Old Dumb MF Can Barely Talk During the ‘Great Rerate:’ Elites and Their Dependent Media Clown the Public by Trying to Prove They Can Get Sheeple to Elect Anyone They [s]Elect, Even a Corpse
/
According to FUNKTIONARY:
voting hoax - "Help Slave America." "We would do well to remember that voting is often a way not of consenting to something, but only of expressing a preference. If the state gives a group of condemned prisoners the choice of being executed by firing squad or by lethal injection, and all of them vote for firing squad, we cannot conclude from this that the prisoners thereby consent to being executed by firing squad. They do, of course, choose this option; they approve of it, but only in the sense that they prefer it to the other option. They consent to neither option, despising both. Voting for a candidate in a democratic election sometimes has a depressingly similar structure. The state offers you a choice among candidates (or perhaps it is "the people" who make the offer), and you choose one, hoping to make the best of a bad situation. You thereby express a preference, approve of that candidate (over the others), but consent to the authority of no one." --A. John Simmons. (See: Taxtortion, Freedom Technology, Ph.F. Degree, NOW, The Matrix, MEDIA, Elections & University of Chocolate City).
Murder: A White GA Cop said 'I Had to Shoot Julian Lewis, He Revved the Engine and Almost Ran Me Over’- but a New Analysis Shows the Black Man's Car Couldn't Start and the Battery had Disconnected
/
From [HERE] Julian Lewis didn’t pull over for the Georgia State Patrol cruiser flashing its blue lights behind him on a rural highway. He still didn’t stop after pointing a hand out the window and turning onto a darkened dirt road as the trooper sounded his siren.
Five minutes into a pursuit that began over a broken taillight, the 60-year-old Black man was dead — shot in the forehead by the white trooper who fired a single bullet mere seconds after forcing Lewis to crash into a ditch. Trooper Jake Thompson insisted he pulled the trigger as Lewis revved the engine of his Nissan Sentra and jerked his steering wheel as if trying to mow him down.
“I had to shoot this man,” Thompson can be heard telling a supervisor on video recorded by his dash-mounted camera at the shooting scene in rural Screven County, midway between Savannah and Augusta. “And I’m just scared.”
But new investigative details obtained by The Associated Press and the never-before-released dashcam video of the August 2020 shooting have raised fresh questions about how the trooper avoided prosecution with nothing more than a signed promise never to work in law enforcement again. Use-of-force experts who reviewed the footage for AP said the shooting appeared to be unjustified.An investigative file obtained by AP offers the most detailed account yet of the case, including documents that spell out why the Georgia Bureau of Investigation concluded the 27-year-old trooper’s version of events did not match the evidence. For instance, an inspection of Lewis’ car indicated the crash had disconnected the vehicle’s battery and rendered it immobile.
Footage of the pursuit has never been made public. It was first obtained by the authors of a new book about race and economic inequality titled “Fifteen Cents on the Dollar: How Americans Made the Black-White Wealth Gap.” Louise Story and Ebony Reed shared the video with AP, which verified its authenticity and obtained additional documents under Georgia’s open-records law.
The footage does not include visuals of the actual shooting, which happened outside the camera’s view. But it shows the crucial final moments in which Thompson uses a police maneuver to send Lewis’ car spinning into a ditch. Then the trooper’s cruiser stops parallel to Lewis’ vehicle and Thompson’s voice barks, “Hey, get your hands up!” The gunshot rings out before he can finish the warning.
The documents show Thompson fired just 1.6 seconds after his cruiser stopped.
“This guy just came out shooting” and did not give Lewis “remotely sufficient time to respond” to his order, said Andrew Scott, a former Boca Raton, Florida, police chief who wrote a dissertation about police chases.
“This goes beyond a stupid mistake,” added Charles “Joe” Key, a former Baltimore police lieutenant and use-of-force expert who has consulted on thousands of such cases.
Key also took issue with the maneuver to disable Lewis’ vehicle, saying that, too, was unwarranted. And he deemed Thompson’s claim that he fired because of the revving engine “total garbage.”
“I’m not in favor of people running from the police,” Key said. “But it doesn’t put him in the category of people deserving to be shot by the police.”
Thompson was fired and arrested on a murder charge a week after the Aug. 7, 2020, shooting, which came amid a summer of protests in the wake of the police killings of George Floyd and other Black people. The trooper was denied bail and spent more than 100 days in jail.
But in the end, Thompson walked free without a trial. A state grand jury in 2021 declined to bring an indictment. The district attorney overseeing the case closed it last fall, when federal prosecutors also ruled out civil rights charges.
At the same time, the U.S. Justice Department quietly entered into a non-prosecution agreement with Thompson forbidding him from ever working in law enforcement again – a highly unusual deal that brought little solace to Lewis’ family.
“It’s inadequate,” said Lewis’ son, Brook Bacon. “I thought the shortcomings that occurred at the state level would be more thoroughly examined at the federal level, but that’s apparently not the case.”
The state of Georgia in 2022 paid Lewis’ family a $4.8 million settlement to avoid a lawsuit.
The U.S. Attorney’s Office for Georgia’s Southern District, which reached the non-prosecution deal with Thompson, declined to discuss it except to say the Justice Department communicated with the Lewis family “consistent with the law and DOJ policy.”
District Attorney Daphne Totten did not respond to requests for comment. Neither Thompson nor his attorney, Keith Barber, would discuss the case.
Because Georgia law doesn’t require troopers to use body cameras, the dashcam footage is the only video of the shooting.
“It’s a heartbreaking case and sheds light on the complexities and difficulties Black families face when intersecting with the justice system,” said Reed, a former AP journalist and one of the authors who first obtained the footage.
