[Peace-discuss] Re: [Discuss] Schwieghart's quote to WDWS

Wed Oct 21 16:56:47 CDT 2009

Something to munch on (related to this discussion): http://bit.ly/23Szt0

On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 4:45 PM, Mikhail Lyubansky <lyubanskym at gmail.com>wrote:

> Hi Melodye and everyone else,
>
> Thank you for taking the time to look into my work. I appreciate it, and
> though I approach my participation on this email list (and in the community
> more broadly ) as a member of the community, not as an academic, I do
> recognize that the two are difficult to separate and, indeed, that one has a
> strong influence on the other. I am also aware that the University (and its
> faculty) has not always been an ally to the less privileged segments of this
> community, so I try to tread as softly as I can. To that end, it was never
> my intention to silence or in any way diminish anyone else's voice. To the
> contrary, I have tried to support those who are trying to turn this tragic
> incident into a stronger and more equitable community, including publishing
> Marti's recent editorial on opednews. It is my intention to continue to be
> supportive of these efforts as we move forward. I couldn't agree more with
> your assertion that community voices have "an equal place on the traditional
> stage."
>
> Thank you also for taking the time to carefully spell out the case against
> Finney and others. I agree that the information that has been put out for
> public consumption thus far has been superficial and meager. The detailed
> description of how city policy is written and edited is very helpful,
> precisely in the way that you outlined, but more information is still needed
> regarding what exactly happened that day. I hope it will be forthcoming.
>
> Until then, I continue to be uncomfortable with the calls for Finney's
> resignation. Your paragraph below does not alleviate those concerns at all.
>
> Whether Finney claims he was not aware of what Norbits intended to do that
>> day, or whether Finney confirms this was a terrible accident that was not
>> intentional, it doesn't matter.  Because it is up to Finney to establish the
>> officer's conduct, and extent of force, as well as when to use deadly force
>> and or when to pull out a firearm and cock it in anticipation of feeling
>> they (officers) or (hostage) is in immediate and imminent danger.
>>
>
> What you're essentially saying is that it doesn't matter what Finney knew
> or didn't know or what he did or didn't do on that day.  That doesn't sit
> well with me.  I know there is a history of racism in the police dept. (and
> in the community more broadly) and I suspect that this incident would have
> played out differently if the "suspects" were white. But I value due
> process...and calls for a resignation at this point don't seem to be
> consistent with the notion of due process.
>
> I offer the above as a friendly comment. I'm not trying to change anyone's
> mind...or put a wrench in what concerned community members are trying to
> accomplish.  I just think there is a fine line between justice and revenge
> and would like to see us stay on the right side of that particular divide.
>
> Mikhail
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 3:50 PM, Melodye Rosales <
> melodye at nitrogendesign.com> wrote:
>
>> Mikhail, we appreciate your interest in the matter.  Your research and
>> expertise regarding racial misnomers both from within the African Diaspora
>> and outside of it may help you to look beyond the superficial information
>> being allowed out for public consumption.  The manipulation of the
>> underclass, the devaluing of the underclass, the dismissive attitude towards
>> the underclass that can easily be found in a conservative community that
>> lacks any folks of color at a decision making level where the buck stops
>> with them---so they don't fear losing their jobs---or mistakenly being
>> associated with the "Them"---those "disgruntled" "lazy" "baby-makin'" "Baby
>> Daddy Gone" "welfare-link card carriers"  "lechers of White Folk with jobs
>> who DO pay taxes"  and on and on..
>>
>> You role as a researcher, an academician at what we affectionately call,
>> The Public Ivy, one of the top ten public research institutions in the
>> nation, you must allow the community leaders voice to resonate and take an
>> equal place on the traditional stage.  Perhaps many of us may seem
>> unpolished, not very articulate, not well groomed, not well educated or well
>> read, scowls affixed permanently on our faces----but bare with us.  Simply
>> appearing to tell the truth does not make it true.  Simply appearing to look
>> balanced and reasonable, using a well metered voice accompanied by well
>> measured gestures----does mean you are speaking with sincerity or
>> transparency.  But I am sure you recognize this.
