When I read C's comment on Mishka Zena's blog about his challenge about court cases involving deaf people and whether or not they got favorable results, I can think of one. I wrote a paper about him- Donald Lang. It's difficult to get information, but I was fortunate to find an out-of-print copy of "Dummy"(non-fiction) by Ernest Tidyman who did research about Donald Lang and the trial. Donald Lang is African-American, deaf, and mental retarded. He was taken out of school at 2 1/2 years old,and never returned to school. He was kept at home 'til his mom died. The book also provided much background, court appointments/trials and what happened to him in the aftermath. From what I remember, Donald Lang was a suspect in a murder of a woman (due to finding blood on some of his clothes left in his closet) However, due to him not knowing how to speak or even sign or write/read, they couldn't really "talk" with him. He DID gesture about stabbing someone, but the question begged, ...did he SEE someone stabbing the woman or did he stab the woman himself? The lawyer was even deaf, Lowell Myers. He managed to convince the judge to send Donald Lang to a mental hospital in hopes that he would learn sign language. That would help them then try him in trial. He didn't learn much sign language- they felt that his age (20 years old) was too late to learn any type of communication. After six years, they let him go. In a year or so, I believe, there was a murdered woman near where Donald Lang worked. At one time when detectives tried to "interview" Donald Lang- he did his best as I'll read you the paragraph (page 182-183)
"Again, Bertucci(detective) read Donald his rights and again, Donald stared blankly at him. Bertucci then took out his pen and wrote several questions on a piece of paper in large, block letters:
DO YOU READ AND WRITE? DO YOU UNDERSTAND ENGLISH?
Donald grabbed the pen from Bertucci's hand, picked up a blank piece of paper from a table and drew a picture with quick strokes of the pen. It was a curious drawing- crude yet somehow terribly expressive. He drew a jagged line in a shape of a stick and a stick figure. After finishing the stick figure, he pointed to himself, indiciating that he was that figure. at the opposite end of the first jagged line, he drew another stick figure with a curly mass of lines at the top to indicate hair. He made a gesture with his cupped hands to pantomime breasts. The drawing was clear to the policemen. A man and a woman- Donald Lang and "Jane Doe." Donald then drew a jagged, steplike line toward the top of the page, perpendicular to the first line. At the top of these "stairs", he drew a big X. He paused for a moment, looked at the men around him, held up three figures, pointed at the figure of the woman and then crossed the woman out with another large X.
It was an eerie experience. The officers stared at the drawing, not quite knowing what to make of it. They had the feeling that they were looking at the story of a crime, but how to interpret it? Was it a confession? What was the significance of the three fingers Donald had held up? Ther was no answer. The men placed their initials on the drawing..."
A detective took the drawing in for inventoried, as another detective noticed there was some brown strains on one of Donald's socks. When they came back to look, the strain wasn't visible.
I'd like to read you this part in the book that made me nod in agreement. After Donald Lang was found guilty, they had a sentencing then.
"State's Attorney Kavanaugh rose and turned to the Bench. "Your Honor, the defendant, Donald Lang, stands here before this court, tried by twelve jurors. He has been found guilty of the crime of murder, the most serious crime known to man.
There has been much comment and conversation in this case concerning Donald Lang's condition, and that Donald Lang is to be looked upon with pity and mercy because of his affliction. Indeed, any rational human being thinks about his affliction with a sense of pity. However, we often neglect to think about the suffering of the victims of crime, in this case; Earline Brown. No comment is usually made about the murdered dead, since they are not around to tell us of the anguish and suffering which occurred to the at the time their life was being taken from them. Earline Brown had a right to live, as much as anybody in this courtroom. And, for that death, which the defendant has been found guilty of beyond a reasonable doubt, the State would recommend to this court a period of incarceration in the Illinois State Penitentiary for no less than 40 nor more than 80 years."
Donald's lawyer said, "We are not asking for pity or mercy from this court because of Donald's condition. The State attempted to show motive for this alleged murder, that Donald Lang hired the services of a prostitute, that he went to the Viceroy Hotel with her and that she attempted to "rip him off" either to take his money without the service, to perhaps demand more money, or to steal any money Donald might have had on him. This is the motive the State presented to the jury. Now, they are asking this court to send him away for forty to eighty years because perhaps he was defending himself.
"Now, here is a man that has been diagnosed all of his life- he has never been really treated, he has just been diagnosed. If he had as much treatment as he had diagnosis, perhaps he wouldn't be here today, perhaps he could have gotten up on the stand and explained what did occur in that room, perhaps it would have amounted to justifiable homicide, or perhaps manslaughter. We don't know. We are asking the court to take his inability to defend himself into consideration. Not for mercy, not for pity; he has had too much pity. We are asking the court to give him the benefit of the doubt... that he went up there...that he was about to be ripped off...and that he was defending himself. He could not yell for help. Perhaps it was self-defense and he had to defend himself. He had nowhere to yell to, no one to yell to, no way to yell.
"This man may be trainable. We have met in chambers with officials of the Illinois Department of Corrections, and we know that they will set up a program where Donald may be trained. It may well be that he will never be trained. Everyone who has diagnosed his condition has said that he is untrainable; yet we know that he can hold a job, we know that this man is so "untrainable" has learned to live in society, in the ghetto, for twenty-five years and hold a year, even though he is totally illiterate. We are dealing with a capable man, we are dealing with a man who must return to society before he is an old man. We are dealing with a man that must be given a chance to live and die in society, not in prison. I humbly urge this court to impose a minimum sentence of 14 years and a maximum sentence of 16 years. Thank you."
