Homeless Black Man Blinded by White Cop's Gunshot Sues Coweta Cty. Police Insisted He was Loitering Despite the fact that He wasn’t Interfering w/Anyone’s Rights as He Slept in Lawfully Parked Car

THE SUPREME COURT HAS RULED the conduct of loitering without a showing that the accused blocked free passage or otherwise interfered with the rights of another is not enough to support an offense such as loitering. Shuttlesworth v. Birmingham, 382 US 87, 91 (1965). If a statute broadly proscribes loitering - without more, it would be unconstitutional. Cicarelli v. Key West, 321 So. 2D 472, 473 quoting Florida v. Ecker, 311 So. 2D 104 at 107 (FLA 1975). According to the Supreme Court, “state courts have uniformly invalidated laws that do not join the term loitering with a second specific element of the crime.” Chicago v. Morales, 527 US 41, 58 (1999).

From [HERE] A man who survived being shot in the head by a Coweta County deputy during a car chase, but lost vision in one eye, is now suing the county’s sheriff and three deputies, claiming they used excessive force during the incident.

Nicholas Sherod Bolton was shot in the head on June 30, 2019, after he led Coweta sheriff’s deputies on a brief car chase, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution previously reported. Bolton lost vision in his right eye but otherwise “made a miraculous recovery,” Coweta District Attorney Herb Cranford later said.

Deputy John Collins, the man who fired the shot, was not indicted on criminal charges after the case was reviewed by a Grand Jury in May 2020, Cranford said in a news release at the time. In the aftermath of the shooting, the case garnered statewide attention and led the GBI to release body camera footage of the incident.

More than a year after officials chose not to indict Collins, Bolton has filed a civil rights lawsuit against him, as well as Coweta Sheriff Lenn Wood and two other deputies who were involved in the incident. Bolton’s suit claims that there was “no factual or legal justification at any time for the degree of force used by defendant Collins when he shot plaintiff Bolton in the head, without warning...”

The suit also claims that Bolton “posed no objectively reasonable threat” to Collins or the other deputies.

The incident began when a sheriff’s deputy saw Bolton sleeping in the back seat of his car in the parking lot of a Newnan shopping center, the AJC previously reported. The deputy shined his flashlight on Bolton, who was described by his attorney as “virtually homeless,” and Bolton climbed into the front seat of his car.

The deputy said Bolton was loitering, adding that “now that you’re not stepping out of the car, you’re obstructing an investigation. So you can either get out and talk to us, or we can take you out and go to jail.” The deputy repeated the options, but Bolton shifted his car into gear and drove away.

Several other deputies quickly gave chase, and less than one minute later, Collins performed a PIT maneuver to stop Bolton’s SUV. Other deputies attempted to box in the SUV with their patrol cars as Collins walked towards Bolton.

According to the DA Cranford, Bolton was pressing his accelerator, causing his tires to spin while his SUV faced Collins and another deputy. When Collins fired his weapon, the SUV’s tires stopped. Collins can be heard on the video saying that he believed Bolton was trying to run over him and the other deputy.

'Conditioning is that which you get used to and think is real, acceptable, tolerable and/or the truth. . . a coerced conformity to a pattern discordant with our essential nature.' - FUNKTIONARY

WASH DC 5/21. pHOTOS COURTESY OF UNDECEIVER VINCENT BROWN.

From "FUNKTIONARY, THE KEY HOLDERS ENPSYCHLOPEDIA. "Copyright 2021 Chocolate City Press.

Resonated & Orchestrated by Dr. Blynd, Ph.F.

Conditioning - the psychological environment in which a man or woman was raised from conception to the present, including all the beliefs and programs taught to him/her about the nature of truth, law, culture and reality. 2) a state where nurture is allowed to function, but nature is prevented from funktioning. 3) accumulated memories. 4) that which has been collected and stored for recall in the cells of the brain. 5) the garments of so-called authority--the Emperor's clothes. 6) to absorb, at a subliminal level, all the thoughtforms and thought patterns of the semantic and natural world. 6) that which you get used to and think is real, acceptable, tolerable and/or the truth. 7) all the accumulations and edicts of society; the sticky residue of so-called education down through the centuries altogether forcing us to conform to a particular pattern discordant with our essential nature. Conditioning is an invisible barrier; a roving border patrol roaming the outposts or margins of the utmost regions of one's mind--entrapping us while imagining we're free to enter the uncharted, unknown and unfamiliar. All conditioning is an impediment to the manifestation of Intelligence which must be unencumbered for true seeing and overstanding. Unlearning is the ability to see and break through the patterns of conditioning--indoctrination, socialization and acculturation. We are all conditioned and cannot escape the conditioning but we can become aware of its source and implements and thereby limit its impact on our thinking and actions. Zombies are those who walk the earth impervious of their total conditioning and therefore think and react as they have been programmed. The overwhelming majority of the world's population (both illiterate and educated alike) are functional sleepwalkers in the psycholingual state or the semantic reality of awake-dream. Just to verbally acknowledge or even realize our state of conditioning is insufficient to enable us to comprehend how we have become so conditioned. Conditioning will allow you to talk about truth but will bar or restrain you from living it and editing (refreshing) it. (See: Acculturation, Socialization, Untrained Mind, Unlearning, Truth-Editing, Awake-Dream, Zombies, Recall Button, Semantic Reality, Self-Confrontation, License, Repeaters, Orderlies, Brain, Paycheck, Authenticity, Reaction, HOT, Indoctrination, Self-Improvement, Blind Belief, Serfers, Ideology, Religion, Unfreedom & Freedom)

What Matters about the Hamilton Police Chief Video isn't that Cops Call Blacks "NGHRS," its What They've Been Doing to NGHRS in Courtrooms and in the Streets and Why Other Whites Never Revealed It

Nigger means "a non-white person who is subject to the system of White Supremacy." [MORE] In the absence of racism/white supremacy niggers would not exist . Nigger is what is being done to us. [MORE]

Don’t get pulled into this trick bag. Instead of analyzing these 2 zombies conversation folks in Hamilton should be reviewing all the arrests and cases these racist cops have been involved in since they’ve been on the force. As Neely Fuller explained calling someone a nigger is just name calling. The only relevant question in a system of racism white supremacy is what do you plan to do with a nigger and/or what have you done to a nigger.

Racism is not primarily about bigotry - minor inconveniences such as trouble catching a cab, standing in a long line to vote, or name calling, disrespect, stereotypes or mean words by white people. Rather racism/white supremacy is about the superior, dominate position of whites and vast unequal power and opportunities and maintaining that imbalance of power through your cooperative control and oppression. 

