MICHEL MARTIN, host:
We'll continue our discussion on the story of Charles Moore and his brother's quest for justice with Joe Davidson, an editor for The Washington Post, Mary Frances Berry, professor at history at the University of Pennsylvania, and Nat Irvin, professor of future studies in Wake Forest University and a columnist for the Winston-Salem Journal. Welcome and thank you all for joining me.
Professor NAT IRVIN (Future Studies, Wake Forest University): Thank you.
Mr. JOE DAVIDSON (Editor, The Washington Post): Glad to be here, Michel.
MARTIN: Now, I asked Thomas Moore and David Ridgen this question, and now I'd like to ask - and first to you, Professor Irvin - why continue this pursuit after four decades? Why not leave the past in the past and look ahead? And Professor Irvin, I'm asking you first because future studies is what you do. That part of what your mission is to help us look - leave the past behind, look toward the future. Why do you think it's important, or perhaps you don't think it's important.
Prof. IRVIN: No, I do think it is quite important, Michel. In fact, I think one of the points that this story so vividly illustrates is the power of ghosts and how the ghost can inhabit. The ghost from the past inhabits both the present and the future.
Ghosts were - is a way to explain why is it that blacks will see something, an incident one way and whites will see it another way. Consistently, when you look at polls at how people, how blacks and whites see race relations in this country, it's clear that it's almost like you could you say, do you see what I see? Where blacks will see certain things and whites will not.
When we talk about, you know, when we're talking about the future and how we'll resolve what we've inherited from the past, what I think happens so often and this story illustrates is that we will have a part of the community who will simply say well, OK, what happened in the past happened in the past and let it go.
What they will fail to realize is that black folks in particular, especially if you're born before 1964, that we more than likely live with a reality of what happens to us. This country has a very difficult time coming to grips with the fact that for a very long period of time - recent history not long history, 41 years ago is a very short time in the nation's history - that this nation itself would deprive people not only of their life and limb, but I mean we had a difficult time even getting the right to vote. This is recent history.
So when we think about the future and trying to reconcile it with the past, I think one of the issues that we have to come to grips with as a nation is understanding where we were. And we have to do that by sometimes exposing the very harsh reality of what Mr. Moore's story represents.
MARTIN: Professor Berry, same question to you. And also because you work with young people as a professor. I can understand what Professor Irvin's point of view, this is very important to the generation who grew up with this, who live with this. It's important for closure, particularly for family members effected. But what about for the students you're teaching now? These events happened long before they were born, do you think these kinds of issues are relevant to them?
Prof. BERRY: Well, I've even asked them, so the reaction to all this is that it's great to solve these cold cases. They think about cold cases, TV show or something. And that's wonderful. And all these people lived all this time and they did these evil things, but they also know because they've studied the history with me that there were thousands of people whose houses were bombed. They were assaulted, black people I'm talking about, in this period in Mississippi and Alabama, and all over the South.
And that the federal government didn't do anything and that the FBI could have years ago unearthed this but they didn't because they weren't interested for a lot of reasons, and that the state, even now, isn't prosecuting this guy for murder.
The federal government has prosecuted him for kidnapping. But they asked me another question, which is why is the Justice Department so focused on these old cases, willing to take them once somebody finds and identifies the information, when that same Justice Department has never pursued the allegations about voting rights from the 2000 election when black people were denied the right to vote?
They never did anything. They never did anything about Ohio. They never did anything about an array of voting rights problems, and in fact most of the attorneys in the voting rights section of the Justice Department quit because they wouldn't let them do anything about it.
So they said why are they so interested now, they at least are proceeding in this cold case. The history is connected with what's going on now. There are vestiges of this. We're glad for the family that this happened. But what we need is somebody to focus on trying to solve today's problems too.
MARTIN: Joe Davidson, an interesting point - in fact, you used to cover the Justice Department. What about Professor Berry's point that her students are making? That they have the sense of that the Justice Department actually pursues these old civil rights violations more avidly than they do contemporary ones. Do you think that's a fair criticism?
Mr. DAVIDSON: Well, I think it certainly seems that way. I mean, I think the Justice Department would come out with a ream of statistics to say that that's not the case. But clearly once - the stories that I've done indicate that the prosecution of civil rights cases has fell off once the Republican administration came into office.
And so I think that there is a very real sense within the black community that the civil rights, fundamental civil rights of black Americans is not well protected by the current administration. And I think, as Mary indicated, the case in Florida was the prime example of that in recent years. Prime example of why many people in the black community feel that these civil rights are not being fully protected by the government at this time.
MARTIN: I'm - it's unfair to ask each of you to speculate, because you are in the business of kind of facts and not, you know, fortune telling. But I'm curious if a trial will ensure. The man was arrested. He's 71 years old. Many, many years have gone by. You know, witnesses, you know, who knows what the sort of the quality of the testimony and their recollections will be.
What do you think the - what would the response be if there were an acquittal in this case? Mary Frances Berry, what do you - what impact do you think that it would have?
Prof. BERRY: Well, I think it would say to most people who paid attention to it that it just means that you still can't get a local jury in that particular area to convict somebody after all these years when the facts are clear. I don't think there would be any enormous outcry. People would be saddened by it. But this guy has lived all this time and been able to be, you know, I guess he has a family and lived a long life having done this right there in the neighborhood where everybody knew that he was there. So it makes you wonder. And all it would do is reaffirm the notion that while things have changed enormously that they have not changed enough.
MARTIN: Professor Irvin, we're down to our last couple of seconds, I want to ask you, do you think, as you and Professor Berry and Joe have discussed, this is the story of many African-Americans, many people from that era - do you think that the cracking of this case might inspire others who wanted to see justice done in that case? Or do you think it might be a comfort to those even if their cases are not pursued, are not resolved?
Prof. IRVIN: Well, Michel, it's a tough question. You know, these kinds of issues are mostly personal, but in general the nation feels better when justice is served. And one of I think the interesting - well, one of the bright aspects of this whole era of uncovering what cold cases are is that it's being largely led by white prosecutors, white newspaper reporters. It is a sort of the new generation of white folks from the South undoing of the damage that was done by their parents.
MARTIN: Professor Irvin, I'm so sorry we have to leave it there - a very rich topic to discuss and not a large amount of time. So thank you so much.
Prof. IRVIN: Thank you.
MARTIN: Nat Irvin, professor of futures studies at Wake Forest University, a columnist for the Winston-Salem Journal. He's at member station WFDD in Winston-Salem, North Carolina. And we were also joined by Joe Davidson, an editor for The Washington Post, and Mary Frances Berry, professor of history at the University of Pennsylvania. And they joined us from NPR in Washington.
Thank you all for joining us.
Mr. DAVIDSON: Thank you.
Prof. BERRY: Thank you.
MARTIN: As always, if you'd like to comment on any of the topics you've heard on our Roundtable, you can call us at 202-408-3330. That's 202-408-3330. Or you can send us an e-mail, log on to npr.org and click on Contact Us. And please be sure to tell us where you're writing from and how to pronounce your name.
Next on NEWS & NOTES, Crossing the Divide in the city of Camden. And a celebrity journalist tells all, and it's serious.
Copyright © 2007 NPR. All rights reserved. Visit our website terms of use and permissions pages at www.npr.org for further information.
Accuracy and availability of NPR transcripts may vary. Transcript text may be revised to correct errors or match updates to audio. Audio on npr.org may be edited after its original broadcast or publication. The authoritative record of NPR’s programming is the audio record.