White supremacist 'stabbed and beaten to death by his black neighbour' in Mississippi town

Source: Daily Mail

White supremacist 'stabbed and beaten to death by his black neighbour' in Mississippi town

By Mail Foreign Service
Last updated at 11:09 AM on 24th April 2010

A white supremacist lawyer was stabbed and beaten to death by a black neighbour who had done yard work for him at his home in Pearl, Mississippi.

A preliminary post mortem showed Richard Barrett, 67, was stabbed multiple times in the neck and bashed in the head, Sheriff Ronnie Pennington said.

He had burns over 35 per cent of his body, though investigators believe he was killed on Wednesday night and his house set on fire Thursday to cover up his death.

Pennington did not disclose a motive but said neighbour Vincent McGee, 22, was charged with murder on Thursday and deputies charged three other people in the case on Friday.




Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1268474/White-supremacist-stabbed-beaten-death-black-neighbour-Mississippi-town.html

shouldn't be too surprised when it finds them.

and getting stabbed and beaten to death ....
Just my humble opinion...

please explain the difference between preaching hate and violence and winding up the victim of hate and violence. You live a life of hate and violence you end your life a victim of hate and violence. Seems pretty straight up logical to me......something about reaping what you sow.....

and the law accomodates for that fact.

you yourself should expect to be a victim of the same violence. Do you really think that the object of your hatred and violence is just going to stand there and take it with a smile on their face? Really? Or, do you think your victim could be incited to respond in kind.....violently. I'm sorry, but I dint' see a HUGE difference between a lifetime of inciting hate and violence and being a victim of your own rhetoric. live by the sword, die by the sword.

as you have

I venture to guess you have reaped what you have sown in the past as well

I am simply pointing out that 1) there is not a HUGE difference between the victim's acts and the perpetrator's acts and 2) if you live your life violently it shouldn't be a surprise to anyone when you meet with a violent end.

I condemn BOTH parties actions

It's as big as the universe itself. The Constitution recognizes that in the 1st amendment. I hope you don't believe it goes too far in protecting our rights. Until one ACTS violently, or is eminently about to at that moment, they richly deserve full protection under the law. Otherwise I could be offended enough by Gandhi or MLK to be justified in killing them. The right to offend is sacrosanct, and must be protected.

directed back at them, which there surely was. I don't think it's a huge difference. Usually people like him are pretty near and dear to those who act on hate.

I see.

it largely does in the US because of 1st amendment rights.

become a giant oak.

If one plants (or sows) hate, one may reap far more than he/she expected. Like the old belief that harm wished on another will backfire tenfold.

Neither do I condone the murder of the white supremacist. The young man who killed him has taken the life of another, destroyed his own life, and has added to the already volatile issue of "race" relations.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

You shall reap what you sow............

your comparsion would be better if he had killed people himself.

:shrug:

...Barrett was surprised speaks not at all to the wrongness or rightness McGee's murdering him. I'm just not sure what you're getting at.

however, I'll shamefully admit that I did have to bite my tongue to keep myself from saying,"serves him right..." when first reading the headline.

Hate only breeds more hate, and now two lives are over because of it.

There is no justification short of self-defense for this action.

Murdering another human being is wrong. The persons views and politics are irrelevant.

Would you say a black person should not be surprised at being hung from a tree and lynched by a white supremicist? Reversing that is every bit as uggly and wrong.

implies that a "black person" is equivalent to a "white supremacist," rather than a "white person." Sort of implies that all black persons hate white persons, as it's written. I doubt that's what you meant to say, but it's a bit awkwardly worded.

Other than that, I agree with your basic statement, that killing for personal hatred is wrong. However, since we don't know anything yet, we don't understand why this happened. If the younger man plotted out and murdered the idiot just because he didn't like his hatred, he doesn't have much of a defense, although he can still argue that the older man's views enraged him beyond reason, or that he felt under emotional duress from hearing such hatred directed at him. (The story doesn't even get into whether he was a white supremacist or a separatist, but that's another issue). If the old guy was spouting racist crap and the younger guy just snapped, he's got a good involuntary manslaughter defense at least. If the old guy threatened him or made any form of violent threat, like maybe saying "You're just like all black people (insert favorite expletive here, there are certain words I just won't use), you ought to be killed," or something, he might even have a self-defense case, if he could prove he felt personally in danger.

