Venezuela Blocked From Moving $2 Billion in Gold as Territorial Gangsters Unite the System of White Supremacy [Republicans, Democrats & Elite Media] to Steal Resources [oil, bauxite, iron, silver]

From [Bloomberg] The embattled Nicolas Maduro regime had its plans to ship 20 tons of Venezuelan gold overseas halted as a growing international push to ring-fence the country’s dwindling hard assets unnerved those handling the transaction, according to a person with direct knowledge of the matter.

The gold bars, which are worth about $850 million, had been weighed and separated in the central bank vaults for transportation, but will not be sent out anytime soon, the person said. The bank has quietly transformed into a microcosm of the crisis: Some staffers, fearful of getting ensnared in U.S. sanctions and worn down by the crippling economic collapse, have begun to disregard orders, prompting senior management to oust them.

The blocking of the 20-ton shipment comes just a week after the Bank of England denied Maduro officials’ request to withdraw $1.2 billion of gold stored there. While the destination of the gold and the nature of the transactions aren’t known with certainty, it’s unusual for a country to be shipping around such massive amounts. And the U.S. officials who are leading the push to have Maduro cede power to a transitional government contend that the attempted transactions form part of his authoritarian regime’s bid to ransack the country in its final days in power.

Bloomberg reports “the central bank’s foreign reserves, including the gold, are down to a mere $8 billion.” Those assets form a key part of the fierce battle for control of Venezuela’s finances between Maduro who was elected after an election approved by Western election observers and Juan Guaido, the National Assembly leader installed by Crimeth Inc - he did not run for president. Rather he simply raised his hand in the air at a rally and proclaimed that he had the right to rule - and US authorities agreed. [MORE] Venezuela has the world’s largest oil reserves, surpassing Saudi Arabia a country run by psychopaths who have regular beheadings and sanction slavery with US approval.


According to FUNKTIONARY:

territorial gangsters - individuals (masquerading as "the State" so-called) who skillfully use fraud, coercion, and terror to claim "jurisdiction" (so-called) over their victims who happen to be in some geographic territory. Territorial gangsters brainwash their victims (the pixelated populace) so that they will work for them not only like slaves but actually as slaves. (See: Stationary Bandits, Statutory Oppression, Jurisdiction, Allegiance, Involuntary Servitude, Slave & Tyrant-Paradigm) terrorism - the implementation of the principle/concept of limited liability. 2) "A system of government that seeks to rule by intimidation." -Funk & Wagnalls New Practical Standard Dictionary, 1946. All acts of terrorism, even those carried out by those outside of the fold of the machinations of Corporate State and its minions (territorial gangsters), are either political or religious expressions. One's man's ideology is another man's religion and vice-versa. Terrorism and the terrorists who carry it out is a kind of psycho-economic Thug-of-War—leaving the countless shattered lives of innocents in its wake. (See: Corporations, War, Corporate State, Territorial Gangsters, Patriot Act, Mononright, Wargasm, Racism White Supremacy, Cryptocracy, Sovereignty, Crimethlnc, Violence, Coercion, Oppression, BOP & Gangbanking)

Orderlies - ordained authorities—those who are trained by the Pathocracy how to scientifically use your mind against you imperceptibly and repeatedly. 2) wardens of the prison planet serving the will of the global elite—your invisible masters. The Orderlies have been duped into and charged by the overruling Pathocracy for the implementation and orchestration of an eventual electronic matrix system of active brain chipping, mind-alienation, genetic modification and population control. Those dressed in authoritative costumes—doubling as uniforms—are kept the most uninformed. The Orderlies implement all the insidious things the Pathocracy conjures up through their foundations and think tanks to constantly plague and depopulate the masses around the world. Orderlies are recruited and vetted for a psychological propensity for inflicting untold strife in (and between) life participants viewed as the profane or "useless eaters" by the overruling dynastic-aristocratic pathological elite. The operatives in and behind government (i.e., orderlies) want and need us to be afraid and invest heavily in creating docile fear-ridden citizens. Orderlies' primary responsibility is fidelity to the overruler's status quo and whose primary responsibility to global racism white supremacy is to console us for our boredom within it and our bondage to it; to deflect our attention away from the reflection of the marvelous in other's eyes who have escaped it or exposed it for all to see—if not directly—at leas indirectly in the eyes of those who are free—who indulge in what its like to finally be Tasty-Free, i.e., so free that anything tha: doesn't constitute freedom registers on your tongue as budding tyranny which is immediately reduced to spittle and dislodgec with a scorn of putrid disdain—even the aftertaste wreaks of pain. This planet is imprisoned by much stronger bars than iror and steel—mental bars of obedient acquiescence far exceed the reach of metal. The orderlies are the same everywhere (like in the movie "The Matrix.") Do we have the courage to see them and overtake them—raising our level of resistance and collecthe consciousness at the same time? Only crime will tell. Holla! (See: Good Shepherd, Pathocracy, Matrix, Eugenics, Chemtrails. Police, Bureaucracy, The Dark Majesty, Law Enforcement, Rut & Realitrix)

Based on an “Anonymous" Tip, White St Paul Cops were Looking for Any “Black Man w/Dreadlocks" when They Stopped & Assaulted Frank Baker & their Released K-9 Mauled His Leg- 1 Cop Arraigned

frank baker.jpg

From [HERE] A white St. Paul police officer indicted by a federal grand jury for using excessive force against a man while apprehending him in 2016 pleaded not guilty in federal court in Minneapolis Thursday.

Officer Brett Palkowitsch kicked Frank Baker, then 52, as a police dog bit into Baker’s leg. Baker filed a federal lawsuit against St. Paul and the city agreed to a historic $2 million settlement in 2017.

Palkowitsch, 31, is charged with one count of deprivation of rights — a federal civil rights violation.

The indictment alleges Palkowitsch “used unreasonable force when he kicked” Baker repeatedly when he “was on the ground and in the grips of a police canine, resulting in bodily injury,” according to a statement from the FBI’s Minneapolis field office.

Officer Brett Palkowitsch said little during the hearing other than to acknowledge to the judge he understand the nature of the allegations against him and that he will cooperate with the terms of his release while his case is pending.

Those terms include surrendering his passport, firearm, and agreeing to limit his travel to within Minnesota and Wisconsin unless approved by probation, the judge said.

He also was ordered to have no contact with the man he’s accused of using excessive force against as well as eight other officers who responded to the scene and may be called as witnesses.

His attorney, Deborah Ellis, pushed back when the U.S. attorney’s office tried to include a ninth officer on the list who is a good friend of Palkowitsch’s.

Ellis told the judge that while she could understand prohibiting her client’s discussion of the case with the officer, limiting his contact with a good friend in entirety seemed “overly broad and unnecessary.”

Federal prosecutor, Christopher Perras, said his office made the request because it discovered during its investigation into the case that Palkowitsch made several attempts to reach out to at least one fellow officer who had been at the scene of the incident in what seemed like an attempt to “get (their stories) straight.”

The federal government wanted to take measures to make sure that didn’t happen with any other potential witnesses, including Palkowitsch’s friend and colleague, Perras said.

Menendez ended up allowing Palkowitsch to have contact with the officer in question so long as there was no discussion of the case.

The federal indictment stems from Palkowitsch’s conduct toward Frank Baker in June of 2016.

St. Paul officers responded to an anonymous report of a man with a gun, described as black and having dreadlocks. The person with the gun was described as a black man with dreadlocks who had been wearing a white T-shirt, according to the settlement agreement. That is the cops had no other corroborating details, such the suspect's height, weight, build, complexion, hair length, facial hair, age or what color jacket, shirt, pants or whether the suspect had a hat on, a hoodie etc. He was black and that was good enough to these white public rulers despite so-called 4th Amendment rights [In order for the police to stop you the Supreme Court has ruled that police must have reasonable articulable suspicion that there is criminal activity afoot and that you are involved in the activity. Police may not act on on the basis of an inchoate or unclear and unparticularized suspicion or a hunch - there must be some specific articulable facts along with reasonable inferences from those facts to justify the intrusion]. [MORE]   

Baker, returning to his East Side apartment at the time, fit this limitless general description because he is Black and had dreadlocks but was unarmed and was not the suspect.

