(Hint:
It’s not because it opposes the liberal agenda – it’s because it opposes
conservative values.)
The
most recent explosion of outrage at alleged police misconduct and inappropriate
government response has centered around the case of Breonna Taylor, a black
woman from Louisville Kentucky who was shot and killed on the 13th of March.
Her death occurred as the result of a raid on her home conducted by Louisville
police operating pursuant to a “no-knock” warrant obtained in connection with
an ongoing investigation into people other than Breonna Taylor.
Taylor
has since become a symbol of the outrage felt by African Americans at the
manner in which they are treated by law enforcement. The latest manifestation
of that outrage occurred this week when a grand jury, following presentations
by Kentucky prosecutors, declined to indict the officers involved for anything
other than a single “wanton endangerment” charge. Even that charge was largely
unrelated to the Taylor death, as it was sustained on the basis of shots having
gone through the walls of adjoining apartments. This will conceivably make the
granting and execution of the actual warrant used to enter the Taylor residence
immaterial, which has led to further outrage.
It
would be the contention of critics of the Kentucky authorities that they did
not “vigorously” pursue an indictment and that the structured charges that
emerged from the grand jury proceedings are far more indicative of authorities
trying to cover their ass than pursue justice. As to why this would be their
position please google “ham sandwich” and “grand jury”. The City of Louisville
obviously thinks there was a screw up here, even if a grand jury seems to be OK
with it. They just wrote a $12 million check to Breonna Taylor’s family. Here’s
a hint – you don’t usually pay someone 12 mill if you think you did nothing
wrong.
To
counter this criticism the conservative “law and order” response has been
largely to attack the personal reputation of Breonna Taylor herself – saying
things like “she wasn’t asleep”, “she still was talking to her ex-boyfriend –
she even bailed him out once”, “she hadn’t worked as an EMT for a while” “even
if the warrant was “no-knock” the cops did knock” and so on. I think that last
one is pretty unlikely (there are many witnesses who contradict it, the
original police statement was the opposite, the behavior of all parties on site
make it HIGHLY unlikely that there was an effective announcement of police
presence and, most tellingly, common sense tells you that you don’t get a
no-knock warrant and then decide “Ah, just to be nice – let’s knock”.
But
look, I’ll concede every one of those statements above to the Breonna Taylor
critics – not because I think any of them are particularly important (or true)
– but because they do not represent why people are so pissed off at the
conservative response to killings like those of Breonna Taylor. I’m not
frustrated because in abandoning Breonna Taylor to the same old tactics of
tearing down the victim conservatives are so ready to oppose what would be
assumed to be the liberal position. No – I’m frustrated because in adopting
that approach conservatives have proven themselves racist by so readily
abandoning THEIR OWN stated positions.
How
do I know this to be true? – Review the following timeline concerning the
events that happened in the 1990’s at Ruby Ridge, Idaho. There is some
commentary I’ve put in there to show why I’ve pulled it up.
Chronology of
events in the siege at Ruby Ridge, Idaho:
* Oct. 24, 1989: Randy
Weaver accused of selling two sawed-off shotguns to an undercover federal
agent. (Conservatives have, perhaps rightly, pointed to this as entrapment).
1990:
* June 12: Federal
agents approach Weaver about becoming an informant on other white separatists
in northern Idaho.
* December: Federal
grand jury in Boise indicts Weaver for selling illegal weapons to the
undercover agent.
1991:
* Jan. 17: Weaver and
his wife, Vicki, arrested. (See “his wife” as being the equivalent of “ex-girlfriend”
as a coercive tactic).
* Feb. 20: Weaver fails
to appear for trial in Moscow, Idaho. Federal bench warrant issued for his
arrest. (The warrant application over states and mis-characterizes the
case).
* March 14: Weaver
indicted for failure to appear at trial.
* March 15: The Weavers
and their three children begin 18-month sit-in in cabin near Naples, Idaho.
Friends keep them supplied; Kevin Harris visits the cabin periodically.
Marshals keep the cabin under surveillance.
1992:
* Aug. 21: Reconnaissance
team of deputy marshals unexpectedly encounters Harris, Weaver’s son, Samuel,
14, and family dog. Deputy U.S. Marshal William Degan, Samuel Weaver and dog
killed in shootout. Federal, state and local authorities and National Guard
troops surround cabin. (Botched warrant, resulting in death of an innocent –
sound familiar?)
* Aug. 22: Mrs. Weaver,
42, killed by FBI sharpshooter Lon Horiuchi, who also wounds Harris and Weaver.
Horiuchi said he fired because he believed they would shoot at a surveillance
helicopter. (Again – inappropriate use of force ending in the killing of an
innocent person. Admittedly – someone who might have been alleged to be
involved in a crime – but agents are not judge and jury – or at least aren’t
supposed to be).
* Aug. 23: Harris
charged with Degan’s murder and Weaver charged with lesser crimes in federal
case.
* Aug. 30: Harris
surrenders.
*Aug. 31: Weaver
surrenders.
