boys that hung them, but it is clearly not a prank for everyone else. The boys involved were to be expelled for the rest of the year by the principal. Once the head of the school board stepped in, he overturned the principal's decision. The principal resigned. The new punishment was alternative school for three weeks. After that they were still not allowed back into the general population with the other students. They were kept in a room with one teacher and not allowed to mingle with any students for the rest of the school year. They were allowed to graduate.

[One2Snoop]

I do not know if it is as bad as a burning cross, but it is very close to that, IMHO. It might have been a prank to the boys that hung them, but it is clearly not a prank for everyone else. The boys involved were to be expelled for the rest of the year by the principal. Once the head of the school board stepped in, he overturned the principal's decision. The principal resigned. The new punishment was alternative school for three weeks. After that they were still not allowed back into the general population with the other students. They were kept in a room with one teacher and not allowed to mingle with any students for the rest of the school year. They were allowed to graduate.

I find this grossly unfair to the black students who were charged with attempted murder. From my understanding, one event lead to another, the biggest being the "beating of a white student" after the nooses were hung. Why didn't justice step in when the nooses were hung? What about the beating of a black student? Do you honestly believe the beating of a white student would've occured if the noose situation had been publically acknowledged and taken care of properly?
If I read correctly, higher authority didn't take it seriouly and thought it would work itself out?? :eek: We're talking a small southern town where 88% (not accurate,I'm sure) of the population is white and 12% is black?! Give me a break! These black kids had no chance and will not get justice with an all white jury.
My biggest question is, if your son or daughter (put yourself in the reversal role here) had been involved with the noose hanging situation what would you have done to publically rectify the situation?

If I'd been in those shoes I'd certainly gone the nine yards to make it right with all involved. Why didn't the families of those boys who hung those nooses in the school yard try to make it right? It's all in upbringing in my opinion. What sort of an example did those parents set? :no: A very bad one IMO.

My view is this. The buck of passing racisim on will never stop, particularly when parents won't step in and tell their kids it was wrong and they need to make it right, particularly when it comes to skin color. It goes both ways people, white or black, purple or blue, yellow or green, we all have to live and work together to make things right. I truly think this is what living in 2007 America is all about? :patriot:

Just My 2 cents
O2S

[TrueSeeker]

I find this grossly unfair to the black students who were charged with attempted murder. From my understanding, one event lead to another, the biggest being the "beating of a white student" after the nooses were hung. Why didn't justice step in when the nooses were hung? What about the beating of a black student? Do you honestly believe the beating of a white student would've occured if the noose situation had been publically acknowledged and taken care of properly?
If I read correctly, higher authority didn't take it seriouly and thought it would work itself out?? :eek: We're talking a small southern town where 88% (not accurate,I'm sure) of the population is white and 12% is black?! Give me a break! These black kids had no chance and will not get justice with an all white jury.
My biggest question is, if your son or daughter (put yourself in the reversal role here) had been involved with the noose hanging situation what would you have done to publically rectify the situation?

If I'd been in those shoes I'd certainly gone the nine yards to make it right with all involved. Why didn't the families of those boys who hung those nooses in the school yard try to make it right? It's all in upbringing in my opinion. What sort of an example did those parents set? :no: A very bad one IMO.

My view is this. The buck of passing racisim on will never stop, particularly when parents won't step in and tell their kids it was wrong and they need to make it right, particularly when it comes to skin color. It goes both ways people, white or black, purple or blue, yellow or green, we all have to live and work together to make things right. I truly think this is what living in 2007 America is all about? :patriot:

Just My 2 cents
O2S

I agree, the punishment and the missed oppurtunity to correct the noose hangers was missed by a long shot. Still, that doesn't make it right to have 6 beat 1. The school could have used the noose hanging as an oppurtunity to teach the children something about racism, instead they did nothing. I believe everyone thought the problem would work itself out. How ridiculous is that? Yes, the parents are partly responsible in all of this.

[accordn2me]

I find this grossly unfair to the black students who were charged with attempted murder. From my understanding, one event lead to another, the biggest being the "beating of a white student" after the nooses were hung. Why didn't justice step in when the nooses were hung? What about the beating of a black student? Do you honestly believe the beating of a white student would've occured if the noose situation had been publically acknowledged and taken care of properly?<snipped>(my bold)

I'll ask again, specifically, what law was broken by the nooses being hung in the school yard tree?

As I understand it, it's public record that the noose hangers were expelled, then that decision was overridden by the school board and the expulsion was reduced to a suspension. It's very hard to legally expel a student from public education, of which a right to is protected by law.

[Athena]

I agree with One2Snoop and with TrueSeeker's comments as well. IMO the whole school body, officials, parents and students should have nipped the noose hangings incident in the bud. It was handled poorly and as FW says it is no justification for striking another individual especially if it were 6 on 1 which is dangerous no matter what as it becomes a "gang" mentality and gets out of hand but if it were handled promptly and apologies made to the black student body this may not have happened. I believe many turn their heads when racial events occur and don't want to speak out in fear of what their "neighbors" will think of them and therein lies part of the problems in this country. In this case because it happened on school property, the school officials should have initiated a "no tolerance" racism rule right then and there.

I'm also confused by the article posted by "Town Talk" as to the 6 on 1. JMO

[accordn2me]

It's also a moral issue that should have offended both blacks and whites, IMO. This should have been nipped in the bud and the suspensions made and apologies made to the black student body BEFORE anything happened. This incident was totally handled poorly by the school administrators. JMHO"Nipped in the bud" how? :shrug:

When did the suspensions happen?

[accordn2me]

A University of New Hampshire Flyer to sent to all Freshman
Hanging a noose is discriminatory harrassment

http://0.content.collegehumor.com/d1/ch6/9/a/collegehumor.4d241b791b30a42bbc36505aa8d571ca.jpg

I don't know how to make it any more clear than asking for the specific law which was broken by hanging 3 nooses from the tree which stood on the Jena High School grounds.

Thank you for providing an example of "discriminatory harassment" according to "A University of New Hampshire Flyer."

[accordn2me]

I am working on it - reviewing case law now.
Thank you, Freshwater. Your efforts are appreciated. :rose:

Now, in light of the ardent support for the Jena 6 here at Crime Library, the fact that the NAACP, not to mention the FBI, having been called in to look at this, and my question days ago asking for the law that was broken going unanswered, I'm going to venture that the answer to my question is: none.

If that is true, and there was no law broken, exactly what do the ardent supporters propose "should have been done" to "handle this properly?"

Both sides need to be held accountable where account is due. The district attorney would have been remiss in not pressing charges against the Jena 6 because the law was clearly broken in the beating of Justin Barker. If no law was broken where the nooses are concerned, the suspensions were the only recourse. If it's the possible length of sentences allowed by law for the charges that were brought against the Jena 6 that is causing the uproar, then say that. Many times, IMO, DAs will charge the maximum knowing that defendants often walk with much lighter sentences than they could potentially get. Maybe that's what's happening in this situation. :shrug:

And let's not forget, this beating happened just after the district attorney's direct warning to the students at the assembly. Personally, I'm impressed that he followed through on his word. Many politicians don't.

[accordn2me]

OK Accorn2me, Here's my first stab at it. What do you think? I also see a general common understanding that hanging a noose represents harrassment - as that act is often cited as such in flyers, student handbooks etc...

IMO it can be argued that the school's conduct violated both the Equal Protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the US Constitution and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The Equal Protection clause prohibits a state from denying "to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." Under Title VI, moreover, "[n]o person in the United States shall, on the ground of race, color, or national origin . . . be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance."

