If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above.
You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed.
To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Sharpton and Jackson are self proclaimed voices. That's like saying La Raza speaks for me. The thing is CNN and other outlets see them as their "go to guys"
Sharpton and Jackson are self proclaimed voices. That's like saying La Raza speaks for me. The thing is CNN and other outlets see them as their "go to guys"
And so what? Your average person of any race wouldn't necessarily feel that anybody they see on the TV is their leader.
I still want to know who the leader of white people is.
Joe Sixpack black guy likely has no idea who these people are, and even if he does, he surely don't cling to every word they say just like you don't cling to something a white leader would say.
Who is the leader of white people?
No "black leaders"? You better tell that to MSNBC and HuffPo.
(BTW, if you're correct and a substantial number of blacks don't know who Sharpton and J. Jackson are, then it's far worse than I imagined.)
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
I still want to know who the leader of white people is.
Hugh Heffner and Martha Stewart
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
I didn't say that there are no political leaders that are black. I said that average people don't take their cues from these people because, statistically speaking, there are more people that are apolitical or fairly ambivalent than there are ideological/political people that know who Sharpton and Jackson are. Even if a majority of people did know who these people are (which I highly doubt), why would political leaders also be sociological leaders? Why would they represent black people any more than Hugh Heffner or Martha Stewart would represent a white person? The demise of the family and the other things you listed are not purely political issues, they are social issues too.
The fact that you cite white owned and controlled media outlets proclaiming "black leaders" even further demonstrates your utter cluelessness. Just stop. Seriously.
Is it true the supervisor at the scene when Garner was choked was a Balck female Sgt.? It appears that way when you watch the video. Since she was iin charge, should she also be held responsible for Garner's death?
Is it true the supervisor at the scene when Garner was choked was a Balck female Sgt.? It appears that way when you watch the video. Since she was iin charge, should she also be held responsible for Garner's death?
What difference would it make if she were black? It's not like black people are all the same, you know?
The fact that you cite white owned and controlled media outlets proclaiming "black leaders" even further demonstrates your utter cluelessness. Just stop. Seriously.
Is it true the supervisor at the scene when Garner was choked was a Balck female Sgt.? It appears that way when you watch the video. Since she was iin charge, should she also be held responsible for Garner's death?
I didn't say that there are no political leaders that are black. I said that average people don't take their cues from these people because, statistically speaking, there are more people that are apolitical or fairly ambivalent than there are ideological/political people that know who Sharpton and Jackson are. Even if a majority of people did know who these people are (which I highly doubt), why would political leaders also be sociological leaders? Why would they represent black people any more than Hugh Heffner or Martha Stewart would represent a white person? The demise of the family and the other things you listed are not purely political issues, they are social issues too.
Originally Posted by besson3c
Also, Tightpants, I hope you aren't cueing a post about black people you know being plugged into black political leadership.
They aren't just political leadership, and you answered your own question about the American attachment to their two party system, as well. Our politicos become "rock stars" and our rock stars are too political, there's too much influence, financial and otherwise, being peddled between the industrial, social, and political spectrums. Don't think for a moment whites aren't susceptible, they invented the whole thing! And now it's all so intertwined that it can't be unseparated again.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
They aren't just political leadership, and you answered your own question about the American attachment to their two party system, as well. Our politicos become "rock stars" and our rock stars are too political, there's too much influence, financial and otherwise, being peddled between the industrial, social, and political spectrums. Don't think for a moment whites aren't susceptible, they invented the whole thing! And now it's all so intertwined that it can't be unseparated again.
So you think that, say, black teenagers that kill each other do so because they were influenced by Al Sharpton?
So you think that, say, black teenagers that kill each other do so because they were influenced by Al Sharpton?
I thought you wanted at least some semblance of a conversation, no?
How about, what the kids are doing is being ignored politically and blame is shifted, when what's going on should be highlighted.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
I don't think it is, I think it just is for people that want there to be blame on one thing, and one thing alone.
No. Example. There's lots of blame heaped upon police after these shootings/killings (in many cases rightfully so), while the mainstream media and gov't agencies are actively avoiding (or covering up) circumstances surrounding those who died. This doesn't help fix anything. What will we do when all cops refuse to work those neighborhoods? (That's happened already in parts of Detroit & Miami.)
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
No. Example. There's lots of blame heaped upon police after these shootings/killings (in many cases rightfully so), while the mainstream media and gov't agencies are actively avoiding (or covering up) circumstances surrounding those who died. This doesn't help fix anything. What will we do when all cops refuse to work those neighborhoods? (That's happened already in parts of Detroit & Miami.)
