Sean Bell's Killers Can Still Face Justice

While Judge Arthur T. Cooperman's verdict of not guilty on all charges last week for Detectives Michael Oliver, Gescard Isnora, and Marc Cooper, the feds seem to be slightly interested in the case. Representative John Conyers (D-MI), the chair of the House Judiciary Committee, met with Bell's family and his two friends injured the melee, Trent Benefield and Joseph Guzman, promising a close look at the case. A federal case being taken up after an acquittal in a state case would not be unprecedented, as Francis X. Livoti - a former NYPD officer - was acquitted of choking a Bronx man, Anthony Baez, to death by a state court, but was later convicted of violating Baez's civil rights by a federal court. Livoti was found to have killed Baez, lied to cover it up, and solicited the help of fellow officers to lie and help cover up the case. He was sentenced to 7 1/2 years in a federal pen. Even before the federal case, Livoti was fired from the force for using the illegal chokehold on Baez, who died in and incident apparently started when a football being used in a family game hit a police cruiser. What is important to note with Livoti's case is that the state judge who acquitted him used similar language as Judge Cooperman. While Livoti's judge said that Livoti was not innocent, the prosecution merely failed to prove his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Judge Cooperman, in his decision, pointed out that things like carelessness and incompetence were not to be decided in his court, leaving open the door for "other forums" (i.e. the feds).

What seems to be certain is that none of the six detectives involved in Sean Bell's killing that night (Detectives Oliver, Isnora, Cooper, and Officer Michael Carey, Detective Paul Headley, and the commanding officer that night Lieutenant Gary Napoli (the only officer not to shoot, which is saying something seeing he was the commanding officer)) will never carry a gun and a badge for the NYPD again (thankfully). The Times quotes officials as saying that none of them can reasonably expect to do so. This is not unprecedented, however, as we saw with Livoti earlier. Taking a look at another case shows the same outcomes. The four officers involved in the Amadou Diallo case no longer carry guns for the NYPD - three left and one (Kenneth Boss) is not allowed a firearm, though he is fighting to get one back. So even if Ray Kelly allows the trigger-happy cops to stay on the force, it would most likely be in a severely limited capacity with no firearms involved, which is a relief for unarmed black men across the city.

As far as the feds picking up the case, it's certainly possible. If Livoti's case in the death of Anthony Baez is any indication, the feds have certainly set precedents to bring justice for victims of police killings. However, it is also important to note that Amadou Diallo's murderers (which I view as a much more egregious case) never faced a federal trial. That's why I think this could go either way. While I will be upset if the feds do not bring charges, I cannot say that I will be entirely surprised. One of the main things I am looking towards, however, is Judge Cooperman's language referring to the "recklessness and carelessness" of the officers, which could result in civil rights charges (plus it is similar to language used by the acquitting judge in Livoti's case). In any event, it is slightly (very slightly) comforting that these men will never carry guns under the charge of the NYPD and hopefully will not serve the NYPD in any capacity in the future. Peace.

Photos - Michael Oliver, Gescard Isnora, Marc Cooper (l-r) (serenitylife.vox.com), Sean Bell (www.nydailynews.com), A good question (dearkitty.blogsome.com)

Revere Mayor Taking His Time: Revere Police Sergeant's Fate Undecided

Sergeant Evan Franklin (Christopher King Blogspot)

It has been more than a week since Revere Mayor Thomas Ambrosino stated that he would make his decision by this past week regarding Sergeant Evan Franklin's fate with the Revere Police Department. The decision comes following Franklin's behavior after the shooting of Daniel Talbot. On top of that, it has been three weeks since Revere Police Chief Terence K. Reardon sent a letter to the mayor suggesting that Franklin be fired (the chief would do it himself, but city bylaws state that only the mayor can terminate the employment of a police officer, the harshest punishment that the chief can dole out is a five day, unpaid suspension which he has already given Franklin.)

