Read The Forum Rules: We have a clear set of rules to keep the forum running smoothly. Click here to review them.

Post Reply 
Uh Oh. Federal Court Ruling
Author Message
vinman Offline
International Playboy
******
Gold Member

Posts: 3,343
Joined: Dec 2010
Reputation: 67
Post: #1
Uh Oh. Federal Court Ruling
How will this affect rap lyrics? Will NWA have to change their name before they reunite?

African-Americans, Compensatory Damages, jury, Lawsuit, N Word, Punitive Damages, Racial Slur, Rob Carmona, STRIVE East Harlem
NEW YORK (CBSNewYork/AP) — A federal jury has rejected an argument that the use of the N-word among blacks can be a culturally acceptable term of love and endearment, ruling instead that its use in the workplace is hostile and discriminatory no matter what.

Jurors last week awarded $250,000 in compensatory damages to a worker at the black employment agency STRIVE East Harlem who was the target of an N-word-laced rant by her black boss.

The jury was set to return to a U.S. District Court in Manhattan Tuesday to decide on punitive damages.

The case against Rob Carmona and the employment agency he founded, STRIVE East Harlem, gave legal airing to what some see as a complex double standard surrounding the word – that it is a degrading slur when uttered by whites but can be used at times with impunity among blacks.

But Brandi Johnson, 38, told jurors that being black didn’t make it any less hurtful to be the target of what her attorney called Carmona’s “four-minute n****r tirade” about inappropriate workplace attire and unprofessional behavior.

Johnson, who taped the March 2012 remarks after her complaints about his verbal abuse were disregarded, said she fled to the restroom and cried for 45 minutes.

“I was offended. I was hurt. I felt degraded. I felt disrespected. I was embarrassed,” Johnson testified.

In closing arguments, Johnson’s attorney Marjorie M. Sharpe said Carmona’s use of the word was intended to offend “and any evidence that defendants put forth to the contrary is simply ridiculous.”

“When you use the word n****r to an African-American, no matter how many alternative definitions that you may try to substitute with the word n****r, that is no different than calling a Hispanic by the worst possible word you can call a Hispanic, calling a homosexual male the worst possible word that you can call a homosexual male,” Sharpe told jurors.

But defense lawyers said the 61-year-old Carmona, a black man of Puerto Rican descent, had a much different experience with the word. Raised by a single mother in a New York City public housing project, he became addicted to heroin in his teens and broke it with the help of drug counselors who employed tough love and tough language.

Carmona went on to earn a master’s degree from Columbia University before co-founding STRIVE in the 1980s. Now, most of STRIVE’s employees are black women, defense attorney Diane Krebs told jurors in her opening statement.


“And Mr. Carmona is himself black, as you yourselves can see,” Krebs said.

In his testimony, Carmona defended his use of the word, saying he used it with Johnson to convey that she was “too emotional, wrapped up in her, at least the negative aspects of human nature.”

Then he explained that the word has “multiple contexts” in the black and Latino communities, sometimes indicating anger, sometimes love.

Carmona said he might put his arm around a longtime friend in the company of another and say: “This is my n****r for 30 years.”

“That means my boy, I love him, or whatever,” he said.

He was asked if he meant to indicate love when he called Johnson the word.

“Yes, I did,” he responded.

The controversy is a blemish on STRIVE, which has been heralded for helping people with troubled backgrounds get into the workforce. Its employment model, which was described in a CBS’ “60 Minutes” piece as “part boot camp, part group therapy,” claims to have helped nearly 50,000 people find work since 1984.

Sharpe told jurors that STRIVE’s tough-love program cannot excuse Carmona’s behavior.

“Well, if calling a person a n****r and subjecting them to a hostile work environment is part of STRIVE’s tough love, then STRIVE needs to be reminded that this type of behavior is illegal and cannot be tolerated,” she said.




http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2013/09/03/j...ial-slurs/

"Feminism is a trade union for ugly women"- Peregrine
(This post was last modified: 09-03-2013 06:49 PM by vinman.)
09-03-2013 06:48 PM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Aliblahba Offline
Banned

Posts: 8,017
Joined: Nov 2010
Post: #2
RE: Uh Oh. Federal Court Ruling
   


This is going to the Supreme Court. The N word has become the most powerful word in the English language. Can't wait to see the playing field leveled.
09-03-2013 07:12 PM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[-] The following 1 user Likes Aliblahba's post:
Genghis Khan
MattW Offline
Recovering Beta
*

Posts: 240
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 3
Post: #3
RE: Uh Oh. Federal Court Ruling
I doubt this will affect music at all as the entertainment industry gets a pass on pretty much everything, e.g. child labor laws.
09-03-2013 08:21 PM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Sonsowey Offline
International Playboy
******
Gold Member

Posts: 3,303
Joined: May 2010
Reputation: 51
Post: #4
RE: Uh Oh. Federal Court Ruling
I'm really unclear what this case is about. Was the use of the N-word the actual crime?

Stop and frisk just got a powerful new weapon.

[Image: White_cops_surround_little_Black_boy.jpg]

"Son, did you just say the N-word? You're under arrest for aggravated hate speech."
(This post was last modified: 09-03-2013 08:25 PM by Sonsowey.)
09-03-2013 08:23 PM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Architekt Offline
True Player
*****

Posts: 2,239
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 12
Post: #5
RE: Uh Oh. Federal Court Ruling
I hope that gets appealed successfully for the sake of America's free (lol) speech laws remaining somewhat in tact.

