Ferguson Report: Individual Innocence, Societal Guilt

Ta-Nehisi Coates discusses the federal government's report that determined Darren Wilson should not be prosecuted for federal civil rights crimes but that Ferguson was guilty:

Government, if its name means anything, must rise above those suspicions and that skepticism and seek out justice. And if it seeks to improve its name it must do much more—it must seek out the roots of the skepticism. The lack of faith among black people in Ferguson's governance, or in America's governance, is not something that should be bragged about. One cannot feel good about living under gangsters, and that is the reality of Ferguson right now.

The innocence of Darren Wilson does not change this fundamental fact. Indeed the focus on the deeds of alleged individual perpetrators, on perceived bad actors, obscures the broad systemic corruption which is really at the root. Darren Wilson is not the first gang member to be publicly accused of a crime he did not commit. But Darren Wilson was given the kind of due process that those of us who are often presumed to be gang members rarely enjoy. I do not favor lowering the standard of justice offered Officer Wilson. I favor raising the standard of justice offered to the rest of us.

Many assumed that Wilson is a murderer. I cannot without doing more research on the details determine he is not guilty of anything.  But, this push for due process for all, while not reducing it for Wilson, is powerful stuff.  As with Trayvon Martin and the choke-hold death in Staten Island, the protests and concerns go deeper than the criminality of the perpetrators here.  A major concern was that the state grand jury in Ferguson was totally screwed up.  This report doesn't change that.  It also doesn't change the underlining racism and rightful discontent of the community. 

[Randy Balko covered the ways certain localities profit from "poverty," which frames the issue here in class terms. As with using class over race in affirmative action, this provides a somewhat incomplete view of the picture. Certain people tend to be poor and it isn't merely because something in the skin makes them such.  Racism is a part of the problem.  Viewing it on class terms can be beneficial -- e.g., race can at times make it harder to deal with things though the law, including constitutional rights, might give the federal government and others more tools here -- but the title of that piece concerns me.]

The death of Michael Brown, like other major tragic things, brings to a boil point the concerns of the community.  Like a factually guilty defendant that whose rights are violated, we should not miss the bigger picture because of singular facts.  It is quite possible that the racism the report highlighted factored into the death.  The officer still might have treated a white person differently, a white person might act differently in that situation. The dynamics of the situation, like a range of things, are complex.  Him not being criminally guilty also doesn't necessarily mean his actions are acceptable. And, the suspicion of wrongdoing would be different too in a less racist society. 

General deterrence looks at the big picture, not only the specifics of a certain situation.  This is often missed, for example, in debates over gun regulation.  So, the NRA trolls Gabby Giffords for supporting background checks because it isn't clear the specifics of certain regulations would have stopped that shooting. But, her efforts are aimed toward a general reduction of avoidable gun violations, which background checks have been shown to help.  Gun regulation is a complex matter and requires various moving parts.  In fact, recognizing an individual constitutional right to keep and bear arms can in the long run benefit it, at least given the situation in this country.

Overall, it looks like the Obama Administration carefully examined the situation and provided a nuanced look at the problems. Imperfect as it might be, and I can find various faults, this is a major reason why we should appreciate that they are in control. Baseline governmental competence is just not something we can assume any more.