Subscribe   Contact   

Twitter       Facebook  

About         Archives

Donate to BW 




Powered by Squarespace

Support BW!

Racist Suspect Watch
Racist Business Index

free your mind!

Cress Welsing: The Definition of Racism White Supremacy

Dr. Blynd: The Definition of Racism

Anon: What is Racism/White Supremacy?

Dr. Bobby Wright: The Psychopathic Racial Personality

The Cress Theory of Color-Confrontation and Racism (White Supremacy)

What is the First Step in Counter Racism?

Genocide: a system of white survival

The Creation of the Negro

The Mysteries of Melanin

'Racism is a behavioral system for survival'

Fear of annihilation drives white racism

Dr. Blynd: The Definition of Caucasian

Where are all the Black Jurors? 

The War Against Black Males: Black on Black Violence Caused by White Supremacy/Racism

Brazen Police Officers and the Forfeiture of Freedom

White Domination, Black Criminality

Fear of a Colored Planet Fuels Racism: Global White Population Shrinking, Less than 10%

Race is Not Real but Racism is

The True Size of Africa

What is a Nigger? 

MLK and Imaginary Freedom: Chains, Plantations, Segregation, No Longer Necessary ['Our Condition is Getting Worse']

Chomsky on "Reserving the Right to Bomb Niggers." 

A Goal of the Media is to Make White Dominance and Control Over Everything Seem Natural

"TV is reversing the evolution of the human brain." Propaganda: How You Are Being Mind Controlled And Don't Know It.

Spike Lee's Mike Tyson and Don King

"Zapsters" - Keeping what real? "Non-white People are Actors. The Most Unrealistic People on the Planet"

Black Power in a White Supremacy System

Neely Fuller Jr.: "If you don't understand racism/white supremacy, everything else that you think you understand will only confuse you"

The Image and the Christian Concept of God as a White Man

'In order for this system to work, We have to feel most free and independent when we are most enslaved, in fact we have to take our enslavement as the ultimate sign of freedom'

Why do White Americans need to criminalize significant segments of the African American population?

Who Told You that you were Black or Latino or Hispanic or Asian? White People Did

Malcolm X: "We Have a Common Enemy"


Deeper than Atlantis

Incompetent President Has No Understanding of Healthcare [he just knows he hates NGHR prezodents like Obama]


Unpopular Racist President Supported by Shrinking White Votary Must Rig 2020 Election [again] to "Win"

White Presumacy. The white population is rapidly declining in the U.S. and worldwide.  At the same time, Latino, Asian and Black populations are growing inexorably. White people's numerical inadequacy and vulnerability fuel the practice of racism here and abroad. [MORE] Racists must practice racism to survive - this includes rigging elections. 

Electionologist and investigative journalist Greg Palast, explains 'the GOP's white votary was not large enough to elect Donald Trump. That is, it is too small unless the GOP quietly builds a secret blacklist of millions of voters, especially voters of color, and systematically and quietly wipes out voter registrations. [MORE]

Another Election Hoax. Pro-Trump media & its Racist Believers are selling a new voter fraud conspiracy theory. From [HERE]. Thousands of people withdrew their voter registrations after Colorado agreed to provide some data to Trump’s election integrity commission

Over 3,300 Coloradans canceled their voter registrations after Trump’s election commission requested personal voter data from states. In Colorado, 3,394 people “canceled their voter registrations” after President Donald Trump’s election integrity commission requested voter data from the states, according to The Denver Post. According to the Post, Colorado officials said “that voters have typically given them two reasons for the withdrawals: They don’t trust President Donald Trump’s voter integrity commission, and they didn’t realize how much of their voter registration information was already public under state law.” From the July 13 article:

Nearly 3,400 Coloradans canceled their voter registrations in the wake of the Trump administration’s request for voter info, the Secretary of State’s Office confirmed Thursday, providing the first statewide glimpse at the extent of the withdrawals.

The 3,394 cancellations represent a vanishingly small percentage of the electorate — 0.09 percent of the state’s 3.7 million registered voters. But the figure is striking nonetheless, with some county election officials reporting that they’ve never seen anything quite like it in their careers.

