James Davis -- Part 1

James Davis served in the CRS Office of Technical Assistance as an Administration of Justice Specialist from 1985 - 1992.

There are 2 parts of this interview and a summary: Part 1, Part 2, and Davis Summary.>. This is Part 1.

Play YouTube Video

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hUPosZH5CbA

 

Bill Froehlich (00:00:00): So today is January 5th, 2022. And I'm here with James A. Davis to continue the Civil Rights Oral History Project update. And James, just for the record, would you mind introducing yourself and spelling your name for us?

James Davis (00:00:20): Ok. Yes. Bill, my name is James A. Davis, D A V I S. And I'm a resident of Rayford, North Carolina, in the county of Hope where I'm the retired sheriff.

Bill Froehlich (00:00:38): Good, thank you. And, we've talked before... you don't mind if I call you Jim, is that right?

James Davis (00:00:43): That's right. Thank you.

Bill Froehlich (00:00:44): Wonderful Jim. Well, you wrote in your email a little bit about...when you worked at CRS. If you could get this formality out of the way and just describe the timeline in which you worked at CRS and the role or roles you held while you were at CRS.

James Davis (00:01:04): Ok. I came to CRS in 1985. I was assigned to CRS from the assistant attorney general... from justice management division. I was serving there as a system security specialist at Interpol and, I was working on a project, project 80, which was actually...an acquisition project for computer hardware software for the Department of Justice, that ended in 85. And, the assistant attorney, general for JMD assigned me to CRS as a transition and Gil Pompa was the director at the time. And... he put me in... an office of technical assistance, in support, OTAS ... as one of the administration of justice specialists. And that was in 1985. And I, retired from CRS in 1992.

Bill Froehlich (00:02:27): Ok. Now there were a couple of terms that you used that I just wanna make sure we clarify. One was Interpol

James Davis (00:02:34): Interpol, it's the international police organization.

Bill Froehlich (00:02:38): Ok, very good. And then the assistant attorney general that assigned you, you said assistant attorney general for JFD can fill us in?

James Davis (00:02:47): The JMD, justice management division.

Bill Froehlich (00:02:50): Thank you. See I got it wrong. So assistant attorney general for JMD. Thank you. All right. And in your assignment as providing technical assistance...what was your role? What was your job duty?

James Davis (00:03:07): Ok. I was ...one of the administration of justice specialists and we provided technical assistance to field staff conciliators and mediators... that were working case work in the field... that involved law enforcement activity or criminal justice concerns, and they needed technical assistance from someone that had law enforcement backgrounds to assist them with the case work.

Bill Froehlich (00:03:41): Very good. Thank you. So before ...we dig into your CRS career, could you Jim, tell me a little bit about your career trajectory prior to coming to CRS?

James Davis (00:03:52): Sure. Well started my law enforcement career right out of the military. First, I was recruited into the general services administration, as a United States special police officer. I... served there shortly...for a short period of time. I wanted to be a street patrolman. So I took the test for the Washington DC Metropolitan Police Department and was accepted, went through basic training and signed foot patrol up in the old number six precinct in Washington, DC. They don't have foot patrols anymore, but after working foot patrol for a while, I was assigned a plain clothed assignment, in the fourth district and later promoted to an... Criminal investigator detective. I was there for several years, but I met the United States Marshall for the District of Columbia in a court proceeding.

James Davis (00:05:10): And he invited me to apply for Deputy United States Marshal position. So I applied for the position and was accepted and became a Deputy United States Marshal in 1971. And worked in the DC field office, serving the District of Columbia superior court and the United States District Court in Washington, DC at every level. Stayed there for about eight years, got promoted to the federal law enforcement training center at Glenco, Georgia in 1978 as an instructor...as a United States Marshal service basic training instructor. And, I stayed there for a year and, I was brought back... to the justice management division to be cross trained as a system security specialist for the justice management division. Then I was assigned to Interpol and to this procurement assignment that we talked about in project 80 and I worked there from 1979 to 1985 and then I was sent to CRS.

Bill Froehlich (00:06:49): Now you also mentioned beginning of the call that you're a retired sheriff. I assume that took place after CRS, so if you could briefly talk about the work you did after CRS as well.

James Davis (00:07:03): Well, like I say, I retired from CRS in, in 92. I actually started a nonprofit with my church in Bladensburg, Maryland. We started a 501-C-3 with my church in the community of Bladensburg, Maryland to rehabilitate the Anacostia, river. Ok. So...I did that for several years and I was being vetted for the presidential appointment with the Clinton administration, to become the United States Marshal for the district of Maryland. And the Senate, while the president sent my name to the Senate for confirmation, the Senate during that time. Like they did with the President Biden, they held those nominations for marshals and US attorneys. So, I got frustrated with the vetting process there and return decided to return to my home state.

James Davis (00:08:25): So I came back home to North Carolina to Rayford. And I started a nonprofit here. My pastor in Maryland took over the nonprofit that I had in Washington at the church. And I started, a community development corporation here in Hope county in 95. And the citizens, of course being born and raised here, they knew of my background in law enforcement and they asked me to run for sheriff... in the 1998 election cycle. So, based on my community service and my nonprofit activity, I was elected sheriff in 1998 and I served a term. I was injured on duty and in 2002 and I was retired. So... I'm blessed to continue to work with the community and serve at many levels. And ... I serve as the chairman of the ninth congressional district for the North Carolina Democratic party now.

