Exhibit A: ‘Space to destroy’.
Via Baltimore Sun:
As Baltimore’s city solicitor a half century ago, George L. Russell Jr. once argued that “Baltimore has no power, duty or authority whatever to conserve peace or protect persons or property from violence.”
He was writing in defense of the city in a lawsuit brought by local business owners John and Hazel Silver. The Silvers were seeking compensation for the damage done to their business during the 1968 riots that followed the assassination of civil rights leader Martin Luther King Jr.
Today, Mayor & City Council of Baltimore v. Silver and the thorny issues it raised have resurfaced as another group of business owners tries to hold the city responsible for riot damage — this time, the looting and burning that erupted three years ago Friday after the death of Freddie Gray.
And in a twist of local history, the case is assigned to U.S. District Court Judge George L. Russell III — Russell’s son.
“Why do you think they call it ‘Smalltimore,’” observed the current solicitor, Andre M. Davis.
When told that his son was presiding over the case, the elder Russell expressed surprise: “Is that right?” His son declined to comment, given that the litigation is pending.
Dozens of Baltimore merchants filed suit last year, saying the city had ample warning that unrest was building in April 2015, and should have done more to protect their businesses. Their claims revive memories of one of Baltimore’s worst nights, when hundreds took to the streets and turned their rage against mostly small neighborhood stores, ransacking and burning them.
Many of the shopkeepers’ experiences that day have not been told widely, in part because of a language barrier: most are natives of Korea. But their nearly 700-page complaint details horrifying attacks: Jin Suk Kim and his wife Kil Ja Kim, for example, were trying to close their liquor store on North Avenue in mid-afternoon that day three years ago, according to the lawsuit, but first one, then another wave of rioters pushed their way in.
The Kims were assaulted with bottles and a fire extinguisher, according to the suit. When police arrived, officers drove them a few blocks away and told them to wait for an ambulance. It came about an hour later, according to the suit, and medics dressed the wound on Jin Suk Kim’s head, but they were not taken to the hospital until their son arrived and drove them there. Their store was looted, burned and beyond salvage, according to the suit, and Jin Suk Kim required neurosurgery for bleeding in the brain and extensive rehabilitation.
Another plaintiff, Seong Ok Baik, lost a corner store she owned in Broadway East — and, she said, her faith in the city.
“Baltimore businesses were thriving, but now, after the riot, a lot of businesses are fleeing and setting up elsewhere,” Baik said through her attorney, who interpreted. “The city doesn’t care about them. … The city has turned its back on them.”