Joe Honick, GMA International (3/30):
Everything got out of control here. Let's all agree that anytime someone is gunned down it's a tragedy. What has happened here is a combination of tragedies. Among other things, the crowd response, without any proper investigation, not only has found the shooter guilty but promoted a national campaign more of commercial proportions than mature lawful review as we are supposed to do here.
It has even driven the dead young man's mother to have to trademark the stuff that will be peddled in his name, a fair step on her part, an almost salacious reality on the parts of those taking advantage of the tragedy.
In this country, it remains the law that anyone is considered innocent until proven guilty under stringent circumstances that do not include orating politicians and mob scenes....circumstances that could destroy a legitimate trial on the facts. I am reminded of another case in which some major Black leaders who could have brought sense and fairness to the situation, opted to dole out blame only to find out that their targets were innocent but now tarnished.
The case was a then well know event where Duke University Lacrosse Players were charged with rape. Jesse Jackson was promptly on the case with his accusations, later shown to be flat out wrong. I wrote about in these pages at the time. I take no backseat to people engaged in fighting racism and prejudice of any kind. I do insist that what the Constitution enuciated not be diminished by anyone for whatever purpose. It is bad enough we have had more than a few already imprisoned men and women later found innocent.
Let's not destroy what must work lest the "Order" part of "Law and ....." is reduced to where it helps no one at all.
Kathy Lewton (4/03):
Joe, perhaps the reason the "crowd" response, "without proper investigation," has been so powerful is precisely because there was NO proper investigation?
For all intents and purposes, from what I've read, the policy had closed the case. Self defense, over and done. It took a "crowd" of concerned people speakign up and speaking out to even get the authorities to take a second look at the facts.
Had there been a careful investigation that the police could point to, one has to wonder (and we'll never know) if the outcry would have been as dramatic as it has been. As with so many crisis situations like this, "it's the cover up" that stirs the most outrage.
There wasn't even a grand jury convened -- until the media and the public scrutiny began.
At least that's the view from here. The family knew that without going public, and making their case over and over again, nothing would happen.
And if you look at those first few days, they were right. It took a while for the authorities in Sanford to take any action at all, and even know, info is seeping out in bits and pieces, which just raises the level of suspicion and anger even higher. Transparency and doing the right thing -- still the best way to prevent or mitigate "crowd" suspicion.
Joe Honick, GMA (4/05):
Kathy, you make good points, but elsewhere in the country much less was made of 10 Black teens assaulting a single young Hispanic lad and beating to the ground and worse afterward. It was an acknowledge 'hate crime' and racially motivated. There were no outcries from Sharpton/Jackson et al. Transparency either in the Sanford or the latter case has not been a matter for discussion. What I do mostly object to is the idea of determining guilt fro a distance, a reason we do have legal means to review things. Unfortunately, the tragic death of the young man in Florida has become a c ommecial venture, while the similarly tragic assault on the Hispanic youth has attracted little from the same fonts of cocnerns.
|