The Jena 6

Parent Cafe
101

<p>“The black kids were all sitting on one side of the auditorium, as is the custom at Jena High. The DA made the remarks while facing them, according to many witnesses. And if you look at the full quote, he said that if the students continued to make a fuss over “an innocent prank” (the nooses) he would be their worst enemy and end their lives with the stroke of a pen. Who was making a fuss? Not the white kids.”</p>

<p>He said on TV that he was sorry that he made that statement. But anyhow, words do not justify this violence, and several posters are saying that the violence was not justified, it is what Bell is charged with that is unfair. I personally think that the Sharptons and Jacksons would be doing the young people a better service by preaching nonviolence. </p>

<p>Quote: "What happened to Justin was horrible of course. But that brings up the next point. Some of you seem to have convicted each and every one of the Jena 6 of beating, stomping and kicking Justin, all without hearing any testimony. How likely is it that an unconscious person, unable to protect himself in any way, could be kicked and stomped by 6 people, yet not have any injuries anywhere other than one side of his face?</p>

<p>Justin was obviously beaten, stomped and kicked, but I doubt it was by 6 people. I think that’s why the DA is pressing conspiracy charges for an incident that obviously wasn’t pre-arranged: he’s hoping that a judge and jury will be willing to send one or two young men who didn’t do anything to Justin to jail for decades simply for the crime of being black and in the vicinity of the attack."</p>

<p>I think that you are overreaching here. All that is being maintained is for fair and equal charges and then they will get their day in court. We do not have the full medical report, or eyewitnesses reports, at least I don’t. Could you provide a link to them? I would not minimze what it takes to cause a concussion and knock someone unconscious. Several people could have taken a kick, do we know?</p>

102

<p>The DA may be sorry, but his words and his attitude played an unfortunate and powerful role in the deterioration of civility between blacks and whites in Jena. Maybe he will think before he speaks next time; but this time…it is too late. The damage is done.</p>

103

<p>Justin testified in court as to the extent of his injuries.</p>

<p>If you think Justin had other injuries that he didn’t testify to, you link them.</p>

<p>“He said on TV that he was sorry that he made that statement.”</p>

<p>And maybe he is. But it doesn’t change the fact that he directed it to the black students, not the white and black students as some are claiming. It also doesn’t change the fact that by doing so, he left the black students only two choices. To endure any taunts, threats, or racial slurs directed at them without complaint, or to take matters into their own hands.</p>

104

<p>Quote: “And maybe he is. But it doesn’t change the fact that he directed it to the black students, not the white and black students as some are claiming. It also doesn’t change the fact that by doing so, he left the black students only two choices. To endure any taunts, threats, or racial slurs directed at them without complaint, or to take matters into their own hands.”</p>

<p>So are you justifying the violence? Is that why you have a new screen name? Let’s see how far violence gets the African-American population in this country. I do believe it was tried before, whoops!</p>

<p>“Justin testified in court as to the extent of his injuries.”</p>

<p>From the CNN reprot:
“Barker was taken to a hospital with injuries to both eyes and ears, as well as cuts. His right eye had blood clots, said his mother, Kelli Barker. He was treated and released that day.”</p>

<p>So the injuries were to both sides of the face. That could be consistent with several parties assaulting him. They will have their day in court, esp now that Sharpton and Jackson are there with all of their frills.</p>

<p>You may be interested to know that several level-headed members of the civil rights community are taking this for what it’s worth, and resisting comparisons to the civil rights heroes of the '60s.</p>

105

<p>“So are you justifying the violence?”</p>

<p>No, I am not. I am saying that the DA’s statements made it inevitable, or nearly so. </p>

<p>"So the injuries were to both sides of the face. "</p>

<p>Even if that’s true, again, 6 people beating, kicking and stomping him, and the only injuries are to his head? That makes no sense. Lie down with 6 people standing around you, and you’ll get an idea of how illogical it is.</p>

<p>“They will have their day in court, esp now that Sharpton and Jackson are there with all of their frills.”</p>

<p>And without the world watching, one of the Jena 6 was facing 22 years in jail for a crime that it wasn’t even legal to charge him with. And the white teacher who signed an affidavit that Bell wasn’t involved in the fight wasn’t even allowed to testify.</p>

