+0000c31obeWed, 02 Jul 2008 18:52:59 +0000 5, 2006

HOME FROM THE MILITARY: WOMEN OF COLOR

July/August 2008
 
 
Women of color in the military have to face more than just engaging the enemy they have enlisted to fight. Race and gender loom predominantly in their lives of active duty while serving their country.They also have to fight against a callous military which turns away from rape of women soldiers, disregard for the racial animus that all women of color are subjected to, and a non-caring VA back home in America, when they are discharged from the military. Add to this the women veterans who are injured and have lost limbs, WOC in the U.S. military suffer to hell and back in the service of their country, as this ColorLines article states. A third of female veterans are women of color. Here are three of their stories. Click here for: AUDIO: Listen to clips of two women’s stories about returning home.
 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 
HOME FROM THE MILITARY
 
 
“I really wanted to prove that I was just as good and just as strong and just as capable as all the boys.”
 
 
WHEN KRISTINA MCCAULEY LOOKS BACK on her time in boot camp, one scene sticks out: she’s standing in the sun as blood flows down her wrist, hoping no one will notice her among the rows of trainees chanting and brandishing bayonets.
 
Thinking back, she’s not sure why she grabbed her weapon the wrong way during that drill. But when she saw that the bayonet on her rifle had sliced cleanly across her hand, she knew calling for help would only invite her drill sergeants to make her life more miserable.
 
“I was just standing out there in the heat of the day and bleeding and trying to be quiet about it,” she recalled later in an interview. Soon, a female drill sergeant came over to berate her for her stupidity—as a lesson to the other trainees—and tossed a few bandages at her.
 
Today, McCauley, a half-Japanese lesbian, has a degree in international peace studies. She’s not your “typical” veteran. As a mixed-race girl with a boyish streak in a straight-laced suburb, McCauley signed up for the military hoping “to belong somewhere.” The service promised respect, power and a chance to test her physical and mental limits.
 
But putting on the greens didn’t bring the transformation she had sought. Instead, she discovered the Army’s veneer of uniformity masks deep fault lines of culture, class and sexuality. She eventually emerged from the military’s rigid hierarchy to embrace what she had tried to escape—by reconnecting with her Japanese heritage, coming out to her family and reorienting her political perspective.
 
“I made a conscious effort to educate myself more deeply,” she said. “I began to study race, sexuality and gender, with a hope to understand my own place in the world more clearly.”
 
As a woman of color who had negotiated the military power structure her entire career, she believed her commander, a white woman, was orchestrating systematic discrimination to ensure that whites controlled the unit.
 
McCauley’s quest resonates throughout the growing ranks of military women of color. Though their decision to enlist is often inspired by hopes of self-empowerment, they may quickly stumble on a landscape of familiar impediments where the rules of race and gender still dictate who fights, who wins and who suffers.
 
There are about 200,000 active-duty military women today, some 14 percent of the total force, according to federal data. About half of them are women of color. Women of color also now make up around a third of former service members. Of a little more than 1.7 million women veterans nationwide, about 19 percent are Black and 7 percent are Latina. Asian American, Pacific Islander, American Indian and mixed-race women each comprise up to 2 percent or less. Proportionally, people of color comprise a greater share of female veterans than of male veterans.
 
Women of color, like others, are drawn into the armed forces by both needs and ideals. Some are spurred by patriotism or a desire for adventure; others just want a stable job or money for college. Whatever their economic or social motives, the recruitment rhetoric pushed to youth across the country markets the military as a way out of their current circumstances and on toward where they need to go.
But the soldier’s path leads many women of color back to where they started—to the turbulence and entrenched discrimination besetting their home communities. And for some, the journey veers unexpectedly toward a new political consciousness.
 
Maricela Guzman, a Latina Navy veteran who now works as a counter-recruitment activist in California, urges youth of color to look past the sales pitch of economic opportunity.
 
“You’re going to this environment thinking you’re going to make all this money,” she warned, “but you’re going back to a system that is going to keep you down.”
 
For many young people, spending a 21st birthday in boot camp would be a sobering experience. But Eli PaintedCrow had grown up early; passing a birthday in the Army was one way to ensure her children would spend theirs under better circumstances.
 
She joined the Army to get off welfare and support her young sons. She also sought a kind of camaraderie she never had growing up in the barrios of San Jose, estranged from her ancestral community, the indigenous Yaqui Nation.
“It really did make me feel like I belonged somewhere and that I could be good at something,” she said.
 
As a fresh Navy recruit a few weeks into basic training, Maricela Guzman shouldn’t have been surprised to find herself facedown on the floor, frantically doing push-ups. She had not followed proper procedure for addressing a commander in his office—knocking before entering and asking permission to speak. Accordingly, he told her to “drop” as punishment. 
 
But while the penalty was routine, the circumstances were not: she had come to tell him she had been raped.
 
Before she could say anything, though, she had to repeat the drill to her commander’s satisfaction. “I think it was 20 minutes later after I was able to do it right,” she said. “And I was so numb afterwards that I couldn’t even say anything.”
 
In the late 1990s, Guzman, a child of Mexican immigrants, was getting back to her education at a Los Angeles community college after leaving high school to work, when a young Black man approached her and told her enthusiastically about the Navy. Guzman researched the military’s education benefits and grilled the recruiter on what the service would be like. In the end, she signed up, confident she wasn’t making her decision blindly.
 
But she never saw him coming.
 
One night at boot camp, on watch duty, she recalled, “I passed a dark corner, somebody grabbed me, and I was raped.” Though she only caught a glimpse of her attacker in the darkness, she said, “It had to be one of the drill sergeants. Just the type of uniform that he had.”
 
After being thwarted in her attempt to come forward within a few days of the incident, Guzman fell silent. Her commanders eventually noticed she was acting withdrawn, but to them, it just showed that she needed more discipline. So they intensified her work routines and upbraided her even more harshly before her peers. “They thought that that was the best thing for them to do—to break me down,” she said.
 
