Civil Rights Archives - Waxman Files

Six Not So Angry Women

August 3, 2013 by Jerry Waxman 1 Comment

By Jerry Waxman

“All the world’s a stage,
And all the men and women merely players:
They have their exits and their entrances;
And one man in his time plays many parts……”

As You Like it by William Shakespeare

Prologue

I’m often fascinated by the way life imitates art, or how art reflects life in many ways. Shakespeare’s brilliant discourse on the seven ages of man and our pre-ordained existence is quite apropos to what has been happening in Florida as relates to the George Zimmerman trial. Let’s think in terms of how this whole experience would make a good (or bad) play and let’s call it The Death of Trayvon Martin.

Act I

Scene 1

At rise the stage is dark. The sounds of a struggle can be heard and then a gunshot goes off. Lights go up to reveal George Zimmerman holding a gun and Trayvon Martin’s lifeless body on the ground. Blackout.

Scene 2

This is the exposition scene. What we hear are disembodied voices screaming for an investigation until two characters appear on stage. These two members of the press will introduce all players in the drama and all timelines through their conversations until the March rally. Blackout

Act II

Scene 1

The Rally. All speakers including Sanford’s Mayor and Congresswoman Corrine Brown who came to his defense when the crowd turned ugly.

Scene 2

The Town Hall meeting in Sanford the following Monday

Act III

Scene 1

Events leading up to Zimmerman being charged with Second Degree Murder.

Scene 2

Again the press providing internet chatter from both Zimmerman and Martin supporters, complete with wild conspiracy rumors, racism comments, character assassinations and speculations leading up to the trial.

INTERMISSION

Act IV

Scene1

Jury selection

Scene 2

The prosecution

Scene 3

The Defense

Scene 4

Closing arguments

Act V

Judges charges, deliberations and verdict.

Basically this is just an outline. We can certainly judiciously edit the script down to perhaps three or even two very long acts, just using some pertinent dialog and edited speeches during the trial phase. Jury deliberations are another matter because there’s no archive of them, but the most important parts of this drama are the jury selection process and the judge’s charging of the jury. Why do I feel this way? That’s simple; the trial was a manipulated process weighted in favor of the defendant. This is not peculiar to this case. It’s just the way the self defense laws are written, exacerbated by the fact that any hard evidence in this case is weak. There were no reliable eyewitnesses that could actually point fingers, nor was there any forensic evidence that showed exactly what transpired. Only three things are indisputable: George Zimmerman carried a gun and got out of his car when advised not to and Trayvon Martin was walking home in the rain so he put his hood up. Since the judge disallowed lots of background evidence on both individuals there’s no way of knowing how the jury would have reacted. The judge and the prosecution both were determined not to make this trial about race, which is almost impossible, yet the defense constantly fed into their fears in summation.

The special Prosecutor, Angela Corey, is also to blame for overcharging Zimmerman. Even though many feel this was a racially motivated incident there was no hard evidence that could prove it and she knew that. She had just sent Marissa Alexander to jail for 20 years for firing a warning shot to keep her husband from beating her. Many experienced Jacksonville lawyers said that the case should never have been prosecuted. Corey also overstepped her bounds by overcharging Zimmerman with Second degree murder. No wonder Rick Scott appointed her; she was the perfect person to weight the trial in favor of the defense. All the state wanted to do is get this mess out of the way and none of Trayvon’s supporters could criticize her for doing exactly what they wanted her to do.

Since this is supposed to be a play, let’s look at the reactions. During the trial itself there were several witnesses whose testimony was at best vague. Compare that with the movie and later a play, Rashomon, which tells the story of three different very clear eyewitness versions of a murder as well as the victim’s version told through a medium. None of the testimony matches up with any of the others and all different stories are told from personal perspective. Basically, everyone’s testimony is given in their own self interest regardless of what is true. The crucible of the courtroom is the ultimate drama, but only if the evidence is so overwhelming or revealing that the jury cannot ignore it. The real drama here is in the jury’s deliberations and how they arrived at their decision. The best example of this is Reginald Rose’s 12 Angry Men which was first presented as a live TV drama in 1954 on CBS’s Studio One. Henry Fonda was so impressed with it that it was rewritten as a screenplay in 1957 that starred Fonda. It was also rewritten as a play in 1964.

