Quote:
Originally posted by BadNewsRef
Now, Montgomery's claims that he was pulled from the game for racial reasons is a whole nother story. That's a subjective view on his part, which so far has not been backed up publicly with facts or evidence.
|
But this incident does not represent his subjective view any more or less than any other similar (and by that I don't mean racial) legal dispute. The fact that it tugged at peoples' emotions and upset high school students, staff and fans for a few days is neither here nor there in my book. He is using available legal channels and will now have to demonstrate the merits of his case as his opponent will have to defend theirs. It may not work out totally fairly, but it's what we've got.
Not that you were, BadNewsRef, but I don't know why people get so upset when individuals exercise their legal rights. If the court made a mistake in granting the injuction (which it appears maybe they did) then isn't that on the court?
Just yesterday I was given a reminder about the legal system and race when our new principal - an African-American man - was telling a few members of the staff about how he had just been pulled over by the local police. They didn't give him a reason for the stop and asked him to get out of his car. He removed his watch, his wedding ring and some other jewelry and put it in his glove compartment. Then he said, "if you are arresting me, I will cooperate but otherwise, no, I will not get out of my car." They asked him again and he said, "no." They asked him about the paycheck on the passenger seat of his car and he said it was from his employer. They asked him why his license was from 600 miles away and he said he had just moved up here to take this new job. He asked what he was being stopped for and if he was being arrested and eventually they let him go without telling him why they had stopped him. I think it's tempting for people to ask what the hell he was thinking and why he didn't just get out of the car but it never really crossed his mind as an option.
I'm not including this example because I think it's parallel to the Montgomery situation - I don't know the whole story there. I just think that it's a tricky thing to sit in judgement of when people choose to invoke their legal rights and what meaning the weight of history carries in that decision. Again, this is not meant as a tirade against your post, BadNewsRef, but just an acknowledgment that we are just looking at someone who decided to invoke his legal rights who is going to have to go through the same burden of proof and suffer the consequences of public opinion.
Now that the injunction is history, it's going to be interesting to see if this gets any sunlight as it progresses or if it just disappears. I don't know what the next steps will be but I can't imagine the injunction was the end of the story.