Born 87 years ago on October 18th, Charles Edward Anderson
Berry became one of the most influential pioneers in music. Better known as Chuck Berry, his musical contribution
is considered to have been a vine for the growth of rock and roll. The
popularity of the genre expanded greatly through Berry as it vibrantly moved from his unique lyrical style, electrifying guitar solos and his animated showmanship.
Berry cleverly fused his catchy tunes with the common experiences of teenage
life. The formula crossed over into mainstream music and gave a loud voice to
the first generation of rebellious teens. Driven by the themes of automobiles, rock and roll and education, the lyrics and music to his songs revved up vivid imagery of what American
teen culture was like and led to several hits, including School Days, Maybellene
and Johnny B. Goode. Berry scored his only number one song on the Top 100 Billboard
in 1972 with “My Ding a Ling”. Berry holds the distinction of being the first
inductee to the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame in 1984. Referring to the style of music, John Lennon once
said that if you had to give it another name, "You might call it Chuck Berry". Considered by some to be the father of rock
and roll, Chuck Berry is a native of Saint Louis, Missouri. The home that he once lived in is located on Whittier Street and is registered as a National Historic Site. A statue
of Berry was erected in the Delmar Loop, an area of his hometown. The
structure stands not far from the Blueberry Hill landmark restaurant and music club where the "Vine of Rock and Roll" still performs once a
week.
On July 20th childhood friends of Tracy Martin, Tommie Liddell, Undre
Howard, Reginald Jordan and Raymond House with the assistance of Stephanie
Miles planned and organized a march/rally in Martin’s hometown of East St.
Louis, Illinois. The march to the United States district court and the rally
that took place there were to show love and support for Martin in his continued fight for justice in the aftermath of the acquittal of his son's killer. The peaceful demonstration, attended by several hundred people, started at the East St Louis Board
of Education. It occurred under the umbrella of the
National Call to Action Day, a nationwide protest where people in over a 100
cities marched on the lawns of federal courts to pressure the U.S. Justice
Department to file charges against George Zimmerman for the violation of Trayvon
Martin’s civil rights.
Barry Malloyd, a minister at Mount Sinai M.B. Church and author of the book Mama Said Write It, started the rally on a spiritual note. He petitioned God with a passionte prayer asking that justice be served in the
nationally known case. Malloyd said, "Truth crushed to stone will rise again." He also pleaded for peace in East St.Louis, a community plague by violence and crime.
Among the featured
speakers were personal friends of Tracy Martin, Tommie Liddell and Raymond
House, Ayonna Khayyam, financial literacy educator and vice president of Young Money Entertainment Inc., and Saint Louis radio personality Carol Daniel.
House (left) professed the community's love for the Martin family. He said, "East St. Louis loves Tracy Martin and Sybrina Fulton and we are especially proud of them for the way they have expressed themselves with dignity, from the circumstances surrounding their son's death and throughout the trial of the man who killed him. They took the high road when there where so many other avenues they could have taken".
Daniel (left) delivered
a powerful message to the youth in attendance. She said “We need you to be all that
Trayvon Martin will never be”.
Liddell (right) read a statement from Martin to the residents of East St. Louis. His message in the wake of the aquittal verdict was “My faith is being tested right now". http://youtu.be/ohG4VjgjY6o
14 year-old Khayyam (right) also addressed the younger people. She said "Knowledge is the key to success. If you're illiterate nobody's going to take you seriously, and with our generation, not taking school seriously, society is going to treat us like a joke"! As Tracy Martin and Sybrina Fulton continue to pursue justice in the killing of their son, they are advocates of the Trayvon Martin Foundation, a non-for-profit organization that raises awareness of ethnic, gender and racial profiling. A goal of the organization is to educate youth in the area of conflict resolution as part of a larger effort to prevent deadly confrontations between them and strangers.
Good
Afternoon Everyone. No Justice! No Peace! No Justice! No Peace! East St. Louis loves Tracy
Martin and Sybrina Fulton, and we are especially proud of them for the way they
have expressed themselves with dignity, from the circumstance surrounding their
son’s death and throughout the trial of the man who killed him. They took the high road when there were so
many other avenues they could have taken.
