Justice Robert W. Doyle is in the midst of selecting a jury for the case of Marcelo Lucero, a 37-year-old Ecuadorian immigrant who was attacked by seven teenagers and stabbed to death in Patchogue, New York in November of 2008. The New York Times reports that “Lucero’s death prompted widespread outrage and exposed racial tensions in Patchogue, where a number of Latinos came forward after the attack to describe muggings and assaults that had them living in fear.” The teenagers who attacked Lucero had, according to the police, “made sport out of assaulting Hispanic men, calling it ‘beaner hopping.’ ” Now, as the first defendant is about to go on trial, the process of jury selection is underway. Jury selection has “proven difficult, in part because of the views on Latino immigration held by some prospective jurors in Suffolk County.” One prospective juror said that “her father, a mechanic, has a ‘huge opinion about illegal immigration,’ and that his views on the subject have ‘become my opinions as well.’ ” Another prospective juror took a different view, saying that “most of the clients in her job are illegal Latino immigrants. ‘I don’t think that because of that they should be killed,’ she told Justice Doyle.” Prospective juror Carla Panetta, who was also excused, “criticized those prospective jurors who said they could not be fair because of their views on illegal immigration.” Panetta said, “ ‘I don’t care whether the man was legal, illegal, white, black, purple or green. . . . There was a murder. It almost seemed like the poor victim was the one going on trial.’ ”
Immigrants and Immigration
Facing Today helps educators connect the study of history to issues in our world today. We select current websites, articles, films and blogs that reflect universal themes, such as identity, membership and participation, represented in our scope and sequence. Each media resource is linked to related Facing History materials, including study guides, videos and lessons.
Subscribe to get the latest Facing Today updates directly into your feed reader-
March 12, 2010
-
February 24, 2010
On February 10th, members of the Al-Farooq Islamic Center in South Nashville arrived for their morning prayers only to find that their building had been vandalized. Nashville City Paper reports that “the words ‘Muslims Go Home’ and a crusade-style cross [had been] spray-painted in red across the front of the center, which doubles as a mosque.” They also found a handwritten note taped to the youth training building; “the words ‘The Enemy Is Islam’ were underlined across the top, and the note was filled with statements tying Muslims to Satan and the downfall of Western nations.” One East Nashville resident was driving by the center on Wednesday and saw the graffiti. “ ‘When I saw it, I just broke down crying,’ the self-described unemployed truck driver said.” The resident immediately bought stain-blocker paint, brushes, rollers, and rags, and came back to the Center to help remove the hateful words. On February 13th, the Islamic Center of Nashville held an event planned long before the hate crime, and “opened their doors to inform, educate, and clear up any misconceptions about Islam,” NBC affiliate WSMV writes. One of the Center’s leaders, Salaad Nur, said “ ‘This is our home. If they indicated that they want us to go home, we want to let them know, we are already here.’ ” The Tennessean reports that 150 people attended the open house.
-
February 3, 2010
Just over two months ago, Switzerland banned the building of new minarets. “A poster was widely cited as having galvanized votes for the Swiss measure but was also blamed for exacerbating hostility toward immigrants and instigating a media and legal circus,” Michael Kimmelman of The New York Times reports. The poster depicted minarets rising like missiles from a Swiss flag with a woman wearing a niqab glaring next to it, and the word “stop” written below. Kimmelman states “the obvious message: Minarets lead to Sharia law.” Alexander Segert, who designed the Swiss minaret poster, told Kimmelman “ ‘if what we do stirs up controversy, then we’ve already won the election.’ ” Political scientist Marc Bühlmann agreed, explaining that “ ‘the aim in making the posters is to be as racist as possible, so then when critics complain, the populists can say elites don’t want ordinary people to know the truth. And the media fall for it every time.’ ” Designers like Segert are successful because, as Segert put it, “ ‘we know how to reduce information to the lowest level, so people respond without thinking.’ ”