Bill Froehlich (00:09:57): I'm sorry to hear about your injury while you were in service and thanks for all the service you've given to CRS and the various places where you've lived Jim. So I want to go now to your career in CRS. I'd love it, If you wouldn't mind, talking through one of your cases with us. Perhaps one that's more interesting or more challenging to give a sense of what your role was, what you did in providing technical assistance and what resulted from your involvement. Can you give us a little background about a case you might be thinking about

James Davis (00:10:35): You know, again, during my time at CRS...I had the opportunity to come back to North Carolina on several cases. Ok. And one particular case was closer to my home county than the others. Okay. My home county is Hope county. I was... I think it was 1998, 1988 February. No, it was February, 1989. Two young, Native Americans took the newspaper, the Robesonian in Robinson county, the next county over, hostage. And, as I said before, when I came to CRS, Gil Pompa wanted me to be cross trained in hostage negotiation and barricade subject activity. So of course, when this newspaper were taken hostage down here in North Carolina, Mr. Pompa sent me down to work with the mediator conciliator that they sent up from region four in Atlanta.

James Davis (00:12:08): So the mediator, the conciliator, came up to the hostage negotiation scene from Atlanta. I came down from Washington DC, of course, the FBI came down to be part of the negotiation process. And of course we worked to get the hostage situation resolved. It was resolved without anybody getting hurt. We got the hostages out and we got the hostage taken into custody. And of course this event was a day and a half long. The... hostage takers gave us their demands. And of course, the demands that they gave us, gave us the indication of what resulted in them taking the newspaper hostage. Ok. They was trying to bring attention to the fact that you, that Robinson county at that time was a tri-racial county, that the minority races felt disenfranchised. And...racially profiled by the law enforcement of the county, which was the Sheriff's office. They felt that several people had been taken, had been missing or killed, and the county wasn't doing anything about it. And that the black residents and the native American residents were locked out of the political process. Okay. So of course... Can I name the conciliator that was sent up?

Bill Froehlich (00:14:06): That's up to you. You're welcome to name the conciliator if you're comfortable with it, you know, I can't give advice on CRS's confidentiality statute. We can always take it out at a later date, or if the conciliator was mentioned in a news article that's public record.

James Davis (00:14:27): Ok... In that, the incident was a national reported incident and... all of the agencies and agents involved were named in all of the reportings. The conciliator that came up initially was Claude Hall from Atlanta. Claude and I worked ... with the FBI to help get the hostages released and the hostage takers arrested. Ok. But like I said, one of the demands was that the hostage takers wanted governor Jim Martin, who was the governor of North Carolina at the time to start a special investigation around the concerns that they had about the disenfranchment of the minority races and the conduct or the illegalities that they felt was going on in the Sheriff's office. So, one of the things that we did as a team, Claude Hall and myself, we contacted the governor's office and encouraged the governor's office to try to help us, fulfill the demands around creating an investigation around the concerns being raised by the hostage takers.

James Davis (00:15:59): Of course that was agreed to. We got the hostage takers out and... of course, this incident caused real concern in the community. So in order to address... the issues that were being raised in the community around the public official neglecting their disenfranchisement of the minority citizens, we called a meeting of all of the elected officials at the county level and every municipality. And... We met with them in a room to help them help us understand what.. One, their concerns were. Two, how they could assist us in addressing the issues that were being raised by these young men that took the Robertsonian hostage and how we as the community relation service could assist them as public officials. Resolved some of the issues that were being addressed by the hostage takers.

James Davis (00:17:21): So again, we went out into the field, met with community leaders, not public officials, but community leaders, got good information from them. And, what resulted was the county agreed to establish a tri-racial human relations commission to address the social issues that were being raised. The governor, agreed to establish... an investigation around the allegations that were being made by the hostage takers and the community leaders within the county. And, in reporting the incident to the justice department, to the attorney General's office... the United States government created enterprise zones and Robinson county became the first of several enterprise zones that was created by the United States government to provide financial resources to minority communities and entrepreneurs from an economic standpoint. So... It was a very... and all of this happened over a period of time, Bill. But the outcome was so dramatic and so affected effective, that it lasted more than 20 years. Ok. The kinds of growth and prosperity... All of that resulted... in equal representation in government.

James Davis (00:19:34): You had a Native American...elected as sheriff immediately. You had black and Native Americans, elected to public office, the county commissioners. And you had minorities elected in several of the municipalities as mayors and city council folk. So the level of disenfranchisement that were being portrayed back when these two Native American board took this newspaper hostage... it was a totally turnaround. And, of course, the progress that were made then still exists today, almost 30 years later.

Bill Froehlich (00:20:34): Incredible... The outcomes here that you're listing. Of having the local human rights commission, the governor's commission connection to the enterprise zones, indigenous elected sheriff, diverse elected local officials. It seems there are ... so many outcomes that lasted and made this a more durable result of... the events that you were involved with. So I do wonder how did you interface with the FBI negotiators? Because you had the training in hostage negotiation. How did you interface with the FBI's negotiators in the process? ... Were you primarily working with the political parties, and they were working directly with the hostage taker, or were you working with the hostage taker directly?

James Davis (00:21:30): Ok. Now I was trained, I was a FBI hostage negotiation. I trained with the FBI. Ok. So, they recognized my role as a part of their hostage negotiation team. But... I was not dialoging with the hostage takers. One of the agents from the bureau was dialoging with them as we were, I guess, providing technical assistance in terms of information from the community and relaying that information. I ... was a conduit from a communication standpoint, communicating with community leaders and the governor's office and the state representative based on what was being said to the negotiators that was inside... We had a command post that was inside the command post communicating with the host detective on the inside of the newspaper.

James Davis (00:22:43): I guess we had a three or four way communication network going on at the time. But again... there was no shots fired. There was no one injured and all of the hostage hostages were released. And... it was more, I believe I never talked to Ed Hatcher, Timothy Jacobs personally, but I believe that they were more afraid for themselves than they were being made afraid of by the hostage takers. They were young, while they did have weapons. I don't believe that they would've used those weapons because ... this was an act of desperation. That's what it was.

Bill Froehlich (00:23:47): And the two individuals were named those were the hostage takers, correct?

James Davis (00:23:52): Yes.

Bill Froehlich (00:23:54): Could you say their names one more time for the recording?

