New Report Chronicles the NYPD’s Reprehensible History of Murdering Black People in NYC, a City Historically Run and Controlled by White Liberals

From [HERE] The ongoing violent crackdown on Jordan Neely protests by the NYPD’s Strategic Response Group (SRG) comes as no surprise. Despite its blatant, costly misconduct during the 2020 George Floyd protests, the “elite unit” has evaded scrutiny, with NYPD officials skipping a City Council oversight hearing in March. 

Meanwhile, NYPD Commissioner Keechant Sewell has made a mockery of the Civilian Complaint Review Board disciplinary process for NYPD officers found guilty of misconduct. 

While earnest liberals may seek to improve the “professionalism” of cops, via measures including better salaries and improved training, a new report shows that if history is any guide, such initiatives will do little to alter the direction of the NYPD. It remains an entity that defies accountability. 

Released last week by the Police Reform Organizing Project (PROP), “The Notorious and True History of NYC’s Finest” reviews the history of the NYPD from its origins in the mid-19th century through the present. The report culls from the work from a wide array of scholars, including Marilynn S. Johnson, Clarence Taylor and Jules Stewart.

$25M Wrongful Death Suit Filed on Behalf of Tyrea Pryor: White Kansas Cops Shot Black Man 25X Despite Being Injured in Serious Car Crash

From [HERE] Backed by a team of local and national civil rights attorneys, the family of Tyrea M. Pryor Sr., a 39-year-old Black man killed by Independence Police, filed a federal lawsuit Thursday against the City of Independence and the officers who shot Pryor.

The lawsuit seeks at least $25 million in damages for wrongful death and excessive use of force by officers Hunter Soule and Jamie Welsh.

On March 11, 2022, a police pursuit ended in a crash near the intersection of U.S. 24 and Noland Road. Pryor, who was driving the vehicle, was left incapacitated by the crash. Multiple officers surrounded the vehicle, guns drawn, according to a letter from the Jackson County Prosecutor’s Office. Two passengers exited the vehicle, but Pryor was stuck.

An assault-style rifle was lodged between the driver’s seat and the console. Officer Welsh thought he saw Pryor reach for a gun from his waistband and said, “Hey, he’s got a gun.” Police then fired more than 20 times into the vehicle, striking Pryor approximately 15 times, according to the lawsuit.

Dashcam video showed the incident. Pryor can be heard moaning in pain before he was shot.

In March, Jackson County Prosecutor Jean Peters Baker declined to press criminal charges, stating that although the officer was wrong in thinking Pryor had a pistol, there was not enough evidence to prove the officers were not justified in their shooting.

To Justify Shooting Tyrea Pryor 15 Times White KS Cops Claimed He 'Brandished a Gun' and 'Had a Shootout w/Them.' But Cops are on Video Saying, “I Don’t See a Pistol” after Shooting Him to Death

John Burris, a California-based civil rights attorney and one of the family’s lawyers, said due to the extent of Pryor’s injuries, the officer’s first step should have been to see if he needed medical attention.

“I wonder if it's only because there was a Black man in a car . . . Although we haven't had to allege a race in this case, it's understood that many of these shootings of African American men were unarmed,” Burris said at a press conference Thursday. “This is another example. Although there was a weapon in a car, he himself was unarmed. He himself was not trying to reach for a gun. So in our way of thinking, this is clearly a violation of his civil rights.”

Attorneys for the family said the Department of Justice is also looking into the case. They say Pryor’s three children, ages 17, 15, and 12, would be the beneficiaries of any settlement.

Burris said the children’s lives will never be the same. [MORE]

Video Shows 2 El Paso Cops Beating and Kneeing a Defenseless Latino Man in the Face as He is Held Face Down with a Cop's Knee on His Neck

From [HERE] ABC-7 has reached out to the El Paso Police Department following a viewer-submitted video that surfaced earlier this week, showing El Paso Police Officers detaining a man.

The incident, recorded on a smartphone, allegedly occurred on Sunday night around 11:30 PM.  The footage, which lasts approximately three minutes, appears to show an altercation between several El Paso police officers and a male victim. The individual, whose actions leading up to the altercation are not seen in the footage, appears to be subdued by the officers.

As the video continues, one of the officers appears to put a knee on the individual.

The El Paso Police Department says the incident is under review. The department has not yet released the names of the officers involved in the incident. [MORE]

Trial for 2 Trenton Cops Underway: Although Black Man Surrendered w/Both Hands in the Air, Cops Excessively Punched Him in the Face, Then Lied by Claiming He was an Aggressor and Ongoing Threat

From [HERE] Testimony started Monday in the trial of two Trenton police officers charged with violating a Black man’s federal civil rights during an April 2017 arrest.

Anthony Villanueva and Drew Inman are accused of punching Chanzie Washington several times following a police pursuit, and then submitting falsified reportis on the incident. A federal grand jury indicted them in April 2019. Villanueva faces additional charges for pepper-spraying a man locked in a holding cell.

According to the indictment:

On or about April 9, 2017, at approximately 2:00 a.m., defendant VILLANUEVA responded to a radio call for assistance, alerting him that other officers were in pursuit of a suspect, later identified as Victim 1, who had fled in his vehicle, attempting to avoid a routine traffic stop near an intersection in Trenton.

3. VILLANUEVA and other officers soon spotted Victim 1 abandoning his vehicle and fleeing on foot. VILLANUEVA and other officers therefore exited their vehicles and pursued Victim 1 on foot.

4. After leading the officers on a foot chase for approximately one to two minutes, Victim 1 reached the banks of the Delaware and Raritan Canal, got into the water, and swam across to the opposite bank. Victim 1 then exited the canal by climbing up a steep embankment and into a brush-strewn area near a parking lot.

5. A chain link fence separated the brush-strewn area adjacent to the canal from the parking lot. As Victim 1 exited the canal and walked towards the chain link fence, Police Officer 1 stood on the opposite side of the fence, in the parking lot. Additional Trenton police officers who had arrived on the scene ordered Victim 1 to put his hands in the air. Victim 1 complied, raising both hands in the air above his head. Police Officer 1 ordered Victim 1 to climb over the fence toward Police Officer 1. Again, Victim 1 complied. Victim 1 placed both hands on top of the chain link fence.

