[News] Chronicle of a Riot Foretold - Racism Fuels the Possibility of Acquittal and Rebellion
Anti-Imperialist News
news at freedomarchives.org
Tue Jun 29 18:18:39 EDT 2010
http://www.counterpunch.org/maher06292010.html
June 29, 2010
Racism Fuels the Possibility of Acquittal and Rebellion
Chronicle of a Riot Foretold
By GEORGE CICCARIELLO-MAHER
Oakland.
As the trial of former transit cop Johannes
Mehserle for the murder of Oscar Grant rushes at
breakneck speed toward its conclusion, spurred by
the insistence of Judge Robert Perry and
political imperative, ominous clouds of injustice
begin to crowd the political horizon in
anticipation of a verdict, which could come as
soon as this week. But while it is this injustice
that we should most fear, too many are focusing
their fear and the fear of others on the
possibility of a repeat of last years street
rebellions should Mehserle be acquitted or convicted of a lesser charge.
What this view neglects is one basic fact, indeed
the most basic fact regarding the Oakland
rebellions: that it was only as a result of those
rebellions of January 2009 and the fear that they
might be repeated that Mehserle was even arrested
and put on trial in the first place. Those
rebellions were, in fact, the basic precondition
for this limited form of justice to even be
possible. Possible, yes, but far from guaranteed.
And yet those who opposed the rebellions from the
very beginning, denouncing them with delusions of
outside agitators as irrational and desperate
outbursts--in short, as riots--are busily
trotting out the same discredited lines as always.
Different Trials, Different Verdicts
Of course, the relative brevity of the Mehserle
trial should not fool us. While The People v.
Johannes Mehserle has only been underway for a
few short days, two other trials have been
proceeding informally for 18 months now: The
People v. The State and The State v. Oscar Grant.
The trial of The People v. The State was
initially played out during the
<http://www.counterpunch.org/maher01092009.html>three
<http://www.counterpunch.org/maher02032009.html>evening
<http://www.counterpunch.org/maher01162009.html>rebellions
of January 2009, rebellions sparked not by
Grants murder, but by the patently hypocritical
inaction of the state in response and its patent
refusal to treat a murder of a Black youth by a
white cop in the same way it would treat any
other murder. These rebellions forced the state
into action, however defensively, giving rise to
Mehserles arrest, indictment, and now to his trial for murder.
Thus forced involuntarily into charging a cop
with murder, the state and all of its allied
institutions responded in the best way they
could: by shifting gears, in Gramscian terms,
from the coercive to the hegemonic, putting Oscar
Grant on trial as a not-so-subtle way of
justifying his murder. As a result, The State v.
Oscar Grant has been played out largely through
the demonization of Grant in the media, a
demonization which continues today as an
essential part of Mehserles defense strategy.
At first, it was the media that put Oscar Grant
on trial, disrespecting his death and the
suffering of his family by bringing up irrelevant
questions about his criminal history, while
equally irrelevant aspects of Mehserles past
were displayed front-and-center, in full view for
all those in doubt of where public sympathy
should lie in a white supremacist society:
Mehserle the murderer thus became Mehserle the
<http://articles.sfgate.com/2009-01-10/news/17195966_1_bart-police-police-academy-police-force>gentle
giant who could do no harm. By contrast, those
elements of Grants history which did not fit the
profile of a young thug looking for trouble were
systematically erased: Oscar Grant the father,
the worker, the friend, the brother and cousin.
More recently, it has been Michael Rains,
Mehserles attorney and notorious cop lawyer
(Rains successfully defended the corrupt
<http://articles.sfgate.com/2004-12-14/bay-area/17457672_1_excessive-force-jude-siapno-keith-batt>Oakland
Riders) who has assumed this role of smear
artist. Knowing full well that racism is squarely
on the side of his client, and that all he needs
to do is to give the (white) public an excuse to
pardon one of their own, Rains has deployed an
ingenious strategy of
<http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2010/02/05/18637119.php>selective
leaks in violation of a prevailing gag order.
