So am I the only one who doesn’t have a problem with this?
The Associated Press reported that a judge sent Mychal Bell back to jail because the infamous fight violated terms of his probation for a previous conviction.
He did agree not to get in any more trouble, no?
Read more about it here and discuss.
Eugene is also a guest contributor at Intelligent Ignorance.
Stop responding to every dam thing cracker has to say whether good bad or indifferent, the first baby mama was ...
THAT WAS FABULOUS!!!!! She killed it. Yep, there'll be some ugliness, but who cares. She made an awesome statement (whether ...
luv it;) 
Leaving Obama aside on this, I found it quite interesting. I'm not American, but even I found it slightly uncomfortable ...
What does Obama have to do with this? Unbelieveable. Why is it when black folk do something that is not ...
‘SEE! SEE! I told you! They are already replacing the National Anthem!’
OMG I bet some people will actually say that! ...
No doubt. It's heating up now, though. Google Trends is spiking with searches for 'Black National Anthem' and 'LIft Every ...
I say more power to her. I do not find it disrespectful at all. However, I'm sure FOXNEWS ...
Check out all the confused faces, lol. They are like 'wtf' 
Interesting article. I think God-centeredness makes life better, even our business experiences. BUT...
I am not sure that it's appropriate in ...
Comment by David Dupree on 12 October 2007:
Eugene, fortunately, you are not the only one that has a problem with this. I’m more than sure that you are in the good company of those who agreed with this young man being tried as an adult. I’m more than sure that somewhere, someone is rejoicing due to the fact that Mychal Bell has returned to the prison system. However, I can’t help but feel that there is echoed sentiment of “ha, we got you anyway” .
Do I agree that he should return to jail for violation of his probation–yes. I am more than sure that they laid out all the ground rules for Mr. Bell. If he so chose to violate those provisions, then the consequence is jail. From what his father says, it seems as though Mychal is familiar with the inside of the courtroom, detention centers, and the like–thus making him a little knowledgeable of the parole processes. I think the real question is, Do I think that he’s going to jail for violation of his probation–not at all.
He’s going back to jail because he (unintentionally) brought all this attention to small town United States and the innerworkings of that particular judicial system. So, now that the possible across the board unequal treatment and judgements of african american males in the Jena, LA has been exposed, he HAD to get caught on a technicality (a valid technicality) that seemingly can’t be refuted.
Finally, is it possible for Al Sharpton to use “I” instead of “We”? I really want him to know that he doesn’t speak for me.
Comment by Nicole on 12 October 2007:
I have to agree that I do NOT have a problem with him returning to jail for a violation of probation. I mean he did violate it. The Jena 6 case upset me for a couple of reasons, 1) I don’t believe a proper assessment of whether these kids should be tried as juveniles was done and 2) the charges were over the top for a school yard fight. That is it. It has been said time and time again that no one thinks that what these kids did was acceptable. He agreed to the terms of probation and now he has t suffer the consequences of violating those terms. I hope Al Sharpton (who I like by the way) doesn’t get on this soapbox too much. It really undercuts his credibility when there is an “REAL” issue to address.
Comment by sucks2BU on 12 October 2007:
I kinda have a problem with thinking that they came after Bell. He made his bed, he should lie in it … or is it lay in it? Whatever …
Racism and screwed up justice system aside … dude has major behavior problems that he needs to put in check and I think he and his supporters have forgotten that.
Comment by Fredric on 12 October 2007:
you’ve got to read the article by howard witt of the tribune about the actual facts of the case.
he returned to jail, not b/c of the incident that was related to the jena 6.
he was sent back for past acts he committed before then, which the louisiana juvenile representatives have already condemned as going against how they do things. you don’t send someone to jail on things they’ve already done a long time ago, after the fact.
the gist of the story is that this judge is trying to take out his anger that the appellate court overruled his decision to try bell as an adult and he’s grasping at straws to try and get bell back in jail.
full story here
Comment by ETS on 13 October 2007:
I looked over the article, but I don’t get it. Did not Bell violate his probation by getting into the fight?
Comment by Sandra on 14 October 2007:
I have a problem with the way the situation has been handled. Bell violated his probation with the fight. The court initially do not revoke his probation, they offered him bail. His family could not afford bail so he spent 10 months in jail, following his conviction in the fighting incident. That was overturned on appeal and then he was offered bail again, which was paid. Now, their trying to jail him for violating his probation when they offered him bail. There is no basis to hold him now because THEY gave him bail. The judge and the DA are being vindictive because Bell’s attorneys tried to have the judge removed from the case.
The reason this situation has gotten so out of hand is because the adults have mishandled it.
Comment by Amiel on 15 October 2007:
I am troubled by the judge’s conduct. It sends a dangerous message to juveniles that every thing you ever do can be used against you at the court’s will. The principle of rehabilitation, as opposed to retribution, should be most prevalent in the juvenile system of justice. For a child to be placed in jail, then removed after court order, only to be placed back into confinement on a matter that the court could have dealt earlier. The only logical conclusion is that the judge sought the strongest sentence for this child and when his first means of confinement was denied he chose the next best option. What has become abundantly clear is that the judicial system in Jena, is unabashedly against these young black men. I do take the point that Mychal Bell violated his probation, however I do not believe that can be done, should be done, especially when prosecuting a juvenile. Judicial discretion should have been better employed in this case. I’m saddened that in the face of so much political pressure and media scrutiny, this judge felt comfortable exploiting a technicality to the detriment of this child’s future.