So your chief compliant is with the depth of coverage and our inability or lack of willingness to look at multiple issues simultaneously?
Well, the complete lack of coverage and our unwillingness to look at multiple issues simultaneously, but that's pretty close.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
Well, the complete lack of coverage and our unwillingness to look at multiple issues simultaneously, but that's pretty close.
Well then, I'm sorry to say this, but you are part of this problem.
A number of times people have weighed in on racial variables they feel are important for us to look at, and you have seemed to blow these off. If the unwillingness to look at multiple issues simultaneously is a problem (and I agree that it is), then the best way to affect positive change is to acknowledge and validate these points in some way, right?
This is assuming that you'd agree that race is not a completely non-factor, or that there is zero racial discrimination in America. Even if you thought there was, the mere *perception* of racial discrimination is an issue in and of itself, and one that has perpetuated for years because it is believable. The mere existence of the KKK and Westboro Baptist makes this sort of thing believable. Sometimes perception is just as important as reality, and these public perceptions are also problems.
Point being, since I don't think it can be argued that race is a non-factor (whether actual racial discrimination or perception issues), by blowing off these arguments you are not looking at multiple issues simultaneously.
Why are you looking for something that common sense would suggest doesn't exist?
I'm not looking. I suggested Ebony, an AA owned and operated publication, would be a better place to determine who AA's see as the "voice" of the AA community. The web sites linked by CTP, as OAW pointed out, are white owned and operated. They are also left of center. As far as groups that claim to speak for the AA community, there is the NAACP and the Urban League.
I'm not looking. I suggested Ebony, an AA owned and operated publication, would be a better place to determine who AA's see as the "voice" of the AA community. The web sites linked by CTP, as OAW pointed out, are white owned and operated. They are also left of center. As far as groups that claim to speak for the AA community, there is the NAACP and the Urban League.
I'm still completely, absolutely, horribly lost as to why you guys think that there are people that can represent an entire race? This makes zero sense to me.
You can have representatives when there is a political structure, but this doesn't exist in a racial community because, if OAW's number of there being 30M AAs is accurate, do you *really* think that all of these 30M AAs are just all the same?
Even with a political structure, representation is difficult when dealing with large numbers. You are Catholic right? Do you think that every Catholic is a Pope Francis fan that would feel comfortable with their beliefs and well-being being in the hands of Francis?
This is very similar to the argument that moderate Muslims should "speak out" against Islamic terrorism. How? With what platform, and what leadership?
I have this wild and unsubstantiated theory that some Republicans feel this way because of their allegiance to their party. The thing is, the Republican wheelhouse is pretty narrow. There are a *ton* of people that feel this same way, but it is not right to think that large numbers of other populations feel the same way about anything. This Republican archetype/stereotype (i.e. liberty loving white Christian who loves small government, low taxes, etc.) is unusually specific and united.
Well then, I'm sorry to say this, but you are part of this problem.
A number of times people have weighed in on racial variables they feel are important for us to look at, and you have seemed to blow these off. If the unwillingness to look at multiple issues simultaneously is a problem (and I agree that it is), then the best way to affect positive change is to acknowledge and validate these points in some way, right?
This is assuming that you'd agree that race is not a completely non-factor, or that there is zero racial discrimination in America. Even if you thought there was, the mere *perception* of racial discrimination is an issue in and of itself, and one that has perpetuated for years because it is believable. The mere existence of the KKK and Westboro Baptist makes this sort of thing believable. Sometimes perception is just as important as reality, and these public perceptions are also problems.
Point being, since I don't think it can be argued that race is a non-factor (whether actual racial discrimination or perception issues), by blowing off these arguments you are not looking at multiple issues simultaneously.
au contraire, I have talked about it, waded in deeply in all of these "black kids slain" threads, and while it's kosher to discuss how the gun-wielding white guys are off the rails and the innocent black "children" are simply misunderstood, it creates a shitstorm when it's posited that there's a probability that the young black men in question were dangerous criminals. It's only been lately that I've waved off the other side, it's all been said, we know that some cops are being heavy-handed, I've repeatedly said that, and even said that in most of these instances they should be fired and probably charged with something, but there's an underlying reason why and it's absurd to say they're violent racists, uniformly nod heads, and then move on.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
Point being, since I don't think it can be argued that race is a non-factor (whether actual racial discrimination or perception issues), by blowing off these arguments you are not looking at multiple issues simultaneously.
