Talk:Jena Six/POV

POV problems mostly

This section entitled "The Assault" belittles the acts of the 6 on 1 Assualt - and barely covers what actually happened during the assault. It uses the word group instead of the accurate number of attackers (6) and furthermore, the wording of his injuries belittles the fact that he was found to have a concussion by dismissing it in the same sentence that states he was released 2 hours later. This section also does not state that he was knocked unconscious and then continuously kicked while defenseless/unconscious and on the ground - which belittles the gruesomoe nature of this attack. This section talks too much about everything that is not the assault and too little about the actual assualt. I would propose moving his injuries to a seperate section so that they are not belittled in the current fashion - if his injuries are found to need to be belittled then giving them their own section will show that he was not beaten badly. his injuries having their own section can only lead to a better understanding of what happened that day. I would also propose that the 6 on 1 assault should be called a 6 on 1 assualt instead of a group of students... Also the reported unconcious status of justin barker during the continued "stomping" should be reported as it has been in many news articles around the country. This page is currently suffering from the same problems most news stories about the incident are suffering from - which is over reporting the racial tensions that happened months in advance and were never mentioned in any of the testimonies during the trial, and under reporting the serious nature of the cowardly attack of the 6 on 1 fight and the injuries justin barker recieved as a result of the actions of the jena 6.

Seeing as there were a ton of conflicing witness testimonies even as to who the attackers were, we can't say that it was six students, hence "group". As for his injuries, they're already listed. It wouldn't make sense to have an entire section for one sentence. However, I will look into rewording the events of the attack. Ophois 04:38, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

I reworded the attack. I also looked up stuff about Barker's injuries, but couldn't find any reliable sources that said more than what is stated here. If you can find a reliable source with more info, I will gladly look over it and add the needed info. The same goes with court testimonies. Though I have read numerous sites about it, none of them can really be considered reliable. Ophois 05:01, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

I managed to find a source with a bit of info. I don't have time to do it now, but I'll add it tomorrow and may end up making a subsection for the injuries. Ophois 05:14, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for making the changes you have already made - cnn.com is listing his injuries as injuries to both his ears and both his eyes with cnn quoting his mother as saying he had a clot in one of his eyes "Barker was taken to a hospital with injuries to both eyes and ears as well as cuts. His right eye had blood clots, said his mother, Kelli Barker." from - http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/law/09/20/jena.six/index.html

from the same link " LaSalle Parish District Attorney Reed Walters urged the world not to forget the victim in the case. 'The injury done to him and threats to his survival have become less than a footnote,' Walters said Wednesday." I urge the editor of this article to make sure that the threats to the victims survival do not become less than a footnote. I still believe that saying he was released within 2 hours, in the same sentence as you describe his injuries, belittles the injuries that the victim suffered. Surely if this a white women or a black man - no one would word this sentence the same way - as if to say they were minor and only required 2 hours of medical attention. The sentence could just as easily read "Justin Barker sustained a concussion, both his eyes were injured, having multiple clots in one of them, he was bleeding from both his ears, as well as sustaining many cuts and bruises to his body. His injuries required prompt and quick medical care that lasted about 2 hours." I can't believe that Justin Barkers injuries are being dismissed and belittled in such a fashion by the entirety of the american press. Because he is a white male he is just suppose to "man up" and get over his injuries... If the injustice done to these 6 men is so horrible - then no one should be afraid to admit what the true injuries to justin barker were. I might also suggest a section of the article to be titled "controversy" in which the quotes 'The injury done to him and threats to his survival have become less than a footnote,' is listed. It is extremely difficult to find out any information as to the actual damage done to justin barker because of the media frenzy that centers around racial tension... - which is leading to an injustice being done to the white victim in the case and even on this wikipedia page. The "background" section that lists racial tensions gets several paragraphs while the actual description of justin barkers attack gets about 2 sentences. I don't understand the importance of listing Justin Barkers ability to attend a ring ceremony later in the day under a section titled "The Assault" it has nothing to do with the assault and only serves to belittle his injuries and the violence that he was a victim of.

Is it not true that he was released within 2 hours? The sentence is true, and as such I see no problem with it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.142.182.183 (talk) 17:12, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

As I have already said, I will update his injuries when I can. As for the article given, the victim's mother can't really be considered a reliable source... Ophois 16:34, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

I thank you for doing an excellent job managing this article.

Your summary is inaccurate. The white student threatened the black students with a loaded gun--a felony. When the black students defended themselves, they were arrested and charged. The charge does not fit the crime. The 6 kids were defending themselves and were lucky to get the loaded firearm away from their attacker. - It is also misleading to ignore the catalyst for the racially charged sequence of events in Jena. After three African American student dared to sit under the "white" shade tree (with the blessing of the school principal), three nooses were hung in the tree. This is a clear reference to the south's history of lynching —Preceding unsigned comment added by 147.253.118.12 (talk) 12:59, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

..which is irrelevant. Threatening someone's life is a crime, which is a possible reading of the nooses, but "referencing the South's history of lynching" (as we have both done here, is certainly not. In American one can still make racist comments without being prosicuted for a crime. Also kicking someone who is unconscious is not self-defense. It's assult. 128.84.234.185 21:58, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

I moved your comment to the bottom of the section to keep the flow intact. To respond to your statement. The gun incident and the tree incident have both been included and they are documented based on media coverage that does not include Barker threatning the Jena 6 with a gun. As far as the nooses are concerned, that's exactly what people in that town felt. That's why it's described in the article as a catalyst. CJ 13:11, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

In response to the above- "The gun incident and the tree incident have both been included and they are documented based on media coverage that does not include Barker threatning the Jena 6 with a gun." You may wish to consider rewording this sentence, as it may confuse some readers into mistakenly believing that Justin Barker was the white student who threatened the Jena 6 with the shotgun, when in reality it was not. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.163.63.64 (talk) 15:13, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

POV again

It seems to me that the majority of people are bias towards the side of the black students. We really should maintain the the information in the article contains a neutral POV. I would suggest using more neutral POV sources. In reference to that facebook group- it basically contains a bunch of immature students who know nothing about prosecution or law arguing to free the "Jena Six", and I doubt its relevance or even citation is necessary. Deathsythe 18:47, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Other than white supremacy sites, it's gonna be pretty hard to find reliable sources that aren't slightly biased. I think that this article is pretty neutral. Ophois 19:07, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

White supremacy sites are unbiased and reliable sources?Dafhgadsrhadjtb 02:26, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Biased towards the black students. Ophois 03:24, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Bias towards the side of the black students? What 15 year olds do you know that get charged with third degree murder for getting into a school fight but yet 15 year old white students that hung a noose for the "white" tree were not charged with commiting a hate crime because they were considered to be juviniles? Or better yet the 15 year old white student that brought a gun on campus wasn't disciplined? Ignorance is bliss and from your comments Deathsythe I can see you are one happy fellow. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.171.107.252 (talk) 23:01, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

I don't know; I have a vague feeling that we have something in this country called "freedom of speech," which includes symbolic speech. Your move, Hitler. 68.32.238.94 23:13, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Freedom of speech does not include threats which also includes "symbolic threats". Treat people as you would like to be treated. You lost out the moment you called names. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.143.129.81 (talk) 04:04, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Cite to a court case, Stalin. 68.32.238.94 23:43, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Here's a case where a guy's speech/symbolic speech was considered threatening enough that he was put on trial[1]. I think the Jena Six noose incident could also be called [Fighting Words|fighting words]Katsam 10:57, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

While I agree with a lot of what you said, 71.171.107.252, I would like to point out that it wasn't a fight (as many media sources say), it was an assault. Many media sources are biased towards the black students instead of being neutral (though most news sources are biased in some way). For example, nearly every news source said that the Jena Six had no previous problems with the law, yet it has been shown that Mychal Bell had a history of violent crimes. However, I feel that this article has covered both sides. Ophois 23:52, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

