April 14, 2014

Innocent Man Freed After 25 Years in Prison 
By Frederick H. Lowe

Jonathan Flemming

Brooklyn D.A. Kenneth P. Thompson

(TriceEdneyWire.com) - Brooklyn, N.Y., District Attorney Kenneth P. Thompson on Tuesday dismissed murder charges against Jonathan Fleming, who spent 25 years in prison, serving time for a crime that occurred in New York although he had solid alibi that he was in Florida at the time.

"Today's actions follow a careful and thorough review of this case and based on key alibi facts that place Fleming in Florida at the time of the murder, I have decided to dismiss all charges against him," Thompson said in a statement.

Fleming was convicted of the Aug. 15, 1989, murder of Darryl Rush in Brooklyn, although Fleming was vacationing with his children in Florida, where they were visiting Disney World in Lake Buena Vista, Fla.

Police arrested Fleming on Aug. 17, 1989, and in his possession, they found a Florida hotel receipt that was time stamped for Aug. 14, 1989, at 9:27 p.m., four hours before Rush was slain at 2:18 am.

During his trial, Fleming said he was innocent of the murder and the hotel receipt corroborated his defense.

The Brooklyn D.A.'s  Conviction Review Unit, which is now headed by Harvard Law Professor Ronald S. Sullivan Jr., was investigating Fleming's conviction when they found the hotel receipt in his files.

The CRU also interviewed Fleming's former girlfriend, who said she called Fleming on the night of August 15, 1989, and he was still at the Florida hotel.

"This witness was found to be credible and phone records support her story," Thompson said. "Other witnesses who claimed to have seen Fleming shoot Rush have either since recanted their testimony, or were found to be not credible."

The Innocence Project, which is based in New York, praised Thompson's decision.

"The Innocence Project is very pleased that the Brooklyn District Attorney's Office has agreed to dismiss the murder indictment against Darryl Rush after a review by its Conviction Review Unit found that Rush was wrongfully convicted," said Paul Cates, a spokesperson for the Innocence Project.

"District Attorney Thompson is to be commended for including defense attorney's in the process, as their presence helps to ensure that the unit conducts a meaningful review of cases under consideration," Cates said.

The 51 year-old Fleming said he has dreamed about this day for 24 years. "I am finally a free man," he said. "I am going to eat dinner with my mother and my family."

April 14, 2014

GOP’s Shameful Treatment of the Powerless
By Rev. Jesse L. Jackson, Sr.

(TriceEdneyWire.com) - The Bible’s injunction that we shall be judged by how we have treated the “least of these” (Matthew 25:40) appears in different forms in virtually every religion or faith. And surely the measure of a country is how it treats the most vulnerable of its people — children in the dawn of life, the poor in the valley of life, the ailing in the shadows of life, the elderly in the dusk of life.

Last week, the House of Representatives was scheduled to vote on the Republican budget proposal put together by Rep. Paul Ryan, chair of the Budget Committee and Mitt Romney’s running mate. The vast majority of Republicans are lined up to vote for it, with possible exceptions for a handful who think it does not cut enough.

It is a breathtakingly mean and callous proposal. The Republican budget would cut taxes on the wealthy, giving millionaires, the Citizen for Tax Justice estimates, a tax break of $200,000 per year. (Ryan tells us only what tax rates he would lower, not the loopholes he would close to make his proposal revenue neutral. But CTJ shows that even if he closed every loophole, it wouldn’t make up for the revenue lost by lowering their top rate).

The Ryan plan would also extend tax breaks for multinationals, moving to make the entire world a tax haven. He would raise spending on the military by about $500 billion over the levels now projected over the next decade. Yet Republicans are pledged to balance the budget in 10 years. To achieve this, the Republican budget would turn Medicare into a voucher program (but only for those 55 and younger). He would repeal the Affordable Care Act (“Obamacare”). He would gut Medicaid, turning it into a block grant for states and cutting it by more than one-fourth by 2024.

The result, as estimated by the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities, would be to deprive 40 million low and moderate income Americans of health care insurance. The Republican budget also devastates domestic programs and investments, cutting them by one-third of their inflation adjusted levels over the decade, ending at an inconceivable one-half the levels of the Reagan years as a percentage of the economy. Infant nutrition, food subsidy, Head Start, investment in schools, Pell Grants for college, public housing, Meals on Wheels and home heating assistance for seniors or the confined all would suffer deep cuts.