James Davis (00:23:58): Eddie Hatcher and Timothy Jacobs. I think Eddie has passed since that time, but I think Timothy is still incarcerated.

Bill Froehlich (00:24:11): Ok. Thank you. Thank you for sharing this, I had no idea that CRS was involved in events like this, but it makes sense, given the tensions connected to race and ethnicity, here in this scenario. So I want to take you back to the beginning. Yeah, go ahead.

James Davis (00:24:34): Well, you know, and ... you had the community tension going on at that time regarding that incident, but then as we left that incident and as I came back to Washington, now this was in February. Ok. I think in early March, one of the leading indigenous folks that were running for a judgeship against the local district attorney was shot and killed. Ok. So I had to go the attorney general sent me back to North Carolina to see what was going on with that. And then Bob Easily and Claude Hall, these two conciliators from Atlanta came up to Robinson County to work with me in trying to understand what had transpired with that. So this entire Robinson County community was really with the concern because, you know, you had folks thinking that it may have been that this indigenous person running for a judgeship may have been killed because of what had happened with the hostage taking situation and what.. was related to it, or he was killed because he had the audacity to run for a judgeship against the very popular district attorney that had been in office for more than 20 years and had a reputation of being... his name was Joe Freeman Britt.

James Davis (00:26:40): And he was in the Guinness book of Records for having the most convictions of individuals on death row. Ok. Putting more people on death row than anybody else in the country as a district attorney. So this Native American is running against him in the election, which was the primary was in either March or April of this year and we had to monitor the election process because of ... the death of this candidate and believe it or not Bill, he won the election as a deceased person.

Bill Froehlich (00:27:38): Wow. Wow. And who took us place on the ballot?

James Davis (00:27:43): ....The governor appointed a Native American... to serve in that post.

Bill Froehlich (00:27:52): Okay. That's incredible. So I want to stick with this sequence of events and you played a role in the negotiation in addressing community tension, getting the neighborhood leaders and the political folks on board to move forward. You played a role in going back down after the shooting of the indigenous candidate. And you played a role in monitoring the elections moving forward. So when you were called to go back after the indigenous candidate was killed.

James Davis (00:28:27): Yeah.

Bill Froehlich (00:28:27): Tell me, did you do anything to prepare to go to that case or because you had already been in North Carolina, the preparation was simple. I know what's going on here. I've been monitoring,

James Davis (00:28:43): So, no. Not only that, but the timeframe was so short. I mean, it was almost like a turnaround. Was able to get home for two or three days or maybe a week. I can't remember right now what the spacing was, but it was a very short turnaround, you know, I had filed my report on the harshes taken of course, the government had taken the action around the enterprise zone designation, and all of a sudden hear this major incident again in Robinson county. So...I had been down there... I was familiar with all of the players, from an official standpoint. So, it made my job that much easier going back, trying to get a better feel for what was going on around now, this murder.

Bill Froehlich (00:29:42): So in a typical case, what would you do to prepare, once you were asked to provide technical assistance in Miami, or Atlanta, or Seattle, what would you to go out technical assistance in a case?

James Davis (00:30:01): Well, of course, if it was a,.... regular case work assignment, I would find out from the conciliator or mediator involved, what their specific needs would be, whether it was, a training mission, where they would need some, technical assistance in developing, models, for the training. If it was a resource that they needed in terms of identifying a specialist that was in the law enforcement arena, to address specific issues... From a documentation standpoint, if they needed documents developed or assembled, from a law enforcement standpoint or administration of justice standpoint, then I would do that. I would assemble the documentation, ship them to 'em, if they needed on site presence, then I would respond and provide whatever technical assistance they needed.

Bill Froehlich (00:31:07): And so when you were getting, if you went on site, like you did in North Carolina, how would you assess the situation? Would you, you said the first time you were in North Carolina, you worked with the community leaders to kind of understand what the tension looked like. Is that a typical assessment for you?

James Davis (00:31:27): Yes.

Bill Froehlich (00:31:27): When you arrived on site and working with the conciliator, were there other things that you did?

James Davis (00:31:32): Well the main thing again, understanding what the conciliator or the mediator needed from me as a technical technical support provider and then I would assist them in making the necessary contacts with citizenry, and officiate them, to get a holistic picture of what the environment was like and what ... kind of results was expected from the activity that the CRS would bring.

Bill Froehlich (00:32:11): And so because you were providing technical assistance and you have this depth of background in law enforcement. My assumption is that you were brought into situations so that you could connect with law enforcement. Were there ever law enforcement officials or others who didn't refuse to talk to, and if there were, what would they do? What would you do?

James Davis (00:32:32): Oh, no, that, well, you know, again, we never had a law enforcement agency refused to dialogue with us. And if we, if we did...we would assess why we felt that. We had some resistance and of course used the tools that were given us, you know, again, everybody hasleadership. Ok. So if it was a police department, that was...resistant to supporting what we were trying to do, then we would talk with the mayor and the city council to the mayor, the manager, or whoever their supervisor was, if it was the sheriff, of course, you know, in most jurisdiction, the sheriff is the highest elected official in the county. Of course you would again... use some persuasive...resources from that, whatever political party that sheriff is elected from, you know, there's ways to help folks realize that, cooperation is needed to address the issues that's causing detention in the community, in which they are supposed to be a leader or an official.

Bill Froehlich (00:34:11): Can you provide any concrete examples of those persuasive political forces that you would use that were connected to the political leadership?

James Davis (00:34:21): Ok, well, you know, I'm in politics, myself, you know, being an elected official you know, Tip O'Neill, coined the phrase back in the day that all politics are local. Ok. Politicians ...a good politician listens to the community, the grassroots, all communities have community leaders, whether they wear tie, or they got grease up under their fingernails ok. Community leaders, grassroots leaders... One of the tools that I used, and I... I still use, and I used then was getting to know who the big stick carriers in the community was. Ok. When I say big stick carriers, I mean, that those persons who have the influence on the grassroots citizens and the influence on whoever's sitting in that office. So those are the people that we try to develop relationships with because those relationships are invaluable. Ok. It ain't about money, it ain't about ego, its about respect. Ok. And those community leaders, every day walking around folks that... are able to get citizens to go to the polls and elect the individuals that they want to serve them. Ok. And politicians respect that if they want to get elected and stay elected.

