BS: Traveller Discrimination in USA - Part 2

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in USA - Part 2
From: SharonA
Date: 27 Sep 02 - 11:05 AM

P.S. – McGrath says ,"...there can be more than one victim. In this case there are two. There's a mother who has snapped and done something stupid and wrong, and nobody is denying that. And there's a community of people who have been discriminated and persecuted in various ways over the centuries, and the mother belongs to that community..."

If you consider the mother to be one victim, and the community to be another, then there are three victims. Remember the child? If the community is a victim of discrimination, then the child as a member of that community is a victim twice over – of discrimination and of abuse by her mother. If the mother is a victim because she "snapped", then the child is a victim three times over – of discrimination, of abuse by her mother, and of the psychological trauma of living with a mother who is capable of "snapping" and may well have "snapped" again and again had she not been brought up short by the justice system. Whether Toogood is convicted of felony battery or not, IMO she shouldn't get any of her kids back until she can manage her anger.

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in USA - Part 2
From: M.Ted
Date: 27 Sep 02 - 11:29 AM

I understand that abuse is an issue for you, Sharon, and I respect that. Abuse is an issue for a lot of us. But, from my own experience, I know that there can be exculpatory facts in situations like this--furthermore, I know, also from my own experience, that the camera image, no matter how vivid, does not really show what is happening--

When the word "exculpatory" comes up, though, it means that there is different explanation for what has happened than the first one that pops into people's minds, not that what we have seen is necessarily reasonable or acceptable--only that the issue is much more complex, in both cause and solution, than we first realize--

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in USA - Part 2
From: GUEST
Date: 27 Sep 02 - 11:38 AM

Have people stopped to think what the child wants, she has go over the physical abuse, keeping her from her mum will add to the emotional abuse. Think of it if the child reasons if she had not been naughty then she would have not been punished. Children can turn situations with a little imagination to it being their fault.

Rather than leaving the child with her mother and letting the humiliation of the event be enough punishiment is taking the child away from her loved ones really helping anyone.

I see this as an over zealous reaction which is more to do with soothing Americans own conscience and making people feel better than it has to do with the reasons behind the mothers actions.

The loser in it all is the little girl all those who post pro removing her from her family should step back and think of the child.

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in USA - Part 2
From: Mary in Kentucky
Date: 27 Sep 02 - 11:40 AM

I'm anxious to hear what those exculpatory excuses are, and what the video really shows. In police beating cases it is sometimes claimed that the suspect was threatening, or resisting arrest, or was dangerous, or did something prior to when the tape started. But this was a 4-year-old child!

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in USA - Part 2
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 27 Sep 02 - 11:42 AM

That was loose use of language on my part, Sharon, and thanks for pointing it out - what I meant was that the child was the first clear victim, because of the way the mother had behaved on that day. That was so clearly in my mind that it didn't occur to me that what I'd written didn't exactly say that.

And the second victim is the Traveller community, and thus potentially the child once again, and also the mother.

The central point I was making was about it being a distortion to present the community from which the child was removed as being abusive towards children. And even if the actions of the authorities did turn out in fact to have been appropriate and proportional and so forth, the impression conveyed by a lot of media coverage seems to have involved that distortion.

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in USA - Part 2
From: katlaughing
Date: 27 Sep 02 - 11:57 AM

I am sorry to say that a lot of what I am reading seems to be self-righteous and judgemental. How can any of us really judge this case without being in a jury box and hearing both sides? The media has made a case against Ms. Toogood, irregardless of how the authorities may have acted, which most definitely uses the prejudice card.

From the beginning of these threads I have never read an intention on Larry's part to deny what seems to have happened or to say Ms. Toogood should not be held accountable.

What I have read, through his postings, Aine's, and my own research, is that whether this woman did this or not (I am NOT saying she didn't!) there is no way in hell she would get a fair trial with all of the media BS about her bring a Traveller and the well-documented discrimination which does exist against that community.

The world is not black and white when it comes to parenting. One known incident does not mean that parent makes a habit of hitting their child. Most parents who find themselves doing that or even thinking about it are horrified and usually will seek some way to cope. I've been there, I know.

Aine, thank you for links and the well-written explanation.

kat

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in USA - Part 2
From: GUEST,Samuel Tischler
Date: 27 Sep 02 - 12:26 PM

Are Irish Travellers discriminated against in the USA? Probably, most ethnic groups in the USA face discrimination.

Larry contends that the Toogood case has been sensationalized in the media because she is an Irish Traveller. That is nonsense.

The Toogood case has been sensationalized in the media becuase she was caught brutalizing her child on videotape.

As a television news director, and former television news reporter, I can assure you that any mother caught brutalizing her child in this manner on videotape, be she WASP, Jewish, African American, Asian American, Hispanic, Arab, whatever, will receive exactly the same treatment.

Samuel Tischler

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in USA - Part 2
From: katlaughing
Date: 27 Sep 02 - 12:48 PM

That is complete nonsense. In Wyoming there was a woman who was a known abuser, who was allowed to keep her several young children with nothing but ocassional checks by DFS. Only thing is, DFS didn't have enough people to check consistently and as a result she beat one daughter to death and stored her in a plastic bag in the garage for over a year before it was discovered. Even then, they had no idea how many children she had at one time. She was white.

Conversly, there were black parents who had their children removed under much less extreme circumstances. Racism and its assumptions are alive and well among some of the law enforcement and social agencies. I see the same types of things regarding Hispanics, too.

Where's the OJ-like media hype in the case of that white actor who was recently charged with killing his wife?

