After White Cop Body Slammed Disobedient Black 12 Yr Old on His Head Outside School, White Saint Lucie Cty Sheriff says He Acted "Within Our Guidelines," White Media Concurs

sherrif ken facist.jpg

From [HERE] A viral video that is making the rounds on social media is drawing concern among parents.

The video shows a Saint Lucie County Sheriff's deputy taking down a sixth grader outside Lincoln Park Academy in Fort Pierce.

"That's kind of rough to be at a school campus, he didn't have to slam him down like that," said General Platt, as he watched the video while picking up his twins on Wednesday.

"I would have freaked out if I saw that in person," said Jazmine Arias, as she was waiting to pick up her sister. "He's a kid, I don't think a little kid should be thrown to the ground like that."

The 15 second video shows a the school resource deputy run after a 6th grader outside the school Tuesday afternoon and slam him on the grass. Another video then shows the student in handcuffs walking away.

"If the kid was fighting him back and he felt like he was in some kind of danger, then I could justify his actions, but it didn't appear to be that way," Platt said.

At a news conference Wednesday afternoon, Sheriff Ken Mascara said the deputy did not use excessive force, and the video does not show what happened in the minutes beforehand.

"Our school resource deputy is very familiar with this student and knows he has a violent history, including possessing weapons," Mascara said.

The Sheriff says the student was recently caught with a knife, and he has to be escorted around campus by a staff member because he's been physically aggressive to staff and students.

Mascara says the 11-year-old was aggressive during dismissal on Tuesday, and when staff tried to stop him he ran away. That's when the resource deputy took him to the ground.

"At the end of the day the deputy did everything he could to diffuse the situation, and his use of force fell within the legal and our agency guidelines," Mascara said.

The deputy has been a school resource officer for eight years, three of which have been at Lincoln Park Academy. Mascara said the deputy has never had a complaint of excessive force.

The student is now facing a number of charges. He was taken to the hospital briefly and left with a band-aid. His grandfather tells WPTV, he is now undergoing a mental health evaluation in Lake Worth Beach.

FOP Probot says Chicago Cops “Did Their Best" after Video Shows Them Drag a 16 Yr Old Black Girl Down Steps & Stomp on Her to Enforce Obedience to Cell Phone Rules at School

chicago fop idiot.jpg

From [HERE] New surveillance video shows two Chicago police officers getting into a violent encounter with a student at Marshall High School.

The incident happened in February, and the student’s attorney filed an amended lawsuit Thursday. The lawsuit claimed the officer pushed and dragged 16-year-old Dnigma Howard down a flight of stairs, then held her down by stepping on her chest, punching her and then shocked her with a stun gun.

Laurentio Howard said the video shows he and his daughter were telling the truth the whole time. In the video, the teen’s father (in the blue coat) tries to intervene and is told to stay away.

The teen has an individualized education program to help manage her behavior, but her father said the protocol in place wasn’t followed.

"She wasn't really fighting back. She was defending herself. They were kicking her and stomping her and stuff. She tensed up. That's a natural reaction of anybody," he said.

The student was initially charged with aggravated battery against the officers.

Prosecutors said police were called to escort her away, after she was suspended and refused to leave. She then kicked, bit and spit on the officers. The charges were dropped less than a week later.

In February, the Fraternal Order of Police president called the state’s attorney’s decision to drop the charges very disturbing.

“They did everything they could to protect her from being hurt and they used the Taser because she seriously injured those two officers and she needs to be recharged,” Kevin Graham, FOP president, said at the time.

Graham said she should be recharged.

“The video doesn’t capture all of the interaction the student has with the police. I know that the officers, one of them almost had her finger bit off and the other officer has a broken knee cap,” Graham said.

Attorney Andrew Stroth said the two officers in the video had 89% more complaints of excessive force than other members in the CPD. He said Howard “did not instigate or provoke any type of attack.”

Stroth said CPD officers should not be in Chicago schools. He’s appealing to Mayor-elect Lori Lightfoot to change the practice. The Chicago Teacher’s Union president has denounced the video.

Judge Denies Immunity: 4 White Camden Cops Pounced on a Black Man’s Back as he Laid in the Street, Stepped on His Neck Leaving Him Quadriplegic & Assaulted Another Black Man who Witnessed it

camden+cops+xavier+ingram.jpg

From [HERE] A Black man left paralyzed after his arrest by white Camden County police officers can pursue a lawsuit alleging violations of his civil rights, a white federal judge has ruled.

Xavier Ingram claims he was the victim of excessive force after he fell on a rain-slicked street during a police chase near 7th and Chestnut streets in June 2014.

Ingram contends a police officer stepped on his neck, causing injuries that left him a quadriplegic, and that police worsened his situation by mishandling him in the wake of his injury. Ingram, now 25, will live the rest of his life in a hospital bed at a rehabilitation facility, unable to move anything below his neck. He eats and breathes through tubes surgically implanted in his body. According to his criminal attorney, Robert Dunn of Morristown, “He’s a quadriplegic in a nursing home and right now there’s no chance of him ever improving,” Dunn said. “Unless there’s a medical breakthrough.”

