Category Archives: Race

UPDATE IV: A Remarkable Legal Process Unfolds In Ferguson (Individualism Vs. Collectivism)

Individualism Vs. Collectivism, Justice, Law, libertarianism, Race

A remarkable process unfolded in Ferguson, Missouri, where St. Louis County Prosecuting Attorney Bob McCulloch has just detailed the grand jury’s lengthy fact-finding mission, executed impressively, the upshot of which is that Darren Wilson, the police officer whose fatal shooting of the unarmed Michael Brown “sparked days of turbulent protests,” will not be indicted.

As infuriating as ever is that the entirety of the text of an official statement is no longer released to media, right away. No one reads any longer. However, McCulloch’s remarks (précised here) were impressive in the exhaustive scope of the search for truth they reveal, undertaken by a grand jury that was left to its own devices.

Nor did the unethical intervention of Attorney General Eric Holder and President Barack Obama on one side of the dispute serve to sway the grand jury. This is a good day for American justice. Unfortunately, many of the vested interests do not understand that the law is a search for facts; truth, and not about an abstract idea of social justice that exists in the minds of the perpetually aggrieved.

UPDATE I: Documents:

* Ferguson grand jury documents, courtesy of the LA Times.

* President Obama’s remarks after the Ferguson grand jury announcement.

UPDATE II (11/25): In the absence of text, I had to transcribe, but will keep the written material for the weekly column.

UPDATE III: FACEBOOK Thread:

Myron Robert Pauli The grand jury most likely acted properly (I say most likely since I was not presented with all the evidence) and any rioting is inexcusable. But I will slightly digress in saying that I read a long but interesting article by “libertarian” Radley Balko on how the local governments (politicians/lawyers/cops) exploit the lower classes (mostly black) in St. Louis County by extorting $$$ to support their parasitical power base using petty traffic crimes, etc. When government goes from protecting lives and liberty and property of people to just bleeding people to support itself (e.g. Inspector Javert meets Lucky Luciano) – it is a sad and tragic overreach. A long article but it raises interesting questions.

Ilana Mercer: Dog ate my homework, Myron Robert Pauli, from left-libertarians. The government robs me too. Blind. It robs you as well. More so than those who get back from the state (aka the taxpayer) more than they pay in. This is a prime example of confusing the argument. Lite libertarians make the mistake a lot. “‘Absolut’ Libertarian Lunacy” touches on this blame the state for individual flaws: “For the sins of man, hard leftists blame society, and hard-core libertarians saddle the state. ‘The State made me do it’ is how such social determinism can be summed-up.”

UPDATE IV (11/26): FACEBOOK Thread:

Myron Robert Pauli:

I always like to caution those on the right OR left when dealing with statistics about people. Yes, in my business, it might mean something to say that “Sensor X has an 80% of detecting Vehicle Y and Range R in Atmospheric Condition Z” – models and data points can be validated to some degree and one can draw conclusions. People are a bit different – so when the left says “look, Group N is underrepresented in Activity M” (Vietnamese women in the NBA, Black women in physics departments), it is not per se a proof of some deep conspiracy. Similarly, if 0.01% of Thai women are pathologically violent but 2% of black men are pathologically violent, it still means that 98% of black men are NOT pathologically violent even if it is far more likely to see that group rather than Thai women behind bars. However, statistical generalizations aside, Ferguson’s Kristallnacht is a reason to be depressed about the “melting pot ideal” working in America.
3 hrs · Like · 1

Ilana Mercer:

Actually, Myron Robert Pauli, sorry to burst the Bubble you’ve retreated into, but check that book, “Into the Cannibal’s Pot.” I gave it to you personally. If only 98% of black men were non-violent, we’d have our Jeffersonian republic. South Africa would be one too. Your stats are way OFF. Still, you are right about treating individuals as individuals, something I’ve preached too for as long as I can remember. Coming from a “black” country, my book is dedicated to 2 black ladies the likes of which cannot be matched among whites: ladies of the finest upbringing and nobility of character!!!! My dad’s caretaker is a gem: a black man. Kind and sweet like nothing I’ve seen among whites. Myron Robert Pauli, you are right about your reminder, not your numbers.

Tyranny Strives For Uniformity: The Onslaught Against Steve Hofmeyr

Free Speech, Media, Natural Law, Political Correctness, Race, Racism, South-Africa

South African media (even more illiberal than America’s) have almost nothing positive to say about Steve Hofmeyr, an immensely popular singer, songwriter, actor and Afrikaner activist. (In the new multicultural South Africa, Afrikaner identity is tantamount to a “racist” identity, naturally.) For speaking out of turn, the forces of tyranny have converged on Hofmeyr with the intent to silence him, and worse. Note the sovietized nomenclature used to bring one man to heel and to induce conformity: Hofmeyr is said to go against “nation-building,” to be “extremely abnormal,” to express a “startling sentiment.”