Lewis worked odd jobs as a carpenter and handyman. He helped put a new roof and siding on a local church, relatives said, and repaired plumbing and electrical wiring in people’s homes. He would often charge friends and family only for materials.
Days after the shooting, Thompson told GBI investigators he used the tactical maneuver to end the chase – which he estimated reached top speeds of 65 mph (105 kph) — out of concern that the pursuit was approaching a more populated area. He acted right after Lewis’ car rolled without stopping through an intersection with a stop sign.
Thompson said that after getting out of his cruiser beside Lewis’ car in the ditch, he heard the Nissan’s engine “revving up at a high rate of speed.”
“It appeared to me that the violator was trying to use his vehicle to injure me,” Thompson said in an audio recording of the GBI interview obtained by the AP. He said he fired “in fear for my life and safety.”
On the dashcam footage, a brief noise resembling a revving engine can be heard just before Thompson shouts his warning and fires. Less than two minutes later, the trooper can be heard saying: “Jesus Christ! He almost ran over me.”
According to the GBI case file, Thompson fired facing the open driver’s side window of Lewis’ car less than 10 feet (3 meters) away.
Agents at the scene found Lewis’ front tires pointing away from the trooper’s cruiser. They also determined Lewis’ car had no power after the Nissan struck the ditch. Raising the hood, they discovered the battery had tipped onto its side after its mounting broke. One of the battery cables had been pulled loose, and the engine’s air filter housing had come partially open.
Investigators later performed a field test on Lewis’ car in which they connected the battery and started the engine. When an agent disconnected one of the cables from the battery, the car’s engine immediately stopped. Likewise, opening the air filter cover caused the engine to die.
Because grand jury proceedings are generally secret, it’s unknown why the panel declined to indict Thompson in June 2021. Georgia affords law enforcement officers the chance to defend themselves before a grand jury, a privilege not given to any other defendants.
Totten, the district attorney, decided not to try again, saying in a Sept. 28 letter to the GBI that “there has been no new evidence developed in this case.”
For Bacon, Lewis’ son, the lack of charges is an open wound. He worries no one will remember what happened given the passage of almost four years — and the number of others killed by police under questionable circumstances.
“It’s hard for anybody to even reach back that far, especially if they didn’t hear about it initially,” he said. “But these issues haven’t gone away.”
Still No Charges in Chicago Cops' Massacre of Dexter Reed, Shot 96X After Unlawful Stop. Amended Complaint says Cops Continued Shooting Unarmed Black Man as he Exited Car and as He Laid in the Street
/
On April 24, 2024, the family of Dexter Reed and their attorneys filed a federal civil rights lawsuit against the City of Chicago and Chicago Police Department (CPD) officers Alexandra Giampapa, Thomas Spanos, Victor Pacheco, Gregory Saint Louis and Aubrey Webb, who fatally shot Reed during a traffic stop in West Side neighborhood Humboldt Park. [MORE] On June 4, 2024 they amended their complaint. It states,
On March 21, 2024, CPD officers targeted Dexter during a predatory, violent, unlawful traffic stop that ended with Defendant Officers shooting Dexter 96 times in 41 seconds. One Defendant Officer continued to shoot at least three bullets into Dexter’s body as he lay unarmed, lifeless, and bleeding out on the street. Rather than attempt to provide Dexter with lifesaving aid, Defendant Officers handcuffed Dexter’s arms behind his lifeless body and then walked away. Eventually, Dexter was transported to the hospital where he was pronounced dead.
Police in an unmarked vehicle stopped Dexter by sideswiping his car without any forewarning or orders to stop. The police officers involved were not wearing uniforms - they wore hoodies and failed to identify themselves as they aggressively stormed Dexter’s car, surrounding him with their guns drawn as they barked commands at him, to enforce an unknown traffic violation.
Although prosecutors clearly have probable cause to charge for murder and the entire crime was captured by cameras, no cops have been charged with any crime - 3 months after the fact.
The complaint states,
“Next, while wearing hoodies, jeans, and other casual clothing, they brandished their weapons in a threatening manner, screamed curse words at Dexter, and attempted to unlawfully enter his vehicle. Defendant Officers unlawfully pointed their guns at Dexter, thus escalating the situation and exponentially increasing the risk of death for everyone—Dexter, Defendant Officers, and bystanders alike. Then, Defendant Officers used wildly disproportionate force against Dexter—repeatedly shooting at him even when he clearly presented no threat. Finally, Defendant Officers ignored Dexter as he was handcuffed and bleeding out on the street. In those critical minutes, Defendant Officers refused to attempt to provide him with any lifesaving aid.”
TARGETING ALL BLACKS. According to the complaint, “Dexter’s death is also directly attributable to CPD’s longstanding practice of engaging in unlawful traffic stops. CPD officers routinely target Black drivers on Chicago’s south and west sides for minor traffic violations. The large scope and persistent unlawfulness of CPD’s Mass Traffic Stop Program has most recently been documented by the Free to Move Coalition2 and in a class action complaint filed by the ACLU of Illinois.3 Free to Move’s data analysis concluded that Black drivers comprised 51.2% of people pulled over despite Black people making up less than 30% of the city’s residents.4 In contrast, over 32% of Chicago's population is white, and 13.6% of stops by CPD were of white drivers.5 CPD officers in the 11th District—where Defendant Officers stopped Dexter—conduct more traffic stops than almost anywhere else in the City. Most of CPD’s traffic stops focus on minor non-moving violations that are unrelated to safety. This data provides further evidence that most CPD traffic stops since 2016 have been pretextual.
