Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

How four accused African-American men came to use the white supremacists' flesh-and-blood defense

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
BurtWorm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-16-08 11:29 AM
Original message
How four accused African-American men came to use the white supremacists' flesh-and-blood defense
Edited on Wed Jul-16-08 11:29 AM by BurtWorm
This is an amazing story, the whole thing a must-read. It raises fascinating questions about the very fundamental mistrust of the judicial system by those who believe the government itself is unjust--or who will do anything to keep justice at bay:

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2008/0805.carey.html

...

Like the Midwestern farmers before them, the Baltimore inmates were susceptible to the notion that the federal government was engaged in a massive, historic plot to deprive them of life, liberty, and property. Such suspicions are prevalent in certain pockets of the black community—that year, a study from the Rand Corporation found that over 25 percent of African Americans surveyed believed the AIDS virus was developed by the government, and 12 percent thought it was released into the population by the CIA. And black separatist groups like the Nation of Islam—also fond of conspiracy theories—have long cultivated members through the prison system; some of these groups have explicitly adopted the language of constitutional fundamentalists. Given these developments, Levitas told me, “I’m surprised this didn’t happen sooner.”

This, then, was how Willie Mitchell came to draw on the accumulated layers of three decades of right-wing paranoia and demand that his case be dismissed “in accord with … House Joint Resolution 192, and Public Law 73-10”—laws that involved the abandonment of the gold standard and the Federal Reserve. And it explained why Shawn Gardner kept insisting that he be addressed as “Shawn-Earl: Gardner,” rather than the capital-letter SHAWN GARDNER printed on the indictment: he thought that if he could convince the court to call him by his “natural” name, it would be tantamount to admitting that the charges had been filed against someone else.

On the morning of January 10, 2006, two months after the first flesh-and-blood hearing, Gardner returned to Judge Davis’s courtroom. Moments after Davis arrived, Gardner stood up. “I object,” he said, over and over, until Judge Davis had finally had enough. “Do you know what you’re doing?” he asked Gardner. “You are committing suicide in broad daylight. There are public suicides in this country far too often. People jump off the Golden Gate Bridge, the Brooklyn Bridge. People walk into their workplaces with a gun and put the gun up to their head and pull the trigger. People slash their wrists. I don’t want you to join that community, but that’s what you’re doing, sir.”

Gardner tried to argue that the court had no power over him under “common law.” “At common law,” Judge Davis replied, “you were property. You were bought and sold just like those Timberlands on your feet today can be bought and sold. That’s what your ancestors were, some of them, and that is what my ancestors were, some of them.”

“You have invoked ideas formulated and advanced by people who think less of you than they think of dirt,” Davis continued. “The extremists who have concocted these ideas that you are now advancing in this courtroom are laughing their heads off. You are giving them everything they ever wished for. They should be paying you to do what you are doing. They are going to make you the poster child for their movement. When you complete this suicide, they will honor you because you are doing their work, better and more effectively than any of them ever dreamed they could do. Some of them—” “I object,” said Gardner, interrupting. “The government wants to do the same thing anyway. So what’s the difference?”

Gardner, unrepentant, was escorted from the courtroom. And so the tenets of Posse Comitatus continued their long, strange journey, from the racist, hate-filled mind of William Gale to four black defendants on trial for their life in Baltimore federal court.


...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
BurtWorm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-16-08 12:00 PM
Response to Original message
1. kick
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BurtWorm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-16-08 01:15 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. kick
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MsTryska Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-16-08 01:35 PM
Response to Original message
3. Really interesting article
One question tho...has this flesh-and-blood defense every actually worked?

if not seems like pure insanity to use it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BurtWorm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-16-08 01:53 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. Apparently not. After all, the government is the one with the monopoly on power.
When you get down to it being a question between your individual authority (or the county sheriff's) vs. the federal government's, it's nor too difficult to guess who's going to win the debate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MsTryska Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-16-08 02:02 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. Bless.
While I certainly hold some sympathy for state's rightists, this is just way too off the mark for me. And then to take that ideology and try to get out of a murder rap? twisted.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue_Tires Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-16-08 02:28 PM
Response to Original message
6. well researched, well written piece
nothing like the little-bit-of-knowledge jailhouse-educated legal whiz who thinks he knows all the angles...another racket for prisoners already serving terms have is to do whatever possible (stall, obstruct, go into lengthy, nonsense speeches) to keep the trial going at a sloth's pace -- The worst day in a courtroom is better than the best day in prison (especially if you are going to be there the rest of your life).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BronxBoy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-16-08 02:56 PM
Response to Original message
7. Wow
Great article. Aside from the irony of using a legal tactic born of a racist ideology these guys were stone cold, remorseful killers.

And is it me or is it incomprehensible that you would go to a drug deal and let the other party sit in the back seat of your car?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BurtWorm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-16-08 08:40 PM
Response to Reply #7
8. Seems a little ill-considered.
;)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 26th 2024, 08:50 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC