|
The Artist as Hero:
By Alemayehu G. Mariam | September 1, 2008
|
The allegation in kangaroo court is that Teddy in the
evening hours of November 2, 2006, driving his vehicle at a high rate of speed
and without an operator’s license, struck and killed a pedestrian. Teddy
allegedly fled the scene of the accident without rendering assistance to the
injured victim. Teddy denies the allegation. He told the kangaroo court: “I did
not kill anyone!” Teddy is telling the truth. He is innocent!
How can we be so sure? We are so sure because Article 22 (3)
of Zenawi’s “constitution” says Teddy is
innocent: “Everyone charged with an offense shall be presumed innocent until
proved guilty by a court of law and not to be compelled to testify against
himself.” That is also the universal rule under Article 11 (1) of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights
(incorporated by express reference in Art. 13 of the “constitution” ), the Rome
Statute of the
(Art. 66, presumption of innocence and a reasonable doubt) and under the laws
and constitutions of all civilized nations. For Teddy to be convicted of the
alleged offenses, the prosecution must prove the elements of the alleged
crimes beyond a reasonable doubt. The burden of proving Teddy’s guilt is ENTIRELY
on the prosecution. That burden of proof never shifts to the accused. Teddy does
not have to do jack to prove his innocence. He does not have to call witnesses
or produce any evidence in his defense. He has the absolute right not to
testify in order to prove his innocence. (Art. 22 (3).)
Proof of guilt “beyond a reasonable doubt” is the highest
standard of evidence known in the law of civilized societies; and ostensibly, Zenawi’s
kangaroo court subscribes to that standard as well. Proof of strong suspicion that
the accused has done the alleged crime does not amount to “proof beyond a
reasonable doubt”. Evidence that Teddy possibly, probably, plausibly, and presumably
did it, just does not cut it under the reasonable doubt standard. Proof that Teddy
very, very likely did it, does not meet the standard of reasonable doubt. Proof
that there is overwhelming evidence Teddy did it, but there is reasonable doubt (that is, a single doubt
based upon reason and common sense, the kind of doubt that would make a
reasonable person hesitate to act) about the pre-dated autopsy report or the contradictory
testimony of the police officers does not meet the standard of proof beyond a reasonable doubt. A directive from
Zenawi’s office that Teddy be convicted because he wrote unflattering lyrics about
him, refused to sing at his millennium party and sang songs that told the truth
about his dictatorship is definitely not proof beyond reasonable doubt.
The evidence that transforms the “presumption of innocence”
to a factual finding of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt is evidence “which, after the entire comparison and consideration
of all the evidence, leaves the minds of the fact finder (judge or jury) in
that condition that they feel an abiding conviction of the truth of the charge.”
Simply stated, the fact finder must have “moral certainty about the evidence
presented against the accused to a point where s/he would act in
reliance upon its truth in matters of the greatest importance to himself or
herself.” Ultimately, the universal rule is that if the fact finder views the
evidence in a criminal case reasonably permitting either of two conclusions — one
of innocence, the other of guilt — the fact finder is required to adopt the
conclusion of innocence. Such is the foundation of the criminal law in all
civilized societies. Even the kangaroo court in Teddy’s case is supposed to
follow these rules as manifested in Article 13 of the “constitution”, and Article
141 of the rules of criminal procedure.
The Evidence Against
Teddy
After a police investigation that has been going on since
November 2, 2006, and with all of the massive investigative resources at the
disposal of the regime, the scanty evidence assembled against Teddy shows the
following: 1) A man claiming to be a cab driver called police and gave the
license plate number of a vehicle registered to Teddy. 2) Police officers came
upon the scene of the accident and found a man who appeared to have sustained
injuries lying on the ground. They saw no vehicle strike the man. 3) The
vehicle allegedly belonging to Teddy had sustained damages. 4) The cab driver
who allegedly reported the incident to the police could not be located. 5) A death
certificate produced in court showed the victim had died a day earlier before
he was allegedly struck by the vehicle registered to Teddy and killed.
The prosecution’s case has more holes in it than a worn out fishing net.
Here is a short list of the most glaring evidentiary deficiencies:
1) The autopsy report does not show the victim died specifically from trauma
resulting from a vehicle collision. All it shows is that the victim died from
blunt force trauma.
2) The autopsy report showed that the alleged
victim had died one day earlier than the date of the hit and run that allegedly
killed him. The prosecution claimed the date registered on the death
certificate was a “clerical error”. (By
the same token, could it be that the license plate number reported to the
police by the alleged cab driver at night implicating Teddy is an
“observational error”? What is good for the goose must be good for the gander!)
3) The prosecution has not produced any
forensic evidence connecting Teddy’s vehicle to the deceased’s injuries or
death. No blood, hair, fiber or any other physical evidence belonging to the
victim was found on Teddy’s vehicle.
