Michael Gaynor
Rank racial hypocrisy at deplorable Duke
By Michael Gaynor
Duke too needs to be investigated for racial discrimination and suits by unindicted players against Duke are the paths to needed reform as well as compensatory and punitive damages. If 46 of the 47 lacrosse players had been black instead of white and the false accuser had been white and had given a pass to the only white member of the team, Duke would have handled the matter properly instead of politically correctly: President Brodhead would have preached the presumption of innocence, the 88ers would have demanded due process for the accused, Duke officials would not have advised players not to talk to their parents or lawyers, Duke officials would not have secretly turned over material to the prosecution and then pretended it had not happened, hateful demonstrations would have been condemned instead of complimented and punitive grading and hostlity from faculty would not have existed.
________________________________________
Duke Law Professor James Coleman, a liberal black Democrat, severely criticized the rogue prosecutor, Mike Nifong, but faithfully "seconded" President Brodhead's "hands-off approach."
Professor Coleman: "I'm not sure what more the University could have said that would have been supportive of the students and would not have appeared to be Duke trying to interfere in the judicial process. Nifong had already basically attacked students as being wealthy, white, privileged students whose fathers could go out and buy them the best lawyers. I don't think the University could have asserted that the students were innocent under those circumstances."
Duke should act when a student victim is black, but not when a student victim is white, or wealthy, or white and wealthy?
A despicable racial double standard, obviously.
Is North Carolina Central University's Chan Hall setting policy for Duke? (Mr. Hall notoriously commented that Duke lacrosse players should be prosecuted "whether it happened or not," as "justice for things that happened in the past.")
Some have taken note!
First email from parents of an unindicted Duke lacrosse player:
"[T]he attached HS article from 1997....is self explanatory. Contrast this with the lacrosse incident. Note that some of the characters remain the same e.g. Lubiano and Holloway."
"Profs seek more than apology in arrest 19 black professors sign letter sent to Duke president Herald-Sun, The (Durham, NC) May 16, 1997 Author: BLAKE DICKINSON The Herald-Sun
"Nineteen black professors signed a letter sent to Duke University President Nan Keohane this week seeking more than an apology for the mistaken April arrest of a black freshman.
"'A tremendous error in judgment cannot be ameliorated merely by saying: "We're sorry the police made a mistake,"' the 4 1/2-page letter stated. 'Neither is some vague reference to an unspecified punishment of the officers sufficient.'
"The letter, signed by such well-known Duke faculty as historian John Hope Franklin, women's and black studies researcher Paula Giddings and African and Afro-American Studies director Karla Holloway, went on to request details on the punishments handed down to the police officers involved and for the female student who summoned police to be 'called to account.'
"'The cavalier dismissal of the incident by some, and the call for more tolerance with an implied plea for greater understanding will not solve the problem,' the letter stated.
"Keohane, who received the letter Wednesday, said Thursday that she was trying to organize a meeting with the signers.
"'It's a thoughtful letter,' Keohane said. 'I appreciate that the faculty members have taken the time and initiative to raise the issue. I look forward to meeting with them.'
"But when pressed for details, Keohane demurred. 'I want to talk with [the letter writers] before I say anything more to anyone else,' she said.
"Keohane issued a public apology, which was printed in Duke's student newspaper on April 24, the day after The Chronicle published a story detailing the April 7 handcuffing and half-hour detention of 19-year-old Calvin Harding by two white officers.
"Harding, who was at his work-study post in the Fuqua School of Business, had been identified to police by another student as a possible suspect in a string of recent thefts. Despite Harding's attempts to show the officers his student ID card and to explain what he was doing at Fuqua, the officers arrested and handcuffed him, then placed him in their squad car.
"After officers discovered they'd made a mistake, about 30 minutes after stopping Harding, they released him without an apology and left.
"'The fact that the student whose rights were violated is African-American, and the officers involved were white, has understandably raised a question of whether race was a factor in this situation,' Keohane wrote. 'It is a regrettable aspect of contemporary American life that members of minority groups all too often are treated in stereotypical ways; this is a problem that festers in our society every day.'
"Duke Police Chief Alana Ennis, who conducted an internal investigation of the incident, and other university officials have stated that sloppy police work, not race, led to Harding's arrest.
"The two officers were 'severely punished,' Ennis and others have reported. But, citing personnel policy, they have declined to give further information about that punitive action.
"'It's not enough,' said letter signer Leonard Beckum, a public policy professor who formerly served as Duke's vice president for institutional equity.
"'Those actions were excellent. There's nothing wrong with them,' he said. 'But that's like killing a fly with a dead carcass in the room and the windows all up.'
"Franklin agreed.
"'We don't know what the punishment was. A punishment in the dark is no punishment, as far as I'm concerned,' Franklin said. 'They could have thrown an ice cream party for them, as far as I know.'