The withdrawals began in earnest earlier this month, after a presidential advisory commission on election integrity requested publicly available voter information from all 50 states.

County election officials told The Denver Post that voters have typically given them two reasons for the withdrawals: They don’t trust President Donald Trump’s voter integrity commission, and they didn’t realize how much of their voter registration information was already public under state law. [The Denver Post, 7/13/17]

Pro-Trump and fringe outlets make the unfounded claim that deregistrations are evidence of voter fraud

Gateway Pundit's Jim Hoft: Deregistrations are proof of “obvious voter fraud.” The Gateway Pundit's Jim Hoft asserted that Democrats are “pretending” that the withdrawn registrations were the result of “voter suppression,” rather than proof of “obvious voter fraud.” From the July 15 article:

Top Democrats are worried after thousands of likely illegal voters cancelled their registrations in Colorado.

More than 3,000 Colorado voters withdrew their registrations since the Trump administration’s election integrity commission requested available voter information from the states.

Hillary Clinton defeated President Donald Trump in Colorado by 136,000 votes.

Democrats are worried that may change if more voters withdraw their registrations.

Democrats are pretending this is voter suppression rather than the obvious voter fraud that caused voters to deregister. [The Gateway Pundit, 7/15/17]

Click to read more ...


6 Million Citizens [1 in 13 Blacks] Do Not Have the Right to Vote due to "felony disenfranchisement"

By [Russ Feingold] In the middle of the hot summer, citizens will gather this week in Florida to champion a ballot initiative to end the state’s permanent felony disenfranchisement.

As we face the daily jaw-dropping revelations about the Trump campaign and administration’s actions, keeping our focus on restoring legitimacy to our elections and our democracy has never been more important, and ending the historic wrong of felony disenfranchisement absolutely must be part of our agenda.

It seems unlikely that the Trump-Pence “electoral integrity” commission will touch this important issue, and any commission that ignores it isn’t serious about the legitimacy of our elections.

Trump's next attack on democracy: mass voter suppression

The right to vote is the most fundamental right of any democracy, granting it legitimacy as a means of government by instilling power in the people and not in politicians. It ensures “consent of the governed” and holds government accountable to the people: not law-abiding people, or moral people, or any other qualifier, but the people.

This most fundamental right is not and never has been about rewarding good citizens or even law-abiding citizens. It is not a luxury or a reward, handed out by the government as it sees fit. It is a right, and should not be conditioned on anything more than citizenship, and being of voting age.

And yet since the civil war, states have intentionally denied the right to vote to a certain category of citizens – those with a felony conviction. Today, felony disenfranchisement bars roughly 6.1 million citizens from the ballot box – one in 13 African Americans nationally.

This denial of a right so inherent to democracy – and to citizenship – is not based on respect for the law, but is rather a historic and deliberate effort to prevent black people from voting.

Click to read more ...


Ineffective Assistance of Counsel From Trump DOJ: Says Texas Can Fix Racist Voter ID Law w/o Court Oversight

Whither goest thou White GOP Votary? [Already, California, Illinois and New York are lost. The GOP has not carried any of the four in seven presidential elections. When Texas – where whites are a minority and a declining share of the population – tips, how does the GOP put together an electoral majority? That is why your votes are not counted.] MORE]

From [HERE] Under the Obama administration, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) waged legal war against the voter ID rules Texas lawmakers passed in 2011, saying the new restrictions would disproportionately impact minority voters. That finding was later validated by multiple federal court rulings, two of which concluded the state’s GOP majority passed a deliberately racist bill.

This week brought another sign of the 180-degree change on voting rights cases under the Trump administration’s DOJ, which on Monday filed a legal brief that argues Texas should be allowed to fix its voter ID rules without federal intervention or oversight. The filing also argues that the courts should simply trust Texas to educate voters on the tweaked voter ID law the Legislature passed earlier this year, despite the state’s faceplant trial run when it tried to implement those rules during last year’s presidential election.

