RETREATING FROM POLICE REFORM IN NYC: NYC City Council pressured to weaken new anti-chokehold law

Words by Charles Brooks 

Photo credit: NYC Mayor's Office

Just three months ago, New York City finally  passed a law criminalizing the chokehold practice  ensuring a level of police accountability unseen before the recent wave of public uprising. New York City Council Member Rory Lancman, introduced the measure after Eric Garner’s chokehold death in 2014. The fact that it took six years to pass the anti-chokehold law should give you some indication of the level of opposition to the new law waged by the mayor, New York Police Department (NYPD) and their union, the Patrolmen’s Benevolent Union (PBA). Right now, legislative efforts are underway to weaken, undermine and outright repeal the new law. 

For one, there’s a lawsuit filed by 18 police unions arguing the new law is “invalid and unenforceable” and violates the New York’s State Constitution. Just to give you an idea of the scope of police opposition – the lawsuit includes unions representing officers from NYPD, Port Authority, Tunnels and Bridges, along with the officers from the court system. In addition to the lawsuit, New York City Council Public Safety Committee chairman, Donavan Richards has already introduced amendments to revise key language in the law while there’s another proposal to outright repeal the newly signed law. 

These latest attempts to revoke this measure of police accountability have been framed around a work slowdown by NYPD officers who contend the new law compromises their safety. Unable to withstand the pressure from the New York Police Department, City Council Public Safety Committee chairman Donavan Richards relented by introducing an amendment: 

The bill would amend Local Law 66 of 2020 to provide that restraining an individual in a manner that restricts the flow of air or blood by sitting, kneeling, or standing on the chest or back in a manner that compresses the diaphragm is a misdemeanor under such law if the restraint is performed recklessly and causes injury due to asphyxiation . 

With this new language, the new law becomes remarkedly weaker where proving “recklessly” becomes immensely more subjective to prove as the officers’ intent comes into play. Bear in mind “recklessly” is the same language that created the loophole allowing the Department of Justice to not file federal civil rights charges against former NYPD Officer Daniel Pantaleo for using the chokehold resulting in Garner’s death. Although, New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio signed the bill into law in July, he not only supports the proposed changes but along with the NYPD has always maintained a position that the chokehold ban was sufficient. 

However, chokehold complaint data shows quite a different story. The Civilian Complaint Review Board (CCRB) investigates public complaints on police misconduct in New York City. According to the CCRB, there were over 3,000 complaints over a 20-year period from 2001 to 2000 – nearly 1,000 since Garner’s death in 2014. And yet despite the data to substantiate the chokehold ban’s ineffectiveness, opposition by the mayor and the New York Police Department not only persisted but hardened. We witnessed their opposition when, not even in the wake of Garner’s chokehold death, could a law be passed to criminalize the chokehold practice. 

Photo credit: December 12th Movement

For years, community relations with NYPD has been characterized by protest demonstrations and public demands for police accountability. Accordingly, attempts to undermine the new anti-chokehold law has been met with a number of protest demonstrations led by the December 12th Movement. They’ve initiated a public campaign to not only mobilize black communities in and around New York City but to inform them as well. So far, several street demonstrations targeted the offices of the Council Public Safety Committee members; I. Daneek Miller, and Adrienne Adams, who also happen to serve as co-chairs of the Black, Latino and Asian Caucus along with the committee Chairman Donavan Richards. In addition, they held a nearly two-hour ZOOM webinar where invited panelists discussed the chokehold issue from a number of different perspectives. 

Viola Plummer, the December 12th chair moderated this important virtual discussion with panelists: NYC Council Member Inez Barron, Attorney King Downing, former NYC Health Commissioner Dr. Mary Bassett, Dr. Susan Williams of the Freedom Socialist Party, Father Frank Morales of the All Souls Episcopal Church, New York State Senator Elect Jabari Brisport, Hawk Newsome of Black Lives Matter of Greater NY, and New York State Assemblyman Charles Barron. They spoke of the historical context and background, the amendment – the proposed change in language and its significance, the immense political pressure to change the law, the scale of police intimidation and subsequent trauma experienced by those living in the community. 