EDIT: Misread slightly. I wonder how many of the 8 jury members were black themselves

Refused - New Noise Wrote:How can we expect anyone to listen if we're using the same old voice?
We need new noise, new art for real people
(This post was last modified: 09-03-2013 08:49 PM by Architekt.)
09-03-2013 08:26 PM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[-] The following 1 user Likes Architekt's post:
Vacancier Permanent
AnonymousBosch Away
International Playboy
******
Gold Member

Posts: 5,243
Joined: Jul 2013
Reputation: 255
Post: #6
RE: Uh Oh. Federal Court Ruling
Quote:But Brandi Johnson, 38, told jurors that being black didn’t make it any less hurtful to be the target of what her attorney called Carmona’s “four-minute n****r tirade” about inappropriate workplace attire and unprofessional behavior.

Johnson, who taped the March 2012 remarks after her complaints about his verbal abuse were disregarded, said she fled to the restroom and cried for 45 minutes.

Emphasis mine. Women are so incapable of hearing honest criticism that they instantly emotionally melt down and then seek revenge on whoever criticised them.

Mixed workplaces are hell. I'm setting things up to quit mine.
09-03-2013 09:28 PM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
LowerCaseG Offline
Chubby Chaser
**

Posts: 472
Joined: Feb 2012
Reputation: 12
Post: #7
RE: Uh Oh. Federal Court Ruling
It sounds like this case is about hate speech, and whether the speaker's cultural/racial/ethnic background can amplify or negate the amount of damage caused by hate speech. For example, someone uses the N-Word as described in the case. Substitute Rob Carmona, with 10 or 100 different people ranging from Nelson Mandela on one end, to a Klansmen on the other, with the appropriate diversity scale in between. Is the victim here entitled to a different reward based on the cultural/racial/ethnic background of each of the different speakers, or is the victim's damage absolute/fixed? If you support different monetary awards, how would you figure it out?

I agree with Ali, that the subject here is clearly the most powerful word in the English Language, practically a sword. I would not, however, anticipate the Supreme Court reaching a conclusion that levels the playing field.
09-03-2013 09:38 PM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
BortimusPrime Offline
True Player
*****

Posts: 1,914
Joined: Sep 2011
Reputation: 19
Post: #8
RE: Uh Oh. Federal Court Ruling
What kind of moron runs an office filled with black female employees, and thinks he isn't going to be up shit creek if he so much as is misheard saying "figure" or "trigger"?
09-03-2013 09:50 PM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Basil Ransom Offline
International Playboy
******
Gold Member

Posts: 4,877
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 112
Post: #9
RE: Uh Oh. Federal Court Ruling
This would motivate employers not to hire hood black dudes who colloquially call each other nigga. Or the equivalent among other ethnicities.

You can imagine a crew of black guys using the word amongst themselves without a problem, and then one guy has a beef with another, or with the boss, and then he files a lawsuit against the company.

To avoid that liability, employers might just pass on any guy who seems like he might do that. Maybe he'll see if you say "ax" instead of "ask," bringing back the shibboleth test.
09-03-2013 09:54 PM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
MrXY Offline
International Playboy
******
Gold Member

Posts: 3,353
Joined: Jan 2012
Reputation: 78
Post: #10
RE: Uh Oh. Federal Court Ruling
Some of you guys are very confused about what this case was about

I'll just say I'm glad the racial double standard is being called into question

"If anything's gonna happen, it's gonna happen out there!- Captain Ron
09-03-2013 09:59 PM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Sp5 Offline
True Player
*****

Posts: 2,369
Joined: Feb 2013
Reputation: 95
Post: #11
RE: Uh Oh. Federal Court Ruling
It's not a criminal case - it's a civil case for employment discrimination. If you create a "hostile environment" for an employee based on his or her race, gender, or religion, you can be liable. Kinda vague, but there are minimum legal standards and then it's up to a jury.

It would be the same if he were berating a white employee as a "cracker."
(This post was last modified: 09-03-2013 11:36 PM by Sp5.)
09-03-2013 11:35 PM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Handsome Creepy Eel Offline
Innovative Casanova
*******
Gold Member

Posts: 10,970
Joined: Apr 2011
Reputation: 158
Post: #12
RE: Uh Oh. Federal Court Ruling
I would be hurt if someone yelled at me over something that I considered unimportant, but the exact choice of words wouldn't matter much. It's like the n-word has becomes a razor-tipped, explosive-charged depleted uranium bullet that leaves a trail of widespread destruction whenever used, and thus must be suppressed as it if were a nuclear weapon.

[Image: aEQ8.jpg]

Saying "pussy", "freak", "idiot" or "asshole" to someone does not cause this, but NIGGER does.

"Imagine" by HCE | Hitler reacts to Battle of Montreal | An alternative use for squid that has never crossed your mind before
09-04-2013 05:00 AM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 


Possibly Related Threads...
Thread: Author Replies: Views: Last Post
  US Court of Appeals: An IP address isn't enough to identify a pirate Adonis 7 913 08-31-2018 10:27 AM
Last Post: Adonis
  Supreme Court Rules States May Tax Online Retailers Sumanguru 5 942 06-21-2018 05:21 PM
Last Post: Gimlet
  More women backing out of divorces as court settlements shrink in UK Simeon_Strangelight 36 4,859 05-16-2018 04:34 AM
Last Post: CatRocketLauncher

Forum Jump:


User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)

Contact Us | RooshV.com | Return to Top | Return to Content | Mobile Version | RSS Syndication