Bill Froehlich (00:36:30): Thank you and I like this phrase big stick carrier. Good. So, once you arrive on the ground and you've talked to the big stick carriers and the other individuals who are connected politically, and those community leaders that you talked to. How did you decide on what your plan would be? ... I know you did this in consultation with the conciliator that was already on the ground, but ... were there particular guideposts? Or did you have a gut feeling? Or how did you make a choice about how to move forward with your work?

James Davis (00:37:09): Well, you know, in interviewing the leaders in the community, they pretty much tell you what it is that they want to see. Ok. And, you know, again experience and collaboration is what you use to decide how to go about getting the results... that you want. Ok. And the results that we wanted was developing a mechanism where we would have a win-win situation. Of course, in order to affect that we have to have decision makers in the room at a level where decisions could be made without resistance, where accountability could be addressed and everybody understood who was responsible for what and how the process... would be implemented. So, you know, in order to get to that place, we had to have the decision makers come together ... as a whole, and sit in the room, looking at each other so that no one would be finger pointing or backing away from a process or decision. You see again, anytime we go into situations, we always look for compromise. We look for a way to get the job done without adversity, without a lot of confusion. But with compromise, you know, no one is going to get everything that they want, but once we are able to see unity or respect, or, you know, those elements that would allow a community to come together, that's what we in CRS back in the day, those are the kind of things we look to try to achieve.

Bill Froehlich (00:39:40): Good. So, in these conversations, you said at the beginning of your last answer, you said that the participants typically told you what they wanted.

James Davis (00:39:51): Yes.

Bill Froehlich (00:39:51): So, were you ever asked to do something that you were unable to, to do either by someone directly involved in the dispute or by an outside party? And how did you deal with that?

James Davis (00:40:03): Well, I don't, you know, again... If there's, you know, ... from the mission and the mandate of the agency, what you can and cannot do. Ok. So, you know... You can't make any promises that you can't keep, you know, you don't lead people on, you don't give false hope. Ok. So again, based on training and experience, you go in and ... give an honest, and forthright assessment of the situation to who you're talking to, whether it's a community's resident or a community leader, or an official, you know, straight talk, you know...you don't go in and be hyperbolic, or ... you don't talk about things that are not relevant to ... what you're trying to achieve. And you be frank, forthright, honest, and, understanding of what their situation is ... and you let them help you help them. Does that make sense?

Bill Froehlich (00:41:23): Mm-hmm, <affirmative>,

James Davis (00:41:25): You know, again, cause they're gonna be the ones to live with whatever process we put in place, whatever mechanism that's derived from the support that we give them ... they're gonna be the ones to implement and live with the decisions that's made. And we try to, again back in the day, we tried to make sure that we left a case complete, where everybody understood what was derived from our presence, whether it was... A mediation document that was signed by all parties, a recognition of what had happened because of the collaboration that was established by the parties.

Bill Froehlich (00:42:29): So...let's not shift a little bit and go to, uh, the process itself. So the mediation or conciliation process that you were involved with typically providing technical assistance in conjunction with a local conciliation specialist. My background is in mediation. That's what I teach and train here at Ohio state. And so, the questions moving forward are broken into two categories, table oriented processes, meaning sitting down at the table and hashing it out and street oriented processes. So maybe during a protest, if you were shuttling back and forth between protestors and police. So I want to focus first on a table oriented process. So in your experience providing technical assistance, who would typically be at the table in a conversation that you engaged in where you're providing technical assistance?

James Davis (00:43:37): Well... in most situations where we had case work that involved... developing a plan of action from a tabletop standpoint, you would have the affected parties. Ok. A leadership from the affected parties, of course the conciliator, so that we would get a good understanding from the affected parties, what the issues were, and what kinds of obstacles we would be faced with, if any. Having the affected parties, either from the community or from the organizations that were being complained about or addressed at the table, we would be able to get, a good feel for what it is that we needed to do ... as CRS representatives, you know, and if there were, of course law enforcement issues or criminal justice issues, whether it was in relationship to the actions... that were being taken or actions that were... being addressed by CRS, with the community, then I would get a good understanding, a good idea of what I needed to do to coordinate with local law enforcement or the... criminal justice system to bring in the technical assistance or the specialists or get the resources from a law enforcement standpoint to help resolve the issues that were being talked about at the table.

Bill Froehlich (00:45:49): So, when we talk about who's around the tables, did you ever have any challenges getting particular parties to the table?

James Davis (00:45:59): Sure. Sure.

Bill Froehlich (00:46:01): Ok. What were some of those challenges? And ... How did you break through?

James Davis (00:46:05): Well, again, you know... Once you... identify folks that should be at the table, you know, you have to, unless they are directly involved, you might meet some resistance. So in that case, you have to really appeal to their sense of ...desire to see their community or the situation be exacerbated or resolved, you know... And again... public people want to be perceived in doing the right thing and believe it or not. Now the mere fact that we are from the United States Department of Justice ... that's a big deal. That's a big deal to local law enforcement. That's a big deal to local public officials... And while we do what we do as... Justice department employees... We have a role to play in making sure... that community leaders and officials, understand that we are there to help, you know, and that resistance are broken down by us just being who we are as justice department employees and being able to help them in resolving the concerns that they might have.

James Davis (00:48:03): So while they might initially resist, ultimately, they... come around and provide the support and become part of the coalition or become part of the resolution of what it is we're trying achieve.

Bill Froehlich (00:48:24): I want to talk about goals for your participation in the process for a little bit. What were your goals in a process? And maybe they were different based on each scenario. Did you articulate those goals? And what were the goals of the participants?