A police K-9 held Baker’s leg for 70 seconds and Palkowitsch kicked him three times in the ribs, police have said. Baker was hospitalized for two weeks with seven fractured ribs and both his lungs collapsed.

Palkowitsch wrote in a police report at the time that he kicked Baker because he believed the man was armed and wasn’t complying with officers’ orders. There appear to be no articulable facts to support his belief that Baker was armed.

Police say no gun was found on the man or in the surrounding scene.

“The decisions and conclusions you made are troubling,” Chief Todd Axtell wrote in the settlement agreement. “You responded to anonymous information about a fight and man with a gun. No witness ever identified this citizen or his vehicle as being involved to you or any other officer and he was three apartment buildings away from the original call location.”

“According to your report and statement, the citizen was never seen with a gun nor did he display any aggression toward you,” Axtell continued in the report. “The entire interaction from when you gave the first verbal command until releasing your K-9 partner was less than 20 seconds.”

Axtell said Ficcadenti’s tactical decisions weren’t consistent with his police training nor his specialty K-9 training. He also said Ficcadenti’s decision to release the K-9 and run toward the citizen with his firearm in his holster was “reckless at best” and created a hazard for Ficcadenti and the assisting officers. [MORE]

Ficcadenti was suspended for 30 days even though a civilian review commission recommended 10 days. He will also not return to the K-9 unit. 

St. Paul police chief fired him after the incident, but Palkowitsch appealed the termination and his employment with the police department was reinstated.

The 2016 encounter with Baker happened the day after Todd Axtell became St. Paul’s police chief. He was placed on paid administrative leave from the force after he being indicted.

Axtell, who apologized to Baker, fired Palkowitsch in 2016. The officer appealed the decision.

In October 2016, the St. Paul Police Civilian Internal Affairs Review Commission decided that Palkowitsch and K-9 Officer Brian Ficcadenti’s “use of force were both excessive and improper.” The commission recommended a 10-day suspension for Ficcadenti and a 30-day suspension for Palkowitsch.

In a departure from that recommendation, Axtell decided to suspend Ficcadenti for 30 days and to terminate Palkowitsch.

But in 2017, a state arbitrator ruled that Palkowitsch should get his job back. He received a 30-day suspension for excessive force and improper procedure.

Palkowitsch returned to work as a St. Paul officer and was most recently a Western District patrol officer. He has been a St. Paul officer since 2013.

The next hearing in his case is scheduled to take place March 14.

“No Reverence for Life." $20M Suit says Stephon Clark Posed No Threat to White Sacramento Cops who Shot at Him 20X while Holding a Cell Phone in His Backyard & Prevented Medics From Rendering Aid

sacremento+cops+aint+shit (1).png

From [HERE] The family of a Black man shot in a barrage of bullets fired by Sacramento police has filed a $20 million federal lawsuit, claiming officers racially profiled the victim in a case that's drawn national interest in the ongoing debate about excessive force.

Lawyers for the family of Stephon Clark say the officers failed to identify themselves as police before they abruptly began firing at Clark in his grandparents' backyard on March 18. Officers suggested in a preliminary investigation that they thought Clark had a gun, but he was only carrying a cellphone when he died.

"The involved officers . . . fired 20 shots striking (Clark) approximately eight times," including shots as he was going to the ground and shots after he had already went down to the ground. At the time of the shooting, DECEDENT was unarmed, with nothing but a cell phone in his hand.”

"The conduct of officers Terrence Mercadal and Jared Robinet was willful, wanton, malicious, and done with reckless disregard for the rights and safety" of Clark, the lawsuit alleges. It says the officers violated Clark's basic civil rights.

At the time of the shooting Clark posed no immediate threat of death or serious physical injury to either Officers TERRENCE MERCADAL or JARED ROBINET, or any other person, especially since he was unarmed and since he was going to the ground or already on the ground when he was shot, including multiple shots to his back.

Officers did not give Clark a verbal warning that deadly force would be used prior to shooting him multiple times, despite it being feasible to do so and they did not issue appropriate commands to Clark. Further, the involved officers did not announce themselves as police prior to the shooting.

Further, Clark was not suspected of committing any serious crime, the involved officers did not observe him commit any crime, the involved officers had no information that he was armed with a weapon, and there was no information that he had physically injured anyone.

The involved officers shot Clark even though he was not an immediate threat of death or serious bodily injury to the officers or anyone else and there were other less than lethal options available. Officers TERRENCE MERCADAL and JARED ROBINET did not show a reverence for human life.

The involved officers are responsible for every single shot they fired and this was not an immediate defense of life situation.

After striking Clark approximately eight (8) times, TERRENCE MERCADAL and JARED ROBINET did not provide or summons timely medical attention for Clark, who was bleeding profusely and had obvious serious injuries, and TERRENCE MERCADAL and JARED ROBINET also did not allow and prevented responding medical personnel on-scene to timely render medical aid/assistance to him. [MORE]

10 months after the incident the Sacramento District Attorney's Office said in a statement that it is continuing its review of the case to see if criminal charges might apply. [Dont hold your breath in system of injustice].

"As always, our review will only address the question of whether the conduct of the two Sacramento Police officers constitutes a prosecutable crime under established California law," the statement said.

The California Attorney General’s Office has previously indicated it will also conduct an independent review of the incident.

Amid Bigotry Expose Ralph Northam Admits He Darkened His Skin to Deal w/Color Deficiency Anxiety & “Resemble Michael Jackson," a Negro who Recreated Himself in the Image of Caucasians

From [CNN] Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam said he does not believe he is either person in the racist photo that appeared in his 1984 yearbook but that he did once darken his face to resemble Michael Jackson during a dance contest in 1984.

In a remarkable, hour-long news conference at the Governor's Mansion in Richmond, Northam defended himself from the cacophony of calls for his resignation, but acknowledged that he had made mistakes on race in his past, like when he darkened his face for the dance contest.

"I believe now and then that I am not either of the people in this photo," Northam said, denying that he had ever worn a KKK robe and hood or been drunk enough to forget a moment like this. "This was not me in that picture. That was not Ralph Northam."

The racist photograph, which was obtained by CNN, appears in the 1984 Eastern Virginia Medical School yearbook and shows one person dressed in blackface and another in the KKK's signature white hood and robes.

michael jackson moon guy.jpg

White Supremacy Paradox. Scholar Anthony Browder explains that ‘Michael Jackson was obsessed with an age old mental disorder called artificial assimilation - the overwhelming desire to recreate oneself in the image other than one’s own. He perfected the meaning of crossover.’ He was what FUNKTIONARY describes as a “negro” -see below.

Similarly, but from the other end of the imaginary hierarchy based on lack of skin color and melanin, Mr. Northam must have been in undercover great anxiety in the presence of color, proximately causing him to darken his skin, momentarily changing what he also hated about himself - back in the day that is.

Dr. Frances Cress Welsing explained that racists suffer from color deficiency and numerical inadequacy. She stated,

“The difficulty whites have in according non-whites socio-political and economic equality within the white supremacy structure stems neither from a moral issue nor from political or economic need, but from the fundamental sense of their own unequal condition - in regards to their numerical inadequacy and color deficiency. They can compensate for their color inadequacy only by placing themselves in socially superior positions. The color inadequacy of whiteness necessitates a social struc­ture based on white superiority. Only tokenism can be tolerated by such a motivational psychological state, wherein the evolution of the myth of the exceptional non-white is used, again, as a defense mechanism.”

