AfroSpear Jena Scrapbook

FBI FOIA Documents Received on Jena Six Case

2010-04-09T23:59:00.000-07:00

In response to my FOIA request for all documents related to the Jena Six March, I received a packet from the FBI. One page of the file was denied to me based on legal grounds, but the packet basically has some newspaper articles from 2006/2007, with some doodling on them.

Then there's a chronology of the events leading up to the nooses in the tree, i.e the overt white administrative posture to let Blacks sit under the tree and the covert white response to prevent them from doing so.

In the FBI documents, there's some discussion of what punishment would and should ensue for the three identified white student noose hangers (whose names are omitted from the FBI documents). The discussion is about whether the students will be expelled from school or merely suspended, with the FBI expressing no opinion on the matter. I believe (without remembering for sure) that the FBI reported that the students were suspended and, once the students having been thereby punished, there was nothing further for the FBI investigate in Jena, Louisiana.

Then there are some new details about the noose tree. The noose tree, says the FBI, was the only shade tree on school grounds and it provided enough shade for five or six picnic tables underneath. So, being excluded from sitting under the noose tree meant being excluded from sitting at picnic tables and excluded from sitting in the shade. At least that's the FBI report's take on it.

In another interesting twist, there are a couple of newspaper articles in the file concerning white supremacists' responses. These white supremacist threats seemed to be taken far more seriously than anything that Blacks might do in response to the noose hanging.

Nonetheless, the FBI saw no real merit to pursuing the matter and and kicked the case over to the Bush Civil Rights Division at the Department of Justice. There, Civil Rights makes the determination that no more review or investigation is warranted, and this decision was made in 2006/early 2007, apparently BEFORE the Black kids beat the white kid up, and BEFORE the school was torched, and BEFORE 30,000 Blacks marched on Jena. Like Katrina, the Bush Administration was asleep at the wheel and unable or unwilling to see the gravity of storms even after getting storm warnings. It's also reminiscent of September 11, 2001. National security people warned Bush that an attack was imminent, so Bush went on vacation, giving the unprecedented attacks all of the attention he believed they deserved at the time.

It's really quite ironic that Jena and Katrina happened in the same state of Louisiana. In both Louisiana cases, the Bush Administration was advised well in advance that a storm was brewing, and in both Louisiana cases the Bush Administration decided to do nothing until it was too late, much to the disadvantage of the Black people (and a considerable number of white people) involved.

Interestingly, there is no mention of the Jena March or the beating of the white kid in the FBI files as released. Perhaps once the FBI and Civil Rights division decided that there was nothing worth investigating in Jena, they decided to stick to that story regardless of the facts as they evolved. The FOIA documents say virtually nothing about Black people's response to the nooses, and the FOIA documents do not, to my recollection, report contact with any specific Black people or organizations before the decision to close the case.

If anyone finds any of this new and interesting, or would like to review the documents for another perspective, I can put the most relevant documents on the Internet in PDF files and/or send them by e-mail.

Jena Six "MOTION TO RECUSE THE HON. J. P. MAUFFRAY, JR."

2008-04-18T19:46:00.000-07:00

Hat Tip to ColorofChange.Org.

STATE OF LOUISIANA NUMBER: J-3868

IN THE INTEREST OF JUVENILE COURT

JESSE RAY BEARD LASALLE PARISH, LOUISIANA

MOTION TO RECUSE THE HON. J. P. MAUFFRAY, JR.

NOW INTO COURT, through undersigned counsel, comes JESSE RAY BEARD, a juvenile, who moves the Court as follows:

Jesse Ray Beard (Jesse Ray) has been charged with a delinquent act as a juvenile and will therefore face adjudication in which the trial judge will be the sole determiner of fact.

The Honorable J.P. Mauffray, Jr. presides in this matter.

A judge must be recused when he is biased, prejudiced, or personally interested in a case.

Where the judge is the finder of fact, a judgeÕs comments expressing his belief that a defendant is guilty may be grounds for recusal.

WHEREFORE, DEFENDANT PRAYS that Judge Mauffray recuse himself from this and all other matters involving Jesse Ray, or in the alternative, that a hearing be granted in front of an impartial judge to determine whether Judge Mauffray be recused from this and all other matters involving Jesse Ray.

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:

___________________________

DAVID J. UTTER

Juvenile Justice Project of Louisiana

1600 Oretha Castle Haley Blvd.

New Orleans, LA 70113

Telephone: (504) 522-5437

Fax: (504) 522-5430

STATE OF LOUISIANA NUMBER: J-3868

IN THE INTEREST OF JUVENILE COURT

JESSE RAY BEARD LASALLE PARISH, LOUISIANA

MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF

MOTION TO RECUSE THE HON. J. P. MAUFFRAY, JR.

May It Please The Court:

JESSE RAY BEARD (ÒJesse RayÓ), by and through counsel, respectfully moves this Court, pursuant to Louisiana Code of Criminal Procedure Article 671, Article I Section 2 of the Louisiana Constitution (Due Process), Article I Section 3 of the Louisiana Constitution (Right to Individual Dignity), and the 5th and the 14th Amendments to the United States Constitution, to recuse the Hon. J. P. Mauffray, Jr., from presiding over this case.

This is a juvenile matter wherein Jesse Ray is prohibited from having a jury determine his guilt or innocence. See, e.g., La. Ch. C. Art. 808 (West 2008) (ÒAll rights guaranteed to criminal defendants by the Constitution of the United States or the Constitution of Louisiana, except the right to jury trial, shall be applicable in juvenile court proceedings.Ó) (emphasis added). Judge Mauffray will, therefore, be the sole determiner of fact in all proceedings in this case. Generally, a judge must be recused when he is biased, prejudiced, or personally interested in a case. La.C.Cr.P. art. 671. Indeed, article 671 mandates recusal where, for any reason, a judge is unable to conduct a fair and impartial trial. As is applicable in the instant matter, where the judge is the finder of fact, a judgeÕs comments expressing his belief that a defendant is guilty may be grounds for recusal. State v. Willis, 915 So.2d 365 (La App.3 Cir. 2005).

Judge Mauffray has made numerous statements, on numerous occasions, in different procedural postures (as will be further discussed at any hearing resulting from the instant Motion), to numerous individuals, which make clear he has pre-judged not only Jesse RayÕs guilt, but the disposition for Jesse Ray as well. Indeed, Judge Mauffray has expressed his belief generally that Jesse Ray and his African-American friends are guilty, not only of the misconduct alleged in this matter, but of several other acts of misconduct as well. Additionally, Judge MauffrayÕs actions and statements in various proceedings for other Jena 6 members demonstrate his inability to conduct fair and impartial proceedings for Jesse Ray Beard. Judge Mauffray should, therefore, recuse himself. In the alternative, should Judge Mauffray refuse to do so, a fair and impartial court should do so for him.

In any delinquency proceeding[1] – and particularly in a delinquency case with the eyes of the world watching – it is imperative that Òjustice satisfy the appearance of justice." In Re Murchison, 349 U.S. 133, 136, 75 S.Ct. 623, 625, 99 L.Ed. 942, 946 (1955) (quoting Offutt v. United States, 348 U.S. 11, 14 (1955)). Thus, our courts have found that Òeven the appearance of impartiality, as well as impartiality itself, outweighs the inconvenience caused by the recusal of the trial judge." State v. LeBlanc, 367 So.2d 335, 341 (La. 1979), citing State v. Lemelle, 353 So.2d1312 (La. 1977). As the federal courts have held:

The question is not whether the judge is impartial in fact. It is simply whether another, not knowing whether or not the judge is actually impartial, might reasonably question his impartiality on the basis of all the circumstances.

Rice v. McKenzie, 581 F.2d 1114, 1116-17 (4`'' Cir. 1978). See also Hall v. Small Business Administration, 695 F.2d 175, 179 (5th Cir. 1983) (disqualification required Òif a reasonable person, knowing all the circumstances, would harbor doubts about his impartiality.Ó).

Although judges in small towns like Jena may know extra-judicial facts about parties who come before them, all judges are expected to act fairly and impartially.[2] Judge MauffrayÕs statements, however, to participants in proceedings, and his behavior in Jesse RayÕs case and other cases known as the Jena 6, show that he is so personally interested, biased, and prejudiced, that he is unable to conduct a fair and impartial trial. See La. C. Cr. P. art. 671(1).

For reasons stated in this Motion, article 671 sections (1) and (6) require that Judge Mauffray be recused from presiding over Jesse RayÕs case. Judge Mauffray should, therefore, recuse himself from this and all other matters involving Jesse Ray. In the alternative, a hearing should be granted in front of an impartial judge. As will be shown at such a hearing, there is no question that Judge Mauffray should be recused because he is biased, prejudiced, and personally interested in this case and cannot conduct a fair trial.

Date: _____________________

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:

___________________________

DAVID J. UTTER

Juvenile Justice Project of Louisiana

1600 Oretha Castle Haley Blvd.

New Orleans, LA 70113

Telephone: (504) 522-5437

Fax: (504) 522-5430

C E R T I F I C A T E

I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing motion has been served upon Mr. Reed

Walters, Assistant District Attorney, Parish of LaSalle, on this the ___ day of ______________,

2007.

___________________________________

DAVID J. UTTER

STATE OF LOUISIANA NUMBER: J-3868

IN THE INTEREST OF JUVENILE COURT

JESSE RAY BEARD LASALLE PARISH, LOUISIANA

ORDER

Considering the foregoing motion, it is ordered that Jesse Ray Beard be granted a hearing herein and that same be heard on the ___________ day of ____________________, at ___ oÕclock AM/PM, contradictorily with the State of Louisiana.

Jena, Louisiana, this ___ day of ___________________, 2008.

___________________________________

JUDGE J. P. MAUFFRAY, JR.

[1] The standard for recusal is the same for both delinquency and criminal proceedings. See Ch.C. art. 803. ÒWhere procedures are not provided in this Title, or otherwise by this Code, the court shall proceed in accordance with the Code of Criminal Procedure.Ó

[2] In addition to the mandates in Article 671, the Louisiana Code of Judicial Conduct provides that a judge Òshall act at all times in a manner that promotes public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciaryÉA judge shall not allow family, social, political, or other relationships to influence judicial conduct or judgment.Ó See Louisiana Code of Judicial Conduct, Canon 2, 8 LSA-RS.

Jena Six "MOTION TO RECUSE THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY"

2008-04-18T19:42:00.000-07:00

Hat Tip to ColorofChange.Org.

STATE OF LOUISIANA NUMBER: J-3868

IN THE INTEREST OF JUVENILE COURT

JESSE RAY BEARD LASALLE PARISH, LOUISIANA

MOTION TO RECUSE THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY

NOW INTO COURT, through undersigned counsel, comes JESSE RAY BEARD, a juvenile, who moves the Court as follows:

Jesse Ray Beard (Jesse Ray) has been charged with a delinquent act.

The District Attorney prosecuting the case is J. Reed Walters (“Walters”).

Walters has shown on numerous occasions that he is so prejudiced and harbors such personal bias against Jesse Ray and the other five African American youths now known as the Jena 6, that he is incapable of fairly and impartially performing his duties as the district attorney.

During the relevant time period, Walters also served as attorney for the LaSalle Parish School Board. In this capacity, Walters provided counsel to the School Board of a nature which created an irreparable conflict of interest with his duties as the district attorney, thereby impairing his ability to perform his duties as the district attorney fairly and impartially.

A district attorney must be recused when his bias, prejudice, or personal interest in a case impairs his ability to fairly and impartially perform his duties.

WHEREFORE, JESSE RAY BEARD PRAYS that after due proceedings, District Attorney J. Reed Walters be recused from this and all other matters involving Jesse Ray.

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:

___________________________

DAVID J. UTTER

Juvenile Justice Project of Louisiana

1600 Oretha Castle Haley Blvd.

New Orleans, LA 70113

Telephone: (504) 522-5437

Fax: (504) 522-5430

STATE OF LOUISIANA NUMBER: J-3868

IN THE INTEREST OF JUVENILE COURT

JESSE RAY BEARD LASALLE PARISH, LOUISIANA

MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF

MOTION TO RECUSE THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY

JESSE RAY BEARD, by and through counsel, respectfully moves this Court to recuse District Attorney J. Reed Walters and his office from prosecuting this case.[1] Jesse Ray Beard (“Jesse Ray”) submits this motion to recuse pursuant to Louisiana Code of Criminal Procedure Article 680, Article I Section 2 of the Louisiana Constitution (Due Process), Article I Section 3 of the Louisiana Constitution (Right to Individual Dignity), and the 5th and the 14th Amendments to the United States Constitution. See La. C. Cr. P. art. 680; La. const. art. I §2; La. const. art. I §3; U.S. const. amend. V; U.S. const. amend. XIV.

As grounds, Jesse Ray states the following:

INTRODUCTION

On August 31, 2006 African-American students arrived at school to find “two hangman’s nooses hanging from the tree that sits in the center of the Jena High School square tree . . . where most students assemble during recess and lunch breaks.”[2] “Incident More Hype than Reality”, Jena Times, p. 1A (Sept. 13, 2006). Disregarding the 4,863 recorded lynchings over the past 125 years, almost all in the Deep South and almost all hangings of African-Americans, officials reported to the local media that “most of the `racial tensions’ were more media hype than reality.” “In reality, the nooses had nothing to do with racial bigotry, but rather an ignorant prank taken from the mini-series, `Lonesome Dove.’” Id. In spite of a recommendation by the school principal that the 3 noose hangers be expelled, the expulsion hearing committee of the LaSalle Parish School Board voted to suspend the students instead. Id. The attorney representing the school board (both in the noose-hangers’ cases and also with regard to the expulsions of six African-American students including Jesse Ray) was, and remains, District Attorney J. Reed Walters; the very person who refused to prosecute these white students but charged Jessie Ray with attempted murder for allegedly hitting a fellow student.[3]

On December 4, 2006, after 3 months of racial tension at the school, including but not limited to: 1) protests and a sit-in by African-American students; 2) numerous fights between African-American and white youth that spilled off school grounds; 3) at least one day of the entire school being placed on “lockdown;”[4]and 4) an arsonist’s fire that destroyed the main school building, Justin Barker (Justin), a white student, was injured in a battery, allegedly by six African-American students.[5] Shortly after the incident, sheriff’s deputies arrested the young men, now known as the Jena 6, and charged them with aggravated second degree battery. Even though Justin was well enough to attend a school function hours later, Mr. Walters increased the charges against the Jena Six to attempted second degree murder, and conspiracy to commit attempted second degree murder, and transferred one of the young men – Mychal Bell – to adult court.[6]

Since that fateful day when three white students placed hangman’s nooses on a tree in the center of the square at Jena High School, Mr. Walters has repeatedly demonstrated his bias and inability to fairly and impartially perform his duties as the prosecutor in the Jena 6 cases. As will be shown at a hearing on this motion, his personal bias in this case and conflict of interests as prosecutor and school board attorney make him unfit to proceed as prosecutor herein.

Our nation’s ugly history of lynching African-Americans and the symbol of the noose as a deadly threat to African Americans made the hanging of those nooses from the school yard tree an undeniable crime in the circumstances of this case. Mr. Walter’s manifest unwillingness to prosecute this crime is the clearest sign of his bias and his inability to fairly and impartially prosecute Jesse Ray. This impartiality is further highlighted when one compares the leniency with which Mr. Walters treated the white noose hangers juxtaposed against his treatment of the Jean Six. Finally, Mr. Walters’ behavior in this and other cases involving Jesse Ray show a willingness to abuse his power as the chief law enforcement officer in LaSalle Parish to secure convictions, disregarding his primary duty to justice.

I. The Law of Recusal

District attorneys are given broad power and discretion in prosecuting cases. However, the United States Constitution and the Louisiana Constitution require that prosecutors’ broad discretion and power is limited to ensure that prosecutors are always seeking justice and that every prosecution is conducted fairly and impartially. If a prosecutor cannot conduct a prosecution fairly and impartially, he must be recused.

