Talk:Jena Six

The Assault

Your summary is inaccurate. The white student threatened the black students with a loaded gun--a felony. When the black students defended themselves, they were arrested and charged. The charge does not fit the crime. The 6 kids were defending themselves and were lucky to get the loaded firearm away from their attacker.    

- It is also misleading to ignore the catalyst for the racially charged sequence of events in Jena. After three African American student dared to sit under the "white" shade tree (with the blessing of the school principal), three nooses were hung in the tree. This is a clear reference to the south's history of lynching

This sentence is wrong, but I can't seem to edit the page:

"Bailey was hit and kicked by the six and was temporarily knocked unconsious."

That should read:

"Barker was hit and kicked by the six and was temporarily knocked unconsious." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.246.40.5 (talk) 01:52, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. It's been fixed. Ophois 03:52, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

POV problems mostly... This section entitled "The Assault" belittles the acts of the 6 on 1 Assualt - and barely covers what actually happened during the assault. It uses the word group instead of the accurate number of attackers (6) and furthermore, the wording of his injuries belittles the fact that he was found to have a concussion by dismissing it in the same sentence that states he was released 2 hours later. This section also does not state that he was knocked unconscious and then continuously kicked while defenseless/unconscious and on the ground - which belittles the gruesomoe nature of this attack. This section talks too much about everything that is not the assault and too little about the actual assualt. I would propose moving his injuries to a seperate section so that they are not belittled in the current fashion - if his injuries are found to need to be belittled then giving them their own section will show that he was not beaten badly. his injuries having their own section can only lead to a better understanding of what happened that day. I would also propose that the 6 on 1 assault should be called a 6 on 1 assualt instead of a group of students... Also the reported unconcious status of justin barker during the continued "stomping" should be reported as it has been in many news articles around the country. This page is currently suffering from the same problems most news stories about the incident are suffering from - which is over reporting the racial tensions that happened months in advance and were never mentioned in any of the testimonies during the trial, and under reporting the serious nature of the cowardly attack of the 6 on 1 fight and the injuries justin barker recieved as a result of the actions of the jenna 6.

Seeing as there were a ton of conflicing witness testimonies even as to who the attackers were, we can't say that it was six students, hence "group". As for his injuries, they're already listed. It wouldn't make sense to have an entire section for one sentence. However, I will look into rewording the events of the attack. Ophois 04:38, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

I reworded the attack. I also looked up stuff about Barker's injuries, but couldn't find any reliable sources that said more than what is stated here. If you can find a reliable source with more info, I will gladly look over it and add the needed info. The same goes with court testimonies. Though I have read numerous sites about it, none of them can really be considered reliable. Ophois 05:01, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

I managed to find a source with a bit of info. I don't have time to do it now, but I'll add it tomorrow and may end up making a subsection for the injuries. Ophois 05:14, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

You Tube

I recently found out about this case from the YouTube video The Jena 6. The article seems to be overall well sourced, but obviously has some formatting issues and needs significant clean up. Please leave suggestions and commentary. --Coldbourne 00:57, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

What the article fails to mention is that Mychal Bell was convicted of attacking some one a year before the Jena six assault.While on probation for that attack he committed 3 more violent crimes.This would have been his fith conviction for violent crimes and the Judge had taken this into account.Mychal Bell had committed 5 violent crimes at the ages of 15-16. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Quaheedus (talk • contribs) 09:07, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Bell's criminal past has been in the article since it was released... It's under the "Mychal Bell" section of "Trial, prosecution, and legal proceedings". Ophois 18:36, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Article has one aspect backwards

The intial charge was attempted murder, then reduced to aggravated assault. The article has it backwards, but the sources at the bottom, have links that show it was reduced, rather than raised.

Retrieved on 2007-07-26.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jydrules (talk • contribs) 17:43, August 25, 2007 (UTC) 

Actually, the original charges were aggravated assault, but later raised to attempted murder before being lowered again. Ophois 20:43, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

As of Wednesday, August 29, 2007 the number of signatures on petitiononline.com is 114,581.Newlocalculture 06:27, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

So is this article about a CURRENT EVENT absolutely perfect, is that why you can't edit it? Because changing it will only make it worse.

Other references

Can someone add http://www.snopes.com/politics/crime/jena6.asp to this article? Snopes is a decent reference and gives a pretty neutral POV, including some information that the email petition, Facebook group (mentioned in this wiki article), and so forth, do not include. Anonymous ??:??, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Also I think it would be appropriate to link, on on the phrase "attempted 2nd degree murder", attempted to the page on attempted murder and 2nd degree murder to the page on murder, specifically the portion on 2nd degree murder in the us. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.34.170.75 (talk) 09:49, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Dates in the future?