The poorest children will suffer the worst cuts. The Republican budget also savages investments vital to our future — not just education, but research and development, renewable energy, modern infrastructure. This budget is scheduled to be voted on by the House of Representatives this week. It is expected to pass with a majority made up entirely of Republican votes. Speaker Boehner has lined up this vote, even as he refuses even to allow a vote on extending unemployment benefits and on raising the minimum wage. It is hard to see this as anything other than a declaration of class warfare by the few against the many.

Republicans declare the country is broke, against all evidence to the contrary. But they still want to cut taxes for the rich and corporations and hike spending on the military. So they lay waste to support for working and poor people. Ryan argues that cutting programs for the poor will set them free, removing a “hammock” and forcing them to stand on their own feet. That might be worth debating if jobs were plentiful, schools received equal support, housing was affordable and jobs paid a living wage. But none of this is true. In today’s conditions, with mass unemployment, savagely unequal schools, homeless families and poverty wage jobs, Ryan’s words simply ring false.

Needless to say, the wealthy and corporations reward Republicans for arguing their case. As the Koch brothers are showing, their campaigns will be lavishly supported; their opponents will face a barrage of attack ads. But most Americans are better than this. Majorities oppose these cruel priorities.

The question is whether those who vote for these harsh priorities are held accountable this fall in the elections. After decades of struggle, we all have the right to vote. The majority can speak if it chooses. It has to sort through annoying ads, poll-tested excuses and glib politicians. But we can decide we aren’t going to support politicians who protect the privileges of the few and vote to make the poor pay the price.

Blackonomics

Where do we stand?  
By James Clingman            

                                                          

 (TriceEdneyWire.com) - Chaka Khan sang, “Tell me somethin’ good.”  The 2014 National Urban League (NUL) report, "State of Black America, One Nation Underemployed; Jobs Rebuild America,” contains a lot of great information, but it will only prove to be “good” if we use it to build a solid and long lasting economic base.  The 236 page report is full of statistics and insights Black people need to know—and act upon.  Knowledge is only power if we use it.

For the most part, Black people in this country are at the bottom of every good category and at the top of every bad one.  Of course most of us don’t need the NUL or anyone else to tell us that; we see it every day all around us, but supporting statistics are a great way to drive the point home.  Sad to say, our overall “state” is not good.  (Sorry, Chaka)

I would love to see a report on the “Fate” of Black America.  Maybe that would wake us up and get us involved in changing our “state.”  Reports on our “state” are nice but they usually tell us what we already know.  Acknowledging and discussing our fate might scare us into implementing long term, solution-based, and work related approaches to our challenges.

I was intrigued by some of the responses to our “state” from Black folks.  For instance, an article titled, NUL State Of Black America 2014 Report Says Minorities Losing Economic Ground, by Jesse Holland, states, “Despite the ‘dismal’ numbers an analysis by the Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research found African-Americans significantly more ‘optimistic’ about their future standard of living than whites…”  Mr. Holland went on to write, “The survey found high optimism even among Blacks who say racism is a cause for economic inequality.”   My reaction was, “Say what?”

Another irony in the NUL report referred to the new “Chocolate City,” Memphis, TN., which is 63 percent Black, according the 2010 U.S Census (The NUL report says 46%), yet ranks the “most equal for ‘Hispanics’ in unemployment equality” (3.8%), compared with a 6.5 percent unemployment rate for whites.”  The unemployment rate for Blacks in Memphis is 16.6 percent.  What’s wrong with that picture?

While optimism is commendable, it is irrational for us to be complacent and continue responding to old problems with the same failed measures of the past.  We should know by now what relying on hope and optimism brings.  MLK’s words, “Why we can’t wait,” and the “Fierce urgency of now” ring true.  Do we just recite his words, or do we act upon them?   As I wrote in a previous article, “Just how long is ‘now’?”

It’s been 46 years since King died in Memphis, fighting for economic rights; according to an article on nashvillescene.com, Memphis is “Among worst the U.S. cities to be Black, male, and unemployed.”   The city just spent $28 million to revamp the civil rights museum; I wonder how many jobs were created for Black men on that project, and how much of the $28 million went to Black contractors.  Did Blacks in Memphis settle for symbolism over substance, or did they get both?

Information on the State of Black America is great, but if we don’t change our inappropriate behavior we will continue to be distracted from the real solutions to our problems.  Heck, Tavis Smiley televised the revolution for several years.  What did we do with that?  I am worn out by our tepid and sometimes total lack of response to the problems we face in this nation.