Louisiana Code of Criminal Procedure Article 680(1) (“Article 680”) limits prosecutors’ power by providing that a district attorney shall be recused when he “[h]as a personal interest in the cause or grand jury proceeding which is in conflict with the fair and impartial administration of justice.” Article 680’s recusal provision is not only provided for but is required by constitutional guarantees of the fair and impartial administration of justice. Plaquemines Parish Comm’n Council v. Perez, 379 So.2d 1373, 1377 (La. 1980). Article 1 § 2 of the Louisiana Constitution provides that “no person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property, except by due process of law.” The Louisiana Supreme Court has defined the essence of due process as “protection from arbitrary and unreasonable action.” Plaquemines, 379 So.2d at 1377. Furthermore, due process itself requires impartiality. See Id. Additionally, Article I Section 3 of the Louisiana Constitution commands that: “No person shall be denied the equal protection of the laws. No law shall discriminate against a person because of race or religious ideas, beliefs, or affiliations.”[7]

The Louisiana Supreme Court has interpreted Article 680 (1) to require courts to recuse a district attorney “when the situation presented raises questions as to whether the district attorney’s ability to fairly and impartially perform his duties has been impaired.” State v. King, 956 So.2d 562, 567 (La. 2007). Recusal is required even where the district attorney is not aware of his partiality and despite his earnest assertions that he is impartial. Id. Furthermore, a defendant need not prove that a district attorney will benefit personally or economically from prosecuting the defendant. The Louisiana Legislature and courts in Louisiana have made clear that a district attorney must be recused if he is involved or interested in any extrinsic matters which might, consciously or unconsciously, impair or destroy his power to conduct the accused’s trial fairly and impartially. Id.; State v. Tate, 171 So. 108 (La. 1936). In fact, when the Louisiana Legislature passed Article 680, it changed the grounds for recusal from requiring a showing of a “personal interest adverse to that of the prosecution” to any “personal interest in the cause which is in conflict with fair and impartial administration of justice.” See, State v. Bailey, NO. 2007-KK-1922 (La. 2007) (writ denied) (dissent) (discussing change in language and requirements for recusal); See also La. C. Cr. P. art. 680.

The proponent of recusal must prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the district attorney has a personal interest which conflicts with the fair and impartial administration of justice. Id. at 566; State v. Snyder, 237 So.2d 392, 395. However, courts must apply an objective standard in making its recusal determination. That is, the proponent of recusal needs only to produce evidence that would lead a reasonable person to question whether the district attorney can conduct the trial fairly and impartially. King, 956 So. 2d at 570.

What is more, if there is a “close” case, courts must err on the side of recusal to promote the fair and impartial administration of justice. Id. at 570. Furthermore, courts have found that district attorneys had personal interests in cases and ordered their recusal based on broad and varied factual situations.

In State v. Marcotte, 86 So.2d 186 (La. 1956), a police constable was convicted of battery and other offenses. Before trial the defendant filed a motion asking the trial court to recuse the district attorney in the case. The defendant claimed that the district attorney had personal animosity against him stemming from altercations with the district attorney’s father and because the defendant and the district attorney had been politically opposed to each other for years. Id. at 187. Furthermore, the defendant alleged that during the previous primary, the defendant had opposed the district attorney’s candidacy. In response to this political opposition, one of the district attorney’s cohorts (with the knowledge and consent of the district attorney) threatened the defendant saying, “unless [defendant] changed his political activities and supported the district attorney’s candidacy, [defendant] would suffer the consequences of vigorous prosecution and conviction immediately after election ...but if he were to change his political support to the district attorney, the charges would be dropped.” Id. The district attorney denied these allegations in his answer to defendant’s recusal motion. The district attorney also claimed that he held no animosity toward defendant and did not regard him as a personal enemy. Id. The trial court denied defendant’s recusal motion without allowing defendant to cross-examine the district attorney or to provide proof to support his claims. Id. at 188. The defendant appealed. The Supreme Court of Louisiana held that it was improper for the trial court to refuse to hear evidence on defendant’s motion because the allegations alleged by the defendant, if sustained by a preponderance of the evidence, were sufficient to require recusation of the district attorney on the ground that he had a personal interest in the case. Id.

Other courts have also considered a district attorney’s statements as evidence of animosity. In King, the court found that the district attorney’s comments that he would proceed with charges against the defendant partially because the defendant had found himself in the district attorney’s cross hairs was evidence of the district attorney’s impermissible personal interest in the case. King, 956 So.2d 562 at 568. At the recusal hearing, the defendant’s lawyer testified regarding a telephone call he had with the district attorney where the district attorney said he would go forward with the charges against defendant because he was upset by rumors about the district attorney’s family spread by the defendant. Id. at 568. The court found that the evidence supported recusal.

In State v. Snyder, 237 So.2d 392 (La 1970), the defendant was charged with perjury and several counts of defamation for allegedly making defamatory comments about the district attorney and other individuals. All of the charges arose out of a heated political campaign in which the district attorney supported the defendant’s rival. The district attorney nol-prossed the charges stemming from the alleged defamation against the district attorney himself. However, he indicted the defendant for the other alleged defamations. The defendant filed motions to recuse the district attorney from the cases. Id. at 393-394. He claimed the following facts in support of his recusal motion: 1) that the district attorney became engaged in political activities in opposition to defendant’s candidacy, 2) acting in his official capacity, the district attorney publicly expressed a judgment that the defendant was guilty of the criminal offenses despite the fact that he had no evidence to justify such a statement, and 3) the district attorney appeared on a radio talk show where he threatened that all of the defendant’s previous comments on radio programs would “be brought to the Grand jury …and the Grand Jury …will have no other recourse but to return a great many indictments against [defendant].” Id. at 395. At the hearing on defendant’s motion to recuse, the district attorney admitted that he had developed strong personal animosity toward the defendant; but he claimed that the animosity eroded after the election. Id. The trial court overruled the defendant’s motion and the defendant appealed. On appeal, the Supreme Court of Louisiana found that based on the evidence presented, the defendant had established, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the district attorney “has a personal interest in the cause which is in conflict with fair and impartial administration of justice” and thus must be recused pursuant to Article 680(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Id. The Court noted that “where such deep-seated hatred has once evinced itself, the district attorney might, even though unconsciously, have impaired his power to conduct [defendant’s] trial fairly and impartially. Id.

II. The Grounds for Recusal

Because of his bias and conflict, Mr. Walters fails to see what any fair and unbiased individual would see: A “hangman’s noose” hung in a tree previously utilized by whites only, in the context and circumstances of this case, is not, and can never be, a prank.[8] This failure, shown in his actions both as counsel to the school board and as District Attorney, indicate a bias and conflict of interest that, while shared with influential parts of the white community, make it impossible to fairly and impartially prosecute Jessie Ray. As legal counsel to the LaSalle Parish School Board, Mr. Walters was ultimately responsible for the legal opinion to his clients that ensured that the noose-hangers’ school term was only interrupted with suspension and weekend detentions, while guiding the system to a full academic year expulsion for the Jena 6. After African-American students reacted in protest and outrage to the noose-hanging and racial unrest engulfed the school, Mr. Walters threatened the African-American students with ruining their lives with a “stroke of his pen” if they did not behave, while ignoring any responsibility the white students had in the unrest.

As District Attorney, Mr. Walters refused to consider charging the three white students who admitted to hanging the nooses, even though he could have proceeded under not one, but four possible statutes: i.e. terrorizing, institutional vandalism, violating Louisiana’s hate crime statute, and assault. After refusing to prosecute the white noose-hangers, Mr. Walters then made good on his threat to African-Americans, in particular the Jena 6 and Jesse Ray, by overcharging the Jena 6, and arguing for high bonds (thus guaranteeing that they all spent time incarcerated before trial). Based on the facts alleged herein, in addition to what will be adduced at a hearing on the matter, it is clear that Mr. Walters has a personal interest and bias in the cause which is in conflict with the fair and impartial administration of justice.

Pursuant to the standards set forth in Article 680 of the Louisiana Code of Criminal Procedure, State v. Tate, 171 So. 108, and other Louisiana case law, the office of the LaSalle Parish District Attorney, J. Reed Walters, must be recused from this case.

A. Mr. Walters in His Capacity as School Board Counsel: Slapping the Wrists of White Students and Hammering African-Americans.

More than any other image from African-American history, a hangman’s noose is a tangible, visual, silent and deliberate threat intended to instill fear and intimidation. African-Americans suffered death at the hands of white vigilantes for all of their history in our nation, but nothing like the spectacle associated with public lynching.[9] Lynching was a prominent component of the late 19^th and 20^th century American political landscape, and was utilized as a tool for the systematic intimidation of African-Americans.[10] Between 1882 (when reliable statistics are first available) and 1968, the vast majority of the 4,863 recorded people lynched in the United States were southern, African-American men.[11]

“Lynch mobs” enforced extralegal and barbarous death sentences of hanging and mutilation on thousands of African-Americans in the southern United States.[12] From the 1890’s through the early decades of the 20^th century, state and federal lawmakers effectively sanctioned the violence by allowing it to go unchecked and consistently turned a blind eye to the thousands of lynchings.[13] "Lynchings were concentrated in a swath running through Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi and Louisiana."[14] It is inconceivable that an experienced Louisiana prosecutor would be unaware of this history. Community institutions were also complicit in condoning lynching and in protecting perpetrators. Some local newspapers refused to report lynchings in their communities, and others wrote stories advertising coming lynchings and guaranteeing huge crowds. Local law enforcement, prosecutors, and even judges often abdicated their obligation to find and punish lynchers. For example, police directed traffic at the 1931 lynching of Matthew Williams in Salisbury, Maryland. The conspiracy of silence extended to the white townspeople as well. Whites often closed ranks to protect their friends and neighbors while fear kept most African-Americans silent. Some elderly African-Americans are still unwilling to talk openly about lynching today, even within their own families.[15]

Mr. Walter’s bias became clear when he ignored this history[16] and either supported or failed to intervene when the LaSalle Parish School Board expulsion hearing committee overrode school Principal Scott Windham’s recommendation that the noose-hangers be expelled. Instead, the students received suspensions.[17] The obvious nature and significance of this history was highlighted when CNN recently aired “The Noose – An American Nightmare.” The program also showed how important it is for unbiased prosecutors to quell potential violence by prosecuting such crimes before they lead to a spiral of violence. Yet, bias can prevent a prosecutor from carrying out his most basic duties.

Principal Windham knew and was willing to act on what the expulsion hearing committee and Mr. Walters failed to recognize because of an overriding bias. The nooses were an overt, racist threat to the African-American students who dared ask school officials if they could sit with white students at lunch under a tree that had long been associated as a gathering place exclusively for white folks. We cannot assume Mr. Walters is ignorant of this background. Were Mr. Walters not biased, he would recognize that in the context described and considering the history of race, racism, and lynchings in the United States (especially in the South), nooses hanging from a tree are a threat to the entire African-American community. They are a powerful, unequivocal statement to any African-American that he dare not upset the dominant social order. Rather than acknowledge the noose-hanging as the assault and/or hate crime that it was, Mr. Walters' bias allowed him to accept the dominant view, seemingly held by some white citizens in Jena, that the act was merely an “ignorant prank”; and thus he supported his client’s (the school board’s) minor disciplining of the three perpetrators of this racist act.[18]

His treatment of the noose-hangers is in stark contrast with the swift expulsions of the Jena 6.[19] All six were arrested and locked in jails – four in the squalid LaSalle Parish Jail and two in juvenile detention – immediately after the Dec. 4, 2006 battery on Justin Barker. By January 29, 2007, the LaSalle Parish School Board upheld the year-long expulsions of four of the students, with the fifth student apparently not appealing his expulsion. Jena Times, p. 1A (Jan. 31, 2007). As counsel to the school board, Mr. Walters ensured that the underlying facts of the incidents and possible racial bias were not explored as part of the process, admonishing the school board members that “[w]e’re not here to discuss the investigation or any other students, we’re here to make sure the expulsion process was conducted in accordance to Louisiana Statutes.” Id., at p. 3A. The vote to uphold the expulsions was seven-one, with the lone dissent coming from the Board’s sole African-American member. Id.

Having acted as counsel to the school board with the result he directed, Mr. Walters could not then turn around and prosecute the noose cases in an unbiased way. Furthermore, he put himself in the untenable position, through his conflict of interest in representing the school board, of being seen as unfairly acting to expel the Jena 6 and not those who hung the nooses. He cannot now deny his bias and his personal stake in prosecuting Jesse Ray. Mr. Walters’ bias and his interest in validating his advice to the school board is a basis for this Court to recuse him. Contrary to the trial judge’s decision in Bailey, a defendant moving for recusal is not required to prove that the district attorney would receive some personal benefit from prosecuting the defendant. The proper standard, as announced in Tate, only requires that a defendant show that the district attorney is involved or is interested in an extrinsic matter which might consciously or unconsciously impair or destroy his power to fairly and impartially conduct the defendant’s prosecution. Furthermore, even if the standard was as the Bailey court suggested (i.e. that a defendant must show that the district attorney received some personal benefit), the facts in this case would still require a court to recuse District Attorney J. Reed Walters. The benefit that Mr. Walters receives from prosecuting Jesse Ray is a professional benefit. By prosecuting Jesse Ray, Mr. Walters validates his advice to the school board to expel Jesse Ray and his co-defendants. Concomitantly by not prosecuting the noose hangers he validates his advice to the school board not to expel the noose-hangers. It would be professionally embarrassing to Mr. Walters to take any other course. Clearly this “conflict” made it impossible for Mr. Walters to be objective in his duties as prosecutor.

In addition, a further conflict of interest for Mr. Walters arises out of the civil litigation filed by the Barkers against the Jena 6 defendants and the School Board. It is very likely that Mr. Walters will be a witness in that litigation since he was counsel for the School Board at the time of the incident and remains its counsel today. It would be highly improper for him to continue as the prosecutor of the individual Jena 6 defendants in such circumstances. Criminal convictions of the Jena 6 would be advantageous to Walters' client the School Board because a civil jury would be more likely to allocate more of the blame and damages to the Jena 6 defendants if they have been convicted of a crime. The School Board could also argue that they cannot be expected to prevent criminal behavior. Alternatively, if the remaining Jena 6 defendants are acquitted (or if Walters would drop the charges -- as may well be mandated by the lack of credible evidence against at least some of the defendants), the School Board would be left as the primary focus of blame in the civil case. Finally, should there be a claim against the Jena 6 by the School Board (or even a defense grounded in alleged untoward action of the Jena 6) Mr. Walters could be seen as using his position as District Attorney to augment and support the interests of his client, the School Board. Such a conflict of interest is simply inappropriate.

B. Mr. Walters' Bias Allows Him to Make Good on his Threat to African-Americans Students and to Abuse his Prosecutorial Power by Refusing to Charge the White Students and Improperly Charging the African-American Students.

A month or so after the nooses were hung, Mr. Walters was called to Jena High School by Detective Paul Smith[20] to address the students at a hastily called assembly. In a recent “chronology” of events disseminated by the Jena Times, Mr. Smith claims the precipitating incident was a fight involving one of the Jena 6. There is no way the fight stemmed from racial tension and the nooses, the Jena Times assures us, because according to them, from Sept. 9 (the day after Jena High was on “lockdown” after someone reported a gun on campus) to Nov. 30, 2006 (the night an arson’s fire burned the school’s main building down) “there were no such reports of any violence or destruction during this time period.” “Disruptions at school were only those of typical disruptions, nothing related to any racial divide, thus, putting to rest any speculation that there was true racial tensions in town.” See Appendix C, pp. 7-11 (“Chronological Order of Events Concerning the `Jena 6’”).

