,
46 tweets,
9 min read
Read on Twitter
i’m headed into court now for the first day of a three day trial in the civil suit over the 2017 charlottesville city council vote to remove the lee and jackson statues. most of the issues in the case have already been ruled in, most of what’s left is determining damages, if any.
tyler has done a beautiful job summarizing the approximately 1000 hours of hearings leading up to the trial today
dailyprogress.com/news/august12/…
dailyprogress.com/news/august12/…
it’s a shame judge moore never went on one of @Jalane_Schmidt & dr andrea douglas’ tours of charlottesville’s confederate monuments. they symbolize more than just those men & their horses. they are monuments to racial terror.
the judge issued a ruling from the bench on the last reminding pretrial issue - the defense will not be allowed to argue that the statute protecting the confederate monuments violates the equal protection clause in this application.
judge moore said that he believes when “most people” look at the statues, their first thought isn’t about race at all but about “bravery and courage and bloodshed.” it’s unclear to me what facts he’s basing his belief about what most people feel.
the va statute that protects monuments/memorials to a number of conflicts was originally explicitly & solely about confederate monuments. moore argued that the amending and readopting of the statute over the years to include additional conflicts makes a weak argument invalid.
he quoted extensively from an opinion by justice alito in a recent supreme court case about a large cross, saying it’s impossible to know the original intent behind old monuments and that messages can change over time.
further, the law holds that merely receiving a message that makes one feel inferior or discriminated against does not constitute an actual injury when no actual unequal treatment from the government has taken place. he says no one is prevented from using the parks.
while it’s true we can’t know exactly what was in the hearts & minds of those that placed these statues in the 1920s, the facts are not exactly unclear
anyway, i better get back to my seat to hear arguments about damages & attorneys fees.
one hour lunch recess. having a great time listening to a bunch of rich old white dudes talk about how bad their feelings have been hurt! we’ve heard testimony from three of the plaintiffs so far. i’ve reaches semantic satiation on the phrase “vindication of the rule of law”
balancing my desire to update during the lunch break with the need have a decent lunch so i can go straight to the final public hearing on the renaming of an albemarle county school named after a racist as soon as court gets out tonight. it’s a busy day for white fragility.
the last hearing on the cale elementary renaming was exquisitely painful. looking forward to a full day of hearing from aggrieved racists.
one thing that’s stood out in the defense’s cross of the 3 plaintiffs who’ve testified so far is that their litigation agreement explicitly requires that any monetary award they may get from this case has to be donated to the monument fund, the nonprofit funding the suit.
counsel for the plaintiffs has said they seek $604,000 in attorneys fees plus $500 in compensatory damages per plaintiff.
the temporary courtroom we’re using while the main circuit court is being renovated has very loud window units that have to be turned off when court is in session. this causes frequent recesses to cool the courtroom when it gets too warm. how appropriately southern.
brian lambert and chris wayne, the two men who have served jail time for trespassing and destruction of property for removing the tarps placed over the confederate statues after A12, are outside the courthouse with a confederate flag. 
the witness called just before the recess is frank earnest, the chief of heritage defense for the virginia sons of confederate veterans.
washingtonpost.com/news/magazine/…
washingtonpost.com/news/magazine/…
a reporter with cville weekly asked wayne & lambert if they’re with anybody. wayne said “i’m with america.”
things are going just as well outside as inside
court adjourned for the day, and brian lambert has gone home, but chris wayne & his confederate flag are still out here shouting at people.
a man looking at this display through the courthouse windows told me he didn’t think it’s fair to call the confederate flag the flag of losers. i pointed out to him that the confederacy did, in fact, lose a whole war.
there’s a lot to recap from today, but please know that one of the plaintiffs, jock yellott (the executive director of the monument fund) broke down in tears on the stand because people are being really mean to robert e lee.
deputy city attorney lisa robertson asked yellott if he’d ever had a conversation with someone who thinks the monuments should be removed whose motivations he felt were sincere. he hemmed and hawed and said he can’t look into people’s hearts.
finally he recounted a single anecdote. he said he met a young woman in the park who said she’d never really thought twice about the statues until she learned that they represent white supremacy. “she’d been a victim of propaganda,” he said.
