Friday, August 26, 2011
"N.C. eugenics survivors prove elusive"
8/26/11
To those who are participating in MODERN DAY EUGENICS:
Please be advised to all those who read this: that KATRINA was and is symbolic of MODERN DAY EUGENICS in the United States of America-[ the news article listed below said 1929 to 1974=LIE] and the reason they can't find the people who are alive that were victims is that they are not one of the their "PETS"[meaning working for males of the larger society]. And that KATRINA showed ONLY the tip of the what is really going on concerning mistreatment of African Americans. There is arguement as to weather KATRINA was intentional. The the effect of Eugenics on the victims of Eugenics was not based on intention; the effect was real; it killed what belonged to people; decisions were made for them; they were not allowed to make decisions for themselves and in the city of Winston-Salem, North Carolina where interestingly enough Mr. W-----[whom I have almost begged and pleaded for him concerning constant intimidatation/harassment/ interferance with my life] says that he cried when he found out about what the state of North Carolina did to citizens; not in the United States; BUT no tears for a present day person being subjected to the same type of system; that not only sterilizes physically but also economically.[guess person have to be one of the "PETS" of the male members of the larger society.][BUT wouldn't that be the same thing as what the people in 1819/1929 who had to do as they were told would call "Slavery"?
And as stated KATRINA was just the tip of what is happening to African Americans in the United States; so is Mr. W-----s reaction my plea and cries for intervention in the MONDERN DAY EUGENICS [which include putting camera's in people's eyes when they have surgery[experiments]; deciding if they should keep one child or two to raise[experiment]; probably putting tracking systems on them while in surgery; and using mind control systems to manipulate them][deciding who they can and can't date]=?
In the article "N.C. eugenics survivors prove elusive" it states that the survivors just can't seem to be found; BUT their "PETS" are making "money" have jobs off of the sorrows of others created by the state=????????; almost like harassing/intimidating a person with confinement if the person works and develope income without participating in illegal activities to force the person to the point of not being able to concentrate/focus to provoke the person into a negative plight in life. And the title of the articles sums up my entire life which as been"ELUSIVE"; meaning that in over twenty plus years of harassment, intimidation, and threats that help has been elusive; even by Mr. W----- who cried when he heard of what the state did to the African Americans [along with Mr.Wombles help being elusive, so was the help from some of Mr. W-----s other collogues].
You would think that in twenty plus years that someone in authority would intervene in the harassment/intimidation/abuse [like the Eugenics surviviors didn't ask for help]. For those of you who can think; Consider the population and number of African Americans during 1929; there were more African Americans than there were Caucasians; and ONLY 1,500 people were serilized=???? [remember the mindset of the majority of the people towards African Americans during 1929=not good].
Good example of MODERN DAY EUGENICS= African American women in the church can't have a husband UNLESS they are FAT and serve males of the larger society [system whereby the wife gives husband wrong information or tells the husband don't hinder what males of the larger society are doing to the smaller community of color][Movie-HITMAN=scene where the female tells the hitman="STOP" and then the hitmans says="She just saved your life."=why the African American minister's wife is controlled by the males of the larger society][Picture on "Sociology Area" blog].
"Longtime Forsyth United Way CEO to retire"[http://www.news-record.com/content/2011/03/30/article/longtime_forsyth_united_way_ceo_to_retire]; the New CEO of United Way is name CYNTHIA [CINTAs=CODE][United Way=relative[code] [CINTAS] has agreed to unite with the local community to [continue the system of "EUGENICS"] by the furtherance of harassment;
intimidate and stealing from "Socialpeacest"= the purpose of the the research by reading the "GUN DIGEST" magazine [where picture of female of the larger society using weapon].
As stated in "SURREPLY" those in higher authority put it in writing that the information was presented in such a way that "the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court"
[information that was written a few minutes ago disappeared][conclusion is that the court said that they understand that those in authority are usining intimidation/harassment, etc. to coerce me into something negative and that I asked that if the courts decision was to dismiss the case that the United States court would give me exemption because that would leave the Plaintiff in a land of "NO Law" and that documents were given to the court that showed that ex employer [---'s -l--] [where the secret members were mostly males of the larger society] use weapons [-u-s] as a form of intimidation. The courts reply/response that "the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court" mean that they have an adequeate understanding of the harassment/ intimidation/and abuse of the plaintiff; "Reference to the Dillinger Bridge Trial in New Orleans was made in the court documents".
N.C. eugenics survivors prove elusive
By Ann Doss Helms and Tommy Tomlinson
ahelms@charlotteobserver.com, ttomlinson@charlotteobserver.com
Read more: http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2011/08/21/2542523/eugenics-survivors-prove-elusive.html#storylink=misearch#ixzz1W9kiEZN6
They were labeled unfit parents, promiscuous or simply feebleminded, then sent by the thousands to surgeons who ensured they would never have babies again - or never at all.
The records are interred in rows of gray boxes in a cold basement of the state archives, waiting for survivors of North Carolina's eugenic sterilization program to step forward and claim them.
State officials say they believe at least 1,500 of the women, girls, boys and men sterilized under state authority from 1929 to 1974 are still alive.
But one year into a three-year quest to find them, only 34 files have been matched with living survivors or descendants of the dead. And officials' talk of paying for the victims' pain could end as a false hope.
A handful of survivors have gone public with their wrenching stories, drawing national attention. Yet those closest to North Carolina's effort to make victims whole question whether the state is acting in good faith.
"Some of (the survivors) have told me, 'Mr. Womble, they're trying to wait until we all die,' " says state Rep. Larry Womble of Winston-Salem, who's been pushing the victims' cause for a decade.
Gov. Bev Perdue created the N.C. Justice for Sterilization Victims Foundation last year to shine some light on a dark time in North Carolina history. In the early part of the 20th century, authorities in this and other states embraced the idea of eugenics - the science of improving the human race by reducing the number of children born to parents with undesirable traits.
In practice, "undesirable" parents included ones with epilepsy and mental illness; it also included ones who were uneducated, abused or simply poor.
The Eugenics Board of North Carolina - one of many similar boards across the country - authorized sterilization of roughly 7,600 North Carolinians. Mecklenburg County did the most in the state, by far. From 1946 to 1968, when the state kept its most detailed records, 485 people in Mecklenburg were sterilized through the eugenics board. Gaston County was third, with 161.
The board sterilized people who fell into three categories: mental illness, such as schizophrenia; epilepsy; and people classified as "feebleminded," which usually meant a low score on an IQ test.
The board looked at other factors. Some people were pegged as too sexually active, or hard to control, or stuck in poverty. Most were women or girls. Some were as young as 10.
The Justice for Sterilization Victims Foundation is supposed to find the survivors.
The state gave the foundation a $250,000 budget, spread over three years. That money pays for the staff - a full-time director, plus two part-timers - and an office in the state education building.
The foundation built a website and sent posters to social services offices throughout the state. But there's no money to advertise or send people into the field.
Charmaine Fuller Cooper, executive director of the foundation, says she's depending on news reports to get the message out. She suspects some survivors don't want to be found; they might want to forget what happened, or might never have told their families.
"This is a closet that we're opening," she says. "You never know what you can find."
The saddest matchmaking
Cooper and her assistants are taking about 200 calls a month now. They talk each caller through the process of seeing whether they or their loved ones are in the files. When she gets a batch of applications - the last was about 50 - she walks them a block over to the archives.
In an age where most everything is accessible with a click, the eugenics records show the methods of a different era.
Each patient was logged onto a piece of cardboard, like the old library card catalogs. Social Security numbers weren't used. Addresses were often route and box numbers. Eight trays are jammed full of the cards. They're kept in an underground storage space kept below 65 degrees.
State officials are emphatic about guarding the privacy of those who may have lived with decades of shame. Staffers sworn to protect the confidentiality of the records check the card catalog. If they find a match, they copy a 10- to 20-page file from the long lines of gray storage boxes, which resemble a columbarium used to store ashes of the dead.
It may be the saddest matchmaking operation in the country. Heirs are already arguing over whether to unearth files that tell of incest, sexual abuse, domestic violence, grinding poverty and degradingly obsolete attitudes toward people with mental illness or retardation.
Compensation complications
Even when the foundation does find survivors, it's not clear what - if anything - the state will do for them.
North Carolina is the first state to seriously consider compensating survivors. In March, Perdue created a five-person task force to figure out possible cash payments for people sterilized under the eugenics board. The task force has met four times but hasn't settled on an amount; the number it has talked about most is $20,000 per victim. But nothing's final, and the task force won't make an official recommendation until February.
The idea of compensating survivors has support across the political spectrum; both the liberal NAACP and the conservative/libertarian John Locke Foundation have come out in favor. The problem is money.
In Canada, the Locke Foundation notes, court judgments have forced large payouts: $740,000 to one eugenics victim who sued, $142 million to about 1,000 victims in another suit.
Even the $20,000 payment being discussed in North Carolina would add up to $30 million if 1,500 survivors were compensated. And North Carolina, like most states, is trying to cut from its budget rather than add to it.
The reluctance to pay angers Womble. He learned of the state-sponsored sterilizations when an academic researcher unearthed the records in the 1990s and shared them with a reporter from the Winston-Salem Journal, who called Womble.
"I really cried when I heard about it. I said, 'What? Not in America!' " he said.
He wants his colleagues in the legislature to approve money for cash compensation, education, medical care and counseling for surviving victims. He wants the state to get far more aggressive in its search for survivors: ads on buses and billboards, satellite offices around the state.
Perdue was hosting the Southern Governors' Association meeting in Asheville late last week; a spokesman said she was unavailable to comment.
Womble has introduced a bill that would provide $20,000 for each living survivor. He says it's up to the House speaker - now Thom Tillis, a Mecklenburg Republican - to let it get out of committee for a vote.
Tillis's press spokesman, Jordan Shaw, said Monday that he would try to get Tillis to talk about sterilization later in the week. After that, neither Shaw nor Tillis returned calls.
Womble doesn't buy the "no money" pitch: "You found the money to do the program. Find the money to compensate the victims."
Cooper finds herself forming a spiritual bond with those who step up.
"There's something in how they speak. They're very calm, almost angelic," she says. "To go through the things these people had to go through, you have to have a higher power with you."
She said she believes the only way the public will understand the enormity of what happened is to hear the victims' stories. And it's those stories, she says, that will spur legislators to make sure those who have spoken out are not sent away with empty apologies.
"The question now is, what do the legislators perceive as justice?" Cooper says. "If we're still casting judgment on victims from 40 or 50 years ago, are we any better? Is no decision actually a judgment?"
Read more: http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2011/08/21/2542523/eugenics-survivors-prove-elusive.html#storylink=misearch#ixzz1W9ks5igL
If you think you were sterilized under the N.C. eugenics board's program, or if you think a family member was, call the N.C. Justice for Sterilization Victims Foundation toll-free at 877-550-6013, 10 a.m.-4 p.m. Mondays-Thursdays.
The Observer is also looking for victims and family members. Contact Ann Doss Helms (704-358-5033, ahelms@charlotteobserver.com) or
Read more: http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2011/08/21/2542523/eugenics-survivors-prove-elusive.html#storylink=misearch#ixzz1W9pwnYz3
• Tommy Tomlinson (704-358-5227, ttomlinson@charlotteobserver.com).