Belief that racism is only bigotry is a vital part of false programming or whitenology sold by the vested interests [elite publishers, scholars, professionals and government representatives] and also promoted by their showcase Blacks who parrot such programming in various styles to gain your cooperation and submission to your own oppression. Defining racism in terms of attitude or bigotry leads to solving the wrong problems. [MORE]

In reality, to be a racist is to be an "upholder, supporter and perpetrator of the institution of the White Supremacy Dynamic in a system of oppression (structured and perpetuated injustice—racism.)" 

Racism is carried out primarily through deception -as most white people consciously or sub-consciously participate in the system of racism white supremacy. In said system of white domination and control all white people should be presumed to be or suspected of being racist [“racist suspect”].

Anon asks and answers:

Q: Are you saying blacks cannot be racist toward whites?

A: That’s correct. Of course, all people can be hateful or prejudiced. Those terms describe individual behaviors, not systematic power. Racism is the COLLECTIVE behaviors of a group. A white individual within a system of racism/white supremacy has the implicit or explicit support of that system IF they choose to practice racism.

If a poor man robs a rich man at gunpoint that doesn’t mean the poor man is more powerful (economically and politically) than the rich man. The poor man is an individual who committed a crime of opportunity. There are no powerful institutions or systems that support his right to rob the rich man, but there are institutions and systems that allow the rich man to rob the poor man - which is why he doesn’t need a gun to do it.

A black person who mistreats a white person doesn’t mean black people are more powerful (economically and politically) than white people. Never confuse the actions of a black individual (or a group of black individuals) that mistreats someone white as proof that black racism exists. Their “power” is limited ONLY to what they can do as individuals. There are NO black institutions or systems that support, defend, or finance the right of blacks to mistreat whites.

There are NO black individuals or black organizations that have the power to strip whites of their collective right to live where they want, work where they want, get an education wherever they want, or control what white people do collectively in ANY area of human activity. There are NO black institutions that are more powerful than white institutions. Therefore, blacks do not have the COLLECTIVE POWER to diminish the quality of life for the white collective.

Q: What is collective power?

A: Collective power is the institutions and systems that benefit one group at the expense of another group, and allow one group to dominate another group in all areas of human activity.

For example, when a white policeman shoots an unarmed black man (50 times), his fellow officers, the police chief, internal affairs, the union, the media, the prosecutor, thejudge, and thejury will support, defend, and finance that white police officer’s “right” to shoot (murder) an unarmed black person. That is white collective power.

It is rare for a white police officer to be punished for using excessive force against a black man, woman, or child. It is just as rare for a black police officer to use excessive force against a white person.

In fact, the authors were unable to find a single instance of a black police officer shooting or killing an unarmed white person in the history of modern law enforcement. This is not surprising but it is absolute proof that the black individual operating within a system of white supremacy cannot mistreat whites even if he or she is wearing a uniform, a badge, and carrying a gun. [MORE]

Black Man Detained for Public Solicitation on a Private Lot and Unregistered Firearm for Possessing a Licensed Gun Still Clings to Legal Truths: Cops Serve Him, Rights Exist and Compliance is Optional

Noted 4th Amendment legal scholar Wayne LaFave explained "The essence of the fourth amendment has never been better stated than in the oft-quoted dissent of Justice Brandeis in Olmstead v. U.S.

"The makers of our Constitution undertook to secure conditions favorable to the pursuit of happiness. They recognized the significance of man's spiritual nature, of his feelings and of his intellect. They knew that only a part of the pain, pleasure and satisfactions of life are to be found in material things. They sought to protect Americans in their beliefs, their thoughts, their emotions and their sensations. They conferred, as against the government, the right to be let alone-the most comprehensive of rights and the right most valued by civilized men. To protect, that right, every unjustifiable intrusion by the government upon the privacy of the individual, whatever the means employed, must be deemed a violation of the Fourth Amendment.”

"Central to the protection of that right is the concept of `probable cause,' for under the Fourth Amendment the police may not make an arrest or search unless they have probable cause to do so." 2 Wayne R. LaFave, Search and Seizure, A Treatise on the Fourth Amendment, § 3.1 at 2.

BLACK CITIZEN HOLDING HIS ‘CELL PHONE” while attempting to communicate with public rulers in the free range prison who decide to listen. DURING THE STOP HE YELLED OUT FOR HELP BUT NO ONE CAME B/C THE GOVT HAS A MONOPOLY ON THE USE OF FORCE. .

Such legal truths must give way to reality on the street as all truths should only be measured by reality. In real life you have no right to be left the fuck alone by the Government.

FUNKTIONARY explains

"rights" - useful fictions declared in order to make agents of another type of fiction ("government") have to play along in their deadly theatrical (tragicomedy) game. 2) mere fictions, the contemplation of which leads only to a progressive social, personal, racial and jurisprudential separation from reality. Discussion and debates about "rights" merely evades the FAQ, i.e., the frequently avoided question of who is to enforce any "right" and who will benefit from the pretense. "Rights" are separated into two categories—those flowing from "negative liberties" and those flowing from "positive liberties." In law, rights are remedies and if a person is without a remedy (as is with citizens of the United States) he is without a right, and only a 'thing' is without rights. (See: Negative Liberties, Positive Liberties, Bill of Rights, Civil Rights, Human Rights, Ma'at & Justice)

rights - fantasmatic or fictitious objects having no reality in actuality by those imagining as an identity being in possession of them. Rights are cultural gratuities perceived through various fantasy frames, recognized, and sometimes even created, by man's system of law to provide a modicum or pretense of civility under a system whereby their very undermining and violation is vouchsafed. Rights are merely rites unless you know how to assert and defend them in order to enjoy them. 2) things people are free to do whether they are able to or not. 3) conditions of existence required by hue-man's nature for their potential survival (primarily against the cartoon that kills, i.e., the wholly unconscionable entity called the "State"). It is a mistaken notion that rights are enjoyed by one at the expense of the many—that is the realm of privilege. Enjoyment of rights in a neo-imperialistic world controlled by Yurugu through the Greater System (Symbolic Order), paradoxically, entails not only a recognition of their inevitability but, equally, their impossibility. How can we be endowed with rights, or even know what rights are when they are based on binary considerations? Rights, as ontological ephemera, cannot be universally observed, recognized, realized or, enforced—and paradoxically, act also as its own eternal source for its assertion and vessel for its fulfillment in our imaginary enjoyment of them. While the law reads rights referentially, what is universally needed in the praxis of rights discourse today is a particular re-inscription, demystification or reontologising of rights (revivified and convivial) by the pan-gendered subject-citizen-decoder—taken symptomatically rather than seriously. Most people rarely experience the cognizance of being property of corporate fictions because as long as you don't violate the rules of society your real status as feudal-property-slave is not involved or revealed. If there is no 'I,' to what and to whom do rights as objects accrue? Those who are confused by suffering (and the subject of same) require a re-onotoligisation of rights through the trajectory of meaning independent of their existence. Rights and even 'lefts' (i.e., what remains after all of our imaginary rights are traced to their inception as figment) for that matter, like good and evil, are human inventions which humans treat as non-human realities. While fantasy frames invent rights, romanticism reinvents them. Enjoy your symptoms and play with your syndrome—the symptom is the solution. Read carefully the holding in the supreme Court case of U.S. v. Babcock. Rights are myths—obedience to servitude or jail is the reality. (See: Abilities, Bill of Rights, Monoright, Servitude, Fantasy, Jurisdiction, Human Resources, Citizenship, Frankenstein, Autonomy. Rule of Law, Surrogate Power, Indigenous Power, Yurugu, Jouissance, Privilege, Disobedience, Duty & Willpower)

JEREMEY LOCKE states: There is no such thing as a right. All people are inherently free. The idea of right was created by men who sought to free people from some of the burdens of government, but who still believed that governments were supreme over men.