Defendant VILLANUEVA was standing on the same side of the chain link fence as Victim 1, and nearby Victim 1, as Victim 1 complied with Police Officer l's commands.

7. Nonetheless, and without issuing any warning or command, defendant VILLANUEVA moved swiftly towards Victim 1 and punched Victim 1 in the face.

8. Simultaneously, defendant INMAN, who had been approaching Victim 1 from behind, tackled Victim 1 to the ground. Defendant INMAN did not issue any warning or command prior to tackling Victim 1.

9. During the next approximately thirty seconds, defendant INMAN and defendant VILLANUEVA punched Victim 1 numerous times. Victim 1 cried out in pain, and told officers, "stop hitting me in my face," and "you've got my hands."

10. Victim 1 was subsequently handcuffed by other officers on the scene, and driven to Trenton Police Headquarters for processing. Defendant VILLANUEVA assisted in processing Victim 1, and was present when Victim 1's booking photograph was taken within a few hours of Victim 1's arrest. The booking photograph depicts various injuries to Victim l's face; namely, a bloody lip and nose, and swelling and bruising around his left eye.

11. Following the assault against Victim 1, defendants VILLANUEVA and INMAN each completed law enforcement reports that memorialized the incident. In the reports, the defendants knowingly made numerous misrepresentations, false statements and omissions in an effort to portray Victim 1 as the aggressor and an ongoing threat. 

Victim 1 as the aggressor and an ongoing threat. [MORE]

Witness says Fleeing Teen was Shot in the Back by Baltimore Cop. Police: 'If Blacks Have a Gun We Can Shoot, No Matter What the Constitution Says. We’ll Release the Public's Video Whenever We Want to'

From [HERE] A Black teenager critically wounded by Baltimore police Thursday afternoon was shot in the back while running from officers, according to an eyewitness account that raised more questions about whether the shooting was justified.

Baltimore police said the shooting followed a short foot pursuit that began because an officer thought the teen was armed and approached him. The teen ran away, ignoring commands to drop his gun, according to police. However, police often lie to justify their conduct.

Officials are considering whether to release body-camera footage of the shooting, which has prompted heated criticism of the Baltimore’s embattled police department.

Baltimore police said the 17-year-old was carrying a gun with an extended magazine, but they declined to provide many other details about the shooting, including whether he was shot in the back.

---

The Supreme Court recently ruled that citizens have the inalienable right to carry guns in public for self defense in case of public confrontation. Specifically, the court made it plain that the 2nd Amendment protects an individual’s right to keep and bear arms for self-defense in public. It stated;

Nothing in the Second Amendment’s text draws a home/public distinction with respect to the right to keep and bear arms. As we explained in Heller, the “textual elements” of the Second Amendment’s operative clause— “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be in- fringed”—“guarantee the individual right to possess and carry weapons in case of confrontation. Heller further confirmed that the right to “bear arms” refers to the right to “wear, bear, or carry . . . upon the person or in the clothing or in a pocket, for the purpose . . . of being armed and ready for offensive or defensive action in a case of conflict with another person.” [MORE]

But said ruling especially has no practical application to Black people residing in liberal jurisdictions. Liberal puppeticians and PropaGandhi work tirelessly to make said inalienable right illusory. As a result, law abiding Black and poor people are prevented from defending themselves in crime ridden areas. [MORE]

---

But witness Pat Felder, 36, said he was sitting on his father’s front stoop Thursday afternoon, eating a sandwich and enjoying the spring weather — when suddenly a young man came running around the corner of a nearby intersection, followed by a police officer. He said the officer was yelling at the teen to “get on the ground.”

Moments later, Felder said, he watched as the officer drew his gun and fired four shots. The young man collapsed.

“He was definitely shot in the back,” Felder said in an interview Friday morning outside his father’s house in majority-Black southwest Baltimore. “He was facing away from the officer, running like he was scared.”

Felder said the officer, whom he described as Black, seemed visibly agitated after the shooting. A crowd quickly formed around the injured teen, yelling at police and demanding to know whether the shooting was necessary.

“That’s the first time I’ve ever seen someone get shot,” Felder said. “I was ready to start crying.”

Baltimore police said the teen ignored “numerous” orders after “displaying characteristics of an armed person.” But officials declined to say whether he ever pointed a weapon at police.

Officers claim they are allowed to use deadly force when they believe it’s “immediately necessary” to protect another officer or civilian from “imminent danger of death or serious physical injury.”

The policy contradicts a 1985 Supreme Court decision that said shooting a fleeing suspect who’s not an imminent threat violates the person’s constitutional rights. The court said that an officer’s threat assessment in a specific situation should be evaluated as a split-second decision, without the benefit of hindsight.

The teenage gunshot victim was a familiar presence in his neighborhood, where residents have long complained about over-policing and discriminatory treatment from law enforcement — a familiar criticism in a city still reeling from its history of troubled policing practices, despite recent reform efforts.

A friend of the teen, who asked to remain anonymous out of concern for his safety, said he recognized the officer involved because he and his partner have been coming through the neighborhood often in recent months. He said the officers would make derogatory jokes and antagonize residents.

The officers are members of a so-called District Action Team, one of the Baltimore Police Department’s specialized units that focuses on proactive patrols and other measures in areas of Baltimore most plagued by violence.

Only one of the officers fired his weapon, according to police. In the minutes preceding the foot pursuit, that officer was sitting on a stoop next to the teen.

Video posted to social media and viewed by The Associated Press shows them sitting side by side while another person yells insults at the officer, who says he’s there to interact with community members, not bothering anyone.

The video stops before the chase. But according to the friend, the teen got up and started walking away, then took off running when the officer tried to grab him.

Other neighborhood residents said the shooting was just the latest example of Baltimore police treating Black communities poorly, making them doubt whether ongoing reform measures are having any real impact.

The department started seriously pursuing reform after a U.S. Department of Justice investigation found longstanding patterns of excessive force, unlawful arrests and discriminatory policing.

The DOJ investigation was launched after Freddie Gray’s 2015 death from spinal injuries in Baltimore police custody. Not long after the consent decree was announced, the Gun Trace Task Force scandal also revealed extensive abuse and corruption inside an elite plainclothes unit — revelations that further ruptured public trust.