Nevertheless bigotry is not a system of racism white supremacy. Contrary to the outrage by The Moteasuh Tribe [more tea sir?] Although it is unlikely he will survive the media fallout, It remains to be seen whether Northam, a racist suspect, actually practices racism in the right now. That is, seen through his actions. As explained by Neely Fuller the question is not ‘why did you call me NGHR? but rather what do you plan to do with a NGHR or do to a NGHR? The Moteasuh Tribe’s politics revolve around Yurugu “doing the right thing.” Said somnesiacs could create a Bigot Jail & Rehabilitation Center and fill it with bigots and yet the system of racism/white supremacy would continue unabated as the primary source of all Black people's problems & their ‘continuous state of checkmate.’ Anyone can be a bigot regardless of color but there is no system of Black supremacy anywhere in the world. Thus, there are no Black racists practicing racism. As explained by Dr. Blynd in FUNKTIONARY;

bigot - one who manifests and expresses self hatred and self inferiority. Not to be confused with racism

Bigotry - manifestation of the self-alien(h)ated and self hatred projected towards others, especially those of a different so-called race. Bigotry is personal, whereas white supremacy racism is an institutionalized group power dynamic and impersonal. 

Negro - a man or woman of Afrikan descent living in pathological mental state of cultural abstinence and historical amnesia— one who wants to impress his or her oppressor while ignoring the effects and plight that his or her accommodationist posture inures. 2) a Hanky-head. 3) an indigenous-to-the-land (American) Afrikan who does everything in his or her power to suppress or pretend that he or she is other than someone of recent Afrikan descent. 4) ethnicity-denying, assimilated and confused Afrikans indigenous to America. 5) one who truly believes he or she is white American—masquerading in black face. Mirror, mirror on the wall, who's a Negro after all? (See: Snigger, Rentellectual, McNegro & Negropolitan)

Why Did a White Cop Run a Warrants Check on a Black Teen Passenger After a Faulty Headlight Stop & Then Shoot Him as he Fled? Trial is Set but Judge says Memphis Can’t be Held Accountable

Officer Schilling.jpg

From [HERE] and [HERE] U.S. District Judge Samuel Mays Jr. has denied a motion from the family of Darrius Stewart to delay the civil trial against the former Memphis police officer who shot him while they try again to have the city included as a defendant in the case.

Mays ruled last week that the city of Memphis was not responsible in Stewart's July 2015 killing, removing the city as a defendant in the case, which is scheduled to go to trial Feb. 25. Stewart was shot by former Memphis police officer Connor Schilling.

Stewart's family has filed an appeal in the ruling that exonerates the city and asked Mays to delay the civil trial against Schilling until there is a ruling on their appeal.

Carlos Moore, an attorney representing the family, said if the appeal is successful, the delay would allow them to have only one trial.

However, Mays noted in his order that there is a federal policy against piecemeal appeals.

The suit alleged “the City of Memphis has a history of its police officers shooting unarmed black men who are attempting to flee.”

According to court filings, on July 17, 2015, Darrius Stewart was a passenger in a vehicle stopped by Officer Schilling. The alleged basis for the stop was a faulty headlight. Each of the occupants of the vehicle complied with Officer Schilling’s instructions and answered his questions truthfully. None of the occupants of the vehicle had used alcohol or drugs on that date.

For unknown reasons, Officer Schilling indicated that he was going to run a computer query regarding whether or not any of the occupants had outstanding warrants. The Memphis Police Department has a practice of checking on young black males more often for warrants than it does for older white males.

Officer Schilling allegedly received information that indicated that Stewart might have outstanding warrants, although Plaintiffs dispute the validity of the warrants and allege that he was innocent of any charges purportedly made against him while he was a minor. (Id. at ¶¶ 15- 17.) Stewart had been stopped previously by the Memphis Police Department but had never been advised of outstanding warrants.

Officer Schilling began being “rough” with Stewart before Officer Schilling knew of the warrants, and he asked Stewart to exit the vehicle. Stewart fully complied with the directions of Officer Schilling and exited the vehicle and allowed himself to be “patted down” to satisfy Officer Schilling that he was not armed and did not pose a threat. Officer Schilling then placed Stewart in the caged backseat of the police car, without being handcuffed and without being placed under arrest.

Officer Schilling issued a citation to the driver of the vehicle and allowed that vehicle to leave the scene. (Id. at ¶ 26.) Before allowing the vehicle to leave, Officer Schilling had not received any radio transmissions regarding any law enforcement entity’s intent to transport or detain Stewart.

Officer Shilling left his radio on after receiving a coded transmission that alerted him that he needed to receive radio transmission information outside the presence of Stewart. Stewart overheard the radio transmission that he was to be held on outstanding warrants.

Officer Schilling then decided to arrest Stewart and place him in handcuffs. After Officer Schilling opened the door to the back of the police car, Stewart tried to flee, and Officer Schilling began assaulting him.

Schilling claimed that after running out of the patrol car, Darrius bit him, twisted his genitals, got on top of him, punched him, struck him with his own handcuffs, and tried to grab his gun.

Ernestine Parrot testified that she saw the struggle and that Stewart was never on top of Schilling. Although Parrot did not see the entire struggle, she did see the relevant portion: the few minutes leading up to the first shot. Schilling testified that Stewart was on top of him towards the end of the fight, just before Schilling shot Stewart. Schilling claimed that Stewart punched him. Two witnesses dispute that. Parrot testified that she “didn’t see Stewart, you know, fighting [Schilling] or hitting him or nothing like that.” William Rogers testified that he “didn’t see any punches” from Stewart.

Schilling’s argument that, based on photographic evidence, it is indisputable that Stewart hit him with handcuffs is not persuasive. Photographs taken the night of the shooting show little or no damage to Schilling’s head and face.

While Officer Schilling was on top of Stewart on the ground, Stewart loudly cried “I can’t breath” or “I can’t f**king breath.”

During the struggle, Officer Schilling shot Stewart once in the upper right chest; the first gunshot was not a fatal shot and was not the cause of the death of Stewart. Some period of time passed, and Officer Schilling shot Stewart again as Stewart stood up and was in the process of turning and fleeing away from the scene. The second shot was fatal. Stewart was unarmed when he attempted to flee and was killed by Officer Schilling.

Schilling claimed that he fired the shots no more than two seconds apart. However, witness testimony suggests it was longer than that. Rogers testified that the shots were fired between fifteen and twenty seconds apart. Parrot, who says she was standing near Stewart and Schilling as they struggled, testified that, after the first gunshot, she “ran to [her] car, jumped in [her] car, took off down the street and made a right turn . . . and [then] heard another shot.” That would take longer than two seconds.

Shelby County District Attorney General Amy Weirich recommend a voluntary manslaughter charge, but a grand jury opted not to indict Schilling.

Schilling has retired from the Memphis Police Department, citing post traumatic stress disorder brought on by Stewart's shooting.

The civil suit against Schilling is expected to begin at the end of February.

Suit says After Black Man Ridiculed Easton Police Online, 10 White Cops Broke Into His House, Assaulted Him in Front of His Kids, Spit On Him & said “NGHR You Have No Rights"

easton cops.jpg

From [HERE] and [HERE] A federal lawsuit says an “obsessed” Easton police officer stalked an Black man, then obtained a bogus warrant to conduct a bogus raid, and then at the raid hurled racial epithets, kicked and stomped on the man.

The lawsuit filed by 31-year-old Jermaine Newsome in federal court names Easton police officer Brian Burd and 14 other members of the Easton Police Department as defendants.

The suit filed Jan. 25 accuses Burd of repeatedly using racial epithets during the raid, including “n----r you have no rights.” It accuses Burd and Lieutenant Matthew Gerould of kicking and stomping on Newsome as he lay prone on his belly while another officer allegedly spit on him.

Jermaine Newsome and his fiance, Becky Liberti, filed the suit Friday against more than a dozen Easton cops, the mayor, city administrator and the city of Easton.

The suit alleges that officers used excessive force against Newsome in retaliation for a "spoof" video he posted on Facebook.

