“This family”?
This isn’t one case, Bob. It’s department policy and has been for a long time.

Agreed, it SHOULD be a big payday for these families… unfortunately that’s at taxpayer, not the police’s pension fund’s, expense….but so far in the years of this practice if the victims got anything it doesn’t seem to have payed enough to get the local government to stop it, or enough to excuse blatant and rampant abusive harassment of law abiding citizens as standard policy, even a revenue generator.

How much is the daily harassment of your children, wife, co workers, family, friends, and business contacts at their work and in their homes late at night for years by dozens of aggressive armed men trespassing and peeping in windows and threatening arrest and continued harassment if they can’t come inside to “talk” at 3 am, all because they know you….without you ever being convicted of a crime….worth?….guaranteed none of the victims of this policy have been paid that much.

It is nice to know you at least say you don’t support DeSantis style policing…so I guess you don’t support his candidacy?

Also interesting you love to dismiss constant violent civil rights violations like this by just claiming the victims will get a huge settlement and that makes it ok (most don’t, police have immunity from all but the absolute worst illegal violations, they don’t even pay to repair the doors they destroy breaking in homes with no warrant or the pets they kill while trespassing and spying on citizens….not even for the innocent people they murder when breaking into their homes at 3 am, and when they are brought to account, they often fight cases for decades first, forcing the victims to sue them over and over and over and over....expensive lawsuits against city hall that most victims can't afford to start)….but when it’s a public health issue where they’re considering forcing you to not become a biological viral lab, stopping you from mutating new viruses to release in America, suddenly your rights to be dangerously idiotic and anti science are sacrosanct, no amount of money could make up for a little ouchie, fuck those other people you kill and disable.
Anti vaxers should not only be denied insurance, but also be forced to pay for treatment of their victims.

Lol.
Again, no, he wasn't caught having lied. He attended an MLK march, not a BLM protest. That's no where near the standard for jury nullification. Chauvin's horrendous defense, his lawyers incredibly bad job reaching near criminal incompetence, is a much better case....but his lawyer isn't arguing that.

But more baggage has come out....in the form of civil rights violation charges against all four. Two separate cases for Chavin including a case from around 2018 when he strangled a 14 year old child by holding him by the throat for 17 minutes while beating him in the head with a metal maglight repeatedly. Grand Jury indictments yesterday. D'oh!

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=pEMj4LZvZTQ

You'll be happy to learn that between 93% and 100% (from a low of 93% in Dallas and elsewhere, up to 100% in San Francisco) of BLM protesters arrested in the last year either never had charges filed against them or those charges were dropped because the police had zero evidence they had committed a crime. That means they were violently kidnapping protesters and holding them without cause or charge, thousands of them....expect thousands of winning cases against police for violating their rights, meaning maybe tens of billions in wasted tax dollars because police decided to be overtly racist and oppose taking responsibility for their uncountable civil rights violations and murders.

That's one way to defund the police. Winning!

I was 18, barely supporting myself working at dominoes pizza. I felt sure I couldn't get a lawyer to talk to me without a video and hospital record, much less do something. I didn't have serious injuries, just some scrapes and dirty clothes, and a well earned lifelong distrust of cops.
This was the 80's when people didn't get paid big bucks for civil rights violations they could prove, and all I had was my punk kid word against an entire police force. That wasn't opening any doors.
When I couldn't even make a record of the incident, I dropped it. After all, the cop did tell me he had my address so I should just walk away and not make trouble for myself, and his superior was clearly going to have his back 100%, to the point of refusing to take my complaint, aggressively. I really just wanted the cop to be reprimanded for being so threatening even after realizing it was all his mistake, I didn't see a winnable case or dollar signs.

Warrant? They can't search you and your property because they got an anonymous call, that is NOT probable cause in any state.
I'm pretty sure this is a civil rights violation, and this draconian stupidity is why people don't, and shouldn't respect police. I hope he lives long enough to end a few careers and take away a few million from the police pension fund, these two cops aren't protecting or serving.

