Judging the Jena Six

Yesterday, thousands marched in protest in Jena, Louisiana, holding signs which read: "Free the Jena 6." The Jena six are black high school students who are accused of beating up a white student. They were initially charged with attempted second-degree murder and conspiracy, but these charges were later lessened. The outrage rests upon the perceived injustices between the punishments of these students and—here is a key point—three white students (of which the beaten teen was not one) who committed the vile-but-not directly related act of hanging nooses from a tree at their school and suffered only brief suspensions for this incorrectly labeled "prank." The case is more complex than this quick summary, and there is enough evidence to convince me that there is definite racism in Jena. However, that doesn't mean that the rhetoric being used in the Jena march is not absurd.

The Rev. Al Sharpton, that squeaky-clean purveyor of right and wrong, fairness and equality, proclaimed the Jena demonstration the beginning of the 21st century civil rights movement. (What exactly delineates this civil rights movement from the 20th century one, I'm still unclear on--but perhaps Sharpton will illuminate us at his next grandstanding event.) Sharpton's reverend-in-arms, Jesse Jackson, was also there to issue (or, in his case, mumble) his own proclamation: "There's a Jena in every state." I can't say for sure, but he may be right about this--I googled "Jena" and "Florida" and guess what--it exists!

Jackson has a knack for symbolic hyperbole, but do he, Sharpton, the marchers, and the millions of Jena six supporters have a point?

Let's return to the first sentence of this piece: the marchers are demanding that the Jena six be freed. Should they be? Well, did they commit a crime? Why, yes, they did. Unless the protesters think that six people ganging up on a person, knocking him unconscious, and badly bloodying and swelling his face is not a crime (it's claimed but not proved that the teen was uttering racial epithets against the Jena six, but understand—words alone do not give anyone the right to violence). Let's be clear. The victim of this case is the beaten teenager, not the Jena six.

The lost logic which I see the protesters following is this: because three white students committed a foul act symbolizing racist violence (but not violent in itself) and served only brief suspensions for it (and they definitely should have suffered more), this excuses the violent act committed by six black students against a white one and thus they should be freed. No, sorry. Whatever mistake made in punishing the white students does not bear on the black students. The incidents are separate. What does it say about our legal system, and our civilized society, if someone can get jumped and beaten unconscious and then millions of people demand the release of the aggressors?

This incident is not one of race. It's one of justice. Free the Jena six?

Absolutely not.