New Philly DA Files Criminal Charges Against Cops for False Imprisonment, False Reports & Official Oppression after Unlawful Stop of Black Man Walking Down the Street

From [HERE] and [HERE] A pair of Philadelphia police officers allegedly detained a Black man without justification and falsified documents earlier this year, the internal affairs division announced Thursday.

Officers Matthew Walsh and Marvin Jones are facing multiple charges stemming from an encounter with a man in the Mount Airy section of the city.

Walsh and Jones were assigned to the 14th District when they stopped a man at around 10:10 a.m on April 14 for "apparently using narcotics," authorities said.

The officers' paperwork states the man was frisked because he failed to take his hands out of his pockets. He then was allegedly placed in handcuffs and driven around by the officers for approximately 15 minutes before being released near the area of the original encounter.

Not long after the incident, the man filed a complaint against the officers.

When investigators reviewed surveillance video from the area, they determined the Walsh and Jones could not possibly have spotted the man using narcotics.

The man, who police said had cooperated during the stop, had prescription medication removed from his pants pocket during the search. Walsh and Jones failed to note this in their investigation report, according to investigators.

The internal affairs investigation determined the two officers stopped the man without reasonable suspicion or probable cause. Surveillance video led authorities to the conclusion that the officers falsified the Vehicle/Pedestrian Investigation Report that they prepared and submitted.

Both men were arrested Wednesday and charged with criminal conspiracy, false imprisonment, tampering with records, obstruction administration of law and official oppression. They have both been suspended with intent to dismiss at the end of 30 days.

Normally this sort of behavior would result in a halfhearted investigation and officers being cleared of any wrongdoing. In extreme cases, someone might be suspended with pay. Lies and illegal stops rarely result in anything more than stern words and civil rights lawsuits. They almost never result in the arrest of the officers involved.

Tech Dirt writes: “Things have changed drastically since Larry Krasner became District Attorney. Anyone who enters this office and immediately earns the undying hatred of the local police union is probably someone actually serious about accountability.” Tech Dirt also states:

Right after taking office, DA Krasner secured 33 resignations from prosecutors and staff who weren't willing to get on board with his reform efforts. He went after the bail system, pointing out it did little else but ensure the poorest Philadelphians spent the most time in jail while still presumably innocent. Then he pissed off the police union by daring to tell incoming police cadets force deployment -- especially deadly force -- is a power to be used only when necessary and handled with the utmost of respect.

Also last month Philadelphia District Attorney Larry Krasner announced charges for Ryan Pownall - who will be charged with Criminal Homicide (18 Pa.C.S.A. § 2501), Possession of an Instrument of Crime (18 Pa.C.S.A. § 907), and Recklessly Endangering Another Person (18 Pa.C.S.A § 2705).

Movement Restrictions in LA for Persons who Look Latino: Report says 70% of Traffic Stops by LA County Cops on the 5 Freeway were of Latino Drivers

FREEDOM OF MOVEMENT, RIGHT TO TRAVEL, 4TH AMENDMENT RIGHT TO BE FREE FROM UNLAWFUL DETENTIONS, SEARCHES & STOPS IS A JOKE FOR NON-WHITES. Above RACIST SUSPECT Los Angeles County Sheriff Jim McDonnell. WITH crime down in la county THE TRUE NATURE OF POLICE WORK CAN BE REVEALED FOR THOSE WHO HAVE EYES TO SEE. IN PHOTO, MCDONNELL SPEAKS AT A PRESS CONFERENCE AFTER HIS CHIEF OF STAFF, A high-ranking Los Angeles County Sheriff’s official, resigned WHEN emails were discovered in which he made racist and crude comments about Muslims, blacks, Latinos, and women IN 2016.[MORE]

From [HERE] Yesterday, The Los Angeles Times published a report about traffic stop data recorded by the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department (LACSD) from 2012 through 2017. Through their analysis, The Times uncovered a troubling reality about the Domestic Highway Enforcement Team that patrols the 5 Freeway allegedly in search of cars carrying drugs: more than two-thirds of the drivers they pulled over were Latino. And, of the over 3,500 drivers who had no drugs or other illegal items in their vehicles, the majority were Latino.

By examining over 9,000 traffic stops, in addition to records from hundreds of court cases, The Times produced the following key findings:

• “Latino drivers accounted for 69% of the deputies’ stops. Officers from the California Highway Patrol, mainly policing traffic violations on the same section of freeway, pulled over nearly 378,000 motorists during the same period; 40% of them were Latino.”

• “Two-thirds of Latinos who were pulled over by the Sheriff’s Department team had their vehicles searched, while cars belonging to all other drivers were searched less than half the time.”

• “Three-quarters of the team’s searches came after deputies asked motorists for consent rather than having evidence of criminal behavior. Several legal scholars said such a high rate of requests for consent is concerning because people typically feel pressured to allow a search or are unaware they can refuse.”

• “Though Latinos were much more likely to be searched, deputies found drugs or other illegal items in their vehicles at a rate that was not significantly higher than that of black or white drivers.”

According to The Times, the LACSD has said that race “does not play a role” in their deputies’ work. Drivers are stopped only because of road violations or other “impartial” factors—race not being one of them (even though the numbers above suggest otherwise).

Through patrolling the 5 Freeway, officials say the LACSD has successfully removed large quantities of illegal narcotics from being circulated. But some legal and law enforcement experts argue that racial profiling is at the center of the team’s success. Whether intentional or not, experts claim racial profiling has violated the civil rights of Latinos.

“When they say, ‘We’re getting all these drugs out of here,’ they are not taking into account the cost,” David Harris, a law professor at the University of Pittsburgh who studies racial profiling by police, told The Times. “They are sacrificing their own legitimacy in the community as a whole and the Latino community in particular.”

Kimberley Fuentes, research director for the California League of United Latin American Citizens, shared a similar sentiment with The Times, “These findings risk tarnishing any trust between the Sheriff’s Department and the Latino community.”

According to The Times, after publishing their findings, Sheriff Jim McDonnell released a statement that praised his team but also expressed concern about “any allegation of racial and ethnic profiling.” He said he “takes very seriously questions about race and police procedures” and would work with the county’s inspector general to “examine any issues of concern.”

Allegations of racial profiling by police are frequent – in recent months, the Innocence Blog has reported about the issue occurring in various parts of the country (here, here and here).

revealing the truth when the lie is no longer necessary: Sen. Lisa Murkowski Admits that the Reasonable Doubt Standard Doesn’t Apply to Kavanaugh’s Confirmation

WHITE PRESUMACY is the standard for White Man Seeking Job. From [HERE] Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska admitted on Friday what no other Republican senator would: The standard for joining the elite ranks of the Supreme Court is higher than “he probably didn’t attempt to rape that 15-year-old.”

For the past week, conservatives have argued that if Democrats can’t prove “beyond a reasonable doubt” that Judge Brett Kavanaugh sexually assaulted Christine Blasey Ford, he should be appointed to the Supreme Court.

But of course, this is not a trial, and it is not appropriate to apply the level of proof meant to protect criminal defendants from having their life or liberty stripped to a judicial confirmation process.