The problem with rights, is that they offer certain delineated permissions, granted to men by government. After these, government can still dispose of you as it pleases. Even in measures of restriction, this still teaches people that they have less value than law.

The truth is that you are free, and there is no authority that has any claim upon you, ever. You are, by your nature, already free. This is the value of a human being.

Doesn't the Takings Clause Require Gov to Compensate People for COVID Business Closures and Work Stoppage? [Yes but "Your Rights" Must Yield to Authority in the Cult of Statism] NM Court to Decide

FUNKTIONARY EXPLAINS:

Statism - the belief "citizens"' and "states" exist and the memetic thought patterns supporting such beliefs. 2) the religion of oppression and domination coupled with the science of exploitation and sociopathic control. 3) the opiate of the so-called Elites. 4) a philosophy that idealizes majority rule gang force (authority) over individual authenticity (autonomy). 5) servitude over liberty and statutes over humanity. So long as "states"' are viewed and accepted as natural, normal, reality-based and inevitable, they will continue to violently abstract humans into extinction. Statism is mind control; people both unwillingly and willingly surrender their property (labor being one's most inviolable property) to men and women pretending to be "governors,"" "commissioners," and "presidents" etc. because they believe they are "citizens" of a so-called "state" and must pay their proverbial "fair share" to support such abstractions or fictions of law. [MORE]

Tyrannolaw - a peremptory (beyond debate or recall) system of law held to be superior to humanity, such that whenever the two are in conflict, humanity must yield. Typified by too many self-propagating laws, contrived complexity, debatable interpretations, encroachment, abuse, corruption, symbolaeography, and overdeveloped unrelenting and violent enforcement. Tyrannolaw subjugates humanity to unyielding, despotic, blind and arbitrary authority—resulting in constraint, conformity and fear. Tyrannolaw is the by-product from the myth that truth and law came from God. Reflect for a minute and realize that if people can't manage themselves, how can they possibly manage law. Law cannot prevent its abuse.

From [HERE] and [MORE] The New Mexico Supreme Court heard arguments Wednesday on whether businesses which lost income due to Covid-19 shutdowns can seek compensation from the state under rules governing regulatory takings.

The high court took up a petition for writ of superintending control and emergency request for stay brought by the state involving plaintiffs in 20 lawsuits brought across the state. The plaintiffs claim business closures and restrictions brought under public health emergency orders constituted regulatory takings and thus the businesses are entitled to compensation under New Mexico’s Public Health Emergency Response Act.

At the heart of the dispute is the concept of a legal “taking.” Under the U.S. Constitution, a regulatory taking occurs when a government regulation limits the uses of private property to such a degree that the owners are deprived of the use or value of their property.

Although shelter in place orders may be necessary they are nevertheless Government seizures of people’s livelihoods and businesses that have forced indefinite closures and widespread layoffs. The government’s actions may be described as “uncompensated takings” that violate the Takings Clause of the 5th Amendment. That is, the government is legally obligated to properly compensate citizens for their tangible losses.

Because the orders would be characterized to effect an alleged regulatory (rather than physical) taking, a fact-intensive, multi-factor analysis applies. The Orders constitute a regulatory taking implemented for a recognized public purpose, and therefore the failure to pay just compensation contravenes the Takings Clause of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments. See Penn Central Transportation Co. v. City of New York, 438 U.S. 104 (1978); Lucas v. S.C. Coastal Council, 505 U.S. 1003 (1992); Horne v. Dep't of Agric., 576 U.S. 350, 135 S. Ct. 2419, 2426 (2015) (“Nothing in the text or history of the Takings Clause, or our precedents, suggests that the rule is any different when it comes to appropriation of personal property. The Government has a categorical duty to pay just compensation when it takes your car, just as when it takes your home.”). [MORE]

Chief Justice Michael Vigil Sr., Justices Barbara Vigil, Shannon Bacon, David Thomson, and retired Court of Appeals Judge Michael Bustamante heard initial statements by attorney Nicholas Sydow, representing the state, Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham and state Secretary of Health Kathyleen Kunkel.

The state argued closures mandated by public health orders do not constitute takings because they are by nature temporary and because property cannot be used in a manner that endangers public health and safety. “It’s not taking away property rights,” Sydow argued, “it’s ensuring that the property will not be used in a way that endangers the public health and safety.”

Further, Sydow said the very nature of the adaptive health orders, which expire in a matter of weeks and which in New Mexico have changed to reflect the best information about the spread and treatment of Covid-19, mean they are not arbitrary or capricious. He said the rules governing the operation of restaurants, close-contact businesses such as salons and others have altered as scientific understanding of how and when people are likely to spread Covid-19 has evolved.

When questioned by the justices, Sydow asserted if there is compensation to be offered to business owners, it should be determined by the Legislature, not by the courts, and offered to all businesses affected by the pandemic.

The plaintiffs’ attorney A. Blair Dunn of Western Agriculture, Resource and Business Advocates argued the closures did constitute a taking because the right to have property — and not have it taken by the government — is a fundamental liberty under the Bill of Rights. To interfere in the operation of private businesses without offering compensation, he argued, violates that liberty.

Asked by Senior Justice Barbara Vigil whether the closures might be covered under the police powers exception to regulatory takings — which says takings prompted by a danger to public health or safety aren’t entitled to compensation — Dunn argued that should be decided on a case-by-case basis in state courts rather than decided broadly in a single hearing. Different business models, he argued, might or might not offer different risks to the public.

“There isn’t some blanket, blank-check limitless exception to the use of police powers,” Dunn argued, “that removes this action by the government from any sort of analysis at the district court level.”

On rebuttal, Sydow brought the focus back to the matter of state law. “This court isn’t being asked to entertain a collective motion for summary judgment [against the individual lawsuits], but to determine as a matter of law that the public health orders cannot support takings claims.”

