LaMidRighter

[QUOTE] The scanned, handwritten statements placed the defendents, including Bell at the scene. So what exactly was your point?



I dunno, maybe the fact that his name appeared in your own source.



I'm on the side right and wrong. Right is people accepting the consequences of their actions. Wrong is trying to escape said consequences by saying the trial was unfair, or based on race, etc.



That's a completely assumptive statement. As another poster replied, there was nothing to defend, they kicked the guy's *** right? They were placed at the scene, right? I thought so. Besides, how exactly is it the prosecutors or judges, or even the jury's fault that their defender did not present a "defense valid in Chanda's opinion"? You still have yet to answer that basic question, among others.



Because it was done according to legal procedure and due process......and the little skipped over fact that the defendants did in fact commit the crime.



He was present at the attack, was close friends with the clearly identified perpetrators, AND did nothing to stop the fight. I guess you think he was just an innocent spectator right? Guilt by association is valid, and besides, if you think he didn't get in at least a few cheap shots then you are either fooling yourself or being dishonest. Which one is it?

__________________
Neither side in an argument can find the truth when both make an absolute claim on it.

LMR

roguenuke

Whether or not a person lives in Jena can not be used as a defense for their own biasness. Alan Bean runs a group called "Friends for Justice". That should be an indicator that he is looking for injustices that occur. Most people will go out of their way to find what they are looking for. This doesn't necessarily mean he IS biased, but to say he isn't just because he doesn't live in Jena would be like saying J. Jackson and A. Sharpton aren't biased just because they don't live in Jena (and I think most people will agree that these two are biased) or that every white person is biased against the defendents because they attacked a white guy. Nobody can really say who is and isn't biased in this case. Also, Washington still maintains that the attack had nothing to do with the nooses. I prefer to believe an official from the Justice Dept. than a guy who is trying to seek out injustices. Do we even know that J. Sloan was friends with any of the noose hangers or J. Barker? He was older than them. And even if he was, that still doesn't mean there was a feud. The noose hangers were punished, this should be dropped. I'm sorry to tell you this, but parents do not always get to decide or have privilege to be informed of other students' punishments. Maybe the school could have had an assembly or in class discussions to try to explain the significances surrounding the noose and its history, but they cannot stop someone from going to school because others believe they are racist. They have to have a true belief that someone is truly a threat to other students. Just being racist DOES NOT automatically make you a threat. There are a lot of racist people who would not attack someone just because they don't like the color of the person's skin. As far as the fair trial goes, this has been covered many times. I'll put this down again and if you're interested in varifying it just run a search for "plea bargains" and/or "overcharging". Most cases in the US are plea bargained, less than 10% actually make it to court. Many DAs around the country overcharge a defendent to try to get the person to plea bargain to the lesser crime. It is not inherently racist because the DAs don't care if the person is black or white or what ethnicity the defendent is, they are just trying to clear their own case loads or get someone that they believe did it but they're not sure they could totally convince a judge or jury some punishment. Not all plea bargains have been overcharged, but most overcharges are to try to get plea bargains. The jury was all white because no black people who were summoned showed up for court. The justice system cannot force people to show up when summoned for jury duty or postpone trials just to get a more diverse jury. Our justice system would be backed up and people are afforded due process of law, meaning they have a right to a fair and "speedy" trial. Defendents would be released simply because the system couldn't get a diverse enough jury in time. Does this truly seem fair? There has been no real evidence given that the DA is racist or unfairly charging the defendents due to their race. As I've said, the trial was not public, therefore, you cannot say the only evidence was the witness statements. Even the news media maintains the trial wasn't public, that's why they are trying to get access to his juvenile trial. They want to report ALL of the evidence against the defendent. If they believed the witness statements were everything, the public has those, so why would they need to see this trial?

roguenuke

I would also like to point out that in those statements, JH does say that M. Bell was an attacker, just not that he saw him throw the first blow. You should read those statements again.

Chanda

JH – Jena 6 Incident 05
“Justin and KR was walking out of the gym when I saw a black boy heard a black boy say something to Justin I turned my head and I saw somebody hit Justin. He fell in between the gym door and the concrete barrier. I saw Robert Bailey kneel down and punch Justin in the head. ES pushed Robert Bailey and he fell. Then Carwin Jones kicked him in the head. Eric pushed Carwin back. I ran over there and Theo Shaw tried to kick him and I pushed Theo Shaw down. I also saw Mychal Bell standing over him. Then somebody yelled teacher and they all ran away. The last person I saw was RB
(Bug) standing over him, but I’m not sure if he kicked him or not. Then I saw Coach Lewis kneel down on the ground beside Justin, but I never saw him during the fight.”

To you, does "standing over him" constitute an attack?

__________________
"The Pearl Harbor of the 21st century took place today." President George W. Bush, in his daily diary, September 11, 2001

roguenuke

There's a second statement by JH that says he was. But we have no idea what was said in court, so the jury or judge would go off of the witness testimony in court and questioning by the DA and defense attorney. It is the responsibility of the defense to properly question the witnesses to find out if there is a reason to not trust their testimony. Besides, both statements at least place Bell on the scene, and this would contradict Bell's statement that he didn't get there til after a teacher/coach showed up.

