Law vs. Justice
I’ve held back comment on this police shooting case for a couple of days, reading a series of articles and letting things soak in. Details started coming to light over a year ago, as the city began recovery, and it’s been obvious all this was going to come to a climax point we haven’t seen yet and won’t until verdicts are handed down months from now.
I covered the news for over 30 years in four different states and on the national level. I have covered politics, the courts, sports, crime, economics, done features, written travel pieces and, basically, covered everything except an actual shooting war (I’ve been shot at once, but that’s another story. Churchill was right — it IS exhilarating). I learned a long time ago that law and justice are two different things — and that serving one so often runs afoul of the other. This case brings that conflict to the fore more than any I can recall. And, in this case, both sides are already the losers.
The grand jury only did its job by issuing indictments. There are indeed enough questions about what went on to justify a jury’s examination and deliberation. Those who accuse the police have more than enough reason to be angry, resentful and demanding conviction. Racial issues aside, the history of police misconduct in New Orleans easily lends itself to overdefensiveness and outrage When Things Go Bad. On the other hand, there are plenty of really good, dedicated police officers on the force. Given the moral/legal/ethical vacuum New Orleans became in Katrina’s immediate wake, I can easily understand the Alamo mentality of outmanned, underdirected, overfatigued cops just trying to survive in an unprecedented hell.
So far, we’ve seen the pro-cop and anti-cop factions split along the predictable lines. And, of course, each side claims its case is the most pristine. It’ll be the jury’s job to put themselves on that bridge at the time and (with the “help” of well-schooled barristers) sort out what “really” happened and who’s to bless and who’s to blame.
My biggest hope is that the case is not moved out of Orleans Parish. I think only those who have lived in this parish for a while can come the closest to understanding and balancing such issues as the day-to-day dynamics of the pressure on police, the situation at the time, the reasons why so many feel threatened by the police and so forth. Given the city’s near-even racial balance these days, I think it’s possible to find enough jurors to duly deliberate this case. I think moving it elsewhere would automatically tip the scale too far one way or the other. It would also be nice to hope the jurors would have IQs larger than their shoe size — but I’m getting ahead of myself.
Should the police win out, too many are going to see it as yet another legalization of police thuggery. Should the officers be convicted, it’s going to be seen as further proof that it’s okay to commit crimes in New Orleans because the courts won’t allow the police to do their jobs. This kind of oversimplification is what makes both sides the losers. Regardless of the ultimate outcome of the case, there will be those who simply won’t be able to let it go. And that hurts all of us. There will be no justice in this case because the circumstances leading to the gunfire at the bridge were too all-encompassing, so overwhelming and unprecedented. The middle ground is simply too big. I think anyone who tries to boil it down to a simple, straightforward issue of right vs. wrong is badly mistaken.
Related posts:
Yes I do agree with you that everybody loses on this one. No matter what the outcome.
As a lawyer, moving the case out of Orleans Parish, even out of South Louisiana, is not such a bad idea. We have a very irresponsible press down here who have already printed and broadcasted things that would not necessarily be admissible at trial. Any potential juror will have heard or read these accounts and would have them in their mind even though it didn’t come up in a trial due to the laws of evidence. I don’t think these cops can get a fair trial down here.
Normally, I’d agree. I’m usually a supporter of changing the venue in controversial cases. But if the case is moved to, say, Shreveport, I’d see a population more likely to be ardently pro-cop. I’d agree that a completely impartial jury would be impossible to find in any parish, so we’re dealing in matters of degree. I just think there are enough in Orleans Parish who reject media accounts and political/racial gamesmanship to be as fair or maybe more fair than elsewhere.