Last year when they came to support the
stop the violence rally here in East St. Louis, we the friends of Tracy Martin,
presented him and Sybrina with a plaque in memory of their son Trayvon. Inscribed
on the plaque was our pledge to them and our prayer for them.As written it reads “We stand with you, we support your fight for justice and we pray that
God continues to be your strength”. That
was our promise then and in the overcast of the verdict, it remains the same. We
stand and support them in their continued fight for justice.
Similar to
the nationwide marches that led the state of Florida to charge George Zimmerman
with second degree murder last year, there are nationwide marches now to have
charges filed against him in federal court. Today is a national call to action
and people all over the country have answered by marching, because we want an
investigation to determine if Trayvon Martin’s civil rights were violated. George
Zimmerman killed Trayvon Martin, lied about the circumstances surrounding it,
never explained it court and was still found not guilty by the jury. There is a
grave injustice in that!
In the
community of common sense we don’t believe for a minute that Trayvon was
peering through windows and looking at houses, just because Mr. Zimmerman said
he was. Who does that when walking from
the store in the rain while talking on the phone in a neighborhood where they
have business to be? In the community of common sense we do believe that George
Zimmerman created reasons to report Trayvon Martin to the police, to portray
him as a suspicious person. What really
made him suspicious? In the community of
common sense we do believe that if Trayvon Martin were white George Zimmerman would
have gone on to Target instead of making him a target. He would have stayed seated in his vehicle and
we would not have had to question whether he was standing his ground or
not.
Fifty years
ago, a march driven by the force of a quarter of a million people traveled to
Washington D.C. to fight for civil rights and against this kind of
discrimination. Because of that march and the laws passed behind it,
forty-five years later an African American man was able to walk into the White
House, not as a servant, but as the president of the United States, the highest
office of power in the world. As far as he has come as an African American man
to get there, if an African American boy isn’t able to walk a few yards to a
house in neighborhood he’s visiting, without being discriminated against and being killed, then we as a people still have a long way to go. Thank you
A walk from the National Mall to the White House is a relatively short distance to travel. Depending on the starting point and the pace the stroll could take as little as thirty minutes. At any rate, if you begin from where African Americans began fifty years ago it would be a much longer journey. On August 28, 1963 from a place of second-class citizenship, a group of African Americans and their supporters gathered at the National Mall for the March on Washington. The march was a demonstration for freedom and jobs. Driven by a force of a quarter of a million people its influence would travel through time to the White House and into history.
As a vehicle of the civil rights movement, the March on Washington carried its message of equality for African Americans from the National Mall on Capitol Hill to the the floor of the legislature in Congress. Dispatched from the Lincoln Memorial, the message boldly served as a notice of intent to reform. Adjoined with a civil rights bill proposed by President Kennedy, it trudged through the bureaucracy of Washington. The moving message prompted the passage of two important laws in successive years, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965.
Impelled into reality by the march, the landmark laws embarked on a mission to remove the road blocks of injustice that prevented minorities from moving forward. Persevering for decades through systemic racism the enduring statutes went on to break down those barriers. Consequently, a path toward better educational and employment opportunities was constructed. It was through that path that the course of life for black people changed and the way was paved for the first African American to arrive at the White House as the president of the United States.
On January 21, 2013, four years after serving his first term as president, Barack Obama arrived at the National Mall again, almost fifty years after the March on Washington. He was there to be sworn in for his second term as president. He took the oath on the holiday named for Dr. Martin Luther King Jr, the keynote speaker at the March on Washington. The bible used to swear him into office was Dr. King's traveling bible.
