Wednesday, October 3, 2018

Will Van Dyke jurors or white male senators break their white 'gentleman's agreement'? Not likely.

Van Dyke & Kavanaugh play the role of victims. 
The prosecutor asked Van Dyke, "Is it your testimony that Laquan never turned his back to you?" Van Dyke answers, "Yes." Prosecutor then asks, "Then how did you shoot him in the back?"
 “We never lost eye contact. Eyes were bugging out, his face was just expressionless,” Van Dyke said, choking up. “He turned his torso towards me . . . He waved the knife from his lower right side upwards across his body towards my left shoulder.” 
“When he did that, what did you do?” defense lawyer Randy Rueckert asked.
“I shot him.”
Jason Van Dyke took the stand yesterday and lied his ass off.  His responses to nearly every question were clearly contradicted by the video -- a video which was withheld from public view by Rahm Emanuel until his election victory was sealed.

His lies, as well as the racist lens through which he viewed his victim, Laquan McDonald,  were there for all to see in this morning's press reports.
Van Dyke: His [Laquan's] face had no expression. His eyes were just bugging out of his head. He had just these huge white eyes, just staring right through me.
 Van Dyke on why he fired 16 shots into Laquan's body: All I could see … I could see him starting to push up, with his left hand, off the ground. I see his left shoulder start to come up. I still see him holding that — that knife with his right hand, not letting go of it. And his eyes are still bugged out. His face has got no expression on it.
Van Dyke: I shot at that knife. I wanted him to get rid of that knife.
Van Dyke: Between the time I stopped shooting and the time I reloaded, the situation had drastically changed... There was no longer a threat by the time I reloaded my weapon and brought it up to the ready position...In those couple of seconds he, um, he had stopped moving.
Despite what amounts to his unsolicited confession, I can't find anyone who thinks Van Dyke will be convicted. The reason? Seven jurors are white. Only one African American on the jury. (How the hell did that happen, prosecutors?) It's hard to imagine all seven (you need all 12 to convict) risking a vote of "guilty" for a white cop murdering a young black man, and then having to go back to their segregated white neighborhoods and face the backlash.

The parallels to the Brett Kavanaugh hearings are obvious, even though Kavanaugh's lies where as transparent as Van Dyke's. The chances of white, male Republican senators violating their centuries-old Gentleman's Agreement and voting "no" on the confirmation are slim to none. This, even after a mini-investigation by the FBI which appears to be a humbug.

The only question left open is, what kind of response will there be from voters in November?

No comments:

Post a Comment

Agree? Disagree? Let me hear from you.