Today on Blogcritics
Home » “Yes, We’re Racist MF’ers,” Announces Milwaukee Jury

“Yes, We’re Racist MF’ers,” Announces Milwaukee Jury

Please Share...Tweet about this on Twitter0Share on Facebook0Share on Google+0Share on LinkedIn0Pin on Pinterest0Share on TumblrShare on StumbleUpon0Share on Reddit0Email this to someone

Image and video hosting by TinyPic
…well, in effect at least. The photo at top (from the Feb. 6, 2005 MJS article mentioned below) depicts Frank Jude shortly after an encounter with a gang of off-duty white policemen at a party. His crime was to arrive at the event with white women (obviously his alleged theft is almost certainly manufactured, though it would be only marginally relevant even if true). An all-white jury deliberated for 26 hours before determining that white is indeed the color of innocence.

The following two articles from the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel provide an overview of the case: “Police suspected in man’s beating,” Feb. 6, 2005; “Leaders call for calm, change in aftermath of Jude verdict,” April 16, 2006. A quick search on Google turns up remarkably little coverage of the incident outside of Milwaukee. Performing a direct search of the New York Times and Washington Post websites reveals that both carried short pieces from the Associated Press. I wouldn’t have learned of the case at all were it not for the brief mention on today’s Democracy Now!

About a dozen police dragged Jude out of a truck and assaulted him before on-duty police arrived in response to a 911 call and proceeded to join in the fun (according to the telephone transcript with the eye-witness, who was still on her cell with 911).

He suffered a concussion, a broken nose and fractured sinus cavity, cuts in both ears, cuts and swelling to his left eye, neck, head, face, legs and back, and a severely sprained left hand, his attorney said. His left eye was swollen shut and continued to bleed for 10 days, he said. [Feb. 6, 2005 MJS article]

Many of the police officers on the force with the assailants are, of course, refusing to cooperate with the investigation. In other news, the city announced it intends to replace its entire staff with Nazi storm troopers in an effort to employ a more tolerant and professional officer corps.

The Federal Government is reportedly considering whether to get involved – it will be of some interest to see if this case gains wider attention from the media and the government or vanishes before most in this country ever even heard of it.

About Kevin Funk and Steve Fake

  • RedTard

    Way to stir up racial tensions. This type of article is what damages race relations. Juries make decisions based on evidence, the evidence wasn’t there and they couldn’t convict, it has nothing to do with race.

    The groups, individuals, and political organizations that thrive on creating this sort of race hate are the real threats to our society.

    The fact that federal charges on being considered in what amounts to a fistfight shows the point of absurdity that this country will go to with regards of race.

  • http://www.morethings.com/log Al Barger

    The authors of this article have done nothing but make baseless charges with absolutely not even an attempt at justification. A black guy gets beat up by cops, it MUST be because the cops hate black people. No, it couldn’t POSSIBLY have been that this guy was violent, or resisting arrest.

    The authors of this article did not even attempt to tell any significant details of the story, such as why 911 had been called or any actions of Mr Jude. There’s certainly not a hint of explaining the cops’ version of the story, let a lone a rebuttal.

    No, the authors here just give us their inflammatory verdict without any presentation of the case. We should just take it on their word that a bunch of cops said, “Look, a black man with a white woman. Let’s beat his ass!” In Alabama 1960 I might believe that. In Wisconsin 2005, I find that unlikely.

    The authors are simply spreading malicious racism here- judging people based on their race rather than their actual actions. That’s bad enough in their unsubstantiated accusations against the officers- and much worse in their even less substantiated charges against the jury. Apparently, it should be that any time any white folk have an altercation with any black man, then a jury must presumptively convict the white men or face conviction in the court of public opinion themselves as “racist MF’ers.”

    But at least the authors here have established their moral superiority by proving that they’re opposed to racism- unlike the rest of society.

  • RedTard

    Al, I did a little background research. The man was a convicted felon with a history of crime. Since the incident he has gotten into additional trouble for physically abusing his own mother. Multiple people already had restraining orders against him because he is violent.

    That’s no excuse for what appears happened at the party though. My main point is that it had nothing to do with race. Trying to eyewitness strange white guys in a mob of strangers when your drunk is less than reliable. The cops won’t talk and should be fired, as they already have been, but there’s not enough to convict in court.

    Making it about race is a great way to divide the population and turn all blacks into victims and hence good democratic voters.

  • RogerMDillon

    The authors have obviously never served on a jury. Did Mr. Jude deserve so bad a beating? Possibly not, but without having heard or seen the evidence the jury had to use, the statements above are baseless conjecture on their part. Why would the jury take roughly four days to come back with their verdict if they were racist?

    Your next article should be: “Yes, We’re Ignorant MFers About The Judicial System,” Announces Bloggers. You are hurting your own cause because the next time you cry “wolf,” I mean “racism,” people are less likely to listen to you.

