OPPONENTS OF STAND YOUR GROUND PROPOSE NEW LAW, DON’T SHOOT ME FOR ABSOLUTELY NO REASON
POSTED BY ANDY BOROWITZ
The New Yorker
JULY 22, 2013
TALLAHASSEE (The Borowitz Report)—Opponents of Florida’s Stand Your Ground law are attempting to mobilize support for a new law called Don’t Shoot Me for Absolutely No Reason.
The proposed law, which faces major opposition in the Florida legislature, would make it illegal for people in the state to shoot each other for no reason whatsoever.
“Under the provisions of Don’t Shoot Me for Absolutely No Reason, you will be required to have an actual reason for shooting someone,” said a spokesman for the measure, Harland Dorrinson. “This will be a first in Florida.”
The controversial bill has already drawn the ire of the National Rifle Association, which issued a statement today saying that requiring someone to have a reason to shoot another person would violate the Second Amendment.
“If you force someone to have a reason to shoot someone, soon you will be taking away his right to shoot that person altogether,” the N.R.A. said.
“We are not in principle against the idea of having a reason to shoot someone,” the N.R.A. continued. “But we believe you should be allowed to shoot the person first and have the reason second.”
Even if Don’t Shoot Me for Absolutely No Reason somehow passes in the legislature, Florida Gov. Rick Scott said today that he would veto it, telling reporters, “Making people in Florida have a reason to shoot each other would fundamentally change our way of life.”v
Showing posts with label violence. Show all posts
Showing posts with label violence. Show all posts
Monday, July 22, 2013
Wednesday, February 20, 2013
Pistorius: people around him were NOT grounding him and pulling him back to earth
Oscar Pistorius
We all need feedback. It's a terrible mistake when we get rid of the people we need most: the ones who tell us the truth.
Pistorius' prior police run-ins
February 20, 2013
By Samuel Burke
CNN
During the bail hearing for Oscar Pistorius in Pretoria on Wednesday, a South African police investigator testified about previous run-ins that the double amputee Olympian has had with police.
Detective Hilton Botha said in his testimony that Pistorius had accidentally fired a weapon at a restaurant in January, and alleged that Pistorius persuaded a friend to take responsibility - Pistorius denied those charges.
The investigator also said Pistorius had previously threatened violence in another incident in an altercation over a woman.
In 2009, Botha said he also investigated another incident, in which an unidentified woman had accused Pistorius of assault, but her claim could not be proved and the case was dropped without any charges being filed...
Patta believes these previous incidents were clearly seeds of some trouble.
"There were daemons that were driving this young man, Oscar Pistorius, who we know as a hero in South Africa. And yet there were signs of aggression." Patta said.
"The gun [incident] took place just a couple of weeks ago and that is incontrovertible. The gun was fired in an open public area. Oscar Pistorius disputes that he fired the gun." Patta said. "He says that it was a friend, but people who were with him said he did fired it. It was fired by accident, make no mistake, but the fact that a gun was being played around with in place public in it of itself is horrifying"
That fact that "song and dance" wasn't made about the incident is also indicative of South Africa's attitude toward these incidents, according to Patta. She believes an episode like this, where a gun is fired where an athlete was present, in another country would have provoked a public debate on gun proliferation.
The allegation in 2009 was not tested in a court of law - Oscar Pistorius was not as well known, not even in South Africa, at that time. Pistorius did speak openly about the incident according to Patta, claiming the incident was a misunderstanding, and even eventually no charges were filed.
"That too seems to have been dropped and just pushed under the carpet," Patta said. "And now when one looks back with, of course, the exact science of hindsight, it does seem that there were warning signs that at the very least that Oscar Pistorius displayed a significant amount of aggression and that were not people around him who were grounding him and pulling him back to earth."
Friday, November 30, 2012
Maybe Jeffrey MacDonald was innocent after all
Maybe Jeffrey MacDonald went to California to escape the people who killed his wife and children, NOT because he was guilty.
Maybe Jeffrey MacDonald was innocent after all
In a rare interview, co-counsel Wade Smith reflects on the murder case that's long captured America's imagination
By Lynn Parramore, Alternet
Nov 30, 2012
AlterNet Remember the perceptual illusion where you look at a picture and you’re certain that you see the bust of a young woman? Then, if someone draws your attention to certain details, suddenly the picture transforms into the profile of an old woman. It’s a disorienting trick. You think you know what you’re seeing, but then you aren’t so sure.
The Jeffrey MacDonald murder case is one of the most disturbing in living memory. There are only two possible pictures, both nightmares.
Picture No. 1. Jeffrey MacDonald, a Princeton-educated Green Beret doctor with no history of violence and a sterling record, butchered his pregnant wife and two young daughters using a knife, ice pick and club. Then he injured himself and set up the scene to make the crimes appear to be the work of intruders. He claimed they chanted, “Kill the pigs! … Acid is groovy!” and scrawled the word “PIG” on the wall in his wife’s blood.
Picture No. 2. Jeffrey MacDonald, a bright young man with everything in life to look forward to, lost his wife and children to senseless, horrific violence. A military hearing found charges against him “untrue,” but he was convicted nine years later in a civilian trial. He has been imprisoned for three decades for a crime he did not commit.
Two possibilities: MacDonald is a monster, or he is a victim of terrible injustice. Young woman; old woman.
Until recently, most people saw Picture No. 1. So did I. I grew up in Raleigh, N.C., about an hour from the Fort Bragg army base in Fayetteville where the murders occurred on Feb. 17, 1970, in the middle of the night. I was born in May of that year, and would thus be the same age as the child Colette MacDonald was carrying when her life was snuffed out. In the early ’80s, I whipped through a dog-eared copy of “Fatal Vision,” Joe McGinniss’ sensational true-crime novel about the killings. It was almost as scary as ”Helter Skelter” – the story of the Charles Manson murders in California that are said to have inspired Jeffrey MacDonald in the coverup for his homicidal rampage.
In 1984 I was glued to the TV, like millions of other Americans, watching the popular miniseries based on McGinniss’ book. McGinniss made the murders sound like the work of a diabolical genius, a man who could transform in a moment from a loving father to a homicidal maniac, and again, in the blink of an eye, to a calculating con man. I thought of devils that lurked in human flesh, like in “The Exorcist,” another popular based-on-a true-story-book-turned-movie of the period that floated around our house. When the show was over, I retired to the safety of my bed, safe from unpredictable evils.
A Shifting Picture
McGinniss’ stark rendering of Picture No. 1 stuck in my mind until recently when a friend from North Carolina told me that Errol Morris had published a book suggesting MacDonald was innocent. That got my attention: the Oscar-winning Morris, whose film “The Thin Blue Line” exonerated a Texas man wrongfully convicted for murder, is one of the world’s great documentary filmmakers. He is both a careful researcher and a profound investigator of the human condition.
My friend and I sat around in her backyard, tossing up what facts about the case we could recall. I even laughed at the idea of hippie murderers in North Carolina. Of all places! But then I felt uneasy. “You sure Errol Morris wrote the book?” She was sure.
Soon I was reading Morris’ “A Wilderness of Error,” feeling skeptical and wondering why this reputable man would involve himself in a case that everyone and their mother (including mine) knew the truth about.
But it didn’t take long to realize that something was wrong. Enough somethings to fill the long, solitary chapters of a man’s life unfolding behind prison walls.
Morris researched the MacDonald case for 20 years and knows each labyrinthine turn of its progress through the criminal justice system. Even before bureaucratic stalling and federal machinery overtook the search for truth, things were working against Jeffrey MacDonald. A crime scene was left open to bystander traffic. Inexperienced military police failed to pick up a woman near the house who fit MacDonald’s description. Many think this woman could have been Helena Stoeckley, a drug abuser and professed member of a witchcraft cult who repeatedly confessed to having been at the MacDonald house the night of the murders, but recanted her story whenever she seemed to fear prosecution. Now deceased, she remains a pivotal figure in the case.
As I read Morris’ meticulous examination the evidence, the picture in my mind became less clear. I began to see that Joe McGinniss’ creation of Picture No. 1 might be just that: a creation. Some of the “facts” I thought I knew began to look more like ideas conjured by eager prosecutors and a journalist who had dealt so disingenuously with Jeffrey MacDonald in writing ”Fatal Vision” that he was sued after publication. McGinniss’ publisher settled with MacDonald out of court, after the judge called the author a “con man.” (This story, in its own right, became a famous book about journalistic ethics by Janet Malcolm.)
