May 10, 2024
Missouri Attorney General’s Investigation of Hazelwood East High School’s DEI Program and his Insinuation that DEI caused or allowed a physical altercation to take place between students away from the school grounds
Missouri Attorney General launched a very public investigation into the DEI program at Hazelwood East High School after an altercation between two children who apparently were both students at the high school was videotaped and made public on the internet. The investigation was initiated based on several assumptions three of which we address here: first, that one of the students involved was assaulted; two, that the altercation was on school grounds; and three that the Schools’ DEI program was the cause of the altercation. These conclusions were made by the Attorney General’s Office before the investigation even began.
A review of his public statements and Press Releases by the Attorney General’s Office do not indicate how the DEI programs at Hazelwood East contributed to the dispute on which the physical altercation was based. There is no indication that the dispute was about the District’s or School’s DEI program. There is no indication that any DEI policy encouraged violence of any kind or for any reason. In fact, DEI is about togetherness and common goals and fostering relationships across diverse characteristics and world experiences. From all indications, this was a physical altercation that went too far and that could have been about anything that teenagers normally argue about. The fight did not take place on or around the school. There is no indication that any school personnel or security personnel knew, participated, condoned, or failed to act on knowledge that this fight was going to take place away from the school.
Many MCBA members were bothered by the violence and the fact that someone was videotaping the fight on a cell phone and never interceded. However, there is no evidence there was a racial component to this fight, contrary to the Attorney General’s Press Release.
Missouri Attorney Gen, Andrew Bailey’s press release states (emphasis provided):
JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. – Today, Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey announced he has launched an investigation into Hazelwood School District after a student was assaulted by another student in broad daylight during school hours. The investigation will focus on how the school district’s diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs contributed to the incident.
“I am launching an investigation into Hazelwood School District after a student was senselessly assaulted by another student in broad daylight,” said Attorney General Bailey. “The entire community deserves answers on how Hazelwood’s radical DEI programs resulted in such despicable safety failures that has resulted in a student fighting for her life. There must be accountability.”
“I am disturbed that it appears Hazelwood School District (‘HSD’) has ignored long-standing Missouri law and elevated political narrative above student safety. In 2020, the HSD Board of Education adopted a ‘Statement of Solidarity’ compelling the district to, among other things: categorize and treat students differently based on race; ‘recruit, hire and promote’ staff based on race; and ‘reevaluate’ the district’s relationship with local police.
Mr. Bailey seems to assume that the Hazelwood East School Safety or Resource officers were responsible to police the students after they leave the campus.
Mr. Bailey assumes the student who apparently was injured in the fight was attacked senselessly in broad daylight during school hours without any knowledge that the fight was going to occur. Mr. Bailey assumes the fight was not planned or arranged notwithstanding all of the students who were around. Mr. Bailey did not mention any local police agency that was supposed to be policing the area away from the school. Mr. Bailey did not mention any of the adults who were involved or nearby. Instead, Mr. Bailey pointed to the DEI policies at the school as the responsible administrative program that caused, condoned and failed to prevent this fight away from the school grounds.
Incredibly, he made all these factual assumptions BEFORE he began his investigation.
“Two weeks ago, on March 11, 2024, during the middle of the school day, a Hazelwood East High School student, Kaylee Gain, was viciously assaulted on a street near school property by another student. As of this writing, Ms. Gain remains in critical condition in a St. Louis area hospital. Notably, during the attack on Ms. Gain, which was captured on video by other students, not a single school resource officer was on the scene to protect Ms. Gain or restore order. The absence of SROs on the scene is directly attributable to Hazelwood’s insistence on prioritizing race-based policies over basic student safety. By its actions, HSD has endangered not only Ms. Gain, but the general school community writ large.”
Diversity is good because it involves the representation and participation of people of different genders, races, ethnicities, religions, ages, sexual orientations, disability and classes. The fight between the children was not over whether DEI was good or bad for the school.