For those of you out of the loop, you can catch up here, and I would also suggest checking out KingCast's First Amendment page, as well, as he has been following the story as well. To make a long story short, Sergeant Evan Franklin, after leaving his department-issued firearm in the backseat of his colleague's unlocked car earlier in the evening, fled the scene of the shooting right after shots rang out. To make matter worse, Franklin flagged down an on-duty Revere cop, not to alert him to the fact that one of his colleagues had been shot, but to be driven home. When asked if everything was OK, Franklin replied in the affirmative.

Franklin got home, never called the police to let them know what happened, and then lied about his presence at the scene to State Police investigators. He has been on paid administrative leave since September 29, 2007. Chief Reardon recently suspended him for five days without pay, which Franklin thought was excessive and is fighting. He is also fighting his chief's dismissal suggestion (which he did by hiring business lawyer Neil Rossman.)

Given Franklin's actions, however, it seems that a dismissal would be a lucky outcome. Of course, this is not all of Franklin's story. Franklin resigned from the force two weeks before graduating from the police academy for his involvement in a hit and run with another cadet in 1995. Franklin re-joined the force in 1997 after going through the academy again (the man Franklin was with, Todd Randall, is now a patrolman.) So Franklin running from a scene is not a freak occurrence; he has a history of this.

Revere Mayor Thomas Ambrosino (Boston Globe)

So my question is this: what is taking Mayor Thomas Ambrosino so long? Is it really that hard of a decision? Let's assume that Ambrosino allows Franklin to stay on the force. Who the hell is going to want to partner up with him? Would anyone feel safe with Franklin as the person who is supposed to have their back on the beat? Additionally, if Ambrosino keeps Franklin on the force, what does this say to anyone who does this type of stuff? Is this behavior that, not only the mayor's office, but the people of Revere are going to tolerate? Is this acceptable behavior of a police officer who already has a tainted record? Is there something Ambrosino knows that we do not?

Everything about these procedures have been public - Chief Reardon's letter and the hearing about Franklin's fate. The facts that the news outlets have reported are (supposedly) all of the facts involving Franklin's involvement with this incident. Given these facts, the decision should be simple: Sergeant Evan Franklin should not be a police officer in Revere or elsewhere.

Setting Dangerous Precedents: Sean Bell's Killers Acquitted

It's Amadou Diallo part II: Sean Bell's killers have been acquitted of shooting 50 rounds at Bell and his friends on that fateful night back on November 25, 2006. At the conclusion of the bench trial requested by the defendants (who, apparently, did not trust the very people that they have pledged to protect and to serve), Judge Arthur T. Cooperman declared that all three men charged (despite the fact that there were five officers involved in the incident) did not act in a criminal manner when they killed Sean Bell and wounded his friends, all of whom were unarmed. Adding insult to injury, Judge Cooperman said that the testimony of Bell's friends at times did not make sense.

Numerous questions have to be asked about this case and its conclusion. What kind of precedent does this set for the NYPD and victims of police violence? First Amadou Diallo's killers get off the hook (following a dubious move to Albany - a much whiter city than New York) after firing 41 shots at the African immigrant, and now Sean Bell's killers, after firing 50 shots, are also off the hook. What is interesting is that with previous NYPD killings, while those officers involved were acquitted of criminal charges, large monetary settlements were given to the families of the victims. Amadou Diallo's family received $3 million, Patrick Dorismond's family got $2.25 million, and Timothy Stansbury's family received $2 million. I would be highly surprised if Bell's family did not receive some sort of compensation for their loss at the hands of the police department. But this begs the question: if the justice system thinks that these officers did nothing wrong, why settle with the families? By giving someone money (which is a shitty substitute for seeing those who killed your loved one put to justice), are you not admitting wrongdoing? If the NYPD is just doing what they're trained to do by gunning down these unarmed black men, then why pay the families of those who obviously had to be doing something wrong to get such a violent response from these trained officers?

