Legal
Analysis of Race War and possible
case for injured Greenwood Blacks under §1 of Federal 1870 Ku
Klux Act --
predicated on future
Congressional Declaration repudiating City's officials:
On an issue-by-issue basis, the four Presbyterian lawyers
gave Dr. Kerr the following analysis of the legal situation
resulting from the 1921 Tulsa Race War:
•The 31st May 1921 editorial
by Tulsa Tribune's publisher Richard Lloyd Jones 'To
Lynch a Nigger Tonight' and The Tribune's false
accusation that the Black youth had scratched the elevator
operator and torn her clothes constituted an 'incitement to
riot' under State Law (21 O.S. §§1320.2, 1363)
... which the
Tulsa Civil Authorities refused to stop
… or later
to indict Richard
Lloyd Jones,
who, together with the oil
magnates and Tulsa's country club civic Establishment, is above the law.
•The Tulsa Police Department failed to perform their statutory duty
under State law (22 O.S. §§101, 104) to prevent
the unlawfully assembly of a lynch mob at the Courthouse for the unlawful purpose incited by the Tribune's
editorial.
Tulsa's
Keystone
Cops tacitly
consent
to
Courthouse 31
May 1921
attempted
lynching of
Black youth
•The Tulsa Police failed to perform their statutory duty under Oklahoma Law to disperse the unlawfully assembled lynch mob in the 'Name of the
State' and to arrest all persons refusing to leave the
Courthouse area: 22 O.S. §§ 101,102; 193 F.2d 760;
21 O.S. §§ 1314, 1315,
1317
•The Tulsa Police failed to perform their statutory duty under State law (22 O.S. §103) to command the aid of all persons
present or within the County to disperse the unlawful assembly
of the lynch mob: The
Greenwood Black Veterans would have been obvious proper persons
from whom to request assistance to disperse the lynch mob at the
Courthouse. See 22 O. S. §§91, 105.
•The Tulsa Police gave 'tacit consent' to the proposed lynching of
the falsely accused Black youth incited by the Tribune by
abdicating their statutory duty imposed by Oklahoma law to maintain
law, order,
and due process of law
… by
refusing to disperse the Courthouse lynch mob:
22 O.S. §§ 101, 104
The City
of Tulsa
supplied the
petrol to
do this
The lynch
mob of
Tulsa's most
upstanding citizens
did the rest:
¿ With such 'upstanding citizens'
… who
needs criminals
?
•The acts taken by the armed Greenwood Black
Veterans to make a lawful resistance in defence of the falsely
accused Black Youth to prevent his lynching incited by the Tribune
at the hands of the unlawfully assembled Courthouse lynch mob
were completely
legal under Oklahoma Law, now codified as Title 21 Oklahoma
Statutes §643(3); 22 O.S. §33;
6 Okla Law Review 231.
•The armed Greenwood Black Veterans acted as 'reasonable men' under Oklahoma Law in response to the
concrete situation existing in Tulsa on the night of Tuesday,
31st May 1921 re
the actual possibility of a lynching attempt upon the
falsely accused Black youth as incited by The Tribune.
•The armed Greenwood Black Veterans possessed a 'legal privilege' under
Oklahoma Law (6
Okla Law Review 231-233)to uphold the
public policy of law, order, and due process of law by acting to
protect the Courthouse and to prevent the crime of murder
incited by The
Tribune.
•The lawful actions (21 O.S. §643(3); 22 O.S. §33; 6 Okla Law Review 231) of the armed Greenwood Black Veterans to uphold public
policy and to offer a lawful resistance sufficient
to prevent commission of a crime (lynching) can not be
characterized as an 'overt
act' of 'armed insurrection' under
Oklahoma or Federal laws.
•The legality of acts taken by the armed Greenwood Black Veterans to
prevent a lynching (21 O.S. §643(3); 22 O.S. §33; 6 Okla Law Review 231)cannot be legitimately characterised
as a 'Riot', 'Rout', 'Unlawful Assembly' or for an 'Unlawful
Purpose' as defined by Oklahoma Law:
21 O.S. §§1311, 1313. 1314. 1317
Tulsa's
buffoon Police Department
had actual
knowledge of
the lawful
actions of
Greenwood Veterans
under State Law
•From repeated telephone calls made by both the leaders of the
Greenwood Veterans as well as by the Greenwood Pastors beginning
in the early afternoon of Tuesday, May 31, 1921,
the Tulsa Police Department and the Sheriff's Office had
advanced actual knowledge of the legal purpose of the Greenwood Veterans under State law (21 O.S. §643(3);
22 O.S. §33; 6 Okla Law Review 231):
To offer a lawful resistance sufficient to protect the
Courthouse from the lynch mob and to prevent the murder of the
Black youth falsely accused by The Tulsa Tribune.