After the section "District Attorney Reed Walters and the "pen statement"" there are dates that are in the future. They need to have the year appended to them--70.156.147.27 18:49, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

What specifically do you want added to the article? Ophois 21:00, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Years, statements such as "The following Monday, December 4" and ..."called an impromptu assembly on September 6..." fail to mention what year these actions took place. It would be wise to add the year to the end (I'm assuming it was in 2006 but I don't know)--65.10.138.74 22:30, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

POV

The six had "a fight with a white teenager"? ONE "white teenager" against six? One kid doesn't get into a fight with six. Sounds suspiciously POV to me. I also question the use of revolutionary rhetoric-style name of the article, "Jena Six" as if they didn't do anything. These are not the Scotsboro Boys.

I'll add a POV tag until we straighten this out.Scott Adler 21:08, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

I changed "fight" to "assaulted". As for the title of the page, that is what they are called. Ophois 21:45, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

i read a newspaper article that seemed to be more in favor of the african-american students as they seemed to be unfairly charged, such as theft for that gun that the caucasian student shouldn't even had in the first place. this article however, seems to portray african-american students in a harsher light, explaining in heavy detail what happened to the white students, while skimming over a lot the african-american who got injured. I'm not african-american so this is def. POV tag-worthy.Adreamtonight 03:53, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

? What are you talking about? What "heavy detail" about the white students are you referring to? And what do you mean that this is POV-worthy because you're not African-American...? Ophois 18:07, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Let's try to keep everything NPOV here, including who's right/who's wrong talk on the discussion page. I think that there are tons of forums/facebook groups out there for that.Dafhgadsrhadjtb 02:26, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

court transcript

....from the first trial. Where is it? It's a matter of public record. Could a Jena Wikipedian (no lols intended) go to the courthouse, copy it, and scan it? 23:55, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Unless it's available online, I don't think we could use it. The info has to be verifiable. Ophois 23:56, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

It is verifiable, at the courthouse. That's why I'm asking someone to verify it. There's no policy that sources have to be online. Dsol —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dsol (talk • contribs) 00:06, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

POV again

It seems to me that the majority of people are bias towards the side of the black students. We really should maintain the the information in the article contains a neutral POV. I would suggest using more neutral POV sources. In reference to that facebook group- it basically contains a bunch of immature students who know nothing about prosecution or law arguing to free the "Jena Six", and I doubt its relevance or even citation is necessary. Deathsythe 18:47, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Other than white supremacy sites, it's gonna be pretty hard to find reliable sources that aren't slightly biased. I think that this article is pretty neutral. Ophois 19:07, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

White supremacy sites are unbiased and reliable sources?Dafhgadsrhadjtb 02:26, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Biased towards the black students. Ophois 03:24, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Bias towards the side of the black students? What 15 year olds do you know that get charged with third degree murder for getting into a school fight but yet 15 year old white students that hung a noose for the "white" tree were not charged with commiting a hate crime because they were considered to be juviniles? Or better yet the 15 year old white student that brought a gun on campus wasn't disciplined? Ignorance is bliss and from your comments Deathsythe I can see you are one happy fellow. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.171.107.252 (talk) 23:01, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

I don't know; I have a vague feeling that we have something in this country called "freedom of speech," which includes symbolic speech. Your move, Hitler. 68.32.238.94 23:13, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Freedom of speech does not include threats which also includes "symbolic threats". Treat people as you would like to be treated. You lost out the moment you called names. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.143.129.81 (talk) 04:04, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

While I agree with a lot of what you said, 71.171.107.252, I would like to point out that it wasn't a fight (as many media sources say), it was an assault. Many media sources are biased towards the black students instead of being neutral (though most news sources are biased in some way). For example, nearly every news source said that the Jena Six had no previous problems with the law, yet it has been shown that Mychal Bell had a history of violent crimes. However, I feel that this article has covered both sides. Ophois 23:52, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

questions

On the surface this story sounds horrible, but I wonder if it's entirely the whole story. Black nationalists and white-guilt liberals LOVE stories like this so they can twist them into simplistic stories of cartoonish cocky evil white racists and poor black victims-and if it happens in the evil south then all the better. Frankly that very well MIGHT be a correct appraisal of events but it seems like everyone has an axe to grind when a story comes up like this, so I never know whats exactly accurate.

