The first pre-trial hearing for Johannes Mehserle – the Ex-BART officer who shot and killed Oscar Grant on New Years Day 2009 – brought out a tapestry of emotion and activity. The Foltz Criminal Justice Center was a buzz with scores of brave protestors, media representatives, and agents of the legal system all taking part in the early morning rush. It was an amazing scene considering that the hearing itself was rather basic and bland. The biggest developments of the day included an announcement of a May 2010 start to the trial and Judge Perry’s insistence of no cameras in the courtroom. While these tidbits of legal information are indeed critical, they pale in comparison to the acknowledgment that countless legislative barriers make it nearly impossible to fairly and successfully prosecute officers like Mehserle in a court of law. This reality creates a piercing anxiety in the hearts and minds of everyone hoping for justice in this case that will not dissipate anytime soon. However, if Oscar Grant has any chance of being our generation’s Emmit Till – a martyr that inspires a movement for progressive social change – we will need to immediately identify concrete next steps to work on. A few recommendations include:
1. Repealing or Amending the California Police Bill of Rights
Passed in 1976 to supposedly protect officers against workplace harassment, this part of the state’s Constitution has become a tool used primarily to protect trigger-happy cops from getting fired. Much of the Police Bill of Rights deals with issues of due process when officers violate department rules. However, it contains several problematic clauses that not only make it difficult to fire officers, but to convict them of criminal acts. Some of these clauses include guaranteeing every officer an administrative review regardless of the severity of their actions and paying officers if they are questioned while off-duty. Moreover, as long as the Police Bill of Rights remains intact, local efforts for community-controlled policing are rendered ineffective. In order to repeal or amend the California Police Bill of Rights community leaders will need to raise millions of dollars to put forth a ballot initiative before voters. This will be a hard-fought, yet just battle to save the lives of thousands of vulnerable residents.
2. Establishing a Special Prosecutor Office to Investigate and Charge Police-Crimes
As the legal representatives of Californians, County District Attorneys have the primary responsibility to handle felony cases throughout the state. Consequently, DAs work very closely with local law enforcement. This collegial relationship creates a gapping contradiction in the legal system. DAs are very reluctant to bring charges against on-duty police officers – especially in cases of brutality and murder – out of fear of alienating the very group often responsible for their pay and job status. In Los Angeles, District Attorney Steve Cooley has consistently refused to charge on-duty officers of murder and other serious felonies. In order to change this appalling scenario, community leaders should look at creating a Special Prosecutors Office that would assume the responsibility of investigating and charging police-related crimes. This move would likely require a ballot initiative approved by voters.
3. Eliminate the Police Board of Rights in Los Angeles
One of the most peculiar police structures in California is the LAPD’s Police Board of Rights. This panel, which is comprised of 2 high ranking police officers and 1 civilian, has the power to make binding decisions in cases where a cop may be demoted or terminated. What makes the Board even more powerful is that no one, including the Police Chief, can reverse their findings. Furthermore, the Board has skillfully interpreted State law to make their process confidential. Therefore, the names of the officers involved or rationale around their findings are not released to the public. The role of the Board of Rights became resoundingly clear in the aftermath of the 2005 LAPD shooting of 13-year old Devin Brown. Despite findings by the Police Commission that the shooting was out-of-policy, the Board of Rights cleared the officers of any wrongdoing. Undoubtedly, the Board’s decision in the Brown case was impacted by their secretive nature and the pervasive presence of the “police investigating police” dynamic. For a department maintained by taxpayer dollars this situation is an abomination and an affront to the principles of freedom and representative government. Since it is written into the Los Angeles City Charter, eliminating the Police Board of Rights will require Los Angeles voters to approve the change at the ballot box. Another hard-fought battle. Another expensive campaign.
All of the above recommendations would require a lot from community leaders and residents. Well-financed law enforcement interest groups would work to prevent any of them from becoming reality. This will force activists to adopt a long-term vision and strategy, raise large sums of money, and recruit a talented network of progressive attorneys, media consultants, and of course, organizers. However, we must recognize that while marches and protests are essential tactics, they leave much to be desired in terms of deterring police officers from arbitrarily killing and abusing members of our community. The family of Oscar Grant and other victims of police brutality deserve our maximum effort. They deserve victory.
Friday, February 26, 2010
The Rebirth of Black Power part 1 - We Need a Black Private Sector
The Rebirth of Black Power Part 1 - We Need a Black Private Sector!!!
I AM not a Republican nor am I blind to the structural inequalities of Capitalism. However, as a Black man I AM thoroughly convinced that my community needs to develop a strong, unified, and viable private sector, which would include at the very least:
1. Independent political organizations free from the constraints and contradictions of the Democratic, Republican or any other mainstream party. We need organizations with the freedom and commitment to develop goals that address the particular needs of Black people and serve as a respected voice on behalf of the Black community to world abroad
2. Black-owned businesses that service a significant consumer base in all communities, but continually utilize their earnings to employ and empower the Black community
3. Independent schools that teach our history and culture, yet also prepare our youth and young adults with the skills to compete in a global, high tech world
We must recognize that after 500 years of enslavement, lynchings, disenfranchisement, and economic exploitation Black people – as a whole – have become largely depended upon the government to provide us with political and economic power. Our concept of political power has been narrowed to the process of voting for practical strangers every four years to positions we honestly don’t understand. Our economic reality is largely defined by a middle-class sustained through dwindling unionized public service jobs or the poor subsisting on endangered government aid like food stamps and CalWorks. Conditions are such that a large portion of our community is literally owned by the State through incarceration in public-run prisons and the foster care system.
