The Sean Bell Verdict Ignites My Students' Fury

The young black student who appeared at my office this morning was practically in tears. "Hey Professor Ricci," she said. "Did you hear?"

"No, Jahqueena, what's wrong?" She just shook her head.

"Sean Bell. Those three cops just got acquitted on all counts."

"Oh my God Jahqueena," I moaned. "It can't be true."

But of course it's true. Why should I be surprised? We all lived through the Amadou Dialou case back in 1999. Dialou was the West African immigrant leveled in a hailstorm of 41 police bullets. The four officers in that case were exonerated by a jury trial. In Bell's case, it was a single judge's ruling.

I'm an English and Journalism professor at a state university in upstate New York, where I teach in a program called Educational Opportunities. EOP caters to low-income students, mostly from inner-city neighborhoods in New York City. The way it works out, most of those indigent students are African American or Dominican or Haitian or Jamaican or Puerto Rican. Often I'm the only white person in the classroom.

Jahqueena, a freshman I've been mentoring since she took my literature class last fall, walked me to class this morning and all the way there, she poured her heart out, carrying on about how unfair and racist the legal system is. I would have loved to disagree, but honestly, what other conclusion can we draw? Those three cops pumped 50 bullets into Sean Bell, who died just hours before he was supposed to head to the altar.

In Queens, people are up in arms. (Jahqueena was on her cell phone, getting on-site reports from her mother, who phoned with the bad news.)

Is it any wonder people are enraged? That 23-year old bridegroom had just emerged from his bachelor party. He had no gun. The cops brought him down, and then, reloaded their guns and filled him with bullets.

I got to class and before I could begin a discussion of the memoir we are reading, a second student, Joely, who hails from Panama, yelled out. "So what do you think of the Sean Bell decision?"

I inhaled. I knew where the class was headed. I told her I thought the decision seemed incredibly unfair. I asked the students - this particular class is about 50-50, black and white -- if they wanted to discuss the verdict. I told them they were free to express their opinions - one by one, by raising their hands in turn - to say what they think.

"Cops are the most despicable people on earth," called out the young black woman sitting next to Joely. "They are the lowest of the low."

Just when I thought she was finished, though, she added: "So I am going to take the test to become a corrections officer. I'm going to change the system, all by myself."

Curiously, there were some students in the classroom - mostly whites - who had never heard of Sean Bell. We in the "know" briefed them on the details. Bell: Bridegroom. Bachelor party. Bullets galore.

A young white woman, blonde and blue-eyed, raised her hand.

"I don't understand," she began, and for a moment I tensed, wondering what she was going to say. "My father is a cop," she went on, "and I know how it works. When somebody has a gun, the cop is just supposed to shoot to disarm. You aim maybe for the leg, or the arm, just so you get the shooter to drop the gun."

I nodded. I waited for more comments. Suddenly I recalled a classic book by a fellow English professor, noted feminist Judith Fetterley. Called The Resisting Reader, the book offers a feminist approach to literature. Fetterley suggests that you can test for sexism in a work of literature simply by flipping the gender of the characters. If the situation makes no sense with the gender flip, then you've probably got a case of sexism on your hands.

I decided to try the Fetterley strategy, modified slightly, to test for racism in the Sean Bell case. "Ok, class," I said, "I have a question for you: would the Bell verdict have come down the same way if the victim of the shooting had been a 23-year old white man?"

The chorus swelled up. "Hell no," some of them yelled.

And then, Nadine, who today was wearing her hair neatly corn rowed, made the final statement.

"If it had been a white man, the cops wouldn't have gone after him in the first place," she said, "and then none of this ever would have happened."

Amen, Nadine.

Amen.

Follow Claudia Ricci on Twitter: www.twitter.com/RicciCJ

Comments

[vschicago]

If your students want to learn more on the deep-seated "why" in this situation, they should check out the research of Dr. Frances Welsing. An all- too-insightful look into why these situations keep recurring on a routine and systematic basis across this country, across the globe. Don't be fooled into thinking that this legal system was ever going to truly prosecute these police officers. Don't be fooled into thinking that the legal system will change for people of color (regardless of class).