A Jury of Whose Peers?
But beyond these informal trials in the court of
public opinion, if there was a single moment
that, more than any other, shoved Mehserle
brusquely toward an acquittal, it was the jury
selection process, and this process, in turn, was
heavily conditioned by the trials change of
venue. Rains is no dummy, and has studied his
history: you change the venue and then you stack
the jury. After successfully getting the Mehserle
trial moved out of Alameda County (but not
successfully pushing it as far south as
notoriously conservative San Diego), Rains came
hard out of the gate, demanding ahead of time
that, in open conflict with California law,
police officers should be allowed onto the jury.
It has a certain logic to it, doesnt it? If we
are promised a jury of our peers, Rains was
merely calling the perpetual bluff of the
criminal justice system: a (white) cop should be
judged by a jury of (white) cops, resulting
inevitably in acquittal. But what if the opposite
were also the case? What if young Black and Brown
men in Oakland were suddenly granted juries of
their peers, juries which understood the
lose-lose situation of the postindustrial
non-economy that is the underside of racist
America? It would be acquittals all around and
the system would come crashing down upon itself.
But such thought experiments inevitably crash
into the hard wall of white supremacy, as it is
only white privilege that allows Rains to
plausibly demand a jury of peers for Mehserle.
Every day, thousands of Black, Brown, and poor
enter the justice system without the resources or
leverage, in short, without the privilege, to
make such demands. While knew he would lose the
battle, however, Rains and his client might yet
win the war, since by demanding police on the
jury they created an opening through which cop
culture would infect the jury by other means. In
the end, either through utter incompetence on the
part of the prosecution or open bias on the part
of Judge Perry, a full four members of the final
jury have police among their family or friends.
As most of us now know, there is a second aspect
to the game, since while Rains was pushing for
police or at least their family members to be on
the jury, he was pushing equally hard to exclude
anyone who might have an unexplained or natural
affinity for Oscar Grants cause. In other words:
Black people. In the final stages of jury
selection, Judge Perry dismissed 2 of the
original 12 potential Black jurors for identified
causes, before Rains summarily dismissed 3 more
peremptorily, meaning that no reason was given.
Stunningly, given what we have just seen, one of
the reasons given for dismissing a potential
Black juror was experience with racial profiling.
In other words, while jurors with family and
friends in the police (and who presumably have
some sort of positive feeling toward the police
as a result) were admitted, a juror with a single
negative experience (of the kind endemic to the Black community) was removed.
In the end,
<http://www.thecampanil.com/2010/06/09/no-african-americans-seated-on-mehserle-trial-jury/>the
defense dismissed 3 Blacks and 4 Latinos, but
only 1 potential juror who was white, and the
prosecution 4 Latinos (2 with strong police
ties), 2 asians, and 1 white. This left the final
jury makeup as follows: majority female, with 7
whites and 5 Latinos (some question remains as to
the ethnicity of one of the latter).
Rains had played his hand impeccably, and if
Oakland burns, he will deserve the lions share
of the credit, but this is credit that he wont
likely be granted: as we all know, the best way
to cheat without being caught is to fix the game
beforehand, so when the shit hits the fan, your
hand doesnt get covered with it.
Crocodile Tears in Court
Efforts to humanize Mehserle reached a
predictable crescendo when he took the stand to
defend himself. While the press feigned surprise,
an understanding of the long-term defense
strategy, i.e. harnessing white supremacy to
garner easy sympathy points, makes Mehserles
testimony look instead like the natural
conclusion of a trial whose conclusion was in many ways predetermined.
And this because his testimony was largely a
repeat of the press coverage that had immediately
followed the murder. Hours were spent on
nominally irrelevant aspects of his background,
such as the fact that he was voted
<http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/inoakland/detail?&entry_id=66583>most
huggable in high school, and that he was
embarrassed by this title at the time. But to
insist that such facts are irrelevant is
misleading, since they reveal the most basic
racist structures that have been operating in
this case since day one, the ways in which the
media and the white public sought to explain away
Grants murder despite seeing it before their
very eyes.
