Did Floyd's death bring change? Black leaders share views

  • Oops!
    Something went wrong.
    Please try again later.
Rebecca Bibbs, The Herald Bulletin, Anderson, Ind.
·5 min read
  • Oops!
    Something went wrong.
    Please try again later.

May 22—ANDERSON — Perceptions of George Floyd's legacy and the April conviction of the Minneapolis police officer who killed him are mixed among Black leaders in Anderson.

Kim Townsend, chair of the Race, Equity and Inclusion Workgroup, and Lindsay Brown, president of the Indiana African American Democratic Caucus, each believe the event that set off a nationwide protest hasn't really led to improved social justice or police reform.

However, Terrell Brown, who helped found the local group It's Up There in response to Floyd's May 25, 2020, death, believes social justice headway has been made in the past 12 months.

Townsend said progress in police policies and actions has been slow to come.

"I can't say that I am seeing any changes," she said. "I think the police unions are maybe the reasons we aren't seeing a lot of change. I think George Floyd has affected race relations among people in general, but I don't see any difference among police."

One incident simply isn't enough to make the kind of systemic change that needs to happen nationwide, according to Townsend.

"I think there needs to be more (officers) brought to justice, and maybe that will send a bigger message," she said.

What's particularly telling, Townsend noted, is that the entire incident was captured on video for the world to see, and still, there was argument during the trial of Floyd's killer, Derek Chauvin, about the "actual" cause of death.

"If I had breast cancer and the doctor says I have three months to live and I get hit by a car, that's what killed me," she said. "I can't believe how twisted we are that when we see someone hold a man down like that, it's still controversial. I just can't believe it even took that long to come to the decision."

What still separates Floyd and other Black men from white men is a trial, according to Townsend.

'JUDGE AND JURY'

"If George Floyd did what they said he did, he didn't have a trial. His trial was on the streets," the mother of two adult sons said. "There's no trial for a lot of our Black males that are being killed in the streets. The police have decided they are going to be the judge and the jury."

The lack of police reform is visible in their culture, which was on display during the Jan. 6 insurrection at the U.S. Capitol in Washington, D.C., Townsend said. Police officers from departments scattered across the nation and members of the military participated in that event, she noted.

At least 31 police officers are under investigation for suspected roles in the riot.

"What disturbs me is some of these officers getting out on social media and supporting some of the things that have happened in other cities," she said. "I think that this supremacy movement is becoming more pronounced because people no longer are fearful to display their feelings and beliefs."

Real change will come when police departments become more diverse and reflective of the communities they serve, Townsend said.

"You can't have one voice in leadership positions," she said. "You need different voices at the table. I think it's hard to get young men interested in law enforcement because of a lack of trust. But still, we can get some of these men interested in some of these roles."

According to Lindsay Brown, the death of Floyd is really just the story of one man.

"The only things that happened is George Floyd died, and his family is in mourning. We're still light years away from positive outcomes," he said.

Lindsay Brown was instrumental in an effort with the state Democratic Party to create a template document to be used by communities throughout the state, including Anderson, for police reform. That effort started prior to Floyd's death, which acted as a catalyst to bring it before city leaders, he said.

"I made the changes to fit the community," he said. "We don't do their job. We don't know what the dangers are they are facing. I am not against the police. I just want to make sure they are doing their jobs by the book and by the law."

Lindsay Brown said he faced resistance from Anderson City Council that eventually derailed the effort.

"Instead of the people's best interests, some of the council members had the police's best interests at heart," he said.

BODY CAMERAS

On the upside, Lindsay Brown said, discussions of reform reopened the possibility of providing Anderson police with body cameras to record their response to incidents. Video can help not only in situations that involve bodily injury or death but even when officers are involved in smaller incidents that lead to charges such as disorderly conduct.

Anderson officials said this month that the city had received the body cameras it purchased and that APD officers were in training to use the cameras.

"We wouldn't have the body cameras if I didn't write that legislation," Lindsay Brown said. "I think if a body camera, if the video is released, it can show a different side."

Transparency also is key to better policing, he said.

"Until it becomes public knowledge of disciplinary actions for police officers, we're going to be hit," Lindsay Brown said.

Terrell Brown said he's seen indications over the past year that the cause of social justice is advancing.

"With the whole George Floyd situation, it opened up the eyes of everyone," he said.

Unlike Townsend and Lindsay Brown, Terrell Brown believes Black men are safer because of Floyd's death. They also are safer because there are more Black judges and the election of the nation's first Black vice president, he added.

"We came together and started a movement that sparked something across the world," he said. "They see the peak of our capability when we unite, so I think it's safer out here."

Follow Rebecca R. Bibbs on Twitter at @RebeccaB_THB,

or call 765-640-4883.

Recommended Stories

  • Doncic has 31 points, Mavs beat Clippers 113-102 in Game 1

    Luka Doncic scored 31 points and the Dallas Mavericks outshot the NBA’s leading team from 3-point range, beating the Los Angeles Clippers 113-102 on Saturday in Game 1 of the first-round playoff series. Tim Hardaway Jr. added 21 points and Dorian Finney-Smith had 18 for the Mavs, who led most of the game. Doncic and Hardaway Jr. made five 3-pointers each, and Finney-Smith had four to help Dallas shoot 47% from long-range.

  • A 'verbal confrontation' led to a mass shooting in downtown Minneapolis that left 2 dead and 8 injured, police say

    The victims include five men and five women, police said. Eight injured victims were sent to local hospitals. One is in critical condition.

  • Police Pulled Him Over. Then They Tested His Daughter’s Ashes for Drugs.

    Screenshot/YouTubeTa’Naja Barnes is a familiar name in Springfield, Illinois. The reason why is tragic. The 2 year-old child was killed by her mother, Twanka L. Davis, in February 2019, mere months after the Illinois Department of Family Services closed an investigation into reported abuse and neglect of the child. There’s even a reform law named after Ta’Naja, which requires more safety checks for a child to be returned to their family after foster care.Still, a civil suit filed this week alleges that the Springfield Police Department “desecrated and spilled out the ashes” of Ta’Naja while her father, Dartavius Barnes, begged them to stop. According to court documents, police officers Colton Redding, Brian Riebling, and Adam Westlake, Juan Resendez, Nicholas Renfro, and Regan Molohon, conducted an “unlawful search” of Barnes’ car during a traffic stop.Bodycam video of the April 6 incident, released by the Springfield ABC affiliate WCIS, shows Barnes handcuffed in the back of a car while an officer holds up some of his daughter’s ashes.The officer says the substance tested positive for traces of meth or ecstasy. “No, no, no bro, that’s my daughter!” Barnes replies, visibly upset as he tries to grab the remains back. “What are y’all doing?”“Please give me my daughter,” Barnes went on. “Put her in my hand, bro. You all are disrespectful, bro … Give me my daughter. That’s very important to me.”The Washington Post reports that Barnes was stopped for around 20 minutes, and 80 grams of marijuana was recovered in his car. He was not arrested, but “given a notice to appear in court for illegal possession of cannabis.”Court documents allege that police officers intended to “cause severe emotional distress or knew that there was a high probability that this conduct would do so.”Representatives for the Springfield Police Department did not respond to The Daily Beast’s request for comment, though the Chicago Tribune viewed a counter filing that said, “Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity as their conduct was justified by an objectively reasonable belief that it was lawful.”The local television station WAND News obtained a statement from Assistant Police Chief Kenneth Scarlette who said, “these are all personnel matters. As such the department will withhold any further comment.” The case will go to trial in 2022.Read more at The Daily Beast.Get our top stories in your inbox every day. Sign up now!Daily Beast Membership: Beast Inside goes deeper on the stories that matter to you. Learn more.

