Jena 6 Update:
National Spotlight Causes DA Strategy Change
The Shreveport Times said last week that a lack of political leadership at the local and state level had created a vacuum for "Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson and the BBC" to fill. That (inter)national spotlight has kick-started Governor Kathleen Blanco (D) into action.
Blanco has persuaded LaSalle Parish District Attorney Reed Walters to re-try Mychal Bell as a juvenile, in conformance with two court rulings. Walters was on record saying he planned to appeal the Louisiana Supreme Court ruling that Bell was improperly tried as an adult.
Bell is the first Jena High School student to be tried after a December 2006 schoolyard fight with fellow student Justin Barker. Six students were eventually arrested and charged with second-degree attempted murder and conspiracy to commit murder. Four of the six were 17; Bell was 16; another student was 14.
Under Louisiana law, anyone who is 15 must be tried as an adult if the charge is attempted murder. However, the charge of battery -- the charge for which Bell stood trial -- is not on the "adult charge" list.
The DA called the attack on Barker pre-meditated. However, others assert that the attack was instigated because Barker was taunting Bailey about being beat up at a party a few nights earlier. Bailey was hit, by a white student, with beer bottles; that student was charged with simple battery and given probation.
See my Jena 6 Timeline and a Jena 6 Overview from Civil Liberties Guide Tom Head.
Comments
There is something unseemly and dishonest about how this is being reported.
Bell is the first Jena High School student to be tried after a December 2006 schoolyard fight with fellow student Justin Barker.
* This was not a “schoolyard fight.” A mob of kids beat another kid and stomped his face. There is a distinct difference, and it is very important to understanding this incident.
* The timeline says Bailey was hit with a bottle when he “and some friends try to attend a private party.” ‘Trying to attend’ a private party to which you weren’t invited is called “crashing the party.” Again, this distinction speaks to motive and is important to understanding the case.
* CNN.com reported it was routine for the superintendent to reduce punishment from expulsion to suspension in discipline cases.
* The DA’s remark “With a stroke of my pen, I can make your lives disappear” was made to a group of white and black students, but the impression given is that white students were not present.
* Now, a sitting governor has injected herself into an ongoing criminal case, in a move that reeks of mob justice.
The worse part of the Duke University rape debacle was that, once the “rogue DA” was removed, his enablers on the left and in the media industry never stopped for a moment’s reflection. It was only a matter of time when they’d make the same mistake again, and it looks like they have.
Hi, CJ:
First, the student’s injuries — a black eye and a cut lip — do not jibe with your assertion that “a mob of kids beat another kid and stomped his face.”
Second, another report says Bailey was invited to the party — that he wasn’t crashing the party, as you infer and imply.
Third, the DA’s remark was made to a general assembly of students. The white kids sit on one side of the gym and the black kids on the other, according to some reports. Reports also say that the DA was looking at the side of the gym holding the black kids when he delivered these remarks.
Finally - a sitting governor has probably reminded a rogue DA that some appeals are doomed from the start. The law seems pretty clear that Bell should not have been tried as an adult because a) he was 16 and b) he was being tried for a crime where 16 does not “equal” being an adult. Two courts had already ruled this.
The only relationship this case has with the Duke case is that in both instances a white DA overstepped his mandate — legal, moral, ethical.
the judge in the jena 6 case should be kicked off of the bench those were kids & not adults they should be fairly as kids who did wrong and not adults! he showed that he was a racist & the president should remove him!
The first two comments are dishonest.
The third makes a good point. We should not tolerate injustice.
Six against one is not a fair fight but it doesn’t equal a “mob”. Although, a school yard fight is usually one on one, not six against one.
Second, Ms Gill is not a medical expert and doesn’t bother to back up her diagnosis of a cut lip and bruises. It appears everyone is going overboard to prove a point. I suppose it is okay for six kids to jump another kid if the end result is just a two hour visit to the emergency room?
What do the court documents say about Barker’s medical expenses and injuries? Did he lose consciousness during the attack? What was the cost for the trip to the emergency room? Medical expenses?
While I agree the charges against the Jena 6 outrageous, the excuses made by some people are equally outrageous. No excuse exits for what happened. Severe punishment for some students and not for others? That is racism.
The only way to heal racial tension is to admit the truth. The attack and beating was wrong. The ridiculous charges do not make the Jena 6 innocent. The lack of action by adults during the escalation of racial tension where white students were not charged with anything for their crimes does not excuse violence.
If we continue facing our problems in this manner, the cycle of violence will continue.
Where are the clear heads at this time?
This is an opportunity to examine our justice system and clean it up. Why is the punishment severe for some students and not for others?
It is also an opportunity for us to examine our role as parents. Why so much rage and hate? Our children are a reflection of us. This should be a time to look inward and heal.