Michael Slager pleaded guilty to federal charges of civil rights violations.

If it is an absolutely true fact, one would think you could provide supporting evidence, but you never do when asked. Unsupported claims are unverified argument, not accepted fact. I've never claimed you're wrong, but you've failed to prove you're correct repeatedly.

The judge used the sentencing guidelines for murder 2, which was part of the plea agreement, so the results were exactly the same. He may be in federal prison, which IS a much nicer place than the state pen. Is that how it falls short, or is your issue the specific charge no matter the sentence? Would it be better if he was convicted of murder 2 but was only sentenced to 5 years?

Avoid getting caught on camera, totally agree, but don't plead guilty?...he was facing life in State prison with a pretty hostile jury pool on top of up to decades in club fed for civil rights violations.. I think he made a good choice.

Thanks for the answer though...which I gather was "no, this does not satisfy".

You've got to be kidding, you know the judge isn't a DOJ employee, right?
You understand the concept that ignoring a judges direct legal orders is a crime no matter what your politics, right?
He wasn't convicted of the civil rights violations, (for pulling over Hispanic looking people and demanding they show their papers) but he was ordered to stop them, and he continued. He was convicted of criminal contempt.
It wasn't the DOJ, it was a federal judge he ignored and the constitution he violated after being ordered to stop it.
EDIT: But yeah...ignoring the constitution, judges, fairness, civility, the Geneva convention, and the rule of law certainly does make him the a America's best sheriff, doesn't it? I hope you and your family gets pulled over at gunpoint by black sheriffs at least once a week for life to check your papers, perhaps you'll eventually learn it's wrong.

If Obama abused that power as you suggest, why weren't there constantly DOJ investigations of elected Republicans and talking heads? It seems insane to even suggest that he reserved it for one evil sheriff.

Also, how do you explain all the charges and lost lawsuits from before Obama? Arpaio's legal troubles didn't suddenly start 8.5 years ago, you know. Was Bush's thumb on that scale against him too?

They'll walk. I mean, remember the cop that shot Walter Scott in the back and then dropped his taser so he could claim that the victim tried to take it? Remember how it was all caught on camera?

"In June 2015, a South Carolina grand jury indicted Slager on a charge of murder. He was released on bond in January 2016. In late 2016, a five-week trial ended in a mistrial due to a hung jury.

In May 2016, Slager was indicted on federal charges including violation of Scott's civil rights and obstruction of justice.
On May 2, 2017, in a plea agreement, Slager pled guilty to federal charges of civil rights violations. In return for his guilty plea, murder charges from the state will be dropped."

That's odd, because we've seen you make numerous definitive statements about exactly what happened in this case. Are you saying now that all your 'factual' statements about this case were really just speculation?! (because you could not have read the transcript yourself if you don't know if it exists)
If so, that's an improvement in my view. For my part, I have tried to be clear that my posts are my speculation based on available evidence (perhaps I have failed to be clear, but I made an effort). I was not there inside anyone's mind, so I can't KNOW anyone else's true viewpoint.

It is not speculation to say things were not handled in the normal methods for a grand jury. We know that definitively from what the DA said in his own press conference and from the evidence he presented (which reportedly IS publicly available information).
Also it's clear from the simple presentation/application of a law that was found unconstitutional 30 years ago, before he was even a lawyer. It wasn't a mistake, he had to search for that long removed law in law history books to even bring it up, it's not like he had ever used that law in the past and just didn't realize it was no longer law, it had not been law for 30 years. That's important, and clearly either clear disbar-able misconduct or complete disbar-able incompetence, I can't see a third possibility, if you do please enlighten me.

Civil rights cases take a long time to build before you take them to court, sometimes years, and sometimes it's impossible. In many cases, even though the CHARGE of a civil rights violation is true there's not enough proof of it to make a legal case, often (not always) due to the entire department closing ranks, hindering the federal investigation, and sometimes even destroying evidence. I think you know this.