[jrockbg]

As you read about the Sean Bell case, this blog posting and its comments, I ask you to observe one thing. Look at those who write with emotion vs those who try to base their comments on the facts as we know them. You will see a consistent pattern between those who feel the cops were guilty vs those who do not.

A juror's (which would be the judge in this case) mandate is to make a decision without passion or prejudice. They try to see the story from all angles.

If all you see is a bunch of black folks "crying racism" again, then you have missed important factors in this case. If all you see is the police gunning down a black man on the eve of his wedding then you too have blinded yourself to important factors in this case.

[TXfemmom]

I am sick and tired of this being made a racial issue. The police have goofed up and do so routinely and kill innocent people of all skin colors, races, ethnic backgrounds, and sexes. Give up on it being racial. They young men were white, but that doesn't make the incident racism, and it doesn't make much difference in how the cops were handled. Two of the cops were black.

I consistently discuss with my husband the fact that anytime one sees more than one officer, and particularly more than two officers at the scene of anything, the chances of them mistakenly killing someone goes up at tremendous rates. We have had several of those incidents here in the Houston area, and they have done it against whites, blacks, hispanics, men and women, and it doesn't make any difference in how it is handled.

The cops raided the wrong house here, and killed someone because one of the cops tripped and discharged his gun and all hell broke loose. The cops killed an innocent person in the house and one of their own, and nothing happened to any of them. Give up on calling everything which happens racial.

[Teyshar]

So what if you are sick and tired of hearing about something? Why is this the latest excuse? I am tired of hearing race X complain. Well tell me how you justify 50 bullets fired and not ONE fired at you? Now imagine the fact common blief is that young black men are disproportionally dealing in crime. Now imagine a guy in a car and you can not tell if they are armed. So you are jumpy. Any move that looks like a grab for a gun leads to gun fire. ACCEPTABLE to a point.

Now inject racism. And pay attention Racism is not based on hating race x. It is based on treatment that varies because a person is race x. The blacks who are angered are angered at Cops period. Because they feel that disproportionately every black person has experienced a person in authority using their race against them. So cops justified in firing 50 bullets at unarmed black because they couldn't tell he was unarmed, not they could tell he was armed. And it is okay because you could not prove literally they murdered the guy. How many unarmed white guys departing from a bachelor party are shot after they get in a car, and the police have been monitoring them from the time they were in the bar. Where the shooters get off. And yeah two cops were black. Still racist.

[1st2vote]

This is to the core of Rev. Wright sermons. Folks this is not right ,no matter how you look at it , it is just not right ,some cops are license to kill Blacks.

[SifSkade]

It is impossible to explain to children how, 50 bullets later, one man with no gun is dead and his friend was shot with more bullets than are in a standard clip, and, according to the law, nobody did anything wrong.

[jedd]

The three officers should have been punished. This kind of verdict sends a message to the public that police officers will be exonerated even if they do not follow proper procedure. These were officers who were dressed in plain clothes and who did not identify themselves as officers.

However, while I agree with the sentiment of this post, I think that the issue raised by the case is far more complicated than the discussion suggests. First, the police officers were white, Latino, and black. This is not a black and white issue literally or figuratively. I'm sure the argument was that this was not racism because a black officer was present. It was really white supremacy. Latinos and blacks as well as whites can be guilty of white supremacy that values white life over the lives of others.

Second, making this simply a racial issue is misguided. Flipping the race of the victim doesn't work for me because it accepts a white supremacist viewing of the world. White is normal and black is abberant.This construct cedes people who could maybe be allies against police hegemony. There is overwhelming evidence that blacks get harder treatment than whites in the criminal justice system. But whites also get treated unfairly by police who abuse their power. Boiling this down just to racism is simplistic. The shooting was a product not only of white suprimicist thinking but also of police thinking that they have the right to do as they please to anyone.