Under Title VI, the ninth district court of appeals in Monteiro v Temple Union School District (http://lw.bna.com/lw/19981027/15511.htm)announced a school district might be liable for a hostile racial educational environment caused by the harassing conduct of its students.
The court followed reasoning previously developed by the US Department of Education in that agency's conclusion that Title VI does indeed prohibit student-to-student racial harassment.
Under this rationale, a school district violates Title VI when there is a racially hostile environment, the district had notice of the problem, and it failed to respond adequately to redress the racially hostile environment.
The court quoted with approval the Department's holding that "an alleged harasser need not be an agent or employee of the recipient [of Federal funds] because this theory of liability under Title VI is premised on a recipient's general duty to provide a nondiscriminatory educational environment."
From these statements, the court concluded that "[r]acial harassment creates a hostile environment if it is sufficiently severe that it would interfere with the educational program of a reasonable person of the same age and race as the victim."


Additional cases that assert racial harrassment in public schools can be a violation of Title VI:

Davis v. Monroe County Board of Education (http://lw.bna.com/lw/19970909/949121a.htm)

Bryant & Bryant v. Independent School Districyt, Gavin County, Oklahoma (http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2003/07/02-6212.htm)

Additional Sources (http://www.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/publications.html#TitleVI)

from Davis v. Monroe County:Because deliberate indifference to known instances of student-on-student racial harassment is a viable theory in a Title VI intentional discrimination suit, I consider it important to discuss the standards that guide our disposition of the instant motion and which, in my judgment, must guide the district court's inquiry on remand.(3)

C. The Test: (1) Did Student-on-Student Conduct at Plaintiffs' School Constitute a Racially Hostile Educational Environment, to Which (2) Defendant Was Deliberately Indifferent?

....

In answering this question, the Supreme Court's analysis in Davis determines what facts are material. See Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 248 (1986) (when considering whether a genuine issue of material fact exists, "the substantive law will identify which facts are material").

In Murrell, we interpreted Davis as setting forth four factors a plaintiff must allege to state a Title IX claim against a school district under the deliberate indifference theory:

She must allege that the district (1) had actual knowledge of, and (2) was deliberately indifferent to (3) harassment that was so severe, pervasive and objectively offensive that it (4) deprived the victim of access to the educational benefits or opportunities provided by the school. This limited rule imposes liability only on those school districts that choose to ignore Title IX's mandate for equal educational opportunities.

Murrell, 186 F.3d at 1246.

In applying this test to plaintiffs' hostile environment claim in this case, the district court on remand must remain mindful of the Court's guidance as to when harassment constitutes a hostile environment and when mere inaction constitutes deliberate indifference. As Murrell indicates, the standard set forth by the Davis Court, which must guide the district court's inquiry on remand into whether defendant's alleged failure to act subjected plaintiffs to a "racially hostile environment," is quite high:

[F]unding recipients are properly held liable in damages only where they are deliberately indifferent to [racial] harassment, of which they have actual knowledge, that is so severe, pervasive, and objectively offensive that it can be said to deprive the victims of access to the educational opportunities or benefits provided by the school.

.....

[F]unding recipients are deemed "deliberately indifferent" to acts of student-on-student harassment only where the recipient's response to the harassment or lack thereof is clearly unreasonable in light of the known circumstances. . . . [T]he recipient must merely respond to known peer harassment in a manner that is not clearly unreasonable. This is not a mere "reasonableness" standard. . . .

Trying to make this fit the incidents at Jena High School.....the school district did acknowledge the nooses - suspended the students who hung them - and cut down the tree at some point. IIRC, there was still unrest at the school so the district called in the local district attorney to address the students, which he did, apparently. After that, part of the school was torched....(were there any arrests for this crime?)...then the beating of Justin Barker happened.

Personally, I don't see where a case under Title IV could be made on behalf of the Jena 6. Do you think the school district was "deliberately indifferent?"

From what I'm reading here, it's the district attorney's actions that are being called into question. That is a problem, not this case specifically, but all over the state of Louisiana that needs to be addressed. District attorneys have the legal right/power to prosecute whomever they wish, or conversely, to not prosecute. :read:

[One2Snoop]

I apologize accord. When it comes to the law, (legal mumbo jumbo) I'm clueless. Doesn't help "my case" at all does it? Thanks to Freshwater and the others who've sited case law. :seeya:

One thing I noticed you failed to mention in your last post was the black student who was attacked "first" and took the gun away from his attacker. He was then charged with stealing the gun. What's up with that? :confused: The beating of the white student happened after this incident, IIRC.

I think this whole case/situation boils down to a chain of events, all steming back to those nooses hung in the school yard. Against the law or not, those nooses were put there to intimidate and it appears that mission was accomplished.



IMO, JMO.

[accordn2me]

I apologize accord. When it comes to the law, (legal mumbo jumbo) I'm clueless. Doesn't help "my case" at all does it? Thanks to Freshwater and the others who've sited case law. :seeya:

One thing I noticed you failed to mention in your last post was the black student who was attacked "first" and took the gun away from his attacker. He was then charged with stealing the gun. What's up with that? :confused: The beating of the white student happened after this incident, IIRC.

I think this whole case/situation boils down to a chain of events, all steming back to those nooses hung in the school yard. Against the law or not, those nooses were put there to intimidate and it appears that mission was accomplished.



IMO, JMO.Oh, please don't apologize, O2S! :seeya: I'm just curious to know if a law was broken by the teens who hung the nooses in the school yard tree. I don't know if one was or not. I would guess not, though. So, if no law was broken..... :shrug:

Interesting that you point back to the nooses as to where the chain of events started. IMO, it started well before that. And it certainly doesn't seem like the black students were "intimidated" (the school was torched, Justin Barker beaten) until they were in jail and facing long prison sentences. JMO

You've got ahead start on me on this case too! I don't know much about the "first" black student who was attacked. Maybe truthseeker, or one of the others can shed some light for us. IIRC, there was something like this where a black student was asked to leave a private party, for some reason he refused, a fight ensued, and a time later...and away from the party...he was confronted by a white adult with a shotgun. Did the black student report this to police? Did the white adult (whom I believe was arrested for the fight) report his gun stolen....and it was later found by police in possession (unreported) of the black student? :shrug:

[Athena]

From Urban Legends:

THE FACTS:

In a small highly segregated rural Louisiana town of Jena in September 2006, a black student asked permission from school administrators to sit under the shade of a tree commonly reserved for the enjoyment of white students. School officials advised the black students to sit wherever they wanted and they did. The next day, three nooses, in the school colors, were hanging from the same tree.

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

[Athena]

I don't usually post links to the Wiki but this appears to be a composition of many articles which are linked via footnotes:

Jena Six assault

The following Monday, December 4, a white student named Justin Barker, aged 17, loudly discussed - "bragged," as characterized by National Public Radio - how Bailey had been beaten up by a white man that Friday night.[1] When Barker walked out of the school gymnasium into the courtyard later that day, he was assaulted by Bailey and five other black students, and was temporarily knocked unconscious. The concussion he suffered has been described in the media as resulting either from a punch to the face or from hitting his head on concrete when thrown to the ground. While on the ground, Barker was kicked repeatedly. Barker was examined by a doctor at the local hospital.[2][1] After two hours of treatment and observation for his concussion and an eye that had swollen shut, Barker was discharged in time to go to the school Ring Ceremony that evening.[4] In the meantime the six black students, eventually dubbed the "Jena Six"[11], were arrested.

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

[packy]

Somehow it seems the school should have known even if it was unspoken that the tree was being reserved and worked at phasing out that so-called that given? And I wonder how much it may have helped if the board and superintendent had not ignored the principal's recommendation. Sad case overall, and someone asked about why the parent's didn't speak out publicly or something to that effect. I wonder too and tend to think that if they didn't it may be because they uphold such activities -- can't help it even if my thought about it is an unfair reaction.

[accordn2me]

Somehow it seems the school should have known even if it was unspoken that the tree was being reserved and worked at phasing out that so-called that given? <snipped> What should they have done to phase "that so-called given" out?

[accordn2me]

Noose hangers should have been arrested for criminal behavior and expelled from school in violation of stated department of education policies. So far, no one has cited the law under which they could have been arrested. If no law was broken, no expulsion should have resulted. The suspension was the appropriate recourse of action. Had the noose hangers been expelled, I'm virtually positive they could have fought it and they would have won.

