shinerbock:
"All this aggression should be first directed at the accuser, if we actually believe these boys are innocent.
I read your post, directed at me, which should be sufficient to stand as a basis for my reply. I don't question that racial tension exists in Durham. I question your interpretation that Al Sharpton went down to Durham seeking justice. Simply because he says that is what he accomplished there, doesn't mean his (or your) assertions are in accord with the facts.
Of course the controversy was there prior to him arriving. One can obviously stir and further play on people's emotions during an existing crisis. The fact that there was existing racial tension furthers my concern regarding the way he approached the situation. If racial tension already existed, how is he helping the community by supporting one side over the other, especially without any rational basis for doing so?
Lets suppose that he went to Durham with the intention of ensuring justice on behalf of the accuser. Why would he feel the need to do so? We've established that the city had existing racial tension, but was there any indication that this woman was receiving unfair treatment? Was the legal process too slow for Sharpton? If it was too slow, perhaps that was quite justified, considering what we've learned as the situation proceeded. Even if his intentions were lofty as he proclaims, his conduct was still questionable, in my opinion. First, operating under our previous (and rather optimistic) assumptions, he determined that the risk of injustice was so great in Durham that it required his presence. Second, despite very little evidence, he immediately sided with the accuser. Why would he do so? Quite obviously, because she was a black woman in an area he deemed incapable of adequately providing justice for a minority. Third, he proceeded to rally the black community in the area, pitching them against the school and these boys, spreading further the crevasse already existing within the city.
As for the boys learning to respect others, I think its pretty ridiculous to paint an entire athletic organization with such a broad brush. We have little, if any, indication that these boys in particular did anything inappropriate.
You're obviously welcome to start a Nifong thread if you so choose. However, I really haven't heard anyone defending his conduct, so I doubt it would be as interesting."
As soon as the media got wind that criminal charges
might have been brought against members of the lacrosse team, strong efforts were made to attack the credibility of the accuser.
That was the first rush to judgement in the whole situation.
That atmosphere of "trying the victim" is what caused all the unrest in the first place. Think about it-how else would all of these people have known so many details about the party in the first place? The media coverage of this alleged crime (which is not uncommon to college campuses) created the volatility that brought Sharpton and the NAACP down there. Furthermore, Sharpton has been making it clear for quite some time that his organization's presence has to be requested. He doesn't just swoop down all Superman type (usually). So we have to assume that someone or some entity intimately related to the situation requested his assistance. My guess is that the local NAACP chapter made the call, because they knew the national media would follow him as they often do. This is what I was referring to in my initial response to you. Even if that didn't happen the motivation was obviously the same. The feeling in that community was that the privileged, white kids were going to get off light (or get off period) and that the government was not going to take this crime seriously because the alleged victim is a black stripper. This is not an uncommon issue for advocates of victim's rights (all of whom are not black). And I've already mentioned the racial overtones. That's why there were
white and black people that appeared to be siding with the victim. There were victim's rights issues and deeply rooted racial tensions at work here. And these issues are still present.
Are you somehow in Al Sharpton's head? Do you know him personally? Why can't you take what he said to be his true reason for being there? I don't find it so hard to believe especially considering his reaction as the DA's conduct became more and more suspect and the case basically disintegrated. What do you say to his statement that he made on his radio show? I'm asking because it's as if you don't acknowledge it at all. I think that it's incredible to continue to paint Al Sharpton with the same brush that you accuse me of using against the lacrosse players. My "brushstroke" is covered with the conduct of its own members (by their own admission) and apparently the media, president of Duke, and some of the student body have their own paintbrushes as well. Go figure.
You are right about one thing. A thread on Nifong would not be as "interesting." Apparently, you guys are just as hell bent on blaming Sharpton for something as some of you claim black people are for blaming white people for all "our" problems.
Whatever.
Threaded Mode