The consequences of this imbalance include the following:
1. Black people are largely seen as burdens, rather than power players in the United States. While many in power will not admit this publicly out of concern for being politically incorrect, they express this reality through the way they deal with our community on important matters. Our community is often ignored when important issues in society are being developed and debated. At best, we are alerted about decisions after they have already been finalized
2. Too much responsibility is ceded to elected officials in the Black community. This goes contrary to the fact that an elected official’s effectiveness is primarily defined by the political, economic and social strength of the communities they represent. Unfortunately, too many Black elected officials are counted on to be the SOLE SOURCE of political, economic and social strength of the community. However since the private sector of the Black community is relatively weak and our system of accountability is spotty at best, Black elected officials are courted and controlled often times by mainstream political parties, white corporate interest or a small circle of Black elites.
3. Black people are extremely vulnerable in times growing conservatism in government and budget cuts to public services. We see this currently in California and other states where our people are being disproportionately injured by eliminations to education, public aid and health care programs
On the eve of Black History, we need to know that we can change our current predicament. In order to do so, we will need to have what Marcus Garvey taught – namely a plan that emphasizes “action, self-reliance and a vision of self and the future…” With a small, but entrenched Black middle class, a plethora of community leaders and elected officials, and numerous community organizations, labor unions and churches, Los Angeles can be the epicenter for the re-birth of real Black Power. However, in order to do so, we must change our current thoughts and actions around the role government will play in our liberation movement. Furthermore, we must once again develop and expand Black-owned independent political organizations, businesses, and schools and do so in a principled and coordinated manner. This is the type of work plan that a people interested in power will take up. Lets get to work.
I AM not a Republican nor am I blind to the structural inequalities of Capitalism. However, as a Black man I AM thoroughly convinced that my community needs to develop a strong, unified, and viable private sector, which would include at the very least:
1. Independent political organizations free from the constraints and contradictions of the Democratic, Republican or any other mainstream party. We need organizations with the freedom and commitment to develop goals that address the particular needs of Black people and serve as a respected voice on behalf of the Black community to world abroad
2. Black-owned businesses that service a significant consumer base in all communities, but continually utilize their earnings to employ and empower the Black community
3. Independent schools that teach our history and culture, yet also prepare our youth and young adults with the skills to compete in a global, high tech world
We must recognize that after 500 years of enslavement, lynchings, disenfranchisement, and economic exploitation Black people – as a whole – have become largely depended upon the government to provide us with political and economic power. Our concept of political power has been narrowed to the process of voting for practical strangers every four years to positions we honestly don’t understand. Our economic reality is largely defined by a middle-class sustained through dwindling unionized public service jobs or the poor subsisting on endangered government aid like food stamps and CalWorks. Conditions are such that a large portion of our community is literally owned by the State through incarceration in public-run prisons and the foster care system.
The consequences of this imbalance include the following:
1. Black people are largely seen as burdens, rather than power players in the United States. While many in power will not admit this publicly out of concern for being politically incorrect, they express this reality through the way they deal with our community on important matters. Our community is often ignored when important issues in society are being developed and debated. At best, we are alerted about decisions after they have already been finalized
2. Too much responsibility is ceded to elected officials in the Black community. This goes contrary to the fact that an elected official’s effectiveness is primarily defined by the political, economic and social strength of the communities they represent. Unfortunately, too many Black elected officials are counted on to be the SOLE SOURCE of political, economic and social strength of the community. However since the private sector of the Black community is relatively weak and our system of accountability is spotty at best, Black elected officials are courted and controlled often times by mainstream political parties, white corporate interest or a small circle of Black elites.
3. Black people are extremely vulnerable in times growing conservatism in government and budget cuts to public services. We see this currently in California and other states where our people are being disproportionately injured by eliminations to education, public aid and health care programs
On the eve of Black History, we need to know that we can change our current predicament. In order to do so, we will need to have what Marcus Garvey taught – namely a plan that emphasizes “action, self-reliance and a vision of self and the future…” With a small, but entrenched Black middle class, a plethora of community leaders and elected officials, and numerous community organizations, labor unions and churches, Los Angeles can be the epicenter for the re-birth of real Black Power. However, in order to do so, we must change our current thoughts and actions around the role government will play in our liberation movement. Furthermore, we must once again develop and expand Black-owned independent political organizations, businesses, and schools and do so in a principled and coordinated manner. This is the type of work plan that a people interested in power will take up. Lets get to work.
Lesson from the Oscar Grant Tragedy - We Need to Get to Work
In many instances, the second pre-trial hearing for Johannes Mehserle could be seen as a victorious day for the family and supporters of Oscar Grant. After weeks of nervous speculation, presiding Judge Robert Perry rejected motions put forth by Mehserle’s legal team to reduce his bail amount and remove the Alameda County District Attorney from the case. While Judge Perry acknowledged that prosecutors employed some questionable and perhaps, unconstitutional tactics during the course of their investigation, those acts failed to substantiate the extreme requests of Defense Attorney Michael Rains.
Victory also extended to outside of the courtroom as scores of activists and supporters braved the early morning chill to hold signs, recite chants and talk to onlookers – all in the name of making the often apathetic Los Angeles populace aware of one of the most significant court cases in state history. While the number people who attended the rally this time was slightly smaller than that at the first hearing, the crowd contained an impressive intensity, dedication and discipline that was appropriate and effective.