* Sept. 17: Weaver
pleads innocent to aiding in Degan’s murder.
*Sept. 18: Harris
pleads innocent to murdering Degan.
1993:
* April 13: Jury
selection begins for the murder-conspiracy trial of Weaver and Harris.
* July 8: Jury acquits
Weaver and Harris in the slaying of Degan. Harris acquitted on all four other
charges. Weaver convicted on two minor counts. (Harris claim of self-defense
is upheld, in that charges have been dropped against Breonna Taylor’s boyfriend
the same can be assumed there as well).
1995:
* August: Justice
Department agrees to pay Weaver $100,000 and each of his three daughters $1
million to settle claims stemming from standoff. (Again, just sayin’, you
generally don’t see that many zeros unless there was wrongdoing.)
* Sept. 12: Citing his
right against self-incrimination, Horiuchi declines to tell U.S. Senate about
how he killed Mrs. Weaver. (In the Taylor case the grand-jury record has
been sealed).
* Sept. 26: Harris
tells Senate that law officers fired first.
1997:
* Aug. 15: Justice
Department decides against prosecuting senior FBI officials for alleged
cover-up that followed siege. Department’s two-year criminal investigation
reaffirms 1994 decision against prosecuting Horiuchi. (In the words of a
famous Marine – “Surprise, surprise, surprise”).
In
fact, there are a huge number of similarities between the two events –
beginning with the fact that the “war on drugs” is very similar to the ATF
pursuit of weapons caches in terms of justifications for governmental
overreach. I’m not going to get in to the merits of the case, but the right
wing has long pointed to the use of overly broad warrants, in the hands of
armed, aggressive and overzealous agents, which needlessly involve innocent
third parties, followed by after-the-fact justifications and payoffs - as the
real reason why there was an outbreak of violence in places like Ruby Ridge,
Waco and, ultimately, Oklahoma City. They state, correctly, that they are not
advocating or excusing such violence – but, they also say, “what can you expect
when continually faced with an oppressive government willing to bend their own
rules”?
Every
single one of those elements is present in the Breonna Taylor case as well.
Police investigations into low level crimes were used as justification for
ridiculously over the top warrants (why the hell would you need a no-knock
warrant to bring in a twenty-something nurse trainee?), which led to events
spiraling out of control, which led to deaths, which led to pay-offs, which led
to a failure to indict in instances where charges would ordinarily be expected.
My God, the two sets of events line up nearly perfectly. There must be some
difference between the two that has kept the right wing from adopting the cause
of Breonna Taylor. What might that difference be? What is different between
Breonna Taylor and Vicki Weaver? What COULD it be? Anything come to mind?
Anything?
Oh
yeah – that.
Conservatives
have claimed that if there was an actual case that showed police REALLY were
acting improperly, that governments REALLY were papering over race-based screw
ups, that people were REALLY dying because of systemic malfeasance - sure,
they’d be the first to condemn what went on. But George Floyd was on angel
dust, Rayshard Brooks was running away with a taser he had stolen, Jacob Blake
had a knife under the front seat of his car, there was no way to know Kyle
Rittenhouse had just shot three people… Excuse after excuse after excuse.
But,
with Breonna Taylor, here’s a case where the elements all line up perfectly
with the type of activity where, when it was a white person who was the victim
– it became a conservative cause célèbre – a reason for outrage - but let a
black person be at the other end of the gun…
Well,
not so much.
Conservatives
– Breonna Taylor was your chance to show that your objections to the criticisms
levelled against the law enforcement structure were not race-based, were, in
fact, color blind, not color coded. That the set of rules you wanted to live by
were applied equally. That those cases cited above – well, those weren’t
irrational excuses, they were logical conclusions. Instead, you turned to the
same old “blame the victim” approach – and you f*cked it up yet again.
I’m
not anti-police. Some of the people closest to me are members of the law
enforcement community. Some of my most diligent readers spent their entire
life’s career in uniform. My thing is – I can’t believe it is in the best
interest of either the police, or, in a larger sense “law and order” to avoid
the fairly obvious conclusion that there is a problem here. If every couple of
years (more recently, months) cities explode because of yet another killing –
something needs to change. Not EVERY victim can be wrong, not EVERY allegation
can be unfounded, not EVERY statistic can be mis-leading, not EVERY shooting
can be justified. It is time to face facts.
However,
instead of facing facts, conservatives (or, perhaps more accurately, those who
follow the lead of the current resident of the White House) create fables.
Those fables lead conservatives away from those things that used to be their
most cherished values - the values that led them to say they faced the world
realistically, and that it was the liberals who were living in the world of
make believe. Instead, now we get fables. The fable of anarchy. The fable of
BLM agitators. The fable of how calling out the National Guard is the best way
to deal with this, rather than just a short term means of sweeping it under the
rug.
The
fable of Donald Trump.
The
fable that, somehow, Breonna Taylor deserved to die because she just didn’t
open her door in time.
No comments:
Post a Comment