106

<p>Don’t forget, the kids tried non-violence. They protested silently under the tree–and were threatened with having their lives taken away if they did it agian.</p>

107

<p>I’ve some questions for you collegialmom. </p>

<p>Why does the Jesse Jackson angle stick in your craw so much more than ANYthing else that has occurred? Of all there is to choose from in this nasty little case, why is your outrage reserved for just this? </p>

<p>And why the constant rehash of the Barker kid’s injuries? He had a concussion…had it been severe, he would have been kept overnight at the hospital. It wasn’t and he wasnt. Obviously, no matter to what degree he verbally provoked Bell and his friends, Barker didn’t deserve to be hurt. But in the same respect, the six black kids allegedly involved did not deserve to be charged with attempted murder in some sick ploy by the DA to move their case into adult court. </p>

<p>And finally, why does an assault against a black youth by grown men with broken beer bottles not invoke the same reaction as the assault on Barker?</p>

108

<p>“Why does the Jesse Jackson angle stick in your craw so much more than ANYthing else that has occurred? Of all there is to choose from in this nasty little case, why is your outrage reserved for just this?”</p>

<p>Because Sharpton and Jackson historically have incited people in a way that has not always been productive. I admire Jackson for his hostage release negotiations. However, the track record of the two of them traveling places has not always been productive, in my opinion. </p>

<p>Quote “And why the constant rehash of the Barker kid’s injuries? He had a concussion…had it been severe, he would have been kept overnight at the hospital. It wasn’t and he wasnt. Obviously, no matter to what degree he verbally provoked Bell and his friends, Barker didn’t deserve to be hurt. But in the same respect, the six black kids allegedly involved did not deserve to be charged with attempted murder in some sick ploy by the DA to move their case into adult court.”</p>

<p>I was responding to the poster now known as “uversa” in his or her post # 98 stating that the victim was only hit in one side of the head. I requested a reference to the injury and was told by him or her to find a link for myself. So I went back and found the details from the CNN report that stated that the victim was hit and kicked on both sides of his face. That’s why!!!</p>

<p>Quote: “And finally, why does an assault against a black youth by grown men with broken beer bottles not invoke the same reaction as the assault on Barker?”</p>

<p>I have no idea what you are talking about. Please provide a link!!! Thanks for the questions!!!</p>

109

<p>“And if you look at the full quote, he said that if the students continued to make a fuss over “an innocent prank” (the nooses) he would be their worst enemy and end their lives with the stroke of a pen. Who was making a fuss? Not the white kids.”</p>

<p>What an amazing threat, when you think about it. Black kids ask to be allowed to stand beneath the “Whites Only” tree (the nerve!). Some white students respond by sending a message whose meaning CAN NOT be misconstrued, one that is meant to be as insulting, and hateful, and hurtful (and quite possibly threatening), as possible. But the school board, and indeed, the District Attorney himself, the highest representation of legal authority in that Parish, dismisses the actions of these white students as “an innocent prank”. No—instead, it is the “silent protest” (how’s that for non-violence, Collegialmom?) of the black students in response to the decision by the school board to wink and nod at the bald-faced racism of both the “Whites Only” tree and the boys who hung the nooses, that’s “making a fuss”, that’s worthy of the threat to “end their lives with a stroke of his pen”. How’s that for sending a clear message? How much more eloquently could the DA have said, “I don’t give a &%#@! I’m not interested in your civil rights, or your fair and equitable treatment. I am the power in this Parish, and I can end your life with a stroke of the pen, if I so choose.” </p>