However, in the midst of countless examples that spoke to the triumphant potential of this case, it was difficult for me to enjoy the moment. In the background of the day’s court rulings and grassroots activism stood the realities of an unjust system that leaves too many families – particularly Black and Latino – mourning the loss of a loved one at the hands of law enforcement. In Black and Latino communities across the United States, there are too many women like Oscar Grant’s mother who have to learn how to live again after having their child’s life ended prematurely by those sworn to “protect and serve”. This tragic situation is compounded by the fact that police murder – unlike murder committed by civilians – often leaves the family with little or no hope of ever receiving legal justice. While some may receive financial settlements, the court system fails time and time again to convict and sentence police officers for murder. For Black people in particular, this perpetual lack of legal re-dress for one of the oldest problems impacting our community has created deeply entrenched pain, fear and anger. No matter the social status, economic class or skin tone, almost every Black person in America has experienced a nervous moment whenever a cop came near. This is not because we are a community of cowards – rather it is because we recognize that the police can arbitrarily kill us without any threat of jail time.
The Mehserle trial is so important to all of us because it can establish a more humane legal precedent in terms of police conduct. A just verdict of murder can help shift policies and practices of law enforcement agencies in Los Angeles, Inglewood and across the country. In order to ensure victory in the case however, we need every resident – especially Black and Latino – to become aware and active in the work. We need established civil rights organizations and leaders in the city to step out of the shadows and become public advocates for the Oscar Grant family. In a case so important, no one who yearns for the full expression of justice can afford to sit on the sidelines and carry on like business as usual. For if we choose that route, another unarmed Black man will be murdered without any accountability and our current attempts for social revolution will be exposed as a hollow and weak impersonation of the 1960s. As the great Afrikan leader Amilcar Cabral taught us, we cannot “claim any easy victories”. Victory in this case not only means the conviction and sentencing of Mehserle, but as Dr. Maulana Karenga teaches, a corresponding re-building of a strong movement capable of instituting progressive practices and policies throughout the society. Lets get to work.
If you are interested in supporting the family of Oscar Grant, please contact Los Angeles Coalition for Oscar Grant at 213-663-6316.
Victory also extended to outside of the courtroom as scores of activists and supporters braved the early morning chill to hold signs, recite chants and talk to onlookers – all in the name of making the often apathetic Los Angeles populace aware of one of the most significant court cases in state history. While the number people who attended the rally this time was slightly smaller than that at the first hearing, the crowd contained an impressive intensity, dedication and discipline that was appropriate and effective.
However, in the midst of countless examples that spoke to the triumphant potential of this case, it was difficult for me to enjoy the moment. In the background of the day’s court rulings and grassroots activism stood the realities of an unjust system that leaves too many families – particularly Black and Latino – mourning the loss of a loved one at the hands of law enforcement. In Black and Latino communities across the United States, there are too many women like Oscar Grant’s mother who have to learn how to live again after having their child’s life ended prematurely by those sworn to “protect and serve”. This tragic situation is compounded by the fact that police murder – unlike murder committed by civilians – often leaves the family with little or no hope of ever receiving legal justice. While some may receive financial settlements, the court system fails time and time again to convict and sentence police officers for murder. For Black people in particular, this perpetual lack of legal re-dress for one of the oldest problems impacting our community has created deeply entrenched pain, fear and anger. No matter the social status, economic class or skin tone, almost every Black person in America has experienced a nervous moment whenever a cop came near. This is not because we are a community of cowards – rather it is because we recognize that the police can arbitrarily kill us without any threat of jail time.
The Mehserle trial is so important to all of us because it can establish a more humane legal precedent in terms of police conduct. A just verdict of murder can help shift policies and practices of law enforcement agencies in Los Angeles, Inglewood and across the country. In order to ensure victory in the case however, we need every resident – especially Black and Latino – to become aware and active in the work. We need established civil rights organizations and leaders in the city to step out of the shadows and become public advocates for the Oscar Grant family. In a case so important, no one who yearns for the full expression of justice can afford to sit on the sidelines and carry on like business as usual. For if we choose that route, another unarmed Black man will be murdered without any accountability and our current attempts for social revolution will be exposed as a hollow and weak impersonation of the 1960s. As the great Afrikan leader Amilcar Cabral taught us, we cannot “claim any easy victories”. Victory in this case not only means the conviction and sentencing of Mehserle, but as Dr. Maulana Karenga teaches, a corresponding re-building of a strong movement capable of instituting progressive practices and policies throughout the society. Lets get to work.
If you are interested in supporting the family of Oscar Grant, please contact Los Angeles Coalition for Oscar Grant at 213-663-6316.
Wednesday, January 6, 2010
2009: The Year of the LAPD and Lies
2009 was a monumental year for the Los Angeles Police Department. Going into the year, then-Chief William Bratton had firmly established himself as arguably the most powerful individual on the Los Angeles political scene. Armed with sly media skills and firm control over the deployment of a supposed understaffed police force in a police-crazed metropolis, Bratton was able to resuscitate the image of the strong Police Chief first honed by the infamous William Parker several decades ago. Furthermore, he skillfully used his growing goodwill to build strategic relationships with communities of color who have long been victimized by the LAPD’s abusive behavior. Bratton’s popularity was growing so rapidly that Councilperson Herb Wesson put forth a plan to change current term limits for police chiefs. This was an obvious attempt to retain Bratton for a longer period of time.
With a strong leader in tow, the LAPD was able to become a strong political force by end of the last decade – especially in the eyes of elected officials like Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa. Faced with plummeting approval ratings, various personal scandals, and a re-election bid, the Mayor consciously attached himself to perceived success of Bratton and the LAPD.
