 [LEGALINSURRECTION] What jumped out at me was the interview with Carmen Twillie Ambar, Oberlin College’s president, who took over after the events at issue. In the interview, Ambar repeated what has become a core part of Oberlin College’s post-trial public relations campaign, the suggestion that Gibson’s Bakery may actually have engaged in racial profiling. It was couched in the interview as a perception issue, that students and faculty had a perception — their own truth and lived experience — of racial profiling.
Koppel seemed genuinely surprised by Ambar’s statements as to perceptions:
KOPPEL: …. But to this day, the president of Oberlin makes allusions to a pattern of racist behavior, if not the specific incident that set things off three years ago.
AMBAR Well, the students pled guilty to the shoplifting. Um, there has been some debate about whether it was shoplifting or false ID.
KOPPEL: It was both.
AMBAR: Right. Well, I think that, that one of the things that the college has always said is that the college has not, doesn’t condone shoplifting, doesn’t condone bad behavior by its students in any way, shape or form. But what led up to the protest, and I think that’s sort of kind of the core issue here, was some series of things that happened before. Some perspectives about people’s experiences in the store.
KOPPEL: Tell me about, tell me about those then. And be specific. What specific incidents are you referring to that happened before?
AMBAR: Right, well, I think that the specific incidents would be, the perception by faculty and students and staff and other people in the town that there had been disparate treatment with respect to people of color in the store. The way I would phrase it, kind of different lived experiences.
DAVE O’BRIEN: This is all basically anecdotal evidence that people …
KOPPEL: Dave O’Brien covered the trials for the local paper, the Chronicle-Telegram
O’BRIEN: People commenting on a, on social media saying I had a, um, I, I felt, I felt uncomfortable in there. I felt like I was targeted because of the color of my skin.
There was no evidence presented in court supporting the claim of a long history of racial profiling, because no admissible evidence was offered.
Subjective feelings, perceptions, own truths, and lived experiences are not evidence supporting the truth of the matter asserted.
There was an interesting portion when Ambar clearly was uncomfortable, when Koppel pressed her as to what her reputation was worth:
KOPPEL: (Narration) What is a reputation worth? (Question to Ambar) You’re a very distinguished academic. What’s your reputation worth?
AMBAR: My reputation is important.
KOPPEL: It’s worth a lot, isn’t it? (Ambar shakes head Yes) I mean, if your reputation was destroyed overnight, you could hardly put a price on that could you.
AMBAR: Well, I certainly believe that reputations are important, but here’s what’s also true, and it’s the jury system that we have, right? And the legal system that we have. That we go through a legal process that makes that determination. And what the institution has said is that we believe that this determination was excessive.
Oberlin College still doesn’t get it. 
|
