Showing posts with label civil rights. Show all posts
Showing posts with label civil rights. Show all posts

Tuesday, March 27, 2018

Alabama calls off execution

Doyle Lee Hamm, who survived Alabama's attempt to execute him last month, will not face another date with the executioner.

After last month's botched execution, in which medical personnel poked and stuck Mr. Hamm in the arms, legs and groin in a desperate attempt to find a vein into which they could pump a lethal dose of drugs before giving up the ghost, Mr. Hamm filed a civil rights lawsuit against the state.

This morning, Mr. Hamm and the State of Alabama reached an agreement by which a new execution date will not be set in exchange for Mr. Hamm dropping his lawsuit against the state.

For those not familiar with the case, Mr. Hamm is now 61 years old and has cancer. He was sentenced to death for the murder of hotel clerk Patrick Cunningham back in 1987. On February 22, 2018, Mr. Hamm was scheduled to be murdered by the state. For two-and-a-half hours medical personnel stuck him with needles in vain because his veins had deteriorated from chemotherapy treatments and from years of drug use.

Mr. Hamm wasn't the first inmate tortured by the state in an attempt to kill and he won't be the last. Luckily for him he had Columbia law professor Bernard Harcourt working tirelessly in his corner. May the next person in Mr. Hamm's position be so lucky.

See also:

Cooper, Stephen, "Fighting the death penalty with James Baldwin," Montgomery Advertiser (3/22/18)

Monday, January 15, 2018

Whitewashing MLK Day

I got quite the chuckle when I saw a link to a Fox News story in my Twitter feed decrying the "media" for politicizing Martin Luther King day. According to the sages at Fox, today is a day to celebrate national unity, not divisiveness.

That, my friends, is the biggest attempt to whitewash MLK day since national chain stores began running MLK day specials.

King is now revered among some on the right side of the spectrum because he preached non-violence - and because he's now dead. During the 1960's those on the right side of the political spectrum called him a rabble rouser, a Communist and an assortment of names I'm not going to print.

Dr. King's work wasn't about "national unity," it was about black folk in this country getting on equal footing with their oppressors. Dr. King was hated by white folk all around the country and particularly by those in the political establishment in the South.

Those on the right love to quote from Dr. King's Washington Mall speech in which he spoke about young black children and young white children living in a world of equal opportunity. What they never cared for was the struggle for those young black children to get to the same starting line as their white counterparts.

The right also doesn't want to talk about Dr. King's Poor Person Campaign, his work against the Vietnam War and his work with labor organizers in the South. Never forget that King was assassinated the day after speaking to a group of striking sanitation workers in Memphis.

What apparently has Fox all in a tizzy is this cover of The New Yorker magazine that depicts Dr. King also with Colin Kaepernick and Michael Bennett kneeling. Fox would like you to believe that Dr. King was a non-threatening black preacher who spoke in generalities about someday black and white folk being judged on their merits and not the color of their skin.

Fox would like you to forget about the protests. They would like you to forget about firefighters turning water hoses on peaceful protesters. They would like you to forget about police officers turning their dogs loose on peaceful protesters. They would like you to forget about police officers beating peaceful protesters on the Edmund Pettis Bridge. They would like you to forget about the struggle for black folks to vote. They would like you to forget that these events occurred in the 1960's. That's within our lifetime.

Dr. King's life wasn't about national unity. His life was about the struggle for equality. And struggle means protest. It means making those in power feel uncomfortable. It means asking difficult questions. And that's what the whitewashers are trying to hide.

Wednesday, August 28, 2013

Wake up America!

Today, on the 50th anniversary of the 1963 March on Washington, we will hear countless clips from the "I Have a Dream" speech given by Martin Luther King, Jr. What you won't hear much of is the speech given by a 23-year old John Lewis.

Now before we go any further it's important to realize that each of the speakers had to hand in copies of their speeches to the organizers of the march - lest someone get a bit too militant for Uncle Sam's tastes. It is also worth noting that the mainstream media is all over the 50th anniversary of the march and the question repeated over and over again is whether Rev. King's dream has been realized.