In the days leading up the 2009 primary election, the Mayor and Bratton began touting the historic drops in murders, rapes, and robberies throughout the city. According to their data, Los Angeles was as safe as it was in the 1950s. To a population still battered and bruised by the drug-induced violent crime waves of the 1980s and 1990s, reports of rapid declines in shootings and causalities were met with open arms.
Consequently, the Mayor was successful in his re-election bid, with much of his support coming from Black and Latino communities. Around the same time, Harvard released results from a survey, which stated that the LAPD enjoyed high approval ratings even from communities like South and East Los Angeles. Furthermore, the LAPD was able to convince a federal judge to lift the Consent Decree and its leader, William Bratton – long rumored to have grander aspirations – abruptly resigned as Police Chief to earn big money with a private security firm. In addition to the before-mentioned accomplishments, the Police Department opened a brand new $440 million administrative building during a time when many in the city were losing their jobs and homes.
While it is clear who benefitted from 2009 being the year of the LAPD, it is also comprehensible that any real benefit alluded residents once again. First of all, the re-occurring narrative around the rehabilitation of the LAPD effectively covered up some recent police killings of residents like Dontaze Storey Jr, a 28-year old unarmed Black man who was shot in the leg, chest, and mouth in front of his pregnant fiancé by Rampart Division officers. While LAPD leadership and elected officials ran around town espousing the development of a more humane police force, yet another Black family suffered the permanent lose of a loved one to brutal police savagery.
Another illusion used to change public sentiment towards the Los Angeles Police Department was its effectiveness in fighting violent crime. In the eyes of some, questionable tactics by police officers became acceptable because crime was going down at a rapid rate. However, a 2009 Los Angeles Weekly report revealed that the city was not as safe as it was in the 1950s as some claimed. In fact, the current crime rate was at least double that of fifty years ago. The Los Angeles Times also reported that the LAPD’s public crime stat website undercounted its violent crime by a whopping 40%. These examples, along with the recent discovery of financial mismanagement by the Bratton regime, support the strong possibility that millions of Angelinos were lied to about the state of their city’s safety and the conduct of its police force in order to ensure the re-election of politicians, the elimination of Federal oversight of the local police force, and of course, the financial gain of key individuals.
As residents that live in communities ravaged by unemployment, drug addiction, and violence, we must finally accept responsibility for our own well-being. The only true solution to creating long-lasting safety and declines in crime are to organize every person on our blocks, streets, and neighborhoods to create activities to provide our basic needs. If we know that people steal because of persistent poverty, we must take responsibility in creating opportunities for our people – especially youth and young adults – to gain employment. Gang violence can be curtailed if community residents create organizations and activities that keep at-risk individuals effectively occupied and engaged. Until we declare ourselves as the first-line responders and primary solution-makers, we will continue to fully depend on a police force that has proven for over 100 years to be hostile, unresponsive, and ineffective to the needs of Black and Latino people in particular. Moreover, without adopting a strong spirit of self-determination, we will remain vulnerable to the continued lies of those we allow to lead us.
With a strong leader in tow, the LAPD was able to become a strong political force by end of the last decade – especially in the eyes of elected officials like Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa. Faced with plummeting approval ratings, various personal scandals, and a re-election bid, the Mayor consciously attached himself to perceived success of Bratton and the LAPD.
In the days leading up the 2009 primary election, the Mayor and Bratton began touting the historic drops in murders, rapes, and robberies throughout the city. According to their data, Los Angeles was as safe as it was in the 1950s. To a population still battered and bruised by the drug-induced violent crime waves of the 1980s and 1990s, reports of rapid declines in shootings and causalities were met with open arms.
Consequently, the Mayor was successful in his re-election bid, with much of his support coming from Black and Latino communities. Around the same time, Harvard released results from a survey, which stated that the LAPD enjoyed high approval ratings even from communities like South and East Los Angeles. Furthermore, the LAPD was able to convince a federal judge to lift the Consent Decree and its leader, William Bratton – long rumored to have grander aspirations – abruptly resigned as Police Chief to earn big money with a private security firm. In addition to the before-mentioned accomplishments, the Police Department opened a brand new $440 million administrative building during a time when many in the city were losing their jobs and homes.
While it is clear who benefitted from 2009 being the year of the LAPD, it is also comprehensible that any real benefit alluded residents once again. First of all, the re-occurring narrative around the rehabilitation of the LAPD effectively covered up some recent police killings of residents like Dontaze Storey Jr, a 28-year old unarmed Black man who was shot in the leg, chest, and mouth in front of his pregnant fiancé by Rampart Division officers. While LAPD leadership and elected officials ran around town espousing the development of a more humane police force, yet another Black family suffered the permanent lose of a loved one to brutal police savagery.
Another illusion used to change public sentiment towards the Los Angeles Police Department was its effectiveness in fighting violent crime. In the eyes of some, questionable tactics by police officers became acceptable because crime was going down at a rapid rate. However, a 2009 Los Angeles Weekly report revealed that the city was not as safe as it was in the 1950s as some claimed. In fact, the current crime rate was at least double that of fifty years ago. The Los Angeles Times also reported that the LAPD’s public crime stat website undercounted its violent crime by a whopping 40%. These examples, along with the recent discovery of financial mismanagement by the Bratton regime, support the strong possibility that millions of Angelinos were lied to about the state of their city’s safety and the conduct of its police force in order to ensure the re-election of politicians, the elimination of Federal oversight of the local police force, and of course, the financial gain of key individuals.
