Joe’s Crab Shack apologizes for using photo of lynching as table decor

[kpete]

According to the Minneapolis NAACP, Tyrone Williams and Chauntyll Allen were preparing to dine at Joe's Crab Shack Wednesday night when they noticed a photo embedded inside the table. It appears to show a large group of white people watching a public execution of at least one black person. On the bottom of the picture, it reads: "Hanging at Groesbeck, Texas on April 12th 1895." At the top, the caption reads, "All I said was that I didn't like the gumbo."
(Photo: KARE)


Allen said she could not believe the image was used so casually.

"Seeing a picture of two black men being lynched was the last thing that I expected to see at what was supposed to be a family-friendly restaurant," Allen said.

Nekima Levy-Pounds, President of the Minneapolis NAACP, said the incident "demonstrates that racism is still alive and well in this country."

"It is sickening to know that someone would make a mockery of black men being savagely lynched and then use that imagery for decorative purposes in a restaurant," Levy-Pounds said in a statement.

MORE:
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation-now/2016/03/11/joes-crab-shack-lynching-photo-texas-hanging-table-decor/81633822/

[DesMoinesDem]

1. Why is he calling it a lynching when the person was hanged as punishment for murder?

[pipoman]

2. Texas doesn't have the best 19th century history on such things.

It probably went something like this...."ol'edddy was keeled!"...."who wooda hurt ol'eddy?"...."look there, them n----z look'n this way"...."git a rope....."...."string'em up, it'll teach'em a lessn"....

Yeah, 19th century Texas justice should probably be viewed with incredulity....not comedy

[othermeans]

15. Copy of the appeal Burleson v. the State of Texas

Not a defender of the death penalty then or now. But it wasn't a lynching. The murder occurred in May 1894 the man was executed in April 1895.

Appellant was convicted of murder in the first degree and his punishment fixed at death, from which he appeals.

The court did not err in overruling the motion for a continuance. There is not the slightest diligence shown by appellant in procuring the attendance of the absent witnesses. The homicide occurred May 2, 1894, and on the same day appellant was arrested and placed in jail in a neighboring county. On August 9th an indictment was found, and upon the 20th of August he was brought back to Limestone County for trial, and counsel was appointed by the court. The case was called for trial on September 3rd; no subpœna or other process was demanded or issued. Appellant claims in his application that he won the money found on his person at the time of his arrest, at gaming, from two other negroes who passed by while he was at work. That he had never seen them before nor since; nor did he know their names or hear them name each other; nor did he know where they lived. The money so found corresponded with that seen in possession of deceased immediately before the homicide. We think the application presents neither diligence nor sufficient grounds for a continuance. But apart from the improbability of the statement, appellant admits on trial, that when he was first arrested he denied having any money in his possession, and when the money was found he claimed to have gotten it from his employer, and when this was shown to be false, claimed he got from his wife, and not until the trial does he claim to have won the money from two strangers. We do not think the court erred in overruling the motion for a continuance.

The testimony is circumstantial, but is sufficient to sustain the verdict. It shows that deceased was in possession of money, and defendant was present and saw the money when deceased paid for some purchases. Deceased started out southeast from town and was followed by defendant, who lived west from town, and the parties were seen three miles from town, the defendant still following deceased, who was driving a wagon, and defendant on foot with a rock in his hand. Deceased was murdered and robbed. Shortly after, and on the same day, defendant was arrested, and money corresponding with that seen in possession of deceased shortly before was found on defendant, who denied he had any money, and then gave conflicting accounts; and upon clothes found at his house were fresh blood-spots. The record presents a cold, bloody murder, for the purpose of robbery.

The judgment is affirmed.

Affirmed.

[philosslayer]

3. The word "lynch" by itself doesn't have a racial component

The definition is to kill someone, usually by hanging, without a trial. It's basically the definition of an extra-judicial hanging.

[DesMoinesDem]

6. Right, but this isnt an extra-judicial hanging. Lynch is being used

as if it is the exact same thing as hang. This was not a picture of a lynching.

