Disturbing new development and mounting taxpayer burden

NC General Assembly: “Yup, We’re racist bigots.”

A resolution was recently brought before the floor of the North Carolina General Assembly to pardon Reconstruction era NC Governor William W. Holden. The offense that he committed which resulted in him being the only governor in United States history to be impeached and removed from office, was his attempt to curb the slaughter of innocent African Americans civilians by the Ku Klux Klan shortly after the Civil War’s end. This is an action by the General Assembly that is long overdue, such as the interracial marriage of heavyweight boxer Jack Johnson during the early Jim Crow days which was a crime in several southern states. Recently, Arizona Senator John McCain has led the crusade to have Johnson posthumously pardoned by the nation’s legislative body and to be signed by the president. There are many examples in history where grave and immoral injustices by the municipal, state, and country’s ruling body are rectified with apologies and pardons after generations of objectivity and distance from the emotional pressures of the day. The resolution to pardon Governor Holden is really a no-brainer and should have been adopted and passed with unanimity. However, Tar Heel politicians have managed to turn what should have been a sure thing into so much drama. Where the issue now stands, I know not and am thoroughly confused. I only know that it did not fly through the General Assembly for Governor Bev Perdue’s signature. What confounds me is what is the argument against passing such a resolution? By not absolving Holden for taking action against the KKK, the General Assembly is in essence saying to the world, “Yup. We’re racist bigots.” This sentiment is reinforced by the recent passage of a bill honoring the unrepentant and admitted racist Jesse Alexander Helms, a North Carolina senator whose actions inside Washington’s capitol helped impede the nation’s movement towards equal civil rights. Of course, Senator Helms’s actions in North Carolina were especially repressive and detrimental to African Americans, gays and lesbians. Yet, the General Assembly honored Helms by passing a laudatory resolution praising him by a bi-partisan, sweeping and almost unanimous vote, with but one nay dissent, and a dozen or so abstaining from the vote. Actions by the Assembly in both the Helms and Holden cases are an insult to African American in the state, and others who were discriminated against by Helms (such as homosexuals). Democratic Senator Dan Blue, one of several African Americans who voted in favor of honoring Jesse Helms, is a leading state senate voice for pardoning Holden. The Assembly’s refusal to do so is a slap in his face. It is indefensible. However African American politicians, such as Blue, have no one to blame except themselves for the disdain state politicians have shown regarding Governor Holden’s pardon. For example, black politician have remained silent when the state castigated former Durham District Attorney Mike Nifong who was violently attacked for doing his job in extending the concept of “equal justice for all” to a young African American woman who claimed to have been sexually assaulted by members of the Duke Lacrosse team. Durham politicians in particular (Representatives Larry Hall, Mickey Michaux, and Senator Floyd McKissick) deserve the brunt of criticism, as they were also quiet as dormice when the Duke Lacrosse case victim, Crystal Mangum, was arrested on trumped up charges and held for three months until her unexpected release by a benevolent bail bondsman satisfied the $100,000 bond under which she was held. That trio of black Durham politicians, like so many other politicians, is missing in action when it comes to issues of the social injustices that plague our state with its tenet of “selective justice based on Class and Color”… lacking the will and/or the courage to do the right thing. Governor William Holden should no more have been impeached and removed from office than Mike Nifong should have been disbarred and forced to resign as Durham district attorney. Generations removed from the accepted standards and attitudes of the day, the morally correct path is clear in the case of Holden, and it demands his immediate pardon. Generations from now, when the emotional turmoil that has been stoked by the biased media has simmered and the minds of the people are driven by reason and objectivity, a movement will be undertaken to reinstate Mike Nifong’s law license… rest assured. It will be Mike Nifong’s legacy that will shine brightest in the future, not the members of the unregulated North Carolina State Bar, not Attorney General Roy Cooper who caved in to defendants’ attorneys’ demands for him to issue an “innocent proclamation,” and not the three Duke Lacrosse defendants, who along with their attorneys, were responsible for shaking down Duke University for $60 million and with their greed not satiated are trying to rip off the cash-strapped city of Durham for $30 mil in addition. Today most people look back at the 19th century and wonder how an injustice such as the one against Holden could have taken place. In the future, the vast majority of people will shake their heads in disgust at the disbarment and mistreatment of Mike Nifong… as many people are already beginning to do. It would be a wonderful thing if people today could take responsibility for cleaning up the injustices it commits, instead of handing the duty for righting wrongs over to those in the future. Current North Carolina politicians should pardon William Holden and undo the injustice of their predecessors, and they should clean up their own mess by seeing that Mike Nifong’s license to practice law is unilaterally and unconditionally reinstated without restrictions. Don’t miss the most recent installment of Episode V of “The MisAdventures of Super-Duper Cooper”… Part 13 of 17. Be sure to view the Comments, Insight, and Analysis which follows the strip and feel free to offer feedback on the link at the conclusion of the commentary. A link is provided below. LINK: http://justice4nifong.com/direc/sdcDirec/sdcEpv/sdc169.htm

The laws, not the technicalities, are the problems

In her Wednesday, October 21, 2009 column in the News & Observer, titled “File this under 2 wrongs,” Ruth Sheehan blames technicalities in the law for what appears to be two miscarriages of justice. The cases referenced in her article are the release of 20 violent felons who were sentenced to life, and consequences for defense attorney Johnny Gaskins, who was convicted of depositing funds in a way to avoid IRS notification of the deposits.

With regards to the release of felons, laws were enacted by the North Carolina General Assembly in the 1970’s that defined the length of a life sentence as being 80 years. This was followed by a law which cut sentences in half, which in essence meant that defendants sentenced to life would be required to serve a maximum of no more than 40 years behind bars. Members of the General Assembly, who should have been looking out for the welfare of the public, did not consider the consequences of their actions in passing this law, which is straightforward. The Court of Appeals and the state’s Supreme Court, agreed with the inmate who ignited a firestorm when he proclaimed he had served his “life” sentence, as defined by laws passed in the 70’s. His release, as is the release of others, is not due to a “technicality” but rather to sloppy legislating.

Instead of placing blame on the 1970’s North Carolina General Assembly, the media is directing the public’s ire towards the inmates who stand to benefit from its gross miscue. Had the state’s senators and representatives been more attentive and committed to conscientiously fulfilling their duties, than enriching themselves personally and professionally, there is less likelihood that such an unintentional outcome would present itself. The “lifer” who was incarcerated and probably read law books and newspapers, was obviously more motivated to achieving his goals than the politicians were in passing sound legislation.

As for Attorney Gaskins, the federal law is clear that it is a crime to try and deceive a banking institution in an attempt to avoid triggering IRS notification when making large cash deposits. In this case, the severity of the crime, I feel, should be conditional with the intent of the depositor. Because Mr. Gaskins reported all monies deposited and paid taxes on them, it is obvious that his “criminal” manner of depositing was not for the purpose of defrauding the IRS of taxes due. Mr. Gaskins definitely deserves leniency, and if anything, what he did should be categorized as nothing more than a misdemeanor. What Mr. Gaskins did, as determined by the jury, was clearly in violation of the law. It is not its interpretation that needs changing, but rather the law, possibly to include intent and/or fraud.

So, I respectfully disagree with Ms. Sheehan that the release of prisoners and Mr. Gaskins’ conviction on depositing practices were due to technicalities. In these cases the laws were unambiguous and correctly interpreted by the courts and the jury. The lesson to be taken from these episodes is that the lawmakers of the state need to be conscientious, to take their duties seriously, and to pass laws that will protect the public and assure that people are not unjustly punished.