James M. Redwine

Gavel Gamut

Luddites Lost

by Leave a Comment

Just recently, a 13-year-old boy captured a photograph of a young girl and used Artificial Intelligence to remove her clothing and make her normal image pornographic. Then he put his modified, false depiction on the internet and caused the girl great emotional distress.

In June 2025, some person or persons used AI to impersonate United States Secretary of State Marco Rubio and sent false messages to several foreign officials.

During the Sean Diddy Combs trial one of the jurors may have accessed internet information about the trial.

Can Americans rely upon their government through its legal system to afford them fair trials when false or inadmissible, unvetted information is readily available on a smart phone? The answer is, Yes! However, trial judges must apply the tools the various State Supreme Courts, Constitutions and statutes provide.

There are probably several ways for judges to approach the rapidly developing dilemmas of how jury trials are affected by Social Media. Three major theories are:

(1)       The ostrich method: pretend it does not exist. Well, it does, so ignoring it will not solve it;

(2)       The Luddite solution where the legal system strikes back with Draconian controls in hopes jurors will be frightened back to pre-internet behavior. Workers of the early 19th century tried to halt mechanization in an effort to save their jobs. The Luddites who refused to adapt to the Industrial Revolution were swept into the dustbin of history; or,

(3)       Adapt to the inevitable change in both technology and sociology.

State trial judges already have the education, training and legal tools to use the only rational approach to the irreversible momentum of the internet. We should call upon the lessons of thousands of years of history and our faith in our democratic system. Jurors, judges, the media and both real and artificial intelligence can operate a fair and efficient legal system using time-tested rules of due process applied with diligence and goodwill.

Technology may change but human nature has been formed over a few million years of hominoid fits and starts and two or three hundred thousand years of Homo sapiens experience and progress. And over about the past 250 years we have gone from gazing at the heavens to visiting them. Plus, over the past 100 years we have gone from curing polio and small pox to creating artificial limbs. Science has been good to us even if we take pause at the levels of death and destruction it has enabled. We just need to keep progressing before we exterminate ourselves and AI might be a huge boost in that regard.

So, how does the legal system deal with Social Media and Jurors? By remaining true to our time-tested principles and having confidence our citizens who are called for jury duty will also. As we know, people usually respond positively to positive treatment and ethically to expectations of ethical behavior. Are there plenty of bad exceptions, absolutely. However, judges have the tools to weed those potential jurors out and to guide and encourage sitting jurors to eschew extraneous influence from outside forces.

In the end, judges must adhere to their honored principles and have faith so will jurors. Most jurors want to be fair and most likely will be if judges give them proper guidance, such as the following instructions:

The parties are entitled to jurors who approach this case with open minds and agree to keep their minds open until a verdict is reached. Jurors must be as free as humanly possible from bias, prejudice or, sympathy. Jurors must not be influenced by preconceived ideas as to facts or as to law.  

… Until the conclusion of this trial, do not discuss this case with any other person, including family and friends. You should not read or listen to any media discussing this case nor research this case in any way, including through the internet or any other tools of technology. Nor should you use any of these means to communicate to others about the case. It is important that this case be decided solely on the evidence you receive in this courtroom.

Progress can be a huge benefit to us. We may not now be able to see the benefits, but we should approach the future relying on our lessons from the past.

 

What Is In Control?

by Leave a Comment

One of the first lectures I received in law school was about how jury trials had changed over about 2,500 years; they hadn’t. According to my law professor, if we budding attorneys had walked into the courtroom in Athens for the trial of Socrates in 399 B.C., we would have easily understood the proceeding. Socrates was charged with corrupting Athenian youth with his views on the prevalent religion and government. He was convicted by a jury of about 500 citizens. Socrates was prosecuted by three senators and he defended himself. In other words, that court of over 2,000 years ago functioned like most courts of the 21st century, until the advent of smart telephones, artificial intelligence and rapidly changing electronic technology.

Unlike the practice of medicine, according to our law professor, that a physician of modern times would not even recognize, until recently the legal profession stoically struggled to deliver justice about the same way our Stone Age progenitors did. As science reached for the stars, the Star Chamber was right at home with the law. Most lawyers, judges and juries sought just verdicts, but often did so with quill pens, arcane fixtures and cloistered proceedings. Well, those honored, if often questioned, days have recently crashed upon the shoals of instant and ubiquitous information and misinformation. And much as the art world and the defense industry are wringing their hands and racing to keep up with machines gone mad, the legal profession is struggling to preserve the First Amendment’s guarantees of Freedom of Speech and the Press along with the Sixth Amendment’s guarantees of Due Process and a Fair Trial.

