Photo by NeitherFanBoy

Last Thursday, the jury in Los Angeles reached its verdict in the Mehserle trial.  Officials announced at 2pm that the verdict would be delivered two hours later.  As a result, many businesses in downtown Oakland released their employees in anticipation of chaos on the streets.

I walked from 20th to 12th Street throughout the downtown corridor, watching thousands of people flee the city.  I have never seen such a traffic jam, as all arteries out of downtown were clogged.  The sidewalks were three and four wide too, as people rushed to the BART stations.  They all believed the media hype that Oakland would burn to the ground regardless of the verdict rendered by the jury.

A funny thing happened on the way to the riot. It never occurred, despite the best efforts of the media to conjure violence with relentless speculation.  Here’s what really happened. People began congregating at 14th and Broadway at about 4:30. The crowd was a true mixture of Oakland’s diversity, many young, old, various ethnic groups and others.  It was a peaceful assembly much to the disappointment of some media, who asked, “Aren’t you angry about the verdict,” and my favorite, “When will the protest turn violent?” Instead most people talked about the verdict and what exactly it meant.  Many simply were still amazed that an unarmed black man could be shot while laying face down on the sidewalk.

Let’s take a moment to consider the jury. No one envies the jury’s job in this case.  They listened to weeks of testimony.  They weighed the evidence and came to the conclusion that a criminal act had been committed by Mr. Mehserle and convicted him on involuntary manslaughter. This does not appear to be a rash judgment.  The prosecution had not shown the necessary intent to kill required for first or second degree murder.  The case really boiled down to whether it was voluntary or involuntary manslaughter. For voluntary manslaughter, the jury would have to find Mr. Mehserle intentionally reached for his gun in a moment of confusion, emotional distress or mistaken self-defense; in other words, that the shooting was intentional, but based on faulty reasoning and action.  For involuntary manslaughter, they would have to find no intent to shoot Mr. Grant, but rather was a mistake or accident based on reckless or negligent behavior.

Back to the protest. As many more people gathered downtown, the mood of the crowd remained calm and looking for answers.  I talked to many people.  The overwhelming feeling was sorrow for this tragedy, not anger towards the verdict.  Members of the Grant family spoke, urging everyone to remain calm and to let the system work.

Many people should be commended for the way Oakland handled this potential crisis.  The City and numerous non-profit groups reached out throughout the city to give an opportunity for people to express their viewpoints in a non-violent manner. Mayor Ron Dellums immediately went public with numerous statements designed to keep people calm.  Many City Councilmembers came to 14th and Broadway urging calm.

Pastor Dion Evans, a radio talk host, brought his program live on location at 15th and Franklin.  He invited people to express their views, discuss the trial, verdict and everything leading up to it.  An Oakland youth jazz group played live music that attracted lots of people to listen instead of protest.  Numerous other individual volunteers circulated throughout the crowd in an attempt to keep peace iin our beautiful city.

The Oakland police were fully prepared for the worst to occur.  They responded admirably to the crowd and ensured that downtown remained safe.  As the evening grew later, the crowd began to change.  Instead of the multi-ethnic, multi-generational crowd, it became younger, more hostile and angry.  You could see many people showing up and dressed in black, hoodies pulled over their heads, masks on their faces and carrying weapons of minor destruction. The irony is that many of these people came to downtown on BART.

It became clear they were not concerned about the Oscar Grant trial verdict or the fate of our city.  No, it was obvious they were there to cause destruction.  Many people have described them as “professional agitators”, out-of-towners looking for the thrill of shattering glass, burning property, and antagonizing police into a confrontation.

As they stood in downtown, I could hear people talking on their cell phones trying to coordinate “their attacks” on the police and buildings.  By then, many of the original gathered masses confronted them, asking them why they were coming to tear up Oakland.  They ignored these pleadings and began to burn, break, crash and attack the police.  The police showed great restraint to control of the situation and arrest over 80 people.  Unsurprisingly, over 80 percent were not from Oakland.

I was really warmed by the tremendous character strength of Oakland residents.  Our beautifully diverse residents came together to save our city and not let it fall prey to mindless and ignorant destruction.  Many people repeated the mantra that violence is not justice.

Many people also understood that this is just the first turn of the wheel of justice, and all parties’ legal rights will be respected.  Soon there will be a sentencing hearing in the criminal trial and the judge will determine sentence.  Also, many expressed hope that super-attorney John Burris is handling a civil case against BART and the police officers.  Many people felt that the civil case would bring to light what the criminal case did not.  Others hoped BART officials understood the severity of this case and that much needed reform of their police force would occur.  The feeling was of hope, not anger and destruction.

The legal system works and Oakland came through despite evil intent from many quarters. I am proud of my city and its wonderful diverse people.

Clinton Killian is an attorney in downtown Oakland, an Oakland resident and a former Oakland Planning Commissioner. He can be reached at: (510) 625-8823 or email: clintonkillian@yahoo.com