Talk:Jena, Louisiana

Racial Tensions Neutrality
I added a neutrality tag to the Racial Tensions section. This section supports the black point of view. I certainly understand that; racism is very evident, but wikipedia policy is to maintain neutrality. My main concern is when the fight is described. The only view presented is that of the black students. It fails to recognize that the white student was beaten after he had lost conciousness. I also question the "week of intimidation", as I have heard nothing about it. I do not believe CounterPunch qualifies as a reliable source. Stop Me Now! 14:47, 26 June 2007 (UTC)


 * I didn't know there was a "black point of view" -- perhaps you mean the point of view of the defendants, which is a rather different thing. That you haven't heard of something, or don't believe some source is reliable, isn't relevant.  If you think something is missing from the description and can source it, you are free to add it.  You've created a dispute where there is no need for one, and the tag should be removed with or without additions. -- 71.102.194.130 11:49, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

(Insert: Come on now, of course their is a "black point of view", the same as there is a "white point of view." Racial prejudice knows no color, and there are feelings of racism on both sides of the color spectrum.) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.167.166.131 (talk) 15:14, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

The "week of racial tensions" included,among other things, one incident in which a white student held a gun on some black students. They got the gun away from the white student; they were charged with assault and robbery (of the gun) while the white student was not charged.

The assaulted white student went to a school event the same evening. The six black students were charged with attempted murder, supposedly using the deadly weapon of their tennis shoes. I find it difficult to believe that if they had wanted to kill him they could not have done so. <>

Source for these two paragraphs: Democracy Now, July 10, 2007. The neutrality tag should be removed, and the article updated.Shodo.spring 17:14, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

I removed the NPOV tag after some edits by me and others. The racial tensions section is now very well sourced. Matt Toups 21:04, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Distinguish Assault vs Aggravated Assault
See discussion of assault & aggravated assault at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aggravated_assault

Name
Does the town's name have anything to do with the Battle of Jena fought by Napoleon? Funnyhat 03:32, 1 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I could find out if you wanted, Funnyhat. RingtailedFox • Talk • Stalk 22:56, 31 July 2007 (UTC)


 * If you could, that'd be awesome. (You don't have to go out of your way or anything - I was just a little curious). Funnyhat 21:17, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

No, Jena is a city in eastern Germany. I don't know that Napoleon ever brought his army to Louisiana. We might have been better off if he had. Obviously, though the town founders must have had Jena, Germany in mind when they named the town.


 * Yes, but Jena, Germany was the location of one of Napoleon's military victories. See Battle of Jena. Funnyhat (talk) 00:27, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

I do find the reference to the battle of Jena not relevant. I think that it is purely by chance that the incorporation of Jena in 1906 is 100 years after the battle of Jena. The actual renaming was in 1871.

BernhardSchmalhofer (talk) 09:01, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

Stealth Racism
What on earth is "stealth racism"? I have never heard of this term before. RingtailedFox • Talk • Stalk 22:56, 31 July 2007 (UTC)


 * it's speech cosmetics. since there evidently is NO racism whatsoever in the US, it has to be STEALTHY if at all present. (the BBC broadcast a documentary about the segregated city of jena, and the "case" today) --Snottily 17:53, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

I recommend that the following two incidents in Jena be added:

In 1998 Wackenhut (since renamed the GEO Group) opened the for-profit Jena Juvenile Justice Center. In 2000, a U.S. Justice Department report detailed widespread abuse and poor inmate conditions at the center. However, Jena Mayor Dale Willis said Wackenhut was a "good corporate neighbor." Willis also stated he didn't believe all the allegations in the Justice Department report. District Attorney Reed Walters told the press, "We want to see what the facts are and present them to a grand jury." The prison was closed later that year by a federal order. http://www.usdoj.gov/opa/pr/2000/March/155cr.htm http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2000/05/09/60II/main193636.shtml

After Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, inmates from other parts of Louisiana were housed in the closed juvenile facility in Jena. However, the Jena Correctional Facility was shut down that same year at the behest of human rights organizations and state legislators amid allegations of widespread, gross abuse. http://hrw.org/english/docs/2005/10/05/usdom11826.htm —Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.225.225.16 (talk) 01:44, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Racial tension non-NPOV
"The six accused of attempted second-degree murder are black and were fighting a white student after a week of intimidation by white students, including the one who was assaulted."

This sentence needs to be removed or edited. The white student was not "fighting" the black students, he was jumped and beaten unconscious, which constitutes at least assault. Calling it a fight implies consent. Mentioning the "week of intimidation" implies there was justification for the attack. That is not for the author of the article to decide.Suicidesamurai 10:28, 23 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Your innocent white student racially taunted a black student who was beaten up by group of white students. Being blind to one side is racism on your part.