Experts say it’s a remarkable argument, given the history of the state’s years-long legal struggle to implement some version of a voter ID law that U.S. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg once called “the strictest regime in the country.”

“The state’s track record here is not impressive,” Rick Hasen, an elections law expert at the University of California Irvine, told the Observer. “The state of Texas and the Justice Department are now saying, ‘Oh, just trust Texas.’ It seems to me there’s not a lot of basis for trust given how much of a train wreck this has all been.”

GOP lawmakers cited the imaginary problem of rampant voter fraud as reason for the sweeping voter ID restrictions then-Governor Rick Perry signed in 2011. That law, Senate Bill 14, required Texas voters to present one of seven state-approved photo IDs — excluding such documents as utility bills and bank statements, which previously sufficed. Civil rights groups that ultimately challenged the law argued the seven types of ID were chosen in large part because white voters were most likely to have them. The following year, the Obama administration successfully blocked the law.

Then, in 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court effectively gutted the portion of the Voting Rights Act that required Texas and other states with a history of race-based voter suppression to clear elections law changes with the feds. Within minutes of the ruling, then-Attorney General Greg Abbott said Texas would immediately implement the new voter ID rules.

So the Obama administration, along with another group of plaintiffs, again sued Texas in an effort to stop the law, this time under a different provision of the Voting Rights Act. In 2014, Corpus Christi federal court judge Nelva Gonzales Ramos issued a thundering 147-page opinion that quoted Abraham Lincoln and concluded that lawmakers intentionally passed a racist law. Ramos pointed to the state’s alarming track record of voting laws that discriminated against minorities — from poll taxes, literacy tests and secret ballots in the 1960s to laws that required voters to own property that pervaded in some parts of the state well into the 1990s.

Even judges on the federal Fifth Circuit appeals court, largely considered the most conservative of the federal appellate courts, have twice ruled the law carried an “impermissible discriminatory effect against Hispanics and African Americans.” But the Fifth Circuit last year punted on whether the 2011 law was deliberately crafted to suppress the minority vote, instead kicking the question of so-called legislative intent back down to Ramos’ court for reconsideration.

Click to read more ...


DOJ revives provision of civil asset forfeiture program

From [HERE] The US Department of Justice (DOJ) [official website] announced on Wednesday that it is reviving a provision of the federal civil asset forfeiture program, which was suspended [JURIST report] in September 2015. The DOJ is reviving a portion of this program in response to President Donald Trump's order to reduce crime because asset forfeiture diminishes organized crime. Attorney General Jeff Sessions outlined the changes to the program that will help better protect law-abiding citizens. Any state or local law enforcement agency must provide sufficient evidence of criminal activity before asset seizure is permitted. One safeguard to ensure the evidence standard is met is the "Request for Adoption of State and Local Seizure" form, which requires the law enforcement agency to provide additional evidence supporting probable cause before seizure is permitted. The policy directive [text] notes that additional safeguards may also be placed on the adoption of cash amounts equal to or less than $10,000, stating:

Those adoptions will be permissible where the seizure was conducted: (1) pursuant to a state warrant, (2) incident to arrest for an offense relevant to the forfeiture, (3) at the same time as a seizure of contraband relevant to the forfeiture, or (4) where the owner or person from whom the property is seized makes admissions regarding the criminally derived nature of the property.

In a tweet, Eric Holder wrote that Sessions' policy was "another extremist action." "This is a reform that was supported by conservatives and progressives, Republicans and Democrats," Holder said. Holder is referring to a Justice Department memo he issued in 2015 that limited a type of practice that allowed local police to share the proceeds of seized cash and property with the federal government.

Click to read more ...


DOJ Boss Promises a Bigger, More Violent War on [Blacks] Drugs - One Not Constrained by Logic or Evidence

From [HERE] Attorney General Jeff Sessions isn't much interested in the "justice" side of the Department of Justice. Instead, it appears he'd like to throw on his letterman's jacket and head back to his glory days as a hard-nosed, 1980s-vintage drug warrior. Things were better when Sessions was a federal prosecutor in Alabama, ringing up drug convictions at a rate four times the national average.