By now, we’ve seen one chokehold incident after another and not just in New York City. We’ve seen the data on chokehold complaints revealing the inadequacy and failure of the 1993 chokehold ban. We’ve seen the evidence of trauma again and again in communities and neighborhoods when black folk fall victim to the chokehold or any other form of police brutality. We’ve also seen police officers acquitted. We should also see that opposition and resistance to the anti-chokehold law is essentially an endorsement for maintaining a police culture rooted in their impunity to wage a campaign of unabated intimidation.

Additional Reading and resources:

Fight the Power: African Americans and the Long History of Police Brutality in New York City, By Clarence Taylor (2018)

Bill De Blasio failure on police reform in New York City, The Intercept

How Decades Of Bans On Police Chokeholds Have Fallen Short, NPR

See the ZOOM webinar on the anti-chokehold law here.

See the contact list for all New York City Council members here.

Please support and visit The Brooks Blackboard's website, our INTEL page, OPEN MIND page, and LIKE and FOLLOW our Facebook page.

Biden picks Kamala Harris - can she be the difference the Democrats need to win in November?

words by Charles Brooks

After nearly 5 months of waiting, the suspense is finally over. On August 11th, Democratic Party nominee Joe Biden made history naming Kamala Harris, former 2020 presidential candidate and current US Senator (D-CA), as his Vice-President. 

The announcement unleashed a level of excitement and enthusiasm unseen since Barack Obama seized the White House back in 2008.  But in less than a week, Ms. Harris already came under attack as Trump’s team resurrected the racist conspiracy “birther” question around her eligibility for the VP post while social and mainstream media interrogates her racial identity and political ambition while publishing racist cartoon images and memes. 

Who will Biden pick?

words by Charles Brooks

Update: On August 11th, Joe Biden picked Kamala Harris as his Vice-President.  Read the update on the Brooks Blackboard post here. 

Ever since Joe Biden, the presumptive Democratic party nominee said he would nominate a woman as his vice-president, there’s been much anticipation around who he would pick as his running mate. In fact, not long after Biden made his announcement during the March 15th primary debate did he start to feel the pressure to pick a black woman as his vice-president that only intensified in the wake of the nationwide racial “reckoning” due to the police killing of George Floyd.     

Interestingly enough, polling results supports this - in a Yahoo!News/You Gov poll  62% responded it was the right decision for Biden to pledge VP woman pick – Blacks (83%), white (59%), and Latino (64%); 36% overall and 61% Blacks said it’s important to pick a woman of color. In another poll, the USA Today\Suffolk poll, 35% Democrats said it was "very important" to them that his running mate be a woman of color; and 37% said it was "somewhat important." Incredibly though, the polling shows 75% of whites said it was very or somewhat important to them compared to 60% for Blacks.   Rep. Clyburn (D-SC) affirms the importance when he told NBC News, "I really believe that we've reached a point in this country where African American women need to be rewarded for the loyalty that they've given to this party." 

Will Biden take Black voters for granted?

words by Charles Brooks

Racial controversies are typical to presidential election campaigns -  and the 2020 campaign has proved to be no different. Just days ago presumed Democratic Party nominee Joe Biden created his own racial controversy when he made a remark about the black vote during an interview during an livestreaming broadcast of the popular radio show, The Breakfast Club.