In fact, the appropriate standard isn’t even the lesser preponderance of the evidence or the “more likely than not” standard that Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, said she relied on in deciding to confirm Kavanaugh. That civil standard is lower because less is at stake in civil matters — one’s property can be taken away, but not one’s liberty. But even that standard is too high. As Rachel Mitchell, the prosecutor hired by Senate Republicans to question Ford, said at last week’s Senate Judiciary Committee hearing: “A Senate confirmation hearing is not a trial, especially not a prosecution,” and “there is no clear standard of proof for allegations made during the Senate’s confirmation process.”

Regardless of whether you agree that the stakes here are ultimately comparable to a (very important) job interview, as many, including myself, have argued, it is undeniable that neither Kavanaugh’s personal liberty nor property is at risk. Although his own behavior during last week’s hearing might put his reputation in jeopardy — the American Bar Association is revisiting its positive evaluation of Kavanaugh based on “new information of a material nature regarding temperament” — if Kavanaugh’s confirmation were to have failed, he would lose nothing tangible that he already had. Like Merrick Garland, whose nomination was stalled for months until former President Barack Obama was no longer in office, he would simply go back to being a judge on the second most powerful court in the country.

That being the case, it was refreshing to hear a conservative acknowledge that the Supreme Court is an institution whose members should engender a high level of respect, rather than merely meet a low bar. During her remarks Friday night, Murkowski seemed to acknowledge that the burden was not on Democrats to conclusively prove Kavanaugh was a sexual predator, but on Kavanaugh to demonstrate that he was qualified for a position that only 113 Americans have ever held — a position that has the power not only to influence the lives of millions, but also to provide an important check on the other branches of our government, and establish confidence in our political system.

“I have a very high bar for any nominee to the Supreme Court of the United States,” she began. Unlike other conservatives, who appropriated criminal law standards that were self-servingly lofty, Murkowski relied on the only truly relevant standard: the Code of Conduct for United States Judges — the nonpartisan benchmark set by the legislature — the standards to which all the senators in the chamber have implicitly signed on.

“The code of judicial conduct,” she read, “states that ‘a judge should act at all times in a manner that promotes public confidence in the independence, integrity, and impartiality of the judiciary,’ and shall ‘avoid impropriety and the appearance of impropriety.’”

“I go back and I look to that,” she said, looking at her notes as if continuing to wrestle with the words. “It is pretty high. It is really high. That a judge shall act at all times — not just sometimes when you’re wearing a robe — but a judge should act at all times in a manner that promotes public confidence.”

“The standard is that a judge must act at all times in a manner that promotes public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary, and shall avoid impropriety and the appearance of impropriety.

“Even in the face of an overly and overtly political process, a politicized process,” she continued, anticipating a common Republican refrain, “and even when one side of this chamber is absolutely dead set on defeating his nomination from the very get go before he was even named … the standard is that a judge must act at all times in a manner that promotes public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary, and shall avoid impropriety and the appearance of impropriety.” After Kavanaugh’s hearing testimony, Murkowski didn’t believe he satisfied that standard. 

Murkowski took on the popular talking point that Kavanaugh’s partisan, red-faced remarks were justified in light of the seriousness of the accusations levied against him. “I’ve been deliberating — agonizing — about what is fair — is this too unfair a burden to place on somebody that is dealing with the worst, most horrific allegations that go to your integrity? That go to everything that you are?”

But as Murkowski later pointed out, judicial temperament is not conditional: “I am reminded that there are only nine seats on the bench of the highest court in the land. And these seats are occupied by these men and women for their lifetime. And so those who seek one of these seats must meet the highest standard in all respects at all times.”

Murkowski returned time and time again to one particular phrase from the code of conduct: “public confidence.” After Kavanaugh’s remarks, in which he called the sexual assault charges against him and the consequent hearing “a calculated and orchestrated political hit … revenge on behalf of the Clintons and millions of dollars in money from outside left-wing opposition groups,” it seemed obvious even to many conservatives that the blush of impartiality was off the rose. 

In light of the failure of public confidence endemic to the Trump administration and also, said Murkowski, to the Obama years, “this judiciary must be perceived as independent, as nonpartisan, as fair and balanced in order for our form of government to function. And it’s that hope, it’s that hope that I seek to maintain. And I think that’s why I have demanded such a high standard to maintain or regain that public confidence.”

It’s remarkable that most Republicans seem to think so much less of the Supreme Court — that so many are so willing to lower the bar.

Could Brazil Return to a Dictatorship? Glenn Greenwald on Possible Election of Far-Right Racist Demagogue

'They Don't Serve Us & We Can't Fire Them' - Racist Suspect Cleveland Police Union President says Pending Arbitration Ruling May Allow Cop Who Murdered Tamir Rice to be Reinstated

From [HERE] The white officer who shot 12-year-old Tamir Rice in November 2014 has been hired as a part-time police officer in southeastern Ohio. [see full story below]

The village of Bellaire confirmed to the Wheeling News-Register Friday that they hired Timothy Loehmann as one of two new part-time officers with its police department.

“This is a part-time job he had to get to make ends meet because he was unjustly fired by the city of Cleveland,” Follmer told the publication. “We are hoping that an arbitration ruling will be made soon and he will be back working as a full-time Cleveland officer.”

Cleveland Police Union President Jeff Follmer [racist suspect in photo] responded to Loehmann's new position saying, "This is a part time job. He had to get to make ends meet because he was unjustly fired by the city of Cleveland. We are hoping that an arbitration ruling will be made soon and he will be back working as a full time Cleveland officer.” [MORE]

The Rewards & Punishments of White Supremacy System: Mostly White Ohio Town Hires White Cop who Murdered Tamir Rice 'because he was never charged with a crime’

From [HERE] A police department in small town in Ohio has hired the officer who killed 12-year-old Tamir Rice, a shooting that became a rallying cry for the Black Lives Matter movement.

Timothy Loehmann will soon begin work as a part-time officer in the village of Bellaire, Ohio, The Intelligencer reported Friday.

Loehmann, who is white, shot Rice two times within seconds of responding to a report of a black “guy” in a park with what appeared to be a handgun. The gun was a realistic Airsoft replica.

“He was cleared of any and all wrongdoing,” Bellaire police Chief Richard Flanagan told The Times Leader of his decision to hire Loehmann. “He was never charged. It’s over and done with.” As is he was inviting other racist suspects to join the police force he stated,

“I have full confidence and faith in every police officer here. We have eight full-time officers and five part-time officers,” Flanagan told the Wheeling News-Register. “And if anyone is looking for a part-time job, call me. All officers are on a probationary period of one year.”

A grand jury declined to charge Loehmann after the shooting, and an internal police investigation cleared him of any wrongdoing. But Cleveland fired Loehmann in 2017 after it discovered the police department in Independence, Ohio, had pushed him out for “lack of maturity” and “inability to perform basic functions as instructed.”

A memo that was part of Loehmann’s Independence personnel file described him having an emotional breakdown over relationship problems during a firearms training and leaving his duty weapon in an unlocked locker overnight.

“His handgun performance was dismal,” Deputy Chief Jim Polak wrote. In the memo, Polak concluded, “I do not believe time, nor training, will be able to change or correct these deficiencies.”

Loehmann also failed an exam to join the Maple Heights, Ohio, police department in 2009, according to The Times Leader.