A time to heal and reflect on setting goals not making excuses for a situation that was wrong all the way around.
Kathy,
**First, the student’s injuries — a black eye and a cut lip — do not jibe with your assertion that “a mob of kids beat another kid and stomped his face.”
Except that is actually what happened. I think “six” can be fairly described as a mob. Or is 10 the minimum? (Really, I don’t know.) I guess you can replace “stomp” with “kick,” but when you’ve found yourself picking at such details, you kind of prove my point. It cost $14,000 to fix the kid up.
**Second, another report says Bailey was invited to the party — that he wasn’t crashing the party, as you infer and imply.
I was using your own description, and that of the newspaper you linked to. He and his black friends “tried to enter a party.” It’s common on college campuses to provoke a rival group by crashing their party. In a story filled with provocations, it is completely logical that this could be the case here. The paper’s wording seems oddly, deliberately vague. Now you say you saw another “report.” I hope we get more information. (BTW, has any white student or parent spoken publicly?)
**Third, the DA’s remark was made to a general assembly of students. The white kids sit on one side of the gym and the black kids on the other, according to some reports. Reports also say that the DA was looking at the side of the gym holding the black kids when he delivered these remarks.
First, you link to a story that said “many black students” made the claim. There are no “reports.” Second, I’d be surprised if students are really allowed to self-segregate in a school assembly. It could be, but boy…
**The only relationship this case has with the Duke case is that in both instances a white DA overstepped his mandate — legal, moral, ethical.
Except the “white DA” in the Duke case was appealing to the *exact same* mentality driving the Jena coverage – and won re-election. He was counting on “civil rights activists” and the media to embrace the provocative storyline of white racism, and to gloss over inconvenient facts that get in the way. That is happening again. The narrow legal question of “juvenile” or “adult” is a valid legal question, one that courts struggle with every day across the country.
The DA explained: “Mr. Bell’s conviction on that charge as an adult has been overturned, but I considered adult status appropriate because of his role as the instigator of the attack, the seriousness of the charge and his prior criminal record.” That is not even close to a DA overstepping his “moral” mandate.
The Civil Liberties link you provide is breathtaking in its distortion: “LaSalle County’s white district attorney stormed the campus with armed police and gave an impromptu lecture to the black students who had gathered under the tree.”
This is dreadful. This is not the way to discuss race relations in 2007.
To “unknown”
First, there are links in my timeline, I believe, that back up anything I said in comment #2.
No, I’m not a doctor. No, I didn’t examine Barker’s injuries. What I did was examine, in detail, probably a hundred “news” accounts of this case. Barker is described as having a black eye and a cut lip. No where have I read that he even needed stitches. He attended a social event that evening — suggesting his injuries were pretty minor.
Second, I am tired of a justice system that is not just.
Finally, I am QUITE tired of being accused of saying that I’m advocating no punishment — whether it’s for Bell or Genarlow Wilson. No Where … NO WHERE … have I made such a suggestion.
The punishment should fit the crime — and it doesn’t in either Bell or Wilson’s case. And I firmly believe that neither young man would be in the position they are in re the judicial system if they had been white. Both were A students; both were student athletes.
Kathy
hi, Mari:
i don’t know what power the judge had in this case. however, the DA should not have attempted to try this young man as an adult accused of murder …. and his public defender should have prepared a case.
At least you admit relying on “newspapers” when offering your medical opinion. What do court/medical records indicate?
Yes, Bell was a good student and athlete who was supported by the town. It is rarely mentioned he was already on probation for assault.
I agree with your comment about our justice system. However, relying on media hype distracts from the fact there are racial and economic injustices in our criminal justice system. That is unfortunate.
To Unknown:
I have not offered a medical opinion.
To hold you to your own standard, you should be saying “allegedly he was on probation for assault.” I have seen no public statement of Bell’s juvey record.
Moreover, if Bell has a juvey record — it should still be sealed. Juvey records are private.
Finally, I fail to see where I have relied on “media hype” — whatever it is you mean by that phrase.
Since you set the tone on this blog and haven’t bothered to use allegedly I don’t see the need for me to use allegedly.
You stated on this blog–
First, the student’s injuries — a black eye and a cut lip — do not jibe with your assertion that “a mob of kids beat another kid and stomped his face.”
I take it you can’t provide that medical report…
It was reported that Bell was on probation. The judge refused to lower bail citing Bell’s criminal record which include four juvenile offenses–
http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/law/09/19/jena.six/
You will also note snopes reports the white student was hit from behind, knocked out and set upon by students who kicked and stomped him as he lay unconscious on the floor.
They also report the 4 prior juvey convictions where Bell was convicted for attacking someone prior to the attack on Barker and then committed 3 more crimes while on probation…making the Jena 6 crime the 5th conviction for violent crimes –
http://www.snopes.com/politics/crime/jena6.asp
At least you admit most of this discussion is allegation relying on the media. No records have been provided medical or juvey.