According to the lawsuit:

On Jan. 2, 2017, Easton police conducted a traffic stop on Newsome, of Allentown, near his fiance's apartment in the 100 block of South 13th Street. The officer found no unlawful activity so Newsome was free to go.

Later that day, Newsome "spoofed the encounter" in a video on Facebook.

Det. Brian Burd found the video and another one online. He and another detective found the video offensive and began to "stalk" Newsome and his fiance, the suit alleges.

Burd became "so obsessed with retaliating against Newsome" that at least twice, he went through the trash bins outside of the Easton apartment building looking for illegal activity, the suit says.

Burd applied for a warrant to search the Easton apartment, "falsifying and misrepresenting the affidavit of probable cause in such a way as to unlawfully induce the judge to approve" it. Newsome lives in Allentown but the warrant was for the apartment where his fiance, Becky Liberti, lives.

The lawsuit says 10 Easton police officers in riot gear broke down the front door and windows of Liberti’s home at 6 a.m. on the date of the raid. Newsome, Liberti and three kids in the home, ages 9 months, 4 and 8, woke up to glass shattering and at least a dozen men dressed in black outside of the house.

After attacking Newsome in front of the crying children, an Easton police officer allegedly yanked Newsome to his feet while another officer said, “n----r you will never walk peacefully in Easton again.”

The suit says the officers broke down the door and pointed guns at Newsome, who was already on the floor facedown.

Burd and Lt. Matthew Gerould kicked and stomped on Newsome multiple times, yelled racial slurs at him and called him a "cop killer," the suit alleges. Another officer spit on him.

Newsome was on the floor for about 30 minutes while the officers beat him and pointed guns at him, Liberti and the children. Newsome was then handcuffed and punched in the face, the suit says.

It accuses officer Burd of repeatedly using racial epithets during the raid, including “n----r you have no rights.” It accuses Burd and Lieutenant Matthew Gerould of kicking and stomping on Newsome as he lay prone on his belly while another officer allegedly spit on him.

Newsome was taken to police headquarters and held for two hours before being released. He then went to the emergency room for treatment, the suit says.

On Jan. 31, 2017, Burd charged Newsome with possession of a small amount of marijuana and the possession of drug paraphernalia [apparently found during the unlawful search].  Newsome pleaded to the charges in Aug. 2017 and paid a $150 fine.

easton cops 2.jpg

Newsome and Liberti are also suing the city of Easton, the police department, police chief, mayor and administrator for not properly training officers on use of force and not investigating the alleged misconduct.

Newsome and Liberti are suing on 19 counts total and are requesting a jury trial.

The city of Easton said it has not yet been served with the lawsuit so cannot comment.

Jury Deliberating Whether White Rochester Cops were Justified Knocking Black Man Out of his Wheelchair & Beating Him in a Fetal Position at the Bus Stop After He Disturbed the Peace of the Masters

From [HERE] Almost six years after Benny Warr's arrest during a highly publicized confrontation with white police officers — an incident caught on cellphone cameras and shared widely on social media — a jury will try to decide just what happened and who was at fault.

Did the officers wrongly arrest Warr, who has a prosthetic leg and was sitting in a wheelchair, and then brutally beat him, as he claims?

Or did Warr intend to stage a scene, have a friend capture it on a cellphone, and then hope it could lead to a successful lawsuit?

These are the dueling tales that a federal jury has heard in a civil lawsuit over the past week. And, after closing arguments from the defense on Thursday afternoon, the jury now must decide which version is supported by the evidence — proof that included video from cellphones and city Blue Light cameras.

Even that video evidence lent itself to different interpretations, as Warr's attorney, Charles Burkwit, said it supported Warr's story and proved that the police had lied in their claims about the incident, while city attorney Spencer Ash said, "This video footage is an ally of ours."

benny warr.jpg

What video showed, and what testimony proved, was that shortly after 8 p.m. May 1, 2013, Warr was sitting outside a Jefferson Avenue office, eating an ice cream cone, as police drove by. According to testimony, the police shouted at a crowd gathered near Warr — but apparently not with him — to disperse. Police say business owners and residents often complain about loitering in the 500 block of Jefferson Avenue, where Warr was, and where drug activity is rampant.

Warr then crossed the street to a parking lot near a bus stop. He said he was waiting for a bus when Officers Anthony Liberatore and Joseph Ferrigno approached him. He testified that he was again told to move, but said he was simply waiting for the bus.

Police allege that Warr yelled profanities at them before he crossed the street, and continued to do so when they approached him near the bus stop. Because he had drawn an unruly crowd, they said, they had decided to charge him with disorderly conduct. He then fought back from his wheelchair, and, as they struggled to get his arms behind him, they had to use force and pepper spray to subdue him, police said. During the confrontation, he tumbled from the wheelchair — was pushed out, Warr said.

Police acknowledged that they kneed him in the abdomen, and Liberatore brought a powerful elbow down upon Warr's head as Warr was on the ground — uses of force that police said were by the book, especially given that Warr, who weighs 250-plus pounds, continued to fight back.

Warr said that he lay in the fetal position as he was beaten. "It was just happening so fast that I couldn't really see anything," he said.

Warr resolved the criminal charges against him by agreeing to what is known as an "adjournment in contemplation of dismissal," which allows for charges to be dismissed after six months if there are no other charges during that stretch.

Challenging claims

Warr has contended that he suffered three fractured ribs and a brain injury and has post-traumatic stress symptoms. Ash challenged those claims, noting that Warr previously suffered from chronic pain and drug addiction (Warr has been clean for years, testimony showed), and twice brought lawsuits claiming physical injuries — once against a movie theater in which a seat collapsed and another time against the driver of a vehicle in a car accident.

Plus, Ash said, if the beating was so brutal, why was there no photographic evidence to support it. Medical records reported only abrasions the night of the incident, Ash said.

"Why is there not one picture to present of how badly you were beaten and injured," Ash asked Warr, during Warr's testimony. 

"I don't know," Warr answered.

Burkwit said that the police fabricated rationale for the arrest after the beating. Ferrigno has said that Warr appeared to be involved in dice games and possible vice activity before the arrest, yet the Blue Light cameras showed nothing to corroborate that claim.

Plus, Burkwit said, had Warr been as unruly as the officers claimed when they first passed by the Jefferson Avenue block, why did they not approach him then instead of waiting until he was across the street.

"Mr. Warr wasn't saying any profanities," Burkwit said in his closing. "That's why these officers left him alone. ... They're trying to justify this arrest."

The officers grew irritated when Warr refused to leave the bus stop, Burkwit said, and that prompted the attempted arrest. "This was a planned attack," he said. "They were not going to take 'no' for an answer."

Also sued is Police Sgt. Mitchell Stewart.

U.S. Magistrate Judge Marian Payson ruled Thursday that Stewart could not be considered in a wrongful arrest claim, because he arrived after the incident started, but could still be considered in an excessive force claim. Liberatore and Ferrigno face both civil claims of wrongdoing.

Payson this week dismissed claims against former Police Chief James Sheppard, who was accused of improperly supervising the officers, who were largely exonerated in an internal review.

The jury is scheduled to begin deliberations Friday.

Despite Having a Broken Shoulder Black Man Should’ve Displayed Faster Compliance & Instant Obedience to White Cop’s Authority: Griffin Police OK its Use of Force After a Review of Itself

From [HERE] After a review, the city of Griffin Police Department determined that the officer shown in a viral Facebook video did not use excessive force against a driver.

Several FOX 5 Atlanta viewers shared the video and raised questions about the officer's actions. The clip shows the officer pin the man, later identified as Joshua McDowell, 32, against his vehicle and threaten to use a Taser on him.  A passenger in the truck recorded parts of McDowell's arrest. 

"I started getting messages and Facebook posts with the video of what happened," said Quantas Terrell, McDowell's fiancée.  "My heart dropped. My heart literally dropped because I didn't know what they were going to do to him." 

According to the Griffin Police Department, the officer witnessed McDowell complete a drug transaction and tried to pull him over.