TEACHER ACTIVISM TAKES ON RACIAL AND SOCIAL JUSTICE

words by Charles Brooks

TEACHER ACTIVISM TAKES ON RACIAL AND SOCIAL JUSTICE

Photo credit: Charles Edward Miller

You may have noticed in recent months that teachers across the nation have been engaged in the sort of activism that fiercely challenges the status quo with their renewed vision for public education.  The sleeping giant has been awakened in 2018 with 8 what’s officially called “work stoppages” in educational services affecting 379,000 workers.  Teachers drew a line in the sand as a wave of teacher strikes hit Arizona, West Virginia, Oklahoma, Arizona, Kentucky, and Colorado.   The trend continued into 2019 with teachers engaging in various forms of protest activities with walkouts, rallies, and yes, strikes in school districts in Los Angeles, Oakland, Denver, and Virginia.  In fact, Mississippi took action to pre-empt a possible teacher strike with pay-raises for teachers and assistant teachers.   

AND STILL NO BLACK GOVERNORS...

words by Charles Brooks

AND STILL NO BLACK GOVERNORS

Photo credit: Onasill ~ Bill - 72m

 When the smoke cleared after the 2018 elections   finally ended – there are still zero black governors. The last African American elected to the governors’ mansion was Deval Patrick in Massachusetts, and that was ten years ago.  The challenge for black candidates for state wide offices like governor is building a campaign that also appeals beyond their local base to white moderate Democrats throughout the state. Nevertheless, the 2018 elections witnessed history in a sense in that not one but three blacks – including one woman - ran as the Democratic Party’s nominee for the Governor’s seat.  Although all three lost their elections, there’s some comfort to be taken from the elections results and exit poll data. 

ABRAMS NOT GOING AWAY QUIETLY

words by Charles Brooks

Photo Credit: Marco Verch

Although the much talked about blue wave managed to sweep in a number of black elected officials during the 2018 election cycle – the nation still has no black governors.

This year’s election cycle saw an unprecedented 3 blacks running for governor; Ben Jealous (Maryland), Stacey Abrams (Georgia) and Andrew Gillum (Florida) each won their respective primaries but lost in the general election.  The race in Maryland was settled on election night with Jealous pulling in 43.5% of the vote with over one million votes, but lost by over 270, 000 votes. The races in Florida and Georgia, however were too close to call on election night forcing Gillum to withdraw his concession while Abrams pointed to the thousands of uncounted votes left on the table and just flatly refused to concede her race.

Book Review: A Conversation about Black Detroit in Black New York

Black Detroit: A People’s History of Self-Determination

Herb Boyd

Amistad/HarperCollins: 432 pages

A Conversation about Black Detroit in Black New York                            

By Charles Brooks

Herb Boyd recently appeared at the revered City College of New York (CCNY) in Harlem, NY to talk about his latest book, Black Detroit: A People’s History of Self-Determination.  Published in 2017, Mr. Boyd has entered yet another book into the annals of black history with Black Detroit that covers slightly over 300 years - spread over 340 pages and 29 chapters.  A prolific author and journalist, Mr. Boyd has an incredible body of work that includes 25 books in addition to countless news articles published over the years with many news outlets. 

Mr. Boyd was joined by CCNY Professor L’Heureux Lewis-McCoy in a format that deviated from the typical stand and deliver to one that was more conversational and informal. For a little over an hour, their conversation covered a wide range of topics that included the book’s sub-title along with Detroit’s history, black press, music, economy, and radical black politics.

Listening to Mr. Boyd and Professor Lewis-McCoy engage in conversation with each other, you got the sense that Black Detroit was more than just capturing critical moments in time. Clearly, Black Detroit was about the people behind those moments but more importantly, their stories of self-determination.  Mr. Boyd makes note of this during the book’s introduction where he wrote: “Black Detroiters survived enslavement, white mobs, housing and job discrimination, and municipal indifference, and with each endeavor they chipped away at that age-old misery index.”  

Mr. Boyd first spoke about the conversations he had with his mother, Katherine – “a veritable walking historian with an encyclopedia of knowledge about Detroit.”  Utilizing his mother as a tremendous source of information, Mr. Boyd talked about the time they spent reminiscing about important dates, events, places and of course – the people who made Black Detroit what it was and is.  “I found myself going back to the old neighborhood – that’s pretty much what I knew I had to do to write about Black Detroit. To go back to these black neighborhoods and talk to some those individuals,” explained Mr. Boyd. But he also mentioned a connection – a special connection he made with the people that enabled him to write Black Detroit.

