Today, a NY City "Judge" issued his verdict acquitting three New York Police Officers of murdering Sean Bell. You know...frankly, I am not surprised. Are you surprised? Are you shocked that the police are free to kill Black people? Is it hard to understand how in the 21st Century, with pundits telling us how far we have come with race relations in this Country, that the benchmark for "fairness" is trained police having the right to unload 50 shots and stand justified?
Reparations Means Acknowledging that There ARE Winners and Losers in the Sean Bell Murder Trial.
Who are the winners? Well, the NYPD - who, after Amadu Diallo and Sean Bell, are more confident that they are free to shoot (and kill) unarmed Black males with Government approval. The winners are these officers, who will not (as of now) serve time for their crime. The winner is the City of New York, who will not - as yet - be held liable and responsible for this malfeasance.
Who are the losers? Well, how about Sean Bell who is dead? What about his fiancée? What about his children and his parents? What about his friends who also were shot...all of whom see no justice? The losers are the Black Community, who is reminded that their lives are of no value to the larger society and that their lives can be taken at any moment - with no consequences.
My father - Krim Ballentine - is a retired Chief Deputy US Marshall, former Asst. Police Commissioner, had designed and organized a police force, and has over 30 years of law enforcement experience. My mother - Rosalie Ballentine - is a former Attorney General. And, we spoke about this.
Yes, there are legal loopholes that could allow for these men to be acquitted. But, legal loopholes do not equate to justice. The Judge indicated that the police officers story was more believable than the victims' story, and said prosecutors did not prove - beyond a reasonable doubt - that the shootings were unjustified.
You see, this is why Reparations means acknowledging that there ARE winners and losers in the Sean Bell Murder Trial. There is no way you can tell me that 50 shots at unarmed men can be justified. Maybe you can justify 1-10 shots. With 5 officers shooting, 10 shots are easy. But, you cannot tell me that "New York's Finest" - with the rigors of their training - do not know how to discern a scene. Ok, maybe they believe that Bell and his friends are armed...maybe. But, how do they not realize - in the midst of this "gun fight" - that no one is returning fire? Again, police officers are trained to remain calm. These men were detectives, who "earned" that status because of their so-called "abilities." Again, how do you justify 50 shots at unarmed men. How do you justify one officer emptying two clips?
Reparations means acknowledging that there ARE winners and losers in the Sean Bell Murder Trial. The Status Quo has won and the people have lost. But, from defeat comes the opportunity for recommitted vigilance. From the ashes comes rebirth. Every loss provides lessons for us to achieve victory. These times cause us to band together, and we can harness the potential power of this unity and channel it for good.
This is reparations: finding rallying points, banding together and promoting the Cause of our people. So, question: what do you think we can do to defend the Community from police brutality? Log onto our Reparative Forum and voice your thoughts.
Come and Get Your Reparations!
Friday, April 25, 2008
Reparations Means Acknowledging that There ARE Winners and Losers in the Sean Bell Murder Trial
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
1 comment:
Police officers acquitted in New York!
How easy it is to accept this as being precedence of law? You see, it has become common law to shoot and kill people who are black where police thought they had a gun. Okay, if it has become common law and accepted practices then why do we as citizens continue to pursue conviction when it is done? Is it because “he” had a gun or I was afraid and in this case were we the four of us trained officers afraid?
I have been a professional law enforcement officer now retired from the United States Marshals Service and the United States Army Reserves, chief deputy U. S. Marshal and counterintelligence agent officer respectively. And, of course, because of our “politically correct mode” to challenge because of race and skin colors, we place being African American before just plain indignant American and we fight the wrong battle. Or do we?
We do not battle the crime we battle the attitude and behavior of the crime participants, police and citizens or persons. My position of chief deputy United States Marshal was fought in a racial manner and I only won on appeal. The racial exercise was when an exclusive labor union representing subordinates were allowed to never file any union or intra-department grievances following the negotiated rules but instead were encouraged by management to conspire against their manager representative in the field about management procedures without any corroborating allegations. Management and bargaining unit members violated the negotiated agreement and my attorney fought it from a racial point of view.