One witness said police were “whooping his ass” as he lay on the ground — will ultimately be decided in federal court.

Police deny wrongdoing, saying the Camden man caused his own injuries when he fell.

In two rulings Friday, U.S. District Judge Jerome Simandle said a jury could consider allegations brought by Ingram and by Darren Dickerson, another Black man who alleges police beat him after he cursed officers at the arrest scene.

In a third decision, Simandle ruled two expert witnesses for Ingram — an orthopedic surgeon and a researcher who specializes in the causes of human injuries — could testify that they believed police were responsible for the man's paralysis.

Dr. James J. Yue, an orthopaedic surgeon in Connecticut, Dr. William D. Matuozzi of Maryland, who specializes in radiology, and Paul C. Ivancic, a spinal biomechanics researcher from Connecticut will testify for Ingram. 

All three said they believe his injuries — a damaged spinal cord, a displaced vertebrae, and other issues — are consistent with force being applied to the back and side of his neck as he lay on his stomach with his head turned to the right.

They said the force it would take to cause such a violent injury is inconsistent with a slip and fall, and the lack of head trauma or swelling means he did not hit his head hard.

Yue said he believes that the first officer’s knee on Ingram’s neck started the dislocation of the vertebrae and that the compression from Merck’s foot on his neck completed or worsened the dislocation and caused the spinal cord injury.

The two doctors also concluded that the officers’ moving and dropping Ingram, after he repeated that he couldn’t feel his legs, made his injuries worse.

They said the force it would take to cause such a violent injury is inconsistent with a slip and fall, and the lack of head trauma or swelling means he did not hit his head hard. [MORE]

xavier+ingram.jpg

According to the decision, Ingram says he fled from police after leaving a liquor store because he had an outstanding warrant.

In contrast, police officers said they suspected Ingram, then 21, had tossed a gun between two parked cars as he walked away from officers in an area known for drug activity around 9:45 p.m.

A grainy surveillance video recorded the pursuit.

“As Ingram ran from the officers, he slipped and fell, seemingly feet first, on wet pavement, striking his buttocks and probably shoulders and head as he fell, all without being touched by the officers,” said the judge’s ruling. “Within less than a second, the officers jumped on or near his torso as he lay on the ground.”

Ingram’s lawsuit contends one officer jumped on his back and two officers punched and kicked him “as soon as he hit the ground.” 

The city man alleged he “was screaming that he could not breathe and that he could not feel his legs” when a supervising officer, Jeremy Merck, told him to ‘shut up,’ stepped on his neck, and … Ingram heard it crack,” according to Simandle’s ruling.

Ingram’s lawsuit alleges excessive force by Merck and two other officers, Nicholas Marchiafava and Antonio Genetta. Among other claims, it also contends the officers showed deliberate indifference to the serious medical needs of a person in custody.

Dickerson alleges excessive force against a fourth officer, Nigel Shockley.

In denying defense motions for summary judgment on those claims, Simandle said a jury might decide in favor of Ingram and Dickerson if it viewed the incidents in a way that’s most favorable to the city men.

He also acknowledged the jury might come to a different verdict if it saw contested facts in a light that favored the police officers.

The judge disputed the defense claim that the surveillance video supported the officers’ actions against both men. Simandle said the video “is of such low quality that it cannot be used to definitively ascertain the amount of force” that police used in arresting both men.

The judge also said officers involved in the incident could not claim legal immunity for their actions, asserting a jury might find they had knowingly violated the men’s civil rights.

“The most significant claims in this case survived summary judgement and are going to trial to be decided by a jury,” said Ingram’s attorney, Beth Baldinger of Roseland, Essex County.

Camden County spokesman Dan Keashen said the police department “fully respects the court’s decision,” but contended Ingram’s claims were “baseless and frivolous” [so they respect something they claim is frivolous?]

Simandle also said a jury could consider whether the police department had failed to train and supervise Shockley.

He noted Dickerson's assertion that Schockley had a “history of at  least six incidents of the use of force that, under Camden County Police Department’s own policies, should have triggered an ‘early warning’ intervention by his supervisors.”

Simandle said “a reasonable jury viewing the video could find it confirms … Dickerson’s version that he never moved toward any officer and was walking away when tackled violently from behind.”

He also noted ”no evidence that Dickerson was acting violently (although he was noisy and disrespectful),” or that Shockley lacked time “to have taken another, non-violent course of action.”

“Under this version of the facts, a jury could reasonably find that this force was not for the purpose of arresting Dickerson, but rather for the purpose of summarily punishing him for being obnoxious toward the officers at a time of heightened emotion due to his witnessing the alleged beating of Ingram in the street nearby,” the judge wrote in his decision.

Ingram, who also alleges false arrest, was charged with drug and weapons offenses, as well as resisting arrest and receiving stolen property.

Ingram has pleaded not guilty to the charges, contending the gun and other evidence against him was planted at the scene.

Atlantic City Authorities Settle Case for $700K before Jury Verdict: 4 White Cops "Viciously Attacked" Non-Resisting Black Man and Released Dog on Him Causing Permanent Damage After Traffic Stop

Charlie Harrison.jpg

From [HERE] and [HERE] Atlantic City has agreed to pay $700,000 in a settlement Thursday to end a New York City man’s excessive-force lawsuit against the city and several resort police officers.

In the suit, filed in U.S. District Court in October 2014, Charlie Harrison, 58, alleged several city police officers, including a K-9, assaulted him after a traffic stop.

“We are pleased that there was some measure of justice done for our client,” Jennifer Bonjean, Harrison’s attorney, said Friday. “A monetary award is really the only outcome in a civil litigation. Money cannot fully make someone whole who has been victimized by the police, but it was a good settlement.”

On Nov. 14, 2012, Officers Michael Oldroyd, Anthony Alosi, Rebecca Seabrook and Bounthamal Thavisack allegedly kicked Harrison in his face and body until he lost consciousness, and Officer Michelle Clarke released a K-9 on him, “causing deep lacerations, scarring and permanent damage,” according to the suit.

According to the suit, Harrison was gambling at the now-shuttered Atlantic Club Casino Hotel on Nov. 13, 2012, and was asked to leave by security, who called police. About 2 a.m. the next morning, Oldroyd followed Harrison’s black Mercedes and pulled him over near Virginia and Pacific avenues. Thavisack and Alosi also responded.

After getting kicked out of a club for his drunkenness and then getting denied entry from multiple Atlantic City establishments in 2012, Charlie Harrison was driving down Pacific Avenue and swerving when officer Michael Oldroyd spotted him and tried to pull him over.

Initially, Harrison didn’t stop, continuing to drive 5 to 10 miles per hour, said Jennifer Bonjean, his attorney, at the openings of the trial. When he eventually did pull over, Oldroyd and a group of officers pulled their guns on Harrison as they shouted orders at him to get out of the car.

A confused Harrison began walking to Oldroyd before the officer “gave him a nice punch in the face” followed by several more, Bonjean said at the openings.

Soon after a K-9 bit him from behind, Harrison dropped to the ground and officers began “raining punches” to the point of him blacking out, Bonjean said. The officers “physically beat” Harrison, according to the suit, and “Clarke’s K-9 partner viciously attacked Plaintiff, who was not resisting arrest or committing any other crime.”

Harrison was charged with assault of a police officer, resisting arrest, eluding police, reckless driving, unsafe lane change and driving while intoxicated. He ended up pleading guilty to eluding police, with all other charges dismissed, according to the suit.

A look into the Atlantic City police department as part of the The Force Report, a 16-month investigation by NJ Advance Media for NJ.com, found that the department often seemed indifferent to officers with violent tendencies, leaving them on the street without repercussions.

Oldroyd was one of those officers.

The 14-year officer used force 50 times from 2012 to 2016. But he wasn’t told about his high rate until February 2014, he said in a deposition. His command staff told him they did not give credence to internal affairs complaints against him and to continue policing how he was. Oldroyd tallied 91 internal affairs complaints — 46 of which were for excessive force — during a stretch of his career.

Bonjean has relentlessly sued Atlantic City over the past five years on behalf of alleged victims of police brutality. The Brooklyn-based attorney has won more than $6 million for her clients in excessive force civil lawsuits.

She is currently representing two young black men who allege in a federal lawsuit that two Atlantic City police officers performed an illegal stop and began harassing them, with one of them telling them that if they “frog up,” his 90-pound dog “is gonna come out and rip the f-- outta you.”

Amended Lawsuit Names Park Police Cops [all white] who Shot Unarmed Iranian American to Death after Car Chase Ended, Although He Posed No Threat

park police murder.jpg

From [HERE] The family of a northern Virginia Iranian American man shot to death by U.S. Park Police in 2017 has identified the two officers in an amended wrongful-death lawsuit.

Bijan Ghaiser was shot on Nov. 17, 2017, after a police chase on the George Washington Parkway.

In a federal lawsuit filed in August, Ghaiser's family described the shooting as "egregious, senseless and unlawful." The family identified the officers as Alejandro Amaya and Lucas Vinyard in a court filing Friday.

A Park Police spokesman declined to comment. Both officers have been on paid administrative duties since the shooting. All the cops were white.

Vinyard has worked for the Park Police since 2007, while Amaya joined the force in 2009.

Neither officer could be reached for comment Friday. Vinyard did not immediately respond to a message left at his home. Amaya did not immediately respond to a message left on his cellphone. The names of their attorneys were not yet listed in court documents.

The lawsuit says the chase began after Ghaiser, 25, was involved in a minor traffic accident. While driving a Jeep Grand Cherokee, he was hit from behind by an Uber driver, driving a Toyota Corolla and with a female passenger in the back seat. The driver and the passenger both reported the incident to 911.