In response to questions from Professor Lewis-McCoy, Mr. Boyd went on to drop nuggets and kernels of information throughout the evening.  For instance, the existence of slavery in Detroit as well as the Underground Railroad where Detroit served as the last stop. Mr. Boyd explains: “This was a path that was carved out by individuals who were escaping the atrocities of servitude in this country,” Or when he talked the racial tensions and hostilities that framed the racial riots of 1943 and 1967.

Or how automobile manufacturing was not only the “lifeblood” for Detroit’s economy but for the nation as well. Or when he unveiled that before Detroit was known for making automobiles, Detroit was at one time, the stove-making capital of the world! Or when he talked about not only how the music and Detroit was “inexplicably connected” – but how the music was more than Motown.  Here, Mr. Boyd pointed to the world class musicians who studied and played a wide range of music - rhythm & blues, blues, be-bop and of course, jazz. He explained that folks came to Detroit because of the Renaissance taking place there – similar to the Harlem Renaissance. “It was more than just New York – there was a renaissance happening all over the country in varying degrees.” He pointed out that the Harlem Renaissance was also replicated in cities such as Pittsburgh and Toledo.

The evening of conversation ended with the topic of politics – specifically, black radical politics.  Professor Lewis-McCoy asked Mr. Boyd to talk about what he described as the “uniqueness” of Detroit in this regard.  Consider for a moment the Nation of Islam, Malcolm X, the Republic of New Afrika, the revolutionary formations taking place amongst the black workers in the automobile plants, and Wayne State University (WSU) as a cauldron of black radical politics. “It was such a promising moment where we thought revolution was just around the corner, such a moment of heightened political intensity,” said Mr. Boyd. Describing Wayne State University as a “hotbed of activism”, Mr. Boyd recounted his first class at WSU where he had 125 students.  There in the first row sat members of the Socialist Workers Party, Black Panther Party, Shrine of the Black Madonna, League of Black Revolutionary Workers, and the Revolutionary Communist Party. He amused his audience when he said: “Every political stripe was represented in that classroom – so you can imagine the tricky line I had to walk from an ideological standpoint.”  

   

Suggested Reading:

The League of Black Revolutionary Workers

The Underground Railroad in Detroit

Book Review: Democracy in Black: How Race still enslaves the American Soul

Democracy in Black
Eddie S. Glaude Jr.
Crown: 288 pages

American Democracy, White Supremacy and Racism

By Charles Brooks

Democracy in Black: How Race still enslaves the American Soul, written by Princeton University Professor Eddie S. Glaude has been on the bookshelves for about two years now.  The book was released January 2016 just as President Obama entered his last year in the White House.  In this book Glaude confronts the American democracy project and its contradiction – a contradiction seemingly rooted in the treatment of African Americans versus the American ideals of freedom, justice and equality. Glaude notes the contradiction and writes: “People could talk of freedom and liberty and hold black slaves.” As the subtitle suggests, this is a book unmistakenly about race and white supremacy in America.  

He challenges American democracy by linking this contradiction to white supremacy as the driving force behind what Glaude describes as the value gap, opportunity deserts and racial habits.  Glaude also writes about the concept of disremembering or active forgetting – a critical component to not just widening the value gap but advancing white supremacy. 

Democracy in Black is a clearly written polemic that’s easy to read without the dense academic prose. Glaude attempts to make a case about the far reaching implications of this American contradiction with anecdotes, historical and contemporary examples along with his personal observations and experiences. You will find featured prominently throughout the book, quotes from James Baldwin, Martin Luther King and W.E.B Dubois that Glaude uses to grapple with his thoughts on white supremacy, the value gap, opportunity deserts, and racial habits. 