For thousands of years societies have confidently relied upon jurors to hear cases without being influenced by prejudicial information from outside of the court. Today, judges cannot just order jurors to not read newspapers, or listen to radio or television stories about a case. Jurors in 2025 are just like virtually every other child, teenager, adult and elderly person; everyone has a smart phone to which they are addicted. All the judicial admonishments judges can think of will not defeat the deep-seated need by jurors to “tune in and turn on” and, most likely buy into, the often incorrect information about practically anything, including “facts” about an on-going case.

The Founding Fathers most feared centralized governmental power and believed the best defense to it was for the public to have almost unfettered Freedom of Speech and for the media to be almost immunized from governmental restraint. Of course, America’s legal system has adapted many times to changes in our society. It will surely find ways to deal with the internet. However, the age-old reliance on the omnipotence and wisdom of the trial judge’s instructions has already become as much of a relic as the pyramids. And, just as the pyramids still inspire us, our historically provident legal system probably will too.

However, we in the legal profession must face the reality that Facebook and its ilk have to be dealt with because the populace will not stand for them to be destroyed. Surely, if I were back in that first law school class today, the professor would evince a different perspective on 2025’s legal system.

The Best Celebration

by Leave a Comment

The Church at 9th and Prudom with side balconies. Picture taken by Peg Redwine

The Fourth of July has slowly gained prominence in my pantheon of special commemorations. Once all seasons paled next to Christmas with the memories of the autumnal aromas of oyster dressing and pumpkin pie fading away to electric trains and baseball mitts. Easter was okay because school would soon be out and girls in pink dresses with blue satin sashes would dash about exposing their laughter and crinoline. But the Fourth of July brought ice cold pop, firecrackers and roman candle battles. However, as a commemoration it seemed to mean a great deal to my elders, but for me it just presaged a return to a regimen of school that broke into my summer freedom.

I am not sure when the trappings of the Fourth began the metamorphosis into my imperceptible awareness that America and I had already struggled through numerous radical stages and, alarmingly and expectantly, might face many more as a man and a country. I think the true reasons the Fourth deserves its place at the head of commemorations began to seep into my consciousness the first time my large and gentle father took me with him to collect a Metropolitan Life Insurance Company policy monthly premium from a Colored family who lived across Bird Creek in a two-room clapboard house with a front porch held up by blackjack oak saplings.

We drove across the Bird Creek bridge in our family’s 1954 Ford sedan. On the way we stopped at Henry’s Bar-B-Q to buy what Dad called heaven’s own ribs. Dad was called “Mister Metropolitan” by Henry and Dad made sure I called the old Colored man “Mister” too. The two sections of two ribs and two Grapette pops cost about a dollar. Dad had bad heart trouble and Mom would not let him eat those beloved fatback pork ribs unless he sneaked over to Henry’s. They were worth any old heart attack as far as Dad was concerned.

After we savored that hickory smoked ambrosia, we drove about another quarter mile up the dirt road of Colored town to Dad’s customer’s house. He told me to stay in the car but I was already out and on the porch before he got the words out. A skinny Colored woman wearing a yellow flour-bag gingham dress and a denim wash rag as an apron opened the screen door and said, “Lord’a mercy, Mr. Metropolitan, is it premium time again already?” Her eyes were downcast.

Dad said, “Son, run back to the car and get my debit book. I must have made a mistake”. I hustled to the front seat to get Dad’s account book and returned just in time to see him taking his hand from his hip pocket.

Then he gently said, “Alright, boy, we better get back before your mother figures out where we went”. We left and I realized somehow the premium had been paid. I think that was my earliest understanding of what possibilities America afforded. Our family was about like all white families in our little town yet Mom and Dad knew from their own Great Depression Days that in America there is always hope if we all help one another. I like to think that that Black family paid forward some of the money that came from that life insurance policy to help someone else.

It took several more years of living with a slowly changing society of segregated schools, restaurants and churches, but I finally learned what the Fourth of July truly meant in 1964 when I returned from where I was stationed in the United States Air Force to attend Dad’s funeral. Our church had a large sanctuary surrounded on three sides with a balcony. When I walked into the church with Mom and looked up, the balcony was filled with Black people who stood in respect for Mom and Mr. Metropolitan.