Four trained police officers in a city of millions were afraid sufficient to shoot forty or more bullets at a person because of their, the police officers’, personal and collective fears of one man, of skin color black who allegedly reached for a gun? Is the law to say that one, especially a police officer, has a right to shoot because of his/her personal fears? Does the law say that one can justify four armed and trained persons being afraid in order to use deadly force? The laws are clear surrounding the use by police of so-called “deadly force.” A police officer may use “deadly force” when his/her life is in eminent danger or when someone’s life around him/her is in eminent danger of being taken or denied.
The man, any person, would therefore not have used police “deadly force” if any person does not place the police officers’ or the lives of others in eminent danger regardless whether it is a gun, knife, brick or merely physical force. And, one, any police officer, is allowed to use only the force, deadly or otherwise, sufficient to control or deny the resisting force. Why is it that we only hear white skin persons being shot by police when usually they are afforded one or two shots at the police before being shot, wounded or killed?
Do you think that one person even with a gun should have or could have threatened the eminent danger to the lives of all four New York city trained gold shield carrying police officers? And could their fears be sufficient to meet the standard of police “deadly force?” Do you think only the force required to resist the threatened force was used in this case? Are police officers able to use “deadly force” because of their fears, suspicions are stereotypes in our United States, skin color exclusive: black, brown, white, yellow or any skin colors?
America is a discriminating country and Americans, citizens and visitors, are allowed by the Constitution of the United States to be discriminatory and racist? Is that not a hell of statement coming from a Negro person that has had a myriad of numerous and diverse law enforcement experiences, civilian and military? Yes, but the statement is made not from frivolity but because of the idealistic truth. Like Spanish is spoken here commercials so is racism exercised in our beloved United States.
In the Constitution of the United States the restrictions of government not man’s discrimination has been outlined later skewed by our legislatures to avoid the bullet themselves for abstinence. The Constitution clearly in common sense language allows no discrimination only as to voting and taxation and that or those restrictions are on government not the private citizens. Americans or citizens or even persons are allowed free speech and other freedoms that indirectly allow individual discrimination and racism.
Knowing that, then why the police may not be wrong or why they may be wrong? The police as citizens or any citizens are allowed to exercise their personal freedoms defined in the Constitution of the United States all the way to their associations; however, police as taxpayers or citizens’ representatives like other government agencies must never embellish their individual freedoms exampled rights by the sanctioning of Un-Constitutional actions by government.
In the United States exercising one’s discriminatory freedoms are justified in racists exercises however when the police or called and the prosecutors are asked to become involved and the courts are queried, the government has no right to exercise racism or discrimination embellishing one’s personal violations of the laws.
Legislatures cannot make laws allowing preferential treatment to skin color right citizens of this country violating the Constitution in their processes. It is the government of the United States who is mandated to represent all persons in the United States that cannot exercise racism and discrimination. It is our government that must never exercise sanctions, consignments or embellishments of racists and or discriminatory actions. One cannot legislate by making laws to force love but has a Constitutional mandate to disavow any hatred of citizens of these United States. The judge in New York was wrong.
So, who was wrong in the forty or more shots fired by police officers of New York? The police officers, the training afforded them and the embellishment of their personal fears, discrimination and racism by our United States Government and some of our citizens were wrong.
We prosecuted racism allowing the jurist to decide no racism leaving the illegal shooting unresolved. We, the people of the United States who happen to be skin color black fought again the wrong battle. The battle was not do police have a right to shoot the man in New York because of racism but do the police of New York or any other city have a right to shoot a person when their or the lives around them are not in eminent danger? You decide. The judge was wrong.
Respectfully,
Mr. Krim M. Ballentine
The Last Negro
PO Box 305396
St. Thomas, (US) Virgin Islands 00803
Post a Comment