Posts Tagged ‘court of law’

I wanna know what happen to Freddie Gray

May 23, 2015

Who was Freddie anyway?

 

Now I don’t know but I been told

that we Americans got a right that we hold:

from unreasonable searches and seizures we are free,

’cause the 4th Amendment say that the way it should be.

 

Now we don’t know what happen to Freddie Gray

but we know he didn’t survive that day

when three cops from Baltimore PD

hauled him in on some charge that no one did see.

 

They said he had a switchblade that’s illegal,

but State’s attorney said he had a pocket knife, legal.

Without probable cause those cops hauled Freddie in,

but he didn’t survive it; it seems like a sin.

 

Now I know its wrong that a riot later ensued

but that don’t change the fact that Freddie was abused.

So I think it appropriate that somehow, some way:

the people of America need to know what happen to Freddie that day.

 

It was a medical examiner, you see,

who examined Freddie’s fatal injury,

and called it not self-inflicted, but homicide.

So in a court of Law, the cops should be tried.

 

We need to know–it needs to be tried–

if Freddy’s death was justified.

We need to know what happen to Freddie that day;

this can’t be like Mike Brown’s case where they never would say.

 

Glass half-Full

This just doesn’t add up

December 6, 2014

Yeah, sure, Michael Brown broke a law.

Yeah, sure, he was resisting arrest;

yeah, sure, the officer of the law was doing his duty.

But in the end, a young man, unarmed, is dead

because he stole a pack of cigarillos and then walked impudently down the middle of the street.

 

Yeah, sure, Eric Garner broke a law.

Yeah, sure, he was resisting arrest;

yeah, sure, the officer of the law was doing his duty.

But in the end, a young man, unarmed, is dead

because he was selling cigarettes.

 

This just doesn’t add up.

There is something wrong here.

And it appears to be, as we say in newspeak, systemic.

 

That is to say, there is something wrong with the system.

 

Yeah, sure, the Missouri grand jury that did not indict the officer

was a legally appointed body the purpose of which was to decide

whether there was a possibility that the arresting officer had violated the law

while attempting to protect himself and the public.

 

Yeah, sure, the New York grand jury that did not indict the officer

was a legally appointed body the purpose of which was to decide

whether there was a possibility that the arresting officer had violated the law

while attempting to protect himself and the public.

 

But we have two dead bodies because of damned minuscule cigarette violations. The deathful end doesn’t justify the means. There’s something wrong with this picture, and the public can smell it.

 

Why is the deadly outcome of these two cases so much bigger, and final, than the sum of their legal parts?

A young man commits a misdemeanor or two; then he’s walking along and suddenly there’s a cop in his face. That’s to be expected; illegal actions have legal consequences. So the cop is doing his job. But hey, a few minutes later the petty criminal is dead.

 

Who issued the guilty verdict and death sentence? A court of law? A trial by jury? No. It doesn’t add up.

There is something going on here, something being exposed, that needs to be dealt with.

Is it racism? True dat. Like sin, it is always there in us, sometimes under the surface, sometimes in full-blown atrocity. Wherever men go upon the earth, there is, was, will be tribe-against-tribe racism.

But racism is only part of this picture; the other part is a justice system with its priorities out of whack. That’s what we the people are feeling now.

Why are so many people–black and white, conservative and liberal–disturbed about the fatal outcome of these incidents?

We have a serious disconnect between the street-imposed sentence (death) and the seriousness of the crime.

That “it doesn’t add up” disconnect is wired into our media-driven minds.  Although we do not know nearly as much as we think we do about news events, neither does a grand jury operating without cross-examination of witnesses.

In this fortnight’s perceived events, it’s almost as if the vast public outcry, as jerky and fickle and circumstantial as it is, produces a more appropriate assessment of the outcome than the traditional, evidence-based system for passing judgement.

 

Oh surely we do not know the facts of the case as well as the grand jury. But we do know this: two young, unarmed men who had not been sentenced to death  are now dead. That’s the bottom line.

It doesn’t add up. The system, with or without grand jury, needs somehow to be fixed, so that the punitive sentence accurately reflects the seriousness of crime.

As if that could happen.

I don’t know though. . . maybe it’s always been this way. Maybe there is, in truth, no justice in this world.

And so folks yearn for something better. . . the Last Judgement of a Righteous God?

I’m not excusing injustice.

Just sayin’. That Last Judgement may be the only justice some of us will ever see.

 

Glass half-Full

Opportunity Lost in Ferguson

November 25, 2014

Officer Wilson will have no opportunity to be publicly exonerated.

I have been thinking about him, and the man he shot. Like many Americans, I have been wondering what exactly did happen on that fateful August night when Officer Wilson, in the line of dangerous duty, killed Mike Brown with a gun.

Based on media-driven hearsay, it sounds to me like the young policeman would have had a pretty solid defense of his actions while attempting to enforce the law. I think, as most other white folk probably do, he would have been found not guilty in a court of law.

But who am I to say? Nobody. I’m a thousand miles away, a merely curious news-seeker with no access to the facts.

Since there will be no trial, and hence no public discovery of what actually happened between Officer Wilson and Mike Brown, we will never know.

Now this tragic death becomes an open wound in our national conscience; it will not heal.

There will be no sworn testimony from Officer Wilson, nor from any witness, no questioning from a defense attorney, no cross-examination from a prosecutor.

As citizens in a nation of laws, we will never know what evidence and testimony might have been called forth in our Officer’s defense in a court of law.

But we need to know. As a nation at black and white crossroads, we do need to know what happened.

As a result of our failure to follow through with due process, the severe wound that has been opened up on our national corpus will not heal; it will fester until it boils up with infections of chronic misinformation, severe political manipulation,  unresolved grief and destructive rage.

We have lost an opportunity. The United States of America will have no close-up examination of what routinely happens between a black shoplifter and a white cop on a dark night in a city that keeps no secrets.

The sad consequence of no indictment in Missouri is that police work in our cities will become more difficult, more dangerous, not less.

And Officer Wilson will have no opportunity for public exoneration from his hastily fatal decision on that dark Missouri night.

Show me some due process, and this could turn out differently for our people.

Smoke