The justices will issue a ruling soon.

'Right to a Speedy Trial Deemed Nonessential in Doggy's Courts During COVID. 6th Amendment Right Not to be Criminally Accused for an Indeterminate Period Less Important than Access to Home Depot

From [HERE] A criminal defense lawyer has filed a speedy trial demand that challenges a federal court’s order suspending all jury trials until March 12.

Lawyer Mark A. Berman has argued in his Jan. 20 motion that the New Jersey federal court has effectively paused jury trials indefinitely in response to the COVID-19 pandemic.

In his motion, Berman cited a concurring opinion by U.S. Supreme Court Justice Neil M. Gorsuch in a case that lifted restrictions on religious services.

“Even if the Constitution has taken a holiday during this pandemic, it cannot become a sabbatical,” Gorsuch wrote.

Berman told Law.com that federal courthouses in Newark, New Jersey, have large courtrooms that could accommodate socially distanced trials. In the alternative, the trial could take place in another location that is larger, he said.

If there is no trial, the remedy is dismissal of charges against his client, Alice Chu, with or without prejudice, Berman said.

“It appears that we are living in a world where the constitutional right to a speedy trial has been deemed ‘nonessential,’” Berman wrote. “Who would have guessed that a criminally accused’s Sixth Amendment right not to be cast as a pariah for an indeterminate period of time would prove to be deemed less important than access to their local Home Depot?”

Berman told Law.com that he is encouraged by two recent decisions in which federal judges in California dismissed indictments in similar cases.

Chu is a Fort Lee, New Jersey, rheumatologist who was indicted on charges of Medicare fraud in September 2019.

“Dr. Chu’s professional and financial life has been destroyed by the indictment in this case,” Berman wrote. “She has gone from having a successful medical practice, in which she helped dozens of patients on a daily basis, to a state of personal destitution and despair. She cannot wait any longer for the criminal charges against her to be adjudicated at trial.”

More Niggarmarole in MN? Judge Separates Derek Chauvin's Trial from the Other 3 Cops Charged w/aiding and abetting His "Felony Assault," During which George Floyd's "Unintended Death" Occurred

[GOVERNMENT AND Dependent media’s sleight of hand was that DEREK Chauvin is charged with 2nd degree unintentional murder. YES, AS IN NOT DONE ON PURPOSE. That is, the white cop did not intend to kill Floyd; rather he intended to commit a “felony assault” and his death occurred in the process.

The AG and media have done nothing to correct the public’s misunderstanding that when AG Ellison upgraded the charge from 3rd degree to 2nd degree said change had nothing to do with whether Chauvin’s conduct was purposeful. In Minnesota a third-degree murder is an unintentional killing which results from an act eminently dangerous to others that is done with a wanton and willful disregard of an unreasonable risk to human life. There are two kinds of 2nd degree murder charges in Minnesota; one requires proof the at the defendant intended to kill and the other CONCERNS unintended murders where the defendant caused the unintended death during the commission of a felony.

Ellison chose the latter which only requires the government to prove that officer Chauvin intended to commit a felony assault on George Floyd and when he did so, his death occurred. The public’s misunderstanding acted as a placebo, calming down protesters - mission accomplished. [MORE] ]

From [HERE] Prosecutors in the criminal trial of four former Minneapolis police officers for the death of George Floyd have asked the Minnesota Court of Appeals to ensure the group is tried together. 

Assistant Attorney General Matthew Frank filed a notice of appeal late Thursday afternoon. Frank has led the murder and aiding-and-abetting prosecution of fired officers Derek Chauvin, Tou Thao, J. Alexander Kueng and Thomas Lane. 

He argued that a recent sua sponte order by Hennepin County Judge Peter Cahill to separate Chauvin’s trial from that of the other three defendants was an abuse of discretion due to the risks posed by the Covid-19 pandemic. 

Cahill issued that order on Jan. 11 in response to a motion by the state to push the trial of all four officers to June. Prosecutors argued that the release of Covid-19 vaccines would make a later trial safer, particularly in light of the possibility of protests and other mass gatherings. 

Chauvin’s attorney, Eric Nelson of Halberg Criminal Defense, also argued for a continuance on different grounds. He alleged discovery misconduct by the state and cited that as cause to move his client’s trial back. Cahill largely rejected that argument, finding no deliberate misconduct. 

He lent more credence to Covid-19 concerns but was reluctant to change the trial date. 

“For most criminal trials involving 14 jurors and multiple defendants, the courtrooms are adequate,” Cahill wrote. 

Despite this, he added, defense attorneys’ recent announcement that they intended to have co-counsel or legal support at their counsel tables make the largest available courtroom insufficient for a four-defendant trial. 

He severed Thao, Lane and Kueng’s trial from Chauvin’s and moved it to Aug. 23. Chauvin’s trial for second-degree murder is still scheduled to begin March 8. 

Cahill also denied a motion to reconsider the severance in an order issued on Jan. 21. 

Frank argued that these decisions were not consistent with civil-procedure rules. 

“The District Court’s decision to proceed to trial on March 8 and to proceed with two separate trials creates a serious public health risk,” Frank wrote in appeal documents. “Regardless of how this Court elects to exercise jurisdiction, relief is warranted here because the District Court’s decision violates the law and threatens serious harms to public health.”

That rule includes three potential causes for severance of co-defendants, including out-of-court statements that are admissible in the case against one or more defendants but not the defendant who made the statement, a determination by the court that severance is needed to fairly determine a defendant’s guilt or innocence, or cases in which two or more defendants are represented by the same attorney. 

The statement also argued that the Court of Appeals had authority to hear the appeal “even absent a showing of ‘critical impact,’” but said that if it opted not to, it had jurisdiction to instead issue a writ of prohibition. 

Attorney General’s Office spokesman John Stiles said that a brief will be filed Friday with more thorough discussion of the state’s arguments. 

“We’ll let that speak for itself,” he said. 

Prosecutors have maintained that they are prepared to go to trial as scheduled. 

Thomas Plunkett, who represents former officer J. Alexander Kueng, declined to comment on the appeal. Attorneys for the three other defendants did not respond to requests for comment Thursday evening. 

The Minnesota Court of Appeals has yet to announce any planned hearings in the case.

The Niggarmarole in GA? New Atlanta DA Says She is Unable to Prosecute the White Cop who Fatally Shot Rayshard Brooks in the Back as He Fled. Requests Racist Suspect AG to Reassign the Case

From [HERE] Fulton County’s new district attorney asked to be taken off two prominent cases involving police officers accused of violence, including the killing of 27-year-old Rayshard Brooks last summer amid national protests for racial justice and police reform.

The move could open more wounds and delay justice for Brooks’s family, Justin D. Miller, law partner for the family’s attorney, told The Washington Post in an interview.