The coverage shows the fascination we have in memorializing events after a certain number of years have passed. Instead of focusing on the woeful job our government has done in ensuring freedom and equality, we'll have an orgy of praise for the anniversary of a speech. Instead of focusing on the shameful minimum wage and the absurdity of a full-time worker living below the poverty line, we'll talk about a dream. Instead of focusing on the ways our criminal (in)justice system has criminalized being young and black, or instead of focusing on the disparity of sentencing in drug cases, we'll hold hands and slap ourselves on the back for how far we've come in the last 50 years.

Mr. Lewis was the leader of the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee (SNCC). He was beaten and almost killed during the Freedom Rides. He is now a 13-term Congressman and a member of Georgia's congressional delegation. He is also the sole surviving speaker from that day.

While Rev. King's speech has a deep resonance with those who champion freedom and equality, Mr. Lewis' speech talks about the nuts and bolts of oppression. His speech is a cry to organize to fight. His speech is a condemnation of the two major parties who worked together to preserve Jim Crow. It is a call for economic justice.
We march today for jobs and freedom, but we have nothing to be proud of.  For hundreds and thousands of our brothers are not here.  For they are receiving starvation wages, or no wages at all.  While we stand here, there are sharecroppers in the Delta of Mississippi who are out in the fields working for less than three dollars a day, twelve hours a day.  While we stand here there are students in jail on trumped-up charges.  Our brother James Farmer, along with many others, is also in jail. We come here today with a great sense of misgiving. 
It is true that we support the administration’s civil rights bill.  We support it with great reservations, however.  Unless Title III is put in this bill, there is nothing to protect the young children and old women who must face police dogs and fire hoses in the South while they engage in peaceful demonstrations.  In its present form, this bill will not protect the citizens of Danville, Virginia, who must live in constant fear of a police state.  It will not protect the hundreds and thousands of people that have been arrested on trumped charges.  What about the three young men, SNCC field secretaries in Americus, Georgia, who face the death penalty for engaging in peaceful protest? 
As it stands now, the voting section of this bill will not help the thousands of black people who want to vote.  It will not help the citizens of Mississippi, of Alabama and Georgia, who are qualified to vote, but lack a sixth-grade education.  “One man, one vote” is the African cry.  It is ours too.  It must be ours! 
We must have legislation that will protect the Mississippi sharecropper who is put off of his farm because he dares to register to vote.  We need a bill that will provide for the homeless and starving people of this nation.  We need a bill that will ensure the equality of a maid who earns five dollars a week in a home of a family whose total income is $100,000 a year.  We must have a good FEPC bill. 
My friends, let us not forget that we are involved in a serious social revolution.  By and large, American politics is dominated by politicians who build their careers on immoral compromises and ally themselves with open forms of political, economic, and social exploitation.  There are exceptions, of course.  We salute those.  But what political leader can stand up and say, “My party is the party of principles”?  For the party of Kennedy is also the party of Eastland.  The party of Javits is also the party of Goldwater.  Where is our party?  Where is the political party that will make it unnecessary to march on Washington? 
Where is the political party that will make it unnecessary to march in the streets of Birmingham?  Where is the political party that will protect the citizens of Albany, Georgia?  Do you know that in Albany, Georgia, nine of our leaders have been indicted, not by the Dixiecrats, but by the federal government for peaceful protest?  But what did the federal government do when Albany’s deputy sheriff beat Attorney C.B. King and left him half-dead?  What did the federal government do when local police officials kicked and assaulted the pregnant wife of Slater King, and she lost her baby? 
To those who have said, “Be patient and wait,” we have long said that we cannot be patient.  We do not want our freedom gradually, but we want to be free now!  We are tired.  We are tired of being beaten by policemen.  We are tired of seeing our people locked up in jail over and over again.  And then you holler, “Be patient.”  How long can we be patient?  We want our freedom and we want it now.  We do not want to go to jail.  But we will go to jail if this is the price we must pay for love, brotherhood, and true peace. 
I appeal to all of you to get into this great revolution that is sweeping this nation.  Get in and stay in the streets of every city, every village and hamlet of this nation until true freedom comes, until the revolution of 1776 is complete.  We must get in this revolution and complete the revolution.  For in the Delta in Mississippi, in southwest Georgia, in the Black Belt of Alabama, in Harlem, in Chicago, Detroit, Philadelphia, and all over this nation, the black masses are on the march for jobs and freedom. 
They’re talking about slow down and stop.  We will not stop.  All of the forces of Eastland, Barnett, Wallace, and Thurmond will not stop this revolution.  If we do not get meaningful legislation out of this Congress, the time will come when we will not confine our marching to Washington.  We will march through the South; through the streets of Jackson, through the streets of Danville, through the streets of Cambridge, through the streets of Birmingham.  But we will march with the spirit of love and with the spirit of dignity that we have shown here today.  By the force of our demands, our determination, and our numbers, we shall splinter the segregated South into a thousand pieces and put them together in the image of God and democracy.  We must say: “Wake up America!  Wake up!”  For we cannot stop, and we will not and cannot be patient. 

