This letter was sent to us by a concerned dad. It follows up on a question he asked during the NDSS, NDSC and FRIENDS Town Hall call on Tuesday. We think he makes some excellent points. We hope that NDSS and NDSC read this letter carefully.
Dear Mr.
Colman and Ms. Goodman,
I write to
follow up on yesterday's town hall conference call. First, I want to thank you for hosting the
event. I appreciate the effort at
community outreach.
At the
meeting, I expressed my view that Maryland state officials should be the focus
of our demand for an independent investigation rather than the federal
government. Today I wish to follow up on
that topic.
As we
discussed, it is encouraging that the United States Department of Justice
("DOJ") has reached out to your organizations. Like you, I remain hopeful that someone
inside the DOJ will initiate an impartial investigation of the Saylor homicide
free of the personal entanglements that derailed the matter at the local level.
I am,
however, concerned about over-reliance on federal action. To begin, as we discussed, the federal actors
you are in touch with have relatively narrow mandates limited to civil rights,
disability rights, and overlap between the two.
Yet for the reasons we discussed, this case---while presenting a fairly
clear-cut case of excessive force---may not reflect the willful deprivation of
Mr. Saylor's rights due to his status as a legally protected minority. Similarly, I am concerned that a claim that
the off-duty deputies violated Mr. Saylor's civil rights may be complicated by
the fact that the men were acting in a private capacity on the night in
question.
More
fundamentally, I am concerned that over-reliance on "civil" and
"disability" rights to establish the guards' culpability undermines
the core narrative that our community should adopt and repeat: that because
Ethan Saylor had Down syndrome, the off-duty deputies did not view him as
worthy of basic human dignity, and they thus overreacted to an innocuous
situation by killing him over the price of a movie ticket. Viewed from this perspective, Mr. Saylor's
death presents a violation of the basic human
right to life. By relying on the
narrower statutory rights enforced by the DOJ, I fear that our community will
lend credence to the off-duty deputies' narrative of innocence: that
miscommunications and/or health problems stemming from Mr. Saylor's Down
syndrome are to blame for the homicide rather than their own misconduct.
For these
reasons, I believe Mr. Saylor's case is best cast as a violation of state
criminal law, and that it falls primarily on the higher Maryland authorities to
see that justice is served. On this
point, the Trayvon Martin case from Florida serves as a useful point of
comparison. There, as here, the killer
overreacted to an innocuous situation based on his personal prejudices against
the victim, i.e., that Mr. Martin (a
young black man) was not worthy of basic human respect. Similarly, there, as here, local law
enforcement placed its stamp of approval on the killer's misconduct by failing
to seek criminal justice.
There,
however, unlike here, a massive outpouring of public outrage---fueled in large
part by national advocacy groups such as the NAACP---forced the governor's hand
to appoint a special prosecutor, who ultimately brought criminal charges
against George Zimmerman.
That, I
believe, is where your organizations come in.
Governors and attorneys general are inherently political creatures, a
circumstance that cuts in both directions.
On the one hand, politicians frequently have their eyes on re-election
and/or higher office, and are thus reluctant to ruffle the feathers of law
enforcement, whose support they believe they will need to advance their own
careers. On the other hand, politicians
will respond to public pressure when they believe it is in their best interest
to do so.
As the
Trayvon Martin case demonstrates, large national advocacy groups such as yours
have the prestige, platform, and resources to galvanize their constituencies
(and others similarly situated) to compel action at the high levels of state
government. I thus urge you to focus
your attention on the Governor and Attorney General of Maryland, as well as any
other appropriate high-level officials, to launch an impartial investigation of
Ethan Saylor's homicide in addition to any action that the federal government
may (or may not) take.
Yesterday
you reaffirmed your commitment to demanding an impartial investigation. I take you at your word. Please do everything within your
power---including contacting the appropriate authorities, organizing marches
and rallies, coordinating social media efforts, and so on---to grab the
attention of the appropriate state officials before it's too late. I believe this action is a moral imperative
of your respective offices, and that only you have the ability to coordinate
the large-scale efforts necessary to ensure Justice for Ethan.
Please
feel free to contact me any time regarding this matter. Thank you.
How does the Maryland grand jury's decision not to indict the officers on state criminal charges impact this recommendation? Typically, in that situation, indictments are only sought & issued based on new evidence. The independent investigation by the DOJ could provide that new info & the civil rights aspect is what gives the DOJ authority to investigate an otherwise state criminal issue.
ReplyDeleteA response from Concerned Dad:
ReplyDelete"My take is that even if MD has some kind of "new evidence" rule, there's no reason why an investigation by the state AG or some kind of special prosecutor couldn't provide the "new" evidence. Of course, as you point out, the feds can and should act as well. Imagine a scenario where a white guy kills a black guy in an ugly and racially-charged incident, and the local DA, for unstated but obvious racist reasons, declines to charge, and the grand jury (unsurprisingly) fails to indict. Clearly, if the case got high profile enough, some grown-up in state government would eventually step in to clean up the mess--by whatever mechanisms exist in the state to do that--without relying on the feds, even if only for self-interested PR purposes."