Jena 6

Godwynn

March to the Sea
Joined
May 17, 2003
Messages
20,524
I'm surprised I haven't heard about this, ever. I am constantly on CNN. I read the Southern Illinoisan and the St. Louis Post-Dispatch. I watch CNBC for about two hours a day. No one has said a word about it.

Here is the background story:

Jena 6

It seems very confusing to me, but some points stand out. Allow me to highlight them.

The following morning, three nooses were discovered hanging from the tree. Anthony Jackson, one of two black teachers at the high school, recalled, "I jokingly said to another teacher, 'One's for you, one's for me. Who's the other one for?'" Jena's principal learned that three white students were responsible and recommended expulsion. The board of education overruled his recommendation, to which Superintendent Roy Breithaupt agreed. The punishment was reduced to three days of in-school suspension.

Walters is alleged to have threatened the protesters if they didn't stop fussing over an "innocent prank" and to have stated, "See this pen? I can end your lives with the stroke of a pen."

On Friday, December 1, there was a private party, attended mostly by whites, at the Fair Barn. Five black youths, including 16-year-old Robert Bailey, attempted to enter the party at about 11pm. According to U.S. Attorney Washington, they were told by a woman that they were not allowed inside without an invitation. The five youths persisted, stating that some friends were already in attendance at the party. A white man, who was not a student,[6] then jumped in front of the woman and instigated a fight.

The following day, an incident apparently stemming from the Fair Barn fight occurred at a local convenience store. A student who had attended the party encountered Bailey and several friends. An argument ensued, after which the white student ran to his pickup truck and produced a pistol-grip shotgun. Bailey ran after the white student and wrestled him for control of the gun. Bailey's friends intervened in the scuffle and took the gun away. Bailey refused to return it and ultimately took it home with him. Local police reported that the accounts of the white student and black students contradicted each other and formed a report based on testimony taken from eyewitnesses. This resulted in Bailey being charged with three counts: theft of a firearm, second-degree robbery, and disturbing the peace. The white student who produced the weapon was not charged.

On June 26, 2007, the first day of trial for defendant Mychal Bell, Walters agreed to reduce the charges for Bell to aggravated second-degree battery and conspiracy to commit aggravated second-degree battery.[15] A charge of aggravated battery requires the use of a "deadly weapon". Walters thus argued that the tennis shoes that Bell was wearing and used to kick Barker were deadly weapons, an argument with which the jury agreed.

On September 4, 2007, a judge dismissed the conspiracy charge but let the battery conviction stand, though he agreed that Bell should have been tried as a juvenile.

Even though Mychal Bell's conviction has been overturned, a rally is still scheduled for September 20, 2007, the day that he was scheduled to be sentenced on.[29] Civil rights leaders Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, and Martin Luther King III plan to attend,[30] as does rapper and actor Mos Def.[31] Darryl Hunt is scheduled to be a key speaker.[32] Due to the large amount of people expected to arrive — up to 60,000[30] — schools on the south side of LaSalle Parish — the Jena side — will be shut down on September 20 and possibly on September 21.

Was the board right to reduce the punishment for the noose hangings from expulsion to three days of in-school suspension (whatever in-school suspension is)? Who were the belligerents?
 
From what I've read, it sounds like pure racism. And give me a break, an innocent prank hanging 3 nooses. That's the biggest load of BS I've heard in a long time.

Wear green tomorrow.
 
Godwynn said:
Was the board right to reduce the punishment for the noose hangings from expulsion to three days of in-school suspension (whatever in-school suspension is)? Who were the belligerents?

I'm not going to pretend to be thoroughly conversant on the situation, but there are counterpoints. I do remember reading about the noose incident when it happened, and I think the students involved in that incident were definitely deserving of harsher punishment. (In-school suspension, as I understand it, is pretty much all-day detention, so students don't think they're getting a "day off" from school)

As far as who the belligerents were, I think that term can be applied to individuals on both sides of the racial tensions. If the wikipedia article is accurate though, I think there definitely should be state and/or federal inquiries (depending on who has jurisdiction) in the way the preceding incidents were handled by authorities.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/law/09/19/jena.six.link/index.html
The events, though likely symptoms of racial tension, were separate incidents, said Donald Washington, U.S. attorney for the Western District of Louisiana.

The events occurred three months apart last year in Jena, Louisiana.

"A lot of things happened between the noose hanging and the fight occurring, and we have arrived at the conclusion that the fight itself had no connection," he said.
Washington said FBI agents who went to Jena in September to investigate the noose report, and other federal officials who examined what happened, concluded it "had all the markings of a hate crime."

The incident wasn't prosecuted as such because it didn't meet the federal standards required for the teens to be certified as adults, Washington said. A court makes the final decision on whether to drop their juvenile status.
Washington said federal officials examined the way the school handled the infractions, and whether black students were being treated differently than whites. The officials found it was not unusual for the school superintendent to reinstate students after the principal recommends expelling them.
 
This is the biggest BS I've read in a long time. OF COURSE the blacks should be tried, six of them assaulted another boy.

the white boys should similarly be tried. Try the principal too.
 
it probaly should of been a week in school suspension.
 