(The Police telephone log in which such calls were
recorded was later intentionally
destroyed by the City Government to cover up its actual knowledge.)
•The Tulsa City Government's fraudulent characterisation of the
completely lawful acts of the Greenwood Black Veterans as a
'Negro Insurrection' constituted
a deliberate legal error ... as a pretext for
justifying the City's policy of violently repressing the Blacks
of Greenwood in what amounted to a Racial War
… to
satisfy the spites of Tulsa's wealthiest citizens swarming about
the Police Station on the night of Tuesday, 31st May 1921.
•The City of Tulsa's subsequent violent repression of this
non-existent 'Negro Insurrection' as city policy constituted a deliberate legal
wrong committed by the
City Government against the Black population of Greenwood on a
deliberately fraudulent pretext.
See 21 O.S. §1401 re "Arson".
•The City of Tulsa was
guilty of 'criminal
negligence' by
giving 'special commissions' to act as 'Emergency Police
Deputies' to members of the original Courthouse lynch mob
swarming at the Police Station and turning them loose upon the
Greenwood Black district ...
with copious amounts of
petrol from the City Government's own supplies
... and armed
with weapons and ammunition commandeered by the Tulsa Police.
•The Greenwood Blacks offered a 'lawful resistance' under Oklahoma
Law (21
O.S. §733; 143 P. 870; 132 P. 375; 9 Okla Law Review 60-65) against the invasion of Greenwood authorized by City of Tulsa to
suppress as city policy a fraudulently contrived 'Negro
Insurrection' (21 O.S. §648; 22
O.S. §34.1).
•Under the American Constitutional system of the 'division of
governmental powers', American courts are constitutionally
required to give judicial
deference to official executive
acts of public officials made within the scope of their official
ministerial discretion:
American courts cannot substitute their own opinion of a
situation for that made by public officials on site.
This constitutional doctrine requires American Courts
to give judicial deference to the City's official
lie of
a 'Negro Insurrection'.
This allows
the City of Tulsa to defeat any court case for damages
… on the grounds that the armed suppression of Greenwood was
necessary to defeat the fictitious 'Negro Insurrection'.
•Simply put, the constitutionally required judicial deference which American courts, even
the United States Supreme Court, are required to give to the official
lie by the City of Tulsa of the existence
of a 'Negro Insurrection' as legal justification for Tulsa City
Government's murder of hundreds of Greenwood Blacks and arson of
their entire community constitutionally bars
the injured Greenwood Blacks from receiving effective legal
relief under Sec. 1 of the Federal 1870 Ku Klux Act
(42 U.S.C.A. §1983) in any case which
these injured Blacks might bring against the City Government and
its confederates for violating their Federal constitutional and
statutory rights under colour of Oklahoma State law re the
police powers of municipalities:
Judicial
deference to
City's official
lie of
a 'Negro
Insurrection' perpetually
bars Blacks
from recovering
damages
deliberately
inflicted by
City of
Tulsa:
¿ Is
this just ?
•Even sympathetic Federal Courts would be obliged to dismiss a
case brought under Sec. 1 of the 1879 Ku Klux ACT (42 U.S.C.A. §1983)
by injured Greenwood Plaintiffs on the constitutionally
required grounds of judicial
deference
to the official determination made by
the responsible public safety authorities of the City of Tulsa
made within their scope of executive or 'ministerial' discretion
that there was, in fact, a 'Negro Insurrection':
•Under American constitutional doctrines of the 'separation of
powers', not even the United States Supreme Court can substitute
its own judgement for the judgement made Tulsa City Officials on
site on the night of Tuesday, 31st May 1921.
•Such judicial deference creates a continuing
legal situation having
the following juridical effects:
•The claims of the injured Greenwood Blacks under Sec. 1 of the
1870 Ku Klux Act (42 U.S.C.A. §1983)
can never become res judicata
as
completed legal
acts over-and-done-with at
the time of commission due
to this judicial deference which must be given to the City's
official lie of a 'Negro Insurrection' as a discretionary
ministerial act which constitutionally perpetually bars American
Courts from granting effective legal relief to the aggrieved
Greenwood Blacks injured by the City of Tulsa in violation of
Sec 1 of the Ku Klux Act.
