By: Mike McDaniel During my police years, I generally got along well with defense attorneys. While they were careful about making any admissions against the interests of their clients, the people I arrested, we would often laugh about their client’s exploits, and I’d kid them unmercifully about potential defenses for the indefensible.
Some defense attorneys were not likeable people. They not only hated the police, they identified with their clients, encouraging their delusions. Some even helped them commit crimes. I found most of these people, usually male, used drugs–in many cases, their clients were their suppliers–and often wore ponytails. Go figure.
But some were rational people, doing a necessary job, but never losing sight of the fact that we need jails, and some people absolutely need to be there for the benefit of us all. They also understood that culture matters, it matters a very great deal, and because of it, they were doomed to represent the same people, over and over again, punctuated only by short spans in prison.
A regular reader, “pre-Boomer Marine brat,” provided the link to an article that took me back to those days, because it was a virtual echo of some of the conversations I had with defense attorneys, and others working in the criminal justice and public health fields (EMTs, the occasional rational psychologist, social workers, etc.). It’s the lessons learned by a Liberal defense attorney, anonymous for obvious reasons. I’ve no doubt it will cause many progressives to immediately scream “RACISM,” but such people usually scream loudest when their beliefs are being exposed as lies, when their rhetoric is obliterated by fact.
Former Attorney General Eric Holder (it feels so good to say “former AG”) once called Americans cowards because they aren’t fond of being harangued about racism they don’t possess. As regular readers know, all race cards had been cancelled at SMM before I posted my first article back in 2011. Here then, a few examples from the article:
“I am a public defender in a large southern metropolitan area. Fewer than ten percent of the people in the area I serve are black but over 90 percent of my clients are black. The remaining ten percent are mainly Hispanics but there are a few whites.
I have no explanation for why this is, but crime has racial patterns. Hispanics usually commit two kinds of crime: sexual assault on children and driving under the influence. Blacks commit many violent crimes but very few sex crimes. The handful of whites I see commit all kinds of crimes. In my many years as a public defender I have represented only three Asians, and one was half black.
As a young lawyer, I believed the official story that blacks are law abiding, intelligent, family-oriented people, but are so poor they must turn to crime to survive. Actual black behavior was a shock to me.”
While I worked in areas with relatively small black populations, the proportions the author mentions are familiar to any honest cop of any race.
Most blacks are unable to speak English well. They cannot conjugate verbs. They have a poor grasp of verb tenses. They have a limited vocabulary. They cannot speak without swearing. They often become hostile on the stand. Many, when they testify, show a complete lack of empathy and are unable to conceal a morality based on the satisfaction of immediate, base needs. This is a disaster, especially in a jury trial. Most jurors are white, and are appalled by the demeanor of uneducated, criminal blacks.
It has been my experience that jurors aren’t racist. In fact, most go out of their way to avoid even the appearance of racial bias, but as the author notes, some people are their own worst enemies. If you’re judging someone, and you have only a few hours, or days, of observation, and no opportunity to ask questions, their demeanor, speech, attitude and apparent humanity are the only factors you have to make that judgment.
As a public defender, I have learned many things about people. One is that defendants do not have fathers. If a black even knows the name of his father, he knows of him only as a shadowy person with whom he has absolutely no ties. When a client is sentenced, I often beg for mercy on the grounds that the defendant did not have a father and never had a chance in life. I have often tracked down the man’s father–in jail–and have brought him to the sentencing hearing to testify that he never knew his son and never lifted a finger to help him. Often, this is the first time my client has ever met his father. These meetings are utterly unemotional.
Many black defendants don’t even have mothers who care about them. Many are raised by grandmothers after the state removes the children from an incompetent teenaged mother. Many of these mothers and grandmothers are mentally unstable, and are completely disconnected from the realities they face in court and in life. A 47-year-old grandmother will deny that her grandson has gang ties even though his forehead is tattooed with a gang sign or slogan. When I point this out in as kind and understanding way as I can, she screams at me. When black women start screaming, they invoke the name of Jesus and shout swear words in the same breath.
I often saw this utter lack of empathy for others, the unemotional aspect. Such people are unemotional about the suffering of others, but delight in taunting them, finding their agony hilarious.
I am a liberal. I believe that those of us who are able to produce abundance have a moral duty to provide basic food, shelter, and medical care for those who cannot care for themselves. I believe we have this duty even to those who can care for themselves but don’t. This world view requires compassion and a willingness to act on it.
It’s fascinating how the author can come so far in understanding the world as it is rather than as it should be, yet still resist coming the rest of the distance. The duty about which the author speaks is a moral duty, not a legal duty. Charity is freely and lovingly given, charity forced is taxation and/or theft.
Progressives tend to give little or nothing to the poor, while Conservatives give a great deal. Is this because Progressives are heartless? Generally not, but they tend to think in terms of policy and groups, not individuals. Their political belief is it is government’s job to provide for the poor, and such provision must come from taxes–other people’s money. Therefore, their charitable obligations are covered by wise Progressive policy, not by directly giving of their resources and time. Conservatives tend to take the lesson of the Good Samaritan to heart and give when they see the opportunity. They don’t think it’s up to others, nor do they think they have a right to spend the money of others.
By all means, gentle readers, take the link and read the article. It will demonstrate, at the least, why it is going to be so hard to deal with the damage racial tribalism causes. Erik Holder was wrong: Americans aren’t afraid to deal with race. They’re just tired of being called racists for pointing out racial and cultural problems, and coming up with rational and effective means to solve them.
Mike’s Home blog is Stately McDaniel Manor.