  • Georgia judge approves ballot audit as Trump supporters continue to push unfounded election claims

    Judge permits recount in county with no evidence of absentee ballot fraud, fuelling former president’s claims

  • Former Trump advisor Michael Flynn says coronavirus a conspiracy to distract from election

    Former three star General is a vocal supporter of QAnon conspiracy theories

  • UK able to count how many people enter and leave the country for the first time, Home Office plans reveal

    The UK will be able to count how many people enter and leave the country for the first time in plans revealed on Sunday by the Home Office. The new digital system will mean that the Government can now accurately measure levels of immigration. The system will also be able to check whether people have permission to enter the country, meaning that the Home Office and border officials can crack down on foreign criminals entering the UK. Those wishing to come to the UK without a visa or immigration status will have to apply for an American-style Electronic Travel Authorisation (ETA), around 30 million of which are expected to be processed each year. Migration estimates in the UK have been inaccurate for decades, with the number of Europeans living in the country going underestimated by millions. It was estimated that 3 million people from the continent lived in the UK, but as of last month there have been more than 5.4 million applications from Europeans for settled status. It comes after senior Tory MPs raised questions about the quality of Government data on migrants in Britain, which affects public services plans to meet demand. Last week John Hayes,a former Conservative security minister, said: “It’s really clear that taking back control of our borders means knowing who is coming and going.” The new “fully digital” reforms to the immigation system are expected to be completed by the end of 2025. Priti Patel, the Home Secretary, said: “Now we have taken back control and ended free movement, security is at the very heart of our immigration strategy. “Our new fully digital border will provide the ability to count people in and out of the country, giving us control over who comes to the UK. “Our new approach will make it easier to identify potential threats before they reach the border. The British people will have confidence that the strongest controls are in place to keep them safe.”

  • Las Vegas officials hold pop-up vaccine clinic at strip club

    Wearing a French maid-inspired lingerie costume and high heels, dancer JoJo Hamner waited patiently to get her COVID-19 vaccine in a line that snaked past a glittery hostess stand under a red-light chandelier. When it was her turn, Hamner sat in a chair and held onto a small feather duster that completed her costume while a nurse administered the shot into her already-exposed arm. Hamner then waited nearby for the required 15 minutes of observation, sitting with other vaccine recipients in leather chairs between plush purple booths, vacant stages and empty poles at this strip club in Las Vegas.

  • 'She had to hold her little boy as he died': 6-year-old's family, California police seeking shooter in road rage death

    The boy, identified by family as Aiden Leos, was in the backseat of his mother's car when another driver shot and killed him, authorities said.

  • Ashton Kutcher's twin brother was 'very angry' when actor revealed he had cerebral palsy

    Ashton Kutcher revealed his twin brother's cerebral palsy diagnosis on national TV during a 2003 interview.

  • Virgin Galactic rocket plane flies to edge of space

    Sir Richard Branson's spaceplane completes the first of three key test flights above New Mexico.