White Miss Cops Already Under Investigation for Shoving Guns Into the Mouths of 2 Handcuffed Black Men and Torturing Them (Michael Corey Jenkins Shot in Face) Now Accused of Sexual Assaulting Them

Only Cops Should Have Guns? White Mississippi Deputies Shoved Their Guns Into the Mouths of 2 Handcuffed Black Men and Tortured Them During Unlawful Search. One Shot in the Face. Feds Investigate

From [HERE] Mississippi sheriff's deputies already under investigation for possible civil rights violations after allegedly placing a gun in a Black man's mouth and firing it are now also being accused of attempting to assault him and a second Black man with a sex toy during an interrogation, according to The Associated Press.

The allegations are contained in a letter to the Justice Department written by Michael Corey Jenkins' attorney, who provided a copy to the AP. In it, attorney Malik Shabazz urges federal prosecutors to file civil rights charges against the deputies and to open a broader investigation into what he called the “unconstitutional customs and practices” of the entire sheriff’s office.

Jenkins has accused six deputies of breaking into a home where he was visiting a friend on Jan. 24, torturing them by various means, putting a gun in their mouths, and firing a gun into Jenkins’ mouth in an apparent attempt to murder him after nearly two hours of “torture.”

RANKIN COUNTY DEPUTIES ACCUSED OF TORTURE, WATERBOARDING On Jan. 24.

Jenkins and another victim, Eddie Terrell Parker, 35, were at a home in Braxton where Parker lives with the property owner when six white Rankin deputies conducting a drug investigation raided. Shabazz said they did not announce themselves or show a search warrant. They accused the men of selling drugs and later charged them with possession of a controlled substance and possession of paraphernalia, the attorney said. Deputies suddenly came into the home where Parker was living and proceeded to handcuff and beat them.

For 90 minutes, deputies exercised what Shabazz called intimidation and unjustified torture of Jenkins and Parker. The men were punched, kicked, slapped and tasered while handcuffed. They had guns pointed at them and were threatened with death, Shabazz said. Deputies shocked them repeatedly with stun guns over roughly 90 minutes. Police also waterboarded Jenkins and Parker by strapping them down while lying on their backs and pouring milk over their faces to simulate drowning.

Jenkins, who has trouble speaking and eating because of his injuries, said one of the deputies, who has not been named publicly, fired a gun into his mouth. Medical records he shared with the AP show he was treated for a lacerated tongue and broken jaw.

Both Jenkins and Parker also informed agents with the Mississippi Bureau of Investigation that deputies stripped the two naked, forced them to take a shower together, and attempted to use a sex toy on them during an hourslong interrogation, according to the letter, which was accompanied by a photo of the toy.

“It was senseless and uncalled for,” Parker said at the news conference. “It was traumatizing and something I never thought I’d go through.” It ended when a deputy placed a gun in Jenkins’ mouth and pulled the trigger, Shabazz said. Jenkins could have died, but the bullet exited his mouth.

“This extreme case of police brutality warrants enforcement of the civil rights criminal laws on the books,” Shabazz said in a statement. “Sheriff Bryan Bailey and Rankin County are covering up the truth of what happened on Jan. 24, and all parties must be held accountable.”

In his Monday letter to Kristen Clarke, assistant attorney general for civil rights at the Justice Department, Shabazz called for an inquiry into a “pattern and practice of police misconduct and police brutality” in Rankin County. Neither the sheriff's office nor an attorney representing the office responded to calls or an emailed list of questions about the allegations.

In a statement, the Justice Department said the civil rights probe into the Jenkins case is ongoing and declined to comment further.

An AP investigation published in March revealed that several Rankin County deputies had been involved in at least four violent encounters with Black men since 2019 that left two dead and another with lasting injuries. Two of the men, Jenkins included, allege that deputies shoved guns into their mouths during separate encounters.

Deputies have said Jenkins was shot after he pointed a gun at them. Shabazz has said his client didn’t have a gun.

Jenkins was charged with possessing between 2 and 10 grams of methamphetamine and aggravated assault on a police officer. Parker was charged with two misdemeanors: possession of paraphernalia and disorderly conduct. Agents with the Mississippi Bureau of Investigation told the men they didn't expect the criminal charges against them to proceed, Shabazz wrote in his letter.

Meanwhile, “No deputy has been disciplined or terminated by Rankin County and all the deputies are still roaming the public at large,” Shabazz wrote.

System is Racist but Anyone Can Get It. VA Cops Indicted for Battering a 77 yr Old White Man Leading to Death b/c of His Alleged Failure to Comply w/Authority After Speeding 8mph Over Limit

A sheriff’s deputy and a deputy in northwestern Virginia have been indicted on felony charges stemming from the violent arrest of a 77-year-old man who, according to his family, was afflicted with dementia and died about two weeks after suffering a head injury during the incident. All involved are white.

The charges result from a traffic stop last year in Front Royal, Va., that occurred after the motorist, Ralph C. Ennis, traveled for four miles in his pickup truck while being chased by a Warren County deputy with his vehicle’s emergency lights and siren activated. The deputy was trying to stop Ennis for driving 8 mph over the speed limit, authorities said.

Ennis — described by his family in a subsequent lawsuit as “confused and disoriented” by dementia — eventually stopped his Ford F-150 in a parking lot and got out. Deputy Tyler S. Poe then slammed Ennis against the truck, after which then-Deputy Zachary A. Fadely tackled Ennis, who fell to the ground beneath Poe and Fadely, according to authorities and video of the April 2, 2022, encounter. [MORE]

Are People Woke to the Reality that the Power Enabling Police to Use Force Offensively (not in self-defense) is Evil? Cops Murdered Handcuffed White Man While Forcing a DUI Blood Draw- CA to Pay $24M

WATCH THE VIDEO. From [HERE] California is set to pay $24 million after reaching a settlement with the family of Edward Bronstein, who died in police custody three years ago after repeatedly yelling, “I can’t breathe,” while an officer knelt on his back and multiple officers restrained him while trying to take a blood sample, lawyers said on Tuesday.

California Highway Patrol officers pulled over Mr. Bronstein, who was 38, on March 31, 2020, believing that he was driving under the influence of a drug, and they then tried to draw his blood. When he asked why they needed a sample, they threw him face down on a mat, video footage showed. After being pinned for several minutes, he appeared to lose consciousness and was pronounced dead by paramedics later that morning.

