It's an unpopular opinion, but I believe the judge presiding over the federal trial of the three men who killed Ahmaud Arbery should have honored the government's and McMichaels plea deal.
Not because I think proving that the defendants were motivated by racism isn't important.
In fact I think it's vital. The state trial whitewashed that those men lynched Ahmaud Arbery. Maybe that was necessary to gain a conviction. States' failure to secure convictions in these cases are one of the reasons federal civil rights cases are brought. vox.com/22801394/racis…
My feelings are rooted in a few things.
1. Knowing that the men would have had to admit that they killed Ahmaud because of racism if they pleaded guilty. That's powerful. If they are convicted at trial they won't because they will appeal.
2. There is no guarantee they will be convicted, which people seem to be assuming they will. The prosecutor at the state trial deliberately didn't mention race because she calculated that would more likely harm than help the state's case. Why would this be different?
3. The men are appealing their convictions in the state case. As part of the plea deal in the federal case, they would give up their right to appeal in the state case.
4. The McMichaels are serving life without parole in the state case. All they would get as a result of the federal plea deal is to serve their sentences in federal not state prison.
Contrary to popular opinion, federal prison is not Club Med. It is still horrific.
Let me also say, I don't think there could be someone more sympathetic or courageous than Ahmaud Arbery's mother, Ms. Wanda Cooper Jones, who directly appealed to the judge to reject this plea deal. Dare I say I would the same as her for my own son if I had one.
Study after study already shows that Black people get sentenced to much more time when the complainant is White, especially if the family make victim impact statements.
I also know, however, that everything about this case is atypical. White men do not get tried for killing Black people. Allowing this precedent will hurt Black people because they are so massively over-represented in the criminal legal system.
It's not that we should not bear witness to what victims' families have to say , it's just it can privilege "perfect victims," victims who have family to fight for them.
They are also deserving of justice. This is so far from perfect justice. If these men are convicted in federal court, if they serve life without parole in state prison, that too is not justice for Ahmaud.
Justice would be if Ahmaud were alive.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Of course almost 2,000 of them call in sick or are AWOL every day, so that reduces their numbers, but that still leaves a ratio of 1 corrections officer per incarcerated person, four times the national average. thecity.nyc/2021/7/11/2257…
Rikers guards have left housing units with almost no staff, have left their posts and watched as people have died by suicide to justify their campaign to get the city to employ more guards. nydailynews.com/new-york/nyc-c…
The client had a drug addiction. He shoplifted to get drugs. He was in horrible physical pain because he was dying, but the ADA was completely unsympathetic.
I remember the judge saying there was "nothing he could do" in these circumstances, even tho he had complete discretion.
Our client was only in jail in the first place because he had shoplifted and the ADA had charged that case as a felony burglary. He had a substantial record for drug and petty theft cases. He couldn't afford bail.
Today in NY that case would not be eligible for bail.
Pulling people over for tinted windows is a form of "broken windows" policing that targets Black drivers - see observations by @GangiFromProp and @MarshallProj .
Moreover, like most traffic stops (and indeed police pursuits for serious crimes) there are far better alternatives - police here had Mr. Aristhee's plates.
in other cases that are not traffic stops there are usually cameras that allow police to follow up.