Thursday, May 3, 2012

Update: Texas blocked from killing inmate

Last evening was the date the State of Texas had chosen to kill Anthony Bartee, who was convicted in 1996 of the murder of David Cook. Last evening the State of Texas was denied its bloodlust when the Fifth Circuit refused to lift a stay of execution from a federal district judge.

Mr. Bartee filed suit against the Bexar County District Attorney's Office under Section 1983, alleging that the District Attorney violated his civil rights by withholding crime scene evidence that could have been tested for DNA. A federal district judge granted the stay based on the lawsuit. The State appealed the stay to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals arguing that granting the stay would reward Mr. Bartee for filing a last minute suit in an attempt to put off his execution date.

The Fifth Circuit refused to lift the stay asking for more information regarding the claims made by both parties.

Mr. Bartee filed the civil rights lawsuit after his writ requests for additional DNA testing were denied. Those requests were denied, in part, because Mr. Bartee had already admitted being at the crime scene so any DNA evidence wouldn't exonerate him, it would just show that other people had been at the crime scene at some point in time.

Last night's events are a win for those of us fighting to abolish the death penalty - but it is likely to be but a temporary reprieve.

Monday, September 8, 2008

Update: Depositions ordered in Hood case



State District Judge Greg Brewer has ordered retired Judge Verla Sue Holland and former Collin County D.A. Tom O'Connell to testify under oath regarding their alleged affair while Charles Dean Hood's case was being tried.

Mr. O'Connell was deposed by attorneys representing Mr. Hood for two hours on Monday evening. He refused to comment after leaving the courthouse following his deposition. Judge Holland is scheduled to be deposed on Tuesday morning.

Earlier in the day, Judge Holland's attorney, Bill Boyd, sought to have the case moved to federal court under the theory that Mr. Hood was pursuing a civil rights claim. Mr. Hood's attorneys argued that the matter before the state court was a preliminary matter and that there was no federal jurisdiction over the case.

U.S. District Judge Richard Schell agreed with Mr. Hood's attorneys and ordered the case back to state court.

Mr. Boyd seemed more upset that Mr. Hood's attorneys moved for depositions 18 years after the trial in which Mr. Hood was convicted, than he was in whether or not Judge Holland was sleeping with Mr. O'Connell at the time of Mr. Hood's trial.

Gov. Perry has yet to make a decision on Mr. Hood's request for a reprieve from the executioner.

In a related development (for a story that just seems to get more bizarre each passing day) an assistant attorney general who used to represent Judge Holland, has filed a grievance against Attorney General Greg Abbott just days after Mr. Abbott sent a letter to the Collin County District Attorney urging him to look into the allegations of the affair between Judge Holland and Mr. O'Connell.