It’s a pretty accurate description of how jury dynamics can work. In the original versions race does play a part in the deliberations as the defendant was described as Puerto Rican and referred to as “Those People”. Upon seeing the movie again a few weeks ago my reaction to the eyewitness testimony by an elderly white man that the defendant threatened the victim was imagined more than real because in the mid fifties that conversation would not have been in English. This jury was all white men and all native born save one European immigrant. Later versions would include mixed races including Ossie Davis, Dorian Harewood, Edward James Olmos and others, However, I digress. The jury deliberations bring out the attitudes and prejudices of all the members and how they react to new revelations until the final verdict.

One pivotal point in the movie involves Juror #8 (Henry Fonda). Juror #8, who was the lone not guilty voter, is discussing the murder weapon and showing that knives of that kind could be purchased anywhere. The script doesn’t reflect that part of the judge’s instructions to the jury is “not to play detective” and stick to the facts as presented. I’ve served on juries and have been told by the judges not to visit the crime scene or look for my own clues, so that struck me as odd, but it is critical to the outcome of the verdict because several jurors were led to believe that only the defendant had a knife like that. I also agree that a juror should be a detective as much as possible if they are truly seeking justice. Through steady logic Juror #8 convinces several others that there is reasonable doubt (especially for first degree murder). Eventually, Juror #8 and the converted jurors start convincing the others that their preconceived biases are standing in the way of a just verdict. The result, of course was not guilty.

According to reports on the Zimmerman jury the original vote was three for acquittal, two for manslaughter and one for second degree murder. But let’s look at the jury. Five white women and one of mixed blood hardly consists of a proper jury of one’s peers but under Florida law anything less than a capital case allows it, and the defense took full advantage of that fact. Perhaps one African American male on that jury might have made a difference but the defense never would have gone along with it and it never looked like the prosecution even cared. In summation, Mark O’Mara asked the jury to use their common sense and NOT connect the dots and they bought into it. It seems proper that people with common sense would connect the dots in seeking a just verdict. It was a setup for his pursuit of selling them the fear of the other. Let’s call it discrimination rather than racism because in Zimmerman’s mind Martin did not look like he belonged in that neighborhood. Juror #B37 bought into the scenario as did two others. Juror #B29, the lone non white did not.

During deliberations she was persuaded finally to vote unanimous for acquittal for the most part based on the judge’s instructions. That’s an absolute cop out. She should have hung the jury. If her heart tells her he’s guilty then she should have stood by her guns (no pun intended) no matter what the judge said. It’s not a crime and she can’t be prosecuted for it and she could have thrown the whole mess back to the state, which is where the mess deserves to be. If Zimmerman had been convicted on any charge he would automatically appeal the decision anyway, but at least for the time being he would not be free to come and go. Had that happened perhaps a more representative jury would be deciding Zimmerman’s fate in the future.

Epilogue

We all watched this drama unfold. Some of us watched all five acts and some of us only watched parts of the trial on the periphery. All of us have opinions based on what we either know or believe. Was the verdict just? Was the trial fair? Do society’s discriminatory attitudes play a part in this? If you think things are wrong how do we go about fixing them? A.R. Gurney, in his brilliant satire, The Fourth Wall states that plays don’t change the world. Well, don’t you believe it. Shakespeare, Ibsen, Chekhov, Shaw and a host of others have been changing the world, in tiny increments since the dawn of drama. Plays arouse our curiosity. They are not intended to provide answers; they are intended to raise questions. The answers have to come from us.