The specific allegations are as follows:
FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS
I. CPD’s UNLAWFUL MASS TRAFFIC STOP PROGRAM TARGETS THE WESTSIDE OF CHICAGO.
25. As described in detail below, CPD operates an unlawful Mass Traffic Stop Program. For at least half a century, CPD has implemented police programs characterized by high-volume stops of Black and Latino people based on low-level violations that CPD uses as excuses to harass, surveil, and intimidate Black and Brown Chicagoans.18
26. CPD operates its Mass Traffic Stop Program with particular force on the Westside of Chicago, where the Defendant Officers unlawfully stopped, detained, and eventually shot at Dexter Reed at least 96 times. CPD officials have repeatedly affirmed that officers should conduct traffic stops “where violent crime occurs.”19 There is, however, no correlation between CPD’s Mass Traffic Stop Program and violence prevention. Fewer than 1% of CPD traffic stops recover contraband. The vast majority of CPD’s traffic stops are not made for “offenses indicating dangerous driving behavior and the stops did not produce evidence of criminal activity.”20
27. CPD officers conduct 22% of all traffic stops in the 11th District and the surrounding area—but only 6% of Chicago’s drivers live in this area. 21
28. CPD’s Mass Traffic Stop Program imposes quotas on CPD officers. CPD internal emails reveal that over a period of several years, 11th District CPD Supervisors repeatedly demanded Tact Team Members report, focus on, and increase pretextual traffic stops.22 On the day they encountered Dexter, Defendant Officers operated pursuant to CPD’s Mass Traffic Stop Program and attempted to achieve the quotas imposed upon them by District 11 supervisors.
II. DEFENDANT OFFICERS CONDUCTED AN UNLA WFUL, PRETEXTUAL STOP OF DEXTER REED.
29. On the evening of March 21, 2024, at approximately 6:00 PM, Dexter drove his recently purchased white SUV on Ferdinand Street, in the City of Chicago. The weather was clear and it was still daylight. Dexter stopped his vehicle at a red light at the intersection of Hamlin and Ferdinand, facing westbound. When the light turned green, Dexter drove through the intersection and traveled westbound onto the 3800 block of West Ferdinand. Another vehicle traveled westbound, immediately behind Dexter. Dexter traveled within the speed limit and complied with the stop sign at the next intersection, Ferdinand and Avers Ave.
30. On the same date and time, Defendants CPD Officers and Tact Team members Alexandra Giampapa, Thomas Spanos, Victor Pacheco, Gregory Saint Louis, and Aubrey Webb patrolled District 11 in an unmarked, silver SUV. Defendant Officer Webb drove the vehicle.
31. While Dexter drove onto the 3800 west block of Ferdinand, Defendant Officers’ vehicle was south of Dexter, stopped at a red light.
32. After both Dexter and the vehicle traveling immediately behind Dexter traveled through the intersection of Hamlin and Ferdinand, Defendant Officer Webb approached and ran through a red light at the intersection of Hamlin and Ferdinand, turning left onto Hamlin. Video footage demonstrates Defendant Officers made the decision to target Dexter merely three seconds after his vehicle came in their line of sight.
33. Defendant Officer Webb accelerated his unmarked car to pass the vehicle traveling immediately behind Dexter. Defendant Webb then pulled the unmarked CPD vehicle alongside Dexter’s vehicle and angled it as if to sideswipe Dexter’s car. This maneuver forced Dexter to stop his car just past the northwest corner of Ferdinand and Avers Ave. Defendant Webb used this vehicle maneuver to unlawfully detain Dexter.
34. West Ferdinand Street, between Hamlin and Avers—where Defendant Officers stopped Dexter’s car—is a residential area, populated by numerous single and multiunit family dwellings, with green space and wide sidewalks for community members to enjoy.
35. Each named Defendant Officer completed a Tactical Response Report documenting Defendant Officers’ initial justification for engaging with Dexter. Those reports state Defendant Officers pulled Dexter over incident to a “traffic stop.” Defendant Officer’s reports affirms that, at the time they targeted Dexter, Defendant Officers had no information to suggest Dexter had committed any serious or violent offense. The reports further affirm Defendant Officers targeted Dexter pursuant to CPD’s Mass Traffic Stop Program.
36. Surveillance camera footage reflects that Defendants lacked reasonable suspicion to suspect Dexter of any traffic violation. Defendant Officers had no legal justification to target, stop, and detain Dexter.
37. After evaluating available video evidence regarding this traffic stop, Andrea Kersten, the Chief Administrator of the Civilian Office of Police Accountability (“COPA”) wrote to CPD Superintendent Snelling documenting concerns with the Defendant Officers’ credibility and justification for stopping Dexter. Specifically, “COPA is uncertain how the officers could have seen this seat belt violation given their location relative to (Reed’s) vehicle and the dark tints on (his) vehicle windows. . .This evidence raises serious concerns about the validity of the traffic stop that led to the officers’ encounter with (Reed).
III. DEFENDANT OFFICERS UNLAWFULLY POINT FIREARMS AT DEXTER AND ENGAGE IN ESCALATORY CONDUCT DURING THE UNLAWFUL STOP.
38. After Defendant Officers unlawfully curbed Dexter’s vehicle, they engaged in a number of violent, threatening, and ultra-aggressive policing tactics intended to confuse and to create chaos. Defendant Officers screamed conflicting commands at Dexter, brandished batons in a threatening manner, used disrespectful and profane language, unlawfully attempted to enter his vehicle, and pointed their weapons at Dexter’s face without legal justification.