To give your viewpoint credibility, it would be best to avoid using stock phrases like "white-guilt liberals", but if you cannot, please follow the guidelines and sign your post. FearlessRahul 13:48, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

I've noticed that none of the sites online fighting for the "Jena 6" have mentioned anything at all about what punishment of the 6 assaulting students should be. Al Sharpton is quoted as saying that the students should be sent back to school, yet he and his supporters believe that the three students who simply hung the ropes from the trees should be expelled? I see this as blatent reverse discrimination, seeing as hospitalizing someone is obviously a much more serious crime than hanging rope from a tree, in that it IS a crime, unlike the latter. How can Sharpton possibly justify releasing the six suspects? Are blacks above the law when it comes to hate crimes? 208.45.168.113 18:39, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, but this isn't a forum. Talk Pages are for discussing the editing of the article. Ophois 18:48, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Punish everyone

Everyone who committed a crime in this case should be punished. The white kids shouldn't have done what they did but even that is not an excuse for the black kids to commit physical assault.Rlevse 02:04, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

There is really no reason for discussion like this on the talk page. We cannot rightly add such viewpoints to the article, as the article has to reflect wikipedia's NPOV stance as should any other encyclopedia's article.Dafhgadsrhadjtb 02:26, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

It is neutral. Would you prefer to punish those in one group and not the other?Rlevse 10:11, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

We're an encyclopedia, not a jury. Dafhgadsrhadjtb's point is that whatever we might personally think about the case, our job on Wikipedia is to present it with a neutral point of view. With that said, I looked at a couple of the references and the article seems to reflect the facts available. The use of Facebook would normally not be valid IMO as a reference; but in this case it's purely illustrating the article's point that a Facebook community is involved in the public response. However, a couple factual references come from activist sites and are IMO non-encyclopedic (e.g. Democracy Now! is a political group).

As far as I can tell, the particular facts referenced can be found in the other sources. The easiest approach is to leave the text and move the citations to more NPOV sources.

Wellspring 15:26, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Eyewitness Testimony: what was it?

Local police reported that the accounts of the white student and black students contradicted each other and formed a report based on testimony taken from eyewitnesses. This resulted in Bailey being charged with three counts: theft of a firearm, second-degree robbery and disturbing the peace. The white student who had produced the weapon was not charged.[1][3]"

I am concerned about the integrity of this part of the article because there is no example of the eyewitness testimony. I feel that without an example, the simple connecting sentence is easily ignored so people jump to one conclusion: racism. Though it may have been due to racism, there may also have been valuable eyewitness testimony that resulted in Bailey being charged for 3 crimes and the white student being charged with nothing. If there is any source where we could pull that information from, it would be pivotal.Dafhgadsrhadjtb 02:49, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

A reference to the witness testimonies are later in the article, but to my knowledge, they haven't released any testimonies. It's only been said that they were conflicting, including some who don't even remember Bell being involved. Ophois 03:26, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Bell's past criminal history

The website in the reference does not exist. —Preceding unsigned comment added by IWikiMe (talk • contribs) 04:48, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. It's been fixed. Ophois 13:41, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

If someone wants to write a summary of what Jason Whitlock presents with regards to Mychal Bell's criminal history. It is somewhat vague, but it does mention his violent criminal history. http://msn.foxsports.com/other/story/7170510Jim 05:52, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

NPR quote with regards to Justin Barker "bragging"

Many news sites seem to contradict what NPR says with regards to Justin Barker bragging. It's been acknowledged that he taunted one of the Jena 6 (more specifically Bailey). The article also seems outdated (July 30) considering the recent influx of facts (which I assume can be attributed to increased national media coverage).Jim 05:50, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Do you have a specific example of a source that contradicts NPR? Ophois 22:14, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Additional information on public defender in Mychal Bell's case

I have added the public defender’s name and specified his race for the following reasons: Since the controversy is about race, it should be acknowledged that the public defender that has been criticized for his handling of Bell’s defense is himself African-American. The source is unchanged, it's the same Chicago Tribune article previously referenced. As it reads now, the article mentions the all-white jury and immediately accuses the public defender of incompetently handling the case. This implies a racial motive on his part, which also makes the mention of his race relevant to presenting a neutral point of view. Typing monkey 19:12, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for adding that, though I reworded it a bit to fit better. Ophois 19:17, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Sept 20 Protest at US Capital, Washington DC

http://mysite.verizon.net/resxrtw0/jena6indc/[[Category:]]

Thanks, but other than that link, I'm unable to find any online reference to it. Do you have a news article or anything that it is mentioned in? Ophois 23:07, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Jena Six Petition

http://www.petitiononline.com/aZ51CqmR/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.165.32.236 (talk) 16:20, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, but that's already in the article.Ophois 21:12, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Did they actually sit under the tree?

