On the national question: Houston activists challenge criminal injustice system
Actions challenge criminal injustice system
By Gloria RubacHouston, Published Jul 18, 2008 12:18 AM
The Harris County criminal justice system here has historically been racist and targeted the poor, with justice denied for untold generations. Within the last year, the struggle against this system has intensified to the point that ruling-class politicians have been challenged to examine its violent and racist practices.
July 10 rally demands indictment of racist vigilante Joe Horn;Photo: Jon Axford
Recently the federal Department of Justice did a five-day examination of the Harris County Jail, a massive complex of detention centers where more than 100 prisoners have been “found” dead.
A Houston Chronicle review of state and county records reveals that from January 2001 through December 2006, at least 101 inmates-an average of about 17 per year-have died while in the custody of the jail. In 2006 alone, after three consecutive years of failing to comply with state standards, the jail recorded 22 in-custody deaths.
At the times of their deaths, at least 72 of the inmates-more than 70 percent-were awaiting court hearings and had yet to be convicted of the crimes that led to their incarceration.
U.S. Congressperson John Conyers (D-Mich.), who heads the House Judiciary Committee, will hold a hearing at Houston City Hall in mid-July to take testimony from victims of Harris County injustice and from family members of those who did not survive.
Rally demands indictment of racist vigilante
On July 10, a week after vigilante Joe Horn was no-billed for killing two Afro-Colombians last November who he said he believed had broken into his neighbor’s home, a militant rally was held. Hundreds of outraged and energetic people gathered in front of the Harris County Courthouse to demand that Horn be indicted for murder.
Horn is the Pasadena, Texas, man who made national news for shooting the two alleged burglars in the back. Despite a 911 operator telling Horn to stay inside his home, Horn was recorded telling the operator: “Well, here it goes, buddy. You hear the shotgun clicking and I’m going. Move and you’re dead.” The sound of him cocking his shotgun and then firing can be heard on the 911 recording.
A Harris County grand jury cleared Horn of all charges on June 30, enraging many in Houston’s African-American community as well as many others of all nationalities throughout the metropolitan Houston area.
At the rally, the speakers berated the racism that is systemic in Harris County’s criminal justice system and demanded that Horn’s shooting be taken before another grand jury, one representative of all the nationalities that make up Harris County.
Nation of Islam Minister Robert Mohammad outlined the five points that the Coalition for Justice, which organized the protest, had agreed upon. They were:
1. We oppose criminal activity in the streets of Harris County and in the suites of Harris County government.
2. We call on the DA, Kenneth Madgison, to take Horn’s case before another grand jury with the same vigor used to indict Blacks, Latinos and the poor of all races.
3. We want the racial makeup of the grand jury that no-billed Horn to be revealed and call for all grand juries to reflect the racial diversity of Harris County.
4. We call for the immediate and unconditional resignation of Sheriff Tommy Thomas and his command staff.
5. We call on local, county, state and national elected officials to endorse the request made by Congresswoman Sheila Jackson Lee for an inquiry by the Department of Justice into the entire legal system of Harris County.
Other speakers included attorney Sadiyah Evangelista with the Millions More Movement; Marcario Ramirez, a long-time Chicano activist; a representative of the Texas Death Penalty Abolition Movement; and Don Cook with the Harris County Green Party.
Minister Quannell X with the New Black Panther Nation introduced Stephanie Storey, the fiancée of one of Horn’s victims.
Kofi Taharka, chair of the National Black United Front, Houston chapter, asked the crowd to raise their hands if they planned to attend the next meeting of the Coalition for Justice on July 15, at 7:00 p.m. at the S.H.A.P.E. Community Center, 3815 Live Oak. Almost the entire crowd lifted their hands into the air and cheered.
Taharka stressed that this ongoing struggle for justice in Harris County was open to all. “This is not a Quannell X thing. This is not a Black thing. This is for ALL those who want to fight for justice!” he said. “Our community has allies in the Hispanic community and we need them. And we don’t hate all white people. We have some whites here today and they are working side by side with us. If we all work together, we can win!”