"The officer knew Joshua McDowell by face and name, knew he had a history of taking flight and knew that he had multiple arrests for drug offenses," the police department said in a statement.  In other words he could predict the future and that in and of itself meets the 4th Amendment threshold. "McDowell initially complied.  However, during the placement of handcuffs on McDowell, he began to resist and attempted to flee."

griffin police 1.jpg

But the woman who was in the vehicle and shot the video disputes the police account.

Shakera Davis told FOX 5 McDowell complied with the officer's order to get out of the vehicle.

Davis claims the officer's bodycam fell off of him when she says the officer slammed McDowell into the vehicle.

She added the incident terrified her, and she plans to file a complaint about the officer's actions.

Terrell said McDowell was still healing from a broken shoulder and could not put his hand completely behind his back.  She still questions the officer's use of force.

"So I felt like it wasn't necessary for you to do all that, to throw him into the car -- to the door -- when you asked him to put his hands behind his back and he told you that he couldn't because his hand and shoulder was broke," said Terrell.  "Honestly, I hope they get rid of those officers because this shouldn't have to happen to anyone."

griffin police.jpg

Police officials, however, said the officer was justified and released body camera video of the traffic stop.

"The officers used the required amount of force reasonable to detain him even though a greater amount of force would have been authorized under the circumstances, such as a Taser or electronic control device," the statement said. 

McDowell was arrested and charged with obstruction of officers as well as possession of marijuana and ecstasy. 

After Assaulting a Black Woman White Fort Worth Cop Cuts a Deal to Get His Job Back Imposing Unwanted Compulsory Public “Service" by Force Onto the Community

fort worth cops .jpg

From [HERE] and [HERE] Activists and the Tarrant County District Attorney had strong reactions Wednesday to the decision to rehire a fired Fort Worth Police Sergeant.

Sgt. Kenneth Pierce, a 22 year veteran, was terminated by Fort Worth Police Chief Joel Fitzgerald in 2017 after the chief said police body camera video of an arrest showed Pierce used excessive force.

The deal approved Wednesday gives Pierce just a 35 day suspension, which Pierce has already served. He'll receive back pay for all but those 35 days and could be on duty again soon.

Pierce did not appear at a hearing on the settlement Wednesday but his attorney Terry Daffron did appear and said it was the right decision.

Dorshay Morris, the woman arrested in the video, was angry about the settlement.

“No justice has been done. He don’t deserve his job back,” Morris said.

The incident involved a domestic violence call by Morris about her boyfriend. When police arrived they found Morris carrying a knife. Pierce was seen in the video grabbing the woman. He ordered another officer to use a stun gun on her. An internal investigation found Morris should never have been arrested and the charges against her were dropped.

The woman’s lawyer, Jasmine Crockett, said a Grand Jury should have decided whether criminal charges were justified for the police officer’s conduct. She said race played a role in the outcome.

“This was unfair. In 2019 a week after MLK day, this is what we’re going through and it’s not right and we all should stand up and demand more,” Crockett said.

District Attorney Sharen Wilson wrote a letter to Police Chief Joel Fitzgerald last year saying that officers had legal justification for detaining Morris. The letter supported reduced administrative charges against the officer.

“In my opinion, under the law, she was lawfully detained and lawfully arrested,” Wilson said Wednesday.

But the letter also said prosecutors found no conduct by anyone in the incident to justify criminal charges. Wilson said the FBI had already come to the same conclusion that no grand jury review was appropriate.

“If we’re going to blame me, then we need to blame the FBI. A decision about criminal conduct is simply that,” she said.

The prosecutor said the city was still free to fire Pierce if it chose to do so for his handling of the incident and the office never offered opinions about what discipline was appropriate.

“That’s not what I do. So my only concern as the DA is looking at the evidence. Was a crime committed such that it should be taken to grand jury? And the answer in that letter, was no,” Wilson said.

Other Fort Worth police discipline cases are still pending and activists claimed the City of Fort Worth also agreed to this settlement to avoid additional hearings that could force Chief Fitzgerald to submit to questioning under oath. Fitzgerald was recently passed over for a job in Baltimore amid doubts about his truthfulness.

“They were more concerned about the image of Fort Worth than justice for Dorshay Morris,” said activist Michael Bell.

Assistant City Attorney Kelly Albin who represented the city at the hearing declined comment but the city issued a statement about the 35 day suspension later.

‘It is critically important to the City that Fort Worth Police Officers operate in a professional manner that is consistent with departmental expectations,” the statement said.

The suspension was imposed for agreed upon infractions of failure to supervise and failing to deescalate the situation.

Other allegations were dropped and Pierce dropped his complaint about being passed over for promotion to Lieutenant.

His attorney said Pierce could be back on duty within days after completing training that he missed while fired. She said it will be up to Fitzgerald to decide where to place Pierce in the department.

White Cops say They had a Legal Basis to Point a Shotgun at a Black Man & Niggerize Him Outside Walmart in Festus (MO) after an Uncorroborated False Flag 911 Call & b/c “He was Known to Us"

festus cops 2.jpg

From [HERE] On Tuesday, all available Festus police officers rushed to the Walmart store in the 600 block of south Truman Parkway believing they may encounter an active shooter situation, based on a call to 911.

"A caller stated a subject, by name, who was known to us, was in our Walmart threatening to shoot some people," said Capt. Doug Wendel

Wendel said as officers arrived, they saw the person named in the call coming out of the store with two others. In a photo, three men can be seen lying on the ground with officers around them and one of the officers holding a shotgun that shoots bean bag rounds.

A 20-year old man named in the 911 call told News 4 that he’d gone to Walmart to buy bottles for his newborn baby son.

After talking with the three men and independent witnesses, Wendel said officers determined the man had argued with two people in the store with whom he’d had a previous dispute. Investigators believe one of them called 911 and made a fake claim in order to get revenge.

festus cops 3.jpg

"This is a very serious matter. Had the subject come out and not been cooperative with police, it could have very well turned out to be a whole different situation," said Wendel.

News 4 spoke with an attorney for the man named in the 911 call who believes police handled the situation poorly. Matthew Brown released a statement that said:

“This was an incident that could have turned tragic because of the overreaction of the authorities.”

In White-Over-Black System the FBI Probed a Civil Rights Group as a Terrorist Threat and Considered the KKK as Victims

white supremacy chart 2.jpg

From [HERE] The FBI reportedly ran a surveillance operation on a civil rights group in California as part of a “domestic terrorism” investigation that labelled the activists as “extremists” and considered members of the Klu Klux Klan to be victims after protests against neo-Nazis at a rally in 2016.

According to documents obtained by The Guardian, the FBI began spying on By Any Means Necessary (BAMN), after a member of the civil rights group was stabbed at the white supremacist rally in June 2016 in Sacramento.

A 46-page FBI report on the group, which was later obtained through a records request by the government transparency nonprofit organization Property of the People, showed that the agency investigated BAMN for “conspiracy” against the rights of the KKK and white supremacists at the rally.

The agency also stated in the report, which the Guardian noted was heavily redacted, that “the KKK consisted of members that some perceived to be supportive of a white supremacist agenda” and cited BAMN’s past advocacy issues, which included efforts against “police brutality,” as evidence in the terrorism probe.

The report reportedly stemmed from a 2016 rally that was organized by two white supremacist groups, the Traditionalist Worker Party and the Golden State Skinheads. At the rally, a number of white supremacists were reportedly armed with knives as they faced off against counter-protesters. Neo-Nazis were reportedly suspected of stabbing at least seven counter-protesters at the event.

As The Guardian notes, it is unclear as to why the rally was labelled a KKK event by the FBI. The Traditionalist Workers share many of the Klan's views, but they are separate entities.

“In 2016, law enforcement learned that the Ku Klux Klan would be holding a rally at the State Capitol Building … The KKK consisted of members that some perceived to be supportive of a white supremacist agenda,” the FBI reportedly states in the report. “In response, a number of groups mobilized to protest the rally. Flyers were posted asking people to attend in order to shut down the rally.” 