Like the fact the superviising Sergeant when Garner was choked is Black and female? There is also the fact the majority of the NYPD patrol officers are minorities. So, depending on what precinct you are in, the cop in an officer involved shooting will not be white.
From Wikipedia:
As of the end of 2010, 53% of the entire 34,526-member police force were white and 47% were members of minority groups. Of 22,199 officers on patrol, 53% (11,717) were black, Latino (of any race), or Asian or Asian-American, and 47% (10,482) were non-Hispanic white. Of 5,177 detectives, 57% (2,953) were white and 43% (2,224) were people of color. Of 4,639 sergeants, 61% (2,841) were white and 39% (1,798) were minorities. Of 1,742 lieutenants, 76% (1,323) were white and 24% (419) were people of color. Of 432 captains, 82% (356) were white and 18% (76) were minorities. Of 10 chiefs, 7 were white and 3 were people of color. In 2002, whites accounted for 60% of members in the rank of police officer. Between 2002 and 2010, the number of minorities in top-tier positions in the force increased by about 4.5%.[15]
In Detroit, it's higher.
Year 2000 breakdown of sex and race in the D.P.D.:[18]
Male: 75%
Female: 25%
African-American/Black: 63%
White: 34%
Hispanic, any race: 3%
The Detroit Police Department has one of the largest percentages of black officers of any major city police department, reflecting current overall city demographics. Lawsuits alleging discrimination stemming from the influence of affirmative action and allegations of race-based promotional bias for executive positions have surfaced repeatedly.[19][20][21] As of 2008, the majority of upper command members in the Detroit PD were black.[22]
My parents would say that their leaders are people like Joel Osteen, Billy Graham, and Benny Hinn, but they're old evangelicals. Black leadership is also tied to their religious beliefs, where most of their political leaders are their spiritual leaders as well. Do you see anything wrong with that picture?
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
au contraire, I have talked about it, waded in deeply in all of these "black kids slain" threads, and while it's kosher to discuss how the gun-wielding white guys are off the rails and the innocent black "children" are simply misunderstood, it creates a shitstorm when it's posited that there's a probability that the young black men in question were dangerous criminals. It's only been lately that I've waved off the other side, it's all been said, we know that some cops are being heavy-handed, I've repeatedly said that, and even said that in most of these instances they should be fired and probably charged with something, but there's an underlying reason why and it's absurd to say they're violent racists, uniformly nod heads, and then move on.
Sometime tells me I'm not the only one that has misunderstood your arguments here then.
For one, whether there is a probability that some of the young black men were criminals or not, would you agree that the police need to be held to much higher standards than kids, most of which are struggling to find their way (as kids in general do at that age)? If so, how is this a good opportunity to get into the black community without being misunderstood at best, interpreted as being insensitive and/or bigoted at worst?
If the police were held at these higher standards and did their jobs by the book such that there wasn't a prevailing interpretation that they made massive errors of judgement, things would likely be different. Granted, making the correct judgment in a split second is damn hard, but that's their gig and the challenge that comes with their line of work. It would be more constructive to discuss ways in which police can do their jobs more effectively, ways in which our legal system can be examined, rather than to trying to reign in the civilization population (which is about as effective as herding cats).
Even with a political structure, representation is difficult when dealing with large numbers. You are Catholic right? Do you think that every Catholic is a Pope Francis fan that would feel comfortable with their beliefs and well-being being in the hands of Francis?
It does not matter if you like Francis, Benedict XVI, John Paul II, John Paul I, Paul VI, John XXIII, Pius, XII, Pius XI, Benedict XVI, PiusX, Leo XIII, etc. The Pope is the "leader" of the Catholic Church and as such, speaks for Catholics, both Latin and Eastern. CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: The Pope
A very poignant op-ed from a former STL police officer ....
As a kid, I got used to being stopped by the police. I grew up in an inner-ring suburb of St. Louis. It was the kind of place where officers routinely roughed up my friends and family for no good reason.
I hated the way cops treated me.
But I knew police weren’t all bad. One of my father’s closest friends was a cop. He became a mentor to me and encouraged me to join the force. He told me that I could use the police’s power and resources to help my community.
So in 1994, I joined the St. Louis Police Department. I quickly realized how naive I’d been. I was floored by the dysfunctional culture I encountered.
I won’t say all, but many of my peers were deeply racist.
One example: A couple of officers ran a Web site called St. Louis Coptalk, where officers could post about their experience and opinions. At some point during my career, it became so full of racist rants that the site administrator temporarily shut it down. Cops routinely called anyone of color a “thug,” whether they were the victim or just a bystander.
