The NAACP's Seattle chapter was badly embarrassed earlier this year when a judge threw out a high-profile legal case against the Kent School District that was filed in response to allegedly inappropriate use of handcuffs and physical force in a number of student disciplinary incidents. It was dismissed because Alfoster Garret, the Seattle NAACP's attorney in the case, and also the chapter's new president, was repeatedly late for court dates and had failed to do basic preparation.
In today's Seattle Post-Intelligencer, columnist Robert Jamieson writes about Garrett's continuing temporal and professional challenges, citing a number of instances where Garrett has failed to arrive on time at scheduled meetings with important public officials such as Washington Governor Christine Gregoire, and Seattle Public Schools Superintendent Raj Manhas. Jamieson also reports Garrett was late for a key court date last week, and his 14-year-old client in the case may have suffered a harsher sentence as a result.
...Sakara Remmu, the chapter's former vice president and education chairwoman, was so disgusted by Garrett's handling of the 14-year-old's case and general lack of professionalism that she resigned -- then courageously broke her silence. "Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere," Remmu says.....Separately, people are upset that Garrett still hasn't refiled the Kent handcuffs case. The whole situation has become so dire that other members of the executive committee have bailed out, pointing the finger at Garrett.
I disagree with Jamieson only to the extent he says, as others in Seattle media have, that the local NAACP chapter was in good hands under former head Carl Mack, who left to take a job near Washington, D.C. Mack specialized in race-baiting protests and media coverage. He was a throwback, highlighting splashy victim politics over the high expectations and ethic of self-responsibility to which so many African-Americans hold themselves.
Posted by Matt Rosenberg at August 04, 2005 08:38 AM | Email ThisI liked this passage:
"That's what happened in the case of the 14-year-old boy. His mother went to the NAACP because of its reputation. She ended up scraping together more than $10,000 because Garrett said he could help. The mother says she plans to file a grievance against Garrett with the state bar association for poor representation."
Garrett is just another con man, preying on his own people, but not as slick as Mak was. He is more likely to become ensnared by his own scams much to the shagrin of the NAALCP...
Posted by: alphabet soup on August 4, 2005 09:12 AMHowever, agreement by a non-black (against the NAACP) is usually greeted with a suspicion of racism or bias. Nothing could be more incorrect. I'll explain:
I've watched the NAACP's actions closely for effective, positive changes in their community. I judge them on the ‘results on the ground’ to their constituent members. Did it work or not? Example: broken families, drugs and other problems plaguing ALL groups and ALL races. If they ACTUALLY contributed to improving clients’ conditions, then great. That can be determined by pulling up a host of government stats.
The most admirable, inspirational (and successful) minorities I worked for & worked with adhered to a code of conduct and discipline practiced by anyone--they were hard-working, pleasant and had good families or mentors that demanded nothing less than excellence, with little room for excuses. They chose & directed their own futures without a lot of whiny fanfare. They kicked the butts of other racial groups and achieved. It was ALL about excellence, not looking to the past. Obviously, they did not need any spoksepeople--THEY were their OWN best examples, role models and spoksepeople by being so successful.
Having a (race-focused) special interest lobby group like the NAACP is not necessary, to me, unless you need help with the basics of success. But that can be supplied by a church or family or community group of any race or creed. Not being a member, I can't say for sure. Just my 2 cents.
ps--the organization's title also seems to separate us as a nation, just like LaRaza (i.e.: “THE Race”--what race is SOOO special over others?)--aren't we just "Americans" of different backgrounds? Why all the sub-distinctions in the groups’ names if race and ethnicity truly do not matter to us and we are allegedly looking for quality and integrity?
I respect any ethnic or racial group's right to form a group, but I think we get carried away in America with too many interest groups to the point of forgetting our original melting pot and assimilation designs and traditions that bring out America's best. Fray a huge rope's multiple little twines, and the entire rope weakens.
Mack, although loud makes his presence and I beleive he is one of the most respected public officials in this city. Garret, well educated, was not diligent and assertive with respect to Kent School Distric Matter.
Garrett points the finger, and lies to his own board memebers. He looks horrible in the papers, and even Mack asked him to resign. Garrett took the one of the top ranked NAACP chapters at made an embarrassement out of it!
Everything Mr. Mack, worked for in the NAACP is shot
Posted by: Anonymous on August 22, 2005 01:05 PM