We found another point of agreement. To me, when one jumps from disagreement on an idea to personal name calling, the name caller is admitting defeat in the debate and is just being a bad loser. I think most of us are guilty of that at one time or another, but some use it as an MO for life.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'NYPD, stop and frisk, civil right violations, police excess' to 'NYPD, stop and frisk, civil right violations, police excess, nyc, abuse, power, racist' - edited by Krupo

Your link is pointless.
Each person in the world practices Capitalism each and every day. So why do you dog it so much?

Your link is about the various causes of homeless.
The lack of Affordable housing is not the fault of capitalism. Capitalism does not raise costs but reduces costs through competition. Government rules and regulations add costs. Go blame them.

Another on that list is "Government policy - Child support enforcement keeping drivers licenses from citizens and other civil rights violations." Once again Government messing with people from enjoying their freedom which costs them more money. Go fight the government, not Capitalism.

Lastly another item on you list is low wages. Low wage is not meant to live on but a stepping stone as one advances in their career. The only people who live on low wages are those who decided not to pay attention in school and got left behind. That's their fault. If they really want a better wage then they will make the necessary adjustments and turn themselves around towards the part of prosperity.

Granted some are born with low IQ or such and would not ever be much more than a burger flipper. That is sad and the local community should be the helping hand in times of need, not Government.


>> ^Peroxide:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homelessness_in_the_United_States

>> ^bobknight33:
Capitalism it the best. It serves all people equally.

Susan Lindauer:
...
I got indicted for protesting the War in Iraq. My crime was delivering a warm-hearted letter to my second cousin White House Chief of Staff, Andy Card, which correctly outlined the consequences of War. Suspiciously, I had been one of the very few Assets covering the Iraqi Embassy at the United Nations for seven years. Thus, I was personally acquainted with the truth about Pre-War Intelligence, which differs remarkably from the story invented by GOP leaders on Capitol Hill.

More dangerously still, my team gave advance warnings about the 9/11 attack and solicited Iraq’s cooperation after 9/11. In August 2001, at the urging of my CIA handler, I phoned Attorney General John Ashcroft’s private staff and the Office of Counter-Terrorism to ask for an “emergency broadcast alert” across all federal agencies, seeking any fragment of intelligence on airplane hijackings. My warning cited the World Trade Center as the identified target. Highly credible independent sources have confirmed that in August, 2001 I described the strike on the World Trade Center as “imminent,” with the potential for “mass casualties, possibly using a miniature thermonuclear device.”

Thanks to the Patriot Act, Americans have zero knowledge of those truths, though the 9/11 Community has zoomed close for years. Republican leaders invoked the Patriot Act to take me down 30 days after I approached the offices of Senator John McCain and Trent Lott, requesting to testify about Iraq’s cooperation with the 9/11 investigation and a comprehensive peace framework that would have achieved every U.S. and British objective without firing a shot. Ironically, because of the Patriot Act, my conversations with Senator Trent Lott’s staff got captured on wire taps, proving my story.

You see, contrary to rhetoric on Capitol Hill, the Patriot Act is first and foremost a weapon to bludgeon whistleblowers and political dissidents. Indeed, it has been singularly crafted for that purpose.

The American people are not nearly as frightened as they should be. Many Americans expect the Patriot Act to limit its surveillance to overseas communications. Yet while I was under indictment, Maryland State Police invoked the Patriot Act to wire tap activists tied to the Chesapeake Climate Action Network, an environmental group dedicated to wind power, solar energy and recycling. The DC Anti-War Network was targeted as a “white supremacist group.” Amnesty International and anti-death penalty activists got targeted for alleged “civil rights violations.”
...
I cannot forget. I cannot forget how I was subjected to secret charges, secret evidence and secret grand jury testimony that denied my right to face my accusers or their accusations in open court, throughout five years of indictment. I cannot forget my imprisonment on a Texas military base for a year without a trial or evidentiary hearing.