Bellaire has about 4,000 residents. It’s police force has eight full-time and four part-time officers. “And if anyone is looking for a part-time job, call me,” Flannagan, the Bellaire police chief, told The Times Leader.

Eric Smith will also be joining the Bellaire Police Department part-time. Smith was suspended from his post as police chief in Bethesda, Ohio, last spring over possible misuse of a law-enforcement database. The Ohio Attorney General’s Office has an ongoing felony investigation into Smith.

Flanagan told The Times Leader he did not have any reservations about hiring Loehmann. But he did express concerns about hiring Smith and said the officer will not have access to Bellaire’s police computer systems.

“I had reservations about Eric Smith and I still do,” Flanagan told the paper. “Everyone has got to prove themselves. I try to prove every day that I am capable of being the police chief. Everybody makes mistakes.”

Armed Black Man Acted in Self Defense, Had No Duty to Retreat & 'Stood His Ground' when a Group of Racists Stepped to Him Outside Irish Pub: Jury Acquits Stephen Spencer in Murder of White Man

From [HERE] A black man has been acquitted of all charges in the shooting death of a white man outside a bar in a case his attorney said stemmed from "ugly racism."

Jurors deliberated for four hours Friday before acquitting Stephen Spencer of homicide, aggravated assault and terroristic threats.

Spencer, 31, was accused of killing Christopher Williams, 32, in a confrontation outside Saints and Sinners Irish Pub on Center Street in July 2017 following a dispute over a game of pool. Spencer had testified that he fired in self-defense as a group of would-be attackers came at him outside, but prosecutors alleged it was murder.

Having spent 453 days in Luzerne County Correctional Center after he fatally shot a man outside a Pittston bar last year, Stephen Jamal Spencer walked out of the Luzerne County Correctional Facility a free man and into the arms of his family Friday evening.

About 90 minutes earlier, a jury had found Spencer not guilty of murder in the racially charged slaying.

“It was unjust for the situation I was in,” Spencer said minutes after his release. “Luzerne County detectives, Pittston police — no one ever did an investigation. They looked at me, I was a black man, and they just thought I was just another black man that committed a murder without any justification or any purpose.”

After a few hours of deliberations Friday afternoon, jurors found Spencer not guilty of murder or manslaughter, clearing him of any criminal wrongdoing.

During closing arguments, Luzerne County Assistant District Attorney Tom Hogans said Spencer had the opportunity — and duty — to retreat from a crowd outside the bar rather than pull his gun.

“Shooting an unarmed man on a street when you can retreat is not self defense,” Hogans said. “He intentionally shot him in a vital part of his body.” Hogans said Spencer also had time to warn Williams he was armed.

Pennsylvania has a "stand your ground” self-defense law. Under the law individuals have no duty to retreat from any place where they have a right to be. Specifically it states in pertinent part:

§ 505.  Use of force in self-protection.

(a)  Use of force justifiable for protection of the person.--The use of force upon or toward another person is justifiable when the actor believes that such force is immediately necessary for the purpose of protecting himself against the use of unlawful force by such other person on the present occasion.

An actor who is not engaged in a criminal activity, who is not in illegal possession of a firearm and who is attacked in any place where the actor would have a duty to retreat under paragraph (2)(ii) has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his ground and use force, including deadly force, if:

(i)  the actor has a right to be in the place where he was attacked;

(ii)  the actor believes it is immediately necessary to do so to protect himself against death, serious bodily injury, kidnapping or sexual intercourse by force or threat [MORE]

Defense attorney John Pike argued Spencer, who is black, was defending himself after enduring a night of racial taunting by drunken bar-goers who were white. They followed him outside the bar, Pike said.

“What’s going to trigger a racist? A black man in their white bar. Fueled by alcohol,” Pike said.

Pike said members of the group were moving aggressively toward Spencer prior to the shooting and shouted “we’re going to get you (racial slur).”

“In his mind, he was terrified and did what he had to do in those few seconds,” Pike said.

He noted Spencer has no criminal history and possessed a valid concealed carry permit for the gun. Pike also pointed out Spencer fired only one shot and stopped when the threat stopped.

Spencer was also acquitted of charges of simple assault and terroristic threats for allegedly pointing a gun at a woman after shooting Williams.

Witnesses said racial tensions were escalating all night at the bar after Williams’ cousin refused to shake Spencer’s hand because he is black.

Spencer arrived at the bar with Williams’ friend, Henry Gift, a white man who is Spencer’s neighbor. As Spencer and Gift were leaving, Gift said he was attacked from behind by two people he didn’t see. Spencer was a little bit in front of him, he said.

The attack — which Gift said he believed was motivated by the fact that he “was with a black guy at a bar” — left him with a black eye and was only interrupted when Gift heard the gunshot Spencer fired from up ahead on the sidewalk, he said.

Pike said he was thankful to the jury, noting Spencer was never in trouble before.

“You don’t go from that to homicide,” Pike said.

Pike said prior to his arrest, Spencer made more than $100,000 a year as owner-operator of a Bimbo Bakeries delivery truck franchise.

“He was self-made,” Pike said.

Spencer’s older brother Amore, with whom he resided in Pittston before the shooting, said his brother “lost everything” between the time of his arrest and Friday’s verdict — “his business, his trucks, cars, motorcycles — everything.”

Hogans said Friday that prosecutors respected the jury’s verdict but disagreed with the outcome.

“We respect the jury’s verdict and realize they had a very tough decision to make in this case,” Hogans said. “Obviously, we felt we had enough evidence to convict Stephen Spencer under the circumstances. Although we may disagree with the outcome, the justice system worked and we know the jury carefully considered all of the evidence presented by the Commonwealth and the defense in reaching a verdict.”

Spencer said he had no words to describe how he was feeling after reuniting with his mother, brother, grandmother and two family friends outside the jail.

Asked if there was anything he’d like to say to Williams’ family, Spencer said, “I do apologize for him to be deceased, but I don’t apologize for the actions I took. But sometimes things like this do happen when people are bullies and people are raised in a culture of racism.”

Spencer said racism is a “terrible” problem in Luzerne County.

“I think it’s bigger than we all think,” he said.

As for his future plans, the father of 6- and 10-year-old sons wasn’t looking too far ahead.

“My plan is just to go home, kiss my kids, tell them that there (are) ways to get out of jail, even when there’s an unjust society out there,” Spencer said. “And there’s hope.”

Video of Verdict, Closing Arguments & Juror Interviews in Jason Van Dyke Trial, White Cop Found Guilty of 2nd Degree Murder of Laquan McDonald

Tennessee Supreme Court Hears Challenge to "Cruel & Unusual" Lethal-Injection Protocol that has Torturous, Painful Effects on People before They are Murdered by the Government

From [HERE] The Tennessee Supreme Court heard oral argument on October 3, 2018 of an appeal brought by 32 death-row prisoners challenging the constitutionality of the state's execution protocol. In a move criticized by one of the court's justices as a “rocket docket,” the court removed the case from a lower court and set argument for one week before Tennessee's scheduled October 11 execution of Edmund Zagorski. Previously, the court denied a stay of execution to Billy Ray Irick, allowing him to be executed before the lethal-injection issues were resolved.