<http://www.counterpunch.org/maher01092009.html>As
I wrote more than a year ago in these very same
pages: One side is automatically condemned; the other automatically excused.
This sickening display continued when Mehserle
returned to the stand Friday, claiming that he
had not meant to shoot Grant, that it was all a
tragic accident, and that as a result, he too was
suffering deeply. Then, in a clearly
well-practiced gesture, Mehserle broke down
weeping on the stand. This might have proven
effective on a jury long-primed to feel sympathy
for this most huggable gentle giant, but it
was certainly not convincing in the least for
Grants friends and family sitting in the court,
especially since Rains himself had laughed
audibly when a friend of Grants who witnessed
the killing similarly broke down during prior testimony.
Grants mother Wanda was so disturbed that she
<http://articles.latimes.com/2010/jun/26/local/la-me-bart-trial-20100626>got
up and left, and 24 year old Tim Killings could
finally take it no longer, standing up to shout:
Maybe you should save those fucking tears,
dude! Killings was promptly arrested under
suspicion of contempt and as I write this has only just been released.
Nonprofits Protect the State, Again
A growing and increasingly hysterical chorus has
begun to warn of the threats faced by the City of
Oakland when the verdict comes down. Perhaps
sensing the increased likelihood of an acquittal,
local government officials and the Oakland police
have kicked into full gear, and their
interventions have again appeared on both the
coercive and the hegemonic levels.
An
<http://www.youthradio.org/news/oakland-road-to-riot-rumors-speculation-fuel-fear?tsp=1>anonymous
letter purportedly from a San Leandro police
officer clearly seeks to stoke the flames of
anxiety: warning of police preparations for
massive riots, naming the Black Bloc as the
threat, and urging readers to stay in their homes
after the verdict. Such apocalyptic predictions
seemed to be supported by both the
publicly-announced
<http://articles.sfgate.com/2010-06-19/news/21917362_1_bart-police-mehserle-shot-grant-johannes-mehserle>riot-prevention
training undergone by OPD and other agencies and
by
<http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2010/06/24/18651756.php>a
message distributed by an emergency medic warning
that the police are preparing for a week-long
riot in Oakland, Los Angeles, and Hayward and
instructing medical responders to prepare for
injured civilians. In a nod toward McCarthyite
snitch culture, OPD has even established
<http://www.mercurynews.com/breaking-news/ci_15378712>a
special tip line for the Mehserle verdict, with
an audio recording encouraging that citizens
report any and all anarchist threats in the coming days.
But explicit threats of force are but one side of
OPDs preparations for the day of the verdict. It
recently emerged that Mayor Ron Dellums and the
Oakland Police
<http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2010/06/23/18651684.php>arranged
meetings with representatives of various
nonprofit organizations and church leaders active
in Oakland in an effort to quell any rebellion in
the streets before it starts. While it should not
surprise us that the city might attempt to do so,
what is more surprising is how easily these
mediating forces fell for it, especially given
the lessons of the past 18 months.
Thus many of the very same church leaders who
played an instrumental role in supporting the
Oakland community and organizing to demand
justice for 18 months took to their congregations
Sunday
<http://www.kcbs.com/bayareanews/Religious-Leaders-Call-for-Peace-in-Oakland/7561516>to
insist that people remain at home, employing the
power of prayer instead of their own power in
the streets. More worrying still was the response
from ostensibly radical nonprofits.