As residents that live in communities ravaged by unemployment, drug addiction, and violence, we must finally accept responsibility for our own well-being. The only true solution to creating long-lasting safety and declines in crime are to organize every person on our blocks, streets, and neighborhoods to create activities to provide our basic needs. If we know that people steal because of persistent poverty, we must take responsibility in creating opportunities for our people – especially youth and young adults – to gain employment. Gang violence can be curtailed if community residents create organizations and activities that keep at-risk individuals effectively occupied and engaged. Until we declare ourselves as the first-line responders and primary solution-makers, we will continue to fully depend on a police force that has proven for over 100 years to be hostile, unresponsive, and ineffective to the needs of Black and Latino people in particular. Moreover, without adopting a strong spirit of self-determination, we will remain vulnerable to the continued lies of those we allow to lead us.
Tuesday, December 29, 2009
The Realities of Race and Global Power
The great Pan-African leader Marcus Garvey once stated that “Englishmen, Frenchmen, Germans, [and] Japanese” were spared from being lynched because they are represented by some of the most powerful nations in the world.
With this statement, Garvey was making a direct connection between the treatment of a particular social group and their degree of power. Therefore, according to the argument, Blacks and Latinos in the United States can expect to suffer all types of state-sanctioned abuse (i.e. police brutality, lack of medical care, poor schools) because they lack significant power over the social, political, and economic system within the country they reside in. Although Garvey uttered these words nearly a century ago, recent developments in the world have re-enforced its significance. As was the case in Garvey’s day– one where the world was coming out of the ashes of World War I – we are experiencing a global shift in power and influence.
China is now a world power with India and Brazil at the brink. Feeling vulnerable for the first-time in centuries, European nations desperately banded together to form the European Union (EU) as a way to maintain political and economic power. While the United States is still the most powerful nation on the planet, it no longer has a monopoly. With mixed results in Afghanistan and Iraq and millions of dollars in debt owed to countries like China, America – according to many – is losing its firm grip around the world’s people and resources.
All of this creates an interesting dilemma for Blacks and Latinos, who along with Native Americans, have long occupied the bottom rung of U.S. society.
Centuries of slavery, racism, colonialism, legalized discrimination, economic exploitation, and incarceration have rendered a large number of people of color ill-prepared to acquire power domestically. With U.S. global hegemony lessening, Blacks, Latinos, and Native Americans are faced with an interesting situation.
On one hand, declining U.S. power hurts the nation’s ability to force other countries to buys it products, which shrinks market share for its corporations and economic growth at home. As a consequence, domestic jobs and services become fewer and fewer with Blacks, Latinos, and Native Americans – who are largely dependent upon the white power structure for life’s essentials – receiving even less. In other words, the poor could get poorer.
However, the situation possibly presents people of color a golden opportunity to destroy the oppressive social, political, and economic relationships that keep them in bondage. Established elements of the white power structure may become extinct or significantly downsized as foreign governments and companies gain control of the world’s landscape and markets. The void in power that could result from this scenario may be filled by Blacks, Latinos, or Native Americans. Barack Obama’s rise to the Presidency may the first of many examples to come that illustrate the before-mentioned theory.
Whatever side one chooses, it is important to consider one of Garvey’s other teachings. He believed that “the only protection against injustice is Power – Physical, Financial, and Scientific”. Physical power meaning the ability to defend oneself against attack and violence. Financial power meaning the ability to accumulate and increase material resources in order to provide the needs of a people. Scientific power meaning the ability to develop methods and tools necessary to master one’s environment. When considering Garvey’s criteria for power, it would appear that Blacks, Latinos, and Native Americans have a long way to go to effectively grab social, political, and economic power within the United States. As mentioned earlier, America’s system of oppression has ensured such a reality. Until we develop a new game plan, people of color will be largely left with an over-dependence on government services and protection, social protest, and mainstream political activity as its core tenets of change. While the positive value of these tenets cannot be discounted or ignored, we must admit that they - in isolation – cannot and will not build power. As Garvey taught nearly a century ago and countries like China and India are proving today, power requires a long-term plan and commitment to building leadership and expertise in areas that develop a group’s skills, create group unity, and produce things that fill needs. Maybe then, Blacks, Latinos, and Native Americans will be truly protected from the abuses they are currently subjected to.
With this statement, Garvey was making a direct connection between the treatment of a particular social group and their degree of power. Therefore, according to the argument, Blacks and Latinos in the United States can expect to suffer all types of state-sanctioned abuse (i.e. police brutality, lack of medical care, poor schools) because they lack significant power over the social, political, and economic system within the country they reside in. Although Garvey uttered these words nearly a century ago, recent developments in the world have re-enforced its significance. As was the case in Garvey’s day– one where the world was coming out of the ashes of World War I – we are experiencing a global shift in power and influence.
China is now a world power with India and Brazil at the brink. Feeling vulnerable for the first-time in centuries, European nations desperately banded together to form the European Union (EU) as a way to maintain political and economic power. While the United States is still the most powerful nation on the planet, it no longer has a monopoly. With mixed results in Afghanistan and Iraq and millions of dollars in debt owed to countries like China, America – according to many – is losing its firm grip around the world’s people and resources.
All of this creates an interesting dilemma for Blacks and Latinos, who along with Native Americans, have long occupied the bottom rung of U.S. society.
Centuries of slavery, racism, colonialism, legalized discrimination, economic exploitation, and incarceration have rendered a large number of people of color ill-prepared to acquire power domestically. With U.S. global hegemony lessening, Blacks, Latinos, and Native Americans are faced with an interesting situation.
