This week, a federal jury found that District of Columbia. police framed Donald E. Gates, an innocent man, for a 1981 rape and murder of a 21-year-old Georgetown University student. Gates, who is African American, was imprisoned for 27 years. Two days after the verdict, the city settled with Gates for $16.65 million in damages.
The trial determined that two D.C. homicide detectives,Ronald S. Taylor and Norman Brooks, both now retired, largely fabricated the confession Gates was supposed to have made to a police informant. The detectives also withheld other evidence from Gates’ defense attorney. You can read the whole horrible story here.
There are a couple of aspects of this story, and others like it, that I don’t understand at all.
One is this: why aren’t the two detectives going to prison? Their conduct has cost the city’s taxpayers eight figures in damages, it has already cost an innocent man the prime of his life, and what is their penalty? I would support capital punishment for police like these. Destroying a man’s life, breaching a public duty, shredding public trust, using the law for evil— few murders do so much damage. It makes no sense for there not to be life imprisonment, execution, something to announce to the community that police and law enforcement officers will and must be held to the highest standards, and suffer greatly when they fail to meet the lowest. From what I can tell, these evil detectives—that’s a fair description, isn’t it?— aren’t even going to lose their pensions.
My other bewilderment stems from the strange blindness of Black Lives Matter. Why aren’t they protesting for Donald E. Gates, and the inexcusably large number of black men like him? Why are incarcerated African Americans who are in prison for breaking laws they knew would send them there the “victims” that Black Lives Matter cares about, rather than innocent men callously abused by police willing to sacrifice them to close cases, prosecutors who care about winning more than they care about justice, a system that gives over-burdened public defenders lacking experience and resources the job of effectively defending indigent clients accused of serious crimes, and lazy juries who lack the intellectual skills to see obvious flaws in cases?
The litany of names we hear from Black Lives Matter are almost never innocent. They are African Americans who died when police used excessive force as they resisted a lawful arrest, or were shot threatening police, like Mike Brown. Sometimes they died as the result of a cascade of mistakes, incompetence and bad luck, as with innocent 12-year old Tamir Rice. The facts in almost every one of these cases are ambiguous and complex, however; most don’t support either the assumption of racism or criminal police conduct, as opposed to excusable reactions to perceived danger or poor choices under stress. I’d attend a Black Lives Matters march in protest of what happened to Donald E. Gates, who unlike almost all of the Black Lives Matters martyrs was not defying law enforcement or avoiding arrest, and while he lived, had his life gutted by those whose duty it was to protect people exactly like him. Police would be supportive of such a march too. They abhor bad cops like Taylor and Brooks.
If Black Lives Matters really was interested in justice rather than race-based power and political influence, it would be at least as concerned about living innocent victims of law enforcement and the justice system as dead guilty ones.
Ethics Alarms 
How utterly horrible! He’s been robbed of so much more than 27 years, and no amount of money could possibly set this right. I’d rather be dead, I believe, than face those years, plus the psychological damage incurred. How do cops and prosecutors get away with this? Is it simply a matter of feet not being held to a fire? I’d love to see them hang for this. I can’t begin to imagine how this guy feels about them.
I wonder how much the Mossad would charge for taking care of these detectives the way they took care of Alois Brunner.
I’d bet he could cover the fee. It might not be as satisfying as the hands-on aproach, but then again, he could probably get himself comfortably settled in a non-extradition country with the remainder of his money.
This is what we need. Why, in these type of cases, does the victim never resort to vigilante justice? I mean, what jury would convict?
I mean, seriously, we have fathers in this world who would kill their daughters for not being chaste. This thing is much more worse than failing to be chaste. why is the chastity of teenage girls worth killing for, but the integrity of our justice system not</i worth killing for?
” I mean, what jury would convict?” Well, I’m not sure Id pin my hopes on that, nor would I personally claim that it’s right and good. I just know I’d be REALLY pissed after 27 years, and I might not care. It would comfort me if I was back in prison to know that it served as a “shot across the bow” to all the others complicit in this sort of thing, too. I’m sure it happens all the time.
“If Black Lives Matters really was interested in justice rather than race-based power and political influence, it would be at least as concerned about living innocent victims of law enforcement and the justice system as dead guilty ones.”
Exactly! Power plays require sensationalism and show. Donald Gates doesn’t fit the narrative. He’s not young, he lived through his ordeal with the police, understanding his story requires thought, getting justice for him takes time and money. You can’t make a mob out of thinking and understanding people.
You’re correct about the narrative, but it’s also the ‘advertising format’. You can’t fit Mr. Gates’ story onto a bumper sticker or t-shirt; or create a protest chant with it; or grab the opening on the local news; or come up with a Facebook meme, so it isn’t very useful for the political agenda of Black Lives Matter.
Will someone tweet the addresses of these detectives?
Where is Spike Lee when you need him?
Who cares if the confession was forged ? The issue is whether this man committed murder. Nobody wants to talk about that. all they want to talk about is forgeries and informants, and they hope to God the truth gets lost in the scrum!
He’s not camera ready and at the start of his life. He’s rich now so why be outraged? /sarcasm Really he won’t sell papers or make people cry. But his is a far worse concerted and long term collection of bad acts.
Have you ever thought that they might have given up on the system?
First stop the immediate extra-judicial executions, then go on to the lesser stuff?
I’m not saying that attitude is correct or accurate. I am saying that those two “evil detectives” today wouldn’t have to bother going through such a rigmarole. When there’s a cell of corruption like that, easier to just kill on the job. There’ll be no comeback, as there isn’t here.