The word "reactionary" is thrown around a lot when describing Trump and his cabinet. But in Sessions' case, the term fits. Violent crimes rates have fallen steadily since the mid-1990s. Meanwhile, drug prices have dropped and purity has increased, despite four decades of harsh enforcement and trillions of dollars being thrown at the problem. Devil weed -- gateway drug and longtime conspirator in the violation of American women by filthy non-whites -- is now a socially and medically-accepted drug, legal in several states.

But there are violent crime increases in a few major cities. He's not sure what's to blame for this potential historical blip, but he has several theories. It might be soft-on-drugs Obama-era policies embraced by his predecessor's DOJ. It might be a lack of respect for law enforcement, which Sessions feels is a failure of the American public, rather than the failures of those who serve them. It might be rambunctious legislators scaling back asset forfeiture all over the country. Whatever it is, the current course needs to be reversed and the policies that failed for multiple decades be allowed to fail again.

Click to read more ...


Senator Kamala Harris Proposes to offer states money to end Punitive Bail & Pre-Trial Release Practices

In her first signature legislative proposal as a U.S. senator representing California, Democrat Kamala Harris is offering states millions of dollars in grants if they abolish their “money bail” systems. Harris is Black.

The bill, introduced Thursday with Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), is called “The Pretrial Integrity and Safety Act of 2017.” It would authorize a three-year, $10 million grant to states that reform or replace pretrial release processes that lean heavily on arbitrary cash and deposit bonds as a means to ensure defendants return to court for trial. If successful, the grants could lead to a reduction in punitive bail practices that studies have shown historically and disproportionally disrupt the livelihoods of black and brown defendants.

“Our justice system was designed with a promise: to treat all people equally,” Harris, who previously served as California attorney general, said in a statement released with the bill. “In our country, whether you stay in jail or not is wholly determined by whether you’re wealthy or not — and that’s wrong.”

States would become eligible for the grant if they replace their money bail system with “individualized, pretrial assessments with risk-based decision-making,” Harris’ statement said. These assessments — which often include court officials determining whether the defendant is a “flight risk” — must not result in practices that are racially discriminatory or unfair to any classification protected by federal law, according to the proposed guidelines. Overall, states must establish the presumption of pretrial release once a defendant has been reasonably evaluated for his or her risk to others in the community. [MORE]


Study says Average Jail Time in US Rises by 37%

From [HERE] A new study by Washington DC-based think tank, Urban Institute reveals the average number of years prisoners spend in jail has increased.

According to the Marshall Project, between 2000 and 2014, the average time served rose by around 37 percent.

And the 10 percent who have been in prison for the longest period, mostly serving sentences for violent crimes, saw their jail time by go up by 42 percent. 

Adam Gelb, director of the Public Safety Performance Project at The Pew Charitable Trusts, told the Marshall Project, the numbers didn't surprise him and that he sees them as proof of a system gone awry.

“There is little to no evidence that longer prison terms produce safety,” Gelb said. “If the objective is punishment for the sake of punishment, regardless of whether we are safer, then the present system is successful.”

The study based its findings on data collected between 2000 and 2014.

It found that in order to reduce the number of people incarcerated in the U.S., currently standing at 2.2 million people, the criminal justice system will have to look at how people who commit violent crimes are treated.

“You could take every nonviolent offender out of prison today. We would still have mass incarceration,” Michael Jacobson, director of the CUNY Institute for State and Local Governance told the Marshall Project. “Targeting low-level offenders is necessary, but it cannot resolve the prison population problem by itself.”

Click to read more ...


As Black Population Increases So Does the likelihood that a City Gov will use fines & fees to raise revenue

From [NPQ] In a study published in the May issue of the Journal of Politics on city government use of fines and court fees as a revenue stream, the authors found that as the proportion of black citizenry increases, so too does the likelihood that a city government will use fines and fees to raise revenue. The study analyzed more than 9,000 cities using data from the Census of Governments provided by the U.S. Census Bureau. These systems often act like debtor’s prisons.

Simple fines implemented to raise revenue can lead to crippling downward spirals when court dates are missed or fines can’t be paid. The authors find that cities with the largest proportion of black residents pay as much as $19 more per person per year than cities with the smallest proportion of black residents.

