White Man Convicted Of Beating Black Man At Charlottesville White Nationalist Rally

[GMDino]

Note:  Often around here the usage of the color of the participants is frowned upon.  In this particular case I don't care what you think. 

https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2018/05/02/607663487/white-man-convicted-of-beating-black-man-at-charlottesville-white-nationalist-ra

Quote:An Arkansas man has been convicted of malicious wounding for beating a black man during a white nationalist rally last year in Charlottesville, Va.


Jacob Scott Goodwin, 23, will be sentenced in August. The jury is recommending 10 years in prison and a $20,000 fine, local TV station NBC 29 reports.

Enlarge this image

A photo provided by the Lonoke County Sheriff's Office shows Jacob Scott Goodwin of Ward, Ark.
AP
On Aug. 12, 2017, the day of the Unite the Right rally, Goodwin was one of several white men who attacked DeAndre Harris, 20, surrounding him, kicking him and hitting him with poles as he lay curled on the ground in a parking garage. Harris was left with multiple injuries.

Goodwin was wearing a helmet and goggles and carrying a shield. Photos and videos from that day show he was also wearing white nationalist and white supremacist symbols: the logo of a neo-Nazi group, as well as a numerical code for Heil Hitler.

The attack was captured on video, and in the weeks that followed, New York Daily News columnist Shaun King organized a crowd-sourced investigation to identify the attackers. Goodwin was one of the men identifiedthrough that effort.

Three other men are currently facing charges.

Goodwin had argued that he acted in self-defense after seeing Harris swing a flashlight at a man who is a state-level chairman of a white nationalist group. (That man previously pressed charges against Harris, who says he was aiming at a flagpole the man was holding; Harris was acquitted.) A group of men "stormed Harris immediately after that confrontation, beating him to the ground with poles in a parking garage," NPR's Colin Dwyer reported.

NBC 29 reports: "[Goodwin's] attorney said Harris kept getting up after being hit, and since the men beating him saw Harris as an attacker they 'didn't know what he would do.' "

Harris testified that he was trying to run away from the men.

The jury found Goodwin guilty after two hours of deliberation.

The Washington Post reports that the trial — of an apparent white supremacist who violently assaulted a black man during a white nationalist rally — barely discussed race or racism:

Quote:"For the entire trial, neither the prosecutors nor the defense attorney questioned Goodwin about his possible affiliation with any white-supremacist groups. At the rally, Goodwin wore two pins, one bearing the number 88, a code for 'Heil Hitler,' and a second with the logo of the Traditionalist Worker Party, a white-nationalist group.

"But during his closing arguments, [Goodwin's attorney Elmer] Woodard suddenly raised the issue. 'They want you to convict this man because he's white, and DeAndre is a black man,' he told the jury.

"The comment drew an objection from [assistant commonwealth's attorney Nina-Alice] Antony, who told the judge she deliberately avoided making the case about race."

[Belsnickel]

Jury is currently at lunch for the Ramos trial, which is the second of three, I believe, defendants for this case. They return at 14:05 and should start deliberations shortly thereafter.

[*bfine32*]

Seems the OP's desires follow that of the defendant's lawyer and not that of the assistant Commonwealth Attorney. I tend to side with the views of her instead of the OP and Defense council. This man should be punished to the full extent of the law.

[*PhilHos*]

I'm confused. What's the issue? A guy beat up another guy ostensibly due to race, got arrested after some investigation and got convicted. Good to know the justice system can still function the way it should.

So what am I missing?

[GMDino]

(05-03-2018, 03:46 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Seems the OP's desires follow that of the defendant's lawyer and not that of the  assistant Commonwealth Attorney. I tend to side with the views of her instead of the OP and Defense council. This man should be punished to the full extent of the law.

Seem you think wrong.

I don't mind them saying a white man was convicted of beating a black man because the white man is a racist and/or a nazi.

So call out his "race".

Being punished would happen no matter what.  Having a racist cry that he is being punished due to his race just makes a little better.

But, if you say so.

[*bfine32*]

(05-03-2018, 04:02 PM)GMDino Wrote: Seem you think wrong.

I don't mind them saying a white man was convicted of beating a black man because the white man is a racist and/or a nazi.

So call out his "race".

Being punished would happen no matter what.  Having a racist cry that he is being punished due to his race just makes a little better.

But, if you say so.

Hell I didn't say so you and the link you quoted said so. Assistant Commonwealth Attorney stated she deliberately tried to keep race out of the equation. The defense introduced it, and you focused on it. 

Lots of folks "cry" that they are being punished because of race.

But folks can read the article and your commentary and decide for themselves. 

[GMDino]

(05-03-2018, 04:18 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Hell I didn't say so you and the link you quoted said so. Assistant Commonwealth Attorney stated she deliberately tried to keep race out of the equation. The defense introduced it, and you focused on it. 

Hell both sides avoided it until near the end of the trial:

Quote:"For the entire trial, neither the prosecutors nor the defense attorney questioned Goodwin about his possible affiliation with any white-supremacist groups.

But I'll stick with the racist/nazi angle cause it makes people who like to defend nazi/racists upset.

(05-03-2018, 04:18 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Lots of folks "cry" that they are being punished because of race.

But folks can read the article and your commentary and decide for themselves. 

Well, if you say so.

[Belsnickel]

Jury for Ramos currently in deliberation. This took about an hour and a half for Goodwin's trial.

I know Phil mentioned about this being how things should work, and I get that. Just keep in mind that this is the first real justice being handed down after the events in Charlottesville, which is a city still dealing with the aftermath. Especially since Jason Kessler is attempting to have an anniversary event this year and has been continuing to cause upheaval in the community.

