Laura: It’s not easy fighting for justice. If it were, more good people would become great people. It’s not easy doing what you do but you seem built for it. Keep it up and give yourself pep talks. Many, many people really appreciate what you do.

Now, to those that would jump up and wail that I have no idea what it means to be opressed… Third generation American. Grampa was fighting in the South Pacific when his Pops (my great-grandfather == who disagreed with the politics and fled the Kaiser) was killed on the streets of Jersey for being German. Gramma was Creek Indian – Born in 1932.
‘N’uff said.

I don’t have time to respond to every part of your post yet, I just want to say:

There is AMPLE evidence to prove what they were intending to do that day. None of it is contradicted. Many students gave details about how they threatened other students that day:

1.) Several male black students approached a male white student (eye witnesses name at least 3 who were threatened).
2.) The same 10 or 12 names were repeated as being the instigators, as well as the same names used during the attack.
3.) They made some comment alluding to a fight or that student being beat up.
4.) Some sort of physical contact was attempted or made by the male back students.

The beating that is being described is very likely what would have happened in the other situations had it been accelerated by some response from the student being bullied. That can definitely be inferred. I’m sorry, the fact that they just attacked his head and that they their time was rather limited to do damage doesn’t convince me that they are not guilty. Their actions before the fight speak volumes about their intentions, that were clearly carried out in the Justin Barker beating.

With a coach right there? More teachers coming on the run? How long do you think they had, to take turns like this?

And why only the head? Why not the body?

And the physical injury? One of the written reports mentioned that the swelling on his eye was going down even before he was checked out a couple of hours later. His injuries were not consistent with being hit, kicked, and stomped by five football players, and six fine athletes.

As for the jury, now exactly who was the classmate of whom, and how many of the jurists knew how many of the eyewitnesses or other participants? You’ll have to excuse me if I find their ability to weight the evidence impartially a little suspect.

I don’t want to take up more of Laura’s comments. I’m aware that she hit bandwidth limits a few days ago. I have a feeling that nothing I will say will change your mind, FromJena. But I also have a feeling that you’re personally involved with this in some say, and so you’ll have to excuse me if I feel that you have a bias as to how the people in this event are perceived. In particular, Reed Walters.

As for eyewitness testimony, can I recommend a couple of readings? They’re very interesting.

Errors in Eyewitness Identification Procedures

Eyewitness Fallibility

Eyewitness Recall

Why Eyewitnesses Screw Up

There’s another good report, but I couldn’t find it. A couple of good books, too.

Yes, I agree that it is reasonable to question the initial punch being Bell’s, but if you’ll notice that an eye witness who was in the lunch line near Bell said she heard him say “I swear on my Mama I’m gonna knock his block off.” Two or three people say they heard BELL say “I’ll teach that mother f***er to run his mouth.” More heard the words said but didn’t precisely implicate Bell. It’s not only people who viewed him throw the actual punch, it’s the instances that were pegged by eye witnesses that led UP to the initial punch that adds evidence towards the initial attacker being Bell.

As Laura and others have said, you’ll often find different versions of events when something goes down. Slight variances in stories. Eye witnesses view crimes differently. In fact, if everyone said the exact same thing, it’d be obvious that they were coached or were colluding to concoct a false report. The fact that so many pegged the SAME people at the scene so many times is very damaging to the defense.

Barker’s girlfriend wrote one thing, the guy who either helped her out of the way or pulled her hair wrote another. Who was this guy? Where did you get this information from. I haven’t read this side of the story yet.

If you’ll notice, few people peg more than 2-4 attackers in their statements. Students were walking to class, they all got different views from different angles at different times. Yeah, it happened fast, but I don’t understand why we should assume that they ALL kicked him in the head at the exact same time. Is it not possible for them to all take turns? They are football athletes and all of them appear agile. It would be very easy for them to do. Maybe this explains why no one listed every single attacker in one statement, because they DID take turns.