"The incident raises disturbing questions about the prevailing treatment of blacks on campus, the letter signers stated. 'Indeed, the handcuffing of Calvin Harding handcuffed us all,' they concluded.
"Other letter signers were: Fred Boadu, Jerome M. Culp Jr., N. Gregson Davis, Chouki El Hamel, David Barry Gaspar, Raymond Gavins, Monica H. Green, William D. Hart, Geraldine R. Henderson, Wahneema Lubiano, Vonnie C. McLoyd, Pierre Ndilikilikesha, Melvin K.H. Peters, Richard J. Powell and Kenny J. Williams.
Second email from parents of an unindicted Duke lacrosse player:
"[A]ttached is a 1997 Chronicle article related to the issue discussed in my previous e-mail. Note the strong support from Duke's faculty. The support for the lacrosse players was almost non-existent for many months and only modest after that (maybe 20 professors). This black student was only detained for 30 minutes. The lacrosse players faced serious threats, abuse and danger, including the very real prospect of 30 years in prison for crimes that never occurred.
"There are obviously other, more current, examples of Duke's two race policy of treating students (as discussed in prior e-mails and in an article you wrote). I think that the letters that the faculty wrote and signed 10 years ago in support of a black student provide an interesting contrast to the recent letters from Duke faculty (Starn, Holsti, Coleman etc.) as well as the Listening Statement, the Clarifying Statement, Baker's letter, etc.
The following is a complete transcript of the letter submitted more than ten years ago to then Duke University President Nan Keohane by Professors John Barrow, William O'Barr and William Reichert and about 250 non-minority members of the faculty.
"Dear President Keohane:
"We, the undersigned faculty and administrative staff of Duke University, write to express our strong support for the statement made by the nineteen Black faculty members who wrote to you on May 12, 1997, concerning the incident between Mr. Calvin Harding, a Trinity College freshman, and two Duke University police officers. No Duke student, faculty member, or employee should suffer the kind of indignity experienced by Mr. Harding, a student in good standing who was carrying out his assigned duties.
"We as a community must take steps to address the underlying causes of such incidents to ensure that they do not recur. Beyond lending support to our nineteen colleagues, this letter is a specific call for you to make the elimination of racism at Duke a top priority.
"Your official apology to Mr. Harding is a significant action, and the subsequent suspension of the officers appropriate. However, we wish to underscore the point of the May 12 letter that simply treating the symptom(s) will not cure the terrible disease of racism that infects our campus. More specifically, racial incidents cannot be treated as isolated cases, and the issue of racism at Duke cannot be considered closed as a result of your actions to date regarding the Harding incident.
"The legacy of the Harding incident should fall nothing short of the wake up call that finally forces Duke's rhetoric and actions on race to converge, thus becoming a place where ALL OF US are treated with dignity and feel welcomed to study, work, and learn. You have demonstrated strong leadership in other areas of University life. We are counting on you and your leadership to bring the same enthusiasm and creativity to solving this terrible problem and we are prepared to join you in this extremely important endeavor.
"Sincerely,
"The Committee Against Racism at Duke"
The Committee Against White Racism at Duke!
Third email from parents of unindicted player: "The double standard is so obvious. Keohane apologized 1 week after the incident and the Duke police officers were 'severely punished.' Brodhead gave a half hearted apology 18 months after the incident and 5 months after the AG declared the players completely innocent, which should have been obvious to Brodhead much sooner. As far as we know there has been no punishment for the faculty who publicly denounced the players and who thanked the protesters with the 'Castrate' signs."
Right!
As I wrote with respect to the local authorities in "Duke case: Reverse racism at work," posted on March 30, 2007
"There is good cause for a federal investigation....Even wealthy white males have civil rights, including the right not to be discriminated against on account of race or color. If the Duke Three were black instead of white, would Mr. Nifong have requested that they be indicted? Or directed an identification procedure that Duke Law Professor James Coleman (a black man) has explained on '60 Minutes' violated federal, state and local guidelines? Or proceeded after the DNA results were received? Or made outrageous public statements? Or concealed important exculpatory evidence?
"I don't think so."
Duke too needs to be investigated for racial discrimination and suits by unindicted players against Duke are the paths to needed reform as well as compensatory and punitive damages. If 46 of the 47 lacrosse players had been black instead of white and the false accuser had been white and had given a pass to the only white member of the team, Duke would have handled the matter properly instead of politically correctly: President Brodhead would have preached the presumption of innocence, the 88ers would have demanded due process for the accused, Duke officials would not have advised players not to talk to their parents or lawyers, Duke officials would not have secretly turned over material to the prosecution and then pretended it had not happened and hateful demonstrations would have been condemned instead of complimented.