According to a report of the accident, Ghaisar pulled away without giving his information to the Uber driver. A lookout for his vehicle was announced and a Park Police car and Fairfax County Police car followed in pursuit. Ghaisar stopped his vehicle and was approached by a Park Police officer with his gun drawn. As Ghaisar drove off, the officer banged on the car with the gun, dropping his weapon. The pursuit continued at 57 miles per hour, in a zone that had a 50-mile-per-hour limit. However, no traffic or people were on the road at that time of night.

Ghaisar stopped a third time in the Fort Hunt area. Park Police parked a vehicle in front of Ghaisar's Jeep to prevent him from fleeing again at an intersection with stop sign. It says Ghaiser drove away from the scene and was pursued by Park Police. They say he stopped three times, and each time, officers jumped from their cruiser and pointed their guns at him.

The lawsuit says that on the third stop, officers blocked his path with their patrol car, jumped out and fired nine shots into Ghaisar's Jeep.

Dashcam video released by Fairfax County police shows that during the final stop, officers with guns drawn approach the car at the driver side door. The video clearly shows that the cops were in no danger when they shot him; the cops were at his driver side just feet away as he began to drive away again turning his car to the right at about 1 mph. After the first set of shots he stops. Moments later, the car continues to move to the right at about 1 mph when the cops shoot into the car again at close range on his driver side. The cops were never in the vehicle’s path.

The FBI said recently that the shooting is a complex case and its 16-month investigation is not unusual [and would it be complex if this man shot cops like this?]. The agency's comments came in a March 15 letter to U.S. Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, who has questioned why the FBI is taking so long to investigate the shooting.

2 White Elkhart Cops are On Unpaid Leave After Federal Indictment for Beating Latino Man Handcuffed to a Chair

elkhart cops charged.jpg

From [HERE] The Elkhart Police Department moved two officers to unpaid leave Monday, 10 days after a federal grand jury indicted the officers on civil rights charges for repeatedly punching a handcuffed man in the face last year.

Elkhart’s Board of Public Safety voted 4-0 to approve Police Chief Chris Snyder’s request to stop paying officers Cory Newland and Joshua Titus while their criminal cases are pending.

The federal indictment, announced March 22, accuses the officers of using excessive force against the handcuffed man after he allegedly spat at Newland. The officers also face separate misdemeanor battery charges filed by Elkhart County prosecutors in November, after the South Bend Tribune and ProPublica requested video of the January 2018 incident.

Snyder said Monday the department has a new policy that officers charged with crimes will be moved to unpaid leave after 60 days. Newland and Titus had been on paid administrative leave since November, but Snyder said the new policy was just approved in March.

They were arresting him for domestic battery, battery to a police officer, public intoxication and resisting police.

Video shows the white cop taunting and apparently daring the handcuffed Latino man to spit on him. He does. Then the two officers then begin to punch & attack him while he is handcuffed to the chair.
Newland has pleaded not guilty to the federal charge. Titus has yet to be arraigned. Both have been released on bond.

Both officers have entered not-guilty pleas to the Elkhart County battery charges. Titus is scheduled for a May trial. Newland is scheduled for a conference with prosecutors this month to discuss a possible plea agreement.

Denver Authorities Pay $60k and Acknowledge Wrongdoing: White Cop Punched Handcuffed Latino Woman in the Face, Called Her “Whore" & Choked Her w/his Knee until Unconscious in Holding Cell

From [HERE] The Denver City Council approved a payout of $60,000 Monday to settle a claim of excessive force against two Denver police officers in 2014.

Officers James Medina and Cheryl Smith arrested Seryina Trujillo in July of that year after she allegedly interfered with attempts to take her friend to detox, according to court documents. Police claim [as they often do as a defense, undetectable by poor video] Trujillo spit on Smith before the officers took her to a holding cell at a police facility [at any rate there is no such thing as a “spit defense.”.]

That’s where a video camera caught Medina knocking Trujillo’s head against the wall and holding her down by the neck with his knee, causing Trujillo to pass out, the complaint against the officers states. Medina told Trujillo, “Don’t cry now” and “Tell it to God.”

denver police settlement.jpg

Medina was ultimately fired from the force. The Denver Police Department and the Department of Safety found that Medina had used excessive force.

“The Seryina Trujillo case was settled to everyone’s satisfaction,” David Lane, Trujillo’s attorney, told Colorado Public Radio. “Denver is acknowledging wrongdoing so that’s always a good thing.”

According to a court order denying a motion to dismiss filed by Denver authorities:

On July 10, 2014, Trujillo and a friend, Daniel Adams, were eating at a Burger King in Denver. (ECF No. 1 ¶ 17.) A homeless, intoxicated man was sitting outside the Burger King, and someone called an ambulance to assist him because it appeared he was having a heart attack. (Id. ¶¶ 18-20.) Officers Smith and Medina also came to provide assistance (Medina was employed by the Denver Police Department at the time). (Id. ¶¶ 10, 19.)

