Burnettiquette

Chicago Beating Death

By now you probably know that a teenage boy was beaten to death in Chicago earlier today by two groups of other teens who were fighting each other - allegedly a gang dispute, but jointly turned on the victim when he unwittingly wandered into the middle of their rumble.

Now, Derrion Albert, a good student and church-going kid with absolutely no reputation for violent or criminal behavior of any kind, is dead.

Over the next several days, good people in Chicago will March, ask police for more patrols, and ask the city for more $$$ to help fund programs to save the kids from themselves. People will also say the violence must stop, but they will say it in a way that mimicks the dissipation of smoke in the open air: that plea will go nowhere, because it will be aimed at no one in particular.

Yeah, communities have to turn on criminals. But this kind of mind-numbing violent crime, involving perpetrators as young as 17, won't stop until communities also turn on parents who allow their children to raise themselves and who don't compel their kids to behave.

That's right. Parents. The four knuckleheads in custody in Chicago for killing Albert didn't lose respect for human life this morning. It's been building for some time, and probably because no adult relative or guardian got in their faces and told them to straighten up or else.'

Pathetic.

PS. If you're considering leaving a racist or borderline racist comment on this post, don't bother, unless you have newly discovered scientific evidence that there is a cause and effect relationship between skin color and behavior. If you don't have that proof - that color causes certain behavior, then swallow your prejudice and face this fact: this crime was (allegedly) committed by four young men, not every other young man in this country who happens to share a tan with them. Hell, I look like 'em. But I look like the victim too. Chew on that.

PPS. I wonder if I'll hear from the readers who wrote me on Friday to say they care less about human victims of crime than animal victims, because human victims ask for it. Hmmm, Albert's family would no doubt be thrilled to hear that enlightened view of the cycle of life.

Follow me, please: http://twitter.com/jamesburnett.

Roman Polanski

In case you live in a cave, thirty-two years ago at the age of 44, movie director Roman Polanski, "hosted" a 13-year-old female date at then friend Jack Nicholson's house. Polanski gave the girl champagne and drugs, and when she was good 'n drousy, he raped her. He later admitted the sexual encounter as part of a botched, wonky, plea agreement with prosecutors in Los Angeles. The agreement called for Polanski to spend 90 days in a secure psychiatric facility, AKA psych jail, being evaluated. Following his evaluation, if the shrinks did not consider him a threat, he'd likely be done with jail, would go on probation, and would have to get counseling, etc.. At the end of his psych incarceration, the judge in the case hinted that he might disregard the plea deal and sentence Polanski to something harsher, in order to appease the public.

So Polanski fled to France, where he was still a citizen. And that's where he's been since, living his life, starting a new family (wife, two daughters), making movies and winning an Oscar, and being hailed as a cultural and artistic icon, till yesterday when police in Switzerland arrested Polanski and held him on that 31-year-old rape case from the U.S.

Pundits and politicians in France and Switzerland are calling for Polanski's release, saying the case is too old to resume, the collective consciousness of the U.S. is too puritanical, and that U.S. authorities should let bygones be bygones.

Friends and fans in Europe and the U.S. say Polanski has suffered enough in life, being exiled all these years from the U.S., being tormented by Nazis during WWII, and dealing with the murder of his first wife Sharon Tate, by Charles Manson and his gang of loons.

So what do I think? Bring him back and lock his Oscar-winning butt up!

Here's my logic:

• Sure, the judge in the Polanski case back in the day, may have been a fame seeker, but criminal law doesn't require a judge to abide by a plea deal between prosecutors and a defendant, if the judge doesn't think the terms of the deal are just. So whatever his motivation, I can't be too mad at the judge for balking at 90 days in psych jail as a sufficient sentence for the rape of a 13-year-old.
• If Polanski wasn't famous, this would not be a public debate right now.
• If a woman whose husband beat her declined to press charges, in most jurisdictions law enforcement would proceed to charge him anyway. So when Polanski's 13-year-old victim - obviously now an adult - says she doesn't want the case against him to proceed, I feel for her desire to move on, but the case should go on. Besides, her judgment may be clouded, since he paid her in a financial settlement from a civil suit she filed against him over the rape.
• If Polanski wasn't famous, no one would even dream of entertaining his claim that his victim was a real-life Lolita and enthusiastic about their encounter.
• Even if you fell for Polanski's Lolita defense, how do you justify the booze and drugs? Consensual sex partners don't need to be drugged first.
• If Polanski wasn't famous, and had instead been your weird, creepy-looking neighbor back in the day, you'd be calling for a new judge to drop the hammer on him. Same goes if he was one of the guys from the trailer park or the projects on the other side of the tracks.
• If that guy from the trailer park or the projects cited his horrific childhood and adult tragedies as factors in his crime, we'd all tell him - say it with me now - That's all sad, but it's no excuse to rape a child!