The FBI also reportedly noted in the documents that it found BAMN to have “lawfully exercised their First Amendment rights by engaging in peaceful protests” in its research of the group but noted that its members “engaged in other activity by refusing to disperse, trespassing in closed buildings, obstructing law enforcement, and shouting during and interrupting public meetings so that the meetings could not continue.” 

The agency refused to confirm to The Guardian whether the investigation into BAMN is ongoing or whether the FBI launched a similar investigation into the neo-Nazis who attended the rally in California.

A spokesperson for the FBI told The Guardian that it cannot confirm or deny the existence of certain probes.

“We cannot initiate an investigation based solely on an individual’s race, ethnicity, natural origin, religion, or the exercise of First Amendment rights,” the agency said in a statement to the news outlet. “The FBI does not and will not police ideology.”

The FBI “investigates activity which may constitute a federal crime or pose a threat to national security," the agency also added.

Baltimore DA is No Longer Prosecuting Marijuana Cases but Strawboss Police Commissioner says Cops Will Continue to Use Marijuana as a Basis to Sniff, Stop, Search & Arrest Blacks



Stawboss Rolebot Fulfills His Function of Promoting Confusion in Service of Racism/White Supremacy. From [NYT] Baltimore has both the highest murder rate among the nation’s big cities and one of the most broken relationships between its police and its citizenry. Only one out of four homicides were solved last year. And the city’s enforcement of marijuana laws has fallen almost exclusively on African-Americans.

Given this dire set of facts, the city’s top prosecutor announced on Tuesday that she would no longer bother with marijuana cases, a controversial move that she argued would improve police-community relations and allow law enforcement to devote more time to serious violent crime.

“If you ask that mom whose son was killed where she would rather us spend our time and our attention — on solving that murder, or prosecuting marijuana laws — it’s a no-brainer,” said Marilyn Mosby, the state’s attorney for Baltimore. She vowed at a news conference to no longer prosecute marijuana possession, regardless of quantity or prior criminal record, and said she would seek to vacate almost 5,000 convictions.

Ms. Mosby’s move places her in a vanguard of big-city prosecutors, including Kim Foxx in Chicago, Larry Krasner in Philadelphia, Cyrus R. Vance Jr. in Manhattan and Eric Gonzalez in Brooklyn, who are moving away from marijuana cases, declaring them largely off limits and in some cases going so far as to clear old warrants or convictions off the books.

Much of their reasoning sounds familiar from the many statewide campaigns that have resulted in outright legalization: Marijuana, they say, is not linked to violent crime. Enforcing its prohibition is a waste of resources, and has left thousands of people with criminal convictions that hinder their search for jobs and housing.

But increasingly, another argument is creeping in: Letting marijuana cases go actually makes communities safer, by shifting the focus to stopping violence and untangling a legacy of racial discrimination, allowing the seeds of trust to germinate in neighborhoods where a chief complaint of police officers is that no one will help them solve crimes.

“How are we going to expect folks to want to cooperate with us,” Ms. Mosby said in an interview in her office on Monday, “when you’re stopping, you’re frisking, you’re arresting folks for marijuana possession?”

The Baltimore police do not share her view, however, and the response to her announcement immediately cast doubt on how effective it would be. The mayor, Catherine E. Pugh, applauded Ms. Mosby’s attempt to address the “unnecessary criminalization” of marijuana users, but stopped short of endorsing the new policy.

The interim police commissioner, Gary Tuggle, said he would not tell officers to stop making marijuana arrests.

“Without the police, this is just political theater,” said Thiru Vignarajah, a former Maryland deputy attorney general who ran against Ms. Mosby in the 2018 Democratic primary. Mr. Vignarajah noted that many of those who are found with marijuana these days are issued citations and allowed to go on their way anyway.

More than 90 percent of marijuana citations between 2015 and 2017 were issued to black residents, who make up roughly two-thirds of the population.

Other critics of the prosecutor’s move called the announcement too little, too late. Tre’ Murphy, a community activist with Black Leaders Organizing for Change, initially expressed support. “Wow, it’s a major overhaul,” he said. But a few beats later, his skepticism set in, and he wondered why it had not happened until Ms. Mosby’s second term in office.

“I don’t think we can afford to wait these long time frames,” he said. “Until we recognize the harm that many of these policies have caused and rebuild these institutions from the ground up, people will never trust it.”

Ms. Mosby’s first term was occupied by a series of epic police scandals, which placed her at odds with the department. Other prosecutors across the country have moved more quickly on the issue.

In Chicago, Ms. Foxx said her office will move to expunge all misdemeanor marijuana convictions. In St. Louis County, Wesley Bell will prosecute no marijuana cases involving amounts under 100 grams. In Boston, Rachael Rollins has pledged to stop prosecuting drug possession and possession with intent to distribute, along with 13 other crimes.

Advocates for decriminalization applauded Ms. Mosby’s new rules for pushing the envelope. People will not be prosecuted for possessing marijuana at all, and will not be charged with distribution or intent to distribute based on quantity alone — there must also be other indicators of drug dealing, such as scales or plastic bags.

“That’s kind of taking it to the next step, in a manner that’s consistent with how people actually use when they’re not trying to profit,” said Jolene Forman, a senior staff attorney with the Drug Policy Alliance.

Ms. Mosby said people charged with felony distribution for the first time will automatically be referred to a diversion program designed to help them enter the job market. Successful completion of the two-year program can result in expungement of the case.

The new policy would not apply in cases where a defendant faces multiple charges, such as possession of both marijuana and a gun, Ms. Mosby said.

Ms. Mosby said her office would also seek to pass a statute that would make it less cumbersome for prosecutors to overturn a conviction when the circumstances warrant.

Police departments and unions have sometimes put up resistance to these broad uses of prosecutor discretion, saying they defy the intent of lawmakers. Ms. Mosby said that when she briefed Commissioner Tuggle, “He said he felt that marijuana drives violent crime, and I explained to him that is not the case.”

After her announcement, the interim commissioner released a statement confirming that arrests will continue “unless and until the state legislature changes the applicable laws.” A new police commissioner, Michael Harrison of the New Orleans Police Department, will arrive next month — the fifth person to head the department since Ms. Mosby took office.

In 2016, Mr. Harrison publicly embraced a legal change that allowed the New Orleans police to handle most marijuana possession cases by issuing a summons, and said that officers would have to get permission to make arrests in those cases.

In Baltimore, the police have few grounds to claim that the status quo is working well.

First there was the shocking case of the elite Gun Trace Task Force, whose members robbed residents and planted evidence. Then there were the bodycam videos that appeared to show officers staging the discovery of evidence. A recent investigation by Buzzfeed and examined the department’s failure to solve, or in some cases even investigate, shootings.

The department’s credibility is so tattered that in April, when the police commissioner himself testified that he had found a loaded gun in a driver’s glove compartment, the jury acquitted the man.

A settlement with the Justice Department to correct systemic racial disparities and excessive use of force has proved to be a challenge. Last week, the judge overseeing the settlement said the department seemed to have a “culture of timidity” when it came to confronting corruption.

Ms. Mosby has been called a divisive figure, particularly after her handling of the case of Freddie Gray, whose death from injuries sustained in police custody set off weeks of unrest. Ms. Mosby charged six officers in the death, and then — after a hung jury and three acquittals — dropped the prosecution, dishing out blame for what she called the Police Department’s failure to conduct an unbiased investigation. She was attacked for being too progressive and for not being progressive enough.

But last year, it became clear that Ms. Mosby understood her base: communities in the city that were both overpoliced for minor infractions and underprotected from violence, with serious crimes going unsolved in their neighborhoods.

In the 2018 primary, she defeated Mr. Vignarajah and another opponent, Ivan Bates, by wide margins, and was unopposed in the general election.