This attitude corrodes the way policing is done.
As a cop, it shouldn’t surprise you that people will curse at you, or be disappointed by your arrival. That’s part of the job. But too many times, officers saw young black and brown men as targets. They would respond with force to even minor offenses. And because cops are rarely held accountable for their actions, they didn’t think too hard about the consequences.
Once, I accompanied an officer on a call. At one home, a teenage boy answered the door. That officer accused him of harboring a robbery suspect, and demanded that he let her inside. When he refused, the officer yanked him onto the porch by his throat and began punching him.
Another officer met us and told the boy to stand. He replied that he couldn’t. So the officer slammed him against the house and cuffed him. When the boy again said he couldn’t walk, the officer grabbed him by his ankles and dragged him to the car. It turned out the boy had been on crutches when he answered the door, and couldn’t walk.
Back at the department, I complained to the sergeant. I wanted to report the misconduct. But my manager squashed the whole thing and told me to get back to work.
I, too, have faced mortal danger. I’ve been shot at and attacked. But I know it’s almost always possible to defuse a situation.
Once, a sergeant and I got a call about someone wielding a weapon in an apartment. When we showed up, we found someone sitting on the bed with a very large butcher knife. Rather than storming him and screaming “put the knife down” like my colleagues would have done, we kept our distance. We talked to him, tried to calm him down.
It became clear to us that he was dealing with mental illness. So eventually, we convinced him to come to the hospital with us.
I’m certain many other officers in the department would have escalated the situation fast. They would have screamed at him, gotten close to him, threatened him. And then, any movement from him, even an effort to drop the knife, would have been treated as an excuse to shoot until their clips were empty.
I liked my job, and I was good at it.
But more and more, I felt like I couldn’t do the work I set out to do. I was participating in a profoundly corrupt criminal justice system. I could not, in good conscience, participate in a system that was so intentionally unfair and racist. So after five years on the job, I quit.
Since I left, I’ve thought a lot about how to change the system. I’ve worked on police abuse, racial justice and criminal justice reform at the Missouri ACLU and other organizations.
Unfortunately, I don’t think better training alone will reduce police brutality. My fellow officers and I took plenty of classes on racial sensitivity and on limiting the use of force.
The problem is that cops aren’t held accountable for their actions, and they know it. These officers violate rights with impunity. They know there’s a different criminal justice system for civilians and police.
Even when officers get caught, they know they’ll be investigated by their friends, and put on paid leave. My colleagues would laughingly refer to this as a free vacation. It isn’t a punishment. And excessive force is almost always deemed acceptable in our courts and among our grand juries. Prosecutors are tight with law enforcement, and share the same values and ideas.
We could start to change that by mandating that a special prosecutor be appointed to try excessive force cases. And we need more independent oversight, with teeth. I have little confidence in internal investigations.
The number of people in uniform who will knowingly and maliciously violate your human rights is huge. At the Ferguson protests, people are chanting, “The whole damn system is guilty as hell.” I agree, and we have a lot of work to do.
I am admittedly torn over this particular incident. Did she kick at the officer? Absolutely. Did her kick actually strike the officer? Hard to tell from the video but most likely so. Was punching an obviously intoxicated, handcuffed woman in the face so hard that you fracture her eye orbit really necessary? Certainly not. Should the officer face felony assault charges and the potential loss of his freedom over this? I don't think so. Should the officer face some other form of discipline? Absolutely. I certainly get that police officers are only human. But the bottom line is that police officers are paid to exercise much better judgement than that. We are punching handcuffed females in the face now? Really?
Local prosecutors have declined to charge a Seattle police officer who punched and seriously injured a handcuffed, intoxicated woman, leading federal prosecutors to say that they will review the incident, the Seattle Times reports.
Acting U.S. Attorney Annette L. Hayes’ office has said that it will look for any possible federal criminal civil rights violation, the news site notes, after King County Prosecuting Attorney Dan Satterberg said that he would not be seeking a state felony charge against Seattle police Officer Adley Shepherd, a nine-year veteran with the department.
The controversy surrounds 23-year-old Miyekko Durden-Bosley’s June 22 arrest, during which she reportedly became verbally abusive, the site notes. Intoxicated, she reportedly cursed at Shepherd and kicked at him while she was being placed in the cruiser.
Shepherd punched the young woman in the face, fracturing her right eye orbit. In-car video captured the entire incident, during which Shepherd could reportedly be heard saying, “She kicked me,” before later complaining about his jaw and pain in his face. However, there was no obvious injury to Shepherd after the incident. He has been on paid administrative leave ever since.
