The “hit list” rumor probably only served to intensify the fear and apprehension experienced by many students.

I noticed that the legal precedent on which Walters bases his “tennis shoe as deadly weapon” theory involves a case in which a young man and a young woman were beaten in a movie theater, and the young man was placed into a coma, from which he had not awoken by the time this opinion was written. The severity of the injuries are obviously different.

I have never stated that I believe I could know who is responsible for this attack, but based on those statements and a confluence of other factors, it is absolutely imperative people remember the burden of proof rests with the district attorney.

I think it is curious that the one coach who was at the scene and apparently tended to Barker testified that he saw another student throw the first punch, and I don’t think any reasonable person could read all of those eyewitness statements and conclude that at least five people are guilty, basing their opinion exclusively on those statements. A few students were able to identify, by name, a group of black students they saw.

Thank you for the link. I hope people will also arrive at their own opinion before making hasty and/or emotional assumptions.

Go to the Evangelical Outpost link I have provided above. It shows a scanned document that was pulled from the Jena 6 court case that shows the basis for which DA Reed Walters is trying aggravated battery. Yes, tennis shoes may seem farfetched as a lethal weapon, but when it connects repeatedly with an unconscious head, it can cause serious damage to the victim. When you go to that site above, look for “State of LA vs. Munoz”. That is the precedent Walters followed. It is another case where tennis shoes were considered a lethal weapon. The appellate court upheld the decision. This court case may give you a glimpse into what Judge Mauffray would have given as a sentencing, had Bell’s adult charges remained.

I have never been terribly fond of Reed Walters, but he is definitely taking more heat than he deserves. There are some obvious questions that need to be answered, but we should be patient and LET them unfold. I totally welcome an investigative team to compare cases to see if he has, as the racial activists say, been practicing two forms of justice (one for black, one for white). If this is indeed found to be true, YES I would gladly ask him to step down and be accountable for his actions. That would be reprehensible; but until this type of investigation is given, it’s impossible to fairly conclude that this is Walters’ behavior.

http://www.evangelicaloutpost.com/archives/003979.html

People can now read the eye witness statements online. I have read them also, and find it EXTREMELY difficult to conclude that at least 5 of the 6 are not guilty.

If you’d like to read what I pointed out of the eye witness statements, go to:

http://pursuingholiness.com/2007/09/27/letter-from-the-jena-6-source/

Personally, I believe very little of what Robert Bailey says. ELEVEN people say that he was kicking and punching Justin Barker, yet he says he was not involved. Additionally, he is the one who says he was cracked over the head with a beer bottle at the Fair Barn incident, yet he puts NOTHING like that in his eye witness statement describing the incident (GO READ IT). He was also never admitted to the hospital. Very fishy indeed. And yes, eye witnesses descriptions of the incident vary, but there is an obvious theme to them that stick out like a sore thumb:

1. They clearly threatened other male white students that day before and after the attack.
2. Some students allude to having a hit list, one student saying a guy who is implicated in the incident was talking about it in class.
3. Read about the female black student who wishes to remain anonymous. She heard Bell and friends planning out what they were gonna do to Barker, including Bell saying “I swear on my Mama I’m gonna knock his block off.” She also witnessed the entire verbal altercation that lead up to the fight. She claims Barker flipped Bell the middle finger, but she never mentions ANYTHING about a racial slur. She also gives a vivid description (with names) of the attack.

I’ve heard many people who are familiar with police procedure say that eye witness statements frequent have minor discrepancies in them. Instead of proving reasonable doubt, it PROVES that the witnesses were not coached. Eye witnesses who are coached normally have identical statements. Yes, there are some valid conflictions regarding the statements (Bell’s role as the initial attacker, Bryant Purvis’ involvement) but, as anyone can see, the others have been implicated repeatedly by MANY eye witnesses.

So you can spin the eye witness statements as you wish, but now they are online and people can form their own opinions. Justice will be served. No, people are innocent until proven guilty, but I am convinced 5 of these guys are guilty based on the eye witness statements.

I welcome anyone to read the eye witness statements and form their own opinion regarding this case. It’s time objectivity and truth take over and show the world what really happened in my little town.

I’ve been following this case casually over the past week or so, and during my time reviewing it, I’ve come to find a great number of interesting facts. One of which, supports the charge of aggravated battery, oddly enough.

In Louisiana, the law regarding aggravated battery, is that it’s battery that results in unconsciousness, protracted and obvious disfigurement, extreme pain, impairment of a bodily function, organ, mental faculty, or a substantial risk of death. I’ve have also come across more general definitions which state that a use of a deadly weapon, battery against a protect person (like a child), battery in a protected place (like a school), and battery causing serious injuries. In some places I’ve come across conflicting or confusing representations of the concept.

I was formerly under the impression that because Justin Barker’s wounds were not severe, nor protracted, and that because no deadly weapons were in use, that the necessary charge, if guilty, would be simple battery.

For those of you more versed in the ways of American, or, more specifically, Louisiana law – would knocking Justin Barker unconscious (on school grounds, no less) constitute aggravated battery? Or am I misunderstanding something?