  • Risk of Nuclear War Over Taiwan in 1958 Said to Be Greater Than Publicly Known

    WASHINGTON — When communist Chinese forces began shelling islands controlled by Taiwan in 1958, the United States rushed to back up its ally with military force — including drawing up plans to carry out nuclear strikes on mainland China, according to an apparently still-classified document that sheds new light on how dangerous that crisis was. U.S. military leaders pushed for a first-use nuclear strike on China, accepting the risk that the Soviet Union would retaliate in kind on behalf of its ally and millions of people would die, dozens of pages from a classified 1966 study of the confrontation show. The government censored those pages when it declassified the study for public release. The document was disclosed by Daniel Ellsberg, who leaked a classified history of the Vietnam War, known as the Pentagon Papers, 50 years ago. Ellsberg said he had copied the top secret study about the Taiwan Strait crisis at the same time but did not disclose it then. He is now highlighting it amid new tensions between the United States and China over Taiwan. Sign up for The Morning newsletter from the New York Times While it has been known in broader strokes that United States officials considered using atomic weapons against mainland China if the crisis escalated, the pages reveal in new detail how aggressive military leaders were in pushing for authority to do so if communist forces, which had started shelling the so-called offshore islands, intensified their attacks. The crisis in 1958 instead ebbed when Mao Zedong’s communist forces broke off the attacks on the islands, leaving them in the control of Chiang Kai-shek’s nationalist Republic of China forces based on Taiwan. More than six decades later, strategic ambiguity about Taiwan’s status — and about American willingness to use nuclear weapons to defend it — persists. The previously censored information is significant both historically and now, said Odd Arne Westad, a Yale University historian who specializes in the Cold War and China and who reviewed the pages for The New York Times. “This confirms, to me at least, that we came closer to the United States using nuclear weapons” during the 1958 crisis “than what I thought before,” he said. “In terms of how the decision-making actually took place, this is a much more illustrative level than what we have seen.” Drawing parallels to today’s tensions — when China’s own conventional military might has grown far beyond its 1958 ability, and when it has its own nuclear weapons — Westad said the documents provided fodder to warn of the dangers of an escalating confrontation over Taiwan. Even in 1958, officials doubted the United States could successfully defend Taiwan using only conventional weapons, the documents show. If China invaded today, Westad said, “it would put tremendous pressure on U.S. policymakers, in the case of such a confrontation, to think about how they might deploy nuclear weapons.” “That should be sobering for everyone involved,” he added. In exposing a historical antecedent for the present tensions, Ellsberg said that was exactly the takeaway he wanted the public to debate. He argued that inside the Pentagon, contingency planning was likely underway for the possibility of an armed conflict over Taiwan — including what to do if any defense using conventional weapons appeared to be falling short. “As the possibility of another nuclear crisis over Taiwan is being bandied about this very year, it seems very timely to me to encourage the public, Congress and the executive branch to pay attention to what I make available to them,” he said about what he characterized as “shallow” and “reckless” high-level discussions during the 1958 Taiwan Strait crisis. He added, “I do not believe the participants were more stupid or thoughtless than those in between or in the current Cabinet.” Among other details, the pages that the government censored in the official release of the study describe the attitude of Gen. Laurence Kutner, the top Air Force commander for the Pacific. He wanted authorization for a first-use nuclear attack on mainland China at the start of any armed conflict. To that end, he praised a plan that would start by dropping atomic bombs on Chinese airfields but not other targets, arguing that its relative restraint would make it harder for skeptics of nuclear warfare in the U.S. government to block the plan. “There would be merit in a proposal from the military to limit the war geographically” to the air bases, “if that proposal would forestall some misguided humanitarian’s intention to limit a war to obsolete iron bombs and hot lead,” Kutner said at one meeting. At the same time, officials considered it very likely that the Soviet Union would respond to an atomic attack on China with retaliatory nuclear strikes. (In retrospect, it is not clear whether this premise was accurate. Historians say U.S. leaders, who saw communism as a monolithic global conspiracy, did not appreciate or understand an emerging Sino-Soviet split.) But U.S. military officials preferred that risk to the possibility of losing the islands. The study paraphrased Gen. Nathan Twining, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, as saying that if atomic