Trujillo briefly exited the Burger King to ask about the homeless man's condition, but Medina told her to "back up and go back inside the Burger King," which Trujillo promptly did. (Id. ¶¶ 20-21.) However, Medina soon gestured through the Burger King window that Trujillo should come back outside. (Id. ¶ 22.) Trujillo complied, accompanied by her friend, Adams. (Id. ¶ 23.) "At this point, Defendant Medina and Defendant Smith attempted to handcuff Mr. Adams, who was intoxicated, in order to take him to Denver Cares, a detoxification facility in Denver." (Id. ¶ 24.) "Not understanding why her friend was being handcuffed, [Trujillo] attempted to pull Mr. Adams away from the officers." (Id. ¶ 25.) Smith then announced that she was arresting Trujillo, and Trujillo called Smith a "bitch." (Id. ¶¶ 26-28.)

…. Smith began treating Trujillo very roughly (including slamming her to the pavement) and then handed her off to Medina, who threw her into the back of the police car, punched her in the face with a closed fist twice, and called her a "whore." Medina then took Trujillo to the District 2 station and asked her to remove her belt and shoes, apparently as an anti-suicide precaution. When Trujillo repeatedly refused, Medina attacked her in order to remove her belt, including by slamming her head against the cell walls and placing his knee on her neck as she was pinned (from her shoulders up) on the cell bench, causing her to black out and hit her head again when Medina finally backed away and her upper body slumped from the bench to the floor. An investigation by the Police Department's Internal Affairs Bureau ("IAB") concluded that Medina had used excessive force, and Medina was eventually fired on account of this incident. (See id. ¶¶ 28-95.)

Excessive White Force: Marietta Authorities "are very proud" of the Amount of “Restraint" Used by a Gang of Marietta Cops to Make an Unlawful Arrest of a Black Man at IHOP

marietta cops at ihop.jpg

From [HERE] The Marietta police department on Monday released its version of the events they say began with officers responding to a call of a man making threats and “gesturing like he had a gun” at the restaurant. 

However, prior to the arrest of Renardo Lewis (39), it is unlikely that the police had corroborated what the threats were with any witnesses present at the IHOP. It also unlikely that police had established whether Lewis had actually made any threats. In the video the cops appear to have just arrived on the scene and had no articulable facts to support the threat complaint that led to the call. Even if cops had established a reasonable suspicion [based on ?] to briefly detain him inside the IHOP they still had no basis to place him under arrest [an act that indicates an intent to take into custody and subject him to the will of the officer]. As such, it is doubtful probable cause existed to place him under arrest. A black employee had called 911 complaining about a threat made by someone - it is also unknown whether said caller or anyone else at the IHOP identified Lewis to the cops prior to his arrest.

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 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. The police will need significantly more evidence to meet the probable cause standard than to justify the intrusion of a Terry stop or brief detention. Whether there was probable cause to make an arrest is viewed from the perspective of “‘a reasonable, cautious and prudent peace officer’ and must be judged in light of his experience and training.” The question is whether officers in the particular circumstances, conditioned by their observation and information, and guided by their experience, reasonably could have believed that a crime had been committed by the person to be arrested. However, said rules depend upon on a “consensus reality” In a police state don’t they? If an officer does not share in the illusion or agree with your belief that your so-called rights exist, then they don’t.

At IHOP, the cops probably had not established probable cause before putting their hands on Lewis, in a consensus reality.

Nevertheless, similar to mainstream media coverage, Marietta police gave the 4th Amendment no consideration; “While the video may seem shocking to some, we are very proud that all officers used only the force necessary to place Mr. Lewis in handcuffs,” Marietta police said in video below. 

Marietta police spokesman Chuck McPhilamy said the officer seen on video striking Lewis has not been placed on administrative leave, as the use of “short-strike punches” did not appear to violate the agency’s guidelines. [MORE]

Israelien Soldiers Detain Palestinian Ambulance at Gunpoint During Protest in the village of Beit Sira

From [btselem] On 8 March 2019, at a demonstration in Beit Sira, Ramallah District, to protest the killing of two Palestinians, an ambulance found itself amidst the clashes. As it tried to drive away, an officer ordered the driver at gunpoint to shut off the engine and hand over the keys. The ambulance was detained for about 15 minutes. Interfering with the work of medical crews or causing them harm is prohibited. There were no grounds for threatening, detaining or endangering the EMTs. These actions by the security forces are but another example of their disregard for the lives of Palestinians, conduct always carried out with impunity.