I also want to go back to a case that I discussed a little over a year ago that occurred in Rhode Island. A corrections officer named Dante Pingitore was scoring some coke in Providence when he was approached by state police. Pingitore, in response to this, "rammed" his car into an unmarked police cruiser with officers inside. Pingitore could assumed to be armed, because he was a corrections officer for his state, yet his showdown with cops was resolved without firing a single shot. The interesting thing about this case (in case you could not figure it out from his Italian name) Pingitore is, by all available evidence short of an actual photo, white. If Rhode Island cops can prevent violence in a nearly carbon-copy case of Sean Bell's, why can't the NYPD? Does this mean that the NYPD is less trained or worse at their job than Rhode Island troopers? No two cases are the exact same, but these two cases are very similar and it should be noted that one ended with a person being given paid leave and bail and the other being buried.

Other questions that seem to remain unanswered: if the officers present that night were so certain that Bell and his friends not only had a gun, but were psychics and knew that Bell and his friends would go back to their car to get said gun and commit a drive-by (maybe the cops are related to Ms. Cleo?), why allow them to get into the car? Was it an example of NYPD brinksmanship? Why did Gescard Isnora open fire? Did he see a gun, or was he just going off of the equivalent of a middle-school rumor (well, someone said it, so it must be true)? Maybe he saw one of the victims' hands and took a page out of Sean Sawyer's playbook. It is amazing how the defense portrayed the whole thing as Joseph Guzman's (one of Bell's friends) fault. They said that because Guzman told Bell to go as Isnora approached the car, he caused all of this. Let's kick some logic for a moment: you just got into an argument with a group outside of a strip club and then some guy approaches your car with a gun drawn. Are you going to stick around to see what happens? Hell no. (Quick note: Isnora said that he clipped his badge to his collar and yelled "police." It was the middle of the night in November, so the car windows were probably closed, and thus they would not have heard Isnora's shout or seen his badge, if he even did this, as witnesses say that Isnora neither yelled police or had his badge visible.) So without seeing a gun or confirming the presence of any kind of weapon, Detective Isnora fired the first shot, leading to 49 more shots from him and his colleagues.

The most ridiculous part of this entire case is probably the role of Detective Michael Oliver - the man who shot 31 shots at Bell and his companions. Now you might be saying to yourself "Wow, I didn't know that the department-issued glocks had banana clips that held so much ammunition." Well, they don't. Oliver emptied an entire clip into the vehicle, felt that was not enough for a group of unarmed men, reloaded and pumped some more lead into the car. Oliver also has shown very little remorse for his actions, partying after the indictments for the charges were handed down. Bell's parents also seem to notice that, of all three detectives, Oliver seems to be remorseless and cocky. Oliver is also no stranger to violence while on-duty. He apparently put a cab driver's head through a window when he thought that the cab driver took too long to move his double-parked car. Oliver admitted no wrongdoing, but the city settled for $10 Gs, which again begs the question of accepting guilt. It is interesting that Judge Cooperman found Bell's friends' testimonies not believable, but found Oliver emptying a clip, reloading, and still believing to be threatened by unarmed men perfectly rational.

Additionally, many point to past activities of the victims as a reason that little sympathy should be felt for them. It is true that Bell, who's record is not squeaky clean, also hung out with people whose records were not squeaky clean. But unless the cops were familiar with the three men and their records prior to the incident, this means nothing. They could have been doctors or lawyers blowing off some steam for all the cops knew. Additionally, many point to the three victims saying that they were less-than-stellar members of society and this contributed to their death. At least Sean Bell graduated high school, which cannot be said for Michael Oliver. Bell's previous arrests were all for non-violent offenses, while Oliver has previously been involved in violent confrontations over such life-threatening matters as double-parking. Of course, people don't focus on this.

Finally, many news outlets have said that because two of the cops were minorities, this shooting could not have been racially motivated. Give me a break. The guy who shot the most was white and anyone who has dealt with cops will tell you that the only color that matters to them is the color of their uniform - blue. Black cops and Latino cops can be just as judgmental and racist as white cops. To quote an NWA line, "But don't let it be a black and a white one / Cuz they'll slam ya down to the street top / Black police showin out for the white cop." Racial profiling permeates police departments and does not affect only white cops; cops (and people, for that matter) of all races and nationalities fall victim to profiling people by the color of their skin.