And I TOTALLY disagree that any decent lawyer would have had this case dismissed. The evidence is laid before us, and SEVEN PEOPLE implicate Bell in the attack. I forgot the exact number, but at LEAST 2 or 3 people say they saw Bell KICK Barker. Even if he WASN’T the initial attacker, others still wrote down that he was involved with the kicking. So it appears to me as if the evidence DOES support it. Just because one contradiction exists doesn’t mean the whole case collapses.

I agree, our courts are based on a system of reasonable doubt. But just looking at the eye witness statements and the repetetive nature of MOST of the details that are written in them, it appears that the prosecution has a very valid case. Bell was convicted by a jury from this evidence before his case was thrown out. Let’s not assume that, just because this jury was composed of “backwoods racist redneck Jena white folks” that they didn’t look at the evidence laid before them and make a truly unbiased judgment.

Reed Walters’ job is to gather evidence, arrest the people he feels is responsible for a crime, then make sure that they are punished appropriately. This is what he did. It is not the District Attorney’s duty to hold the defense attorney’s hand and guide him to evidence that will show a valid argument against his own case. I DO think he was off-base by asking for attempted murder charges, but aggravated battery is very appropriate for the crime in question. Of course, everyone’s opinion varies on that, but that one is mine.

A favorite tactic of those who teach police science and law is to stage an event, such as having a supposedly armed man run in and do something, and then collect the memories of the people in the room. Almost every witness will contradict the others. Witnesses are notorious for allowing their biases to influence their perception, and their perception influences what it is they ’see’.

The Coach sees one student punch Barker to the ground, other students see a different person, including Bell. Some say it was a person in a green hood.

Even Barker’s girlfriend — one guy stated that he moved her out of the way of harm, but she testifies that she was also attacked, and had her hair pulled.

People agree that Barker was knocked down between the door and a cement divider or wall — I’ll have to go back and check. Yet then six big guys all moved in at the same time, and proceeded to stomp on Barker, kick him, and punch him — all the while several teachers are moving in to break all of this up.

I found a picture of the door — it’s impossible for more than a couple of people to have been able to get into to attack the guy at one time. The physical evidence does not match what the eye witnesses state.

Only one person, who didn’t witness the event, was able to mention all six of the Jena 6 guys. Most witnesses say that people moved in to punch and kick Barker in the face. They all say the same thing, the face. Why? Makes no sense. If you were going to kcik the guy, you wouldn’t play mother may I have a turn to kick him in the face.

But I bet the kids saw Barker being hit in the face, knocked down, and one or two guys continued to hit him, one punching, another perhaps kicking (or was it? Or was it just moving in?) and they extrapolated from that to all six men moved in to punch stomp, and what not Barker all on the face only!.

Really. How amazingly selective of these young men. Most young men when they kick, they kick the body. Better target.

Any decent lawyer, in front a truly unbiased court, would have had this case dismissed, or at a minimum, would have been able to take apart the eyewitness testimony, especially when the physical evidence doesn’t support it, and the eyewitnesses contradict each other.

It doesn’t matter when you have five who say one thing, and four another, and eight something else — this is conflicting eyewitness testimony, and should all have been suspect.

Let’s also look at the inherent bias. People said “a bunch of black guys”, or we found out that at least one of those who testified against Bell also hung one of the nooses — this does show that there is a pre-existing bias in the witnesses perception that should have rung bells.

Our courts are based on a system of reasonable doubt. It doesn’t matter what people have done before, or who they are, or their color–all that matters is that it’s the job of the prosecutor to prove his or her case beyond a reasonable doubt.

DA Walters cherry picked the witnesses to present to the court. He failed his duty to the community. He made an assumption of who was supposed to be guilty, or who he wanted to be guilty, or who was most expeditious for the first trial, and then cherry picked the evidence presented. He even acted in violation of Louisiana law, which states that the only way that a juvenile can be tried as an adult for second degree aggregated assault is if the juvenile used a gun.

It’s just a pity that Bell did not competent counsel.