•The running of the statute of limitations on the claims of
injured Greenwood Blacks against the City of Tulsa and its
confederates under Sec. 1 of the Federal 1870 Ku Klux Act (42 U.S.C.A. §1983) is
perpetually tolled or suspended as
long as
the constitutionally required judicial deference to the City of Tulsa's official lie of a 'Negro Insurrection' in
its capacity as a discretionary ministerial act remains in
effect: Proscription cannot 'run' if aggrieved parties are
barred by such judicial
deference to the City's official lie of a 'Negro
Insurrection' from recovering damages.
•The Tulsa City Government's ‘deliberate’
legal error in fraudulently asserting there was a 'Negro
Insurrection' perpetually instituted the beginning of a continuing legal
situation, which renews itself
-- continually,
perpetually, and repeatedly
-- each day
that such judicial
deference by the Courts must continue to be given to the
City's official
lie.
•The claims of the injured Greenwood Blacks under Sec. 1 of the
Federal Ku Klux Act remain
in a
perpetual state of
suspended
animation due
to such
constitutionally-mandated judicial deference to the
City's official lie but
can never be lost by prescription or the running of any
statute of limitations --
which can
never 'run' due to the constitutional judicial deference which American courts must give to the City of Tulsa's official
lie
of a
'Negro Insurrection'
as a pretext for the City Government's armed suppression
of Greenwood. I.e.,
the statute of limitation can
'run' only when one is capable of receiving effective
legal relief from a court seized with jurisdiction to grant such
under the statute.
•Because this continuing legal situation
arises from the constitutional
judicial deference which American courts
must give to the City of Tulsa's
official lie of a 'Negro Insurrection'
in its capacity as a discretionary
'ministerial act',
mere
private
knowledge of the City's official lie does not constitute
'discovery' of the City's fraudulent concealment of a cause of
action by the injured Greenwood Blacks against the City
Government under Sec 1 of the Federal 1870 Ku Klux Act for
violation of Federal constitutional and statutory rights re
'equal protection of the laws', etc.
•Due to the constitutional
nature
of
the judicial deference which courts must give to the City's
official lie as a discretionary act,
only a
Congressional Declaration formally repudiating the City's
official lie of a 'Negro Insurrection' as a deliberate legal
error and
repudiating the City's armed suppression of this fictional
'Negro Insurrection' as a deliberate legal wrong
is legally
capable of
discovering a
cause of action for the injured Greenwood Blacks under
Sec. 1 of the Federal 1870 Ku Klux Act
... presently
concealed
by the judicial deference which must be given to the
City's official
lie of a 'Negro Insurrection'.
•Instituted by the constitutional judicial deference which
American courts must give to the City of Tulsa's official lie of
a 'Negro Insurrection' as
a ministerial discretionary act providing the City Government's
legal pretext for the armed suppression of Greenwood,
this continuing legal
situation continues
in existence perpetually
and indefinitely
... until
such time
as the
American Congress enacts
a Congressional Declaration repudiating the City's official lie
and armed suppression of a fictitious 'Negro Insurrection' made
pursuant to this official lie for violation by Tulsa's City
Government of
the Federal constitutional and statutory rights of the Greenwood
Veterans and the Greenwood Black
population.
•Because the City of Tulsa's deliberate
legal error and wrong conceals a strong case for the recovery of damages by the injured Greenwood
Blacks under §1 of the Federal 1871 Ku Klux Act (42 U.S.C.A. §1983) for
racialist injuries inflicted upon Blacks by local American city
and county units of government under colour of State law in
violation of Federal constitutional and statutory guarantees,
… any future
enactment of the needed Congressional Declaration will 'discover' this case …
which presently lies hidden behind the judicial deference
which American courts must give to the City's fraudulent
assertion of a ‘Negro Insurrection’.
Analogously see 782 F2d 227; 793 F2d
304; 482 US 64.
•Simply put, the constitutional judicial deference which
all American Courts must give
City of Tulsa's official
lie
of a
'Negro Insurrection'
made within the official
ministerial discretionary scope of Tulsa's
authorised public
safety policymakers continually conceals a good case (511 F2d 504 at
510) for damages against the City of Tulsa by the injured Greenwood
Blacks under
42 U.S.C.A. §1983 for
deprivation of Federal constitutional and statutory rights made
by the City Government under colour of State Law:
Only a
Congressional Declaration can remove this judicial deference and
'discover' a
case under 42 U.S.C.A. §1983.
•This continuing legal
situation permanently
denying effective legal relief to the racially oppressed
Greenwood Blacks injured by the City of Tulsa during the 1921
Tulsa Race War, will continue unabated until the American Congress enacts a
Congressional Declaration:
•Declaring the City's fraudulent characterisation of the lawful
actions of the Greenwood Veterans under Oklahoma Law (21 O.S. §643(3);
22 O.S. §33; 6 Okla Law Review 231) as a 'Negro Insurrection' to be a deliberate legal error;
and
•Declaring the City's violent suppression of this non-existent
'Negro Insurrection' to be a deliberate legal wrong.
•Enactment of a
Congressional Declaration officially
repudiating the
City of Tulsa's official lie
of a non-existent 'Negro Insurrection' as a deliberate legal
error in
violation of the Federal constitutional and statutory rights of
the Greenwood Veterans and population and
the City's
suppression of this fictitious 'Negro Insurrection' as city
policy to be a deliberate legal wrong in violation of the
Federal constitutional and statutory rights of the Greenwood
Blacks will give
rise to the following:
•'Discovery' of cause
of action for
the injured Greenwood Blacks (or their heirs)
under Sec. 1 of the 1870 Ku Klux Act (42 U.S.C.A. §1983)upon the enactment of the needed Congressional Declaration.
•The statute of limitations for the purposes of bringing a case
for damages against the City of Tulsa and its
confederates will run from the date of enactment of this
Congressional Declaration --
not
from the date of the injuries on 31 May/1st
June, 1921.
•Because this deprivation
of justice to injured Greenwood Blacks is a continuing
legal situation instituted
by the judicial deference which American courts must
constitutionally give to the City's
official lie of a 'Negro Insurrection' in its capacity as
a 'discretionary ministerial act',
the injured Greenwood Blacks (or their heirs and
successors-in-interest) will
also be entitled to invoke whatever new statutory or
judicial (established via case law) remedies which
may have arisen between the date of such injuries in 1921 and
the date of enactment of the needed Congressional Declaration.
•Under Tulsa's 'commission' form
of city government, Tulsa's
Police and Fire Commissioner, the Chief of Police, and the
Police Inspector constituted
the City of
Tulsa's responsible
public safety
policymakers,
whose actions under colour of State law re the authority
of municipalities in formulating city policy were
legally sufficient
under Sec. 1
of the 1870 Ku Klux Act
to render the City of Tulsa
financially liable
for the wrongful deaths and property damage wrought by
the City Government upon
the Greenwood Black
community as a constitutional tort
(delict)
under Sec. 1 of the Federal 1879 Ku Klux Act
in express violation
of the Federal constitutional and statutory rights of the
Greenwood Black population re 'equal protection of the laws' and
of 'equal privileges and immunities under the laws'.
See 42 U.S.C.A. §1983
when read in conjunction
with 485 U.S. 112; 879 F2d
1573; 974 F2d 293;
729 FSupp 625; 981
F2d 1537; 628 F2d
915; 972 F2d 992;
966 F2d 13; 476
F2d 238;
497 F2d 197; 468
FSupp 270; 436 FSupp
1220; 983 F2d 459;
40 F3d 777; 30
F3d 1332; 27 F3d
1432; 60 F3d 381;
895 F2d 1469; 988
F2d 649; 820
F2d 1245; 889 FSupp
1495; 68 F3d 486;
898 FSupp 1435; 889 FSupp 1284;
830 FSupp 1302; 857
FSupp 711; 916 FSupp
1; 914 FSupp 245;
72 F3d 712; 69
F3d 441; 40 F3d
1176; 38 F3d 282.