“The next DA or the next prosecutor who picks it up is going to have to start from scratch,” Miller said.

In a letter to Georgia Attorney General Christopher M. Carr, a racist suspect, dated Jan. 25, Fani T. Willis blamed her former political opponent and predecessor, Paul Howard Jr., for her request to transfer the cases.

She accuses Howard of violating Georgia Bar rules for prosecutors, saying he obtained arrest warrants against Garrett Rolfe, the former Atlanta officer facing charges in Brooks’s fatal shooting, during his reelection campaign and used video evidence in television spots.

“In addition, as you are aware, my predecessor’s conduct also prompted a referral to the [Georgia Bureau of Investigations] for criminal investigation by you” for Howard’s issuance of grand jury subpoenas at a time when no Fulton County grand jury was empaneled, she wrote in the letter that was first reported by the Atlanta Journal-Constitution.

Howard, who lost by nearly 44 percent, told the New York Times that the move is a ploy by Willis to shy away from being held responsible.

“You’ll see all kinds of invented reasons that prosecutors come up with,” he told the news outlet. “If the DA cannot prosecute the police, how can the DA prosecute fairly the other people in the community?”

The Post reached out to a number registered to Howard but didn’t hear back.

Miller said it’s fairly common for a prosecutor to request that someone else handle a case, especially if they don’t want any hint of impropriety surrounding the case.

“We get that, but the effect of that is harsh for the family,” he said.

This isn’t the first time Howard’s actions in the case have been questioned.

Attorneys for one of the two officers involved in Brooks’s shooting request Howard’s removal from the case in July.

“Paul Howard has systematically sought to deprive Garrett Rolfe of a fair trial and impartial jury since the day he announced his decision to arrest Garrett Rolfe,” Rolfe’s attorneys said, according to court records.

Rolfe faces multiple charges, including felony murder, and his former partner, Devin Brosnan, faces charges of aggravated assault and violation of his oath.

Brooks was shot and killed by officers after they responded to calls about a man asleep in his car at a Wendy’s drive-through. The young father of four had initially cooperated, but when they attempted to arrest him, a scuffle occurred.

Widely circulated video of Brooks’s shooting showed him pointing a Taser at officers as he ran away before the sounds of gunshots being fired. Brooks was struck in the back.

His killing last summer followed the slayings of other Black Americans in fatal encounters with law enforcement, such as George Floyd and Breonna Taylor.

The other case that Willis says she should not handle is that of six officers facing charges that range from aggravated assault to pointing a gun during a May 30 incident involving Morehouse College student Messiah Young, 22, and his girlfriend and Spelman College student, 20-year-old Taniyah Pilgrim.

The couple were stuck in traffic amid George Floyd protests when live TV and body-camera footagecaptured six officers smashing Young’s car windows after the city’s 9 p.m. curfew. The officers used their stun guns, and Young suffered a fractured arm and a gash requiring 24 stitches.

A spokesperson for the attorney general’s office told The Post that the office is awaiting “additional information necessary to initiate the process for appointing a substitute prosecutor.”

That leaves the family in limbo, since other prosecutors can also choose to punt the case, Miller said.

“They don’t know what’s going to happen next, and it opens up old wounds,” he said.

NPR Study says Since 2015 Police Have Exercised Their Absolute, Unaccountable Authority to Kill by Fatally Shooting at Least 135 Unarmed Black People. At least 75% of the Cops were white

From [HERE ]The police response to insurrectionists who stormed the Capitol on January 6 and killed a police officer contrasts sharply with recent examples of police violence against Black people. A new investigative report from NPR reveals troubling patterns in fatal police shootings of unarmed Black people—including a glaring lack of accountability that keeps violent officers on the streets.

Police officers have fatally shot at least 135 unarmed Black men and women nationwide since 2015, an NPR investigation found. At least 75% of the officers were white, and nearly 60% of the shootings occurred in the South.

NPR reviewed job applications, personnel records, use of force reports, citizen complaints, court records, lawsuits, news releases, witness statements, and local and state police investigative reports to examine the backgrounds of the officers and analyze details of each shooting. Reporters also interviewed experts, police, lawyers, prosecutors, and relatives of victims.

The findings reveal a disturbingly widespread indifference to criminal, unethical, and violent conduct by police officers.

At least six of the officers who shot and killed unarmed Black people were hired as police officers despite serious red flags in their backgrounds, like drug use, domestic violence, and being fired from another police department.

Several officers kept their jobs after they were convicted of crimes including battery and obstructing justice and several remained on the job after violating department policies and being cited for ethics violations.

More than two dozen stayed on the street even though they accumulated citizen complaints or were involved in use of force incidents. NPR found an officer in Fort Lauderdale who had 82 reviews for use of force incidents but was never found to be in violation.

Police officials told NPR that some departments are so desperate to bring on new officers, they’re willing to ignore red flags in a recruit’s background. And once hired, police unions can make it nearly impossible to remove an officer from the force, including those who engage in repeated shootings.

Even officers who kill are rarely held accountable.

In 33 of the fatal shootings investigated by NPR, the officers were fired or resigned, but at least three got their jobs back and five went to work for other law enforcement agencies.

It’s rare for any officer to be involved in a shooting. In fact, experts told NPR, many police officers go their entire careers without ever pulling their guns.

But at least 15 of the officers who killed unarmed Black people had been involved in more than one shooting.

NPR found that authorities failed to charge officers in more than 80 cases. Only 13 were charged with murder, and of those, only two were found guilty. Of seven officers charged with manslaughter, two were found guilty.

Prosecuting police officers who gun down unarmed Black men and women is difficult because juries tend to give cops the benefit of the doubt, experts said. In contrast, Black victims are presumed dangerous. [MORE] and [MORE]

To Curb the Uncontrollable Authority Cops Have to Interfere w/Citizen Rights and Take Life as They See Fit, a FLA Puppetician Proposes a Law to Limit Strangulation Under Certain Circumstances

From [HERE] About eight months after the death of George Floyd in Minneapolis touched off nationwide protests, a Florida state senator has filed a bill that targets strangulation by police officers.

The bill (SB 730), filed Friday by Sen. Randolph Bracy, D-Orlando, could lead to officers facing third-degree felony charges if they strangle people under certain circumstances.

“A law enforcement officer commits the offense of strangulation by a law enforcement officer if while on duty the officer knowingly and intentionally impedes the normal breathing or circulation of the blood of an individual so as to create a risk of or cause great bodily harm or death by applying pressure on the throat or neck of the individual or by blocking the nose or mouth of the individual, including the use of a chokehold or similar restraint,” said the bill, filed for consideration during the legislative session that starts March 2.

Floyd, a Black man, died in May after a police officer kneeled on his neck during an arrest, preventing him from breathing.