MCBA had a working relationship and open dialogue with the Attorney General when he was in the Governor’s Office and attended events in St. Louis. We issue an open invitation to talk with the Missouri Attorney General about issues in St. Louis, including DEI issues. We hope that the Attorney General’s Office - as a state-wide elected official charged with representing all of the interests of all the people in the state of Missouri – is fair, open-minded and willing to collaborate and work with and along-side organizations and law enforcement agencies charged with investigating and holding those responsible accountable in the St. Louis Metro-area in addressing teen violence and criminal activity.
Mound City Bar Association is the oldest African-American bar association west of the Mississippi River, organized on January 7, 1922. Our objectives are to advance the professional interests of our members; to improve the administration of justice; to uphold the honor of the legal profession; to promote the professional development of our members; and to provide service to the community, including pro-bono representation.
May 10, 2024
A Review of Certifications of Children as Adults Based on Alleged Crimes and the Difference in the Purposes of Our Juvenile System Versus Our Adult System
Mound City Bar Association (MCBA) has always respected the process of law and the important balancing of considerations that jurists must employ when making sound decisions of legal significance. This process is never more challenging when the issue of justice coincides with the very vexing problem presented by children who present with behavior that must come under the court’s scrutiny.
In Missouri the stated purpose of the Juvenile System is to provide care, protection and discipline under 211.011 below. The tenets have been described to include the belief in the juvenile’s capacity to be “rehabilitated” through an individualized justice customized to the needs of the juvenile with the family as the primary source of guidance and support. See the AFHC Power Point Presentation describing Missouri’s Juvenile system. (Link)
211.011. Purpose of law — how construed. — The purpose of this chapter is to facilitate the care, protection and discipline of children who come within the jurisdiction of the juvenile court. This chapter shall be liberally construed, therefore, to the end that each child coming within the jurisdiction of the juvenile court shall receive such care, guidance and control as will conduce to the child's welfare and the best interests of the state, and that when such child is removed from the control of his parents the court shall secure for him care as nearly as possible equivalent to that which should have been given him by them. The child welfare policy of this state is what is in the best interests of the child.
Compare that to the Adult Criminal Justice System where the stated purpose is its primary purpose of incarceration while lately competing with other more recent and progressive goals and purposes such as restorative justice, some rehabilitation and even reintegration. Missouri Law Enforcement Juvenile Justice Guidelines and Recommended Practices 2022 published by the Missouri Juvenile Justice Association, page 14. (Link) An example of an effort at a more balanced approach in the Adult system is HB1545 currently pending in the Missouri legislature. But clearly our Adult criminal justice system is designed to punish through incarceration because it can and often does impose life sentences without the possibility of parole and the ultimate penalty – the Death Penalty. There are hundreds of articles and studies that evaluate the effect that Missouri’s approach to criminal justice has on society and many note its disparate impact on minorities communities.
Although MCBA does resist the politicizing of incidents where children are accused of crimes. Unfortunately, factions do exist that leach upon these situations for political fodder. Therefore, it behooves this organization that undertakes a responsibility to its community to address the toxicity that has entered the discussion with regard to the prosecution of a child accused of fighting near Hazelwood East High School that has been the subject of articles across the country based a video of the fight that was released over the internet.
As an association of attorneys, we must and do believe in “the legal process “of addressing children’s behavior in the best interest of the child, and here we want to make sure the process does not become tainted by those who would manipulate the situation for political reasons. Both of the children deserve justice. Justice for these children would demand that the court sees them as they genuinely are, and not as some may consider the caricatures that have been painted. These children may have been on a collision course for some time, but they also had identities separate and apart from this terrible altercation.