Let's review. Regardless of whether the judge was fame-seeking or not, here are a few of the things that troubled him about Polanski's deal: Polanski gave his victim multiple glasses of champagne; fed her quaaludes; performed oral, vaginal, and anal sex on her, even after she said asked him to stop, and even after she said she felt like she was suffering an asthma attack; and had the presence of mind to lie to a visitor who unwittingly interrupted the rape, and told that person he was getting dressed.

Yeah, I thought The Piano was a great movie too. But Polanski needs to face a judge in this country, where he committed and admitted his crime.

PS. Here's a doozy for ya: My Friday column was about two South Florida men accused of horribly mutilating two horses, so they could butcher the animals and sell their meat. I mourned the loss of the animals but said I was disturbed by what appears to be an increasing callousness toward human victims of violent crime. I suggested that we shouldn't care less about animal victims of violent crime, but we should definitely care more about human victims of violent crime. Half the reader responses I received argued that humans aren't real victims like animals, because humans bring crime on themselves. Hmmm, does that enlightened view apply to 13-year-old rape victims too?

Follow me, if you don't mind: http://typepad.com/jamesburnett.

Today's Column: Mourning people as we mourn animals

What's crackin' friends and frienemies? Busy day, so I'll get right to it. My column in today's Miami Herald is about the outrage expressed in South Florida over the recent slaughter of a number of horses. This week and last, two young men were arrested for two of the killings, and they're facing serious criminal charges, as they should be. Supposedly they were killing the horses - other people's horses - not for sport, but to sell the meat to people who enjoy eating horse.

So along with just about everyone else in the Miami area, I was pretty angry when I read details of how these poor horse were killed. And I want the book thrown at the killers. But what annoyed me at a level much greater than my anger over the horse killings was the starkly opposite responses of readers to the horse killing news and concurrent but unrelated people killing news.

Comments on the horse killings were that the young killers should suffer horrible deaths and burn in hell, etc. On a story about a 15-year-old boy who was shot and killed at a Burger King a couple weeks ago, one reader commented that the boy's death was "no big loss; he should have been home studying."

Hmmm, so a 15-year-old kid, a victim, sort of asked for it 'cause he wasn't home studying. But if that had been a 15-year-old horse, the same reader would have written in that the killer should suffer the same fate as the victim.

I'm not saying that we should not take special care of animals. I get it. They're innocent creatures and depend on us. But just because humans have a cognitive level that allows us to better know right from wrong than four-legged animals, doesn't mean we deserve to be victims of cold-blooded murder any more than horses or dogs or cats deserve it. So only if you're innocent and not able to care for yourself do you deserve to be mourned or avenged for your murder? Doesn't make sense to me.

So my feedback on the column so far has been interesting - a mixed bag. Some folks agree with me. Others think I'm an idiot, because I can't compare innocent animals to humans...who may have asked for it.

I don't need to tell you what I think of that philosophy. But I will give you this analogy that I shared with a woman who emailed and told me that she makes no distinction between human and four-legged animal life, 'cause we're all animals:

I told her I didn't believe her, because while we may agree that when it comes to being victims, neither humans nor four-legged animals should suffer cold-blooded violence (unless they're cows or chickens preparing to be shipped off to the grocery. What? I'm just sayin'.). But if the topic is not victimization then human instinct will not allow us to value four-legged animal lives as equal to human lives.

So you're walking down the street and you come upon a house on fire. A woman laying on the front lawn begs your help and tells you her baby and her cat are both upstairs in different rooms - cat to the left, baby to the right.

Knowing you may have time to rescue only one of them, you run upstairs. Which way do you go? I'd argue that even the greatest animal lover is going to go to the right and rescue the baby first.

But why? They're both innocent creatures, right?

No answer necessary to that one. I think common sense will fill in the blank.

Anyway, check out the column here. And if you want to continue friendly (or unfriendly) debate about that column, go here to post a question or comment for my interactive chat that will take place from 1 - 2 p.m. today.

Either way, it's all good.