39. Defendant Officer Giampapa exited the unmarked CPD SUV from the back passenger side. She was un-uniformed and wore a hoodie and blue jeans. Defendant Officer Giampapa did not announce herself as a police officer, nor did she advise Dexter why he had been stopped.
40. Instead, Defendant Giampapa aggressively demanded “Roll the window down, roll the window down. What are you doing?” Dexter complied and completely rolled down his front driver’s side window. In response to Defendant Officer Giampapa’s question, Dexter stated that he was doing “nothing.”
41. Defendant Officer Giampapa then ordered Dexter to roll down his other windows. Body camera footage suggests Dexter became flustered and, in an effort to comply with Defendant Officer Giampapa’s commands, mistakenly partially rolled up the driver's side window instead of rolling down the vehicles’ other windows. The fact that Dexter had committed no violation, but was still subject to Defendant Officers’ aggressive threats undoubtedly created confusion and panic for Dexter.
42. After Dexter’s window rolled partially up, Defendant Officer Giampapa commanded Dexter “do not roll the window up.” At the same time, Defendant Officer Giampapa unholstered her firearm and pointed it at Dexter’s face. While she pointed her gun at Dexter, she attempted to open the driver’s side door of Dexter’s vehicle. Defendant Officer Giampapa unreasonably pointed her gun at Dexter within seconds after she approached his vehicle
43. With her gun pointed at Dexter’s face, Defendant Officer Giampapa continued yelling, screaming repeatedly “Open the doors now!” Dexter replied “Okay, Okay I’m trying.” Defendant Giampapa never acknowledged Dexter’s words and never inquired whether his window had malfunctioned or if his door was jammed. Instead, she continued screaming at him with her gun aimed at him.
44. Defendant Officer Saint Louis, who was un-uniformed wore a hoodie pulled up over his head and jeans. Defendant Officer Saint Louis did not announce himself as a police officer nor did he advise Dexter why he had been stopped.
45. Defendant Officer Saint Louis exited the unmarked CPD vehicle from the front passenger’s seat and approached the front passenger side of Dexter’s vehicle at the same time Defendant Giampapa approached Dexter on the driver’s side. Defendant Officer Saint Louis approached Dexter with an extended baton in his raised hand and immediately ordered Dexter to roll down his passenger side window and commanded “Put your ... put your window down, man,” “Hey roll this one down too... Hey, unlock it!” Seconds after he approached the vehicle, Defendant Officer Saint Louis pointed his gun at Dexter, cocking his wrist and aiming the weapon at Dexter through the windshield.
46. Defendant Officer Pacheco was un-uniformed, wearing khaki pants and a baseball cap. Defendant Officer Pacheco did not announce himself as a police officer nor did he advise Dexter why he had been stopped and curbed.
47. Defendant Officer Pacheco exited the unmarked SUV from the back passenger side and approached the driver’s side of Dexter’s vehicle. Immediately after exiting CPD’s vehicle, Defendant Officer Pacheco pointed his firearm at Dexter and began screaming "Do not f---'g roll it up. . .Unlock the f---'g door.”
48. Defendant Officer Spanos was un-uniformed, and dressed in a hoodie, khakis, and a knit cap. Defendant Officer Spanos did not announce himself as a police officer nor did he advise Dexter why he had been stopped and curbed.
49. Defendant Officer Spanos exited the unmarked SUV from the back driver’s side and approached the driver’s side of Dexter’s vehicle. Standing just a few feet from Dexter’s vehicle. Defendant Officer Spanos immediately unholstered and pointed his gun at Dexter and yelled “Put both hands up!”
50. CPD policy prohibits officers from pointing their firearms at a person unless objectively reasonable to do so.24
51. CPD’s Use of Force Policy General Order 03-02 provides that officers will “use de-escalation techniques to prevent or reduce the need for force. . .” The Policy further provides de-escalation techniques include providing a “warning and exercising persuasion and advice prior to the use of force” and determining whether the situation could be “stabilized through the use of time, distance and positioning.” The Policy also requires that CPD officers “treat all persons with courtesy and dignity which is inherently due every person and will act, speak, and conduct themselves in a courteous, respectful, and professional manner.” Finally, the Policy prohibits officers from using force unless it is the “minimum amount of force needed to provide for the safety of any person.”
52. Defendant Officers surrounded Dexter and failed to identify themselves as police officers or to explain why they conducted the aggressive, pretextual stop and trapped him in between the curb and a parked car. Defendant Officers then each unholstered and pointed their guns at Dexter at close range and screamed various and conflicting commands at him, with several of them repeatedly and forcefully pulling on his car doors and trying to get inside his vehicle. Defendant Officers’ actions created a confusing and chaotic environment and placed Dexter in objective fear for his safety, and at risk of great bodily harm. None of the Defendant Officers engaged in any type of de-escalation. Instead, they pointed their weapons at Dexter and used profane language in clear violation of CPD policy.
53. CPD’s Use of Force Policy General Order 03-02 imposes on CPD officers an affirmative obligation to intervene when they observe a use of force that is “excessive or otherwise in violation” of CPD policy. The Policy instructs officers to “verbally intervene” to stop a violation.
54. From the driver’s side of the CDP vehicle, Defendant Officer Webb observed Defendant Officers Giampapa, Saint Louis, Pacheco, and Spanos engage in the escalatory and unlawful conduct described above. In clear violation of CPD policy, Defendant Officer Webb took no action to intervene or deescalate.
55. By pointing their firearms at Dexter during a minor traffic stop and otherwise escalating this encounter as detailed above, Defendant Officers Giampapa, Saint Louis, Pacheco and Spanos engaged in an unreasonable use of force. By observing these unlawful actions and failing to take action, Defendant Officer Webb violated his duty to intervene.