© Michael Gaynor
Duke too needs to be investigated for racial discrimination and suits by unindicted players against Duke are the paths to needed reform as well as compensatory and punitive damages. If 46 of the 47 lacrosse players had been black instead of white and the false accuser had been white and had given a pass to the only white member of the team, Duke would have handled the matter properly instead of politically correctly: President Brodhead would have preached the presumption of innocence, the 88ers would have demanded due process for the accused, Duke officials would not have advised players not to talk to their parents or lawyers, Duke officials would not have secretly turned over material to the prosecution and then pretended it had not happened, hateful demonstrations would have been condemned instead of complimented and punitive grading and hostlity from faculty would not have existed.
________________________________________
Duke Law Professor James Coleman, a liberal black Democrat, severely criticized the rogue prosecutor, Mike Nifong, but faithfully "seconded" President Brodhead's "hands-off approach."
Professor Coleman: "I'm not sure what more the University could have said that would have been supportive of the students and would not have appeared to be Duke trying to interfere in the judicial process. Nifong had already basically attacked students as being wealthy, white, privileged students whose fathers could go out and buy them the best lawyers. I don't think the University could have asserted that the students were innocent under those circumstances."
Duke should act when a student victim is black, but not when a student victim is white, or wealthy, or white and wealthy?
A despicable racial double standard, obviously.
Is North Carolina Central University's Chan Hall setting policy for Duke? (Mr. Hall notoriously commented that Duke lacrosse players should be prosecuted "whether it happened or not," as "justice for things that happened in the past.")
Some have taken note!
First email from parents of an unindicted Duke lacrosse player:
"[T]he attached HS article from 1997....is self explanatory. Contrast this with the lacrosse incident. Note that some of the characters remain the same e.g. Lubiano and Holloway."
"Profs seek more than apology in arrest 19 black professors sign letter sent to Duke president Herald-Sun, The (Durham, NC) May 16, 1997 Author: BLAKE DICKINSON The Herald-Sun
"Nineteen black professors signed a letter sent to Duke University President Nan Keohane this week seeking more than an apology for the mistaken April arrest of a black freshman.
"'A tremendous error in judgment cannot be ameliorated merely by saying: "We're sorry the police made a mistake,"' the 4 1/2-page letter stated. 'Neither is some vague reference to an unspecified punishment of the officers sufficient.'
"The letter, signed by such well-known Duke faculty as historian John Hope Franklin, women's and black studies researcher Paula Giddings and African and Afro-American Studies director Karla Holloway, went on to request details on the punishments handed down to the police officers involved and for the female student who summoned police to be 'called to account.'
"'The cavalier dismissal of the incident by some, and the call for more tolerance with an implied plea for greater understanding will not solve the problem,' the letter stated.
"Keohane, who received the letter Wednesday, said Thursday that she was trying to organize a meeting with the signers.
"'It's a thoughtful letter,' Keohane said. 'I appreciate that the faculty members have taken the time and initiative to raise the issue. I look forward to meeting with them.'
"But when pressed for details, Keohane demurred. 'I want to talk with [the letter writers] before I say anything more to anyone else,' she said.
"Keohane issued a public apology, which was printed in Duke's student newspaper on April 24, the day after The Chronicle published a story detailing the April 7 handcuffing and half-hour detention of 19-year-old Calvin Harding by two white officers.
"Harding, who was at his work-study post in the Fuqua School of Business, had been identified to police by another student as a possible suspect in a string of recent thefts. Despite Harding's attempts to show the officers his student ID card and to explain what he was doing at Fuqua, the officers arrested and handcuffed him, then placed him in their squad car.
"After officers discovered they'd made a mistake, about 30 minutes after stopping Harding, they released him without an apology and left.
"'The fact that the student whose rights were violated is African-American, and the officers involved were white, has understandably raised a question of whether race was a factor in this situation,' Keohane wrote. 'It is a regrettable aspect of contemporary American life that members of minority groups all too often are treated in stereotypical ways; this is a problem that festers in our society every day.'
"Duke Police Chief Alana Ennis, who conducted an internal investigation of the incident, and other university officials have stated that sloppy police work, not race, led to Harding's arrest.
"The two officers were 'severely punished,' Ennis and others have reported. But, citing personnel policy, they have declined to give further information about that punitive action.
"'It's not enough,' said letter signer Leonard Beckum, a public policy professor who formerly served as Duke's vice president for institutional equity.
"'Those actions were excellent. There's nothing wrong with them,' he said. 'But that's like killing a fly with a dead carcass in the room and the windows all up.'
"Franklin agreed.
"'We don't know what the punishment was. A punishment in the dark is no punishment, as far as I'm concerned,' Franklin said. 'They could have thrown an ice cream party for them, as far as I know.'