"Israelien" [imposters having no ancestral connection to Afrikan Hebrews] Soldiers Murder 18 yr Old Palestinian Medic while he was Treating Injured Protesters in the West Bank

israel murded medic.jpg

According to FUNKTIONARY:

Israeliens - imposter (pale interloper alien) Hebrews—Eastern European stock Caucasians who adopted the philosophy, myths, fables, and traditions of the so-called "Jews" while living in Russia—masquerading as if they had any genetic or historical ancestry and cultural heritage to the Afrikan Hebrews, the Afrim people, who occupied Canaan (Palestine) from ancient times. 2) those who currently are occupying Palestine (the land of Canaan), colonizing and killing its rightful descendants, historic owners and dwellers), and are undeniably alien (foreign—not aboriginal) to that land. 3) imposter Hebrews originating from the Pale of Settlement in Kazzarian Russia currently an occupying force (militarily holed-up and propped-up by US financial support and British skullduggery) in occupied Palestine. 4) alien Jews—Pinchbeck Hebrews. Israeliens are East Europeans with no genetic or actual historic ties whatsoever to the land now called Palestine. Israeliens have brainwashed (and fooled themselves and many others into believing this historical lie and propaganda that they are the descendants of "Jews" (a misnomer for African Hebrews, itself a misnomer for the Afrim people). Anyone with a modicum of research skills, knowledge of basic geography, philology, and an unbiased-by-religious-myth mind can easily confirm or validate this fact for his or herself. Both so-called Sephardic and Askanazzim "Jews" are not historically tied to the Afrim. It's not that Caucasians who have adopted the "Jewish" religion shouldn't have a place to live—but how about suggesting relocating where they came from—the hills of Russia, and not on another peoples" land. You don't invade (break into) someone's house (property) and expect them to just go away and not fight to get it back (despite how much force, murdering, deception, and propaganda that is brought to bear to justify such wrongful invasion and genocide). Psychological repression is both invisible and reflexive. (See: Zionism, USS Liberty, Gulf of Tonkin, Genocide, Immigrant Human, Evolution, Caucasian, Pilgarlick, El & Judaism)

'Who supplies the lies we all consume?' Elite US Media is Lying About Venezuela to Con-Sense-Us into Believing an Artificial Reality in which Robbery [theft by force] is Justified

According to FUNKTIONARY:

Media- a mind-shampoo and conditioning process of the Greater System—"the media is the mirage." 2) the psychotherapist for the Greater System—a conditioning process and a subdivision of Commerce. 3) the guardian of the Commodity and Spectacle. 4) the misinformation cul-de-sac. 5) reconditioned reality. "Every media extension of man is an amputation." -Marshall McLuhan. "In our society, the media functions as a collective nervous system or immune-response task force, inoculating the social body against any new pattern or incoming information that might threaten the conventional value and biases." -Daniel Pinchbeck. All mainstream media is "doubt-sourced" information (prepackaged programmed propaganda)—consider the source; consider the agenda; who supplies the lies we all consume? (See: "Greater System," Spectacle Society, Great Lie, Propaganda, Televasion, TV, LIAR, Consensus Reality & Camera)

white+media+lies23.jpg

MEDIA - Mind-controlling Everyone's Decisions and Ideologies in America. 2) Mindless Entertainment Deviation Indoctrination Alienation. 3) "Multi-Ethnic Destruction In America."-Professor Griff. 4) Brainwashington, Drone City. 4) Mentally Entraining Drone Information Anonymously. 5) Marginally Entertaining Distraction In Amerika.

According to Amos Wilson, "the most effective means of disseminating and reproducing ideas in society is to have that community perceive their dissemination and reproduc­tion as the work of disinterested, unbiased, non-manipulative, liberal yet authoritative, White American individuals, groups, or institutions, or as flowing from sources independent of the marked influence of the powerful. Thus, White America strongly pushes and projects the powerful mythology of independent, liberal American media, universi­ties, and other information processing establishments. That is, America loudly congratulates itself for what it calls its "free press" and mass media which permit the free exchange of ideas. . . Most are not mindful of the fact that the American press and mass media are privately owned, profit-making, White elite-controlled corporations.” 

According to FUNKTIONARY:

consensus - the hypnotic communal cultural trance—the collective psychosis. 2) a common agreement about reality. 3) an artificial overlay or semantic screen (filter) that obfuscates clarity of our subjective reality. 4) a search for an acceptable myth. 5) an opinion or position no one really likes, but everyone is seemingly able to live with it or through it. It is impossible to ever find (or experience) reality by consensus. Consensus is the art of conning the group—Con-Sense-Us—you con. Consensus has nothing to do with census, but with common sense, albeit mostly manufactured through programming and social conditioning of the masses. (See: Consensus Reality, Split-Mind, Mirrorealization, Predictive Programming, Conformity & Funnel Vision)

consensus process - a group decision-making paradigm/system wherein the goal being the attainment of a decision with which everyone voluntarily participating can agree (assent to), without the imperative of unanimity or the resort to the win-lose democratic (mob rule) process of voting, i.e., decision-actions may either be carried out (if the dissenters deem it a minor opposition, or if it is deemed a major opposition), the decision-action is postponed and the onus of resolution is placed on the dissenters, while the group proceeds on other business matters to be addressed. 2) a form of self-governmental legitimization. (See: Belief Space, Communitarianism Stratocracy. Citizen & Symbiocracy)