James Davis (00:48:42): Yeah, well again, like I said earlier, having folks at the table, having a good... developing a good relationship... With the various players or parties involved, Bill we would from the beginning, let the participants know what we were able to do as justice department representatives. And... try to determine what the outcome that they wanted to see would be... Our goals would be to help them resolve the issues, to the satisfaction that would be amenable for the community. That would be our goal. Their goal would be to help resolve the issues within their community... for the best outcome, whether it was a March or whether it was a... Community concern around race, whatever, our goal would be helping them meet their goal.

Bill Froehlich (00:50:18): ...In a table oriented process, did you typically identify ground rules for the conversation and what were they? Or did you not use ground rules at all?

James Davis (00:50:31): Well, nine times outta ten, the mediator, or conciliator, at the... event or at the table... would be the one that would develop... the ground rules. As a technical assistance provider, I'm there to support them. I'm there to provide the resources that they determined would help them be effective in providing... the results that they were there to provide. And... I'm a specialist in law enforcement and administration justice. So, so,

Bill Froehlich (00:51:18): Yeah. Sorry, go ahead.

James Davis (00:51:19): No, no, go ahead.

Bill Froehlich (00:51:20): So, would you, let's say the conciliator identifies three overarching issues that the parties want, or they want to discuss with the parties, and the parties are amenable to those three issues, and one of them is law enforcement practices with respect to black and indigenous communities. Would you facilitate that conversation? Would you lead that conversation, or would you in your role as a technical assistance provider, provide ideas about how other communities have resolved or addressed similar issues? Can you say a little bit more about what you would do when you were in the weeds of a conversation about police engagement with black or indigenous communities?

James Davis (00:52:11): Sure. You know, again... as a minority practitioner myself, I would always be available to provide, you know, personal experiences. And... as a technical assistant provider, I would be able to address the issues around policy and practice, and activity, and give guidance and direction. Or give voice to what was needed. Or what was desired from that area of specialty. I wouldn't necessarily lead the conversation, but if the conciliator, its always a conciliator case or the mediator's case, and, I would take my lead from them to voice, to give advice or counsel, or be a part of the conversation that they... wanted me to assist them with. We are there to provide support to the field.

Bill Froehlich (00:53:26): So, yeah, I appreciate this and I'll just let you know, and for the eventual reader of this transcript, but some of the questions here, because your focus is providing technical assistance. I'm going to skip over, because you're not facilitating the conversation in a way that a conciliator might and that's perfectly ok, but some of them are critically important like this one, how Jim, did you build trust with the parties when you were brought in to support a conciliators work?

James Davis (00:54:04): One, I would explain to them who I was, give them a little of my background and give them a good, honest assessment of what I saw of their concern or issue. And...what I could do from where I came from to assist them. I think trust is very, very important in the work that we do. And building that trust initially, is a very responsible position of the conciliator and the technical assistant provider as we go in...into the field. So yeah, honesty, you know, forthrightness, you know, all of those things though, hand in hand with a successful mediation.

Bill Froehlich (00:55:09): How did you deal... In a table oriented process with seemingly intractable demands, one party was proposing something that, you know, law enforcement officers cannot do. How would you approach that issue?

James Davis (00:55:29): Keep 'em talking, keep 'em talking, because again, once they understand based on repetition of fact and truth, it gets to a point where folks then realize that unreasonable requests, and especially when there are rules, policies or law that prevents the provision of certain expectations. You know... they'll conceed. I've been in those situations, but like I say, you just have to keep talking.

Bill Froehlich (00:56:23): How did you, you just mentioned issues related to fact, how would you help deal with a vehement disagreement over facts? So, to give you an example, I could imagine a police involved shooting, you're called in the aftermath of a police involved shooting, and there's disagreement about what took place immediately before the shooting took place, and that could have an impact, the outcome of, or what's taking place in the community. How did you deal with a disagreement over facts?

James Davis (00:56:59): Well, and that Bill, you know, again, that's a very good question. And... the reality exists even today. You know, back in the day, we did not have smartphone and video situations and photographs... of instant events. So you had to depend on... source information. Ok. Eyewitness folks that were, party to, knowledgeable of, and of course facts... You try tomake sure that the disputants know what the reality is. And that's whether you have to assemble documentation. Policies that existed before the fact and policies that are amenable to the incident or to the facts. So, disputants understand if they have the information that is realistic. Ok. You know, you can't give someone something that and... you don't want to promise someone something that don't exist.

James Davis (00:58:50): Ok. So... it's important that, you know, what the facts are yourself, you know, if there's policy and procedure, connected to situations that you are addressing. I'll give you an example in law enforcement, of course, like you said, that shooting situation, police department is supposed to have use of force policies. Ok. Continuing of force policies, and it's incumbent upon you as a technical assistant provider to make sure that you have those policies where you can... have them given to folks that have concern that these things were in place and should have been adhered to by the officers involved. So today we'll have confidence that you being the technical assistant provider is holding the law enforcement leaders accountable for the conduct of the officers that have now taken an action that's in dispute. So if the policies are in place, and the actions that were taken were consistent with the policies that were in place, irrespective of the different races or ethnic identifications of the individual, they're still issues to be resolved. And, hopefully by having these conversations and... having this dialogue, will come to some agreement. You know, it's hard to convince something, especially when you have a situation where you've had loss of life. Ok.

James Davis (01:00:59): It's hard to convince the parties, especially the parties that's been adversely affected to understand the dynamics of policy procedure because they're always going to be in the back of the mind... If it hadn't have been of another race, it wouldn't have happened, you know, so that's what you gotta overcome as a minority service provider. You know, you gotta, you gotta be able to give that level of assurance that, Hey, I'm doing all that I can... as a technical assistance provider to get to the truth and the factual evidence... of what happened so that you can know that you have forthrightness in what we're trying to do just to assist you.