"The incident raises disturbing questions about the prevailing treatment of blacks on campus, the letter signers stated. 'Indeed, the handcuffing of Calvin Harding handcuffed us all,' they concluded.
"Other letter signers were: Fred Boadu, Jerome M. Culp Jr., N. Gregson Davis, Chouki El Hamel, David Barry Gaspar, Raymond Gavins, Monica H. Green, William D. Hart, Geraldine R. Henderson, Wahneema Lubiano, Vonnie C. McLoyd, Pierre Ndilikilikesha, Melvin K.H. Peters, Richard J. Powell and Kenny J. Williams.
Second email from parents of an unindicted Duke lacrosse player:
"[A]ttached is a 1997 Chronicle article related to the issue discussed in my previous e-mail. Note the strong support from Duke's faculty. The support for the lacrosse players was almost non-existent for many months and only modest after that (maybe 20 professors). This black student was only detained for 30 minutes. The lacrosse players faced serious threats, abuse and danger, including the very real prospect of 30 years in prison for crimes that never occurred.
"There are obviously other, more current, examples of Duke's two race policy of treating students (as discussed in prior e-mails and in an article you wrote). I think that the letters that the faculty wrote and signed 10 years ago in support of a black student provide an interesting contrast to the recent letters from Duke faculty (Starn, Holsti, Coleman etc.) as well as the Listening Statement, the Clarifying Statement, Baker's letter, etc.
The following is a complete transcript of the letter submitted more than ten years ago to then Duke University President Nan Keohane by Professors John Barrow, William O'Barr and William Reichert and about 250 non-minority members of the faculty.
"Dear President Keohane:
"We, the undersigned faculty and administrative staff of Duke University, write to express our strong support for the statement made by the nineteen Black faculty members who wrote to you on May 12, 1997, concerning the incident between Mr. Calvin Harding, a Trinity College freshman, and two Duke University police officers. No Duke student, faculty member, or employee should suffer the kind of indignity experienced by Mr. Harding, a student in good standing who was carrying out his assigned duties.
"We as a community must take steps to address the underlying causes of such incidents to ensure that they do not recur. Beyond lending support to our nineteen colleagues, this letter is a specific call for you to make the elimination of racism at Duke a top priority.
"Your official apology to Mr. Harding is a significant action, and the subsequent suspension of the officers appropriate. However, we wish to underscore the point of the May 12 letter that simply treating the symptom(s) will not cure the terrible disease of racism that infects our campus. More specifically, racial incidents cannot be treated as isolated cases, and the issue of racism at Duke cannot be considered closed as a result of your actions to date regarding the Harding incident.
"The legacy of the Harding incident should fall nothing short of the wake up call that finally forces Duke's rhetoric and actions on race to converge, thus becoming a place where ALL OF US are treated with dignity and feel welcomed to study, work, and learn. You have demonstrated strong leadership in other areas of University life. We are counting on you and your leadership to bring the same enthusiasm and creativity to solving this terrible problem and we are prepared to join you in this extremely important endeavor.
"Sincerely,
"The Committee Against Racism at Duke"
The Committee Against White Racism at Duke!
Third email from parents of unindicted player: "The double standard is so obvious. Keohane apologized 1 week after the incident and the Duke police officers were 'severely punished.' Brodhead gave a half hearted apology 18 months after the incident and 5 months after the AG declared the players completely innocent, which should have been obvious to Brodhead much sooner. As far as we know there has been no punishment for the faculty who publicly denounced the players and who thanked the protesters with the 'Castrate' signs."
Right!
As I wrote with respect to the local authorities in "Duke case: Reverse racism at work," posted on March 30, 2007
"There is good cause for a federal investigation....Even wealthy white males have civil rights, including the right not to be discriminated against on account of race or color. If the Duke Three were black instead of white, would Mr. Nifong have requested that they be indicted? Or directed an identification procedure that Duke Law Professor James Coleman (a black man) has explained on '60 Minutes' violated federal, state and local guidelines? Or proceeded after the DNA results were received? Or made outrageous public statements? Or concealed important exculpatory evidence?
"I don't think so."
Duke too needs to be investigated for racial discrimination and suits by unindicted players against Duke are the paths to needed reform as well as compensatory and punitive damages. If 46 of the 47 lacrosse players had been black instead of white and the false accuser had been white and had given a pass to the only white member of the team, Duke would have handled the matter properly instead of politically correctly: President Brodhead would have preached the presumption of innocence, the 88ers would have demanded due process for the accused, Duke officials would not have advised players not to talk to their parents or lawyers, Duke officials would not have secretly turned over material to the prosecution and then pretended it had not happened and hateful demonstrations would have been condemned instead of complimented.
© Michael Gaynor
The views expressed by RenewAmerica columnists are their own and do not necessarily reflect the position of RenewAmerica or its affiliates.
(See RenewAmerica's publishing standards.)