There are independent legal issues that are or could be addressed in the Jena 6. I believe strongly that Under Title VI of the Civil Rights act of 1964, claims of civil rights violations can be made on behalf of the Jena 6. I also believe that a school district interested in those said rights would have more vigorously pursued all legal remedies to ensure the expulsion of the noose hangers. There were several available legal avenues that could have been pursued by the DA and the School board to ensure the noose hangers were removed from the school in order to promote a safe, fair, and ethical school environment.I disagree that Title VI could be used to prosecute the noose hangers. IMO, Title VI violations could only be brought against the district, not the students who hung the nooses. The school district was not "deliberately indifferent" to the nooses, or to the racial unrest at the school.

School Board - The Board could have made a case for expulsion based on the LaSalle Parish Schools policies and standards (http://jhs.lasallepsb.com/school_policies.htm#Recommended%20Expulsion:) where it states "
Recommended Expulsion:
Threatening a student and/or faculty or staff with a weapon (real or imagined) Possession of drugs (State Law)
Fourth suspension "
As stated earlier I see a noose as a threat of violence and I would consider it's placement on a tree as a threat with a weapon.The nooses were hung by students under the "white" tree, not in any particular person's yard, but in the school yard. Furthermore, the description of the tree as the "white" tree strikes me as hilarious. I wonder when the tree was coined the "white" tree?

Do you think the school district...all school districts...should impose rules against self-segregation? I know the administration at a couple of schools I've taught at have tried to discourage teachers from self-segregating at faculty and PTA meetings. There have been not so subtle admonishments about teachers grouping on one side and parents on the other at PTA meetings. At faculty meetings it seems black teachers sit together while white teachers sit together. It didn't even dawn on me this was happening until it was pointed out and we started being grouped by grade level. As soon as we didn't have required places to sit, it went right back to the way it was before. :shrug: I don't see a practical way to regulate this.

According to Louisiana law: A hate crime is a criminal offense committed against a person, property or society which is motivated, in whole or in part, by the offender's bias against a race, religion, disability, sexual orientation or ethnicity/national origin.
The three elements that must be present:
Threat or use of force.
Motivated by bias.
Involves a federally protected activity such as education, employment, parks, streets, accommodations, etc.The nooses were hung by students. The school district responded. The FBI took a look and said: no crime. :shrug:

Element 1 - There was most definitely IMO a threat of force. The noose hanging implies a threat of of violence in and of itself. I believe there could be countless experts called to clarify the symbolic meaning of the noose as a terror threat in much the same way that a swastika is considered a terror threat when painted on a synagogue.
Element 2 - I believe that hanging a noose from a tree that is considered a white tree reserved exclusively for white students the day after three Black students sought official school permission to sit under said tree demonstrates motivational bias
Element 3 - The noose hanging most definitely involves a federally protected activity - education. Jena High School does indeed receive federal funds.

The noose hangers should have been arrested for terroristic threats with the compounded element of a hate crime. In addition to violating the civil rights of the three black students who had dared to sit under the white tree.Who reserved the "white" tree exclusively for white students? Did it have a sign on it?

What were the specific civil rights that were violated? Who violated them?

[accordn2me]

You may elect to disagree here but the larger issue is that no officials in Jena sought to pursue this angle to ensure the removal of the noose hangers from Jena High School. In fact the Principle of Jena High School - the official closest to the ground - initially DID IIRC expel these students under the schools threat and harassment policy. This decision was overturned by the Superintendent - not the legal arm of the school district - as being too severe a punishment (not that there was no legal basis for expulsion). Moreover, in protest and further acknowledgment that the educational environs were indeed hostile, the principal of Jena High School resigned.Maybe the officials didn't pursue "this angle" because legally it wouldn't stand up in court. :shrug: I don't know, maybe it would have. However, I know of instances where students have brought deadly weapons to school (guns, knives), they were expelled, fought the expulsion, and were allowed to go back to school because their right to a public education is guaranteed by the state constitution. That right supersedes any violation they committed. I know that sounds wrong, but unfortunately, that's the way it is here in Louisiana (and probably other places too).

Additional issues may include:
1. The simple assault conviction and sentence to probation for the white students who assaulted a black student.
2. Lack of arrest for white student, brandishing a weapon, and threatening black students
3. The heightened charge of second degree murder and consequentially high bail for the Jena six when no weapon was used and minimal injuries occurred.

And with that I leave the remainder of this debate and discussion to all of you!

Freshwater

I'm reading conflicting accounts of what you listed as "additional issues." On issue 1., were there multiple white students on one black student? What do you feel would have been the appropriate charge and sentence?

On issue 2., I thought the weapon was brandished by an adult who was arrested. He claims he was threatened. :shrug:

You seem to be most bothered by "The heightened charge of second degree murder and consequentially high bail for the Jena six when no weapon was used and minimal injuries occurred," after a physical attack, yet you are calling for severe measures, (requiring a narrow, stretching interpretation of the law, IMO) against students who touched no one physically. You say the Jena 6 used no weapon. Saying a tennis shoe is a weapon does seem absurd at first. However, study self-defense and you will find that all sorts of things can be used as weapons (e.g. ink pens, pencils, keys, credit cards, perfume, belts, shoelaces, certain jewelry, etc.).

Supporters of the Jena 6 seem to have two major complaints. The first is against school district officials for the handling of the racial unrest in the school district. This should most certainly be addressed. However, unless a law is broken, it can't be addressed in a courtroom.

The next complaint is against what appears to be an unfair district attorney. For me, this is the major issue that should be addressed. Unfortunately, the race card has been played and it will forever obscure the most serious underlying problem, IMO, of this entire ordeal - all powerful district attorneys who are totally within their legal rights and power granted to them by the Louisiana state constitution to do as they will with cases falling under their jurisdiction. :(

[accordn2me]

I believe many would disagree with your categorization of their motivations for a call for equitable justice. It is not, as I believe you are implying, the use of race to "get over". <snipped>What are you talking about my "categorization of their motivations for a call for equitable justice?" :confused:

I wasn't implying that anyone was using race to "get over," either. I thought I stated quite clearly that the "race card" will keep "the real issue" from ever being addressed. The real issue being that this DA, like all others in the state of Louisiana, has sole discretion concerning who he prosecutes and who he doesn't. That is the problem. However, like you, others see the problem as this: an issue of racist beliefs turning into practice resulting in minimal punishment for white students who threaten blacks and an excessive punishment for black students who assaulted a white student.. Leave the race issue out of it and focus on the problem for what it is. As the law stands right now, this district attorney simply exercised the powers afforded him by the state's constitution. He didn't overstep his bounds, and he didn't break any laws.



<snipped>

The DA made the wrong moral and legal call here <snipped> Wrong moral call, maybe.....definitely not wrong "legally."

I personally do not believe that all charges against the Jena 6 should be dropped.


It seems the sanction imposed should be consistent with other sanctions given for similar circumstances. When a group of white students jumped a black student the DA charged a single white student with simple assault resulting in a misd and probatin as opposed to black students being charged with second degree murder for an unarmed aassault that did not produce serious injuries. I think I see an inequity here that is troubling. Although it has yet to be determined if all 6 of the Jena 6 where even involved, what is clear is that the use of a fist is an assault. Is it not excused by the use of racial slurs or threats of violence by white students. But there is a question of what is equitable in terms of criminal behavior and the sanction imposed. And it is this issue I believe that motivates those that call the actions of Jena School Officials and DA Reed into question.

FH20Please direct me to a link where I can read about this fight and the subsequent charges you are referring to.

Your reasoning does give me pause. People who oppose the death penalty use this type of argument: we shouldn't impose the death penalty on any criminals because there are much worse crimes where the DP is not imposed. :shrug: Don't throw the baby out with the bath water, fix the system!

[Luke Davis]

Simple - Black Faculty members should have sat under the tree when the students were present. Are there any black faculty in Jena? OK how about some black parent volunteers? Along with a statement that the the segregation of students under the tree would not be tolerated. BTW the tree was cut down. Almost a year after the noose hanging.IIRC two teachers are black.