The only solace that can come from this is the fact that these three officers will never work undercover again because their faces have been plastered all over the world. Judge Cooperman called their actions careless, but not criminal (though, last time I checked, recklessness that leads to a death is a crime, but let's not get tied down with what the law says) and hopefully all three will no longer be employed by the NYPD. Let's hope that Al Sharpton keeps his trap shut and some legitimate leaders say some intelligent things about the bullshit that occurred today instead of going through the usual rhetoric of the reverend. Rest in peace, Sean Bell, and hopefully justice will come to your killers someday. Peace.

Photos - Marc Cooper, Michael Oliver, and Gescard Isnora (l-r) (www.gothamist.com), Sean Bell, his fiancee Nicole Paultre-Bell, and their child (en.wikipedia.org), Judge Arthur T. Cooperman (www.nydailynews.com), The scene of Sean Bell's death the following morning (Pan-African News News Wire Photo File's flickr), The scene outside of the Queens courthouse following the verdict (cityrooms.blogs.nytimes.com), Never Again - hopefully not (www.villagevoice.com)

The 2008 Election: Another Example of the Devolution of Politics

Obama and Jeremiah Wright (NYTimes)

I know that I have not posted in a while (even WikiCU has downgraded my status from "Active" to "Somewhat active"), and that is due to the massive amounts of work that I have. I should be doing work now, but having watched MSNBC and perused through some other news sources and stories about the 2008 election (both the Democratic primary and Republican candidate John McCain), it seems that there are so many conflicting stories and one-sided information that it is no wonder that less than half of Americans who are eligible to vote actually do (and we are the nation exporting our democracy overseas).

To begin with, let's look at the Jeremiah Wright scandal (who also has ties to Bill Clinton, but hey, why talk about that?) So Obama went to Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago for a while and was influenced by Wright. It turns out that Wright has made some controversial comments saying after 9/11 that America's chickens have come home to roost, God damn America (which was in the context of slavery and Jim Crow) and that America started the AIDS virus. Let's address the first one: 9/11 as being caused by America. While it's obvious to anyone that America did not deserve the horrendous tragedy that befell it on 9/1, America's past foreign policy had a lot to do with the events leading up to it. Our involvement in the Soviet-Afghan War laid the groundwork (both literally in Tora Bora and with CIA arms and figuratively) for Osama bin Laden and the Taliban to gain a stronghold in Afghanistan and begin to train terrorists to hijack airplanes and attack the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. Additionally, the warning signs were there and the government was well aware of them. Given these two things, to say that American policy had no role in 9/11 and that we had no idea that anything like this could happen is unbelievable.

The "God damn America" remark certainly looks pretty bad when taken out of context. However, when you watch the entire video and Wright's remarks leading up to his "God damn America" statement, the comment is much less damaging than one might think. Wright discussed slavery (you know, that thing that happened when Americans, with help from Portuguese and Spanish traffickers, kidnapped Africans from their homeland, shipped them across the Atlantic like dry goods in the Middle Passage and forced them into backbreaking labor) and Jim Crow (when blacks were treated as sub-human) in America. In this context, he said God damn America. However, I suppose that if you think that slavery and Jim Crow were good things, then you would be outraged that someone would say God damn America for doing them.

As for America starting AIDS, that one's kind of out there. While we do not know how AIDS, which seems to have mutated from Simian Immunodeficiency Virus (SIV) into HIV, which is the precursor to AIDS, came to fruition and became a worldwide epidemic like it is today, there is little conclusive evidence that the American government had anything to do with it. Maybe Wright was referring to the Oral Polio Vaccine (OPV) Theory, which is also inconclusive, or maybe he was referring to the government's slow response to the disease in the early 80s. However, this comment from Wright is inappropriate. But again, it's important to take the comment in the totality of its context, which I cannot find online. However, the comment is misleading and inappropriate if, in fact, it means that the government synthetically created the disease and then spread it among blacks and homosexuals.