As with most versions of events surrounding the Jena 6, Jena’s African-Americans recall things differently. Indeed, even the Jena Times’ “Chronology”, which contains lengthy narratives editorializing on facts critical to the events and questions whether the nooses were “racial”, notes an impassioned speech by an African-American mother about the nooses at a school board meeting on Sept. 18, 2006 – nine days after the time of supposed racial “peace” noted above. Id. at pp. 6-7. It was Mr. Smith, the lead detective in the Jena 6 case, not the school principal who called the assembly. Id. at p. 8. African American students remember Mr. Walters harshly admonishing students to behave and obey school rules, saying, “I can be your best friend or your worst enemy. I could take your lives away with the stroke of my pen.”[21]

Unfortunately, this is precisely what Mr. Walters proceeded to do to the Jena 6. After Mr. Smith’s investigation of the battery on Justin, which included a statement by one of the admitted noose-hangers implicating three of the Jena 6 in the attack, all six African-American students were arrested and incarcerated. Bonds were set between $70,000 and $138,000, much too high for most to secure bail and release. Although the Jena 6 were charged with second degree battery at the time of their arrest, Mr. Walters increased the charges to attempted second degree murder and conspiracy to commit attempted second degree murder.

In an unusually public comment on a criminal case, especially one with an on-going investigation, Mr. Walters noted in the front page of the local paper that he “will do whatever is in my authority and power to bring justice to those charged with criminal actions and help restore the schools to a place where the teachers can teach and the children can learn free from the threat of criminals.” See Jena Times 12/13/2007, p. 1A. In fact, in the only conviction to date, Mr. Walters was found by a reviewing court to have exceeded his authority. As noted earlier, this included overcharging 16 year old Mychal Bell in order to transfer the case to adult court and incarcerate him with grown men in a squalid jail for 10 months, only to drop the charges to aggravated second degree battery (a charge not transferable to adult court) after the selection of an all-white jury, and securing a conviction forthwith. An appellate court determined Mr. Walters’ actions exceeded his authority, reversed Mychal’s conviction, and remanded the case back to juvenile court. [22] Cite to 3^rd Circuit opinion or attach if unpublished.[23]

In contrast, Mr. Walters was unable to identify a crime committed by the three white students who admitted to hanging the nooses on schools grounds the day after African-American students asked to sit with white students at lunch under a tree long noted as a gathering place for whites. On September 19, 2007, in a statement to the press, Mr. Walters claimed that he “researched state law and came to the conclusion that there is no state criminal statute prohibiting the conduct [of hanging nooses on school grounds].” The Jena Times, p. 2A (Sept. 19, 2007). Undersigned counsel’s research found a number of possible criminal statutes applicable to the crimes committed by the white students.

First, Mr. Walters had grounds to initiate criminal proceedings against the individual(s) that hung the nooses on the grounds of Jena’s high school under Louisiana’s terrorizing or institutional vandalism statutes. In light of the facts surrounding the noose hanging, Mr. Walters also could have prosecuted such individual(s) for violation of Louisiana’s hate crimes statute. Louisiana’s hate crime statute, provides:

It shall be unlawful for any person to select the victim of the following offenses against person and property because of actual or perceived race, age, gender, religion, color, creed disability, sexual orientation, national origin, or ancestry of that person or the owner or occupant of that property or because of actual or perceived membership or service in, or employment with, an organization: first or second degree murder; manslaughter; battery; aggravated battery; second degree battery; aggravated assault with a firearm; terrorizing; mingling harmful substances; simple, forcible, or aggravated rape; sexual battery, second degree sexual battery; oral sexual battery; carnal knowledge of a juvenile; indecent behavior with juveniles; molestation of a juvenile; simple, second degree, or aggravated kidnapping; simple or aggravated arson; placing combustible materials; communicating of false information of planned arson; simple or aggravated criminal damage to property; contamination of water supplies; simple or aggravated burglary; criminal trespass; simple, first degree, or armed robbery; purse snatching; extortion; theft; desecration of graves; institutional vandalism; or assault by drive-by shooting.

La. Rev. Stat. ann. § 14:107.2(A). In order to be guilty of violating Louisiana’s hate crime statute, a defendant must be guilty of one of the underlying offenses set forth in section 14:107.2(A). Hanging a noose constitutes not one but two of the specified underlying offenses: terrorizing[24] and institutional vandalism.”[25] Terrorizing was one of the goals of lynchings in the American South. “Lynchings …had three intertwined functions. [The] first goal, [was] to maintain social order over the black population through terrorism…"[26] Those nooses hanging from a tree (perceived by many as a white only tree) represent that terrorism.

In addition, Mr. Walters could have prosecuted such individual(s) for assault[27] if he had simply overcome his bias and recognized that a hanging noose, in light of the facts herein and its historical meaning in Louisiana, conveys a substantially similar message as that of a burning cross, and then relied on precedent establishing that a burning cross causes the person to whom it is directed to be in reasonable apprehension of receiving violence to his or her person. See, e.g., Virginia v. Black, 538 U.S. 343 (U.S. 2002) (Supreme Court held that a state may prohibit intimidating cross-burning without violating the First Amendment’s prohibition on regulating free speech because burning a cross falls under the “true threat” exception to free speech.); Florida v. T.B.D., 656 So.2d 479 (Fl. 1995) (Supreme Court of Florida held that a statute prohibiting cross burnings on another’s property without written permission is constitutional, and holds that burning a cross is a threat. The Court stated that “an unauthorized cross-burning by intruders constitutes a direct affront to one’s privacy and security and has been inextricably linked in the state’s history, to sudden and precipitous violence – lynchings, shootings, whippings, mutilations, and home-burnings. The connection between a flaming cross in the yard and forthcoming violence is clear and direct.”). Additionally, in T.B.D., the dissenting opinion noted that the state could have prosecuted the cross-burner for assault: “the issue in this case is not whether the state can prohibit the contemptible act of cross-burning. Clearly, it can. . . . The defendant in T.B.D. could have been charged with any number of offenses other than the one at issue, including assault.”

Although he was unable to find a law to prosecute the noose-hangers, Mr. Walters’ creativity knew no bounds when it came to charging and prosecuting the Jena 6. He charged the African-American youth with attempted murder, even though Justin walked out of the hospital and attended a school party hours after the incident. He convinced the Mychal Bell jury that a tennis shoe was a dangerous weapon in order to qualify for aggravated second degree battery.[28] But he could not find a law to prosecute the white boys who hung nooses from a tree on public school grounds. As will be made clear at a hearing on the matter, his failure to do so had little to do with the Louisiana criminal code’s shortcomings, and everything to do with his personal bias and interest in the case.

C. Mr. Walters Has Abused His Authority in Other, Confidential Matters

At a hearing on this motion, Jesse Ray will seek a public trial on matters that have heretofore been confidential, juvenile proceedings. Under our state’s juvenile code he apparently is not free to discuss the proceedings or release documents related to those proceedings. Jesse Ray will waive the confidentiality and protection it was supposed to provide and seek a full and open discussion of prosecutorial misconduct that occurred therein and in this proceeding that prove that Mr. Walters is unable to fairly and impartially perform his duties in this case.

The United States Supreme Court made clear in United States v. Berger -- echoed almost immediately by our Supreme Court in State v. Tate, -- that a prosecutor’s responsibility was to seek justice, not convictions:

[The prosecutor’s] interest . . . in a criminal prosecution is not that it shall win a case, but that justice shall be done. As such, he is in a peculiar and very definite sense the servant of the law, the twofold aim of which is that guilt shall not escape or innocence suffer. He may prosecute with earnestness and vigor -- indeed, he should do so. But, while he may strike hard blows, he is not at liberty to strike foul ones. . . .

It is as much his duty to refrain from improper methods calculated to produce a wrongful conviction as it is to use every legitimate means to bring about a just one. . . .

United States v. Berger, 295 U.S. at 88 (emphasis added).

The Louisiana Constitution of 1974 embraces the same principle when it states, in Section 1 of Article I (The Origin and Purpose of Government):

All Government, of right, originates with the people, is founded on their will alone, and is instituted to protect the rights of the individual and for the good of the whole. Its only legitimate ends are to secure justice for all, preserve peace, protect the rights and promote the happiness and general welfare of the people.

La. Const. Art. I, sec. 1. In reference to the prosecutor’s responsibilities towards fairness, our Supreme Court has plainly said:

The district attorney is a quasi judicial officer. He represents the State, and the State demands no victims. It seeks justice only, equal and impartial justice, and it is as much the duty of the district attorney to see that no innocent man suffers as it is to see that no guilty man escapes.

Plaquemines Parish Commission Council v. Perez, Jr., 379 So. 2d 1373, 1376-1377 (La. 1980) citing State v. Tate, 185 La. 1006, 171 So. 108 (1936).

As will be shown at a hearing on this matter, it is clear that Mr. Walters’ behavior in this and other cases involving Jesse Ray is not about justice, but instead has been about securing convictions in a patently unfair and abusive manner.

Conclusion

Mr. Walters is incapable of fairly and impartially prosecuting Jesse Ray Beard. His bias and conflict of interest in this matter is made clear by his disparate treatment of the students at both the school board level and as prosecutor. In addition, his actions at the school board created a conflict of interest and made it impossible for him to fairly and impartially act as a prosecutor herein. Finally, Mr. Walters’ actions in this and other cases abused his authority as a prosecutor and prove his bias and prejudice toward Jesse Ray. Therefore, this Court should recuse Mr. Walters and his office from this prosecution.

Date: _____________________

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:

___________________________

DAVID J. UTTER

Juvenile Justice Project of Louisiana

1600 Oretha Castle Haley Blvd.

New Orleans, LA 70113

Telephone: (504) 522-5437

Fax: (504) 522-5430

CERTIFICATE

I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing motion has been hand-delivered to Mr. Reed

Walters, Assistant District Attorney, Parish of LaSalle, on this the ___ day of ______________,

2008.

___________________________________

DAVID J. UTTER

ORDER

Considering the foregoing motion, it is ordered that Jesse Ray Beard be granted a hearing herein and that same be heard on the ___________ day of ____________________, at ___ o’clock AM/PM, contradictorily with the State of Louisiana.

Jena, Louisiana, this ___ day of ___________________, 2008.

___________________________________

JUDGE J. P. MAUFFRAY, JR.

[1] When the District Attorney himself is recused, Article 682 of the Louisiana Code of Criminal Procedure requires the trial judge to appoint a qualified attorney of that district “who is not an assistant to the recused District Attorney” or notify the Attorney General to appoint a member of his staff or a District Attorney of another district to act. la. c. Cr. P. art. 682. Similarly, well-settled case law clearly establishes that the District Attorney’s own assistant cannot prosecute after his recusal. State v. Buhler 62 So.2d 145, 148 (La. 1913); State v. Snyder, 237 S.2d 392, 395 (La. 1970). Cases in which courts have allowed others in an office to prosecute upon recusal deal with the recusal of an assistant District Attorney where the power and control of the District Attorney over his assistant was not an issue. Since Motions to Change Venue are also pending in other Jena 6 prosecutions, it would seem most reasonable that the Attorney General should be notified in accordance with Article 682.

[2] According to one white resident, the tree had a history of association with white students that went back to the days when the school was “initially integrated.” Race Hate in Louisiana (BBC documentary, May 24, 2007).

[3] By statute, the District Attorney of a particular district is the regular attorney for the parish school boards in that district. La. Rev. Stat. ann §16:2 (A) However, nothing prevents the school board from employing a general or special attorney which would relieve the district attorney of his responsibility under circumstances such as these. This approach should have been taken in this case to avoid the most obvious of conflicts. LA. Atty Gen Op. No. 90-150, 1990 WL 544667 (La. A.G. May 25, 1990) (Visitor's Commission may appoint Special Counsel); La. Atty. Gen. Op. No. 89-612, 1989 WL 454467 (LA. A.G. 1989) (Conflict of interest established that necessity required replacement under statute); LA. Atty. Gen. Op. No. 95-500, 1995 WL 815626 (LA. A.G. 1995) (School board may hire special counsel); LA. Rev. Stat. Ann. §42 263(A). How could Mr. Walters have been expected to fairly judge whether those who hung the nooses should be criminally prosecuted after possibly advising the school board in a situation where ultimately they were not even expelled from school? How could Mr. Walters have been expected to fairly judge whether those who hung the nooses and those involved in the fight should be criminally prosecuted when he possibly had already participated in school board determinations that one group should be expelled and not the other?

[4] See “Incident More Hype Than Reality,” Jena Times, p. 2A (Sept. 13, 2006) (On Sept. 8, a week after the hangmen’s nooses menaced the African-American population, reports of a gun on campus caused police to search the entire building. 160 students were checked out of school early by their parents and another 150 had failed to come to school in the first place. So palpable was the racial tension and so panicked was the community that LaSalle Parish School Superintendent Roy Breithaupt appeared on local radio to claim the school was safe.)

[5] Mychal Bell, the only defendant in the Jena 6 to go to trial, recently pled guilty to second degree battery and admitted to punching Justin once in the head. See, Appendix A (Transcript, Dec. 3, 2007 Guilty Plea and Sentence, State In the Interest of Mychal Bell, No. J-4002/J-4005). Mychal and his family contend that Mychal’s battery of Justin was provoked by racist and threatening behavior by Justin. Appendix B (Amended and Supplemental Answer, Reconventional Demand, and Cross Claim, David Barker, et al. v. LaSalle Parish School Board, et al., No. 35918, 28^TH JDC, Parish of LaSalle, State of Louisiana) (In his family’s responsive pleading to a lawsuit by the Barkers, Mychal claims that a few days before the battery, Justin drove his pick-up truck by Mychal and a passenger in the truck pointed a shot-gun out the window, pointing at Mychal and pumping it once. In addition, Mychal claims that Justin called Mychal a “stupid ass nigger” before lunch, and that a tomato was thrown from Justin’s table at Mychal’s table during lunch. It was immediately after lunch, after Justin allegedly insulted Mychal again, that Mychal admitting to hitting Justin.)

[6] A 16 year old with a promising college football career ahead of him, Mychal spent approximately 10 months in the adult jail in LaSalle Parish up to, during, and after his trial. After Mr. Walters amended the charges back down to Aggravated Second Degree battery, the all-white jury convicted Mychal in short order. The Third Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the conviction and held that Mr. Walters improperly transferred Mychal to adult court. As noted above, Mychal recently pled guilty to second degree battery.

[7] The United States Constitution also mandates Due Process and Equal Protection in the 5th and 14th Amendments respectively. See U.S. const. amend. V; U.S. const. amend. XIV.

[8] As President Bush recently declared: “Displaying [a noose] is not a harmless prank . . .”, but instead is “deeply offensive.” “They [nooses and references to lynchings] are wrong. And they have no place in America today.” See, e.g., www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23131433/.

[9] Ronald L.F. Davis Ph.D, California State University Northridge, Creating Jim Crow: In-Depth Essay, The History of Jim Crow (2007), www.jimcrowhistory.org

[10] Kevin Lawrence Pitts, Don’t Let the Past Repeat, The Diamondback, (September 18, 2007), www.Diamondbackonline.com

[11] “Creating Jim Crow: In-Depth Essay”. Ronald L.F. Davis, Ph.D., California State University, Northridge, The History of Jim Crow, www.jimcrowhistory.org

[12] “Hanging”. Answers.com, 2007, www.answers.com.

[13] “Explorations Lynching”. Digital History, digitalhistory.uh.edu, (2007).

[14] Stewart E. Tolnay et. al, A Festival of Violence: An Analysis of Southern Lynchings, 1882-1930, (Chicago University Press 1992).

[15] Sherrilyn A. Hill, Disempowering An Ugly Symbol, Baltimore Sun,( September 20, 2007), www.baltimoresun.com

[16] Jesse Ray will be prepared to provide expert testimony regarding the symbolic power of the hangman’s noose to African-Americans.