As of year end 2019, 1.4 million people were in US prisons; an imprisonment rate unmatched worldwide [Decarceration is Incompatible with White Supremacy’s Goal of Greater Confinement for Non-Whites]

RWS requires the greater confinement of substantial numbers of non-white people. Undeceiver Neely Fuller makes it plain that “The White Supremacists know that a world system based on Racism White Supremacy requires that substantial numbers of non-white people be greatly restricted in their movements from place to place. The White Supremacists restrict the movements and activities of non-white people so as to keep them idle, and/or keep them from becoming constructively sufficient.

The Racists make certain that large numbers of non-white people exist under conditions that will most likely cause them to do things that will give racists an “excuse” to put them in Greater Confinement.” [MORE]

From [HERE] Following a nearly 700% increase between 1972 and 2009, the U.S. prison population declined just 11% since reaching its peak level in 2009. If we continue at this recent pace of decline, it will take 57 years—until 2078—to cut the prison population in half.

The Sentencing Project released a new report Can We Wait 60 Years to Cut the Prison Population in Half? (link is external)which contains analysis that underscores the need to reduce unnecessarily high levels of imprisonment amidst a public health crisis and going forward. Meaningful decarceration, as explained in the report, requires reducing excessive prison terms for violent convictions.

Puppeticians Cory Booker and Dick Durbin Propose Bill To Eliminate the Federal Crack and Powder Cocaine Sentencing Disparity

From [HERE] United States Senators Cory Booker (D-NJ) and Dick Durbin (D-IL), both members of the Senate Judiciary Committee, on Wednesday announced legislation to eliminate the federal crack and powder cocaine sentencing disparity and apply it retroactively to those already convicted or sentenced (press release available here(link is external)).

The senators noted that "the crack and powder cocaine sentencing disparity has disproportionately impacted people of color." 

The full text of the proposed law is available here(link is external).

Rather than Decriminalize Petty Crimes TX Authoritarians are @ an Impasse as Cops Want to Keep the Power to Arrest People for Fine Only Crimes and DA's Want to Keep Using Crim Records Against People

From [HERE] On Monday, Marco Puente agreed to a $200,000 settlement in his lawsuit against two police officers with the City of Keller.

On a broiling August day last year, Dillon Puente drove through the Fort Worth suburb of Keller to take his car to a mechanic. The high temperature that day was above 100 degrees and Puente’s air conditioning wasn’t working, so he kept the windows down to stay cool. After he made a right turn onto Main Street, he saw lights from a police car flashing behind him. He pulled over on a side street, near his grandparents’ house. When Blake Shimanek, a white officer, approached his Honda Civic, 22-year-old Puente was scared. He’d seen videos and news stories of cops killing people of color during traffic stops. Puente rolled his window three-quarters of the way up, hoping it would keep him safe. 

Shimanek radioed for backup as he approached the vehicle. Puente remembers Shimanek’s hand on his holster. The reason he stopped Dillon, he said, was a wide right turn. Then, “Any reason why you’re rolling your window up when I walked up to this car?” 

“No sir,” Puente replied. 

Shimanek ordered him to leave his car. Puente stepped out with his hands above his head. “Don’t move, do you understand?” Shimanek said as he ordered Puente to face the car and put his hands behind his back. Puente was still. “Why are you acting so suspicious?”

“Because I’m scared.” Shimanek cinched a handcuff around Puente’s left wrist. 

Marco Puente, Dillon’s father, happened across the scene soon after. Marco was on his way to the repair shop to give his son a ride home when he saw him on the side of the road in handcuffs. Marco pulled his truck to the side of the street and began recording the arrest on his cell phone. Shimanek threatened to arrest Marco multiple times, and just a few minutes later, he grabbed Marco’s phone, pinned him to the ground and ordered another cop three times to pepper spray him. 

The officers arrested the father and son and booked them into Tarrant County Jail. Marco was later released and the two charges against him were dropped. Dillon had to pay more than $350 in fines and fees before he could leave. 

Dillon could be taken to jail for a “wide right turn” because Texas law allows police to arrest people for most Class C misdemeanors, or low-level offenses such as traffic stops that are punishable only with a fine. And data suggests he’s one of thousands of Texans jailed every year for such minor offenses. An analysis of Texas arrest data conducted by Austin criminal justice advocacy group Just Liberty revealed that in 2018, nearly 23,000 such arrests occurred in large cities and counties. A similar report found that in 11 of Texas’ counties, representing 38 percent of the state’s population, more than 30,000 people were jailed for fine-only misdemeanors in 2017. And while other states have outlawed the practice, it’s alive and well in Texas.   

Now, lawmakers are again tackling the problem of fine-only arrests in the 2021 legislative session that began this month.The Democrat-led effort has powerful legislators behind it, but they have their work cut out for them: In past years, a combination of pro-police lobbying and intra-party division crashed similar legislation. Will this be the year a solution is finally reached?

Police only began reporting the numbers of such arrests three years ago as part of a requirement of the Sandra Bland Act, which was passed by the Texas Legislature in 2017. Sandra Bland was arrested for kicking a Texas state trooper during a traffic stop where he threatened to tase her and drag her out of the car. Three days later, Bland died by suicide in a Waller County jail cell. Some activists say that she would never have died or been arrested if the Legislature banned arrests for fine-only misdemeanor arrests. She was initially pulled over for a Class C misdemeanor: not using her turning signal when changing lanes.

Criminal justice reform advocates say police use fine-only misdemeanor arrests to punish people who tick them off—for “contempt of cop” as Scott Henson, policy director for Just Liberty, puts it. Sometimes cops lean on such arrests to get around the Fourth Amendment, which requires a warrant or a person’s permission to search their vehicle. In Dillon’s case, the officers had neither, but they still searched the vehicle, according to a lawsuit filed by the Marco. They found nothing illegal. Meanwhile, reports have found policedepartments around the state disproportionately stop and search people of color.

Following the deaths of George Floyd and other Black people at the hands of law enforcement last year, Texas legislators are considering policing reforms with a new urgency. Houston state Representative Senfronia Thompson and Dallas state Senator Royce West, both Black Democrats, filed the George Floyd Act, which includes a ban on chokeholds and would bar arrests for most fine-only offenses. Thompson also filed a similar, separate bill to mostly ban such arrests. 

Advocates say that compared to other, more ambitious police reforms proposed this session, ending the practice of fine-only arrests is low-hanging fruit that could serve as something of a bellwether for more sweeping criminal justice reforms. Such arrests perpetuate a system of mass incarceration while costing those involved hefty booking fees, lost work, even their lives, in the case of Bland. Data also indicates that being jailed once increases the likelihood that a person will be jailed again. “This is the tip of the spear,” says Henson. “If we succeed, this is going to be the piece that succeeds first. … If we can’t get this done, it’s likely that there’s not much they can get done this session.” 

