Uncle Ruckus's nephew experiences the "new professionalism"


find me a tampon
Jul 20, 2002
Orange County, CA
A nephew of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas suffered a seizure after he was beaten during a scuffle with security guards in the emergency room of a New Orleans area hospital, relatives alleged Friday.

Derek Thomas, 25, was immobilized with a stun gun Thursday when hospital security tried to prevent him from leaving West Jefferson Medical Center in Marrero, La., according to an account his sister, Kimberly Thomas, provided to WDSU, a local television station.

Kimberly Thomas said security officers used the device, possibly a Taser, to immobilize her brother. "One of the security guards punched him in the lip," she told WDSU. "Another one pulled out more than a fist full of his hair and, from that point, they [shocked] him."

Thomas has epilepsy, she said, and suffered a seizure shortly after the stun gun was used.

Their mother, Dora Thomas, confirmed the account in an interview with The Washington Post. She said she picked her son up from the hospital on Friday and he is resting at home.

"He's okay," she said. "He's as well as can be expected."

Clarence Thomas is upset about the incident and is planning to go to New Orleans to check on his nephew, perhaps as soon as Friday, Kimberly Thomas told the television station. Dora Thomas declined to comment on her brother-in-law's travel plans.


Square that with this:

Back in 1992, just after joining the court, Thomas dissented in the 7-2 decision that upheld a $800 award for damages for a Louisiana inmate who, from behind his locked cell, argued with a prison guard. Three guards took the inmate out of his cell, put him in handcuffs and shackles, and dragged him to a hallway where they beat him so badly that he suffered a cracked dental plate.

The lower court ruled that the beating had nothing to do with acceptable prison discipline. But Thomas all but laughed off the beating, saying the injuries were ''minor.'' Thomas said the ''use of force that causes only insignificant harm to a prisoner may be immoral, it may be tortious, it may be criminal, and it may even be remediable under other provisions of the Federal Constitution, but it is not `cruel and unusual punishment.'''