[vinman]

How will this affect rap lyrics? Will NWA have to change their name before they reunite?

African-Americans, Compensatory Damages, jury, Lawsuit, N Word, Punitive Damages, Racial Slur, Rob Carmona, STRIVE East Harlem
NEW YORK (CBSNewYork/AP) — A federal jury has rejected an argument that the use of the N-word among blacks can be a culturally acceptable term of love and endearment, ruling instead that its use in the workplace is hostile and discriminatory no matter what.

Jurors last week awarded $250,000 in compensatory damages to a worker at the black employment agency STRIVE East Harlem who was the target of an N-word-laced rant by her black boss.

The jury was set to return to a U.S. District Court in Manhattan Tuesday to decide on punitive damages.

The case against Rob Carmona and the employment agency he founded, STRIVE East Harlem, gave legal airing to what some see as a complex double standard surrounding the word – that it is a degrading slur when uttered by whites but can be used at times with impunity among blacks.

But Brandi Johnson, 38, told jurors that being black didn’t make it any less hurtful to be the target of what her attorney called Carmona’s “four-minute n****r tirade” about inappropriate workplace attire and unprofessional behavior.

Johnson, who taped the March 2012 remarks after her complaints about his verbal abuse were disregarded, said she fled to the restroom and cried for 45 minutes.

“I was offended. I was hurt. I felt degraded. I felt disrespected. I was embarrassed,” Johnson testified.

In closing arguments, Johnson’s attorney Marjorie M. Sharpe said Carmona’s use of the word was intended to offend “and any evidence that defendants put forth to the contrary is simply ridiculous.”

“When you use the word n****r to an African-American, no matter how many alternative definitions that you may try to substitute with the word n****r, that is no different than calling a Hispanic by the worst possible word you can call a Hispanic, calling a homosexual male the worst possible word that you can call a homosexual male,” Sharpe told jurors.

But defense lawyers said the 61-year-old Carmona, a black man of Puerto Rican descent, had a much different experience with the word. Raised by a single mother in a New York City public housing project, he became addicted to heroin in his teens and broke it with the help of drug counselors who employed tough love and tough language.

Carmona went on to earn a master’s degree from Columbia University before co-founding STRIVE in the 1980s. Now, most of STRIVE’s employees are black women, defense attorney Diane Krebs told jurors in her opening statement.


“And Mr. Carmona is himself black, as you yourselves can see,” Krebs said.

In his testimony, Carmona defended his use of the word, saying he used it with Johnson to convey that she was “too emotional, wrapped up in her, at least the negative aspects of human nature.”

Then he explained that the word has “multiple contexts” in the black and Latino communities, sometimes indicating anger, sometimes love.

Carmona said he might put his arm around a longtime friend in the company of another and say: “This is my n****r for 30 years.”

“That means my boy, I love him, or whatever,” he said.

He was asked if he meant to indicate love when he called Johnson the word.

“Yes, I did,” he responded.

The controversy is a blemish on STRIVE, which has been heralded for helping people with troubled backgrounds get into the workforce. Its employment model, which was described in a CBS’ “60 Minutes” piece as “part boot camp, part group therapy,” claims to have helped nearly 50,000 people find work since 1984.

Sharpe told jurors that STRIVE’s tough-love program cannot excuse Carmona’s behavior.

“Well, if calling a person a n****r and subjecting them to a hostile work environment is part of STRIVE’s tough love, then STRIVE needs to be reminded that this type of behavior is illegal and cannot be tolerated,” she said.




http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2013/09/03/j...ial-slurs/

[Aliblahba]

   


This is going to the Supreme Court. The N word has become the most powerful word in the English language. Can't wait to see the playing field leveled.

[MattW]

I doubt this will affect music at all as the entertainment industry gets a pass on pretty much everything, e.g. child labor laws.

[Sonsowey]

I'm really unclear what this case is about. Was the use of the N-word the actual crime?

Stop and frisk just got a powerful new weapon.



"Son, did you just say the N-word? You're under arrest for aggravated hate speech."

[Architekt]

I hope that gets appealed successfully for the sake of America's free (lol) speech laws remaining somewhat in tact.

EDIT: Misread slightly. I wonder how many of the 8 jury members were black themselves

[AnonymousBosch]

Quote:

But Brandi Johnson, 38, told jurors that being black didn’t make it any less hurtful to be the target of what her attorney called Carmona’s “four-minute n****r tirade” about inappropriate workplace attire and unprofessional behavior.

Johnson, who taped the March 2012 remarks after her complaints about his verbal abuse were disregarded, said she fled to the restroom and cried for 45 minutes.

Emphasis mine. Women are so incapable of hearing honest criticism that they instantly emotionally melt down and then seek revenge on whoever criticised them.

Mixed workplaces are hell. I'm setting things up to quit mine.

[LowerCaseG]

It sounds like this case is about hate speech, and whether the speaker's cultural/racial/ethnic background can amplify or negate the amount of damage caused by hate speech. For example, someone uses the N-Word as described in the case. Substitute Rob Carmona, with 10 or 100 different people ranging from Nelson Mandela on one end, to a Klansmen on the other, with the appropriate diversity scale in between. Is the victim here entitled to a different reward based on the cultural/racial/ethnic background of each of the different speakers, or is the victim's damage absolute/fixed? If you support different monetary awards, how would you figure it out?

I agree with Ali, that the subject here is clearly the most powerful word in the English Language, practically a sword. I would not, however, anticipate the Supreme Court reaching a conclusion that levels the playing field.

[BortimusPrime]

What kind of moron runs an office filled with black female employees, and thinks he isn't going to be up shit creek if he so much as is misheard saying "figure" or "trigger"?

[Basil Ransom]

This would motivate employers not to hire hood black dudes who colloquially call each other nigga. Or the equivalent among other ethnicities.

You can imagine a crew of black guys using the word amongst themselves without a problem, and then one guy has a beef with another, or with the boss, and then he files a lawsuit against the company.

To avoid that liability, employers might just pass on any guy who seems like he might do that. Maybe he'll see if you say "ax" instead of "ask," bringing back the shibboleth test.

[MrXY]

Some of you guys are very confused about what this case was about

I'll just say I'm glad the racial double standard is being called into question

[Sp5]

It's not a criminal case - it's a civil case for employment discrimination. If you create a "hostile environment" for an employee based on his or her race, gender, or religion, you can be liable. Kinda vague, but there are minimum legal standards and then it's up to a jury.

It would be the same if he were berating a white employee as a "cracker."

[Handsome Creepy Eel]

I would be hurt if someone yelled at me over something that I considered unimportant, but the exact choice of words wouldn't matter much. It's like the n-word has becomes a razor-tipped, explosive-charged depleted uranium bullet that leaves a trail of widespread destruction whenever used, and thus must be suppressed as it if were a nuclear weapon.



Saying "pussy", "freak", "idiot" or "asshole" to someone does not cause this, but NIGGER does.