•In their capacity
under state law as the City of Tulsa's responsible public
safety policymakers under Tulsa's 'commission' form of city
government, Tulsa's
Police and Fire Commissioner, the Chief of Police, and the
Police Inspector adopted
and ratified
under colour of state law re the
'police powers' of municipalities
the earlier actions of Tulsa's Police Department
concerning the following in
violation of the Federal Constitutional and statutory rights of
Dick Rowland, the Greenwood Black Veterans, and the
Greenwood Black population under Sec. 1 of the 1879 Federal Ku
Klux Act re 'equal
protection of the laws' and 'equal privileges and immunities
under the laws':
(1) Police refusal to confiscate the
incendiary 31st May
1921 'lynching edition' of The Tulsa Tribune
containing Richard Lloyd
Jones "To Lynch A Nigger Tonight" editorial
constituting an incitement to riot under Oklahoma State laws and
to arrest Richard Lloyd Jones for incitement to murder under
State law re 21 O.S. §§ 1320.2, 1363 (Richard
Lloyd Jones, Tulsa's oil magnates, and Tulsa's elite oil-wealthy
civic leadership are effectively
above
the law for all practical purposes);
(2)
Police refusal to prevent a lynch mob from gathering at
the Courthouse for the illegal purpose incited by The Tribune
editorial as required by State law
re 21 O.S. §§101, 104;
(3)
Police refusal to disperse the lynch mob once gathered
and to arrest all persons who refused to leave for 'route' or
'riot' as required by State
law re
21 O.S. §§1314, 1315, 1315;
22 O.S. §§101, 102;
(4)
Police refusal to request the assistance of law-abiding
citizens to disperse the lynch mob gathered at the Courthouse
as required
by State law re
22 O.S. §§91, 103, 105 (The
decorated Greenwood Veterans would have been obvious law-abiding
citizens to assist the Police,
as they had repeatedly telephoned the Tulsa Police
Department offering their assistance);
(5)
Police 'tacit consent' given to the proposed lynching of
Dick Rowland incited by The Tribune's 'lynching
editorial' by disappearing from the Courthouse area and
abdicating their statutory duties under state law to uphold law,
order and due process of law
re 22 O.S.
§§101, 104;
(6) Having
prior actual knowledge of the legal
purpose of the Greenwood Veterans under State
law (21 O.S.
§643(3); 22 O.S. §33; 6 Okla Law Review 231)
from repeated telephone calls to the Police Station by both
the Greenwood Veterans and
the Greenwood Pastors,
fraudulent Police characterisation
of the legally privileged actions of the Greenwood
Veterans to offer a lawful resistance to protect the Courthouse
and to prevent the murder of the falsely accused Black youth
as an
"overt act"
of "civil
insurrection" or
as a "Negro Insurrection";
(7) Fraudulent Police characterisation of
the lawful actions of the armed
Greenwood Veterans under State
law (21 O.S.
§643(3); 22 O.S. §33; 6 Okla Law Review 231)
as a
'Riot', 'Rout',
'Unlawful Assembly' or
for an 'Unlawful purpose as defined by Oklahoma
law: 21 O.S.
§§1311, 1313. 1314. 1317;
(8) Criminal
Negligence of the Tulsa Police Department by giving
'special commissions' to act as 'Emergency Police Deputies' to
angry racialist members of the original Courthouse lynch mob with
blood in their eyes and turning them loose heavily armed and
supplied with copious amounts of petrol upon the Greenwood Black
district;
(9)
Police actions in supplying such 'Emergency Police
Deputies' and other volunteer members of a 'City Posse' under
State law with copious amounts of petrol from the City's own
petrol supplies in quantities sufficient to arson every
structure in the Greenwood Black district in violation of
Oklahoma law:
21 O.S. §1401
See 42 U.S.C.A. §1983
when read in conjunction with
859
F2d 797; 596
FSupp 122; 519 FSupp
925; 663 F2d 24;
782 FSupp 110; 476
F2d 238; 79 F3d 56;
15 F3d 443; 872
FSupp 746; 74 F3d
977; 926 FSupp 979;
882 FSupp 1247; 917
FSupp 209; 50 F3d
1186; 81 F3d 988;
76 F3d 1446; 956
F2d 973; 764 FSupp
1308; 10 F3d 501;
988 F2d 649; 974
F2d 293; 742 FSupp
994; 497 F2d 197;
468 FSupp 270; 436
FSupp 1220; 893
FSupp 1086; 896
FSupp 793; 782 FSupp
173; 777 FSupp 116;