Our revels now are ended. These our actors,

As I foretold you, were all spirits and

Are melted into air, into thin air:

And, like the baseless fabric of this vision,

The cloud-capp’d towers, the gorgeous palaces,

The solemn temples, the great globe itself,

Yea, all which it inherit, shall dissolve

And, like this insubstantial pageant faded,

Leave not a rack behind. We are such stuff

As dreams are made on, and our little life

Is rounded with a sleep.

The Tempest by William Shakespeare Act IV, Scene 1

There’s a Lot to Celebrate

February 6, 2013 by Jerry Waxman Leave a Comment

By Jerry Waxman

Random thoughts while driving to the Celebration of 2012 at the GLBT Center……

It has been a long struggle. The world has not treated the gay community kindly for practically forever. Up until the Stonewall riots in 1969 the gay community sort of lived with it in quiet desperation. After Stonewall, things were not the same. That first taste of fighting back almost forty five years ago awakened the fighting spirit and gave rise to vigorous gay activism which is now stronger than ever. One of the reasons was the cultural revolution of the sixties in music, fashion, and the arts, a far cry from the conformist 1950’s. The most famous gay activist, Harvey Milk, born into a middle class Jewish family in 1930 lived (outwardly) a normal life for almost 35 years, graduating college with a degree in mathematics and even serving as an officer in the US Navy during the Korean War.

The GLBT community was at first mocked and ignored, which is how society usually treats people who are different, labeling them “misfits”. In literature and the arts it was rare that gays were regarded as anything but “odd”, or “eccentric”. The punishment for breaking these rules was brutal, witness the sad plight of literary giant Oscar Wilde.

Wilde was the very successful author of The Picture of Dorian Gray, a strikingly dark novel which had some homosexual allusions, and at one point had three hit plays running at the same time in London. He was widely known for his intellect, sharp wit, and biting remarks. He was a married man and the father of two children. He was also “that way” (that’s what they called it back then). In Victorian England there was an active community of people who were “that way” only nobody talked about it. Wilde was enamored of Lord Alfred “Bosie” Douglas, the son of the Marquess of Queensberry, a real macho man. Bosie reciprocated and the affair began. The Marquess, being the macho man he was, publicly denounced Wilde and constantly harangued him. Wilde sued for libel rather than quietly ignoring the situation. Evidence discovered during the trial compelled Wilde to drop the charges, but not before the damage was done. Wilde was arrested and convicted (after three trials) of “gross indecency” with other men. He spent two years in prison which ruined his health and died at the age of 46 in 1900.

In American culture for the first half of the Twentieth Century there was hardly any mention of gays. There were many American artists and writers living abroad, notably Gertrude Stein, who found acceptance in Paris and other European capitals. Gay artists who lived here kept it hidden. Composers and lyricists like Cole Porter, Aaron Copland, Lorenz Hart and Leonard Bernstein. Actors, writers and artists of all disciplines stayed in the closet. In 1934 Lillian Hellman’s The Children’s Hour, set at an all girl boarding school broke new ground. A rumor started by a student, uncorroborated, about the two owners having an illicit affair causes the school to close. The play captivated audiences and caused the end of a law in New York that made it illegal to mention homosexuality on stage. In the movies, pre code there were a few portrayals but nothing overwhelming, however t he picture of Marlene Dietrich in top hat and tuxedo was a powerful image of the decadence happening in Berlin. Greta Garbo’s portrayal of Queen Christina was a rare departure from the conventional perceptions in film. Lesbians were usually portrayed as old maid aunts, busybodies or sadistic matrons like Judith Anderson’s Mrs. Danvers in Rebecca or Cornelia Otis Skinner’s Miss Holloway in The Uninvited, or Hope Emerson in Caged.

Men fared a little better. Actors like Edward Everett Horton, Donald Meek, Franklin Pangborn and Eric Blore worked constantly in films, usually as comic sidekicks or as officious department store managers who looked down on their customers and staff. They were never essential to the plot, and when they were their characters usually looked and acted like Peter Lorre’s portrayal of Joel Cairo in The Maltese Falcon. One of the only openly gay Actors who could carry a film by himself whose characters appealed to mainstream audiences was Clifton Webb. He horrified us in Laura. He made us cry in The Razor’s Edge and he made us laugh as Mr. Belvedere all while playing himself, an effete snob. In the play Tea and Sympathy, later made into a movie,

The central character at a boy’s prep school is perceived and taunted by the others as gay, which he is not. The story is about being different and how people’s ignorance perceives that difference.