  • http://gratefuldread.net NR Davis

    Well, it all needs to be considered in order to reach any fair judgment. I hope that the evidence before the jury led the panel to acquit, and it certainly may have, but who knows? At the same time, this piece only presents one side, so it doesn’t offer readers any clue as to what the pro-cop side or the evidence to squash or support the allegations might have been. Of course, that’s mitigated to a degree by its clear designation as an opinion piece.

    The bottom line is, yes, there are some rotten, violent, bigoted cops. There are many more who are not. Whatever our often valid fears and suspicions, everyone is supposed to be innocent before proven guilty. If the jury acquits, there it is. Sometimes guilty people walk free.

    Look at OJ. A jury acquitted him for reasons involving possible jury nullification and a lack of more than circumstantial proof. The gloves didn’t fit. I believe fully that Simpson murdered two fellow humans, but the jury found it could not convict. I was furious when that verdict was read. Too bad. We have to live with it.

    Sometimes the bad guys walk. Shit happens; the system is far from perfect. But sometimes, even when evidence points at them and even if public sentiment is not in their favor, the defendants really didn’t commit the crime. And sometimes – particularly in the case of cops dealing with often unruly ex-cons – they do what they feel they must in order to protect and serve.

    I’m a militant pacifist. Don’t believe in violence. Won’t raise a hand in self-defense. But sorry, I wouldn’t support jailing a nonpacifist cop who beats up a violent perp and can show evidence for having legally acceptable justification for it (the suspect was visibly violent and/or threatening while attempting to elude arrest, others in danger, etc.). And while I completely oppose rogue cops kicking ass just because they can – which does happen – it would be against the nation’s claimed values to jail them if guilt can’t be proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

    At any rate, if anyone is interested in learning the facts about the case, this article would not be the source I would recommend. It is only the authors’ opinion, to which they are entitled, and which they are free to share either with or without presenting opposing viewpoints or inconvenient facts. And good: It’s beneficial to hear all sides of an issue before drawing one’s own conclusions, so thanks to Messrs. Funk and Fake. The authors just have to deal with the responses or whatever resulting rise or fall in credibility follow their one-sided opinion piece’s publication.

  • http://everyonemustgo.blogspot.com/ Steve Fake

    I should append one comment to the opinion piece I posted above: without studying the trial transcript it is of course true that one cannot know with certainty whether there was sufficient evidence presented in the courtroom to convict the officers. That said, a cursory examination of the evidence available in the media strongly indicates there was a solid basis for convictions – at least if we wish to apply the same standards of evidence to this case as we do to the millions of trials nationwide that have resulted in a grossly disproportionate number of people of color in prison.

    Now to directly address some of the comments… my purpose was not to provide an exhaustive narrative of the case but rather to spark interest so that readers could research it further on their own. The sources I mentioned in the article are a good place to start. Most of the comments above betray zero familiarity with Jude’s case. One poster finds it “unlikely” that such a thing could happen in 2005 (sic, 2004), to which I can only conclude that he also lacks familiarity with reality. After doing “a little background research” another poster determines “that it had nothing to do with race” and that “there’s not enough to convict in court.” The poster provides no evidence to substantiate claims that radically contradict every news article I’ve seen on the story. Another comment (“Did Mr. Jude deserve so bad a beating? Possibly not…”) either accepts the absurd wallet claim or feels only a moderate beating is merited for a black man accompanying white women.

    My post is hardly racially divisive, though it may provoke some difference of opinion between those with minimal commitments to justice and those who prefer a racially divided nation. Nor do I think it’s particularly “one-sided” unless one means the term in the trivial sense that taking a position on anything (Hitler, etc) is “one-sided.” The question is whether the position is correct. Lastly, I would like to address the notion that Mr. Jude’s case is merely another proof that, despite the best efforts of our glorious criminal justice system, sometimes bad people go free. Sadly, our justice system is strikingly racist (for instance, blacks are disproportionately likely to be arrested, to face harsher sentencing, etc, even when controlling for any racial disparities in crime rates or types of crimes committed). Surely under any justice system, criminals would occasionally be able to get away with crime. However, our society systematically favors certain groups (the police in this instance) while discriminating against other groups. Now that’s divisive!

  • MilwaukeeResident

    In an odd twist, I actually believe this situation has somewhat strengthened racial ties in my city since last Friday. Ever since the ridiculous verdict came down, together as one, we people of all color have decided to detest the MPD and the three officers that got let off due to the sub par work done by our DA. The protests that took place again this morning featured whites and blacks walking together, chanting together, and finding a common ground together. It is bittersweet to see one of the most segregated cities in America come together like this in the shadow of judicial travesty like the one that took place on Friday.

  • RedTard

    “it is of course true that one cannot know with certainty whether there was sufficient evidence presented in the courtroom to convict the officers.”