The issue of arrests for fine-only offenses has been hotly contested for a decade. In 2001, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that state lawmakers have to change existing statute to forbid the practice. While Texas legislators approved a bill to limit such arrests that year, then-Governor Rick Perry vetoed it. In the 2019 legislative session, a bill to limit such arrests died on the state House floor despite broad Democratic support and a spot in the Texas Republican Party platform. Pundits chalk up the bill’s failure last year to Democratic infighting, confusion, and “idiocy,” especially given the final blow that killed it: not enough Democrats were there to approve the bill.

Unsurprisingly, police unions emerged as an enemy of reform legislation. Activists say Combined Law Enforcement Association of Texas (CLEAT), one of the top police unions in the state, lobbied intensely against the measure by pushing for “poison pill” amendments and urging legislators to vote against it. Charlie Wilkinson, CLEAT’s executive director, says he approved of the bill, but he opposed legislation “every time something came up without our amendments.” This session, Wilkinson says he will support reform legislation so long as it includes exceptions such as allowing police to arrest people who don’t provide ID.

Many police unions also claim that arrests for fine-only misdemeanors are an important tool in fighting crime, especially when an arrested person is a threat to public safety. They give public intoxication as an example. Police also defend such arrests in cases where a person refuses to come to court, sign their citation, or can’t properly be identified, so the cop can charge the right person with the crime. 

Ray Hunt, executive director of Houston’s police union, says some people lie about their identity during traffic stops, and wholly banning fine-only misdemeanor arrests—without exceptions in place—would incentivize this practice. “Word is going to get out…every bad guy is going to start giving false information,” he says. 

“It’s just a red herring….a smoke screen,” Henson of Just Liberty says of police unions’ concerns surrounding IDs. Thompson and West’s bills wouldn’t change existing law that requires an individual to identify themselves or sign their citation, he says. 

Some large cities in Texas already have limits on fine-only misdemeanor arrests. The Houston Police Department doesn’t generally allow such arrests without supervisor approval, and it’s common practice in the Dallas Police Department to only conduct those arrests if a person is being charged for three different violations. Hunt suggests that Houston’s policy should be adopted at the state level. 

In December, Marco Puente filed a lawsuit against the Keller police officers who arrested him; Dillon will soon join the suit. The police unlawfully arrested him for recording and used excessive force against him, it alleges. “Will the Legislature wake up and change the law?” says Scott Palmer, Marco’s attorney. “Maybe this is the case that springboards it.”

DOJ Pulls Trump Administration’s Charging & Sentencing Policies that Required Federal Prosecutors to Pursue the Harshest Charges and Stiffest penalties to Mostly Non-White Defendants

From [HERE] The acting attorney general under President Joe Biden has rescinded the Trump administration’s charging and sentencing policy, which mandated that federal prosecutors almost always pursue the harshest charges and stiffest penalties (article available here(link is external)).

In a memo to all federal prosecutors, acting Attorney General Monty Wilkinson rescinded a May 10, 2017, memo from then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions. At the time, Sessions told federal prosecutors across the country to always pursue to harshest charges and penalties possible unless they received specific permission from their supervisors.

Acting AG Wilkinson reinstated AG Holder’s May 19, 2010 charging policy(link is external), which directs prosecutors to conduct an individualized assessment of relevant facts in making charging and sentencing decisions. The Wilkinson memo “supersedes any conflicting Justice Manual provisions.”

“The goal of this interim step is to ensure that decisions about charging, plea agreements, and advocacy at sentencing are based on the merits of each case and reflect an individualized assessment of relevant facts while longer-term policy is formulated,” Wilkinson wrote.

President Biden has nominated current federal appellate judge Merrick Garland for attorney general, Lisa Monaco for deputy attorney general and Vanita Gupta for associate attorney general.

Military Intelligence Agency Says It Monitored U.S. Cellphone Movements without Warrant by Purchasing Location Data Aggregated from Smartphones

From [HERE] In a new document made public Friday, the nation’s top military intelligence agency acknowledged monitoring the location of U.S.-based mobile devices without a warrant through location data drawn from ordinary smartphone apps.

The Defense Intelligence Agency told congressional investigators that the agency has access to “commercially available geolocation metadata aggregated from smartphones” from both the U.S. and abroad. It said it had queried its database to look at the location information of U.S.-based smartphones five times in the last 2½ years as part of authorized investigations.

Such data is typically drawn from smartphone apps such as weather, games and other apps that get user permission to access a phone’s GPS location. A robust commercial market exists for such data for advertising and other commercial purposes. The Wall Street Journal first revealed last year that numerous U.S. government agencies were also buying access to that data from commercial brokers without a warrant, raising questions about whether those agencies were adequately safeguarding the privacy and civil liberties of Americans.

The ability of U.S. intelligence agencies to access data on Americans for intelligence purposes is typically circumscribed. A warrant from the secretive Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court is required for most kinds of surveillance. However, the Defense Intelligence Agency told Congress that it didn’t believe it needed any sort of court authorization to acquire commercial data for foreign intelligence or national security purposes.

That echoes a position taken by numerous other U.S. government agencies in recent years as the amount of data on individuals using computers, smartphones and tablets has exploded. The Department of Homeland Security is buying a similar data product and is using it for warrantless tracking as part of its border security and immigration mission. The Internal Revenue Service also purchased access to cellphone data as part of its law enforcement mission. All claim because the data is purchased on the open market, no court order is required. 

The disclosure about the DIA’s domestic monitoring efforts was made in a memo to the office of Sen. Ron Wyden, an Oregon Democrat who has been conducting an investigation into the use of commercially available data by government agencies for intelligence and law enforcement purposes. The New York Times first reported the existence of the memo.

A spokesman for the Defense Intelligence Agency declined to comment.

Mr. Wyden raised the issue of the government’s commercial data acquisition this month in a hearing to consider the nomination of Avril Haines, President Biden’s nominee for director of national intelligence.

“The abuses here take your breath away, and it really is a dodge on all the legal protections Americans have,” Mr. Wyden said about U.S. efforts to collect data.

“I’m particularly troubled by the intelligence community’s purchases of Americans’ private data. It’s almost like getting around the whole question of people’s privacy rights. And so transparency is crucial,” Mr. Wyden said.

Amazon’s Ring now reportedly partners with more than 2,000 police and fire departments to Better Surveil and Control Everyone under the pretext of of Safety

From [HERE] All but two US states — Montana and Wyoming— now have police or fire departments participating in Amazon’s Ring network, which lets law enforcement ask users for footage from their Ring security cameras to assist with investigations, the Financial Times reported, Figures from Ring show more than 1,189 departments joined the program in 2020 for a total of 2,014. That’s up sharply from 703 departments in 2019 and just 40 in 2018.