>>
>> What you may not recognize is the city of Champaign's policy making
>> process. Before you begin reading, I am using laymen terms to simplify for
>> all readers to understand.  This may increase my chances of being a bit
>> repetitive--so please forgive in advance.
>>
>> *In answer to your specific quote (above) The order of  policy created at
>> any governmental level/department in Champaign is as follows:*
>>
>> 1) City Manager, Steve Carter
>> 2) City Council
>> 3) Department Heads to enforce
>>
>> Any of the three (above) can request a policy to be established, revised,
>> edited or changed, but it is always passed through the City Council for an
>> official vote ---to accept or reject---or to table until a Study session can
>> be agreed upon by the majority of the council
>>
>>
>> *Here is the communities justification for asking for the resignations of
>> named individuals:*
>>
>> 1) Norbits is a subordinate of Chief Finney
>> 2) Chief Finney sets the parameters of what or what not within his
>> department level power.  But he is limited to policies already on the books
>> that have previously been approved by City Council.  In otherwords, Finney
>> cannot make the rules up as he goes if they are not drawn from pre-existing
>> policy that was approved by City Council
>> 3) Steve Carter controls the language of the policy when it is put up for
>> a vote at City Council.  Carter has Fred Stavins (City Atty) draft the
>> language to be presented
>> 4) The final word on what the policy looks like before it is presented to
>> City Council is up to Steve Carter (only)
>>
>>  note: What makes it awkward and often frustrating for Council Members is
>> that Carter has the sole authority to combine separate policies, under one
>> vote.  In otherwords, if one Council Member wants Section 8 to be included
>> as a recognized class and to adhere to the National Policy for
>> same----Carter may include a policy(ies) that would not be passed by the
>> same Council Members who want the Section 8 policy revised---it might be
>> something like allowing officers to use tasers.
>>
>> Clearly those opposed to Tasers will not vote yes----similarly, those who
>> oppose Section 8 won't vote yes. So, no proposed policy at that juncture
>> gets passed.
>>
>> Also known as: Blocking (layman term)
>>
>> This, for example, would not be to eliminate Tasers from the table---but
>> its sole purpose is to eliminate Section 8 from the table.
>>
>> Then, at a later date, Carter can draft another Taser policy without any
>> other policies attached---for that single vote, and it may get the majority
>> vote because the Council is only considering one issue, one policy and their
>> vote will only apply to that one matter.
>>
>> Also known as: Stacking the Deck in your favor (layman term)
>>
>> Though this is normal in politics when Bills and policies are on the floor
>> for a vote, it also depends on whose the chair of the group who can tilt in
>> in favor one way or block it from another.  The Chair in the Council is
>> Carter.
>>
>> Therefore, it is inconceivable for Carter not to have known that Finney
>> revised a standing policy that was previously approved by City Council.  And
>> both Carter and Finney know the rules of engagement.  They both know that
>> unless City Council signs off on it, those policies cannot override the
>> existing ones.  Hence, the community questioning this illegal move.  This
>> dishonest move, and what was the driving reason for this deception?
>>
>> Likewise, Finney is the Chief of Police. His men follow his direct orders.
>>
>> Whether Finney claims he was not aware of what Norbits intended to do that
>> day, or whether Finney confirms this was a terrible accident that was not
>> intentional, it doesn't matter.  Because it is up to Finney to establish the
>> officer's conduct, and extent of force, as well as when to use deadly force
>> and or when to pull out a firearm and cock it in anticipation of feeling
>> they (officers) or (hostage) is in immediate and imminent danger.
>>
>> And as for the so-called revised policy for "Use of Force" that allegedly
>> was introduced and put into effect on Oct. 1---would not be considered "in
>> effect" unless the Council approved.  And the Council never even saw the
>> document or knew of its existence so technically it was not---and is not, in
>> effect.
>>
>> So the ever changing Chameleon Public explanations delivered by the City
>> Staff has tried to think ahead and claim that the "Use of Force" revision
>> came directly from the State level to go into effect on Oct. 1---so no need
>> to pass it by Council or the Public.
