Jena 6: Update by ABC’s The Blotter
July 30, 2007 by Laura | Trackback URI
ABC News’ The Blotter has a decent article: Black Youth Facing 22 Years for Schoolyard Fight. The money quote?
The Justice Department would not comment on the meeting because it is part of “ongoing casework.” The district attorney could not be reached for comment.
Ongoing casework by the Community Relations Service or by the Civil Rights Division? It makes all the difference. The CRS’ recent forum in Jena basically amounted to “Simmah down, people!” The rather bizarre query to attendees for suggestions on how they think the DOJ should have handled the situation added insult to injury with this bizarre comment:
[US Attorney Donald Washington] mentioned and addressed each of the complaints he thought community members have raised in recent months — selective and malicious prosecution, the fact that some students have been suspended and others expelled, hate crimes and patterns or practice of racism.Many questioned whether there was prosecutorial misconduct on the part of LaSalle Parish District Attorney Reed Walters. He did not attend the forum, citing a judicial gag order.
Washington said selective prosecution is very hard to prove, and in order to do so he would have to have to “dig in his head” to determine if Walters was treating black and white people differently.
In fact, neither extrasensory perception nor brain surgery are methods used to determine selective prosecution..
In order to establish a prima facie case of selective prosecution, a defendant must show both “(1) that others similarly situated have not been prosecuted, and (2) that the prosecution is based on an impermissible motive, i.e. discriminatory purpose or intent.” Id. at 475 (emphasis added). See also United States v. Bourgeois, 964 F.2d 935, 938 (9th Cir. 1992). The impermissibly discriminatory purpose or motive must imply “that the decision-maker selected or reaffirmed a particular course of action at least in part because or, not merely in spite of, its adverse effects upon an identifiable group. The identifiable group is typically a race, religion, or group of persons exercising a constitutional right.” Gutierrez, 990 F.2d at 476 (citations omitted). Selective prosecution claims are evaluated according to ordinary equal protection standards. Bourgeois, 964 F.2d at 938. Similarly, to establish a prima facie case of vindictive prosecution, a defendant must make a “showing that charges of increased severity were filed because the accused exercised a statutory, procedural, or constitutional right in circumstances that give rise to an appearance of vindictiveness.” United States v. Gallegos-Curiel, 681 F.2d 1164, 1168 (9th Cir. 1982).
How should it be handled? Investigate. Investigate. Investigate. The government is chock full of investigations for far less life-impacting situations than putting a bunch of teenagers in prison for a high school fight. Surely they can spare a little time and some resources for this one.
Comments