IV. DEFENDANT OFFICERS DEMONSTRATED A GROSS DISREGARD FOR THE SANCITY OF HUMAN LIFE WHEN THEY SHOT DEXTER REED 96 TIMES IN 41 SECONDS AND FIRED BULLETS INTO DEXTER’S MOTIONLESS BODY.
56. Defendant Chicago Police Officers Giampapa, Pacheco, Spanos, and Webb unloaded a barrage of bullets at Dexter while he was inside his vehicle. At some point either before or after the Defendant Officers Giampapa, Pacheco, Spanos, and Webb began shooting at Dexter, Defendant Officer Saint Louis sustained a gunshot injury when a bullet grazed his wrist.25
57. After Defendant Officers Giampapa, Pacheco, Spanos, and Webb shot their weapons at Dexter for approximately 27 seconds, firing approximately 83 shots, Dexter exited his vehicle, unarmed, with hands empty and raised in sign of surrender. At this point, Dexter posed no threat of imminent harm.
58. After observing Dexter exit his vehicle, the Defendant Officers Giampapa, Pacheco, Spanos, and Webb failed to provide Dexter with any commands or warnings. Nor did any of these Defendant Officers attempt to engage in any de-escalation. Instead, they continued to shoot at Dexter in a reckless, out-of-control manner demonstrating a complete disregard for Dexter’s humanity.
59. After Dexter exited his vehicle, unarmed and with his hands empty, Defendant Officers Giampapa, Spanos, and Pacheco moved closer to Dexter.
60. Defendant Officer Giampapa shot additional bullets at Dexter.
61. Dexter collapsed to the ground at the rear of his vehicle. His head slammed into the street and lay unmoving and face down, with his head under the rear of his vehicle.
62. At this point, Defendant Officers Giampapa, Pacheco, Spanos, and Webb took no action to determine if Dexter was alive. Nor did they make any effort to secure him medical assistance.
63. Instead, Defendant Officers Spanos and Pacheco continued to shoot at Dexter even as he lay motionless, face down in the street.
64. Even after Dexter fell to the street, Defendant Officer Spanos paused his shooting, and then fired an additional three shots at Dexter’s body as he lay face down and motionless on the street.
65. Ultimately, Defendant Officers Giampapa, Pacheco, Spanos, and Webb shot 96 bullets at Dexter 41 seconds after they first encountered him.
66. In the letter to Superintendent Snelling, based on a review of relevant video evidence, COPA Chief Kersten documented “grave concerns about [Defendant Officers Giampapa, Pacheco, Spanos, and Webb’s] ability to assess what is a necessary, reasonable, and proportional use of deadly force.”26
67. CPD’s Use of Force Policy G03-02 instructs officers that CPD’s “highest priority is the sanctity of human life. In all aspects of their conduct, Department members will act with the foremost regard for the preservation of human life and the safety of all persons involved.” This Policy further provides that officers must continually “assess the situation and modify[] the use of force as circumstances change.”27
68. In violation of CPD written policy and applicable law, Defendant Officers Giampapa, Pacheco, Spanos, and Webb used grossly disproportionate force against Dexter when he clearly presented no threat to the officers.
69. Defendant Officer Spanos demonstrated a gross disregard for the sanctity of human life when he continued to fire his weapon at Dexter’s motionless body, even after the other Defendant Officers ceased firing.
V. DEFENDANT OFFICERS FAILED TO PROVIDE DEXTER WITH ANY LIFE SAVING MEASURES AS HE LAY BLEEDING OUT ON THE STREET.
70. None of the individual Defendant Officers provided any life-saving measures to Dexter after they had shot 96 bullets at him, striking him multiple times. Instead, Defendant Officers Giampapa, Pacheco, Spanos, and Webb left Dexter lying face down on the City street with his head under his vehicle as he bled out.
71. After the shooting stopped, Defendant Giampapa approached Dexter as he lay in the street with one shoe missing. Blood poured from his head and pooled on the street. Despite Dexter’s obvious and urgent medical needs, Defendant Officer Giampapa called for an ambulance for Defendant Officer Saint Louis, but never communicated Dexter’s need for care.
72. Instead, Defendant Officer Giampapa repeatedly screamed at Dexter “don’t move, don’t move, don’t f---’ing move!” When Defendant Giampapa was just a few feet from Dexter she stated “he’s still breathing.” Defendant Officer Webb responded “we need EMS here now! We need EMS here now!” At this point both Defendant Officers Giampapa and Webb realized Dexter was still alive and in need of urgent medical attention. But neither Defendant Officers Giampapa nor Webb took any action to provide Dexter with any lifesaving care.
73. Defendant Officer Giampapa continued to move closer to Dexter, while repeatedly screaming “hey don’t f--’ing move! Do not f--’ing move!” When she was close enough to touch Dexter Defendant Officer Giampapa stated repeatedly “I don’t know where the gun is.” She attempted to issue commands to Dexter, stating “hey dude, let go of the gun” as she pulled Dexter’s left hand out from underneath body. Simultaneously, Defendant Officer Webb pulled Dexter’s right hand out from underneath his body. Dexter’s hands were empty. There was no gun in his possession or near his body. After confirming Dexter did not have a gun in his hands, Defendant Officers Webb and Giampapa walked away from Dexter. At no time did they provide him with lifesaving aid.
74. Officer John Doe 1 aided by Officer John Doe 2 took over for Defendant Officers Webb and Giampapa and placed handcuffs on Dexter.