so this man, who testified that he often sits alone in the park reading a book waiting for unsuspecting tourists to lecture about this statue, said he has never not once spoken to someone who disagrees with him that he believes to be sincere in their views. incredible.
other highlights included plaintiff fred payne describing august 12, 2017 as “terribly disruptive” because people were on his lawn and frank earnest, the representative for the sons of confederate veterans, comparing the removing confederate statues to 9/11 (on 9/11, no less!)
plaintiff edward tayloe (who is also suing my friend jalane for talking about his family’s slave owning history & his involvement in this lawsuit) said this monument removal talk is TEARING THIS CITY APART!
plaintiff charles weber said after the tiki torch rally in may of 2017 he called jason kessler and asked him “what are you doing? this is not helping our case!” before penning a letter to the editor disavowing kessler.
“we don’t carry tiki torches - we come to court,” weber said.
“we don’t carry tiki torches - we come to court,” weber said.
weber, who was backpacking in yellowstone on 8/12/17, was originally appointed to represent james fields! he was only able to communicate intermittently by satellite phone at the time and when he heard his wife was being harassed, he assumed it must be ANTIFA!
... it was not antifa. he admitted on the stand the only people harassing his wife were journalists trying to get a hold of him for information about his appointment to represent the a murderer, nazi, and domestic terrorist.
(note: i’m not sure how he got out of the job but i hope his involvement in the lawsuit to keep the statues that incited the rally that precipitated the murder constituted a conflict of interest!)
plaintiff stephanie marshall’s, a local stone masonry company CEO, connection to the statues is apparently that her husband’s great great grandfather laid the paving stones that surround the statue & she thinks the statues are beautiful. 🤷♀️
the fifth plaintiff to testify today was a 94 year old woman. “for as long as i have memory, i’ve been walking past those statues,” she said. (the lee statue was erected the year before she was born!)
much of the issue of damages has surrounded the 188 days for which the statues were covered by tarps. council voted to cover the statues for a period of mourning after heather heyer was murdered. plaintiffs argue this harmed them because they couldn’t look at the statues.
when asked about the effect those tarps had on her, 94 year old virginia amos said “i was just saddened to a degree that i cannot even express. it brought tears to my eyes. it was very hurtful to not be able to see them as i’ve been used to.”
another plaintiff is the great great grand nephew of henry shrady, the scultptor who died in 1922 without finishing the lee statue.
he is the youngest plaintiff by far and a sculptor himself. he spoke softly and reverently of what is actually a really hideous piece of art.
he is the youngest plaintiff by far and a sculptor himself. he spoke softly and reverently of what is actually a really hideous piece of art.
(objectively speaking! and maybe shrady’s version would’ve been better but the proportions are bizarre. aside from being racist & all, it’s really just an ugly sculpture.)
when asked about damages, plaintiffs were asked to estimate the value of their involvement in the suit (many are lawyers who assisted with research & drafting) and what they’ve lost.
fred payne said that while the statues were covered, he was deprived of access to ART & that the only comparable art around here is monticello which costs $20 to visit. think of all the times he was deprived of free looks at those statues!!!
jock yellott asked the court to consider the value of the time of all! the people who didn’t get to look at the statue. he speculated about the value of that time at the minimum wage, which he repeatedly stated is $10/hr 🙄
this really did happen
a strange & upsetting thread throughout the day was the idea that the council’s vote to remove the confederate statues is what ruined the city’s reputation... not the nazi street riot & hate crime murder that happened because people like them can’t let go of a racist statue.
anyway, these people are all just debilitatingly disingenuous and desperately seeking validation for their victim complexes and i’m excited to hear another full day of it in the morning.
again, just for the sake of clarity - while this IS the trial for the lawsuit filed over the fate of charlottesville’s confederate monuments, everything interesting has already been decided. the judge has already ruled on enjoining the city from doing anything to the statues.
we are, legally speaking, stuck with those confederate statues unless the state law changes or a higher court rules differently on appeal. the judge did not allow the city to argue the statues violate the equal protection clause.
