[Vision2020] Rick Perry's Newest Problem

[Ted Moffett]

Thanks for this very thoughtful commentary, j. Whitney...

On the subject of racism, also the death penalty, and the egregious
flaws in our so called justice system, the following story makes me
literally feel sick... There is something horrendously fundamentally
systemically wrong with a society that would with full cold blooded
pre-meditation use the power of the state to commit such an
unthinkable horror!

http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-679368?ref=feeds%2Flatest

He was 14 yrs. 6mos. and 5 days old --- and the youngest person
executed in the United States in the 20th Century

George Junius Stinney, Jr.,
[b. 1929 - d. 1944]

In a South Carolina prison sixty-six years ago, guards walked a
14-year-old boy, bible tucked under his arm, to the electric chair. At
5' 1" and 95 pounds, the straps didn’t fit, and an electrode was too
big for his leg.

The switch was pulled and the adult sized death mask fell from George
Stinney’s face. Tears streamed from his eyes. Witnesses recoiled in
horror as they watched the youngest person executed in the United
States in the past century die.

Now, a community activist is fighting to clear Stinney’s name, saying
the young boy couldn’t have killed two girls. George Frierson, a
school board member and textile inspector, believes Stinney’s
confession was coerced, and that his execution was just another
injustice blacks suffered in Southern courtrooms in the first half of
the 1900s.

In a couple of cases like Stinney’s, petitions are being made before
parole boards and courts are being asked to overturn decisions made
when society’s thumb was weighing the scales of justice against
blacks. These requests are buoyed for the first time in generations by
money, college degrees and sometimes clout.

“I hope we see more cases like this because it help brings a sense of
closure. It’s symbolic,” said Howard University law professor Frank
Wu. “It’s not just important for the individuals and their families.
It’s important for the entire community. Not just for African
Americans, but for whites and for our democracy as a whole. What these
cases show is that it is possible to achieve justice.”

Some have already achieved justice. Earlier this year, syndicated
radio host Tom Joyner successfully won a posthumous pardon for two
great uncles who were executed in South Carolina.

A few years ago Lena Baker, a black Georgia maid sent to the electric
chair for killing a white man, received a pardon after her family
pointed out she likely killed the man because he was holding her
against her will.

In the Stinney case, supporters want the state to admit that officials
executed the wrong person in June 1944.

Stinney was accused of killing two white girls, 11 year old Betty June
Binnicker and 8 year old

Mary Emma Thames, by beating them with a railroad spike then dragging
their bodies to a ditch near Acolu, about five miles from Manning in
central South Carolina. The girls were found a day after they
disappeared following a massive manhunt. Stinney was arrested a few
hours later, white men in suits taking him away. Because of the risk
of a lynching, Stinney was kept at a jail 50 miles away in Columbia.

Stinney’s father, who had helped look for the girls, was fired
immediately and ordered to leave his home and the sawmill where he
worked. His family was told to leave town prior to the trial to avoid
further retribution. An atmosphere of lynch mob hysteria hung over the
courthouse. Without family visits, the 14 year old had to endure the
trial and death alone.

Frierson hasn’t been able to get the case out of his head since,
carrying around a thick binder of old newspaper stories and documents,
including an account from an execution witness.

The sheriff at the time said Stinney admitted to the killings, but
there is only his word — no written record of the confession has been
found. A lawyer helping Frierson with the case figures threats of mob
violence and not being able to see his parents rattled the seventh-
grader.

Attorney Steve McKenzie said he has even heard one account that says
detectives offered the boy ice cream once they were done.

“You’ve got to know he was going to say whatever they wanted him to
say,” McKenzie said.

The court appointed Stinney an attorney — a tax commissioner preparing
for a Statehouse run. In all, the trial — from jury selection to a
sentence of death — lasted one day. Records indicate 1,000 people
crammed the courthouse. Blacks weren’t allowed inside.

The defense called no witnesses and never filed an appeal. No one
challenged the sheriff’s recollection of the confession.

“As an attorney, it just kind of haunted me, just the way the judicial
system worked to this boy’s disadvantage or disfavor. It did not
protect him,” said McKenzie, who is preparing court papers to ask a
judge to reopen the case.

Stinney’s official court record contains less than two dozen pages,
several of them arrest warrants. There is no transcript of the trial.

The lack of records, while not unusual, makes it harder for people
trying to get these old convictions overturned, Wu said.

But these old cases also can have a common thread.

“Some of these cases are so egregious, so extreme that when you look
at it, the prosecution really has no case either,” Wu said. “It’s
apparent from what you can see that someone was railroaded.”

And sometimes, police under pressure by frightened citizens jumped to
conclusions rather than conducting a thorough investigation, Wu said.
------------------------------------------
Vision2020 Post: Ted Moffett

On 10/4/11, j Whitney <jenwhitney at gmail.com> wrote:

> The difference is that our national, state, and city governments are meant
> to be impartial establishments that serve the people--all the people.  It
> should be an educated venue that does not perpetuate harmful and inaccurate
> beliefs/stereotypes, let alone to an entire race of people.   By allowing
> those place names (of gov't owned land, not privately owned) to remain, our
> governments are showing that they endorse the discrimination and harm
> against the people who are impacted by it, and in doing so, are teaching our
> children and the next generation that this is an acceptable policy as a
> nation.  Place names and mascots are something that impacts everyone because
> of their very public nature, therefore they should remain
> non-discriminatory.
>
> Yes, each person has the right to read, say, and think any offensive thing
> they wish.  A book that has offensive content, even to a wide majority of
> people, is still acceptable, and owning such a book is a right to each of
> us.  Those who are offended by that book could choose not to read it or not
> support it with their purchase.  You could say, though, that people could
> just avoid attending games with offensive mascot names or not visit or talk
> about places with offensive titles, but the difference is that the book was
> not printed by the government, nor is it a widely used social icon.  Once a
> name, item, idea, person reaches a large enough level in society, it has
> greater influence over those who live in that society, therefore, there is a
> greater responsibility that those things not outright harm, marginalize, or
> malign entire sections of the population, and should certainly not then
> receive government acceptance.
>
> Rick Perry now falls into this category on some level.  Whether he changes
> the name of his family land or not, is ultimately his choice, as his land is
> NOT a societal icon or location, but the fact that HE sees no problem with a
> name that is harmful is concerning, since he aims to represent the entire
> nation.  Would he then decide to ignore harm caused to others because he
> himself is not impacted?  Government approved/endorsed names are an aspect
> of society that perpetuates the disadvantage of discrimination on a
> structural level, and should be addressed.  Structural discrimination is
> particularly insidious because it becomes an unconscious part of people's
> beliefs about the world and the people in it, leading to disadvantages for
> those it targets.  If we could remove the structural disadvantages to
> minority groups in our society that hinder opportunities and access to
> resources for everyone, we'd have less people needing government support
> just to live.  Removing or changing the items that prevent others from
> succeeding would help us all!
>
>
> On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 7:29 AM, Paul Rumelhart <godshatter at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> **
>> Of course I'm not saying that they shouldn't be offended or insulted.  I'm
>> saying that shouldn't be enough to force the people who named the place to
>> have to change it, either through the law or through social pressure.
>> Can't
>> we live in a world that has things others find offensive?  People fight to
>> keep books containing material that others find offensive from being
>> banned,
>> why is it different with mascots or place names?
>>
>> Paul
>>
>>
>