I cannot forget how the FBI, the US Attorneys Office, the Bureau of Prisons and the main Justice office in Washington — independently and collectively verified my story— then falsified testimony to Chief Justice Michael Mukasey, denying our 9/11 warnings and my long-time status as a U.S. intelligence Asset, though my witnesses had aggressively confronted them. Apparently the Patriot Act allows the Justice Department to withhold corroborating evidence and testimony from the Court, if it is deemed “classified.”

I cannot forget threats of forcible drugging and indefinite detention up to 10 years, until I could be “cured” of believing what everybody wanted to deny— because it was damn inconvenient to politicians in Washington anxious to hold onto power.
...

Okay, I'll throw my testicles into the ring. First, Amanda Marcotte is a staunch feminist and modern liberal. Not that there's anything wrong with that, but it's important to note when considering the source of the above article. Not sure why DFT is posting it here as if it was anything but a biased article.

Second, I like how NetRunner tried to completely disqualify GeeSussFreeK's comment by pointing out I'm not part of the national media. That was classic. Apparently NR has never heard of BNN. It's only the smallest national news outlet in all the world.

Third, and most importantly, why does the Democratic fight against "privatization" take precedence over their fight against the civil rights violations? Honestly this comes back to bipartisanship. Going along with the party and all that.

The truth is the TSA is under the purview of the Obama Administration so it opens this entire discourse up to bipartisan rhetoric, and that's all we're seeing here with NR and DFT. I believe if the porno-scanners and the enhanced gate rape pat downs were implemented under the McCain Administration (shudder) then the Republicans would be saying the exact same shit the Democrats are saying now, "These are the times we live in" and "The number one priority is safety" and so on.

And the Democrats would be in the streets protesting them for their civil rights violations. What hypocrisy. Where are our civil liberties loving Democrats? Oh, that's right, they're too busy defending their saintly leader to fight the good fight. Maybe later when a Republican gets in office we'll see the "Party of Peace" rear their pretty Code Pink faces again. Wouldn't that be something?

>How very astute of you, you're right, tasering some little scrote is the perfect way to stop them from doing something this stupid ever again.
Till you just tasered the wrong guy by accident. That's why we let the law dole out our justice. Innocent till proven guilty.
I await your stupid reply, my spider senses are tingling and i know you're gonna come back with one.


HELLO! Are you BLIND?! The guy's black. He's BOUND to be guilty of SOMETHING. Tasering him is the only way to make sure he learns to stop hating whitey. </sarcasm>

But, honestly, he had to know something was gunna happen. You don't stand around ON TOP OF A PLANTER looking suspicious as all hell as a brick flies at a cop car from his direction. We also don't know the whole story. Was anybody else even around to point the finger at? He could have been talking back to the cop, and the situation was more heated than the video shows. He was probably warned more than once. I'm sure there is a reason the video leaves out the part leading up to this incident.

Also, when was the last time you heard of some white crackhead, who just got beat down by the cops, suing the police department for "violating their civil rights?" Either it's racist black people, who damn well know they're guilty of something, throwing down the civil rights defense, or it's racist white people only violating the civil rights of black people. Either way, SOMEBODY got pissed off, and SOMEBODY overreacted.

If some fool threw a brick through my window, you better damn well believe the last thing I'm concerned about is his motherfucking civil rights. The prick gave up that right when he damaged my property and put my safety in jeopardy. However, if this guy wasn't the one responsible for the brick throwing (and he probably was), it's still pretty god damned suspicious to be 18 years old, and standing on top of a planter on city property, outside the police headquarters.

I just get the image in my head of some young punk listening to too much cop-hating rap music, glaring at every cop car that passes by. Finally, he reaches the boiling point and just chucks the nearest heavy object at some white oppressor. When he gets beat down for it and handed his well-deserved punishment, it's "Oh HELL nah!" And now we get to see the judicial system being exploited once again, in the name of 'civil rights violations.'