“There was justice in the civil case — now we want justice with the criminal case,” said Luis Carillo, one of five lawyers helping represent Mr. Bronstein’s family. “We want them to pay in jail for taking a human life. These officers had no reverence for human life. They killed an innocent man.”

The civil rights settlement is among the largest of its kind, lawyers said. In March 2021, the City of Minneapolis agreed to pay $27 million to the family of George Floyd, a Black man murdered by police.

Mr. Bronstein was about five minutes from the home where he lived with his father in Burbank, Calif., when California Highway Patrol officers pulled him over.

Officers gave him a breathalyzer test, which allegedly showed that he was under the legal alcohol limit, but they suspected that he was under the influence of a drug and obtained a warrant to draw his blood, according to a police report.

They placed him in handcuffs and took him to the parking lot of a patrol station near Pasadena to take his blood, according to the police and autopsy reports.

His daughter, Brianna Palomino, said her father had been terrified of needles and that was most likely why he had initially hesitated when the officers ordered him to put out his arm. Video footage shows that he then said he would cooperate before officers grabbed him and forced him down on the mat.

“Please don’t,” Mr. Bronstein said, repeating over and over again that he would cooperate.

“It’s too late,” one of the officers said. For nearly two minutes, Mr. Bronstein screamed and gasped, telling the officers at least a dozen times, “I can’t breathe.”

Mr. Bronstein’s death prompted the highway patrol to change its policies to prevent officers “from using techniques or transport methods that involve a substantial risk of positional asphyxia,” the agency said, according to The Associated Press. Additional training was also ordered for uniformed officers.

STATIST DELUSION. This is where all statist’s [those who believe “citizens” and “states” exist and the memetic thought patterns supporting such beliefs] get lost, thoughting and discussing whether ‘the use of force was appropriate?’ or ‘whether police used too much force to make this kind of arrest.’

All use of force offensively is immoral and evil. Acts that would be considered unjust or morally unacceptable when performed by people are just as unjust or morally unacceptable when performed by government agents. Putting your hands on another human being, not in self-defense but offensively, without their consent and ‘manipulating their body in disregard of their volition is evil’, whether its done by citizens or representatives of “authority” wearing blue costumes. Contrary to legal truths, the government’s implied power (authority) to initiate unprovoked acts of violence on citizens is immoral and evil. Larken Rose explains, “authority is permission to commit evil – to do things that would be recognized as immoral and unjustified if anyone else did them.” Subconsciously we know and understand the right to rule over other people is irrational and barbaric. [MORE]

In the free range prison, all pretenses of civilization aside, the legal system is primarily based on physical coercion (violence): comply with authority or go to jail or die. There is no “free government.” Government does not rest on our voluntary consent, it is anchored in violence. Citizens can either obey authority or go to jail. The lie of tyranny is that you will maintain your freedom by obeying authority. The choices it offers you are a lifetime of obedience or death.“ [MORE] Government and it’s “services” are not voluntary and individuals cannot opt out or reject government services or choose to live without government – rather, we are born into this involuntary arrangement. As explained by FUNKTIONARY,“Government” is simply, unequivocally, and always initiation of force or coercion and nothing else. “While there are varying degrees, “government” very simply is “one man violently controlling the life and property of another man.” Governmental rule based on authority cannot be voluntary or consensual.

All “Laws” are threats backed by the ability and willingness to use violence/force against those who disobey. An individual can choose not to comply with a law or an order, which will subsequently lead to another order/command or threat of a worse sanction, but in all governmental systems, at the end of the chain of orders or worsening sanctions comes a threat that the violator cannot defy. Michael Huemer states, “The system as a whole must be anchored by a nonvoluntary intervention, a harm that the state can impose regardless of the individual’s choices. That anchor is provided by physical force.” Huemer explains, “One can choose not to pay a fine, one can choose to drive without a license, and one can even choose not to walk to a police car to be taken away. But one cannot choose not to be subjected to physical force if the agents of the state decide to impose it. Thus, the legal system is founded on intentional, harmful coercion.’

Government “authority” can be summed up as the implied right to rule over people. It is the idea that some people have the moral right to forcibly control others, and that, consequently, those others have the moral obligation to obey.’ [MORE] As so-called representatives of authority, police officers (among other authorities) are empowered to use force offensively against citizens who are legally obliged to obey.

The problem is that there is no rational basis for authority. That is, there is no legitimate or rational way to account for our belief in its existence. Authority, the basis for all governments and rulership, is a farce.

First of all, authority comes from no rational source. All persons have the natural right to defend themselves and come to the defense of others if they believe another person is in imminent danger from an aggressor. Private security workers and guards also work under said natural law. In contrast, police officers and other representatives of authority have the extra or added “power” to act offensively as aggressors; they have been granted the power to use force offensively on people or initiate unprovoked acts of violence against people whenever they deem it necessary. As such, police are permitted to do things “citizens” cannot do, such as, stop individuals, touch them against their will, attack (make arrests) people, interfere with their freedoms in many ways, kidnap people (detain and transport) or imprison them all because higher authorities have empowered them to do so. In turn, “citizens” are said to have a moral and legal obligation to obey all government orders, laws and have no right to even resist an unlawful arrest in most states. Authority must be obeyed on a content-neutral basis (regardless of whether citizens agree or not.) [MORE] This hypothesized moral property (authority) is said to make government the supreme authority over human affairs.

However, “authority” does not come from people nor is it derived from any natural source. All governmental power allegedly is said to come exclusively from the people. Citizens delegate their individual power to government and it’s representatives for them to represent citizens and act on their behalf. Such representation works much in the same way agents represent principals in all kinds of business or other contractual relationships. For instance, a manager at McDonalds represents the franchise owner when she carries out his everyday business requests, like ordering inventory and hiring workers, etc. She is the agent, the owner is the principal who empowers and directs her work and is responsible for her conduct. Naturally, an agent only can possess whatever powers the principal gave to her. For instance, the Manager does not have the authority to sell the store unless the owner granted her such power. Similarly, the McDonalds manager could not have the power to do things that the franchise owner has no power to do - such as change the McDonalds logo to a black panther or use another business’ parking lot for storage. Additionally, numbers don’t change anything – a group of McDonald’s owners still don’t have the power to grant an agent the power to use another business’ parking lot either. An agent cannot have more power than the principal because all his/her power necessarily originated exclusively from the principal.