It gets worse. The study also calls out prior evidence indicating racial bias in pedestrian stops. Citing further studies, the authors suggest that politicians are more likely to communicate with constituents with similar descriptive traits and that citizens are more likely to communicate with same race representatives. Taken together, this paints a grim picture of local governance and exploitative fines. These are regressive taxes that hurt the poor, and insofar as minorities are targeted by police, it hurts poor minorities.

Click to read more ...


Lawsuit says Latino Man Surrendered with Hands in Air When Shot Dead by White Anaheim Cop

From [HERE] Attorneys representing Adalid Flores' family filed a federal lawsuit last week claiming the unarmed man surrendered when shot dead by an Anaheim cop in November. The story line starkly contrasts with an Orange County District Attorney (OCDA) report publicly released earlier this month that cleared officer Lorenzo J. Uribe—who had a past of being trigger-happy—in the shooting.

According to the agency's investigation, Flores fled the scene of a traffic collision on the 91 freeway in Anaheim on the night of November 19, 2016 and ran into the driveway of a nearby home. The report states he held one hand behind his back when officers confronted him. Flores refused to comply with repeated commands to show his hands. Officer Scott Eden, Uribe's partner, told investigators that he said Flores held a cellphone or thought he did. "Don't say that!" Uribe rebuffed the rookie policeman on the scene.

After issuing a final command for Flores to show his hands, Uribe opened fire four seconds later when he didn't. Police searched Flores only to find a cellphone. "By saying 'Don't say that,' the inference is Uribe already had the intent to shoot," says Humberto Guizar, an attorney for the family. "That's very powerful circumstantial evidence."

The forty-page complaint paints a different picture than the OCDA report. It states Flores held his hands in the air before being gunned down, a claim Guizar says is based on information he's received from witnesses. As Flores "raised his hands in the air," the suit reads, "Uribe drew his firearm and opened fire on...Flores in the front yard of a residence."

The Guizar, Henderson & Carrazco firm hasn't had the opportunity yet to review any body-worn camera footage of the shooting. The OCDA report cites video evidence that purportedly shows Flores holding an object behind his back "in a manner that suggested it was a gun." But the suit counters that Flores posed no threat of imminent death to officers before the shooting and was denied immediate medical assistance after it.

The litigation on behalf of Flores' four children, their mother and his parents seeks a jury trial and unspecified damages. In making their case, lawyers summon the Anaheim Riots that happened five years ago when two Latino men were killed by police in back-to-back shootings. "The protests reflect a deep racial division in Anaheim which is historically rooted between APD and minority communities," the suit reads before criticizing a "code of silence" within the department.

Click to read more ...


New White Judge Appointed in Laquan McDonald Case Alleging Conspiracy by 3 White Cops to Cover Up his Murder

From [HERE] After one judge recused herself and another was removed at the request of the special prosecutor, Cook County associate judge Domenica Stephenson will manage the trial of three former Chicago Police Department (CPD) officers charged with allegedly covering up Laquan McDonald's 2014 shooting death by ex-colleague Jason Van Dyke. Stephenson is a white woman. [MORE]

The Chicago Sun-Times reported yesterday (July 18) that Stephenson replaced county circuit court judge Diane Gordon Cannon to administer the trial against former detective David March and former officers Joseph Walsh and Thomas Gaffney. A Cook County grand jury charged each man with felony conspiracy, misconduct and obstruction of justice charges last month. ABC 7 reported at the time that the indictment accuses the officers of collaborating with Van Dyke, who is White, to mask the truth of his fatal encounter with the Black teen. McDonald's videotaped killing and the subsequent cover-up allegations provoked major protests that led to former police superintendent Garry McCarthy's resignation and Cook County state's attorney Anita Alvarez's electoral defeat. Van Dyke still faces six murder, one misconduct and 16 aggravated battery charges—one for each of the 16 bullets he shot into McDonald's body.