<p>So given that the white kids were in the position of the cat that ate the canary, who had no reason to “make a fuss” over how things shook out in the wake of the noose hanging, what group do you REALLY think the DA’s threats were addressed to? This was long before before the fighting started, or the gun was pulled on the black teens, or the black kid was beaten up at the party. This was certainly before J. Barker was beaten. The black kids were served notice that day in the auditorium, and from then on (if they’d ever had any doubts), knew exactly where they stood—which was up sh%<em>'s creek. Nobody was going to stand up and do the right thing, certainly not the DA, for whom “right” obviously meant nothing. No wonder Justin Barker felt free to toss smug racial slurs in the direction of the black students that day. He knew he stood on the side that the very DA declared had all the political and social power in Jena. It reminds me of a photograph of a white woman holding a sign while protesting school desegregation in the 60’s. The sign said, “N&</em>%#r, Don’t You Wish You Were White?”, and the smug expression on her face is one I’ll never forget. I wonder what expression was on Justin B’s face when he saw fit to sling racial epithets at the black kids. (And don’t even try to say that I’m justifying the beating of Justin Barker by stating the above. I’ve already stated my position on this multiple times).</p>

<p>The DA was like the 800 lb. gorilla when he made this outrageous threats against the black students of Jena High, but now, in the face of national attention, he’s “sorry”, he made the statement? I just bet he is…:rolleyes:</p>

110

<p>I think some people in some part of the country will accept the beating of a black boy by a group of white men but wont accept the beating of a white kid by some black boys. They will argue that the black boy deserves what he got for going to a white party.Blacks should stick to their side of the town.</p>

111

<p>From the Washington Post: </p>

<p>In the weeks that followed, the fighting continued. In one scuffle, Robert Bailey, one of the six teenagers now facing trial, said a white man broke a beer bottle over his head after jumping him at a party, but there was no immediate investigation. Months later, Justin Sloan, who is white, was charged with simple battery and given probation for that attack.</p>

<p><a href=“http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/08/03/AR2007080302098.html[/url]”>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/08/03/AR2007080302098.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

112

<p>OK, if tega’s response doesn’t illustrate that blatant racism still exists in this country, then I don’t know what does.</p>

113

<p>collegialmom, one thing surprises me:</p>

<p>You keep speaking of how many civil rights activists are disregarding the crimes committed by the boys; apparently, this is your biggest issue in this mess.</p>

<p>Where is your outrage over the fact that, had these same agitators (and many others, granted) not taken this kind of stand (excessive as it may be), Bell would be spending 22 years in prison, after a trial that made mockery of justice, and after being charged with wildly excessive crimes?</p>

<p>Frankly, from my perspective, the fact that certain activists are minimizing the boys’ crimes, while extremely regrettable, is by far the least of the issues here. By far.</p>

<p>teriwtt: I think tega was actually trying to point out the disparity and racism in Jena, not perpetuating it - it seems to me that the really bad grammar in the post may be obfuscating the message. I could be wrong, but reading it, I interpret it as this:</p>

<p>“I think some people in some part of the country will accept the beating of a black boy by a group of white men but wont accept the beating of a white kid by some black boys. They will argue that the black boy deserves what he got for going to a white party, and that blacks should stick to their side of the town.”</p>

114

<p>"“Why does the Jesse Jackson angle stick in your craw so much more than ANYthing else that has occurred? Of all there is to choose from in this nasty little case, why is your outrage reserved for just this?”</p>

<p>Because Sharpton and Jackson historically have incited people in a way that has not always been productive."</p>

<p>Are you aware, Collegialmom, that that’s EXACTLY the kind of thing many said about Martin Luther King, Jr.?—that he was an agitator, inciting gullible negros into taking actions that “weren’t in their best interest”, that were “not always productive?” If the message offends, so will the messenger. </p>

<p>I personally don’t hold either of the “reverends” in the kind of esteem which I hold Dr. King. But, I’m not going to let this discussion devolve into Al and Jesse bashing, because to do so would be to fall for a rather obvious rhetorical red herring. The events that have been unfolding in Jena, Louisiana have been doing so for over a year, largely out of the public eye. Long before Al or Jesse arrived on the scene, long before the TV trucks and buses of protesters arrived, it has been what it is: a sad and unfortunate example of throw back racial injustice in the deep south. No amount of straw man arguing changes that. Sorry.</p>

115

<p>collegialmom - I understand why Jackson and Sharpton irk you. But what I don’t understand why with Jackson and Sharpton, of all places, is where you choose to lay your outrage. Above all other things including racism, segregationism, intimidation, abuse of power by legal authority and even assault? Boggles my mind.</p>