Bill Froehlich (01:02:18): That's a really helpful example of how you've walked through issues with respect to facts, and come back again to ... one of your core values of being forthright with parties. So on a similar note, but different concept... how would you deal with a fundamental disagreement about values? You know, you might be with parties, I imagine indigenous and police parties at a table oriented process that have different values that are core to them, or in a modern sense, you might think of and the aftermath of police involved shooting, negotiating or mediating, or providing technical assistance, where you have advocates from an abolitionist perspective sitting down in the same room as police. How would you grapple with a fundamental difference in values?

James Davis (01:03:19): Well, you know, again, values... is self imposing. Ok. You know... we know what common values are. We know what values are in terms of societal values. Ok. But... when you come down to personal biases and personal agendas, that's what we would have to try to... get those personal biases of those personal values. We have to try to get those addressed now. And... I would ask the question and, you know, and ask you a question from a very, you know, honest perspective, you know... Is this your personal value, or is this your culture value? If it's a personal value and not your culture value, then is there a way to set this aside and listen to... the overarching issue that we are trying to resolve?

James Davis (01:04:59): You know, and again, as I said earlier Bill, you know, if you keep parties talking, talking about how they feel and how they want to see things accomplished, that conversation, and you know, we are at a point in our history right now today where members of the United States Congress have stopped talking, you know...the art of compromise have been diminished to a point where we don't know what's going on in this country. Ok. And I believe that if we keep people talking at every level of society about disputes, disputes is going to be resolved by people coming to... a recognition that they need to come together and address what's being put on their plate or address what is before there. But you gotta do it collaboratively, you know, and that's what's not being done today, but that's, you know, that's a technique that we use years ago.

James Davis (01:06:37): I don't know what's being done today... in the community relation service, but I'll tell you, and I'm glad to be part of this oral history because the techniques that we used back in the eighties, I wasn't there in the seventies or the sixties when CRS was created. But I tell you, I was there with Wally Warfield and Ozell Sutton and... Mr. Levine there in his [inaudible] office. I mean... we had some leaders in dispute resolution brother back in the day that really addressed the concerns of this country when it comes down to race and kinds of disputes.

Bill Froehlich (01:07:44): Can you talk about any other specific techniques you used, you've mentioned techniques generally. So were there other specific techniques that you recall using that were really effective, when you had table oriented conversations?

James Davis (01:08:00): Well, you know, body language... understanding body language is a technique that... I would encourage current day conciliators to become knowledgeable of, you know, because you want to be able to look a person in the eye and understand where they're coming from. You want to be able to hear what's being said, I know words... are very important, but hearing what a person is in and the inflection of their voice, or the way that they're trying to describe something from a cultural standpoint. Give you an example, black folks talk differently than white folks. Ok. And... as you go into a case work situation, you need to understand that from a technical standpoint and use techniques that address those cultural issues. Indigenous people... have different cultural kinds of, not needs, but behaviors that from a technique standpoint, you have to be knowledgeable of.

James Davis (01:10:03): And I would say from a conciliation point of view,.... do your homework first on a case, get to know... who you are going to be working with...and their cultural and racial and ethnic kinds of backgrounds, so that you can deploy the techniques and other kinds of support systems that you would need to help resolve the concerns that you want to address... I'm down here in North Carolina where we have full basic races, you know, black whites, native Americans and Hispanics. Ok. Right now, in Southeast North Carolina, we have a good... I don't think that we have racial issues, among the minority races as we have had in the past, issues that are coming up now are pretty much based on the extremist elements that exist throughout the country.

James Davis (01:11:41): And I think from a community relations standpoint Bill, that's going be with us for a while, you know, the community relations service, we can make a difference in this country. If, I think, the government would utilize the talents that we have. And Bill, let me say this, I belong to a group now called CRS remembered. And I don't know if you're familiar with that, but CRS remembered there is a coalition of old, us old timers. You know, some of us are in our eighties and I just turned 75 a couple months ago. So, you know, we were back there in the day. And, we learned from those that started CRS and it came up through CRS as it got matured. And, now we are trying to pass it off to a generation of... conciliators and mediators. That's gonna take it into the future. And .... this oral history project, I hope will help new young people develop the tools that they need to provide the services that this country needs.

Bill Froehlich (01:13:15): I hope so. I hope so. That's part of the aim is to develop a record of some of the incredible work that you all have done and carry on legacy of the founders of CRS. So ... if you don't mind, I want to turn back to a few specific questions about your processes. When, and that example about, that you just shared is exactly what I was looking for about body language, about knowing who you're meeting with, and working with and what their ethnicity and connections are in advance. So you can prepare effectively. I wonder, how did you work with power disparities? I've read in other oral histories, prior histories, where conciliators are meeting with... a warden and prisoners. The prisoners have no...

James Davis (01:14:15): No power.

Bill Froehlich (01:14:16): No power, diminished power, and diminished negotiation ability. And so folks have, conciliators have spent time training the prisoners to negotiate and advocate for themselves, and then they conciliate. Have you engaged in processes like that? Or did you have other techniques to work through power disparities?

James Davis (01:14:38): No. Case work wise, I've never had that experience in case work. But of course, you know, being in the profession that I'm in, I've had experience in that... And of course, you know, while... your memory talking to you about everyone has a leader. Everyone has somebody that to report to, even in the situation that you described around the prisoners. And, not have not being able to have a voice... with the warden, if they were being... if you had a issue, and that power difference.

Bill Froehlich (01:15:42): I do recall.

Bill Froehlich (01:15:43): Yes... I've had situations where I've had to remind people of where they are and the fact that even though they are supposed to be this powerful individual or person, they're still supposed to be a servant or a leader. And... They, even though these individuals below them may not be of a sort that they respect, but they need to respect them. You know, humanity is humanity is humanity. And I have to help, you know, one of the things that I do, even in my work today, is help people reminding them that we are all God's children. You know, we are all God's children. And what we need to do is to know that as we walk through these days of life, we are here to effectuate God's will, ok. And that's by helping and loving humanity, helping and loving humanity, you know, and...when it comes down to public service, sometimes we have to remind our public servants... at whatever level they are in that they are still responsible for loving and helping humanity. Does that make any sense, Bill?