[Teyshar]

I disagree in part. It is true that a white person would have had a pause. More thought and also less bullets. I agree to the majority. Black cop shooting because they are scared of Black patterned criminals is definitely possible. Also I agree that poor whites, and anything that fits the so called classic mold of criminal is discrimited upon by those in authority. We believe it is safe to do this. Whether the name is muslim should he be president? The face is dark should he be president. Or the guy is black should we trust he has no weapon? Or the guy is driving a beat up truck and he lives in a trailer park. The term social injustice needs to be brought back out to the front page.

[jrockbg]

Yes it is difficult for a child to understand. What does that make you? Grow up, the world is no longer black and white (no pun intended).

[cct1984]

All you folks out there who are criticizing the cops, may I suggest you walk a mile in their shoes before you give your myopic opinion. Seriously, for those who think cops are just criminals in a uniform, I suggest you participate in a cop ride-along program, preferably the midnight to morning shift. Believe me, you will have a new found appreciation for what cops put up with on a daily basis. Cops routinely deal with the worst of our society--murderers, muggers, drunks, drug users, wife-beaters, child molesters, pimps, prostitutes, punks, you name it--it's a thankless job for which a number have given their lives. When they show up at a potential crime scene they don't know the good guys from the bad guys, therefore everyone is a threat until proven otherwise. That may sound harsh but that is the reality of police work; if threatened, cops are trained to shoot to kill, not wound. Trying to wound a potential threat is more likely to end in the cops own death. In the real world, threats come at you fast, there is no time to have a debate about possible courses of action, you have to react fast; a cop that hesitates too long is likely to orphan his kids. Based on the evidence I’ve seen on this case, the cops were justified in what they did.

[Bonobou]

I don't think anyone is saying that cops do not have a dangerous job, and they don't face danger on a daily basis.

My problem with he case is the way the cops handled the situation from the beginning. If what is reported is true, the confrontration should have never occured; at least not in the manner it did.

To me, they had 'probable cause' to detain the guys as soon as they heard the comment. Even if they didn't want to blow their cover in the club, why wait the length of time they did. I would think it would be better to confront someone suspected of having a weapon in the light, rather in a dark ally that is almost a half block away. It was three on three and the cops had weapons, it is dubious if the three guys had weapons; since I'd suppose the reason they followed them out of the club was because of the statement...'let me go get my gun" (or something similar).

Sir, that's my argument! It's not a matter of not respecting the police force, but there are officers out there who are out of control.

[jrockbg]

What does it matter the time it took officers to find the men outside the club? It has no bearing on the whether deadly force is authorized. Unless you are claiming the officers specifically waited until they got in the car to gun them down. But then there is no evidence, not even circumstantial to sustain that. The shooting of Mr bell, as jarring as it is, appears to be justified. It always did.

[EGNY]

Speaking of walking a mile in someone else's shoes, you might try the same before you go calling people "myopic." As a white man, I would not presume to tell African Americans -- who are undeniably treated worse by cops than whites, even when the cops are African American -- how they should feel.

I also do not regard the police as generally bad. I agree that, given the dangers they face, the cops have to be given broader consideration of what's "reasonable" than is afforded to non-cops.

That said, this verdict just CAN'T be right. The man had no gun, so the cops couldn’t have seen one. It’s unclear whether anyone in Bell’s group said anything about getting a gun. So how can that many shots be justifiable? The cops couldn't have taken cover, stopped shooting and demand their suspects surrender, hands up? And, the judge's reasons for acquitting sound more like excuses than anything else.

I don't hate the cops. A relative of mine recently retired after a decorated career in the NYPD. But this one just doesn't pass the smell test. It seems the courts in NYC are saying that no matter how outrageous their conduct, an officer involved shooting is never a crime by the officers. That's scary! This paints NYC as if we're the deep south in the '50's. Bell’s family has to go to the feds to get justice because the NY courts refuse to give it to them? That’s horribly wrong!