[William Anthony]

What are you talking about my "categorization of their motivations for a call for equitable justice?" :confused:

I wasn't implying that anyone was using race to "get over," either. I thought I stated quite clearly that the "race card" will keep "the real issue" from ever being addressed. The real issue being that this DA, like all others in the state of Louisiana, has sole discretion concerning who he prosecutes and who he doesn't. That is the problem. However, like you, others see the problem as this: . Leave the race issue out of it and focus on the problem for what it is. As the law stands right now, this district attorney simply exercised the powers afforded him by the state's constitution. He didn't overstep his bounds, and he didn't break any laws.

Wrong moral call, maybe.....definitely not wrong "legally."

Please direct me to a link where I can read about this fight and the subsequent charges you are referring to.

Your reasoning does give me pause. People who oppose the death penalty use this type of argument: we shouldn't impose the death penalty on any criminals because there are much worse crimes where the DP is not imposed. :shrug: Don't throw the baby out with the bath water, fix the system!

The system began with the words "all men are created equal and endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights." The baby should be cleaned and the dirty water disposed of. Judging from the numbers of people killed in a fight where only fists and feet were used as compared to the number of people killed by the discharge of guns, I would think that pulling a gun is more severe or at least has the potential to inflict serious bodily injury more often than fists of feet. All other things being equal, I think the punishment for brandishing a gun should be punished more severly. The most obvious difference betwen the two incidents, other than there was a gun used in one, is the race of the accused.

Imho, the problem is simply not one of an over zealous DA. It is a sign of a system that perpetuates and acts as a catalyst for such conduct from a DA. If the DA is elected, then I see a problem in getting rid of him, when the largest percentage of the population may relish his conduct. I agree that diversity presents a learning as opposed to a hating experience.

[packy]

What should they have done to phase "that so-called given" out?

I thought about this and my gut reaction is that in situations like in the case of a reserved tree any of us as an individual could stand up and be counted, but then my gut said that may just encourage more power playing. But the school officials should/could have manipulated the population in such a way that no one could feel ownership of that tree. There are ways by setting clear-cut guidelines, and bringing it to attention with a direct statement that discrimination will not be tolerated. That is if their hands weren't tied.

I had hope that when my generation died out we would have more feeling for our fellow man, but maybe it didn't happen fast enough before the contagion was able to spread. I'll shut up now because I'm on kick and making it sound rather hopeless it seems.

[adnoid]

...Why didn't justice step in when the nooses were hung?...

What I'd like to know is how long there had been a "White Only" tree, and why justice didn't step in the moment ANYONE in authority at the school became aware of it. The concept turns my stomach.

[TrueSeeker]

Oh, please don't apologize, O2S! :seeya: I'm just curious to know if a law was broken by the teens who hung the nooses in the school yard tree. I don't know if one was or not. I would guess not, though. So, if no law was broken..... :shrug:

Interesting that you point back to the nooses as to where the chain of events started. IMO, it started well before that. And it certainly doesn't seem like the black students were "intimidated" (the school was torched, Justin Barker beaten) until they were in jail and facing long prison sentences. JMO

You've got ahead start on me on this case too! I don't know much about the "first" black student who was attacked. Maybe truthseeker, or one of the others can shed some light for us. IIRC, there was something like this where a black student was asked to leave a private party, for some reason he refused, a fight ensued, and a time later...and away from the party...he was confronted by a white adult with a shotgun. Did the black student report this to police? Did the white adult (whom I believe was arrested for the fight) report his gun stolen....and it was later found by police in possession (unreported) of the black student? :shrug:

Ok, I must agree that the Jena Six were not intimidated, their actions prove that, IMHO. First, one of the black boys decided to go to a private party, all by himself and try to force himself in. Well, that shows he was not easily intimidated, it also shows he wasn't fearful for his life. A fight broke out, I don't know who punched the first lick, both sides claim the other done this.:rolleyes: It was a one on one fight. The white boy involved was charged with simple battery. No charges were filed against the black boy even though he did try to invite himself to a private party and used force to try to enter the building.
The fight at Gotta Go. There has been so many conflicting reports of what happened I don't even know where to begin. The white boy said he was in Gotta Go and the black boys approached him and was making threats, so he ran to his truck to get his gun to just scare them enough to get them to back off so he could leave. The black boys said they were approached by the white boy threatening them with a gun and they wrestled him to the ground and took it from him. The gun was thrown in someone's yard, IIRC, and that is where it was found by police once the white boy reported it stolen. What a mess. I think there is three sides to this story. One for each side, then the truth. :shrug:

[TrueSeeker]

What I'd like to know is how long there had been a "White Only" tree, and why justice didn't step in the moment ANYONE in authority at the school became aware of it. The concept turns my stomach.

I have many relatives that live in Jena, I called them to ask them about the "white tree." They had never heard of a white tree. They even said their daughter that attended there saw many blacks and whites sitting under the tree. My relative said that some were told by certain students not to come around them, not because of their race, but because they were starting trouble. The certain students were sitting under the tree when they said this. Many suggest the "white tree" never existed. My relative did say, though, that many of the students did choose to stick to certain places. The blacks did seem to stay to certain areas and the whites stayed to one certain area, that can not be denied. They did mingle and talk to each other, though. There was no unnamed rules that everyone had to stay in a certain place.

[TrueSeeker]

IIRC two teachers are black.

I am not certain, but I think they have more than two black teachers. I will make some calls.

[William Anthony]

Ok, I must agree that the Jena Six were not intimidated, their actions prove that, IMHO. First, one of the black boys decided to go to a private party, all by himself and try to force himself in. Well, that shows he was not easily intimidated, it also shows he wasn't fearful for his life. A fight broke out, I don't know who punched the first lick, both sides claim the other done this.:rolleyes: It was a one on one fight. The white boy involved was charged with simple battery. No charges were filed against the black boy even though he did try to invite himself to a private party and used force to try to enter the building.
The fight at Gotta Go. There has been so many conflicting reports of what happened I don't even know where to begin. The white boy said he was in Gotta Go and the black boys approached him and was making threats, so he ran to his truck to get his gun to just scare them enough to get them to back off so he could leave. The black boys said they were approached by the white boy threatening them with a gun and they wrestled him to the ground and took it from him. The gun was thrown in someone's yard, IIRC, and that is where it was found by police once the white boy reported it stolen. What a mess. I think there is three sides to this story. One for each side, then the truth. :shrug:

Could it be that someone was afraid for his life and tired of being intimidated chose to make a stand, rightly or wrongly, so that attention could be brought to the situation, regardless if it meant his life or not?

If you are able to run to your truck, are you not able to leave?

I agree that the truth lies somewhere around the two stories. These are just some questions I have when I look for the truth.

[William Anthony]

I have many relatives that live in Jena, I called them to ask them about the "white tree." They had never heard of a white tree. They even said their daughter that attended there saw many blacks and whites sitting under the tree. My relative said that some were told by certain students not to come around them, not because of their race, but because they were starting trouble. The certain students were sitting under the tree when they said this. Many suggest the "white tree" never existed. My relative did say, though, that many of the students did choose to stick to certain places. The blacks did seem to stay to certain areas and the whites stayed to one certain area, that can not be denied. They did mingle and talk to each other, though. There was no unnamed rules that everyone had to stay in a certain place.

I have found that in many cities I have visited that the residential concentration of Blacks is higher in one particular area of the city than in others. Is this true of Jena? There may not be an unnamed rule but an understood and unspoken one. The disparity of concentration may be the result of other understood and unspoken disparities.

Did the daughter say what the reaction of the White students were to seeing Blacks sitting under the tree?

[TuscanDreams]

Let's look at this from another stance, let's state the Jena Six are Jewish and the other kids are black. Let's change the nooses to Swastikas.

See the racial intimidation now? I sure do. The intent to intimidate is the same and the Jena Six should not be held to a different standard simply because they are black.

