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

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.”

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

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

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)

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]  

Meet the Racist Suspect Behind One Third of All Entries on Wikipedia

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"

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.

Venezuela Bars Guaido from Holding Office For 15 Yrs b/c He Was Never Elected President; he is a Puppetican Selected by His Western Masters to Open Oil Fields to American Companies

Venezuela Bars Guaido from Holding Office For 15 Years b/c He Was Never Elected President; he is a Puppetican Selected by His Western Masters to Open Oil Fields to American Companies

Lathered Up Over Gun Violence [by citizens not cops] Black "Legistraitor" in Mobile (Ala) Pushes for "Safety Checkpoints"-Not Realizing Such Stops and Searches of Vehicles by Cops are Unconstitutional

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

While the police have power to create roadblocks for the purposes of border security (United States v. Martinez-Fuerte, 1976), and removing drunk drivers from the road (Michigan Dept. of State Police v. Sitz, 1990), such power is limited to situations in which the search was "designed to serve special needs, beyond the normal need for law enforcement." The Court has drawn a line on check point programs that followed Police v. Sitz (1990) "whose primary purpose" is "to detect evidence of ordinary criminal wrongdoing". The Court refused to "credit the 'general interest in crime control' as justification for a regime of suspicionless stops."

From [HERE] Frustration over heightened gun violence is driving councilmembers to propose new actions.

However, Mobile’s public safety director says some ideas on the table put our constitutional rights in jeopardy.

Mobile's public safety director James Barber says a recent increase in gun violence is a direct result of stolen guns -- most being taken from unlocked cars.

“High capacity weapons are ending up in the street and they are ending up in the wrong hands of adolescents as well as criminals and that’s why you are seeing this huge increase in gunshots,” Barber said.

Councilman CJ Small, a negro somnesiac and his constituents think the increase in violence has a direct link to the city cutting out checkpoints on our roadways.

Small says several years ago, officers would stop drivers and ask for licenses and insurance keeping the community on their toes.

“It seems like since the city has stopped checkpoints that crime has risen,” Small said, adding, “You hear about more shootings now than you did several years ago and so I have citizens pleading for the administration to start checkpoints again.”

Barber doesn't agree.

“It has been our experience that there’s been very little effectiveness in these safety checkpoints,” Barber said, adding, “They were hugely inconvenient to the public. They were hugely costly to police because of the number of personnel assigned and very few guns were ever taken from these checkpoints.”

Barber says our fourth amendment right dictates police can't just stop and search cars. There needs to be probable cause.

“You have to weigh the public convenience against whether or not it really serves a public safety interest,” Barber said.

To cut down the number of guns stolen from unlocked cars, Barber's interested in working with Small on a different proposal.

“Maybe to the permits, the pistol permits people get to carry these guns, there could be some sanctions as far as suspension or revocation of that permit if they are irresponsible,” Barber said.

Barber says he wants to make sure people's second amendment right to owning and responsibly using a gun isn't jeopardized either.

[only 4% of all Attorneys are Black] Press Conference of Black Atty Detained by White MD Cop who Misperceived Him to be the Defendant

The legal profession is overwhelmingly white. According to a report by the Institute for Inclusion in the Legal Profession (IILP) :

• Aggregate minority representation among U.S. lawyers stood at 14.5% in 2015, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics (see Table 1). This represents a drop from a high of 15.7% in 2014; however, these data appear somewhat noisy, with significant year-to-year fluctuations. Based on three-year (unweighted) averages, aggregate minority representation among lawyers has increased from 10.5% in 2003-05 to 14.8% in 2013-15 (see Table 1).

• Progress for different groups varies. African American representation among lawyers has increased very little over the past ten years, from an average of 4.3% in 2003-05 to an average of 4.8% in 2013-2015 (see Table 1). During the same period, Hispanic representation among lawyers increased from an average of 3.6% to an average of 5.3%, and Asian American representation among lawyers increased from an average of 2.6% to an average of 4.8% (see Table 1). Thus, while African Americans historically have been the best-represented minority group among lawyers, this pattern has changed. In 2015, African American representation among lawyers was 4.6%, compared to 5.1% for Hispanics and 4.8% for Asian Americans (see Table 1).

• Aggregate minority representation among lawyers is significantly lower than minority representation in most other management and professional jobs. In 2015, minority representation among lawyers was 14.5%, compared to 24.5% among financial managers, 28.2% among accountants and auditors, 44.2% among software developers, 31.2% among physicians and surgeons, and 27.3% within the professional labor force as a whole (see Table 3). Moreover, “legal occupations” collectively have the lowest level of minority representation of any subcategory of “management, professional, and related occupations,” including those not reported here. Although these figures, too, can be noisy, this unhappy comparison is consistent with patterns from prior years.