To those who are participating in MODERN DAY EUGENICS:
Please be advised to all those who read this: that KATRINA was and is symbolic of MODERN DAY EUGENICS in the United States of America-[ the news article listed below said 1929 to 1974=LIE] and the reason they can't find the people who are alive that were victims is that they are not one of the their "PETS"[meaning working for males of the larger society]. And that KATRINA showed ONLY the tip of the what is really going on concerning mistreatment of African Americans. There is arguement as to weather KATRINA was intentional. The the effect of Eugenics on the victims of Eugenics was not based on intention; the effect was real; it killed what belonged to people; decisions were made for them; they were not allowed to make decisions for themselves and in the city of Winston-Salem, North Carolina where interestingly enough Mr. W-----[whom I have almost begged and pleaded for him concerning constant intimidatation/harassment/ interferance with my life] says that he cried when he found out about what the state of North Carolina did to citizens; not in the United States; BUT no tears for a present day person being subjected to the same type of system; that not only sterilizes physically but also economically.[guess person have to be one of the "PETS" of the male members of the larger society.][BUT wouldn't that be the same thing as what the people in 1819/1929 who had to do as they were told would call "Slavery"?
And as stated KATRINA was just the tip of what is happening to African Americans in the United States; so is Mr. W-----s reaction my plea and cries for intervention in the MONDERN DAY EUGENICS [which include putting camera's in people's eyes when they have surgery[experiments]; deciding if they should keep one child or two to raise[experiment]; probably putting tracking systems on them while in surgery; and using mind control systems to manipulate them][deciding who they can and can't date]=?
In the article "N.C. eugenics survivors prove elusive" it states that the survivors just can't seem to be found; BUT their "PETS" are making "money" have jobs off of the sorrows of others created by the state=????????; almost like harassing/intimidating a person with confinement if the person works and develope income without participating in illegal activities to force the person to the point of not being able to concentrate/focus to provoke the person into a negative plight in life. And the title of the articles sums up my entire life which as been"ELUSIVE"; meaning that in over twenty plus years of harassment, intimidation, and threats that help has been elusive; even by Mr. W----- who cried when he heard of what the state did to the African Americans [along with Mr.Wombles help being elusive, so was the help from some of Mr. W-----s other collogues].
You would think that in twenty plus years that someone in authority would intervene in the harassment/intimidation/abuse [like the Eugenics surviviors didn't ask for help]. For those of you who can think; Consider the population and number of African Americans during 1929; there were more African Americans than there were Caucasians; and ONLY 1,500 people were serilized=???? [remember the mindset of the majority of the people towards African Americans during 1929=not good].
Good example of MODERN DAY EUGENICS= African American women in the church can't have a husband UNLESS they are FAT and serve males of the larger society [system whereby the wife gives husband wrong information or tells the husband don't hinder what males of the larger society are doing to the smaller community of color][Movie-HITMAN=scene where the female tells the hitman="STOP" and then the hitmans says="She just saved your life."=why the African American minister's wife is controlled by the males of the larger society][Picture on "Sociology Area" blog].
"Longtime Forsyth United Way CEO to retire"[http://www.news-record.com/content/2011/03/30/article/longtime_forsyth_united_way_ceo_to_retire]; the New CEO of United Way is name CYNTHIA [CINTAs=CODE][United Way=relative[code] [CINTAS] has agreed to unite with the local community to [continue the system of "EUGENICS"] by the furtherance of harassment;
intimidate and stealing from "Socialpeacest"= the purpose of the the research by reading the "GUN DIGEST" magazine [where picture of female of the larger society using weapon].
As stated in "SURREPLY" those in higher authority put it in writing that the information was presented in such a way that "the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court"
[information that was written a few minutes ago disappeared][conclusion is that the court said that they understand that those in authority are usining intimidation/harassment, etc. to coerce me into something negative and that I asked that if the courts decision was to dismiss the case that the United States court would give me exemption because that would leave the Plaintiff in a land of "NO Law" and that documents were given to the court that showed that ex employer [---'s -l--] [where the secret members were mostly males of the larger society] use weapons [-u-s] as a form of intimidation. The courts reply/response that "the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court" mean that they have an adequeate understanding of the harassment/ intimidation/and abuse of the plaintiff; "Reference to the Dillinger Bridge Trial in New Orleans was made in the court documents".
N.C. eugenics survivors prove elusive
By Ann Doss Helms and Tommy Tomlinson
ahelms@charlotteobserver.com, ttomlinson@charlotteobserver.com
Read more: http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2011/08/21/2542523/eugenics-survivors-prove-elusive.html#storylink=misearch#ixzz1W9kiEZN6
They were labeled unfit parents, promiscuous or simply feebleminded, then sent by the thousands to surgeons who ensured they would never have babies again - or never at all.
The records are interred in rows of gray boxes in a cold basement of the state archives, waiting for survivors of North Carolina's eugenic sterilization program to step forward and claim them.
State officials say they believe at least 1,500 of the women, girls, boys and men sterilized under state authority from 1929 to 1974 are still alive.
But one year into a three-year quest to find them, only 34 files have been matched with living survivors or descendants of the dead. And officials' talk of paying for the victims' pain could end as a false hope.
A handful of survivors have gone public with their wrenching stories, drawing national attention. Yet those closest to North Carolina's effort to make victims whole question whether the state is acting in good faith.
"Some of (the survivors) have told me, 'Mr. Womble, they're trying to wait until we all die,' " says state Rep. Larry Womble of Winston-Salem, who's been pushing the victims' cause for a decade.
Gov. Bev Perdue created the N.C. Justice for Sterilization Victims Foundation last year to shine some light on a dark time in North Carolina history. In the early part of the 20th century, authorities in this and other states embraced the idea of eugenics - the science of improving the human race by reducing the number of children born to parents with undesirable traits.
In practice, "undesirable" parents included ones with epilepsy and mental illness; it also included ones who were uneducated, abused or simply poor.
The Eugenics Board of North Carolina - one of many similar boards across the country - authorized sterilization of roughly 7,600 North Carolinians. Mecklenburg County did the most in the state, by far. From 1946 to 1968, when the state kept its most detailed records, 485 people in Mecklenburg were sterilized through the eugenics board. Gaston County was third, with 161.
The board sterilized people who fell into three categories: mental illness, such as schizophrenia; epilepsy; and people classified as "feebleminded," which usually meant a low score on an IQ test.
The board looked at other factors. Some people were pegged as too sexually active, or hard to control, or stuck in poverty. Most were women or girls. Some were as young as 10.
The Justice for Sterilization Victims Foundation is supposed to find the survivors.
The state gave the foundation a $250,000 budget, spread over three years. That money pays for the staff - a full-time director, plus two part-timers - and an office in the state education building.
The foundation built a website and sent posters to social services offices throughout the state. But there's no money to advertise or send people into the field.
Charmaine Fuller Cooper, executive director of the foundation, says she's depending on news reports to get the message out. She suspects some survivors don't want to be found; they might want to forget what happened, or might never have told their families.
"This is a closet that we're opening," she says. "You never know what you can find."
The saddest matchmaking
Cooper and her assistants are taking about 200 calls a month now. They talk each caller through the process of seeing whether they or their loved ones are in the files. When she gets a batch of applications - the last was about 50 - she walks them a block over to the archives.
In an age where most everything is accessible with a click, the eugenics records show the methods of a different era.
Each patient was logged onto a piece of cardboard, like the old library card catalogs. Social Security numbers weren't used. Addresses were often route and box numbers. Eight trays are jammed full of the cards. They're kept in an underground storage space kept below 65 degrees.
State officials are emphatic about guarding the privacy of those who may have lived with decades of shame. Staffers sworn to protect the confidentiality of the records check the card catalog. If they find a match, they copy a 10- to 20-page file from the long lines of gray storage boxes, which resemble a columbarium used to store ashes of the dead.
It may be the saddest matchmaking operation in the country. Heirs are already arguing over whether to unearth files that tell of incest, sexual abuse, domestic violence, grinding poverty and degradingly obsolete attitudes toward people with mental illness or retardation.
Compensation complications
Even when the foundation does find survivors, it's not clear what - if anything - the state will do for them.
North Carolina is the first state to seriously consider compensating survivors. In March, Perdue created a five-person task force to figure out possible cash payments for people sterilized under the eugenics board. The task force has met four times but hasn't settled on an amount; the number it has talked about most is $20,000 per victim. But nothing's final, and the task force won't make an official recommendation until February.
The idea of compensating survivors has support across the political spectrum; both the liberal NAACP and the conservative/libertarian John Locke Foundation have come out in favor. The problem is money.
In Canada, the Locke Foundation notes, court judgments have forced large payouts: $740,000 to one eugenics victim who sued, $142 million to about 1,000 victims in another suit.
Even the $20,000 payment being discussed in North Carolina would add up to $30 million if 1,500 survivors were compensated. And North Carolina, like most states, is trying to cut from its budget rather than add to it.
The reluctance to pay angers Womble. He learned of the state-sponsored sterilizations when an academic researcher unearthed the records in the 1990s and shared them with a reporter from the Winston-Salem Journal, who called Womble.
"I really cried when I heard about it. I said, 'What? Not in America!' " he said.
He wants his colleagues in the legislature to approve money for cash compensation, education, medical care and counseling for surviving victims. He wants the state to get far more aggressive in its search for survivors: ads on buses and billboards, satellite offices around the state.
Perdue was hosting the Southern Governors' Association meeting in Asheville late last week; a spokesman said she was unavailable to comment.
Womble has introduced a bill that would provide $20,000 for each living survivor. He says it's up to the House speaker - now Thom Tillis, a Mecklenburg Republican - to let it get out of committee for a vote.
Tillis's press spokesman, Jordan Shaw, said Monday that he would try to get Tillis to talk about sterilization later in the week. After that, neither Shaw nor Tillis returned calls.
Womble doesn't buy the "no money" pitch: "You found the money to do the program. Find the money to compensate the victims."
Cooper finds herself forming a spiritual bond with those who step up.
"There's something in how they speak. They're very calm, almost angelic," she says. "To go through the things these people had to go through, you have to have a higher power with you."
She said she believes the only way the public will understand the enormity of what happened is to hear the victims' stories. And it's those stories, she says, that will spur legislators to make sure those who have spoken out are not sent away with empty apologies.
"The question now is, what do the legislators perceive as justice?" Cooper says. "If we're still casting judgment on victims from 40 or 50 years ago, are we any better? Is no decision actually a judgment?"
Read more: http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2011/08/21/2542523/eugenics-survivors-prove-elusive.html#storylink=misearch#ixzz1W9ks5igL
If you think you were sterilized under the N.C. eugenics board's program, or if you think a family member was, call the N.C. Justice for Sterilization Victims Foundation toll-free at 877-550-6013, 10 a.m.-4 p.m. Mondays-Thursdays.
The Observer is also looking for victims and family members. Contact Ann Doss Helms (704-358-5033, ahelms@charlotteobserver.com) or
Read more: http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2011/08/21/2542523/eugenics-survivors-prove-elusive.html#storylink=misearch#ixzz1W9pwnYz3
• Tommy Tomlinson (704-358-5227, ttomlinson@charlotteobserver.com).
Tuesday, August 09, 2011
"New Orleans is at the center of a key federal pursuit"
8/9/11
Following below are some of the statements by local people that live in New Orleans who was giving their opinion about the verdict of the New Orleans trial where the five authority figures and their behaviors had been identified and the verdict of the authority figures behaviors towards intentionally shooting innocent citizens in the back.
Heard on a local radio station after the verdic that the Federal Court was
sending a message there would be no tolerance to anyone doing any type of harm to citizens. Let me remind you that during the Katrina Storm that there were many a news, radio station, internet and newspaper that called the people in the Katrina storm [refugees]; which brings to point that as posted before African Americans who are participating in any type of harassment of the African American people are considered to be one of theirs [right now I'm thinking that they are calling them citizens]; which leaves the question and the issue-what about African Americans that do not participate in ethnic intimidation [does that give the authority figures the right to do whatever they want to the African Americans that do not participate in ethnic intimidation?]
Based upon the present court case in The United States Court of Appeals in Virginia where the judges wrote, "We dispense with oral argument because [the facts and legal contentions] are adequately presented in the material before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process."