In the case of government however, the government has somehow granted itself the power to do things that no individual citizen could ever do. While citizens have the inalienable right to act in self-defense or come to the defense of others, citizens have no right to initiate unprovoked acts of violence (use force offensively) on other people and no right to forcibly control other people. As such, it is logically impossible for citizens to delegate the power to forcibly control others to the government - because citizens cannot possibly delegate rights that they don’t have.

Larken Rose explains, ‘the people whom the politicians claim to represent have no right to do anything that politicians do: impose “taxes,” enact “laws,” etc. Average citizens have no right to forcibly control the choices of their neighbors, tell them how to live their lives, and punish them if they disobey, So when a “government” does such things, it is not representing anyone or anything but itself.’ As stated, it is a logical and legal impossibility for a representative to have more power than the person he is representing. Larken Rose explains, “you can’t give someone something you don’t have.” There is nothing complicated about this. [MORE] and [MORE]

According to FUNKTIONARY:

Force – the source or sources of all possible actions of the particles or materials of the universe(s). 2) the manipulation of a man or woman in disregard of its own volition or nature. 3) the use of an outside physical coercion of any kind by one or more humanoids against another or others in order to make him/her or them obedient and compliant to his/her or their will. 4) the basis of all social evils and can only be used in the sense of attack not defense. 5) You must! In the way I say! 6) the social disease. “Force (coercion) and fraud are the foundation of all social systems and the source of the aroma which they exhale.” ~Max Nomad. “Force” operates to remove personal volition from opportunity to act or not act. Someone “makes” you behave in a certain way by threatening to injure or enslave you, someone you love, or something you prize, if you do not behave in that way. Force operates to obtain an intended behavior when the forced party would otherwise have exhibited a different behavior. Punishment, pain, suffering, and discomfort characterize force. Unfortunately, governments only function by misuse of force—mistreatment, duress and coercion. Once established, they put laws into effect by threatening persecution, imprisonment, fine, or death against all who don’t comply with those laws—including the use of the force continuum. “That which is imposed by force is sooner or later deposed by force.” ~ Mikhail Naimy. In reality, force is neutral, it is how it is applied that colors its action. The greatest and highest force in the universe is love unfolding in each moment. (See: Government, Autonomy, Justice, Fiction, Fraud, Corporate State, Freedom, Forgery, Racism White Supremacy, Religion, Authority, Violence, Coercion, Deception, Language, Force Continuum, Capital Punishment & Gerp)

The Public Masters in Kansas City Allow Amaree’ya Henderson's Family to View Body Camera of Fatal Police Shooting of Black Man. But the public's Video will Remain Secret from Public, Until They Say So

Imagine if police departments across the nation sought funding for a new program described as follows:

"We propose a video surveillance program targeted toward heavily patrolled low-income neighborhoods of color in order to gather evidence of crimes such as drug possession, vandalism, and resisting arrest. We will primarily use this evidence to prosecute criminal cases against civilians - not police officers - withholding it from defendants to encourage pleas, and allowing access only to those who take the risk of going to trial. The public and the media will rarely, if ever, gain access to these videos, and we will release them at our unilateral discretion; we will, of course, own and control all the footage."

If this were the avowed purpose and description of a program, few would support it. Yet this is precisely how most police body camera programs are currently run. [MORE PDF]

From [HERE] The family is entitled to see the video under Kansas law, even if there are no plans to release it publicly or identify the officer involved in the April 26 fatal shooting of Amaree’ya Henderson.

Kansas City, Kansas, police are allowing family members to view body camera footage after an officer killed a Black man during a traffic stop.

The family is entitled to see the video under Kansas state law, even if there are no plans to release it publicly or identify the officer involved in the fatal shooting of Amaree’ya Henderson on April 26, according to KCTV5 News.

According to Yahoo! News, which cited The Kansas City Star, Pauletta Johnson claimed police stopped her son and his girlfriend, a passenger, while they were delivering food in the area.

Attorneys for his family claimed that despite Henderson’s repeated requests, the officer never gave a reason for the stop, according to KCTV5.

Henderson’s girlfriend eventually FaceTimed Johnson because he was afraid. Yahoo! News reported the grieving mother claimed she was on the phone when she heard the gunshots, and she rushed to the scene by tracking their phones.

“They killed my baby,” Johnson said, Yahoo! News reported. “My only son.”

Kansas City officer Donna Drake said the police officer involved was somehow slightly injured and taken to the hospital.

Johnson along with the family’s attorneys, are calling for more transparency as they continue to question how what seemed to be a routine traffic stop resulted in a deadly shooting.

​​The Wyandotte County district attorney’s office — which will determine whether the use of force complied with Kansas law — received the case after it was investigated by police in Kansas City, Missouri. The two cities have followed that protocol for shootings involving officers since late last year, according to the Yahoo! report.

McNegro Rolebot SF DA Refuses to Release Video/Reports in Shooting of Black Man [the public doesn't own public video b/c we 'agreed' to Make Authorities our Masters, who own us and whatever we own]

From [HERE] San Francisco’s Board of Supervisors voted unanimously on Tuesday in favor of a resolution calling for the city's district attorney to release police reports, witness accounts and videos pertaining to the April 27 killing of a Black transgender man by a drugstore security guard. 

Security guard Michael Earl-Wayne Anthony, 33, shot and killed Banko Brown, 24, after what police described as a shoplifting incident in which Brown reportedly stole several dollars’ worth of candy from a downtown Walgreens. According to various reports, Anthony was still inside the store when Brown, standing outside the store, turned toward him, raised his arm, and spat on him before Anthony drew his gun. Brown was unarmed.

San Francisco police booked Anthony on suspicion of murder the day after the shooting, but he was released after prosecutors declined to charge him. 

“The evidence clearly shows that the suspect believed he was in mortal danger and acted in self-defense,” District Attorney Brooke Jenkins said in a statement on May 1. 

Calling the shooting a tragedy, she said, “We cannot bring forward charges when there is credible evidence of reasonable self-defense. Doing so would be unethical and create false hope for a successful prosecution.”

However, a week after making those statements Jenkins said in a written statement that the investigation was ongoing.