[TuscanDreams]

What I'd like to know is how long there had been a "White Only" tree, and why justice didn't step in the moment ANYONE in authority at the school became aware of it. The concept turns my stomach.

Agreed, that is where this entire incident stems from.

[William Anthony]

Agreed, that is where this entire incident stems from.

I agree with the sentiments behind these posts. However, I do not see the tree as the commencement of the incident but rather as the culmination of what appears to be incidents of racial animosity.

[accordn2me]

I have many relatives that live in Jena, I called them to ask them about the "white tree." They had never heard of a white tree. They even said their daughter that attended there saw many blacks and whites sitting under the tree. My relative said that some were told by certain students not to come around them, not because of their race, but because they were starting trouble. The certain students were sitting under the tree when they said this. Many suggest the "white tree" never existed. My relative did say, though, that many of the students did choose to stick to certain places. The blacks did seem to stay to certain areas and the whites stayed to one certain area, that can not be denied. They did mingle and talk to each other, though. There was no unnamed rules that everyone had to stay in a certain place.If the account by your relative is true, and black and white students sat under the tree, but some trouble makers were told to stay away, that changes things a bit, IMO.

Were the students who asked "permission" to sit under the tree the trouble makers that were told to stay away? Were they part of the Jena 6?

[accordn2me]

......<snipped> I would think that pulling a gun is more severe or at least has the potential to inflict serious bodily injury more often than fists of feet. All other things being equal, I think the punishment for brandishing a gun should be punished more severly. The most obvious difference betwen the two incidents, other than there was a gun used in one, is the race of the accused.You think that pulling a gun on someone should be more severely punished than a situation where someone was actually knocked unconscious and beaten by 6 others? :eek: And your reason: "pulling a gun is more severe or at least has the potential to inflict serious bodily injury more often than fists of feet." Well, what can I say to that! :no: Except, dead is dead. It doesn't matter if the death was caused by a gun, a club, or a tennis shoe! And IMO, a threat should not be punished more severely than actually carrying out the threat.

Imho, the problem is simply not one of an over zealous DA. It is a sign of a system that perpetuates and acts as a catalyst for such conduct from a DA. If the DA is elected, then I see a problem in getting rid of him, when the largest percentage of the population may relish his conduct. I agree that diversity presents a learning as opposed to a hating experience.That system would be the constitution of the state of Louisiana. This does need to be addressed. District attorneys have too much unchecked power. However, until it's addressed in the Louisiana legislature, DAs can't be charged with malfeasance in cases such as this one. Unfortunately, the racial issues in this case will obscure the problem and the solution.

[William Anthony]

You think that pulling a gun on someone should be more severely punished than a situation where someone was actually knocked unconscious and beaten by 6 others? :eek: And your reason: "pulling a gun is more severe or at least has the potential to inflict serious bodily injury more often than fists of feet." Well, what can I say to that! :no: Except, dead is dead. It doesn't matter if the death was caused by a gun, a club, or a tennis shoe! And IMO, a threat should not be punished more severely than actually carrying out the threat.

That system would be the constitution of the state of Louisiana. This does need to be addressed. District attorneys have too much unchecked power. However, until it's addressed in the Louisiana legislature, DAs can't be charged with malfeasance in cases such as this one. Unfortunately, the racial issues in this case will obscure the problem and the solution.

Yes, that is exactly what I think. However, let's look at the law.

"RS 14:38

§38. Simple assault
Simple assault is an assault committed without a dangerous weapon.
Whoever commits a simple assault shall be fined not more than two hundred dollars, or imprisoned for not more than ninety days, or both.
Acts 1978, No. 394, §1. "

There is no doubt that the gun was a dangerous weapon. Therefore, the charge and the punishment should have been more severe. The argument can be made that fists and feet are dangerous weapons. Therefore, came the charge against the Jena six for aggravated assault. The charge against the White person should have therefore been aggravated assault. The fact that the gun had to wrestled away from the person in no way minimizes the assault and, in fact, shows an intent on the part of the person to use the gun, especially when one considers the person had a chance to leave when he got to his truck. These facts are taken from one post I have read on the incident. Therefore, if that is true, yes, I think that the charge and punishment should have been more severe. I do not think that you would even argue that pulling a gun on someone is not an assaault.

You seem to focus more on the circumstances of the assault rather than the elements of an assault charge. You fault the Louisiana Constitution but admit that it is the law. The law is what it is. The judge dropped the charges from attempted murder to aggravated assault. I think the reason the charges were reduced was because there was no evidence that the Jena Six ever intended to murder the student, but there was evidence that they intended to and did assault the student. Therefore, the evidence in the gun incident shows that the person intended to assault and did assault the students. Therefore, with all things being equal, other than the race of the defendant, I think that the gun incident should have been charged more severely. We all have heard and know of cases were firearms have accidentally discharged killing someone. I think the pulling of a gun shows an intent to commit murder and the fact that someone was able to prevent this by taking the gun away should does not minimize the intent.

The racial issues will expose the problem and hopefully help to resolve the issue of the apparent racial inequality occuring in the judicial system in Jena and elsewhere, imho.

[TuscanDreams]

You think that pulling a gun on someone should be more severely punished than a situation where someone was actually knocked unconscious and beaten by 6 others? And your reason: "pulling a gun is more severe or at least has the potential to inflict serious bodily injury more often than fists of feet." Well, what can I say to that! Except, dead is dead. It doesn't matter if the death was caused by a gun, a club, or a tennis shoe! And IMO, a threat should not be punished more severely than actually carrying out the threat.

Actually, I want to weigh in on this subject. Brandishing a firearm, even as a threat, has led to deadly consquences. I think it should be firmly and solidly punished to the furthest extent of the law.

[TuscanDreams]

I agree with the sentiments behind these posts. However, I do not see the tree as the commencement of the incident but rather as the culmination of what appears to be incidents of racial animosity.

That's true. Actually, I should have stated that the tree is the symbol that represents racial inequality, which led to the incident. Hope that makes sense, my eyes are crossed from working on a paper for class.

[William Anthony]

That's true. Actually, I should have stated that the tree is the symbol that represents racial inequality, which led to the incident. Hope that makes sense, my eyes are crossed from working on a paper for class.

Yes, and I agree. School work is so much fun, isn't it?

[Athena]

The one thing that is clear in these incidents are that there are two systems of justice in Jena.
Contrary to what may be believed by some hanging those nooses right after black students protested by sitting under a "white only tree" is a federal hate crime.

While I believe that the Jena 6 members should have been punished there is no way that I am going to believe they should have been charged with attempted murder and even with the conspiracy charge removed it still can put Bell in jail for 15 years? because he used a "weapon"; his shoes. Justin Barker was not admitted to the hospital and was able to attend a planned event that evening. Students who let their emotions get out of hand are indications of immaturity and certainly Justin did not deserve to get jumped (after he made comments - wasn't done out of the blue) but attempted murder? Please..... as far as the DA goes -- he is elected by the town -- a town that is only 12% black. Don't hold your breath for that to change. It says a whole lot when a principal resigns IMO and quite obvious he was not getting support for punishing the students for hanging those nooses. Justice is supposed to be blind -- but is it "color-blind"? I think not. JMO
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Those who fail to grasp the horror black people experience at the sight of a noose in a tree cannot understand this story and are not qualified to comment on it. Unfortunately, most of the folks in a typical Jena jury pool fit this description.

http://friendsofjustice.wordpress.com/2007/08/06/jena-finally-makes-the-washington-post/

"Advocates for the Jena 6 aren't saying the boys should be let off if they indeed pummeled Justin Barker. Rather, they're saying the charges should match the crime -- and that the juvenile court should handle the teens' cases.

Brown said he will use his radio show as a platform to push for justice until an appellate court throws out Bell's conviction and the remaining Jena 6 see a fair trial.