PS. Follow me at http://twitter.com/jamesburnett.

Friday Column: Beer Tastes & Tap Water Budgets

What's crackin', friends and frienemies? Happy Friday.

My column this week is about a young woman, Yanira Doyle, who is surviving South Florida's real estate crisis right now, because she used her head before the crisis struck. We need more Yanira Doyles buying houses:

Basic logic could have prevented real-estate mess

By JAMES BURNETT

jburnett@MiamiHerald.com

Yanira Doyle could easily be a prophetic figure in the South Florida real-estate market, and all because she didn't let her eyes get bigger than her stomach.

Before the housing market began to slide sharply downward two years ago, Doyle, then a 26-year-old prospective home buyer who is not psychic, saw the future and weighed her options accordingly:

Buy a gleaming condo in a shiny tower on the beach and fit snugly into the sometimes skewed impressions distant friends and relatives have of South Florida, based on Travel Channel shows -- or buy a place where monthly expenses weren't so high that Doyle couldn't maintain it, pay her other bills, and continue to build a savings account.

`A NO-BRAINER'

Doyle, featured recently on the WLRN FM 91.3 radio show Under the Sun for her uncommon sense, opted for the latter. ``It was a no-brainer to me,'' she says. ``You buy what you can afford.''

Don't scoff at the simplicity of Doyle's logic. Unless you've had your head in the sand for the past couple of years, you know that there are plenty of South Floridians and prospecting interlopers who did just the opposite of Doyle and now find themselves in trouble.

For all the academic and government studies on what went wrong, it can be summed up like this: There is an anti-Doyle attitude pervasive in South Florida, an attitude that says, I can only achieve the American Dream by keeping up with the Joneses . . . even if the Joneses earn more money than me.....

Go here to read the rest of the column.

Quick Hits

What's crackin' friends and frienemies? It is a busy Thursday, so I'm gonna keep this short, which loosely translated means long.

First, don't forget to read my column tomorrow. Some of you will get it right away. Others won't like it 'cause it touches on a cultural boogeyman - a racial/ethnic issue. Boo! Ha ha ha ha ha ha! Don't get tense. It's just my opinion. And trust me, it'll be food for thought. We all know that sometimes the healthiest food doesn't go down smoothly. Anyway, I'll link the column tomorrow. And for once, would some of you please join me in my online chat at 1 p.m. tomorrow at this address - http://www.miamiherald.com/qna/forum/james_burnett/index.html? You're gonna make me develop a complex. Last week, I was left hanging like the wallflower on prom night.

Second, U.S. Rep. Joe Wilson (R - South Carolina) is an idiot - not because he's a Repubican or because he disapproves of Pres. Obama's healthcare reform plans. Wilson's an idiot because he disrespected the office of the presidency last night by shouting over a sitting president, during a live address, and calling the President of the United States a liar. What Wilson did was worse than when American celebrities (you, Gwyneth Paltrow!) talk to foreign media and complain about living in the US. The worst a few moronic Democratic congressmen did during live addresses by former Pres. George W. Bush was hiss. That was disrespectful too, but doesn't rise to the level of interrupting a sitting president to call him a liar. And don't try any partisan crap w/me. I'd say the same if we were talking about Pres. John McCain right now.

Third, take a good look at the mug shot below. It is of Alan Dale Lee, a Pasco County, FL, man, jailed recently for stabbing another man. Not another penny ever needs to be spent on anti-drug use campaigns. Lee's head shot is the best deterrent I've ever seen.

 

 

 

Fourth, Mike Duvall violated the rules of the game and the tenets of The Cowboy Code: He talked publicly about a sexual conquest. A real player wouldn't have done that. If you don't know the story, Duvall was a California state assemblyman...until yesterday, when he resigned after audio/video recordings surfaced of him bragging to a lobbyist in the state assembly chamber about how he - Duvall - had a mistress, had way too much sex with her, and liked to spank her because she's "such a bad girl." Some of you don't think affairs are that big a deal. I strongly disagree with you, but that's another post. For the record, Duvall now says he didn't have an affair. He just made up a story about a mistress to make himself seem cool, or as he described it, he engaged in "inappropriate storytelling." Hmmm, flashback to 8th grade. Sorry, I'm having trouble typing this 'cause I'm constantly drawn to Mr. Lee's mug shot above.

