I don’t know about you, but in following all that’s happened since April 11 when NC Attorney General Roy Cooper spoke the truth - “Innocent” - I missed a great column by professor and blogger William (“Bill”) Anderson who’s been in the forefront of the fight for truth and justice in the Duke Hoax case.
Bill’s April 12 column includes:
The politics of rape dominate the law in this country, and that is not a good thing. Yes, rape is a terrible crime, but a rape must first be committed before one can say there was a crime.You can read Bill’s entire column here, and if you haven’t, I hope you do.
The modern politics of rape do not require a rape, only an accusation, and once that accusation is made, it almost is impossible to dislodge.
Even today, even with the AG’s statement and all of the investigation done, there still are "rape crisis" advocates out there who will insist that those three young men raped Crystal Gail Mangum. Take the following quote:"I hope people who experience sexual violence in any form feel comfortable calling for help ... and know that each case is different, and they can seek help when they've been violated.Thus, we see the intersection of the politics of race and rape. That intersection more often than not produces lies, and we have seen the wreckage.
There's a possibility that the way the media handles high-profile sexual assault cases, and the fear that would happen to any survivor who comes forward, can have a chilling effect and make them reluctant to step forward." – Margaret Barrett, executive director, Orange County Rape Crisis Center in Chapel Hill.
This comes from the NAACP:
"Now, as we have repeatedly said, comes the hard part. How do we proceed toward the healing places in our communities and our hearts? Long after the television vans with their saucer antennas have pulled out of Durham, long after the bloggers have grown weary from typing, those of us who believe in freedom and justice can not rest.
How do we work to ensure that the final decisions in this case in no way deter women of color from making claims of violations against them which violate their spirits and their bodies?" – statement from William J. Barber II, president of the North Carolina NAACP.
This part of the case is over, although the trials for Michael Nifong are just beginning. One can hope that this miscreant meets the bar of justice. There are more people who need to meet that bar, too, and I will deal with them at a different time.
Bill offers wise words.
Folks, after reading Bill’s column, I searched the net for Rev. Barber’s statement.
It’s not at the state NAACP site. I called the NC NAACP office. They’ll be posting it soon, I was told. I asked for a fax copy: it hasn’t arrived.
I’ve a lot of questions about what Barber’s been quoted as saying since Cooper made his statement, but I settled on asking him about the most important of those questions as you’ll see in the email I'm sending him.
_____________________
Dear Rev. Barber:
I blog as John in Carolina and post often on the Hoax case.
On Apr. 12 the Durham Herald Sun reported:
State NAACP President William Barber said in a prepared statement that he supported the attorney general's move.Did the H-S quote you accurately and completely?
"If [Attorney General Cooper’s] office believes the state lacks sufficient evidence to convince a jury beyond a reasonable doubt that all the elements of each crime took place, then it is the state's constitutional duty to dismiss the charges," Barber said. "We trust that [Cooper's office and the State Bureau of Investigation have] left no stone unturned in the investigation of this case."
I was concerned to see you quoted as saying: "If his office believes the state lacks sufficient evidence to convince a jury beyond a reasonable doubt that all the elements of each crime took place, then it is the state's constitutional duty to dismiss the charges.”
In fact, Attorney General Cooper said: “Based on the significant inconsistencies between the evidence and the various accounts given by the accusing witness, we believe these three individuals are innocent of these charges.” (emphasis added)
If you were accused of stealing from your church and I was accused of abetting you, and Attorney General Cooper, after a lengthy investigation, said he believed we were “innocent of these charges,” we’d want and rightly expect at least fair-minded people to say, “They’re innocent,” instead of “the state lacks sufficient evidence to convince a jury beyond a reasonable doubt that all elements of each crime took place that Rev. Barber and John in Carolina are accused of.”
Do you agree with the Attorney General: they’re innocent?
I’ll publish your response at JinC. This link will take you to a post where I discuss the matters I’ve just placed before you.
Thank you for your attention to my query.
Sincerely,
John in Carolina
8 comments:
A photo of Rev. Barber can be viewed at "NC State NAACP On the Move" Rev. Dr. William J. Barber II President, a page of the official website of the NC NAACP.
On the right of the page are 82 bullet points, with a note that they were posted on August 9, 2006.
Below are points 72 through 78, as they appeared when I visited on April 17, 2007.
(NC Attorney General Cooper declared that Duke lacrosse team members were factually innocent of all felony assault charges on April 11, 2007.)
I would be curious to know at what point Rev. Barber stopped believing in the truth of these 82 points, if he has.
I'd be equally curious to know whether his organization plans to update this webpage to reflect the facts of the case as they have been known for some time, and as they were confirmed on April 11th.