Glaude takes on a wide range of topics that includes a brief history lesson on the origins of American contradiction. He digs into the implications and dangerousness of white fear, but more specifically white fear of the anticipation or rather, the expectation of black criminality.  He describes the narrowness of today’s black politics and black leadership that includes a searing critique of Reverend Al Sharpton and President Obama. While Glaude is not likely to get any love from Sharpton or Obama fans, he won't receive any from the clergy either when he talks about the death of the black church and their retreat as a progressive institution. He also takes on struggling HBCU’s, revealing his thoughts about President Obama’s apparent dismissive approach. His discussion about race also includes, the public resistance to the deaths of Trayvon Martin and Michael Brown, radical activism, and the Great Recession, where he writes “…the very foundations of Black America have cracked under the weight of the economic fallout.” 

There are passages in the book that should trigger passionate debate such as his criticism of President

Obama where he writes, “Obama refuses to engage directly the crisis sweeping black America.” Or when he says Obama was supposed to be more – he was supposed to be different, “He was ideally our black progressive antidote to the conservative policies of the Bush years.” Such provocative statements are certain to draw condemnation from Obama’s supporters who fiercely defend him at all costs. There’s Glaude’s prescription for presidential politics where he advocates for essentially a protest vote where there’s no vote for the presidential candidates or simply left “blank” – hence the “Blankout” strategy. With a hint of naiveté, Glaude reveals his belief in America when he talks about remaking American democracy.  He says a revolution of value is needed to transform the value gap and racial habits, and there are three ways to accomplish this - with changes in how we view government, black people and to what truly matters as Americans.  Yet in this context, Glaude did not include his views around “respectability politics” or provide a more expansive analysis on structural racism.  Although Glaude outlines some meaningful remedies to remake American democracy – there’s this muted dismissal of the realities around those interests or issues that inherently generates opposition. Whether the issue is poverty, minimum wage, healthcare, crime, or even support for the Confederate flag – there will always be a clash of two sides.

Nevertheless, Democracy in Black is definitely worth the time to read as Glaude makes more than a few points throughout the book that argues for a new way of thinking.  The Ferguson protests, the Black Lives Matter movement, and the Forward Together campaign - the politics of disruption are just a few examples that he uses as being informed by taking a more radical approach to transforming American democracy.  Just as important is Glaude’s inclusion of the need to transform the current state of black politics from its limited and narrow state to one that is more expansive in political expression. Like Glaude says – something has to change. 

Suggested Reading:

Structural Racism and American Democracy, Dr. Manning Marable

How American Democracy sustains racial inequality, Pamela Newkirk

Activists charge Mugabe is Right - on land reform & cruel economic sanctions

By Charles Brooks

Just hours before Zimbabwe President Robert Mugabe landed in New York City to attend the 72nd United Nations General Assembly, there was a protest demonstration demanding an end to the 16 year old sanctions imposed by the United States. Sanctions were imposed after President Mugabe took a nationalist approach to land reform by taking land from white farm owners and returning them to black farmers.

Over one hundred pro-Mugabe supporters marched through the streets in a protest demonstration led and organized by the December 12th Movement International Secretariat, a non-governmental organization with consultative status with the United Nations’ Economic and Social Council. “President Robert Mugabe and the people of Zimbabwe have consistently fought for political and economic independence,” Spokesman Omowale Clay continues, “control of their land is fundamental. These illegal sanctions infringe on their national sovereignty.”

What really happened to Sandra Bland?

By Charles Brooks

We paid attention and took notice of the disturbing trend.  We read the stories and saw the videos of not only blatant police harassment but of vicious police violence visited not on Black men – but on Black and Brown women, as well.  All across the country we saw it over and over - Black women pushed, punched, kicked, and at times suffering this violence while being handcuffed by the police. In those cases that did manage to reach national attention, we saw that these Black women were college professors, house wives, bathing suit clad teenagers and yes – even pregnant Black women felt the brunt of this police violence. 

What really happened to Freddy Gray?