The FT reports that local law enforcement departments on the platform asked for Ring videos for a total of more than 22,335 incidents in 2020. The disclosure data from Ring also shows that law enforcement made some 1,900 requests — such as subpoenas, search warrants, and court orders— for footage or data from Ring cameras even after the device owner has denied the request. Amazon complied with such requests 57 percent of the time, its figures show, down from 68 percent in 2019. 

Privacy advocates have raised concerns about how Ring data is used by and made available to law enforcement. Ring’s Neighbors app, which allows Ring users to share videos with others nearby has been criticized for containing racist comments and reports. And a report from NBC News last February found that Ring footage wasn’t all that helpful for solving crimes. When it was useful, the Ring footage was mostly used for low-level non-violent property crimes (like the theft of a Nintendo Switch).

Elite, White Cloutlaw Robert Kraft Orders the Court to Order the Destruction of “unlawfully obtained" Surveillance Footage of Him Engaging in Paid Sex Acts at a Spa in Florida

A federal court in Florida ordered the destruction of “unlawfully obtained” surveillance footage of the Orchids of Asia Day Spa in Jupiter, Florida. The order, requested on behalf of a John Doe, pertains to video that allegedly shows New England Patriots owner Robert Kraft of engaging in paid sex acts. Prosecutors last year dropped charges against Kraft relating to the prostitution sting. [MORE]

Was Being Infected w/Poisons an "[Un]natural Cause" of Hank Aaron's Death? Legend Gone After Getting COVID Vaccination @ Event to Propagandize the Safety of the Toxin w/COINTELBRO Andrew Young

ABOUT THE TUSKEGEE EXPERIMENT SNAG [SNITCH ASS NEGRO AIDING GOVERNMENTS] ANDREW YOUNG STATED “WE HAVE TO GET OVER THAT.” ABOUT FELLOW SNAG ERNEST WITHERS, A BLACK PHOTOGRAPHER WHO WAS AN UNDERCOVER FBI snitch who gave extensive information on MLK and other BLACK activists, their movements, their conversations, endangering their lives, HE SAID “I don’t think Dr. King would have minded him making a little money on the side” [MORE] and "We have no problem with Ernest acting as an agent of the Government because it was OUR Government and we were acting within the law" [MORE] THIS COIN-OPERATED CORPSE ALSO APPEARED IN AND ENDORSED THE NEW DOCUMENTARY MLK/FBI WHICH PARROTS J EDGAR HOOVER’S DEROGATORY IMAGE OF Martin Luther King TO DEMEAN HIM AND DEGRADE BLACK SELF-RESPECT.

From [HERE] and [HERE] Baseball Hall of Famer Hank Aaron, former U.N. Ambassador and civil rights leader Andrew Young and former U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Louis Sullivan got vaccinated against COVID-19 in Georgia on January 4, 2021.

Within about two weeks Aaron was dead. Hank Aaron died of natural causes, according to the Fulton County Medical Examiner’s office today. No other details were provided.

Morehouse School of Medicine issued a statement, saying his death was not related to the vaccine.

“Baseball legend, businessman and philanthropist Henry “Hank” Aaron was a strong supporter of Morehouse School of Medicine. Our clinical team was honored to administer the Moderna Covid19 vaccine to Mr. Aaron and wife Billye Suber Aaron — along with more than 20 civil and human rights leaders — on Jan. 5, 2021. Each recipient was over the age of 75 and therefore part of Class 1A.”

“Mr. Aaron was a public health advocate and worked with us to help bridge the health equity gap in Atlanta and around the world. His passing was not related to the vaccine, nor did he experience any side effects from the immunization. He passed away peacefully in his sleep.” [MORE]

According to the Braves, he died peacefully in his sleep. [MORE] and [MORE]

Getting vaccinated "makes me feel wonderful," Aaron told The Associated Press. "I don't have any qualms about it at all, you know. I feel quite proud of myself for doing something like this. ... It's just a small thing that can help zillions of people in this country.''

Rolling up their sleeves to take the first of two doses, these octogenarians, their spouses and several other civil rights leaders who received the shots in a brand-new health clinic at the Morehouse School of Medicine acknowledged the legacy of mistrust that many African Americans have toward medical research, stemming from the infamous Tuskegee experiment in which U.S. health workers left syphilis untreated in Black men without their consent, making them suffer needlessly.

"I've been taking vaccines now for 88 years and I haven't been sick,'' Young said. "The truth of it is, Black folk have been living by shots, and just because they did something crazy and murderous and evil back in 1931, we're still thinking about that. We've got to get over that.''

Young told KSDK in Atlanta that Aaron "never had any reaction" to the shot before his death. "I talked to the fella who was his driver," Young told KSDK ... "And I said, 'Was Hank feeling any discomfort or any problem over the last few days?' And he said, 'No.'" [MORE] [Young is a broken down token, watch your front - BW]

It’s only right that if authorities use Hank Aaron to “propagendize” the safety of the COVID vaccine then authorities should be completely transparent about the precise, detailed cause of his death. Unverifiable, conclusive statements that Aaron’s vaccination and death are coincidence are insufficient. In fact, it is suspicious that authorities are so dogmatically dismissive and uncurious of whether there was any actual connection.

THEY ARE NOT THE SAME PEOPLE. (NOTE ALSO THAT TUSKEEGEE IS MISSPELLED). IT IS UNKNOWN WHETHER THE BROTHER ABOVE SURVIVED HIS COVID INJECTION. NEVERTHELESS, BOTH EVENTS APPARENTLY PROPAGANDIZED “GETTING OVER TUSKEGEE.” AS EXPLAINED, SLEEPING TOM ANDREW YOUNG SAID IT IS TIME FOR BLACK PEOPLE TO PUT THE TUSKEGEE EXPERIMENT BEHIND US and get on THE COVID EXPERIMENT. more photos HERE.

According to FUNKTIONARY :

vaccine - toxin. Vaccines are pus -- decaying animal tissue and other foreign/toxic matter (allergens/antigens). Most vaccine, contain the mercury-based preservative and known neurotoxin thimerosal. Thimerosal (mercury acetate) in vaccines serve two purposes. First, it's a preservative, and second, it's an adjuvant, i.e., it irritates the immune system to catalyze it into creating 'search-and-destroy' antibodies to attack the injected dead or inactive viruses or bacteria in the vaccine. The body cannot excrete mercury, it accumulates and impairs brain development, sometimes even resulting in autism. (See: Squalene & Gull War Syndrome)

vaccinated - infected with poisons. (See: Antibiotics)

vaccination - mandatory infection--typically administered by agents of Corporate State in their public schools of indoctrination camps. How can unvaccinated children endanger other children who are immunized?