The story many of us think we know tells that MacDonald’s wounds were superficial. But he had multiple bruises and puncture wounds, and two stab wounds, including one that collapsed his lung — a serious injury that left him falling in and out of consciousness. The popular story says there was no evidence of intruders. But there was, including wax drippings (MacDonald insisted that one of the intruders carried a candle), fibers and hairs that did not belong to the household or family members.
McGinniss drew on pop-sociology to render an image of a psychopathic killer in the guise of the friendly doctor-next-door; the kind we know from endless horror movies. He theorized that diet pills caused MacDonald to fly into a fit of rage. McGinniss had to be creative, because the man’s character never fit the crime. MacDonald had no history of violence or temper. When the initial military hearing was conducted in 1970, no one in his life could be found who had a bad thing to say about him. Psychiatric professionals on both sides pronounced him incapable of having committed the crimes. On the evening of the murders, Jeffrey MacDonald had taken his kids to ride the pony he had bought them, fed them dinner while their mother took a night class, and put them to bed. It didn’t make sense.
But did hippie intruders make sense? Maybe more than I would have thought as a teen. Vietnam-era Fayetteville was not sleepy Raleigh in the 1980s. There was violence. Soldiers’ corpses arrived at Fort Bragg stuffed with heroin. In 1970 America was gripped by the horror of the Manson murders – a fact used against MacDonald because he subscribed to Esquire magazine, which had run a story about the dark side of hippie culture. The Esquire story, for all its salaciousness, touched upon real issues that plagued many communities outside of California. In Fayetteville, an Army town, strong tensions existed between Army types like Jeffrey MacDonald on one side of the war, and hippies and protesters on the other. Helena Stoeckley confessed many times that MacDonald’s willingness to turn heroin addicts in to the police infuriated local drug dealers. She knew this world, and was herself a police informant. According to her, they wanted to teach MacDonald a lesson and rough up his family the night of the killings. But things got out of hand.
In October 1970, following an investigation and hearing, the military dropped its case against MacDonald, and he was honorably discharged from the Army. He moved to California to become the director of emergency medicine at St. Mary’s Medical Center in Long Beach. But an unfortunate thing happened in the following years. MacDonald’s relationship with his father-in-law, originally a staunch supporter, became strained. Freddy Kassab had inserted himself into the 1970 military hearing and made himself the center of a media circus, holding news conferences and firing off letter to members of Congress. He wanted his son-in-law to stay on the East Coast and pursue the killers. Eventually, he turned on the man he had once so ardently defended. Through his aggressive pursuit of the case, MacDonald was indicted.
MacDonald was tried in a civilian court in 1979. Many felt that his acquittal would be a cinch, but much more was to go wrong. The nine-year lag between the murders and the trial is extremely unusual; experts consider such a lag to pose a great danger of wrongful conviction. Appearances didn’t help MacDonald, either. He looked angry on the stand. Worse still, Judge Franklin Dupree seemed to have his mind made up before the trial began. Some said he should never have taken the case because his former son-in-law was the prosecutor in the original Army hearing. Dupree would not admit overwhelming psychiatric testimony in MacDonald’s favor, nor the testimony of witnesses to whom Helena Stoeckley had confessed her involvement. Bernie Segal, a long-haired Jewish lawyer from Philadelphia, took the lead in the case and managed to alienate the entire courtroom. Segal took up nearly all the time in the critical period for closing remarks and left only a few minutes for co-counsel Wade Smith, an eloquent native Carolinian who understood the jury.
One thing about this case is never in doubt no matter who’s talking: If Wade Smith had been able to lead and give his closing remarks, MacDonald would be a free man today.
The list of misfortunes goes on: exculpatory evidence withheld; possible prosecutorial misconduct; and fallible humans who twisted the MacDonald story to fit their own agendas. MacDonald was convicted twice, both in the courtroom and in the all-important court of public opinion, which was sealed by McGinniss’ book and miniseries.
Since 1979, the MacDonald case has continued to trouble those who delve beneath the surface of the media narrative. The social justice movement is now involved; the Innocence Project, a prestigious nationwide network dedicated to exonerating the wrongfully convicted, has worked strenuously for MacDonald’s conviction to be overturned. In a 2011 press release, the Innocence Project stated:
Since MacDonald was convicted of the murders in 1979, considerable evidence of his innocence has come to light. Most recently, retired US Marshall Jimmy Britt came forward with information that another suspect in the case, Helena Stoeckley, admitted to the prosecutor that she was in the house on the night of MacDonald’s murder and that he treated to indict her for first degree murder if she admitted that in court. In addition, DNA testing on evidence that was recovered from the fingernails scrapings of one of the victims and a hair found under another victim did not match MacDonald. Earlier, evidence came to light that a FBI forensic examiner mislead the jury about synthetic hair evidence. MacDonald claimed the hairs were from the wig of one of the murders, but the forensic examiner incorrectly claimed they were from one of the children’s dolls.
None of this has set MacDonald free. By now, many members of the original hearing and 1979 trial are dead, including Judge Dupree. Judge James Fox, a close friend of Dupree’s and quite elderly himself, has taken over and has dismissed appeals. Recently, the 4th District Court of Appeals ordered Fox to consider new evidence, and to examine all the evidence as a whole. On Sept. 17, 2012, in Wilmington, N.C., a crowd of familiar faces assembled for a new hearing. Jeffrey MacDonald, Joe McGinniss, prosecutor James Blackburn (who went to prison himself for defrauding his clients), Wade Smith and others newer to the case gathered once again to testify.
MacDonald now waits to see if the federal judge will vacate his 33-year-old conviction. He could get an answer by the end of this year...
See interview of Wade Smith...
Maybe Jeffrey MacDonald was innocent after all
In a rare interview, co-counsel Wade Smith reflects on the murder case that's long captured America's imagination
By Lynn Parramore, Alternet
Nov 30, 2012
AlterNet Remember the perceptual illusion where you look at a picture and you’re certain that you see the bust of a young woman? Then, if someone draws your attention to certain details, suddenly the picture transforms into the profile of an old woman. It’s a disorienting trick. You think you know what you’re seeing, but then you aren’t so sure.
The Jeffrey MacDonald murder case is one of the most disturbing in living memory. There are only two possible pictures, both nightmares.
Picture No. 1. Jeffrey MacDonald, a Princeton-educated Green Beret doctor with no history of violence and a sterling record, butchered his pregnant wife and two young daughters using a knife, ice pick and club. Then he injured himself and set up the scene to make the crimes appear to be the work of intruders. He claimed they chanted, “Kill the pigs! … Acid is groovy!” and scrawled the word “PIG” on the wall in his wife’s blood.
Picture No. 2. Jeffrey MacDonald, a bright young man with everything in life to look forward to, lost his wife and children to senseless, horrific violence. A military hearing found charges against him “untrue,” but he was convicted nine years later in a civilian trial. He has been imprisoned for three decades for a crime he did not commit.
Two possibilities: MacDonald is a monster, or he is a victim of terrible injustice. Young woman; old woman.
Until recently, most people saw Picture No. 1. So did I. I grew up in Raleigh, N.C., about an hour from the Fort Bragg army base in Fayetteville where the murders occurred on Feb. 17, 1970, in the middle of the night. I was born in May of that year, and would thus be the same age as the child Colette MacDonald was carrying when her life was snuffed out. In the early ’80s, I whipped through a dog-eared copy of “Fatal Vision,” Joe McGinniss’ sensational true-crime novel about the killings. It was almost as scary as ”Helter Skelter” – the story of the Charles Manson murders in California that are said to have inspired Jeffrey MacDonald in the coverup for his homicidal rampage.
In 1984 I was glued to the TV, like millions of other Americans, watching the popular miniseries based on McGinniss’ book. McGinniss made the murders sound like the work of a diabolical genius, a man who could transform in a moment from a loving father to a homicidal maniac, and again, in the blink of an eye, to a calculating con man. I thought of devils that lurked in human flesh, like in “The Exorcist,” another popular based-on-a true-story-book-turned-movie of the period that floated around our house. When the show was over, I retired to the safety of my bed, safe from unpredictable evils.