“To hold you to your own standard, you should be saying “allegedly he was on probation for assault.” I have seen no public statement of Bell’s juvey record.”
For goodness sakes, Ms. Gill, you haven’t even read the DA’s public plea for reason in this case? It was in the NY Times and linked in these forums:
“Mr. Bell’s conviction on that charge as an adult has been overturned, but I considered adult status appropriate because of his role as the instigator of the attack, the seriousness of the charge and **his prior criminal record**.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/26/opinion/26walters.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
OR THIS?
“In addition to the beating, in which the white youth, Justin Barker, was knocked unconscious and kicked, Mr. Bell has a criminal record that includes **arrests for battery** and property damage.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/22/us/22jena.html?_r=1&ref=us&oref=slogin
OR THIS?
“Bell’s case was particularly thorny because **the teen possessed a criminal record** and prosecutors believe he instigated the attack on a white youth.”
http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/opinion/sfl-editafjena6nboct01,0,1368552.story
I realize you’re not a journalist, but this kind of willful ignorance and outright distortion (“schoolyard fight”) is a perfect illustration of the deplorable, racially divisive coverage this incident has received.
CJ - yes, I read the DA’s NYT column where there are lot of assertions presented as “facts” … the prosecutor arguing his case knowing that there was no one presenting a rebuttal.
Have you seen this from the president of the southern poverty law center?
Kathy,
I cited sources beyond Walters that bell had a criminal (violent) record. You are wrong to portray that as an “assertion.” It matters and you should have known the facts before presenting this case in such a divisive manner.
It is part of the reason the DA sought to try Bell as an adult, a fact that SPLC also avoids mentioning.
The SPLC is also less than forthright about the federal hate crime investigation (another reason they decided not to pursue was because they could find no connection to a hate group or previous, similar acts by the students who hung the nooses.)
This is the first time I’ve seen a reference to a La. law that could have been charge in that incident. If that is true, they should have been charged. But I’d need to see it from a more reliable source than the SPLC.
The SPLC should be just as trustworthy as the DA — or else neither should be. They both have a point of view, both are either lawyers or staffed by lawyers.
We don’t really know why the USA office did not pursue the noose act — I have found three different reasons given by the USA in press reports. Which one is “the” reason? It’s anyone’s guess.
The DA had No Choice but to try Bell as an adult after he hung the murder charge on him — because LA law *required* it. It is my contention that he picked the murder charge _so_ he could be tried as an adult. But that’s simply an opinion, based upon his actions and his words as reported in the press.
I put him in the same category as the DA in the Genarlow Wilson case. Neither used any sort of common sense OR judicial discretion … and you and I both know that the DA would not have treated a white teen the same way. On that, we have the DA’s record.
Kathy
STOP STICKING UP FOR CRIMINALS, PEOPLE! if a group of white kids beat up a black kid because he killed their families, THEY WOULD ROT IN JAIL. and eveyone knows it and people need to stop being ignorant that white people are getting the short end of the JUSTICE stick! NOT BLACKS!
We both know the storyline you and others are pushing goes way beyond a dispute over ‘common sense and judicial discretion.’
And if you can support the following, rather incendiary allegation, please do it. Because you haven’t yet:
“… the DA would not have treated a white teen the same way. On that, we have the DA’s record.”
Hi, CJ — yes, there is evidence for my claim: the prosecutor chose not to throw the book at three white boys who beat up a black boy and instead charged one white boy with simple assault for hitting said black boy in the head with a beer bottle.
Why is it when a Black student is beaten it is a HATE CRIME, and when a white student is beaten he “asked for it?”.
Why is it OK for the Black students in the High School where I teach( Virginia) , OK to make a place where they alone sit, but if a white group does it they are raciest?
Why is it our black “Leaders” can condemn White students at Duke and not be help accountable for what they say, But a White radio D-J gets fired for what he said?
Why is it the JENA 6 ‘s prior records is not being discussed? Should you not be telling others that they have beaten other students before? Why so quiet?
My students would like you to answer this for them; they do not see color in my classroom only intelligence, something that is lacking with those who promote HATE.
Would it matter if I were White?
Thank you
Hello, David — if you were truly a high school teacher, you would know that a minor’s record is NOT a public record.
Yes the records are viewable to the courts (you should know that) The public has not the ability to view them. With that in mind should we pretned the “children” had NO record at all??
Who are you trying to fool?
David,
**es the records are viewable to the courts (you should know that) The public has not the ability to view them. With that in mind should we pretned the “children” had NO record at all?? Who are you trying to fool?**
I share your frustration. This story has been reported in a way that race relations are generally depicted: with a shocking lack of honesty.