Opinion Polls: Delphi's Polling Place

Hosted by Cstar1

Opinion polls on all subjects. Opinions? Heck yes, we have opinions - but we're *always* nice about it, even when ours are diametrically opposed to yours. Register your vote today!

  • 3967
    MEMBERS
  • 71171
    MESSAGES
  • 1
    POSTS TODAY

Discussions

Should instructions to mobs on how to remove statues be published in detail?   The Serious You: Politics

Started Jun-20 by $1,661.87 in cats (ROCKETMAN_S); 5557 views.
Showtalk
Staff

From: Showtalk 

Jun-22

Statues are boring?  I have seen enough of them and I have to agree. A lot of them are creepy up close.

MerlinsDad

From: MerlinsDad 

Jun-22

The reason they are so boring is that they were mass produced:

A large share of Confederate statues are of nameless, generic soldiers, like the one the protesters took down in Durham. Towns erected them in the early 20th century, decades after the Civil War, because their Confederate mythologies helped to justify Jim Crow laws in the South that oppressed black citizens, Taber Andrew Bain, a librarian at Virginia Commonwealth University, pointed out on Twitter.

The statues are often called the “Silent Sentinel,” “Single Soldier,” or something similar, and depict a regular soldier in Confederate uniform staring solemnly into the distance, at ease, with feet spread—a stance called “parade rest,” according to art historian Lola Arellano-Fryer, who wrote about the statues for Hyperallergic. The statutes proliferated specifically because they were cheap.

To sculpt a statue in marble would have been time-consuming and prohibitively expensive for small towns in the early 1900s. But northern foundries that worked in cast bronze or zinc could churn them out quickly and sell them at much lower costs.

One of the leading manufacturers was the Monumental Bronze Company of Bridgeport, Connecticut, which specialized in a cast zinc it called “white bronze” (a light gray or pale blue color). In 2015, the Associated Press dug into the company’s history: It sold life-size statues for just $450 and larger eight-and-a-half foot versions for $750.  https://qz.com/1054062/statues-of-confederate-soldiers-across-the-south-were-cheaply-mass-produced-in-the-north/

Every small town wanted one to commemorate the "lost cause," and, as they say above, "because their Confederate mythologies helped to justify Jim Crow laws in the South that oppressed black citizens."

Is it any wonder want to remove them?

Jeri (azpaints)

From: Jeri (azpaints) 

Jun-22

I wonder how many northerners would recognize who the statue was of.  

"Daddy, whose that guy on the horse!"

"I don't know, son! I think he owned a famous race horse"

Showtalk
Staff

From: Showtalk 

Jun-22

Then maybe someone who really wants one in their yard will pay for removal and storage. They can hide it on their property and no one will see it.

Showtalk
Staff

From: Showtalk 

Jun-22

Yeah, a guy on a horse.  
 

Roosevelt was or will be removed. What did he do to get banished?  I’m so behind on statue knowledge.

Jeri (azpaints)

From: Jeri (azpaints) 

Jun-22

The statue itself is deemed offensive because it shows Roosevelt on the horse with a Native American and a black man walking beside him in a "subservient" manner.  Per the announcement from the museum.

MerlinsDad said:

I worry about people being hurt. There must be a good way to prevent the destructors from being injured in the process since you insist that we can't make cranes available to make it safe.

I'm insisting that no cranes or other legitimate equipment that some destructor doesn't personally own would be rented, leased, loaned, etc. to anyone to use to commit a crime. Now if the destructors were to *steal* a crane, then the crane owner would be more or less just another victim.

The legal theory is, if someone is hurt or killed while committing a felony, and since the value of nearly every statue is well beyond the threshold that elevates theft or destruction from a misdemeanor to a felony in most states, then the persons who were responsible for the felonious act are "jointly and severally" liable for whatever happens.

And if someone is killed while taking down a statue illegally, then *everyone* who participated could theoretically (heck, there is plenty of case law out there well beyond mere theory) could be charged with murder (of the person killed because the statue fell on him or he fell onto something, or even if he had a fatal heart attack from the exertion of doing something).