While the nonprofit sector
<http://www.counterpunch.org/maher01162009.html>played
a significant role in demobilizing the rebellions
of January 2009, providing, in the words of local
group
<http://advancethestruggle.wordpress.com/2009/07/15/justice-for-oscar-grant-a-lost-opportunity/>Advance
the Struggle, a buffer protecting the state,
never before had they come out so openly in
support of the governing apparatus as would be
the case in
<http://occupyca.wordpress.com/2010/06/27/non-profits-defend-the-state/>a
June 23rd email from Nicole Lee of the Urban
Peace Movement. Astonishingly referring to the
Mayors office and the City of Oakland as allies
and partners Lee (and by the looks of it,
several prominent Oakland nonprofits) urges
nonprofiteers to inoculate their bases so that
outside agitators will not be able to lead them
astray as they did in January of 2009. Evidently,
inoculation means using revolutionary language
in an effort to fool the youth, as Lee, somewhat
incredibly, evokes the spirit of Martin Luther
King, Malcolm X, and even Huey P. Newton to
conceal her collaboration with the state.
There is no mention of the fact that the outside
agitator claim, one which originated with OPD
itself, was
<http://www.sfbayview.com/2009/oakland-rebellion-eyewitness-report-by-pocc-minister-of-information-jr/>widely
discredited at the time, and that those deploying
it were not even themselves present on the
streets. There is no recognition of the utter
condescension that such a claim entails, reducing
youth of color to passive followers of whatever
white anarchist attracts their attention. And of
course, there is no suggestion whatsoever of what
strategy for demanding justice these nonprofits
have to offer their base beyond negotiations with the enemy.
Rebellion on the Horizon?
While I dont want to stoke hysteria about an
impending riot, nor do I intent to ignore the
very real and very justified rage that will greet
an acquittal of Mehserle (and likely even his
conviction on manslaughter charges, according to
a
<http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2010/06/24/18651810.php>recent
communiqué published by Oaklands Raider Nation
Collective). Toward this end, ominous graffiti
has begun to appear near Downtown Oakland reading
L.A. better get it right, or else, and other
considerably less pleasant phrases. Closing
arguments are slated to begin any day now, and a
rally has already been called to meet at 6pm on
the day of the verdict at 14th and Broadway in
Downtown Oakland, notably the point of origin of rebellions past.
But while recognizing the possibility of a
renewed rebellion in the streets, our efforts
should not be focused on preventing it, but
rather at refocusing attention on the real
violence at work in Grants murder and the
Mehserle trial. The real violence is that which
was suffered by Oscar Grant, his family, and his
friends, and this is a violence multiplied a
thousandfold across the United States as a whole.
It is this violence that permeates the structures
of the state, of the judicial system, of jury
selection, and of sentencing, and it is this
violence that has played out in the Mehserle
trial as a dehumanization of Oscar Grant and a
sympathetic presentation of Mehserle himself.
This is a violence far more grave than a few
broken windows and a burning car or two, and it
is a violence far more deeply rooted and
insidious to be eliminated by putting a single
cop on trial. But when that cop is on trial as a
result of mass action in the streets, a transitional victory has been achieved.
Some 18 months ago,
<http://www.counterpunch.org/maher01092009.html>I
noted the intuitive rationality of those who took
to the streets in the following terms: we have
to do something, and in the face of police
impunity, this is all we can do. This
rationality stood against all the claims from the
nonprofit left that to do so was utterly
irrational. Fortunately, we have been proven
correct, and whereas before, we came with but a
desperate wager, we now come with the experience of a popular victory.
In such a context, any and all calls for
unconditional peace without justice, for
community solidarity in collaboration with the
police and the state, and for rational dialogue
with an unreservedly irrational force must
inevitably confront the single most important
lesson of January 2009: that Mehserle was not
arrested due to the peaceful and rational
requests of the Oakland community, and nothing
could be more violent and irrational than
rewriting the history that we have made.
George Ciccariello-Maher received his Ph.D in
political theory at the University of California,
Berkeley. He lives in Oakland, and can be reached at gjcm(at)berkeley.edu
Freedom Archives
522 Valencia Street
San Francisco, CA 94110
415 863-9977
www.Freedomarchives.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://freedomarchives.org/pipermail/news_freedomarchives.org/attachments/20100629/55324c32/attachment.htm>
More information about the News
mailing list