Fifth, it's Thursday. And my only televised guilty pleasure airs tonight: Real Housewives of Atlanta. Yes, I'm sure that if I continue to watch I'll catch something awful like junk rot, which will go nicely with the disease I'm certain I caught watching the first episode of Miami Social. But you can't live forever!

Finally, am I the only person concerned that classic Marvel Comics characters like Spiderman, Iron Man, the Fantastic Four, and Wolverine, are gonna be integrated into Mickey Mouse cartoons now that Disney has purchased Marvel? Probably.

Till next time, follow me at http://twitter.com/jamesburnett.

Don't forget...

My next column runs tomorrow. I'll post it in its entirety in this blog. And if you want to mix it up with me in real time, I'll be doing a live chat at this address from 1 - 2 p.m. tomorrow. Or you can post questions/comments early.

In the mean time, here is last week's column for your viewing pleasure if you're a friend, or your scorn if you're a frienemy:

Finish this sentence with me: You'd have to be pretty brazen in order to ...

If you can't think of anything, try this: enter a church, point a gun at a meeting of church employees and volunteers, and rob them inside their sanctuary. Monday night, that's exactly what happened to a group at Jordan Grove Missionary Baptist Church in Liberty City, where the armed robber snatched wallets, cash, cellphones, and even the senior pastor's car.

Even if you're not religious, it is important to note the history of spiritual sanctuaries. Going back to the 13th century, they have been places where the accused and criminals, like Monday's robber, typically steer clear, unless, ironically, they're seeking help.

After the robber fled the church, his victims promptly prayed for him -- a gracious gesture, because I assure you that, contrary to the principle of turning the other cheek, I'd have prayed for the robber to meet with a Wile E. Coyote-esque accident.

As things stand, average residents of Liberty City have already turned cheek too many times to an unhealthy diet of robbers and killers and all manner of villains who would selfishly disrupt the lives of decent people. There are only two cheeks on your face, and when you turn the cheeks below the waistline, you tend to get kicked in them.

CHURCH RESPONSE IS KEY

Now church workers, the people most looked to for inspiration and guidance in tough times, have been kicked. And how Liberty City churches respond to what happened at Jordan Grove can make a tremendous difference in how residents respond.

To date, most of the community's churches have called for more policing, and prayer. But any genuinely religious person knows police don't change hearts. And prayer isn't enough by itself.

People who would pull guns in church require more tangible treatment, like being exposed and turned over to police.

Churches in urban communities have always been tremendous vocal advocates for victims. This incident is an opportunity to launch a new twist on spiritual advocacy by urging parishioners to tell crooks: From now on, a helping of prayer comes with side dishes of cutting ties and turning you in!

BOSTON EXAMPLE

In 1992, parishioners inside Morningstar Baptist Church in Boston held a funeral for a 20-year-old murder victim. Gang members crashed the service, fired shots into the crowd and stabbed a mourner.

Boston churches that for years had called for, you guessed it, more policing and prayer, threw down the gauntlet and publicly declared there would be no more sanctuary for the criminal-minded. And prayer would be accompanied by stiff kicks to the lower cheeks.

Call it a coincidence, but in the six years following that epiphanic moment, Boston experienced the steepest violent crime drop to date of any large American city.

`THOSE WHO ARE UNWILLING'

Jerome Starling, an assistant pastor at Jordan Grove, hasn't lost faith in spiritual redemption but concedes that ``requests'' that criminals behave probably fall on deaf ears.

``We must continue to pray for them, because it's what the Lord wants,'' Starling says. ``But it is clear . . . the young men perpetrating these crimes lack responsibility and accountability. I'd like to see a probationary program that rehabilitates repentant young people and gives them a second chance in the military. . . . But for those who are unwilling . . . we're just going to have to stop talking and `push' them.''

UPDATE: Since this column ran last Friday, thieves have struck Jordan Grove Missionary Baptist Church again.

Football Coach Charged Wtith Murder

What's crackin' folks?

So one of the national news stories I've been following lately is about Jason Stinson, a high school football coach in Kentucky who was charged recently with reckless homicide over the death of one of his players.

The player, Max Gilpin, 15, died after suffering heat exhaustion during a grueling, extended practice. His temperature reached heights of 107 degrees. And Stinson allegedly denied Gilpin water.

I don't know if I think Stinson should have been charged with murder, but having made a lame attempt - literally; I had bum knees - at high school sports, I'm convinced any time you put your kid on a field or a court these days with some guy you know little about, you're gambling with your kid's health.