consensus reality - a movie comprising belief, expectation and the magic of agreeing. 2) an aggrieved upon hallucination. Consensus Reality is the most malefic trickster of all. Whether you think you can or you can't, or whether you think it is or it isn't, you're right! (See: Maya, Granfalloons, OWLs & Dreamland)

consent - voluntary and explicit agreement. Anything done under the guise of consent can be done by consent. (See: States)

consensual validation - pretending to agree on a thought form level only. The supposed agreement that we're all seeing the same things in an external objective reality "out there'" is a pretense—we have all been programmed to have the same expectations of what is being seen—with threats of force and violence (only when necessary). Get real, frank and honest—you have to start where you are. Stop pretending. People can't stand other people being honest or real, it's always easier to be a polite hypocrite. 'This experience right now is your door to freedom, just like this, nothing needs to change." -Chameli Ardagh. The door away from and back to ourselves are within us. How fortunate we are that it lies within all of our hearts. (See: Funk Dojo, Kingdom of Heaven, Spiritual Provocation, Experiences. Program. Seeing. Looking, Thought Form & Authenticity).

Beyond Censorship: Corporate Elites Seek to Define the Limits of Acceptable Ideas [those that support and justify their vested interests] and Destroy Free Thought Online

Amos Wilson explained, “The central aim of the ruling elite's ideology process is to define the "domain of discourse." That is, the corporate elite seeks to define the limits of "acceptable ideas" and to define what is worth talking about, worth learning, teaching, promoting, and writing about. Of course, the limits of the "acceptable," the "responsible," are set at those points which support and justify the interests of the elite itself. To a great extent the elite ideology process essentially involves the reinforcement of long-held, orthodox "American" values, perspectives, practices and ideals (which the system of power relations has already indirectly shaped to begin with). These factors are the ideological bases of elite power. It is a well-known fact that propaganda works best "when used to reinforce an already existing notion or to establish a logical or emotional connection between a new idea and a social norm." [MORE]  

google fights.jpg

Although Greyhound “holds itself out as having a zero-tolerance policy for discrimination," Lawsuit Says It has a "practice of subjecting low-income, non-white passengers to immigration raids"

From [HERE] A class action against Greyhound for letting immigration officers perform searches on its buses belongs in Alameda County Court, a federal judge ruled Thursday in an order for remand back to state court.

The court order states:

“Greyhound is a private bus company that operates throughout California that “holds itself out as having a zero-tolerance policy for discrimination aboard buses and promotes itself as Latino friendly.” FAC ¶¶ 1-2. According to the FAC, despite Greyhound’s representations, Greyhound has a “policy or practice of voluntarily subjecting its predominately low-income, non-white passengers to immigration raids in the non-public, restricted-access passenger cabins of buses and private bus station facilities.” Greyhound allegedly knows that those “raids routinely involve racial and ethnic harassment of its passengers, and worse.”

Fed Ct says Cops are Immune: Even if Cops Stole $225k the Defendants “did not have a clearly established 4th or 14th Amendment right to be free from the theft of property seized pursuant to a warrant"

law over humanity.jpg

Under the doctrine of sovereign immunity we are bound by the written law but those who wrote the law are bound by the law of the jungle. Makes you feel like a fool, doesn't it? [MORE]

From {Forbes] Two businessmen who claimed they were robbed of more than $225,000 by police in Fresno, California during an investigation into illegal gambling saw their civil rights lawsuit dismissed last week, when the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled it was “not obvious” that theft by cop would violate their Fourth Amendment rights. Writing for a unanimous court, Judge Milan Smith held that even if police officers did steal (an allegation they repeatedly denied), the two men “did not have a clearly established Fourth or Fourteenth Amendment right to be free from the theft of property seized pursuant to a warrant.” As a result, the officers would still be entitled to “qualified immunity” and could not be sued for damages in federal court.

Back in September 2013, Fresno police executed a search warrant into three properties owned by Micah Jessop and Brittan Ashjian, who run an ATM business. After the search, officers handed the businessmen an inventory sheet stating they had seized around $50,000. But Jessop and Ashjian claimed that police actually took $151,380 in cash as well as $125,000 in rare coins, and simply “stole the difference” (over $225,000) between those amounts and what was officially reported. Neither man was charged with a crime.

Jessop and Ashjian filed a lawsuit claiming that Fresno police violated their Fourth Amendment right to be free from “unreasonable searches and seizures” and their Fourteenth Amendment right to due process. “Unquestionably,” they argued in court documents, “the theft of over $100,000 and collectible coins/currency exceeded the legitimate scope of the search warrant.”

Like many other civil-rights plaintiffs, Jessop and Ashjian sued the Fresno officers under Section 1983 of the U.S. Code, which lets Americans sue government officials for “the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws.” But in its 1982 decision, Harlow v. Fitzgerald, the U.S. Supreme Court substantially reformulated the doctrine of qualified immunity, which made it much more difficult for plaintiffs to show that the immunity should be lifted.

