tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5592542.post1957596945671911039..comments2024-03-18T17:28:44.693-07:00Comments on Rondam Ramblings: Battling racism in a free societyRonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11752242624438232184noreply@blogger.comBlogger13125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5592542.post-25296365293776415242017-11-14T18:24:17.156-08:002017-11-14T18:24:17.156-08:00> you apparently are unaware of the case law
W...> you apparently are unaware of the case law<br /><br />What? The Supreme Court has interpreted a fundamental right out of all recognition? I'm shocked, yes, shocked! :-)<br /><br />Two points about that case, though. First, it's Federal law, not State law, since the defendant was a member of the military and it was Naval investigators who did the interrogation. So different rules of Peter Donishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09122769947782402203noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5592542.post-86454031021441037242017-11-14T15:03:50.434-08:002017-11-14T15:03:50.434-08:00> Are you saying it's OK for judges to just...> Are you saying it's OK for judges to just ignore the law and the rules of criminal procedure and the rights of the defendant, as long as they don't do so in a racist manner?<br /><br />No, of course not. But you apparently are unaware of the case law:<br /><br />https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Davis_v._United_States_(1994)<br />Ronhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11752242624438232184noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5592542.post-89550719179725991292017-11-14T14:44:29.365-08:002017-11-14T14:44:29.365-08:00> That would be great, but that's not the w...> That would be great, but that's not the world we live in.<br /><br />I'm confused about your position. Are you saying it's OK for judges to just ignore the law and the rules of criminal procedure and the rights of the defendant, as long as they don't do so in a racist manner?<br /><br />Furthermore, in this case it's actually the law that the defendant getting a lawyer isPeter Donishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09122769947782402203noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5592542.post-64872677642561506812017-11-14T14:26:47.276-08:002017-11-14T14:26:47.276-08:00> Having a defendant represented by a lawyer sh...> Having a defendant represented by a lawyer should be the default.<br /><br />That would be great, but that's not the world we live in.<br />Ronhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11752242624438232184noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5592542.post-38944842040913991242017-11-13T22:11:24.160-08:002017-11-13T22:11:24.160-08:00@Ron:
> It's entirely possible that Justice...@Ron:<br />> It's entirely possible that Justice Crichton has never in his life heard the word "dawg" and had no idea what it means. That is no small part of the problem.<br /><br />No, it isn't, it's irrelevant. Having a defendant represented by a lawyer should be the default. It shouldn't be something the defendant has to ask for.<br /><br />> he didn't even Peter Donishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09122769947782402203noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5592542.post-60881755177059018072017-11-13T09:52:53.972-08:002017-11-13T09:52:53.972-08:00No offense (I'm a big fan) but this feels to m...No offense (I'm a big fan) but this feels to me like a naive and overly optimistic attitude. Educating and shaming people may have the effect of causing them to suppress their racist tendencies, but racism, I believe, is an extension of tribalism which is a deeply rooted behavior. In times of troubles, people turn to their tribes for security and their suppressed racism will surface as a S.https://www.blogger.com/profile/12752810625701800885noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5592542.post-33966264134247019972017-11-11T18:19:02.856-08:002017-11-11T18:19:02.856-08:00> Because of the extreme historical power imbal...> Because of the extreme historical power imbalance between blacks and whites which persists to this day. The denial of rights was just a symptom of this much larger systemic problem.<br /><br />So to you, denial of rights is only worth talking about as a "symptom"?<br /><br />Anyway, I think you have it backwards. The denial of rights is the fundamental problem. The power imbalance Peter Donishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09122769947782402203noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5592542.post-66514148407846760102017-11-11T12:56:00.235-08:002017-11-11T12:56:00.235-08:00@Peter:
> if your answer is "of course n...@Peter:<br /><br />> if your answer is "of course not"<br /><br />And it is (of course).<br /><br />> then what's the point of focusing on it at all, instead of on the substance--that a judge denied a defendant's rights?<br /><br />Because of the extreme historical power imbalance between blacks and whites which persists to this day. The denial of rights was just a Ronhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11752242624438232184noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5592542.post-64572675190642730942017-11-11T09:04:55.653-08:002017-11-11T09:04:55.653-08:00@Ron:
Your comment just goes down the same rabbit...@Ron:<br /><br />Your comment just goes down the same rabbit hole I described. To focus on the fact that the judge misconstrued a figure of speech of black culture invites the question: would it have been OK if it was a black judge misconstruing a figure of speech of white culture? And if your answer is "of course not", then what's the point of focusing on it at all, instead of on Peter Donishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09122769947782402203noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5592542.post-48690562928529101312017-11-11T08:11:11.463-08:002017-11-11T08:11:11.463-08:00> For one thing, we can't look inside his h...> For one thing, we can't look inside his head and know for sure why he did it.<br /><br />Oh, come on, peter, you can't possibly be that dim -- and neither could the judge. He didn't just "deny a citizen equal protection", he denied a *black* citizen equal protection by intentionally mis-construing a figure of speech that is characteristic of black culture. And he Ronhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11752242624438232184noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5592542.post-36132420061662235372017-11-10T19:46:10.808-08:002017-11-10T19:46:10.808-08:00> The OP says "simply relying on the law i...> The OP says "simply relying on the law is not enough", with examples. It seems that your contention is that it is. <br /><br />I don't know how you got that out of my post. I said we should paint people as pathetic losers for denying equal protection and rights to everyone. That's not a legal strategy, it's a social strategy, just like the one Ron proposed.Peter Donishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09122769947782402203noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5592542.post-36431394159086954932017-11-10T19:37:26.869-08:002017-11-10T19:37:26.869-08:00Did you just say "all lives matter" the ...Did you just say "all lives matter" the long-winded way?<br /><br />The motivation (that in these cases may spring from the identities of the judge and defendant) matters if you hope to stamp out these complex problems at their root. _Perhaps_ what you say would be viable, if it was just judges and the accused, and not law enforcement, and corrections officers, and school officials, andO.https://www.blogger.com/profile/12852590480441556047noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5592542.post-24882934484391567302017-11-10T19:00:18.188-08:002017-11-10T19:00:18.188-08:00> The way to eliminate racism is to paint racis...> The way to eliminate racism is to paint racists as pathetic losers. And the best way to do that is to teach history.<br /><br />I don't actually disagree with this, but I would like to offer an alternative (or perhaps a complementary--there's no reason both could not be pursued) strategy.<br /><br />You quoted what I posted about the Louisiana judge. My point was to focus on *what* Peter Donishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09122769947782402203noreply@blogger.com