75. After Dexter was handcuffed, another John Doe Officer exclaimed, “I don’t know where it is”— seemingly in reference to a weapon the officers suspected Dexter of possessing. In response, Officer John Doe 1, walked away from Dexter, walked in a circle around Dexter’s vehicle, CPD’s vehicle and other parked vehicles and explained to a fellow officer that he is “trying to find a gun.”
76. While Officer John Doe 1 attempted to “find a gun,” Officer John Doe 2 stood over Dexter’s body. Neither Officer John Doe 1 nor Officer John Doe 2 provided Dexter with any lifesaving aid.
77. In sharp contrast, while Defendant Officers ignored Dexter’s obvious and urgent medical needs, multiple CPD officers surrounded and provided aid to Defendant Officer Spanos who was—in his own words: “ok, [but] just freaking out.” After reloading his weapon three times and shooting Dexter dozens of times, blood was splattered on Defendant Officer Spanos’ pants. When he realized his pants were blood stained, Defendant Officer Spanos exclaimed plaintively to other CPD officers “these are my favorite pants.”
78. Seconds later, Defendant Officer Spanos approached Dexter while he was laying on the street, bleeding out. He observed Officers John Does 1 & 2 standing over Dexter while failing to provide him with any lifesaving aid. Defendant Officer Spanos took no action to provide Dexter with aid nor did he encourage any Officers John Does to do so.
79. Eventually, other CPD officers who arrived at the scene, immediately provided Dexter with chest compressions and other potentially lifesaving aid. Their efforts came too late to save Dexter. He was pronounced dead later that day.
80. CPD Special Order S11-10-03 provides that every CPD member—including each Defendant—receive training in Law Enforcement Medical and Rescue Training, often referred to as LEMART. LEMART instructs CPD officers on the use of four lifesaving implements: (1) tourniquets to stop arterial bleeding; (2) combat gauze containing a hemostatic agent that can stop bleeding in seconds; (3) chest seals that prevent air from entering the chest cavity of gunshot victims; and (4) pressure bandages to stop bleeding. A reasonable police officer who has training about and access to these implements would use them to attempt to save the life of any gunshot victim.
81. CPD General Order 03-02 provides that CPD officers are required to “immediately request appropriate medical care for [an] injured person” and guides officers to provide medical care consistent with their training to any individual with visible injuries.
82. Defendants Officers Giampapa, Pacheco, Spanos, Webb, and Officer John Does 1 and 2 had access to the lifesaving implements described above and training on how to use them. Despite this fact, these Defendants refused to provide care to Dexter and further failed to request appropriate medical care for Dexter “as soon as it was safe and practicable” in violation of CPD policy and the law.
ACLU says Pervasive Mass Traffic Stops are "Urgent Problem" in Chicago as Cops Arbitrarily Interfere w/Black Peoples Freedom of Movement. An Increase of 90,000 to 500,000 Stops a Year from 2016-2023
/
From [HERE] Five Black and Latino Chicago motorists, Plaintiffs and proposed class representatives in Wilkins v. City of Chicago et al.,are asking Chief Judge Rebecca Pallmeyer to block CPD from sidestepping their case by moving oversight of traffic stops in the city under the Consent Decree process that has moved at a “snail’s pace” due to CPD’s recalcitrance. Last month, after years of complaints and warnings about the CPD’s mass traffic stop program, the federal court overseeing the consent decree set a public hearing on Tuesday, June 11th for testimony about “what specific traffic stop-related requirements should be added to the Consent Decree, if any.”
The Court order follows a hearing in October 2023 in which the issue of including traffic stops under the consent decree was publicly discussed. There was no indication at that time how the decree would address the problems of discriminatory traffic stops or what steps would address the issue, and several community members testified that they preferred other mechanisms for fixing CPD’s traffic stop practices. In the intervening months, there was no indication that the parties in the consent decree were working to move traffic stops under the decree process.
The Wilkins plaintiffs have a clear and distinct interest in how the issue of discriminatory traffic stops is addressed and reformed, leading to today’s filings.
“As our clients have made clear in their complaint, discriminatory traffic stops are an urgent problem in Chicago,” said Alexandra Block, director of the Criminal Legal System and Policing Project at the ACLU of Illinois who represents the Wilkins plaintiffs. “More than a half million Chicago motorists, mostly Black and Latino, are being stopped each year with no benefit to public safety. Moving oversight under the consent decree – without a transparent plan for immediate and accountable transformation of CPD’s practices and policies – does not meet the community’s need for urgent change.”
The request to intervene in the consent decree process comes as another federal judge has ruled that the Wilkins case may move forward. Judge Mary Rowland largely denied the City’s motion to dismiss the case and held that the Wilkins Plaintiffs can proceed on their claims that the mass traffic stop program violates their rights under the federal Equal Protection Clause and the Illinois Civil Rights Act. The Court found that the Wilkins Plaintiffs presented sufficient facts to show that the City intentionally discriminated against Black and Latino drivers on the basis of race, and that the mass traffic stop program unlawfully burdens Black and Latino drivers disproportionately.
The Wilkins lawsuit alleges that CPD officers are more likely to pull over Black and Latino drivers than white drivers, flooding neighborhoods on the South and West Sides of the City with traffic stops for alleged minor equipment and registration violations. The issue of racially discriminatory traffic stops in Chicago has been reported publicly for years. The number of traffic stops has grown astronomically in recent years, from fewer than 90,000 in 2015 to more than 500,000 in 2022 and 2023. Data shows that since 2016, Black drivers in Chicago have been 4 to 7 times more likely than white drivers to be stopped by police; Latino drivers have been twice as likely to be stopped as white drivers. The data presented also shows Chicago police are also far more likely to search Black and Latino drivers and their vehicles, even though the police often have higher rates of finding illegal contraband in the vehicles of white drivers.