Black people had never been allowed in our church, but the woman I saw that day years before with Dad was there with her family as were numerous other Black people from across Bird Creek. Later my sister told me that Black lady had come by our house and asked Mom if Colored folks could attend Mr. Metropolitan’s funeral. Mom had to get Church Board permission which was granted only after Mom threatened to leave the church. Coloreds would be allowed that one time if they sat in the balcony, but that was a sea change many years in the making.

That day was when I knew America had the capacity to atone for past sins, and that was when the Fourth of July became my favorite holiday.

The Aft Balcony.
Picture taken by Peg Redwine.

 

Lessons From Moms

by Leave a Comment

President Trump announced his main goals during his second inaugural address on January 20, 2025:

“We will measure our success not only by the battles we win but also by the wars that we end – and perhaps most importantly, the wars we never get into. My proudest legacy will be that of a peacemaker and a unifier.”

President Trump also declared:

“After years and years of illegal and unconstitutional federal efforts to restrict free expression, I will sign an executive order to immediately stop all government censorship and bring back free speech to America.”

President Trump’s stated goals are the bedrock of our fragile democracy. It takes very little to get mired in endless wars, especially when voices calling for peace and reason are silenced. History is littered with great societies who charged headlong into their own destruction for the silliest of causes.

The most famous war of ancient western civilization was the Trojan War between Greece and Troy. It lasted ten years, cost countless lives and treasure and was started over one woman, Helen, whose face, according to the poet Homer, “Launched a 1,000 ships”.

World War I was often called the “war about nothing”, cost the earth millions of human lives, including over 100,000 Americans, and was started over the assassination of the Arch Duke of Austria-Hungary, Franz Ferdinand.

America’s Viet Nam War spanned over twenty years of conflict, but it was a questionable attack on a United States ship in the Tonkin Gulf in 1964 that was used to justify America’s involvement in the “endless war”.

The United States had no quarrel with Iraq but false intelligence alleging Iraq had “weapons of mass destruction” got us involved in the costly military slog that has continued since 1990. In this pointless and endless war America has expended and is still expending countless lives and treasure. What President Trump recognized in his inaugural address is that war can be slid into easily but may result in catastrophic consequences and never end.

Since his inauguration, President Trump has frequently compared the fighting between Israel and its neighbors to a school yard dustup between boys. As President Trump has frequently said, America has no reason to be involved. U.S.A. involvement might lead to another world war but it could lead to a permanent Middle East Peace if we put into practice the lessons of history or simply those from our mothers.

When I was in the first grade, for some never fathomed reason, another first grader and I developed a routine of fighting every day after school. As do most schoolboy contests, they amounted to little damage to either of us but did result in the destruction of numerous tee shirts. Well, our mothers banged our heads together and ended our “endless war”. He and I, of course, became good friends and still are today. Neither of us has a clue what we fought about back then.

I respectfully suggest to President Trump that he tell Israel and Iran they should neither one have nuclear or atomic weapons and neither should attack the other or their neighbors. Instead of arming one country to attack the other, America should use its enormous motherly power and wisdom to sit Israel and Iran down with the stern warning that no more tee shirts will be lost by anyone, including us.

Wise Fools Needed

by Leave a Comment

Arthur Miller’s 1953 play The Crucible was a metaphor for the dangers of the McCarthyism era. Senator Joseph McCarthy wielded virtually unchecked power using Red Scare tactics. Governments, the news media and the public devoured allegations that Soviet Communists had infiltrated American culture and the only solution was to excise the traitors. Thousands of careers were ruined as was the social standing of countless loyal citizens by innuendo. Senator McCarthy’s most powerful weapon was fear. Freedom of speech could have been America’s best defense, but fear of being painted with McCarthyism’s red brush kept truth at bay. As with many dangerous social problems, America’s solution had already been provided by our 18th century Founders, scholars and historians who had studied thousands of years of great civilizations that had destroyed themselves through hubris and stifled debate. Freedom of Speech is not just a shield, it is also a democratic society’s most powerful sword. To concede this ultimate right is to voluntarily disarm.

Our Constitution was crafted by human beings who were steeped in the lessons of civilizations that had been forged on an anvil of free speech but had declined when truth could or would no longer confront power. Our Founders knew their history, especially that of the brilliant ancient Greeks who realized:

“…democracy insisted on complete freedom of speech, and thought it well to mock the personalities and
air the burning problems of the moment.”