Essentially, qualified immunity lets government officials sidestep Section 1983 lawsuits, “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known,” the court held in Harlow. According to the Supreme Court, qualified immunity would encourage “the vigorous exercise of official authority” and would protect government officials “from undue interference with their duties and from potentially disabling threats of liability.”

NY Court says Govt’s Possession of Cell Phone for 9 Months Wasn't Unreasonable b/c the Defendant Refused to Provide the Phone Password

From [HERE] Defendant’s phone has been in the hands of the government for many months, but defendant refused to provide the password to access the phone. That justifies the delay in the government accessing the phone. The motion for return of property or to stop attempting to get into the phone is denied. United States v. Cantoni, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 50722 (E.D. N.Y. Mar. 27, 2019).

Plaintiff claimed a clear misstatement of fact to obtain a search warrant for his house which the District Court found a factual dispute for and denied summary judgment. This is not a proper basis for an interlocutory appeal. Brubaker v. City of Tucson, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 9130 (9th Cir. Mar. 27, 2019).*

PA Court Reminds Cops and Prosecutors, “The 4th Amendment does not have a time limit; it protects individuals from unreasonable seizures, no matter how brief."

From [HERE] “The Fourth Amendment does not have a time limit; it [allegedly] protects individuals from unreasonable seizures, no matter how brief.” The brief detention here wasn’t based on reasonable suspicion and implicated the Fourth Amendment. Commonwealth v. Adams, 2019 Pa. LEXIS 1734 (Mar. 26, 2019):

This discretionary appeal requires the Court to consider once again when an interaction between an ordinary citizen and a law enforcement official ripens from a mere encounter, requiring no level of suspicion, to an investigative detention, which must be supported by reasonable suspicion that criminal activity is afoot. We conclude, based on longstanding precedent of this Court and the United States Supreme Court, that the line is crossed when a reasonable person would not feel free to leave, and that a detention effectuated by police in the interest of officer safety is impermissible in the absence of reasonable suspicion of criminal activity. We therefore reverse the decision of the Superior Court and remand the matter to the trial court for proceedings consistent with this Opinion.

. . .

The Commonwealth and the courts below improperly focus, in part, on the duration of the detention that occurred. That the detention was only temporary is irrelevant to our analysis of whether a seizure occurred. An investigative detention, by definition, encompasses only a “brief detention.” See United States v. Sokolow, 490 U.S. 1, 7, 109 S. Ct. 1581, 104 L. Ed. 2d 1 (1989) (“In Terry[], we held that the police can stop and briefly detain a person for investigative purposes if the officer has a reasonable suspicion supported by articulable facts that criminal activity ‘may be afoot,’ even if the officer lacks probable cause.”); Strickler, 757 A.2d at 888 (“The Fourth Amendment protects against unreasonable searches and seizures, including those entailing only a brief detention.”). The Fourth Amendment does not have a time limit; it protects individuals from unreasonable seizures, no matter how brief. See, e.g., United States v. Brignoni-Ponce, 422 U.S. 873, 880-82, 95 S. Ct. 2574, 45 L. Ed. 2d 607 (1975) (finding an interaction between border patrol officers and individuals in their vehicles during roving-patrol stops and lasting “no more than a minute” to be an investigative detention requiring reasonable suspicion of criminal activity).

The analogies presented for our consideration by the Commonwealth are inapt. An officer’s act of closing the door of a person’s vehicle as the person begins to open it is not similar to a request that a person remove his hands from his pockets, as the latter request in no way constrains a person’s ability to leave the area. Further, although the Commonwealth is correct that the Fourth Amendment allows an officer to order the occupants of a vehicle to exit during a lawful traffic stop, it ignores that a traffic stop is an investigative detention that itself requires reasonable suspicion or probable cause. See Commonwealth v. Chase, 599 Pa. 80, 960 A.2d 108 (Pa. 2008). In Mimms, police initiated a vehicle stop after observing the defendant driving with an expired license plate. The high Court explained that where police have already lawfully and permissibly intruded upon the personal liberty of the vehicle’s occupants by conducting the stop of the vehicle and the driver is lawfully detained, the “additional intrusion” of having the individuals exit the vehicle at the officer’s direction does not constitute a separate seizure and “can only be described as de minimis.” Mimms, 434 U.S. at 111.

The key differentiation of the circumstances in the case at bar is that there was no preexisting permissible intrusion or restraint on Adams’ liberty. The Commonwealth does not contend, and the record does not support a finding, that Adams was already subjected to a lawful investigative detention at the time Officer Falconio closed the vehicle’s door. See Commonwealth’s Brief at 17-21 (asserting that the interaction began as a mere encounter). Thus, unlike in Mimms, Officer Falconio’s action was not an additional de minimus intrusion upon a person who police had already lawfully seized.