The media is always looking for an angle on which to "hook" viewers, so they can get more advertising dollars. If they can do so using ethnicity, they will. If they can do so using the fact that a woman is a single parent, they will (I am thinking of the case several years ago, the mother who drowned her kids.) Nobody gets treated equally in the media, no matter how much you might want to believe that.

kat

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in USA - Part 2
From: Nerd
Date: 27 Sep 02 - 01:08 PM

Larry,

sorry I assumed there was money involved, etc. In any case, I know from your posts that you're too honorable for that to have been your main motive.

I still think people who are close to an issue, and considered experts on it (as I am on other issues) often face the problem of being so close to a community that they cannot avoid taking on a cause espoused by that community without endangering the relationship that allows them to be considered an expert. In other words, if an expert on the Masai pisses off the Masai tribal authorities so that he is shunned by the tribe, the Kenyan government will eventually cease to consider him an expert. Being an expert, which is where some of us get some of our sense of pride and self-worth, becomes contingent on taking sides. Usually this is not problematic for those of us interested in oppressed communities, because taking their side is usually what we'd do anyway. But sometimes our judgment can get clouded and we end up defending wrongdoing. An observation--do with it what you will.

Anyway, Larry, fight the good fight. Because whether or not THIS is an example of anti-Traveller discrimination (and I still think it's probably not), that discrimination DOES exist, and this case may bring it out in the open. In the meantime, let's all hope the mother can productively work through her issues and be reuinited with her child!

On another note, I think I may be the originator of some of the posts NicoleC is referring to as "it's just their culture." What I had said in part one was that many European ethnic communities practice corporal punishment, including my own, and that what I saw on that tape was not much worse than much of what I endured myself, and certainly no worse than what my parents endured. This is not saying "it's just their culture" so much as saying "it's our culture"; in other words, there is a disconnect between American official law and common practice in a wide range of families, and she was definitely in the realm of common practice for many communities. But having been properly chastened by some fellow Mudcatters, I realized that this should not excuse her from scrutiny. The fact is, in most cases like this, children are not permanently separated from their parents unless the abuse is ongoing, so the legal system can run its course. Unless there's evidence of worse abuse, I don't think drastic consequences will result. If they do result, without evidence of worse abuse, I think we need to take another look at the possibility of discrimination. But so far, she has been treated by the authorities just as any mother would have been treated in the circumstances.

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in USA - Part 2
From: Jerry Rasmussen
Date: 27 Sep 02 - 01:20 PM

As a point of information: In USA Today, the one truly national newspaper, they included editorials from five or six (don't feel like going down stairs to count which) newspapers across the country on this case. Not one of them mentioned that she was an Irish Traveller. Those claiming descrimination act as if that is the primary focus of news coverage. So far, in newspaper coverage I have yet to see that connection mentioned once. I think it's fairly obvious that not everyone is judging her as part of the Irish Traveler community if I have seen seven or eight articles so far, none of which mention the Irish Travelers.

Jerry

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in USA - Part 2
From: Nerd
Date: 27 Sep 02 - 01:31 PM

Uh, Jerry, I hate to say this but last week my wife saved a copy of USA Today for me because it had a whole article on the Toogood case that explained how she was an Irish Traveller, along with a sidebar about who the Travellers are. So that particular newspaper has definitely been using the Traveller angle at least a bit. I still think there's truth to what you say, though.

BTW, I'm ambivalent about the USA Today Travellers article, because it used the tactic of saying "Travellers have been known to commit fraud, but many are law-abiding." So you can't fault it for the facts, but if we said "blacks have been known to commit robbery, but many are law-abiding" or "Jews have been known to be stingy, but many are generous" I think we'd feel uncomfortable despite the fact that the sentences are obviously accurate in a strict sense. Still, the paper had no choice but to mention the common perception that Travellers commit fraud, because otherwise there's no real reason to be talking about Travellers at all!

I'll see if we've saved the paper at home, and I'll let you know the date if so.

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in USA - Part 2
From: katlaughing
Date: 27 Sep 02 - 01:32 PM

The fact remains that, at least in the area where this took place, according to what Aine posted and has told me (she lives near there, too), it has been an issue with the media.

I've also found that, according to an AP article, the fact that she is an Irish Traveller will have a bearing on who gets custody of her child:

Charles Smith, director of the St. Joseph County Office of Family and Children, said the fact the family is part of the Irish Travelers will play a role in whether other family members get temporary custody of the girl – and whether the Toogoods regain custody.

And, that's not discrimination?

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in USA - Part 2
From: Ron Olesko
Date: 27 Sep 02 - 01:36 PM

Kat - your story about the woman in Wyoming just points out a fault in the system, not a case of prejudice. That woman you speak of SHOULD have had her children taken away and perhaps the end of your story would not have had a tragic ending.

In the Toogood case there is too many eyes watching the case. IF the child was given back to her parents and something went wrong the arguements would be made at how bad our system is at protecting children.

Yes, the media has focused on the case of Robert Blake. Unlike O.J., Blake has not been flaunting his innocence in the same manner as O.J. did at the time. The evidence against Blake is not as substantial as the evidence against O.J. APPEARED to be at the time. On top of that, this is similar to the "second child syndrome". We've had it with O.J. and people are tired of such cases. Also, the Blake case has not gone to trial yet.

Everyone is quick to point out that the media is at fault. Do you think they would broadcast the news if people didn't WANT it? Look how many people are posting notes here. We are all to blame.

Ron

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in USA - Part 2
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 27 Sep 02 - 01:42 PM

If I went by the newspapers I generally read, I'd think that the media in England treated refugees and immigrants and Travellers and all kinds of people with respect, and always made sure that the problems they face were accurately explained.