In this case, the Juvenile Judge is called upon to decide whether the child should be subjected to the same approach that is applied to adults or the approach applied to children. Our state allows the certification of children starting at age 12 until 18, while there is pending legislation to change the age from 15 to 18. See Senate Bill 1229 and the law was recently changed to increase the age from 17 to 18. The decision is made by the judge after hearing from the child, Prosecutor’s Office, the Deputy Juvenile Officer (DJO) and after reviewing a report prepared by the DJO. Under state law:
211.071. Certification of juvenile for trial as adult — procedure — mandatory hearing, certain offenses — misrepresentation of age, effect. — 1. If a petition alleges that a child between the ages of twelve and eighteen has committed an offense which would be considered a felony if committed by an adult, the court may, upon its own motion or upon motion by the juvenile officer, the child or the child's custodian, order a hearing and may, in its discretion, dismiss the petition and such child may be transferred to the court of general jurisdiction and prosecuted under the general law; except that if a petition alleges that any child has committed an offense which would be considered first degree murder under section 565.020, second degree murder under section 565.021, first degree assault under section 565.050, forcible rape under section
566.030 as it existed prior to August 28, 2013, rape in the first degree under section 566.030, forcible sodomy under section 566.060 as it existed prior to August 28, 2013, sodomy in the first degree under section 566.060, first degree robbery under section 569.020 as it existed prior to January 1, 2017, or robbery in the first degree* under section 570.023, distribution of drugs under section 195.211 as it existed prior to January 1, 2017, or the manufacturing of a controlled substance under section 579.055,
or has committed two or more prior unrelated offenses which would be felonies if committed by an adult, the court shall order a hearing, and may in its discretion, dismiss the petition and transfer the child to a court of general jurisdiction for prosecution under the general law.
The court has to consider the following factors and issue findings and rulings that specifically explain the court’s decision based on the statutory factors and law:
211.071. 6. A written report shall be prepared in accordance with this chapter developing fully all available information relevant to the criteria which shall be considered by the court in determining whether the child is a proper subject to be dealt with under the provisions of this chapter and whether there are reasonable prospects of rehabilitation within the juvenile justice system. These criteria shall include but not be limited to:
(1) The seriousness of the offense alleged and whether the protection of the community requires transfer to the court of general jurisdiction;
(2) Whether the offense alleged involved viciousness, force and violence;
(3) Whether the offense alleged was against persons or property with greater weight being given to the offense against persons, especially if personal injury resulted;
(4) Whether the offense alleged is a part of a repetitive pattern of offenses which indicates that the child may be beyond rehabilitation under the juvenile code;
(5) The record and history of the child, including experience with the juvenile justice system, other courts, supervision, commitments to juvenile institutions and other placements;
(6) The sophistication and maturity of the child as determined by consideration of his or her home and environmental situation, emotional condition and pattern of living;
(7) The age of the child;
(8) The program and facilities available to the juvenile court in considering disposition;
(9) Whether or not the child can benefit from the treatment or rehabilitative programs available to the juvenile court; and
(10) Racial disparity in certification.
The law requires an investigation into the statutory factors and a report given to both sides and the Judge to consider after hearing from both sides with constitutional protections including notice, discovery and a right to be heard by an objective decision-maker.
The statute requires the judge to consider all relevant factors with a central question of whether the child can be rehabilitated. We do not know what the evidence will show regarding the alleged child’s criminal history or the circumstances involving the fight. But we note that the statute understands and contemplates and acknowledges that racial disparities exist in the Juvenile System based on the last item in the list of criteria set-out above. Notably, this very circuit was recognized by the Department of Justice as having denied juveniles basic constitutional due process rights in hearings and access to discovery and legal assistance according to the Department of Justice Press Release identifying the Consent Decree with the St. Louis County Family Court. (Link). We believe all the facts are relevant and should be considered.
MBCA is and has always been a force for justice in the St. Louis Community and that’s our purpose herein as the oldest predominantly African American Bar Association west of the Mississippi River. Our members are diverse with wide ranging opinions on any number of hot-button topics, and this is no exception.