Brown said of his rationale, "My grandma used to tell me, 'You can't hang a thief for murder,' and that's what they're doing in Jena."

http://edition.cnn.com/2007/US/law/09/04/bell.jena.six/index.html

Photo of Justin's injuries:

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

MARCUS JONES: Well, what I understand that took place is wrongdoing. The judge let the DA just really just choose an all-white jury. There was an all-white jury. Relatives of some of the jurors was some of the witnesses, too. One of the boys that testified for Barker was one of the boys that hung up the nooses at the high school.

AMY GOODMAN: Was that brought out in the trial?

MARCUS JONES: No, no, that wasn’t brought out in the trial. See, we had a complication with my son’s court-appointed lawyer, and come to find out that he was working with the DA for to get my son convicted.

MY GOODMAN: And were you called up to testify?

MARCUS JONES: No, no, no, no.

AMY GOODMAN: So you couldn't speak about the case, and you were kept out of the trial?

MARCUS JONES: Yes, the whole while. We was allowed -- only time we was allowed back in the courtroom, when the verdict came back.

AMY GOODMAN: Did your son's court-appointed attorney call up any witnesses?

MARCUS JONES: No. He did not put up no kind of defense at all. He did not call one witness. There was a coach that had wrote a statement out saying that he didn't -- that Mychal wasn't the one was involved in the fight, that didn't hit Barker --

AMY GOODMAN: Justin Barker.

MARCUS JONES: -- so he didn't even subpoena him. Now, remember, in the school system, a teacher or a coach, any administration word or statement is more credible than any student. So he didn't, I mean, didn't even call, I mean, had the coach subpoenaed for to come testify for Mychal. And he was Mychal's key witness.

http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=07/07/10/1413228

[Luke Davis]

The one thing that is clear in these incidents are that there are two systems of justice in Jena.
Contrary to what may be believed by some hanging those nooses right after black students protested by sitting under a "white only tree" is a federal hate crime.

While I believe that the Jena 6 members should have been punished there is no way that I am going to believe they should have been charged with attempted murder and even with the conspiracy charge removed it still can put Bell in jail for 15 years? because he used a "weapon"; his shoes. Justin Barker was not admitted to the hospital and was able to attend a planned event that evening. Students who let their emotions get out of hand are indications of immaturity and certainly Justin did not deserve to get jumped (after he made comments - wasn't done out of the blue) but attempted murder? Please..... as far as the DA goes -- he is elected by the town -- a town that is only 12% black. Don't hold your breath for that to change. It says a whole lot when a principal resigns IMO and quite obvious he was not getting support for punishing the students for hanging those nooses. Justice is supposed to be blind -- but is it "color-blind"? I think not. JMO
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Those who fail to grasp the horror black people experience at the sight of a noose in a tree cannot understand this story and are not qualified to comment on it. Unfortunately, most of the folks in a typical Jena jury pool fit this description.

http://friendsofjustice.wordpress.com/2007/08/06/jena-finally-makes-the-washington-post/

"Advocates for the Jena 6 aren't saying the boys should be let off if they indeed pummeled Justin Barker. Rather, they're saying the charges should match the crime -- and that the juvenile court should handle the teens' cases.

Brown said he will use his radio show as a platform to push for justice until an appellate court throws out Bell's conviction and the remaining Jena 6 see a fair trial.

Brown said of his rationale, "My grandma used to tell me, 'You can't hang a thief for murder,' and that's what they're doing in Jena."

http://edition.cnn.com/2007/US/law/09/04/bell.jena.six/index.html

Photo of Justin's injuries:

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

MARCUS JONES: Well, what I understand that took place is wrongdoing. The judge let the DA just really just choose an all-white jury. There was an all-white jury. Relatives of some of the jurors was some of the witnesses, too. One of the boys that testified for Barker was one of the boys that hung up the nooses at the high school.

AMY GOODMAN: Was that brought out in the trial?

MARCUS JONES: No, no, that wasn’t brought out in the trial. See, we had a complication with my son’s court-appointed lawyer, and come to find out that he was working with the DA for to get my son convicted.

MY GOODMAN: And were you called up to testify?

MARCUS JONES: No, no, no, no.

AMY GOODMAN: So you couldn't speak about the case, and you were kept out of the trial?

MARCUS JONES: Yes, the whole while. We was allowed -- only time we was allowed back in the courtroom, when the verdict came back.

AMY GOODMAN: Did your son's court-appointed attorney call up any witnesses?

MARCUS JONES: No. He did not put up no kind of defense at all. He did not call one witness. There was a coach that had wrote a statement out saying that he didn't -- that Mychal wasn't the one was involved in the fight, that didn't hit Barker --

AMY GOODMAN: Justin Barker.

MARCUS JONES: -- so he didn't even subpoena him. Now, remember, in the school system, a teacher or a coach, any administration word or statement is more credible than any student. So he didn't, I mean, didn't even call, I mean, had the coach subpoenaed for to come testify for Mychal. And he was Mychal's key witness.

http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=07/07/10/1413228

The injury bill is now at about $14,000.

[TrueSeeker]

IIRC two teachers are black.

I checked, you are correct.

[TrueSeeker]

Could it be that someone was afraid for his life and tired of being intimidated chose to make a stand, rightly or wrongly, so that attention could be brought to the situation, regardless if it meant his life or not?

If you are able to run to your truck, are you not able to leave?

I agree that the truth lies somewhere around the two stories. These are just some questions I have when I look for the truth.

I need to make some corrections on my earlier post about the Gotta Go incident. The police report states that Matt Windham, there are two in Jena and I don't know which one is mentioned, pulled up at Gotta Go and three black boys came to his truck and started going through his things, CDs, sunglasses and such, harrassing him. They then grabbed his gun which was in his truck because it was hunting season. He cranked the truck up and peeled out leaving his gun with the three black boys. Take if for what it is worth. :shrug:

[TrueSeeker]

If the account by your relative is true, and black and white students sat under the tree, but some trouble makers were told to stay away, that changes things a bit, IMO.

Were the students who asked "permission" to sit under the tree the trouble makers that were told to stay away? Were they part of the Jena 6?

According to my relative's daughter, yes, it was a few of the Jena Six.

[TrueSeeker]

Athena,

Thanks for the pciture of Barker's injuries. The image of his face sqaures with all the original descriptions - no serious injuries, no broken bones, no stiches - it seems as time goes by this kid might find himslef in an iron lung from the Dec incident. ALL JMHO :rolleyes:

Many teachers and students stated that they thought Barker was dead after the beating. Theo Shaw even tried to get his friends from beating Barker while he was unconscious. Once witness that I talked to said she overheard Theo tell the other boys to stop or they was going to kill Barker. One of the black boys laughed then stood on Barkers head. It came out in court that they were standing on his head after the beating. Luckily, his injuries were not serious. Most students said they thought he was dead because of the amound of blood and the fact that he was not responsive.

[William Anthony]

I need to make some corrections on my earlier post about the Gotta Go incident. The police report states that Matt Windham, there are two in Jena and I don't know which one is mentioned, pulled up at Gotta Go and three black boys came to his truck and started going through his things, CDs, sunglasses and such, harrassing him. They then grabbed his gun which was in his truck because it was hunting season. He cranked the truck up and peeled out leaving his gun with the three black boys. Take if for what it is worth. :shrug:

I do believe that police reports are inadmissible as hearsay unless the officer was there to see the incident. I also find it incredible that Windham would be charged with assault, if the police report was accurate.

[William Anthony]

According to my relative's daughter, yes, it was a few of the Jena Six.

"Quote:
Originally Posted by accordn2me
If the account by your relative is true, and black and white students sat under the tree, but some trouble makers were told to stay away, that changes things a bit, IMO.

Were the students who asked "permission" to sit under the tree the trouble makers that were told to stay away? Were they part of the Jena 6? "

Trouble makers asked permission? What do we call the individual(s) who placed the nooses in the tree?

[TrueSeeker]

"Quote:
Originally Posted by accordn2me
If the account by your relative is true, and black and white students sat under the tree, but some trouble makers were told to stay away, that changes things a bit, IMO.

Were the students who asked "permission" to sit under the tree the trouble makers that were told to stay away? Were they part of the Jena 6? "

Trouble makers asked permission? What do we call the individual(s) who placed the nooses in the tree?