Arguing for the prisoners, assistant federal defenders Kelley Henry and Dana Hansen Chavis told the court that “unassailable science” shows that midazolam, the first drug used in Tennessee executions, is insufficient to block the intense pain caused by the second and third drugs.

The prisoners asked the court to consider medical evidence from Irick’s execution that Irick had been conscious while experiencing the torturous effects of the vecuronium bromide injected to induce paralysis and the potassium chloride used to stop his heart. Witnesses to Irick’s execution reported that he choked, moved his head, and strained his forearms against restraints while being put to death.

The prisoners offered a sworn statement from Dr. David Lubarsky, one of the nation’s leading anesthesiologists, who offered an opinion “to a reasonable degree of medical certainty” that Irick “was aware and sensate during his execution and would have experienced the feeling of choking, drowning in his own fluids, suffocating, being buried alive, and the burning sensation caused by the injection of the potassium chloride.”

“If the Eighth Amendment means anything,” Henry argued, “then the court will rule in favor of the plaintiffs.”

Much of the argument focused on the requirement imposed by the U.S. Supreme Court that before a state’s chosen execution method can be declared unconstitutionally cruel and unusual, prisoners must prove that some other constitutionally-acceptable method is available to execute them.

The Tennessee prisoners proposed that the state could switch to a one-drug protocol using pentobarbital, which both Georgia and Texas have recently used in carrying out executions. Alternatively, they suggested that Tennessee drop the paralytic drug from the execution process, citing testimony that its inclusion causes additional, unnecessary pain.

Tennessee’s lawyers argued that the state had made a “diligent effort” to obtain pentobarbital but none of the approximately 100 suppliers the Tennessee Department of Correction contacted would provide the drug for use in executions. Associate Solicitor General Jennifer Smith provided no explanation for why suppliers refused the sale but said that “[t]he state bears no burden at all” to prove that the drug was unavailable. In an admission that countered one of the frequent claims of execution proponents, Smith said there was no evidence death penalty opponents had interfered with the state’s efforts to obtain the drug.

In response to questions from Justice Holly Kirby about the prisoners’ burden of proving that the state could obtain pentobarbital, Henry explained that the state’s refusal to provide any information on its efforts created “procedural roadblocks” to proving that point.

Justice Sharon Lee appeared to support the prisoners’ position on transparency, asking Smith how the state could fairly demand that the prisoners “prove what they can’t possibly prove because they can’t get the records.” A motion to stay Zagorski execution is pending before the court, and it is unclear whether the court will rule on the merits of the appeal before his execution date. An application for clemency has also been filed and is under review by Governor Bill Haslam.

Video Shows Unprovoked White Mesa Cops Violently Assaulted Latino Man Laying on His Couch, Lied About it, Falsely Arrested Him & Caused Malicious Prosecution, Detention

From [HERE] Mesa police Officer Nathan Sund punched Christian Topete as he sat on a couch in his apartment. Later, another officer explained to Topete that he was punched because he attacked Sund first.

Footage released Thursday by Mesa police indicates that Topete did not attack Sund or his partner, Officer Kristen Johnson.

Prosecutors have charged Topete, 32, with two counts of aggravated assault on an officer and one count each of resisting arrest, unlawful imprisonment and assault, court records show. His trial is set for November.

The altercation, which occurred October 12, 2017, is the subject of a lawsuit alleging civil rights violations filed this week in U.S. District Court by Topete’s lawyer, Nathaniel Preston. 

In the past year, the Mesa Police Department has drawn scrutiny over officers’ use of force. This case is among a string of police brutality allegations being examined in the courts, by the FBI or by an independent police organization.

The lawsuit says Topete was also kicked in the face by Johnson and urinated on himself as Sund had him in a chokehold.

“We’re soaked in blood and urine,” Johnson says in one of 25 body-cam videosof the incident released by Mesa police. The department used an effect on the videos to blur them.

Preston said, “These officers clearly and knowingly violated rules and training procedures if they have even been trained at all. And then, later, they try to pin it back on the victim.”

The encounter started when a neighbor called 911 to report that she heard Topete and his ex-girlfriend arguing.

The ex-girlfriend later explained to police that she went over to Topete’s apartment to drop off a “sippy cup” for their 2-year-old son, who was sleeping at the time, according to the video and police report. The ex-girlfriend, who lives nearby, also said that when she stood in front of Topete’s apartment door, he pulled her inside and they began to argue.

What the videos show

Johnson’s body camera shows Sund walk into the apartment and ask Topete to put his hands on his head. Topete asks, “What did I do?”

As Topete begins to raise his hands, Sund grabs one of them, but Topete pulls it away, the video shows. 

Then Sund begins to punch Topete in the face, the video shows.

“Are you going to punch me?” Topete asks. He goes on to say, “Are you going to punch me? I’m no b—h.” 

Johnson curses and calls him a profane name.

Johnson also began to punch and kick Topete, using her baton to hit him while also “driving her combat-style boots directly into” Topete’s face and nose, according to the lawsuit.

The lawsuit also says that Sund put Topete in a choke hold because Topete kept resisting. Topete momentarily passed out and urinated himself, the lawsuit says.

In Johnson’s footage, she is heard later telling other officers, “We’re soaked in blood and urine.”

In a second video, Topete appears to lunge toward the second-floor railing, as medics escort him out of his apartment. Police officers pull him back into his apartment and pin him to the ground. “I didn’t do anything,” Topete says, crying.

“I say we just f—king hobble him and drag his fat ass down there,” an unidentified officer says. 

In a third video, an officer questions Topete in a hospital.

“My question to you is, what were you thinking about when you attacked the officers then,” the officer asks.

Topete says he was punched in the face.

But the officer responds that Sund “punched you in the face after you attacked him.” Topete denies this and asks to see the video and the officer says he would eventually view it.

FBI launches civil-rights violations investigations into Mesa police

Topete tried to explain that he couldn’t have attacked the officer because he was sitting on his couch, but the officer doesn’t believe him, the video shows. 

“Whatever you want to say, boss,” the officer responds.

“It’s not whatever I want to say. It’s what I remember. I remember getting punched in my … face. And I’m sitting down on the couch,” Topete says in the video. “And yeah, I did struggle because I’m getting beat up. As a human being, you have a reflex of defending yourself or trying to protect yourself when you’re getting beaten up.”

Still, the officer tells Topete he doesn’t believe him.

“Well, that’s all the questions I have for you,” the officer says. “Because obviously, you’re either still intoxicated, so you’re not going to tell the truth.”

Topete responds that he isn’t drunk and ends the conversation by saying he wants to talk to his lawyer.

Preston told The Arizona Republic in a phone interview that the way the officers acted after the attack on Topete was an attempt to try to justify “police brutality.”

Ryan Tait, Topete’s attorney representing him in the criminal case, said he couldn’t comment because the case is pending in Maricopa County Superior Court.

What police say

In an email, Mesa police Detective Nik Rasheta said that the case has been under internal investigation since April when the city of Mesa received a notice of claim, which is a precursor to a lawsuit. Rasheta also said that the officers are “working” but couldn’t confirm if they are on patrol.

“This case is currently under investigation by the professional standards unit,” Rasheta said. “We are unable to provide additional information beyond this statement.”