From my perspective it means that the court knows and understands that my plight may be similar to the possibility of the plight of the people that were gunned down in the back in New Orleans; and one of the judges was a hispanic appointed about the same time that the other judge that came to Winston-Salem North Carolina to speak[communicate rob an individual] at the NAACP was appointed and all of the judicial appointments and transferance to the court case in Appeals Court in Va [as if by design]which has resulted in constant created appeals [manner to use to attack an individual]
Did speak with an individual who did say that the situation sounded more like a personal situation [I diagreed because of the numerous type of negative situations viewed]; And from this perspective if is is personal; it is from the authority; personally didn't know they were in the world because of focus on quote on quote "making it in life"; guess a person can't "make it in life" UNLESS working for authority [which in the city of Winston-Salem is basically males of the larger society];[which thinking that the court case in Appeals Court/4th Circuit in Va. was used as a leverage for the Katrina Court Case [again, it is more acceptable to society to deal with the issue of/in the Katrina trial vs dealing with the issue of males of the larger society targeting and coercing African American females to work for authority or authority will interfere and/or block their paths to "making it in life"; because that would be the equivalent of slavery [what slave masters use to do - not allow any type of slave to prosper unless the slave master said so and unless the person did as they were told.
And the judges words verify the fact that there is a conflict [which personally was viewed upon as already having been settled during the civil war] African Americans are no longer slaves and have all the rights of the white people[not my words] based upon the United States Constitution and the Bill of Rights and that no one has the right to tell African Americans or any person who they are [or to block a person from access to resources unless they are in a secret club].
In the New Orleans article about the trial-they have a comments section, where people give their view of the trial and some of the things that were posted such as: "The FED's come in because the local judicial officials are most likely, part of the crime or coverup. If they didn't have a shakeup now and again, the NOLA Metro would be the US crime capitol. Lest we forget, the FBI, has its own dark past. The details are well known, and historical fact, even though most are in denial, or convenient forgetfulness. This time, they all deserve a round of applause, and job-well-done awards. I never could figure out, what did Martin Luther King do to deserve all of that anyway"; which means that UNLESS a MIRICLE occurs that leaves me, my life [especially based upon the comments of a lot of the people-the problems are larger than the New Orleans trial]in the plight of the victims of the New Orleans authority].
The United States Constitution says that a person has the right to pursue life, liberty, property, happiness, which I have spent over three decades pursuing only to get the opposite results - because the members of the secret club [African American females with husbands/males in their lives] have been paid to block the path to "making it in life" to force me to into involuntary servitude vs. Freedom.
Never had a desire to fight with anyone, just wanted a 9-5 job. And so all will know my Granddaddy was white and his whole family ran the local authority office and my Granddaddy wouldn't participate[and he didn't like his white family-he disowned them]=which resulted in my daddy [who was constantly under attack by authority][bind the demon from operating in my life.][My cousin works for/with them-when they messed up my phone and it HAD to be replaced with a new phone [they left her number in the phone as the ONLY contact person=all other people they will try and block from out of my life=and cousin is in total agreement with the males of the larger society that walks around [where my cousin works]with great big shiny weapons intimidating all forms of individual thought; not to mention the extremely negatiave situations constantly presented to my cousin; think they call it mind control; and at the same time it also is method of control so that the only way they will allow me to have my life is to do as they say[my cousin will be my only contact]and if not then my cousin will no longer serve any purpose to them[which is not good].
And regardless of the pictures that are shown of the authority figures were convicted; it is still a black and white issue; specifically a Black and White WALLSTREET issue; WHITE WALLSTREET can grow and people who help it to grow are rewarded; BlACK WALLSTREET on the other hand or anything that allows for the development of anything Good in the African American CULTURE in not allowed and the product [except bad products],businesses [except illegal businesses] are attacked and destroyed as they did the BLACK WALLSTREET][http://www.blackwallstreet.freeservers.com/The%20Story.htm]Point is African Americans moved on and said that all that was in the past and those who participated must have passed on the concept that read about that never again would "BLACK WALLSTREET" rise up or be.
[One technique is to block a person from access to their family [family is a support system].
Socialpeacest
*************************************************************
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/contentions
Contentions: con·ten·tion /kənˈtɛnʃən/ Show Spelled[kuhn-ten-shuhn] Show IPA
noun
1. a struggling together in opposition; strife.
2. a striving in rivalry; competition; contest.
3. strife in debate; dispute; controversy.
4. a point contended for or affirmed in controversy.
Synonyms
1. conflict, combat. 3. disagreement, dissension, debate,
altercation.
Main Entry: contention
Part of Speech: noun
Definition: competition
Synonyms: altercation, argument, battle, beef, belligerency, bone of contention, bone to pick, combat, conflict, contest, controversy, difference, disaccord, discord, dispute, dissension, dissent, dissidence, disunity, enmity, feuding, fight, flak, hassle, hostility, quarrel, rivalry, run-in, scene, scrap, set-to, squabble, static, strife, struggle, variance, war, wrangle, wrangling
Antonyms: affection, consideration, friendliness, friendship, good will, kindness, sympathy
Main Entry: contention
Part of Speech: noun
Definition: argument for idea
Synonyms: advancement, affirmation, allegation, assertion, asseveration, avowal, belief, charge, claim, contestation, declaration, demurrer, deposition, discussion, explanation, ground, hurrah, hypothesis, idea, maintaining, opinion, plea, position, predication, profession, rumpus, stand, thesis, view
Concept Thesaurus Concept: Contention.
Category: 1. Conditional Antagonism
Synonyms: -nouns
contention, strife; contest, contestation; struggle; belligerency; opposition., controversy, polemics; debate (discussion); war of words, logomachy, litigation; paper war; high words (quarrel); sparring., competition, rivalry; corrivalry, corrivalship, agonism, concours, match, race, horse racing, heat, steeple chase, handicap; regatta; field day; sham fight, Derby day; turf, sporting, bullfight, tauromachy, gymkhana; boat race, torpids., wrestling, pugilism, boxing, fisticuffs, spar, mill, set-to, round, bout, event, prize fighting; quarterstaff, single stick; gladiatorship, gymnastics; jiujitsu, jujutsu, kooshti, sumo; athletics, athletic sports; games of skill., shindy; fracas (discord); clash of arms; tussle, scuffle, broil, fray; affray, affrayment; velitation; colluctation, luctation; brabble, brigue, scramble, melee, scrimmage, stramash, bushfighting., free fight, stand up fight, hand to hand, running fight., conflict, skirmish; rencounter, encounter; rencontre, collision, affair, brush, fight; battle, battle royal; combat, action, engagement, joust, tournament; tilt, tilting [Medieval times]; tournay, list; pitched battle., death struggle, struggle for life or death, life or death struggle, Armageddon., hard knocks, sharp contest, tug of war., naval engagement, naumachia, sea fight., duel, duello; single combat, monomachy, satisfaction, passage d'armes, passage of arms, affair of honor; triangular duel; hostile meeting, digladiation; deeds of arms, feats of arms; appeal to arms (warfare)., pugnacity; combativeness; bone of contention.
-verbs
contend; contest, strive, struggle, scramble, wrestle; spar, square; exchange blows, exchange fisticuffs; fib, justle, tussle, tilt, box, stave, fence; skirmish; pickeer; fight (war); wrangle (quarrel)., contend with, grapple with, engage with, close with, buckle with, bandy with, try conclusions with, have a brush with, tilt with; encounter, fall foul of, pitch into, clapperclaw, run a tilt at; oppose; reluct., join issue, come to blows, go to loggerheads, set to, come to the scratch, exchange shots, measure swords, meet hand to hand; take up the cudgels, take up the glove, take up the gauntlet; enter the lists; couch one's lance; give satisfaction; appeal to arms (warfare)., lay about one; break the peace., compete with, cope with, vie with, race with; outvie, emulate, rival; run a race; contend for, stipulate for, stickle for; insist upon, make a point of.
-adjectives
contending; together by the ears, at loggerheads at war at issue., competitive, rival; belligerent; contentious, combative, bellicose, unpeaceful; warlike; quarrelsome; pugnacious; pugilistic, gladiatorial; palestric, palestrical.
-phrases
a verbis ad verbera; a word and a blow; "a very pretty quarrel as it stands" [Sheridan]; commune periculum concordiam parit; lis litem generat.
Following below are some of the statements by local people that live in New Orleans who was giving their opinion about the verdict of the New Orleans trial where the five authority figures and their behaviors had been identified and the verdict of the authority figures behaviors towards intentionally shooting innocent citizens in the back.
Heard on a local radio station after the verdic that the Federal Court was
sending a message there would be no tolerance to anyone doing any type of harm to citizens. Let me remind you that during the Katrina Storm that there were many a news, radio station, internet and newspaper that called the people in the Katrina storm [refugees]; which brings to point that as posted before African Americans who are participating in any type of harassment of the African American people are considered to be one of theirs [right now I'm thinking that they are calling them citizens]; which leaves the question and the issue-what about African Americans that do not participate in ethnic intimidation [does that give the authority figures the right to do whatever they want to the African Americans that do not participate in ethnic intimidation?]
Based upon the present court case in The United States Court of Appeals in Virginia where the judges wrote, "We dispense with oral argument because [the facts and legal contentions] are adequately presented in the material before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process."
From my perspective it means that the court knows and understands that my plight may be similar to the possibility of the plight of the people that were gunned down in the back in New Orleans; and one of the judges was a hispanic appointed about the same time that the other judge that came to Winston-Salem North Carolina to speak[communicate rob an individual] at the NAACP was appointed and all of the judicial appointments and transferance to the court case in Appeals Court in Va [as if by design]which has resulted in constant created appeals [manner to use to attack an individual]
Did speak with an individual who did say that the situation sounded more like a personal situation [I diagreed because of the numerous type of negative situations viewed]; And from this perspective if is is personal; it is from the authority; personally didn't know they were in the world because of focus on quote on quote "making it in life"; guess a person can't "make it in life" UNLESS working for authority [which in the city of Winston-Salem is basically males of the larger society];[which thinking that the court case in Appeals Court/4th Circuit in Va. was used as a leverage for the Katrina Court Case [again, it is more acceptable to society to deal with the issue of/in the Katrina trial vs dealing with the issue of males of the larger society targeting and coercing African American females to work for authority or authority will interfere and/or block their paths to "making it in life"; because that would be the equivalent of slavery [what slave masters use to do - not allow any type of slave to prosper unless the slave master said so and unless the person did as they were told.
And the judges words verify the fact that there is a conflict [which personally was viewed upon as already having been settled during the civil war] African Americans are no longer slaves and have all the rights of the white people[not my words] based upon the United States Constitution and the Bill of Rights and that no one has the right to tell African Americans or any person who they are [or to block a person from access to resources unless they are in a secret club].
In the New Orleans article about the trial-they have a comments section, where people give their view of the trial and some of the things that were posted such as: "The FED's come in because the local judicial officials are most likely, part of the crime or coverup. If they didn't have a shakeup now and again, the NOLA Metro would be the US crime capitol. Lest we forget, the FBI, has its own dark past. The details are well known, and historical fact, even though most are in denial, or convenient forgetfulness. This time, they all deserve a round of applause, and job-well-done awards. I never could figure out, what did Martin Luther King do to deserve all of that anyway"; which means that UNLESS a MIRICLE occurs that leaves me, my life [especially based upon the comments of a lot of the people-the problems are larger than the New Orleans trial]in the plight of the victims of the New Orleans authority].
The United States Constitution says that a person has the right to pursue life, liberty, property, happiness, which I have spent over three decades pursuing only to get the opposite results - because the members of the secret club [African American females with husbands/males in their lives] have been paid to block the path to "making it in life" to force me to into involuntary servitude vs. Freedom.