“I hear and understand the concerns from people calling for transparency, but releasing any evidence before the investigation is complete could compromise the investigation and is unethical," Jenkins wrote. 

Given that the district attorney’s office was up against a deadline to make a charging decision before the 72-hour custody deadline lapsed, she was forced to let Anthony go in order to avoid violating due process, Jenkins continued.

After supervisors on Tuesday heard from a long line of speakers outraged by the district attorney’s refusal to release video of the incident, the 11-member board voted unanimously for a resolution calling for Jenkins to release evidence relating to the April 27 killing. 

“It is Brooke Jenkins’ job to release the tape and provide as much transparency as possible,” said one woman, who then criticized Mayor London Breed for her absence due to a public relations trip to Israel. 

Many of the speakers who turned out to support the resolution were young adults who expressed anger towards the district attorney. One woman led the room in chanting “Justice for Banko Brown!”

“I am here today because I am disgusted that Walgreens, a national chain from Chicago, their property ... was worth more than a citizen of San Francisco,” said one young person who identified as nonbinary.

“You were fed up, so you just took all your anger out and said I’m gonna kill someone today,” said another person. “We don’t just need the tape. We need justice!”

Finding unanimity among the supervisors, once the more than two hours of public testimony was finished, proved almost effortless. In an amendment, the supervisors changed the word “murder” to “homicide." Supervisor Matt Dorsey also sought to add language underscoring that the body sought access to “publicly disposable” information. That caught Supervisor Hillary Ronin’s attention, prompting her to ask exactly what that meant.

“It seems to me that she can release them if she chooses to, and we have other ways that we can pursue this," Board President Aaron Peskin said.

"I mean, you heard — and I was quoted in the newspaper — that this board does have the power to subpoena things from third parties and maybe we’ll go that way," he added. 

Dorsey agreed to drop the wording “publicly disposable” and the resolution passed unanimously.

Each of supervisors had expressed their outrage about the shooting; some were in tears as they gave their statements.

“I don’t see how anyone can sit here and not be moved by all of this,” said Supervisor Catherine Stefani through tears. “I know if it were my kids, I’d be losing my mind.”

Knowing the Board of Supervisors was expected to take up the matter of releasing evidence later that day, Jenkins’ office reissued her most recent statement on the matter, originally released Monday.

Arguing that viewing a single piece of evidence “alone in a vacuum” is irresponsible, Jenkins said she understood the public’s desire to see the evidence for themselves but doing so could compromise the investigation.

“If a final decision is made to not charge in this case, my office will publicly release a comprehensive report that provides a full accounting of the evidence reviewed and how the decision was made because I understand the public’s need for a higher degree of transparency in this case," she said.

The Presumption of Innocence or Presumption that No Blacks are Innocent: Safe McNegro DC Mayor Wants More Cops and More People Detained PreTrial to Please Her White Liberal Masters [dc jail 95% Black]

Strawboss D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser is hinting that she will soon introduce legislation that would keep more people charged with violent crimes behind bars pending trial, which she said would address concerns that people with histories of violence are too easily allowed back into the community and could be contributing to the spike in certain crimes in the city.

Bowser’s announcement came during a four-hour-long Public Safety Summit she hosted Wednesday. She touted the event as an opportunity for dozens of law enforcement and public safety agencies, civic organizations, and business groups to put their heads together and engage in “critical introspection about what is working and what is not working and what needs to change” to address the increase in certain crimes like homicide, carjackings, and gun-related offenses in recent years. (Earlier this year she hosted a similar summit with Advisory Neighborhood Commissioners.) [MORE]

RACISTS ARE OBSESSED WITH CRIME STATISTICS IN BLACK COMMUNITIES. ACCORDING TO THE SENTENCING PROJECT, “RESEARCHERS HAVE SHOWN THAT CRIME REPORTING EXAGGERATES CRIME RATES AND EXHIBITS BOTH QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE RACIAL BIASES. THIS INCLUDES A TENDENCY . . TO EXAGGERATE RATES OF BLACK OFFENDING AND WHITE VICTIMIZATION AND TO DEPICT BLACK SUSPECTS IN A LESS FAVORABLE LIGHT THAN WHITES.“

LIBERAL AND CONSERVATIVE MEDIA BOTH FEED THIER AUDIENCES WITH CRIME DATA TO HELP OTHERIZE BLACKS AND SUPPORT A POSTURE ALREADY TAKEN AND PROJECTED; AS THESE WHITE SIMPLETONS BELIEVE CRIME STATS ARE PROOF OF THE FANTASTIC MYTH THAT BLACKS ARE INHERENTLY CRIMINAL. BASED ON THIS UNSTATED BELIEF, WHITE LIBERALS IN LOCAL MAINSTREAM MEDIA FOR INSTANCE, GO ON USING CRIME TO JUSTIFY TREATING BLACK PEOPLE CRIMINALLY IN LIBERAL CITIES, FREELY IMPOSING PUNITIVE POLICIES AND SOCIALLY DISTANCING THEMSELVES FROM BLACKS. IT SHOULD GO WITHOUT SAYING BUT WHITE REPUBLICAN PROSECUTORS AND JUDGES AREN’T THE ONES FILLING THE JAILS WITH BLACK PEOPLE IN DIVERSE, LIBERAL CITIES LIKE WASHINGTON D.C., NYC OR CHICAGO. [MORE]

Decades of Research Show that Mass Pretrial Incarceration Actually Undermines Public Safety. A New Study from the University of Chicago Law School Suggests that Judges are Making the Problem Worse

Despite the fact that tough-on-crime rhetoric may have cost them votes in the midterms, prominent Democrats continue to double down on calls to roll back bail reform. Earlier this month, New York Gov. Kathy Hochul (D) doubled down on her calls for bail reform efforts to be walked back, urging legislators to expand judges’ ability to lock up the accused while awaiting trial.

She’s not alone. New York City Mayor Eric Adams (D) has been beating the drum against bail reform for months — and New Jersey lawmakers recently introduced a bill to scale back the state’s landmark bail reforms. Amid growing concerns about violent crime, politicians have seized on the idea that locking people up before trial leads to safer streets.

The problem is that decades of research show that mass pretrial incarceration actually undermines public safety. And a new study from Professor Siegler’s Federal Justice Clinic at the University of Chicago Law School suggests that judges are making the problem worse.