We hope that the court will follow the statute and consider all relevant and statutory factors including but not limited to; the character, history, nature of the allegations and other relevant characteristics of the child when making a certification decision on whether to see her as the child capable of rehabilitation, rather than as an adult defendant in the criminal process simply based on how some have portrayed her in the media. The court is well learned on the law and the factors and the goals of the applicable law to be examined and considered when determining the best interest of the child, and our intention is to merely emphasize and encourage from the sideline sound jurisprudence based only on the facts and law in this case and not from uniformed politicians or media that have offered opinions on this matter.
Respectfully submitted,
/s/ Anthony D. Gray
President, Mound City Bar Association
Mound City Bar Association is the oldest African-American bar association west of the Mississippi River, organized on January 7, 1922. Our objectives are to advance the professional interests of our members; to improve the administration of justice; to uphold the honor of the legal profession; to promote the professional development of our members; and to provide service to the community, including pro-bono representation.
For Immediate Release
February 24, 2023
The Mound City Bar Association (MCBA) has always been a champion of justice. We have stood in the breach when injustice has been afoot. Such is the case with regard to the gathering political forces against twice elected St. Louis City Circuit Attorney, Kim Gardner. MCBA stands with this Circuit Attorney and brings the full force of its weight in the community to bear against those who would seek to end her leadership as Circuit Attorney. Our responsibility in this situation is to help educate the public as to the factual considerations of this case.
It behooves this Association to cast a light on the political forces in their cynical attempts to seize upon such a terrible event to use as political fodder and polarization. The politics of this case are driving the narrative, not the facts. To be certain, that’s no coincidence. The same people who have never wanted to see African American leadership in the Circuit Attorney’s office are the same people who are currently seeking to remove her. At every turn, these same individuals use every device to undermine Ms. Gardner’s progress and the good work she has done for this city. No Circuit Attorney has faced such opposition and scrutiny over largely routine incidents in any administration.
To be sure, no individual situation defines an administration—not a win nor a loss. What’s more important is the established priorities of the office and the execution of same. MCBA recognizes that Ms. Gardner’s established priorities align with the principles of justice to which MCBA subscribes. As an organization, MCBA supports prosecutors with a universal approach to law enforcement based on fairness and diversion for nonviolent first-time offenders. Ms. Gardner has a well-established policy which subscribes to these values. But most importantly, Kim Gardner is of the city and elected by this city as its lead law enforcement officer. MCBA must protest against outside forces who seek to disenfranchise the vote of the people of St. Louis. MCBA will remain a force on behalf of those people. As such, we stand with Kim Gardner and will protest against efforts to remove her from office.
Celestine Dotson – Current MCBA President
Supported by the following Past Presidents
Anne-Marie Clarke
Kenneth Goins
Pamela Meanes
Mildred Motley
Reuben Shelton
Annette Slack
Elaine Harris Spearman
Rufus Tate, Jr.
Mavis Thompson
Freida Wheaton
Dorothy White-Coleman
January 31st, 2023
MOUND CITY BAR ASSOCIATION STATEMENT ON THE BEATING OF TYRE NICHOLS BY MEMPHIS POLICE OFFICERS
The Mound City Bar Association issues this statement regarding the release of body camera footage of the January 7 beating of 29-year-old Tyre Nichols. Nichols died from his injuries. Five Memphis police have been indicted for second-degree murder and other crimes in this case.
We DEMAND that the officers and all those involved be held accountable for Tyre Nichols death.
We call on our leaders in government to support the adoption of laws and administrative rules that provide for independent units in the prosecutors’ offices to investigate allegations of police misconduct, especially shootings or other forms of physical violence. We support additional training and resources such as body cameras and non-lethal appropriate applications of force.
We call for adequate access to records for purposes of oversight from civilian review boards with subpoena power.
We call for brave police of good will to refuse to tolerate violence, abuse, or disrespect of the public whom they are sworn to protect.
We stand with the grieving family of Tyre Nichols, the city of Memphis, and the National Bar Association in their denunciation of the actions of these police.
Click here for the video of the beating
Click here for another version
Celestine Dotson
President
Mound City Bar Association