Never had a desire to fight with anyone, just wanted a 9-5 job. And so all will know my Granddaddy was white and his whole family ran the local authority office and my Granddaddy wouldn't participate[and he didn't like his white family-he disowned them]=which resulted in my daddy [who was constantly under attack by authority][bind the demon from operating in my life.][My cousin works for/with them-when they messed up my phone and it HAD to be replaced with a new phone [they left her number in the phone as the ONLY contact person=all other people they will try and block from out of my life=and cousin is in total agreement with the males of the larger society that walks around [where my cousin works]with great big shiny weapons intimidating all forms of individual thought; not to mention the extremely negatiave situations constantly presented to my cousin; think they call it mind control; and at the same time it also is method of control so that the only way they will allow me to have my life is to do as they say[my cousin will be my only contact]and if not then my cousin will no longer serve any purpose to them[which is not good].
And regardless of the pictures that are shown of the authority figures were convicted; it is still a black and white issue; specifically a Black and White WALLSTREET issue; WHITE WALLSTREET can grow and people who help it to grow are rewarded; BlACK WALLSTREET on the other hand or anything that allows for the development of anything Good in the African American CULTURE in not allowed and the product [except bad products],businesses [except illegal businesses] are attacked and destroyed as they did the BLACK WALLSTREET][http://www.blackwallstreet.freeservers.com/The%20Story.htm]Point is African Americans moved on and said that all that was in the past and those who participated must have passed on the concept that read about that never again would "BLACK WALLSTREET" rise up or be.
[One technique is to block a person from access to their family [family is a support system].
Socialpeacest
*************************************************************
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/contentions
Contentions: con·ten·tion /kənˈtɛnʃən/ Show Spelled[kuhn-ten-shuhn] Show IPA
noun
1. a struggling together in opposition; strife.
2. a striving in rivalry; competition; contest.
3. strife in debate; dispute; controversy.
4. a point contended for or affirmed in controversy.
Synonyms
1. conflict, combat. 3. disagreement, dissension, debate,
altercation.
Main Entry: contention
Part of Speech: noun
Definition: competition
Synonyms: altercation, argument, battle, beef, belligerency, bone of contention, bone to pick, combat, conflict, contest, controversy, difference, disaccord, discord, dispute, dissension, dissent, dissidence, disunity, enmity, feuding, fight, flak, hassle, hostility, quarrel, rivalry, run-in, scene, scrap, set-to, squabble, static, strife, struggle, variance, war, wrangle, wrangling
Antonyms: affection, consideration, friendliness, friendship, good will, kindness, sympathy
Main Entry: contention
Part of Speech: noun
Definition: argument for idea
Synonyms: advancement, affirmation, allegation, assertion, asseveration, avowal, belief, charge, claim, contestation, declaration, demurrer, deposition, discussion, explanation, ground, hurrah, hypothesis, idea, maintaining, opinion, plea, position, predication, profession, rumpus, stand, thesis, view
Concept Thesaurus Concept: Contention.
Category: 1. Conditional Antagonism
Synonyms: -nouns
contention, strife; contest, contestation; struggle; belligerency; opposition., controversy, polemics; debate (discussion); war of words, logomachy, litigation; paper war; high words (quarrel); sparring., competition, rivalry; corrivalry, corrivalship, agonism, concours, match, race, horse racing, heat, steeple chase, handicap; regatta; field day; sham fight, Derby day; turf, sporting, bullfight, tauromachy, gymkhana; boat race, torpids., wrestling, pugilism, boxing, fisticuffs, spar, mill, set-to, round, bout, event, prize fighting; quarterstaff, single stick; gladiatorship, gymnastics; jiujitsu, jujutsu, kooshti, sumo; athletics, athletic sports; games of skill., shindy; fracas (discord); clash of arms; tussle, scuffle, broil, fray; affray, affrayment; velitation; colluctation, luctation; brabble, brigue, scramble, melee, scrimmage, stramash, bushfighting., free fight, stand up fight, hand to hand, running fight., conflict, skirmish; rencounter, encounter; rencontre, collision, affair, brush, fight; battle, battle royal; combat, action, engagement, joust, tournament; tilt, tilting [Medieval times]; tournay, list; pitched battle., death struggle, struggle for life or death, life or death struggle, Armageddon., hard knocks, sharp contest, tug of war., naval engagement, naumachia, sea fight., duel, duello; single combat, monomachy, satisfaction, passage d'armes, passage of arms, affair of honor; triangular duel; hostile meeting, digladiation; deeds of arms, feats of arms; appeal to arms (warfare)., pugnacity; combativeness; bone of contention.
-verbs
contend; contest, strive, struggle, scramble, wrestle; spar, square; exchange blows, exchange fisticuffs; fib, justle, tussle, tilt, box, stave, fence; skirmish; pickeer; fight (war); wrangle (quarrel)., contend with, grapple with, engage with, close with, buckle with, bandy with, try conclusions with, have a brush with, tilt with; encounter, fall foul of, pitch into, clapperclaw, run a tilt at; oppose; reluct., join issue, come to blows, go to loggerheads, set to, come to the scratch, exchange shots, measure swords, meet hand to hand; take up the cudgels, take up the glove, take up the gauntlet; enter the lists; couch one's lance; give satisfaction; appeal to arms (warfare)., lay about one; break the peace., compete with, cope with, vie with, race with; outvie, emulate, rival; run a race; contend for, stipulate for, stickle for; insist upon, make a point of.
-adjectives
contending; together by the ears, at loggerheads at war at issue., competitive, rival; belligerent; contentious, combative, bellicose, unpeaceful; warlike; quarrelsome; pugnacious; pugilistic, gladiatorial; palestric, palestrical.
-phrases
a verbis ad verbera; a word and a blow; "a very pretty quarrel as it stands" [Sheridan]; commune periculum concordiam parit; lis litem generat.
Monday, August 08, 2011
Truax v. Raich (No. 361)
8/8/11
Also located a lot of court cases related to the issues that have appeared in community [Winston-Salem]; the cases are from 1915 [Truax v. Raich (No. 361)]
and one case is in the 1800's or before.
Socialpeacest
*********************************************************
Truax v. Raich (No. 361)
219 Fed. Rep. 273, affirmed.
Syllabus
Opinion
[ Hughes ]
Dissent
[ Mcreynolds ]
HTML version
PDF version HTML version
PDF version HTML version
PDF version
Syllabus
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
239 U.S. 33
Truax v. Raich
APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No. 361 Argued: October 15, 1915 --- Decided: November 1, 1915
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A suit against officers of the State who are about to proceed wrongfully to complainant's injury in enforcing an unconstitutional statute is not a suit against the State within the meaning of the Eleventh Amendment.
While, generally speaking, a court of equity has no jurisdiction over prosecution, punishment or pardon of crimes or misdemeanors, equity may, when such action is essential to the safeguarding of property rights, restrain criminal prosecutions under unconstitutional statutes.
The right to earn a livelihood and to continue employment unmolested by efforts to enforce void enactments is entitled to protection in equity in the absence of an adequate remedy at law.
The fact that an employment is at the will of the employer and employee does not make it one at the will of others, and unjustified interference of third parties is actionable although the employment may be at will.
Although a statute may only render an employer liable to prosecution if it operates directly upon the employment of the employee and its enforcement would compel the discharge of an employe, the latter is affected directly, has no adequate remedy at law, and if the statute is unconstitutional, is entitled to equitable relief.
An alien admitted to the United States under the Federal law has not only the privilege of entering and abiding in the United States, but also of entering and abiding in any State, and being an inhabitant of any State entitles him, under the Fourteenth Amendment, to the equal protection of its laws. [p34]
The description in the Fourteenth Amendment of any person within the jurisdiction of the United States includes aliens. Yick Wo v. Hopkins, 118 U.S. 356.
The right to work for a living in the common occupations of the community is of the essence of that personal freedom and opportunity which it was the purpose of the Fourteenth Amendment to secure.
The power to control immigration -- to admit or exclude aliens -- is vested solely in the Federal Government, and the States may not deprive aliens so admitted of the right to earn a livelihood, as that would be tantamount to denying their entrance and abode.
A State may not, in order to protect citizens of the United States, in their employment against noncitizens of the United States in that State, require that employers only employ a specified percentage of alien employes -- such a statute denies to alien inhabitants the equal protection of the law, and so held as to statute of Arizona of December 14, 1914.
Such a statute is not the less unconstitutional because it allows employers to employ a specified percentage of alien employes.
The rule that a State may recognize degrees of evil and adapt its legislation accordingly applies to matters concerning which the State has authority to legislate.
Whether the statute of Arizona attempting to regulate employment of aliens is void as conflicting with rights of aliens under treaties with their respective nations not determined in this case, as the statute is held unconstitutional under the equal protection provision of the Fourteenth Amendment.
The facts, which involve the constitutionality under the equal protection provision of the Fourteenth Amendment of the Act of December 14, 1914, of the State of Arizona relative to the employment of aliens in that State, are stated in the opinion. [p35]
Also located a lot of court cases related to the issues that have appeared in community [Winston-Salem]; the cases are from 1915 [Truax v. Raich (No. 361)]
and one case is in the 1800's or before.
Socialpeacest
*********************************************************
Truax v. Raich (No. 361)
219 Fed. Rep. 273, affirmed.
Syllabus
Opinion
[ Hughes ]
Dissent
[ Mcreynolds ]
HTML version
PDF version HTML version
PDF version HTML version
PDF version
Syllabus
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
239 U.S. 33
Truax v. Raich
APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No. 361 Argued: October 15, 1915 --- Decided: November 1, 1915
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A suit against officers of the State who are about to proceed wrongfully to complainant's injury in enforcing an unconstitutional statute is not a suit against the State within the meaning of the Eleventh Amendment.
While, generally speaking, a court of equity has no jurisdiction over prosecution, punishment or pardon of crimes or misdemeanors, equity may, when such action is essential to the safeguarding of property rights, restrain criminal prosecutions under unconstitutional statutes.
The right to earn a livelihood and to continue employment unmolested by efforts to enforce void enactments is entitled to protection in equity in the absence of an adequate remedy at law.
The fact that an employment is at the will of the employer and employee does not make it one at the will of others, and unjustified interference of third parties is actionable although the employment may be at will.
Although a statute may only render an employer liable to prosecution if it operates directly upon the employment of the employee and its enforcement would compel the discharge of an employe, the latter is affected directly, has no adequate remedy at law, and if the statute is unconstitutional, is entitled to equitable relief.
An alien admitted to the United States under the Federal law has not only the privilege of entering and abiding in the United States, but also of entering and abiding in any State, and being an inhabitant of any State entitles him, under the Fourteenth Amendment, to the equal protection of its laws. [p34]
The description in the Fourteenth Amendment of any person within the jurisdiction of the United States includes aliens. Yick Wo v. Hopkins, 118 U.S. 356.
The right to work for a living in the common occupations of the community is of the essence of that personal freedom and opportunity which it was the purpose of the Fourteenth Amendment to secure.
The power to control immigration -- to admit or exclude aliens -- is vested solely in the Federal Government, and the States may not deprive aliens so admitted of the right to earn a livelihood, as that would be tantamount to denying their entrance and abode.
A State may not, in order to protect citizens of the United States, in their employment against noncitizens of the United States in that State, require that employers only employ a specified percentage of alien employes -- such a statute denies to alien inhabitants the equal protection of the law, and so held as to statute of Arizona of December 14, 1914.
Such a statute is not the less unconstitutional because it allows employers to employ a specified percentage of alien employes.
The rule that a State may recognize degrees of evil and adapt its legislation accordingly applies to matters concerning which the State has authority to legislate.