Guzman tried to cope on her own by immersing herself in her job as an information systems technician. Working nonstop, she garnered various service awards and became, on paper, a model soldier.
 
“The only way I could think of surviving,” she said, “was to make myself tired enough where I couldn’t think about things.”
 
One of the military’s open secrets is the prevalence of sexual coercion. Screenings of female veterans at Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) medical facilities indicate that about one in five has experienced sexual assault. Meanwhile, advocates believe just a tiny fraction of survivors come forward as they wrestle under a culture of enforced conformity.
 
Racial rifts add another social dimension to military sexual abuse.
Demographic data is scarce, but the Pentagon’s 2006 survey of workplace and gender relations among active-duty military indicates people of color generally experienced sexual harassment at somewhat higher rates than whites.
 
In recent years, the Pentagon has sought to address the issue through awareness training and prevention programs and by enhancing services for victims. The VA has stepped up treatment programs for assault and harassment survivors.
 
Yet the intimidation is hard to shatter. Though survivors can technically make a “restricted” report, without command or law enforcement being notified, advocates argue that confidentiality means little for a woman who must live and work alongside her assailant and the assailant’s friends. Aside from the threat of retaliation, in a volatile combat situation, commanders may be reluctant to disrupt operations by investigating or removing personnel.
 
Another deterrent may be the investigation process itself, as victims feel put on the defensive by criminal investigators’ scrutinizing and lengthy interrogations.
 
Last fiscal year, according to the Pentagon, the military completed nearly 2,000 criminal investigations based on sexual assault reports, resulting in punitive commander action for about 1,172 people. For hundreds of other alleged offenders, commanders did not take action for various reasons, including “insufficient evidence,” “unfounded” allegations, “victim recanted” or obstacles in the legal process. Some cases were routed to the civilian legal system; sometimes, the accused was listed as “unidentified.”
 
In 2002, Guzman left the Navy and crashed into reality.
 
“I’d thought I was superwoman at one time,” she said, “where I could do everything and do amazing work.” But in the civilian world, depression and anxiety made it impossible to hold down a job or pursue her college goals.
Her marriage—to another Navy member whom she had clung to as “somebody who was safe enough”—soon disintegrated. Unable to support herself, she moved back home with her family after living apart from them for years. Her emotional descent bottomed out in the summer of 2004 when hoping to finally bury her trauma, she crammed her body with sleeping pills.
 
“I thought I was crazy, and I didn’t connect that [to the rape],” she said. “I didn’t know what was going on with me.”
 
The problem that Guzman could not yet name was part of an epidemic that has ensnared tens of thousands of veterans. Post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is commonly associated with combat but frequently emerges in the aftermath of sexual abuse, as well.
 
Relatively little research has focused on military women’s unique PTSD risks. VA researchers working with women veterans in Texas, however, found that survivors of military sexual assault were nine times more likely to suffer from PTSD than a comparison group without assault histories, yet they received fewer healthcare services.
 
Guzman’s recovery process has been both helped and hindered by the VA system. She currently receives therapy through her local VA facility’s free treatment program for sexual trauma survivors. But last year, she said, the VA denied her claim for PTSD-related veterans benefits, apparently due to insufficient evidence that her assault was responsible for her mental health problems.
 
Guzman reads the rejection as an ironic sign that her emotional camouflage worked too well. “Because I had such a great record and was one of the top soldiers in the service,” she said, “that proved to them that this could not happen to me.”
 
While the claim system overall is over-stretched, crippled by mounting backlogs, advocates say the problem is especially devastating for sexual trauma survivors, as many claims are unfairly denied because VA staff lack the training to follow appropriate procedures for evaluating their complex cases.
 
The VA system folds into a minefield of challenges besieging veterans as they transition back to civilian life. For women coming home to marginalized communities, reintegration means confronting both personal trauma and structural inequality.
 
“You program individuals to go into the military, but you don’t deprogram them when they come out,” said Wendy McClinton, an Army veteran and executive vice president of New York–based Black Veterans for Social Justice. Without adequate support, “they don’t transition properly. They just walk away. And…if you don’t deal with it, then it will manifest itself later on.”
 
When PaintedCrow retired after Iraq, her body bore the scars of a uterine problem that had been left untreated, and her mind reeled with depression and anger. As she strained to regain stability, her younger son struggled with a brain injury suffered while he was in the military. But the VA claim process dragged on for so long, she said, she resorted to public assistance in the interim to support herself—returning to the same poverty that had pushed her to enlist a generation earlier.
 
In remote native communities, PaintedCrow said, veterans contend with broken social service systems, while VA programs in many areas ignore healing methods rooted in indigenous cultures, like traditional ceremonies and sweat lodges.“You go, you serve, they honor you and you come back. And then nobody talks about what happened,” she said. “And the nearest VA is maybe a hundred miles away, so you’re not going to go…So yeah, you’re going to start drinking, you’re going to start acting out in other ways that are going to put you in prison.”
 
The women who are part of Black Veterans for Social Justice come home to face crises ranging from unemployment to psychological breakdown to homelessness. Some women have had to go months without medical care while wading through the claim process, McClinton said. Others are so disenchanted with the military that they simply refuse to access VA entitlements and services.
 
While transitional issues affect both male and female veterans, she noted, women are acutely vulnerable in many cases because they are the primary income earners and caregivers for their children. And in the current wave of veterans of the U.S. wars on Iraq and Afghanistan, mothers are returning to unprecedented challenges.

“Women are coming back from Iraq without limbs,” she said. “How do I hold the child that I left when I don’t have arms?”

 
Though the military system revolves around social control, it unfurls a spectrum of emotion among individual members. For women of color who serve, shades of pride, bitterness and ambivalence can merge into a deeper sense of identity. As the daughter of a white Irish-American father and a Japanese-American mother, McCauley often strained to fit into her mostly white, San Francisco–area suburb, Pleasant Hill.
 