Other use-of-force incidents

In August, an 84-year-old woman sued the city of Mesa, claiming two police officers used excessive force and unlawfully arrested her when they arrived at her house to do a welfare check on her grandson. Her case caught national attention when pictures uploaded on Facebook by her granddaughter went viral.

The FBI is reviewing several use-of-force allegations against Mesa police, according to an Aug. 28 letter sent by a federal agent to the Mesa Police Department.

To Propagandize the Idea that Protest Against Unlawful Conduct by Police is Somehow “Radical," Elite Media & FBI Promote Their Imaginary Projection - the "Black Identity Extremist"

[above VICE explores a granfalloon]. What could be extremist about protesting against conduct that is already illegal? The “resistance” or BLM is what it is - people should be upset when so called “government servants” attack “citizens.” BLM or the resisters are asking cops and prosecutors to do their jobs. The so-called “resistance” is simply seeking enforcement of the status quo [upholding existing laws] and equal treatment under the law. For the most part, BLM effectively organizes non-violent, lawful protests aimed at police after they unlawfully harm or kill Blacks or Latinos.

Yet, through propaganda and “propagenda” elite racists in government and media have given the public the perception that they are doing something much more than just simply blowing off steam. Like picking up the wrong luggage at the airport, the resistance is perceived and also has misperceived itself to be carrying on a struggle like Malcolm X or the BPP waged back in the day - which is fantasy.

Debate in a de-mockery cannot be stilled but it can be controlled and constrained within “proper” bounds. Doggy sets the table for us or “controls the spectrum of ideas” discussed by “citizens” - encouraging us to think within certain boundaries of “thinkable thought” while enforcing the belief that freedom reigns. Such debate or “resistance” is desirable for tyrants in a corporate police state because it keeps the peasants thinking they are participating, knowledgable or involved without providing them any real means to achieve freedom.” [MORE] Dr. Amos Wilson states, "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." [MORE]

In reality, the alleged “resistance” is very tame politics engaged in by mostly obedient citizens - protest activity also known as propagandhi. Elites have drawn the parameters of Black dissent by programming Blacks to believe that what is actually common sense and essentially conservative is somehow "radical" politics. Therefore, Blacks civil obedient Blacks reject common sense in rejecting "the radical" or what is perceived as "radical." Consequently, law abiding or obedient Blacks will not pursue things that anyone else with common sense would pursue- because to do so would be revolutionary! The resisters are not resisting anything. They are mostly petitioning authorities to apply the status quo. They are expressing genuine, common sense outrage at an unaccountable system of white collective power: racist suspect jurors, judges, prosecutors, fellow cops, media and businesses that support, defend and finance a cop’s right to murder or harm Blacks. But what else? [MORE]

In Support of White Supremacy Trump Poised to Roll Back Federal Police Misconduct Probes by "His" "Justice" Department

From [HERE] Federal oversight of local policing could look very different under Donald Trump.

Under President Barack Obama, the Department of Justice (DOJ) regularly investigated high-profile incidents of police use of force. The DOJ also investigated police departments for patterns of malpractice.

Trump has held that policing is a local matter the federal government mostly shouldn’t meddle with.

“The federal government should provide assistance to state and local law enforcement, but should not dictate to state and local law enforcement or interfere, unless invited in by appropriate authorities or when verifiably improper behavior is clearly demonstrated,” Trump’s campaign wrote in a response to questions from the International Association of Chiefs of Police in August.

The DOJ has previously aimed investigations at whole police departments, to determine whether officers have violated citizens’ civil rights regularly because the department condoned or abetted it.

The Obama administration opened about two dozen such investigations, in cities including New York City, Ferguson, and Cleveland. His two predecessors were similarly prolific, according to a count by The Marshall Project.

Trump’s position suggests he’ll cut back on such investigations.

Case by Case

When it comes to investigating individual officers, scholars who’ve analyzed the impact of  federal lawsuits have observed they serve as poor guards against misconduct. This is partly because they’re too blunt an instrument, according to Barbara Armacost, law professor at the University of Virginia.

“The criminal sanction has an ‘all or nothing’ quality that exposes the offending officer to the risk of prison, as well as job loss and public humiliation,” she wrote in a 2004 Washington Law Review article. “As a practical matter, the government will not, and probably should not, employ criminal sanctions except in the clearest and most egregious cases of police brutality.”

When an egregious case of police misconduct comes up, the DOJ has sometimes served justice where local prosecutors failed.

For example, after the infamous beating of Frank Jude by off-duty Milwaukee police officers in 2004, a state prosecution ended in acquittal or mistrial for all of the officers.

Then the DOJ stepped in. Four of the officers pleaded guilty, receiving sentences of between 12 and 32 months. Three more were convicted and sentenced to 15 to 17 years.

This year, the department brought charges or secured convictions in about 20 civil rights cases against police officers—mostly for excessive use of force.

Fine Line

Dubbing himself the “law and order” candidate, Trump has a fine line to walk.

If his attorney general reins in DOJ investigations too much, he risks missing some cases in case police erred and justice was due. That may spark civil unrest, especially in communities with frayed relations with police.

Yet, if Trump’s Justice Department doesn’t act with noticeably more restraint, police and their unions may accuse him of backtracking on his campaign promises.

Citing Racial Bias, Federal Judge Halts Trump’s Efforts to Rescind Temporary Protected Status for Immigrants from Haiti, Sudan, Other Nations

From [HERE] A federal judge in California has temporarily halted the Trump administration’s efforts to suspend the legal status of nearly 300,000 Haitian, Nicaraguan, Sudanese and Salvadoran immigrants who fled to the U.S. to escape violence and disaster in their native countries.

In his decision Wednesday, U.S. District Judge Edward M. Chen of San Francisco cited what he called substantial evidence proving President Donald Trump’s administration lacked “any explanation or justification” to end the temporary protected status of immigrants from the aforementioned countries.

Chen also noted there were “serious questions as to whether a discriminatory purpose was a motivating factor” in the administration’s efforts and cited statements by Trump attacking Muslims, Mexican and African immigrants. In January, the former “Apprentice” star sparked international outrage when he described Haiti, El Salvador and African nations as “shithole” countries.

“Why do we need more Haitians?” Trump said, according to unnamed figures who attended the contentious meeting discussing protections for immigrants from Haiti, Africa and El Salvador as part of a failed bipartisan immigration deal. “Take them out.”

Per The Washington Post, the Ramos v. Nielsen suit is just one of several cases where the president’s incendiary comments have been cited by judges to block the administration’s contested policies on issues like immigration and LGBTQ rights. The ACLU of Northern and Southern California, among other organizations, filed the lawsuit in March on behalf of TPS recipients who faced the possibility of deportation as a result of the administration’s actions.

Earlier this year, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security announced plans to terminate the temporary protected status (TPS) of immigrants from Haiti, Nicaragua, El Salvador and Sudan, arguing that the harrowing conditions that prompted the immigrants to flee were no longer present in their nations.

In their complaint, plaintiffs argued the change was based on “animus against non-white, non-European immigrants.” Chen agreed, writing there was both direct and circumstantial evidence proving race was a motivating factor in DHS’s decision.