Bill Froehlich (01:17:22): Absolutely. It does, I can imagine the scenario where you're reminding or trying to help individuals remember why they are public servants in the first place

James Davis (01:17:35): In the first place. Yeah. And... especially elected officials because elected officials can get on their high horse and, you know, oftentimes... And that's what causes them not to be able to hear grass roots, you know? And... from a community relations standpoint, we have to have the courage to be forthright. We have to have... We have to be armed with the information to articulate, to be able to articulate truth, speak truth to power. You know, I mean, you know, sometimes you go into a situation and folks... will identify and recognize who you are by the credentials that you carry... in your wallet.

James Davis (01:18:50): And they respect those credentials, but they might be of a station or status of life where they feel that ... while you are carrying these credentials, that their position might be a little bit higher than yours. So you have to be... bold enough or aware of what your role or responsibility is, to help them understand or realize who they are and what they're supposed to be about. You know, and as conciliators and mediators and technical assistant providers, as we do our work, we oftentimes have to remind governors and mayors and you know, superintendents.. that they are still elected officials and servants of the people, you know...that we the people thing is real.

Bill Froehlich (01:20:04): That's true. It's the first phrase in the constitution that's for sure... So when you were... in a mediation session there's a lot, often a lot of tension. There might be tension between parties involved. What were some of the techniques that you use to diminish tension when hostilities were increasing during conversation?

James Davis (01:20:35): You know, I used to carry around a pocket full of mints, ok. Ok. I mean candy. If I encountered a level of hostility rising up, you know, I would offer a mint, you know, "Hey, let's take a break." And have a mint, and you know again, just the offering of a token, you know, being kind, you know, offering a little humanity that brings a person right around, believe me. Does that make any sense?

Bill Froehlich (01:21:27): Offering a little humanity. It does. When I was a labor attorney, folks would recall stories about how the attorneys would be arguing at the negotiation table for hours, and they'd have a smoke break, and they'd all be standing outside together, you know, shooting... the breeze, right. They'd be back in the room, back at it again. But... that was a different part of it. And so, offering that piece of humanity, reduced tension for you, that that's a great illustration. Did you ever deal with anyone who threatened, aside from the hostage scenario, did you ever deal with anyone who ever threatened violence... in a mediation session?

James Davis (01:22:16): No... Not... in a session, but what...

Bill Froehlich (01:22:22): What about folks...who left threatened to leave? Did you ever deal with any folks who threatened to leave and what did you do with those?

Bill Froehlich (01:22:32): Um, if you can recall

James Davis (01:22:33): To... leave the discussion or to leave the situation that we were trying to resolve? Oh yeah. But then, you know...you have to be insistent enough to keep them involved. You have to appeal to every sense that they have, you know, if you have to plead with them, you know, you do that. If you have to try to appeal to their sense of responsibility? You do that. You know, it's your role... as a dispute resolver to help persons that you are resolving disputes between to see the benefit of a resolution, you know, of an actable resolution you see. So, you know, keep them talking. That's real because if you are able to keep people talking and you are able to help them see the humanity and the decisions that they make, because it's going to be their decision.

James Davis (01:23:54): It's not going to be yours, it's going to be theirs and you want them to compromise. You want them to feel like they have won or at least been a part of a winning situation and you have to appeal to their sensibilities. You know, you have to appeal to their sense of justice, sense of reality, you know... And oftentimes, you know... you have to have... a cold-hearted individual after you go through all of the techniques and all of the...conversations that you've had. You know, you gotta be pretty good to get away from Jim Davis, if ...you walk away from... a session or dispute situation, because I'm a dog, I'm going to keep you, I'm going to keep you talking. I'm going to, you know, if I have to apologize to you, if I have to... promise you the moon, that I will, you know, I'm going to do what I need to do realistically to keep you, to get you where you need to be, to agree to what we need to agree upon.

Bill Froehlich (01:25:29): So let's talk about agreements for a little bit, when you were brought to provide technical assistance, were the agreements that you were involved with, were you suggesting the solutions as the expert on the subjects? Were the parties coming up with the solutions themselves? How were those solutions developed?

James Davis (01:25:49): Ok. I would provide the resources that would be part of the agreement process. Ok. If... say if we had a situation where we needed a model formats, say a civil liability policy, a civil liability agreement, or... a use of force policy that would need to be... vetted up to deciding...if they needed to put together a... citizens review board, something like that, you know, those are the kind of formal agreement... that disputants would normally look to, you know, my kind of specialty to bring and provide. So those are the kind of things that I would offer for them and be the lead and helping them understand the dynamics around it.

Bill Froehlich (01:27:03): Okay. So, you would provide resources that they wanted to incorporate into their agreement. You earlier described in the hostage negotiation scenario in North Carolina, an agreement that was really durable. You saw it last for 20 years, from your perspective, what did you do to assure what other solutions were durable? What did you do to assure they were carried out? Did you plan any formal role in any or many of those resolutions and in overseeing that they were carried out?

James Davis (01:27:42): In...some of them. But you know... In many of the cases, I just stayed in contact with the individuals that were affected, you know, and... that personal contact and just letting folks know that you care about the results that happened ...that's a lot, that means a lot to them. And it just keep your records updated too, as to how things are and ... what you've done.

Bill Froehlich (01:28:20): So what were some of the formalized roles that you played? You said you played a bit of a formal role in some of those. What were some of those formal roles?

