Actually, they may be more innocent than the DA is willing to admit.

By all accounts from the Louisiana webloggers who have been following Jena and Mychael Bell's trial, there's a very good chance one or more, including Mychael Bell, had nothing to do with the white kid getting hit or knocked down. It may have been more 2 or 3 of the kids involved, but everyone just lumped all the black kids present into a 'gang' of attackers.

The only person who identified Mychael Bell as an attacker is one of the people who hung one of the nooses that helped start this chain of events. Not someone I would find credible.

Even now, Bell is being held for a 'conspiracy' charge. What conspiracy? That he showed up for school that day? That he wore tennis shoes?

That he's black?

People are taking this 'six on one' story the DA gave out and are accepting it as fact, when it's anything but.

As for showing the nooses being legal that's not completely true. Any act that's meant to intimidate or threaten members of a specific race or religion is considered a 'hate crime', especially since the nooses were hung on public property. The reason the FBI didn't go after the kids who hung the nooses is because hate crimes are harder to prove with kids.

Something about kids doing stupid things, which I guess is allowed for white kids, but not black.

Really, "hate speech" not protected under the First Amendment. No intimidation, "fighting words," and the like are not protected. But abstract "hate speech" is perfectly protected. The Supreme Court upheld the right of friggin' Neo-Nazis to march in Skokie Illinois in the late seventies, and America lacks the often abused "hate speech" laws common in England and Europe. So get your facts right. PS I'm a lawyer, I doubt you are. So don't talk about things you're not expert in and make sweeping and false pronouncements on Constitutional law. The US Attorneys and local prosecutors both investigated whether they could prosecute the noose folks and found they could not. Incidentally, I think that kind of speech is totally obnoxious and should be grounds for expulsion. But it's not a crime in America to spout hate of other races or ayone else. Indeed, if it were, where would Al Sharpton and Farrakhan be able to ply their own hate speech against white people. You all are focusing on something that is a minor problem compared to black criminality, black on black crime, the breakdown of the black family, and the other black-caused black problems in America.

1. I agree that the Jena 6 are not innocent; they are, however, being subject to discrimination under the city's judicial system, and that's where the issue comes in.

2. As to whether or not the Jena 6 are "good people" and if they belong on the street…well that's for the judge to decide. Given the already outrageous behavior based on the charges, it's hard to say if the decision won't be given with some form of bias. I don't know them personally, so let's not go there.

3. The murder charges have not been dropped for all the members of the Jena 6; they've only been reduced to aggravated second-degree battery for Mychal Bell, and aggravated second-degree battery and conspiracy for Carwin Jones, Theo Shaw and Robert Bailey, Jr. The other teenagers are still being tried and charged as adults.

4. This "whole thing" is not moot; for every Jena, LA, there are other cases going on in this country which aren't getting this much attention from bloggers and/or the media and go largely unnoticed or unenforced. At least with Jena, should things go in the Six's favor, would set an established precedent.

5. No one is questioning the legality or constitutionality of using or displaying symbols of hate or scorn, so bringing that up didn't even make any sense. Don't insult my intelligence AND yours by spouting off nonsense.

These guys are not innocent even under their supporters' account. They were provoked by words and responded with a six on one beat down. These are not good people and they don't belong on the street. The murder charges have been dropped, so this whole thing is moot. In what world does such a violent assault go unpunished?

PS It's still legal under the First Amendment to show nooses on a tree or dress as a gardener and all the rest. It might mean you can get suspended from school–which the offenders were–but that's it. Maybe you should read the Constitution sometime.

& you blks dont have a collage fund just for u & blks frat houses just for u and so many blks have to be working in a place acorrding to the EEO.. give me a break!!! pull your pants up and wear a bealt