While CPD has consistently failed to address this problem – even as the number of stops increased dramatically – Superintendent Snelling publicly responded to the release of video footage of CPD officers shooting a Black driver, Dexter Reed, ninety-six times during a pretextual traffic stop by calling for traffic stops to be brought under the consent decree. CPD could have unilaterally ended its program of pretextual stops, but did not do so.
The Wilkins plaintiffs have asked the court overseeing the consent decree to allow them to participate in proceedings to determine whether the consent decree should be modified so they are not crowded out of any discussions about ways to end CPD’s mass traffic stop program. The Wilkins plaintiffs are represented by the ACLU of Illinois and the law firm Arnold & Porter.
The Wilkins plaintiffs also note that CPD has not used the consent decree process to make real changes since the final Consent Decree was entered in January 2019. The most recent Monitor report about progress under the decree shows that the City has fully met its requirements in only 7% of the Decree’s provisions. Moreover, CPD repeatedly has been called out by the Monitor for failing to engage the public in the reform process, a problem that would be exacerbated by cutting off the Wilkins clients from meaningful discussions on reform of the traffic stop program.
“CPD has moved at a snail’s pace in making change under the Consent Decree – something which already frustrates members of the community across Chicago,” added Block. “It is simply unacceptable to allow their recalcitrance to be extended to traffic stops and to eliminate the voices of our clients in this process.”
“We urge the court to ensure that our clients’ voices are heard in this process.”
Despite Falling DC Crime Rate, Liberal Authorities Empower Cops to Use Drones, CCTV Cameras and License-plate readers to Constantly Surveil Law Abiding Black People and Put Them in Greater Confinement
/From [HERE] D.C. will soon have more eyes in the sky.
The Metropolitan Police Department will start using drones in limited situations to try to protect residents from violent crime. It comes as Mayor Muriel Bowser adds hundreds of closed-circuit TV cameras and license plate readers.
Taking off from its base near the Frederick Douglass Memorial Bridge, Falcon 1 is ready for action. MPD unveiled the $6 million chopper at a press event Monday. The pilot called the helicopter a “game changer” because of its mapping technology and infrared cameras, which can help during car chases.
MPD’s air fleet now includes five drones. Chief of Police Pamela Smith said the drones will not be used for patrol operations but will be used in situations including barricades, crowd management, missing persons cases and major crash reconstruction.
“We will not be using artificial intelligence, and nor will we be using facial recognition with the drones yet,” she said.
Bowser said D.C.’s newly approved budget includes funding for 200 new CC TV cameras and nearly 50 more license-plate readers, which will be added over the next year.
UK Tests Emotion Recognition Cameras in Train Stations [coming soon to urban cities w/large Black/Latino Populations that are Controlled by elite white liberals]
/From [HERE] For the last two years, British authorities have been testing AI-powered emotion recognition cameras on travelers in train stations, according to recently disclosed documents.
What can the cameras see?
In each of eight train stations around the UK, five to seven cameras or sensors scan the passing crowds. Using AI software from Amazon, the cameras use object recognition algorithms to spot criminal activity, trespassing, weapons, wet floors, overcrowding, and overstuffed trash cans.
They can also alert authorities when passengers engage in “unusual behavior,” such as shouting, running, smoking, or skateboarding.
A combination of existing cameras and newly installed smart cameras are being used for the surveillance project. All are equipped with Amazon’s Rekognition surveillance system.
Emotional recognition
Through a combination of facial and behavioral analyses, the Rekognition software allows officials to also analyze visitors’ emotions. Internal documents note that the cameras can detect whether a passenger is “happy, sad [or] angry.” They can also recognize passenger satisfaction, which “could be utilized to maximum advertising and retail revenue.”
Anti-social behavior
Authorities can also detect passengers who exhibit “anti-social behaviour,” which according to London’s Metropolitan Police Service means “behaviour by a person which causes, or is likely to cause, harassment, alarm or distress to persons not of the same household as the person.”
Social distancing, face masks, and demographics
Other use cases for the surveillance cameras include detecting whether passengers are keeping to social distancing rules and wearing face masks. The cameras can also scan for demographics by identifying people’s age profiles and “socio-economic classification,” which the documents note can create “revenue opportunities for better targeted advertising and product placement.”
Jury Finds MD Cop Guilty of Excessive Force for Peppering Spraying a Handcuffed Black Man After an Unlawful Stop and then Waiting Several Hours to Transport him to Jail. Faces 10 Years in Prison
/From [HERE] A former police officer in Maryland was recently convicted for using excessive force during a traffic stop, a federal jury determined. Philip Dupree, 40, formerly with the Fairmount Heights Police Department was found guilty of one count of deprivation of rights under color of law, according to a statement from the U.S. Attorney's Office.
The announcement came from U.S. Attorney Matthew M. Graves, along with comments from Assistant U.S. Attorney General Kristen Clarke and FBI Assistant Director David Sundberg. Dupree, who now faces up to 10 years behind bars, will be sentenced at a later date with a particular consideration of the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines, and other statutory factors.
"We depend on law enforcement officers to protect our communities from crimes and to protect our civil rights while doing so," U.S. Attorney Graves said. Graves pointed out the breach of community trust that occurs when an officer such as Dupree "unjustly and unreasonably" uses their authority against citizens. The conviction stemmed from an incident on Aug. 4, 2019, where Dupree initiated a traffic stop on Eastern Avenue NE, just within the District of Columbia's border and allegedly without proper cause.