Moreover, the judge said the plaintiffs presented a “substantial record” showing the department’s move to alter various criteria affecting the TPS program were unjustified and violated the Administrative Procedure Act, a law requiring agencies to make orderly decisions based on reasoned judgment to prevent “arbitrary” actions by the federal government.

Instead of basing their decisions on what the evidence showed, Chen found the administration seemingly made its decision based on a “preordained result desired by the White House,” the Washington Post reported. Moreover, Chen argued that the potential harm to the immigrants forced to return to their war-torn and disaster-struck countries far outweighed any harm to the government.

“Absent injunctive relief, TPS beneficiaries and their children indisputably will suffer irreparable harm and great hardship,” Chen wrote. “TPS beneficiaries who have lived, worked, and raised families in the United States (many for more than a decade), will be subject to removal. Many have U.S.-born children; those may be faced with the Hobson’s choice of bringing their children with them or splitting their families apart.”

The Justice Department issued a scathing response to the ruling, accusing Chen of usurping the president’s security and immigration powers.

“The Justice Department completely rejects the notion that the White House or the Department of Homeland Security did anything improper. We will continue to fight for the integrity of our immigration laws and our national security,” spokesman Devin O’Malley said in a statement.

Meanwhile, immigrant-rights advocates cheered the decision as a major victory against Trump’s anti-immigration agenda.

“The hundreds of thousands of workers with TPS who build our cities and keep them running deserve the security of knowing the lives they’ve built in the US are safe,” said advocacy group Working Families United. “This shows that Trump’s move to terminate TPS was based in his racial motivations and not in any law or consideration of safety.”

As of this year, over 262,000 people from El Salvador, 58,000 from Haiti, 5,300 from Nicaragua and 1,000 from Sudan held TPS, according to a tally cited by The Washington Times.

Study Finds that Experiencing Racism Can Create a State of Biological Imbalance that Increases Causes of Chronic illnesses in Black Women

From [HERE] Less-educated African American women who report experiencing high levels of racial discrimination may face greater risk of developing chronic diseases, says a new study by UC Berkeley researchers

The study of 208 middle-aged African American women from the San Francisco Bay Area is the first to examine the links between racial discrimination and allostatic load, a measure of chronic physiologic stress in the body that is a predictor of a variety of chronic diseases. Higher levels of educational attainment may buffer some of the negative health effects of discrimination, the team found.

“Racial discrimination has many faces. It is not being able to hail a cab, getting poor service in stores and restaurants, being treated unfairly at work, being treated unfairly by police and law enforcement and being followed around in stores because of racial stereotypes,” said Amani M. Allen, an associate professor of epidemiology and community health sciences in UC Berkeley’s School of Public Health. “We found that experiencing racial discrimination repeatedly can create a state of biological imbalance that leaves certain groups of people more susceptible to chronic disease.”

Numerous studies show that African American women have higher levels of allostatic load, a collection of biological factors like high blood pressure and high blood sugar that collectively raise an individual’s risk of developing chronic illness. African American women are also more likely than other racial and gender groups to experience chronic diseases, including heart disease, stroke, diabetes and cancer.

While previous research has linked racial discrimination to specific conditions, this study, appearing online this month in the journal Psychoneuroendocrinology, is the first to examine the association between racial discrimination and allostatic load.

“We know that African American women suffer disproportionately from chronic disease, and we know a lot about what contributes to these diseases — diet, physical activity, access to care and even genetics in some cases,” Allen said. “However, these factors fall short of explaining the disparities faced by African American women. The goal of our study was to examine whether racial discrimination is in itself a type of stressor that may be related to higher levels of allostatic load, thereby increasing risk of chronic illness among this group.”

Education may be a powerful predictor of health

Each participant completed a questionnaire rating their experiences of racial discrimination in different contexts, including finding housing, finding employment, at work, at school, getting credit for a bank loan or mortgage, and in healthcare settings. The team also gave each participant a physical exam, recording their height, weight, blood pressure, blood sugar and measures of inflammation and other health indicators that can contribute to allostatic load.

Study participants were provided with the results of their physical exams and given educational materials about health risks facing African American women. “It was important to us that this be an informative experience for them,” Allen said.

The team broke down the analysis by educational attainment and poverty status, unearthing some surprising trends. For African American women with a high school diploma or less, experiencing a high level of racial discrimination correlated with much higher allostatic load. However, this trend was reversed for highly educated women, for whom very high levels of racial discrimination correlated with lower allostatic load.

The researchers hypothesize that these differences may be partly attributed to how women interpret the racial discrimination they face.

“There are better health outcomes associated with those who attribute their racial discrimination experiences to systemic racism and do something about it as opposed to just accepting it and engaging in self-blame,” said Marilyn D. Thomas, a doctoral candidate in epidemiology at Berkeley. “Since we found that less-educated women were less likely to report racial discrimination, we suspect that those who have higher education may be more prepared to acknowledge and report racism versus internalizing it and blaming themselves.”

While the relationship between racial discrimination and allostatic load also varied by poverty status, the trends were not as pronounced as they were for education level.

The researchers stress that while education is a powerful predictor of health, it should not be seen as an antidote to the potential adverse health effects of racial discrimination.

“We need to think about the determinants of health in different ways,” Allen said. “They are not just access to care, genetics or even socioeconomic position. We need to look at the social conditions of people’s day-to-day lives, and how we might improve those conditions so that every person, regardless of their race, their gender or anything else, has an equitable opportunity to live optimally. Unequal treatment is bad for health.”

Serving Elites & Tricking Dumb White Folks, in Trump's Economy Corporate Profits Hit a Record High while 40% of American Workers Can’t Afford Food and Shelter

“6 deaths means the jail is unsafe." Black Judge Refuses to Detain Defendants who Can't Afford Bail After Inmate Deaths in Uncivilized Cleveland Jail [73% Black] Always Operating at Over 100% Capacity

From [HERE] and [HERE] A Black judge in Cleveland is refusing to send people accused of low-level crimes into the county jail system, citing safety concerns after six inmate deaths in four months.

The judge, Michael L. Nelson Sr. of Cleveland Municipal Court, said this week that he would release people charged with such crimes until their next court appearance, rather than holding them on bail, which many defendants cannot afford.

Defendants who are released must still agree to any conditions imposed, which could include electronic monitoring or regular check-ins.

“Six deaths means the jail is unsafe,” Judge Nelson said in a phone interview. “You shouldn’t die before we see you in court.”

Five of the six inmates were being held at the Cuyahoga County Jail in Cleveland, and one was at the Euclid City Jail, which is also run by the county, according to the county medical examiner.

The cause of death has yet to be determined in two of the cases, the most recent of which occurred on Tuesday. That prisoner, Allan Martin Gomez Roman, 44, died four days after he was arrested on a warrant stemming from a cocaine possession charge, Cleveland.com reported. Cuyahoga County officials have refused to release any details as to how he died. County spokeswoman Mary Louise Madigan would not say when Gomez was taken to the hospital or the circumstances surrounding the death, according to Cleveland.com. Had Gomez come across judge Nelson, he may still be alive today.

Two of the other men who died were found hanging in their cells, and two had drugs in their systems at the time of their deaths, the authorities said.

In a statement, the Cuyahoga County sheriff, Clifford Pinkney, said he would ask the County Council to pay for an independent expert to assess the jail system.

