This tag was created by Anonymous. 

Harlem in Disorder: A Spatial History of How Racial Violence Changed in 1935

Assault in the courts (13)

While fifty-four assaults appear in newspaper reports and hospital records, only thirteen men appeared in court charged with assault in relation to eight of those reported assaults. Already only encompassing a fraction of the violence of the disorder, those prosecutions resulted in outcomes that produced an even more limited picture. Eight of those men were ultimately not prosecuted for assault but instead for disorderly conduct. The proportion of those arrested for assault that faced that lesser charge (8 of 13, 62%) was greater than those charged with breaking windows (11 of 20, 55%) or looting (12 of 50, 20%) — although given that the basis for the arrest of sixteen of those charged with disorderly conduct (32%) is unknown, that pattern has to be be considered uncertain. There are no details of one of those cases other than that the same man, Vito Capozzio, made the complainant against two men, Richard Jackson and Salathel Smith, who were arrested by the same police officer. In the docket book the charge against them is annotated "fight," suggesting they may been arrested for fighting each other rather than having been involved in the disorder. However, the offense of disorderly conduct did not involve violence. Four other Black men arrested for assault but charged with disorderly conduct, ,allegedly shot at a police officer that charge, and the failure of police to find weapons in the men's possession and their release after their appearance in court, indicates that shooting did not occur, so only their arrest and appearance in court, not the assault, are included in the analysis as events. One additional man, Rivers Wright, allegedly part of a group that attacked a white man, was also charged with disorderly conduct, likely indicating that he had been part of a crowd in the area but that police had no evidence that he participated in the assault. Magistrate Renaud convicted three of seven men, Jackson, Smith, and Wright, but imposed very short sentences, two days in the Workhouse for Jackson and Smith and ten days for Wright (the outcome of one prosecution is unknown).

Magistrates transferred Harry Gordon to the Court of Special Sessions to be prosecuted for "simple" (misdemeanor) assault, involving a lesser level of violence, and sent four of the twelve arrested, involved in half the assaults for which an arrest was made, to the grand jury. James Smitten, who was arraigned in the Night Court during the disorder, did not appear in any other sources, so the outcome of his prosecution was unknown. Gordon, charged with assaulting a police officer and initially associated with the Communists arrested at the beginning of the disorder, was initially reported in the press as likely to be sent to the grand jury. However, police ultimately could not produce evidence to support a charge of felony assault. They did continue to investigate his case for far longer than anyone else arrested in the disorder, with his trial the last, seven months later. Gordon was convicted, but the offense and his sentence are unknown. 

Of the four men magistrates held for the grand jury, one, Douglas Cornelius, had no case file in the District Attorney's records, and there was no information on the outcome of the prosecution in other sources. All three of the others were indicted. Despite the prevalence of plea bargaining in this period, they all went on trial in the Court of General Sessions. Only one jury voted for a conviction, of James Hughes for throwing a rock that hit Detective Henry Roge, but only for misdemeanor assault. The judge sentenced him to only three months in the Workhouse, indicating that he and the jury both believed Hughes' target had been a store window, not the detective. Juries acquitted the other two men put on trial, Paul Boyett and Isaac Daniels, both in cases of assaults by Black men on white men. That was not a circumstance in which white juries usually voted for acquittal. As the cases involved alleged assaults by groups, identification of the defendant as the person who committed the assault was likely the issue. In Boyett's case, he testified he had been a spectator, not a participant in the assault, arrested because he was hit by shots fired by police. In Daniels' case, police did not arrest him at the scene, but later, when the man he allegedly assaulted saw him at Harlem Hospital. Daniels' wife, however, testified he had been at home at the time of the assault.

The legal process thus further diminished the interpersonal violence of the disorder: even the small proportion of arrests for assaults largely proved to not have apprehended those responsible for the violence. The resulting absence of convictions for assault meant that the attacks reported in the immediate aftermath of the disorder did not carry forward into later accounts, making it possible to form impressions of what happened that omitted that violence, particularly the interracial assaults.

This page has tags:

Contents of this tag:

This page references: