The Minneapolis Story Home Page

The Experience of Ron Edwards

A Renaissance Black Man in a White Man's World

A Beacon for Freedom in the City

2016 Blog Entries

Home | 2016 Columns » | All Columns » | 2016 Blogs »

The Jamar Clark case is closed, and. after October 21st, the case is sealed, with no more public utterances to be made.

October 21, 2016, 12:25 p.m.

                    List of Columns on the Jamar Clark case
                                 and aftermath since.

Questionable conduct by county attorney in prosecution of Jerome Copeland
April 20, 2016

Federal Grand Jury begins to prepare for Clark Case
Department of Justice in Washington, D.C. will call the shots.
April 13, 2016

In the matter of Jamar Clark and Jerome C. Copeland.
Jerome Copeland, an eyewitness to the death of Jamar Clark.
April 6, 2016

In the matter of Jamar Clarks’ death.
Has the integrity of the investigation been compromised?
March 23, 2016

In the matter of Jamar Clark. Preparing for the Grand Jury, March 2, 2016

See also: 2015: A Year Of Terror And Indecision.
2016: A Year Of…?
December, 31, 2015

Breaking the heart of a community in response to the death of Jamar Clark: Both BLM & NAACP Protestors Attack Black fire fighters and Black police officers.
December, 24, 2015

Whose voice will be heard? And when? The struggle for control.
December 17, 2016

An open letter: To Black Lives Matter, NAACP, and out of town demonstrators.
December 10, 2015

White supremacists shoot and wound protestors in North Minneapolis.
December 3, 2016

Listen and Understand. City Tense After African American Youth, Jamar Clar, Shot and Killed in Police Involved Shooting. Anger builds after shooting.
November 26, 2015

EDITOR's note: on, Sunday, March 29, 2016. The Minneapolis Star Tribune published these 3 summaries of the Jamar Clark case so far:

1. What we know about the death of Jamar Clark: 29 point Star Tribune list.
2. Full Coverage: list of 31 Star Tribune Stories on the Jamar Clarkcase.
3. Time Line of the Jamar Clark shooting: 12 point Star Tribune list from November 15, 2015 (the day of the shooting) to February 10, 2016 (when the findings of the BCA -- Bureau of Criminal Apprehension -- were turned over to the Hennepin County attorney's office

Compiled April 2016
Posted on Column home page April 2016
Posted here on Blog side, October 21,12016

If future columns or blog entries, they will also be posted here.

The drama continues regarding the investigation of police conduct (part 2)

Written Friday, October 14, 2016
Posted Tuesday, October 18, 2016

Some of the most intense discussions amongst Republicans in the United States Senate was the decision assign attorneys to Minnesota's two Senators, Amy Klobuchar and Al Franken, members of the Senate Judiciary Committee, to legal represent them during the criminal investigation that is moving forwardregarding the Minneapolis Police Department and the circumstances surrounding the Constitutional and Civil Rights violations of African American police officers and MPD Sgt Michael Keefe ten years ago.  Our senators have had more than one meeting with the office of Committee Chairman, Senator Charles E. Grassley, R-Iowa, as previously reported. 

Ms. Elizabeth Anne Farrar and Mr. Wonder are the attorneys assigned to represent Minnesota’s two Senators, Klobuchar and Franken respectively.  We wonder why Mrs. Farrar called Keefe about the case when she is on the other side of the table representing someone of interest in this criminal investigation into what was done to Keefe, who is white, and his fellow officers, who are black.

This blog broke this explosive story of this investigation in a letter published on this blog, a letter from the Department of Justice to Keefe, dated August 9, 2016.  We join with Wikileaks in exposing the criminal investigation, which has been suppressed by all the major media in the State of Minnesota, and certainly suppressed by the two Senators from Minnesota.  

What will the Wikileaks turn up regarding this investigation?  Why has Minnesota’s two U.S. Senators lawyered up?  How is that being transparent and honest with those who elected them?

This blog will ontinue to follow this criimimal investigation provide additional information over the coming weeks. 

Written Friday, October 14, 2016
Posted Tuesday, October 18, 2016, 8:15 a.m.

The drama continues regarding the investigation of police conduct (part 1)

Written Friday, October 14, 2016
Posted Tuesday, October 18, 2016, 8:20 a.m.

What was the purpose of announcing a 32-member Task Force, a committee appointed by Minnesota’s Governor, Mark Dayton a Task Force to coverhow to deal with the issue of police community relations. Of these 32, only 15 will be granted to when Task Force ballots are cast?  The remaining 17, who I call the Silent 17, can only sit and listen to the perceived profundity of the Big 8 and the 15 who will control the process, using Roberts Rules of Order and then democratic philosophy of one vote one organization to actually cancel out the principal of democracy, one person one vote. 

A key question we have is why was the MWPA (Minnesota Women Police Association) is not provided with a seat on the committee of the Big 32 / 15?  Are Minnesota female police officers considered irrelevant or of beiong the “weaker” sex, not worthy of their input?  This is particularly strange in light of the increase of domestic violence in the State of Minnesota.  Another question:  why has the Black Lives Matter person from the St. Paul I.S.A.I.A.H organization been granted a seat but not the Minneapolis NAACP nor the Minneapolis Urban League denied participation.   There are too many unanswered questions here to expect anything but failure.  One way to assure success is to study and  incorporate the work of the Police Community Relations Council of 2004 – 2008, of which I was co-chair  What other studies will the base from which they start, or this a “new world forgetting the past”?

Finally, what was the rational for St. Paul's BLM to have a possible 3 seats on the Tsk Force and the Minneaolis NAACP and Minneapolis Urban Leabue not a seat at all?

Written Friday, October 14, 2016
Posted Tuesday, October 18, 2016, 8:30 a.m.