Whether the statute of Arizona attempting to regulate employment of aliens is void as conflicting with rights of aliens under treaties with their respective nations not determined in this case, as the statute is held unconstitutional under the equal protection provision of the Fourteenth Amendment.
The facts, which involve the constitutionality under the equal protection provision of the Fourteenth Amendment of the Act of December 14, 1914, of the State of Arizona relative to the employment of aliens in that State, are stated in the opinion. [p35]
HELP!!!??!! or where do you get help from abuse from authority=?????
8/8/11
katrina trial new orleans law:
Verdict=relative that lived in Greensboro=forced/intimidated to move to New YOrk City=punishment for my not working/doing what the authorities say;=to force as someone said in isolation/box me in=New Orleans trial=on August 1, 2011 recieved Judgement from 4th Circuit Appellant Court= that was mailed on August 1, 2011 and recieved in Winston-Salem in two and half Days- on August 3, 2011 with the decision to dismiss case after the BIG AUGUST 2, deadline for the DEBT CRISIS= People kept asking=what is that date about=it is the birthday of a relative that is closely associated with the relative that lived in Greensboro and Moved to New York[form of threat to the relative that moved to New York; that if they didn't negative consequences such as EATING or other relatives helping the person with the August 2 birthday eating would arise; therefore DEBT CRISIS=so much so that at local library=PAULA magazine=beside it was a magazine that was entitled[never seen before]; lined up neatly that lead to FOOD] and paula is still working at the local library as intimidation.
Also last time grass was cut male of the larger society appeared with all of the African American males equipment to cut grass=leaving the male of the larger society in complete control to cut grass and leave any type of intimidating message he wanted to; he left a can [which I had in a wood pile from attempting to do work on the house][that he took out of the wood pile]beside the back bedroom window; and today for the first time; don't know where it came from; never seen in on any of the book shelves by the law books; but there it was a book about g-ns[weapon];only problem is that there is no money to buy a g-n[weapon] and they know it.
Socialpeacest
********************************************
NEW ORLEANS — A federal jury on Friday convicted five current or former New Orleans police officers of civil rights violations in one of the lowest moments for city police in the chaotic aftermath of Hurricane Katrina: the shooting deaths of a teenager and a mentally disabled man as they crossed a bridge in search of food and help.
The case was a high-stakes test of the Justice Department's effort to rid the police department of corruption and brutality. A total of 20 current or former New Orleans police officers were charged last year in a series of federal probes. Most of the cases center on actions during the aftermath of the Aug. 29, 2005, storm, which plunged the flooded city into a state of lawlessness and desperation.
Sgts. Robert Gisevius and Kenneth Bowen, Officer Anthony Villavaso and former officer Robert Faulcon were convicted of civil rights violations in the shootings that killed two people and wounded four others on the Danziger Bridge less than a week after the storm. They face possible life prison sentences.
Retired Sgt. Arthur "Archie" Kaufman and the other four men also were convicted of engaging in a brazen cover-up that included a planted gun, fabricated witnesses and falsified reports. The five men were convicted of all 25 counts they faced.
Shaun Clarke, a defense attorney and former federal prosecutor who moved from New Orleans to Houston after Katrina, said the verdicts are "critically important" to the Justice Department's reform efforts.
"It's a huge verdict for the government," he said. "Of all the cases concerning alleged misconduct by police officers after Katrina, this was the one that had the highest national profile."
U.S. Attorney Jim Letten echoed that, saying the verdicts send a message that "public officials, and especially law enforcement officers, that they will be held accountable and that any abuse of power will have serious consequences."
Jurors found Faulcon guilty in the fatal shooting of Ronald Madison, a 40-year-old mentally disabled man, but the jury decided his killing didn't amount to murder. Faulcon, Gisevius, Bowen and Villavaso were convicted in the death of 17-year-old James Brissette. Jurors didn't have to decide whether Brissette was murdered because they didn't hold any of the defendants individually responsible for causing his death.
Kaufman, who was assigned to investigate the deadly encounter on the bridge, wasn't charged in the shootings. New Orleans Mayor Mitch Landrieu, who invited the Justice Department last year to conduct a thorough review of the police department, said the verdicts "provide significant closure to a dark chapter in our city's history."
In March, the Justice Department issued a blistering report that said New Orleans police officers have often used deadly force without justification, repeatedly made unconstitutional arrests and engaged in racial profiling. Landrieu has said he expects the federal review to bring about court-ordered reforms.
Five former officers pleaded guilty to participating in cover-up of the bridge shootings and testified during the trial. Another former officer, retired Sgt. Gerard Dugue, has a separate trial scheduled to start in September.
Brissette's mother, Sherrel Johnson, said she was relieved by the verdict after "a long, hard six years" and would now try to move on. But she lamented what her son has lost.
"For him there will be no prom, no baby, no nothing. My child will never have nothing," she said.
Madison's relatives said in a statement the family had waited six years to "find out what really happened on that bridge."
Madison's sister Jackie Madison Brown read the statement, which also said that after an event like Katrina, "all citizens, no matter what color or what class, deserve protection."
After the verdict was read, Justice Department prosecutor Bobbi Bernstein became emotional, hugging the families of Madison and Brissette and holding hands with two of Madison's sisters.
Defense attorney Roger Kitchens, who represented Villavaso, said he believed negative media coverage of the case tainted jurors.
"At this point, I don't think it's possible for a New Orleans police officer to get a fair trial in the city of New Orleans. And I don't think they got one today," he said.
Prosecutors said police had no justification for shooting unarmed, defenseless people trying to cross the bridge in search of food and help mere days after Katrina struck.
Defense attorneys argued, however, that police were shot at on the bridge before they returned fire.
Faulcon, the only defendant to testify, said he was "paralyzed with fear" when he shot and killed Madison, as he chased him and his brother, Lance Madison. Faulcon didn't dispute that he shot an unarmed man in the back, but he testified that he had believed Ronald Madison was armed and posed a threat.
Prosecutors contended that Kaufman retrieved a gun from his home weeks after the shootings and turned it in as evidence, trying to pass it off as a gun belonging to Lance Madison. Police arrested Lance Madison on attempted murder charges, but a grand jury later cleared him.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/08/05/katrina-danziger-bridge-katrina-shooting-verdict_n_919502.html
The Louisaina Weekly,Special to the Trice Edney News Wire- On its third day of deliberations, a federal jury in New Orleans Aug. 5 found five members of the New Orleans Police department guilty on 25 counts in the Danziger Bridge shootings and subsequent cover-up. The 2005 shootings that took place just days after Hurricane Katrina claimed the lives of two civilians and wounded four others. One of the survivors lost an arm.
“Today’s verdict by these jurors sends a powerful, a powerful, unmistakable message to public servants, to law enforcement officers and to the citizens we serve and indeed to the world,” U.S. Attorney Jim Letten said outside the federal courthouse. “That message is that public officials and especially law enforcement officers will be held accountable for their acts, and that any abuse of power, especially that power that violates the rights and the civil liberties of our citizens, will have serious consequences.”
“The citizens of this country will not, should not, and we intend that they will never have to fear the individuals who are called upon to protect them,” Letten added. “The citizens of this country should not have to fear the people called upon to protect them.”
While the five current or former officers were convicted on all 25 counts, the jury didn’t find that the shootings of James Brisette or Ronald Madison amounted to murder, The Associated Press reported.
Five other officers — Michael Lohman, Jeffery Lehrmann, Michael Hunter, Robert Barrios and Ignatis Hill, pleaded guilty on a variety of federal charges and agreed to cooperate with the U.S. Department of Justice as it continued its probe of the 2005 incident.
In closing arguments Tuesday, a federal prosecutor told jurors that Hurricane Katrina gave no excuse for the carnage on the Danziger Bridge.
But a defense attorney urged jurors to consider the “disorder, chaos and lawlessness” that gripped the flooded city after Katrina when they decide whether the officers acted reasonably in using deadly force, The Associated Press reported.
“That doesn’t mean the rules change, but the perception changes,” added Paul Fleming, a lawyer for former officer Robert Faulcon. “What’s considered reasonable gets looked at a little differently.”
Assistant U.S. Attorney Theodore Carter said police had no justification for shooting unarmed, defenseless people on the Danziger Bridge on Sept. 4, 2005, and then plotting to plant a gun, fabricate witnesses and falsify reports.
“They thought they could do what they wanted to do and there wouldn’t be any consequences,” Carter said of the defendants. “It was unreasonable for these officers to fire even one shot, let alone dozens.”
After several hours of closing arguments, jurors began their deliberations Wednesday.
The jurors heard five weeks of testimony from roughly 60 witnesses in the Justice Department’s case against Faulcon, Sgts. Robert Gisevius and Kenneth Bowen, Officer Anthony Villavaso and retired Sgt. Arthur Kaufman. Faulcon, Gisevius, Bowen and Villavaso are charged in the shootings and with taking part in the alleged cover-up. Kaufman, who investigated the shootings, only is charged in the alleged cover-up.
Defense attorneys say police were shot at on the bridge before they returned fire.
“None of these people intentionally decided to go out there and cause people harm,” said Timothy Meche, Villavaso’s lawyer. He said they did their best, operating under “terrible, horrible circumstances.”
Eric Hessler, Gisevius’ attorney, accused the government of ignoring evidence that somebody shot at the bridge from a grassy area nearby.
Carter, however, said the claim that police encountered armed residents is discredited by the officers’ failure to recover any weapons.
“This wasn’t a gunfight. This was carnage,” the prosecutor said.
On the morning of the shootings, a group of officers piled into a rental truck and drove to the bridge in response to an officer’s distress call.
On the east side of the bridge, officers allegedly opened fire on a group of people without issuing warnings or identifying themselves. Prosecutors say Bowen leaned over a concrete barrier and randomly sprayed gunfire at wounded, unarmed people seeking cover.
“There’s no excuse for that. There was no threat,” Carter said. “What is that? That’s attempted murder.”
Carter said Faulcon fired the “kill shot” from a shotgun, striking 17-year-old James Brissette in the head, mortally wounding him.
“The only thing James Brissette pointed at these officers was his back,” Carter said.
Bowen’s attorney, Frank De¬Salvo, said ballistics evidence doesn’t support prosecutors’ claim that his client leaned over the barrier and shot Brissette while he was lying down.
“There is not a shred of evidence that Ken Bowen intended to shoot James Brissette,” he said.
Fleming said the evidence suggests another former officer who pleaded guilty to participating in a cover-up and cooperated with federal authorities was responsible for fatally shooting Brissette.
Faulcon, the only defendant to testify, said he was “paralyzed with fear” when he shot and killed 40-year-old Ronald Madison as he chased him and his brother, Lance Madison. Faulcon didn’t dispute that he shot an unnamed man in the back, but said he had believed Ronald Madison was armed and posed a threat.
“Unfortunate and tragic do not mean unreasonable,” Fleming said.
Kaufman allegedly retrieved a gun from his home weeks after the shootings and turned it in as evidence, trying to pass it off as a gun belonging to Lance Madison. He also is accused of fabricating two non-existent witnesses to the shootings.
Kaufman’s attorney, Stephen London, said another investigator, retired Sgt. Gerard Dugue, was responsible for the contents of the department’s official report on the shootings. London told jurors they heard proof that Kaufman didn’t write any false reports.
“He not only didn’t sign anything, they don’t have anybody who puts his finger anywhere near
that,” London added.
Dugue also is charged in the case but is scheduled to be tried separately later.
In 2006, seven officers were indicted in state court on murder or attempted murder charges. After a state judge dismissed those charges in 2008, the Justice Department’s civil rights division opened an investigation.
Lance Madison, who was arrested on attempted murder charges but later cleared by the state grand jury, has said he believed teenagers were shooting at him and his brother on the bridge. He disavowed that recollection during the trial, but defense attorneys said his earlier statements were powerful evidence that police faced a deadly threat.
