Long before a Missouri grand jury deliberated on whether to indict a policeman when a young man was shot and killed, there was already a problem in Ferguson, by all accounts. Michael Brown’s tragic death, whether justified or not, didn’t cause the problem; it just triggered the symptom.
For those who practice law and understand the grand jury process, the decision not to indict was not a surprise; a determination to indict would not have been a surprise either. But neither a finding of probable cause nor lack of probable cause was going to solve the problem. If the matter had gone on to trial, the outcome would have resulted in a similarly polarized and divisive result. Remember the OJ verdict? Either way, some people would have felt that justice was not served, that a young man’s death could have been avoided and should be accounted for, or that a police officer’s career has been abruptly cut short, and his life as he knew it before the shooting has been forever changed. Either way, a young life has tragically ended. Neither his family nor the life of the man who pulled the trigger and that of his family will ever be the same.
At the end of the day, what does an indictment or no indictment, or a verdict – one way or the other – do for everyone involved? For some, it may bring a certain level of satisfaction, but one that is short lived. For others, it leaves an immense sadness and disappointment, and a sense of injustice. But what does any of that do for the future Michael Browns who will be in the wrong place at the wrong time? Or the future police officers faced with a hard choice of potential life or death? And beyond them, how does it help their families, their friends, and all those stakeholders not only in the communities of Ferguson and New York City and other sites of shootings or tragic deaths to come?
Not much. That is the deeper tragedy. Zero sum games like indictments and verdicts never give everyone involved what they really need. It’s already too late. And even for the side that “wins”, it’s usually a hollow, Pyrrhic victory, not full resolution. No matter what, someone loses. Protests will follow. People will become polarized because they are being forced into picking a side. Did the OJ Simpson acquittal really do anyone any good? If he had been found guilty, would it have been any more of a productive result? How about the result in the Zimmerman case in Florida? Did it make a productive difference? Do communities have any better guidance in when to use and not use deadly force? Or when it is OK to act in self-defense and how to do so?
These are empty end-game results, largely unproductive because they only react to a symptom and don’t get to the hard work of a cure. Ferguson still has a problem with relations between its citizens and its police. Policemen still feel their hands are somewhat tied every time they are faced with a dangerous life and death situation that involves a black man. Young black don’t feel the same sense of security a white man may (or may not) feel in knowing that there are policemen around protecting communities which include them.
There are many great policemen out there trying their best to protect every person and make good decisions every day. There are a lot of good black men out there that are innocent and haven’t ever thought about committing a crime. But there are also some bad policemen, and there are good policemen that sometimes make bad decisions. And there are black men and white men out there that do intend to do harm to people and property, break laws and disrupt and dishonor society. Do we decide whether or not to give someone a pass or not based on his color?
As for us, there are some of us that just cannot get beyond seeing society in a divided, polarized us vs. them way – black vs. whites, legal citizens vs. illegal aliens, “Americans” (whatever that means) vs. immigrants, liberals vs. conservatives, gays vs. straights, wealthy vs. poor, Democrats vs. Republicans, haves vs. disenfranchised. As long as we allow ourselves to view ourselves this way and come up with no better way of solving our problems than going to court and getting a winner-loser decision, we limit ourselves to reacting to symptoms, not solving problems.
The question to ask is not whether a police officer was guilty of using unjustified deadly force. The question we need to be asking is what leads to that situation, what creates that conflict, what is the root of that lack of trust and can we replace all the false assumptions in our heads with validated facts. The inquiry is not whether or not the policeman made the right decision, but why were that police officer and Michael Brown put into a situation where a policeman had to decide to shoot or not? Why and how did we get to that point?
To answer these questions, we need more than a grand jury or a trial. We need to be able to sit down together – potential victims, potential perpetrators, the community they both live it, and every single stakeholder – and first understand that we are all connected. This is our problem to solve, before it ever reaches the point of the need for an officer to pull out a gun. If that police officer had had the chance to know Michael Brown, and Michael Brown’s parents had made the effort to know the police officers, and there was a relationship and a level of trust established, that confrontation may never have happened.
What might help us answer the right questions, though, would be some form of community building, the use of restorative justice, and the practice of the ancient American Indian Circle Process, gathering everyone involved into the circle with the intended goal of solving the larger problem. That conversation, using a talking piece, gathering every stakeholder in the matter and giving them a forum in which to be heard and to listen to each other, is where the process of real resolution can begin. Not with a grand jury; not with a judge or a jury, and not in the acquittal or guilty verdict that would follow.
Maybe, if we can get people into the Circle first, rather than only giving them the option of having to angrily turn to the streets later, something really good and lasting might come of it. If not, there will continue to be more Michael Browns and more Fergusons, eventually leading to an end game in which we all lose.
The post Ferguson: Are we asking the wrong questions? appeared first on Dispute Resolution Counsel.