While I'm not an attorney and don't play one on TV, I know some who have both prosecuted state and federal cases, and some who have defended the same. Pretty much, someone injured or killed during the commission of a felony is treated just as if the act was directed to the injured party.

Good example of someone actually on Death Row. He and his buddy rob a convenience store. He never went in the store, but was the lookout and the getaway driver. They drive away with the loot, and a block down the street, are T-boned by a drunk driver who ran a stop sign. His buddy who committed the robbery is killed. He's badly injured.

Because he was a participant in a felony in progress when the accident happened, the getaway driver is charged - and convicted - of the murder of - you got it - his buddy the perp because they were committing a felony at the time of the fatal crash.

In the eyes of the law, the unauthorized pulling down of a statue is just the same as committing an armed robbery, or an arson, or any other serious felony,.

MerlinsDad

From: MerlinsDad 

Jun-22

Yeah.  No one would ever recognize it.  In so many ways, the statues are out of date.  Maybe memorial statuary is itself out of date.  

MerlinsDad

From: MerlinsDad 

Jun-22

rocketman says:  "The legal theory is, if someone is hurt or killed while committing a felony, and since the value of nearly every statue is well beyond the threshold that elevates theft or destruction from a misdemeanor to a felony in most states, then the persons who were responsible for the felonious act are "jointly and severally" liable for whatever happens.

I've seen the statues in the town square of many towns.  I doubt that the value of the statue (unless the melted down bronze has monetary value) would exceed the cost of cleaning it up after the destructors finished their job

I just don't want anyone to get hurt in the process.  My guess is that there will be few charged and even fewer convicted.

I live in the south.  The confederate soldier statues in so many town squares were mass produced and sold cheap to townships.  My guess is that building the pedestal for it and erecting the memorial cost more than the statue.
 

Adjusted for inflation the threshold is about $1000 in most states. Even a cheaply mass produced statue, if you were to look at replacement costs, would easily exceed that, and would be considered in any restitution order as well. Restitution is intended to "make it whole".

The problem is, they are committing a crime by the unauthorized removal of a statue. Period. Doesn't matter how angry they are. Just like it's a crime to kill your spouse's lover, no matter how angry you are when you catch them in the midst of an affair. Anger is NOT a defense in a court of law.

And in this day and age, with video cameras everywhere in every pocket, and some of the participants live-streaming it, it's just like the folks who robbed someone then posed with the loot on Instagram. There will be some slam-dunk convictions in the future, and I doubt a jury would decide to acquit. "The statue was offensive" is not a legal defense, either.

A lot of them will discover sooner or later just how wrong they are in the eyes of the law. And those who are already on probation or parole, well, that's a violation right there. Revoking probation or parole is quite easy to do if there are any of those participating in the statue destruction.

Then already there have been plenty of people convicted of all sorts of things because of evidence collected from Instagram and Snapchat and other places, not to mention that once there's probable cause, search warrants on phones are certainly issued.

My guess is, there will be a lot of evidence presented to grand juries in the coming months, and then those participants, thinking they got away with it, one day discover there were dozens of sealed indictments and a big huge sweep that arrests them at work, in grocery stores, at weddings and funerals, or when picking up the kids from school.

Then with such damning digital and other forensic evidence, *especially* posts on social media proudly proclaiming how they "stuck it to some old dead white dude", there will be reams of plea deals and a record that will follow them around for the rest of their lives even if they never serve time.

These people, by failing to work through channels within the system to remove said statues, are not winning much sympathy from anyone outside their own circles, and have zero legal cover for their actions and full exposure to all liabilities that can arise. I doubt most juries would be sympathetic or vote for acquittal on any cases that go to trial, and likely most indicted will pretty much plea it down to a lesser but still serious offense to avoid the risk of conviction and possibly the maximum sentence.

read this thread:

https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladviceofftopic/comments/h129hg/if_you_pull_down_a_statue_in_a_riot_and_it_falls/

TOP