According to the Seattle Times, City Attorney Pete Holmes originally sent the case to Satterberg, thinking that the case “undoubtedly met the felony standard,” but having no jurisdiction to prosecute on that charge.
Satterberg’s office said that it could not prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the officer used excessive force. “While Officer Shepherd may have had other options or alternatives, we have concluded that we would be unable to prove that Officer Shepherd’s use of force was criminal,” prosecutors said.
Now, unless the U.S. attorney’s office determines that there were civil rights violations, Shepherd will not be charged criminally. The officer, however, still has to contend with the department’s Office of Professional Accountability over his actions and could still be disciplined or fired. However, according to his lawyer, Eric Makus, Shepherd is eager to return to work and “pleased that he has been exonerated from any wrongdoing.”
As for Durden-Bosley, she spent four days in jail pending investigation for assaulting an officer, but the case was ultimately dismissed.
Handcuffed and half his size? That's completely uncalled for, he should be fired and charged with A&B.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
I hardly think spending 4 days in jail and a fractured eye socket constitutes a "pass". Furthermore, the officer is also black so is that why he's not facing charges as well?
Not only was 12 year old Tamir Rice shot on sight, it would appear the Cleveland PD's treatment of his family was simply deplorable ....
As Tamir Rice's 14-year-old sister rushed to her brother's side upon learning he'd been shot, police officers "tackled" her, handcuffed her and placed her in a squad car with the Cleveland officer who shot Tamir, her mother and a Rice family attorney told reporters Monday.
The mother, Samaria Rice, was threatened with arrest herself as she "went charging and yelling at police" because they wouldn't let her run to her son's aid, she said.
Speaking at a Baptist church in Cleveland, Rice recalled how a seemingly normal November 22 morphed into tragedy as two Cleveland police officers pulled up to her son outside a recreation center across the street from her home. Within two seconds of exiting the police car, Officer Timothy Loehmann gunned down Tamir, 12. The boy died the next day.
Tamir was playing with a pellet gun, and a witness who saw "a guy with a pistol" told 911 twice that it was "probably" fake but that Tamir was scaring people. It doesn't appear the 911 dispatcher relayed the information to Officers Loehmann, 26, and Frank Garmback, 46.
Police have said that Loehmann, who has been criticized for his policing in the past, opened fire after Tamir reached for the gun in his waistband and that an orange tip indicating the gun was a toy had been removed. Rice said she didn't allow her son to play with toy guns, explaining that one of his friends had given it to him.
The boy's mother recalled Monday how she got the news that the youngest of her four children had been shot.
"Two little boys came and knocked on my door and said, 'Police officers just shot your son twice in the stomach,' " she said.
At first, she didn't believe them but quickly realized they were telling the truth.
"I really thought they was playing, like joking around, but I saw the seriousness in their face, and it scared me," she said.
She ran to the scene, admittedly frantic, and arrived at the same time as an ambulance. Officers wouldn't let her check on her son, she said, "and then I saw my daughter in the back of a police car, the same one the shooter got out of." Family attorney Walter Madison said police placed Tamir's sister in the car with Loehmann.
Samaria Rice said she calmed down and asked police to release her daughter. They told her no, she said. Not only would they not release her daughter, but later, she said, they made her choose: Stay with her daughter or accompany her son to a hospital.
She chose the latter but was told she couldn't ride in the back of the ambulance with her son, so she rode in the front seat on the way to the hospital, she said.
"The treatment of the family is unacceptable," said Councilman Jeffrey Johnson, who appeared alongside the family at the news conference. "It just shows the lack of training when we shackle a grieving sister, threaten a grieving mother and not even take care of a child lying on the ground."
Cleveland police declined to discuss the family's allegations. Detective Jennifer Ciaccia told CNN, "We're really not commenting further at this point."
There's one other thing that's been bothering me about this case. So much has been made of the "orange tip indicating the gun was a toy had been removed." To which I say ... what difference does that make? It's very clear in the video that the gun was tucked away in the boy's waistband when he was killed. So even if the orange tip was present it still wouldn't have been visible to the officer. So as far as I'm concerned that is just an excuse for this cop's "Shoot first, ask questions later" actions.
Let me be clear though. I don't disagree with most of your analysis. Wilson is irrefutably a lying sack of shit. Similarly, as you've pointed out, we lack the benefit of having this lying sack of shit get cross-examined.