42 Years After Death Sentence, Federal Appeals Court Says Charles Ray Finch is ‘Actually Innocent’ Yet He Remains Locked Up in Lawless Society

From [DPIC] A federal appeals court has found 80-year-old Charles Ray Finch (pictured) “actually innocent” of the murder for which he was convicted and sentenced to death in North Carolina 42 years ago. The pronouncement came in a unanimous ruling issued by a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit on January 25, 2019. In that decision, Chief Judge Roger L. Gregory wrote that “Finch has overcome the exacting standard for actual innocence through sufficiently alleging and providing new evidence of a constitutional violation and through demonstrating that the totality of the evidence, both old and new, would likely fail to convince any reasonable juror of his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.” The U.S. Supreme Court has never recognized innocence alone as grounds to overturn a conviction, so the appeals court could not set Finch free. Instead, the panel reversed a lower court’s denial of relief and sent the case back for adjudication of constitutional violations relating to Finch’s innocence claim. Jim Coleman, Finch’s lawyer and the co-director of the Duke Wrongful Convictions Clinic, said he now hopes to convince North Carolina Attorney General Josh Stein to “remedy the miscarriage of justice in joining us in a motion to overturn Ray’s conviction and release him without any further proceedings in court.”

Finch was convicted and sentenced to death in 1976 for the killing of Richard “Shadow” Holloman during a failed robbery attempt, but he has consistently maintained his innocence. In 1977, the North Carolina Supreme Court reduced his sentence to life in prison after the U.S. Supreme Court had declared the state’s then-mandatory death penalty law unconstitutional. The Fourth Circuit identified significant problems with the evidence used to convict Finch. He was subjected to “suggestive lineups,” in which he was the only suspect dressed in a three-quarter length jacket, the same style of clothing that the eyewitness, Lester Floyd Jones, said the perpetrator was wearing. Such lineups have since been declared unconstitutional. “These procedural issues support Finch’s allegations of constitutional error that he was misidentified by Jones,” Judge Gregory wrote. “No reasonable juror would likely find Finch guilty beyond a reasonable doubt if it knew the high likelihood that he was misidentified by Jones both outside and inside the courtroom as a murder suspect because of the impermissibly suggestive lineups.” The court also noted that Jones, who the court said “had cognitive issues, struggled with alcoholism and had issues with short-term memory recall,” told police that the killer was armed with a sawed-off shotgun and had never mentioned to the police that the shooter had any facial hair. At the time Holloman was killed, Finch had a long beard and distinctive sideburns. A new review of the autopsy evidence decades after the crime disclosed that Holloman had been killed with a pistol, not a shotgun and new ballistics evidence contradicted prosecution claims that the shells found at the crime scene matched a shotgun shell found in Finch’s car. Other witnesses also indicated they had been pressured into providing testimony implicating Finch. “This new evidence,” the court said, “not only undercuts the state’s physical evidence, but it also discredits the reliability of Jones.”

The Fourth Circuit opinion also addressed whether Finch might be guilty under the felony-murder rule, which would require only that he participated in the robbery, even if he did not shoot Holloman. The court identified two problems with this argument. First, though the state now says that Finch’s conviction relied on the felony-murder rule, the trial court “provided inconsistent instructions to the jury regarding felony murder but ultimately required the jury to find that Finch fired the fatal shot in order to convict him of first-degree murder.” Second, if Jones misidentified Finch, and he was not actually present for the robbery, he could not be guilty even under the felony-murder rule. “Criminal liability under any theory, including the felony-murder rule, would not attach to Finch if there is no evidence that he was at Holloman’s store during the murder,” the opinion stated.

Uncivilized Authorities in Texas Murder Black Man who Murdered a Black Cop -Jury was Never Instructed to Consider Evidence Supporting a Sentence Less than Death, had an IQ of 65

texas murder death penalty.jpg

From [HERE] and [HERE] A 61-year-old Black man was executed Wednesday evening for killing a Black Houston police officer more than three decades ago. He was murdered by Texas amid questions as to his eligibility for capital punishment and the constitutionality of his death sentence.

Jennings was convicted under a sentencing procedure that the U.S. Supreme Court had struck down shortly before his trial in 1989 because it did not adequately allow jurors to consider evidence supporting a sentence less than death.

The jury instructions given in his case to redress that error were also later declared unconstitutional, and 25 Texas death-row prisoners had their death sentences overturned as a result. However, Jennings’s court-appointed trial and appeal lawyers failed to raise the issue in Texas state court and the Texas federal courts refused to consider the issue on the grounds that the state court lawyers had procedurally defaulted the claim. The U.S. Supreme Court later changed federal habeas corpus procedures to permit review if ineffective state-court representation caused the default. But when Jennings’s federal lawyers attempted to raise the issue again, the Texas federal appeals court ruled on January 28 that its prior decision had not been based on procedural default and that it had already rejected the claim. Without comment, the Supreme Court issued an order on January 30 declining to hear Jennings’s case, and he was executed.

Robert Jennings received lethal injection for the July 1988 fatal shooting of Officer Elston Howard during a robbery at an adult bookstore that authorities said was part of a crime spree.


In challenging Jennings’s death sentence, his current lawyers also argued that both Jennings’s trial lawyer and his previous appellate attorney provided inadequate representation. Jennings’s trial attorney was defending two death-penalty cases at the same time and did not investigate significant mitigating evidence that included Jennings’s history of brain damage from a car crash and an injury with a baseball bat, an IQ of 65, and intellectual and adaptive deficits associated with his low IQ. Trial counsel also failed to present readily available evidence of Jennings’s impoverished, abusive, and neglectful upbringing: he was born as the result of a rape, and his mother frequently told him she did not want him. His original appeal lawyers also failed to raise these issues. Edward Mallett, one of Jennings’s current lawyers, said, “There has not been an adequate presentation of his circumstances including mental illness and mental limitations.”

U.S. District Judge Lynn Hughes took the unusual step earlier in January of asking the state to consider supporting clemency for Jennings, citing the 30-year delay between the crime and the scheduled execution. Jennings's attorneys argued in his clemency petition that the state had granted clemency last year to a white death-row prisoner with fewer mitigating circumstances. "Denying a commutation truly will demonstrate that race, class, and privilege matter in determining who is executed in Texas," attorney Randy Schaffer wrote. "This would send a terrible message to the world."

As witnesses filed into the death chamber, Jennings asked a chaplain standing next to him if he knew the name of the slain officer. The chaplain didn't respond, and a prison official then told the warden to proceed with the punishment.

"To my friends and family, it was a nice journey," Jennings said in his final statement. "To the family of the police officer, I hope y'all find peace. Be well and be safe and try to enjoy life's moments, because we never get those back."

Video Shows White Greensboro (MD) Cops "Just Trying to Help" by Beating, Smothering, Crushing & Killing Black Teen they Determined to be Schizophrenic - Under Arrest for Horse Play

greensboro md cops.jpg

From [CBS] Officials have released body camera video of a deadly encounter between police and a black teenager who died after struggling with white officers in a town on Maryland's Eastern Shore, footage that fueled a civil rights group's call for an independent investigation. The video shows the cops manhandling the teenager by beating, pouncing and pulling on the teen as if they were moving heavy furniture.

Greensboro Police Chief Mike Petyo released the footage after a county prosecutor announced Thursday that he isn't asking a grand jury to consider criminal charges in the September 2018 death of 19-year-old Anton Black.

The video shows Black's mother screaming after police chased her son to the driveway of his family's home, where an officer smashed a car window to get to Black inside and then shocked him with a stun gun before the teen struggled with three officers and a civilian. The footage also captured how Black's mother and officers reacted when they realized he stopped responding.

Caroline County State's Attorney Joseph Riley said in a statement that his office "is not empowered to prosecute tragic acts." An autopsy report, signed Wednesday by the state's chief medical examiner, says Black suffered "sudden cardiac death." It said a congenital heart condition, mental illness, and stress from the struggle likely contributed to his death.