According to one well-known study, locking even low-risk arrestees in jail for just two or three days increased the likelihood that they are arrested for a new crime by 40 percent. What’s worse, people jailed pretrial often lose their jobs, homes, and custody of their children. 

This is nothing new. Policymakers across the political spectrum have long acknowledged the cascading, harmful effects of pretrial jailing. Ironically, the perils of pretrial detention led to the passage of federal bail reform signed by President Reagan in the ’80s, an era most liberals consider the modern epicenter of mass incarceration. Still on the books, the Bail Reform Act of 1984 flatly prohibits judges from jailing people who are too poor to pay for their freedom. [MORE]

Stacey Abrams , Clyburn Endorse Barbara Lee in California Senate Race to Replace Dianne Frankenstein

Stacey Abrams, former Democratic candidate for governor in Georgia, endorsed Rep. Barbara Lee (D-CA) on Monday, in the heated race to replace retiring Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA).

Lee is in a three-way race to replace Feinstein, 89, who is not seeking another term but has faced renewed calls to resign due to health-related complications. Reps. Katie Porter (D-CA) and Adam Schiff (D-CA) are also in the race to become California's next senator, in what could be the fiercest Democratic primary of the 2024 cycle.

"Honored to be endorsed by the barrier-breaking and inspiring @staceyabrams," Lee tweeted. "Stacey has been instrumental in moving the needle for progress in our country, and I am thrilled to have her support as our team works to bring that same spirit of progress to California, delivering real change and turning progressive policy into law in the U.S. Senate. I'm so grateful to have you on my team, Stacey!"

Schiff, who former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) has endorsed, led his rivals in fundraising during the first quarter. Schiff brought in $6.5 million in April, while Porter's campaign raised $4.5 million, and Lee brought in more than $1.4 million.

Abrams isn't the only well-known Democrat to endorse Lee. Last week Rep. Jim Clyburn (D-SC), a top Pelosi lieutenant, endorsed the California Democrat calling her, "the voice Americans need now in the U.S. Senate." Lee also scored an endorsement from the Congressional Progressive Caucus (CPC) Chairwoman Pramila Jayapal (D-WA). "Barbara is a champion for justice who has been a persistent progressive voice in the U.S. House," Jayapal said of Lee. [MORE]

Who Pulls the Strings on "Black" Puppetician Eleanor Holmes Norton? House Rep Proposes to Put Marijuana in the Capitol Garden While Delivering Little of Tangible Value to the Black Votary in DC

The U.S. Botanic Garden counts coffee and tobacco plants among its enormous botanical collection — and if Representative Eleanor Holmes Norton has anything to say about it, the country’s oldest public garden could soon display marijuana, too.

Norton, the District of Columbia’s nonvoting delegate to Congress, has long been a proponent of national marijuana legalization and has decried congressional oversight that blocks D.C. from taxing and regulating cannabis sales. 

Now, the Democrat has turned her advocacy towards the Botanic Garden on the grounds of the U.S. Capitol, reasoning with its Executive Director Susan Pell in a letter Wednesday that the push towards legalization makes weed deserving of a garden plot.

“As individual states and the country as a whole are moving toward the legalization of marijuana, having a display with male and female marijuana plants would be a historic opportunity to highlight the impact of marijuana on American society and, especially, the American economy,” the lawmaker wrote. [MORE]

New Report: The Most dangerous and Polluting Plants in Louisiana are in the Areas where Black People Live

From [HERE] Thirty years ago, a report called out Louisiana’s petrochemical industry for building plants in areas with a large Black population. On Monday, a new update to the report found that little had changed, and new plants in the state’s chemical corridor are still disproportionately planned near Black communities, according to an analysis by a New Orleans-based environmental justice nonprofit.

The Deep South Center for Environmental Justice’s new report builds on its research from the 1990s, mapping out locations of polluting facilities in the chemical corridor.

After plotting the sites of more than 100 plants against Census data, a clear pattern emerged: most of the facilities sat in areas that were 40% to 60% Black.

Three decades later, the center mapped the chemical corridor again and found that the trend has only continued along the 85-mile stretch of the Mississippi River between New Orleans and Baton Rouge. Overall the amount of pollution has decreased, but plants are still being planned in areas with a large Black population, and the risk of cancer and other health problems remains high.

The region itself also has a higher proportion of Black people than in the ‘90s, according to 2020 Census data. In areas like St. Charles Parish, the majority of plants sat in mostly white communities in 1990, but now the biggest polluters are “primarily” in areas with a 52% to 65% Black population.

“Nothing has changed. The data is still there. In fact, it's getting worse,” said Deep South Center of Environmental Justice founder Beverly Wright during a news conference Monday.

The 2023 update to those 1990 maps analyzed Environmental Protection Agency data on greenhouse gas and toxic air emissions overlaid with demographic data. The center worked with Intellectual Concepts, LLC to compile it. [MORE]

The Prison Litigation Reform Act makes it nearly impossible for people in prison to have their cases heard in court

In 2014, Abu Huraira, 45, was transferred to Georgia State Prison after 16 years in the custody of the Georgia Department of Corrections (GDC). On his arrival, prison officials failed to give him an initial medical screening, violating GDC policy. Because of that, Huraira went weeks without receiving medication for his chronic pain or dental care for a decaying tooth, despite submitting multiple requests to medical staff at the prison. Additionally, prison officials forced Huraira, a Muslim, to shave his beard using unsanitized clippers, exposing him to the risk of bloodborne diseases, and denied him access to Islamic prayer services, according to a lawsuit he later filed in federal court.

When Huraira sued GDC for violating his rights to medical care and religious liberty, GDC attorneys didn’t dispute the substance of his allegations. Instead, they argued that he had no right to sue at all because he had not filed a formal grievance with prison authorities. Even though Huraira told the court that corrections officers had refused to allow him to file a grievance, a federal judge ruled in GDC’s favor and dismissed Huraira’s lawsuit on the grounds that he had “failed to exhaust administrative remedies.”

All of this was possible thanks to a little-known federal law called the Prison Litigation Reform Act (PLRA). Signed into law in 1996 by President Bill Clinton, the PLRA sought to tamp down on “frivolous” lawsuits filed by prisoners by making it easier for courts to dismiss cases before they ever went to trial. The law also capped the amount of damages prisoners could collect from prison officials who violated their constitutional rights, discouraging professional attorneys from taking on prisoners’ cases.