Special prosecutor Patricia Brown Holmes filed a motion, published by DNAInfo, to replace Cannon last week. The motion notes that any prosecutor or defense attorney who requests a judge's replacement—an option also available to attorneys representing each of the three defendants—must prove that the judge is biased against their argument. Holmes declined to tell media outlets why she filed the motion, which also doesn't specify her justification.

DNAInfo reports that Cannon previously acquitted CPD commander Glenn Evans on charges that he allegedly shoved his gun into the mouth of 22-year-old Ricky Williams and threatened to kill him in 2013—an accusation supported by a state police forensic scientist's finding that Williams' DNA was on the barrel of the gun. 

Cannon replaced the trial's first judge, county circuit judge Mary Margaret Brosnahan, who recused herself, per the Chicago Tribune. Brosnahan did not explain her decision, but the Tribune cites unpublished police records revealing that Kriston Kato, her husband and a former CPD detective, visited the scene of McDonald's killing as a Fraternal Order of Police union representative and spoke with involved officers.

Per the Sun-Times, Judge Stephenson made headlines earlier this year for two cases: one where she dismissed convictions against four men incarcerated for a 1995 double murder, and another where she sentenced a cab driver to 22 years behind bars for sexually assaulting a woman during an attempted robbery. Stephenson told the Sun-Times that the next court hearing for the case is set for August 29.


Racist Fox News is unusually focused on the Skin Color & Nationality of the officer who Killed White Woman 

In the history of modern law enforcement there has not been a a single instance of a black police officer shooting or killing an unarmed white person. [MORE] Above, hater of Blacks, Tucker Carlson would care less if this tragic incident happened to a non-white person. Go fuck yourself buddy. 

White Lives Matter Most to FoxNews. From [HERE] On July 17, developments emerged in two cases of fatal officer-involved shootings, but Fox News rushed to cover only one of them and focused disproportionately on the officer’s nationality in doing so.

On the day Balch Springs, Texas, police officer Roy Oliver was indicted for the fatal shooting of Jordan Edwards, a black teenager, news broke of the July 15 shooting of an Australian woman by a Minneapolis, MN, police officer who was later identified as Mohamed Noor. Noor is Somali-American. While Fox News aired several segments about Noor, the network made not a single mention of the indictment of Oliver, who is white, continuing its disinterest in the case since Edwards was killed on April 29 in Dallas, TX.

In the first three days of coverage following the shooting of Justine Ruszczyk (who went by the surname of her fiancé, Don Damond), Fox News covered the story in 11 segments, six of which mentioned that the officer was “Somali-American,” an "immigrant" from Somalia, the first Somali-American to patrol that precinct, or that Minneapolis boasts a “very significant Somali population.” A Fox News article online began both its headline and body with Noor’s Somali background. In the same period, MSNBC and CNN both dedicated seven and 14 segments, respectively, to the story. CNN reporters did mention his Somali-American identity twice when prompted by hosts for more details about his background. MSNBC did not mention that he is Somali-American.

Fox News’ Tucker Carlson went so far as to claim the mainstream media is engaged in a deliberate cover-up of the officer’s nationality. On the July 18 edition of his show, Carlson said, "Mohamed Noor was an immigrant from Somalia. Is that a relevant fact? We don't know. But it's being treated as one by many news organizations. How do you know that? Because they're not reporting it."

Click to read more ...


Video Appears to Show Baltimore Cops Planting Drugs to Fabricate Evidence Against [Black] Man in Felony Case

From [HERE] and [HERE] It was a routine drug arrest in one of Baltimore’s more troubled neighborhoods. But it has become a flash point sparked by video from one of the officer’s body cameras.

The public defender’s office looked at the video and contended it showed an officer planting evidence in a trash-strewn alley.

Baltimore police countered with a more complicated explanation. They are investigating whether the officer had legitimately found drugs but, realizing he had forgotten to turn on his body camera, reconstructed his find. His body camera captured both him hiding the drugs and then finding them. Authorities said that would be improper but would not be an effort to make a false arrest of an innocent citizen. [It would also be improper to use such fake video to convict someone of a felony!]

