Justice

As many people are aware, this morning the jury reached a verdict in the trial of Dwight DeLee for the murder of Lateisha Green.  That verdict was that DeLee was guilty of first-degree manslaughter as a hate crime, and of criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree.  I am relieved that the trial ended, and I hope that this verdict brings some small degree of closure to Green's friends and family, who have suffered tremendously in the months since Lateisha's murder.  I'm pleased to see that they have taken some solace in the ruling.

Personally, I am glad to see that the jury recognized that hatred against queer people (although the statute as written and interpreted applies only to actual and perceived sexual orientation) was behind this horrible crime.  I'm not a big fan of the manner in which our society uses prisons as a way of dealing with crime.  I don't feel that longer sentences deter crime.  However, I am tremendously upset that the jury did not recognize this crime for what it was-- murder.  In my opinion, pointing a gun inside a car window and firing represents an intent to kill somebody.  Further, while the jury did find Dwight DeLee guilty of a hate crime, I'm still concerned that the identity of the car's passengers may have impacted the way they viewed the crime.  I'm not a legal scholar, and am not aware of cases of other people who have been shot and killed in a similar manner, but I'd like to think that their cases brought murder convictions.

I don't share the excitement of many trans and LGBT organizations about hate crimes legislation.  I think that it's incredibly important that law enforcement gives a high priority to crimes committed on the basis of bigotry.  There is a long history of law enforcement agencies failing to adequately investigate and prosecute crimes against members of disadvantage groups, or even being complicit in those crimes.  Thankfully, that was far from the case in Syracuse, as it was in Greeley.  I also want the courts, the media and society to acknowledge the violence that occurs against minority communities.  However, I am less enthusiastic about arbitrary and extended sentences that the justice system may misuse.  We must not measure justice in the years of incarceration, but rather in the ability of all people to reach their full potential.

One of the things that struck me during this trial was the state's tremendous ability to wield power over arbitrary matters.  The judge was able to expel people from his courtroom at will, including Lateisha's mother, and just prior to the trial, a baby that was softly whimpering.  There were multiple armed court officers present to enforce the rules of the court.  The judge did not want people sending text messages from his courtroom, and his will was done.  Not only did a court officer demand that I remove my coffee from the courtroom, he also instructed me that it was unacceptable to return with my empty travel mug.  I saw officers confiscate water from members of the gallery.  In fact, the only way for those of us in the gallery to get water was to have a coughing fit, upon which time the judge might nod to an officer, who would pour and deliver a paper cup filled with court approved water to the parched observer.  Inside the courthouse and inside the courtroom, it was clear who held the power.

Everything that I mentioned above is, in my opinion, defensible at some level.  I don't mean to paint a picture of anything other than seasoned, courteous officials who were executing their duties.   Rather, my point is that there were lots of arbitrary rules, and that the county invested individuals with the power and resources to ensure that people followed those rules.

There was one rule that struck me as indefensible.  This was the insistence by attorneys, the judge, and government witnesses in referring to Lateisha Green by her legal name and male pronouns.  I understand that this practice wasn't personal per se.  As the victim of this crime, Green wasn't present, and official documents listed a name and gender that by all accounts, she didn't identify with.  However, identity is personal, almost tautologically so.  The whole business might have struck me as a silly game, were it not for the impact that it had.  Because of the bizarre legal requirements set up by a cissexual establishment, Lateisha Green all but vanished from a trial about her very death, and yes, very identity.  I find it tragically ironic that during the very trial where a young man was found guilty of killing Lateisha Green because of his profound disrespect for her identity, the legal system disrespected Ms. Green in its own way.  This delegitimizing of Lateisha's identity certainly did nothing to dissuade much of the local media from insisting on using her birth name and refusing to accept her womanhood in its coverage.  To me, the whole trial consisted of one big mixed message-- what I took from the government witnesses, the attorneys and the judge (whatever their intent) was that they believed killing a human being was wrong, regardless of how "different" they might be.  I suppose this is progress for trans people, but it's hardly an out-and-out victory.

As I've said, the authorities have shown that they are capable of displays of power for multiple ends, be it maintaining an orderly courtroom, or ensuring the sanctity of legally acceptable identities.  The issue is that real justice often isn't found in a courtroom.  Lateisha Green's family complained that she had been bullied and harassed throughout the four years following her coming out.  They had complained to school officials, and others, but I'm not sure that anyone ever lifted a finger to stop this bullying.  Green's mother reported hearing nasty comments in the courtroom.  I heard rumors of the harassment of LGBT friends of the Green family in the hallway outside of the courtroom.  I saw that the news media has footage of a fight between the Green and DeLee families outside of the courthouse.  What I did not hear about was any of numerous court officials stepping in to stop this harassment.

Don't get me wrong, the district attorney is looking into allegations of witness intimidation.  They appear to be taking Mark Cannon's statement that he was threatened with a gun seriously.  This morning, there was a very visible police presence outside the courthouse, presumably to prevent any violence.

It's not that people in power aren't doing their jobs, it's that their job descriptions are wrong.  Prevention of violence needs to be proactive, not reactive.  Those in power need to use their actions to affirm the value of all human beings.  This means taking bullying seriously.  This means speaking up.  If we're ever going to get to the just society that so many people surrounding this trial spoke of, we're going to need that same establishment that so ably controlled the flow of courtroom water to respect people's identities.  We need school teachers to take bullying seriously, rather than participating in it.  We need citizens to speak up when they see injustice.