Officer Heather Gore, an officer who isn’t charged in the case, testified before a federal grand jury that she saw a man point an assault rifle at police when she jumped out of the rental truck. Justice Department prosecutor Bobbi Bernstein called her a liar.
“The only people with guns on the bridge that day were the officers,” she said.
During the trial, Susan Bartholomew, the shooting victim who lost her right arm, told jurors that she and her family were crossing the eastern New Orleans bridge in search of food and other supplies when they were hit with a barrage of bullets by NOPD officers.
“The police just kept shooting and I just kept felling myself being hit,” Bartholomew said. “I prayed. I just called on the Lord. I didn’t know what else to do.”
OPTIONAL CUT BEGINS
On Count 1, deprivation of James Brissette’s civil rights Bowen, Gisevius, Faulcon and Villavaso were found guilty.
On Count 2, use of a firearm in the Brissette shooting, Bowen Gisevius, Faulcon and Villavaso were found guilty.
On Count 3, deprivation of Susan Bartholomew’s civil rights, Bowen, Gisevius, Faulcon and Villavaso were found guilty.
On Count 4, deprivation of Leonard Bartholomew IV’s civil rights, Bowen, Gisevius, Faulcon and Villavaso were found guilty.
On Count 5, deprivation of Lesha Bartholomew’s civil rights, Bowen, Gisevius, Faulcon and Villavaso were found guilty.
On Count 6, deprivation of Jose Holmes’ civil rights, Bowen, Gisevius, Faulcon and Villavaso were found guilty.
On Count 7, use of a firearm in the shootings of Holmes and the Bartholomews, Bowen, Gisevius, Faulcon and Villavaso were found guilty.
On Count 8, deprivation of Ronald Madison’s civil rights by shooting, Faulcon was found guilty.
On Count 9, use of a firearm in the Madison shooting, Faulcon was found guilty.
On Count 10, deprivation of Ronald Madison’s civil rights by beating, Bowen was found guilty.
On Count 11, conspiracy to obstruct justice and make false statements, Bowen, Gisevius, Faulcon, Villavaso and Kaufman were found guilty.
On Count 12, conspiracy to violate Jose Holmes’ civil rights by false prosecution, Bowen, Gisevius, Faulcon, Villavaso and Kaufman were found guilty.
On Count 13, conspiracy to violate Lance Madison’s civil rights by false prosecution, Bowen, Gisevius and Kaufman were found guilty.
On Count 14, falsification of evidence to obstruct justice, Kaufman was found guilty.
On Count 15, obstruction of justice by planting a firearm, Kaufman was found guilty.
On Count 16, making false statements to the FBI regarding a firearm, Kaufman was found guilty. Kaufman was also found guilty of Count 17, falsification of victim statements, and Count 18, false statements to the FBI regarding victim statements. Bowen was found guilty of Count 19, September 2005 false statement to Arthur Kaufman in NOPD report, and Count 20, January 2006 taped false statement about shooting.
On Count 21, January 2006 taped false statement about shooting, Gisevius was found guilty.
On Count 22, June 2006 taped false statement about shooting, Faulcon was found guilty.
On Count 23, January 2006 taped false statement about shooting, Villavaso was found guilty.
On Count 24, fabrication of witnesses, Kaufman was found guilty. Finally, on Count 25, false statements to the FBI regarding fabrication of witnesss, Kaufman was found guilty.
OPTIONAL CUT ENDS
Sentencing for the five officers, all of whom will likely face lengthy prison sentences, has been scheduled for Dec. 14 before U.S. District Judge Kurt Engelhardt.
“These defendants will be facing very, very long sentences,” legal analyst Dane Ciolino told WWL-TV Friday.
Bowen, Gisevius, Faulcon and Villavaso are facing potential multiple life sentences, as well as additional penalties for charges tied to a conspiracy to cover up what happened on the bridge. Kaufman faces a maximum penalty of 120 years in prison. Kaufman remains out on bond while the other four defendants remain in jail.
Defense attorney Roger Kitchens said he believed negative media coverage of the case tainted jurors and prevent his client, Villavaso, from getting a fair trial..
“At this point, I don’t think it’s possible for a New Orleans police officer to get a fair trial in the city of New Orleans. And I don’t think they got one today,” Kitchens said.
On Friday, after the verdict was read family members, supporters and prosecutors gathered outside the courthouse to talk about the trial and its meaning.
While reminding reporters that the guilty verdict won’t bring his 40-year-old brother back, Lance Madison said Friday that he was grateful to the jury and federal prosecutors for helping the Madison family to get justice in the case and at least begin the healing process.
“We’re thankful for closure after six long years of waiting for justice,” Madison said.
Lance Madison said the family would “never be completely healed, because we will never have Ronald Madison back.”
“We have sought justice not only for our family but for the entire community,” Jackie Madison Brown, Ronald Madison’s sister, told reporters. “We knew that what happened to our family could have — and did — happen to other innocent families. Everyone in our community — regardless of race or class — deserves protection and safety, especially from the police officers who are supposed to protect and serve us.
“We are hopeful that with the ongoing help of the Department of Justice that there will really be a change in our police department and our city,” Madison Brown added. “We’re also committed to participating in this process as we continue to heal as a family and a community.”
“I have been robbed a great deal because he was only 17,” a still-grieving Sherrell Johnson, the mother of James Brissette Jr., told reporters after the verdict was read. “There is nothing for James — nothing. No prom, no first car, no baby, nothing. My child will never have nothing. He will forever more be an urn of ashes.
“I want to thank the people responsible for his death. Thank y’all very much. They did a good job. They took the twinkle out of my eye, the song out of my heart and they blew out my candle, but it’s going to be alright because justice has been served. The day has come, the fat lady has sang and the curtain has come down. There’s nothing more to say.”
“Today is a great day and I am extremely happy for the families that have received this justice because they suffered more than any of us,” W.C. Johnson, a member of Community United for Change and co-host of the New Orleans cable-access show “OurStory,” told The Louisiana Weekly. “We all recognize and understand that their pain and plight has been the pain and plight of all of us. That’s something when you lose a loved one when it was not necessary, especially when they try to turn him into a criminal.
“I’m overjoyed, I’m extremely elated and happy and want to thank the families for their strength and energy and for making this possible,” Johnson added. “Had it not been for them, we would not be able to have this victory today. Especially the Madison family, the ones that persevered and brought all of this to fruition. I’m most grateful to Dr. Romell Madison and Johnson said it’s important that the community never forgets the tragic deaths and human rights violations that made last week’s legal victory necessary and possible.
“It’s unfortunate that Black folks have been put in a position since coming to this continent under European rule that we have to rejoice at someone else’s sorrow because no one was there to protect us and keep us from having the problems that we’ve had to suffer over the years,” W.C. Johnson told The Louisiana Weekly. “One of the things that makes people so joyous is the fact that the community doesn’t have to go down there and tear up the CBD. I don’t think people would have taken a not-guilty verdict lying down here, especially in the beginning of August with all this heat. I just don’t see people in New Orleans taking it kindly if they would have let these officers off.
“Unfortunately, we have to do rejoicing and libations in dealing with the fact that we have received some justice, some justification as being human beings, some reinforcement that all is not totally lost,” Johnson continued. “We are showing our youth that we can do things through perseverance, without having to go outside of the structure to get it done.”
U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder said Friday that he hopes the verdict will lead to greater trust and cooperation between New Orleans residents and the city’s embattled police department.
“The officers convicted today abused their power and violated the public’s trust during the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina—exacerbating one of the most devastating times for the people of New Orleans,” Holder said in a written statement.
“I am hopeful today’s verdict brings justice for the victims and their family members, helps to heal the community and contributes to the restoration of public trust in the New Orleans Police Department.”
“The verdicts in the Danziger Bridge trial provide significant closure to a dark chapter in our city’s history,” New Orleans Mayor Mitch Landrieu said Friday. “We now have an opportunity to turn the page and to heal.
“With these verdicts, the American justice system delivered a clear message that no one stands above the law and that police abuse and misconduct will not be tolerated.
“Today, we reaffirm our commitment to change,” Landrieu added. “The citizens of New Orleans deserve nothing less than a police department that truly protects and serves – one that partners with the community to keep New Orleans safe.
“Our heartfelt apologies and prayers are with the families of James Brissette, Ronald Madison, Leonard Bartholomew III, Susan Bartholomew, Lesha Bartholomew, Jose Holmes, Jr., and Lance Madison.”
“This is another step in the process,” Danatus King, president of the New Orleans branch of the NAACP, told The Louisiana Weekly Friday. “Aside from the obvious closure it brings to the families that were directly affected, it also highlights the amount that remains to be done in this city in regards to race relations and in regards to our police department.
“When we place these guilty verdicts alongside the celebratory parade that those same defendants received when they were first brought up on charges, that just highlights the distance that we have to go in this city,” King added.
While Johnson applauded last week’s guilty verdict, he also said that it’s become clear to him and many others that any significant reformation of the NOPD will have to be community-led and community-based.
“I don’t think that Chief Ronal Serpas and Mayor Mitch Landrieu will receive and understand the significance of this,” Johnson told The Louisiana Weekly. “I do not believe that they have the foresight to be able to see that they need to do things differently now because they’ve done nothing through this entire process leading up to this point that indicates that they are willing to do things differently. The good ole boy system is embedded and I think they will die trying to maintain the existence of the good ole boy system. They’ve given me no indication up to this point that they understand that they need to totally rebuild the police department from the foundation up to bring about true reform. They’ve given me no indication that they’re willing to do that, so we’re going to have to fight as hard or harder to get them to accept what the DOJ has documented. They need to accept that the community has to have a starring role in the reforming of the NOPD. They have totally ignored the community as far as reform for NOPD has gone thus far.”
Johnson said CUC will continue to hold protests calling for the resignation or termination of NOPD Supt. Ronal Serpas every Thursday noon in front of City Hall and will also host neighborhood meetings to gain community input for the DOJ-mandated consent decree for the police department.
While he had harsh words for the mayor and police chief, Johnson commended the federal judge who presided over the Danziger Bridge trial, U.S. District Judge Kurt Engelhardt. “I had criticized him because of the stringent controls that he had put in place” for the trial, Johnson told The Louisiana Weekly. “But after the fact I have to say that in the end it will serve justice more than if he had not because it’s going to be difficult for the defendants to win an appeal with the kinds of controls that were put in place.”
A community meeting led by Community United for Change will be held on August 25 at Hood 2 Hood T-shirt shop, located at 706 Felicity Street in the Sixth Police District. Another meeting will take place on Sept. 20 in the Third Police District, although the location of that gathering has not yet been announced.
“We are beginning to put in place within each police district oversight from that community for that precinct,” Johnson told The Louisiana Weekly. “We have to have each precinct being monitored on a regular basis by citizens of this community. That gives them a direct link and makes them a direct stakehold in true reform in this city. We have to do this block by block; anything less than that would not serve the community or the people here in New Orleans.”
“While I applaud these jurors for doing the right thing and not allowing the issue of skin color to cloud their judgement, it is important to remember that two innocent people lost their lives and that four others were shot without provocation on the Danziger Bridge six years ago,” Ramessu Merriamen Aha, a former Internet radio talk-show host and New Orleans businessman, told The Louisiana Weekly. “Today’s verdict won’t mean a thing if the mayor and police chief don’t start listening to the people of New Orleans who have been clamoring for a complete overhaul of the New Orleans Police Department from top to bottom for a very long time and getting nothing but the runaround from Mitch Landrieu and Ronald Serpas.
“The culture and attitudes that led to the murders of Ronald Madison and James Brissette are still in place in the New Orleans Police Department and unless substantive reforms are implemented, it’s only a matter of time before we have another Danziger Bridge.”
