Tuesday, November 25, 2014

Ferguson grand jury decision and police use of force with blacks

This was a pretty good panel discussion about the Ferguson decision. To be clear, based on how our laws are written, what evidence was available, and how our justice system "works", Zimmerman and Mesherle were not guilty, and there was not enough here to indict Wilson. Whether that is right or acceptable is another story.

No one really expected an indictment of Wilson, however there was some concern about how the process unfolded: the prosecutor seemed to focus on the officer's perspective, the prosecutor's dad was a cop killed by a black suspect (and didn't recuse himself), Brown's family was not called to testify (but Wilson was - highly unusual), the convenience store crime footage was released, and AG Holder was indirectly involved. There is also the over-arching issue of the proximity between law enforcement and the DA's office, and whether impartial oversight of alleged police misconduct is possible. Was this g. jury just a "show trial" as justice theater, to go through the motions when no one really wanted to investigate Wilson. And maybe Wilson in fact broke no laws.

We've spoken about these issues before, but obviously if police were not armed (like in the UK, Norway, and many other places), that precludes the risk of violent altercations. We know that's not going to happen, so maybe police resources could be allocated to community outreach and rules-of-engagement/de-escalation policy analysis and training rather than ridiculous military exercises that they will never (or should never) use domestically. And instead of buying tanks and sniper rifles, maybe law enforcement could invest in officer and vehicle cameras - which have been shown to deter violence and misconduct from both officers and public. Convictions were possible in the Rodney King case because of footage, otherwise we all probably believe that the verdict would have been different.

There are "ambiguous" cases where an officer can rightfully shoot or not shoot - it's up to their discretion. The data show that when the suspect is black or brown, shooting is a lot more likely outcome. Assuming that minority suspects are no more dangerous than white suspects, this may be a manifestation of traditional racism, lack of sensitivity training, and/or unconscious fear (particularly of large black urban men). Ferguson's police force is under 10% black, yet the community is 2/3 black. Why was the actual white cop-killer in PA apprehended with little harm to him (and maybe no shots fired), but kids, mentally challenged, and unarmed/poorly armed minorities are beaten to a pulp or shot 10 times?

Would white America think it was OK if the tables were turned? Imagine if blacks were 60% of the population, had all the wealth/power (and Obama would still be president because he's half white), and most of the guns. Would they be OK with young white man after young white man (unarmed) killed by black cops or black neighborhood watchmen, with no convictions or even indictments? And all of this met the letter of the law?

----

Maybe there has been some sensationalism and race baiting by the media and others over Ferguson, but this crap isn't much better:


I guess Wilson is on his PR tour, and lucky for him he's the only one left alive to tell the world what happened that day. He took a punch from Brown, and then "feared for his life". He is 6'4" 210 lbs, but he said he was like a boy vs. "Hulk Hogan" - that's how big that "man" was (Brown was 6'4" 292 lbs). Either Wilson's stupid or melodramatic, but it's pretty hard to die from one or two punches. He was in a motor vehicle. If he feared for his life, why not just hit the gas and escape (assuming the car was running)? Only when he went for his gun did it become a "life and death" struggle. During his grand jury testimony (when he was not subject to cross-examination), he said Brown was a "demon". Is that to evoke sympathy and/or an admission of his hysteria?

Wilson's recounting of the incident could be accurate, but it's quite peculiar. I don't know their stories, but I believe that Brown did not have a history of violence, erratic behavior, or aggression. I am not sure about Wilson's record on duty. But the way Wilson described Brown, the kid seemed to be crazy. I'm not saying it's impossible, but why would a teen, when ordered by a cop authority figure to get off the road and then approach the patrol car, suddenly attack the armed officer without provocation? It's like Trayvon - did he suddenly just decide to kill an adult stranger on a whim? Then instead of finishing Wilson off in close quarters, somehow the hulk-demon Brown ends up 35-40 feet away from the police car, turns around, and charges back at Wilson - ostensibly with intent to kill (even though the kid already passed up an easier opportunity to kill Wilson)? At that point, Wilson said that the thought in his mind was, "Legally can I shoot this guy? I have to." If he was attacked by a "demon" and fearing for his life before, it's not likely that Wilson could be so conscientious and analytical in that moment. This makes me really suspicious of his version of events.

