Racism, Speech, And The Law

Recently, you may have heard that a student at Fairfield Warde High School has been arrested for making racially charged comments (1).  Let us discuss this matter forthwith (see Note 1) .  

Now, please don't get me wrong; I regard the specific remark that was made (a word beginning with N, and rhyming with "bigger") as vile, and inherently racist.  It approaches the line between free speech and "hate speech".  Nevertheless, that line was not crossed.  

You see, just because someone utters an insult (or even a remark that is racist in nature), that doesn't necessarily mean that the speaker has engaged in criminal activity.  For this to be the case, the words said must either constitute a "true threat" (to the safety of others), or cause/encourage physical harm to be done to another (2).  

Perhaps I'm wrong, but it seems that in this instance, neither of the two associated tests can be met.  Thus, the speech in question is not "hate speech", but free speech.  

Having discussed the issue surrounding what words were said, let's move on to a secondary issue at play.  

As the US Constitution's Supremacy Clause points out, in cases of conflicts between laws, the Constitution is the superior document (see Note 2) (3).  Consider Title 53 Chapter 939 Section 53-37 of the Connecticut General Statutes.  It specifies that:

"Any person who, by his advertisement, ridicules or holds up to contempt any person or class of persons, on account of the creed, religion, color, denomination, nationality or race of such person or class of persons, shall be guilty of a class D misdemeanor" (4).  

And what does the Connecticut Constitution say about speech? Specifically, it says this:

"Every citizen may freely speak, write and publish his sentiments on all subjects, being responsible for the abuse of that liberty" (5).  

Being that the General Statutes are subordinate to the state constitution, Section 53-37 is effectively unconstitutional, thus null and void.  The Fairfield Police Department doesn't seem to realize or understand this.  

In any event, since the remarks made were not of a criminal nature, this case is a big "oh well".  

As it would have been to refrain from speaking, it was the prerogative of the student in question to make the comments that he allegedly did.  In this, he did nothing that (constitutionally speaking) is criminally wrong.  Therefore, the case should be dismissed, and the student released from police custody.  

Finally, allow me to offer a bit of advice to town law enforcement.  Don't waste the time and money of Fairfielders by going on "fishing expeditions".  Instead, be a little more concerned with actual crimes, such as robberies and auto break-ins.  Perhaps then, the town of Fairfield would be a safer place in which to live and work.  

Questioning the Answers

Hold on to your hats folks, it's time for me to call somebody out.  In this case, that "somebody" happens to be the Fairfield (Connecticut) Police Department.  

Opening up my e-mail this morning, I was shocked and disappointed to learn of a racial incident at Fairfield Warde High School (1).  I'll allow you to read the news story yourself; here's the link.  

Seeking to know more about this case, I have taken it upon myself to ask law enforcement about the content of the message.  Specifically, what was it that was allegedly said? Was the post hate speech, or simply an expression meant to insult someone? 

Here's a screenshot of my correspondence with the police department, presented in link form.  As you can see, police gave me a standard press release regarding the incident, and refused to provide further details (2).  

Saying that I'm disappointed in the department's response would be a bit of an understatement.  If you weren't aware, I'm a long-time resident of the town of Fairfield.  I went to school at Fairfield High School (the immediate predecessor of Warde and Fairfield Ludlowe high schools), and graduated as part of its Class of 2000.  

Moreover, as a concerned citizen, I believe I deserve transparency in town matters.  After all, I have the right to be informed about news happening in my own hometown.  

Having explained my interest in this case, let me directly address the Fairfield Police Department.  

It's obvious that I'm being stonewalled; honestly, I don't understand why that is.  Perhaps I'm incorrect, but there seems to be more to this story than meets the eye.  In any event, it's my right as a citizen to have access to relevant information; this will help me to craft an informed opinion (which I have the right to have) (see Note 1).  

Now, a final thought.  A long time ago, one of my high school teachers told me to not "just answer the questions, question the answers".  That's all I'm doing here.  To "question the answers", I need to know what those answers are....don't you think?

Thoughts on Another Cheating Scandal

If you've been keeping track of sports recently, then you've probably heard about the latest cheating scandal.  

On Saturday, ESPN reports, Kentucky Derby winner Medina Spirit tested positive for "an excessive amount" of steroids.  The failed test has put the result of the Derby in question, and the apparent winner in danger of being disqualified (1).  Right now, the "finger of suspicion" is squarely pointed at Medina Spirit's trainer, Bob Baffert; it's safe to say he's in a bit of hot water.  

You see, in terms of drug tests, this isn't the Hall of Famer's first walk around the block.  In the past year, five of his horses have failed standard tests, including one that was disqualified in September's Kentucky Oaks race.  Therefore, the credibility of racing's most successful trainer has come into question.  

For his part, Mr. Baffert claims that nobody associated with him has ever given a horse betamethasone (the drug that was found to be in Medina Spirit).  Nevertheless, I question if he's being honest.  Baffert offers no explanation as to how his horse could've been contaminated, nor does he express any intent to have a scheduled second test "expedited" (see Note 1).  

Let's be real for a moment.  What we have here is a major cheating scandal, one that could impact the sport of horse racing for years to come.  Knowing this, if Baffert is innocent of the charges, why wouldn't he want to clear his name (not to mention that of the horse) as soon as possible? (2) 

Something's amiss here; thus far, the actions of Mr. Baffert haven't made a lot of sense.  

Having discussed the subject at issue, allow me to state my opinion on the matter.    

It seems to me that at the moment, Bob Baffert is talking out of both sides of his mouth.  I can't say with any certainty whether the trainer cheated; I can only say that if he did, he's in the same boat as the Houston Astros of MLB.  That is, Baffert and Medina Spirit should be (and will be, according to Churchill Downs officials) stripped of their apparent victory, and that win awarded to what is now the runner-up.  

Cheaters should not ever win, whether in horse racing, baseball, or any other endeavor.  That's not simply a personal opinion, it's a fact.  

"We now return you to regular programming, already in progress"

A Head-Scratcher!

Usually, civil lawsuits are not filed for dilatory reasons.  Rather, they address damages allegedly done to the plaintiff, or violations of the plaintiff's rights.  Nevertheless (legal arguments notwithstanding), I don't see the purpose behind a particular case being argued in Antrim County, Michigan.  

The matter at issue is rather complex; it deals with possible election fraud in the county.  In this, a William Bailey alleges that county and state officials failed to follow laws concerning security of votes, thus calling official election results into question (1).  

Here's a quick summary of the events surrounding the vote.  

• November 3, 2020: Presidential election is held.

• November 4: Initial reports from the county show a victory for Joe Biden.  This is later revealed to be an error (caused by a mistake in machine tabulations).  

• November 5: An official report of the Antrim County Supervisor of Elections corrects the error, and show a victory for Donald Trump.  

• November 21: An additional report confirms the result reported on November 5 (subsequently, this result is certified).  

Bear with me here for a moment, as I'm not quite sure how to say what's on my mind.  

The nature of current lawsuits is that many Americans believe that, through fraud, many more votes were given to Biden than he actually won.  Regarding this, concerned citizens are attempting to have official results declared to be invalid, and Trump declared the lawful president.  

In any event, if the plaintiff in this case wishes to effect the above purpose, then bringing legal action against Antrim County is illogical at best.  After all, the county's citizens voted for Trump, as the results indicate and certify (2).  

Now, perhaps I misunderstand the issue, but I'm baffled at this one.  In my opinion, this lawsuit is a frivolous misuse of time and money.  The court would be wise to dismiss the matter.