McCain sleeps on a private plane
(NYMag)

Now that Wright is out of the way, let's look at Obama's "bitter" comment. He said that people in small towns that have faced economic hardships in the post-industrial economy of America can be bitter and often cling to guns and religion and anti-immigrant sentiment as a way to release their frustration. People pounced on him for that comment. But are people who are affected by illegal immigration and the lower wages that they will take because of their exploitable status happy about things? Hopeful that the government will do something to curb illegal immigration? I would say no. So they turn to anti-immigrant sentiment, they turn to the church for support and guidance, and they turn to their 2nd Amendment right as something to hold on to that the government cannot take away from them. Was Obama's comment bad because it was wrong, or because of the reality of the situation that it pointed out?

One of the best reactions came from the McCain camp who called Obama elitist and out of touch with the people of America. This actually made me laugh, because McCain is a man of many shades. First he is the war hero who was shot down in Vietnam, then he is the man against corruption and pork-barrel spending, and the man who supports the surge in Iraq. What no one mentions is the fact that he was sleeping around on his first wife with his current wife, married his current wife (who is loaded - so loaded that McCain is afraid to publicly announce her tax returns), was involved in a huge savings and loan scandal with the Keating Five, and a man with such a bad temper that he called his wife a cunt in front of numerous media reporters. Plus, the man made $419,731 in 2007. His net worth is $40,000,000 according to Money magazine. You want to talk about out of touch with the American people and elitism? McCain is worth more than most people in this country and he won't even disclose his wife's tax returns because he is scared that she makes too much money. McCain's politics have always been mixed with his wife's father's business, so privacy is not really an excuse. But hey, if McCain wants to parade around like he's "one of us," let him. I know I'm not buying it.

Hillary Clinton, allegedly landing in sniper fire
(Donklephant)

Now let's look at Hillary. She's persistent, you can give her that. Personally, I see her as the annoying aunt who does not leave at the holidays despite every hint you drop to her. She has lied numerous times throughout this campaign, the most serious one being about Bosnia sniper fire. That wasn't even a fib, that was a blatant lie. Plus, no matter what she says to Bill, he does not shut up and continues to hurt her campaign by bringing up negative things, like her Bosnia lie (which Bill proceeded to lie about). Plus, Pennsylvania Governor Ed Rendell, a Clinton supporter, has been working hard for Clinton in Pennsylvania. The only problem is that Rendell has, in the past, graciously praised both Louis Farrakhan and the Nation of Islam and Clinton has chastised Obama in the past for not rejecting Farrakhan's support. Obama did not solicit the support, he did not praise Farrakhan, he simply did not outright reject the support. Here Rendell is basically kissing Farrakhan's ass and he is seen as a major Clinton ally. I guess we'll have to see how she handles that one.

Then there is the Weather Underground mess for Obama. Obama has known a man named William Ayers, who was a member of the Weather Underground, which was a domestic terrorist group. Ayers is much older than Obama and was apparently involved in bombing targets like the Pentagon and has gone on record as saying that they should have done more. The relationship between the two was brought up at the Pennsylvania debate moderated by none other than George Stephanopoulos (a former major adviser for President Clinton), which was actually a question fed to Stephanopoulos by Sean Hannity, a guy who's written anti-liberalism books that have been trashed by reviewers (so much for good, objective reporting ABC). Obama ripped Stephanopoulos a new one, saying that what Ayers did when Obama was 8 has little bearing on Obama's patriotism. Seriously, there have got to be better questions more pertinent to the American people than some loony who did some crazy shit in the past and Obama knowing him. Of course, Hillary played right into it, trying to blast Obama for knowing him, under the guise that she's not the one saying it, but the Republicans will. And ABC tries to defend that bullshit debate.

