BoxRec

I can't understand why President Obama, after Congress passed a bipartisan resolution supporting the pardon last year, will take the opportunity to correct U.S. history, and pardon Jack Johnson? Interesting article about it.

https://theundefeated.com/features/will ... k-johnson/

I thought he already did. John McCain brought that up in '04.

Personally I dont think Jack Johnson wouldnt like to be pardoned.
anyway he really was helping the Prostitutes he knew and was hanging out with by personally helping them
expand their business by going in it for themselves(for a bigger cut from the Johns) rather then working for a Madam and giving at least half or more.
but you already knew that didnt you ?

Badhusker wrote:I can't understand why President Obama, after Congress passed a bipartisan resolution supporting the pardon last year, will take the opportunity to correct U.S. history, and pardon Jack Johnson? Interesting article about it.

https://theundefeated.com/features/will ... k-johnson/

Does this apply to everyone that fell foul to the 'law" ...or only Johnson? Was he not guilty of soliciting women and taking them across state lines for immoral purposes?? Is this in regards to the Mann Act? I need educating in this matter I think.

It is common for pardons to come in the last two weeks of a presidency - if he hasn't he probably will before the 20th.

Why pardon him? If so pardon everyone prosecuted and persecuted under the Mann act. Johnson was actually guilty under the letter and spirit of the law, was convicted, and then fled the country. He is exactly the type of person who shouldnt be pardoned regardless of what his apologists say. Great fighter, shitty person.

There should be no pardon. The injustices Johnson had to endure should remain in place as a stark reminder of the times

golden oldie wrote:

klompton wrote:Why pardon him? If so pardon everyone prosecuted and persecuted under the Mann act. Johnson was actually guilty under the letter and spirit of the law, was convicted, and then fled the country. He is exactly the type of person who shouldnt be pardoned regardless of what his apologists say. Great fighter, shitty person.

This time, the woman, another alleged prostitute named Belle Schreiber, with whom he had been involved in 1909 and 1910, testified against him. In the courtroom of Kenesaw Mountain Landis, the future Commissioner of Baseball who perpetuated the baseball color line until his death, Johnson was convicted by an all-white jury in June 1913, despite the fact that the incidents used to convict him took place before passage of the Mann Act. He was sentenced to a year and a day in prison.

Fair play to Johnson for refusing to kow tow to the racist America of the 1910's. He was right to skip the country, he deserves to be pardoned, and indeed posthumously honoured.

So much for the " spirit, and the letter " of the law. Convicting a guy for something that allegedly occurred before the law was even passed.

The guy was covorting with and employing prostitutes as both a pimp and a john. He provided financial support to prostitutes and his cabaret doubled as a whore house. Sorry, but there were a hell of a lot more people convicted of the Mann act that were less deserving than Johnson and far more deserving of a pardon. Why some people let their love of a sport and their respect for a participants skills cloud their judgement is beyond me. Most of the people who pop off about how poorly johnson was treated and dont know jack shit about that case or the law. On top of the fact that he was guilty as sin of this law, he also beat the shit out of sickly 100 pound man, evaded taxes and evaded import and customs duties, beat his women, was responsible for the suicide of one of them, constantly rang up lavish expenses literally all over the world and refused to pay for them and was kicked out of almost every country he ever visited and not, as you would have us believe, because he was black. It was because he was a selfish, egomaniacal, anti-social asshole who regardless of his skin color felt that not only the laws of whatever country he was in but also the basic rules of living in a society did not apply to him. Yeah, some hero. While you are putting him on some pedestal as paragon of the civil rights movement keep in mind that most of the people actually fighting for civil rights during his life considered him a disgrace and harmful to the cause (Which he was) specifically because of his antisocial and illegal behavior. Pick someone more deserving of your sympathy and far more deserving of a pardon.

klompton wrote:

golden oldie wrote:

klompton wrote:Why pardon him? If so pardon everyone prosecuted and persecuted under the Mann act. Johnson was actually guilty under the letter and spirit of the law, was convicted, and then fled the country. He is exactly the type of person who shouldnt be pardoned regardless of what his apologists say. Great fighter, shitty person.