Chanda

If it is the same JH, his two statements are contradictory:

JH – Jena 6 Incident 05
“Justin and KR was walking out of the gym when I saw a black boy heard a black boy say something to Justin I turned my head and I saw somebody hit Justin. He fell in between the gym door and the concrete barrier. I saw Robert Bailey kneel down and punch Justin in the head. ES pushed Robert Bailey and he fell. Then Carwin Jones kicked him in the head. Eric pushed Carwin back. I ran over there and Theo Shaw tried to kick him and I pushed Theo Shaw down. I also saw Mychal Bell standing over him. Then somebody yelled teacher and they all ran away. The last person I saw was RB
(Bug) standing over him, but I’m not sure if he kicked him or not. Then I saw Coach Lewis kneel down on the ground beside Justin, but I never saw him during the fight.”


JH - Jena 6 Incident 09, Jena 6 Incident 09b
“ES, me, Justin, and KR were walking out of the gym. I was first. I saw a bunch of black boys standing on both sides of the sidewalk. When a boy hollered something like “There is that white mother f***er that was running his mouth. Then a group of black boys ran and stood in front of him. Then I turned and saw somebody punch him in the right side of his head. Then he fell hard on the ground and the group of boys started kicking him and stomping his head. I went in to help Justin. I saw Coach Lewis holding
the gym so no one could get out. The only boys I could identify for sure that kicked him was Mychal Bell & Robert Bailey. I saw ES pull Robert & Carwin off, but I didn’t actually see Carwin kick him. I never saw Bryant Purvis anywhere near all of this. I just know that there were a lot more boys than just Robert & Mychal beating Justin up. There were too many to pick out. After the other black boys ran off, Bug (RB) stepped either over or on Justin, popped something off & he got took away by Coach Manning then I left & went to office.”

__________________
"The Pearl Harbor of the 21st century took place today." President George W. Bush, in his daily diary, September 11, 2001

Chanda

The fact remains that a non-resident of Jena is likely more objective than a resident.

Because government officials are known for being honest and non-political??? Washington's reason for finding no connection was this:

"We could not prove that, because the statements of the students themselves do not make any mention of nooses, of trees, of the 'N' word or any other word of racial hate."

Of course the students would not mention nooses or trees in a description of the December 4 brawl. Why would they? And Washington was also wrong about the "N" word.

In addition to Alan Bean's claim, I have seen at least one other reference to their friendship:

"A group of six black students attacked Justin Barker after they heard him bragging about a racial assault his friend had made."

Guardian Unlimited | Comment is free | Apart from the noose, this is an everyday story of modern America

The lunchroom altercation involved Tony Knapp, one of the noose-hangers, which makes the fight directly connected to the noose-hanging.

No, it should not be dropped as long as the noose hangers (and their friends and sympathizers) continue to incite racial violence like Tony Knapp and Justin Barker did in the lunchroom altercation by taunting and using the N word.

Like what? What other possible evidence can you conceive of? I know there were also medical records and injury photographs, but those would not identify the attackers.

More importantly, what reason do the DA and presiding judge have for disallowing public scrutiny?

__________________
"The Pearl Harbor of the 21st century took place today." President George W. Bush, in his daily diary, September 11, 2001

Stinger

The Denver Post - Jena 6 face donation questions

A controversy is developing over at least $500,000 that was donated to the "legal defense fund" of the Jena 6. That parents have refused to publicly account for the money and how they have already spent over $250,000 of the cash. Michael Baisden, a national syndicated radio host who is leading the drive has declined to reveal how much he has collected and attorney's for Mychal Bell say they have not received any money from him.

"Meanwhile, photos and videos are circulating across the Internet that raise questions about how the donated funds are being spent. One photo shows Robert Bailey, one of the Jena 6 defendants, smiling and posing with $100 bills stuffed in his mouth. Another shows defendants Carwin Jones and Bryant Purvis modeling like rap stars on a red carpet at the Black Entertainment Television Hip Hop music awards in Atlanta last month."

Shameful how one segment of society has made hero's our of these thugs.

__________________
"The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." Marcus Aurelius
Proud member of the Gang of Five, the gang that is always right!
No Personal Attacks, if you can't debate the issue go elsewhere.

Caine

Wow Another Blog.....
Written by another Race Baiter. Just look at his other blogs they are all about "poor black person here" and "poor black person there".

When all your blogs tend to go in the same direction on every issue. Thats is what I call evidence of bias.

So if a black dude robs a white dude across town, and then I happen to get into an altercation with him months later, it was direct retaliation for the robbery?



As Ive stated before, we seriously have to take a step back and look at what direction this "black culture" is going in if a little word can cause blacks to group together and act like fools.

White people get called names on a daily basis by blacks, and even by mainstream black comedians. Do you see us crying and fighting over it?

When is the last time you heard a mainstream white comedian use the word ****** or even discuss black people in a stereotypical yet comical way and it wasn't decried as racism?

LaMidRighter

I bolded the very key point there. Micheal Richards, he's cooked, Don Imus, ruined, but employed again, hell, there was a case of a white guy getting **** canned for using a word that resembles the N bomb but is not related in context or meaning to the slur. Yet Eddie Murphy, Martin Lawrence, etc. are all doing quite well for themselves. I don't care if anyone uses derogatory language, but insist that the rules are universal one way or the other. Hell, I'm half spanish and all catholic, so I have a 100% chance of encounering a slur every day, but I have thick skin, so I consider them funny and laugh, but only 50-75% of the time(reference to being half......oh never mind)

__________________
Neither side in an argument can find the truth when both make an absolute claim on it.

LMR