What I propose is the best way to deal with the first issue is to ignore Wilson's testimony. He's an utterly unreliable witness. Attempting to separate the truth from his lies is a fruitless endeavor.
One could argue the lack of cross-examination means this automatically should have gone to a trial, but I don't think it's that simple. If as a Grand juror I've already determined Wilson is such an unreliable lying sack I'm unable to do anything with his testimony other than flat-out ignore it, what's a cross-examination going to tell me? I should ignore it more?
Likewise, my position is until Wilson gets out of the car, I consider Johnson's testimony as incontrovertible truth. Is there any way a cross-examination of Wilson could improve this situation? Could I somehow consider Johnson's testimony more true after hearing someone take apart Wilson?
So let's take Wilson's claims of where and how hard he was hit: I'm ignoring that. Just like I'm ignoring every other word which came out of his mouth. Even if I wasn't, since I'm considering Johnson's testimony as truth, Wilson's testimony of where and how hard he was hit has to be a lie, since it doesn't match Johnson's claims.
Much of your post refers to problems with Wilson's testimony. There's nothing I can say to it other than "you are so correct I see no option other than to completely ignore what he says".
Real hard to blow this one off as just another "thug" who got what she deserved ....
Two white police officers who were fired for slamming a black woman's head into a counter in custody will not face criminal charges - after a grand jury decided to clear them.
Ricky Grissom and Ryan Cunningham were caught on camera in June 2013 brutally manhandling Keyarika 'Shea' Diggles, 25, in Jasper County, Texas, after she had been arrested for an unpaid traffic ticket.
They are seen coming at her from behind, bashed her forehead on the desktop and then dragging her off to a dark 'detox' cell with her handcuffs on.
The pair were sacked from the force following the incident but almost 18 months later, they have both avoided an indictment.
The revelation follows the decisions not to charge the police officers involved in the deaths of Mike Brown and Eric Garner.
News that they would not be indicted sparked protests against police brutality around the country.
Cade Bernson told My Fox Houston the decision was appalling.
'I think it sends a terrible message to the public,' he said. 'It sends a terrible message to minorities and women that the law doesn't seem to apply equally to civilians as it does to police officers.'
The victim was on the phone to her mother, asking for $100 to cover an unpaid fine, when one of the officers cut off the call.
Diggles then starts to remonstrate with Grissom, Officer Cunningham comes from behind her and attempts to handcuff her, but not before he pushes her forward and slams her head onto the countertop.
The two men then wrestle Diggles to the floor before dragging her by her ankles into a jail cell. At one point Officer Cunningham yanks Diggles' shoe off her foot - causing him to loose his balance and fall onto the floor unceremoniously.
Initially, Diggles was charged with resisting arrest but that was dropped on the Monday following the ordeal according to Bernsen.
Diggles settled a civil rights lawsuit against the city and the officers last December for $75,000. And less than a month after the incident, Jasper’s city council voted to fire Cunningham and Grissom.
Both Cunningham and Grissom have refused to comment on the matter.
Their firing came 15-years since another hate crime in Jasper, which is a town of 8,000 people two hours northeast of Houston.
In 1998, James Byrd Jr. was tied to the back of a pickup truck by three white men and dragged for miles until he was decapitated.
There followed clashes between the New Black Panthers and the Ku Klux Klan.
In 2012, the majority white Jasper City Council fired the town's first black police chief after 16-months.
A call by the station to Jasper County District Attorney was not returned.
Makes total sense. What I'm saying is that if Wilson is a "lying sack of shit" about the events INSIDE the SUV ... then we have even more reason to be skeptical about his claims of what happened OUTSIDE the SUV. I guess my point here is that even if we take Wilson's word for it that Brown simply attacked him inside the SUV and went for his gun for no discernible reason .... the shots inside the SUV would be justified. But once Brown starts fleeing for his life Wilson now has to provide some sort of justification for the other 9 shots. Claiming that a guy who had already been shot and had run over 150 feet away ... losing his hat and both of his flip flops in the process ... suddenly changed his mind and decided to turn around and make a suicidal charge on a cop who is still shooting at him is downright nonsensical. And all the talk about Brown being a "thug" who had just committed a strong-arm robbery doesn't change that. Which is precisely why people all round the country are not letting it be swept under the rug.
I've mentioned a few times in this thread that STL is one of the most racist metropolitan areas in the country. So think about this for a second. A few years ago the STL Post Dispatch eliminated anonymous comments on its website because of all the blatantly racist posts that were routinely made on the site. They replaced it with a Facebook login which helped considerably. Having to use one's real name seemed to have a restraining effect as most of the commenters began to be a lot more circumspect with their language. Well it would appear that the Ferguson situation has prompted the more racist members of the STL public to throw all caution and restraint out the window ... Facebook login notwithstanding. The comment feature has now been shut down entirely for op-ed pieces because of all the racist remarks. And no ... the STL jury pool is not immune.