I know that there are court cases to be heard and legislative battles to be fought, but let's not wait that long.  Justice isn't just about using the system to protect ourselves-- it's about fighting to replace an arbitrary system with one that values the dignity of all human expression.  Judging from the leadership that Lateisha's friends and family and members of the near-Westside community have shown, we're already on the road to that point.

---

I may add links later; at this point I'm looking for (and writing because) I need a certain degree of closure myself.  I definitely need to take a break (starting now) to spend some time with my family, my hobbies and my career.  However, watching these painful events unfold has certainly galvanized my desire to become a more effective advocate for change within our community.

Limited Personal Comments on Day 2 of the Lateisha Green trial

I’m going to be fairly limited in what I post about the trial for a number of reasons.  First, I don’t want to overshadow the public statements of Lateisha Green’s friends and family by replaying the minutae of the trial.  Along those lines, there are a number of non-profit, activist groups who are putting out responsible, carefully-worded and important statements about events surrounding the trial.  Second, I don’t quite feel right about retelling all of the details of the evening of November 14, 2008 to the broader world.  Frankly, I don’t enjoy hearing most of the details.  I’m fairly sure that all parties touched by the events aren’t particularly thrilled about reliving that night, much less about having the details retold over-and-over on the internet.  I would rather leave it to those more intimately tied to the murder of Lateisha Green and the subsequent criminal proceedings to post any such details, were they to deem it appropriate.

Before I make my limited observations, I’d also like to comment about my presence at the trial.  I wrestled with whether or not to attend the trial, and whether or not to blog about it.  I’ve been attending the proceedings because I take the murder of Lateisha Green personally.  I’ve dealt with adversity in my life as a trans person—far less adversity than many (if not most) transsexual people deal with, yet far more than is acceptable.  I’m familiar with the sobering stories of many trans friends, acquaintances and strangers.  Listening to accounts by Green’s family, I am struck by how much love and support she was surrounded with, and how full of life she must have been.  Based on what I’ve heard, it seems to me that in many ways Lateisha Green had a support network that many trans people would be envious of—the sort of support than all human beings deserve.  Yet this was not enough to protect Lateisha from harassment and violence.  I cannot tell you how much this saddens me.  I am attending the trial because I’m hoping that the addition of one more person in the gallery will be a small gesture of support to Lateisha’s friends and family during this difficult time, and because my publically taking notice of the trial sends a message to the community that one more person takes violence (violence writ large, violence against trans people, and violence against a trans person, Lateisha Green) seriously.  I also want to verify that the criminal justice system not only takes the tragic taking of Lateisha Green seriously, but also that those involved do justice to Lateisha by respecting her identity.

Here are comments on three things:

The use of names and pronouns

Throughout testimony for the prosecution that I witnessed (prior to 3:30 p.m.), authorities (multiple police officers, an EMT, and a medical examiner) referred to Ms. Green by her birth name, and used male pronouns in reference to her.  The prosecution and defense did likewise.

I’m not sure what I’d expect, given that Ms. Green’s birth name was also her legal name.  I never met Ms. Green and am loathe to ascribe her with an identity based on my experiences, although given statements from her family that she had been living as Teish for 4 years, and their consistent use of female pronouns in reference to her, this use of names and pronouns troubles me.  I don’t want to speculate about the degree to which the usage of names and pronouns is due to cissexual perspectives on gender, or the degree to which the hate crimes designation is a consideration in how the prosecution has treated Ms. Green’s identity.

Clothing

When asked by the defense whether he noticed anything about Lateisha Green in respect to her sexuality, a police officer refered to her as a man dressed “flamboyantly” and as ‘a man dressed as a woman.’  During cross-examination, the defense discussed the specific clothing Ms. Green was wearing when the officer was observing her medical treatment, and stated that the clothing was not “flamboyant.”

While discussing the external portion of the autopsy, the chief county medical examiner gave a description of Lateisha Green’s underwear, followed by the observation that the sizing of said underwear was consistent with a woman’s undergarment.  The defense objected to this statement, which led to a conference at the bench, after which the prosecution and witness moved on to other subjects.

I’m not going to deconstruct all of this, but again, I personally find all of the above statements troubling.  In my opinion, popular depictions of trans women frequently pay undue attention to details of clothing, particularly undergarments.  The term "flamboyant", and phrase 'man dressed as a woman' are, in my opinion, very loaded.  Presumably, much of this testimony and the back-and-forth about it is related to the hate crimes charge.

A point about an EMT

One of the police officers on the scene testified that an EMT who was treating Ms. Green hesitated after cutting away her shirt revealed a bra.  The officer testified that he told the EMT to keep going, and that Ms. Green was a man.

It’s important to note that the hesitation that the witness mentioned was inconsequential in terms of the medical treatment that Ms. Green received.  There was no discussion of or elaboration on the length of the presumably momentary hesitation.  Again, in light of other testimony during the trial, I see this hesitation as inconsequential with respect to the trial, and Ms. Green's death.  However, as a transsexual woman living in Syracuse, I find this testimony deeply troubling.  I see obvious parallels (and differences) with the death of Tyra Hunter.  Again, I don’t want to make mountains out of molehills, but I’d also prefer to believe that one’s gender identity and expression does not impact the quality of emergency medical care that one receives.

There were lots of other developments today, but I’m assuming that TDLEF or others will touch on them.  I’m not in a mood to discuss all of the minutiae of the trial, and I also don’t want to discuss things that I’m not prepared to discuss in an unemotional manner.