CPE0018f8d6bdf2-CM0014e8279210.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com, so, how is that around canada —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.138.110.8 (talk) 14:35, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

2 POV problems

listing that justin barker was able to attend a ring ceremony later that day has nothing to do with his injuries and has no business being listed in a section entitled "injuries" listing his attendence of the event does nothing but belittle his injuries. his injuries should not be belittle simply because he was a strong person who wanted to go to an important high school ceremony he had been waiting 11 years for. in the following article (which is already linked on the page as a reference) http://www.katc.com/Global/story.asp?S=6719374 justin barker is quoted as saying "I waited 11 years to go to it. I wasn't going to let that get in my way" as if to say he would have been there no matter how bad his injuries were.

I respectfully disagree. Disclosing his attendance at the ring ceremony the same day helps to explain the extent of his injuries. Barker was not medically prohibited from attending the ceremony due to life threatening injuries or risk of medical complications that would require inpatient treatment. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.207.253.96 (talk) 21:52, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

listing the previous racial tension issues in this article makes no sense unless the 6 or justin barker were directly involved. justin barker was not punished or found guilty of hanging the nooses and the 6 reportedly never took part in any of the other racial tension escalations. these racial tension events should be listed on a page chronicling the history of racial tensions in jenna... but if the jenna 6 or justin barker were not involved they have no place here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.165.37.26 (talk) 16:37, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

So you're trying to argue that the context and situations which led directly to the incident are not relevant in an article about the incident? I don't think Wikipedia policy agrees with you on that. ThatGuamGuy 20:28, 21 September 2007 (UTC)sean

Reportedly, Bryant Purvis's cousin was the one who asked about sitting there, and Bryant was one of the people who did sit under the tree. I'll update the page for that later, unless someone else can find a reliable source for that? Ophois 16:51, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

I live in Alexandria and our local paper printed a few excerpts from the court transcript and police investigation. One of the defendents (they did not identify which one) was asked about his comments immediately after the assault. Most of the defendants were scared afterwards, but one was heard to say, "Don't worry, they won't be too [s] harsh on us. We'll just make up some shit about the white boy keep calling us nigger." We ['ll] just say they are racist."

This would be heresay and also could not be evaluated without knowing something about who said it, what the defendents testimony was about his comments, whether other witnesses (and which witnesses if any)coroborated the testimony, etc. On the face of it it sounds suspicious. Also, the excerpts of the "police investigation" cannot be taken without a serious grain of salt, given the pontential "white" bias of the the local police (demonstrated in their response to the other incidents). Finally, I have read that Mychal Bell's PD did not really put on a defense (!), so the trial transcripts have to be read with that in mind, i.e. we are not hearing both sides of the story. Kelmad 19:33, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

I'm going to go back and look at other papers for that week to see if anything else from the court or police was printed.

I read the same article...it's from The Town Talk. Sheriff Carl Smith has so far declined to comment on any of this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.213.36.2 (talk) 18:26, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Neutrality Dispute

I decided to use the POV dispute. I believe many good points have been brought up here on the discussion page. I believe they should be answered before the POV dispute is resolved.

The Jena 6 wouldn't be the Jena 6 if they hadn't battered a white student.

I am challenging the following sources that are used for information:

1. 13 - http://blackstarnews.com/?c=135&a=3594 ; If you really need me to explain why, you should not be moderating this page. "Kangaroo court", "white vigilantes"

This is just 1 issue. I will continue to add more, but I think it's easier to address 1 issue at a time. So please, don't consider this resolved.Jim 05:25, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

I'm going to concur with the challenge over this source. This is obviously some sort of op-ed piece. Keithbrooks 05:46, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

"Kangaroo court" is an actual term. There's even a wiki page for it. But I see what you mean about other stuff in it. The info that cites it is only one minor thing, so I'll try and find another source for it when I can. Anything else?Ophois 11:37, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