I don't think I'm being melodramatic. I had a basketball coach at one of my high schools who called my asthma attacks "sissy fits." There were times I'd have killed for just a few seconds with my inhaler. And no, I didn't complain. To whom? My team mates? My parents? That's not how teenage boys think.

I tease friends and acquaintances who are "helicopter parents," who hover over their kids and refuse to give 'em space. But when it comes to high school competitive sports, I plan on being a helicopter parent one day too.

Don't want any more Max Gilpins in the news.

PS. Follow me: http://twitter.com/jamesburnett.

Today's Column

Yeah, I know it's lazy, but Mrs. B and I have been swamped the past week with doctor stuff. When I haven't been working, I've been at the doc's office. No time to do a regular blog post.

For now, humor me and pretend to like my new Friday column. Here is the link. It's about an opportunity a church has to be a tipping point in urban crime fighting.

And if you want to discuss the column or related topics, I'm doing a live online chat today at 1 p.m.

Here is the chat link You can go to it any time and post questions/comments in advance if you like.

Don't Forget....

My column tomorrow. In case I forget to link to it first thing in the morning, you'll be able to go to MiamiHerald.com, scroll down about 2/3 of the way till you see the orange bar that says "Commentary," and click on "columnists" to the right of the bar, unless you see my fat face right there. If you see my face, just click it.

A little preview: It's about a recent murder victim here in Miami, the circles in which he ran, the sad fact that his words may have led to someone killing him, and the fact that some people will unwittingly make excuses for his killers by blaming his favorite form of entertainment.

Words don't kill. People do. Unless, of course, the words are "throw the switch," or something to that effect.

Till tomorrow...

Threats, Suggestive Language, "Art," and the 1st Amendment

I love living in Florida, 'cause I rarely have to use my imagination when I ask "what if..."

So here's a scenario for you: A 20-year-old Lakeland, FL, man, a wannabe rapper, posts a song called "Kill Me a Cop" on the MySpace page of a "homemade" record label operated by an acquaintance. The song mentions two active duty Lakeland cops by name, along with a local sheriff's deputy and police dog who were killed in the line of duty. A gang unit officer from Lakeland, trawling the Web, comes across the song and begins investigating. A short time later, the man, Antavio Johnson, already in jail on a probation violation, is criminally charged with "corruption by threat of public servant" . He later pleads no contest. He is now serving a 2-year prison term on that plea, because the actions that constituted "corruption by threat" were his posting for public consumption a song, whose lyrics pointedly said that he fantacized about killing police officers.

Setting aside whatever distaste you have for rap tunes in general, and saving for a later date the deep discussion of Johnson's intellect, what do you think of the charges and conviction?

I have lots of cop friends. I have cop relatives. I have cop professional associates. And I think it's despicable for anyone to target cops for violence. There's no excuse for it. On the other hand, giving cops special consideration isn't necessary. We could substitute "cops" for teachers, reporters, homemakers, preachers, women, kids, men with one leg, women with no arms, etc. And it would still be despicable to target that group with murder.

BUT (you had to know that was coming), what if I told you this young man's friends and family say that he wrote that song several years ago around the time he was 16 or 17, after a run-in with a couple of Lakeland cops, whom he felt had picked on him? Reportedly, it was the same two officers he named in the song lyrics. But I haven't confirmed that. Would that revelation strengthen or weaken your position?

My immediate reaction to hearing this story was this guy sounds like a dumbass, who needed to get smacked "upside his head," as my grandmother would say. But I'm not sure what he did warrants two years in jail.

His friends and family could be lying to try to help get him out of this. But if they're telling the truth about this, Johnson has had a pretty long time to try to act on the song if he wanted to.

I find everything about this distasteful, but I think Johnson was just an idiot who was venting. Surely, he isn't the first artist who has written and/or performed words that constituted a threat. What about singers who've bragged in lyrics about their drug use, or about sexual exploits whose descriptions sometimes sound dangerously close to assault?

I've heard politicians make physical threats against other politicians - threats they later said were jokes or venting of pent-up anger - on radio shows that are broadcast to hundreds of thousands of people. Why weren't they charged.

Constitutional experts are saying that the Johnson was a knucklehead but that saying he wanted to kill cops in a very bad song was not enough to charge him with a crime.

I'm guessing this only went as far as it did, becaus he mentioned real cops by name. Had he kept his threat vague and broadly generalized, I'll bet he'd still be an unknown wannabe, instead of an incarcerated wannabe.