A detail of moderate importance that I have found in only one story[1]:

Told by the vice principal they could sit wherever they pleased, the student and his pals sat under the sprawling branches of the shade tree in the campus courtyard.

Does anyone have any info to corroborate this?--macdonja 00:55, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

From what I recall, different news stories seem to have different versions. Ophois 01:36, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

I found some more articles.[2][3]--macdonja 01:18, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll try and look over them tomorrow. Ophois 05:05, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Introduction

Please add this to the introduction:

"The lives of six young black men are being ruined by Jim Crow justice in Jena, Louisiana." —Preceding unsigned comment added by Larie (talk • contribs) 01:43, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Haha no. 75.75.70.176 03:08, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

 Sorry, that's a biased sentence and if you read the rules of Wikipedia you would know we are not allowed to put in biased opinions like that.65.6.123.193 03:20, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Trial, prosecution and legal proceedings

This should be added to this section:

"The District Attorney has refused to protect the rights of Jena's Black population and has turned the police and courts into instruments of intimidation and oppression." Larie 01:46, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, Larie, but Wikipedia is a place for objective facts, not statements such as these that -- no matter how strongly you might believe them -- are opinions and not verifiable by our standards. --SuperNova |T|C| 01:55, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

"White Tree"

Does anyone have a source as to why it's called "the white tree"? It's really simple, and perhaps true, to imply that it's called the white tree because it's where all the white people sit. But my first assumption is still that it has always been called a white tree for some school or taxonomy reason, and that it became a slur because of its scientific title. I have no idea either way, and can't find anything about it. PS NPR's not generally a great source. I'm a fanatical listener, but no matter how hard they try, it is an extremely liberal POV franchise. --Mrcolj 11:48, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

The only references I've seen to it seem to indicate the name is because the White students sat under it. Perhaps someone from Jena will be able to provide further information. CJ 12:45, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Assault with a Deadly Shoe argument

The author of the shoe paragraph obviously thinks the shoe stuff is ridiculous, but the jury did not. Does anyone have any insight as to why one teen's shoes were considered deadly weapons, while, for instance, the other shoes were not? Kicking people unconscious, sadly, happens every day... hasn't this argument then been used before, if not daily, somewhere in America? Can we find a source to explain what's going on? I have to assume one kid had heelies, or steel toed boots, or something... --Mrcolj 11:48, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Haven't you seen Austin powers? That movie sets a strong legal precedent in cases such as these. Dsol 11:54, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

I think most people think the argument is ridiculous. It's being presented in the media as a tactic by the prosecution to increase the severity of the charges. Remember, the aggravated assault charge was a drop down from attempted murder 2. I'm sure the tactic has been tried before several times, just not in the public spotlight. There are a few other things to remember. First up the defense attorney was a public defender who's competence has already been questioned. It's possible that he never filed an objection to the characterization of the shoes as deadly weapons. Secondly, the jury was probably predisposed to convict and that's even before you bring race into the mix. I'm sure we'll see some analysis of this case by professional law journals or in the media. It just will take time and effort to find it.CJ 12:57, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Flow of article

I don't believe anyone can organize this article while it's still a hot topic, but 6 months from now, someone needs to put these paragraphs in a better order. As always, I think the wikipedia is the best place to go for great summary articles on controversial topics, but nevertheless this article is pretty hard to follow from the beginning. I came on here to read it for the third time, because I first read it aloud in my urban public school class, most of whom had not heard of the issue--and not a single student understood what was going on. There are all kinds of subjective side issues about tensions given equal weight to the crime itself. Anyone who reads the article has to walk away wondering what the difference in the six attackers was, why it's as newsworthy as it seems to be, why Bell gets all the press, what the current status really is, etc. Okay, after all that complaining, let me give a summary suggestion: Someone rename the categories so the outline can be read as a chronological summary without reading the article. That's at least how my professors taught me to name subheadings--they should be able to be either skipped entirely or read alone without affecting the flow of the article. --Mrcolj 12:07, 20 September 2007 (UTC)