The video led prosecutors to drop the felony drug case against a suspect who had been jailed for nearly six months. Baltimore police said one officer has been suspended and two others were placed on desk duty amid an internal investigation.

One officer has been suspended and two others have been placed on administrative duty, police said. Police said they have not reached any conclusions as to the conduct depicted in the video. Other cases in which the officers are involved are now under review as well, police and prosecutors said.

The case is among the latest to show the challenges faced by the growing number of police agencies whose officers wear cameras, including questions of when officers should start and stop recording, and how much discretion they should be given. [huh? stop & start the public's cameras?]

The public defender’s office, which released the footage, said it was recorded by an officer during a drug arrest in January. It shows the officer placing a soup can, which holds a plastic bag, into a trash-strewn lot.

That portion of the footage was recorded automatically, before the officer activated the camera. After placing the can, the officer walks to the street, and flips his camera on.

“I’m gonna go check here,” the officer says. He returns to the lot and picks up the soup can, removing the plastic bag, which is filled with white capsules.

Police cameras have a feature that saves the 30 seconds of video before activation, but without audio. When the officer is first in the alley, there is no audio for the first 30 seconds.

The public defender’s office flagged the video for prosecutors last week, prompting prosecutors to drop the heroin possession charge against the man arrested.

The man, unable to post $50,000 bail, had been in jail since January, according to attorney Deborah Levi, who is leading a new effort to track police misconduct cases for the public defender’s office.

Levi said prosecutors called the officer just days later as a witness in another case — without disclosing the allegations of misconduct on the officer’s part to the defense attorney in that case.

“You can’t try a case with that guy and not tell anyone about it,” Levi said.

Click to read more ...


Bored NJ Cops Making More Marijuana Arrests Than Ever Before & Racial Disparities Are at All-Time High 

Latino and Black New Jerseyans Get More Traffic Tickets and Summonses

From [HERE] Hispanic and black drivers have been more likely than white drivers to be ticketed by New Jersey State Police troopers in the eight years since federal monitoring of the agency ended, according to the Stanford Open Policing Project’s data set covered in the Daily Record. Data from 2009 to 2016 revealed that Hispanic drivers were 28% more likely to receive tickets than white drivers when pulled over. In addition, white drivers were more likely than black drivers (46% vs. 41%) to receive a warning following a stop, rather than a summons.

Carmen Salavarrieta, the director of Angels for Action, suggested that Hispanics may receive summonses at higher rates because some are prohibited from having a driver’s license due to their immigration status. Gov. Chris Christie has opposed creating a system for issuing licenses for undocumented immigrants, a reform that Salavarrieta hopes the next governor will support. The Stanford Open Policing Project has 130 million records from 31 state police agencies across the country. 

Racial Disparity in New Jersey Marijuana Arrests

From 19,607 arrests in 2000 to 24,067 in 2013, New Jersey police are making more marijuana possession arrests than ever before and racial disparities in the state’s marijuana arrests are at an all-time high, according to the American Civil Liberties Union of New Jersey. Black New Jerseyans were arrested for marijuana possession about three times as often as whites in 2013, despite marijuana use being similar among racial groups. In some small towns, blacks are arrested 25 to 30 times as often as whites for this offense, reports This report comes at a time when the New Jersey legislature is considering legalizing recreational use of marijuana, though it does not have support from Gov. Chris Christie.


New Jersey Legislation Aims to Teach Children How to [NGHR OBEY US] Interact with "Police"

The New Jersey state Assembly passed legislation requiring schools to teach children how to interact with police in “a manner marked by mutual cooperation and respect,” reports NBC News. The legislation, which would affect students in kindergarten to 12th grade, needs to be passed by the Senate before it reaches the governor’s desk. However, not all believe that this bill would be helpful in improving police-civilian relations. “This legislation does not empower young people, especially those living in brown and black communities. Instead, it empowers law enforcement by allowing them to continue to evade accountability for abuse and misconduct while forcing the burden on the public,” says New Jersey teacher and activist Zellie Imani. Texas recently passed similar legislation mandating that high school students be taught how to interact with police, while law enforcement undergoes civilian-interaction training.