[yellowcanine]

8. But the caption "All I said was that I didn't like the gumbo." suggests otherwise......

The picture itself may be of a legal public hanging. The caption turns it into something else entirely. Whoever put together this little piece of "table art" seems to be depicting it as a lynching.

[backscatter712]

9. Here in the U.S., the association's pretty strong.

Granted, lots of people of all colors have been lynched, but all over the country, especially in the Deep South, it was black people who got the vast majority of lynchings. At the hands of those nice guys in the white robes with the pointy hoods.

[Bestuserever]

16. Today it is used to describe interracial hangings

Although originally it was used for a Va judge who imprisoned (mostly if not entirely white) British Loyalists. It's not exactly clear how it came to be applied for hangings of blacks.

[demwing]

4. I thought the same thing, then wondered...

Who the hell thought a photo of an execution-legal or not-was appropriate family dinner decor?

[Coventina]

5. Exactly. Geez.

[mountain grammy]

18. No kidding!

Are there photos of firing squads and electric chairs too? From the Attila the Hun school of restaurant decor? This has nothing to do with being politically correct, just human decency.

[LanternWaste]

12. Why would either a visual of a lynching or a hanging be considered pleasing during a meal?

Why would either a visual of a lynching or a hanging be considered pleasing during a meal? Regardless, if you're curious as to why he called it a specific something, wouldn't he be the individual to ask...?

(see, we can both miss the larger point while wallowing in irrelevancies)

[DesMoinesDem]

14. I never said it was pleasant.

If I was face to face with the guy I would ask him why he called it a lynching. But Im not so I will ask the question on a discussion board in a thread about him calling it a lynching. If you think it is irrelevant you can move on.

[Nitram]

7. Yuck.

[max blancke]

10. Not a lynching.

SIMKINS, JUDGE.

Appellant was convicted of murder in the first degree and his punishment fixed at death, from which he appeals.

The court did not err in overruling the motion for a continuance. There is not the slightest diligence shown by appellant in procuring the attendance of the absent witnesses. The homicide occurred May 2, 1894, and on the same day appellant was arrested and placed in jail in a neighboring county. On August 9th an indictment was found, and upon the 20th of August he was brought back to Limestone County for trial, and counsel was appointed by the court. The case was called for trial on September 3rd; no subpœna or other process was demanded or issued. Appellant claims in his application that he won the money found on his person at the time of his arrest, at gaming, from two other negroes who passed by while he was at work. That he had never seen them before nor since; nor did he know their names or hear them name each other; nor did he know where they lived. The money so found corresponded with that seen in possession of deceased immediately before the homicide. We think the application presents neither diligence nor sufficient grounds for a continuance. But apart from the improbability of the statement, appellant admits on trial, that when he was first arrested he denied having any money in his possession, and when the money was found he claimed to have gotten it from his employer, and when this was shown to be false, claimed he got from his wife, and not until the trial does he claim to have won the money from two strangers. We do not think the court erred in overruling the motion for a continuance.

The testimony is circumstantial, but is sufficient to sustain the verdict. It shows that deceased was in possession of money, and defendant was present and saw the money when deceased paid for some purchases. Deceased started out southeast from town and was followed by defendant, who lived west from town, and the parties were seen three miles from town, the defendant still following deceased, who was driving a wagon, and defendant on foot with a rock in his hand. Deceased was murdered and robbed. Shortly after, and on the same day, defendant was arrested, and money corresponding with that seen in possession of deceased shortly before was found on defendant, who denied he had any money, and then gave conflicting accounts; and upon clothes found at his house were fresh blood-spots. The record presents a cold, bloody murder, for the purpose of robbery.

The judgment is affirmed.

Affirmed.

DAVIDSON, Judge, absent.

[cyberswede]

11. An execution is no better, frankly.

It's insensitive to display an image like that, regardless.

[LanternWaste]

13. That makes it somehow more decorative?

That makes it somehow more decorative? Or does it change the fundamental aspect of the story, the action and the reaction?

[Bestuserever]

17. Using a hanging as comedy and decoration is still pretty nasty