Edit: after a 35 minute deliberation, Alex Ramos has also been found guilty of felony malicious wounding.

[fredtoast]

Funny how the exact same people who claim black people are always "imagining" racism now want to completely ignore that fact that a black man was beaten down by white supremacists at a rally where they were praising white supremacy.

"This clearly has NOTHING to do with racism. Just a regular assault with no racial overtones at all. Move along. Nothing to see hear."

[*PhilHos*]

(05-04-2018, 11:43 AM)fredtoast Wrote: Funny how the exact same people who claim black people are always "imagining" racism now want to completely ignore that fact that a black man was beaten down by white supremacists at a rally where they were praising white supremacy.

"This clearly has NOTHING to do with racism.  Just a regular assault with no racial overtones at all.  Move along.  Nothing to see hear."

Who said this has nothing to do with racism? Just another strawman for fred to knock down. Good work, fred, keep knocking those strawmen down.

[StLucieBengal]

I guess a friendly light hearted joke isn’t allowed on this thread. Nor any other of my posts.

[fredtoast]

(05-04-2018, 01:00 PM)PhilHos Wrote: Who said this has nothing to do with racism?

Bfine said he agreed with the DA that he did not want to say it was about race, and you used the word "ostensibly" which means it is possibly not about race at all.

Seems like you guys are still unwilling to admit that this was racially motivated.

[*PhilHos*]

(05-04-2018, 02:14 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Bfine said he agreed with the DA that he did not want to say it was about race, and you used the word "ostensibly" which means it is possibly not about race at all.

Seems like you guys are still unwilling to admit that this was racially motivated.

ostensibly: apparently or purportedly
synonyms: apparently, seemingly, for all intents an dpurposes

So saying that it's most likely about race = unwilling to admit that this was racially motivated. Ok. 

[SunsetBengal]

(05-04-2018, 02:14 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Bfine said he agreed with the DA that he did not want to say it was about race, and you used the word "ostensibly" which means it is possibly not about race at all.

Seems like you guys are still unwilling to admit that this was racially motivated.

Let's roll with your "definition" for a moment.  Could it also be that the White Supremacist with a chip on his shoulder would have just as likely beaten a person of any race that was opposing him, at that moment?  Or, do you just want to go with the evil white guy sought out, stalked and brutally attacked a single, meek and humble black man?

Edit: Part of me thinks that both the White Supremacists and the protesters were both looking for trouble, and they found it.

[fredtoast]

(05-04-2018, 02:26 PM)PhilHos Wrote: ostensibly: apparently or purportedly
synonyms: apparently, seemingly, for all intents an dpurposes

So saying that it's most likely about race = unwilling to admit that this was racially motivated. Ok. 

If you had not cherry picked a definition you would see that the term "ostensibly" implies outward appearances that are contrary to the true meaning.

Why did you feel the need to add that word instead of just saying "due to race"?

[fredtoast]

(05-04-2018, 02:57 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Let's roll with your "definition" for a moment.  Could it also be that the White Supremacist with a chip on his shoulder would have just as likely beaten a person of any race that was opposing him, at that moment?  Or, do you just want to go with the evil white guy sought out, stalked and brutally attacked a single, meek and humble black man?

Edit:  Part of me thinks that both the White Supremacists and the protesters were both looking for trouble, and they found it.

Welcome to "Bend over backwards to defend the white supremacist" day.

These were white supremacist wearing Hitler badges at a rally promoting the superiority of the white race beating up a black guy, but you DON'T think it was about race?

[SunsetBengal]

(05-04-2018, 03:10 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Welcome to "Bend over backwards to defend the white supremacist" day.

These were white supremacist wearing Hitler badges at a rally promoting the superiority of the white race beating up a black guy, but you DON'T think it was about race?

FWIW, I didn't see a single post in this thread that was defending the actions of the White Supremacist, or rebuking his punishment.  However, if you want to make huge melodrama over the use of the word "ostensibly", keep right on going as you're doing a great job!

[*PhilHos*]

(05-04-2018, 03:04 PM)fredtoast Wrote: If you had not cherry picked a definition you would see that the term "ostensibly" implies outward appearances that are contrary to the true meaning.

LOL. Now, I'm cherry pickng a definition. First off, ONE of the definitions of 'ostensibly is that outward appearances MAY be contrary to the true meaning. But one of the other defintiions of is apparent, evident, or conspicuous.


Use either definition you want, that still doesn't make what I said the equivalent of saying I'm unwilling to admit this was racially motivated.

(05-04-2018, 03:04 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Why did you feel the need to add that word instead of just saying "due to race"?

Because I don't know the particulars of the case. I assume this crime was racially motivated, but you never know.

[*PhilHos*]

(05-04-2018, 03:10 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Welcome to "Bend over backwards to defend the white supremacist" day.

These were white supremacist wearing Hitler badges at a rally promoting the superiority of the white race beating up a black guy, but you DON'T think it was about race?

What if, while this guy was shouting 'Heil Hitler' and cheering on cries for the advancement of the white race, a black guy comes up and slugs him right in the face and proceeds to pound on the guy until the cops drag him away. Is the black guy guilty of a crime? What if the black guy shot him dead, still a crime? Would you also say it was racially motivated?

Please note: I'm not defending the white supremacist in the OP. I'm not saying this is what actually happened or what I think happened. This is a hypothetical.

[*PhilHos*]

(05-04-2018, 03:15 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: FWIW, I didn't see a single post in this thread that was defending the actions of the White Supremacist, or rebuking his punishment.  However, if you want to make huge melodrama over the use of the word "ostensibly", keep right on going as you're doing a great job!

It's probably my fault. I praised fred for knocking down a strawman, so it stands to reason he'd keep on knocking them down. Sorry.