The Oscar Grant Verdict and Aftermath

When people say “there’s no such thing as a fair trial,” they’re right and they’re wrong. Those of us who don’t work in courtrooms sometimes forget that the law is an extremely complicated series of if/then operators. So while emotionally and intellectually it’s perfectly reasonable to be astounded that a (white) police officer can be convicted of involuntary manslaughter (by an all-white jury) for having shot (in the back) an unarmed (black) person (who was face-down on the ground), there is at least some logic to it in a legal sense. This is a good short primer on California law and voluntary and involuntary manslaughter-the “voluntary” charge involves provocation and passion. The conclusion being that, in this case and others like it, the law is not made for these situations: “Any result from a criminal justice proceeding will fall far short of the consequences that would truly constitute justice. Inherently. Intentionally.” In Oakland last night, after the verdict, a largely peaceful planned protest was only somewhat marred by a conflict of agendas between different groups. A smaller anti-capitalist splinter group was interested in the tactic of violence against property-while a much larger group was interested in a peaceful opposition to a verdict that literally could not do justice to the crime. One of those groups received more attention from the media, which as an entity could not quite bring itself to make any differentiation between the two.