He added that the jails were dealing with an influx of people struggling with addiction and psychological problems.

A report released last year by the Pretrial Justice Institute found that the Cuyahoga County Jail, with 2,100 beds, had been operating at over 100 percent capacity, on average, in four of the previous five years.

The report, which was requested by local court officials and the American Civil Liberties Union of Ohio, included a survey of all inmates released on a single day. It found that 73 percent of them were black. In the latest census, 53 percent of Cleveland’s residents were black.

Judge Nelson said that the jails remained overcrowded and that staffing levels were not sufficient to monitor all of the inmates. He was loath to place people in those facilities because they could not afford bail, he said.

Cash bail, which requires defendants to put up money or other assets to win their freedom, has been widely criticized in recent years. Some states and municipalities have taken steps to reduce its use; California recently abolished cash bail altogether. (The change takes effect next year.)

In Ohio, Cleveland.com and The Plain Dealer spent more than a year examining the bail system in a series called “Justice for All.” Officials in parts of the state, including Cuyahoga County, have initiated changes to bail practices, and a statewide bill was introduced last year.

Critics of the cash bail system argue that defendants should be evaluated based on the risk they present to public safety, not on their financial situation.

Low-income defendants often turn to bail bond agents, which function as the payday lenders of the criminal justice world. Commercial bail is a $2 billion industry, and agents charge steep fees and can even arrest their clients.

Judge Nelson said the most recent death underscored the need to change bail practices and reduce overcrowding and strain on the jail system.

“If the balance of the county had implemented bail bond reform, there’s a good chance that young man would not be in jail, period,” he said.

What Result Occurs when Racist Suspect Cops Can Choose to Enforce or Not Enforce the new “Decriminalized" Marijuana Law in Pittsburgh? Arrests of Blacks Increase & Triple Whites

In 2016 Pittsburgh enacted a “decriminalization “ ordinance which reduced possession of a small amount to a summary offense. Anyone caught with 30 grams or less could be subject to a $25 fine. Those caught smoking it in public face fines up to $100. Under the ordinance cops still can arrest people in possession of marijuana “where there is probable cause to believe that a criminal offense other than simple possession of a small amount of marijuana has been or is being committed.” The new law was seen as a victory on many fronts: 

Local governments would see fiscal savings thanks to fewer resources being used to arrest and prosecute individuals. Progress was promised in reducing the disproportionate arrests of black people in the city. And, hopefully, vulnerable populations would avoid entering the criminal-justice system for marijuana possession in small amounts. 

“From a social perspective, it will really help a lot of young men and women’s lives from being destroyed or caught in sort of the hamster wheel of prosecution through governmental means,” Pittsburgh City Councilor Daniel Lavelle told City Paper in 2015.[MORE]

This is all whitenology or rulership of non-white people by racists through deception, confusion and many lies. Belief in enough lies results in the creation of a falsified consciousness in Black people making them pliable white authority and control - as they live in the imaginary world or world presented to them by elite racists.

First of all possession of marijuana still remains a criminal law - the ordinance only reduced the penalty. Violations are not processed through a civil office (such as an administrative court) as civil offenses. Rather they are criminal violations adjudicated in court. Also, an arrest record (is always created when a person is arrested as persons are photographed, fingerprinted and a file is created) and a criminal record are created for a marijuana arrest and/or conviction. This means violations may appear on criminal background checks that employers can see and result in other collateral consequences, like barring someone from receiving college financial aid or triggering a driver’s license suspension. A violator’s records must be formally sealed by a court to be hidden or removed from public view. [MORE]

Most importantly police officers still have a choice to charge a person with misdemeanor possession under state law. For 30 grams or less, a maximum sentence of 30 days and a fine of up to $500. For more than 30 grams, a maximum sentence of one year and a fine of up to $5,000. As such, under state law marijuana is an arrestable offense and cops may use their discretionary authority to do so.

The value or effectiveness of any law is subject to the kinds of persons who are administering and enforcing it. What kind of law can change the relationship between Black people and white people? None. In a white over Black system of vast unequal power between whites and Black people how will most racist suspect cops apply their discretionary authority to arrest or not arrest Black people in possession of marijuana in Pittsburgh? If you believe laws and “rights” will save you then you have been lied to, you are probably losing your mind and cooperating in your own destruction.

Blackness is Permanently Criminalized in System of White Supremacy. A major goal of racism/white supremacy is to place Black people into greater confinement.

From [HERE] and [HERE] In Allegheny County, black residents are arrested more, charged more, sit in jail longer, and pay more for misdemeanor marijuana possession offenses than white residents. That’s according to a new report from The Appeal, a team of journalists who focus on criminal justice in the United States. The report highlights the ongoing racial disparities in marijuana enforcement in Pennsylvania and Pittsburgh in particular. And its conclusions are especially striking in light of the city’s decriminalization of marijuana in 2015. Indeed, The Appeal’s findings show that despite progressive drug policy reforms, law enforcement and the criminal legal system are still geared against people of color.

Arrests for marijuana have increased since Pittsburgh enacted decriminalization policies. Many police departments are continuing to arrest rather than ticket suspected offenders. Black residents make up most of Allegheny County’s prosecutions for misdemeanor marijuana possession, according to The Appeal’s analysis of these charges. Even after the decriminalization ordinance gave officers the option to treat possession of a small amount of marijuana as a summary offense similar to a traffic citation rather than a misdemeanor, Pittsburgh leads the county in these criminal charges.

The Appeal reviewed all criminal charging dockets filed in magisterial district judge offices in Allegheny County in 2016 and 2017 and found roughly 2,102 cases where defendants were charged with misdemeanor possession of a small amount of marijuana—defined as 30 grams or less—with a possible additional charge of possession of drug paraphernalia.

(Any case where the defendant was initially charged with another criminal offense, vehicle code violation or any drug crime other than possession of marijuana or drug paraphernalia was excluded from the review of records.)

About 51 percent of the people charged in these cases were Black, according to The Appeal’s review. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, just 13 percent of the county’s population is Black.

More than 600 cases were filed by Pittsburgh Police Department, and more than 400 of those cases were filed against Black defendants. That is twice as many cases as were filed against white defendants.

Though it’s only the second most populous county in Pennsylvania, Allegheny leads the state in the number of arrests for possession of marijuana. In 2016, police in Allegheny County made more than 2,100 arrests for possession of a small amount of marijuana, according to the Pennsylvania State Police Uniform Crime Report.

Arrests for marijuana have actually risen since decriminalization went into effect, and police departments can still choose not to abide by the ordinance. In most counties in Pennsylvania, including Allegheny, police are able to file criminal charges and even resolve low-level offenses without consulting the district attorney first.

Police handled more than 90 percent of the cases identified by The Appeal, which were disposed of early in the process by either reducing the charges to a summary citation or dropping the charges altogether.

Only about 2 percent reached Allegheny County District Attorney Stephen Zappala’s office.

In those cases, both Black and white defendants faced roughly the same likelihood of being sentenced to either probation or jail, but Black defendants on average were ordered to pay about $50 more than white defendants.