[jrockbg]

why is it there are so many people who do not believe that the car itself is a deadly weapon? That is why you get called myopic.

And if you don't believe that a car can be considered a deadly weapon, fine. Almost every law enforcement agency disagrees with you.

[kegbot1]

When I worked for a newspaper in Central Illinois a local yokel cop emptied his entire semi-auto into the back of a mentally challenged man sitting in his car who was already stopped on a bridge overpass. His crime? He drove off without paying $15 in gas. In McLean County Illinois that merited a death sentence. The coroner ruled it a homicide and the officer was prosecuted and, of course, acquitted by a jury of upstanding citizens in conservative Bloomington. And the cop and victim were white. I just pass this along to say that perhaps we're looking more at race when we should be looking at training and screening of officers.

[Teyshar]

Again no. Our nation has a heritage of race biased crime. it must be looked into. Also we need our legislators to craft a law that impedes use of deadly force in incidents like handicapped guy not paying for gas. The training of officers and screening is a good deterent. But the law that fails when screening fails also needs to be looked at. Judges should be impartial.

[Bonobou]

Part II

must say, I doubt anyone that sees a person pointing a gun at them and not in official uniform of an officer and not holding up a badge, would do exactly what this guy did; stomp on the gas and try to get out of dodge!!

Yes, we do not know exactly what went on in the club, but I tend to go along with what was posted by another on this thread; somebody got a little pissed about something that went on in the club.

We all have our opinions, but the explanations by the cops leave a little doubt about what really happened.

[Bonobou]

Part I

I have somewhat of a problem with this whole case. True, none of us have the trial transcript to the entire case, but some things that have been reported about the case troubles me.

If in fact it is ture that one of the officers overheard one of the three say... "let me go get my gun", that to me would indicate the person was unarmed. It also would seem that only that person would leave the club to retrieve a gun. If it was thought that all were leaving to get their weapons, why didn't the undercover cops not stop the guys right after they exited the club. Having overheard a statement about "going to get a gun" would provide ample reason to detain them (while in the light of the club' marquee(sp)) and ask for a search of their car. Why wait for the guys to go almost a half a block, around a corner into an ally, get into their car, crank up the car and then attempt to stop them?

Sure, the cops might not have wanted to blow their cover in the club, but they had ample opportunity to stop them prior to reaching their car, identifying themselves and asking for a search; since, buy their testimony, they would have had probable cause.

I

[BeamMeUpScotty]

Undercover detectives were at the club to investigate prostitution. Where does Sean Bell figure into that? Sean Bell's flight from people not in police uniform is entirely understandable, but that is precisely what the police have used to justify their actions. Fifty bullets to subdue one man is a massacre. I believe the police officers should be fired. To not even discipline them in any way is adding insult to injury.

[jrockbg]

The vehicle was considered a deadly weapon. Police had reason to believe there was a gun in the car. 50 bullets does sound extreme but deadly force does appear to be authorized in this case.

[Teyshar]

Point again made. I disagree in that the car is also not a deadly weapon unless being used as such. to imply that the vehicle was being used, there has to be merit. The only merit provided was a guy in plain clothes approaches your veicle armed. In this case no clear definition of cop is provided. So they have not broken a law except trying to escape armed men. Now this may justify shooting out tires. It may justify calling a uniformed officer. It may justify tailing the car while you get a uniformed officer.

There were other options besides rip a clip justice.

[sueno]

How do you explain to a 16 year old black male, not to fear police? that's a problem I face-
People don't fully understand, how deep this verdict cuts. This verdict is going to breed more violence.
To make matters worse, the prosecutor in the midst of the verdict, shouted and spelled out relief as "NOT GUILTY" for his clients. No remorse, nothing- This from the people whom we expect to protect us all.
Again, how do you explain to your kid that there are good cops on the streets- we are all victims
especially with the examples of unfair & unbalanced justice that the NYC courts provide.
Think about this, when the next officer walks up to you ready to re-load.
Thank you for your article.