This time, the woman, another alleged prostitute named Belle Schreiber, with whom he had been involved in 1909 and 1910, testified against him. In the courtroom of Kenesaw Mountain Landis, the future Commissioner of Baseball who perpetuated the baseball color line until his death, Johnson was convicted by an all-white jury in June 1913, despite the fact that the incidents used to convict him took place before passage of the Mann Act. He was sentenced to a year and a day in prison.

Fair play to Johnson for refusing to kow tow to the racist America of the 1910's. He was right to skip the country, he deserves to be pardoned, and indeed posthumously honoured.

So much for the " spirit, and the letter " of the law. Convicting a guy for something that allegedly occurred before the law was even passed.

The guy was covorting with and employing prostitutes as both a pimp and a john. He provided financial support to prostitutes and his cabaret doubled as a whore house. Sorry, but there were a hell of a lot more people convicted of the Mann act that were less deserving than Johnson and far more deserving of a pardon. Why some people let their love of a sport and their respect for a participants skills cloud their judgement is beyond me. Most of the people who pop off about how poorly johnson was treated and dont know jack poo about that case or the law. On top of the fact that he was guilty as sin of this law, he also beat the poo out of sickly 100 pound man, evaded taxes and evaded import and customs duties, beat his women, was responsible for the suicide of one of them, constantly rang up lavish expenses literally all over the world and refused to pay for them and was kicked out of almost every country he ever visited and not, as you would have us believe, because he was black, he was a fugitive from justice and while a fugitive he even attempted to act on behalf of our enemies during world war 1 (despite the absolutely incorrect assertions by some of his apologists and biographers that he was actually trying to help America and her allies). It was because he was a selfish, egomaniacal, anti-social asshole who regardless of his skin color felt that not only the laws of whatever country he was in but also the basic rules of living in a society did not apply to him. Yeah, some hero. While you are putting him on some pedestal as a paragon of the civil rights movement keep in mind that most of the people actually fighting for civil rights during his life considered him a disgrace and harmful to the cause (Which he was) specifically because of his antisocial and illegal behavior. Pick someone more deserving of your sympathy and far more deserving of a pardon.

bollocks wrote:There should be no pardon. The injustices Johnson had to endure should remain in place as a stark reminder of the times

This was what I was thinking when I opened the thread.
The story of prejudice against blacks before, during and after Johnsons reign should always be remembered.
If the Jack Johnston story is about anything it is this. A pardon won't change that to be fair, it may even serve to highlight the wrongs of yesteryear, but I'd leave the issue alone and leave the story to be told, as it is, forever more.

OK, give Jack Johnson his pardon, then strip him of his title for not defending it against credible opponents.

Seamus wrote:OK, give Jack Johnson his pardon, then strip him of his title for not defending it against credible opponents.

Fair!

Pardoning people in western society is usually done because fresh evidence has came to light which made a conviction unsafe.
You don't pardon people because the law has now changed. The law was in force at the time and he broke that law and convicted. It doesn't matter what we now think of a particular law.

This type off thing has started to emerge from well organised protest groups representing minority groups who are intent on altering history. The aggressive feminist groups began this around 40 years ago.
Let it lie, it's totally worthless and boring.

- I see a segment of congenitally argumentative here who never met a fact that informed their opinion are wallowing in their faux morality.

The Mann law was passed June 25th, 1910. The charges against Johnson were first dropped on a technicality after he married the 18 year old prostitute, so they went back further in time to Belle Schreiber who said she was financed by Johnson in setting up a brothel on October of 1910. Typically law enforcement threatens to prosecute a "snitch" witness to force them to testify, but I recall looking at transcripts several years back with JJ ending pleading guilty, perhaps to loosen the surveillance on him so as to skip town after his conviction, a train ride arranged in advance by his buddy Rube Foster to pass as a member of his baseball team.