On one hand, declining U.S. power hurts the nation’s ability to force other countries to buys it products, which shrinks market share for its corporations and economic growth at home. As a consequence, domestic jobs and services become fewer and fewer with Blacks, Latinos, and Native Americans – who are largely dependent upon the white power structure for life’s essentials – receiving even less. In other words, the poor could get poorer.
However, the situation possibly presents people of color a golden opportunity to destroy the oppressive social, political, and economic relationships that keep them in bondage. Established elements of the white power structure may become extinct or significantly downsized as foreign governments and companies gain control of the world’s landscape and markets. The void in power that could result from this scenario may be filled by Blacks, Latinos, or Native Americans. Barack Obama’s rise to the Presidency may the first of many examples to come that illustrate the before-mentioned theory.
Whatever side one chooses, it is important to consider one of Garvey’s other teachings. He believed that “the only protection against injustice is Power – Physical, Financial, and Scientific”. Physical power meaning the ability to defend oneself against attack and violence. Financial power meaning the ability to accumulate and increase material resources in order to provide the needs of a people. Scientific power meaning the ability to develop methods and tools necessary to master one’s environment. When considering Garvey’s criteria for power, it would appear that Blacks, Latinos, and Native Americans have a long way to go to effectively grab social, political, and economic power within the United States. As mentioned earlier, America’s system of oppression has ensured such a reality. Until we develop a new game plan, people of color will be largely left with an over-dependence on government services and protection, social protest, and mainstream political activity as its core tenets of change. While the positive value of these tenets cannot be discounted or ignored, we must admit that they - in isolation – cannot and will not build power. As Garvey taught nearly a century ago and countries like China and India are proving today, power requires a long-term plan and commitment to building leadership and expertise in areas that develop a group’s skills, create group unity, and produce things that fill needs. Maybe then, Blacks, Latinos, and Native Americans will be truly protected from the abuses they are currently subjected to.
The Importance of the Oscar Grant Trial
A recent decision to move the criminal trial of Johannes Mehserle – the former BART officer who shot and killed Oscar Grant on New Years Day – to Los Angeles has once again thrust the city to the forefront of controversy involving police abuse and murder. Nearly two decades after the Rodney King beating case and forty-five years since Watts exploded in protest of law enforcement’s brutal behavior, the Oscar Grant case offers Los Angeles yet another opportunity to show the world how far we have progressed, or regressed, in ensuring that everyone – including police officers – is equal and accountable to the law. As with any case involving law enforcement, it is not merely a legal matter. It is very much a battle for social power between the elements of the status quo (i.e. law enforcement, politicians, business) who benefit from police officers’ arbitrary violence against Black people in particular and those who are fighting against it. Specifically, the Mehserle trial will go a long way in concluding if the State of California is willing to convict a police officer for murder. While we are at least 6 months away from the start of the trial, its history-making potential begs for us to understand and analyze some important elements that will impact the verdict.
1. Support from Police –Mehserle is enjoying tremendous support from law enforcement despite the fact that he resigned from the BART police force and fled authorities to Nevada immediately following the shooting. Police organizations throughout the state have allegedly raised more than $3 million in support of his defense. Why would California police officers shell out millions to help someone who shot an unarmed person, quit the police force, and went on the run? They understand that if Mehserle is found guilty of murder it potentially creates a precedent that would make it easier to convict other officers of murder and other tougher felonies. Remember, the greatest taboo in law enforcement is to convict officers of murder. The belief is that they have the “right” kill – no matter how racist, tragic, and unjust. Police organizations will do whatever it takes to maintain that right.
2. Legal Strategy – Most people assume that because the incident was recorded for the world to see, Mehserle will automatically be found guilty. As many legal experts and activists know all too well, this is far from the truth. In order to receive the maximum punishment, the defendant will have to be convicted of either first or second degree murder. According to the law, first degree murder is pre-meditated and intentional. In contrast, second degree murder may be intentional but not pre-meditated. In either case, these are difficult to prove against on-duty police officers, who are given the right to carry and use a gun everyday. Furthermore, Mehserle has already stated that he mistakenly grabbed his gun and shot Grant. The Alameda County District Attorney, who hasn’t made decision yet on which charge they will pursue, has the huge responsibility to put together a strategy to disprove Mehserle’s theory and show that he killed Grant intentionally. Did he shoot Grant because he was a young Black man? Did Mehserle have a history of committing abuse and misconduct? These are some of the questions that may be considered by the prosecution in establishing intentionality and pre-meditation. There is a lot at stake. In the state of California, anyone convicted of first degree murder gets no less than a sentence of 25 years to life. No less than 15 years to life for a conviction of second degree murder. If Mehserle is convicted of either it would be a rare and historic moment. It would be similar to the first time Klu Klux Klan members were first convicted of murdering a Black man in the south.
3. Jury Selection – If history is any indication, these types of cases are largely won and lost during jury selection. In almost every police brutality and murder case, the officer’s attorneys will fight to move the trial to an area that can produce a pro-police jury (e.g. white, suburban) that will likely acquit their client. This tactic was recently used by Mehserle’s lawyers, who demanded that the trial be moved out of Alameda County for concern that the jury pool in the area was largely prejudiced against the ex-BART police officer. While they were pleased that the trial was moved, they were just as disappointed that it ended up in Downtown Los Angeles rather than a court in the more conservative, pro-police San Diego County. With a population more diverse and critical of police abuse and misconduct than many, the jury pool in Downtown Los Angeles potentially provides prosecutors in this case with a rare situation – a jury open to finding a police officer guilty.