James Davis (01:28:30): Providing technical assistance to the dispute, I'm going to give you an example. Can I tell you another story? Ok. And... this is early on in my service with CRS. Ok. I told you that the assistant attorney general sent me over to see my boss, who was Larry Wallace and Gil Pompa were friends. Ok. Gil Pompa, as the director of CRS, even though he was titled director, he was on the level of assistant attorney general. Ok. So Larry and Gil were close friends. So Larry and I were friends. So when Gil asked for help performing this hostage negotiation barricade subject program in his office of technical assistance. Larry sent me over there because of my background in law enforcement. Ok. The first case that I went out on Bill was... of a subject in North Carolina who has shot and killed the mayor of Madison, North Carolina, wounded, an FBI agent and had barricaded himself in a warehouse.

James Davis (01:29:57): Ok. Ozell Sutton was a regional director in Atlanta, and he was sent to... Mr. Pompa, asked him to meet me in Greensboro. I came down from Washington and we drove to Madison, North Carolina, which was north of Greensboro when we got there, the warehouse where this barricade subject had barricaded him himself...was on fire. Okay. And... this was an overnight situation where they didn't put the fire because it was a real blaze. And... the next morning, of course we found the barricaded subject in the warehouse dead. Ok. From being burned. Well, Jerry Welsh...the police chief of the town of Madison, you know, we worked with him because again, all of this commotion, all of this situation ... with the perpetrator who was a longstanding, upstanding citizen of the town and supposed to be a friend of the mayors, the community was in... a confusion about why this all happened. The mayor was a white man. The perpetrator was a black man, but they were supposed to be friends.

James Davis (01:31:40): The police chief had never experienced anything like this in his career... A shooting like this and a barricading subject incident. So one of the things that we did from a CRS perspective after we got the community tension diminished, we invited the chief of police to come to Washington and working with... a couple of the agencies in the Department of Justice. We put on a training session around barricade subject, a hostage taking incident for this police chief... and got him some training with one of the local police departments in Prince George's county, Maryland, that assisted him in understanding how he could be more effective in his little town in North Carolina. Now that was technical assistance that were provided on the ground in North Carolina, with a local police chief connecting... with a larger police department on a subject matter issue that... would help him and benefit his town from years to come. The relationship that he established with the police chief in Prince George's county lasted for years, you understand what I'm saying?

James Davis (01:33:32): That was CRS. That was the kind of work that CRS did from a technical assistance standpoint back in the day. Those are the kind of things that you utilize as a technical system provider in headquarters for the field, even though, even though Ozell Sutton was the regional director...one of the premier field operative that we had in CRS at the time, you know, he was appreciative of the technical assistance that I provided as a administration of justice specialists at headquarters, you know, that he didn't have access to, you know, so those are the kind of roles that we play in supporting one another.

Bill Froehlich (01:34:20): And I see your role as connecting others who are similarly situated with different styles of experience, meaning this hostage, barricade experience. I imagine you did that in other scenarios as well to support others who needed that technical assistance. Whether it's you providing the training yourself or connecting them with others who had been through a similar situation.

James Davis (01:34:43): Yes, exactly.

Bill Froehlich (01:34:45): That's... that is a great role from my perspective. So couple more quick questions about table oriented processes, and then probably pause this interview... and reconvene if you're up for it at another time. So did you always work with groups together in the same room, or did you have shuttle or caucus mediation sessions where you moved between one groups and kept between groups and kept the parties separate?

Bill Froehlich (01:35:21): No... I would normally work with the conciliator or the mediator in the environment that they would establish for their case work. Because it remember, as I said before, they were the leaders, I mean, it was their case where I was a technical assistant provider. So, I followed their lead and supported them and whatever it is that they wanted to get done.

Bill Froehlich (01:35:50): And so how long... You participated in dozens of these table oriented processes?

Bill Froehlich (01:35:56): Oh, yes. Oh yeah.

Bill Froehlich (01:35:58): And so how long would they last? Half a day? Six months? Years sometimes?

Bill Froehlich (01:36:05): Give me a range

James Davis (01:36:06): So yeah, well some lasted, like I say, you know, some lasted...several hours of a day. It depends on the kind of environment that the mediator or the conciliator found themselves in. You know, but whatever the timeframe was, we... were there to support and provide them with the resources that they needed to effectuate a good outcome.

Bill Froehlich (01:36:42): Yeah. So one last question about outcomes from your observation were the outcomes that you supported, Were they durable? Did they last? Sorry, I broke up there a little.

James Davis (01:37:04): Yeah... You froze a little bit.

Bill Froehlich (01:37:05): Yeah. I apologize. Were the outcomes that you supported, the agreements that you helped the parties reach? Did they last, or did they fall apart? From your observation, what typically happened?

James Davis (01:37:20): Well, fortunately for me... many of the cases that I worked on from the times that I were there and, like I say, I was only there from, from 85 to 92. What? Seven years? Much of the work that I was associated with had been lasting, you know, from that time to now, you know... And I attribute that to the work of the agency, the work of the agency, the resources that we provided, and the staff that were in place. Ok. I was blessed and fortunate enough to work with some of the best. And, you know, for yourself Bill, in dispute resolution, you got to have a lot of patience. You got to have a lot of persistence. And, you know, you have to add a little bit of love into it too now, because you got to care about the... environment that you and the people that's connected with it.

James Davis (01:38:47): And, I guess that's who we are as disputers. Because even though some folks might have law degrees and some folks might have, you know, badges and some folks might have collars and, you know, we all have to have concern for our fellow man... and trying to help them help themselves in the situations that they find themselves in. And that's not easy today because Bill, back in the day, we didn't have internet, we didn't have email, you know, we didn't have social media, Facebook, you know, we didn't have all of those things that conciliate. I mean, I believe today the average conciliator or mediator would be able to do a lot more with resources from a technological perspective that they have today. But I don't think they would have merely the fun nor developing... the comradery that we developed back in the day. Because we had to talk to people. We had to get in the room and... we don't have necessarily the smoke field rooms now that we had back in the back in the day. But yeah.