"In October 1910, Johnson helped her open her own place of business — wiring her money for train fare from Pittsburgh to Chicago, then paying the first month's rent and buying all of the furniture for her own brothel. But two years later federal investigators tracked her down to a whorehouse in Washington D.C., and she became the prosecution's chief witness in Johnson's Mann Act trial." If Johnson was so aggrieved, why did he agree to do war bond fundraisers during WW2?

http://www.pbs.org/unforgivableblacknes ... women.html

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2005 ... raffic-act

Now, others charged with violating the Mann Act include iconic architect Frank Lloyd Wright and Luis Firpo for driving their traveling secretaries across state lines for immoral purpose with Firpo and his secretary deported to Argentina, and Charlie Chaplin. The Supremes ruled affirmatively on conviction cases of two married California men convicted for driving their girlfriends to Nevada for a sexual holiday right around this time frame, so Johnson fits right into the era narrative no matter the stated motivations.

McCain/Reid, and others get a free feel good ride for "standing up against racial prejudice" all while ignoring the largest criminally smuggled drug and human network in this history of the Americas, primarily Mexicans through Mexico empowered by Mexico whose remunerations from these expats are reputedly the 2nd largest source of income in Mexico.

Periodically there are busts here of restaurants, work houses, and the like, but that doesn't address the exploitation the vast numbers here endure who keep low profiles lest their children who can no longer speak Spanish get deported with them. The sexual trafficking I personally witnessed in my neighborhood when I saw a young Mexican girl crying, holding her stomach like she had just been beaten up by a pimp. She looked fresh off the bus that dropped her here, maybe 15 years of age. I would see her walking in the neighborhood and saw the transformation of a simple peasant girl into a whore highly made up escorting new Johns to her place where he may have consummated the transaction,or maybe gets rolled and robbed as happens. These networks know where these young kids come from and threaten their family members back home if they don't do their biding.

BTW, Prez O'Billary has commuted thousands of drug sentences and hundreds more pardons which are more important to his constituency than JJ. Since he's a lawyer interested in filing quarter billion tax returns when leaves office, there is a tricky legal ground concerning this case that includes the woman component, and remember, he's got 2 daughters. What, he's gonna pardon Mike Tyson too? Oh, and the reputed transcripts were making the election 2016 rounds of the NY charges against Prez to be Rump for a sexual encounter with a trafficked 13 year old at the home of the infamous child molester, millionaire Jeffrey Epstein. Epstein has served time, but Rump thus far has been slipperier with the charges dropped, then refiled, and reported threats made against the young woman.

I suggest that you poor misbegotten dears pay attention to the sins of your era as hundred years from now, no doubt you will look proper doltish, vicious and sleezy slimy murderous.

Are you arguing that four wrongs make it (all)right? - I read the link you offered - they make it pretty clear that they went after Chaplin because of his leftist political leanings, and that the women (wives) were misusing the system (the law) just to get back at their cheating husbands . . . what era narrative does this fit into: 'it is OK, because Johnson embarrassed white men at a time when racism was considered OK' narrative?

The Chaplin case was after the war, not part of that era - I suspect so was the Wright charges?

dalcumly wrote:Pardoning people in western society is usually done because fresh evidence has came to light which made a conviction unsafe.
You don't pardon people because the law has now changed. The law was in force at the time and he broke that law and convicted. It doesn't matter what we now think of a particular law.

I disagree, pardons are sometimes granted because the social temperament changes - hell even the witches of Salem village where pardoned because the social temperament had changed; it is Ok for us to judge our fathers behavior; and to alter the historical record to show our dissatisfaction with their behavior - it is a substantive argument not a due process concern.

If they pardon Jack Johnson then the President should pardon everyone that was ever convicted of the Mann act
as well as all of the prosititutes back then too who got them convicted.
It only seems right.