Just sayin', without facts, this story is just written to push a few culturally charged emotional buttons. For all we know it was a simple robbery or a simple self defense case and the white supremacy had nothing to do with it. Could even be a mental illness issue, for all we know.

that their beliefs in white supremacy should make their murder understandable and acceptable in some way. This story has been posted several times. And there are always people who seem to feel the guy got what he deserved, in some way. That he, or people like him, shouldn't be surprised when they are murdered for their beliefs.

White Supremacy and other forms of racism are wrong, but that doesn't mean one should be killed for that belief any more that a black person should be lynched because of his race, a Jew murdered because he is Jewish, or a Tutsi murdered because he isn't a Hutu.

WHY did he do it? Because he was a racist? Because he'd said something racist to him? What was it exactly that prompted the attack, I wonder.

In any case, I'm sorry McGee sacrificed his young life to murder a racist. Was it worth it? Barrett should not have been murdered. Ignored? Yes. Regarded as scum? Yes. But murdered, no. It was just such a dumb move; he'll be imprisoned for the rest of his life because he HAD to take the life of a single racist.

Sigh...

Everyone is leaping to the conclusion that it had to do with "payback," but I wouldn't be surprised if it was something much more banal, like an argument that got out of hand.

in the news that I want to know about in more detail. It was probably something as simple as being owed for work done, then an argument that got out of hand.

Although that would not necessarily be simple. I remember in Mississippi in the 50s, hearing about white racists who employed blacks and stiffed them for wages earned or at least delayed payment until it was convenient for THEM (the employer). And that stemmed from the ATTITUDE of the racists that it was OK to do this to black folk because they weren't white. IOW, they weren't quite human, so they didn't deserve the moral rules that applied to other humans.

MS in the 50s was like that with wages for their black employees...I remember one motel owner telling me that he paid his maintenance man $20/wk but withheld $10 of it so that the guy could be bailed out on Monday. Other equally revolting stories about that period...this was in Biloxi.

exclusively black work force as a logging contractor in north central Mississippi back then told me those stories.It was hard to believe even then. And my grandparents were not excessively liberal. Although I guess they were for the time since they didn't belong to the Klan.

...was something like that too. Perhaps more details will be posted (or maybe elsewhere) as they come in.

http://www.clarionledger.com/article/20100424/NEWS/4240339/1001

Snip: McGee's family members say the suspect and Barrett knew one another because McGee had done yard work twice for him.

"He was unhappy with pay both times," Lewis said.

Lewis said his stepson once worked a full day for Barrett, scraping paint off a home near Ross Barnett Reservoir for $1 and a bowl of spaghetti, when he was 17.

Still, after getting out of prison two months ago, McGee decided to work for Barrett again - this time at a home in Utica. He worked six hours and was paid only $26, according to Lewis.

I have no reason to believe that the Missisippi police department is not playing their own white supremacist game here.

In any event, "Presumed Innocent" might still be in effect in this country, unless "terrorism" is evoked.

Nazi gets killed, find a Jew to blame it on.

and cynics are made, not born

Just because this was in Mississippi, the police are going to be white supremacists? I'm from Mississippi, as are a lot of other DUers. We are white supremacists, or is it just cops in Mississippi? And do you know the race of the police chief, sheriff, or investigator here? (The sheriff is white, but did you know that, or just assume?)

By the way, the cops are claiming this was not racially motivated. The killer is claiming he killed the victim because the victim made a sexual advance on him. The killer had known Barret for many years and worked for him as a teenager, and they were neighbors.

http://www.wlbt.com/Global/story.asp?S=12367018

.

The media tries to boil them down to the most emotional sketches and leaves out any detail that might make the picture more complete.