In the mid 1800’s a legal issue in the state of Missouri
involving slavery further flamed the debate of whether to abolish it and
eventually led to the Civil War. At the center
of the controversy was Dred Scott. He
had been born a slave around 1799 to the Blow family in Virginia. After the family relocated to Saint Louis
they sold Scott to John Emerson. When
Emerson died Scott tried to buy his freedom from the estate of Emerson’s wife
who inherited him as property. The attempt
was unsuccessful and in 1846 with the help of legal representation, Scott filed
suit in the Saint Louis Circuit Court. The basis of his argument hinged on the
fact that he had been taken by his owner from the slave state of Missouri into
areas where slavery was against the law. This was a violation of “Once free,
always free”, a common law doctrine that had been previously recognized by the
courts. The law made it illegal for slaves who had ever been freed to be
enslaved again. Under the ownership of
John Emerson, Scott had lived with him in the free-state of Illinois and the free
territory of Wisconsin. The governing entities in anti-slavery areas
also supported the view that time spent by slaves in free-states and territories made them free. Since there were no
laws within their boundaries to govern the possession of slaves, they believed that
slave owners with slaves in their jurisdictions forfeited their rights to own
them. Without a legal precedence of
someone trying to obtain their freedom after leaving a free area and returning to a slave state, the
court had to determine a course of action. In
1847 the case went to trial and despite the favorable legal presence of the Once Free, Always Free Law and the strong anti-slavery sentiments of abolitionists, the
judgment went against Scott and he remained a slave. However, due to the evidence
of hearsay discovered after the verdict, the judge ordered a re-trial. In the second trial, citing the fact that
Scott had been wrongfully enslaved while living in free-areas a jury decided to grant him
his freedom. Displeased with the
decision, his owner appealed it and in 1852 the Missouri Supreme Court
overturned it. The court stated that “Once
free, always free”, which had been adhered to for the previous 28 years was no
longer applicable. Scott was returned to
a life of slavery. Since Scott’s owner
lived in New York, his lawyer was able to have the case retried
under appeal in the federal district court. Another trial was held. Nevertheless, the original decision
was upheld, Scott lost his case and again was denied his freedom. In 1857 the case went to the United States
Supreme Court. It decided against awarding Scott his freedom too. The judge ruled
that no person of African ancestry could claim
citizenship in the United States. Furthermore, since he was not considered a
citizen, it was illegal for him to file suit in a federal court. The
court also concluded that granting Scott his freedom after he temporarily lived
in anti-slavery areas, would have denied his rightful owner of possessing his property,
which would have been a violation of the Missouri Compromise. Still considered as the property of the newly married heiress Irene Emerson,
Scott's status was reaffirmed to be that of a slave. Emerson's marriage prior to the Supreme Court verdict was the start of an unexpected turn toward freedom for Scott. Emerson's husband was an abolitionist and had been unaware
that his wife owned the most controversial slave in the country. After finding
out, he and his wife decided to return Scott to his original owners, the Blow
family. The Blow family had also become
abolitionists and just four months after the Supreme Court ruling they released
Scott and his wife Harriet. Finally after years of fighting court battles as a slave Scott was free. In September 1858 he went to work as a porter and less than two
years later he died from tuberculosis. In 1863, a few years after Scott's death the Emancipation Proclamation, an executive order by President Lincoln started the process of freeing all slaves.
Interestingly, it was in the court of law that Scott pursued his liberty, but it was through the court of changing public opinion that he gained it. As the progressive attitude to abolish slavery grew it persuaded the people who owned Scott to set him free. Perhaps
it’s fitting where the statue of Scott and his wife erected in 2012 is located. 155 years after its ruling to
keep him enslaved the statue of Dred
Scott stands in the yard of the Saint Louis Old Courthouse. Ironically, as a lifeless sculpture he has gained more freedom outside the courthouse than he was able to as a living
person inside of it.
Hear
the Smoking Gun Evidence in the George Zimmerman Case!
Kel-Tec PF-9
Only
minutes after George Zimmerman made a phone call to the Sanford Police
Department to report Trayvon Martin as a suspicious person, their paths briefly
crossed and Martin’s life suddenly ended. Since it became a major story
in the media people all over the world have wondered what really happened that
night. According to Zimmerman, he killed Martin in self-defense shortly
after Martin tried to take his firearm. Zimmerman claims that Martin went for
his concealed weapon when it became exposed during a struggle.