A Shifting Picture
McGinniss’ stark rendering of Picture No. 1 stuck in my mind until recently when a friend from North Carolina told me that Errol Morris had published a book suggesting MacDonald was innocent. That got my attention: the Oscar-winning Morris, whose film “The Thin Blue Line” exonerated a Texas man wrongfully convicted for murder, is one of the world’s great documentary filmmakers. He is both a careful researcher and a profound investigator of the human condition.
My friend and I sat around in her backyard, tossing up what facts about the case we could recall. I even laughed at the idea of hippie murderers in North Carolina. Of all places! But then I felt uneasy. “You sure Errol Morris wrote the book?” She was sure.
Soon I was reading Morris’ “A Wilderness of Error,” feeling skeptical and wondering why this reputable man would involve himself in a case that everyone and their mother (including mine) knew the truth about.
But it didn’t take long to realize that something was wrong. Enough somethings to fill the long, solitary chapters of a man’s life unfolding behind prison walls.
Morris researched the MacDonald case for 20 years and knows each labyrinthine turn of its progress through the criminal justice system. Even before bureaucratic stalling and federal machinery overtook the search for truth, things were working against Jeffrey MacDonald. A crime scene was left open to bystander traffic. Inexperienced military police failed to pick up a woman near the house who fit MacDonald’s description. Many think this woman could have been Helena Stoeckley, a drug abuser and professed member of a witchcraft cult who repeatedly confessed to having been at the MacDonald house the night of the murders, but recanted her story whenever she seemed to fear prosecution. Now deceased, she remains a pivotal figure in the case.
As I read Morris’ meticulous examination the evidence, the picture in my mind became less clear. I began to see that Joe McGinniss’ creation of Picture No. 1 might be just that: a creation. Some of the “facts” I thought I knew began to look more like ideas conjured by eager prosecutors and a journalist who had dealt so disingenuously with Jeffrey MacDonald in writing ”Fatal Vision” that he was sued after publication. McGinniss’ publisher settled with MacDonald out of court, after the judge called the author a “con man.” (This story, in its own right, became a famous book about journalistic ethics by Janet Malcolm.)
The story many of us think we know tells that MacDonald’s wounds were superficial. But he had multiple bruises and puncture wounds, and two stab wounds, including one that collapsed his lung — a serious injury that left him falling in and out of consciousness. The popular story says there was no evidence of intruders. But there was, including wax drippings (MacDonald insisted that one of the intruders carried a candle), fibers and hairs that did not belong to the household or family members.
McGinniss drew on pop-sociology to render an image of a psychopathic killer in the guise of the friendly doctor-next-door; the kind we know from endless horror movies. He theorized that diet pills caused MacDonald to fly into a fit of rage. McGinniss had to be creative, because the man’s character never fit the crime. MacDonald had no history of violence or temper. When the initial military hearing was conducted in 1970, no one in his life could be found who had a bad thing to say about him. Psychiatric professionals on both sides pronounced him incapable of having committed the crimes. On the evening of the murders, Jeffrey MacDonald had taken his kids to ride the pony he had bought them, fed them dinner while their mother took a night class, and put them to bed. It didn’t make sense.
But did hippie intruders make sense? Maybe more than I would have thought as a teen. Vietnam-era Fayetteville was not sleepy Raleigh in the 1980s. There was violence. Soldiers’ corpses arrived at Fort Bragg stuffed with heroin. In 1970 America was gripped by the horror of the Manson murders – a fact used against MacDonald because he subscribed to Esquire magazine, which had run a story about the dark side of hippie culture. The Esquire story, for all its salaciousness, touched upon real issues that plagued many communities outside of California. In Fayetteville, an Army town, strong tensions existed between Army types like Jeffrey MacDonald on one side of the war, and hippies and protesters on the other. Helena Stoeckley confessed many times that MacDonald’s willingness to turn heroin addicts in to the police infuriated local drug dealers. She knew this world, and was herself a police informant. According to her, they wanted to teach MacDonald a lesson and rough up his family the night of the killings. But things got out of hand.
In October 1970, following an investigation and hearing, the military dropped its case against MacDonald, and he was honorably discharged from the Army. He moved to California to become the director of emergency medicine at St. Mary’s Medical Center in Long Beach. But an unfortunate thing happened in the following years. MacDonald’s relationship with his father-in-law, originally a staunch supporter, became strained. Freddy Kassab had inserted himself into the 1970 military hearing and made himself the center of a media circus, holding news conferences and firing off letter to members of Congress. He wanted his son-in-law to stay on the East Coast and pursue the killers. Eventually, he turned on the man he had once so ardently defended. Through his aggressive pursuit of the case, MacDonald was indicted.
MacDonald was tried in a civilian court in 1979. Many felt that his acquittal would be a cinch, but much more was to go wrong. The nine-year lag between the murders and the trial is extremely unusual; experts consider such a lag to pose a great danger of wrongful conviction. Appearances didn’t help MacDonald, either. He looked angry on the stand. Worse still, Judge Franklin Dupree seemed to have his mind made up before the trial began. Some said he should never have taken the case because his former son-in-law was the prosecutor in the original Army hearing. Dupree would not admit overwhelming psychiatric testimony in MacDonald’s favor, nor the testimony of witnesses to whom Helena Stoeckley had confessed her involvement. Bernie Segal, a long-haired Jewish lawyer from Philadelphia, took the lead in the case and managed to alienate the entire courtroom. Segal took up nearly all the time in the critical period for closing remarks and left only a few minutes for co-counsel Wade Smith, an eloquent native Carolinian who understood the jury.
One thing about this case is never in doubt no matter who’s talking: If Wade Smith had been able to lead and give his closing remarks, MacDonald would be a free man today.
The list of misfortunes goes on: exculpatory evidence withheld; possible prosecutorial misconduct; and fallible humans who twisted the MacDonald story to fit their own agendas. MacDonald was convicted twice, both in the courtroom and in the all-important court of public opinion, which was sealed by McGinniss’ book and miniseries.
Since 1979, the MacDonald case has continued to trouble those who delve beneath the surface of the media narrative. The social justice movement is now involved; the Innocence Project, a prestigious nationwide network dedicated to exonerating the wrongfully convicted, has worked strenuously for MacDonald’s conviction to be overturned. In a 2011 press release, the Innocence Project stated:
Since MacDonald was convicted of the murders in 1979, considerable evidence of his innocence has come to light. Most recently, retired US Marshall Jimmy Britt came forward with information that another suspect in the case, Helena Stoeckley, admitted to the prosecutor that she was in the house on the night of MacDonald’s murder and that he treated to indict her for first degree murder if she admitted that in court. In addition, DNA testing on evidence that was recovered from the fingernails scrapings of one of the victims and a hair found under another victim did not match MacDonald. Earlier, evidence came to light that a FBI forensic examiner mislead the jury about synthetic hair evidence. MacDonald claimed the hairs were from the wig of one of the murders, but the forensic examiner incorrectly claimed they were from one of the children’s dolls.
None of this has set MacDonald free. By now, many members of the original hearing and 1979 trial are dead, including Judge Dupree. Judge James Fox, a close friend of Dupree’s and quite elderly himself, has taken over and has dismissed appeals. Recently, the 4th District Court of Appeals ordered Fox to consider new evidence, and to examine all the evidence as a whole. On Sept. 17, 2012, in Wilmington, N.C., a crowd of familiar faces assembled for a new hearing. Jeffrey MacDonald, Joe McGinniss, prosecutor James Blackburn (who went to prison himself for defrauding his clients), Wade Smith and others newer to the case gathered once again to testify.
MacDonald now waits to see if the federal judge will vacate his 33-year-old conviction. He could get an answer by the end of this year...
See interview of Wade Smith...
Wednesday, April 06, 2011
Muslims' unique love of violence?
Apr 4, 2011 19:05 ET
Primitive Muslims' unique love of violence
By Glenn Greenwald
Salon.com
University of Tennessee Law Professor Glenn "Instapundit" Reynolds, today, echoing so many by lamenting the compulsive violence of Muslims:
It’s hard to keep track of all the barbaric behavior emanating from that part of the world.