When Oakland exploded in anger after Oscar Grant’s killing, many in Los Angeles sat on the outside looking at a scene so familiar to the civil unrest in 1965 and 1992. Now through the inner workings of the justice system, Angelinos are now center stage of another police-related tragedy. With a new LAPD chief in office and multiple investigations of Inglewood’s Police Department pending, the region’s leadership will be closely monitoring the Mehserle trial. Its verdict – whether guilty or innocent – may greatly impact the type of policing we will see here for the foreseeable future. Community activists and residents will need to be attentive and most importantly, effectively organize to make sure that police abuse and murder becomes a thing of the past.
1. Support from Police –Mehserle is enjoying tremendous support from law enforcement despite the fact that he resigned from the BART police force and fled authorities to Nevada immediately following the shooting. Police organizations throughout the state have allegedly raised more than $3 million in support of his defense. Why would California police officers shell out millions to help someone who shot an unarmed person, quit the police force, and went on the run? They understand that if Mehserle is found guilty of murder it potentially creates a precedent that would make it easier to convict other officers of murder and other tougher felonies. Remember, the greatest taboo in law enforcement is to convict officers of murder. The belief is that they have the “right” kill – no matter how racist, tragic, and unjust. Police organizations will do whatever it takes to maintain that right.
2. Legal Strategy – Most people assume that because the incident was recorded for the world to see, Mehserle will automatically be found guilty. As many legal experts and activists know all too well, this is far from the truth. In order to receive the maximum punishment, the defendant will have to be convicted of either first or second degree murder. According to the law, first degree murder is pre-meditated and intentional. In contrast, second degree murder may be intentional but not pre-meditated. In either case, these are difficult to prove against on-duty police officers, who are given the right to carry and use a gun everyday. Furthermore, Mehserle has already stated that he mistakenly grabbed his gun and shot Grant. The Alameda County District Attorney, who hasn’t made decision yet on which charge they will pursue, has the huge responsibility to put together a strategy to disprove Mehserle’s theory and show that he killed Grant intentionally. Did he shoot Grant because he was a young Black man? Did Mehserle have a history of committing abuse and misconduct? These are some of the questions that may be considered by the prosecution in establishing intentionality and pre-meditation. There is a lot at stake. In the state of California, anyone convicted of first degree murder gets no less than a sentence of 25 years to life. No less than 15 years to life for a conviction of second degree murder. If Mehserle is convicted of either it would be a rare and historic moment. It would be similar to the first time Klu Klux Klan members were first convicted of murdering a Black man in the south.
3. Jury Selection – If history is any indication, these types of cases are largely won and lost during jury selection. In almost every police brutality and murder case, the officer’s attorneys will fight to move the trial to an area that can produce a pro-police jury (e.g. white, suburban) that will likely acquit their client. This tactic was recently used by Mehserle’s lawyers, who demanded that the trial be moved out of Alameda County for concern that the jury pool in the area was largely prejudiced against the ex-BART police officer. While they were pleased that the trial was moved, they were just as disappointed that it ended up in Downtown Los Angeles rather than a court in the more conservative, pro-police San Diego County. With a population more diverse and critical of police abuse and misconduct than many, the jury pool in Downtown Los Angeles potentially provides prosecutors in this case with a rare situation – a jury open to finding a police officer guilty.
When Oakland exploded in anger after Oscar Grant’s killing, many in Los Angeles sat on the outside looking at a scene so familiar to the civil unrest in 1965 and 1992. Now through the inner workings of the justice system, Angelinos are now center stage of another police-related tragedy. With a new LAPD chief in office and multiple investigations of Inglewood’s Police Department pending, the region’s leadership will be closely monitoring the Mehserle trial. Its verdict – whether guilty or innocent – may greatly impact the type of policing we will see here for the foreseeable future. Community activists and residents will need to be attentive and most importantly, effectively organize to make sure that police abuse and murder becomes a thing of the past.
Inglewood Police Woes: It's a Question of Leadership
Earlier this year, Inglewood was named an All-American City. While some may scoff at the controversy-plagued city winning such a distinction, I fully embrace it. Like America, the City of Inglewood is at a critical juncture in its history.
In particular, the city of over 120,000 residents is currently confronted with the question about what type of police department it will have from this point forward.
After the most recent rash of police shootings, which resulted in 5 unarmed individuals losing their lives in the last year, it has become resoundingly clear that Inglewood needs a significant change in police policies and practices. The situation has been further complicated by the Inglewood City Council's refusal to release findings from an Office of Independent Review (OIR) report concerning its police department – findings that probably aren’t favorable.
However, in every significant political moment, there needs to be one or more decision-makers who act in a courageous and just manner to create the change that is needed. We see this currently with President Obama’s principled stand for health care reform in the face of death threats and deceit. Inglewood also needs a courageous and just decision-maker to arise. Its residents demand and deserve someone who will not back down to reactionary forces within law enforcement, who prioritize protecting abusive police officers over community safety, trust, and integrity.
Inglewood’s current group of political leaders is an intelligent and highly skilled group. However, the question remains if Mayor Roosevelt Dorn and Councilmembers Danny Tabor, Judy Dunlap, Eloy Morales, and Ralph Franklin have the courage to do what is right, which would be the following:
1. Increase the powers and responsibilities of the Citizens Police Oversight Commission (CPOC)
Created in 2004 to provide civilian oversight, this commission was stripped of any significant power by the City Council and Police union. The Commission doesn’t even have the right to review cases of abuse or misconduct. The CPOC must have the power to review cases, conduct independent investigations, and make disciplinary recommendations to truly represent the voice of Inglewood citizens.