[flacon]

Claudia, it's professors like you who make me ashamed of my degree from your school. Noone has mentioned that two of the three police are african-americans. Does that mean that only one was racist?

A better approach to the situation would be to teach your students how not to be another statistic. Tell them that cops, black, white, brown or yellow, are people. They can be scared and panic. More importantly THEY HAVE GUNS!! I raised my sons to obey the cops. I told them they can't win with a stacked deck. If they got in a jam, be quiet, go to the station house and call me. They never had to but they knew the drill.

That the judge didn't believe the witnesses is telling. The victim wasn't exactly a choir boy on his way to church. Those of you condemning the police don't have all the facts.

And professor, do yourself and your students a favor. Teach them that authority isn't always right, but there's a way to disagree while still protecting yourself.

[kegbot1]

So you enjoy living on your knees?

[TheHandyman]

I don't know just what kind of college degree you got but there sure wasn't any courses in sociology or critical thinking was there. First, all the studies ever done show that judges will side with the police 87% of the time because they perceive thenselves as a part of the set that "protects society." They are biased going in. Go sit in traffic court sometime and listen to the people who have gone to great lenghts to produce evidence that the citation they got could not be as described by the policeman issuing the citation and without any rebutal on the part of the police, the Judge will uphold the citation. The presumed innocent is overshadow by the Police never lie syndrome. The notion that you have to raise your children to be afraid of authority is abominal! The People should not be afraid of its government, the government should be afraid of the People. Arming the police makes them something to fear and that is the point, isn't it. Professor, keep doing what you are for educating people and bringing them together through dialogue and shared experiences will go farther in leeping these things from happening than will putting the fear of authority in them. Flaco, you are proof of the old adage, a mind is a terrible thing to waste! And so was the money you spent to get a college degree. It bought you a piece of paper but not an education!

[Teyshar]

V for Vendetta?

[jedd]

As sad as it is, black police officers sometimes treat other blacks worse than they treat whites or other groups. White supremacy is so widespread in American society that black officers often profile other blacks just as bad as or even worse than white officers. Some of the most anti-black commenst that I have heard in my life have been from blacks who are filled with self-hatred.

I do agree with you about what the professor should have been teaching her students about being smart in their encounters with the police. But the important detail about this case is that these were plain clothes police officers who did not identify themselves. How can you protect yourself against officers that you do not know are officers?

[max9goldfinger]

And we the taxpayers have to pay to educate these creeps!!
most of my indigent students are African American or Dominican or Haitian or Jamaican or Puerto Rican. Often I'm the only white person in the classroom.

[lisakaz2]

What makes minority students "creeps" unworthy of an education? Some of them can be the best students most eager to obtain an education and their enthusiasm is refreshing because a lot of students today don't have nearly enough. Ever heard of financial aid?

[Rocky4356]

I guess the cops knew the rap sheets of the folks in the car just by looking at them. Give me a break - The cops were trigger happy. Shooting 51 shots at a car that was not returning shots. Really bad police work. Really make cops look bad . They will face department charges of firing into a car. -You better believe that.

[andyg]

you mean 3 crack dealers.

[lisakaz2]

And they knew this because? And this means they should be shot at 51 times because?

[keriheb]

What do you mean by this?

[michaeledward]

A moving car can, and should be, considered a weapon. That Mr. Bell put the vehicle into motion is sufficient justification for a police shooting.

However, I think the unidentified police officers who approached the car, in the dark, brandishing their firearms, and placing a foot on the front of the car; could just as easily be percieved as a threat. I think it is equally reasonable to believe Mr. Bell began moving the car in self-defense.

Lastly, the young lady in the class whose police officer father told her that he shoots to immobilize, I suggest, has a father attempting to shield her from the truth. No one, including police officers, should ever point a gun at anything, unless they plan to Destroy It. Perhaps her father didn't want to tell his little girl that he might someday have to kill a person.