David Harris, a law professor at the University of Pittsburgh, told The Appeal that the disparity is most likely a result of unequal enforcement. Black and white people use marijuana at roughly the same rate, but Harris said there is most likely heavier police presence in communities of color, which leads to police detecting and arresting for these low-level offenses more there than in predominantly white communities.

“It’s not about who offends, but it’s about where the enforcement is placed,” Harris said. [MORE]

(According to Philly NORML out of the 772 people arrested on misdemeanor marijuana-possession charges in 2017, 551 of them were black. That means in a city where African Americans make up just 24 percent of the population, black residents made up 71 percent of these marijuana arrests. That percentage has seen virtually no annual change since 2013. [MORE])

White Presumacy Prevails as Defendant Trump Chooses his Own Juror & GOP Forces Unwanted Perverse, Yurugu Judge Down the Public’s Throats [the true nature of democracy]

From [HERE] A bitterly divided Senate cleared the way for Brett M. Kavanaugh to become the next Supreme Court justice as President Trump’s nominee secured the support of a handful of wavering senators in a tumultuous confirmation fight. 

During a frenzied day Friday on Capitol Hill, two Republicans — Susan Collins of Maine and Jeff Flake of Arizona — and one Democrat — Joe Manchin III of West Virginia — said they would vote for Kavanaugh, whose confirmation seemed in peril three weeks ago over allegations of sexual misconduct.

Another lawmaker, Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), broke with her party, saying Kavanaugh was a good man but “not the right man for the court at this time.”

Their pronouncements turned Saturday’s confirmation vote into a fait accompli, and one that will reverberate for the judiciary, the Senate and the nationwide #MeToo movement. [MORE]

Mob Rule aka De-mockery - a spectacle of the true nature of democracy. What each political party wants is not justice but its own idea of what is just (for themselves and their special interests)." [MORE]

According to FUNKTIONARY: 

democracy - a commercial form of "government" (exploitation and theft via force, deception and involuntary participation) of the mob, by the mob, and/or the mob, i.e., Mob-Rule. 2) a guise rubber stamping of an alternative royalty into overruling power. 3) the worst possible form of government because the majority rules whether they be good, evil, or misled by a minority. 4) slavery of the people, by the people, for the people. 5) equality achieved through force. 6) a system where only the majority need to befooled. 7) advertised equality. 8) a parody of a free society that only ethical anarchism or voluntaryism can usher into existence. "Democracy has always been seen (and is still seen today) as equality of rights (granted privileges), not conditions. To the hypothetical equality of rights there has always corresponded a substantial inequality of conditions. And instead of being related to the nature of their individuality, differences between people have always been those marked by the different basic conditions they live in as they struggle against the suffocating artificial divisions imposed on them by power." —Alfred M. Bonanno. Democracy is a euphonious term created mainly to serve as sheepskin for Leviathan, Doggy and the Crimethlnc. All-Stars. 9) Dictatorship camouflaged as freedom 10) a whitewashed plutocracy with a pastel eggshell finish.

Democracy, next to "monetized debt," and direct taxation (on labor) is the biggest con-game perpetrated on a population. Democracy has proved only that the best way to gain and sustain power over people is to assure the people that they are ruling themselves. Once they believe that lie, they make wonderfully submissive and self-maintained slaves. "There are those who maintain that at bottom what is called democracy, (whenever and wherever it is supposed to have existed), is merely the mask for the rule of capitalist and/or bureaucratic minorities over an ignorant and deceived majority whose franchise signifies only the right to choose or to change its masters." -Max Nomad.

As long as mob rule is allowed through secret ballots, operational and organizational transparency will evade us and vice (vested interests controlling economies) will continue to forsake us and break us. Democracy is a powerful synthetic ideology of recuperation.

Democracy goes against the emancipation of desire. Democracy allows for A to band together with B (majority rule) to rip off C.

Democracy and citizenship are the chains that filter your pursuit of happiness and the happiness in your pursuit.

Democracy in America has been checked and balanced, or gone unchecked and unbalanced—depending on one's indoctrination—to the point (extent) of collapse. Only the improper is left t: prop it up aright as if it were still standing on its own ideological efficacy and edifice. "Democracy (the political ideal) is just i dream, it has not happened anywhere, it cannot happen. And wherever it happens (in practice), it creates trouble, the medicine proves more dangerous than the disease itself." -OSHO.

"If the people of a democracy are allowed to do so, they will vote away freedoms that are essential to that democracy." -Snell Putney.

As H.L. Mencken so aptly observed, "Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want and deserve to get it good and hard." In a democracy, scum rises to the top; otherwise it starts there. Democracy is a specific instance of stationary rogue State power.

Under the rubric democracy, justice can be attained only by begging, buying, milking and taking. A gang is an embryonic democracy in the making.

Keep in mind that Hitler was elected in a full, free and fair democratic election. Democracy is a sweet-sounding word that offers freedom but delivers illusions. It has no other choice—it isn't what it appears and never could be what it advertises There has never been a democracy where the public was consulted for input or consent before statutes and policies detriment: to their interests were already completed and or implemented by the shadow, invisible or parallel government (the Pathocracy

The ruse of democracy and fake elections stalls rebellion. It's a placebo fed to the public so the ruling dominant elite can execute their plans for a global society—a New World Order. "Already American democracy and freedom are in their to throes, hemorrhaging from years of corporatist mutilation. Elections have become a sham, a farce. Freedoms are disappearing becoming extinct.

The enemy within wishes for nothing more than an authoritarian, fascist nation, the easier to make decision; the easier to implement their vision, the easier to control the population. The enemy within detests democracy, and this we must understand.

Democracy and freedom are enemies.

"Ask yourself who has been the organization destroying our democracy at: freedoms, our civil rights and liberties? Who has enacted Patriot Acts I and II, who has destroyed due process, right to an attorney, habeas corpus? Who has tried to silence truth, dissent, protest and free speech? Who has made torture legal, false imprisonment necessary, confessions by torture legal and evidence concocted through hearsay or torture legal? Who has made . legal to spy on American citizens, opening our email accounts, overhearing our phone conversations, and looking into our live; It has not been the dreaded Arab evildoers. It has been the Bush administration. It has been your own government." —Manuel Valenzuela.

The noted author, Alex Carey, an Australian, states with prophetic clarity that: "The twentieth century has be: characterized by three developments of great political importance: the growth of democracy, the growth of corporate power and the growth of corporate propaganda as a means of protecting corporate power against democracy." I am 50 years old and have  never known any government but fascism and take it as a matter of course that they are out to get me for exposing the truth.

(See: Mobocracy, Federal Constitution for the United States, Pathocracy, Fascism, Promises, Servitude, Enforcement, Disa-:t Capitalism, VICE, COP, Nine-Eleven, Patriot Act, CRIME, Statism, Doggy, Demarchy, Crimethlnc, Corporate State, Major Rule, Voting, Formal Democracy, Colonialism, Communism, Conformity, Economatrix, SOS, Popular Sovereignty, Execu:. -Orders, Bush Family Crime Syndicate, Cooperative Federalism, Self-Maintained Slavery, New World Order, Understran:.-Herd Management, War, LOFTY, Anarchy, Communism, MOS DEF, Capitalism, Parallel Government, Rebellion, Me: Motion of Alimni, "Government" & Authoritarianism)