4) The prosecution has produced no evidence on the mechanical condition of the
vehicle. There is also no accident investigation/reconstruction evidence.
5) There is no expert testimony showing the deceased’s injuries are consistent
with vehicular collisions in general, or with the vehicle damage observed on
Teddy’s vehicle. There is no expert testimony in the form of traffic accident reconstruction findings to connect the
cause of death of the alleged accident victim to the vehicle in question; and no
data were extracted from the onboard “black box” of the BMW which retains
critical parametric performance data in the seconds preceding impacts of the
nature alleged in this incident, and often critical in vehicular
manslaughter cases., e.g. engine rpm,
brake status, throttle position, position of air bag sensors and restraint
systems (which would be deployed in the event of high speed impact with an
external object at factory preset specifications), time from maximum
velocity to impact, etc. In high
impact vehicle collisions, it could be reasonably expected that the driver
and/or passenger could sustain minimally some soft tissue injury from secondary
collision effects (e.g. sudden tensioning of the inertial belt retractor from
high velocity impact, injury from debris, etc.). In any case, if Teddy’s BMW had
been involved in any kind of collision serious enough to cause the death of a
pedestrian, one could reasonably expect evidence of some physical injury on
him. But there is no evidence Teddy had sustained any physical injuries
consistent with collision impact.
6) There is no evidence that at the time of the alleged incident Teddy was
actually driving the vehicle. No witness has been able to positively identify Teddy
as the driver of the vehicle that allegedly struck the decedent.
7) There is no evidence that the
driver of the vehicle in question was “speeding” or driving at a high rate of
speed, e.g. no evidence of fixed maximum speed limits for the accident
location, no “black box” data or other expert or eyewitness testimony on traffic,
road, weather conditions and visibility at the time of the alleged collision
with the deceased.
8) The police officers testified that when
they came upon the scene, they found an apparent victim of a hit and run
accident. Supposedly, the victim had been drunk. They did not see Teddy hit and
run from the scene. It was further reported that the police officers had
difficulty expressing themselves in the official language, and without
translation assistance, it was difficult to follow their testimony. Further, their
testimony was conflicting.
9) Teddy was denied fundamental due process by the admission of hearsay
evidence (an out of court statement given by a witness to the police) without
cross-examination of that witness. When Teddy’s lawyer objected to the evidence
and complained that he can not defend his client in a manifestly arbitrary
proceeding, he was ordered to serve 20 days in jail for contempt of (kangaroo)
court.
10) There is no evidence that Teddy made any admission of culpability, and
he has always maintained his innocence against the charges.
Enough of the theory and practice of reasonable doubt in Zenawi’s kangaroo
court! It would be a waste of paper and time to comment further on the kangaroo
court proceedings. Suffice it to say that one finds more integrity, better
prosecutorial trial advocacy, a more coherent judicial process and display of
legal savvy in a mock trial courtroom in an American high school than in Zenawi’s
kangaroo court.
The Real “Crimes” of Teddy Afro in Federal
First Kangaroo Court
Teddy Afro is in Zenawi’s jail not because of any traffic or
other criminal offense. Teddy is in jail because he pissed off Zenawi and his
henchmen by getting in their faces and telling them like it is! Zenawi feels “dissed” by Teddy. He feels
insulted. He wants to punish Teddy by showing him who is really “wearing those shorts
(qumta) darned with 17 needles.” That’s
why Teddy is in jail! That is why he will remain in jail. Zenawi knows it. So
does everybody else. If Teddy would ask for a “pardon” tomorrow (“Lord! I have
sinned against you!”), he would be out of jail before you could say jack.
Now, if you really want to know the “crimes” for which Teddy
is rotting in a lice-infested jail, check out the following list of charges:
Charge 1: Crime of
Love of Country.
For his entire artistic career Tewodros Kassahun, a/k/a
Teddy Afro, has shown undying love for
lyrics, said Teddy Afro has glorified
thugs and paid homage to African fathers who have toiled to bring about African
unity and promote pan-Africanism.
Charge 2: Crime of Speaking Truth to Power.
For his entire artistic career Tewodros
Kassahun, a/k/a Teddy Afro, has refused to lie, and bow before thugs and
thieves. In his album, Yasteseryal, said Teddy exposed the truth about
the seizure of the throne by a criminal band of thugs.
Charge 3: Crime of Refusing
to Bow Down Before King Kong
For his entire artistic career Tewodros Kassahun, a/k/a
Teddy Afro, has refused to bow down and worship King Kong.
Charge 4: Crime of
Refusing to Sell Out or Be Corrupted
For his entire artistic career Tewodros Kassahun, a/k/a
Teddy Afro, has been offered riches and rewards beyond measure to sell out his
integrity and honor. But on all occasions, he has adamantly refused to sell
out. He was offered millions to sing at the Millennium Mambo but he refused; instead
he sang for free to the public at the stadium.