By Charles Brooks

An encounter on April 12^th – a fatal encounter - between Freddie Gray and Baltimore City Police officers left Gray comatose with devastating spinal injuries.  Initial reports indicate that 80 percent of his spinal cord was severed leaving Gray with essentially a broken spinal vertebrae, and a crushed voice box.  Gray died from those injuries a week later on April 19^th.  In the two months since Gray died from horrific spinal injuries occurring while in police custody, questions remain unanswered; what exactly happened to Freddy Gray and how did he die?  

A narrative quickly began to develop that Gray was somehow responsible for his own death. The original reports of Gray's death that determined that Gray died of a head wound from a bolt sticking out within the van. Then there were reports about another prisoner in the police van with Gray who disputed initial reports that he said Gray was “banging against the wall” and “intentionally trying to hurt himself”.  The public were fed a story line that framed Gray’s injuries occurring during what’s called a “nickel ride” – reminiscent of the cheap and rocky rides at the local amusement park. The prisoner is handcuffed but not secured with a seatbelt – so they will bounce around inside the van as the police van drives through traffic, making turns and sudden stops.

There was a “leaked” autopsy report that Gray suffered from what the report described as a “high energy” injury while making a comparison to injuries suffered from shallow-water diving accidents. The report states: The type of fracture/dislocation documented in imaging studies on admission is a high energy injury most often caused by abrupt deceleration of a rotated head on a hyperflexed neck, such as seen in shallow water diving incidents.”  

The autopsy report also revealed toxicology results where cannaboids and opiates were found while pointing out Gray’s apparent aggressive behavior as “yelling, banging and causing the van to rock”.  See this excerpt from the autopsy report: “…After the inner and outer doors were closed, it is reported that Mr. Gray could be heard yelling and banging, causing the van to rock.  No injuries that would suggest the use of a neck hold, Taser deployment or physical restraint, other than wrist and ankle cuffs, were identified…” 

As daily protests began to take hold, Baltimore quickly became the latest flashpoint in the national resistance to police violence as uprisings quickly followed suit across the country.  Protesters were routinely dismissed and characterized as “outside agitators” and a “lynch mob”.  The scent of a police coverup began to carry a heavy stench as community tensions escalate while critical questions were left unanswered. 

The winds of resistance blew stronger and stronger in Baltimore where within hours of laying Gray to rest, a rebellious confrontation with the police emerged. The world witnessed an open rebellion on the streets of America as images splashed across the television screen of Baltimore students hurling rocks, stones and metal pipes at a battalion of Baltimore police officers clad in military and riot gear.  These young people took matters into their own hands apparently disgusted by their own daily experience of police harassment and violence – they decided to fight back the only way they knew how. The images were so foreign to the typical American – they were more reminiscent of the battles in the Middle East of young Palestinians pummeling the Israeli military. While the rebellious actions in Baltimore were immediately and widely condemned as "thugs" by the president and yes, the mayor. 

In the two months since the Baltimore Rebellion in Baltimore, there are reported plans to build a $30 million youth jail, divert nearly $12 million allocated for Baltimore City schools towards pensions, thousands are fighting turnoff notices for delinquent water bills, while FEMA rejected Baltimore’s request for disaster aid to cover the millions lost in property damage.

The pressing question should be where will the next uprising take place and how will the people respond to the next case of police violence.  Over the last year or so, more and more people are realizing this is a real human rights issue that has become a national crisis. You have seen the many nationwide protests and acts of civil disobedience, and fierce uprisings attracting international support over this issue of police violence.  For years now, black and brown communities all across the nation recognized the police as an intruding force who have clearly abused their power thus shattering this notion of public trust.  But the recent rash of escalating police violence not only shows the apparent lack of accountability afforded to police officers but really provides some insight to the extent of the political support police departments across the country have. 

Related Posts:

Ferguson/Garner protests: The uprisings will continue until...

Where will the next Ferguson uprising take place

What really happened to Sandra Bland?