[My emphasis in"bold")                                

U.S. Department of Justice

                                                                  Federal Bureau of Investigation

                                                                   Washington, D.C.  20535-0001
                                                                   August 9, 2016

Mr. Michael P. Keefe

Dear Mr. Keefe:

            Your complaint directed to the Department of Justice, Office of the Inspector General (OIG), was referred to the Initial Processing Unit (IPU), Internal Investigations Section (IIS), (Inspection Division), Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI).  The IIS/INSD is the FBI entity responsible for investigating allegations of misconduct or criminal activity on the part of FBI employees.

In your complaint, you reported corruption involving members of the Violent Offenders Task Force, along with Assistant US Attorney's and Assistant Minneapolis City Attorneys.  You claimed you filed a lawsuit against the Minneapolis Police Department (MPD) and the Department of Justice refused to help you expose any wrongdoing./

 The purpose of this letter is to advise you the IIS/ISD has review this matter and determined it does not warrant the opening of an aministration inquiryThis matter was forwarded to the Criminal Investigative Division, Public Corruption/Civil Rights Section for appropriate attention.  IPU will take no further action in this matter.


                                                               Unit Chief     
                                                               Initial Processing Unit           
                                                               Internal Investigations Section          
                                                               Inspection Division

Posted Wednesday, October 5, 2016, 5:05 p.m.

Responsibility and accountability matter,
Violence is never responsible nor unaccountable.

September 23, 2016

Charlotte reminds us of four key questions being debated today that repeat the 60s:

  1. In fighting to keep our eyes on the prize, should our pursuit of our goal be “by any means necessary.”
  2. Which comes first, unity or diversity.
  3. Where should wse address community education, jobs, housing:  local sovereignty or federal rulings and dictates.
  4. Can we develop standard humanitarian rules of engagement, or should it be ideology (political or religious)?
  5. By what means should we pursue unity in society regardless of our different tents under the big top:   “by any means necessary“ favoring our tent,  or by a standard developed by all the tents together, or by standards set up In the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, or some other standard?  

Charlotte officials, family and friends of any victim, and demonstrators, must make sure they speak with provable “truths.”  When they don’t they lose credibility, and the movement loses credibility we all lose credibility.  But that is a two way street, for when the Mayor, police and other officials don’t speak with provable “truths,” they lose credibility, for when both sides become what they hate in the other, hope and peaceful change become impossible.

President Obama said it exactly right in 2004:  “There is not a black America and a white America and Latino America and Asian America — there’s the United States of America.”  History tells us that down through history, those societies that tried to function while purposefully separating themselves by race and religion, didn’t last long, especially as they fought to force others to accept their views of reality.  Those that forged a unity culture with many parts, all subordinate to the whole, survived.

People seem to be gravitating to the time of Malcolm X they like the most:  when he accepted violence if necessary.  But he changed.  He and Martin Luther King were converging, Dr. King having emphasized political rights and X economic rights, to where they both emphasized socioecomnoic rights and opportunities, not just political ones.

Those of us old enough to remember “the” poster, understand this change.  Recall the poster of Malcolm X standing at a window with a machine gun, under the heading, “Liberate Our Minds By Any Means Necessary.”

There are those today who would resurrect “by any means necessary,” again opening the door for “justified” violence.  They purposefully ignore the movement of X to be closer to Dr. King, and no longer advocating violence.  He did originally say, in the mid-1960s,“We declare our right on this earth to be a man, to be a human being, to be respected as a human being, to be given the rights of a human being in this society, on this earth, in this day, which we intend to bring into existence by any means necessary.”  We share the goal but not the “any means necessary.”  Recall the end of the major motion picture on the life of South Africa’s Nelson Mandela.  The movie ends with Mandela uttering those words of Malcolm X.  But he told the director he would not utter the last 4 words, for he feared it would incite violence and undo all they were working to achieve.  So those 4 words were dropped, just as Malcolm X himself had dropped them. 

President Obama’s drops them too in his statement about one America, “The United States of America,” with the emphasis on “united.”  There is There is along held reality that “order” is the “fundamental mandate of any society”.  The fight then becomes over whose definition of “rule of law.”  Our continued breaking into conflicting groups try8ing to get others to accept our mandate for order ic causeing the rule of law to be dropped in favor of the executive orders of whoever is in the chief’s chair.  As one person has written, over the past~100 years, “we've allowed the rule of law to be nibbled away by bootstrapping lawyers and politicians to enable the whims of men seeking favors from one another, while robbing the general public of their money and freedom.”

This weakening of a sense of community trust is causing people to believe it why they believe they won’t be treated fairly.  This loss of confidence and trust in one another can become unstoppable.  When people begin to treat others fairly, the result is that impartiality and equality dies, leading to the Balkanization of the body politic, and right behind that, the death of local democracy and local governance, and the beginning of an even wider authoritarian rule.

Claiming to be on the "right side of history,"  they feel their end justifies their means.  We  must bring an end to
the challenge of students screaming for the police to arrest the politically incorrect or for universities to ban speakers,"

Written September 23, 2016
Posted Tuesday October 4, 2016, 12:55 am

Ron hosts “Black Focus” on Channel 17, MTN-TV, Sundays, 5-6 pm. Formerly head of the Minneapolis Civil Rights Commission and the Urban League, he continues his “watchdog” role for Minneapolis. Order his book, hear his voice, read his solution papers, and read his between columns “web log” at

Permission is granted to reproduce The Minneapolis Story columns, blog entires and solution papers. Please cite the Minnesota Spokesman-Recorder and for the columns. Please cite for blog entries and solution papers.

Home | 2016 Columns » | All Columns » | 2016 Blogs »