“I was raised not really reflecting too much upon my own race, and in fact there was actually shame involved around being different,” she said. The pull toward assimilation has historical undercurrents in the Japanese-American community; during World War II, McCauley’s mother spent part of her childhood at a military internment camp in Arizona.
 
She and her brother grew up enduring taunts from other children, and as she approached her teens, her first crush on a girl made her feel even more like an outsider. By the time she reached college, she was looking to flee by joining the 82nd Airborne Division.
 
While money for school was an enticement, so was her drive to “do something that no other women did.”
 
A tomboy throughout her youth, she said, “I really wanted to prove that I was just as good and just as strong and just as capable as all the boys.”
 
She remembers the thrill of landing her qualifying parachute jump at Airborne School at Fort Benning, Georgia, and receiving a validating handshake from a fellow paratrooper who was male. But there was also the sting she later felt after a botched jump at her duty station in Fort Bragg, North Carolina. An equipment problem forced her to drop some of her gear in mid-air to ensure her chute would open, drawing the ire of a senior noncommissioned officer. He seemed bent on blaming her gender, she recalled, hurling a tirade about “all the reasons why women shouldn’t be in the military,” with comments like, “You’re not capable, you shouldn’t be here, you’re holding us back.” He pointedly relayed those sentiments via radio to her company commander.
 
The gender hierarchy tightened its grip when McCauley faced an unplanned pregnancy, with little help from her then-boyfriend, another Army member. Operating policy obligated her to disclose her pregnancy, and her chain of command sent her to the unit’s chaplain, though she was not religious. His stern lecture against having an abortion—pushing for adoption instead—left her feeling “angry and extremely isolated.”
 
“It made the situation even worse for me,” she said, “because I was 22 at the time and extremely confused and just really ashamed.” She arranged an abortion on her own and kept it a secret from her family for years.
 
In 1997, after three years of service during which she suffered a breakdown from job-related stress, McCauley resolved to not only break out of the military’s institutional repression but also sever the restraints she had long imposed on herself.
 
Since then, McCauley has traveled outward—nomadically roaming the country for a time in a Volkswagen—and deeper inside—embracing her sexual identity and seeking to own the mixed-race background she once banished.
 
As the community of military women of color expands, it draws together parallel political crosscurrents at home and abroad.
 
Margaret Stevens, a Black New Jersey native who served several years in the National Guard to help pay for college, acknowledged that Black women may see the military as an economic springboard. But in reality, she said, “the military reproduces the same socioeconomic inequalities that are in the civilian world.”
 
Last year, Guzman, PaintedCrow, McCauley and Stevens helped form the Service Women’s Action Network (also known as SWAN), an organizing project focused on active-duty and veteran women.
 
While not aligned with the mainstream antiwar movement, SWAN aims to raise awareness about military issues, particularly among young women of color. Partnering with the Women of Color Resource Center, a California-based grassroots group, SWAN has developed educational programs that highlight personal stories of military women’s struggles with discrimination, psychological trauma or benefits that fell short of what was promised.
In her outreach work with SWAN, McCauley tries to help women make more informed decisions about enlisting than she did. Still, she knows it’s ultimately their choice.
 
“If given another chance, I would do it all over again.” she said. Though the Army had negative aspects, “I see all my experiences as opportunities for growth and change. I’m the person I am today because of them.”  Guzman does counter-recruitment work with the religious activist organization American Friends Service Committee to reach youth of color in Los Angeles neighborhoods like the one she grew up in. Talking publicly about her struggles in the military has helped her heal personally, she said, while encouraging youth to link violence and economic stratification in their communities with the inequalities girding the military system.
 
Yet voices like Guzman’s are seldom heard in the public dialogue on militarism. Despite the looming military presence in communities of color, she said, “You really don’t see the peace activists or the antiwar movement in South Central L.A.”
 
“As women veterans of color are coming back,” she said, “it’s very difficult for them to find a space to voice their experience, even within the antiwar movement.”
 
Fusing self-expression with activism has helped PaintedCrow salve her battle wounds. She is currently organizing Turtle Women Rising, a pro-peace gathering to be held in Washington, D.C., in October. Led by indigenous women, the event will center on prayer and traditional concepts of healing.
 
She distinguishes between peace initiatives and mainstream antiwar campaigns. In her view, conventional activists have fixated on criticizing the current administration’s policies and promoting a “for or against” mentality, rather than raising consciousness about underlying inequities that sow military violence.
 
PaintedCrow and other SWAN activists trace a different front line, stretching from embattled Iraqi villages to blighted American streets. “The problem lies in many places,” she said. “The problem lies in the racism that is still in our nation. The problem lies in the separation of issues.”
 
In indigenous communities, she noted, many youth enlist in hopes of rekindling their past warrior traditions. But, having witnessed both sides of the military’s human toll, she said, “I think it’s another illusion that they value, that being a warrior and a soldier are the same. A soldier takes orders. A warrior does things with heart.”

Michelle Chen is a writer in New York City.
 
 

+0000c31obeWed, 02 Jul 2008 17:49:04 +0000 5, 2006

RACIAL DIVIDE IN WALLER COUNTY STIRRED BY BURIAL OF MURDER VICTIM

Wednesday, July 02, 2008 | 5:41 AM
More than a year ago, an unidentified woman’s body was found on a road, her dark hair shorn off, a plastic bag taped around her head, her hands severed. She had been strangled and tossed away by her killer.
 
Today, the crime remains unsolved, the murder victim’s name is still unknown and efforts to bury her have set off controversy in Waller County — a rural area just west of Houston that is long roiled by racial divisions.
 
The victim is white, while the funeral home and cemetery that a justice of the peace initially chose to handle her burial in Hempstead are historically black.
 
But Waller County Commissioners Court balked at paying for that burial. When activists started raising questions about the county’s hesitation at burying the woman in a black cemetery, the commissioners asked a white-owned funeral home in Waller to handle arrangements.
 

