I have been actively involved in the fight for Heather Ellis, the 24-year old school teacher now facing up to 15-years in prison for cutting line at a local Wal-Mart. Although Heather has now reached a plea deal with prosecutors over her arrested, there are still questions that need to be answered. No, she was not charged with cutting in line, but it was the cashier’s reaction to the alleged line cut which led to the relevant sequence of events. Had the cashier been more professional and not refused to serve Heather, none of this would have happened (You hear that Walmart? Perhaps that’s why your attorneys are telling you to remain silent).
I have five simple questions about the trial of Heather Ellis:
1) If “no one was seriously injured,” why was she facing up to 15-years in prison?
In the opening statements of the trial, the prosecutor in the case, Morley Swingle (the dandy fellow with the Confederate flag on the cover of his book) stated that “There was no serious injury, but it did hurt,” when referring to the alleged assaults committed by Ms. Ellis. If no one was seriously injured, does that constitute a Class-C felony? This statement was quite telling when it comes to understanding the style of justice being administered in the Southeast Missouri area (which is why we are sending our reports to the Justice Department after the trial is over). Given that Ellis appears to have been the only person to go to the hospital after she allegedly beat down all of these great big men, it would seem to me that perhaps she might be the one who is able to file an assault charge against the officers. Additionally, the defense attorney on the case, Scott Rosenblum, presented evidence in court of there being blood in Heather Ellis’ jacket pocket from the night of the incident. This would be consistent with her claim to the doctor the next day that she was assaulted by the police.
1 comment:
Wow. Dr. Watkins, for shame. You’re grasping at straws now that Heather accepted a plea deal before winding up with felony convictions. Despite all the hype on the site, there must have been an understanding at some point that this was a no-win situation for her. Hopefully she will learn a lesson from this. Perhaps you will as well.
1) If “no one was seriously injured,” why was she facing up to 15-years in prison?
Because she was charged with a felony that had a maximum potential sentence of 15 years. It is disingenuous to suggest that Heather faced an actual sentence of 15 years. As you well know, she was a first time offender and her sentence would probably have been similar to what she wound up with. She could have saved herself and the rest of the nation the trouble by owning up two years ago.
And bringing up the book the prosecutor wrote, the one about the civil war. Yup, way to tug at those racial heartstrings. You do a disservice to your people.
And as for the last minute evidence: Was the blood tested? Was it Heather’s? Was it perhaps from one of the police officers? Why did the doctor who examined her say that he found no evidence of abuse beyond bruised wrists? It is not true that bruised wrists can be caused by struggling, fighting, and resisting arrest?
2) Why did the prosecutor hype up the videotape? Was he lying?
I think it showed exactly what it needed to show. By crying racism Heather put forth the idea that she was an innocent victim who acted like and angel but was still abused by the mean whites. In truth, she lost her temper, acted unreasonably, and ultimately acted so out of line that the police were called.
I’ve gotta quote this, because I can’t honestly beleive you wrote it:
“My father was a cop for 25-years, so I know that officers stick together, especially when they think they can get away with it. ”
So then, how many racially motivated crimes did he cover up during his years on the force?
3) If Heather was the aggressor, why is she seen on the videotape leaving the store?
Correction to your slanted statement. Heather was being ESCORTED from the premesis. Big difference. Had she stopped, she’d have been arrested. She apparently stopped, perhaps to continue arguing with the officers.
4) How can you go to trial in less than a week on a case that was given to you by someone in an entirely different office?
Simple. This was not a complicated case. A first year law student could have effectively prosecuted this case. There was a video tape that showed Heather was agitated enough to repeatedly abuse a customer and the clerk. There was not a single witness who could corraborate her story, other than her family members. There was no physical evidence to back up her claims of police brutality. There is nothing other than her word against he word of a dozen or so other people.
5) Why has this case been made to be about Heather’s cursing and allegedly “lewd behavior”?
No, the question is whether she deserves 15 years in prison for resisting arrest and assaulting police officers. You continue to assert that this case was entirely about race, or the prison sentence, or something else besides Heather’s behavior. Think for a moment and realize just how silly you sound.
She acted abhorrently. She resisted arrest. She committed crimes. Period. She was offered plea bargains. She insisted on a trial. She did so publicly. She did so using racial tension as her lever. I’m sorry, but I see no redeeming features there, Doc.
The freedom of Heather Ellis will not negate the effect of overzealous race baiting either. Imagine all of the time, money, energy, and talent wasted on this charade. It is disgraceful. And the result will likely have a generational effect and contribute more damage to race relations than it has any right to. It was a tiny thing, and she is a tiny person. For that matter, though you try very hard, it’s tough to play the moral high horse when you’ve acted so reprehesibly yourself. It makes you look stupid.
Post a Comment