Additional reporting by Louisiana Weekly editor Edmund W. Lewis. Florida Courier
http://www.flcourier.com/flnation/5880-jury-finds-cops-guilty-in-new-orleans-shootings
Socialpeacest
katrina trial new orleans law:
Verdict=relative that lived in Greensboro=forced/intimidated to move to New YOrk City=punishment for my not working/doing what the authorities say;=to force as someone said in isolation/box me in=New Orleans trial=on August 1, 2011 recieved Judgement from 4th Circuit Appellant Court= that was mailed on August 1, 2011 and recieved in Winston-Salem in two and half Days- on August 3, 2011 with the decision to dismiss case after the BIG AUGUST 2, deadline for the DEBT CRISIS= People kept asking=what is that date about=it is the birthday of a relative that is closely associated with the relative that lived in Greensboro and Moved to New York[form of threat to the relative that moved to New York; that if they didn't negative consequences such as EATING or other relatives helping the person with the August 2 birthday eating would arise; therefore DEBT CRISIS=so much so that at local library=PAULA magazine=beside it was a magazine that was entitled[never seen before]; lined up neatly that lead to FOOD] and paula is still working at the local library as intimidation.
Also last time grass was cut male of the larger society appeared with all of the African American males equipment to cut grass=leaving the male of the larger society in complete control to cut grass and leave any type of intimidating message he wanted to; he left a can [which I had in a wood pile from attempting to do work on the house][that he took out of the wood pile]beside the back bedroom window; and today for the first time; don't know where it came from; never seen in on any of the book shelves by the law books; but there it was a book about g-ns[weapon];only problem is that there is no money to buy a g-n[weapon] and they know it.
Socialpeacest
********************************************
NEW ORLEANS — A federal jury on Friday convicted five current or former New Orleans police officers of civil rights violations in one of the lowest moments for city police in the chaotic aftermath of Hurricane Katrina: the shooting deaths of a teenager and a mentally disabled man as they crossed a bridge in search of food and help.
The case was a high-stakes test of the Justice Department's effort to rid the police department of corruption and brutality. A total of 20 current or former New Orleans police officers were charged last year in a series of federal probes. Most of the cases center on actions during the aftermath of the Aug. 29, 2005, storm, which plunged the flooded city into a state of lawlessness and desperation.
Sgts. Robert Gisevius and Kenneth Bowen, Officer Anthony Villavaso and former officer Robert Faulcon were convicted of civil rights violations in the shootings that killed two people and wounded four others on the Danziger Bridge less than a week after the storm. They face possible life prison sentences.
Retired Sgt. Arthur "Archie" Kaufman and the other four men also were convicted of engaging in a brazen cover-up that included a planted gun, fabricated witnesses and falsified reports. The five men were convicted of all 25 counts they faced.
Shaun Clarke, a defense attorney and former federal prosecutor who moved from New Orleans to Houston after Katrina, said the verdicts are "critically important" to the Justice Department's reform efforts.
"It's a huge verdict for the government," he said. "Of all the cases concerning alleged misconduct by police officers after Katrina, this was the one that had the highest national profile."
U.S. Attorney Jim Letten echoed that, saying the verdicts send a message that "public officials, and especially law enforcement officers, that they will be held accountable and that any abuse of power will have serious consequences."
Jurors found Faulcon guilty in the fatal shooting of Ronald Madison, a 40-year-old mentally disabled man, but the jury decided his killing didn't amount to murder. Faulcon, Gisevius, Bowen and Villavaso were convicted in the death of 17-year-old James Brissette. Jurors didn't have to decide whether Brissette was murdered because they didn't hold any of the defendants individually responsible for causing his death.
Kaufman, who was assigned to investigate the deadly encounter on the bridge, wasn't charged in the shootings. New Orleans Mayor Mitch Landrieu, who invited the Justice Department last year to conduct a thorough review of the police department, said the verdicts "provide significant closure to a dark chapter in our city's history."
In March, the Justice Department issued a blistering report that said New Orleans police officers have often used deadly force without justification, repeatedly made unconstitutional arrests and engaged in racial profiling. Landrieu has said he expects the federal review to bring about court-ordered reforms.
Five former officers pleaded guilty to participating in cover-up of the bridge shootings and testified during the trial. Another former officer, retired Sgt. Gerard Dugue, has a separate trial scheduled to start in September.
Brissette's mother, Sherrel Johnson, said she was relieved by the verdict after "a long, hard six years" and would now try to move on. But she lamented what her son has lost.
"For him there will be no prom, no baby, no nothing. My child will never have nothing," she said.
Madison's relatives said in a statement the family had waited six years to "find out what really happened on that bridge."
Madison's sister Jackie Madison Brown read the statement, which also said that after an event like Katrina, "all citizens, no matter what color or what class, deserve protection."
After the verdict was read, Justice Department prosecutor Bobbi Bernstein became emotional, hugging the families of Madison and Brissette and holding hands with two of Madison's sisters.
Defense attorney Roger Kitchens, who represented Villavaso, said he believed negative media coverage of the case tainted jurors.
"At this point, I don't think it's possible for a New Orleans police officer to get a fair trial in the city of New Orleans. And I don't think they got one today," he said.
Prosecutors said police had no justification for shooting unarmed, defenseless people trying to cross the bridge in search of food and help mere days after Katrina struck.
Defense attorneys argued, however, that police were shot at on the bridge before they returned fire.
Faulcon, the only defendant to testify, said he was "paralyzed with fear" when he shot and killed Madison, as he chased him and his brother, Lance Madison. Faulcon didn't dispute that he shot an unarmed man in the back, but he testified that he had believed Ronald Madison was armed and posed a threat.
Prosecutors contended that Kaufman retrieved a gun from his home weeks after the shootings and turned it in as evidence, trying to pass it off as a gun belonging to Lance Madison. Police arrested Lance Madison on attempted murder charges, but a grand jury later cleared him.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/08/05/katrina-danziger-bridge-katrina-shooting-verdict_n_919502.html
The Louisaina Weekly,Special to the Trice Edney News Wire- On its third day of deliberations, a federal jury in New Orleans Aug. 5 found five members of the New Orleans Police department guilty on 25 counts in the Danziger Bridge shootings and subsequent cover-up. The 2005 shootings that took place just days after Hurricane Katrina claimed the lives of two civilians and wounded four others. One of the survivors lost an arm.
“Today’s verdict by these jurors sends a powerful, a powerful, unmistakable message to public servants, to law enforcement officers and to the citizens we serve and indeed to the world,” U.S. Attorney Jim Letten said outside the federal courthouse. “That message is that public officials and especially law enforcement officers will be held accountable for their acts, and that any abuse of power, especially that power that violates the rights and the civil liberties of our citizens, will have serious consequences.”
“The citizens of this country will not, should not, and we intend that they will never have to fear the individuals who are called upon to protect them,” Letten added. “The citizens of this country should not have to fear the people called upon to protect them.”
While the five current or former officers were convicted on all 25 counts, the jury didn’t find that the shootings of James Brisette or Ronald Madison amounted to murder, The Associated Press reported.
Five other officers — Michael Lohman, Jeffery Lehrmann, Michael Hunter, Robert Barrios and Ignatis Hill, pleaded guilty on a variety of federal charges and agreed to cooperate with the U.S. Department of Justice as it continued its probe of the 2005 incident.
In closing arguments Tuesday, a federal prosecutor told jurors that Hurricane Katrina gave no excuse for the carnage on the Danziger Bridge.
But a defense attorney urged jurors to consider the “disorder, chaos and lawlessness” that gripped the flooded city after Katrina when they decide whether the officers acted reasonably in using deadly force, The Associated Press reported.
“That doesn’t mean the rules change, but the perception changes,” added Paul Fleming, a lawyer for former officer Robert Faulcon. “What’s considered reasonable gets looked at a little differently.”
Assistant U.S. Attorney Theodore Carter said police had no justification for shooting unarmed, defenseless people on the Danziger Bridge on Sept. 4, 2005, and then plotting to plant a gun, fabricate witnesses and falsify reports.
“They thought they could do what they wanted to do and there wouldn’t be any consequences,” Carter said of the defendants. “It was unreasonable for these officers to fire even one shot, let alone dozens.”
After several hours of closing arguments, jurors began their deliberations Wednesday.
The jurors heard five weeks of testimony from roughly 60 witnesses in the Justice Department’s case against Faulcon, Sgts. Robert Gisevius and Kenneth Bowen, Officer Anthony Villavaso and retired Sgt. Arthur Kaufman. Faulcon, Gisevius, Bowen and Villavaso are charged in the shootings and with taking part in the alleged cover-up. Kaufman, who investigated the shootings, only is charged in the alleged cover-up.
Defense attorneys say police were shot at on the bridge before they returned fire.
“None of these people intentionally decided to go out there and cause people harm,” said Timothy Meche, Villavaso’s lawyer. He said they did their best, operating under “terrible, horrible circumstances.”
Eric Hessler, Gisevius’ attorney, accused the government of ignoring evidence that somebody shot at the bridge from a grassy area nearby.
Carter, however, said the claim that police encountered armed residents is discredited by the officers’ failure to recover any weapons.
“This wasn’t a gunfight. This was carnage,” the prosecutor said.
On the morning of the shootings, a group of officers piled into a rental truck and drove to the bridge in response to an officer’s distress call.
On the east side of the bridge, officers allegedly opened fire on a group of people without issuing warnings or identifying themselves. Prosecutors say Bowen leaned over a concrete barrier and randomly sprayed gunfire at wounded, unarmed people seeking cover.
“There’s no excuse for that. There was no threat,” Carter said. “What is that? That’s attempted murder.”
Carter said Faulcon fired the “kill shot” from a shotgun, striking 17-year-old James Brissette in the head, mortally wounding him.
“The only thing James Brissette pointed at these officers was his back,” Carter said.
Bowen’s attorney, Frank De¬Salvo, said ballistics evidence doesn’t support prosecutors’ claim that his client leaned over the barrier and shot Brissette while he was lying down.
“There is not a shred of evidence that Ken Bowen intended to shoot James Brissette,” he said.
Fleming said the evidence suggests another former officer who pleaded guilty to participating in a cover-up and cooperated with federal authorities was responsible for fatally shooting Brissette.
Faulcon, the only defendant to testify, said he was “paralyzed with fear” when he shot and killed 40-year-old Ronald Madison as he chased him and his brother, Lance Madison. Faulcon didn’t dispute that he shot an unnamed man in the back, but said he had believed Ronald Madison was armed and posed a threat.
“Unfortunate and tragic do not mean unreasonable,” Fleming said.
Kaufman allegedly retrieved a gun from his home weeks after the shootings and turned it in as evidence, trying to pass it off as a gun belonging to Lance Madison. He also is accused of fabricating two non-existent witnesses to the shootings.
Kaufman’s attorney, Stephen London, said another investigator, retired Sgt. Gerard Dugue, was responsible for the contents of the department’s official report on the shootings. London told jurors they heard proof that Kaufman didn’t write any false reports.
“He not only didn’t sign anything, they don’t have anybody who puts his finger anywhere near
that,” London added.
Dugue also is charged in the case but is scheduled to be tried separately later.
In 2006, seven officers were indicted in state court on murder or attempted murder charges. After a state judge dismissed those charges in 2008, the Justice Department’s civil rights division opened an investigation.
Lance Madison, who was arrested on attempted murder charges but later cleared by the state grand jury, has said he believed teenagers were shooting at him and his brother on the bridge. He disavowed that recollection during the trial, but defense attorneys said his earlier statements were powerful evidence that police faced a deadly threat.
Officer Heather Gore, an officer who isn’t charged in the case, testified before a federal grand jury that she saw a man point an assault rifle at police when she jumped out of the rental truck. Justice Department prosecutor Bobbi Bernstein called her a liar.