In the end, they figured that it would be cruel to him to put him in jail. They had him taken to Joilet Reception Diagnostic and Special Center to stay for between 14-25 years. At this time, he is released from that mental institution and now lives in a mental institution where he is allowed to work (seems he LOVES to work and be useful) as well as have some freedoms. In this case, I believe he had gotten favorable results due to his deafness, mental retardation and limited communications if any. AND this happened in 1972. Yes there were interpreters in court, there was several psychologists and mental health counselors speaking up about his diagnosis and what they found about Donald's mental, physical and emotional abilities. I don't know about you, but to me, wow... 1972 and they tried to be fair with the guy, because of his inability to speak up for himself (while Daphne Wright was ABLE to speak up for herself if she desired), they tried to help him by giving him opportunities to learn how to learn sign language or at least give him access (while Daphne was able to communicate with interpreters.)
In my perception, they didn't use the "deaf card" or "pity card"..they UNDERSTOOD his inability to understand right and wrong, his incapability to communicate either by speaking, signing or writing and his limitations in what he can do and what he can't, especially with growing up in an hostile neighborhood (ghetto), he survived by having a full-time job (and very helpful and useful as his employers reported at court) and not having ANY method of communication, being the only deaf and mental retarded African-American man at that time and in that neighborhood (that had been popular with rapes, drug abuse, robbery, mugging and murders.)
In some ways, I have to admire that he managed to survive all through that before the murder of the women, and for me to be amazed that Chicago courts actually went out of their way to ensure that the trial was "fair as possible." Did I say that it happened in 1972?
5 comments:
hi,
I remember seeing a movie when I was very young about this man. And thank you for bringing this up because this has been buggin me since I was about 9 years old...
I wondered what happened and why he got off then go back.. It was a lot of stuff for a 9 yr old with no captions back then...
I guess this is the reason why I am fascinated with court how Deaf get treated fair or unfair.
Thanks for this...
It was 1984, in summer. I was in Chicago visiting the Deaf club on a vacation trip with my family including my toddler daughter.
A friend at the club pointed out Donald Lang to me. Donald was there on a scheduled visit with his social worker aide. I looked at him sitting by himself, not communicating, but watching what was happening.
My friend said, "That's "Dummy" from the book. The same one that Lowell Myers, the deaf lawyer, defended. He's out of jail and in a day program."
I had read the book, and had spent several years working with people like Donald, so went to him to start small talk. I began with gestures, feeling out what little signs he knew.
He was responsive, his language indeed limited, but he was alert and appreciative of the attention. I don't remember what we said, as it was small talk. I did not get a feeling of whether he was a murderer, nor that he was aware that I knew of his past imprisonment. He was sociable and even friendly.
My little one just then reached over a pool table and picked up two of the balls. She ran away, knocking the balls together with glee. Donald went after her and I quickly went after him, not sure what would happen. He stopped her and gently took the balls. He mimed, no hit balls, ball flat, and placed them back on the table.
My impression? He was no different than the people I had worked with. He can learn. He can communicate, though in a very basic way. Whether he could tell past from present, or tell where he was the day before, was hard to tell. Whether he knew the truth from a lie, I could not say. However, he appeared to know survival skills, and had some street smarts.
There are more Donald Langs out there. Chicago has been decent to this one, even trying to integrate him with other Deaf people after his release from prison.
There are still unanswered questions: are we doing enough? Are we reaching all of them, or are some still alone on the streets and in institutions, depending on street smarts and people around them?
Are the needs of society being served when these adults are turned out on the streets?
Yes, Dianez, that's the question, isn't it? I remember a deaf and mental retarded client that came to an agency where I worked. He never had been exposed to deaf community, even less sign language. He was in his 50's. No one knew about him until the police called the agency. Seems the cops found him hiding in the house after his father (in his 70's or 80s) died of a heart attack. Never learned to write, read or even speak. I am not with that agency now, however I do check for updates about that client- it has been 8 years, he learned signs, yes. But no one knows if he really UNDERSTANDS what the signs are for- he'd mimic staff and clients whenever they sign, so. Nevertheless, that was in late 90's, I have always wondered "Before all this, hadn't anyone checked on him? Schools? Social workers? Government? Even IRS? (even if his dad entered him as a dependent on his tax form) Why didn't anyone LOOK?"
So like you asked, "Are we doing enough?" I cannot lie and say "yes." There are a lot of unknown Donald Langs out there.
I was just reading the information and comments that you have posted. I want to say that Lang should have been treated like any other criminal; however, he was not. Lang was not convicted of his murders nor was he sentenced appropriately for the crimes he allegedly committed. Lang murdered my grandmother. It is a well known fact in my family, due to the fact that he was known in the neighborhood. My grandmother had three children at the time she was murdered. The youngest was only 12. My family still mourns over her death. Earline Brown, was a prostitute but she was also a single black mother struggling to take care of her children and grandchildren. She was an upstanding mother and grandmother. Do not sympathize with Lang...he was a killer.
Ann Brown
I just finished reading Dummy. It took some searching to track this book down. I knew of the Donald Lang case but not any real details. I am interested in knowing if there is any more recent info published about him. I was enrolled in an interpreter training program in the 80,s. One of my teachers was interpreting for Donald Lang. I am not sure if the case had actually been appealed and reopened or if it was under consideration to be reopened. At any rate, Donald Lang was sitting next to me in the courtroom. He was obiviously no longer in jail. I know that he had "outings" with his therapist. I had met his therapist at a Chicago Deaf Club meeting some months before. Does anyone have any recent information about the status of his case?
Post a Comment