That outraged Walter Pendleton, a local black minister who filed a federal lawsuit against the city of Hempstead that forced it to integrate its public cemeteries.
 
“I’m just appalled right now. I can’t believe this county stooped that low,” he said. “The county overstepped its boundary to get a white funeral home to pick up the body so that it could not be buried in a black cemetery.”
 
The victim would be the first known white person buried in a black cemetery in Waller County. Since March 25, Waller County has paid neighboring Harris County $50 a day to store the body.
 
“I have never seen such defiance and determination to protect a segregated system,” said DeWayne Charleston, the Waller County justice of the peace who first ordered the black funeral home to handle the arrangements.
 
Judge Owen Ralston, the county’s top elected official, denied that racial issues were at play. “I didn’t know if the victim was black or white, and I didn’t care,” Ralston said.
 
Rather, he attributed the delay in burial to the black funeral home director’s insistence that the county sign a letter guaranteeing payment. Ralston said that went against county policy, and instead contacted another funeral home to handle the arrangements.
 
The white-owned funeral home picked up the woman’s body on Monday — the same day community activists sent out a news release calling attention to the situation.
 
That a nameless murder victim’s burial is stirring claims of racial discrimination is not surprising in Waller County.
 
In 2006, the Texas Attorney General investigated claims that the rights of black voters were violated. Earlier this year, students at historically black Prairie View A&M University protested to bring attention to racially motivated voting problems in Waller County.
 
“The issue of racism always raises its head here — from voting rights to education, to the criminal justice system,” Charleston said. “Waller County is stuck in the 19th century.”
 
Charleston said he wasn’t trying to cause trouble when he ordered the black funeral home to handle arrangements for the woman. He was simply struck by the brutality of the crime and the poignancy of a murder victim with no family to claim her.
 
“You never know what her circumstances were. She could be from Texas and estranged from her family. She could be the victim of human trafficking,” Charleston said. “She’s certainly entitled to a dignified burial no matter what the circumstances. I’m treating her as though she is a kin of mine.”
 
The woman’s nude and mutilated body was found on a Prairie View road just before dawn on March 18, 2007. She is believed to be between 30 and 50 years old, and was likely killed at another location, then dumped on the roadside, police say.
 
“It was gruesome and that no one identified her or claimed her makes it more horrific,” Charleston said. “I thought that this woman, if nothing else, was going to have the distinction of integrating Waller County cemeteries.”
      
(Copyright ©2008 by The Associated Press.)
 
 

+0000c31obeWed, 02 Jul 2008 14:36:10 +0000 5, 2006

FUCK YOU TREE

 

 

Fuck You Tree; 2007. Graphite on paper, 30″ x 40″. Artist: Eric Beltz

+0000c31obeWed, 02 Jul 2008 00:18:43 +0000 5, 2006

THE ENDANGERED MACAWS OF COSTA RICA

 

 
Next

  Endangered Macaws  


A pair of scarlet macaws that are part of a breeding program sit in the ZooAve Center for the Rescue of Endangered Species in La Garita, Costa Rica, Jan. 29, 2008. Endangered scarlet macaws born in captivity are reproducing in the wild for the first time in Costa Rica’s southern Pacific coast. (Photo: AP Photo/Kent Gilbert)

+0000c31obeWed, 02 Jul 2008 00:04:46 +0000 5, 2006

CALIFORNIA TO INTEGRATE SEGREGATED PRISONS

When an inmate who is not black enters Will Williams’ cell for the first time at San Quentin State Prison in Northern California, one of the last forms of legalized segregation will come to an end.
San Quentin
(Justin Sullivan/Getty Images)
 
 
In a case that went as high as the U.S. Supreme Court, California’s prisons must begin racially integrating their cells this month. Integration goes against an unwritten code of conduct among San Quentin inmates, which says they must never communicate with other races.
 
 
Click here to listen to a radio report by ABC News’ Alex Stone about the San Quentin integration.
 
 
Inmates and guards admit they are nervous about the changes because so much of the violence inside the walls of the prison, which sits on the rocky shore of the San Francisco Bay, is caused by racial tensions.
 
“I just don’t think it’s going to really work because everybody is so against it,” said Williams, who has been locked up at San Quentin for 35 years on a kidnapping and robbery conviction. “The whites are saying they don’t want blacks, and the blacks are saying they don’t want whites.”
 
 
Related
 
 
Until now, most California prisons, including San Quentin, have been segregated in order to keep the peace. Guards say nearly every inmate in the prison is in a gang. The gangs only recruit their own races, and when the races meet it can often result in deadly violence.
It is hard for outsiders to understand the gang lifestyle inside the prisons.
 
“We have the whites and they’re not even allowed to talk to blacks,” said Officer Jamie Allejos, who watches over inmates in San Quentin’s B Block. “We’ve got guys who get beat up just for talking to another race or sharing food with another inmate.”
 
The integration is the result of a 1995 lawsuit filed by a black inmate in California who claimed being segregated infringed upon his rights. The case eventually made its way to the U.S. Supreme Court, which handed it down to a federal mediation court. Both sides agreed to integrate the cells.
 
Allejos made it very clear that he believes integrating the cells will lead to increased violence.
 
“The guys who are making these decisions don’t know nothing about prison. I think the people who are making these decisions should come here for six months and find out the conditions in here,” Allejos said.
 
Some California prisons will begin integrating this month, but the races will not be fully integrated inside San Quentin until next year because racial issues are so complex at the prison housing California’s only death row.
 
On the fourth floor of one of the prison’s cell blocks, Scott Williams, who is known to inmates and guards as “Speedy,” studies his law books alone in a cell. Williams used to be what other inmates have dubbed a “shot caller” — essentially a gang leader who directs members of the Aryan Brotherhood. Guards claim Williams has killed two inmates himself.
 
Speaking through bars and fencing, Williams explained to ABC News how he would have directed his members to attack other races if they were ever put in the same cell.
 
“There’s many rules that people have to follow in prison, and to integrate these people who have been fighting each other for so long is going to be an extreme problem,” Williams said.
Despite the negative views about integration among some inmates and guards, experts point to Texas as an example of where the practice has been successful. That state’s prisons integrated in the 1990s and, in time, violence was reduced within the lockups.
 
When the integration begins in California, it will not be blind. Even though race will no longer be a factor in deciding which cells inmates live in, the California Department of Corrections will evaluate a number of other factors, including street gang affiliation, mental stability, age and size.
 
California Department of Corrections spokeswoman Terry Thornton said her staff is prepared for the integration and she does not expect any major problems.
 
“Some inmates are going to be restricted to their own race because they were either the perpetrator or victim of a racially motivated incident,” Thornton said.
 
If inmates refuse to integrate, they will be penalized. In most cases those who will not mix with other races will be sent to solitary confinement for 90 days. Some inmates, like David Glover, who has been at San Quentin for four months on a burglary conviction, said they would rather be penalized than be forced to integrate.
 
“Not because I have a problem with other races, but because every race has a shot caller and you have to obey the rules,” Glover said.
 
But not all inmates believe they have the option to refuse integration. Will Williams is trying to get parole and if he does not allow an inmate of another race into his cell, he fears he will lose his chances at parole.
 
“Going home is the most important thing,” Williams said. “Regardless of whatever else happens, that’s first, so if I have to put up with somebody coming into the cell who’s a different race, if that’s what I have to do to get out of here, hey, at least maybe I’ll be going home.”
 
 
 

+0000c31obeTue, 01 Jul 2008 22:15:55 +0000 5, 2006

SOLANGE: “I DECIDED”

+0000c31obeTue, 01 Jul 2008 19:21:52 +0000 5, 2006

THE CASTLE DOCTRINE LAWS

With the case of Joe Horn of Pasadena, Texas in the news lately, (and especially late last year, when news of his shooting two unarmed burglars broke, and when I first posted on this story, http://kathmanduk2.wordpress.com/2007/11/17/putting-property-above-human-life/ ), many people may have questions on the concept of “Castle Doctrine Law”, so I decided to post on this little known law of self defense, and how it differs from other laws of self defense.
 
Many people are not familiar with the ‘Castle Doctrine Law’ (also known as
‘No duty to retreat if in home law’ ( in Texas it is know as ‘Stand your ground law/no duty to retreat anywhere’ law). The law differs from state-to-state, and some states do not have the Castle Doctrine on their law books. The law takes its moniker from the phrase:  “A man’s (or woman’s) house is his/her castle“.
 
Castle Doctrine (also known as a Castle Law or a Defense of Habitation Law) is an American legal concept derived from English Common Law, which designates one’s place of residence (or, in some states, any place legally occupied, such as one’s car or place of work) as a place in which one enjoys protection from illegal trespassing and violent attack. It then goes on to give a person the legal right to use deadly force to defend that place (his/her “castle”), and/or any other innocent persons legally inside it, from violent attack or an intrusion which may lead to violent attack. In a legal context, therefore, use of deadly force which actually results in death may be defended as justifiable homicide under the Castle Doctrine.
 
Castle Doctrines are legislated by state, and not all states in the US have a Castle Doctrine. The term “Make My Day Law” comes from the landmark 1985 Colorado statute that protects people from any criminal charge or civil suit if they use force - including deadly force - against an invader of the home. The law’s nickname is a reference to the famous line uttered by Clint Eastwood’s character Dirty Harry in the 1983 film Sudden Impact, “Go ahead, make my day”.
 
This legal doctrine is often linked to the rights of homeowners to bear arms, as defined in the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution in the case of District of Columbia v. Heller.
 
The original law enacted in 1973, during a rewrite of the penal code, the Legislature imposed a duty for a person facing criminal attack to retreat if a reasonable person would do so under those circumstances, thus requiring Texans to attempt to retreat when criminally attacked. It also allowed a person to use deadly force to prevent someone from committing a break-in at night. In 1995, the state legislature passed an exception to the need to retreat if the attack occurred in a person’s home, allowing the use of force without retreat when the intruder had illegally entered the victim’s home. The SB. 378 amended the previous law where you no longer had to retreat within your own home before the use of deadly force was committed. The state of Texas allows for the use of “deadly force” only when the occupant of their living abode feels a serious threat to their life exists.   
 
The revised law allows Texans to use deadly force “without retreat” when defending themselves, their homes, cars and workplaces.
 
 
 
Here are the states which have Castle Doctrine Laws in their satutes:
 
 
 
States with a Castle Law (No duty to retreat anywhere):
 
States with a Castle Law (No duty to retreat if in the home):

 

  • Alaska
  • Colorado (Colorado Revised Statutes Section 18-1-704.5 Use of deadly physical force against an intruder.)
  • Connecticut
  • Hawaii (Retreat required ouside the home if it can be done in “complete safety.”)
  • Maine (Deadly force justified to teminate criminal trespass AND another crime within home; duty to retreat not specifically removed)
  • Maryland See Maryland self-defense (Case-law, not statute, seems to have incorporated the castle-doctrine into Maryland self-defense law).
  • Massachusetts
  • Michigan (more recent law–Act 309 of 2006–does not relieve duty to retreat “unless [deadly force is] necessary to prevent imminent death;” this represents no change from common law, which does not require retreat unless it can be safely done)
  • Missouri (Extends Castle Doctrine to one’s vehicle)
  • Ohio (Extends to vehicles of self and immediate family; effective September 8th, 2008. Section 2901.09
  • North Carolina)
  • Rhode Island
  • West Virginia
  • Wyoming
States with weak Castle Law: duty to retreat not removed, but deadly force may be used to end invason of home without presence of immediate lethal threat
  • Idaho (Homicide is justified if defending a home from “tumultuous” entry; duty to retreat not specifically removed)
  • Illinois (Use of deadly force is justified if defending a home from “tumultuous” entry; duty to retreat not specifically removed)
  • Kansas (§ 21-3212. Use of force in defense of dwelling. A person is justified in the use of force against another when and to the extent that it appears to him and he reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to prevent or terminate such other’s unlawful entry into or attack upon his dwelling.)
  • Minnesota (Homicide justified to prevent the commission of a felony in the home)
  • Montana (Deadly force justified to prevent felony in the home).
  • Utah
  • Washington
Here are the states with no known Castle Laws on their books:
 