After the 1950’s things gradually began to change. In 1962 Advise and Consent featured a Senator who had a gay past. The transition was gradual, but gay themes and characters in the movies and television have come full circle and today hardly raise any eyebrows. Our culture has advanced equality on all fronts, save some die-hard churches and certain conservative politicians. Even the Boy Scouts are taking a second look at admitting gays. They had better, because their ranks might be thinning out too much.

Wow! There’s no place to park!

OK, that broke my train of thought and here I am at the center. My first impression from outside was that there were an awful lot of people inside, and yes, there were, at least two hundred. It was a real celebration. Many local politicians were there and gave speeches. After all, this celebration was for them. These were the people that the GLBT community backed and they were celebrating those victories. Speakers were Orange County Tax Collector Scott Randolph, Orange County Property Appraiser Rick Singh, State Senator Darren Soto, State Representative Victor Torres, County Commissioner Tiffany Moore Russell among several others. Joe Saunders, one of the two openly gay representatives in the Florida House was unable to attend due to a last minute emergency. The highlight of the evening was the premiere of the video Get Tested which features prominent politicians and sports stars urging people to get tested for HIV infection. Testing is free and confidential and worth doing. The idea originated with The Center’s Director, Randy Stephens, who asked Rita Ashton, wife of State Attorney Jeff Ashton to help out. She did the entire project from start to finish, securing cameras, and crew and post production through her network of professionals who all volunteered their time. Although there doesn’t appear to be a link on the Center’s Website, the video is on the Center’s facebook page, GLBT Community Center of Central Florida.

Rita and Jeff Ashton

This was one of those occasions where few people left early. There was plenty of time to meet and mingle with the politicos as well as old friends. The cash bar was active and the food was plentiful and tasty. The politicians were completely accessible and didn’t show signs of that defensive wall that they can put up. I spoke for several minutes with Rita and Jeff Ashton, mainly about her video however, I couldn’t resist congratulating him on his decision to investigate the texting scandal. He looked at me and said “come on, that was a no-brainer!” His utter candidness made me decide to not ask him the follow up question.

The evening’s events, speeches and tone showed the immense gains that have been made in recent years. I have two thoughts about it: to paraphrase a Virginia Slim slogan, “We’ve come a long way, baby,” and in the words of Oscar Brown, Jr. “But we’ve still got so terribly far to go.” It is my hope that someday we’ll only identify people by their names. And so the journey continues.

Civil Rights for All Means Just That

May 24, 2012 by Jerry Waxman 1 Comment

By Jerry Waxman

Equality seems to be coming in a lot of forms recently. The Republican War on Women shows the tremendous inequality that poor and middle class women face especially in health issues. The GLBT community has had a huge boost recently thanks to VP Joe Biden and President Obama and all of these equality issues are important to the specific groups involved. There is a larger equality issue, however, that has largely been operating under the radar and at an extreme disadvantage; labor organizing. The Conservative movement and specifically Republican legislators have been working tirelessly to deprive workers of their right to be represented by a union. The crucible in this fight is heading for a conclusion in Wisconsin in early June and the recall election of Scott Walker is too close to call at the present time. There is a remedy to this outlined in an op-ed letter I received from my friend Phyllis Hancock, who is head of the A. Philip Randolph Institute of Central Florida. Specifically, this is a civil rights issue and it makes a lot of sense. Workers are not a minority. They are the bulk of the people in this country, which encompasses people of every ethnic and religious makeup and they deserve the equal protection from abuse that the laws of this country provide for. Here’s the letter in its entirety:

The authors are Norman Hill and Velma Murphy Hill. Norman Hill, staff coordinator of the historic 1963 March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom, is president emeritus of the A. Philip Randolph Institute. Velma Hill, a former vice president of the American Federation of Teachers (AFT), is also the former civil and human rights director for the Service Employees International Union (SEIU). They are currently working on a memoir, entitled “Climbing Up the Rough Side of the Mountain.”