Eric Garner, was he resisting arrest or resisting harassment, Part I

Eric Garner, was he resisting arrest or resisting harassment, Part II

 

 

Attorney General Confirmation Hearings: "...I will be Loretta Lynch."

By Charles Brooks

 

Confirmation hearings were recently held for President’s Obama’s nominee for U.S. Attorney General, Ms. Loretta Lynch to replace Eric Holder, who resigned four months ago.  Ms. Lynch currently serves as the U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of New York.  If confirmed, Ms. Lynch would be the first African American woman to lead the Department of Justice – certainly a plus for the President’s legacy. Since the start of the Obama administration, both the President and Attorney General – both African Americans – have been the source of some very intense opposition and hostility from Republicans. When Holder announced his resignation, he was immediately described as “the most divisive U.S. Attorney General in modern history” by Republican Congressman Dan Issa, who serves as Chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee.  This is what Mr. Issa had to say: “Eric Holder is the most divisive U.S. Attorney General in modern history and, in a vote supported by 17 Democratic House Members, has the dubious historic distinction of being the first Attorney General held in criminal contempt by the U.S. House of Representatives,” said Chairman Issa. “Time and again, Eric Holder administered justice as the political activist he describes himself as instead of an unbiased law enforcement official.  By needlessly injecting politics into law enforcement, Attorney General Holder’s legacy has eroded more confidence in our legal system than any Attorney General before him. Republicans have attacked Mr. Holder on critical national issues such as voting rights, terrorism, and immigration while pointing to controversial issues such as the Fast and Furious and IRS scandals.

Ferguson/Garner protests: The uprisings will continue until...

By Charles Brooks

  

Photo credit: digitaldefection via www.flickr.com

For over a month now, the world has witnessed a special moment unfolding in America where literally thousands upon thousands took to the streets in a stunning display of mass resistance in response to, not one but two recent controversial grand jury rulings. The world took notice of the rebellious uprisings emerging in city after city – from Ferguson, Missouri to Brooklyn, New York to Oakland, California – making their presence felt uptown as well as downtown, in the ‘hood’, and on college campuses. Protestors infiltrated and disrupted holiday shopping, Thanksgiving parades, Christmas events – brought the nation’s major highways and the railroads to a stop – gnarling traffic for miles.  

Photo credit: Fibonacci Blue via www.flickr.com

Two separate high profile grand jury proceedings in St. Louis and New York City ruled against indicting police officers, Darren Wilson and Daniel Pantaleo – in essence validating their use of deadly force against Michael Brown and Eric Garner, respectively. The vastly unpopular rulings triggered an incredible wave of mass resistance protesting against not just the police brutality issue but also against the abysmal lack of accountability for killing unarmed African American men. The grand jury’s decision not only exonerated the use of deadly force with no criminal charges but the decision also reinforced the notion that such deadly force is indeed the standard operating procedure, particularly when unarmed African Americans are involved. But there’s more - the grand jury’s decision essentially enables the uninterrupted freedom of both officers and allows them to return to their jobs, to walk the beat above ground while the bodies of Michael Brown and Eric Garner lay buried below ground. 

The ruling triggered painful reminders from a wretched racist past.  Take for example, the ruling serving as a reminder of the second-class citizenship that typically characterized Black America in the days before integration – you know, like when lynching was routine.  Another reminder of how unjust and unequal the criminal justice system is towards the black communities that make up Black America.  Another reminder of the Black America’s relationship with the police and how different that relationship is with other communities that make up the nation. Another reminder of the role the police had during the Civil Rights and Black Power Movements – as the first line of defense -  the brutal enforcers of Jim Crow and legal segregation. Another reminder of their role with COINTELPRO. And yet another reminder of the tragic failure of the state to recognize black humanity.  