I never understand why everybody cares about pardoning a dead man. Jack Johnson couldn't care less anymore about being pardoned. He stopped caring on June 10th, 1946 to be exact. Maybe before that even.

People are in prison now for crimes they didn't commit. That should be the priority above pardoning somebody to dead to care.

Caractacus wrote:If they pardon Jack Johnson then the President should pardon everyone that was ever convicted of the Mann act
as well as all of the prosititutes back then too who got them convicted.
It only seems right.

Does it matter that Johnson's conviction, under the Mann Act, was a deliberate 'fishing expedition' on the part of the prosecutor; 'expedition' in the sense that they went after the man, and then only discovered he committed the particular crime? - That is not out brand of justice; we don't want our government going after people; we want them to prosecute crimes.

golden oldie wrote:

dalcumly wrote:Pardoning people in western society is usually done because fresh evidence has came to light which made a conviction unsafe.
You don't pardon people because the law has now changed. The law was in force at the time and he broke that law and convicted. It doesn't matter what we now think of a particular law.

This type off thing has started to emerge from well organised protest groups representing minority groups who are intent on altering history. The aggressive feminist groups began this around 40 years ago.
Let it lie, it's totally worthless and boring.

That is the whole point though. The Mann Act was NOT law at the time of JJ's alleged offence. They charged him almost 2 years later after the Mann Act BECAME law.

Like John McCain said, this is an egregious (shocking, appalling, horrendous) act of racism, and history should be corrected. The sad thing is, there are still plenty of racist people here in the U.S. that feel Johnson got what he deserved. Some are downright racist, some are just stupid, and most are both. There was not another black person to fight for the championship after Johnson until Joe Louis about 20 years later.

APerno wrote:It is common for pardons to come in the last two weeks of a presidency - if he hasn't he probably will before the 20th.

Obama has issued thousands of pardons. And I'd rather see him using them on the living. I imagine he's flummoxed by Johnson's habitual brutalizing of women.

Not to mention he was a piece of shit.

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:

APerno wrote:It is common for pardons to come in the last two weeks of a presidency - if he hasn't he probably will before the 20th.

Obama has issued thousands of pardons. And I'd rather see him using them on the living. I imagine he's flummoxed by Johnson's habitual brutalizing of women.

From Yahoo News, Sébastien BLANC

"Obama has so far granted 148 pardons since taking office in 2009 -- fewer than his predecessors, who also served two terms, George W. Bush (189) and Bill Clinton (396). . . But he has surpassed any other president in the number of commutations, 1,176."


Despite the numbers so far, either way - expect a rash of pardons in the next week or two - in particular dispute is the Snowden issue.

APerno wrote:

Caractacus wrote:If they pardon Jack Johnson then the President should pardon everyone that was ever convicted of the Mann act
as well as all of the prosititutes back then too who got them convicted.
It only seems right.

Does it matter that Johnson's conviction, under the Mann Act, was a deliberate 'fishing expedition' on the part of the prosecutor; 'expedition' in the sense that they went after the man, and then only discovered he committed the particular crime? - That is not out brand of justice; we don't want our government going after people; we want them to prosecute crimes.

He was high profile person doing it,that was probably the main reason.
There was a movement in America nationwide around that time to get rid of all vice.
and he had the bad timing of being caught up in it.

Caractacus wrote:

APerno wrote:

Caractacus wrote:If they pardon Jack Johnson then the President should pardon everyone that was ever convicted of the Mann act
as well as all of the prosititutes back then too who got them convicted.
It only seems right.

Does it matter that Johnson's conviction, under the Mann Act, was a deliberate 'fishing expedition' on the part of the prosecutor; 'expedition' in the sense that they went after the man, and then only discovered he committed the particular crime? - That is not out brand of justice; we don't want our government going after people; we want them to prosecute crimes.

He was high profile person doing it,that was probably the main reason.
There was a movement in America nationwide around that time to get rid of all vice.
and he had the bad timing of being caught up in it.

Don't be absurd.