 * All these discussions back and forth with both sides being blind to simple facts that you can use any name whatsoever i.e. call a person any name and it NEVER excuses ANY assault (according to legal theory); and you cannot ever excuse 6 persons kicking an unconscious person. (blows from a leg are 5-10x stronger than from an arm or punch). And the extreme lucky fact that victim was able to go out the next day has NOTHING to do with the facts of the assault where he was alledgedly attempted to be severely injured... if so ... (but that fact of how severely the attempted injury was is for a jury). Please review and get that all straight as NONE of it has anything to do with racisim. -- unsigned comment added by 208.54.7.178 (talk) 03:36, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
 * wrong imo, it DOES have to do with racism. it is the alleged reason for the assault. i'm not saying it was a good reason, but it was the Defense's justification for it.  aI'm not trying to belittle what they did, bu you have to admit that 20 years without bond just for beating up a classmate is quite excessive.  ~ 69.149.105.63 00:04, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

This is so sad this is going on today in Louisiana and in Unted States of America, regardless if your black, white, or what ever. For elected officials, professional, and educated men and women acting this way, is SAD. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.44.40.150 (talk) 01:12, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Reverends
Which reverends took part in this struggle?Kkrunkk 20:21, 17 September 2007 (UTC) It is very sad that all of this had to happen for both the back and white students. It seems that the students should not be on trial, but the administration that is in charge of the school these students attend. Allowing the racial actions of the party that started this incident should have not been tolorated in any way, shape, or form. Allowing one race to a privalage and not the other is very SAD and Ignorant of these highly educated people these students call teachers and principles. So when ever it is all said and done I don't understand how these adults allowed the sistuation to go this far.

KG__indianapolis,IN —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.141.228.12 (talk) 06:21, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

I'm in agreement and although these instances never occur in vacuums we must be judicial that both parties have an expressed interest in the matter and perhaps the only way we could alieviate tensions would be to take the facts and just the facts. Truth prevails. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.247.115.28 (talk) 13:48, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

so very, very wrong- please look under 'fighting words' there is a long history in our legal sysetm of some words being so offensive that physical retaliation, although never justified, is understandable and defendable. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.102.86.2 (talk) 08:19, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Who is "him"
Hey I was just reading this article, and I had trouble understanding a sentence...It is in teh racial tensions part. Thanks in advance:

Racial tensions resurfaced in Jena on September 1, 2006, when hangman's nooses were discovered in an oak tree on the campus of Jena High School after a black student had asked the vice principal if he and some friends could sit under the tree, where white students had typically congregated. The school administration recommended that the noose-hangers be expelled. The elected La Salle Parish School Board overruled the school, HIM and the three white student perpetrators received in-school suspension.[4]

I capitalized the HIM that I am confused about BCapp 03:38, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

---

I also have no idea who it refers to. Regardless of meaning, it's not grammatical. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.35.93.53 (talk) 00:40, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
 * It presumably refers to the white kid that was beaten. ~ 69.149.105.63 23:56, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

a fight broke out on campus
The word fight implies there was a contest between combatants. Six against one is not a contest and the sentence doesn’t inform the reader who started the conflict. Wouldn’t it be more accurate to have written: six African-American students allegedly attacked a white student. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Patriotjohn (talk • contribs) 11:09, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Lula Coleman
Hi, I would like to verify some information: today the German news magazine Spiegel wrote that in 1918 Lula Coleman held the office the first female sheriff in the USA, and that in 1920 was the first female mayor of the town of Jena and the State (of Louisiana, I assume). Does anybody in Jena, Louisiana know more about Mrs Coleman? --91.12.248.137 07:31, 21 September 2007 (UTC) Lula Coleman was my great grandmother. She was the first female deputy sheriff in Louisiana and possibly the first in the United States. She was the first female mayor of a town in Louisiana and again possibly the first in the United States. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mjrwjr (talk • contribs) 20:18, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

If you do enough googling, you will find that there were already female deputy sheriffs in other states out west, especially larger metropolitan areas. However, Ms. Lula V. Coleman is definitely considered the first Louisiana female deputy sheriff. I have found nothing in official statements that indicate she was the actual sheriff. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.217.136.27 (talk) 20:23, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

Pronunciation
Is the town's name pronounced "Jean-a" or "Jenna" (Jen- as in "Jennifer") The town is pronounced "Jean-a"149.169.46.56 21:08, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