----------
72. Mr. Nifong made comments about possible accessory charges, since it is hard to believe that a gang rape in the bathroom could occur without other party-goers knowing something about it. He gave several interviews about the case the first few weeks, when it created a media firestorm. He once estimated he gave "50 to 70" interviews during that period, and the defense lawyers have used that figure repeatedly. He has since apologized for giving so many interviews to the media, which would camp outside his office everyday until he stopped granting any interviews.
73. Since about two weeks before his successful primary election, maintained a professional quiet with the press.
74. The defense lawyers are paid large fees to zealously represent their clients. A tactic in every sexual assault case is to intimidate the survivor/witness of the attack into refusing to testify. As part of this tactic, they released their photos of the dancer, they have dug up old stories about how she was traumatized as a teen-ager, and have tried to put her past character on trial, knowing well her past sexual history is off limits before the jury.
75. The strategy of the Duke 3 Support Group is as old as sex. Attack the survivors, the vulnerable women. Trash them to re-traumatize them. First the night of the assault, and then every night after on the tv talk shows, the blogs, and on the front pages of the press—trying to bludgeon them into to being afraid to testify.
76. There is a second reason why the Duke 3 Support Group and the defense lawyers continue to try their case in the media—even when the State has chosen to not to join the publicity contest. Their objective is simple: to prepare for a Motion to Change the Venue, saying the jury has been hopelessly tainted with what they have read. They are worried Mr. Nifong and his prosecutors will be on their home court, with a home jury, that will no doubt have at least 5 and maybe more African Americans on it. They are worried the egregious racism of some of the players will affect a Durham Jury, just as it has affected all people of good will who are outraged by the arrogant, entitled behavior of these men, whether or not three men physically assaulted an obviously almost comatose woman.
77. No one represents Ms. M, the survivor. As in the case of domestic violence or any other violence against a woman, she becomes the third party victim of the criminal justice system. Nifong represents the State of North Carolina, not the survivor.
78. The three defendants they have two mountains to climb. First, they must deflect public attention from their boorish, racist, and illegal behavior by mounting outlandish attacks on the survivor and the D.A. Second, they must deal with a mountain of physical evidence, that is corroborated by, we have reason to believe, accounts of some of the men who were at the party who have cooperated with the police and the D.A. from early on.
John & amac - I wrote Rev. Barber about that very page a few months ago; no reply. Specifically:
---
Rev. Dr. Barber-
My name is Michael Gustafson, and I am a Duke alumnus and faculty member as well as a Durham resident. As you can imagine, the events of the past 10 months have been deeply troubling to me as they have for so many others, and I must say in all this that one of your earliest quotes gave me great hope for the way things might unfold. Your quote - "I would want the young men treated the same way as my sons and the young lady the same as my daughter" - was exactly what I had hoped would happen.
Given that, however, I cannot imagine that http://www.naacpncnetwork.org/Publicity/768 is how you would want your sons to be treated. And yet it is your visage peering out from the page, explicitly or implicitly condoning those 82 paragraphs. My prayer is that you might take a moment to re-read those paragraphs through the lens of your earlier statement.
Sincerely,
Michael Gustafson
---
annnnnd it's still there...
John: Come now. You don't really expect Barber to respond honestly, do you? The race hustlers can't afford to concede any arguments for fear of losing their constituency. Barber's a race-baiting hustler like Sharpton and Jackson, only less well paid. Hope you're feeling better. Rest is nature's nurse.
In case anyone noticed, I failed to use the term "Rev" in identifying Barber, Sharptojn, and Jackson. I'm sorry, I'm a product of a decent education and a high degree of morality--I simply can't, in good conscience, use that term in connection with those clowns.
Anonymous --
You are jumping to the conclusion that Rev. Barber doesn't have a better nature, or that it won't come to the fore. That might be so (it might be true for any of us). But doesn't it make more sense to ask questions that might promote self-reflection, and correction? Given the natural human tendencies towards rationalization and self-justification, a genuine and polite query is surely the best approach.
The Hoax affair does not suffer from a shortage of anger or bitterness.
Here, via LieStoppers, is sportswriter Gregory Moore, writing today:
"...However that does not make it right and that is why I am willing to write an 'open' letter of apology to these three men. If no other writer in this country has the guts to pen something of a heartfelt apology, I want these three young men, their families and their friends to know that at least this African American sports writer is willing to give a heart felt apology."
John:
You are trying to engage a mental midget in battle . . . not a fair fight. My sense is that Barber, and others of his ilk, have received free passes all their lives and really have no mental discipline and reasonong power. Good luck.
Thanks John!
I've seen so many latching on to this case that do not have a care what others think of them, so long as their picture or name is in the public's eye.
On Gregory Moore's apology, it was an effort best limited to that paragraph quoted in Amac's comment. It meant more taken out of context. Still an effort though.
Forgot to pass along my wishes that all is okay John!
Kent
Post a Comment