bombings of air bases did not force China to break off the conflict, there would be “no alternative but to conduct nuclear strikes deep into China as far north as Shanghai.” He suggested that such strikes would “almost certainly involve nuclear retaliation against Taiwan and possibly against Okinawa,” the Japanese island where U.S. military forces were based, “but he stressed that if national policy is to defend the offshore islands then the consequences had to be accepted.” The study also paraphrased the secretary of state, John Foster Dulles, as observing to the Joint Chiefs of Staff that “nobody would mind very much the loss of the offshore islands but that loss would mean further communist aggression. Nothing seems worth a world war until you looked at the effect of not standing up to each challenge posed.” Ultimately, President Dwight Eisenhower pushed back against the generals and decided to rely on conventional weapons at first. But nobody wanted to enter another protracted conventional conflict like the Korean War, so there was “unanimous belief that this would have to be quickly followed by nuclear strikes unless the Chinese communists called off this operation.” Ellsberg said he copied the full version of the study when he copied the Pentagon Papers. But he did not share the Taiwan study with reporters who wrote about the Vietnam War study in 1971, like Neil Sheehan of The Times. Ellsberg quietly posted the full study online in 2017 when he published a book, “Doomsday Machine: Confessions of a Nuclear War Planner.” One of its footnotes mentions in passing that passages and pages omitted from the study are available on his website. But he did not quote the study’s material in his book, he said, because lawyers for his publisher worried about potential legal liability. He also did little else to draw attention to the fact that its redacted pages are visible in the version he posted. As a result, few noticed it. One of the few who did was William Burr, a senior analyst at George Washington University’s National Security Archive, who mentioned it in a footnote in a March blog post about threats to use nuclear weapons in the Cold War. Burr said he had tried about two decades to use the Freedom of Information Act to obtain a new declassification review of the study — which was written by Morton Halperin for the RAND Corp. — but the Pentagon was unable to locate an unabridged copy in its files. (RAND, a nongovernmental think tank, is not itself subject to information act requests.) Ellsberg said tensions over Taiwan did not seem as urgent in 2017. But the uptick in saber-rattling — he pointed to a recent cover of The Economist magazine that labeled Taiwan “the most dangerous place on Earth” and a recent opinion column by The Times’ Thomas Friedman titled, “Is There a War Coming Between China and the U.S.?” — prompted him to conclude it was important to get the information into greater public view. Michael Szonyi, a Harvard University historian and author of a book about one of the offshore islands at the heart of the crisis, “Cold War Island: Quemoy on the Front Line,” called the material’s availability “hugely interesting.” Any new confrontation over Taiwan could escalate, and officials today would be “asking themselves the same questions that these folks were asking in 1958,” he said, linking the risks created by “dramatic” miscalculations and misunderstandings during serious planning for the use of nuclear weapons in 1958 and today’s tensions. Ellsberg said he also had another reason for highlighting his exposure of that material. Now 90, he said he wanted to take on the risk of becoming a defendant in a test case challenging the Justice Department’s growing practice of using the Espionage Act to prosecute officials who leak information. Enacted during World War I, the Espionage Act makes it a crime to retain or disclose, without authorization, defense-related information that could harm the United States or aid a foreign adversary. Its wording covers everyone — not only spies — and it does not allow defendants to urge juries to acquit on the basis that disclosures were in the public interest. Using the Espionage Act to prosecute leakers was once rare. In 1973, Ellsberg himself was charged under it, before a judge threw out the charges because of government misconduct. The first successful such conviction was in 1985. But it has now become routine for the Justice Department to bring such charges. Most of the time, defendants strike plea deals to avoid long sentences, so there is no appeal. The Supreme Court has not confronted questions about whether the law’s wording or application trammels First Amendment rights. Saying the Justice Department should charge him for his open admission that he disclosed the classified study about the Taiwan crisis without authorization, Ellsberg said he would handle his defense in a way that would tee up the First Amendment issues for the Supreme Court. “I will, if indicted, be asserting my belief that what I am doing — like what I’ve done in the past — is not criminal,” he said, arguing that using the Espionage Act “to criminalize classified truth-telling in the public interest” is unconstitutional. This article originally appeared in The New York Times. © 2021 The New York Times Company