<p>And if you google…you will find MANY descriptions of the fight the night of the party in which a black youth was assaulted twice by white adults who used beer bottles as weapons.</p>

116

<p>“Are you aware, Collegialmom, that that’s EXACTLY the kind of thing many said about Martin Luther King, Jr.?—that he was an agitator, inciting gullible negros into taking actions that “weren’t in their best interest”, that were “not always productive?” If the message offends, so will the messenger.”</p>

<p>He preached nonviolence. He would have had a great speech about rising above this, and maybe some nonviolent protests. </p>

<p>"collegialmom - I understand why Jackson and Sharpton irk you. But what I don’t understand why with Jackson and Sharpton, of all places, is where you choose to lay your outrage. Above all other things including racism, segregationism, intimidation, abuse of power by legal authority and even assault? Boggles my mind.</p>

<p>And if you google…you will find MANY descriptions of the fight the night of the party in which a black youth was assaulted twice by white adults who used beer bottles as weapons."</p>

<p>I am not disputing that people who are arrested should receive equal charges and have stated that several times. I keep being asked about Sharpton and Jackson and am replying in kind. I have also stated that I believe the leaders of nonviolent civil rights demonstrations in the '60s were heroes. I am not going to say that this episode in Jena compares to the voting rights or Jim Crow struggles of the '60s. The community in Jena needs work, and it is good that the charges will be reexamined. If this is the beginning of a new civil rights era, then I hope that there will be more effective leaders than Jackson and Sharpton, who tend to polarize situations and often resolve very little.</p>

<p>As to the attack by one white person towards a black man with a bottle, I’m against it. Don’t like violence, never have and never well.</p>

<p>I would happily continue to be a lightening rod for this conversation, but have a very heavy work schedule the next few days, during which I am sure to see some teenagers who have been assaulted. It is not a pretty sight and I don’t recommend it to anyone, whether you get discharged home or admitted to the hospital. No such thing as an easy assault. Don’t like them, never have, never will!</p>

117

<p>1of42 - I sure hope you’re right regarding my misunderstanding.</p>

118

<p>This may be oversimplfying what has been said, but I keep trying to find the common denominator in all these posts because people keep saying “I don’t condone violence, I think the perpetrators should be punished.”</p>

<p>Can we all agree that, had the white boys who hung the nooses been appropriately charged and punished, this story would not have the attention it does now? Everyone would have been held accountable for their actions, before this erupted further, and maybe we wouldn’t be discussing it on this board. That’s the injustice of this whole story - the white boys were given a slap on the hand.</p>

119

<p>Idmom06 - post #75

If that’s not racism, what is ?</p>

<p>A lot of the black OJ jurors were on the makes, trying to getting paid interviews. One even said during the trial “what’s so big about couple of dead whites? A lot of my ancestors were killed by whites.” Only that idiot judge Ito didn’t throw out the juror, and the incompetent Marcia Clark/Chris Darden did absolutely nothing about it.</p>

<p>Will you make the same argument if a white jury acquitted a white killing a black ?</p>

<p>Idmom06, you rightfully called out racism by whites, but why you condone racism by blacks?</p>

120

<p>should be punished just as whoever is found guilty of the teens, because I feel al and jesse are guilty of racism, it was asked of me. (Asked post 27, my posting #26)Heck no! Racism in itself isn’t illegal. The Jena 6 aren’t being charged with racism. One can dislike another race for no real reason, and it isn’t illegal. Naturally, if that unreasoned dislike spills over into employment, housing, violence then yes, those acts are illegal, and rightfully so. My point, and LAX(his post 45) is that what I consider overt racism is the these 2 high publicity “social leaders” so quick to defend the Jena 6 but not the Duke boys. No opinion here, on the validity of the charges of either group of young people, but just a statement on Jesse and Al’s actions after the charges. Both groups of boys seem to have been charged unfairly in the face of their being a minority in the involved neighborhood. The Reverends came to fan the flames of one group, came to point out the injustice of other group. I think Al and Jesse should be punished “in the media” in the sense that interviewers need to press them, and I believe press them hard, to publicly explain their inconsistent actions. In that way, I believe they’d continue to lose credibility and that would be their punishment.</p>