Glenn Reynolds, November 23, 2010, on his prescription for dealing with North Korea:
If they start anything, I say nuke ‘em. And not with just a few bombs. They’ve caused enough trouble -- and it would be a useful lesson for Iran, too.
Glenn Reynolds, November 4, 2006, on how to deal with the Muslim world:
It's also true that if democracy can't work in Iraq, then we should probably adopt a "more rubble, less trouble" approach to other countries in the region that threaten us.
Glenn Reynolds, February 13, 2007, on how to deal with Iran:
We should be responding quietly, killing radical mullahs and iranian atomic scientists . . .
Glenn Reynolds, September 11, 2001, on responding to the 9/11 attacks:
GEORGE BUSH IS NOW THE MOST POWERFUL MAN IN THE WORLD:. . . Now, if he wants to nuke Baghdad, there is nobody to say him nay -- and damned few who would want to...
Primitive Muslims' unique love of violence
By Glenn Greenwald
Salon.com
University of Tennessee Law Professor Glenn "Instapundit" Reynolds, today, echoing so many by lamenting the compulsive violence of Muslims:
It’s hard to keep track of all the barbaric behavior emanating from that part of the world.
Glenn Reynolds, November 23, 2010, on his prescription for dealing with North Korea:
If they start anything, I say nuke ‘em. And not with just a few bombs. They’ve caused enough trouble -- and it would be a useful lesson for Iran, too.
Glenn Reynolds, November 4, 2006, on how to deal with the Muslim world:
It's also true that if democracy can't work in Iraq, then we should probably adopt a "more rubble, less trouble" approach to other countries in the region that threaten us.
Glenn Reynolds, February 13, 2007, on how to deal with Iran:
We should be responding quietly, killing radical mullahs and iranian atomic scientists . . .
Glenn Reynolds, September 11, 2001, on responding to the 9/11 attacks:
GEORGE BUSH IS NOW THE MOST POWERFUL MAN IN THE WORLD:. . . Now, if he wants to nuke Baghdad, there is nobody to say him nay -- and damned few who would want to...
Sunday, January 30, 2011
Time is now for humane immigration reform
Employers both large and small like the low cost of immigrant workers. That's why the rules are being enforced only in a haphazard manner. But although the people in power want to keep immigrant labor, many of them do not want immigrants to stay and become part of American society. That's why we don't give documents to all the workers we want and need. We keep them in the shadows. Obviously, we should give documents to the workers we want and need. The other part of the equation is the government of Mexico, which operates for the benefit of the Mexican elite. It's no accident that the richest man in the world, Carlos Slim, is a Mexican. Mexico is using immigration to the US to relieve the political pressure that would normally build up in a brutally unequal society. I believe that both the US and Mexico need reform, and I would like to see activists addressing both problems. We should care about all our Mexican brothers and sisters, not just the ones who come to this country.
Time is now for humane immigration reform
By Enrique Morones
SDUT
January 30, 2011
The country is once again united, at least momentarily, as we mourn the recent violence in Arizona. It was so sad to see the rise in rhetoric that leads to a rise in violence. Racial profiling kills, as in the case of the 9-year-old girl killed in Arizona. The death of
Christina Taylor Green was tragic, but I am referring to Brisenia Flores. Never heard of her? Murdered in 2009 in Arizona, allegedly by Shawna Forde, an anti-immigration activist for the Federation for American Immigration Reform and a Minutemen member. Forde’s trial is currently under way in Tucson. Brisenia was murdered along with her father, Raul, because they were brown.
It was so sad to see the vile comments online in connection with this “Living in the shadows” project by some that oppose immigration reform, and the ignorance of their own family history as well as the history of this great country. Those in favor of humane immigration reform, 67 percent of the population according to a national Gallup poll, presented positions based on documented facts and sources.
We all agree that the immigration system in this country is broken. Let’s fix it. We all want secure borders. Let’s secure them. What this country needs is humane immigration reform. We want a pathway to legalization and civil discourse. To learn more about sources of information and/or myths versus realities on immigration, check our website: www.borderangels.org.
Societies are judged on how we treat our children. Christina Green and Brisenia Flores PRESENTE!
Humane immigration reform. Si se puede!
Morones is the founder and president of Border Angels, a nonprofit group that seeks to prevent the deaths of migrants crossing the Southwest border.
Time is now for humane immigration reform
By Enrique Morones
SDUT
January 30, 2011
The country is once again united, at least momentarily, as we mourn the recent violence in Arizona. It was so sad to see the rise in rhetoric that leads to a rise in violence. Racial profiling kills, as in the case of the 9-year-old girl killed in Arizona. The death of
Christina Taylor Green was tragic, but I am referring to Brisenia Flores. Never heard of her? Murdered in 2009 in Arizona, allegedly by Shawna Forde, an anti-immigration activist for the Federation for American Immigration Reform and a Minutemen member. Forde’s trial is currently under way in Tucson. Brisenia was murdered along with her father, Raul, because they were brown.
It was so sad to see the vile comments online in connection with this “Living in the shadows” project by some that oppose immigration reform, and the ignorance of their own family history as well as the history of this great country. Those in favor of humane immigration reform, 67 percent of the population according to a national Gallup poll, presented positions based on documented facts and sources.
We all agree that the immigration system in this country is broken. Let’s fix it. We all want secure borders. Let’s secure them. What this country needs is humane immigration reform. We want a pathway to legalization and civil discourse. To learn more about sources of information and/or myths versus realities on immigration, check our website: www.borderangels.org.
Societies are judged on how we treat our children. Christina Green and Brisenia Flores PRESENTE!
Humane immigration reform. Si se puede!
Morones is the founder and president of Border Angels, a nonprofit group that seeks to prevent the deaths of migrants crossing the Southwest border.
Wednesday, August 05, 2009
Pittsburg Fitness Center killer George Sodini wrote a blog
George Sodini's Blog, Full Text By Alleged Gym Shooter
Online Diary Apparently Kept by Alleged Pittsburgh-Area Health Club Killer
ABC News
August 5, 2009
A gunman walked into a Bridgeville, Pa., health club tonight, turned out the lights and opened fire, witnesses of the shocking attack said.The shooting left five people dead -- including the shooter, a law enforcement source told ABC News radio. Up to 15 others have been reported injured.
Following is text of a blog kept by George Sodini, the man suspected of opening fire in a Pittsburgh-area gym, killing three and injuring at least 15 others before apparently turning a gun on himself.
BLOG:
George Sodini
Age 48.
DOB 9/30/1960
DOD 8/4/2009
5-10, 155 lbs.
Never married.
...Tetelestai Church in Pittsburgh, PA - "Be Ye Holy, even as I have been Ye holy! Thus saith the lord thy God!", as pastor Rick Knapp would proclaim. Holy ----, religion is a waste. But this guy teaches (and convinced me) you can commit mass murder then still go to heaven. Ask him. Call him at [phone number]. If no answer there, he should still live at [address]. In any case, guilt and fear kept me there 13 long years until Nov 2006. I think his crap did the most damage. Their web site: http://www.tetelestai.org.
...Maybe soon, I will see God and Jesus. At least that is what I was told. Eternal life does NOT depend on works. If it did, we will all be in hell. Christ paid for EVERY sin, so how can I or you be judged BY GOD for a sin when the penalty was ALREADY paid. People judge but that does not matter. I was reading the Bible and The Integrity of God beginning yesterday, because soon I will see them...
RELATED STORY:
A powerful right-wing Christian group called the family, to which several prominent politicians belong, also twists the concept of predestination. The "Family" helped Senator John Ensign, Rep. Chip Pickering and Governor Mark Sanford with recent sex scandals.
The "Family" believes that if you're chosen, the rules don't apply
...David Coe, Doug Coe's son and heir apparent... Attempting to explain what it means to be chosen for leadership like King David was -- or Mark Sanford, according to his own estimate -- he asked a young man who'd put himself, body and soul, under the Family's authority, "Let's say I hear you raped three little girls. What would I think of you?" The man guessed that Coe would probably think that he was a monster. "No," answered Coe, "I wouldn't." Why? Because, as a member of the Family, he's among what Family leaders refer to as the "new chosen." If you're chosen, the normal rules don't apply...
