John White Clemency: Where Do We Go From Here?

-A +A

[I Write What I Like]

Although we assert weekly at United African Movement in Brooklyn that people of African ancestry have been robbed of our names, our languages, our cultures and our religions, the greatest crime has been the robbery of our principles.  Dr. Martin L. King, Jr. said it best:  “A man who does not have anything to die for does not have anything to live for.”

When a White lynch mob trespassed on John White’s property in Suffolk County, in New York, spewing racial epithets and committing hate crimes against himself and his family, Dr. King’s teaching had to enter, at the very least, into the recesses of his mind. This was fifty-one years to the month after the lynching of Emmett Till in Money, MS.

In 1955, Emmett Till’s uncle, who was the homeowner, had to beg for his nephew’s life. Of course, his plea fell on deaf ears. While virtually every Black homeowner in Mississippi in 1955 owned a gun, it was against the law to use it against White criminals. Therefore, a Black man’s home in Mississippi was not his castle.

Fifty-one years later, Blacks in New York were warned that a Black man’s home is still not his castle. This warning was made by New York’s judicial system this year and it was affirmed this week by the executive branch of government. In 2010, Blacks still enjoy no constitutional protections. The inference to be made is that the New York Legislature has two sets of books.  New York penal laws apply to whites and the slave codes apply to Blacks.

Today, John White is civilly dead. If he kills another White man in self-defense, he will be prosecuted as a second felony offender. Three strikes and he will be out.

The proof is in the pudding. The Sixth Amendment requires the effective assistance of counsel. A white homeowner, if he had ever been convicted of killing a Black trespasser on his property who was also spewing racial epithets and threatening to rape the homeowner’s wife, would have been summarily entitled to a pardon by a Black governor.

Instead of seeking a pardon for John White, his attorneys, based on historic realities, were circumscribed to petitioning a Black governor for executive clemency  under the three-fifths proviso of the U.S. Constitution. This means that New York will not condone a Black homeowner in killing a White trespasser. New York intermediate court ruled that the Black homeowner and his family had a duty to retreat.
This is the same intermediate appellate court that ruled twenty-years ago that Black clients in New York enjoy no attorney-client privilege and that any attorney who is unwilling to snitch on a client is guilty of obstruction of justice which requires the immediate disbarment of the attorney. Since May 22, 1990, no attorney in New York has refused to snitch on a client. This is stare decisis.
The attorney-client privilege belongs to the client and not to his or her attorney.  It can only be waived by the client. On the other hand, the attorney owes to the client the right of effective assistance of counsel under the Sixth Amendment. This means that any rights of a Black client can be found in Dred Scott.
Anyone with a single, ticking brain cell has to conclude that the United States also has two sets of books. Unfortunately, all leading Blacks have already reached this conclusion. They have all buried their heads in the sand while sporting their bogus titles. In New York, the HNIC has turned his own victimhood into a profit.
His job is to ensure that all Blacks submit to Dred Scott. The “right to bear arms” should be of no concern to any Black person. This explains why this HNIC refused to support a pardon for White. According to him, John White’s problems started when he refused to participate in a state-sponsored, gun, buy-back program. Stated differently, no Black woman including Tawana Brawley is entitled to be protected against a rape by a White man.
Dr.  King never advised Blacks to disarm themselves. Non-violence was only a tactic. If a White man had ever put his hands on Corretta Scott King, Dr. King would have defended her. I know where Dr. King would have stood on Tawana Brawley. Those who claim to come in his name should be avoided at all costs. I do not need the assistance of Mayor Michael Bloomberg in writing Dr. King’s true story.

"Speaking Truth To Empower."

Also Check Out...

Norton Demands Answers after
Libya: Missing Migrants sent to
Democrats Introduce Legislation to
COVID-19 Impact Report: What Black
Magic Johnson: Sports Needs More
Report: Nicaragua’s Indigenous