Do you have any proof of this claim? If so, let's see it, otherwise, let's wait for all the evidence to come out. It seems that accusing the Police of wrongdoing is becoming the national pasttime lately and I can tell you that the vast majority of police are honest, hardworking men and women who put their lives on the line for us everytime they put on the uniform and go to work. How do I know this? Because my daughter is a veteran of the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Dept., so if you have proof of wrongdoing by the Mississippe Police, put up or shut up

The dead guy was a white supremacist and the killer a young black man. The young black man claims he killed him because the old man made a pass at him, not because of any white supremacist views. (I googled a bit after my first post). One form of bigotry might replace another as a motive. Sounds like Grisham has a new story.

It's wrong when a white bigot does it, it's wrong when a black does it, and as far as I'm concerned, it's wrong when the State does it.

We glorify violence and suppress sexuality. We are a sick society.

What if a sexually abused child kills his attacker years later when in no danger? Is the past crime a mitigating circumstance? (not implying that's the case here, just talking about absolutes since that's the way the discussion went).

I agree, and never claimed otherwise, that all killing not for self-defense is wrong, but I see a big difference between, say, a thrill killer murdering a woman he grabbed from a parking lot because that's how he gets his jollies and a father killing the man who murdered his child that way. Both are wrong and have to be punished, but I think one type of killing is far worse than the other. I'm a liberal precisely because I don't believe in absolute white and black in most cases. (If I didn't believe in black and white in any case, that itself would be an absolute position. :) )

Say for a moment this young man had been molested by the older guy repeatedly while he was younger, and threatened to stay quite on it, or he would, say, kill his family. The young man gets twisted by this, reacts angrily against society, winds up in jail, and returns to society where he faces the man again. The man taunts him, makes a pass at him, sets off old emotions... Again, I'm not claiming anything at all like that happened, but would that mitigate your judgement?

My only real point here is we don't know enough details from the story above to know what happened.

then no, not all killings are equally wrong--a fact long recognized in law. In fact, a psych evaluation I wrote was recently used in an attempted murder case in which an abused woman tried to kill her husband, and the defense attorney told me that the evaluation was a major factor in the lightening of her sentence.

That's how you build a winning army that won't revolt against abusive authority. It's the one line of thought, though a very dark one, that has survived many thousands of years, through the passage of many civilizations. As a way of maintaining authoritarian hierarchies, it is impeccable. In fact I wouldn't know any other way of doing it. You get people to build their own cage, so it actually requires very little effort on your part.

Barrett was know to 'invite young skinheads to his home on the weekends' (Wikipedia) and apparently enjoyed the company of young white racists.

It's been keeping killers out of jail for a very long time.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gay_panic_defense

pictures. there is no way in hell a white supremest is going to hire a black guy with star tattoos on his face. and what person puts star tattoos on his face? a lovers fight is more like it.

did something happen that provoked the murder. Not that I'm excusing it, murder is wrong. With hate groups on the rise I'm afraid we're going to see more violence.

People who "preach" hate are the lowest most disgusting kind of person, but it doesn't justify murder. IMO.

the lowest form of human is a child predator

I don't like to think of them as human so I leave them out. Nice correction.



:hi:

they are not human, they are monsters. I've always said that if someone is overwhelmingly guilty, and I don't mean found guilty just because a child testified against them, we all saw how well that went in Kern County, CA or Wenatchee, WA, but irrefutable evidence against them, then put them in general population and let the other convicts take care of the problem, the worst possible thing you can be in prison is a child molester and these convicts have children on the outside and don't want this person ever hurting a child again.

Just my 2 cents worth, or should I say, just my $20.00 worth what with the value of the dollar

My aunt worked as a nurse in a prison, and she would tell us what the other prisoners would do to child molesters. It wasn't pretty, but I can't seem to muster one iota of compassion for them. I don't/wouldn't lose one minute of sleep on them. They get what they deserve. Many people believe they should be put to death, I don't I think the better punishment is exactly what you said.

My aunt was always conflicted, as a nurse she couldn't just leave them hurt, as a parent she wanted nothing more than to see them suffer. Needless to say, she didn't work very long there.

well, my granddaughter wants on the computer and my wife and I are raising a baby House Sparrow who is demanding our attention right now so I will sign off for now and say
Peace Out and good talking to you:toast:

Have a great day.

Nice talking with you too.