Online Diary Apparently Kept by Alleged Pittsburgh-Area Health Club Killer
ABC News
August 5, 2009
A gunman walked into a Bridgeville, Pa., health club tonight, turned out the lights and opened fire, witnesses of the shocking attack said.The shooting left five people dead -- including the shooter, a law enforcement source told ABC News radio. Up to 15 others have been reported injured.
Following is text of a blog kept by George Sodini, the man suspected of opening fire in a Pittsburgh-area gym, killing three and injuring at least 15 others before apparently turning a gun on himself.
BLOG:
George Sodini
Age 48.
DOB 9/30/1960
DOD 8/4/2009
5-10, 155 lbs.
Never married.
...Tetelestai Church in Pittsburgh, PA - "Be Ye Holy, even as I have been Ye holy! Thus saith the lord thy God!", as pastor Rick Knapp would proclaim. Holy ----, religion is a waste. But this guy teaches (and convinced me) you can commit mass murder then still go to heaven. Ask him. Call him at [phone number]. If no answer there, he should still live at [address]. In any case, guilt and fear kept me there 13 long years until Nov 2006. I think his crap did the most damage. Their web site: http://www.tetelestai.org.
...Maybe soon, I will see God and Jesus. At least that is what I was told. Eternal life does NOT depend on works. If it did, we will all be in hell. Christ paid for EVERY sin, so how can I or you be judged BY GOD for a sin when the penalty was ALREADY paid. People judge but that does not matter. I was reading the Bible and The Integrity of God beginning yesterday, because soon I will see them...
RELATED STORY:
A powerful right-wing Christian group called the family, to which several prominent politicians belong, also twists the concept of predestination. The "Family" helped Senator John Ensign, Rep. Chip Pickering and Governor Mark Sanford with recent sex scandals.
The "Family" believes that if you're chosen, the rules don't apply
...David Coe, Doug Coe's son and heir apparent... Attempting to explain what it means to be chosen for leadership like King David was -- or Mark Sanford, according to his own estimate -- he asked a young man who'd put himself, body and soul, under the Family's authority, "Let's say I hear you raped three little girls. What would I think of you?" The man guessed that Coe would probably think that he was a monster. "No," answered Coe, "I wouldn't." Why? Because, as a member of the Family, he's among what Family leaders refer to as the "new chosen." If you're chosen, the normal rules don't apply...
Saturday, April 11, 2009
Granddaughter of pastor arrested for murder of 8-year-old in Tracy
Teacher Arrested in Cantu Murder
By TERRY COLLINS
AP
April 11, 2009
A Sunday school teacher was arrested on suspicion of kidnapping and killing 8-year-old Sandra Cantu, whose body was found in a suitcase in an irrigation pond.
Melissa Huckaby, 28, was arrested at 11:55 p.m. Friday, about five hours after she drove herself to the local police station at the request of officers, said police Sgt. Tony Sheneman.
Police have arrested a Sunday school teacher and pastor's daughter, Melissa Huckaby, 28, in the death of 8-year-old Sandra Cantu. The girl's body was found in a suitcase submerged in an irrigation pond on April 6. Sandra vanished on March 27...
Huckaby's family had been questioned at length during the investigation, and their home and vehicles had been searched, Sheneman said.
Huckaby was being held without bail at the San Joaquin County Jail, with arraignment set for Tuesday, according to the county sheriff's Web site...
Huckaby had previously told The Tracy Press that Sandra visited her home on the day of her disappearance to play with her 5-year-old daughter. But Huckaby said she'd turned Sandra away because her daughter needed to pick up her toys and Sandra went to another friend's home. Huckaby also said she had left her suitcase in the driveway that day, and that it was missing.
The Tracy Press reported that Huckaby was released Thursday from Sutter Tracy Community Hospital, where she spent several days in intensive care for what she described as "internal bleeding."
Huckaby is a granddaughter of Pastor Clifford Lawless, whose Clover Road Baptist Church was the subject of a police search. Huckaby taught Sunday school at the church and lived with Lawless in the Orchard Estates Mobile Home Park that also was Sandra's home...
By TERRY COLLINS
AP
April 11, 2009
A Sunday school teacher was arrested on suspicion of kidnapping and killing 8-year-old Sandra Cantu, whose body was found in a suitcase in an irrigation pond.
Melissa Huckaby, 28, was arrested at 11:55 p.m. Friday, about five hours after she drove herself to the local police station at the request of officers, said police Sgt. Tony Sheneman.
Police have arrested a Sunday school teacher and pastor's daughter, Melissa Huckaby, 28, in the death of 8-year-old Sandra Cantu. The girl's body was found in a suitcase submerged in an irrigation pond on April 6. Sandra vanished on March 27...
Huckaby's family had been questioned at length during the investigation, and their home and vehicles had been searched, Sheneman said.
Huckaby was being held without bail at the San Joaquin County Jail, with arraignment set for Tuesday, according to the county sheriff's Web site...
Huckaby had previously told The Tracy Press that Sandra visited her home on the day of her disappearance to play with her 5-year-old daughter. But Huckaby said she'd turned Sandra away because her daughter needed to pick up her toys and Sandra went to another friend's home. Huckaby also said she had left her suitcase in the driveway that day, and that it was missing.
The Tracy Press reported that Huckaby was released Thursday from Sutter Tracy Community Hospital, where she spent several days in intensive care for what she described as "internal bleeding."
Huckaby is a granddaughter of Pastor Clifford Lawless, whose Clover Road Baptist Church was the subject of a police search. Huckaby taught Sunday school at the church and lived with Lawless in the Orchard Estates Mobile Home Park that also was Sandra's home...
Monday, March 03, 2008
Going to church and being homeschooled doesn't mean a kid is on the right track
Yesterday, in the small town of Alba, Texas a 16-year-old girl killed her mother and two brothers, and tried to kill her father, because her family ordered her to break up with her boyfriend. The boyfriend and two other boys assisted in the murders.
Could this crime have been prevented?
Almost certainly.
The family clearly believed that evil comes from outside, and they were half-right in this case. Outsiders were definitely involved.
But there was also something destructive inside this girl that most likely came from her family, which provided both her environment and her heredity.
I suspect that the girl wasn't given the help she needed to deal with her anger, which may have been justified to some extent. It's quite possible she was abused by her family in some way.
People with rigid beliefs about right and wrong, who believe that they are very different from lesser mortals, often also believe in punishment as opposed to positive reinforcement to shape their children's behavior. They often think it is appropriate to use verbal abuse on a child, shaming her and frequently pointing out her spiritual unworthiness.
It probably would have been better to coach the girl on how to deal with the evil in the world, rather than merely trying to isolate her from the world.
Could this crime have been prevented?
Almost certainly.
The family clearly believed that evil comes from outside, and they were half-right in this case. Outsiders were definitely involved.
But there was also something destructive inside this girl that most likely came from her family, which provided both her environment and her heredity.
I suspect that the girl wasn't given the help she needed to deal with her anger, which may have been justified to some extent. It's quite possible she was abused by her family in some way.
People with rigid beliefs about right and wrong, who believe that they are very different from lesser mortals, often also believe in punishment as opposed to positive reinforcement to shape their children's behavior. They often think it is appropriate to use verbal abuse on a child, shaming her and frequently pointing out her spiritual unworthiness.
It probably would have been better to coach the girl on how to deal with the evil in the world, rather than merely trying to isolate her from the world.
Saturday, February 23, 2008
Gay Teen's Killing Labeled a Hate Crime
Gay Teen's Killing Labeled a Hate Crime
By REBECCA CATHCART
The New York Times
2008-02-23
OXNARD, Calif.
Hundreds of mourners gathered at a church here on Friday to remember an eighth-grade boy who was shot to death inside a junior high school computer lab by a fellow student in what prosecutors are calling a hate crime.
In recent weeks, the victim, Lawrence King, 15, had said publicly that he was gay, classmates said, enduring harassment from a group of schoolmates, including the 14-year-old boy charged in his death.
“God knit Larry together and made him wonderfully complex,” the Rev. Dan Birchfield of Westminster Presbyterian Church told the crowd as he stood in front of a large photograph of the victim. “Larry was a masterpiece.”
The shooting stunned residents of Oxnard, a laid-back middle-class beach community just north of Malibu. It also drew a strong reaction from gay and civil rights groups.