The St. Louis Post-Dispatch is turning off all comments on its opinion editorials, columns and letters, the editorial board announced Monday.
The paper offered a succinct explaination: "Why? Ferguson."
The Post-Dispatch said that for the next two months readers will not be able to comment on any opinion page pieces, calling it "an experiment in elevating the conversation." The decision to cut commenting is a result of high levels of "vile and racist comments" as well as "shouting and personal attacks" in the height of the Ferguson protests over the killing of Michael Brown.
The comments have not all been negative and racist, the editorial board said:
We intend to use our opinion pages to help the St. Louis region have a meaningful discussion about race. So we are going to turn off the comments in the editorial section for a while, and see what we learn from it. (Comment will continue on news articles). Comments might return to the opinion pages. Or we might find that without them, the discussion -- through letters, social media conversations and online chats, rises to a higher level.
That's the goal.
The post added that there will still be plenty of ways to comment on stories and for readers to get their voices heard, including a weekly live chat on Ferguson, which the paper will host. Readers can also go to their Facebook page and leave comments there.
"Let's give civility a try," the note concluded.
Editorial page editor Tony Messenger told The Huffington Post in an email Monday that while the paper hasn't calculated an exact increase in negative comments in relation to the Ferguson unrest, racism is undoubtedly present on the site. He said that the move to turn off commenting came after the paper challenged its readers to engage in a serious conversation about race.
"It's hard to have that conversation if the first comment under any editorial or column or letter on the topic divides rather than unites," he wrote.
Messenger said that the paper's goal now is to find a way for conversations to be "the most productive they can be."
"My goal is that our pages, and our editorial portions of the website be a place where some of the most important ideas for change are being discussed, and that people know they can come there and engage in ideas that might push the conversation forward, toward meaningful change," he wrote. "Maybe our letters increase and we add space for them. Maybe voices participate in the conversation who might have otherwise felt left out. Mostly, I wanted to make a statement: This conversation about race is important. We have to have it. We have to do so with civility in mind."
Actually that was done a long time ago soon after Eric Garner was killed. There's a reason why that climactic scene from his 1989 film "Do The Right Thing" resonated so strongly. It's why Eric Garner's death resonates so strongly today. The parallels are striking.
In light of all the unrest following the Ferguson and Eric Garner situations I think this article that was written on the 20th anniversary of the film (it's been 25 years now) is very relevant ...
Twenty years later, the trash can is still crashing through America’s window.
At the climax of Spike Lee’s 1989 drama “Do The Right Thing,” the eternal battle between love and hate teeters on a razor’s edge. The young black man Radio Raheem has been choked to death by white police after a fight with a Brooklyn pizzeria owner. A seething crowd gathers in front of the shop.
Lee’s character, Mookie, a black pizza deliveryman, stands between the crowd and the shop. He’s shoulder-to-shoulder with Sal, the shop’s Italian owner. They exchange looks of confusion, betrayal and regret.
The crowd stares at Mookie. He’s on the wrong side. Mookie moves over to his brothers, rubs his face, wrestling with the weight of the moment. Then he decides.
“Hate!” screams Mookie as he hurls the metal can through the pizzeria’s plate glass window. The dam bursts. The mob destroys the shop in a frenzy that was both inevitable and completely avoidable.
Much has changed since “Do The Right Thing” announced Lee’s special gifts to the world. The police choke hold that killed Radio Raheem — a fictionalization of the real death of Michael Stewart in New York City — has long been outlawed. Life on the ravaged Brooklyn block where Lee filmed the movie has improved. Ronald Reagan has given way to Barack Obama.
But for every measure of undeniable progress, “Do The Right Thing” also points to the divides that remain.
In May, a black New York City undercover cop who was running after a suspect with his gun drawn was shot to death by a white officer. Boarded-up buildings, broken windows and jobless young men still populate that Brooklyn block. And Lee, who wrote, produced and directed the film, insists the racial disconnect at its heart still exists.
“White people still ask me why Mookie threw the can through the window,” Lee said in an interview. “Twenty years later, they’re still asking me that.”
“No black person ever, in 20 years, no person of color has ever asked me why.”
That question is what made “Do The Right Thing” so explosive. Some writers speculated, erroneously, that it would incite riots.