[17] The extent of Mr. Walters’ role in the suspension/expulsion hearing of the noose-hangers is unclear. He is quoted as advising the school board during the expulsion decisions regarding the Jena 6. See, Jena Times, p. 1A (January 31, 2007). Of course, the extent and nature of this advice and his advice regarding the noose-hangers will need to be tested in discovery or at the hearing through the testimony of Mr. Walters and the school board members. Whether a privilege will be asserted in an attempt to hide such disclosures will also have to be tested under oath considering the public waiver of any suggested privilege.

[18] It is unclear whether the newspaper’s interpretation of the event was its own or that of unnamed officials. The Sept. 13, 2006 article states that “officials note that most of the `racial tensions’ were more media hype than reality” and later calls the nooses an “ignorant prank.” Jena Times, p. 1A (Sept. 13, 2006). The real question is who the “officials” were. While the list is possibly a long one that includes Mr. Walters himself, it does not matter for purposes of this motion due to Mr. Walters' actions as school board counsel that supported the lenient discipline.

[19] According to the media reports, only five of the Jena Six were expelled. See, Jena Times, p. 3A (Jan. 31, 2007). At this time it is unclear who was not expelled, and while Jesse Ray was eventually allowed back at Jena High, and is the only one back, many of the six are attending school again, albeit not at Jena High School.

[20] Mr. Smith was the lead investigator in the Jena 6 case and is now police chief of Jena.

[21] Mr. Walters, in a statement provided to the Jena Times, acknowledges such a statement to students, and admits that he pulled out his ink pen to illustrate his point. “DA/School Officials Grant Exclusive Interviews,” Jena Times web version, 10/03/2007. In addition, he claims he directed his comments to disrespectful white girls in the audience; Jesse Ray will present testimony at a hearing on this matter with a different interpretation of Mr. Walters’ words and the circumstances of the assembly.

[22] Days before his re-trial in juvenile court, Mychal accepted a plea bargain. In return for a plea of guilty to a reduced charge of second degree battery, Mychal was given a disposition of 18 months in the custody of the Office of Youth Development, with no recommendation regarding juvenile prison, and a modification of a prior commitment to secure care, changing the prior disposition to no recommendation of juvenile prison. The plea bargain and modification of Mychal’s prior disposition meant that Mychal was freed from further prison or jail time, as he was allowed to serve this sentence concurrently with another 18 month sentence he had already begun serving for an unrelated set of charges. See, Appendix A (Transcript, Dec. 3, 2007 Guilty Plea and Sentence, State In the Interest of Mychal Bell, No. J-4002/J-4005).

[23] Indeed, this is not the first case to get under Mr. Walters’ skin. He was recused from a recent case when he let his personal feelings towards a defendant influence his charging decisions. See, State of Louisiana v. King, 956 So. 2d 562, 563 (La. 2007).

[24] Under Louisiana law, the criminal offense of terrorizing is defined as “[t]he intentional communication of information that the commission of a crime of violence is imminent or in progress or that a circumstance dangerous to human life exists or is about to exist, with the intent of causing members of the general public to be in sustained fear for their safety; or causing evacuation of a building, a public structure, or a facility of transportation; or causing other serious disruption to the general public.” La. Rev. Stat. ann. § 14:40.1(A). While Mr. Walters does not have authority to prosecute Federal hate crimes it should be noted that Donald Washington, the U.S. Attorney for the Western District of La., recognized in his testimony before Congress that the noose hanging was a federal hate crime. See Chicago Tribune §1 p. 4, (October 17, 2007).

[25] The offense of institutional vandalism is defined, in relevant part, as follows:

A person commits the crime of institutional vandalism by knowingly vandalizing, defacing, or otherwise damaging the following:

· . . .

· (3) any school, education facility, or community center [or]

· (4) the grounds adjacent to and owned or rented by any institution, facility, building, structure or place described in Paragraph 3.

La. Rev. Stat. ann. § 14:225.

[26] Stewart E. Tolnay et. al, A Festival of Violence: An Analysis of Southern Lynchings, 1882-1930, (Chicago University Press 1992).

[27] Under Louisiana law, assault is defined as “an attempt to commit battery, or the intentional placing of another in reasonably apprehension of receiving a battery.” La. Rev. Stat. ann. §14:36. “Battery is the intentional use of force or violence upon the person of another.” La. Rev. Stat. ann. §14:33.

[28] "Aggravated second degree battery is a battery committed with a dangerous weapon when the offender intentionally inflicts serious bodily injury.” La. Rev. Stat. ann. §14:34 (2007) (emph. added)

Color of Change Expects Important Developments in Jena Six Case

2008-04-17T19:53:00.000-07:00

The following information comes from Mervin Marcano at Color of Change:

There are some new developments in the Jena 6 situation that I wanted to bring to your attention. Jesse Ray Beard, the youngest of the Jena 6, is fighting to have the notorious Judge J.P. Mauffray and District Attorney Reed Walters removed from his case.

You will remember Reed Walters as the man at the center of the racist controversy who overcharged the six teens with attempted murder and pursued them to the bitter end.

People may or may not know Mauffray, who has been presiding over the cases. Because Jesse Ray's case is a juvenile matter, Judge Mauffray's behavior is not as well-known because his case is sealed. Hopefully, a public hearing will bring all of this information to light.

There will be developments in the coming weeks as the motions make their way to the courts to a public hearing and more facts come to light. I'm hoping folks will bring this to the fore early on to keep people engaged in what's happening.

I'm pasting our release which has all the info below. If anyone wants to see the motions that were filed, hit me up and I can get them to you.

Here's a link to an AP story on the motion:
http://www.ksla.com/Global/story.asp?S=8174973&nav=menu50_2

The local paper in Alexandria, LA went out with something as well:
http://www.thetowntalk.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080416/NEWS01/804160326/1002/NEWS01

Feel free to hit me up with any questions, as usual. Would love to hear what you all think about this.

Youngest of Jena 6 Fights to Oust Judge and DA:

Lawyers File Motion to Recuse Judge and DA—Putting State on Trial—Claiming Clear Pattern of Race Bias

JENA, LA— Lawyers for the youngest of the Jena 6, Jesse Ray Beard, filed a motion today to remove Judge J.P. Mauffray Jr. and District Attorney Reed Walters from any future involvement in juvenile court matters involving Beard. Mauffray and Walters served as the trial judge and prosecutor, respectively, in the Jena 6 cases and Beard's attorneys argue that their prejudice during and after the proceedings has betrayed an unfair bias against Beard.

Millions of Americans remember District Attorney Reed Walters as the man who refused to prosecute white students who hung nooses at Jena High School and then threatened black students at a school assembly saying that he "could end their lives with a stroke of his pen." Walters charged Jesse Ray Beard, and five other African-American students with attempted second-degree murder for allegedly beating Justin Barker, a white student, in a schoolyard fight following the incident. Attorneys for Beard argue that this and other facts paint a clear picture of the District Attorney's bias.

"Millions of people turned their attention to the Jena 6 last year, but at the end of the day the system itself has to go on trial," said James Rucker, Executive Director of ColorOfChange.org, the 400,000-member group that advocated on behalf of the Jena 6. "Reed Walters and Judge Mauffray have behaved outrageously at every turn and violated the most basic principles of justice. There can be no justice in Jena with these men as its agents."

Because Beard is a juvenile, Louisiana law prohibits him from having a jury trial. Judge Mauffray will be the sole determiner of fact, which adds additional weight to the concerns of defense attorneys who argued in a motion filed today that Mauffray is too prejudiced to preside over the case. Attorneys for Beard ask Mauffray to do the right thing and voluntarily step down from the case, and if he does not, seek a public hearing to present their case in support of their motion.

More than 20,000 people marched on Jena, LA last year to protest the treatment of the six black young men now known as the "Jena 6." The 6 teens were being tried for attempted murder after a fight on school grounds where Barker was beaten, which followed the hanging of nooses in the school's courtyard and subsequent race-based conflicts. Jesse Ray Beard, the youngest of the Jena 6, demands a fair trial, where he can test the allegations made by DA Walters. Walters is the same D.A. who secured a conviction before an all-white jury of Mychal Bell, 16 at the time of the incident, after illegally transferring him to adult court. In December, Bell plead guilty to punching Barker after Barker and his friends taunted Bell with racial epithets.

"When a judge shows strong bias and a district attorney has a clear conflict of interest, a motion to recuse is not only fitting, it is required," said Charles Ogletree, professor and executive director of the Criminal Justice Institute at Harvard Law School. "Given the sad history of the case and the allegations in the motions, the DA and judge should avoid the appearance of bias and voluntarily step aside to provide Jesse Ray Beard and the rest of the Jena 6 a fair trial."

###

--
Mervyn Marcano
Communications Director
mervyn@colorofchange.org
917.553.1001
www.colorofchange.org

Journalism Schools Begin Disecting Jena Six and Afrosphere Coverage

2008-01-24T22:58:00.000-08:00

With the Jena Six March and the underlying injustices recognized as a significant news occurrence of 2007, journalism schools and institutes are beginning to dissect the coverage and the underlying facts to review the media's own performance. The Robert C. Maynard Institute for Journalism Education studies the role of Howard Witt of the Chicago Tribune in writing stories that first brought the Jena Six broad national attention. This article is positive, recounting the genesis of the story.

Raquel Christie in the American Journalism Review (January 25, 2008) attempts to write a revisionist history of the Jena Six story, alleging that although nooses were hung in a tree on public school property, nonetheless the public and media reaction to the incident may have been symptomatic of "paranoia", according to this revisionist analysis. The story quotes Keith Woods, Dean of Faculty at the Poynter Institute who says,

If we are a nation of paranoid people, we need to know that. And so if it is pure paranoia that's driving the busloads of people that drive down to Jena, some of us need to report that . . . "

We Blacks are certainly used to the suggestion that our objection to the hanging of nooses in trees on public school property amounts to "pure paranoia". We get more of this from the Raqual Christie article. However, our familiarity with the history of lynching makes it impossible for Blacks to discount fear and loathing and anger at nooses as "pure paranoia."

Jena Six Trial Must Be Open to the Public, Higher Court Rules.

2007-11-21T19:13:00.000-08:00

Howard Witt, of the Chicago Tribune, reports that a Louisiana judged has ruled on appeal that the Jena Six Mychal D. Bell trial must be held in open court, a win for the Chicago Tribune and other newspapers filed suit to open the trial to public scrutiny:

JENA, La. - A judge ruled Wednesday that the public and the news media should have full access to all legal proceedings involving Mychal Bell, one of the teenage defendants in the racially charged Jena 6 case in Louisiana whose prosecution had been shrouded in secrecy on orders of the trial judge.

Ruling in a lawsuit brought by the Chicago Tribune and joined by a coalition of major U.S. media companies, Rapides Parish District Judge Thomas Yeager ordered that Bell's upcoming criminal trial, as well as any pretrial hearings, must be open to the press and the public. Yeager also ordered that the court record and transcripts of any closed proceedings held so far be made available to the news media, and that attorneys for Bell be released from the trial judge's gag order directing them not to speak about the case.

"The right to an open trial is one that's very important," Yeager said in making his ruling, "so that the public has confidence in what we do." Chicago Tribune

"Judge won't drop charges against 'Jena 6' defendant," says CNN, citing this blog for commentary.

2007-11-18T07:15:00.000-08:00

CNN reports the following information and then includes our "Jena Scrapbook" in its "From the Blogs Section", as an example of commentary on the issue.

This is from CNN, and the link to this blog is there in the "From the Blogs" section:

JENA, Louisiana (CNN) -- A juvenile court judge Thursday denied a defense request to drop charges against one of six black students accused in the beating of a white student, according to a source inside the courtroom.

Supporters surround Mychal Bell after his release at the LaSalle Parish courthouse in September.

Attorneys for Mychal Bell, 17, had argued their client faced double jeopardy because he had already been tried and convicted of battery and conspiracy to commit battery in adult court.
Those convictions were overturned in September, and prosecutors brought charges against him in juvenile court.
Bell's attorneys intend to appeal Thursday's decision to the 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals in Lake Charles, Louisiana, said the source, who requested anonymity because of the gag order imposed by the judge.
Bell's trial has been set for December 6.

Apparently, one effect of forcing the Jena issue into national awareness has been forcing awareness and citation of Black blogs into the mainstream press.

Jena Six Trials to be Held in Open Court

2007-11-16T12:45:00.000-08:00

Shawn Williams of the AfroSpear's Dallas South blog brings our attention to an important development in the Jena Six case, reported by the Chicago Tribune's Howard Witt: "Judge backpedals, opens Jena trial to public, but jurist won't allow access to preliminary hearings." It's clear that AfroSpear advocacy is having an effect on the transparency of criminal court proceedings for at least a few Black young people:

Replying to a lawsuit filed by a coalition of U.S. media companies, the judge overseeing the trial of Mychal Bell, one of the teenage defendants in the racially charged Jena 6 case in Louisiana, reversed course Thursday and agreed to open Bell's upcoming juvenile trial to the public.

But LaSalle Parish District Judge J.P. Mauffray, in a court filing, maintained that he is not required to open pre-trial hearings in Bell's case to the news media or the public, and he argued that the media lawsuit seeking full access to Bell's case should be dismissed.

The lawsuit, initiated by the Chicago Tribune and joined by the Associated Press, The New York Times Co., CNN and other major media organizations, asserts that Mauffray's earlier decision to close all the proceedings in Bell's case runs counter to Louisiana juvenile laws and provisions of both the Louisiana and U.S. Constitutions. More at the Chicago Tribune.

AfroSpear Furious Over Re-Arrest of Mychal Bell on Old Charges

2007-10-12T21:51:00.000-07:00

As Mychal D. Bell, one of the Jena Six, was re-imprisoned today even after a Louisiana Appeals Court had ordered that he only be tried as a juvenile and he be considered for bail, Blacks and some whites across America are re-evaluating whether the local judge in Jena is in open rebellion against the rest of the criminal justice system or whether the entire system is rotten to the core. Local judge Judge Maufrey, who presides over both adult criminal court and juvenile court in Jena, Louisiana, had released Bell two weeks ago, after orders from the Third Circuit Louisiana Appeals Court, but then suddenly decided to re-imprison Bell today on prior charges that existed at the time when he was released two weeks ago.

Although the legal aspects of the case remain murky, Blacks are generally furious and looking for new strategic options, beyond marching, to compel equal justice in cases concerning Blacks and what some call the criminal (in)justice system.

Howard Witt, a Chicago Tribune writer whose reporting has helped catalyzed public opinion by consistently making the facts known to a larger audience, wrote today,

It was unclear why [judge] Mauffray decided to send Bell to jail on the prior charges. The judge has ordered all the proceedings in Bell's case to be closed and directed all the lawyers in the case not speak about it publicly.

Other experts on Louisiana's juvenile laws said that Mauffray's decision to jail Bell on the earlier charges appeared to run counter to the state's juvenile statutes.

"I don't know the motivation for this judge and the district attorney, but what they did goes against the grain of our own juvenile code, which holds that home and the community is the best place to treat juveniles," said David Utter, an attorney and founder of the Juvenile Justice Project of Louisiana. Utter is representing one of the Jena 6 defendants. ChicagoTribune

Having marched sixty-thousand strong in Jena on September 20 in Jena, the AfroSpear bloggers who helped organize the march are determinedly seeking Bell's release, with one blogger even discussing a picketing stores during the Christmas shopping season to pressure all of America to see that Mychal D. Bell does not spend Christmas in jail.

Political, Judicial Pressure Freed Mychal D. Bell, Jena Teen

2007-09-29T14:36:00.001-07:00

Almost like Shaquanda Cotton, Mychal D. Bell has been freed from prison after an immense outcry by the AfroSpear, denouncing a system of injustice that systematically treats Black children much more harshly than it does whites.

But, we cannot even say that Bell is "free," because, even though he has already spent nine months in prison for a alleged involvement in a schoolyard fight, he still faces juvenile court charges that could put him behind bars for an additional three years, until he is 21.