    Then why go out and sow the seeds of race hate if you even admit that you don’t know the truth?

    “My post is hardly racially divisive”

    Go back and read your title and see if you can type that with a straight face. These types of propaganda are part of the problem, not the solution.

  • Ebony Ghost

    In what sense is this peace racially divisive? There’s nothing in it that would surprise anybody, is there? I didn’t see any baseless charges, but I did see a link to a story which pretty well laid out the facts. Naturally it had nothing to do with race. This was just one more in a long line of coinkydinks. I can accept that. However, no one can look at the facts and deny that a gross injustice was carried out. It wasn’t just some fluke of the system. Somebody did it on purpose.

    There are a number of facts that do not seem to be in dispute. There were at least 12 police officers on the scene. The man was brutally beaten by at least 3 of those 12 officers. That means that, although there could have been as few as zero inocent bystanders, there were as many as 9 witnesses to the crime who are officers of the law. The officers were all white. The jury pool is 70% white. The jury was all white. And, no one was convicted of a crime. Did I miss anything?

    So, what happened? Perhaps, the police sent 3 innocent men to trial. If so, they did it knowingly because they definately know who is guilty of the crime. Perhaps, a number of policeman went into a court of law and lied through their teeth. That wouldn’t have been about race; just a conspiracy to protect a group of criminals. A third possibility is that the jury knew the men were guilty and just let them go. Sorry, I can’t make up an excuse for that one, but I wonder if the same evidence in the same crime would have gotten the same verdict if the accused were Black civilians.

  • http://chantalstone.blogspot.com chantal stone

    This story appeared on Dateline last year I believe, shortly after the crime….with no resolve to the story, obviously, because the trial had not yet happened. The dateline story, told mostly from the point of view of the white women who accompanied the victim, clearly made it seem like the beating was racially motivated.

  • Bliffle

    redTard: “Way to stir up racial tensions. This type of article is what damages race relations.”

    Hear hear! Things would be a lot better if those darkies would just stay in their place!

  • RedTard

    Nice implication that I am a racist, Blif. That’s par for the course for the PC nuts. No rational debate, nothing to refute my statement just imply I’m racist if I don’t buy your BS. The sad thing is people are ignorant enough that it works.

  • RedTard

    “I didn’t see any baseless charges”

    Then obviously you missed the inflammatory title of the piece, “‘Yes, We’re Racist MF’ers,’ Announces Milwaukee Jury”.

    If you have evidence that the jury was racist then please bring it out. What they heard was testimony from drunk people with fuzzy memories trying to identify total strangers, just the sort of stuff that creates reasonable doubt. It won’t be the first fight between drunks that didn’t result in jailtime, or the last.

    If not, then admit you are a race baiter, that you have made up lies about people you don’t even know, and please quit contributing to the problem. This is really a disgusting display of how low people are willing to go to divide us by race.

  • Ebony Ghost

    Let’s get real, RT. The title was an effective hook. It got people to look. These total strangers just happened to be policemen who just happened to be at a party that just happened to be at a policeman’s house and nine of them were fired over the incident. Surely a credible identification was made of those men. Unless someone just pulled some names out of a hat, which I doubt.

    Additionally, the Courttv website has a story which states:

    Prosecutors in Milwaukee rested their case Friday against three former police officers after a uniformed officer testified he saw the defendants kick and punch an unarmed theft suspect even after the man was handcuffed.

    Officer Joseph Schabel’s testimony followed four days of statements from several off-duty officers, who testified that they did not witness any inappropriate physical violence toward the alleged victim, Frank Jude.

    The man was obviously the victim of inappropriate physical voilence. Yet none of these total strangers, who just happened to be attending a party at a coworkers house, saw what happened. Yep, they just dragged the man out of his truck and closed their eyes. The tooth fairy must have snuck up and worked him over. Gimmie a break!!

  • http://www.everyonemustgo.blogspot.com/ Steve Fake

    Tuesday’s edition of the radio/webcast program, Democracy Now!, features an interview with Mr. Jude’s aunt and his attorney. The segment can be viewed at: “Outrage in Milwaukee Over Acquittal by All-White Jury of Police Officers Charged in Vicious Beating,” Democracy Now!, Tuesday, April 18th, 2006

  • http://theallinoneblog.blogspot.com Casey

    It seems a little strange that the police aren’t cooperating.

  • merhawe

    ahahha

    seems like all the white people here disagree..,
    ha

    im not suprised

    i think white people think that all racism is done

  • dion laurie

    a police officer should do his job by arresting prisoners not beating them to a pulp.No one deserves that brutality whether their black or white.

  • toeknee

    as a former cop, all of the officers there should have been charged. mpd is racist!! all of the officers when brier was cheif are sgts, lts, cpts, and upper brass. briers goon-squads live on!!!