Now, with the trial fully underway, new clues have emerged from previously released evidence. They cast doubt on
Zimmerman's assertion that Martin tried to take his gun, which he says was in his holster. The clues arise from the very call that the neighborhood
watchman made moments before the shooting. While it’s not a secret, it is
a mystery that the evidence isn't more widely known. Especially, since the call
revealing it was released and broadcast repeatedly in the news. One possible
explanation is that listeners have been distracted by conversation. The
startling clues are faintly heard in the background of the on-going dialogue
between Zimmerman and the dispatcher. I’m not a detective nor am I an attorney.
Neither am I familiar with all of the prosecution’s discovery, but I
would venture to say that one of the most damning pieces of evidence in the
murder case against George Zimmerman is that recorded phone call. After
carefully listening to it again, I am convinced that the distinct and
compelling noise heard in it is the smoking gun. It’s those sounds that likely
led to the second-degree murder charge against him and could very well lead to
a conviction.
Listen
for yourself and decide. (Stereo headphones enhances the quality of
sound).
At the
2:00 minute mark of the recording Zimmerman is still in his vehicle while
giving directions for arriving officers to get to his location. Within a few seconds he
abruptly uses an expletive as he states for the first time that Martin is
running. A second later what sounds like the following noises are heard, a
vehicle door opening, an open door alert sounding, and the door of a vehicle
closing. Next Zimmerman’s voice is heard slightly straining as he
continues to talk to the dispatcher while moving to get out of a vehicle.
Apparently tracking Martin movements, he reports to the dispatcher where
the teen is running. The dispatcher then asks Zimmerman if he’s following
him. Zimmerman responds, “Yeah.” The dispatcher says, “Okay, we don’t need you
to do that” and Zimmerman’s says, “Okay.” As there is no obvious change in the background
noise, there is no way to confirm that Zimmerman discontinued following Martin.
The dispatcher says, “Alright sir what is your name?” “George,” Zimmerman
responds. For a second time Zimmerman states that Martin is running. The
dispatcher asks Zimmerman his last name. When he responds, the evidence
that has been largely unheard by listeners boldly speaks, perhaps as a chilling
prelude to the heart-wrenching screams heard on the 911 call shortly before
Martin is shot. At the 2:56 mark on the recording as Zimmerman states his
last name with particular emphasis, what sounds like the mechanisms of a gun
are clearly heard. Almost simultaneously, Zimmerman seemingly preoccupied with doing something sounds frustrated, as he utters two words in a very low voice. One sounds like the
expletive, “s**t” and the other is “no.” A few seconds later tapping noises are heard. The noises are heard
intermittently for approximately 22 seconds until the 3:23 mark on the
recording. The call ends shortly thereafter.
It's circumstantial audio evidence, but it can be just as compelling as visual evidence. Obviously the prosecution would have to convince a jury that the noise heard is Zimmerman preparing his firearm. If gun experts can testify that the sounds are consistent with preparing that type of gun for shooting, it would be a start toward persuading a jury. Furthermore, if they could re-create the same kind of noise heard, using Zimmerman's own gun, it would be very powerful testimony. Since there is no visual evidence, the prosecution would also likely argue that the context in which these sounds occur make the accusations that Zimmerman was getting his gun ready for use more probable. How Zimmerman's weapon was introduced into the confrontation is an important point. If Zimmerman prepared his gun with the intent to pursue Martin without provocation, at that point he engaged in premeditated criminal activity. If that's the way it happened, Zimmerman's unlawful behavior subsequently led to the death of Martin, who was unarmed, not committing a crime, and running away from him.
On Friday May 25, Tracy Martin and Sybrina Fulton, the
parents of Trayvon Martin, the Florida teen who was shot and killed during an
encounter with neighborhood watchman George Zimmerman on February 26,
were presented with twin plaques at a Stop the Violence rally in East Saint
Louis, Illinois. Martin, who is from East St. Louis and Fulton were in town to
support the campaign against youth violence. The two were presented with the
plaques at the North End Missionary Baptist Church by friends from the
neighborhood where Martin grew-up.
The plaques read-Tracy Martin and Sybrina Fulton, as your friends
we also mourn the loss of your son, Trayvon. In your time of need, we are an
ear to listen and a shoulder to cry on. We stand with you, we support your fight
for justice and we pray that God will continue to be your strength.
.jpg)