The town is pronounced with a long "e" as in Jean, not Jen. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.226.242.214 (talk) 16:50, 22 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Anyone have a source for this? I had wondered about the pronunciation too.  Thx Grover cleveland 15:51, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Racial Tension
The NPOV banner and banner for lack of references should be removed. There are references galore. I also see no significant disputes regarding NPOV beyond claims of NPOV by a few editors above without further explanation and discussion. I wait for comment and discussion before removing these banners.melonbarmonster 23:59, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
 * There's a comment on the article page (at the top of Racial Tension and the Jena Six) that reads: . So, I think that all three templates should stay (current events is a given, though)  NA SC AR Fan 24 (talk&bull;contribs) 12:04, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Requested additional sources
Per the refimprove tag in the "Racial tension and the Jena Six" section, here's one that sheds some light on why things may not be all that they seem in the polarizing national media: Frankly, after reading this, I get the feeling that most reporting (and punditry) on this is too selective with its sources and information to give any true perspective. Even this article inspires more questions. Did the students generally feel the way the staff claims to feel about the "white tree"? Was the multiracial horseplay with the nooses just ordinary goofing around, or an intentional teen community reaction to the implied threat? How many jurors (black and white) were called for the Bell trial, and how many of each group didn't show up? (The statement alone doesn't say enough to suggest whether it has any statistical meaning. Saying of the black jury candidates that "none showed up" implies there were several (not just one or two) candidates, but a pool of residents in a 10%-black parish that would yield at least three African-Americans would suggest several dozen candidates for the jury. Is that typical? The actual numbers would seem necessary for clarity.) It seems to me that we're going to need a lot more details to provide any meaningful perspective on this situation. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 08:23, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

NPOV
It is heavily contested that this was a "fight." Six boys attacked one boy and bloodied him. Regardless of the appropriateness of the sentencing, describing the facts as a "fight" is incorrect. This was an attack or ambush. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.34.234.180 (talk) 15:44, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

This is how the Jena 6 page on wikipedia describes the attack: "On December 4, 2006, 17-year-old white Jena High School student Justin Barker was assaulted at school. He was struck on the back of the head and knocked down by a black student. According to some witnesses, a group of black students then repeatedly kicked him." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.34.234.180 (talk) 15:49, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Yeah: Semi-protect
This thing is a bit on the controversial side, because it involves racism and allegations of racism - and racism is a topic that stirs people's blood and causes them to do stupid things like vandalize and pick fights - and semiprotection was warranted here. &mdash; Rickyrab | Talk 14:45, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Extra electoral notes
1995 Gubernatorial runoff: Foster 6078 (86%), Fields 1021 (14%) (Source) 1999 Gubernatorial initial election: Foster 82%, Jefferson 9% (Source)

Going 2 to 1 for David Duke (Source) is also troubling.

Just in case you wanted to know some more on the LaSalle Parish electoral history. The massive majorities for Foster (who didn't live in/near LaSalle) and Duke make the swing to Blanco even more troubling. --RobbieFal 01:28, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Fighting a White Student
I take exception to the wording highlighted in bold italics. " ...attempted second-degree murder are black and were fighting a white student after what they claimed..." to me it appears to be Weasel Wording favoring a pro-jena 6 arguement. The factual account is that someone punched the one white boy in the head, he went down immediatly, and never hit back even once. Pretty much by definition a fight requires both parties to be attacking, as it requires by definition an actual conflict between the parties directly involved. No one (not even the pro-Jena supporters) have suggested that the white victim in question even so much as saw the attack coming, much less took ANY offensive action. NO CITED ACCOUNT differs from this, and it's been discussed on the Jena 6 page here on wikipedia before. I ask that the word fighting be replaced with the appropriate word, Assaulting. They Assaulted their victim. They did not Fight their victim.

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Jena, Louisiana. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive http://www.webcitation.org/6YQozzgAf?url=http://www.naco.org/Counties/Pages/FindACounty.aspx to http://www.naco.org/Counties/Pages/FindACounty.aspx
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/print/2008/01/the-truth-about-jena/6580/
 * Added archive https://archive.is/20160602200744/http://www.census.gov/popest/data/cities/totals/2015/SUB-EST2015.html to http://www.census.gov/popest/data/cities/totals/2015/SUB-EST2015.html
 * Added archive http://www.webcitation.org/6YSasqtfX?url=http://www.census.gov/prod/www/decennial.html to http://www.census.gov/prod/www/decennial.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 03:00, 21 April 2017 (UTC)