OMG!

A fellow named Brad Cibane, in training at the American Ivy League (which, increasingly, does not stand for true intellectual excellence) to excel as Conformity Enforcer in South Africa, illustrates his terrifying notion of allowable speech. Deploying somewhat specious distinctions such as the “vertical right to free speech vs. horizontal right to free speech”— Cibane does, however, make a valid point with respect to Hofmeyr’s court injunction against a clown called Conrad Koch. Both have a natural right to speak out of turn. Nevertheless, I do understand Hofmeyr wanting to use all arrows in his quiver because the deck—the state included—is stacked against him and his cause.

The libertarian imperative here is to deal with the meta-issues, leaving out the substance of the offending words: They are irrelevant. As this column has explained, policing what people say for political propriety is not a dance in which libertarians should partake—it is “a dance adopted by the political establishment to cow contrarians into submission. By going on the defensive—allowing themselves to be drawn into these exchanges—libertarians are, inadvertently, conceding that speech should be policed for propriety, and that those who violate standards set by the PC set are somehow defective on those grounds alone, and deserve to be purged from “polite” company.”

Black Caesar, Black AG

Conflict, Crime, Law, Race, Racism

Other than interfering with the decision of Missouri Governor Jay Nixon to declare a state of emergency in Ferguson, on the eve of the grand jury’s decision in the matter of Michael Brown, as well as instructing local law enforcement authorities in “proper” policing, not to mention inserting himself qua long-suffering black man into the narrative of oppression—the attorney general of black America, Eric Holder, delivered these not-so veiled introductions, Friday:

* To Police: “It is vital to engage in planning and preparation, from evaluating protocols and training to choosing the appropriate equipment and uniforms.” (How about adding garlands around the neck, Hawaii-style?)

* Guess whose side the AG is on: The “demonstrations and protests … have sought to bring attention to real and significant underlying issues involving police practices, implicit bias, and pervasive community distrust.”

* Listen-up, you “nation of cowards,” hurry up and change your errant ways: “… demonstrations like these have the potential to spark a sustained and positive national dialogue, to provide momentum to a necessary conversation, and to bring about critical reform.”

* “… progress will not come easily, and long-simmering tensions will not be cooled overnight. These struggles go to the heart of who we are, and who we aspire to be [an Obama oft-repeated cliché], both as a nation and as a people—and it is clear that we have a great deal of important work to do.”

True to type, Holder has taken sides.

MORE.

Keeping A Cool Head About Proceedings In Ferguson

Justice, Law, Race

I’ve described him as “a usually reserved, dignified, civil-rights attorney.” Writing in The Daily Beast, Paul Callan expatiates on those “ill-informed ‘experts'” who’re misleading the public on the grand jury proceedings in the shooting death of 18-year-old Michael Brown by Officer Darren Wilson. “There’s No Conspiracy in Ferguson’s Secret Jury”:

… If the evidence provides reasonable cause to believe a crime was committed, the grand jurors’ oath requires a vote to indict.

On the other hand, if Officer Wilson is found to have acted lawfully in his use of deadly force, then he deserves a dismissal and the right to salvage whatever scraps of a normal life will be left for him when the case is over. Only the facts of this case are relevant. The grand jury is not charged with resolving the issue of police brutality or even sending a message about it.

The law authorizes police officers to use deadly physical force in a wider variety of situations than permitted for ordinary citizens. It can be used not only in self-defense but also in certain cases to subdue a fleeing felon who poses a danger to the officer or the public. A police officer has no duty to retreat and can stand his ground even though an encounter with a potentially dangerous suspect might be avoided by backing off and waiting for help. The prosecutor will provide instructions on these and other important legal principles before the grand jury votes to indict or return “No True Bill,” precluding a trial.

Though the grand jury is an imperfect forum for resolving social issues, it works very well in finding truth. …

… The grand jury inquiry affords opportunity to test accuracy of witness accounts. If the witness did in fact witness such a terrible crime, the testimony will survive in the crucible of cross-examination. If true, it will have a discernable consistency with the forensic evidence. Was the witness really in the time and place to have made the claimed observations? Was the suspect raising his hands in a surrender gesture or could the arm placement have been viewed from a different angle as an aggressive “tackle” gesture? How close was Michael Brown to Officer Wilson when he turned in Wilson’s direction? How much time did the officer have to react? Do the varied autopsy reports support or contradict witness testimony? Did Michael Brown have a motive to violently attack the officer?

MORE.