“People were fearful of the backlash,” said Rosie Perez, who played Mookie’s Puerto Rican girlfriend, Tina. “A lot of things happening in the movie were happening in real life. People were afraid when the truth, although a little exaggerated, was put up on the screen for everyone to see.”
Meanwhile, Lee got rave reviews from many influential critics. Roger Ebert cried after watching it at the Cannes Film Festival, where it lost to “sex, lies and videotape.”
Audiences definitely were not prepared.
Most serious films about race, like “In the Heat of the Night,” ‘’To Kill A Mockingbird” and “The Defiant Ones,” ended with understanding or even brotherhood. And for every ambitious movie like “Watermelon Man” or “Black Like Me,” there were a half-dozen violent, sexy ghetto shoot-em-ups — “blaxploitation” flicks.
Lee had something new to say. “In just three feature films,” critic Gene Siskel wrote then, “Spike Lee has given us more genuine and varied images of black people than in the last 20 years of American movies put together.”
Today, Ebert says “Do The Right Thing” should have won the Oscar for best picture. “It was so honest about the way people really feel,” he said via e-mail. “No hypocrisy. It generated grief and left us with a central question of American society.”
The best picture of 1989, according to the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences: “Driving Miss Daisy,” about the friendship between a white Atlanta woman and her black chauffeur.
It ends on a Thanksgiving in the 1960s, with the chauffeur feeding Miss Daisy a piece of pie.
Less than five miles from the theater where a man with Down syndrome died at the hands of the law enforcement officials he idolized, a grand jury on Friday heard the details of the case and decided that no crime had been committed.
“They felt no further investigation was necessary,” Frederick County State’s Attorney J. Charles Smith said at a news conference outside the county’s courthouse.
Grand jury proceedings are secretive in Maryland, but Smith said that his office presented the jury with 17 witness statements and that three deputies involved in the death — Lt. Scott Jewell, Sgt. Rich Rochford and Deputy First Class James Harris — all testified.
An attorney for the parents of Robert Ethan Saylor, who died at the age of 26, described their reaction as “extremely disappointed and saddened and concerned.”
“This is a really hard day for them,” attorney Sharon Krevor-Weisbaum said. “They’re going to have to digest this unsettling news and determine their next step.”
Nationally, the case has drawn wide attention from parents of children with Down syndrome and advocacy groups. More than 1,000 angry messages also fill the Facebook page of the Frederick County Sheriff’s Office.
Saylor was known for his hugs and was so fascinated with the police that he would sometimes call 911 just to ask a question.
In January, he and an aide watched “Zero Dark Thirty” at a Frederick movie theater. As soon as it ended, Saylor wanted to watch it again and would not leave the theater.
Officials say this is what happened next: The aide, an 18-year-old woman, was getting the car when a theater employee called the three off-duty officers, who were working security at the Westview Promenade shopping center, and told them that Saylor needed to buy another ticket or leave.
Smith, who would not go into great detail about the investigation, said that when the deputies confronted Saylor, he verbally and physically resisted their attempts to remove him. He said they restrained him using three sets of handcuffs because of his large size. Smith said that when the deputies placed Smith on his stomach, it was for “one to two minutes” and that once Saylor began showing signs of distress, the deputies removed the handcuffs, called for help and administered CPR.
Krevor-Weisbaum said that a witness heard Saylor cry out for his mother, who even though he didn’t know it, wasn’t far away. Alerted by someone to what was happening, Patti Saylor was on her way to the theater and was almost there, Krevor-Weisbaum said.
In February, the Chief Medical Examiner’s Office in Baltimore ruled Saylor’s death a homicide as a result of asphyxia. On Friday, Smith said that the report indicated that Down syndrome and obesity made Saylor more susceptible to breathing problems.
Krevor-Weisbaum said that Saylor had no ongoing health problems. She added that his parents had not seen the autopsy report, although they have requested it, along with all the files from the investigation. She said the family has been concerned that the investigation was handled by the same sheriff’s office that employs the deputies.
Since February, the deputies have been on paid administrative leave. An attorney for them said Friday that they welcomed the chance to testify and did so voluntarily.
“They’ve stood by patiently waiting for this day to come,” attorney Patrick J. McAndrew said. “This was an unfortunate set of circumstances. Each of these professionals, devoted law enforcement officers, did what was necessary under the circumstances, and they did what their training dictated that they do.”
"One of these things is not like the others, one of these things just doesn't belong. Can you tell which thing is not like the others by the time we finish this song?"
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
Top