Unfortunately there are a lot of newspapers I never read, and they aren't like that at all. But a lot of people read them, far more than read the papers I choose to read.

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in USA - Part 2
From: katlaughing
Date: 27 Sep 02 - 01:52 PM

Ron, true, absolutely. Thanks for pointing that out. Again, it goes back to the media will use whatever will get them more viewers, i.e. more ratings, thus advert money.

Mudcatter Stephen L. Rich just posted a thread about hsi new CD. I noticed one of the lines in one of the songs mentions his "consciousness sitting on the shelf." (That may not be exactly, I've only heard it once.) Anyway, I wonder how many people who watch tv, esp. the news, have set aside their consciousness and haven't a clue as to what kind of influence their watching exerts.

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in USA - Part 2
From: Ron Olesko
Date: 27 Sep 02 - 02:02 PM

Kat, you are 100% correct about the media doing whatever it can to get ratings. I spent 12 years working as a Production Manager for a cable news network and saw first hand what the priorities are - it is getting viewers to watch the program. I saw a once respected journalist revive his career by focusing on the O.J. scandal. As soon as O.J. ended, the ratings dropped. The decision on what subject to follow was driven by what people wanted to watch. If viewers weren't tuning in to watch O.J. news then the focus would shift to find something that would attract viewers. If the powers that be couldn't find news that would attract viewers, new powers that be would be brought in to try to "fix" the problem.

The days of Edward R. Murrow are unfortunately long gone. We have to rely on a number of sources to get the news and form our own opinions.

Ron

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in USA - Part 2
From: Nerd
Date: 27 Sep 02 - 02:03 PM

Also, Ron, OJ was a "first-tier" celebrity. When Roots was being made, he just had to call and say "I want to be in Roots" and they wrote him a role. Imagine Robert Blake doing that! His career high point was Baretta! I am SO not surprised that nobody's paying attention to him now...they never paid attention to him when he was supposedly famous!

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in USA - Part 2
From: Ron Olesko
Date: 27 Sep 02 - 02:17 PM

Nerd - you are right. Attention is being paid ONLY when new information breaks, or when it is a slow newsday.

Also, it should be pointed out that the news of the Irish Travelers and this specific case are not being covered in what I would call the "mainstream" press. It has become the fodder for tabloid talk shows and Fox News Channel. If you pick up your local paper and see if the story is still in the headlines. That is hardly the NY Times or CBS Evening News (or NBC, ABC). Unless a major development occurs, this is now "old news" It is the cable newschannels are littered with tabloid journalists who talk about subjects they know audiences will listen to. If you are reading this note (or writing it!) then you are part of the situation.

Ron

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in USA - Part 2
From: Grab
Date: 27 Sep 02 - 03:14 PM

Kat, you said:

I've also found that, according to an AP article, the fact that she is an Irish Traveller will have a bearing on who gets custody of her child:

Charles Smith, director of the St. Joseph County Office of Family and Children, said the fact the family is part of the Irish Travelers will play a role in whether other family members get temporary custody of the girl – and whether the Toogoods regain custody.

And, that's not discrimination?

No it isn't, it's making sure no further child abuse happens.

For instance, consider the cases of children abused by priests. What happened to them? They were put into the care of other priests and pressurised into saying nothing. Years later the truth comes out, and the childcare system is changed as a result to ensure the same kind of horrible events can't happen again. But just because of the ethnic origin of these people, you think it's a good idea to go back to this system?

You want a child who has been abused by her mother to be put into the care of people who have a close relationship with her mother, and who have in the past weeks concealed the mother from the police to cover up for her? I don't know about you, but I think that's the last thing that should happen! Do you seriously think that's it's better to risk putting her back in a situation where she can be abused, than to remove her temporarily from the Traveller community?

If they can find a Traveller family who are unconnected with the mother, then all well and good. That's the best option for everyone. But if all the Traveller families are close friends of the mother, what choice is there for ensuring the child is safe?

Ron Olesko's point is absolutely correct - the first priority in cases of child abuse is to remove the child from the abuse, and ensure that no connections remain between the child and the abuser which can be used to pressure the child into silence. This isn't some "bureaucratic" ruling, it's plain common sense.

Larry, you said in the earlier thread that separating the child from the Traveller community would harm the child. I've never yet heard the accusation that it's harming a black child to foster them temporarily with a white couple, nor vice versa. Why should it be different for fostering this girl with a non-Traveller family? Please explain how this is damaging the girl, bcos I simply don't understand how this can be the case.

Graham.

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in USA - Part 2
From: Jerry Rasmussen
Date: 27 Sep 02 - 03:15 PM

Thanks, Nerd: I must admit that I don't buy USA Today every day. I miss once every couple of weeks for one reason or another. It's part of my morning ritual to drive down the hill to get a paper, and stop in at Walmarts to shoot the breeze with some friends. Last week, the vending machine in front of Walmart that sells USA Today wasn't in operation, so I picked up the paper where I could, and read the New Haven Register the day I couldn't get a copy. If I thought about it, I could probably figure out which day you and your wife saw the article.

Yeah, I don't like the way they phrased their commentary. It made it sound like dishonesty is the norm, but there are exceptions. And, I would never present USA today as the paragon of newspaper reporting, although its leagues ahead of papers like The New York Post and Daily News out this way. One of the things I really like about it, though, is that they do print editorials from a variety of newspapers around the country, and I find them determinedly balanced in presenting opposing views... usually the exact number on each side of the issue.