Charge 5: Crime of Courage
and Refusing to Be Silent in the Face of Inhuman Acts
For his entire artistic career, Tewodros Kassahun, a/k/a/
Teddy Afro, has steadfastly refused to remain silent in the face of crimes
against humanity, war crimes and human rights violations.
Charge 6: Crime of
Advocating Reconciliation and Unity
For his entire artistic career, Tewodros Kassahun, a/k/a/
Teddy Afro, has called upon all Ethiopians to unite. He has called upon Christians
and Muslims to join hands and people of all ethnic backgrounds to live in
harmony, peace and love in a single Ethiopian nation.
Charge 7: Crime of Singing Uplifting Songs
For his entire artistic career, Tewodros Kassahun, a/k/a/
Teddy Afro, has sung songs that are, without exception, inspiring and
uplifting. His music, songs and lyrics have been effective antidotes to
diabolical efforts to undermine the spirit of the Ethiopian people. Teddy wrote
and sang the subversive lyric, “Hold on, hold tight!
tinsae) is near, if only we forgive each other in love.”
Charge 9: Crime of
Captivating the Hearts of All Ethiopians
For his entire artistic career, Tewodros Kassahun, a/k/a/
Teddy Afro, has sung songs that have captivated all Ethiopians, young and old.
Charge 10: Crime of Being
the Most Inspiring Young Artist of His Generation Tewodros Kassahun, a/k/a/
Teddy Afro, is without doubt, the most inspiring musical artist of his
generation. Beyond his peerless artistic talents, said Teddy has inspired millions
of people to yearn for democracy, freedom and human rights in a single
Ethiopian nation.
Aggravating
Circumstances in the Commission of the Foregoing Crimes
In the commission of all of the foregoing crimes, Tewodros
Kassahun, a/k/a/ Teddy Afro, has acted with the intent to promote love and understanding
among the people of
and in the furtherance of social harmony and national unity.
There is a mountain of evidence larger than Ras Dashen that Teddy
is GUILTY of all 10 charges beyond a shadow of doubt.
The Ballad of Teddy Afro
“Teddy Afro! I charge
you with a crime!!!”
Thundered His Honor, the First Instance Kangaroo Judge.
“What is my crime?” asked Teddy with his usual sunny smile,
“Crime?” snorted His marsupial Honor.
“Don’t gotta do no crime!
We’ll just make you do the time.
Make YOU, do the time! The time!! THE TIME!!!”
Teddy returned once more to plead his case,
Said he to His Kangarooship:
“Please hear me out, Your Honor, sir
“You must do me justice! Must do me right!”
“Young man! I’d love to do you justice and right,
But you can see, I am just a kangaroo judge and not very
bright,
I do as I am told, be it wrong or right.”
Jah people stood in kangaroo court,
Shouting, “Teddy is innocent, him no do no crime.
“God him witness, Jah is Supreme Power.
“Rulers of
free Teddy!
“Unchain Teddy today!
“Set Teddy free,
“Let him be.”
But them took Teddy back to the dungeon,
A lice-infested hellhole they call Kality prison.
Them vowed to break Teddy’s spirit and pride,
Them vowed him solitary keep, make him weep, deny him sleep!
But Teddy, him put his faith in Jah.
Him say, “Break my bones, bruise my flesh,
Jah Man’s spirit, Jah Man’s pride will never diminish.”
Teddy, him sat solitary in jail (no bail),
Him sang Bob Marley (Ye
Ityopia Anbessa) songs:
“Africans Unite!” “Ethiopians Unite!”
“Them belly full,
but we hungry.”
“We gonna chase those crazy,
Chase those crazy bunkheads,
Chase those crazy baldheads out of our town.”
The people cried, “It’s a shame, an outrage!”
Them ask, “Isn’t it odd, isn’t it strange,
“To put a lion in a cage?
“Isn’t it odd, isn’t it strange,
“To see hyenas on the stage?
“Hyenas chain a lion in a cage?”
Them say, “It’s a doggone outrage!”
Teddy Afro! You are our Hero!
My HERO, Teddy Afro!
“You rock so, you
rock so, like you never did before.”
Bob Marley, him say:
“Get up, stand up: stand up for your right!”
“Get up, stand up: don’t give up the fight!”
Teddy: Don’t give up the fight! Don’t give up the fight…
Don’t…!
Jah, Yasteseryal!
Free Teddy Afro, our HERO!!!!
Please sign the “Free Teddy Afro” online petition at:
http://www.petitiononline.com/TedyAfro/petition.html
One
today. One
tomorrow. One
forever.
—–
The writer, Alemayehu G. Mariam, is a professor of political science at California State University, San Bernardino, and an attorney based in Los Angeles. For comments, he can be reached at [email protected]