William Ayers, alleged best friend of Obama
(Penn Live)

I guess that all of this just goes to show the level that politics have sunk to. We have Clinton and McCain attacking Obama for those who he has known in the past, with the media outlets not really looking at Clinton's and McCain's past affiliations and past actions. If this is what the game has devolved to - finger pointing on bullshit issues - then at least be fair about it and put everyone's past out there. Obviously it would be nice if the media and the people of the United States could simply focus on the issues, but alas, the mudslinging overtakes the issues and we are forced to focus on that. I would like everyone to go to websites and actually look up the issues on which these people are running. Also look at the politician's integrity. Integrity is not defined by who you have spoken to before or anything like that. Look at things like, does the politician lie? Lying can take many forms, like sleeping around on your wife or saying you landed in sniper fire when in reality little 7 year old girls were giving you flowers and kisses once you deplaned. Look at hypocrisy - are people calling others elitist when in reality they are the ones out of touch? Are people jumping on others for crazy religious leaders like Louis Farrakhan when in reality, some of their biggest supporters have praised these leaders in the past? Obama has made very little screw-ups this entire campaign and, because he has been in Washington only a short time, has not been as corrupted as others who are Washington insiders. If you are going solely on media coverage and who is the least sleazy of the candidates (which I think America does a lot), then Obama is your man. I'll be voting for him because not only does he have a tendency to tell the truth, he also takes stances that I like on most of the issues.

Officer at the Scene of Daniel Talbot's Murder Faces Dismissal

Officer Daniel Talbot (My Fox Boston)

More Daniel Talbot news coming out of Revere. It was reported today that the ranking officer on the scene of the Talbot murder last September faces dismissal from the force due to his behavior. As I reported back in November, it was determined that Sergeant Evan Franklin of the Revere Police Department was on the scene when Officer Talbot and his posse got into a verbal altercation with Derek Lodie, who allegedly called up Robert Iacoviello, Jr. who came upon the scene. Then, according to Franklin's lawyer, the group of officers approached Lodie and Iacoviello anticipating a fistfight. Talbot was hit in the head and died a day later, while no one else was hit and the police officers who returned fire (Officers Soto and Bruzzese) were unable to hit the shooter. Numerous questions about this case remain unanswered, but if Sergeant Franklin's behavior is any indication, something is not right about this entire situation.

In a scalding letter, Revere Police Chief Terence K. Reardon lays out Franklin's conduct that night and why he should no longer be a police officer. The story goes as follows: Once the shooting started and Officers Soto and Bruzzese returned fire, Franklin bolted from the scene. Reardon says that Franklin ran "a considerable distance from the scene," and came upon on-duty officer Robert Impemba. Franklin, being a sergeant, ordered Impemba to drive him home (apparently Franklin was so drunk that Impemba had to help him out of the back seat of the cruiser). When Impemba asked Franklin if everything was OK, Franklin lied and said yes. The lies continued, as Franklin, who neglected to let the department know that an officer had been shot, lied to State Troopers about how he got home and that he did not know that someone had been shot.

Sergeant Evan Franklin (Christopher King Blog)

Now Franklin's lawyer, Neil Rossman, claims that one of the reasons that Franklin did not stick around was because he was unarmed. Chief Reardon addresses this in his letter, because apparently Franklin left his department-issued handgun in the back of Officer Soto's car, which was unlocked (which violates department rules and state law.) Rossman also said that people should not criticize his client for his behavior because all the officers were drunk and lured into an ambush. So I guess it's official that the officers were drunk. Also, Franklin was the only one to run (even Talbot's fiance, who is not trained in police tactics and was also [assumedly] unarmed appears to have stuck around.) It seems there is little, if anything, that can justify the way that Franklin acted in this situation. Franklin was also chastised by Chief Reardon for not discouraging his comrades from breaking the law by drinking in public (him being the ranking officer). Of course, this is not the first time that Sergeant Evan Franklin has run afoul of the law. According to the Daily Item of Lynn, Franklin and a friend (Todd Randall) were involved in a two-car accident on Route 1 in August of 1995 and fled the scene on foot. The two men were soon to graduate from the police academy, but resigned from the force following the incident. Franklin was re-hired after going through the police academy again in May 1997.

