Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Louise Wu on July 21, 2011 at 8:20pm

Thanks for your detailed reply.  You are absolutely entitled to your feelings about this, informed by your experiences with your family members in law enforcement.  I did want to add that the discussion about the use of improper OGA in Emily's case was from the online law journal of NY State Judges, Prosecutors, and Defense Attorneys.  I understand that they also are not on the ground as police officers in the line of duty.  But I wanted to let you know that it wasn't my opinion.  Thanks again.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by ShannonG on July 21, 2011 at 11:07am

I'd like to say something here. Emily Good strikes me as a kid in search of any cause she can join, She invited the confrontation with the police and got exactly what she was looking for. My major concern is: does she truly care about the 19th Ward or is she merely on the look out for a way to make trouble? The police tell you to remove yourself from a situation you do so. She went looking for that confrontation.
I'm tired of the pointing fingers and the lack of taking responsibilty. Emily Good has not taken responsibility for anything here, she appears to be a little girl with a big mouth and an utter lack of common sense. Does she have any idea how dangerous she made that situation? It is not up to her to determine if someone's rights are being "violated" while the police are trying to do their jobs. It is not her job to determine that these things need to be taped or otherwise. She does not have the right to disturb the peace and that is EXACTLY what she did.

I don't find her to be this crusader for the poor and downtrodden, I find her to be an arrogant trouble maker without an ounce of sense in her head. Does she have any idea of the hisotry of this neighborhood? Does she know how hard people have worked over the last 30 years to build relationships with the police here, to make life better in the Ward? I doubt very highly that she has. I don't believe she has any respect for this neighborhood or the people who live it in. has she spoken with people who fought the redlining and the push for the "white flight" when their children were young? Has she talked to anyone about how we arrived here, why all the good things have fallen apart? Does she know ANYTHING about this place?

Great freedoms such as we have in this country comes with a price, it comes with taking responsibility for your actions and your words. It comes with the knowledge that you must respect those around you when you exercise these rights, as you absolutely can and should exercise.

Emily Good is no hero and to be critical of the fact that a lot of seemingly right thinking people are not impressed and who are not jumping on the bandwagon to demonize the police in the wake of her actions is not called for. We live in complicated times in a complicated neighborhood that has a lot of problems. I don't believe she is helping. And why isn't she volunteering for the Community Association? Why isn't she doing any number of things that could make this a better neighborhood? I suspect it is because she could be anywhere, the fact that she is in the 19th Ward means nothing in the long run.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Louise Wu on July 21, 2011 at 11:44am

Again, I'm really at a loss to understand all the anger coming at Emily.  She's a lifelong Rochester resident, except for her time at college and some time in the Northwest.  She and her whole family live in the city, work and own homes in the city, and most of them are here in the 19th Ward.  We can agree to disagree about how or where she gets involved. No problem.  She wasn't old enough, but her mom and dad were very active in Metro Justice and its precursor organizations working on the very issues you have named.  I have a suspicion that this is where she got her moral compass.  I am also glad to see that she and other young people like her want to come and live in the Ward and help with the issues at hand here, like predatory foreclosure mills trying to destroy our families and neighborhood.  I was grateful for her dedication to this, because we already have three empty houses on our block!  When she and others went before a judge after after defending my neighbor's house from an illegal eviction (by a foreclosure mill law firm in Buffalo, Steven J. Baum, that does 75 percent of the 3000 foreclosures in Rochester per annum, has a RICO anti-racketeering case against them, 2 class actions suits, and the new NY State attorney general subpoenaing their records), the judge let Emily and the others off with several hours of community service, and complimented them all on the service they did at my neighbor's house.  I hope this helps with some of your concerns about her interest in our neighborhood and our current and historical struggles.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by ShannonG on July 21, 2011 at 12:42pm

I don't buy her altruism. And guess what, the police who arrested the good widow DID NOT foreclose on her house. They just did their jobs. Ok so let's hear it: what are her intentions? Doe she have any ideas? Does she work with the Association? Working for Metro Justice doesn't mean you know any thing about this neighborhood or the people who live in it. Has she talked to anyone who were here 30 years ago and grew up here, like me or any of the other 100s of people who returned her to raise their families?
Does she have any idea of the accomplishments and the failures of people like my parents who worked hard as hell to get this neighborhood into shape? Has she spoken to the people who try very hard everyday to make thier streets and their neighbors feel good about living here? Has she had a conversationwith any of those people who belong to, say the Marlborough Road block club, or any of the other groups that are making a difference street by street?

NO she hasn't done any of that. I don't think she cares, and I think the constant defense of her is disturbing. She hasn't proven her good intentions; she has caused an uproar in a neighborhood that needs the police and needs to be able to communicate with them and make sure we are getting what we need, what we deserve. And shame on you for saying, totally and completely irresponsibly that the police have threatened to break into her house. Are you serious? Prove it, prove it right here in this forum.

Join the association, LISTEN instead of instructing people of how they should react to one thing or another. I am angry because this has not helped this neighborhood at all. Not one bit. I started stuffing mimeographed fliers in the old association office on Thurston Road 35 years ago when I was 7 years old. My mother lived and breathed this neighborhood and put her heart into it, as did countless people who are Emily Good's neighbors.