922 FSupp 1184.
•The following city
policies adopted and undertaken by Tulsa's Police and Fire Commissioner,
the Chief of Police, and the Police Inspector
in their capacity under state law
as the City of Tulsa's
responsible public safety policymakers
acting under colour of State law re the 'police powers'
of municipalities render
the City of Tulsa financially
liable
under
Sec. 1 of the 1870 Federal Ku Klux Act for the wrongful
deaths and property damage wrought upon the
entire class of the Greenwood Black community in
violation of the Federal constitutional and statutory rights of
the Greenwood Black population
re 'equal
protection of the laws' and
'equal privileges and immunities under the laws':
(1) To declare the lawful actions of the
Greenwood Veterans under State law to be a 'Negro Insurrection;
(2) To declare that urgent reasons of
public safety necessitated as city policy the armed suppression
of this fictional 'Negro Insurrection',
(3)
Specially commissioning members of the original
Courthouse lynch mob as 'Emergency Police Deputies'
as well
as to
specially commission entire
units of local vigilante groups
(such as the World War One 'Home Guards) and to summon
all local gunmen to act as a City Posse
under State law
-- to
execute city
policy to suppress a
fictitious 'Negro
Insurrection';
(4)
Commandeering arms
and ammunition from local stores with which to arm these armed
forces and to supply them with copious amounts of petrol from
the City Government's own supplies in quantities sufficient to
arson every structure in the Greenwood Black district;
(5) Organising these various armed forces
into operational units under the command of a regular police
officer;
(6)
To conspire with representatives of Tulsa's civic
leadership at the Police Station to arson deliberately large
segments of the Greenwood district long desired by the civic
leadership for conversion into a rail switchyard, industrial
supply, and warehouse district;
(7)
To draft an operational plan for the invasion and arson
of Greenwood in execution of the common plan formulated with
Tulsa's civic leadership;
(8)
To order the local Tulsa unit of the State Militia placed
under the control of Tulsa's City Government by the Governor to
clear Greenwood of its
Black inhabitants and
to hold them captive at various detention centres;
(9)
To command the City's
various volunteer
armed forces
to invade and
to arson
Greenwood in
execution of the City's operational
plans in the
early hours of Wednesday, 1st June
1921 in violation of State Law
re 21 O.S. §1401;
(10)
To murder of Greenwood Blacks offering
a 'lawful
resistance under
State law
(21 O.S. §§648, 733;
22 O.S. §34.1;
143 P. 870; 132 P. 375; 9 Okla Law Review 60-65) against the
City's invasion of Greenwood to suppress as city policy
a non-existent 'Negro Insurrection'; and
(11) To
destroy all City records, plans,
and information concerning the City's invasion and
deliberate arson of Greenwood, the City's deliberate injuries
and murders inflicted upon unarmed Greenwood Black residents,
and the City's secret disposition of the Greenwood dead in
places unknown, and the City's deliberate failure to identify
the dead ...
for the purpose of active fraudulent concealment of legal
causes of action by the injured Greenwood Blacks against the
City Government and its confederates and to obstruct their
ability to obtain justice.
See 42 U.S.C.A. §1983
when read in conjunction with
988
F2d 649; 910
F2d 1422; 890 F2d
1557; 485 US 112;
820 F2d 1245; 729
FSupp 625; 981 F2d
1537; 937 F2d 920;
830 FSupp 1302; 857
FSupp 711; 916 FSupp
1; 865 FSupp 1564;
56 F3d 332; 988
F2d 649; 979 F2d
1342; 57 F3d 253;
983 F2d 459; 946
F2d 1017; 67 F3d
1174; 74 F3d 1239;
40 F3d 777; 973
F2d 386; 30 F3d
1332; 47 F3d 1522;
69 F3d 441; 74
F3d 1150; 971 F2d
708; 60 F3d 381;
991 F2d 1316; 977
F2d 337; 972 F2d
992; 897 F2d 723;
694 FSupp 117; 956
F2d 973; 988 F2d
649; 923 F2d 1474;
966 F2d 13; 476
F2d 238; 856 FSupp
1185; 58 F3d 636;
85 F3d 230; 81
F3d 521; 28 F3d 802;
27 F3d 1432; 57
F3d 680; 38 F3d 282;
873 FSupp 1293; 78
F3d 589; 55 F3d 633;
865 FSupp 681; 882
FSupp 1319;
The
lawyers explained to Dr. Kerr that the process of obtaining the
needed Congressional Declaration would be entirely political.
They felt that the
immense economic and political power of the Tulsa-based oil
industry of primarily Southern orientation would be focused on
blocking it.
Citing
the biased Tulsa June 1921 Grand Jury Report blaming the
Greenwood Blacks for the racial war,
the lawyers advised Dr. Kerr that any Congressional
Declaration should incorporate an automatic change of venue for
the trial of any case arising from Sec. 1 of the 1870 Federal Ku
Klux Act: A
local Tulsa jury would automatically reject any case for
injuries by the Greenwood Blacks as any recovery would raise
their own local taxes.