And, as Chicago Tribune's correspondent Howard Witt informs us below, there are still five other Jena Six defendants whose criminal and juvenile trials have yet to begin, who have not yet been tried and convicted by an all-white jury, as Bell was. But, that's what they face and the AfroSpear faces it with them.

Most white Jena youths who attacked a Black student with a broken bottle (potentially assault with a dangerous weapon or even attempted murder), bloodying him, were not charged at all, while the one who was charged was immediately freed and placed on probation.

The struggle in this case is not over. In fact, it's just beginning. As the AfroSpear said in a press release on Setember 15,

We will insist that ALL ADULT AND JUVENILE CHARGES AGAINST ALL 6 DEFENDANTS be dropped now and foreclosed for the future, and that de jure and de facto segregation be ended at Jena High School.

“Afrosphere bloggers and our audiences will continue to assert our role as forceful advocates of equal justice for Blacks in the American justice system.” AfroSpear: Let the World Know that the March Goes On.

Here are the details of Mychal Bell's release, from Howard Witt:

By Howard Witt

Chicago Tribune Senior Correspondent

7:46 PM CDT, September 27, 2007

HOUSTON

Mychal Bell, the black teenager whose incarceration in a racially explosive case helped draw tens of thousands of civil rights protesters to the tiny Deep South town of Jena, La., last week, was released from jail on Thursday after more than nine months behind bars.

Bell, 17, one of six black teenagers charged with the beating of a white classmate at Jena High School last December, was freed after a local judge abruptly set a bond of $45,000, which a local bail bonding firm quickly posted on Bell's behalf.

The youth's release capped a day of mounting political and judicial pressures in a case that has drawn condemnation from scores of national civil rights leaders concerned about perceived inequalities in the town's justice system.

"We still have mountains to climb, but at least this is closer to an even playing field," said Rev. Al Sharpton, who helped organize last week's massive protest and accompanied Bell as he walked out of jail. "He goes home because a lot of people left their home and stood up for him."

In Washington, the Congressional Black Caucus asked the U.S. Justice Department to investigate possible civil rights violations and prosecutorial misconduct in the Jena 6 case.

"This shocking case has focused national and international attention on what appears to be an unbelievable example of the separate and unequal justice that was once commonplace in the Deep South," the group of 43 lawmakers said in a letter to Acting Atty. Gen. Peter Keisler.

A Justice Department spokesman said investigations into the case were ongoing but declined to comment further.

Meanwhile, the Louisiana district attorney whose prosecution of the Jena 6 defendants sparked the civil rights protest declared that only through the intervention of Jesus Christ was Jena spared from a "disaster" last week when more than 20,000 African American demonstrators marched peacefully through the town.

"I firmly believe that had it not been for the direct intervention of the Lord Jesus Christ last Thursday, a disaster would have happened," LaSalle Parish District Atty. Reed Walters told a nationally televised press conference.

When a black Jena pastor attending the press conference called it a "shame" that the prosecutor was crediting divine intervention for the orderly behavior of the demonstrators, Walters, who is white, said: "What I'm saying is, the Lord Jesus Christ put his influence on those people, and they responded accordingly."

The six-hour march on Sept. 20 drew families from across the nation who rode buses for hours to protest perceived racial discrimination in the mostly-white town of 3,000 people. The demonstration was completely nonviolent; state and local authorities confirmed that they made no arrests and received no reports of property damage.

Walters insisted that he had treated all of the Jena 6 defendants "fairly and with dignity" but said he would not relent in his prosecution of the youths for aggravated second-degree battery in the beating of Justin Barker, a 17-year-old white classmate.

The attack on Barker followed months of racial unrest in the town sparked after three white students hung nooses from a tree at the high school in an apparent warning aimed at black students not to try to sit beneath its shade. In a series of ensuing racial fights both on and off the campus, white students who attacked black students were charged with misdemeanors or not at all, but the six black youths who jumped Barker and knocked him briefly unconscious were initially charged by Walters with attempted murder.

Bell was the first of the teenagers to go to trial. One of the remaining five has been charged as a juvenile, three others await trial as adults and one youth has yet to be arraigned.

Walters said Thursday he had not been swayed by the demonstrators or the attention the case has attracted. But his prosecution of the case has not been smooth.

On the eve of Bell's trial in June, as national scrutiny mounted after a Tribune report about the case in May, Walters abruptly reduced the attempted-murder charges to aggravated second-degree battery and conspiracy. He won a conviction before an all-white jury after Bell's original court-appointed defense attorney called no witnesses and presented no defense.

But the appellate court vacated that conviction on Sept. 14, ruling that both Walters and LaSalle Parish District Judge J.P. Mauffray had erred in allowing Bell to be prosecuted as an adult rather than a juvenile.

Walters confirmed Thursday that he had decided not to go through with an appeal of the appellate decision and would instead refile the charges against Bell in juvenile court. That decision cleared the way for Bell's release on bond after Mauffray, who last week refused to set bail for Bell, quickly set the new bond just hours before the appellate court was expected to rule on a defense request that Mauffray be compelled to release Bell.

Had he been convicted as an adult, Bell could have faced up to 15 years in prison. If convicted as a juvenile, he can be held until he turns 21.

Walters' decision not to press for Bell's prosecution as an adult followed an intervention by Louisiana Gov. Kathleen Blanco, who had declined for months to get directly involved in the Jena case.

On Wednesday evening, Blanco emerged from a meeting with Sharpton in Baton Rouge, declaring to the protesters who had marched through Jena that "I share your concerns."

Blanco added: "The Louisiana justice system is designed to correct itself when necessary...The juvenile court system is where this case belongs."

One of Bell's new defense attorneys, Robert Noel, said he was certain that political pressures were having an effect on the case.

"The tide has been turning since we won that [reversal] on Sept. 14," Noel said. "I think Walters is under tremendous pressure. There's not a single district attorney in the state that doesn't want to see this whole thing go away. They are concerned about jury nullification in their own cases--they don't want the system to be seen as so unfair that potential jurors are not going to be willing vote guilty."

hwitt@tribune.com

Southern Poverty Law Center Deconstructs Jena Prosecutor's Bias

2007-09-29T04:06:00.001-07:00

In an e-mail, Gabriel Rey-Goodlatte of ColorofChange.Org says,

"Richard Cohen (of the SPLC [Southern Poverty Law Center]) and John Tye (civil rights attorney) have a piece deconstructing Reed Walters' recent op-ed in the New York Times, focusing in on his double standard prosecutorial discretion. (I think it touches on a lot of what dnA wrote about it response to the same piece).

It would be great if this got some attention -- it's unfortunate that Reed Walters was given a forum by the New York Times for several outright distortions about the case in Jena (as this piece shows). Richard Cohen and John Tye are very credible voices on this.

Gabriel"

I agree that this is crucial information, so here's the Southern Poverty Law Center article in its entirety:

The Stroke of a Pen
Double Standard in Jena
By Richard Cohen and John Tye

To Reed Walters, the prosecutor in the Jena Six case, his job is a simple one. As he explained in a recent New York Times op-ed piece , "For 16 years, it has been my job as the district attorney to review each criminal case brought to me by the police department or the sheriff, match the facts to any applicable laws and seek justice for those who have been harmed." Just the facts, ma'am.

But Walters ignores the tremendous latitude prosecutors have to raise, lower, or dismiss charges as they see fit, under the doctrine of prosecutorial discretion. The injustice in Jena is not that any criminal charges were brought in the assault on Justin Barker. Rather, the injustice is that black perpetrators in Jena receive a completely different brand of prosecutorial discretion than white perpetrators.

Let's start with the white students who hung nooses from the so-called "white" tree after black students sat under it.

Walters states that the United States attorney "found no federal law against what was done." In actuality, the federal prosecutor told CNN that "the FBI believed that [the case had] the elements of a hate crime ." But because of the boys' ages and backgrounds, he declined to bring charges that could have put them away for 10 years. This is prosecutorial discretion in action.

Walters also had discretion to prosecute the noose-hangers in state court. He claims that the noose incident "broke no law. I searched the Louisiana criminal code for a crime that I could prosecute. There is none." But, it just ain't so.

Louisiana Revised Statute 14:107.2 creates a hate crime for any institutional vandalism or criminal trespass motivated by race. Walters was creative enough to turn a schoolyard assault into an attempted murder case; he surely could have figured out how to make nooses into hate crimes.

But -- and this is a crucial point -- Walters and the Justice Department were right not to prosecute the noose-hangers. Prison terms for them would not have served Jena as well as a thoughtful, measured response that addressed the deep community concerns triggered by the nooses.

Unfortunately, that never happened. Instead, Walters and the school system tried to stifle debate. Black parents were ignored at school board meetings. After black students staged a sit-in under the contested tree, Walters came to the school and, according to numerous witnesses, ominously told the student body that if they did not settle down, "I can end your life with the stroke of my pen."

Reed Walters knows prosecutorial discretion.

Things did settle down somewhat, until an arsonist burned down much of Jena High on November 30, 2006. What happened the next day perfectly illustrates the racial disparity in Walters' decision-making.

On December 1, a black student, Robert Bailey, was attacked by a group of whites, beaten to the ground, and apparently hit with a beer bottle. He suffered a gash to his head.

Walters could have prosecuted the group of whites with felony charges that might have put them away for years, just as he is now prosecuting the Jena Six. Instead, Walters charged one white with a misdemeanor; that person served no prison time. The others walked.

Three days later, the assault on Barker occurred. Bailey and five other black teens were arrested and charged by the police with aggravated second-degree battery, a very harsh charge under the circumstances. But Walters, in an apparent effort to show what he could do with a stroke of his pen, went even further and used his discretion to increase the charges to attempted murder.

Since then, Walters' decisions have continued to raise serious questions. In April, the Supreme Court of Louisiana removed him from an unrelated case -- an unusual and drastic step -- after Walters told the defendant that he was "in the cross hairs," not because of the severity of the alleged crime, but because the defendant had spread rumors about Walters.

In the Jena Six cases, Walters decided to prosecute 16-year-old Mychal Bell in adult court even after dropping the ill-conceived attempted murder charges. An appeals court later ruled that Walters' decision was improper. He's still pursuing aggravated assault charges on the theory that the boys' tennis shoes were dangerous weapons.

Justice should be blind. But prosecutors are not. They see color. And, unfortunately, it often has an impact on how they exercise their prosecutorial discretion. In Reed Walters' case, it's as clear as black and white.

Richard Cohen is president of the Southern Poverty Law Center. John Tye is a civil rights attorney in New Orleans.

Now, let's talk about what's annoying me about the mainstream reaction to Jena, LA

2007-09-26T11:50:00.000-07:00

By the Prometheus 6 AfroSpear blog,
via the Afrosphere Associated Press (AAP.)

The official narrative on Jena has been decided. There were nooses hung, then six months later a white kid got jumped.

Find me an article less than a week old that says anything different. And I'd rather think there was a meeting where this was decided than think so many white folks coincidentally decided to ignore the exact same information.

This ignorance is promoted by giving Reed Walters a platform in the New York Times. By overlaying his explanation of things on the most detailed description of events I can find, we see strong evidence of the importance of equal protection under the law.

Many in Jena's black community wanted the three white students expelled. But when the white superintendent and other school administrators investigated, they decided the nooses were a prank. Instead of expulsion or arrest, the three received in-school suspension.

This is the sin at the root of all the commotion. Do not lose track of this. Consider Walters' own opinion

If those who committed that act considered it a prank, their sense of humor is seriously distorted. It was mean-spirited and deserves the condemnation of all decent people.

This means the superintendent and other school administrators, who thought it was a prank, are mean-spirited, deserve condemnation...and are still running the school.

I would like to take this opportunity to make clear that hangman's nooses and burning crosses are to Black people as swastikas are to Jews. You know damn well you'd find charges to press against people who hung swastikas where Jewish people congregated.

Assuming you let them in your neighborhood, of course.

But things didn't calm down. Some whites felt triumphant; some blacks were resentful. Fights began to break out at the high school. But that year, the football team was having an unusually good season and the black athletes were a major reason why. So while there were fights throughout the fall, nobody wanted to take any action that would hurt the team.

It is not a coincidence that everyone who felt triumphant was white, nor that everyone who felt resentful was Black. Whether conscious intimidation or a lengthy Freudian slip, it was what Walters projected.

Am I ignoring the poor victim, Justin Barker, in all this?

Yes, just as WE are ignoring Robert Bailey.

The next night, 16-year-old Robert Bailey and a few black friends tried to enter a party attended mostly by whites. When Bailey got inside, he was attacked and beaten.

No one charged for that assault.

The next day, tensions escalated at a local convenience store. Bailey exchanged words with a white student who had been at the party. The white boy ran back to his truck and pulled out a pistol grip shotgun. Bailey ran after him and wrestled him for the gun.

After some scuffling, Bailey and his friends took the gun away and brought it home. Bailey was eventually charged with theft of a firearm, second-degree robbery and disturbing the peace. The white student who pulled the weapon was not charged at all.

Though Bailey was charged for daring defend himself. We're even going to ignore that Justin Barker admitted in public that he was an accessory after the fact, at minimum, to that assault.

The following Monday, Dec.4, a white student named Justin Barker was loudly bragging to friends in the school hallway that Robert Bailey had been whipped by a white man on Friday night.

Barker should be questioned as to the identity of those who assaulted Mr. Bailey, and charged with obstruction of justice if he refuses to identify them...and if he was just lying he should be charged with inciting a race riot.

But instead, a sneaker was declared a deadly weapon in order to justify trying these six young men as adults. Focusing on Mychel Bell is a diversion because others of them were treated that way. Bell just happened to be unable to raise the bond, and the first to go to trail.

It is within the power of Mr. Walters to identify and punish everyone involved, including the white folks. If he does not, he is using his prosecutorial discretion to ignore the crimes of the white kids that were involved. The purest example of personal racism bleeding over into institutional racism that can be found.

Congressman John Conyers (D) To Call For Mychal Bell's Release

2007-09-26T05:55:00.000-07:00

By the Too Sense AfroSpear blog, via the Afrosphere Associated Press (AAP) Wednesday, September 26, 2007

According to the AP, House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers intends to call for Mychal Bell's release after meeting with his parents and other black lawmakers. Although all adult charges against Bell have been dismissed on the basis that he is a juvenile and must be tried as such, Bell remains in an adult prison.

A lawmaker said Tuesday he will press the government for the release of a black teenager held in the "Jena 6" case that spurred one of the biggest civil-rights demonstrations in years. Other activists said they planned more protests if the teen is not immediately pardoned.

"Our first responsibility is to get young Mychal Bell out of prison," said Rep. John Conyers, the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, who said he will pressure the Justice Department to take a hard look at "the miscarriages of justice that have occurred in Jena, Louisiana."

Sharpton maintains that the issue is equal justice, not justifying the actions of the Jena Six in attacking Justin Barker.

"We are not fighting for black kids that beat up white kids. We're talking about the disparity in how the law works," the New York-based activist said, adding that he still expects the local county prosecutor who brought the charges to be called to testify before Congress.

That should have been clear from the beginning. But it's not, because for those who want to keep the Jena Six in prison, the issue really is the race of the attackers and the race of the victim, rather than fairness in how the law is applied. It's not that they think the law wasn't fairly applied, it's that given the circumstances, they don't think it should be.

DA Mike Nifong was disbarred after circumventing the law to bring three white, affluent Duke students up on false charges. Mychal Bell lacks their resources. But if the system is capable of rendering justice under these circumstances, Jena's District Attorney Reed Walters will be following in Nifong's footsteps, and never be allowed to practice law again.

More importantly, the hearings in Congress should bring attention to the racial disparities in our criminal justice system. This issue has somehow escaped the notice of major presidential candidates in both parties, despite the fact that there are more than 2 and a half million Americans in prison, a disproportionate number of which are black.