"The Car is Locked, He's Passed Out" and White Cops Shot Him to Death Instead of Tapping on the Window: Vallejo Releases Edited Propaganda Video of the Execution of Willie McCoy

Propaganda is disinformation used as programming that in its absence wouldn't stand up itself nor stand up for itself by itself. FUNKTIONARY

From [IndyBay] Responding to pressure from community groups and news outlets to release the tapes, the City of Vallejo today posted a compilation video which includes police body camera footage and other media related to the police killing of Willie McCoy on February 9. While it's obviously packaged as a pro-police propaganda piece, lying about what's in the video, the footage is nonetheless disturbing and view discretion is advised.

The City of Vallejo titled their video posting "Officer Involved Shooting: February 9, 2019 Public Release Presentation," but the video more closely resembles what you might see as a courtroom exhibit than a typical public release of raw video and audio source material. Even as a courtroom exhibit, it's not likely it would all be wrapped up into a single piece as is this video. 

The video compilation begins with a nearly 3-minute long introduction preparing viewers for what is to come, presumably an attempt by the city to shape a narrative exculpatory to police before we are allowed to see anything for ourselves. We are told that "Visual enhancements have been applied to the footage to explain what is being seen." Do not believe your lying eyes. They'll explain it to us. In the text about body camera footage, we are told not to trust what we see in the video. Noting that police might be looking in a different direction than their body cameras are filming seems disingenuous, most especially when cameras are pointing toward Willie McCoy and it was his slight movement that supposedly motivated six Vallejo cops to kill him in a hail of bullets. After the first cop shoots, five other cops immediately join in to create a close-range firing squad. 

Video is presented in slow motion at times. Titles and captions are added, such as one that supposedly marks the point when Willie McCoy was reaching for a gun, even though he clearly is not. All that's missing is the city attorney arguing to a jury how the video "proves" all six cops were simultaneously made afraid for their lives by an unconscious man. The city attorney, arguing on behalf of the killers, would tell us to disregard that the cops following the lead of the initial shooter were most likely responding to the sound of police gunfire rather than anything Willie McCoy actually did. The city attorney would have us believe all six cops were each individually made afraid for their life by the actions of Willie McCoy. 

Willie McCoy's family was allowed to view raw body camera footage earlier this month. They reported that Willie McCoy did not appear to be awake and was murdered in reaction to him scratching his shoulder. Others such as council member Hakeem Brown were shown related stills and footage. The public, however, is served this propaganda piece. And the city did not bother to notify relatives of Willie McCoy that any video would be coming out today. [MORE]

AG Declines to File Charges Against NYPD Cops who Killed Saheed Vassell “Misperceiving" that He Had a Gun. Public Video Showing Him Allegedly Pointing an Object at Cops Remains a Public Secret

From [HERE] and [HERE] The state attorney general’s office will not pursue charges against the four NYPD officers involved in the shooting death of Brooklyn “madman” Saheed Vassell — who became a symbol of the Big Apple’s mental health crisis last year.

The 34-year-old was gunned down by cops in Crown Heights on April 4, 2018, after he tried to attack numerous people with a metal welding tool. The officers involved — Leon Dingham, Anthony Bottiglieri and Bekim Molic, from the 71st Precinct — fired a total of 10 shots after mistaking the tool for a gun.

Attorney General Letitia James’ Special Investigations and Prosecutions Unit released its report on the incident early Friday afternoon, along with an outlined list of “recommendations” that the NYPD should now follow in the wake of what happened.

“Over the course of the investigation, SIPU found that the officers’ actions were legally justified, and that there was no adequate evidence to warrant criminal prosecution against the officers involved,” officials said. “In order to prevent another tragedy, and to promote the public’s confidence in how local law enforcement responds to such occurrences, the Office of the Attorney General outlined the following recommendations.”

The first suggested that 911 operators and police dispatchers receive “comprehensive critical incident training.” The second asked that the NYPD “review and reform its public information policies and practices regarding which facts it should release to the public in police-involved uses of force.”

“The death of Saheed Vassell was a tragedy, and I extend my deepest condolences to his family and loved ones,” James said in a statement. “The Special Investigations and Prosecutions Unit is committed to providing thorough and transparent investigations. We urge the New York Police Department to implement our recommendations.”

Witness Says "In 2 Seconds They Started Shooting" & 'His Hands Were Empty.' Thus far, racist suspect simpletons with the NPR, New York Times and rest of the US media parrot whatever the NYPD tells them to. Showing us all sorts of shit that the cops did not know about before they interacted with this Black man. Cops do not hear 911 calls or read scripts or 911 call chronologies on their way to the scene. They get their info from police dispatch. Obviously, cops did not watch videos or "video compilations" from a private camera before interacting with this Saheed Vassell  and they did not see video stills. Such info is not relevant to whether their conduct was reasonable or constitutional. The only question is whether there is any independent evidence to corroborate what the cops claim they saw when they encountered  Saheed Vassell. [MORE]

In the unit’s incident report, SIPU investigators describe how Vassell was suffering from bipolar disorder at the time of the shooting.