Finally an easy question. They are also "troublmakers."

[TrueSeeker]

I do believe that police reports are inadmissible as hearsay unless the officer was there to see the incident. I also find it incredible that Windham would be charged with assault, if the police report was accurate.

The authorities must go by the police reports. The blacks didn't report the incidence, so all they had to go on was the report that Windham had filed. They couldn't charge Windham with a crime. I will see if I can find some witnesses to the incidence to get a little more insight. For some reason many don't want to talk about that incidence, whites or blacks. :shrug:

[Athena]

According to my relative's daughter, yes, it was a few of the Jena Six.

According to everything I've read and seen in news coverage, it was only 1 or 2 students who asked permission to sit under this tree and were told they could sit wherever they wanted to. Just the fact that they had to ask permission says alot.

I've never read that any of these students were part of the Jena 6.

Your relative's daughter could be mistaken as well.

It's on Geraldo right now. White residents are seen with t-shirts saying "Free Jena 6" as well.

Jeanine Piroo is saying this DA was out of control. Ryan Smith confirmed DA said "I can take you out with the stroke of a pen" to black students protesting the "white tree".

[accordn2me]

Actually, I want to weigh in on this subject. Brandishing a firearm, even as a threat, has led to deadly consquences. I think it should be firmly and solidly punished to the furthest extent of the law.Beatings have led to deadly consequences, as well, even when death was unintentional. Some people can just as easily kill with their bare hands as with a firearm. If a firearm is brandished without good cause that could result in criminal charges. If a firearm is brandished with good cause no criminal charges should be filed, IMO.

[accordn2me]

<snipped>I do not think that you would even argue that pulling a gun on someone is not an assaault. Of course it would depend on the circumstances under which the gun was pulled. There are circumstances where I could clearly argue that pulling a gun is not an assault. :read:

You seem to focus more on the circumstances of the assault rather than the elements of an assault charge. You fault the Louisiana Constitution but admit that it is the law. The law is what it is. <snipped>

The racial issues will expose the problem and hopefully help to resolve the issue of the apparent racial inequality occuring in the judicial system in Jena and elsewhere, imho.I'm not focused on the assault at all. IMO, that's not the problem. The problem, IMO, is the power afforded district attorneys by our state constitution. You are right. The law is what it is. Reed Walters is following it. I'm not complaining about that.

[accordn2me]

According to everything I've read and seen in news coverage, it was only 1 or 2 students who asked permission to sit under this tree and were told they could sit wherever they wanted to. Just the fact that they had to ask permission says alot.

I've never read that any of these students were part of the Jena 6.

Your relative's daughter could be mistaken as well.

It's on Geraldo right now. White residents are seen with t-shirts saying "Free Jena 6" as well.

Jeanine Piroo is saying this DA was out of control. Ryan Smith confirmed DA said "I can take you out with the stroke of a pen" to black students protesting the "white tree".

Why did these particular students have to ask permission and other students (black and white) felt they did not, and didn't? They just sat where they wanted in the first place.

[TrueSeeker]

As of now there is a lack of clarity on this issue. Public reports on the incident claim that it was an unspoken rule that the tree was reserved for white students. It is claimed by a local with a relative in town that that is in fact not the case. Before we move forward let's see if we can get this clear.

If you have any suggestions on what I could do to clear up this matter, then let me know. I will gladly check it out for you. You are right, this matter needs to be clarified.

[Athena]

As of now there is a lack of clarity on this issue. Public reports on the incident claim that it was an unspoken rule that the tree was reserved for white students. It is claimed by a local with a relative in town that that is in fact not the case. Before we move forward let's see if we can get this clear.

Doing a search every single article I have read depicts this tree as "reserved" for white students and the following day the nooses were hung. Why would Kenneth Purvis have to ask permission of the principal to sit there? It also appears IMO that the white residents that have been interviewed have said there is no racism in Jena. BBC did a documentary on this case but I have been unable to find a transcript of it.

Tom Mangold reports 'Race Hate In Louisiana' for 'This World', BBC2, Thursday, 7pm.

"It all began at Jena High School last summer when a black student, Kenneth Purvis, asked the school's principal whether he was permitted to sit under the shade of the school courtyard tree, a place traditionally reserved for white students only. He was told he could sit where he liked.

Caseptla Bailey who is 56 and a former Air Force officer, has a degree in business management, but she cannot get a job as a bank teller. She lives in an area called Ward 10, which is where the majority of blacks live in trailers or wooden shacks. She says no whites live there at all.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/this_world/6685441.stm

It began in Jena's high school last August when Kenneth Purvis asked the headteacher if black students could break with a long-held tradition and join the whites who sit under the tree in the school courtyard during breaks. The boy was told that he and his friends could sit where they liked.

The following morning white students had hung three nooses there. 'Bad taste, silly, but just a prank,' was the response of most of Jena's whites.

The majority of blacks live in an area known as Ward 10. Many homes are trailers, or wooden shacks. Rubbish lies in the streets. On 'Snob Hill', where the whites live, the spacious gardens and lawns are trimmed, the gravelled drives boast SUVs and nice new saloons. Only two black families live there. A teacher from Jena High had enough money to buy his way in. But when he arrived local estate agents refused to show him a 'white' property even though several were advertised in the local paper ('they're all under contract,' the agents lied). The teacher eventually went to see one white owner and offered him cash. 'The guy preferred green [dollars] to black, so I got the property,' laughed the teacher, 'but since we moved in three years ago we haven't been invited by a single neighbour.'

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/world/story/0,,2083762,00.html

Local activists say that this wave of problems started last September when Black high school students asked for permission to sit under a tree at an area of the high school that had, traditionally, been used only by white students. The next day, three nooses were hanging from the tree.

The following week, Black students staged a protest under the tree. At a school assembly soon after, Jena district attorney Reed Walters, appearing with local police officers, warned Black students against further unrest. "I can make your lives disappear with a stroke of my pen," he threatened.

http://www.counterpunch.org/flaherty05092007.html

In September 2006, as the school year kicked off, a black Jena High School student asked the vice principal if he and some friends could sit under an oak tree where the white students typically congregated.

Told by the vice principal they could sit wherever they pleased, the student and his pals plopped down under the sprawling branches of a shade tree in the campus courtyard.

The next day, students arrived at school to find three nooses hanging from those branches.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/anastasia-goodstein/preventing-the-next-jena_b_63048.html


Injustice in Jena as Nooses Hang From the "White Tree"
By Bill Quigley

The trouble started under "the white tree" in front of Jena High School. The "white tree" is where the white students, 80 percent of the student body, would always sit during school breaks.

In September 2006, a black student at Jena high school asked permission from school administrators to sit under the "white tree." School officials advised them to sit wherever they wanted. They did. The next day, three nooses, in the school colors, were hanging from the "white tree." The message was clear. "Those nooses meant the KKK, they meant '******s, we're going to kill you, we're going to hang you till you die,'" Casteptla Bailey, a mother of one of the students, told the London Observer.

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/070307B.shtml

he origins of the story can be traced back to early September when a black high school student requested permission to sit under a tree in the schoolyard where usually only white students sat. The next day three nooses were found hanging from the tree.

http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=07/07/10/1413220&mode=thread&tid=25

[Athena]

Snoop, you asked me to take another look at this. So, I'm doing that. Can I give you some homework?

First assignment:
Find me the law that says it's a crime to hang nooses from a tree. :read:

Existing federal law protects people like Denise McCollum from workplace harassment and violent acts based on race, color, national origin or religion. Federal Civil Rights statute 18 U.S.C.A. section 245 has been instituted in the United States Congress to safeguard people like McCollum from vicious attacks by inconsiderate persons. The Department of Justice considers noose incidents to be federal crimes of intimidation, punishable by up to 10 years in prison.

http://www.poormagazine.com/index.cfm?L1=news&story=308

A man accused of leaving a clothesline formed into a hangman's noose on a black co-worker's car has been charged with a hate crime. On Tuesday, the man, Timothy W. McDonald, 26, of Granby, turned himself in to the police and was charged with intimidation by bias or bigotry, and threatening. Melvin Johnson, who is black, found the noose on the door handle of his car on July 2 while working on a house.

