Justin Lai 譯述文集
【美國城市示威與警察】
Freddie
Gray never had a chance-死者佛烈迪格雷從未有申辯的機會
Here is the key finding in
the Freddie Gray case: Police had no legitimate reason to arrest him in the first place.
佛烈迪被害案件的主要發現如下：首先警察即無合法的理由逮捕他。
The ostensible charge
against Gray – that he had an illegal switchblade – was false, according to
Baltimore City State’s Attorney Marilyn Mosby.
The folding knife found in his pocket was of a design that is perfectly legal
under Maryland law, Mosby said. Gray never should have been put into the police
van where he suffered a fatal injury to his spine.
依巴爾第摩市-瑪麗蓮摩士比州檢察官的說法，格雷非法擁有彈簧小刀，這個明顯的控訴是虛假的。摩士比州檢察官說，在他口袋中找到的摺疊式小刀，依馬利蘭州的法律，是屬於一種完全合法的設計，摩士比又說格雷根本就不該被帶上警車，在車上他的脊骨受到致命的傷害。
Now does everyone
understand the anger in Baltimore?
是否人人瞭解巴爾的摩市民的憤怒?
The assumption that police
officers made from the beginning was that Gray must be guilty of something. He
was standing on a street corner – not a crime. He made eye contact with one of
the officers who approached him – also not a crime. He ran away – still not a
crime.
一開始警察就假定格雷必定犯了某種罪。其實當時他不過站在街角，這並不犯罪。他雙眼注視走近他的警察們，這也不算犯罪。後來他跑開了，仍不構成犯罪。
But he was a young
African-American man in a depressed inner-city neighborhood, so he enjoyed a presumption
of guilt, not of innocence. He never had a chance
問題出在當時他是一位處在一個鬱悶的、人口稠密貧民區的年青黑人，因此他就被假想為是犯罪者而非無辜者。可是他從未有機會申辯。
Running from the police is
not a crime. It is true that courts have given police more latitude in
“high-crime” areas, so the officers might have been able to defend their
decision to chase Gray. But once they had caught him – and found he was not in
violation of any law – police had no justification whatsoever for taking him
into custody.
逃離警察並非是犯罪。不錯，法庭是給與警察在高犯罪率地區，有更多執勤的辦案空間，因此他們就能為追捕格雷的決定作辯護。可是一旦逮捕到他，並發現他未犯法時，警察就無任何正當理由監禁他。
Police officers exercise
discretion every day. They don’t stop everyone they see walking in the street,
selling loose cigarettes, driving with a broken tail light or loitering on a
“high-crime” corner. They make choices. Far too often, they choose to assume
that black men must be guilty of something – and look for reasons to arrest
them.
警察每天都要審慎辦案。他們不會攔阻在街上走路的行人，販售散裝香煙的人，駕駛車子尾燈破損的人，或在『高犯罪率』街角逗留的人。他們固然要判斷作決定。但他們常常作「假定黑人一定會犯罪」的選擇，然後再找理由來逮捕他們。(譯註：欲加之罪何患無辭?)
Imagine what would happen
if police cruised the nation’s wealthiest suburbs, looking for excuses to
arrest people. Imagine the outrage if officers regularly patrolled golf
courses, taking middle-aged white men into custody for illegally betting on the
outcome of a match. Imagine how people would react if such a trumped-up arrest
ended in the death of the person being arbitrarily detained.
想想看倘若警察在國內最富有的郊區巡邏，尋找抓人的藉口，會發生什麼事? 想想看如果警察在高爾夫球場定期巡邏，並逮捕中年白人，因他們非法打賭球賽的輸贏，會引起多大的憤怒? 假設似此捏造罪名濫捕無辜，而導致這個被任意拘押致死的人，想想看人們的反應會如何激烈?
It is gratifying that six
police officers have been charged in Gray’s death. Justice, this time, will
have a fighting chance. But the “Black Lives Matter” campaign
should continue – until they actually do.
還好有六位警官被控導致格雷的死亡。這次法官們將會有爭辯的機會。但所謂的『黑人的命值錢』的這項訴求運動應該持續到真正落實為止。
Condensed from Washington
Post (取材自華盛頓郵報)
05/02/2015
民眾在市政府前的集結 05/02/15 黑人的生命值錢
【譯者評論】：
本次發生於美東巴爾的摩城市應定名為另一次的『警民』衝突，而非『黑白種族』暴動。固然受害者是年青黑人，但涉嫌執法不當的警察有六人，三位白人，三位黑人。此事已引發全國性(from coast to coast) 的示威，對象清一色是警察。但抗議示威者，黑白均有，鎮壓警察也是，CNN全程報導(full coverage) 大部是黑人的男女記者(譯註：惟恐遭殃被攻擊?)。
此次的暴動與1960年代大不相同，當年主要是以『種族歧視』(racial discrimination) 為主，當時如果控制不當則可能是美國另一次內戰(civil war) ，十分嚴重。但最近的幾次是『警方執法』的缺失，無獨有偶，被害人全是黑人。這已經不是當年的馬丁路德(Martin Luther King, Jr.) 犧牲了一條命就可解決，不是到處大馬路用他的名字命名，或以他的生日訂為國訂紀念日 (national holiday) 就可擺平。
近年來美國黑白通婚逐漸普遍，有些白人女子甚至以下嫁老黑為榮，常在公共場合很自然地展現黑白混血兒女(losing no opportunity to show people their hybrid children) 。因此各地所暴發的示威，很難看出孰(黑) 是 孰(白) 非。
此案應是嚴重的內政問題，中國人稱『官逼民反』，因為它與黑白人種生活的差距有關。凡是大城市總是存有太大差距的區段(neighborhood) ，警方執法時常有『先入為主』的觀念 (presumption)，不分皂白先抓黑人再說。當然黑人也常有被冤枉的情事，但當一個人常被懷疑犯罪時，久而久之，作人的尊嚴會逐漸喪失，遂有『挺而走險』步入歧途之可能，而形成「惡性循環」(vicious circle) ，反正跳下黃河也洗不清。
本案另一案外案為，州政府女檢察官(D.A.)-Mosby年僅36歲，竟一口氣控訴六名警察涉有行為不當(misconduct) 、暴行(manslaughter) 、毆打(assault) 及甚至第二級謀殺(2nd degree murder) 等罪嫌。其行動之快出乎讓全國警察感到意外，是檢警步調不一? 員警是否會被起訴? 尚言之過早，但這是政府人員不『官官相護』的表面事証，是否檢警『唱雙簧』? 不得而知，但對平息眾怒可能不無影響。另外對2016年的總統大選或有些衝擊(impact) ，尤其是民主黨，因此希拉蕊(Hilary Clinton) 趕緊公開呼籲民眾冷靜團結。
另外從電視畫面可以看到黑人群眾在街上砸壞警車、路邊公共設施如拉圾筒，座椅等公物，有些入衝入商店搗壞物品或搶劫一空，這樣肆無忌憚地掠奪財物(looting) ，已使訴求大為變質，恐很難博得冷靜客觀群眾們的同情。此事如何落幕得看兩黨政客們的協商與相關政治利益的談判，現場的群眾與執勤的警察不過是另一齣戲中的演員而已。
Justin Lai (賴正雄) 評
05/04/2015
沒有留言:
張貼留言