I also don't doubt that newspapers in the Midwest may be reporting it differently, just as newspapers around here will report a local story with their own "angle" for area viewers. I also don't doubt that there is prejudice against Irish Travellers.

Just for a little lightness, I'll share a true story with you. I knew someone in Graduate School at USC many years ago, who told me this story. A Jewish student at USC was using his "jewishness" to blackmail professors into giving him higher grades than he had earned by threatening to charge them with discrimination if they didn't. He apparently succeeded a couple of times, and tried it on another professor. When he told the professor that he was going to charge him with discrimination and report him to the Dean if he didn't raise his grade, the professor told him to go ahead. The student filed a formal complaint about being discrimated against by the Professor, and then discovered that the Professor was Jewish. As was the person who told me the story. :-)

Jerry

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in USA - Part 2
From: Ron Olesko
Date: 27 Sep 02 - 03:53 PM

I guess the lesson is simple. If the mother didn't treat her child in the manner that she did, none of this would have happened. The child would still be in her custody and they could continue their lifestyle.

Sure, you can't change the past. The rest of us can learn from it however - people are responsible for their own actions - you can't blame society.

We have our issues in society and prejudice is still a huge problem. Toogood and her lawyers are making a HUGE mistake if they think they can turn public sympathy away from the child and the alleged abuse and make it a battle for Irish Traveler rights. They are trying to turn this into a battle against prejudice and it looks like they have a poor battle plan.

Frankly, prejudice USUALLY is based on appearance - the color of skin, the way a person looks or dresses, or gender. The Irish Travelers that we've seen on the news lately appear to blend into white middle class America. The prejudice only arises when incidents such as scams or thefts occur. (Didn't Dateline a few years ago do a story on underage marriage as well?) Unless the Traveler participates in some sort of ILLEGAL activity, I am curious as to how they are identified. A woman in a department store that looks like half of the customers will not stand out to a security guard unless something occurs. If a security guard started watching a shopper JUST because they are black, Indian, or a woman - then you have a strong case of profiling. I am very curious as to how they can PROVE profiling in this case. I'm not saying it doesn't happen, I just can't figure out HOW they are doing it.

Ron

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in USA - Part 2
From: SharonA
Date: 27 Sep 02 - 04:03 PM

Ron: On the other hand, I don't think it's wise to refuse to use the media as a source of information, nor do I think there's anything wrong with exchanging views in a forum such as this one. Ignoring the problem of sensationalism in the media won't make it go away, but observing the sensationalism doesn't necessarily mean that one is caught up in it or that one is "to blame" for its existence. Better to be informed about misdeeds of the media in order to effectively speak out against them, eh?

-------------------------------

A while ago, Kat said, " 'Charles Smith, director of the St. Joseph County Office of Family and Children, said the fact the family is part of the Irish Travelers will play a role in whether other family members get temporary custody of the girl – and whether the Toogoods regain custody.' And, that's not discrimination?"

I have to say that I don't think it is. Here's why: the county authorities are aware of the migratory habits of the clan to which Toogood belongs, and I'm sure their concern is that the little girl be living in a situation that can be monitored to assure that she will not be abused or assaulted again. I'm sure there are laws in Indiana to the effect that the child's living situation must be monitored pending investigation of charges against her parent or guardian. This, of course, is difficult to do when the clan moves from state to state. If Martha were released into the custody of family members, I'm sure those family members would have to agree to remain in the county for the duration of the term of custody, which would go against their custom.

There's also the fact that at least some family members have already proven to be uncooperative with authorities with regard to releasing information about the child's whereabouts and condition, supposedly because of the clan's protectiveness of its private affairs. I think the authorities are concerned that the same uncooperative spirit might present itself if they tried to legally monitor the child's safety in the home of a member of the clan.

Then there's the fact that Toogood had already proven herself to be a flight risk when she left Texas, using her migration with her clan to avoid two outstanding warrants for her arrest there. Quite obviously, no one in the clan who knew of these warrants was willing to report Toogood to authorities for extradition to Texas. The child-protective services in Indiana are understandably concerned about Martha being in a family situation where disregard of warrants for arrest is the norm. If Martha were to be released into the custody of one of the families in the clan, the authorities would want to be sure that it was a family of law-abiding clan members who would not be influenced by those without regard for the law, so some investigation would have to be done beforehand.

Whether the Toogoods themselves regain permanent custody would depend on Madelyn's willingness to stop using the clan to hide from the law and her husband's willingness to stop using the clan to hide his wife from the law. The husband himself admits having some unspecified run-ins with the law when he was younger but claims to have mended his ways, yet he was still willing to take his wife with him from Texas to travel with the clan and let warrants be issued for her arrest, rather than stay in Texas with her and have her face the charges against her. The authorities are understandably concerned that the little girl, if she continued to live with them, would be influenced by similar clan pressure to travel out of state rather than stay with family members in-state while they have their day in court.

None of this has to do with prejudice but with the behavior of this family and clan in their previous dealings with the law, just as any family's history is examined in a custody placement. I don't see anything prejudicial about concern by legal authorities that the law be respected and followed. Note that Mr. Smith was quoted as saying that the family's association with the Irish Travelers would play a role in the county office's decisions about custody of Martha, not that it would be the overriding factor in those decisions.

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in USA - Part 2
From: SharonA
Date: 27 Sep 02 - 04:11 PM

Oops. I intended to turn off the italics after my second paragraph, where I posted the quote from Kat. Second time today! What am I doing wrong??

