I hesitate to give this terrible article by Neal Rubin in Detroit News any additional clicks, but here is my initial respose. He basically tries to rewrite the Vincent Chin case based on no new evidence and much mistaken and false information. Go to my other blog, RememberingVincentChin.com for more up to date information.
Hey Neal Rubin, According to the juror interviewed in the Academy Award winning documentary, "Who Killed Vincent Chin?" the jurors in Detroit federal trial found Ms. Racine Colwell to be THE most credible witness in the whole trial. You also forgot about the part where Ebens and Nitz paid Jimmy Perry $20 to help them hunt down "the Chinaman," before finally finding him at the McDonald's. Yes, Ronald Ebens was employed at Chrysler at the time (and Nitz had recently been laid off)--that was one of the reasons cited by Judge Kaufmann for the lenient sentence, that having a job gives one license to kill--but that does not mean that this case still was not all about race. Rather than relying on random third-hand information for a convoluted argument, you should do some research before launching your revisionist history and irresponsible journalism. The Michigan State Bar has deemed this case a Michigan Legal Milestone. You should talk to them.
--Frances Kai-Hwa Wang
Here is Neal Rubin's terrible article in The Detroit News (Note: the content has been changed several times since first publication April 29, 2014, 1:03 am ish without any editor's notes regarding the updates):
What we all assume we know about the Vincent Chin case probably isn't so | The Detroit News
And here is the almost as terrible article by Charlie LeDuff in the New York Times that started it all with a careless offhand comment re the Vincent Chin case:
A Beating in Detroit - NYTimes.com