2 Perspectives on Race and Life in L.A.

This is a story about one column and two letters offering very different perspectives on life in Los Angeles. It is, alas, yet another story about race, O.J. Simpson and the LAPD.

Yes, these topics can be tiresome. But bear with me. With the Simpson trial drawing to a close--the first trial, that is--these subjects will be with us for some time to come.

I’m not an O.J. junkie. But sometimes something happens that’s impossible to ignore, such as the audiotapes that revealed retired Detective Mark Fuhrman as a racist and a liar, prompting Fuhrman to later invoke his 5th Amendment right against self-incrimination.

Why, I wondered, were people so shocked? Fourteen months earlier, it had been widely reported that the defense strategy would hinge on the theory that a bloody glove had been planted by an allegedly racist cop named Mark Fuhrman. It was known that years earlier Fuhrman had gone on psychiatric disability and unsuccessfully sought an early pension because he, by his own account, couldn’t handle the stress of dealing with blacks and Latinos and acted on violent impulses. The pension board figured Fuhrman was just trying to con the system. But from any perspective, Fuhrman looked like trouble.

A couple of colleagues predicted I’d hear plenty of criticism. But you know what? I received only one negative response, from a guy named Steve:

Hating street thugs doesn’t necessarily indicate character flaws. How would it be to have to wade in amongst people who hate you every day, and they don’t just hate you because of your uniform, but because you’re white, blonde, good looking, tall, confident. . . . Reverse racism is bad news in this city . . . . I think he [Fuhrman] knows the good guys from the bad. . . .

Blacks are obviously the most riled up and wounded, although it’s their job to act not surprised and say Fuhrman’s no different that the rest. Whites couldn’t possibly be as offended, but we try, falling over ourselves, outdoing the next guy with sensitivity and empathy with the black community.

But I say big deal! You want hate? Go to the black community. Some of the racists there make Mark Fuhrman look like a Cub Scout . . . .

And so on. His name is Steve, but I was unable to reach him, and it doesn’t seem prudent to print his last name. There’s plenty to rebut here. Fuhrman, for example, didn’t just express his dislike for street thugs in his pension hearing, but for “the citizens.” Still, no doubt some other people see Fuhrman as a victim, even a martyr, and not a pariah. They were probably disappointed that the Police Protective League denounced him. They probably saw it as betrayal.

But given the lonesomeness of this letter, Mark Fuhrman probably doesn’t have much of a fan club.

It would be nice to introduce Steve to retired Superior Court Judge Gilbert C. Alston of Pasadena. He’s black, so Steve might not be interested. But here goes:

Whether real or feigned, the reaction of the (white) public to the Fuhrman tapes shows a profound ignorance of history both remote and recent. This writer grew up reading about case after case of lynching of Negroes simply because a Negro was alleged to have committed a crime and some Negro was apprehended in conjunction with the accusation.

Usually little was done to affirm that the suspect was the correct one. . . . Frenzy, both public and police, took over and the suspect was quickly murdered in a variety of ways. The most common was simple hanging to the nearest tree. Frequently, the favored technique was to hogtie the accused, pour gasoline on him and drag him, alive and flaming, through town . . . . These are things from my conscious memory, meaning there are thousands of guilty lynchers still living. Living and breeding and spreading their hate to succeeding generations.

It is difficult to convince (black) people, whose active memories still recoil with horror at such graphic events, that the same (white) people are incapable of simple doctoring of the evidence by planting a glove or sprinkling a little blood around . . . .

And so on. Judge Alston seems no less outspoken in retirement than he was on the bench. A few years back, Alston caused a furor by dismissing a rape charge because the victim was a prostitute and the defendant her customer. This wasn’t rape, Alston declared, but a breach of contract. Alston plainly is a man of strong opinions.

Lynchings may seem a distant point of reference, in time and geography. But, as Alston suggests, that may only be a white perspective. In more recent years, blacks have recoiled at the Eulia Love shooting, the police chokehold deaths, the Rodney King beating, the first King verdict and now Mark Fuhrman.

Alston writes: We have shouted “wolf” . . . with each King type beating, with each unsupported “prone out” of our wives (yes, wives) just because they were black and driving a Mercedes or Cadillac. . . . Each time we’re reassured that the “wolf” was just an old lovable German shepherd. Our cries were interpreted as, “They’re playing the race card.”

Now, none of this necessarily means that Fuhrman actually planted the glove or that O.J. is an innocent man. But if the question is establishing “proof beyond a reasonable doubt,” it would help explain why black jurors may prove especially skeptical of the prosecution’s case.

Reverse racism? Steve would probably say so. If nothing else, it’s one reason why almost nobody expects a guilty verdict.

Scott Harris’ column appears Tuesdays, Thursdays and Sundays. Readers may write to Harris at the Times Valley Edition, 20000 Prairie St., Chatsworth, Calif. 91311. Please include a phone number. Address TimesLink or Prodigy e-mail to YQTU59A ( via the Internet: YQTU59A@prodigy.com).

Lynchings may seem a distant point of reference, in time and geography. But . . . that may only be a white perspective.