It’s frustrating to see Black people settling for a nebulous request for “jobs” and an increase in the minimum wage to $10.10.  We do need more jobs, but we must create some of those jobs ourselves, and be able to hire a significant percentage of our own workforce.  A decade ago, Economist, Thomas Boston proposed his “20 by 10” concept that called for 10 percent of Black workers being hired by Black businesses by 2010.  We missed that boat, so maybe Professor Boston should now call for a “10 by 20” effort.

We must raise our level of entrepreneurship by including it in our schools’ curricula, and by growing our businesses via mutual support and strategic alliances.  The NUL report states, “We must recognize…entrepreneurship as the most important vehicle of economic development in the Black community.”  Amen!

Our “high optimism” alone will not take us to the promise land of “economic equality.”  Complacent optimism makes us feel good in our misery; pragmatism makes us work to “do good” and do well at the same time.

Curtis Mayfield wrote it, and EnVogue sang, “Giving him something he can feel.”   Great song, but it’s better when coupled with the Isley Brothers’ classic, “I got work to do.”  Let’s move, as the Temptations sang, from “Standing on shaky ground” to “Standing on the top.”

April 14, 2014

Ethos and President Lyndon Johnson
By Dr. E. Faye Williams, Esq. 

(TriceEdneyWire.com) - Ethos is a Greek word meaning "character."  It is commonly used to explain the value systems that distinguish the beliefs or ideals of a group, organization, community, nation or ideology. Ethos is the root of ethikos, meaning "moral, showing moral character" and it’s the origin of the modern English word ethics. I've often been told that the demonstration of character is what you do when you know that the only right thing is to do what's right -- it's doing the right thing when no one is watching.

The practical significance of ethos, and therefore ethics, is that few individuals or entities can exist over time without disclosing – intentionally or unintentionally – the foundation of their character.  Among Bid Whist aficionados, it is understood that one must eventually show his or her ‘hold card.’  Among politicians, and other public policy-makers, it’s understood that they or their actions will eventually disclose those whose interests they elect to serve and protect.

Significant in the past few days has been the focus on President Lyndon Baines Johnson and the signing of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 fifty years ago.  All this week, dignitaries, including Presidents Obama, Clinton and Carter, have edified the character and courage that it took for President Johnson to sign that legislation, especially considering the social and political climate of the times.  Although his upbringing, experience and the social mores of his area of residence clearly opposed the goals of his "signature legislation," Johnson knew that our country could not survive with the racial hostilities that were then ingrained in the personal and institutional fabric of our national ethos.

However he is considered by others, I am grateful that President Johnson chose to stand against popular political wisdom of the time and that he set the institutional wheels of racial justice and progress into motion.  Through the lens of recent history, we have seen and can evaluate the good works and character of this man.  He serves as an exemplar of fair play and justice.

As I see it, most of the current crop of politicians who huddle under the banner of the Republican Party stand in stark contrast to the ethos and character of Lyndon Johnson.  While Johnson realized that a democracy could truly flourish only when the opportunity for participation and growth was expanded for all, contemporary Republican philosophy centers around the principle of limiting participation in the social structure of the nation, especially in the arena of voting. Since Republicans, seemingly, cannot create a political message that captures the hearts and minds of a majority of American voters, they have dedicated themselves to restructuring the composition of the majority by denying voting opportunities to undesirables.

And just who are these undesirables?  They are those of us who are not numbered among the wealthy.

While pushing the verbal pabulum of populism, Republican legislative efforts support uplifting those least in need of assistance. They are zealots in the fight against removing subsidies provided to the wealthiest of commercial industries.  At every turn, they oppose tax reform that would result in the wealthy contributing a fairer share of revenue to the "general welfare."  They refuse to pass legislation designed to create jobs or increase wages, yet their policies cut assistance to the unemployed and underemployed.

We often hear the negatives, but examining the ethos of President Johnson sheds the light of comparison, contrast and clarity on the ethos of the Republican Tea Party.  The challenge isn’t deciding whether they serve the interests of our community.  Our greatest challenge is to actually commit ourselves to timely action.  Like President Johnson, we must commit to and sustain the fight however unpopular or uncomfortable it becomes to us.  After all, November cometh.

(Dr. E. Faye Williams is National Chair of the National Congress of Black Women, 202/678-6788, www.nationalcongressbw.org)

​