It’s also a pity that the people of Jena are willing to settle for so little from their legal system.

Also, Shelley, I strongly disagree with your case that all of the facts are contradicted in the eye witness statements. Eleven people say they saw Robert Bailey kick or punch Barker. Seven report they saw Shaw and Bell. Six report they saw Jones. Three report they saw Beard. I have not heard that mentioned by ANY news source or blogsite yet. That is hardly contradictory. Bell throwing the first punch has been contradicted. Purvis’ involvement in this attack is contradicted. I’m sure there are more, but these eye witness statements point to a very OBVIOUS overall theme. These guys were planning on doing what they did to Justin Barker that day. It’s difficult to argue this.

I have also not yet heard ANYWHERE except from these eye witness statements that:

1.) Some students mention a “hit list” that the Jena 6 had.
2.) Three or four students report these guys threatened them before AND AFTER the Barker beating.
3.) Only ONE eye witness statement points to Barker saying the “n” word. That one statement was Bell’s, who’s story that he was not involved has been contradicted by at least 7 eye witness statements.
4.) Robert Bailey never said a WORD about a beer bottle in his eye witness statement regarding the Fair Barn incident. There is also no medical report to prove such claims.
5.) Several have stuck to claims that there are contradicting statements regarding who threw the first punch and this is why Bell’s guilt is in question. Notice that at least one (maybe more, I forget) eye witness statement says they heard Bell saying he was gonna “knock his block off.” This should be factored in when determining his guilt and involvement in the situation. It proves intent.

There are SEVERAL other arguments that haven’t been brought to light until these eye witness statements have been put online for all to see. I will not list them all. To downplay these statements and to say they don’t shed some new light in the eyes of the public does not make alot of sense to me, personally. If this is your train of thought, you must be either:

1.) a very informed individual about this case, or
2.) someone who is intentionally downplaying these statement to detract readers from what they say

I will make no assumptions to this, as I don’t know you. Nevertheless, the public now has access to what the DA had to work with when the case first evolved. THAT is very new.

These documents cost $1.00 per page. In a perfect world, people could pool together with unlimited funds and get this entire case online, but it isn’t a perfect world. So until someone who has alot of money is willing to pay money out of their own wallets to get the rest of the documents, you’re not likely to see them. So costs were prohibitive when this research was conducted. In my opinion, someone like CNN or ABC who have millions of dollars at their disposal should be doing this, but it seems as if the truth is too boring for these companies. And if fifth-rate (no, second-rate does not do them justice) news outlets such as Democracy Now! and Collateral News would do the same thing that is being done now, people wouldn’t have been mislead about what actually happened in Jena. Instead they chose to click the 12x zoom lens into gear and focus on one side of the story, allowing plenty of room for even bolder assumptions and theories that were way off-based. They also have money at their disposal that few people have.

Even if not EVERY SINGLE ounce of information is being released about this case on this site and EvangelicalOutpost.com, that doesn’t mean the information being supplied is not valid.

In summary, be happy that you are now allowed to form your own judgment. It’s just sad that so many people have hardened their stance on this issue so much that, when the truth stares them in the face, their already-hardened assumptions will override their ability to change their stance in the order of fairness and balance.

I’m not only amazed that the DA took this to court, but that he won.

I’m not knocking the work, and appreciate the effort. Especially putting the medical record online. I do think that your mystery poster should have provided all of the document for the bail hearing — the fact he or she only included that small portion doesn’t necessarily speak well of their intentions.

As for the transcript, I rather hoped that someone would have a copy of the transcript online for folks to download, or that the court system would have online access. I have access to court documents here in Missouri, as well as the PACER system for federal documents. As you said with these, the more people have access to the actual documents, the more they can form an informed decision. Too bad.

If you want the docs, you have to go in person to the courthouse and pay for them. As we did. But you can call the La Salle Parish courthouse to verify that.

A half truth is worse than an out and out lie.

Most of this information should be accessible via request since it is public information. I am curious as to who this person feels they have to remain anonymous.