“We’ve never had school violence like this here before, never had a school shooting,” said David Keith, a spokesman for the Oxnard Police Department.
Les Winget, 44, whose daughter Nikki, 13, attends the school, called the crime “absolutely unbelievable.”
Jay Smith, executive director of the Ventura County Rainbow Alliance, where Lawrence took part in Friday night group activities for gay teenagers, said, “We’re all shocked that this would happen here.”
The gunman, identified by the police as Brandon McInerney, “is just as much a victim as Lawrence,” said Masen Davis, executive director of the Transgender Law Center. “He’s a victim of homophobia and hate.”
The law center is working with Equality California and the Gay-Straight Alliance to push for a legislative review of anti-bias policies and outreach efforts in California schools. According to the 2005 California Healthy Kids Survey, junior high school students in the state are 3 percent more likely to be harassed in school because of sexual orientation or gender identity than those in high school.
'He Was Always Smiling'
King's Friend Comments to MTV.com
That finding is representative of schools across the country, said Stephen Russell, a University of Arizona professor who studies the issues facing lesbian, gay, transgender and bisexual youth.
Mr. Davis said “more and more kids are coming out in junior high school and expressing gender different identities at younger ages.”
“Unfortunately,” he added, “society has not matured at the same rate.”
Prosecutors charged Brandon as an adult with murder as a premeditated hate crime and gun possession. If convicted, he faces a sentence of 52 years to life in prison.
A senior deputy district attorney, Maeve Fox, would not say why the authorities added the hate crime to the murder charge.
In interviews, classmates of the two boys at E. O. Green Junior High School said Lawrence had started wearing mascara, lipstick and jewelry to school, prompting a group of male students to bully him.
“They teased him because he was different,” said Marissa Moreno, 13, also in the eighth grade. “But he wasn’t afraid to show himself.”
Lawrence wore his favorite high-heeled boots most days, riding the bus to school from Casa Pacifica, a center for abused and neglected children in the foster care system, where he began living last fall. Officials would not say anything about his family background other than that his parents, Greg and Dawn King, were living and that he had four siblings. Lawrence started attending E. O. Green last winter, said Steven Elson, the center’s chief executive. “He had made connections here,” Dr. Elson said. “It’s just a huge trauma here. It’s emotionally very charged.”
Since the shooting, hundreds of people have sent messages to a memorial Web site where photographs show Lawrence as a child with a gap in his front teeth, and older, holding a caterpillar in the palm of his hand.
“He had a character that was bubbly,” Marissa said. “We would just laugh together. He would smile, then I would smile and then we couldn’t stop.”
On the morning of Feb. 12, Lawrence was in the school’s computer lab with 24 other students, said Mr. Keith, the police spokesman. Brandon walked into the room with a gun and shot Lawrence in the head, the police said, then ran from the building. Police officers caught him a few blocks away.
Unconscious when he arrived at the hospital, Lawrence was declared brain dead the next day but kept on a ventilator to preserve his organs for donation, said the Ventura County medical examiner, Armando Chavez. He was taken off life support on Feb. 14.
Brandon is being held at a juvenile facility in Ventura on $770,000 bail, said his lawyer, Brian Vogel. He will enter a plea on March 21.
At a vigil for Lawrence last week in Ventura, 200 people carried glow sticks and candles in paper cups as they walked down a boardwalk at the beach and stood under the stars. Melissa Castillo, 13, recalled the last time she had seen Lawrence. “He was walking through the lunch room, wearing these awesome boots,” she said. “I ran over to him and said, ‘Your boots are so cute!’ He was like, ‘Yeah, I know.’ ”
She raised her chin and arched an eyebrow in imitation. “ ‘If you want cute boots,’ ” Lawrence had told her, “ ‘you have to buy the expensive kind.’ ” His boots had cost $30.
“So, for Lawrence,” Melissa said to five girls holding pink and green glow sticks, “we have to go get the expensive kind.”
http://news.aol.com/story/_a/boys-killing-labeled-a-hate-crime/20080223141909990001?ncid=NWS00010000000001
By REBECCA CATHCART
The New York Times
2008-02-23
OXNARD, Calif.
Hundreds of mourners gathered at a church here on Friday to remember an eighth-grade boy who was shot to death inside a junior high school computer lab by a fellow student in what prosecutors are calling a hate crime.
In recent weeks, the victim, Lawrence King, 15, had said publicly that he was gay, classmates said, enduring harassment from a group of schoolmates, including the 14-year-old boy charged in his death.
“God knit Larry together and made him wonderfully complex,” the Rev. Dan Birchfield of Westminster Presbyterian Church told the crowd as he stood in front of a large photograph of the victim. “Larry was a masterpiece.”
The shooting stunned residents of Oxnard, a laid-back middle-class beach community just north of Malibu. It also drew a strong reaction from gay and civil rights groups.
“We’ve never had school violence like this here before, never had a school shooting,” said David Keith, a spokesman for the Oxnard Police Department.
Les Winget, 44, whose daughter Nikki, 13, attends the school, called the crime “absolutely unbelievable.”
Jay Smith, executive director of the Ventura County Rainbow Alliance, where Lawrence took part in Friday night group activities for gay teenagers, said, “We’re all shocked that this would happen here.”
The gunman, identified by the police as Brandon McInerney, “is just as much a victim as Lawrence,” said Masen Davis, executive director of the Transgender Law Center. “He’s a victim of homophobia and hate.”
The law center is working with Equality California and the Gay-Straight Alliance to push for a legislative review of anti-bias policies and outreach efforts in California schools. According to the 2005 California Healthy Kids Survey, junior high school students in the state are 3 percent more likely to be harassed in school because of sexual orientation or gender identity than those in high school.
'He Was Always Smiling'
King's Friend Comments to MTV.com
That finding is representative of schools across the country, said Stephen Russell, a University of Arizona professor who studies the issues facing lesbian, gay, transgender and bisexual youth.
Mr. Davis said “more and more kids are coming out in junior high school and expressing gender different identities at younger ages.”
“Unfortunately,” he added, “society has not matured at the same rate.”
Prosecutors charged Brandon as an adult with murder as a premeditated hate crime and gun possession. If convicted, he faces a sentence of 52 years to life in prison.
A senior deputy district attorney, Maeve Fox, would not say why the authorities added the hate crime to the murder charge.
In interviews, classmates of the two boys at E. O. Green Junior High School said Lawrence had started wearing mascara, lipstick and jewelry to school, prompting a group of male students to bully him.
“They teased him because he was different,” said Marissa Moreno, 13, also in the eighth grade. “But he wasn’t afraid to show himself.”
Lawrence wore his favorite high-heeled boots most days, riding the bus to school from Casa Pacifica, a center for abused and neglected children in the foster care system, where he began living last fall. Officials would not say anything about his family background other than that his parents, Greg and Dawn King, were living and that he had four siblings. Lawrence started attending E. O. Green last winter, said Steven Elson, the center’s chief executive. “He had made connections here,” Dr. Elson said. “It’s just a huge trauma here. It’s emotionally very charged.”
Since the shooting, hundreds of people have sent messages to a memorial Web site where photographs show Lawrence as a child with a gap in his front teeth, and older, holding a caterpillar in the palm of his hand.
“He had a character that was bubbly,” Marissa said. “We would just laugh together. He would smile, then I would smile and then we couldn’t stop.”
On the morning of Feb. 12, Lawrence was in the school’s computer lab with 24 other students, said Mr. Keith, the police spokesman. Brandon walked into the room with a gun and shot Lawrence in the head, the police said, then ran from the building. Police officers caught him a few blocks away.
Unconscious when he arrived at the hospital, Lawrence was declared brain dead the next day but kept on a ventilator to preserve his organs for donation, said the Ventura County medical examiner, Armando Chavez. He was taken off life support on Feb. 14.
Brandon is being held at a juvenile facility in Ventura on $770,000 bail, said his lawyer, Brian Vogel. He will enter a plea on March 21.
At a vigil for Lawrence last week in Ventura, 200 people carried glow sticks and candles in paper cups as they walked down a boardwalk at the beach and stood under the stars. Melissa Castillo, 13, recalled the last time she had seen Lawrence. “He was walking through the lunch room, wearing these awesome boots,” she said. “I ran over to him and said, ‘Your boots are so cute!’ He was like, ‘Yeah, I know.’ ”
She raised her chin and arched an eyebrow in imitation. “ ‘If you want cute boots,’ ” Lawrence had told her, “ ‘you have to buy the expensive kind.’ ” His boots had cost $30.
