Another Olympic Athlete Drops Dead. Sprinter Tori Bowie RIP [Coincidence Theorists Believe There is Nothing Unusual About the Substantial Number of People Dying Since the mRNA Vax Rollout]

Tori Bowie, a sprinter who won three medals at the 2016 Olympics in Rio de Janeiro and the next year won the world championship in the 100-meter dash with a stunning comeback, has died. She was 32.

Her death was confirmed in a statement on Wednesday by U.S.A. Track and Field, which provided no other details.

The Orange County, Fla., sheriff’s office said in a statement that its personnel went to a house in Winter Garden, Fla., on Tuesday to check on a woman in her 30s who had not been seen or heard from in several days. They entered the home and found the body of a woman, whom they tentatively identified as Frentorish “Tori” Bowie. The statement said “there were no signs of foul play.”

At the 2016 Olympics, Bowie won a gold medal in the 4x100 relay, anchoring a team with Tianna Bartoletta, Allyson Felix and English Gardner that finished the race with a time of 41.01. She won the silver medal in the 100-meter dash and bronze in the 200-meter. [MORE]

DeSantis Signs Bills Permanently Banning Deadly mRNA COVID "Vaccine" and Mask Mandates in Florida

From [HERE] Governor Ron DeSantis was in Destin Thursday morning signing his "Prescribe Freedom" legislation.

The bills permanently ban vaccine and mask mandates in Florida.

That includes government offices, schools and workplaces.

They also protect physicians who offer treatments other than those recommended by federal agencies.

"These restrictions and these mandates, the purpose of them was not to safeguard your health. The purpose was to control your behavior," DeSantis said.

The legislation also bans vaccine passports, gain of function research, and formally rejects world health organization recommendations in Florida.

Whites Murdering Blacks: 1st Hearing Held by Ohio Lawmakers to Abolish the Death Penalty [OH Death Row is 55% Black, yet Black people are only 14% of the state's population]

PERSONS SCHEDULED TO BE MURDERED BY OHIO AUTHORITIES ("Death Row")

Death row data above is from the DPIC.

From [HERE] On May 9, 2023, the Ohio Senate Judiciary Committee held its first hearing on Senate Bill 101 that would abolish the state’s death penalty. The co-sponsors of the bill, Senate Democratic Leader Nickie Antonio (D-Lakewood) and Senator Stephen Huffman (R-Tipp City), argued in favor of the bill’s passage and noted that more than one-third of Ohio’s senators have signed on as sponsors.

Antonio said that the bill has received “the most bipartisan support yet” and described the death penalty as “expensive, impractical, unjust, inhumane and erroneous.” In 2022, Antonio and Huffman met with human rights representatives from other countries who said some companies are interested in pursuing business in states that have abolished the death penalty. Huffman said, “We are the only Western nation and member of NATO that still uses the death penalty.”

Huffman said his opposition to the death penalty has been influenced by his religious beliefs: “I believe life at all stages is sacred and truly a person’s greatest gift from God. As both medical director and a man of unwavering faith, I believe this gift of life should be preserved and defended at all costs.”

If passed, Ohio would become the 24th state to abolish the death penalty. There are at least 120 people on death row and the last execution was carried out in July 2018.

Question: 'After string of dismissals, how will SF's McNegro Rolebot DA Handle Her Remaining Police Brutality Case?' Answer: How Ever Her White Liberal Masters Want Her to Handle It

From [HERE] When San Francisco District Attorney Brooke Jenkins took the city’s top law enforcement seat last year, she inherited three historic prosecutions of police officers for on-duty assaults or killings.

Now, San Francisco is down to one, and some are already predicting its collapse. 

“I’m not optimistic,” said Oakland civil rights attorney John Burris, who represented family members of Sean Moore in their excessive force lawsuit against San Francisco. Given Jenkins’ pattern to date, Burris said he would not be surprised if the criminal case is dismissed.

Moore was shot and wounded by Officer Kenneth Cha in 2017. The victim died three years later while serving a sentence for an unrelated crime in San Quentin prison, apparently from health complications from his gunshot wound. 

Jenkins was not immediately available for comment on Friday. San Francisco officials settled with Moore’s family for $3.25 million. He was unarmed when he was shot.  

Should the case against Cha sputter, it would mark a significant shift from the core policies of former District Attorney Chesa Boudin, who promised to take a hard line on police misconduct and was the first San Francisco district attorney to charge an officer with homicide. [MORE]

White Minn Cop "Sorry" He Got Caught Brutally Attacking a Black Man who Posed No Threat, Breaking his Eye Socket. "Black" Rolebot DA Gives Him a No Jail Plea, Dismisses Felony for his Liberal Masters

From [HERE] A white Minneapolis police officer will be spared jail time after pleading guilty to assault and misconduct charges for brutally beating a defenseless Black man.

Justin Stetson entered guilty pleas to felony third-degree assault and gross misdemeanor misconduct of a public employee or officer for the 2020 beating of Jaleel Stallings. Stetson was originally charged with assault more than two years after the attack, but recently the Minnesota Attorney General's Office added the lesser charge, signaling a potential plea.

District Judge Shereen Askalani accepted Stetson's guilty pleas Wednesday. The agreement means Stetson will avoid jail time and the felony charge will be removed from his record if he successfully completes a two-year probation.

Terms of the deal require that Stetson enroll in an anger management class and write a letter apologizing to Stallings, who suffered a broken eye socket, spent days in jail and went on trial for attempted murder in the aftermath of the encounter with police on May 30, 2020. He was acquitted by a jury and won a $1.5 million settlement from the city. In Stallings' unsuccessful objection to the plea deal, he noted that he spent more time in jail than Stetson.