  • Trump turns on his own party and labels Republicans who don’t want to talk about Arizona ‘weak and stupid’

    Trump has critiqued Republicans, such as Representative Liz Cheney, for their disinterest in Arizona vote recount on conservative media

  • Myanmar coup: Junta head claims Aung San Suu Kyi 'in good health'

    Min Aung Hlaing makes the claim in his first interview since seizing power in February.

  • Marco Rubio slams the proposed January 6 commission as 'a partisan joke' that's 'about damaging Republicans'

    Legislation for a bipartisan commission to probe the deadly January 6 insurrection, is currently "designed" to hurt Republicans, Rubio said.

  • A Chinese-American civil rights group is suing Trump for $22.9m for calling COVID-19 the 'China Virus' and 'Kung Flu'. That's $1 for each Asian American and Pacific Islander living in the US.

    The Chinese American Civil Rights Coalition is suing Trump for defamation and infliction of emotional distress on Asian Americans.

  • Are Senate Republicans trying to 'drive a wedge' between Biden and his staff during infrastructure negotiations?

    Senate Republicans are "trying to drive a wedge" between President Biden and his staff during negotiations over the White House's infrastructure proposal, political analyst Bill Scher argues, citing an email to the press from Sen. Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.V.). Capito is leading the Republican effort to get Biden to cut down on his plan, which initially cost $2.25 trillion, but, as of Friday, sits at $1.7 trillion. Shrinking the total appeared to be a gesture of compromise, but it wasn't well-received by the GOP, and Capito's office took aim at Biden's advisers, stating that the two sides have been growing further apart since they got involved. White House staff, meanwhile, insist they, just like Biden, genuinely want to reach across the aisle, Politico reports. This, from Capito’s office, should be parsed closely: “Based on today’s meeting, the groups seem further apart after two meetings with White House staff than they were after one meeting with President Biden.” Capito is trying to drive a wedge between Biden and his staff — Bill Scher (@billscher) May 22, 2021 If Scher's reading of Capito's statement is accurate, there so far doesn't seem to be any inkling that the strategy is working. Read more at Politico. More stories from theweek.com5 riotously funny cartoons about GOP resistance to the January 6 CommissionWhy Emily Wilder got fired and Chris Cuomo didn'tAngelina Jolie stands perfectly still, unshowered, covered in bees for World Bee Day

  • Fire at Poland's largest lignite mine out, unit to be shut

    A fire engulfed a conveyer belt at Poland’s largest brown coal mine Saturday before it was extinguished, and a linked power plant will have one of its units shut because the fire disrupted coal deliveries. The midday fire at the Belchatow mine in central Poland covered the area that includes Poland’s largest lignite power plant with huge clouds of black smoke. The fire was the second incident this week forcing the suspension of some of the power plant’s generators.

  • Hamas defiant with military parade, appearance of top leader

    Hundreds of masked Hamas fighters brandishing assault rifles paraded in Gaza City and the group’s top leader made his first public appearance on Saturday, in a defiant show of strength after the militants' 11-day war with Israel. In the fighting, Israel unleashed hundreds of airstrikes against militant targets in Gaza, while Hamas and other militants fired more than 4,000 rockets toward Israel. More than 250 people were killed, the vast majority of them Palestinians.

  • Dua Lipa blasts group that condemned her for Mideast stance

    Singer Dua Lipa is blasting an organization that paid for a full-page ad in The New York Times that called her antisemitic for her support of Palestinians, saying it used her name “shamelessly” to “advance their ugly campaign with falsehoods and blatant misrepresentations.” In the rambling ad which appeared in Saturday's newspaper in the main section, Rabbi Shmuley Boteach, the head of the World Values Network, named Lipa, and the models Bella and Gigi Hadid as three “mega-influencers” who have “accused Israel of ethnic cleansing” and “vilified the Jewish State.” Lipa took to Twitter on Saturday afternoon to “reject the false and appalling allegations” and said the World Values Network twisted what she stands for.

  • If Donald Trump faces criminal charges, few think it will hurt him with his base in 2024

    Criminal charges would create political problems for Trump, but would not necessarily prevent him from campaigning in 2022 and running in 2024.