In the United States, worker rights and civil rights have a deep and historic connection. What is slavery, after all, if not the abuse of worker rights taken to its ultimate extreme? A. Philip Randolph, president of the Brotherhood of Sleeping Car Porters, recognized this link and, as early as the 1920s, spoke passionately about the need for a black-labor alliance. Civil rights activist Bayard Rustin, Randolph’s protégé and an adviser to Martin Luther King, Jr., joined his mentor as a forceful, early advocate for a black-labor coalition.

The very title of the famous 1963 “March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom,” conceived by Randolph and organized by Rustin, reflected their black-labor perspective. Two years later, they founded the A. Philip Randolph Institute, to solidify the black-labor alliance.

With prodding from Randolph, the AFL-CIO came to recognize the deep connection between labor rights and civil rights. The civil rights movement has moved similarly, acknowledging organized labor as by far its strongest ally. In 1961, King spoke to this, declaring that “Negroes are almost entirely a working people. Our needs are identical with labor’s needs: decent wages, fair working conditions, quality education and healthcare. That is why blacks support labor’s demands and fight laws that curb labor.”

That is why the labor hater and the race baiter is virtually always a twin-headed creature, spewing anti-black epithets from one mouth and anti-labor propaganda from the other. And that is why, at the time of King’s assassination in 1968, he was preparing to lead a march in Memphis, Tennessee, in support of black striking sanitation workers.

Still today, the benefits of trade union membership for African Americans, women and Hispanics are clear. According to recent estimates, the wages of black union members are 31 percent higher than their non union counterparts. The union wage advantage for women is 34 percent; for Latino’s, it’s a whopping 51 percent. Therefore, the union movement’s decline should be of special concern. In the mid-1950s, about one-third of the workforce belonged to unions. Today the proportion is 12 percent.

Is this decline inevitable; the unavoidable result of globalization, with union jobs going to low-wage countries? Apparently not. Although unionization rates have declined across most developed nations, nowhere else has deunionization been as pronounced or as sustained as in the United States.

Fortunately, a provocative new remedy has recently been proposed.

In Why Labor Organizing Should Be a Civil Right, Richard Kahlenberg and Moshe Marvit pinpoint the reasons for U.S. Labor’s decline and offer a plausible solution. They observe that the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), which oversees most unionization campaigns, does not offer effective remedies for illegal corporate retaliation against pro-union workers. Under NLRB procedures, workers who are fired for supporting unions, may not win back their jobs for years, if at all. Meanwhile, their co-workers are frightened into abandoning the unionization. The fines for union-busting are also so minimal that corporations have little to lose and much to gain by continuing their bad behavior.

Kahlenberg and Marvit argue that placing the right to organize under Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act offers a possible solution. Their proposal would add abridgement of workers’ rights to discrimination against individuals based on race, gender, religion as a new protected category. Under the amended Civil Rights Act, pro-union workers could regain their jobs within days by a federal judge, and employers could face major costs if found guilty of breaking the law.

An amendment to the Civil Rights Act establishing the right to organize could not pass the current Congress. But discussion around the proposal can certainly begin now. And the labor and civil rights movements, in their traditional black-labor-minority coalition, can begin acting now through cooperation with other minority, religious and liberal organizations.

NAACP president Benjamin Jealous and AFL-CIO president Richard Trumka have endorsed the idea of treating the right to organize as a civil right. More leaders of the liberal-labor alliance should begin advancing this concept while also working to elect representatives, senators, and a president who will translate it into law.

– Norman Hill and Velma Murphy Hill

Workers are certainly not represented properly and deserve the protection that this action could offer. Civil rights is not a selective process. We all deserve equality, not just a select few.