Dear Editor:

Comparing the recent decision of the high profile Taliaferro case in Powhatan a recent case in Virginia Beach, we can see why there has been an outcry from the Powhatan community of the need to do something to find out why our Commonwealth’s Attorney would allow the jury to even receive and consider instructions of involuntary manslaughter.

With the Taliaferro decision we thought we were not in Virginia. The family had asked the NAACP to assist them with monitoring of the court.

Moving away from those issues, and going back to the preliminary hearing in which we were allowed to monitor and to get the confidence from the evidence the Commonwealth’s Attorney put forward, the involuntary manslaughter verdict is hard to accept. The Commonwealth’s Attorney took time to come before the public in an NAACP meeting to explain the judicial process, providing handouts on how the case would proceed based on the evidence. What a letdown for him to allow the jury to be given these instructions.

Our concerns during this time of assessment and investigation of the facts are: did the Powhatan Commonwealth’s Attorney, who represents all of the people, perform his duties by allowing the judge to give involuntary manslaughter charges to this jury? What made them special?

He even has a request for funding for taxpayers’ money in the county budget to support his office. Reviewing the facts presented that were certified as First degree murder did not support jury instructions by the commonwealth with no objections.

How can the judicial system be so different in the same state from the case (reported below) in Virginia Beach? Our executive committee was alarmed to read about this case in Virginia Beach as characterized by Harvey L. Bryant.

We realize some people are having difficulty understanding why members of the community are so outraged by the loss of life of a young student. We thought we would share this information from Harvey L Bryant’s website:

“Jury Sentences Armed Robber Who Punched and Kicked Police Dog to 24 Years

Harvey L. Bryant, Commonwealth’s Attorney for the City of Virginia Beach, announced today that a jury found Elijah Temel Baker, 25 years old, previously residing in the 1300 block of Pierside Court in Virginia Beach, guilty of one (1) count of Conspiracy to Commit a Felony; one (1) count of Robbery; one (1) count of Use of a Firearm in the Commission of a Felony; one (1) count of Carjacking. The jury recommended a sentence of twenty- four (24) years. Prior to the jury trial, Baker pled guilty before the Honorable Patricia L. West to one (1) count of Eluding Police – Endangerment; one (1) count of Interfering with a Police Animal; one (1) count of Reckless Driving – Endangerment; and one (1) count of Driving on a Suspended Operators License. Judge West found the defendant guilty of the additional charge of Possession of a Firearm by a Convicted Felon. He faces formal sentencing on June 9, 2009 on the jury sentence and the additional crimes to which he pleaded.

Baker has a prior felony record that includes Possessing a Schedule I or II Drug. His co-defendant, Devin Watts has been convicted of similar charges already and awaits sentencing in the Circuit Court.”

Is this difference between the outcome of a trial in Powhatan and one in Virginia Beach the result of the race of the defendants? For in VA Beach the defendant Elijah Temel Baker was an African American and he received 25 years for kicking a K-P-9 dog named Diesel and a white defendant in Powhatan is recommended to receive 11 years for killing a black male.

What is the value of African American life?

R. Vaughan, President
Powhatan Branch NAACP