home
Jena Six: Law Bloggers Cite Confusing Facts | 54 comments (54 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

link (none / 0) (#47)
by scopemonkey on Mon Sep 24, 2007 at 03:47:34 PM EST
My understanding is that Justin Barker was not one of the noose-hangers.  I could be wrong on that.  

I was posting a follow-up to the previous poster who claimed that the Justice Department said that the nooses were not racially motivated.  What the federal investigation actually said was that they found no direct link between the nooses and the beating, but that the nooses were in fact a hate crime.  The poster was presumably confused, misreading or misremembering the former conclusion as the negation of the latter.  

Whether there actually is a direct link that the federal investigation overlooked, that is something that one would need to establish evidentially, which is, I think, part of the point of Jeralyn's post.

Parent

Why it might be relevant (none / 0) (#50)
by scopemonkey on Mon Sep 24, 2007 at 05:44:42 PM EST
Might be meaningful for two reasons:

  1. If hate crimes charges were filed against the noose hangers, direct links to violent outcomes may have consequences on their trial.
  2. It might be considered a mitigating circumstance in the Jena 6 case.  Certainly lots of people believe this to be the case.

Either way, a link would need to be shown in a court of law.

Parent

Jena Six: Law Bloggers Cite Confusing Facts | 54 comments (54 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft