Interesting stop on the book tour...

Submitted by Prometheus 6 on June 8, 2006 - 9:31am.
on

Quote of note:

Mr. Minucci insists that Mr. Moore was about to commit a robbery and that he used the word as a form of benign address before subduing him with a few swats to the side and legs.

Mr. Minucci's lawyer, Albert Gaudelli, said he hoped Professor Kennedy's testimony would convince the jury that the mere use of the epithet did not constitute racism. On the stand yesterday, Professor Kennedy's explanation of the modern usage of the word seemed to support Mr. Gaudelli's claim.

Epithet 'Has Many Meanings,' a Harvard Professor Testifies
By COREY KILGANNON

Guess who?The witnesses in the trial of a white man accused of a racially motivated beating of a black man in Howard Beach last summer had been typical for an assault case in Queens. Until yesterday.

All of the previous witnesses — the hardened detective, the newsstand owner, the pizza maker, the career criminal and other assorted neighborhood characters — had offered plain-spoken testimony about Nicholas Minucci, 20, who is charged with using a racial epithet while attacking Glenn Moore with a baseball bat on June 29, 2005.

But the final witness for Mr. Minucci was a stranger to him, to Howard Beach and to the State Supreme Court in Kew Gardens, Queens. The defense got the Harvard Law School professor Randall Kennedy to travel from Boston to testify about the current usage of the racial epithet, sometimes referred to in court as the "n" word.

The epithet has become central to the trial, as a measure of whether Mr. Minucci attacked Mr. Moore because of his skin color. Several witnesses have testified that Mr. Minucci repeatedly spewed the epithet in anger while chasing Mr. Moore and beating him on the head. Mr. Minucci insists that Mr. Moore was about to commit a robbery and that he used the word as a form of benign address before subduing him with a few swats to the side and legs.

Mr. Minucci's lawyer, Albert Gaudelli, said he hoped Professor Kennedy's testimony would convince the jury that the mere use of the epithet did not constitute racism. On the stand yesterday, Professor Kennedy's explanation of the modern usage of the word seemed to support Mr. Gaudelli's claim.

"The word is a complex word," he testified. "It has many meanings."

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Submitted by Ourstorian on June 8, 2006 - 10:16am.

"Professor Kennedy had just taken the stand in a packed courtroom and rattled off his impressive credentials — which include attending Princeton, Oxford and Yale, a clerkship for Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall and his membership in the Bar of the Supreme Court."

He left out: Pissboy! Kennedy's carrying water for this bigot shows how low a real NIGGER will go.

Thurgood is probably spinning in his grave.

Submitted by Kim Pearson on June 8, 2006 - 2:36pm.

Very quickly, for what it's worth: 

Randall Kennedy has been consistent in the 30 years that I've either interacted with him or followed his career. (I was a year behind him in college). Let me say, first, that I have always found him to be a man of principle. He's not a doctrinaire conservative, and he's not Shelby Steele or John McWhorter. However, he tends to approach issues in an abstract way, without giving as much weight to what he acknowledges are "sociological" realities. I suspect that he honestly believes that his statement should not lead the jury to draw a conclusion one way or the other about whether the defendant's specific use of the epithet was evidence of racial bias. I took issue with his general philosphical stance a few years ago in an essay for Tonya Bolden's website: "Does the 'Talented Tenth' Have Amnesia?"  http://www.tonyabolden.com/pw0201b.html.

"The arc of the universe is long, but it bends toward justice." I need to believe that right about now...

Submitted by Prometheus 6 on June 8, 2006 - 3:08pm.

First I heard of Prof. Kennedy was that thing he wrote for The Atlantic Monthly...My Race Problem...And Yours, something like that. It was also my first encounter with the word eschew, as in I eschew racial solidarity. I wasn't impressed.

On the other hand, I recognized what he was trying to do. He was trying to conceptualize an aracial outlook that would still render racial justice.

Kim, you've confirmed my opinion of him: a nice man who doesn't have a clue. Or maybe he had to numb himself to "social realities" to get where he got. He wouldn't be the first to take that particular damage. Hell, I'VE probably taken some of that damage...relentlessly direct as I am, it's a real possibility.

Submitted by Ourstorian on June 9, 2006 - 11:05am.
Kim, I really enjoyed your article and your analysis of Kennedy's position and attitude.

Unlike you, however, I have no personal knowledge of Kennedy, and can only respond to his positions as he articulates them. From my take-no-prisoners-in-the-culture-war approach, I do not find them to be naive in their formulation or benign in their implication and impact. And his willingness to testify on behalf of a racist thug, and by extension on behalf of his own half-baked ideas about the so-called "modern" usage of the N-word, marks him in my mind as a quisling and a stooge.

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
More information about formatting options