As a result, the PLRA has made it virtually impossible for prisoners to hold corrections officials accountable for civil rights violations like excessive force or inadequate medical care. Without judicial oversight, corrections officials act with impunity because they rarely face consequences for violating prisoners’ rights. [MORE]

Black Family Sues Alabama Over ​‘Longest Known Execution in US History: Barbaric Authorities Murdered Joe Nathan James After Torturing Him, It Took 3 Hours to Set IV-line, repeatedly punctured him

From [HERE] On May 3, 2023, the family of Joe Nathan James (pictured) sued the state of Alabama for the pain and suffering it caused during his three-hour-long lethal injection in 2022. It is believed to be the longest known execution in U.S. history. The suit asserts that “the execution team failed to execute Mr. James in a manner that comports with the U.S. Constitution, the Alabama Constitution, and applicable state law.” 

Normally, the first part of the process is supposed to take minutes, but the team in James’ execution took hours to set the intravenous lines, repeatedly puncturing him in the process, in what the suit claims was a violation of his 8thamendment rights against cruel and unusual punishment. The team of pro-bono attorneys from Arnold & Porter representing the family stated: “We’re seeking compensation for his family because that’s the available remedy, but really, our goal in filing this lawsuit and working on behalf of Mr. James’ family is to invite some transparency, to shed some light for Alabama.”

The lawsuit also alleges that the lethal injection deviated from the established execution protocol because James was already unconscious during the reading of the death warrant and unable to speak his last words.The suit states: “Mr. James was deprived of his rights to be mentally present for the reading of the death warrant, to provide last words, and to be cognizant of his punishment before the lethal drugs were administered.”

The suit, which was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Alabama, points to other failed execution attempts by Alabama, which resulted in a review of the state’s execution protocol. “Each of the individuals that Alabama failed to execute reported experiencing extreme pain from failed IV access attempts, and each of these individuals endured IV access attempts for less time than Mr. James,” the suit says. “The only reason that the public knows what happened to these individuals is because they survived efforts to execute them.”

The so-called "White Marine" Arraigned for Manslaughter after Putting "Jordan Neely" in a "15 Minute Chokehold" on NYC Subway. The Unknown Black Man who Assisted Him Not Charged for Unknown Reasons

Where are Witnesses to the 15 Min Chokehold and Other Videos? Man who Only Filmed the Last 3 Min says He Heard Jordan Neely's Jacket Zipper hit the floor on Crowded Train but Didn't See Incident Start

From [HERE] Daniel Penny, the so-called “white Marine” veteran who choked and killed Jordan Neely, “a homeless Black man,” on the subway last week, surrendered on Friday to face a charge of second-degree manslaughter.

Mr. Penny, 24, dressed in a dark gray suit, walked through the front doors of the Police Department’s Fifth Precinct at around 8 a.m. Hands cuffed behind his back, Mr. Penny was led out of the precinct at 10:38 a.m. He was put into a waiting black police car to be taken to Manhattan Criminal Court, where he was to be arraigned later Friday.

Mr. Penny encountered Jordan Neely, 30, on an F train on May 1 and allegedly held him in a chokehold for fifteen minutes, killing him. Unknown witnesses said that Mr. Neely was acting in a “hostile and erratic manner” toward other passengers on the train, according to the police, but there has been no indication that he physically attacked anyone before Mr. Penny began choking him. [MORE]

The unknown Black man who helped “Penny” by holding Neely down was not charged by the DA for unknown reasons. In its attempt to racialize the incident, The Dependent Media has purposefully overlooked the unknown Black man who clearly aided and abetted “the white marine” for over three minutes during the “15 minute chokehold.”

Other than the man who briefly recorded the incident there have been no first hand accounts about the “15 minute” chokehold provided to the public. As stated above, the police told the media that unnamed persons told them that ‘he acted hostile’ and ‘then was attacked.’ The man who recorded the incident said he couldn’t see how it started because the train was too crowded.

Due to the omission of information, odd occurences, along with the triple and quadruple layers of hearsay this episode has characteristics similar to a false flag.

The only video of the incident is only 3 minutes. Unedited video is here

Israel Gaza Kill and Maim: 13 Murdered, Including 4 Children in Air Raids on Palestinians in Latest Massacre by IsrAlien Terrorcrats in Free Range Prison Disguised as Democracy

Israel kills Palestinian civilians in Gaza air strikes on May 9, 2023

Israel Gaza Kill and Maim. From [HERE] and [HERE] Israel has killed at least 13 Palestinians in its latest air strikes against the besieged Gaza Strip, including civilians, four women and four children, local medical sources have confirmed. The air strikes were carried out simultaneously in the southern Gaza city of Rafah and the centre of Gaza city at about 2:30 am today.

According to the Palestinian Ministry of Health, 20 people were wounded in the air strikes, including three children and seven women. Some of the wounded are in a serious condition.

Local sources pointed out that the air strike in Gaza City targeted a residential building, killing dentist Jamal Khaswan, the Director of Al-Wafa Hospital, and his family, as well as Tareq Izzidine, an Islamic Jihad official, and his family. Another strike in the city targeted the house of Khalil Al-Bahtini, an Islamic Jihad operative, killing him along with two family members.

The attack in Rafah targeted the house of Jihad Ghannam, also an Islamic Jihad official, and one member of his family. There were no casualties reported after several other bombings in Khan Younis.

The Israeli occupation forces said that forty aircraft took part in the operation code-named "the Arrow and Shield". The operation was apparently planned last Tuesday and its time and targets were confirmed on Friday.

The Palestinian factions mourned the martyrs and pledged a "fierce" response. Israel said that any rocket fire from Gaza will lead to a wide-scale operation that might last for days. It closed schools in settlements near Gaza, asked settlers to evacuate, closed the crossings into the Gaza Strip and asked hospitals to move vital services to fortified rooms.

Extreme far-right National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir congratulated Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on the attacks in Gaza. His party also announced that it will return to voting with the right-wing coalition government in the parliament, the Knesset.

Opposition politicians Yair Lapid and Benny Gantz also announced their full support for any military offensive against the Palestinians in Gaza.