“So, for Lawrence,” Melissa said to five girls holding pink and green glow sticks, “we have to go get the expensive kind.”
http://news.aol.com/story/_a/boys-killing-labeled-a-hate-crime/20080223141909990001?ncid=NWS00010000000001
Tuesday, February 12, 2008
13-year-old killed his favorite teacher
Teen guilty of second-degree murder in teacher killing
May 16, 2001
Nathaniel Brazill is convicted of second-degree murder, and now faces a sentence between 25 years and life.
CNN's Mark Potter reports
WEST PALM BEACH, Florida (CNN) -- A jury Wednesday found 14-year-old Nathaniel Brazill guilty of second-degree murder for killing his middle school English teacher last May.
The verdict was a lesser charge than first-degree murder, which was sought by the prosecution and would have carried a mandatory sentence of life in prison without the possibility of parole.
The jury of nine women and three men, many of them parents, had deliberated since Monday afternoon.
Brazill's attorneys conceded that he shot and killed Barry Grunow, a popular language arts teacher, on May 26 last year, but they insisted it was an accident. Brazill was 13 years old at the time of the shooting.
The teen had a quizzical look on his face when the verdict was read in the hushed courtroom. His attorney, Robert Udell, placed his head on Brazill's left shoulder and closed his eyes.
Udell said his client turned to him and said, "Not too bad," after the verdict was read.
A second-degree murder charge -- which means jurors believed the shooting was spur of the moment and not premeditated -- carries a minimum 25-year prison term up to life in prison. Brazill was also found guilty of aggravated assault for pointing the gun at another teacher as he fled the scene.
But Kurt Grunow, the slain teacher's brother, said he was "very disappointed" with Brazill's conviction on the reduced charge.
"If you want to say you're not going convict him because of his age, that's one thing. But it's clearly first-degree murder," Grunow said. "He said he was going to do it, and he went back and did it."
A sentencing hearing was scheduled for June 29 at 8:30 a.m. EDT.
Brazill's attorneys said that the judge has a lot of discretion in deciding the teen's sentence.
"I think the judge has leeway from zero time in prison to life," Udell said.
Udell said he had mixed emotions because he felt a manslaughter verdict was merited. But he was pleased a first-degree verdict was not returned.
"Apparently, (the jury) believed Nathaniel that he didn't go to school with the intent to assault and/or kill Mr. Grunow," he said. "We won a little battle today."
"I agree that it was a fair verdict. Let's see if we get a fair sentence," Udell said.
Prosecutors said the jury did a good job and delivered a "just verdict."
During the trial, the teen testified that he pointed the gun at Grunow because he would not let him speak to two girls in his class. Brazill, who was sent home earlier that day for a water balloon fight, testified that he cocked the .25 caliber pistol because he wanted Grunow to take him seriously, and the weapon went off. He said he thought the safety was on.
Prosecutors argued that Brazill brought the gun to school because he was angry about being suspended by another teacher for throwing water balloons. They said he was also upset because he was failing Grunow's class.
In his closing argument, assistant State Attorney Marc Shiner repeated his opening statement that a "storm was brewing" inside Nathaniel Brazill the day of the shooting last year.
Kurt Grunow said he was "very disappointed" with Brazill's conviction on the reduced charge
"This is first-degree murder anyway you look at it," he said. "You don't point a gun at someone and when it goes off ... call it an accident."
Prosecutors called a number of students who saw the shooting and a girl who said he made death threats just hours before the shooting. The most dramatic testimony came from Brazill himself during two days on the stand last week.
At one point, he clutched the handgun used in the shooting, showed jurors how he cocked the weapon and put a bullet in the chamber.
Brazill showed little emotion during his testimony, but shed tears when asked if Grunow took him seriously "after you shot him."
Brazill said he pulled the slide back on the gun to cock it and told the teacher to get out of his way.
"I was aiming at his head."
"Where did you hit him?" Shiner asked.
"In the head."
"Did he take you seriously after you shot him?"
Brazill did not respond.
"What did Mr. Grunow do when he fell to the ground?"
After a long pause and with tears welling up in his eyes, Brazill said, "What do you think he did?"
Udell, Brazill's defense attorney, told the jury during his closing arguments that Brazill was morally responsible for the shooting.
"We never said and I will not tell you that Nathaniel is not responsible for what happened here. His parents aren't at fault, the school is not at fault, the gun is not at fault. Nathaniel is at fault and only Nathaniel is at fault," Udell said in his summary statements.
He said Grunow was Brazill's favorite teacher, and that the teen did not intend to hurt him.
Udell urged the jury to consider Brazill's age.
"Any of you who have dealt with 13 year olds, or have one, know that they get stupid on us," Udell said.
One of the key pieces of evidence in the case was a videotape of the shooting from the school's security system.
The tape shows Brazill pointing the handgun at Grunow for about 11 seconds before cocking the weapon and then shooting the teacher. The tape also showed Brazill pointing the gun at another teacher as he ran away.
Jurors also saw Brazill make a videotaped confession to police after he was arrested.
http://archives.cnn.com/2001/LAW/05/16/teacher.shooting.04/index.html
May 16, 2001
Nathaniel Brazill is convicted of second-degree murder, and now faces a sentence between 25 years and life.
CNN's Mark Potter reports
WEST PALM BEACH, Florida (CNN) -- A jury Wednesday found 14-year-old Nathaniel Brazill guilty of second-degree murder for killing his middle school English teacher last May.
The verdict was a lesser charge than first-degree murder, which was sought by the prosecution and would have carried a mandatory sentence of life in prison without the possibility of parole.
The jury of nine women and three men, many of them parents, had deliberated since Monday afternoon.
Brazill's attorneys conceded that he shot and killed Barry Grunow, a popular language arts teacher, on May 26 last year, but they insisted it was an accident. Brazill was 13 years old at the time of the shooting.
The teen had a quizzical look on his face when the verdict was read in the hushed courtroom. His attorney, Robert Udell, placed his head on Brazill's left shoulder and closed his eyes.
Udell said his client turned to him and said, "Not too bad," after the verdict was read.
A second-degree murder charge -- which means jurors believed the shooting was spur of the moment and not premeditated -- carries a minimum 25-year prison term up to life in prison. Brazill was also found guilty of aggravated assault for pointing the gun at another teacher as he fled the scene.
But Kurt Grunow, the slain teacher's brother, said he was "very disappointed" with Brazill's conviction on the reduced charge.
"If you want to say you're not going convict him because of his age, that's one thing. But it's clearly first-degree murder," Grunow said. "He said he was going to do it, and he went back and did it."
A sentencing hearing was scheduled for June 29 at 8:30 a.m. EDT.
Brazill's attorneys said that the judge has a lot of discretion in deciding the teen's sentence.
"I think the judge has leeway from zero time in prison to life," Udell said.
Udell said he had mixed emotions because he felt a manslaughter verdict was merited. But he was pleased a first-degree verdict was not returned.
"Apparently, (the jury) believed Nathaniel that he didn't go to school with the intent to assault and/or kill Mr. Grunow," he said. "We won a little battle today."
"I agree that it was a fair verdict. Let's see if we get a fair sentence," Udell said.
Prosecutors said the jury did a good job and delivered a "just verdict."
During the trial, the teen testified that he pointed the gun at Grunow because he would not let him speak to two girls in his class. Brazill, who was sent home earlier that day for a water balloon fight, testified that he cocked the .25 caliber pistol because he wanted Grunow to take him seriously, and the weapon went off. He said he thought the safety was on.
Prosecutors argued that Brazill brought the gun to school because he was angry about being suspended by another teacher for throwing water balloons. They said he was also upset because he was failing Grunow's class.
In his closing argument, assistant State Attorney Marc Shiner repeated his opening statement that a "storm was brewing" inside Nathaniel Brazill the day of the shooting last year.
Kurt Grunow said he was "very disappointed" with Brazill's conviction on the reduced charge
"This is first-degree murder anyway you look at it," he said. "You don't point a gun at someone and when it goes off ... call it an accident."