Lawyers for Black's family vowed Thursday to ask the U.S. Justice Department's civil rights division to investigate his death. The American Civil Liberties Union of Maryland joined their call for a federal investigation or an independent investigation by the governor-appointed Maryland State Prosecutor, whose office investigates misconduct in office by public officials or employees.

The group said in a statement Friday that the "disturbing" video shows officers used excessive force on a man who shouldn't have been arrested. Family attorneys said in a statement Black committed no crime and there was no reason for Webster and the other officers from neighboring departments to chase him back to his home, no reason for Webster to break the car's window, and no reason to Tase the teen or restrain him.

"There was no reason for Anton Black to die," the statement said.

It says the family only Wednesday received the autopsy report, though it was completed a day after his death.

"The ACLU is outraged by the gross delay in the handling and release of information related to the autopsy and police body camera footage, which raises significant red flags that local law enforcement agencies have something to hide in Anton's death," the statement says.

Riley told The Baltimore Sun that his office's investigation remains open.

"If I am provided new information," he said, "that could potentially change my position."

Family attorneys had urged Riley to convene a grand jury for the investigation. They claim police used excessive force on the teen and argue the autopsy report mischaracterizes his death as accidental.

The attorneys said in a statement the autopsy notes 43 abrasions, contusions or hemorrhages they say Black suffered during the struggle with officers.

"The autopsy raises serious questions about why such a high degree of force was used on an unarmed teenager on his own property who posed no threat to law enforcement or the public," Timothy Maloney, one of the family lawyers, wrote in an email Thursday.

The encounter began when Greensboro Police Department officer Thomas Webster IV responded to a 911 call from a woman who drove by and said she saw the teenager dragging a 12-year-old boy down a street. Lawyers for Black's family say he merely was playing with a longtime friend and wasn't harming the child.

Petyo, the police chief, said the woman who called 911 didn't know Black or the 12-year-old boy.

Webster told investigators he saw Black pin the 12-year-old against the hood of his patrol car, according to the statement from the state's attorney. Black identified himself as the 12-year-old's brother, but the body camera video shows the boy denying that.

The video then shows officers chase Black before he locked himself inside a car parked outside his family's home. An officer used a baton to break the driver's side window and then shocked Black with a Taser through the broken window before the teen got out and began struggling with the officers.

"Stop! You're under arrest!" an officer yelled.

The body camera footage shows Black's mother screaming her son's name as she sees officers pinning him down outside her home. One appears to lie on top of him as officers struggle to handcuff him.

"Anton, stop, baby!" she said after police handcuffed him.

"I love you!" he shouted.

"You'll be better if you don't fight. Calm down," a man said off camera.

"This is a mental health emergency. We're not treating this like a crime," an officer says. "He's not with us right now. He's going to be OK. We're going to get him some help."

The mother asks if her son will be locked up; an officer responds that they will instead take him to a hospital.

About 30 seconds later, the officers turned the handcuffed teen onto his back and checked for a pulse.

"He's breathing," a voice says.

The teen appears to be unresponsive. A dispatcher asks over the radio whether the teen is conscious and alert, and an officer replies, "Negative."

His mother points out that her son is "turning dark." Officers removed his handcuffs and began performing CPR on him. They also administer Narcan, meant to counter the effects of opioids. Black later was pronounced dead at a hospital.

The medical examiner's report says Black's medical record shows he recently had been involuntarily hospitalized and diagnosed with bipolar disorder. The report describes his mental illness as a "significant contributing condition." It doesn't show that drugs were in his system.

Maloney and Rene Swafford, another attorney representing the family, said they are conducting an independent review of forensic and medical evidence. "In any event, Anton Black did not die because of any mental condition," they said in a statement.

Webster was placed on administrative leave earlier this month. Petyo said Webster has returned to active duty following the decision by the state's attorney, but the chief said the officer isn't on a patrol assignment, in uniform, or interacting with the public.

Petyo said he will review the officer's status once the department receives official notice of the prosecutor's decision.

Racist Puppetician Steve King Gets Standing Ovation from his Constituent-believers at 1st Event Since his White Supremacy Rebuke because Most White People Hate Black People

steve king belivers .jpg

From [NY Post] White Constituents applauded racist Republican Rep. Steve King on Saturday at the Iowa congressman’s first public event since being rebuked by his House colleagues over racist comments he had made to a newspaper earlier this month.

King told the roughly 75 people who showed up for the first of 39 planned town hall meetings in his sprawling district that he doesn’t adhere to a white supremacist ideology and he repeated his assertion that he’s not racist.

The nine-term House member caused an uproar after he was quoted in a New York Times story saying, “White nationalist, white supremacist, Western civilization — how did that language become offensive?” King claimed his comments were taken out of context, but the House voted 424-1 to rebuke him, with King himself voting in favor of the resolution, and Republican leaders denied him any committee assignments.

Addressing what he called “the elephant in the room” in his opening remarks at Saturday’s event, King expressed frustration that his comments about white nationalism and white supremacy in the Times interview led to even his fellow Republicans disowning him.

“It is stunning and astonishing to me that four words in a New York Times quote can outweigh 20-some years of public service, 20-some years of giving you my word every day,” King said. “And not one soul has stood up and said I’ve ever lied to you or misrepresented anything. Not one soul has stood up and said Steve King has ever acted in a racist fashion, that he ever discriminated against anybody.” [MORE]

“Most white people hate Black people. The reason that most white people hate Black people is because whites are not Black people. If you know this about white people, you need know little else. If you do not know this about white people, virtually all else that you know about them will only confuse you." -Neely Fuller.

Federal Judge says Arkansas’ Israel Boycott Law Doesn’t Violate or Restrict 1st Amendment Speech & Activity b/c a Boycott is Not Speech

Can You Afford Free Speech? From [Jurist] A federal district judge in Arkansas on Wednesday upheld a state law prohibiting state entities from entering into contracts with companies for goods or services unless those companies certify in writing that they are not currently engaged in, nor will they engage in for the duration of their contract, a “boycott of Israel.”

The Arkansas Times, which sought an advertising contract from a public university, argued that the law was a violation of the Times‘ First Amendment rights. They argued that the law impermissibly compels speech regarding contractors’ political beliefs, association, and expression and that it “restricts contractors from engaging in protected First Amendment activities, including boycott participation and boycott-related speech, without a legitimate justification.”

The judge found that the Times had standing but failed to show how a boycott of Israel was First Amendment-protected speech. A boycott of Israel “is not speech, inherently expressive activity, or subject to independent constitutional protection,” he said.

“Because engaging in a boycott of Israel, as defined by Act 710, is neither speech nor inherently expressive conduct, it is not protected by the First Amendment. Accordingly, the Arkansas Times has failed to state a claim upon which relief may be granted.”

Nebraska Supreme Court [an all white jury] Upholds Death Sentences [75% Non-White] Following Brief Repeal Orchestrated by Racist Suspect Governor

nebraska sup court.jpg

From [Jurist] The Supreme Court of Nebraska upheld death sentences for eight death row inmates on Friday. 

The plaintiffs, who had all been sentenced before 2015, claimed that when the Nebraska legislature repealed capital punishment in 2015, their sentences should have been commuted, even though capital punishment was reinstated by referendum in 2016. One of the eight plaintiffs had been executed as the case was pending.

govefrnor ricketts.jpg

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) represented the plaintiffs. The ACLU argued that the sentences for the inmates had been automatically commuted after the legislative repeal, and the referendum only applied to future sentencing. They also argued that proper procedures regarding sponsorship were not followed during the referendum and that the executive branch violated the separation of powers in orchestrating the referendum.

The court unanimously (minus the two justices who did not participate) affirmed the district court’s decision to dismiss the suit because “other equally serviceable remedies were available.” The opinion reads, “We have held under similar circumstances that an action for a declaratory judgment does not lie where another equally serviceable remedy is available.” The court noted that the plaintiffs had pending individual appeals and could seek relief through those appeals.  None of the plaintiff’s arguments were discussed in the opinion.