They should pick cases where the killing was clearly wrong.
“Clearly” wrong to whom? To you? If there was no debate over whether or not it was wrong, then there’d be no need to protest. I feel like the main post misses this too; the BLM movement specifically protests shootings of black men where the circumstances are complicated, and not everyone agrees that they were wrong; if there’s universal condemnation, what is the point of a protest?
If the protests are just about police shootings, what are the protests on campus about? Why are they talking about “mass incarceration”? It is far broader than the shootings, and supposedly always has been.
Its website says: Rooted in the experiences of Black people in this country who actively resist our de-humanization, #BlackLivesMatter is a call to action and a response to the virulent anti-Black racism that permeates our society.Black Lives Matter is a unique contribution that goes beyond extrajudicial killings of Black people by police and vigilantes.
Sounds broad enough to cover police frame jobs to me.
Of course, the website also says the movement arose out of the “murder” of Trayvon Martin, which means the movement is based on ignorance, bias, presumed racism and lies.
As I have said.
Mass incarceration ?!?!? As in with scaring everybody into a big net, like in “Roots”, or walling up cities like “Escape From New York”? That’s terrible!
The protesters and their liberal enablers are feeble-minded morons. It’s really that simple.
There is a such thing as large gatherings of stupid people. Their numbers don’t somehow confer legitimacy to their claims.
There is a such thing as large gatherings of stupid people…
Donald Trump, Ben Carson, Hillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders rallies, for example.
What surprises me that otherwise smart people would join these rallies.
Nothing surprises me anymore. Probably not even a flying elephant at this point.
There ya go. Stupidity straddles ideological lines.
I’d think twice, Jack, about joining a BLM march, even for a legitimate cause. They have a bad habit of turning on clueless white supporters and beating the hell out of them for the crime of being white. At its core, this is a bitterly racist hate movement that seeks political power along with material gain.
Notice, however, that their efforts are mainly aimed at gutless college deans and corrupt Democrat mayors whom they know will knuckle under. Nor do I think they appreciate the growing counter movement. They’ve been used for too long of white politicians and citizens giving in under the threat of being called racist.
A lot of whites have now awakened to the fact that all they can look forward to from these guys is more slander, more robbery (legal and not) plus the increased danger to themselves and their loved ones. Moreover, an increasing number of blacks have become sickened by this criminality and are standing against BLM, too, as a number did in Ferguson. We may be seeing the last polluted gasp of fifty years of race based extortion in this country. At least, we can hope so.
“Why Doesn’t The Life of Donald E. Gates Matter To Black Lives Matter?”
The cynic in me thinks it’s because it’s hard to monetize for yourself when the victim is still alive, and SJWs are ultimately very selfish people. They don’t take up causes because the cause is ‘right’, they take up causes because there’s something in it for them, either financially or socially.
And… Just so we’re all aware, yet again, South Park nailed it in their new season.
In “Sponsored Content”, PC Principle hosts a frat party at the PC frat house and invites a group of disabled students, who are then promptly ignored by the PC frat brothers, who instead hit on women (The line “No I’m sorry, I need affirmative consent. I’ll need you to say ‘Yes you may take me upstairs and crush my pussy at this time.’” made me chuckle.), the boys, ‘led’ by Jimmy, go on to write an article on their school newspaper on how PC must stand for “Pussy Crushing” because that seems to be the only reason anyone goes to those events, and hilarity ensues.
You asked why the two detectives aren’t going to prison. If I read D.C. Code § 23–113 correctly, the statute of limitations has run. It appears to me that they can’t be prosecuted for any offense that they committed more than 9 years ago, other than murder and the most egregious sex crimes.
I don’t know where to find a copy of the DC police union contract, but I’ll bet there’s something in there that prevents their pensions from being taken away.
Typically a statute of limitations doesn’t start running until the crime is discovered.
You’re right. But if I’m reading the D.C. statute correctly, it says the prosecution must commence before the later of (x) 6 years from commission of the offense or (y) 3 years from discovery of the offense, or from the resignation or retirement of a public official or employee who committed an offense based on official conduct, but (z) in no case longer than 9 years from commission. That’s in paragraph (a)(6).
Great. The perfect crime then.
Vigilantes do not obey the statute of limitations.
Too bad the Punisher is a fictional character.
I don’t know what any of this had to do with my comment, but it’s interesting all the same. As a concept, are statutes of limitations ethical?
Sure. They exist to prevent a prosecutor from holding evidence until exculpatory or alibi witnesses die, as well as being part of the same theory as speedy trial guarantees. It allows the accused to get on with their lives and not wonder for decades if a crime is going to charged. Or in civil law, someone changing their mind and suing long after an alleged tort to cash in. It’s fair to limit the duration of a looming threat of court action.
Fair enough, I hadn’t thought of it like that. It seems unfortunate in a case like this, but if there has to be a rule, I suppose it makes sense to err on the side of process rights.
First of all, we should remember that D.C. had a crackhead as mayor, and has a track record of defying the U.S. Constitution.
Second thing to remember is that I see a disturbing trend of elected officials having contempt for our legal protections.
http://www.rawstory.com/2015/11/nowhere-to-hide-jihadi-wayne-ny-daily-news-declares-war-on-the-nra-for-blocking-terrorist-gun-law/comments/
The list in question is not a list of convicted terrorists, but only a list of people suspected of having terrorist connections.
We have several members of Congress, including Senator Chuck Schumer,wanting to punish people merely for being suspected of a crime, the Constitution be damned.
That is the same mentality that Ronald S. Taylor and Norman Brooks had.