It is an actual term, I know this and I am sure Keith Brooks does. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kangaroo_court. The article suggests that the legal proceedings were sham... read the Donald Washington quote on citation 2. Some might say it says otherwise.Jim 17:20, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

There dont seem to be any other outstanding POV disputes so I'm going to pull the tag if no one ojbects within about 5 minutes. CJ 14:55, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

People aren't on every second of the day... you should let people reply. Also, there is more than 1 reason why it's up there. Jim 17:27, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

I replaced the source listed above and reworded it a little. What are the other POV issues that you have? Ophois 17:39, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

From the page: "According to some accounts, on September 5, 2006, a number of black students organized a peaceful sit-in under the white tree in response to the reduced punishment of the perpetrators. The protest was then dispersed by police.[10][11]". I understand you have the part where Donald Washington says there's no proof of this occurring, but there is still no reason for that to be on the page IMO. Supposed to be about what happened... not what supposedly happened and a DA saying it didn't.Jim 17:48, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

I agree and removed it. I had wanted to keep it in because it said that police were called to disperse it. However, the source says that police were called and the DA came, not that they did anything to the protest. What else?Ophois 18:02, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Assembly with Walters and Fowler. "Walters and school board member Billy Fowler, also present, deny that the comments were specifically directed at black students.[3]". If there's no mention of the comments being intended for the Black Students, then there should be no mention of them refuting that. It seems like it's the words of 2 authority figures, against who NPR describes as black students. By the way, nice job with the hard work maintaining this page. I have not edited much knowing you have spent a great deal of time on here.Jim 18:32, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

I disagreee. Just because they are authority figures doesn't make them more credible than the students. Both perspectives should be kept in for neutrality. Especially since both are sourced. And it's not just NPR that says the kids said they felt like the statements were directed at them. It's nearly every news source I've seen that mentions the assembly.CJ 19:33, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Except when specific names are mentioned. It's been said in this discussion that Justin Barker's mother is not a reliable source; yet we are accepting hearsay by what NPR calls "black students".Jim 19:48, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

I changed it to "Though black students state that Walters was looking at them as he made the comments, Walters and school board member Billy Fowler, also present, deny it." A similar phrasing used to be in the article, but someone changed it. Ophois 19:35, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Alright, thanks for your work on this page. I will remove the POV dispute for now.Jim 19:48, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Actually, Barker's mother's statements probably can be used, but just clarify that she made the statements. Ophois 19:51, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

We really need to avoid sweeping statements like "black and whites accused each other of the crime." This article is being written in ridiculous statements like this. Despite the tone of the media coverage, this is not 1957. Let us report facts, and facts only, in as neutral tone as possible.--Wehwalt 23:05, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

This Wikipedia Article is Biased

After reading many other articles on this matter it becomes clear that the author of this piece is slanted against the Black children. They do have some responsibility in this incident but the major issue is the unequal treat meeted out by the authorities in that town. From speaking to many black people there is a different America for them than their white counterparts There are huge pockets of rural america where if a black person ventures their safty would be at risk, only because they are black this is not the America of MLK's dream. PLEASE ADJUST THIS ARTICLE IT DOES NOT REFLECT WELL ON WIKIPEDIA —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.75.72.103 (talk) 19:17, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

How is it biased against the Jena Six? Because it gives facts that most newspapers choose to ignore? I am in support of the Jena Six, but this article must remain neutral, so we must report both sides. You say to adjust the article, so please cite where it is biased, and I'd be happy to fix it if you are correct. Ophois 19:42, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

This article is not biased, if anything it is biased in favor of the jena 6. It belittles barker's injuries by dismissing them saying that he went to his high school ring ceremony later that day. I have asked several times that this be deleted from the article or moved to another section - as it certainly doesn't have anything to do with his injuries... but his injuries, and the seriousness with which he was attacked, continue to be belittled.

Could the author of the above statement please sign his name? I want to nominate him to the Guiness Book of World Records for using the word "belittle" the most times on one webpage. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.108.99.30 (talk) 14:19, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

What, you mean twice? Well hold the press, we have a record indeed. Anyway, his/her comment is still valid, Barker attending the Ring ceremony has nothing to do with the case.

Uh, the injuries have been given its own section... as well, it goes into more detail and shows that he testified he had to leave early due to pain... Ophois 19:51, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Having no place else to put this I have posted it in this section - In reading all of the comments posted I am mindful of the rules relating to Wikipedia and “What Wikipedia is not” (a section all should read). With the preceeding in mind and in the spirit of Wikipedia I strongly suggest that a proper understanding be given to the whole “Jena Six” issue. In reading the posted statements it is very apparent that many of the posters don’t have a clue as to what the whole “Jena Six” issue is all about. In fact the whole artile in and of itself lacks a real statement helping others to understand the full ramifcations of “Jena Six”. In the narrow view “Jena Six” is about six Black teenagers who assaulted a white teenager. As it is written, that is what the Wikipedia article is all about. However, the “JENA SIX” issue IS NOT ABOUT SIX BLACK TEENAGERS WHO ASSAULTED A WHITE TEENAGER, it is about the unequal treatment of blacks versus whites under the laws of our country. If the Blacks had been charged with a simple battery, as was the white man who beat up the Black teenager in Jena, then there would really be no issue to complain about. Jena Six is in essesence simular to a class action lawsuit. A class action lawsuits may be brought if the claim arises under federal law, or if all named representative members of the potential plaintiff class are from a different state than the defendant. Nationwide plaintiff classes are possible, but such suits must have a commonality of issues across state lines. With regards the “Jena Six” the focus is being placed upon the numberous insidents of such injustice across the United States where Blacks of being imprisoned upon trumped up charges and sentenced to long prison sentences for crimes that were improperly classified. No one is saying that the teenagers involved in the “Jena Six” event aren’t entitled to some form of punishment for their deeds but 20 to 80 years in prison is just beyond reason. If not for the media attention Mychal Bell may very well have been convicted of the attempted second-degree murder and conspiracy to commit murder, carrying sentences of up to 80 years in prison. Instead he was convicted of the aggravated second-degree battery and conspiracy to commit aggravated second-degree battery (up to 22 1/2 years in prison, 15 years after the conspiracy was dropped). Basically, that is the problem, Mychal Bell and his friends are guilty of a simply battery, a six month misdemeanor, and not a 80 year felony as it was when the rally was planned or the 15 years as it stood before the court threw out the remaining conviction. I trust there are those who will want to talk about how bad the victim was beat without knowing the truth [you can not believe every thing you read without a through investigation. I bet the medical records will not show there was a cat scan done which is required when there is any indication of a head trauma]. However, given the facts as they have been disclosed, does it warrant locking up a 16 year old for 15 years? No, I don’t think so and nether does a lot of the Black community. Thus in closing I again would say that the article should reflect the big picture and not just the narrow view of the incident in question. Only then will people understand all of the relevant factors starting with the request to sit under the “Whites Only” tree. CyberQue 03:38, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Have you even read the wiki article...? Everything is covered, not just the attack. Ophois 03:55, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Yes I have both the article and all of the posting in the discussion area. In fact I just read everything again to make sure I was not missing anything. I do belive everything is well covered from the narrow point of view and with the exception of a one sentence statement regarding the NAACP I sincerely doubt that readers will really under stand the big picture. It is not about the incident in question it is about injustice in the U.S.= Commentary 'Jena 6' rally was about equal justice, not race - It was great seeing so many people exercising their free speech and right to protest, but to also demand a change to what they felt is an unjust legal system. Roland Martin, Newscaster [2]