Howard Witt Addresses Jena on NBC

2007-09-25T22:59:00.000-07:00

Shawn Williams Addresses Jena on NPR

2007-09-24T21:40:00.000-07:00

Shawn Williams, Afrosphere Bloggers Association's

on National Public Radio

White supremacist backlash builds over Jena case

2007-09-24T20:38:00.000-07:00

By Howard Witt

Tribune senior correspondent

6:59 PM CDT, September 24, 2007

HOUSTON

No sooner did tens of thousands of African-American demonstrators depart the racially tense town of Jena, La., last week after protesting perceived injustices than white supremacists flooded in behind them.

First a neo-Nazi Web site posted the names, addresses and phone numbers of some of the six black teenagers and their families at the center of the Jena 6 case and urged followers to find them and "drag them out of the house," prompting an investigation by the FBI.

Then the leader of a white supremacist group in Mississippi published interviews that he conducted with the mayor of Jena and the white teenager who was attacked and beaten, allegedly by the six black youths. In those interviews, the mayor, Murphy McMillin, praised efforts by pro-white groups to organize counterdemonstrations; the teenager, Justin Barker, urged white readers to "realize what is going on, speak up and speak their mind."

Over the weekend, white extremist Web sites and blogs across the Internet filled with invective about the Jena 6 case, which has drawn scrutiny from civil rights leaders, three leading Democratic presidential candidates and hundreds of African-American Internet bloggers. They are concerned about allegations that blacks have been treated more harshly than whites in the criminal justice system of the town of 3,000, which is 85 percent white.

David Duke, the former Ku Klux Klan leader, last week announced his support for Jena's white residents, who voted overwhelmingly for him when he ran unsuccessfully for Louisiana governor in 1991.

"There is a major white supremacist backlash building," said Mark Potok, a hate-group expert at the Southern Poverty Law Center, a civil rights group in Montgomery, Ala. "I also think it's more widespread than may be obvious to most people. It's not only neo-nazis and Klansmen-you expect this kind of reaction from them."

Controversy over the Jena 6 case has been percolating for months but it exploded into national view last Thursday when a crowd of at least 20,000 peaceful demonstrators from around the country marched through the central Louisiana town.

They came to support the six black high school students who were initially charged by the local prosecutor with attempted murder for attacking Barker, a white classmate who was beaten and knocked briefly unconscious last December. The charges were later reduced to aggravated second-degree battery.

The incident capped months of racial unrest after three white students hung nooses from a shade tree at the high school after black students asked permission to sit under it. School officials dismissed the noose incident as a prank, angering black students and their parents and triggering a series of fights between whites and blacks. The whites involved were charged with misdemeanors or not at all while the blacks drew various felony charges.

McMillin has insisted that his town is being unfairly portrayed as racist-an assertion the mayor repeated in an interview with Richard Barrett, the leader of the Nationalist Movement, a white supremacist group based in Learned, Miss., who asked McMillan to "set aside some place for those opposing the colored folks."

"I am not endorsing any demonstrations, but I do appreciate what you are trying to do," Barrett quoted McMillin as saying. "Your moral support means a lot."

McMillin declined to return calls seeking comment Monday.

Barker's father, David, said his family did not know the nature of Barrett's group when they agreed to be interviewed, adding, "I am not a white supremacist, and neither is my son."

But Barrett said he explained his group and its beliefs to the Barker family, who then invited him to stay overnight at their home on the eve of last week's protest march.

Rev. Jesse Jackson told the Tribune that he had grown so concerned about white extremists' threats against the Jena 6 families and perceived injustices in the town that he called the White House over the weekend to ask for immediate federal intervention. Jackson said the acting head of the U.S. Justice Department's civil right division phoned him Monday to say that the agency had begun investigating the Jena situation.

hwitt@tribune.com

NATIONAL LAWYERS GUILD CALLS FOR RELEASE OF MYCHAL BELL

2007-09-24T14:43:00.000-07:00

From the AfroSpear's Bronze Trinity, via Commondreams and the Afrosphere Associated Press (AAP)

NATIONAL LAWYERS GUILD CALLS FOR RELEASE OF MYCHAL BELL, FOR ALL CHARGES AGAINST THE JENA 6 TO BE DROPPED, AND FOR FEDERAL INVESTIGATION INTO JENA 6 ARRESTS AND PROSECUTIONS / NLG STATEMENT ON JENA 6

Monday, September 24, 2007, 11:44 AM

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE, September 24, 2007

Contact: Kerry McLean, 917-334-9331
Marjorie Cohn, NLG President, 858-204-3565

NATIONAL LAWYERS GUILD CALLS FOR RELEASE OF MYCHAL BELL, FOR ALL CHARGES AGAINST THE JENA 6 TO BE DROPPED, AND FOR FEDERAL INVESTIGATION INTO JENA 6 ARRESTS AND PROSECUTIONS

The National Lawyers Guild (NLG) calls for the immediate release of Mychal Bell, one of the six high school students who have come to be known as the “Jena 6.” The Guild also calls for all charges against the Jena 6 to be dropped, and for the investigation and disbarment of Judge J.P. Mauffray and District Attorney Reed Walters.

Judge J.P. Mauffray and DA Reed Walters have engaged in a string of egregious actions, the most recent of which was the denial of bail for Bell on Friday. The NLG urges that: 1) The United States Department of Justice convene an immediate inquiry into the circumstances surrounding the arrests and prosecutions of the Jena 6; 2) Judge Mauffray be recused from presiding over Bell’s juvenile court hearings or other proceedings; 3) The Louisiana Office of Disciplinary Counsel investigate Reed Walters for unethical and possibly illegal conduct; 4) The Louisiana Judiciary Commission investigate Judge Mauffray for unethical conduct; and 5) The Jena school district superintendent be removed from office. ( . . . )

Walters not only failed to file criminal charges against the students who hung the nooses, he also failed to file charges against a white teen who pulled a shotgun on three black students in the parking lot of a convenience store in December 2006. In a startling twist, the three black teens were arrested and charged with aggravated battery and theft when, exercising their right to self-defense, they managed to take the weapon from the gunman.

In December, shortly before the schoolyard fight for which the Jena 6 were arrested, a white man, Justin Sloan, attacked Robert Bailey with a bottle at a party. Robert Bailey is, coincidentally, one of the Jena 6. DA Walters charged Sloan with simple battery and released Sloan on probation.

Yet in staggering contrast, after a schoolyard fight erupted later that December where a white student was beaten, DA Walters charged six black students with second-degree attempted murder and conspiracy to commit murder. The student who was beaten was released from the hospital after two hours, and attended a school function that same night. Walters eventually reduced the charges to aggravated battery for most of the boys because he would not be able satisfy in court the necessary legal elements for attempted murder.

Bail for the Jena 6 ranged from $70,000 to $138,000. Most of the six boys remained in jail for months as their parents attempted to raise money for bail. Mychal Bell’s family was never able to raise the money for bail, and he has been in an adult jail since December 2006.

In addition to unequal treatment of blacks and whites under the law, DA Reed Walters has participated in decisions concerning the Jena 6 where there was a conflict of interest. The Jena 6 were immediately expelled from school after being arrested and charged. The six boys appealed their expulsion.

The school district conducted an internal investigation regarding the Jena Six, but Walters would not allow the school board to review it before it voted not to expel the six boys. Walters’ advice to the school board was likely a violation of the Louisiana State Bar Association’s rules regarding conflicts of interest.

Walters had charged Mychal Bell as an adult, even though Bell was a minor when the fight occurred. Judge Mauffray allowed the trial to proceed. An all-white jury, which included a family friend of the white student who was beaten, found Bell guilty. The Third Circuit vacated the conviction because Bell should not have been tried as an adult. DA Walters has vowed to appeal the Third Circuit’s ruling.

Since the Third Circuit vacated the conviction of Bell in September. Bell’s attorneys sought to have Bell released pending Walters’ appeal of the Third Circuit’s decision. Though Louisiana’s Code of Judicial Conduct requires a judge to “disqualify himself or herself in a proceeding in which the judge's impartiality might reasonably be questioned,” Judge Mauffray, the same judge who presided over Mychal Bell’s trial in adult court, presided over Bell’s juvenile court bail hearing on Friday. Mauffray denied the request for bail.

At a separate hearing on Friday, a court denied Bell’s attorneys’ request to remove Mauffray from Bell’s case. Mauffray set an exceedingly high bail of $90,000 for Bell prior to his conviction. The day before Mauffray’s ruling, the case drew tens of thousands of protesters from all over the country to Jena to rally against the Jim Crow era practices.

"The double standard of justice in Jena, one for black students and another for whites, is emblematic of the racism that still permeates many towns throughout the South and the country as a whole. There must be an immediate and full investigation of judicial and prosecutorial malfeasance in Jena, Louisiana," said Marjorie Cohn, President of the NLG.

David Duke emerges as Jena's most ardent defender.

2007-09-24T07:16:00.000-07:00

From the Too Sense AfroSpear Blog, via the Afrosphere Associated Press (AAP).

David Duke has emerged as Jena's most ardent defender. Not surprisingly, he sees this as an issue of "white civil rights":

Much has been made of the fact that I won an overwhelming majority of votes in Jena Louisiana in my election bids for U.S. Senator and for Governor. Such is said to falsely label the people in Jena as “racists.” In fact, I won the overwhelming majority of the White vote in the entire state of Louisiana, not just in Jena. Since the people of Jena voted for me twice to speak for them as their Senator and as their Governor, I will ardently speak for them now.

The people of Jena, the people of Louisiana and I are not racist. We simply want justice to be done. We understand that White people in America have lost our basic civil rights. Whites are now deprived of human rights by racial discrimination in jobs, promotions, scholarships, college admissions and in many other programs. More importantly, Whites are increasingly victims of Black racial violence and hate crimes. In fact, a White person is 40 to 50 times more likely to be a victim of Black gang violence than a Black is likely to be a victim of White gang violence.

Reading David Duke reminds me of that old joke about the Jewish guy in Germany during the beginning of the Holocaust. A Jewish friend asks him why he's reading the Nazi newspaper, and he says "Because it has all the good news! We own the banks, we own the government..."

I feel the same way about Mr. Duke believing we are somehow overrepresented in higher education and high paying jobs. It's a facile rationalization for his hatred, but that perception of unequal treatment for white people (when the opposite is actually true) is only slightly refined before being blared 24-hours a day from Fox News, where it gains the kind of legitimacy he could never give it. Simply put what he's saying really isn't so different from what Bill O'Reilly says on a daily basis.

The New South may not be so different in attitude and outlook from the Old South. But as always, we will not be moved, and we will not be intimidated. They can string nooses from Charleston to El Paso, we will not be silent.

Jen 6 - If you think the Jena 6 trial and aftermath is over, you are wrong

2007-09-24T06:56:00.001-07:00

AfroSphere Alert!

Rev. Jackson appeals to President Bush in' Jena 6' case

From the African American Political Pundit AfroSphere Blog, via Afrosphere Associated Press (AAP).

A Web site run by a White supremacist posted the names, addresses, and phone numbers of the 'Jena 6." The site was taken down but returned shortly under another site address. Federal authorities are investigating whether or not the site is breaking any federal laws.

Sunday, the Reverend Jesse Jackson said it is time for the President of the United States to step in.

"People who believe this way are armed legally to do battle with black people and the government. So, people should be aware of this real danger," Reverend Jackson said during a press conference at a South Side church. "There's an urgency in Jena. We need the president of the United States...We need the Department of Justice to intervene before it escalates."

Source: Bayou Buzz

Apparently, according to Governor Kathleen Babineaux Blanco, there are national reports of hate groups publishing private contact information for family members of the Jena Six. Reportedly, this information is on the Internet

Governor Blanco in response issued this statement: "Harassing families involved in the legal issues in Jena can not and will not be tolerated. Public attacks on private citizens done out of ignorance and hatred is appalling, and anyone who stoops to such unspeakable persecution will be investigated and subject to the full penalty of law. I have asked law enforcement agencies to investigate this matter, and as Governor I will do everything in my power to put a stop to these cowardly threats to Louisiana citizens."

BATON ROUGE – If you think the Jena 6 trial and aftermath is over, you are wrong.

Apparently, according to Governor Kathleen Babineaux Blanco, there are national reports of hate groups publishing private contact information for family members of the Jena Six. Reportedly, this information is on the Internet.

Governor Blanco in response issued this statement: "Harassing families involved in the legal issues in Jena can not and will not be tolerated. Public attacks on private citizens done out of ignorance and hatred is appalling, and anyone who stoops to such unspeakable persecution will be investigated and subject to the full penalty of law. I have asked law enforcement agencies to investigate this matter, and as Governor I will do everything in my power to put a stop to these cowardly threats to Louisiana citizens."

Also, according to various news stories, bail which had been set for $90,000 for one of the black individuals who battered a white and whose conviction was overturned last Friday, has been denied by the Court. Because the matter is in juvenile details are uncertain if no bond was set or if there was a refusal to allow a bond or if there was a refusal to allow the payment of the prior bond.

Also, a white male hailing from Colorado has been arrested in Alexandria Louisiana for various charges. The male reportedly had a noose in his possession. There are also reports that he has family associations with the KKK. BayouBuzz.Com

All-White Juries vs. the "Group Juror" Concept

2007-09-24T06:10:00.001-07:00

I also think we should present a direct challenge to the caselaw and the fake belief in color-blindness by, for example, insisting on the abolition of all-white juries. I think we should advocate the "Group Juror" concept, under which every jury must have at least one member who is of the skin-color/ethnic group/linguistic group of the defendant.

Whites will say that this is unconstitutional. We will counter with this question: "Why is it constitutional to have all-white juries but unconstitutional to have one member on the jury who is Black?"

We will probably not win this change on the short term, but we will put America's all-white juries on trial, make the findings of all-white juries (Mychal D. Bell) appear inherently suspect, and focus national attention on color-based injustices in the criminal (in)justice system.

Francis

Bell Denied Bond, Neo Nazi Group Targets Families Of The Jena Six

2007-09-23T16:20:00.000-07:00

By the Too Sense AfroSpear Blog

Friday, September 21, 2007

The judge today denied Mychal Bell bond, citing previous battery charges.

Mychal Bell, the sole defendant who remains behind bars from the group of teens known as the "Jena 6," will not be released Friday, a court decided.
Bell, 17, has been in jail since his arrest more than nine months ago.
It was not immediately clear what happened in court Friday, where Bell's attorneys had planned to push for his release.
"It is our understanding that the judge refused to give bond or bail to Mychal Bell today," the Rev. Al Sharpton, a civil rights activist who traveled to Jena for Thursday's rally, said in a written statement.
A source inside the court said the issue of bond was not discussed at the hearing. Attorneys did not immediately comment. The proceedings, involving a juvenile, are not open to media.

In addition, a Neo-Nazi group has published online the home addresses of the families of the Jena Six, along with a threat. The FBI is investigating.

Also on Friday, the FBI said it was looking into an online posting by a neo-Nazi white supremacist group that published the home addresses of all six of the African-American teenagers, as well as the phone numbers of some. The group said on its Web site it is calling on followers to "let them know justice is coming."

I wonder who gave them that information. It couldn't have been someone who lives in Jena could it? No one is racist in Jena or has any connections to white supremacist groups, that's simply an invention of the media.

This is still so far from over.

Jena School Administrators Violated 1st Amend. Establishment Clause, Sponsoring In-School Religious Services

2007-09-23T15:00:00.000-07:00

No time for Black parents and students at School Committee meetings, but schools are open for Sunday and Monday school-sponsored prayer meetings during school hours.

Although Jena School officials denied Black students and parents time at school committee meetings to address the hanging of nooses in the school "noose tree," school officials nonetheless sponsored religious prayer services at the high school, on a Sunday and on a weekday during students' lunch time. This would appear to violate the Establishment Clause of First Amendment of the US Constitution.