Prosecutors called a number of students who saw the shooting and a girl who said he made death threats just hours before the shooting. The most dramatic testimony came from Brazill himself during two days on the stand last week.
At one point, he clutched the handgun used in the shooting, showed jurors how he cocked the weapon and put a bullet in the chamber.
Brazill showed little emotion during his testimony, but shed tears when asked if Grunow took him seriously "after you shot him."
Brazill said he pulled the slide back on the gun to cock it and told the teacher to get out of his way.
"I was aiming at his head."
"Where did you hit him?" Shiner asked.
"In the head."
"Did he take you seriously after you shot him?"
Brazill did not respond.
"What did Mr. Grunow do when he fell to the ground?"
After a long pause and with tears welling up in his eyes, Brazill said, "What do you think he did?"
Udell, Brazill's defense attorney, told the jury during his closing arguments that Brazill was morally responsible for the shooting.
"We never said and I will not tell you that Nathaniel is not responsible for what happened here. His parents aren't at fault, the school is not at fault, the gun is not at fault. Nathaniel is at fault and only Nathaniel is at fault," Udell said in his summary statements.
He said Grunow was Brazill's favorite teacher, and that the teen did not intend to hurt him.
Udell urged the jury to consider Brazill's age.
"Any of you who have dealt with 13 year olds, or have one, know that they get stupid on us," Udell said.
One of the key pieces of evidence in the case was a videotape of the shooting from the school's security system.
The tape shows Brazill pointing the handgun at Grunow for about 11 seconds before cocking the weapon and then shooting the teacher. The tape also showed Brazill pointing the gun at another teacher as he ran away.
Jurors also saw Brazill make a videotaped confession to police after he was arrested.
http://archives.cnn.com/2001/LAW/05/16/teacher.shooting.04/index.html
Tuesday, December 25, 2007
Tragedy, recklessness on all sides
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/23/AR2007122302551.html?tid=informbox
Jury Convicts Black Man in Shooting Death of White Teen
Long Island Case Involved Questions of Race, Recklessness
Washington Post
By Frank Eltman
Associated Press
December 24, 2007
RIVERHEAD, N.Y. -- A black man who invoked images of lynch mobs in explaining why he killed a white teenager has been convicted of second-degree manslaughter because a jury rejected defense lawyers' arguments that his actions were justified.
Jurors reached a verdict Saturday night after four days of deliberations and an emotional three-week trial that flared around questions of race and recklessness.
The defendant, John White, raised the nation's history of racist violence in describing why he brandished a gun at a group of angry white teenagers who came to his house on Aug. 9, 2006. White ultimately shot Daniel Cicciaro, 17, in what he said was an accident but a prosecutor said was the result of poor judgment.
Saying White plans to appeal, defense lawyer Fred Brewington called the verdict "disappointing for African Americans" in the area.
"You have to survive in Suffolk County, where people can roll up on your house at 11:30 at night, threaten you, threaten your family, curse at you, call you a [N-word], and you've got to take it," he said.
But the slain teenager's mother, Joanne Cicciaro, said the case "was never about race. It was about individuals and individuals' actions."
White, 54, remains free on bail until sentencing, when he faces a prison term of five to 15 years. White was also convicted of a weapons-possession misdemeanor that carries a penalty of two to seven years in prison; it would probably run concurrently with the other sentence.
The verdict came after a 12-hour deliberation session in which jurors said they were deadlocked -- as they briefly had the day before. The judge told them about 8:15 p.m. Saturday to keep deliberating, and notice of the verdict came about 45 minutes later. Jurors declined to comment.
Outside the courtroom, the Cicciaro family's supporters chanted "Dan-O! Dan-O!" and honked their horns as they drove away. Several supporters had the teenager's nickname, "Dano Jr.," tattooed on their bodies.
"My son is finally vindicated," Joanne Cicciaro said. "The truth prevailed."
The shooting happened outside White's home in Miller Place, a predominantly white community on eastern Long Island. His 19-year-old son, Aaron, had awakened him around 11 p.m. to say that he had been feuding with other teenagers after being asked to leave a party and that several of them were headed to the Whites' house for a confrontation.
John White grabbed a shotgun, then opted for a pistol he had hidden in the garage. He and his son, who picked up the shotgun, went down the driveway to confront the group in the street.
"He wanted to stop these people who said they were coming to kill his son," Brewington said in closing arguments.
White contended that the gun fired accidentally when Cicciaro lunged for it.
Suffolk County Assistant District Attorney James Chalifoux said White should have locked the door and called police, rather than going outside to confront the unarmed teenagers with a gun.
Chalifoux also sought to play down the racial element, telling jurors that the Brooklyn-raised White never said anything about a lynch mob until the case went to trial. The prosecutor noted that the Ku Klux Klan attack on White's grandfather occurred 30 years before White was born.
He quoted White on the night he was arrested as telling police: "I did what I had to do. You might as well put the cuffs on now. This is the end of me."
After the verdict was read, Dan Cicciaro Sr. defended his son. "Maybe now they'll stop slinging my son's name and stop accusing him of all this racism," he said.
Jury Convicts Black Man in Shooting Death of White Teen
Long Island Case Involved Questions of Race, Recklessness
Washington Post
By Frank Eltman
Associated Press
December 24, 2007
RIVERHEAD, N.Y. -- A black man who invoked images of lynch mobs in explaining why he killed a white teenager has been convicted of second-degree manslaughter because a jury rejected defense lawyers' arguments that his actions were justified.
Jurors reached a verdict Saturday night after four days of deliberations and an emotional three-week trial that flared around questions of race and recklessness.
The defendant, John White, raised the nation's history of racist violence in describing why he brandished a gun at a group of angry white teenagers who came to his house on Aug. 9, 2006. White ultimately shot Daniel Cicciaro, 17, in what he said was an accident but a prosecutor said was the result of poor judgment.
Saying White plans to appeal, defense lawyer Fred Brewington called the verdict "disappointing for African Americans" in the area.
"You have to survive in Suffolk County, where people can roll up on your house at 11:30 at night, threaten you, threaten your family, curse at you, call you a [N-word], and you've got to take it," he said.
But the slain teenager's mother, Joanne Cicciaro, said the case "was never about race. It was about individuals and individuals' actions."
White, 54, remains free on bail until sentencing, when he faces a prison term of five to 15 years. White was also convicted of a weapons-possession misdemeanor that carries a penalty of two to seven years in prison; it would probably run concurrently with the other sentence.
The verdict came after a 12-hour deliberation session in which jurors said they were deadlocked -- as they briefly had the day before. The judge told them about 8:15 p.m. Saturday to keep deliberating, and notice of the verdict came about 45 minutes later. Jurors declined to comment.
Outside the courtroom, the Cicciaro family's supporters chanted "Dan-O! Dan-O!" and honked their horns as they drove away. Several supporters had the teenager's nickname, "Dano Jr.," tattooed on their bodies.
"My son is finally vindicated," Joanne Cicciaro said. "The truth prevailed."
The shooting happened outside White's home in Miller Place, a predominantly white community on eastern Long Island. His 19-year-old son, Aaron, had awakened him around 11 p.m. to say that he had been feuding with other teenagers after being asked to leave a party and that several of them were headed to the Whites' house for a confrontation.
John White grabbed a shotgun, then opted for a pistol he had hidden in the garage. He and his son, who picked up the shotgun, went down the driveway to confront the group in the street.
"He wanted to stop these people who said they were coming to kill his son," Brewington said in closing arguments.
White contended that the gun fired accidentally when Cicciaro lunged for it.
Suffolk County Assistant District Attorney James Chalifoux said White should have locked the door and called police, rather than going outside to confront the unarmed teenagers with a gun.
Chalifoux also sought to play down the racial element, telling jurors that the Brooklyn-raised White never said anything about a lynch mob until the case went to trial. The prosecutor noted that the Ku Klux Klan attack on White's grandfather occurred 30 years before White was born.
He quoted White on the night he was arrested as telling police: "I did what I had to do. You might as well put the cuffs on now. This is the end of me."
After the verdict was read, Dan Cicciaro Sr. defended his son. "Maybe now they'll stop slinging my son's name and stop accusing him of all this racism," he said.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)