Wilson repeated that he has a clear conscience because he followed his training to the letter and did nothing wrong. To me, that's like Bush saying that he can't think of a mistake he made as president. Honest people can always admit they could have done something better - it doesn't require deep introspection and intellect. And if you are truly in the right, that doesn't mean that you are not allowed to be sub-perfect. Any time someone kills someone else, something obviously went wrong. But for Wilson to be so sure and culpability-free, that suggests he is on the defensive and hiding something. Maybe he is (rightfully) worried that if he is open and contrite, his words will be twisted and turned against him. He is not out of the legal woods yet. However, I don't think it's very persuasive to neutrals or skeptics when you show very little to no empathy or remorse, and just keep maintaining that you did everything right and you are actually the victim.

Wilson is the professional peace officer with the firearm and the training. He has the power of life and death, not Brown. Maybe he wielded that power in accordance with the laws of the land, but don't tell us that all this was 100% unavoidable and 100% of the blame is on Brown. Is conflict ever so black and white?

"Is there anything you could have done differently that would have [avoided the killing]?"
"No."
"Nothing?"
"No."

----

When you speak of intellect and police, please keep this in mind:


Bottom line:  They're smart enough to know their own limits, which makes them feel inferior.  Give him a gun and that inferiority goes away.  The police are poorly trained and intellectually ill-equipped to do a job like policing.  Police (in a civilized society) need to read a situation and determine the way to de-escalate it to protect everyone, not just themselves.  Instead, they exacerbate and intimidate.
If Brown was a 'demon', a police officer should know how to deal with them.  You cannot tell me that Brown wouldn't understand that if he punched a cop in the face, he'd be killed.    Every black child is told that he is perceived as a threat in society just because the color of his/her skin.  It is the 'talk' black parents have to have with their kids in order to hope they might not land in jail or get killed. 
Once again, it's bullshit cop story and because the american society is so racist, they believe it.
How long ago did we watch Rodney King get beaten?  Same as it ever was.  

----

Yeah, "the talk" is a good point; most black American men know not to do anything remotely aggressive towards the cops. Yet Wilson admitted to firing his gun 12 times at the unarmed Brown. As you said, I am pretty sure Wilson did/said something offensive to provoke Brown, who responded like a testosterone-fueled teen might, and then Wilson probably escalated because he felt that his petty ego/authority was challenge and he wanted to put this punk in his place. Like Jack Reacher said, people join the armed forces either because they're legacy, unable to get a better job, or want to legally kill people. I think some people become cops because they have inferiority complexes and want to wave the gun/badge around and intimidate (like Denzel's depiction in Training Day).

Maybe I'm way off base about Wilson, but I know this applies to some cops over the years based on the long record of misconduct and corruption (and those are only the cases that saw the light of day). Teachers and gov't workers get blasted by the right all the time, but they always apologize for the cops. They are all supposed to be public servants, but yes, there are structural and psychological reasons why they may put their own interests over the public's at times. But when cops do that, people can get hurt and justice suffers.

The way Wilson, Zimmerman, and some in right-wing media/politics describe, young black men are a ticking time bomb of primal rage that can't be reasoned with. That is racism to me, with tragic effects. Same thing with some Muslims - they are accused of embracing a culture of martyrdom and death. "We love life and freedom, they hate it." They're barely human, so they need to be caged and killed like dogs. So sure, when a psychotic 300 lb black guy wants to tear you limb-from-limb, of course you regretfully have to protect yourself with deadly force. Poor Wilson. I acknowledge that some blacks and Muslims fit these descriptions, but the vast majority don't. And plenty of whites exhibit this behavior and worse (the majority of mass murderers in US history were white men, often educated and not that poor). So we're profiling all wrong. But maybe the error stems from, and is reinforcement of, the centuries-old stereotypes about white man's burden and black savages.

One thing I also wanted to comment on was the criticism over the rioting and looting in black neighborhoods in the wake of Ferguson, Rodney King, Watts, Katrina, etc. This is somehow validation for conservatives that blacks are the problem. I am not condoning the behavior, but when people are given no better outlets for redress, and day-after-day subject to mistreatment and negativity all around, they are going to react poorly during times of strife. It is not inherent to blacks - it is what happens when you marginalize people and leave them with no hope/future. The discrimination, harassment, and violence (economic violence too) that some black people face (often from non-blacks) are significant disadvantages that others often dismiss because they haven't experienced it themselves. I also think Obama was too dismissive and unsympathetic of the protesters' perspective in Ferguson (esp. compared to Trayvon), but I assume he is being extra cautious so as to not get blamed/associated with the racial anger/violence.

No comments: