[Peace-discuss] More differential application of SYG

Laurie Solomon ls1000 at live.com
Fri Jul 19 06:05:34 UTC 2013 

Why do you insist on making it such an oversimplified either vote to convict 
or vote not to convict (in other words engage in jury nullification) in all 
drug trials?  Are there not other possibilities or strategies?  why restrict 
it to just drug trials since minorities are charged with and go to prison 
for all kinds of violations of the law in disproportion to white middle and 
upper class folks.

As I said, theoretically the strategy is interesting; I was only assessing 
it from a practical perspective as to its effective implementation on a 
meaningful scale.  I feel no obligation to come up with a strategy or 
solution that is more practical and can be more effectively implemented on a 
grand scale. I am not even sure one is possible.  I can think of all kinds 
of actions that would be costly and time consuming pain-in-the-ass 
disruptions and delaying tactics for the establishment; but such actions 
would also wind up negatively impacting on and punishing for the defendants 
who probably cannot get or afford bail and do not wish to have their lives 
treated as a by-product of some reform or revolutionary movement.

Since it seems as though some have given up on changing the laws and 
legislators as a lost cause, I do not feel the same way about the legal 
system and juries; instead they see to feel that they stand a better chance 
using the courts to change the laws and the system.  I have to assume that 
the laws that are passed and the legislators who pass them must have enough 
public support or apathy to get elected and pass the laws that they do 
without the general public getting up in arms against them, the electoral 
process, the legislative process and institutions, etc. to revolt despite 
the establishment power, authority, money, and or propagandizing.

Obviously, I am not an optimist when it comes to believing that systemic 
change is possible through reform, education, or employing the institutions 
of the system against itself and the establishment that runs and controls 
it.  I am cynical and skeptical when it comes to joining in impractical or 
symbolic actions by people who tend to be political gadflies.

-----Original Message----- 
From: C. G. Estabrook
Sent: July 18, 2013 3:41 PM
To: Laurie Solomon
Cc: Peace-discuss List ; ocCUpy
Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] More differential application of SYG

So we should simply vote to convict in drug trials?

On Jul 18, 2013, at 11:08 AM, Laurie Solomon <ls1000 at live.com> wrote:

> It is an interesting strategy; but like most strategies that might be 
> theoretically effective to some degree, I doubt = practically speaking - 
> that one would find the numbers of people needed to actually engage in the 
> strategy to make it effective.  I further think that once the 
> establishment caught on they would implement much stricter screening of 
> jurors and definitions of who should make up the jury pool as well as 
> easing the number of jurors needed to establish a verdict.  Given the 
> recent trend toward juries with fewer members (i.e., from 12 to 6), 
> changing the rules from needing total agreement to reach a verdict to some 
> lesser number would either defeat the success of the strategy in most 
> cases; if a mistrial took place, it would result in placing the defendant 
> in limbo and jailed until a trial could be had in which a verdict was 
> reached, which in effect would mean indefinite incarceration that would 
> serve the establishment's original intent.
>
> -----Original Message----- From: C. G. Estabrook
> Sent: July 18, 2013 9:59 AM
> To: "E. Wayne Johnson 朱稳森"
> Cc: Laurie Solomon ; Peace-discuss List ; ocCUpy
> Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] More differential application of SYG
>
> David Simon, the creator of The Wire:
>
> "In an essay published [in 2008] in Time magazine, the writers of The Wire 
> made the argument that we believe the war on drugs has devolved into a war 
> on the underclass, that in places like West and East Baltimore, where the 
> drug economy is now the only factory still hiring and where the 
> educational system is so crippled that the vast majority of children are 
> trained only for the corners, a legal campaign to imprison our most 
> vulnerable and damaged citizens is little more than amoral. And we said 
> then that if asked to serve on any jury considering a non-violent drug 
> offense, we would move to nullify that jury’s verdict and vote to acquit. 
> Regardless of the defendant, I still believe such a course of action would 
> be just in any case in which drug offenses—absent proof of violent 
> acts—are alleged."
>
> <http://www.slate.com/content/slate/blogs/browbeat/2011/03/10/david_simon_creator_of_the_wire_speaks_on_felicia_snoop_pearson_s_arrest.html>
>
> On Jul 18, 2013, at 9:46 AM, "E. Wayne Johnson 朱稳森" <ewj at pigsqq.org> 
> wrote:
>
>> The Jury is the last line of defence of the People against the State.
>> The Jury can Nullify bad laws.
>>
>> In the present situation in the US, it should be clear to all that the 
>> State
>> is one of the most effective tools of the 1%.
>>
>> The Jury is one of the few remaining ways in which the People, accused,
>> can escape from the grasp of the State (and the 1%, who are the prime 
>> benefactors
>> of the state).
>>
>> One can't say that Occupy! has gone home and hid because they all got 
>> tired.
>> They went home because the 1%, particularly the banksters, doesnt like 
>> Occupy!,
>> and used the authority of the State to clear Occupy! out.
>>
>> The 1%, because some of Occupy! members really do love Big Sibling,
>> have also been able to co-opt Occupy! into support of policies that
>> are either neutral, relatively harmless, or beneficial to the 1%.
>>
>> Far better that Occupy! and the co-opted Left wear themselves out
>> going round and round on an Penrose-Escher staircase than to
>> actually go after the man behind the curtain, get him by the toe,
>> and make him holler.
>>
>>
>> On 07/18/13 22:15, C. G. Estabrook wrote:
>>> 'This' refers to the jury system.
>>>
>>> On Jul 18, 2013, at 12:23 AM, Laurie Solomon
>>> <ls1000 at live.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>  The point is almost a truism and the same can be said for a non-jury 
>>>> system although the benefits may not always be identical; but I do fail 
>>>> to see why one has to invoke or quote William Kunstler to make the 
>>>> point.  His statement make the point in a highly obtuse way when just 
>>>> saying "that the jury system retains values that occasionally benefit 
>>>> even enemies of the state" is a much more pointed and clearer 
>>>> articulation of the point.
>>>>
>>>> As for your statement, "For an account of how this and other hard-won 
>>>> peoples' victories are being destroyed in the 21st c. by the minions of 
>>>> the 1%, see Peter Linebaugh, "The Magna Carta Manifesto: Liberties and 
>>>> Commons for All" (Cal UP 2008),"  I have no idea what the reference of 
>>>> the "this" in "how this and other hard-won peoples' victories...." is. 
>>>> Does it refer to "the jury system," "the retained values," "the 
>>>> occasional benefits it furnishes to even enemies of the state," all of 
>>>> the above, or some combination of the above?  Or are you saying that 
>>>> this publication gives an account of how " the jury system retains 
>>>> values that occasionally benefit even enemies of the state" is a hard 
>>>> won people's victory which is being destroyed by the minions of the 1%.
>>>>
>>>> -----Original Message----- From: C. G. Estabrook
>>>> Sent: July 17, 2013 9:22 PM
>>>> To: Laurie Solomon
>>>> Cc: Peace-discuss List ; ocCUpy
>>>> Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] More differential application of SYG
>>>>
>>>> The point is that the jury system retains values that occasionally 
>>>> benefit even enemies of the state.
>>>>
>>>> For an account of how this and other hard-won peoples' victories are 
>>>> being destroyed in the 21st c. by the minions of the 1%, see Peter 
>>>> Linebaugh, "The Magna Carta Manifesto: Liberties and Commons for All" 
>>>> (Cal UP 2008).
>>>>
>>>> And in this campaign Neoliberalism seems sometimes to be aided by 
>>>> well-meaning Liberals.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Jul 17, 2013, at 11:33 AM, Laurie Solomon
>>>> <ls1000 at live.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I find it interesting, telling, and disappointing that you feel little 
>>>>> or no restraint in falling back on the use of racist terms, such as”Chink,” 
>>>>> and terms colored by a biased and emotion-invoking spin, e.g., the 
>>>>> “injustice” system when you could just as easily engaged in a rational 
>>>>> civil discussion without having employing those tactics.   I also find 
>>>>> that many of your posts of recent on this and other topics have tended 
>>>>> to become very disjointed and elliptical, making them hard to follow 
>>>>> and understand.  I attribute some of this to your use of your iPhone 
>>>>> and in part to your attempt to multi-task in which you are giving 
>>>>> little attention to any of the tasks you are performing but feel 
>>>>> compelled to respond even if you cannot give the time to any detail.
>>>>>
>>>>> While I am not a big fan of CGE, I am going to give him the benefit of 
>>>>> the doubt here and assume that he was not focusing on invoking William 
>>>>> Kunstler as much as invoking the Counterpunch article that he supplied 
>>>>> a link to which does invoke Kunstler’s remark as an occasion for 
>>>>> articulating the points of the article.  Personally, I fail to see 
>>>>> what Kunstler’s comments or positions (actual or presumptively 
>>>>> attributed to him) on the jury system or ALEC orchestrated reforms 
>>>>> have to do with anything.  To do what a lot of people – including 
>>>>> myself – seem to be doing these days, I will ask a counterfactual 
>>>>> question:  What if Kunstler has said that he had no opposition to  and 
>>>>> even supported the ALEC orchestration of reforms of the judicial 
>>>>> system and SYG; how would that change anything including your 
>>>>> position?  I would suggest that it would not change anything and even 
>>>>> suggest that the cognitive dissonance that this would create would 
>>>>> result in his comments being dismissed
>>>>> as irrelevant, senile, or misinformed.  It is for that reason that I 
>>>>> think invoking Kunstler or his comments is a distracting irrelevancy 
>>>>> and totally unnecessary.
>>>>>
>>>>> From: Paul Mueth
>>>>> Sent: July 17, 2013 6:15 AM
>>>>> To: Peace-discuss List
>>>>> Cc: ocCUpy
>>>>> Subject: [Peace-discuss] More differential application of SYG
>>>>>
>>>>> The injustice system is rigged, another case in point
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> http://mobile.thegrio.com/thegrio/#!/entry/71yearold-black-man-found-guilty-of-manslaughter-jury-rejects-stand,5124f9c5d7fc7b56703b5d2f
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The Alternet article I circulated at the beginning of this string has 
>>>>> the stats on how the Florida SYG is applied depending on the race of 
>>>>> the stander.
>>>>>
>>>>> William Kunstler invoked by CGE on the jury system would be 
>>>>> fundamentally
>>>>> opposed, I'm sure, to the ALEC orchestrated "reforms" of the judicial 
>>>>> system, of which SYG is only one. And I guess perhaps the most deadly, 
>>>>> at least in terms of individuals.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> (Their tort reforms effectively releasing big Pharma further from 
>>>>> liability could possibly cause more damage in the long run, 
>>>>> societally. . . )
>>>>>
>>>>> Sent from my iPhone 3GS, It doesn't chat!
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Peace-discuss mailing list
> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
> https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss
>
> _______________________________________________
> Peace-discuss mailing list
> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
> https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss


_______________________________________________
Peace-discuss mailing list
Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss

More information about the Peace-discuss mailing list