An ACLU Legal Bulletin

The Establishment Clause And Public Schools

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment
of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."

These opening words of the First Amendment to the Constitution set forth a dual guarantee of religious liberty. Both the Establishment Clause and the Free Exercise Clause operate to protect the religious liberty and freedom of conscience of all Americans. Quoting Thomas Jefferson, the Supreme Court has stated that the Establishment Clause was intended to accomplish this end by erecting a "wall of separation between Church and State." Everson v. Board of Educ. of Ewing, 330 U.S. 1, 15-16 (1947).

It is one of the fundamental principles of the Supreme Court's Establishment Clause jurisprudence that the Constitution forbids not only state practices that "aid one religion . . . or prefer one religion over another," but also those practices that "aid all religions" and thus endorse or prefer religion over nonreligion. Everson, 330 U.S. at 15. See Wallace v. Jaffree, 472 U.S. 38, 53 (1985)("[T]he individual freedom of conscience protected by the First Amendment embraces the right to select any religious faith or none at all"); see also County of Allegheny v. ACLU Greater Pittsburgh Chapter, 492 U.S. 573, 589-94, 598-602 (1989); Texas Monthly, Inc. v. Bullock, 489 U.S. 1, 17 (1989); Torcaso v. Watkins, 367 U.S. 488, 495 (1961).

For the past 20 years, the federal courts have utilized the three-pronged framework first set forth in Lemon v. Kurtzman, 403 U.S. 602 (1971), to maintain the separation of government and religion. Under the so-called "Lemon test," a court must inquire (1) whether the government's action has a secular or a religious purpose; (2) whether the primary effect of the government's action is to advance or endorse religion; and (3) whether the government's policy or practice fosters an excessive entanglement between government and religion. See 403 U.S. at 612-13. In recent years, the Supreme Court has also frequently asked whether the challenged governmental action constitutes an impermissible "endorsement" of religion. See, e.g., Allegheny, 492 U.S. at 592 (inquiry is whether the government "convey[s] or attempt[s] to convey a message that religion or a particular religious belief is favored or preferred"); id. at 592-94; School District of the City of Grand Rapids v. Ball, 473 U.S. 373, 390 (1985)("[A]n important concern of the effects test is whether the symbolic union of church and state effected by the challenged governmental action is sufficiently likely to be perceived by adherents ... as an endorsement, and by nonadherents as a disapproval, of their individual religious choices").

( . . . )
It violates one of the Establishment Clause's most fundamental principles to turn government power over to religion. As the Supreme Court has recognized, the public school is the forum through which basic norms of citizenship are transmitted to the next generation and is thus a "vital civic institution for the preservation of a democratic system of government." See Abington Township, 374 U.S. at 230 (Brennan, J., concurring). When government permits a religious group to take over part of the school's facilities during instructional time, however briefly, it strongly implies official endorsement of that religion. In the Grand Rapids case, the Supreme Court stressed the importance of avoiding any "symbolic link" between government and religion. The Court held that the second ("effects") prong of the Lemon test will not be satisfied where the government fosters a "close identification of its powers and responsibilities with those of any -- or all -- religious denominations." School District of the City of Grand Rapids v. Ball, 473 U.S. at 385. ACLU

"Silence is not the answer," says today's New York Times on Jena

2007-09-23T14:07:00.001-07:00

The New York Times says today,

( . . .) Jena could have treated the noose incident as a teachable moment -- a catalyst for important discussions about the history of race relations in Louisiana and beyond. For instance, Sen. Mary Landrieu of Louisiana could have explained to the Jena assembly why she introduced a resolution on Feb. 7, 2005, apologizing that the Senate hadn't passed anti-lynching legislation despite repeated attempts throughout the 20th century.

White students might then have realized, in the words of her resolution, that "the crime of lynching succeeded slavery as the ultimate expression of racism in the United States following Reconstruction." They could have begun to understand why the hanging of a noose could never be seen as an innocent prank. ( . . . ) New York Times

Jena Police Declared State of Emergency Before the 9/20 March

2007-09-23T11:07:00.000-07:00

Schools and businesses closed, with public officials leaving their offices vacant.

State of Louisiana v. Mychal D. Bell, Rendered 9/20/2007 (Order to Hold Habeas Hearing Within 72 Hours)

2007-09-22T10:32:00.000-07:00

STATE OF LOUISIANA
COURT OF APPEAL, THIRD CIRCUIT

NO: KW 07-01160
Judgment rendered and mailed to all
parties or counsel of record on
September 20, 2007 at 10:30 a.m.

STATE OF LOUISIANA IN THE INTEREST OF MYCHAL D. BELL

FILED: 09/19/07

On application of Mychal D. Bell for Writ of Review in No. J-4002 on the docket of
the Twenty-Eighth Judicial District Court, Parish of LaSalle, Hon. John Philip
Mauffray, Jr.
Counsel for:
Louis Granderson Scott
Mychal D. Bell
Carol Denise Powell-Lexing
Counsel for:
Hon. J. Reed Walters
State of Louisiana
Lake Charles, Louisiana, on September 20, 2007.

WRIT GRANTED AND MADE PEREMPTORY: The trial court is hereby
ordered to conduct a hearing on the Defendant's application for writ of habeas corpus within 72 hours of this opinion, pursuant to the provisions of La.Code Crim.P. art.

354 or La.Ch.Code arts. 812-831, if applicable.
_________________
_________________
_________________
JDS
MGS
JDP

State of Louisiana v. Mychal D. Bell, Rendered 9/18/2007 (Decision on Motion to Enforce is "Premature.")

2007-09-22T10:24:00.000-07:00

STATE OF LOUISIANA
COURT OF APPEAL, THIRD CIRCUIT
NO: KM 07-01142
Judgment rendered and mailed to all
parties or counsel of record on
September 18, 2007.

STATE OF LOUISIANA VERSUS MYCHAL D. BELL

FILED: 09/18/07
On application of Mychal D. Bell for Motion to Enforce in No. 82112 on the docket
of the Twenty-Eighth Judicial District Court, Parish of LaSalle, Hon. John Philip
Mauffray, Jr.
Counsel for:
Louis Granderson Scott
Mychal D. Bell
Carol Denise Powell-Lexing
Counsel for:
Hon. J. Reed Walters
State of Louisiana
Lake Charles, Louisiana, on September 18, 2007.
MOTION NOT CONSIDERED: The motion for release from custody, filed by the
Defendant in this court, is premature. The Defendant does not allege that he has filed an application in the trial court seeking release from custody, based on this court's prior ruling vacating his conviction in district court, pursuant to either the habeas corpus provisions of La.Code Crim.P. arts. 351, et. seq., which mandate a hearing on such a motion within seventy-two hours, or the bail provisions of La.Ch.Code arts.

817-831, if applicable. See also La.Code Crim.P. art. 912.1(C)(1).
For this reason, the Defendant's motion is not considered.
_________________
_________________
_________________
SRC JDS
MGS

State of Louisiana v. Mychal D. Bell, Rendered 9/18/2007

2007-09-22T10:13:00.000-07:00

STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL, THIRD CIRCUIT

NO: KW 07-01129

Judgment rendered and mailed to all
parties or counsel of record on
September 18, 2007.
STATE OF LOUISIANA
VERSUS
MYCHAL D. BELL

FILED: 09/13/07
On application of Mychal D. Bell for Writ of Review in No. 82112 on the docket of
the Twenty-Eighth Judicial District Court, Parish of LaSalle, Hon. John Philip
Mauffray, Jr.
Counsel for:
Louis Granderson Scott
Mychal D. Bell
Carol Denise Powell-Lexing
Counsel for:
Hon. J. Reed Walters
State of Louisiana
Lake Charles, Louisiana, on September 18, 2007.

WRIT DENIED: The issues presented in the Defendant's writ application to this
court are moot. See State v. Bell, an unpublished writ opinion bearing docket number
07-1106 (La.App. 3 Cir. 9/14/07).

For this reason, the Defendant's writ application is hereby denied.
_________________
_________________
_________________
MTA
JDP
JTG

State of Louisiana v. Mychal D. Bell, Rendered 09/14/2007

2007-09-22T09:53:00.000-07:00

STATE OF LOUISIANA
COURT OF APPEAL, THIRD CIRCUIT
NO: KW 07-01106
Judgment rendered and mailed to all
parties or counsel of record on
September 14, 2007.

On application of Mychal D. Bell for Writ of Review in No. 82112 on the docket of
the Twenty-Eighth Judicial District Court, Parish of LaSalle, Hon. John Philip
Mauffray, Jr.
Counsel for:
Louis Granderson Scott
Mychal D. Bell
Robert S. Noel II
Peggy J. Sullivan
Counsel for:
Hon. J. Reed Walters
State of Louisiana
Lake Charles, Louisiana, on September 14, 2007.

WRIT GRANTED AND MADE PEREMPTORY; STAY DENIED: The trial court erred in denying Defendant's motion in arrest of judgment regarding his conviction for aggravated second degree battery. The Defendant was not tried on an offense which could have subjected him to the jurisdiction of the criminal court pursuant to either La.Ch.Code arts. 305 or 857; therefore the provision of La.Ch.Code art. 863, permitting the trial court to retain criminal jurisdiction over juvenile defendants under limited circumstances, is inapplicable, and jurisdiction remains exclusively in juvenile court.

Accordingly, the ruling of the trial court denying Defendant's motion in arrest of judgment, as to his conviction for aggravated second degree battery, is hereby reversed, vacated and set aside. The motion in arrest of judgment is granted, and the conviction for aggravated second degree battery is vacated.

Further, the Defendant's request for a stay of all matters in district court, as
well as those pending on other charges in juvenile court, is hereby denied.
_________________
_________________
_________________
MTA
JDP
JTG

Dallas South Blog Interviews with Dallas Morning News

2007-09-22T05:30:00.000-07:00

Cross-posted at the Francis L. Holland Blog.

Here's an interview with the AfroSpear's Shawn Williams, Dallas South Blog, that will appear in the Dallas Morning News (largest daily in Dallas) this Saturday.

Like many public events these days, this week's Jena rally came together largely through the efforts of bloggers. One of them was Dallas resident Shawn Williams, 33, who helped spread the word through his Dallas South Blog (www.dallassouthblog.com) .

In an e-mail interview with The Dallas Morning News Friday, the pharmaceutical salesman and member of Friendship-West Baptist Church reflected on his blog and the Jena rally:

The News: Give us the background on the Dallas South Blog. Did you create it? What is its aim?

Mr. Williams: I started Dallas South Blog 15 months ago as a way of expressing myself, but as the site has evolved, the goal is to promote positive images of African-Americans to contrast the negative images put forth daily in the popular press.

The News: Have you been involved in other civil rights movements or protests before?

Mr. Williams: I think the movement is ongoing. Since college I have been aligned with these types of issues in some form or fashion, but most recently I worked to rid our neighborhood of a sexually oriented business that was being built in walking distance of a charter school.

The News: What was your role in this week?s trip to Louisiana?

Mr. Williams: Besides helping to get 1,000 folks that left from our church on the right bus, I was just a participant. I marched, I listened, I shouted, but mostly, I was there in support of the young men who stand accused.

The News: Did you network with other bloggers?

Mr. Williams: I am a member of the Afrosphere Bloggers Association . We had day of Blogging for Justice on August 30th, where many of us blogged about Jena at the same time.

The News: How will Thursday's event advance the civil rights movement?

Mr. Williams: No one can answer that. I am hopeful that the African-American community will commit to seeking justice and equality for the long hall. Cases like this happen all over the United States. We must use this energy to highlight injustice and to take responsibility for our own community and our own future.

Judge Denies Request to Free Jena Teen, Mychal Bell

2007-09-21T18:46:00.000-07:00

The Associated Press, via the Washington Post
Friday, September 21, 2007; 9:25 PM

JENA, La. -- A judge on Friday denied a request to release a teenager whose arrest in the beating of a white classmate sparked this week's civil rights protest in Louisiana. Mychal Bell's request to be freed while an appeal is being reviewed was rejected at a juvenile court hearing, effectively denying him any chance at immediate bail, a person familiar with the case told The Associated Press. The person spoke on condition of anonymity because juvenile court proceedings are closed.

Earlier, Bell's mother emerged from the hearing in tears, refusing to comment.

Bell, 17, was convicted of aggravated second-degree battery, which could have led to 15 years in prison. But his conviction was thrown out by a state appeals court that said he could not be tried on the charge as an adult because he was 16 at the time of the beating.

"This is why we did not cancel the march," said the Rev. Al Sharpton, an organizer of Thursday's rally along with the Rev. Jesse Jackson and the NAACP. "When they overturned Mychal's conviction, everyone said we won."

Jackson said in an interview Friday that federal intervention is needed to protect Bell's rights. Sharpton said he has scheduled meetings in Washington with congressional leaders to discuss the Jena Six case.

At a separate closed hearing Friday, a judge refused a request from defense attorneys to remove Judge J.P. Mauffray Jr. from Bell's case, said John Jenkins, father of one of Bell's co-defendants.

Defense lawyers have complained that Mauffray set a high bail for Bell _ $90,000 _ prior to his conviction in the Barker beating. Mauffray had cited Bell's criminal record, which included juvenile arrests for battery and damage to property, in setting the bail.

On Thursday, the case drew thousands of protesters to this tiny central Louisiana town to rally against what they see as a double standard of justice for blacks and whites. The march was one of the biggest civil rights demonstrations in years.

The case dates to August 2006, when a black Jena High School student asked the principal whether blacks could sit under a shade tree that was a frequent gathering place for whites. He was told yes. But nooses appeared in the tree the next day.

Three white students were suspended but not criminally prosecuted. LaSalle Parish District Attorney Reed Walters has said he could find no state law covering the act.

The incident was followed by fights between blacks and whites that culminated in the attack on Justin Barker, who was knocked unconscious on school grounds. According to court testimony, his face was swollen and bloodied, but he was able to attend a school function that night.

Five of the teens were originally charged with attempted second-degree murder _ charges that have since been reduced for four of them. The sixth was booked as a juvenile on sealed charges.

Nooses Found At High School In High Point (NC copycat)

2007-09-21T16:14:00.000-07:00

WFMY news 2 | 9/21/07 | Sarah Lanse, Free Republic

Posted on 09/21/2007 11:14:47 AM PDT by Rb ver. 2.0

Police are trying to figure out who hung at least four nooses at Andrews High School in High Point.

High Point -- School leaders found and removed four nooses at Andrews High School in High Point Friday morning.

Police and school leaders are looking for a fifth noose.

Police don't know if it's connected to the Jena 6 incident in Louisiana. They think it could also be a prank from Asheboro High School. Andrews and Asheboro face off Friday night in football.

Police are interviewing Andrews football players, students and faculty to try and develop leads.

Students will be making signs, saying they won't tolerate this type of behavior.

The school system is sending letters home with students. They're also activating their connect-ed system to send a voice message to parents' homes explaining what happened.

Jena Brings Tears to My Eyes, of Sorry and of Hope

2007-09-21T15:50:00.000-07:00

I'm not getting a lot of sleep because I'm trying to stay on top of developments, read the news coverage and see where things are going next.

This morning, I started to cry while reading reading a blog called Listen to me for a minute, by a brother named "Reginald M." who's from Jena, "a small town in Louisiana." His first post was on May 21, called:

"Racial Tension in a Small Louisiana Town : Jena in Brief."

He clearly was moved to start this blog because of the Jena Six, and I urged him to become part of the AfroSpear's Black Accused Support Groups (BASG's). I hat tipped him, (mentioned him at my blog), but I never heard from him, perhaps because he needs to keep his anonymity. Or maybe his blog was set up for him by an Afrosphere activist like me, who sets up blogs for others in order to publicize their situations.

Anyway, this is the comment I posted on his blog back on May 21: (I was the first person to comment on his blog, which I had found by Googling "Jena, noose, high school") :

"Racial Tension in a Small Louisiana Town"

16 Comentários - Mostrar postagem original Reduzir comentários

Francis L. Holland Blog disse...