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in USA - Part 2
From: GUEST,Ireland
Date: 27 Sep 02 - 04:14 PM

So I'm from Ireland fly to America, get drunk on Irish whiskey, beat up some people trash a bar,rely on the stereotypical views of the Irish about drunks and fighters and claim I'm Irish thats what we do, nature of the beast.

Accountability, law was broke people were in danger irrespective of my origins and I have to like all other citizens be accountable for my actions it is what separates us from the animals.

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in USA - Part 2
From: GUEST,McGrath of Harlow
Date: 27 Sep 02 - 04:18 PM

"turn public sympathy away from the child "

Yes, the interests of the child clearly have to be the first and most important thing, as in any case involving children. And as I read it, the central worry of people like InOBU is that the interests of the child are very likely indeed to be severely damaged if it isn't handled a great deal more sensitively than it seems to have been.

Taking a child away from its community and family isn't a neutral thing to do. It's happened to children of Native Americans, and Native Australians and to Travellers of one sort or another, and it's often been seen as a kind of rescue from a lifestyle that is assumed to be damaging - and it's worked out very badly indeed in many many cases.

Yes, of course there are circumstances when particular parents can't be relied on to care for their children, and alternatives have to be found, temporarily or even lon term. But it's a delicate matter, and there's a real danger of doing real damage. Wherever possible it is far better to use relatives rather than strangers, especially strangers from a completely different culture.

Violence towards children is not an accepted and normal part of the Traveller way of life. It happens sometimes, as it happens in all kinds of families, and when it is seen to happen it needs to be effectively responded to, in a way that protects the child. But in a way that protects the child in all kinds of ways.

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in USA - Part 2
From: Ron Olesko
Date: 27 Sep 02 - 04:23 PM

Sharon - I didn't mean to suggest that we should ignore the media, just realize what it is all about. In fact, I think you might be echoing what I was trying to say. As I said earlier, we need to draw our own conclusions from a variey of sources.

I DON'T think that the media intentionally lies or changes the focus - they merely reflect what the public is asking for. The sensationalism that the media creates is merely a reflection of our curiosity. If people weren't feeding off it, the media wouldn't cover it. Frankly we are "to blame" for it's existence - we create it.

Ron

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in USA - Part 2
From: SharonA
Date: 27 Sep 02 - 05:40 PM

Ron, thanks for your response and for clearing that up! I see the situation of watching media sensationalism as one of "knowing your enemy." As you say, we the public create the demand for sensationalism that the media supply, so I guess "we have met the enemy and he is us", so each of us needs to be his or her own media watchdog!

Thank you too, M Ted, for your response. I still can't imagine what the exculpatory evidence for Toogood's behavior might be... guess I'll have to wait for Larry to share it before we see if we – and more importantly, the court – can be convinced that it's a satisfactory explanation. I'm skeptical, though, since so far Larry hasn't managed to convince many of the posters on these two threads that his argument holds water.

Waiting with bated breath,
Sharon

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in USA - Part 2
From: M.Ted
Date: 27 Sep 02 - 05:41 PM

It is relatively easy to find the website for The South Bend Tribune, which is the local paper-- and if you did you would learn that there is quite a concern in the community that the unusually high bail (Class D felonies usually have a $500 bond set, rather than the $5000 fine that was set by St. Joseph County Superior Court Judge Jerome Frese) was based on prejudice--you may also see for yourself Jerry, that, though you may not have known that the Toogoods were Irish Travellers, Michianans (the name that the folks in the South Bend/Niles metropolitan area use to desribe themselves) have known about it since the Toogoods were first identified in the video--

You would also have learned that Mr. Toth, the prosecutor of this case, is up for re-election, and, at least in some quarters, his actions in this matter are suspect--

Also, you would gather that the farther someone is from the scene of the crime, the more severe a punishment they seem to demand--Michianans seem to believe that the family unit is much more important than Mudcatters do, and many express the need to return the child to the mother, albeit with the necessary counciling and support, as soon as possible.

Talk is cheap, folks--and most of what you all have posted here is cheap talk--

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in USA - Part 2
From: Ron Olesko
Date: 27 Sep 02 - 05:50 PM

MTED - the high bail is because she has already skipped out on other hearings. She has proven to be a flight risk - and flight risks can be anyone, not just a Traveler. Since she turned up here in NJ, I guess she is rather mobile. I guess if you consider that prejudice, it is - but it still doesn't show that the prejudice is against Travelers, rather it is prejudice against someone who has skipped a court appearance.

I do think a child's place is with the mother, when all legal and psychological critera are met.

Thank you for contributing to the "cheap talk" with the rest of us.

Ron

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in USA - Part 2
From: katlaughing
Date: 27 Sep 02 - 06:03 PM

My quote was the fact the family is part of the Irish Travelers will play a role in whether other family members get temporary custody of the girl – and whether the Toogoods regain custody not as Sharon characterised the family's association with the Irish Travelers. Not associated with, but part of, therefore indicting the entire clan, IMO. Substitute "migrant worker" or any other minority group for "Irish Travellers" and see if it sounds like prejudice.

I'd hate to think that if I'd hit my child that my family and extended family would be judged by my actions and denied temporary custody of my children; as close knit as we were, my children would have been severely traumatised by such.

Also, as I understood it, from some ealier posting, this clan does not go from state to state, but rather winters in one for about six months, then goes back to the other.