On Thursday, I wore black in support of the Jena 6, and turned on CNN's webstream in my office so that I could quietly watch the thousands who gathered in Washington and Jena, Louisiana at rallies in support of the Jena 6. They served as a fervent reminder of the realities of criminal injustice across racial lines Janine Beach columist [3] It's a story that reads like one from the Jim Crow era, when judges, lawyers and all-white juries used the justice system to keep blacks in "their place"--but it's happening today. [4] Injustice in Jena as Nooses Hang From the "White Tree" By Bill Quigley - At a rally in front of the courthouse: Alan Bean, a Texas minister and leader of the Friends of Justice, said: "I have seen a lot of trials in my time. And I have never seen a more distressing miscarriage of justice than what happened in LaSalle Parish yesterday." Khadijah Rashad of Lafayette Louisiana described the trial as a "modern day lynching." Tory Pegram with the Louisiana ACLU "People know if they don't demand equal treatment now, they will never get it.” Hebert McCoy, a relative of one of the youths who has been trying to raise money for bail and lawyers, challenged people everywhere at the end of the rally when he said: "You better get out of your houses. You better come out and defend your children - because they are incarcerating them by the thousands. Jena's not the beginning, but Jena has crossed the line. Justice is not right when you put on the wrong charges and then convict. I believe in justice. I believe in the point of law. I believe in accepting the punishment if I'm guilty. If I'm guilty, convict me and punishment, but if I'm innocent, no justice." The crowd joined with him and shouted, "No peace!" [5] On Thursday, the case drew thousands of protesters to this tiny central Louisiana town to rally against what they see as a double standard of justice for blacks and whites. The march was one of the biggest civil rights demonstrations in years. [6] = BTW Ophois, I think you are doing a great job on this.CyberQue 04:42, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Jena Six refers to the movement of the Black community to protest what they see as a double standard of justice for blacks and whites. The movement was sparked by an incident wherein a group of six black teenagers were arrested and charged with crimes related to their alleged involvement in the assault of a white teenager in Jena,CyberQue 05:11, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Speaking to demonstrators in front of a rural Louisiana courthouse last week, Alan Bean, a Baptist minister from the Texas panhandle, inveighed against injustice. “The highest crime in the Old Testament,” he declared, “is to withhold due process from poor people. To manipulate the criminal justice system to the advantage of the powerful, against the poor and the powerless.” As he delivered his message to the crowd, officers from the state police intelligence division watched from the side, videotaping speakers and audience. Bean was speaking at a rally organized by residents of Jena, Louisiana. In the space of a few weeks, more than 150 of this small town’s residents have organized an inspiring grassroots struggle against injustice. The demonstrations began when six Black students at Jena High School were arrested after a fight at school and charged with conspiracy to attempt second-degree murder. The students now face up to 100 years in prison without parole, in a case that King Downing, National Coordinator of the ACLU's Campaign Against Racial Profiling, has said “carries the scent of injustice.” [7]Louisiana NAACP president Ernest Johnson, who is helping to organize Thursday's march in conjunction with a coalition of civil rights groups--including Jesse Jackson's Rainbow/PUSH, Al Sharpton's National Action Network and the Southern Christian Leadership Conference--says the scope of the campaign is broadening. "I think people are coming to show strength and unity against these types of injustices," he says. "They're coming to send a message to other Jenas throughout the country. To the Jena in New York, the Jena in Washington, in California--there are a lot of Jenas out there." Rich with symbolism and iconic images, the case of the Jena Six certainly makes for a compelling parable of racial injustice in America. Louis Scott, Bell's lead counsel, agrees that the protests will place a spotlight on racial disparities in the criminal justice system, but he doesn't think it will necessarily affect the way the case is litigated.[8]CyberQue 05:57, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

This looks like stuff that has already been discussed and placed into the article where possible. If there was a specific suggestion in there could you trim it down to maybe one or two lines? CJ 09:01, 22 September 2007 (UTC)`