Revere Mayor Thomas Ambrosino
(Revere Journal)

So where does this leave the case? Well, the ranking officer involved lied about the incident to State Police investigators, which makes me think that something that has not been made public lies beneath the surface of this entire debacle. We still do not know why Talbot and his group argued with Lodie. We still do not know what caused shots to be fired. We also do not know why the officers did not call on-duty (and sober) officers to the scene when they got into an argument with Lodie. It also seems odd that some thug would be able to hit Talbot in the head and escape any bullet wounds from trained officers of the law shooting back. Additionally, the Daily Item's attempt to have the videotape from Revere High public surveillance cameras made public was denied, with the judge in the case saying that because the tape is still being used in a grand jury investigation it cannot be released. I can only assume, then, that the grand jury investigation continues and not all responsible parties have been rounded up (at least to the prosecutor's content), which begs the question: how long will this case be drawn out?

Sergeant Evan Franklin's behavior speaks for itself. It seems ridiculous that he is fighting the fact that his breaking several laws and lying to State Police investigators about an incident in which a fellow police officer was killed warrants his dismissal from the force. He has been getting paid administrative leave since September 29, 2007 (minus the five day unpaid suspension). It looks like he has little to complain about, and I would argue that he has gotten off pretty easy considering what he's done (public drinking, leaving firearms unsecured, lying to investigators, etc.) It will be interesting to see if Revere Mayor Thomas G. Ambrosino uses common sense or keeps Franklin on the force. What occurred that night back in September on the property of Revere High School continues to be shrouded in mystery.

Christopher McCowen Denied New Trial

Bringing this blog back to the Cape, Christopher McCowen, the trash collector convicted of killing fashion writer Christa Worthington, has been denied a new trial by Judge Gary Nickerson following serious allegations of racial bias within the jury that convicted him. I have already written up a lengthy post about the crime and the trial itself, which I will not go over again in detail here, so please read the link above if you want to reacquaint yourself with the issue.

The judge presiding over the case, the aforementioned Judge Gary Nickerson, stated that McCowen did not deserve a new trial because the charges of racial bias tainting the jury were unfounded. He did not go into much detail beyond that (at least as the media is reporting it and I currently cannot find a full transcript of Nickerson's decision). It is disappointing because it seemed like the the charges of racial bias, if not completely true, had some truth in them and Nickerson's denial of a new trial is, if you believe that race played a role in this, condoning this type of behavior. I would also like to know how Nickerson came to the conclusion that the charges were unfounded.

But what is even more confounding is what Cape and Islands District Attorney Micheal O'Keefe said following the ruling: "Though it's not perfect, O'Keefe said, 'The system works.'" It is confounding that someone who works within the system everyday feels that this system works. This system is broken in so many ways - from the initial contact with the system through the police all the way up to the "correctional" system and incarceration. This is the same legal system that legally segregated blacks and white for almost 50 years, the same system that allowed laws against sodomy - which is defined legally as any sex beyond vaginal penetration - until 2003, the system that let OJ Simpson walk, the system that is not even respected by our presidents, a system that has incorrectly incarcerated over 200 people (that has been proven so far), kept Genarlow Wilson in jail for years, a system that has executed an innocent man (who knows how many others). The system is far from perfect, Mr. O'Keefe, nor is it exactly "working."

Of course, Michael O'Keefe himself does not believe in the system. Let's not forget that he asked all men in Truro to give up a sample of their DNA to match up to the DNA found on Worthington (who O'Keefe has called a "slut" in the past). Of course, anyone who has glanced over the Constitution and the Bill of Rights (specifically the 4th Amendment) knows that it is an American's right to be protected from "unreasonable searches and seizures." It's not very reasonable (or cost- or time- effective) to test every male's DNA in Truro. O'Keefe should probably get off his high horse with this case, which has been marred from the beginning (from the three year delay in a suspect, to the fact that the Worthington's family wanted him off the case, to a juror getting kicked off the jury during final deliberations).