M. Ted, thanks for the local information.

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in USA - Part 2
From: Jerry Rasmussen
Date: 27 Sep 02 - 06:30 PM

Like many Mudcat threads, this one has wandered all over the place, and now is somewhere where I don't think anyone can give an intelligent opinion... me included. We've gone from challenging Larry's original statement that the charges leveled against a Mother who beat crap out of her kid were discriminatory, to who should get custody of the child. God help anyone who had to rely on Mudcat, or any other group you care to choose to make a decision on Child Custody. I know from personal experience that far more investigation and evaluation go into the process than could ever occur on Mudcat. And, it is done by people who have far more experience than most of us. Count me out on figuring out where the child should be. I think you should count Larry out, too, personally, and you too McGrath. We just don't know the details, and it looks like Larry made up his mind before he even knew half the facts. I agree with Larry that I hope the decision is made without prejudice. I don't agree that the only decision possible without prejudice is to put the child back in her home. I'd probably lean in that direction myself, but what do I know? What do any of us know about an issue as complex as long-term custody? There's far too much, "I'm thinking about the child, and she should be in her community," and "I'm thinking about the child, and she should be removed from an abusive situation." Truth is, when it comes to custody, I don't think we know what the Hell we're talking about. I'm sure that I don't. I still think Larry has consistently minimized the damage to the child, and glossed over the problems in the family, the police records, the scams. Better that someone more objective look at this one...

Jerry

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in USA - Part 2
From: wysiwyg
Date: 27 Sep 02 - 06:34 PM

It's unfortunate, but IMO the "discrimination" is buried back in that time when the only Travellers most people in the US had ever heard of were the criminal element preying on folks in scams and frauds, who called themselves "Travellers." Benign Travellers didn't step forward then (nor did their allies), as far as I know, to let people know of the honorable people who also claim that identifier. I wish they had. I've served as ally and defender to every victim of injustice (individuals and groups) that I've ever known personally or known about, and put myself and my reputation on the line to do it. But until a chance thread here at Mudcat, I'd never heard of any sort of Traveller except the kind who wants my money and will do a lot of bad things to get it. And neither has anyone I know, who I've asked about it, since that thread.

To blame people for discriminating when they have never been given correct information is unrealistic. And offering correct information, in the middle of a firestorm about what millions have now seen on videotape, is even more unrealistic. IMO the battle for fairness lies elsewhere.

The effective and peacemaking way to gain allies, understanding, and equity is not to cry foul over any individual case, and berate people for being dumb, but to lovingly and accurately educate people over a long period of time about who people actually ARE. And IMO the present instance serves as a very poor starting point.

Don't blame people if a criminal group has co-opted an honorable but little-known name. Take the name back, instead, reclaiming it in honor and peace.

~Susan

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in USA - Part 2
From: GUEST,McGrath of Harlow
Date: 27 Sep 02 - 07:07 PM

In these islands the term "Traveller" has been used for the last thirty of so years as the normal term to cover various groups of people who might otherwise be described as Gypsies, Tinkers, Didakoi. It sets aside the kind of arguments that might arise as to what to call particular people, and uses one aspect of the way of life they have in common.

More recently the term has been used - as "New Age Travellers" - to describe people with a non-travelling background who for various reasons have adopted a related lifestyle, a combination of hippieish people, and of refugees from marginalised lives in cities. And in fact people from older communities of Travelling People have sometimes wished to distance themselves from these newcomers, rejecting the term, or qualifying it,maybe by describing themselves as "Gypsy Travellers." That's because "new age travellers" have come in for a lot of bad treatment and scapegoating.

I'd think most people who are into folk music would inevitably be familiar with the term "the Travelling People", thanks to Ewan MacColl's song. (The link there is to Dick Gaughan's song site - I couldn't find it on the DT, though likely enough it's there.)

Incidentally, it's a strange thing that the word "traveller" means exactly the same as the English word "roamer" - which sounds exactly like Roma. But I think that is a sheer coincidence, since I gather the word "roam" dates back to a time before the Roma came to Europe.

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in USA - Part 2
From: M.Ted
Date: 28 Sep 02 - 01:55 AM

Are you saying that Larry should recuse himself from the case, Jerry? Larry knows more about the case than any of us, because he is actually involved in it--he has access to more of the facts than anyone else here, and he will play a part in the final resolution of the case because he is a lawyer involved in the matter--

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in USA - Part 2
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 28 Sep 02 - 06:33 AM

I think it'd be better if we all backed off from concentrating on this particular case, and leave it to the court process. That's what I took Jery as meanig there. As they say, we're in danger of generating more heat than light.

Let's talk about songs instead for a bit, and their relationship to the real life of the Travelling people.

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in USA - Part 2
From: Jerry Rasmussen
Date: 28 Sep 02 - 07:34 AM

No, Mr. Ted: I don't think that Larry should back off the case. I think that the Travellers need an advocate to make sure that there is no discrimination in the decision as to the long-term placement of the child. As I said, I'd probably lean toward keeping the child with the parents, while holding them accountable for their criminal actions and requiring the mother to get counselling. I'd all expect that there'd be some on-going evaluation ond supervision of the family. What I do believe is that because Larry is the lawyer for the Travellers, he of necessity only presents information that is on their behalf in this forum, and in the best possible way. That makes it impossible for us to evaluate the issue of where the child should live. I am not qualified to make that decision, and I don't believe that Larry is in a position of objectively making it, either. It's like asking the defence lawyer to make the decision in a court case. I want this case handled with justice. I just don't believe that this forum is a place to discuss it anymore. Thank you, Kevin. You understood what I was saying. Let's leave this to the officials now, and let Larry do the job he has been hired to do, whether there is actual payment involved, or not.