It could have just as well read, "Man killed by neighbor"

n/t

or none of us do.

I see some DUers saying that Barrett deserved it for being racist.

Meanwhile, on Free Republic, many members say that George Tiller and abortion doctors deserved to be murdered for being "baby killers" based on the pseudoscientific idea that fetuses=people.

If Barrett didn't physically attack McGee, McGee sank to the low level of Barrett.

scumbag asshole does not mean they deserve to die

also that ideology preaches hate, so all freedom of speech should be thrown out the window....Release the killer, he should be hailed, because the dead mans words & ideology may have been hateful....and it probably was just a matter of time before the dead man did something awful if he had not been stabbed multiple times, burned & murdered?

Who's to say the killer wasn't also a racist and despised white people, they are also around as well?

NO presumptions and NO excuses!

Pigman Limbaugh has always met the same hateful racist criteria I despise....but given the chance I sure as fuck wouldn't torture and kill the bastard!

someone who thinks what you just said was hateful would be justified in murdering you?
It doesn't matter what he MIGHT have done, what matters is what happened at that moment.
The suspect is also innocent until proven guilty by a jury of his peers.
The victim may have been a POS racist but that doesn't give someone the right to kill him and besides, it doesn't sound like this was racially motivated.
We do have a 1st Amend right in this country and no matter how offensive you might find someone's views, they have the right to express them without fear of retribution

Whoops, click on the wrong button, sorry about that

Cut & paste the content to whom you meant your post for....sounds like that person needs to hear it.

again I aploogize

Very clever.

You know, the part where the "killer" was identified as having killed him despite not yet being convicted.

other vile conservative talkshow hosts for violent actions performed by others, they mean... what? We are all touting the right to say whatever the heck we want, including racist hate speech. How, then, do we feel comfortable turning around and blaming Limpballs for attacks on IRS buildings? (I am using broad examples here - please don't write back to inform me of this)

"'Those who shout appease, appease, are hung by those they sought to please.' That's the tragedy of Trent Lott."
Salon Article from when Trent Lott Showed His Ass: http://www.salon.com/news/politics/feature/2002/12/13/barrett/index.html

In this case, the one who did anything and everything to 'resist progress' ended up stabbed, 30% of his body burned, etc. etc.

I'm not saying any human being deserves to be murdered. Not at all. But there's an irony in those words. . .

Then again the headline in and of itself IS oh so very Daily Mail. He (the accused) didn't do ANYTHING until it has been proven in a court of law.

I agree,but where were all of the up roar when a deputy sheriff murdered the young black football player earlier this year? Mississippi is the worst place for blacks to live or try to live,racism runs rampart in that backward place and you whites that live there know it and the blacks damn well know thats the truth.

I need more details of this story. I know how the climate is and have to wonder if there is a past history between this guy and the blacks in the area. I have to reserve judgement since I just know too much about the area and state and not enough about the people involved.

I actually met this guy a couple of times while I lived in Jackson. He wasn't all that impressive and had too much a poor reputation to ever get too powerful. Yes, even in Mississippi.

A friend of mine worked for him even, handing out flyers for God knows what. That only lasted a week, long enough for the late mister Barrett to make inappropriate amorous advances toward my friend.

He was not well liked, at least in Jackson, of which Pearl is a suburb. His public displays rarely attracted more than a dozen people and he was publicly ridiculed even then. Often, he would 'ride the coattails' of other, more influential people passing through. Lyndon LaRouche for one if I recollect.

I don't know the circumstances surrounding his demise, nor the history of Mr. McGee, but I can certainly imagine that Mr. Barrett probably offended the accused on many levels. Or, possibly, the deceased was simply in the wrong place at the wrong time.

This murder will become a rallying point for extremists on both sides. The white supremacists will point to it as another reason to hate blacks. Black panthers, nation of islam, etc., will say that the murder was the justified result of white racism. Either way, hate wins the day.

So we don't know if this is a hate crime or just a simple murder. We know nothing of the motives of the accused so we shouldn't speculate that this was racially motivated at all. The headline implies that, which is bad journalism. And people are yapping like this was some kind of live by violence, die by violence thing when there is no evidence to suggest that.