“Some neighbors were aware of this, but none of the police officers involved in this incident were,” the report says. “At the time of the shooting, Mr. Vassell was standing on Utica Avenue and Montgomery Street in Brooklyn, wielding and pointing a silver metal object in the direction of the police officers. Misperceiving the object to be a gun, officers discharged their weapons.”

Investigators note how Gov. Andrew Cuomo ordered up the SIPU investigation to see if any unlawful acts or omissions were made.

“Based on a review of all of the evidence, the OAG finds that, pursuant to New York State Penal Law (hereinafter ‘PL’) Section 35.30, the NYPD officers who shot Mr. Vassell were legally justified in their actions,” the SIPU report says, noting how the law allows officers to use deadly physical force when, “regardless of the particular offense which is the subject of the arrest…the use of deadly physical force is necessary to defend the police officer or peace officer or another person from what the officer reasonably believes to be the use or imminent use of deadly physical force.”

“Considering all of the information obtained by the OAG during its investigation, we conclude that no criminal prosecution is warranted in this matter,” the report adds. “Under the particular facts and circumstances of this case, the officers’ use of deadly physical force was justified in that it was reasonable for them to believe that such force was necessary to defend themselves and others from what they reasonably believed to be Mr. Vassell’s imminent use of deadly physical force.”

While the actions of the officers were justified, SIPU investigators point out several mistakes that were made during the NYPD’s response — and that’s what prompted the AG office’s recommendations.

“[The suggestions] might have prevented the tragic death of Mr. Vassell, or might have given the community greater faith in law enforcement’s public response in the aftermath of the incident,” says the SIPU report. “Despite the fact that the 911 callers were not completely sure whether the item Mr. Vassell was wielding was a gun (although they thought it was), the police officers on patrol received information that was less equivocal.”

For example, “the information they received included ‘firearm job’ and ‘caller states the male was pointing a gun at people,'” the report adds. “Furthermore, officers were never advised that Mr. Vassell was a person with a mental illness. It is important to note that the police officers on patrol cannot hear an actual 911 call. Rather, a summary of the content is transmitted via the system to a dispatcher, who in turn communicates it to officers via NYPD-supplied cell phones, tablets, and/or over the radio.”

Investigators say the public information policy change recommendation ultimately stems from the release of “protected health information” and Vassell’s “previous contacts with law enforcement” — which, according to them, came from sealed records.

“This information should not have been publicly released,” the SIPU report says. “Because the OAG obtained no evidence that any of the involved police officers were aware of any of this information, it could not have formed any part of their decisions to use force in this incident. Thus, release of such information served no useful purpose except to denigrate Mr. Vassell.”

White Media Shows Things White Cops Never Saw or Heard Before Executing Black Man in Brooklyn [the Ends Justify the Means to Mind Blocked fascists in a Police State of White Supremacy]

Six days after the shooting, the NYPD released portions of some video footage it received of the incident — which showed Vassell menacing residents. Investigators say the department should’ve released the entire tape.

“The publicly-released footage did not include much of the videotape showing the interactions between Mr. Vassell and civilians before the shooting,” the SIPU report says. “The released footage was also slowed down and stopped at various points, apparently to emphasize a narrative that the object Mr. Vassell wielded appeared be a weapon.”

According to investigators, the NYPD has no written, publicly available policy governing the release of video in critical incidents.

“For some time, law enforcement agencies have been encouraged to develop ‘[c]lear and concise policies and procedures relating to …[among other issues] video evidence’ in officer-involved incidents,” the SIPU report says. “As noted below, many agencies have embraced this recommendation, generated policies, and made them available to the public. Such an approach serves the dual purpose of establishing expectations and promoting consistency. The OAG recommends that the NYPD, the largest law enforcement agency in the country, generate a publicly available policy governing the release of video in critical officer-involved incidents.”

The NYPD said Friday that it was “closely reviewing” the SIPU recommendations.

“Specifically, the Department is developing plans to enhance crisis intervention training for 911 operators and dispatchers,” Police Commissioner James O’Neill said in a statement. “The NYPD is also in the process of formalizing a clear policy on the release of public information in critical officer-involved incidents.”

The city’s top cop went on to praise the attorney general for making the recommendations, saying they are “valuable contributions on how we can all strengthen our work on behalf of New Yorkers.”

“The death of Mr. Vassell was a tragedy that no police officer — or anyone — would ever want to occur,” O’Neill said. “It is also a somber reminder of the difficult, split-second decisions officers face, with only the information available at that moment, when confronted with what they believe is a significant threat to public safety.”