Jerry

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in USA - Part 2
From: Leadfingers
Date: 28 Sep 02 - 11:01 AM

Wether one is prejudiced or not,the behaviour of people who APPEAR to be of one group or another will colour ones views on that group.I like to think that I am as liberal minded as the next man (provided the next man is NOT the good Senator Mc Carthy)but I have very little time for any body who moves onto a nice green field and leaves a huge mound of filth and old car parts behind when they move on to their next site.Equally,the three young men who drove past me in a Transit pick up when I stopped for a newspaper and shouted oscenities in broad Irish accents at me for no reason at all. Can I be blamed for thinking unkind thoughts about Irish Travellers?. But it wont stop me going to the Old Crown for a pint of Guiness and to join in with the Irish band who play there. Another point to consider is that your average Catter is possibly a person who's education has stuck a little more than some peoples,and they are therefore more able to see through the headlines that the Tabloid Press are prone to present us with.

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in USA - Part 2
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 28 Sep 02 - 12:15 PM

Sometimes when a bunch of Travellers of one sort or another have been in a field and move on the place looks pretty messy - very often of course it's not so much a question of them moving on as of being moved on, and that's a major factor.

But a few weeks or months on and the field looks OK once more. But when a developer moves in, and churns up the ground, and puts down concrete foundations or covers the surface with asphalt for parking and so forth it's going to take a lot longer before it looks right.

I'm thinking of a particular little field near where I live where a few years ago just this happened. After a few travellers had been moved on they left the place looking pretty bad. It didn't take that long though, and the place recovered well, and was really pretty once more. Then the owners - who of course weren't any kind of Traveller - turned up, and put up great rusty wire fences around it, and big iron gates, and laid down concrete parking over most of it. They had some idea of using it as a lorry park, that never came off. Years later and it looks a real dump.

Human beings have a tendency to wreck the places we occupy - and we need to find a way to avoid doing that. Up until a couple of generations ago Gypsies and other Travellers were actually pretty good at passing through the world without wrecking the stopping places. Where this has changed, there are a lot of reasons, and many of them not their doing at all.

I've had obscenities shouted at me by young men with English accents in white vans, but it hasn't made me think any worse of the English in general. Of course, I have enough contact with English people who aren't like that to recognise it as being just the way some people are. The danger is when people generalise from an isolated instance, and think it tells them something that applies to a group as a whole, when it's a group they haven't had too much contact with.

And that's really what lies behind the worry some of us have expressed about this whole episode. The very fact that it seems that, for a lot of people, it's the first time the existence of the Travelling People has come to their attention, means a real danger of this kind of stereotyping. Especially when "the experts" creep out of the woodwork and encourage the process, with the cooperation of people in the media who like to keep the story simple and dramatic.

Arguing about what exactly happened in this case, and how it was dealt with, isn't really too helpful.

I think and hope that everyone who has joined in is actually agreed on what really matters - violence towards children is wrong and cannot be ignored; and prejudice and unfair discrimination and persecution of any group of people is wrong, and cannot be allowed.

The rest is details and speculation about facts where most of us, including me, really haven't actually got the facts. We're a bit like the friends who came to blows arguing about the colour of a horse - and they were in the dark anyway.

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in USA - Part 2
From: M.Ted
Date: 28 Sep 02 - 12:31 PM

I wrote to the South Bend Tribune and asked them to set up a page with links to all their Toogood Articles, which they were happy to do--South Bend Tribune Toogood Special Page This will make it easy for all of you to read about what has actually been going on in the community--I love the internet!

html link fixed by mudelf ;-)

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in USA - Part 2
From: catspaw49
Date: 28 Sep 02 - 02:57 PM

Suppose they were Amish..............

I've really tried to stay away from this one.....I really have. I'm not going into any credentials I might have to judge this one as most of us here are talking through our hats anyway. What you saw on the videotape happens many times everyday all over the country. Sometimes the offenders are caught......Most times they aren't.

When they are and Children's Services is involved, the law enforcement agency authorizes the emergency temporary placement of the child in foster care. The first task after that of the caseworker is to find a suitable longer term foster/relative placement. The first place to look is to the relatives and if they are available, suitable, and willing to commit to the rules governing foster placement (yes, there are extensive rules that cover foster care), then the child is placed with them. In this process, the first and foremost motive that drives the decision should be "the best interests of the child." Not flight risk....Not the opinions of another's style of living. The best interest of the child.....period.

I, and none of you either, know the details that the caseworker and casework supervisor are investigating. If they are being driven in their investigation by public opinion, they are not doing their job. If they are being driven by the feelings and thoughts of a prosecutor or anyone else with an ax to grind, they are not doing their job. The job is to find the best possible placement in the best interests of the child.   Safeguards can be set up within the placement agreement and if they are broken, then the placement is moved. The caseworker and supervisor are free to do this and it is done in almost every case of "relative placement" as a matter of course.

The only thing I can say here with any degree of certainty is that children in foster care would almost always prefer to be with relatives.....or their parents, regardless of how abusive the situation. I have seen kids that had parents who murdered a sibling and they would prefer to be with the parents even so. It's a tough thing to understand........

I'm outta' here...........Should have kept my mouth shut.