Charles A. Robinson, Jr.
In his Introduction to
An Anthology of Greek Drama (1949)

From Sophocles’ twenty-five-hundred-year-old Oedipus the King to Shakespeare’s (1564-1616) Macbeth and other countless examples from civilizations of old to modern times, we have warnings that leaders who do not heed voices cautioning against hubris can bring down great societies. A common theme in both monarchial government and literature for thousands of years is that of the Wise Fool who, without fear of repercussions, both whispers in the emperor’s ear and speaks truth to his or her face.  In the plays of ancient Greece this role was often played by the chorus which would presage the harm a ruler’s pride was going to bring about later if he did not heed the warnings or if the populace did not replace the ruler. This is the ultimate in free expression. However, often times those in power surround themselves not with “Wise Fools” who tell them unwelcome truth, but with fearful fools who cling to power through sycophantic flattery.

When the victims of Salem, Massachusetts were executed in 1692-1693, it was not because they were witches but because superstition, personal grudges, prejudices, ignorance or religion trumped truth. In the McCarthy era, the Red Scare did not put America in peril, the fear of it did. The cure then as always is Freedom of Expression. The disease of misguided or corrupt power is best cured by a free flow of ideas and most exacerbated by silence, or worse, capitulation. When even our universities cower into silence before threats of our government, the rotting of our moral core as a free people has taken root. We have the recent example of the 1950’s to awaken us to what silence in the face of government power run amok can wreak on our democracy. History is littered with the rubble of previously once great societies that have committed the sin of lassitude in the face of ignorance.

The voices of campus protesters in the 1960’s and 1970’s helped bring America back from the precipice during the Viet Nam War era much as the courage of those such as Arthur Miller, who refused to be silenced, did during the 1950’s Red Scare. One might ask where the prophetic and courageous Greek chorus and wise fools are today as our government sends our soldiers into our streets?

An Anniversary

by Leave a Comment

Just over one hundred years ago (June 1921), what historians consider one of the worst incidents of White on Black racial violence occurred in Tulsa, Oklahoma. An entire Black business district and many Black owned residences were destroyed by White vigilantes. Approximately 300 Negro citizens were murdered. The matter was omitted from official historical records until 2001. As a student in Oklahoma public schools from 1950-1961, I never heard of this event. It is now being included in school curricula. I recently was doing research for this column when I referred to a book, The Oklahoma Story, by former Oklahoma University Professor of History Arrell Morgan Gibson (1921-1987). In an informative and interesting book on the history of Oklahoma published in 1978, there is no mention of the 1921 Tulsa Race Massacre even though Professor Gibson does include Oklahoma’s history of segregation and racial prejudice.

For example, the book points out that the first Legislature of Oklahoma formally adopted legal segregation of public schools, public transportation, public toilets, water fountains and other facilities. While I have never forgotten living in a culture steeped in Jim Crow formal and societal expected segregation, Gibson’s book sharpened my memories and caused me to return to my frequently sublimated curiosity about America’s caste systems. One of my most difficult father/son experiences I had was attempting to explain the apartheid of my youth to my son who could not comprehend the incomprehensible. It is difficult to explain what one does not understand. I approached our numerous conversations about Jim Crow by relating my personal experiences with it. Of course, my experiences remained almost as mysterious to me as they were to my young son.

I had no explanation for why White society used its majority power to keep Blacks, what we called Coloreds, at a distance and a disadvantage. Why was the water from a White’s only public fountain better than that from a Colored fountain when they were both connected to the same source only a couple of feet apart? What difference did it make if Colored waste was separated at a commode when the sewers claimed both? And why was it okay for Coloreds to pay White restaurant owners for food to go but it was illegal for Coloreds to sit at the counter? What was so vile about Colored bodies that they could not ride in the White only seats? Most puzzling of all was what was so sinful about Colored Christianity that it could not be expiated along with White sin on Sunday?

Well, Gentle Reader, if you did not live under apartheid, this probably makes no more sense to you than it did to my son, or frankly, to me. On the other hand, I do wonder if we still have far to go as a society when it comes to race, or religion or gender or…. I also wonder if such public spectacles as the Sean Diddy Combs trial would be the titillating social phenomenon it is if the participants were White. Does America still suffer from a 400-year-old need to keep Black culture in a separate category from White?

Have we progressed or have we found ways to assuage our prejudice with bemusement? Even our President appears to fear that any recognition that America has need to make reparations is somehow morally wrong. As for that conversation with my son who now has children of his own, well, his daughter’s best friend is Black. However, the better news is, I do not think either his daughter or her friend knows there is a distinction.