The day after the rally, the two Harris County jailers responsible for the Jan. 10 death of Clarence Freeman, a prisoner, were fired. Taharka said, “This is the beginning of justice for Freeman. The end will be when the jailers are charged and convicted of his murder.”
Cherry Bradley-Freeman, Freeman’s spouse, who had spoken at the rally, said the firings give her hope that the people responsible for her husband’s death will face justice. “I’m glad that they have come forward and admit what I already knew,” she said.
The firings came three days after the U.S. Department of Justice launched what was expected to be a five-day inspection of the downtown county jail facilities to determine whether they are operating under “lawful” conditions.
Articles copyright 1995-2008 Workers World.
Verbatim copying and distribution of this entire article is permitted
in any medium without royalty provided this notice is preserved.Workers World, 55 W. 17 St., NY, NY 10011
Email: ww@workers.org
Subscribe wwnews-subscribe@workersworld.netSupport independent news http://www.workers.org/orders/donate.php
7 comments
I posted the news story above in light of some recent comments regarding Cynthia McKinney and whether she deserves support because of her alleged “relationship” with the New Black Panther Party. It’s about a courageous fight against racist oppression and the criminal injustice system in Houston, Texas. I guess the problem is, according to some, that the “wrong” organizations are leading the fight - including the Nation of Islam and a Texas-based split from the NBPP called the New Black Panther Nation.
So let’s not beat around the bush. Matt says that activists should shun what he calls “reactionary” black-led organizations. I say that the national question and the fight against racism requires that we support the leadership that an oppressed community chooses, especially when that leadership is involved in a deadly serious fight against a government intent on jailing and killing people of color.
If these groups were organized in Hartford’s North End and were fighting this battle, where would we be? On the sidelines explaining why they are not “true revolutionaries” and lecturing people of color about the evils of nationalism? Or standing shoulder-to-shoulder with them?
first off, you’re blatantly mis-representing my point on nationalism, and i expect an apology.
look, i’ve got no problem rubbing shoulders with people with questionable ideologies, when it comes to working on a life-and-death issue. there are religious groups locally–like members of the Catholic Church–that are also reactionary in one way or another, that i’ve worked with on issues like immigrant rights, etc, etc.
but when you voluntarily accept the aid of a group like the NBPP, sorry, that’s really fucked up. i realize it’s an organization that’s a mixed bag, often with a disconnect between the membership and leadership.
but when you got an organization who’s leader, Khalid Muhammad says shit like “We kill the women. We kill the babies. We kill the blind. We kill the cripples. We kill them all. We kill the faggot. We kill the lesbian. … When you get through killing them all, go to the goddamn graveyard and dig up the grave and kill them a-goddamn-gain, because they didn’t die hard enough” the first time, in reference to whites in South Africa after the fall of apartheid, then you’ve got something you need to keep–at minimum–at arm’s length.
Matt, yes, it is an absolutely outrageous statement. It’s still pretty outrageous even when it is quoted in context, which is that KM was posing the question: Given the incredible, mind-numbing extent of the brutality inflicted upon blacks in South Africa over hundreds of years, what is the first thing that they should do once they gain power over the whites who are directly responsible for genocide?
I’m not being critical that you didn’t put it into context, though, because when you do a google search, you find that the entire speech is not posted but that there are a couple of dozen white supremacist and racist websites that post the “excerpt” to prove how evil the NBPP is.
So you and I are incredibly, horribly offended by this outrageous statement by a leader of a black nationalist organization that IS actively organizing around life and death issues in the black community. Great. We’re offended. Now what.
Are we saying that KM doesn’t have the right to feel this way about the genocide of black people in South African and also in the U.S.? Are we saying that making that statement is morally wrong because - hey, you’re not allowed to be outraged and angry, or else if you’re gonna be, it had better be directed only at the “bad” white people?
I don’t feel comfortable with that take on KM’s statement. When Che said that revolutionaries are motivated by great feelings of love he didn’t mean that we should sentimentally weep over the harshness of the world. He meant that, feeling great love for our sisters and brothers, seeing their pain, humiliation and exploitation inspires outrage and motivates us to dare incredible challenges to end their suffering. So when I read KM’s statement one thing that comes through to me loud and clear: here is a man who loves his people, who feels incredible compassion for them, who is moved to outrage over the horrors to which they have been subjected.
That being the case, is it “revolutionary” of me to write him off — as well as anyone who associates with him in any way — because I feel offended by the frankness and forthrightness of his anger? Or should I challenge myself to convince him and people like him that there are whites who also are capable of looking at the horrors that his people have suffered and of being truly and genuinely outraged? In other words, if I am a revolutionary, is it my responsibility to struggle to convince him and people who share his feelings of pain and anger that I am capable of loving black people?
peter - i care a lot less about his anger at whites, than i am at his express desire to murder queer folk. growing up around–and serving–boojie whites, i really take no issue with just about anything anyone has to say about them, cuz i know just how terrible they can be. nationalism i generally have little problem with, outside a theoretical basis–but of course you know that, and intentionally mis-represented what i was saying in order to construct a strawman argument. but what makes him reactionary is his belief that other oppressed groups are his enemy and should be subject to violence.
otherwise i agree with you on the role of revolutionaries and our cooperation with groups with problematic politics. the point at which we part ways is that you and Workers World have an ideological commitment to, first and foremost, anti-imperialism with absolutely no standards beyond that, to the point where, in practice, you have no concept of Right and Left. i believe there is a very cut-and-dry difference; if you recognize your liberation is bound up with people who are not necessarily just like you, then you are on the Left. if you believe your liberation is contingent upon the subordination and/or destruction of others unlike you, then you are on the Right.
does this mean i won’t have any official association with the NBPP? yes. does this mean i won’t collaborate informally with their members where possible? no. does this mean i won’t show up to their protests, like the Sean Bell verdict protest in NYC they organized? no. does this mean i’m going to keep my mouth shut because somehow being oppressed makes a public political organization off-limits to criticism? heeeeellll no. but i generally won’t waste my time, when locally there are plenty of groups of people of color that are essentially quite progressive and internationalist, with good ties to groups that i’m connected to.
I was cleaning out some papers today and came across this idea. We talked of this years ago. I must admit that I never really relished the idea then nor do I now but know it must be the reality. The idea was “unconditional but critical support”–or supporting people who do not necessarily support you and supporting them without any preconditions.
This idea has been a struggle in our LGBT groupings since the Mattachine Soceity conservatives took over from the left and from the days of the GAA and their single issue “gay” only platform. Those of us who tried to intergrate out and in the open about who were are into the other left groups,picket lines, anti-war groups, unions, etc. were met with distain, to put it mildly, and resistance against us was rampant Still is in many places.
Today I see many times our activists just shut up because they do not get the connections or they don’t think that it matters or the worse having a attitude that to speak about LGBT/Q would somehow offend some in the organization whose protest we are joining.)
The CPUSA was one of the worse offenders back in the day and now tries hard amongst the left to play catch up. As I remember it was only the Workers World Party and Freedom Socialist (founded by feminists and queers) who supported queer rights, and welcomed us into their groups. The conection was made that we can not be isolated and fight a common enemy.
Matt, it is quite true that Workers World does not subject leaders of oppressed groups to a white left litmus test before deciding whether or how much to support their struggles. No argument there.
On the other hand, Workers World also does not hide its own politics or perspective in order to curry favor with those leaders - or with anyone else. WWP doesn’t stop being pro-LGBT when working in coalitions with transphobic political organizations, just like it doesn’t stop supporting black self-determination when working in coalition with white peaceniks or mainstream labor leaders.
Revolutionaries should ask themselves which is a more effective way to break down barriers and create unity. Shall we stand on the sidelines and lecture about the shortcomings and wrongheadedness of this leader or that group? Or shall we get in the game, engaging in unconditional solidarity in the struggle against oppression while also clearly articulating our own political perspective?
way to contribute to a nuanced, no-bullshit discussion, peter, without being condescending or dishonest. oh wait, no you didn’t. oh well, i’m sure it’ll make for good pillow talk with whatever thug you jump into bed with next. hope you don’t catch anything…
Leave a Comment