>>
>> Wrong again.  Nothing a local municipality does to regulate and implement
>> codes and laws is dictated by the State of Illinois if it is "in addition
>> to".  In other words, the city can cherry pick as long as they follow the
>> basic National requirements of the Law or those of a particular State that
>> are "mandatory".   There was nothing in the State revision/language for "Use
>> of Force" that would allow for a mandatory revision--it simply gave
>> municipalities a broader scope from which to cherry pick to strengthen and
>> or add to in addition of, the standard mandatory rules, regulations, and
>> codes as required used as the basis of all law making municipalities to use
>> as is or embellish on as that municipality feels is needed.
>>
>> Case-in-point the revised policy for Use of Force included language about
>> the use of Tasers.  A weapon CPD does not currently have in their arsenal.
>> So you can clearly see including that language from the revised policy of
>> "Use of Force" on Tasers could be excluded---and is not a mandatory item
>> unless you have Tasers, and even then, each municipality can create it's own
>> language, even add to it--as long as the basic standards of "Use of Force"
>> are used.
>>
>> Having said that, if only one word were changed, added, deleted, altered
>> from a policy that is currently in place and previously approved by Council,
>> Council would have to take the altered language to a vote before it becomes
>> effective and is acted upon.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 11:08 AM, Mikhail Lyubansky <lyubanskym at gmail.com
>> > wrote:
>>
>>> Good morning,
>>>
>>> Like many here, I am very saddened and concerned about Kiwane
>>> Carrington's tragic death and the Champaign Police dept's role in this (as
>>> well as past) incidents.  However, I am uncomfortable with the recent calls
>>> for Chief Finney's resignation given the information currently in our
>>> possession.  We do not, for example, know what actually happened in the
>>> moments leading up to the fatal shooting or what Finney did or did not do
>>> during this time.  Furthermore, while there are parts of the Department's
>>> Use of Force policy that I find troubling (particularly section 1.3.2
>>> concerning the use of deadly force), it is not clear to me that Finney was
>>> responsible for determining this portion of the policy.  To the contrary,
>>> according to the document, that section was determined by the lllinois
>>> Compiled Statutes (220 ILCS 5/7-5).
>>>
>>> I write this not to defend Finney but to caution us from rushing to
>>> judgment. Sometimes time is of the essence and decisions must be made before
>>> all the necessary information is in.  This is not one of those cases. I
>>> suggest that, for the moment, we marshal our efforts to push for a full and
>>> independent investigation and the creation of a community review board and
>>> hold off on judging Finney until more information is available.
>>>
>>> In hope of community healing,
>>>
>>> Mikhail
>>>
>>>
>>> **
>>>
>>> Mikhail Lyubansky, Ph.D.
>>> Department of Psychology
>>> University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign
>>> http://www.psych.uiuc.edu/~lyubansk<http://www.psych.uiuc.edu/%7Elyubansk>
>>>
>>> Managing Editor, OpEdNews
>>> http://www.opednews.com/author/author18834.html
>>> Follow me on Twitter: http://twitter.com/mikhaill
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 6:40 AM, Christopher Evans <caevans2 at hotmail.com
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>>  In reaction to the call for Chief Finney's resignation:
>>>>
>>>> *"I think that's alot of emotionality. The Chief hasn't done anything
>>>> that calls for his resignation. I wouldn't support his resignation. Uh, he
>>>> acted in a legal manner."*
>>>>
>>>> Said even though Finney's police tactics help cause the death of an
>>>> unarmed 15 year-old, Finney snuck in the taser and broad use of deadly force
>>>> in the use of force policy behind Council's back, and relations betweeen the
>>>> community and police are at an all-time low.
>>>>
>>>> ------------------------------
>>>> Hotmail: Trusted email with Microsoft’s powerful SPAM protection. Sign
>>>> up now. <http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/177141664/direct/01/>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Discuss mailing list
>>>> Discuss at lists.communitycourtwatch.org
>>>>
>>>> http://lists.communitycourtwatch.org/listinfo.cgi/discuss-communitycourtwatch.org
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Discuss mailing list
>>> Discuss at lists.communitycourtwatch.org
>>>
>>> http://lists.communitycourtwatch.org/listinfo.cgi/discuss-communitycourtwatch.org
>>>
>>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.chambana.net/mailman/archive/peace-discuss/attachments/20091021/562971bc/attachment.html