The Afrosphere is a national and international group of Black bloggers dedicated to equality in the criminal and civil justice systems for Blacks and all Americans. Within the Afrosphere we have a group called the Black Accused Support Groups (BASG) that works with Black people, family, friends and communities, to assure that individual Blacks and all Blacks receive justice in the criminal justice system.

Our blogs have just become aware of the situation in Jena as a result of an article by Howard Witt, and we have begun reporting on the cases. We offer our support to individuals and the community, to publicize and strategize about solutions for Jena and and similar situations that exist, unfortunately, across throughout the United States of America.

Although Howard Witt is an excellent reporter, we should not have to read national white newspapers to find out what's going on in local Black communities. By linking all of our blogs together, we are able to stay on top of important stories before they are mentioned in the national press and even if they are never mentioned in the national press, because when all of our blogs are linked together, we become a national press.

May 21, 2007 8:32 AM

When I read that comment today, I start to cry, and my eyes are watering again now. We are never alone in the AfroSpear, as long as our blogs are linked, which is why we insist on the fundamental role of our AfroSpear linklist that unites each blog with all of the AfroSpear. That's our lifeline. And now I'm crying again.

Francis

The Jena 6, Shaquanda Cotton, and Blog Power

2007-09-20T20:42:00.000-07:00

September 20, 2007

The Jena 6, Shaquanda Cotton, and Blog Power
Jim Crow's Children

By CHARLES MODIANO

One must wonder if without the aid of the internet: would "The Jena 6" ever made national mainstream news?; would Shaquanda Cotton still be locked up?; or even, would we have experienced the meteoric increase in profit-inducing prisoners over the last 30 years? And what about all the other Bell's and Cotton's who never received a protest march in their name. Is it because we simply don't know their stories? Witt reports that thousands of juvenile cases in Texas are currently being reviewed "as part of a sweeping overhaul of the scandal-plagued system". While this is encouraging news, what will happen in Louisiana and the other 48 states? In 1964, grotesque television images helped coalesce just barely enough national support to get President Johnson to sign a new "Civil Rights Act" in the face of vitriolic segregationists. Is it possible for BLOG POWER to wake up America to deal with Jim Crow's children and get a "Criminal Justice Reform Act" signed at a juncture in American history that boasts a rise in hate groups?

While such a suggestion may only be a pipe dream, BLOG POWER is not quietly hoping for Senators, governors, and other elected officials to do their job, nor is it patiently waiting for Tim Russert, Chris Matthews, or Joe Scarbarough to determine what is newsworthy. BLOG POWER is a place that demands an end to mainstream media's insidious practice of "racism-by-omission". It is a "cyber rights movement" that won't stop until widespread white denial is widely denied. It is a new virtual democracy at work and a voice for the voiceless. But perhaps the greatest contribution that a handful of committed local journalists and thousands of committed bloggers can make is not its ability to show that Jim Crow has returned, but only to demonstrate that he has never really left. Read all of "Jim Crow's Children," by CHARLES MODIANO.

Blog Power Fuels Civil Rights Movement, Says Electronic Village

2007-09-20T20:30:00.000-07:00

September 20, 2007

Blog Power Fuels Civil Rights Movement,

Says Electronic Village

Today was a remarkable day. Seeing the streaming video of the Jena, LA protest march was inspiring on a number of levels. The highlight for me came when it was announced that a mandatory hearing must be held within 72 hours to explain why Mychal Bell is still sitting behind bars. Chances are good that the massive pressure will result in the young man being released from prison within the next 3-4 days.

The other amazing thing is to realize that our efforts in the afrosphere are recognized as the catalyst for this massive protest today in Jena, LA. The most extensive analysis that I've seen can be found on Counter Punch in an article entitled, 'Jim Crow's Children'.

"The development of Jena story is only part of a much larger "Cyber Rights Movement" that has been gaining greater ground in America in 2007. Let's call it "BLOG POWER"! It goes a little something like this: yet another African-American teenager falls victim to Jim Crow-like criminal injustice; the injustice is covered in some local newspaper; national mainstream media completely ignores story; story spreads like wildfire across hundreds of predominantly African-American blogs; national media still ignores it; bloggers still blog; national media keeps ignoring; bloggers keep blogging on irresponsible national media; one national mainstream outlet might pick up story; bloggers keep blogging; other embarrassed national outlets might pick up story; bloggers keep blogging; finally, previously voiceless activists start to receive national media attention; bloggers keep blogging; more well-known activists such as Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson are part of planned widespread national march; bloggers keep blogging; just days prior to the scheduled protest the charges against the young teenager have been reduced or thrown out. While there exist many examples of BLOG POWER, perhaps the greatest two in 2007 involve "The Jena 6" and Shaquanda Cotton. But before we examine what they represent, some context might be necessary."

Lousiana Appeals Court Orders Monday Hearing on Bell's Detention

2007-09-20T18:30:00.000-07:00

The Jena 6, Shaquanda Cotton, and Blog Power

2007-09-20T18:17:00.000-07:00

Jim Crow's Children

By CHARLES MODIANO

Did you hear the good news on "The Jena 6"? The adult conviction and potential 22 year sentence of Mychal Bell has been overturned. This comes less than one week before widespread protests scheduled for this Thursday in Jena, Louisiana. Since this case and the fate of the other five boys are a looooong way from being resolved mass protests will continue as planned.

The development of Jena story is only part of a much larger "Cyber Rights Movement" that has been gaining greater ground in America in 2007. Let's call it "BLOG POWER"! It goes a little something like this: yet another African-American teenager falls victim to Jim Crow-like criminal injustice; the injustice is covered in some local newspaper; national mainstream media completely ignores story; story spreads like wildfire across hundreds of predominantly African-American blogs; national media still ignores it; bloggers still blog; national media keeps ignoring; bloggers keep blogging on irresponsible national media; one national mainstream outlet might pick up story; bloggers keep blogging; other embarrassed national outlets might pick up story; bloggers keep blogging; finally, previously voiceless activists start to receive national media attention; bloggers keep blogging; more well-known activists such as Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson are part of planned widespread national march; bloggers keep blogging; just days prior to the scheduled protest the charges against the young teenager have been reduced or thrown out. While there exist many examples of BLOG POWER, perhaps the greatest two in 2007 involve "The Jena 6" and Shaquanda Cotton. But before we examine what they represent, some context might be necessary. Read the whole article at CounterPunch!

Jena Six is International News in the United Kingdom

2007-09-20T14:49:00.000-07:00

Hundreds Join Jena 6 Rally in Louisiana

Thursday September 20, 2007 1:31 PM

By MARY FOSTER

Associated Press Writer

JENA, La. (AP) - Hundreds of black-clad protesters, from college students to veteran civil rights activists, descended on this small town for a rally Thursday in support of six black teenagers who were initially charged with attempted murder in the beating of a white classmate. Guardian.CO.UK

Barack Obama: Call for an End to All-White Juries!

2007-09-20T12:08:00.000-07:00

AfroSpear's Francis L. Holland Blog

and Electronic Village Blog on MSNBC

Senator Barack Obama says that he is the candidate for president who would be most able to bridge divides of color in America. If so, this would be an excellent time for him to prove it. If he steps forward now with new proposals for addressing and ending the systemic injustices that have led thousands of people, Black and white to protest in Jena, Louisiana today, then Barack Obama might be able to capture the imaginations of Americans and provide leadership, showing the way forward. He could create a new consensus for threshold notions of fairness.

"We Are the Jena Six," on MSNBC

This crucial moment in the history of the American Civil Rights Movement will truly tell us much about Barack Obama's modus operandi. If he were elected president, would he feel compelled to mostly ignore debates about skin color in order to avoid disagreeing with white perspectives and thereby being fatally cast as the "Black candidate." Would be bridge divides or simply be the proponent for a "new denial." Can Barack Obama come forward with substantive alternatives to the status quo that about which Blacks and whites as well as Latinos can endorse and feel good?

"In a confluence of the Civil Rights Movement and the Internet age, the word has gone out that a big gathering is descending on [Jena] beginning tomorrow. ... At the heart of this the young lives that have been affected by this volatile case. --
"MSNBC's Brian Williams with positive coverage
of AfroSpear/ColorOfChange efforts.

For example, the Jena, Louisiana criminal panel that convicted Mychal was an all-white jury.

A court-appointed attorney in Bell’s adult trial did not present any evidence or witnesses in his defense before an all white jury convicted him of guilty of second-degree aggravated battery and conspiracy to commit second-degree aggravated battery. Black America Web

Because Blacks, at one time, were forbidden by law to sit on juries, all white juries are an historical symbol of systemic anachronistic injustice, constituted by prosecutors and the courts precisely because they are more likely to be blind to the guilt or innocence of Black people and to render injustice based on prejudices. All-white juries are not an accident that yield accidental injustice. Instead, they are both a manifestation and factory of prejudice. There is no justification to insist on all-white juries in this day and age.

March is coming, but Jena mayor requests "smaller numbers."

So, will candidate Barack Obama step forward and propose that every jury be composed of at least one "group juror" who is a representative of the accused's ethnic group? Of course this one juror would still be in the overwhelming minority and would be in no position to single-handedly change or guarantee a fair process or result. The group juror could only act to help review the evidence and pique the conscience, both of the jury and of society.

A new insistence upon ending all-white juries would focus America's attention on the inherent unfairness of a system that so often is so careful NOT to have minority jury participation when convicting and sentencing minorities. In the process of implementing a "group juror" consideration, the new thinking required to end all-white juries would shine a continuous light into an unfair court system and bring constant attention to other forms of injustice, focusing America's attention first on the injustice that is most visible in order to build a political will for a continual effort to end injustices that are more subtle.

"By the time the Jena Six story came around, there was a group of probably 80, 90 bloggers who would e-mail one another daily."

AfroSpear's Shawn Williams, Dallas South Blog.

The group juror concept is a direct challenge to notions of color-blindness promoted by the Roberts Court in its decision to overturn Brown v. Board of Education. And this proposal would put insistent discriminators on the indefensible defensive.

What, after all, is the great need to maintain the institution of the all-white jury? Would having ONE member of the defendant's color be so injurious to the prospects for justice? In order to make justice truly blind in America, it is time to redefine the term "a jury of one's peers" in the public consciousness to mean a jury that includes at least one member of one's own ethnic group.

Does this mean that an Arab terrorist must have at least one Arab on his jury? Yes it does. And how or why would the presence of one Arab so confound the system that justice could not be served?

D.A. Taunts Jena's Blacks by Appearing with White Perpetrator.

Meanwhile, a call by citizens and organizers for an end to all-white juries would be one way of maintaining the public's focus on the most blatantly obvious systemic unfairnesses. The group juror proposal is a way of asserting the inherent unfairness of a criminal justice process that excludes the participation of Blacks, and this is so even in cases where the defendant's guilt or innocence is unclear, as it always is until a jury has pronounced its sentence.

Of course, many people will insist that this proposal is unconstitutional, that the courts must "ignore the skin color or the defendant" while convicting Black youths at a rate six times higher than whites. These defender of all white juries will insist that maintenance of all-white juries is, in fact, constitutional while the "Group Juror" proposal is not. Yet arguments for that proposition would show the idiocy of all that has transpired in the discussion of skin color since Bakke. Because if all-white juries are truly essential to our Constitution, (and I don't believe they are) then it may explain why there are so many Black people in jail. The group juror proposal is based on the Constitutional proposition that our society deserves a fair trial to determine each defendant's guilt or innocence.

Constant updates on the Internet and Black radio

have galvanized Black Americans.

Advocating for the group juror proposal challenges the assumption that "justice is blind," and that a system run exclusively by whites can be fair to those who are not. This advocacy challenges Americans to concede the inherent fairness of a "jury of one's peers."

As such, the "Group Juror" proposal subtly and obliquely offers a rationale for Obama's own candidacy, which is predicated on the belief that no person should be excluded from service based exclusively on the color of his skin, while no system should systemically ignore or discount the services to democracy and justice that are offered by those who are not white men.

"Mychal Bell, the only one of the Jena Six to be found guilty . . . His conviction has been overturned but he's still behind bars . . . " - - MSNBC

As such, the Group Juror proposal would be a direct challenge to America's history of systemic segregation and discrimination, while those who believe that all-white justice is a good thing would be compelled to step forward and defend that proposition. In any case, if Barack Obama cannot step forward now to show America the way out of this Jena morass, then he may effectively be conceding that he cannot and does not offer something to unite us that his opponents do not.

AfroSpear Jena Scrapbook

FBI FOIA Documents Received on Jena Six Case

Jena Six "MOTION TO RECUSE THE HON. J. P. MAUFFRAY, JR."

MOTION TO RECUSE THE HON. J. P. MAUFFRAY, JR.

Jena Six "MOTION TO RECUSE THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY"

MOTION TO RECUSE THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY

Color of Change Expects Important Developments in Jena Six Case

Journalism Schools Begin Disecting Jena Six and Afrosphere Coverage

Jena Six Trial Must Be Open to the Public, Higher Court Rules.

"Judge won't drop charges against 'Jena 6' defendant," says CNN, citing this blog for commentary.

Jena Six Trials to be Held in Open Court

AfroSpear Furious Over Re-Arrest of Mychal Bell on Old Charges

Political, Judicial Pressure Freed Mychal D. Bell, Jena Teen

Southern Poverty Law Center Deconstructs Jena Prosecutor's Bias

Now, let's talk about what's annoying me about the mainstream reaction to Jena, LA

Congressman John Conyers (D) To Call For Mychal Bell's Release

Howard Witt Addresses Jena on NBC

Shawn Williams Addresses Jena on NPR

White supremacist backlash builds over Jena case

NATIONAL LAWYERS GUILD CALLS FOR RELEASE OF MYCHAL BELL

David Duke emerges as Jena's most ardent defender.

Jen 6 - If you think the Jena 6 trial and aftermath is over, you are wrong

All-White Juries vs. the "Group Juror" Concept

Bell Denied Bond, Neo Nazi Group Targets Families Of The Jena Six

By the Too Sense AfroSpear Blog

Friday, September 21, 2007

Jena School Administrators Violated 1st Amend. Establishment Clause, Sponsoring In-School Religious Services

"Silence is not the answer," says today's New York Times on Jena

Jena Police Declared State of Emergency Before the 9/20 March

State of Louisiana v. Mychal D. Bell, Rendered 9/20/2007 (Order to Hold Habeas Hearing Within 72 Hours)

State of Louisiana v. Mychal D. Bell, Rendered 9/18/2007 (Decision on Motion to Enforce is "Premature.")

State of Louisiana v. Mychal D. Bell, Rendered 9/18/2007

State of Louisiana v. Mychal D. Bell, Rendered 09/14/2007

Dallas South Blog Interviews with Dallas Morning News

Judge Denies Request to Free Jena Teen, Mychal Bell

Nooses Found At High School In High Point (NC copycat)

Jena Brings Tears to My Eyes, of Sorry and of Hope

"Racial Tension in a Small Louisiana Town: Jena in Brief."

"Racial Tension in a Small Louisiana Town"

16 Comentários - WritePostCollapsor(); Mostrar postagem original WriteCommentsCollapsor(); Reduzir comentários

The Jena 6, Shaquanda Cotton, and Blog Power

Blog Power Fuels Civil Rights Movement, Says Electronic Village

September 20, 2007

Blog Power Fuels Civil Rights Movement,

Says Electronic Village

Lousiana Appeals Court Orders Monday Hearing on Bell's Detention

The Jena 6, Shaquanda Cotton, and Blog Power

Jena Six is International News in the United Kingdom

Barack Obama: Call for an End to All-White Juries!

"Racial Tension in a Small Louisiana Town : Jena in Brief."

16 Comentários - Mostrar postagem original Reduzir comentários