  

Photo credit: Rose colored Photo via www.flickr.com

Consider for a moment what activist Rosa Clemente recently noted when she underlined significance of the ruling: “…The grand jury’s refusal to indict Darren Wilson means that the physical evidence, testimony of witnesses, police report on the incident, and Wilson’s own inconsistent and implausible account will never be subject to cross-examination, scrutiny, and comparison before a jury.”  Simply put, Ms. Clemente nailed it in pointing out the implications when police are left unindicted – no trial, no public scrutiny, no transparency and certainly no accountability. That’s why so many are just infuriated with the grand jury refusals to indict, and in fact, held very little hope for indictments of police officers Darren Wilson and Daniel Pantaleo.  Deep down…we already knew…

Photo credit: sierraromero via www.flickr.com

Take the Michael Brown case for instance where there were issues from the start. There were several events that instilled doubt within the local Ferguson community and larger extended community who demanded justice. Aside from not having a video of the shooting, Mr. Brown’s character came under heavy scrutiny, while the Prosecuting Attorney, Mr. McCullough refused to recuse himself from the case despite the strong conflict of interests.  Doubts around the Brown grand jury grew stronger as leaks spilled out, at one point, almost daily.  For days, all eyes were squarely riveted on Ferguson as we constantly heard that a decision “was coming any day now.” We braced ourselves for the worst… During this time the Governor announced his plan to deploy the National Guard, and declared a state of emergency…before an emergency.  Businesses fortified themselves as if preparing for a hurricane to blow through town. Schools closed down. Gun sales hit the roof. And then the announcement was made hours after the day turned into night - at the nighttime hour of nine o clock - Darren Wilson will not be indicted.  The Ferguson community erupted at the news and the rebellious uprising was in full swing quickly spreading across the country like California wildfire.  To make matters worse, we gradually learned about disturbing issues with the grand jury – first, the inconsistent presentation of evidence, and most recently, the apparent issues with lying witnesses. 

Then less than two weeks after the Brown grand jury decision, the Garner grand jury decided not to indict NYPD Officer Daniel Pantaleo. Despite the cellphone video showing an illegal chokehold used on Mr. Garner by Mr. Pantaleo as well as Chief Examiners Report that
ruled Mr. Garner’s death a homicide!   Just like the Brown case, there were issues with the Garner case from the start – community demands for a special prosecutor, concerns regarding a jury pool being picked from a biased pro-police Staten Island community and the Staten Island District Attorney seemingly delaying the grand jury process considering they didn’t start hearing evidence until nearly October – almost three months after Mr. Garner was killed. To make matters worse, nearly ten days after the Brown grand jury ruling, the Garner grand jury was announced and the public response was both swift and fierce with a flurry of daily protests around the country. 

And then two New York City police officers were gunned down on a Saturday afternoon – and you can sense the gradual shift in the narrative as the pro-police forces began to assert themselves. The police killing was immediately linked to the protests, and echoed loudly with inflammatory commentary by police union chief Pat Lynch, former governor George Pataki and former mayor Rudy Guiliani.  Ironically though, calls were made to halt the protests against the police violence while making no mention of stopping the pro-police protest rallies or their divisive rhetoric.  Nonetheless a debate quickly emerged – should the protests continue in light of the two dead NYPD officers?  But the real question is not whether the protests should continue or not but rather - when will police officers be held accountable for their criminal use of deadly force?

Meanwhile, the protest demonstrations continued unabated – and for a few good reasons. Let’s see, the issue of police brutality and violence has become a national crisis.  An issue that has been ongoing for many years with no apparent repercussions or consequences for police use of excessive deadly force. The police officers routinely get the benefit of the doubt regardless of the questionable circumstances that ultimately feeds doubt.  And then, aside from the Brown and Garner grand jury rulings, police officers were also not indicted in grand jury cases for Ezell Ford, John Crawford, Jonathan Baker, and Keyarika Diggles.  Yes – the protests have continued…and for good reason.

 

Related Posts:

 

Eric Garner; Resisting arrest or Resisting harassment,  Part I and Part II, and the death Michael Brown.