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in USA - Part 2
From: InOBU
Date: 28 Sep 02 - 05:13 PM

Bless you Spaw, that is the truth. The real story will out, a little at a time, and I hope the press is there to cover it, not in the sensationalist way it has been presented, such as Andrea Peyser saing, "This train wreck of a mom is one of the so-called Irish Travellers - nomadic misfits with I'd never before heard of..." she goes on to say "By foistering a bizare athority shunning way of life on kids, the Travellers put them in danger." I don't have a lot of time to say much, I have to run down south, having only been back a few hours from the mid west, and for the rest of the evening work on a Romani child custody case... folks, look at the above, I can give you ten or twenty equaly vile statements in the reporting... when you call any culture bizarre, misfits, there is only one word for you, a bigot, and bigotry hurts children in a way that maybe a Traveller knows better than alot of our fellow countryfolk.
Best wishes to all, keep thinking about this, keep watching and learning. Larry

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in USA - Part 2
From: GUEST,Ireland
Date: 28 Sep 02 - 05:59 PM

Larry, If you are part of the Toogood defence why are you bringing this into the public domain. The ethnic tactic is wrong it has backfired, juding from the posts people did not care about the womans origins. Playing this card seems to have turned people against her, not doing too good a job.

People are actively seeking information on this person i.e southbend link how many are doing so to gain info to attack this woman. The legal team are leaving this woman out to dry as it seems she is getting little sympathy or understanding.

Maybe I'm wrong but as I'm Irish you will excues me.

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in USA - Part 2
From: InOBU
Date: 28 Sep 02 - 07:04 PM

Hi folks, I am not the lawyer for the Toogoods, I am a political scientist with a Juris Doctorate, who knows a huge amount about Roma and a good deal about Travellers, and has access and a personal relationship with the real experts both with a Phd and a thrity foot trailer, so to speak. As far as what has gone on in the case before I was asked to speak with the press, I wont comment on that. The Traveller issue was raised before anyone called me. As to my effectiveness, the story on the AP was the first positive word about Travellers published, and the talk with Bill O'Rielly on FOX went well, so I am told. We will see what the public says about CNN. As far as it goes, here I have commented on what has been public record. Frankly I think some of the Catters are bending over backwards to not see the prejudice here, and some who talk about Irish Travellers shouting at them with Irish Accents, know nothing about Travellers in the US and are parading a potenial prejudice... (gee that came out like Johnny Cockran, sorry folks...) anyway, I am sharing an informal natter with my mudcat family, while avoiding anything confidential, because, you, dear singers of the truth, are the hope for spreading the word they way it should be, in a cultureal context. You folkies owe travellers more than you think, Larry

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in USA - Part 2
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 28 Sep 02 - 07:21 PM

And anyone who hasn't listened to the MacColl/Parker Radio Ballad The Travelling People, you've missed something, but you needn't keep on missig it. And if you buy it, remember to do it via CAMSCO.

But, once again, couldn't we move on here from this particular case, which is now in the court system, and turn to other relevant matters?

To quote what I said a couple of posts back "I think and hope that everyone who has joined in is actually agreed on what really matters - violence towards children is wrong and cannot be ignored; and prejudice and unfair discrimination and persecution of any group of people is wrong, and cannot be allowed."

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in USA - Part 2
From: GUEST,928
Date: 28 Sep 02 - 07:33 PM

But, once again, couldn't we move on here from this particular case, which is now in the court system, and turn to other relevant matters?

McGrath,

You and anyone else are always free to move on and turn to other matters. If you don't want want to continue in this thread, you're not obligated to read it, let alone pontificate endlessly, as you do often in so many threads, and certainly not to dictate to everyone else what they should be concerned about.

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in USA - Part 2
From: GUEST
Date: 28 Sep 02 - 07:35 PM

Thanks 928. Ol' Kevin sure likes to play the Lord Konow-It-All of Mudcat. He is very tiresome.

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in USA - Part 2
From: GUEST,.gargoyle
Date: 28 Sep 02 - 10:34 PM

There are a lot more traveler traits in you than you admit to, Larry. Back on the 26th you stated, I am part of a legal team

Would you like to ask the generous MudCat community for a donation?

Sincerely,
Gargoyle

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in USA - Part 2
From: InOBU
Date: 28 Sep 02 - 11:41 PM

Hi Garg: They really do contribute. Much of the comments here, at some time and another get mulled over by the team, which at the moment is a lawyer, a phd folklorist - which sounds less serrious a study than it is, it entails antro, sociolgy, linguistics... but I read and contemplate our little microcausem of the world here, and it helps me to learn how to explain Traveller culture as opposed to steryotypes to the world at large. I get support and inspiration from M.Ted and McGraw, and Spaw and others, but where would a boxer be without a good sparing partner. That is why I always said that you are underapreciated, you have at times been a good sparing partner, a bit of sand papper to get folks smoothed out and on the plumb!
Well, I have to get off to the kip. I am on the road driving alone at 8am to go many miles before I sleep, and to see wonderful things. God bless all, and thanks.
I'm just going to take off the tirsty boots for a few hours, then I am on the road again.
Scare off them demons, Garg, Larry

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in USA - Part 2
From: Nerd
Date: 28 Sep 02 - 11:43 PM

Yes, Larry, you have been a bit confusing about your role. I assume that you are telling the truth in both posts, though, and that you are a consultant to the lawyers, hence part of the team but not the counsel. Is this accurate?

In any case, I really can't agree that loudmouth bigots in the press prove anything about the actions of the social workers or the authorities. No one is saying prejudice doesn't exist. But you pointing out that some journalist I've never heard of is an asshole doesn't have much bearing on whether prejudice was shown by the authorities in the case itself. I'm waiting for the new evidence you've promised, especially now that there are new charges relating to giving the address of strip-mall drycleaner as their permanent abode (I know, I know, travellers don't have a fixed address....)

Subject: RE: BS: Traveller Discrimination in USA - Part 2
From: JJ
Date: 28 Sep 02 - 11:52 PM

The story was on the 11:00 WCBS local news here in New York tonight with emphasis on the question: is the child in custody really Martha? But not one word was uttered about Irish Travelers...