If Stetson remains offense-free and abides by all conditions of the plea, such as completing 30 to 90 days of community service, never seeking employment as an officer or possessing firearms, the felony charge will be dropped from his criminal record and the court will enter a conviction only for the misdemeanor.

Askalani will formally sentence Stetson on Aug. 9. Stallings, who now lives in Texas, plans to attend.

The Attorney General's Office said it could not disclose details of the plea until the hearing Wednesday morning. Attorney General Keith Ellison appeared for the hearing, but declined to take questions on why he found the plea acceptable.

In a written statement, Ellison called the outcome a historic accountability measure that bars Stetson from ever serving as a law enforcement officer in Minnesota again.

"Rarely if ever do police officers plead guilty to using excessive force in the line of duty — and today, Stetson has admitted he did so under color of his official authority, in violation of the law," Ellison wrote, while acknowledging the harm Stallings suffered.

"We cannot undo the unjust trial he endured, and we cannot undo the unjust days he spent in jail. Nevertheless, I hope Stetson's admission of the facts related to the assault, his apology and acknowledgment he was part of a harmful culture of policing in the Minneapolis Police Department, and his inability ever to wear a badge again serves as some measure of accountability to Mr. Stallings and to the community."

Stallings, 30, and his attorney, Eric Rice, characterized the plea deal as a "betrayal" of justice.

"The lenient resolution simply reassures other malicious officers that they are welcome to use violence and lies against their own citizens without fear of punishment," Stallings wrote in a 15-page letter to the court.

Immediately following the hearing, Rice denounced a court process that appeared to ignore the victim's concerns. He believes the outcome will fail to curtail police misconduct in Minneapolis.

"With nothing changed, these things will continue to happen again. Rogue officers will continue to abuse their position and inflict improper violence," Rice told the Star Tribune. "They will lie to conceal their actions, and they will have a system that even with substantial efforts doesn't hold them to account."

Stallings was charged with attempted murder after firing at Minneapolis police officers in the chaotic protests that followed George Floyd’s death but was acquitted of all charges against him.

Jaleel Stallings argued self-defense during his trial, testifying that he fired at the unmarked white van after he was struck in the chest with what turned out to be a nonlethal rubber bullet fired by police.

Stallings, 29, testified that he thought he was being attacked by civilians, had been struck by a bullet and was potentially bleeding out, his attorney. Court documents show that after Stallings was hit, he fired three shots toward the van as a warning, then took cover. He surrendered when he realized he had fired at police. No officers were hit.

when Stallings realized he had fired at police officers, he immediately put his gun on the ground and lay face-down, with his hands on the ground. A pretrial order from Judge William Koch said Stallings was motionless for 20 seconds and posed no obvious threat before Officer Justin Stetson and Sgt. Andrew Bittell approached him. The order says Stetson began kicking and punching Stallings in the head and neck, and Bittell began kneeing and punching him in the stomach, chest and back. [MORE]

Stetson repeatedly struck him and didn't stop until a sergeant intervened.

The judge found that Stetson and Bittell violated Stallings’ Fourth Amendment rights during the arrest and that their actions were objectively unreasonable.

The Attorney General's Office took over the case after the Hennepin County Attorney's Office initially charged Stallings with eight felonies, including attempted murder. Stallings was legally in possession of a firearm the night Stetson and a swarm of officers attacked him.

Five days after Floyd's murder, officers were roving in south Minneapolis in an unmarked van and shooting nonlethal projectiles at people who were violating curfew orders. Stallings, a veteran with a license to carry, armed himself for protection during the unrest. When the officers shot a projectile at Stallings, he fired back, unaware they were police officers. When they stopped the van and ran toward him, Stallings dropped his gun and surrendered.

In court Wednesday, Stetson agreed that his force was excessive and unlawful. He admitted to picking up Stallings' head from the ground as he lay in a prone position, unarmed and compliant, then slamming his face into the concrete.

"When you were kicking him and punching him, at some point do you believe you crossed the line?" Bruno asked him in establishing facts of the case.

"Yes," Stetson said.

"You went too far?"

"Yes."

"You let your emotions get too much of you that night?"

"Yes."

Assistant Attorneys General Zuri Balmakund and Erin Eldridge questioned him in greater detail about the attack, forcing him to acknowledge slamming Stallings' head into the pavement, delivering knee strikes to the head and face, and not discontinuing the assault until he was told to stop. Stetson agreed to all facts. And he affirmed that the force was unauthorized under the law and outside his scope as an officer.

As the hearing was coming to a close, Bruno asked Stetson if he was sorry for his actions.

Yes, I am sorry," Stetson said.

Balmakund made clear to the judge that Stallings did not agree to the plea because he considered it "too lenient."

"The state is of the position that based on discussion with defense counsel and the prosecution team," she said, "this resolution is appropriate."

In a one-page letter addressed to Stallings and his loved ones, Stetson apologized for exhibiting a "lack of control and poor judgment" that night.

"The humiliation that you must have felt during that time must have been unbearable. Not only did I cause you physical injury but I know that the emotional scars of the brutality are equally as painful and can last forever," Stetson wrote.

"I acknowledge and apologize for the actions of the past and the role that MPD has played in society's historical mistreatment of the disadvantaged communities and against those engaged in peaceful civil protests."

The gesture fell flat for Stallings' attorney.

"At this point," Rice said, "it is essentially worthless."

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.

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

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]