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=990ce3d81038f936a15754c0a9649c8b 63

For Burns, a six-year Winroc employee, the noose incident reflects the kind of racially charged atmosphere he says he endures day in and day out. He and a fellow employee of four years, Marvin Dortsch, 32, who is also Black, filed a joint federal lawsuit against the company on October 31, 2006.

Their 12-page complaint charges racial discrimination and retaliation. Earlier findings of an investigation conducted by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunities Commission (EEOC) add credibility to their claims; the EEOC sent them a Notice of a Right to Sue on August 31 of last year.

http://www.tcdailyplanet.net/node/4874

[Athena]

Traditional hate crime legislation protects persons because of "his race, color, religion or national origin," as in the case of the 1969 federal hate crimes law. (18 U.S.C. Section 245). Most state laws now include additional protected groups. Some laws are restrictive and only protect a member of a group if she/he is involved in specific activities. For example, the current (1969) federal law only applies if the crime happens when a person is attending a public school or is at work or participating in one of four other "federally protected activities."

Official definitions of hate crimes:

Typical hate crime laws criminalize the use of force, or the threat of force, against a person because they are a member of a specific, protected group. 4 Four definitions of the term "hate crime" are:
bullet Hate Crimes Statistics Act (1990): "crimes that manifest evidence of prejudice based on race, religion, sexual orientation, or ethnicity, including where appropriate the crimes of murder, non-negligent manslaughter, forcible rape, aggravated assault, simple assault, intimidation, arson, and destruction, damage or vandalism of property." ( Public Law 101-275)
bullet Bureau of Justice Administration (BJA; 1997): "hate crimes--or bias-motivated crimes--are defined as offenses motivated by hatred against a victim based on his or her race, religion, sexual orientation, ethnicity, or national origin."
bullet Anti-Defamation League (ADL): A hate crime is "any crime committed because of the victim’s actual or perceived race, color, religion, ancestry, national origin, disability, gender [male or female] or sexual orientation." 5
bullet National Education Association (NEA): "Hate crimes and violent acts are defined as offenses motivated by hatred against a victim based on his or her beliefs or mental or physical characteristics, including race, ethnicity, and sexual orientation."

http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_hat3.htm#of

[TrueSeeker]

Doing a search every single article I have read depicts this tree as "reserved" for white students and the following day the nooses were hung. Why would Kenneth Purvis have to ask permission of the principal to sit there? It also appears IMO that the white residents that have been interviewed have said there is no racism in Jena.(snipped)

There is racism in Jena, that can not be denied. If you look for it, you will find it. From talking to people there it is mainly the older crowd that does this, the 70 and older crowd. How does the fact that the Doughty man doesn't cut black people's hair have anything to do with this criminal case? Would people want to free the Jena Six because one old man in town doesn't cut black people's hair? If that is the case, then the prisons would be empty. Every place on earth has racism, but that does not give someone a get out of jail card. Now, if you can prove the DA is racist then you would have something.

[Athena]

There is racism in Jena, that can not be denied. If you look for it, you will find it. From talking to people there it is mainly the older crowd that does this, the 70 and older crowd. How does the fact that the Doughty man doesn't cut black people's hair have anything to do with this criminal case? Would people want to free the Jena Six because one old man in town doesn't cut black people's hair? If that is the case, then the prisons would be empty. Every place on earth has racism, but that does not give someone a get out of jail card. Now, if you can prove the DA is racist then you would have something.

I actually laughed when I read that. I don't know any black guys who would get their hair cut by a white barber. I have seen black and white women get their hair cut by both.

This morning I was actually listening to a talk show and Al Sharpton did say that there was white support in Jena for the Jena 6 due to the severity of the punishment.

Don't know if anyone saw Geraldo last night but they depicted a group of people in Jena, both white and black that were wearing the "Free Jena 6" t-shirts.

I believe that at the heart of this matter is the punishment does not fit the crime. I also don't believe people who are supporting the Jena 6 don't think they shouldn't be punished (me included). The problem is there are two justice systems at work here...... and the disciplinary action taken against these black students went way too far! JMO

I also have a question for you?

I saw one of your posts (sorry I don't remember the thread off-hand) where you said the DA had already been investigated by the Justice Dept and cleared. This is not what I am hearing. Even on Geraldo last night it was said he needs to be looked at; that he was out of control and that letters were being sent to the Justice Dept and to the Governor demanding action.

[adnoid]

Actually, I want to weigh in on this subject. Brandishing a firearm, even as a threat, has led to deadly consquences. I think it should be firmly and solidly punished to the furthest extent of the law.

As a long time gun owner I cannot agree with you more.

[TuscanDreams]

Beatings have led to deadly consequences, as well, even when death was unintentional. Some people can just as easily kill with their bare hands as with a firearm. If a firearm is brandished without good cause that could result in criminal charges. If a firearm is brandished with good cause no criminal charges should be filed, IMO.

We will just have to disagree with this. Brandishing a firearm is a Class B Felony- unlawful use of a weapon, in most states. Assault is normally a misdemeanor.

Self defense isn't even a question in this matter with the Jena Six.

[William Anthony]

Of course it would depend on the circumstances under which the gun was pulled. There are circumstances where I could clearly argue that pulling a gun is not an assault. :read:

I'm not focused on the assault at all. IMO, that's not the problem. The problem, IMO, is the power afforded district attorneys by our state constitution. You are right. The law is what it is. Reed Walters is following it. I'm not complaining about that.

If the White person pulled a gun and threatened someone, he committed an aggravated assualt or at least an aggravated battery, to which he was not charged, and Walters did not follow the law.

I know that you are not complaining about Walters following the law, but :read: The fact that the White was charged with simple assault tells us there was an assault. There is not denying that a gun is a dangerous weapon. Hence, the law was not followed.

[William Anthony]

There is racism in Jena, that can not be denied. If you look for it, you will find it. From talking to people there it is mainly the older crowd that does this, the 70 and older crowd. How does the fact that the Doughty man doesn't cut black people's hair have anything to do with this criminal case? Would people want to free the Jena Six because one old man in town doesn't cut black people's hair? If that is the case, then the prisons would be empty. Every place on earth has racism, but that does not give someone a get out of jail card. Now, if you can prove the DA is racist then you would have something.

Are you saying that mainly someone 70 and older hung the nooses in the tree? Racism is not an innate quality, imho. Watch the children! The problem is that it is like wild fire, imho. The fact that you believe every place on the earth had racism shows the urgency with which this problem should be addressed, imho, as opposed to displaying a complacent attitude with its existence.

[sharlock]

Are you saying that mainly someone 70 and older hung the nooses in the tree? Racism is not an innate quality, imho. Watch the children! The problem is that it is like wild fire, imho. The fact that you believe every place on the earth had racism shows the urgency with which this problem should be addressed, imho, as opposed to displaying a complacent attitude with its existence.
No the problem in my opinion is that a school yard fight has been blown way out of proportion!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Sure the cause of the fight was instigated by horribly backwards racist actions including hanging nooses from a tree to warn the black kids not to sit there but then som black kids went and hit a white kid which they shouldn't have. Still that is it. How in the world did this turn into a case of aggravated battery and conspiracy which threatens to send these children to jail for more up to 22yrs? When my neice was punched at school we couldn't get the school to do more about it then suspend the other students. I would have preferred expulsion but no where in my wildest dreams would I have wanted those kids to have been locked up for it. The reason that it has come to such serious charges is that some American towns are allowing double standards and ignoring this throwback to mississipi burning without even blinking. If it was your child who had done this would you be okay with the charges now levelled at the Jena 6? They were stupid reckless and violent they should be punished but as students not as criminals! Expulsion and serious censure(community service) not jail! This is unbeleivable and