“The only people with guns on the bridge that day were the officers,” she said.
During the trial, Susan Bartholomew, the shooting victim who lost her right arm, told jurors that she and her family were crossing the eastern New Orleans bridge in search of food and other supplies when they were hit with a barrage of bullets by NOPD officers.
“The police just kept shooting and I just kept felling myself being hit,” Bartholomew said. “I prayed. I just called on the Lord. I didn’t know what else to do.”
OPTIONAL CUT BEGINS
On Count 1, deprivation of James Brissette’s civil rights Bowen, Gisevius, Faulcon and Villavaso were found guilty.
On Count 2, use of a firearm in the Brissette shooting, Bowen Gisevius, Faulcon and Villavaso were found guilty.
On Count 3, deprivation of Susan Bartholomew’s civil rights, Bowen, Gisevius, Faulcon and Villavaso were found guilty.
On Count 4, deprivation of Leonard Bartholomew IV’s civil rights, Bowen, Gisevius, Faulcon and Villavaso were found guilty.
On Count 5, deprivation of Lesha Bartholomew’s civil rights, Bowen, Gisevius, Faulcon and Villavaso were found guilty.
On Count 6, deprivation of Jose Holmes’ civil rights, Bowen, Gisevius, Faulcon and Villavaso were found guilty.
On Count 7, use of a firearm in the shootings of Holmes and the Bartholomews, Bowen, Gisevius, Faulcon and Villavaso were found guilty.
On Count 8, deprivation of Ronald Madison’s civil rights by shooting, Faulcon was found guilty.
On Count 9, use of a firearm in the Madison shooting, Faulcon was found guilty.
On Count 10, deprivation of Ronald Madison’s civil rights by beating, Bowen was found guilty.
On Count 11, conspiracy to obstruct justice and make false statements, Bowen, Gisevius, Faulcon, Villavaso and Kaufman were found guilty.
On Count 12, conspiracy to violate Jose Holmes’ civil rights by false prosecution, Bowen, Gisevius, Faulcon, Villavaso and Kaufman were found guilty.
On Count 13, conspiracy to violate Lance Madison’s civil rights by false prosecution, Bowen, Gisevius and Kaufman were found guilty.
On Count 14, falsification of evidence to obstruct justice, Kaufman was found guilty.
On Count 15, obstruction of justice by planting a firearm, Kaufman was found guilty.
On Count 16, making false statements to the FBI regarding a firearm, Kaufman was found guilty. Kaufman was also found guilty of Count 17, falsification of victim statements, and Count 18, false statements to the FBI regarding victim statements. Bowen was found guilty of Count 19, September 2005 false statement to Arthur Kaufman in NOPD report, and Count 20, January 2006 taped false statement about shooting.
On Count 21, January 2006 taped false statement about shooting, Gisevius was found guilty.
On Count 22, June 2006 taped false statement about shooting, Faulcon was found guilty.
On Count 23, January 2006 taped false statement about shooting, Villavaso was found guilty.
On Count 24, fabrication of witnesses, Kaufman was found guilty. Finally, on Count 25, false statements to the FBI regarding fabrication of witnesss, Kaufman was found guilty.
OPTIONAL CUT ENDS
Sentencing for the five officers, all of whom will likely face lengthy prison sentences, has been scheduled for Dec. 14 before U.S. District Judge Kurt Engelhardt.
“These defendants will be facing very, very long sentences,” legal analyst Dane Ciolino told WWL-TV Friday.
Bowen, Gisevius, Faulcon and Villavaso are facing potential multiple life sentences, as well as additional penalties for charges tied to a conspiracy to cover up what happened on the bridge. Kaufman faces a maximum penalty of 120 years in prison. Kaufman remains out on bond while the other four defendants remain in jail.
Defense attorney Roger Kitchens said he believed negative media coverage of the case tainted jurors and prevent his client, Villavaso, from getting a fair trial..
“At this point, I don’t think it’s possible for a New Orleans police officer to get a fair trial in the city of New Orleans. And I don’t think they got one today,” Kitchens said.
On Friday, after the verdict was read family members, supporters and prosecutors gathered outside the courthouse to talk about the trial and its meaning.
While reminding reporters that the guilty verdict won’t bring his 40-year-old brother back, Lance Madison said Friday that he was grateful to the jury and federal prosecutors for helping the Madison family to get justice in the case and at least begin the healing process.
“We’re thankful for closure after six long years of waiting for justice,” Madison said.
Lance Madison said the family would “never be completely healed, because we will never have Ronald Madison back.”
“We have sought justice not only for our family but for the entire community,” Jackie Madison Brown, Ronald Madison’s sister, told reporters. “We knew that what happened to our family could have — and did — happen to other innocent families. Everyone in our community — regardless of race or class — deserves protection and safety, especially from the police officers who are supposed to protect and serve us.
“We are hopeful that with the ongoing help of the Department of Justice that there will really be a change in our police department and our city,” Madison Brown added. “We’re also committed to participating in this process as we continue to heal as a family and a community.”
“I have been robbed a great deal because he was only 17,” a still-grieving Sherrell Johnson, the mother of James Brissette Jr., told reporters after the verdict was read. “There is nothing for James — nothing. No prom, no first car, no baby, nothing. My child will never have nothing. He will forever more be an urn of ashes.
“I want to thank the people responsible for his death. Thank y’all very much. They did a good job. They took the twinkle out of my eye, the song out of my heart and they blew out my candle, but it’s going to be alright because justice has been served. The day has come, the fat lady has sang and the curtain has come down. There’s nothing more to say.”
“Today is a great day and I am extremely happy for the families that have received this justice because they suffered more than any of us,” W.C. Johnson, a member of Community United for Change and co-host of the New Orleans cable-access show “OurStory,” told The Louisiana Weekly. “We all recognize and understand that their pain and plight has been the pain and plight of all of us. That’s something when you lose a loved one when it was not necessary, especially when they try to turn him into a criminal.
“I’m overjoyed, I’m extremely elated and happy and want to thank the families for their strength and energy and for making this possible,” Johnson added. “Had it not been for them, we would not be able to have this victory today. Especially the Madison family, the ones that persevered and brought all of this to fruition. I’m most grateful to Dr. Romell Madison and Johnson said it’s important that the community never forgets the tragic deaths and human rights violations that made last week’s legal victory necessary and possible.
“It’s unfortunate that Black folks have been put in a position since coming to this continent under European rule that we have to rejoice at someone else’s sorrow because no one was there to protect us and keep us from having the problems that we’ve had to suffer over the years,” W.C. Johnson told The Louisiana Weekly. “One of the things that makes people so joyous is the fact that the community doesn’t have to go down there and tear up the CBD. I don’t think people would have taken a not-guilty verdict lying down here, especially in the beginning of August with all this heat. I just don’t see people in New Orleans taking it kindly if they would have let these officers off.
“Unfortunately, we have to do rejoicing and libations in dealing with the fact that we have received some justice, some justification as being human beings, some reinforcement that all is not totally lost,” Johnson continued. “We are showing our youth that we can do things through perseverance, without having to go outside of the structure to get it done.”
U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder said Friday that he hopes the verdict will lead to greater trust and cooperation between New Orleans residents and the city’s embattled police department.
“The officers convicted today abused their power and violated the public’s trust during the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina—exacerbating one of the most devastating times for the people of New Orleans,” Holder said in a written statement.
“I am hopeful today’s verdict brings justice for the victims and their family members, helps to heal the community and contributes to the restoration of public trust in the New Orleans Police Department.”
“The verdicts in the Danziger Bridge trial provide significant closure to a dark chapter in our city’s history,” New Orleans Mayor Mitch Landrieu said Friday. “We now have an opportunity to turn the page and to heal.
“With these verdicts, the American justice system delivered a clear message that no one stands above the law and that police abuse and misconduct will not be tolerated.
“Today, we reaffirm our commitment to change,” Landrieu added. “The citizens of New Orleans deserve nothing less than a police department that truly protects and serves – one that partners with the community to keep New Orleans safe.
“Our heartfelt apologies and prayers are with the families of James Brissette, Ronald Madison, Leonard Bartholomew III, Susan Bartholomew, Lesha Bartholomew, Jose Holmes, Jr., and Lance Madison.”
“This is another step in the process,” Danatus King, president of the New Orleans branch of the NAACP, told The Louisiana Weekly Friday. “Aside from the obvious closure it brings to the families that were directly affected, it also highlights the amount that remains to be done in this city in regards to race relations and in regards to our police department.
“When we place these guilty verdicts alongside the celebratory parade that those same defendants received when they were first brought up on charges, that just highlights the distance that we have to go in this city,” King added.
While Johnson applauded last week’s guilty verdict, he also said that it’s become clear to him and many others that any significant reformation of the NOPD will have to be community-led and community-based.
“I don’t think that Chief Ronal Serpas and Mayor Mitch Landrieu will receive and understand the significance of this,” Johnson told The Louisiana Weekly. “I do not believe that they have the foresight to be able to see that they need to do things differently now because they’ve done nothing through this entire process leading up to this point that indicates that they are willing to do things differently. The good ole boy system is embedded and I think they will die trying to maintain the existence of the good ole boy system. They’ve given me no indication up to this point that they understand that they need to totally rebuild the police department from the foundation up to bring about true reform. They’ve given me no indication that they’re willing to do that, so we’re going to have to fight as hard or harder to get them to accept what the DOJ has documented. They need to accept that the community has to have a starring role in the reforming of the NOPD. They have totally ignored the community as far as reform for NOPD has gone thus far.”
Johnson said CUC will continue to hold protests calling for the resignation or termination of NOPD Supt. Ronal Serpas every Thursday noon in front of City Hall and will also host neighborhood meetings to gain community input for the DOJ-mandated consent decree for the police department.
While he had harsh words for the mayor and police chief, Johnson commended the federal judge who presided over the Danziger Bridge trial, U.S. District Judge Kurt Engelhardt. “I had criticized him because of the stringent controls that he had put in place” for the trial, Johnson told The Louisiana Weekly. “But after the fact I have to say that in the end it will serve justice more than if he had not because it’s going to be difficult for the defendants to win an appeal with the kinds of controls that were put in place.”
A community meeting led by Community United for Change will be held on August 25 at Hood 2 Hood T-shirt shop, located at 706 Felicity Street in the Sixth Police District. Another meeting will take place on Sept. 20 in the Third Police District, although the location of that gathering has not yet been announced.
“We are beginning to put in place within each police district oversight from that community for that precinct,” Johnson told The Louisiana Weekly. “We have to have each precinct being monitored on a regular basis by citizens of this community. That gives them a direct link and makes them a direct stakehold in true reform in this city. We have to do this block by block; anything less than that would not serve the community or the people here in New Orleans.”
“While I applaud these jurors for doing the right thing and not allowing the issue of skin color to cloud their judgement, it is important to remember that two innocent people lost their lives and that four others were shot without provocation on the Danziger Bridge six years ago,” Ramessu Merriamen Aha, a former Internet radio talk-show host and New Orleans businessman, told The Louisiana Weekly. “Today’s verdict won’t mean a thing if the mayor and police chief don’t start listening to the people of New Orleans who have been clamoring for a complete overhaul of the New Orleans Police Department from top to bottom for a very long time and getting nothing but the runaround from Mitch Landrieu and Ronald Serpas.
“The culture and attitudes that led to the murders of Ronald Madison and James Brissette are still in place in the New Orleans Police Department and unless substantive reforms are implemented, it’s only a matter of time before we have another Danziger Bridge.”
Additional reporting by Louisiana Weekly editor Edmund W. Lewis. Florida Courier
http://www.flcourier.com/flnation/5880-jury-finds-cops-guilty-in-new-orleans-shootings
Socialpeacest