In the Public Outcry section there are three items listed “The Petition” (by the way there are several petitions), the “Defense fund”, and “Rally in Jena”. I don’t see any of the above listed AND more importantly no where n the whole article do I get an understanding of why the Jena Six issue is such a big deal – Blacks have been railroaded off to prison in many other cases and in every state of the United States. Unless the “WHY” is answered the whole matter is one of the Black population coming to the aid of the six Black boys in Jena. HOWEVER, if you will note the highlighted statement above you will note that the Black population is not talking about the six Black boys, they are talking about racial inequality in the legal system when it come to how Blacks are treated within the criminal justice system. The NAACP, Jesse Jackson's Rainbow/PUSH, Al Sharpton's National Action Network and the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, not to mention the numerous other Black organizations involved, have all come together for what? Because of an incident involving six Black boys in Jena, that’s the narrow viewpoint of what is occurring. They have come together with one statement in mind – “stop railroading our Black men into prison on trumped up charges”, and since the Jena incident is a perfect example of what Blacks are upset about, it was time to take the issue to the public forum. Reading the Wik article I would have no awareness of the bigger picture involved as I read about the attack, the injuries and the events leading upon the attack. In fact I would believe that Blacks were upset because the whole thing started with a Whites only shade tree and some nooses were hung from the tree after some Blacks sat under the tree. If you really want to make an entry about the Jena Six event look at the big picture and help your reader understand what is really going on. I suggest changing the lead sentence, “Jena Six refers to a group of six black teenagers who have been arrested and charged with crimes ..” to “Jena Six refers to the movement of the Black community to protest what they see as a double standard of justice for blacks and whites. The movement was sparked by an incident wherein a group of six black teenagers were arrested and charged with crimes …” CyberQue 15:58, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Jena Ignites a Movement, By Jordan Flaherty, Left Turn. [9]

I am a relatively new user/editor of Wikipedia and have a recommendation. When I first heard about Jena 6 on CNN, I was very confused as to what really happened and why there was rally. I went to my computer to search wikipedia because I know that it strives to give detailed and unbiased information. When I read the article I was pleased to see that the community at Wikipedia was coming together well to create a page that represents this incident (and the preceding incidents as well) in a way that I - as a reader - could explore the details and come to my own educated oppinion. Wikipedia is not designed to guide people to a specific view of a topic - as so many other news sources are. Having read all of the article and everything is this talk page, I believe there is real injustice going on and that America has a big issue to deal with. Having said that, I do not believe that there should be more direct information listed in this page about the overall issue of injustice in America for African Americans (or any other race/minority). This is not the place for that. I recommend that those people who have evidence of the numerous events in our country that prove this injustice is happening create a page about that injustice. There could be a link to it on the Jena six page. And that article could reference the Jena six events as proof of the injustice throughout America. This way, the issues that CyberQue is expressing will be available to the wikipedia public. And, this article about the Jena six incident(s) may stay as unbiased as possible. NatalieOne 17:44, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

I totally agree that this is a bias report. Why does the intro sentence NOT include that the six teens were originally charged with ATTEMPTED MURDER? But there were no charges in the attacks against the black kid at the party AND the gunshot incident. It's not equal justice. That's WHY they are the Jena 6! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 167.218.152.178 (talk) 14:42, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

There were charges filed about the attacks. what gunshot incident are you talking about? Cryo921 00:37, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

What is signigicant about the injuries is what was lacking. There was no broken nose, no broken ribs, no broken cheekbones, no broken bones at all, no bodywide contusions and abrasions, no renal injuries and no injuries significant enough to prohibit mobility. If 6 people are attempting to murder the victim, and are stomping on the victim as indicated the injuries would have been far more severe. The injury that is a significant injury was the one to the eye and from the nature of that injury two things are clear, firstly that he was facing his attacker and secondly that he was hit in the eye with a fist very hard, which is undoubtedly the source of the concusion and was most likely the blow that knocked him unconcious to the ground as reported. There was nothing medicaly verifiable for his reported ongoing medical problems and he is suing. The injuries don't sustain the charges. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.72.187.175 (talk) 13:33, 6 June 2008 (UTC)