2. Engage a large number of Inglewood residents around what they want from their police department
One of the obvious next steps for the City of Inglewood is to engage its own residents about their thoughts and solutions to the issues facing their police department. My organization, the Families for Community Safety Campaign, recently organized volunteers to collect over 200 surveys from Inglewood residents on the subject. Our findings were profound but not surprising. For instance, the majority of residents surveyed do not think that Inglewood Police officers are held accountable for abusive behavior. This information is important and should be prioritized by Inglewood’s leadership when crafting solutions. Furthermore, frequent surveying of residents should be an often-used tactic by the Inglewood City Council. If a volunteer group can do it, the City of Inglewood should be able to do so.
3. Conduct a comprehensive review of the Inglewood Police Department in order to discover and change any practices or policies that encourage abusive policing (i.e. cleaning house)
The Inglewood Police Department has had 3 Chiefs in 10 years. Despite these frequent changes, it is clear that police abuse and misconduct continue to be tolerated, as evidenced by the actions -- and in some cases, inaction -- of both high-ranking and rank-and-file officers. The City Council, through Chief Jacqueline Seabrooks, must be creative and effective in establishing a humane and community-centered police department. This must be done by improving/changing the department's policies and procedures. Central to this effort must be thorough and consistent mandatory training for officers and management.
4. Make a public stand against the Police Bill of Rights and the District Attorney's consistent refusal to prosecute police officers who commit murder and/or misconduct
We have constantly heard about how the California Police Bill of Rights and the District Attorney's Office create the real barriers to ending police brutality. While it is true that police officers receive too much protection from state law and the DA’s office, the City of Inglewood can do a lot of good by instituting policy reforms and making a public stand against the Police Bill of Rights and the District Attorney.
In response to recent media coverage of the Inglewood City Council’s handling of the OIR report, its members are scrambling to “save face” and finally do something. However, unless the Mayor and City Council provide real leadership on this issue and act with courage, any proposed solutions will fail to make change. Given the current idea of creating a task force – which would have no real power either – Inglewood’s political leaders continue to fail at the expense of the residents of their All-American City.
In particular, the city of over 120,000 residents is currently confronted with the question about what type of police department it will have from this point forward.
After the most recent rash of police shootings, which resulted in 5 unarmed individuals losing their lives in the last year, it has become resoundingly clear that Inglewood needs a significant change in police policies and practices. The situation has been further complicated by the Inglewood City Council's refusal to release findings from an Office of Independent Review (OIR) report concerning its police department – findings that probably aren’t favorable.
However, in every significant political moment, there needs to be one or more decision-makers who act in a courageous and just manner to create the change that is needed. We see this currently with President Obama’s principled stand for health care reform in the face of death threats and deceit. Inglewood also needs a courageous and just decision-maker to arise. Its residents demand and deserve someone who will not back down to reactionary forces within law enforcement, who prioritize protecting abusive police officers over community safety, trust, and integrity.
Inglewood’s current group of political leaders is an intelligent and highly skilled group. However, the question remains if Mayor Roosevelt Dorn and Councilmembers Danny Tabor, Judy Dunlap, Eloy Morales, and Ralph Franklin have the courage to do what is right, which would be the following:
1. Increase the powers and responsibilities of the Citizens Police Oversight Commission (CPOC)
Created in 2004 to provide civilian oversight, this commission was stripped of any significant power by the City Council and Police union. The Commission doesn’t even have the right to review cases of abuse or misconduct. The CPOC must have the power to review cases, conduct independent investigations, and make disciplinary recommendations to truly represent the voice of Inglewood citizens.
2. Engage a large number of Inglewood residents around what they want from their police department
One of the obvious next steps for the City of Inglewood is to engage its own residents about their thoughts and solutions to the issues facing their police department. My organization, the Families for Community Safety Campaign, recently organized volunteers to collect over 200 surveys from Inglewood residents on the subject. Our findings were profound but not surprising. For instance, the majority of residents surveyed do not think that Inglewood Police officers are held accountable for abusive behavior. This information is important and should be prioritized by Inglewood’s leadership when crafting solutions. Furthermore, frequent surveying of residents should be an often-used tactic by the Inglewood City Council. If a volunteer group can do it, the City of Inglewood should be able to do so.
3. Conduct a comprehensive review of the Inglewood Police Department in order to discover and change any practices or policies that encourage abusive policing (i.e. cleaning house)
The Inglewood Police Department has had 3 Chiefs in 10 years. Despite these frequent changes, it is clear that police abuse and misconduct continue to be tolerated, as evidenced by the actions -- and in some cases, inaction -- of both high-ranking and rank-and-file officers. The City Council, through Chief Jacqueline Seabrooks, must be creative and effective in establishing a humane and community-centered police department. This must be done by improving/changing the department's policies and procedures. Central to this effort must be thorough and consistent mandatory training for officers and management.
4. Make a public stand against the Police Bill of Rights and the District Attorney's consistent refusal to prosecute police officers who commit murder and/or misconduct
We have constantly heard about how the California Police Bill of Rights and the District Attorney's Office create the real barriers to ending police brutality. While it is true that police officers receive too much protection from state law and the DA’s office, the City of Inglewood can do a lot of good by instituting policy reforms and making a public stand against the Police Bill of Rights and the District Attorney.
In response to recent media coverage of the Inglewood City Council’s handling of the OIR report, its members are scrambling to “save face” and finally do something. However, unless the Mayor and City Council provide real leadership on this issue and act with courage, any proposed solutions will fail to make change. Given the current idea of creating a task force – which would have no real power either – Inglewood’s political leaders continue to fail at the expense of the residents of their All-American City.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)