New Graffiti Found at CFA

CFA graffiti

From an anonymous source:

This morning (4/8/2015) new graffiti appeared on the Mahaney Center for the Arts in Middlebury College. The graffiti features a stenciled figure of a cop holding a baton on top of two hands raised in the air, and reads “WALTER SCOTT R.I.P.,” a tribute to the man killed by police yesterday Saturday in South Carolina. Similarly to the last round of anti-police graffiti on campus, facilities was ordered to erase the art immediately. By the time we reached the scene, some of the work has already been cleaned up. Another black smudge by the door hints on a different unknown piece that has already been removed.

In the uniquely vivid video from the scene, police officer Michael T. Slager shoots 50 year old Walter Scott eight times in the back, handcuffs him, and places a gun next to the corpse. With the aftermath of the combative Ferguson Movement, this might be the first time a US police officer will be convicted with murder of a black man.

At least 312 people have been killed by police since January 1st, 2015, and the daily average of police killings in the past couple of years stands on over three people a day (source: In this light, it is important to recognize that justice can’t be sought after through courts, a mechanism of the same state system of mass incarceration and genocide. The graffiti that has been appearing on Middlebury’s walls suggests we should find non-institutional ways to grieve. As the Gensler Symposium about the carceral state will seek to show next week, we might find alternatives to police and prisons in forms of restorative justice.

Thoughts?  See below for more pictures from the CFA.

cfa graffiti 3

CFA graffiti 2

5 thoughts on “New Graffiti Found at CFA

  1. yo just a clarification, Walter Scott was shot on Saturday. The officer was charged with murder yesterday, and his official firing was announced today.

  2. “this might be the first time a US police officer will be convicted with murder of a black man.”

    This really needs a citation (and better syntax).

  3. Is this entire post from an anonymous source? If so, that should be indicated in the post formatting (e.g., indented.)

    If not:

    Is this post an opinion piece? If so, it should be labeled as such and attributed to an author.

    Is this post attempted to be an unbiased piece of reporting? If so, it fails.


    I second the comment by “At least try.”


    “The graffiti that has been appearing on Middlebury’s walls suggests we should find non-institutional ways to grieve.”

    How is placing graffiti on the walls of an institution with the knowledge that it will be handled by the institution a suggestion of finding non-institutional ways to grieve?

    But isn’t it nice to know that “facilities” (eg, people who already have enough work cleaning up after college students) can simply be dispatched to repair the damage. How “non-institutional.”

    Poor wording, unnecessary use of collective pronoun, and I’m not buying it.

    MiddBeat, I hope you can do better.

    1. all these trolling commenters are apparently oblivious to the context. who cares about these technicalities??? you could literally grill any campus article in the same way (and Middblog was by no means any better, seriously…).student journalism is always crappy, but here they’re at least trying to make a statement. I suspect all of these aggressive unnecessary editorial comments just attempt to delegitimize a very legitimate call against a hidden genocide that happens everyday in the streets of our country.

      1. “At least try” here. I am willing to admit that my editorial snark gets out of hand–I wouldn’t have noticed how garbled the phrase that I quoted was if I hadn’t read it a couple of times in the course of writing my comment (I’m very neurotic), and so I can let that pass. You are absolutely right that one could make the same complaint about any article in the campus, and I often do. But the formal quality of the writing of this piece is really of secondary importance.

        Keep point here, that I will put in all caps so it stands out: I TOO WANT JUSTICE FOR THE MURDER OF WALTER SCOTT AND OTHERS LIKE IT.

        I don’t think that the importance of the issue lets the writer off the hook for sloppy, factually inaccurate writing. I find it impossible to believe that this would be the first time ever, in the 239 year history of the United States, that an American cop would be convicted for murdering a black man. Including that kind of nonsense (and I could cite more examples from the text) vastly undercuts the effectiveness of the article. As someone who supports the author’s goal, I want him or her to make the most effective appeal possible. That was my goal in commenting. And, if I am not being overly presumptuous, the goal of “Alum from Middblog era,” as well. Packaging matters.

Leave a Reply