While I originally thought that Nickerson would grant McCowen a new trial, it appears that this will not happen. Is McCowen innocent? I have no idea. Does he deserve a new trial because of what has been alleged? I believe so. He may be guilty, and if he is I think it would be better to have him convicted by a jury that is not tainted by allegations of racial bias. As far as O'Keefe goes, hopefully he handles future investigations a little better than the Worthington one and won't call victims sluts or try to get people to forgo their constitutional rights. Peace.

Photos - Christopher McCowen (www.boston.com), Christa Worthington (nymag.com), Cape and Islands District Attorney Michael O'Keefe (www.capecodtoday.com)

Lou Dobbs Shows His True Colors

Lou Dobbs (Mediabistro)

For those of you lucky enough to have never seen or heard of Lou Dobbs, I commend you. Unfortunately I have seen and heard the things Lou Dobbs says on a regular basis, and his xenophobia is hard to take sometimes. It's common knowledge that Dobbs (who makes millions a year and, previous to his "transformation" into a sensationalist news reporter was an oft-ignored business reporter) fights for the middle class of America and sees globalization as the worst thing in the world (besides illegal immigrants). For example, Dobbs has said that he resents holidays that do not strictly celebrate America and that people who are attached to their homeland in some way (such as Irish folks who celebrate St. Paddy's Day) are splitting America up because they don't celebrate America's commonalities. It's interesting to hear this from Dobbs because he is married to a Mexican-American named Debi Lee Segura de Dobbs. Of course, her last name is from a very old tradition in Spanish speaking countries that involves tracking lineage through last names. Using Dobbs' logic, his own wife is one of the Americans in this country who are attached to their homeland and not spending all of their time celebrating America's commonalities. I'd also be interested to know if the Dobbs household does anything for traditional Mexican holidays such as El Dia del Muerto (which, under Dobbs' logic, would be un-American).

Dobbs also has a history of using inflated numbers when it comes to scaring his viewers into believing that illegal immigration is the product of the devil himself. For instance, he once had a correspondent on his show who said that there were 7,000 cases of leprosy, attributing the large rise in leprosy cases (which turned out to be a false report in the first place) to our "open" borders. Dobbs also has said that illegal aliens make up 1/3 of our federal prison system - another incorrect "fact."

But it is not Dobbs' lack of fact-checking or his xenophobic stance on illegal immigration that spurned this post. It is his recent comments concerning race, particularly Condaleeza Rice's statement that America has a "birth defect" in its history (slavery) and this makes it difficult to discuss race honestly and frankly. She says that the legacy of slavery and its repercussions still reverberate today (which, in my opinion, they do). When Dobbs heard this, he lost it. The irony of his tirade is that his comments prove Rice's point. When he is about to call black politicians who argue what Rice has said "cotton pickers" he is embodying what is wrong with America today and its history:



Now I'm not going to argue about what he said. He clearly said "cotton" and then puckered his mouth up to start with a "p". The only combination I can think of with the word "cotton" and a word starting with the letter "p" is "cotton picker," which, of course, is a derogatory name aimed at black people due to the institution of slavery that this country (indeed, the Constitution) condoned and allowed to thrive.

What is even more interesting is the fact that CNN tried to clean up the transcript of Wolf Blitzer's show that night (another CNN anchor who has made dumb statements in the past). The word "cotton" was nowhere to be found in the transcript, which can be read here. From what I can understand neither Dobbs nor CNN has made a statement regarding his comments. I'll be interested to see how this works out, but my guess is that Dobbs will not be punished or anything like that. His sensationalism that he calls "The Lou Dobbs Show" brings in ratings and money talks, even more than Dobbs does.