States with no known Castle Law:
 
 
Iowa (Law does not require retreat from home, but may require retreat within the home) Ohio. (However, the 127th Gen Assembly is considering “Castle” legislation under S.B. 184 and H.B. 264. 4/16/2008 - In its sixth (and final!) hearing on Ohio’s Castle Doctrine legislation today, the Ohio Senate Judiciary Committee on Criminal Justice accepted yet another amended substitute HB184, passed the bill (Committee members Teresa Fedor and Shirley Smith - both Democrats - voted no, Senator Lance Mason, the third Democrat committee member, was absent). Just a few hours later, the full Senate took up consideration of the bill. It received 31 yeas, 0 nays. There are 33 members in the Senate. Pennsylvania - Relevant statute not found; “Stand your ground” legislation pending;  Virginia
 
________________________________________________________________
 
I have included the amended portion of Texas’s Castle Doctrine Law ( revised September 1, 2007.)
 
 
S.B. No. 378
 
   
 
     
 
 
  A BILL TO BE ENTITLED
  AN ACT
  relating to the use of force or deadly force in defense of a person.
         BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF TEXAS:
         SECTION 1.  Section 9.01, Penal Code, is amended by adding
  Subdivisions (4) and (5) to read as follows:
               (4)  “Habitation” has the meaning assigned by Section
  30.01.
               (5)  “Vehicle” has the meaning assigned by Section
  30.01.
         SECTION 2.  Section 9.31, Penal Code, is amended by amending
  Subsection (a) and adding Subsections (e) and (f) to read as
  follows:
         (a)  Except as provided in Subsection (b), a person is
  justified in using force against another when and to the degree the
  actor [he] reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary
  to protect the actor [himself] against the other’s use or attempted
  use of unlawful force.  The actor’s belief that the force was
  immediately necessary as described by this subsection is presumed
  to be reasonable if the actor knew or had reason to believe that the
  person against whom the force was used:
               (1)  unlawfully entered, or was attempting to enter
  unlawfully, the actor’s habitation, vehicle, or place of business
  or employment;
               (2)  unlawfully removed, or was attempting to remove
  unlawfully, the actor from the actor’s habitation, vehicle, or
  place of business or employment; or
               (3)  was committing or attempting to commit aggravated
  kidnapping, murder, sexual assault, aggravated sexual assault,
  robbery, or aggravated robbery.
         (e)  A person who has a right to be present at the location
  where the force is used, who has not provoked the person against
  whom the force is used, and who is not engaged in criminal activity
  at the time the force is used is not required to retreat before
  using force as described by this section.
         (f)  For purposes of Subsection (a), in determining whether
  an actor described by Subsection (e) reasonably believed that the
  use of force was necessary, a finder of fact may not consider
  whether the actor failed to retreat.
         SECTION 3.  Section 9.32, Penal Code, is amended to read as
  follows:
         Sec. 9.32.  DEADLY FORCE IN DEFENSE OF PERSON.  (a)  A person
  is justified in using deadly force against another:
               (1)  if the actor [he] would be justified in using force
  against the other under Section 9.31; and
               (2)  [if a reasonable person in the actor's situation
  would not have retreated; and
               [(3)]  when and to the degree the actor [he] reasonably
  believes the deadly force is immediately necessary:
                     (A)  to protect the actor [himself] against the
  other’s use or attempted use of unlawful deadly force; or
                     (B)  to prevent the other’s imminent commission of
  aggravated kidnapping, murder, sexual assault, aggravated sexual
  assault, robbery, or aggravated robbery.
         (b)  The actor’s belief under Subsection (a)(2) that the
  deadly force was immediately necessary as described by that
  subdivision is presumed to be reasonable if the actor knew or had
  reason to believe that the person against whom the deadly force was
  used:
               (1)  unlawfully entered, or was attempting to enter
  unlawfully, the actor’s habitation, vehicle, or place of business
  or employment;
               (2)  unlawfully removed, or was attempting to remove
  unlawfully, the actor from the actor’s habitation, vehicle, or
  place of business or employment of the actor; or
               (3)  was committing or attempting to commit an offense
  described by Subsection (a)(2)(B) [The requirement imposed by
  Subsection (a)(2) does not apply to an actor who uses force against
  a person who is at the time of the use of force committing an offense
  of unlawful entry in the habitation of the actor].
         (c)  A person who has a right to be present at the location
  where the deadly force is used, who has not provoked the person
  against whom the deadly force is used, and who is not engaged in
  criminal activity at the time the deadly force is used is not
  required to retreat before using deadly force as described by this
  section.
         (d)  For purposes of Subsection (a)(2), in determining
  whether an actor described by Subsection (c) reasonably believed
  that the use of deadly force was necessary, a finder of fact may not
  consider whether the actor failed to retreat.
         SECTION 4.  Section 83.001, Civil Practice and Remedies
  Code, is amended to read as follows:
         Sec. 83.001.  AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE.  It is an affirmative
  defense to a civil action for damages for personal injury or death
  that the defendant, at the time the cause of action arose, was
  justified in using force or deadly force under Subchapter C,
  Chapter 9 [Section 9.32], Penal Code[, against a person who at the
  time of the use of force was committing an offense of unlawful entry
  in the habitation of the defendant].
         SECTION 5.  Chapter 83, Civil Practice and Remedies Code, is
  amended by adding Section 83.002 to read as follows:
         Sec. 83.002.  COURT COSTS, ATTORNEY’S FEES, AND OTHER
  EXPENSES.  A defendant who prevails in asserting the affirmative
  defense described by Section 83.001 may recover from the plaintiff
  all court costs, reasonable attorney’s fees, earned income that was
  lost as a result of the suit, and other reasonable expenses.
         SECTION 6.  (a)  Sections 9.31 and 9.32, Penal Code, as
  amended by this Act, apply only to an offense committed on or after
  the effective date of this Act.  An offense committed before the
  effective date of this Act is covered by the law in effect when the
  offense was committed, and the former law is continued in effect for
  this purpose.  For the purposes of this subsection, an offense is
  committed before the effective date of this Act if any element of
  the offense occurs before the effective date.
         (b)  Section 83.001, Civil Practice and Remedies Code, as
  amended by this Act, and Section 83.002, Civil Practice and
  Remedies Code, as added by this Act, apply only to a cause of action
  that accrues on or after the effective date of this Act.  An action
  that accrued before the effective date of this Act is governed by
  the law in effect at the time the action accrued, and that law is
  continued in effect for that purpose.
         SECTION 7.  This Act takes effect September 1, 2007.
 
RELATED LINKS:
“WIDER RULES ON SELF-DEFENSE APPROVED: PROSECUTORS WORRY ABOUT ‘SHOOT FIRST’ MENTALITY”:  http://www.statesman.com/news/content/region/legislature/stories/03/21/21guns.html
Also see the following case:
 
BEARD vs. UNITED STATES, 158 U. S. 550 (1895):   http://supreme.justia.com/us/158/550/case.html
 
Yes, it is an old case, but, please read it. Many laws written decades, centuries ago, still have bearing on all our lives.
 
The above states may have amended their laws; some states may have revised their “stand your ground” laws. Some of the language of each states laws may be unclear to readers. Please check your own state’s laws to obtain the legal statues that affect you and the Castle Doctrine Laws for your particular state you reside in.

+0000c31obeTue, 01 Jul 2008 19:21:03 +0000 5, 2006

DIAMOND MORGAN AND STEPHANIE STORY: PROTESTING THE JOE HORN DECISION

By Jessica Willey
 
Community activists are now threatening lawsuits and putting pressure on legislators to change the system over a grand jury’s decision to clear a man who shot and killed two suspected burglars.
 
That grand jury’s decision has led to loud calls of support from those who feel Joe Horn did the right thing and an uproar among community activists who believe he is getting away with murder.
 
Black community activists and one of the deceased men’s fiancée came together Tuesday to react to the grand jury’s decision to not indict Horn. They’ve had a day to digest it and to plan action.
 
Activist Quanell X called the news conference. Sitting next to him was Stephanie Storey, the fiancée of Hernando Torrez. Horn shot both he and Diego Ortiz last November. They allegedly had just broken into Horn’s neighbor’s house and were running away. Horn shot both in the back, killing them.

On Monday, a grand jury decided not to indict Horn. Several black leaders want to know the makeup of that grand jury.
 
“We want to see if he was judged by his peers,” said community leader Pastor James Nash. “If not, we need some minorities on that particular grand jury. It is wrong. I don’t care what anyone says. That should not have happened.
 
“I’m very surprised that these two lives had no value, that someone could take the law into their own hands and shoot them down like animals and absolutely get away with it,” said Storey. “I’m more than angry right now. I’m going to pray to my God, it’s going to be done. It’s not over.”
 
Storey plans to meet with attorneys to discuss the possibilities of a civil suit. Those at the news conference also plan to lobby lawmakers to change the ‘Castle Doctrine’ to exclude protecting property as a justification to use deadly force.
 
Meantime, Quanell X is planning a protest at the Harris County district attorney’s office for next week.
 
Of course, this is just one side of the story. There are still those who are calling Joe Horn a hero.
 
Horn will talk about the decision for the first time exclusively on Good Morning America. Hear what he has to say Wednesday morning at 7am.
 
 
 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 
WIFE OF JOE HORN VICTIM TALKS
 
By Kevin Quinn
 
 
A day after a grand jury decided not to indict Joe Horn for killing two suspected burglars the wife of one of the men is talking to Eyewitness News.
 
She says she doesn’t hate Horn, but she also thinks her husband didn’t deserve to die for his crime. One thing many people forget in cases like this is that there are real people affected forever by what happened out here.
 
We talked exclusively to Diamond Morgan. She says she was the common law wife of Diego Ortiz, one of the men Joe Horn shot and killed. She says she doesn’t condone what her husband did, but she insists that killing him was not the answer either. Morgan is angry at the grand jury and angrier at Joe Horn. Though she says she doesn’t hate him.
 
Morgan’s son Diego Jr. is now about 15 months old. He was only seven months when his father was killed. Morgan says he shouldn’t have to grow up without a father. Morgan says she’s not looking for pity she’s again, not condoning the crime her husband was committing she just wishes horn would have stayed in his home and never confronted the two suspected burglars.

Morgan says she hasn’t decided yet if she wants to try and sue Joe Horn. She says his punishment will come when he’s judged by a higher authority than the court system.
 

+0000c31obeTue, 01 Jul 2008 19:20:26 +0000 5, 2006

QUANELL X: GRAND JURY SYSTEM IS ‘BROKEN, UNFAIR TO MINORITIES’

04:48 PM CDT on Tuesday, July 1, 2008

By Taylor Timmins / KHOU.com

 

HOUSTON — An angry Quanell X on Tuesday condemned the Harris County grand jury system as unfair to minorities in the wake of the ruling on the Joe Horn case.
 
In a much-anticipated decision, a Harris County grand jury on Monday declined to indict Horn for shooting and killing two suspected burglars outside his neighbor’s Pasadena home in November.
 
“In this case, the grand jury concluded that Mr. Horn’s use of deadly force did not rise to a criminal offense,” said Harris County District Attorney Kenneth Magidson.
 
The shootings sparked outrage across the nation, culminating in an emotional, racially-charged protest in Horn’s neighborhood that pitted Pasadena against itself.
 
Quanell X, a Houston activist, said the District Attorney’s office has a “racist mindset” and intentionally strikes African-Americans from grand juries.
 
“Those who put that grand jury together picked people that look like them, think like them,” Quanell X said.
AP
He said he was told the vast majority of the grand jurors were white, and that there was one minority.
 
The Harris County District Attorney’s office as a rule refuses to comment on the identities of grand jurors.
 
The men Horn killed, Hernando Torres and Diego Ortiz, were both illegal immigrants from Colombia who police believe were involved in an organized home burglary ring.
Horn claimed he shot the men in self-defense, but an autopsy showed they were both shot in the back.
“I am very surprised that these two lives had no value, that someone can take the law into their own hands and shoot them like animals and get away with it.  This is not over. It’s not over by a longshot,” Stephany Storey, the fiancé of one of the men Horn killed, said.
Storey had hoped to testify before the grand jury last week, but she was turned away.
In response to the verdict, Quanell X said he will lead a protest at the DA’s office at 5 p.m. on July 10.
“In less than 10 years, blacks, Hispanics and minorities will be the largest number in Harris County, and we will remember how we were treated,” Quanell X said. “So those in power, remember you got children and grandchildren too. You reap what you have sowed.”
He maintains that if a black man did the same thing Horn did, he would have received jail time.
 
“This was a wild and out-of-control Western-thinking, gun-toting man who saw the opportunity to be judge, jury and executioner, and Harris County let him get away with it.
 
But we’re not going to let him get away with it,” Quanell X said.
 
As for Horn’s neighbors, the activist said he sympathizes with the fact that they don’t want unrest in their community, but he thinks they need to let law enforcement take care of criminals.  
 
“We said from day one we deplore and condemn the criminal act they were participating in, but we do not believe you use criminal behavior to solve criminal activity,” Quanell X said.  
Meanwhile, Quanell X said he is meeting with civil attorneys to discuss the next legal move.
 
 He said he planned to lobby lawmakers to change the Castle Doctrine, which he believes is racially motivated.
 
The Castle Doctrine is a controversial law that gives Texans a stronger right to defend themselves with deadly force in their homes, cars and workplaces.   
 
But not everyone was displeased with the grand jury’s decision.
 
“I think the evidence showed that Joe was, in fact, within his legal rights to do what he did.
 
He didn’t want to do it, but he didn’t have any other alternative,” said Horn’s attorney, Tom Lambright.
 
Horn testified before the jurors for about 90 minutes on Friday before he was escorted out of the courtroom in secret.
 
Lambright said Horn still feels awful about the shooting and is not ready to comment publicly yet. But he said that Horn is very grateful to the people who supported him and stood behind him.
 
The whole controversy started back in November, when Horn called 911 to report that two men were burglarizing his neighbor’s home.
 
During the 911 call, the operator repeatedly warned Horn to stay inside.
 
“I’ve got a shotgun do you want me to stop ‘em?” Horn asked.
 
“Nope don’t do that. Ain’t no property worth shooting somebody over OK?,” the Pasadena dispatcher said as he called out officers to the scene.
 
“I’ll be honest with you, I’m not gonna let ‘em go, I’m not gonna let them get away with this (expletive),” he told the dispatcher.
 
Then a short time later: “I can’t take a chance on getting killed over this. I’m gonna shoot.
I’m gonna shoot.”
 
 
Horn can be heard telling the suspects, “You’re dead,” followed by a loud boom.
 
Lambright, who has known Horn for decades, said his client is normally a quiet, humble man and his behavior that day was out of character.
 
Many of Horn’s friends and neighbors have supported him throughout the ordeal, some even applauding his actions.
 
Others, like Quanell X, feel he is nothing more than a vigilante.
 
“How can you call the man who shoots two men in the back a hero,” Quanell X said.
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Joe Horn will give an interview Wednesday morning, July 2, 2008, on ABC Good Morning America. He will be speaking to Diane Sawyer on his shooting two men in the back, and his no-bill from the Harris County Grand jury. Check local listings for broadcast airtime.
GOOD MORNING AMERICA
 

 

 

UPDATE 7-2-2008:

“JOE HORN IN HIS OWN WORDS”:  http://abclocal.go.com/ktrk/story?section=news/local&id=6240527 

“JOE HORN: BRAVADO, FEAR FUELD MY ACTIONS”:  http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/story?id=5291506&page=1

POLICE VIDEO:  JOE HORN TELLS WHAT LED UP TO HIS SHOOTING TWO MEN IN THE BACK:  http://abclocal.go.com/ktrk/media?id=6244996

Copyright 2008 Houston Chronicle
Houston Chronicle readers discuss Joe Horn, paralyzed surgeon Eugene Alford and Iraqi oil.. Or would he be like Joe Horn and eliminate the thieves?
07/02/2008
 
By RUTH RENDON
There was no fear in their eyes,” Horn said. There was no time to aim,” Horn said.
07/01/2008
 
Copyright 2008 Houston Chronicle
But no one is safer when Texas enables people like Joe Horn to act on those impulses.
07/03/2008

+0000c31obeTue, 01 Jul 2008 16:52:10 +0000 5, 2006

THE ANIMAL KINGDOM’S ODD COUPLES

 

 

Animal Kingdom's Odd Couples

Animal Kingdom’s Odd Couples

A dog feeds two Siberian tiger cubs and her puppy at a zoo in Hefei, Anhui Province, China. The mother of the cubs was not able to feed them after giving birth, according to local news reports.
(China Daily/Reuters)
 
 
PHOTOS:
 
PreviousNext
1 of 14