The Free Republic archive of threads on this subject is really fascinating if you want to see all the ways southstate Republican voters can find to say the N word without actually saying it.

Only in Louisiana can a guy pull a gun on you in a heated argument, you pull the gun away from him, and they charge you with theft of a firearm. F*ck the South.
 
The Free Republic archive of threads on this subject is really fascinating if you want to see all the ways southstate Republican voters can find to say the N word without actually saying it.

Only in Louisiana can a guy pull a gun on you in a heated argument, you pull the gun away from him, and they charge you with theft of a firearm. F*ck the South.

Yeah because only the south has racists. They just don't exist up north or out west do they.:rolleyes:
 
the white boys should similarly be tried. Try the principal too.

Tried for what? Hanging the nooses? Assuming they could actually prove that the boys the principle tracked down did it then I agree, though you're going to find that even if they were tried they would get off quite easily. What they did was pretty outrageous but it falls under a grey area according to the law.

As for the boys, the kid they beat up supposedly was fine. They should not have been charged for the crimes that they were charged with, but rather lesser assault charges. I can see charging them as adults, or at the very least that Bell kid as he supposedly has had three previous run-ins with the law, but the sentence they got was way too harsh. Didn't fit the crime at all and it does reek of racism.

Still, for all of the people going out there to protest/celebrate the overturning, I want you to think about the kid(s) you are supporting. Personally, they aren't anyone I would want in my neighborhood, school or even city.
 
Tried for what? Hanging the nooses? Assuming they could actually prove that the boys the principle tracked down did it then I agree, though you're going to find that even if they were tried they would get off quite easily. What they did was pretty outrageous but it falls under a grey area according to the law.

As for the boys, the kid they beat up supposedly was fine. They should not have been charged for the crimes that they were charged with, but rather lesser assault charges. I can see charging them as adults, or at the very least that Bell kid as he supposedly has had three previous run-ins with the law, but the sentence they got was way too harsh. Didn't fit the crime at all and it does reek of racism.

Still, for all of the people going out there to protest/celebrate the overturning, I want you to think about the kid(s) you are supporting. Personally, they aren't anyone I would want in my neighborhood, school or even city.

no, for assaulting the black boys at the party.
 
no, for assaulting the black boys at the party.

You mean the private party that the black kids attempted to enter to incite more racial tension? If you and your bros were having a party and I tried to enter with a group of my friends without being invited I'm pretty sure you and I would have some words. According to what I've read the kids never even got inside and only one person, a white man, got into a fight with them. He was charged with something too: battery. Seems about right for a little scuffle with some punks who were trying to crash a party.

Just because the black kids got hit with some trumped up charges doesn't mean the white people involved in these incidents should get unfair treatment as well. I'm all for equal treatment, but fair and equal treatment. The fairness is just as important.
 
Only in Louisiana can a guy pull a gun on you in a heated argument, you pull the gun away from him, and they charge you with theft of a firearm. F*ck the South.

Only in the North would progressive-minded hippies think of banning kickball because it is too violent.

Both the black students responsible for assault and the white students responsible for the racist noose gig should be suspended. Perhaps expelled.
 
You mean the private party that the black kids attempted to enter to incite more racial tension? If you and your bros were having a party and I tried to enter with a group of my friends without being invited I'm pretty sure you and I would have some words. According to what I've read the kids never even got inside and only one person, a white man, got into a fight with them. He was charged with something too: battery. Seems about right for a little scuffle with some punks who were trying to crash a party.

Just because the black kids got hit with some trumped up charges doesn't mean the white people involved in these incidents should get unfair treatment as well. I'm all for equal treatment, but fair and equal treatment. The fairness is just as important.

I'm all for fair treatment too, and I am all for charging the six black boys with attempted murder and assault. But that doesn't mean that we shouldn't investigate the other conflicts which were a precursor to this one. Even so, we need to analyze each independently. Only then will people understand that the legal system isn't being racist here.
 
Well supposedly he was beaten until he was unconscious and his eye was swollen shut. I really love the anti-racism wording you see though when they report the beating. Justin Barker was taken to a hospital where he was "released in time to attend the school's Ring ceremony that evening." That line is there to undermine the seriousness of the crime committed. We are talking about six boys gang beating another kid until his face is swollen and he is unconscious, yet because he was able enough to actually live and attend a social event we are supposed to believe that it was no big deal.

I think 22 years is a bit excessive. I think assault with a deadly weapon is a trumped up charge that only passed because the jury let prejudice get in the way of justice. I think he should be charged as an adult (Bell in this case) because he has 4 previous convictions, including battery (violent crime). You are only a kid until you prove otherwise. I know 20 year-olds who are still kids; in this case Mychal Bell is not a kid. The law is hazy here though so there is a lot of room open for debate, but if I made the laws I would not protect a person from judgement because of their age if they have proven in the past that they can commit violent crimes.
 
The problem with toleration is the fact that it implies that they're different in the first place, so you have to tolerate them.
 
Back
Top Bottom