This doesn't help us. Not at all. And quite frankly the moralizing and the "you just don't know how pure and wonderful Emily is and how she has gone to peace studies classes and you should react more positively" is offensive. That attitude is as implacable as the one that all of those horrible people who actually had a difference of opinion from the Kool Aid drinkers who insist on instructing us on how to feel about things are unsupportive meanies. Give me a break.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Louise Wu on July 21, 2011 at 2:13pm

I don't think I'm instructing anyone.  Again, I am surprised at how critical some here have seemed of her without talking to her.  You're saying she hasn't talked to the association, but they haven't talked to her either.  She did go to the meeting at the Presby Home with Mr. McFadden and other police.  But that is not the association, I guess.  What I am wondering is if you think the police are so thinned skinned that they will withdraw their help? Will they boycott the 19th Ward?  Will they do a work slowdown to punish us?   I can't believe that is possible.  Police in other jurisdictions, like Chicago, no longer enforce the foreclosure orders.  They realized that just uncritically  doing their jobs to carry out court orders that are highly questionable legally, and bring about great social harm, comes too close to the Nuremberg Defense.  Happily, it appears quite possible that our police are even faster understanding this than Cooke County's sheriff was, and are not making that kind of thing a priority any longer.  If that truly is the case, then they all deserve medals.  Yes, you are right, it is complicated here.  But it is possible that while one policeman over at Emily's forgot or never knew the constitution, that others in the RPD are indeed wise and capable of great compassion?   I look forward to finding out.  I think it might actually be working out that way.  I think Emily talking about the threats to her before the entire city council, the police chief, and many citizens gathered (the chambers were full) as witnesses is good enough for me to accept it.  Emily knows lots of people who lived in the Ward 30 years ago.  Sometimes it seems like everyone lived here at some point and then left.  She knows many who are here and former Warders who still live in Rochester in other neighborhoods.  But she lives here, and I am glad for people still buying houses and moving in.  I'm grateful there is not a mass exodus of young home owners.  She does a lot of work with a community association in Corn Hill.  I suppose it's okay to have more than one neighborhood association?  I understand the people on her block care for her and were very distressed that she was arrested unlawfully and without cause.  I think its okay to stand up for our rights, and to require that peace officers follow the law.  I also think that the majority of the RPD want the same thing: co- workers who are professional, know the law, uphold the law, and the constitution.  I am sorry if defending Emily upsets or offends you.  It's not at all my intent.  It just seems like there is so much mis-information out there feeding misperceptions about what's happing with all this.  I think this local dialogue is important and I really don't want to scare anyone or make them unhappy.  So it was very helpful for me to read your view of things.     

 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by ShannonG on July 21, 2011 at 4:41pm

Louise I just don't think you get it. I don't think you have a clue as to why something like what Emily Good pisses people off here. Of course the police won't boycott the  neighborhood but you do not see to grasp, and neither does Emily Good that we NEED the police. And no one wants to be told how crap like she pulled should be responded to. And I think what people like Emily Good know about street smarts and what the hell is going on here could fit on the head of a pin. And makes me not want to entertain a thing you or a thousand Emily Goods have to say.

 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Louise Wu on July 21, 2011 at 8:23pm

I am saddened by the personal tone of your message.  But I do understand that you have some strong feelings about it all.  Thanks for your reply.  I appreciate the time and care you've taken with this discussion today.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by ShannonG on July 22, 2011 at 6:57am

And I am saddened by your condescending "understanding" of my feelings. You don't have a clue as to why some of us feel the way we do, you have demonstrated that throughout this thread. Everything about this is personal. It is good ot have all these difference of opinions but I truly do not think that Emily Good did a constructive thing, I think she made things worse and she drew the focus of what really needs to get done here to herself and her suspect agenda.

I will never feel good about that. I don't feel good about any of this. People like her don't help.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Louise Wu on July 22, 2011 at 8:36am

So you don't feel strongly about all this?  I guess it is kind of confusing?  I'm trying to be respectful and validate your feelings.   If it seemed condescending, I apologize.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by John Boutet on July 22, 2011 at 4:17pm

Shannon and Louise (Spelling corrected),

It is nice to see so much passion for improving the neighborhood being poured into this "Meeting attendance - important or not!?" discussion.  I think you are both making a strong case for answering that question in the affirmative.  There is much to be said for talking face to face when communicating with people, particularly if people don't know each other or are in disagreement on an issue.  Discussion forums such as this can be useful for a community to exchange ideas but are very poor substitute for face to face discussion of controversial issues.  Once a discussion gets adversarial it becomes almost impossible for thoughts we express in writing to not be misinterpreted by the person we disagree with and vice versa.  I think it is time for a few of the people who have been expressing passionate opposing views to get together one on one or in small groups, with a mediator if needed, to get to know each other and explore how to channel this energy for our common good.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Louise Wu on July 22, 2011 at 5:16pm

That's a really nice offer John.  Thanks for thinking of it.  I'd be glad to sit down and talk with folks anytime!

 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by John Boutet on July 21, 2011 at 5:57pm

Getting back to the "Meeting attendance - important or not!?" topic that this discussion is about...  I know everyone can't attend all the meeting.  That is one reason I have been pushing people to post informative minutes in a timely fashion so those who can't attend can learn what is going on. 

When people do come to meetings it is importent they try to be ther for the whole meeting.  If they only come when they think their issue is up for discussion, or even worse, leave as soon as the next agenda item comes up it leave me irritated.  I can excuse this when an official or someone else who has 3 meetings that night sandwiches stopping by to share a presentation at our meeting then has to go on to another meeting.  For community members who live in the community they have a need to know ALL the issues that are considered important to the people there.   Coming late and leaving early is counterproductive in at least three way.  1) It deprive them of a full understanding of the range of issues people in the community will prioritize as they address the most pressing ones first that they think they can impact.  2) Coming late and leaving early gives the impression that the person only cares about their agenda and does not care about everyone else's issues. 3)  They don't get a chance to establish the interpersonal relationships needed to get people to know them.  Talking to people after the meeting is sometimes more important that the meeting discussion itself.

Unfortunately we saw some of that behavior at both the meeting where the eviction was discussed and at the meeting where the Emily Good arrest and the subsequent ticketing at a support rally was discussed. 

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• Next ›
• Page