During the stop, Dupree's aggressive handling of the situation escalated to physical violence, even after the victim was handcuffed and placed in Dupree's personal vehicle. The encounter, much of which was captured on both body-worn camera footage and cell phone video by an eyewitness, showed Dupree pepper-spraying the restrained driver in the face and chest. Later, instead of following department policy to transport the victim to county lock-up, Dupree took the driver to the local station and reportedly fabricated a statement of Probable Cause claiming, the driver had attacked him.
Assistant Attorney General Clarke vehemently condemned Dupree's actions, stating, "Police brutality and violent misconduct against defenseless people are disgraceful acts that have no place in our society today." Similarly, FBI Assistant Director Sundberg reassured the public of the FBI's dedication to investigating such cases, emphasizing their commitment to protecting citizens' civil rights against law enforcement misconduct.
Dupree was arrested on August 24, 2022, in Washington D.C., following an investigation by the FBI Washington Field Office with the prosecution being led by Trial Attorney Sanjay Patel of the Civil Rights Division and Assistant U.S. Attorney Christopher Howland for the District of Columbia. Details of Dupree's sentencing will be released upon scheduling by U.S. District Court Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly.
Kansas AG Civil Suit Claims Pfizer Lied About COVID Shots to Get Paid. Pfizer Knew Injections Caused Death, Miscarriages, Heart Problems, Strokes and Knew “Vaccine” Didn’t Stop or Prevent Transmission
/
UNJUST ENRICHMENT, FRAUD, BATTERY AND MURDER. consent obtained by lies, halfTruths, non-disclosures, fraud, coercion is not lawful consent. A plaintiff cannot ordinarily be regarded as actually consenting to the defendant's conduct if the plaintiff assented to the conduct while mistaken about the nature and quality of the invasion intended by the defendant. — Prosser and Keeton on Torts § 18, at 119-20 (5th ed. 1984).
The failure to provide informed consent is a basis of medical malpractice. But it also may be the basis of a lawsuit for an intentional battery, negligence or fraud. Battery is an intentional, unwanted or offensive touching by another. A lawsuit for battery increases the likelihood of punitive damages and unlike a claim for negligence, no proof of injury or harm is necessary. A lawsuit for battery generally has a shorter statute of limitations than a claim for negligence. [MORE]
From [HERE] Kansas Attorney General Kris Kobach brought 9 Counts against Pfizer under the Kansas Consumer Protection Act and 1 Count of Civil Conspiracy for conspiring with the US government (including the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS*), the media, social media, universities, the lobbying group BIO, and other organizations in order to generate billions of dollars in revenue by willfully concealing material evidence and misrepresenting the fraudulent safety and efficacy claims of Pfizer’s COVID-19 mRNA injections to Kansas residents.
In the lawsuit, AG Kobach correctly points out that after Pfizer received their FDA-approval on August 23, 2021, the pharma giant and HHS were legally obligated to disclose all clinical trial data, as well as adverse events reported to Pfizer and the government agencies.
The complaint states:
1. Pfizer misled the public that it had a “safe and effective” COVID-19 vaccine.
2. Pfizer said its COVID-19 vaccine was safe even though it knew its COVID-19 vaccine was connected to serious adverse events, including myocarditis and pericarditis, failed pregnancies, and deaths. Pfizer concealed this critical safety information from the public.
3. Pfizer said its COVID-19 vaccine was effective even though it knew its COVID19 vaccine waned over time and did not protect against COVID-19 variants. Pfizer concealed this critical effectiveness information from the public.
4. Pfizer said its COVID-19 vaccine would prevent transmission of COVID-19 even though it knew it never studied the effect of its vaccine on transmission of COVID-19.
5. To keep the public from learning the truth, Pfizer worked to censor speech on social media that questioned Pfizer’s claims about its COVID-19 vaccine.
6. Pfizer’s misrepresentations of a “safe and effective” vaccine resulted in record company revenue of approximately $75 billion from COVID-19 vaccine sales in just two years.
7. Pfizer’s actions and statements relating to its COVID-19 vaccine violated previous consent judgments with the State of Kansas.
8. Pfizer’s actions and statements relating to its COVID-19 vaccine violated the Kansas Consumer Protection Act, K.S.A. 50-623 et seq., regardless of whether any individual consumer ultimately received Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine.
9. Pfizer must be held accountable for falsely representing the benefits of its COVID19 vaccine while concealing and suppressing the truth about its vaccine’s safety risks, waning effectiveness, and inability to prevent transmission.
The suit says “Pfizer concealed, suppressed, or omitted material facts it possessed showing significant safety concerns associated with Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine. It states,
“As of February 28, 2021, Pfizer’s adverse events database contained 158,893 adverse events (from 42,086 case reports) from its COVID-19 vaccine. As of February 28, 2021, Pfizer’s database contained 1,223 fatalities after taking Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine, although Pfizer did not make causality findings.
Pfizer was receiving so many adverse event reports that it had to hire 600 additional full-time staff and expected to hire more than 1,800 additional resources by June 2021. Pfizer’s representations that its COVID-19 vaccine did not have any safety concerns was inconsistent with the adverse events data it possessed.”
The suit claims the billionaire corporation knew its injections were harming pregnant women. As of February 28, 2021 Pfizer knew that its shots cause miscarriages, pre-mature births and “other adverse effects on the reproductive systems of women.“ Also, by April 2022, Pfizer knew of tens of thousands of adverse events connected to its COVID-19 vaccine including heavy menstrual bleeding (27,685); menstrual disorders (22,145); irregular periods (15,083); delayed periods (13,989); absence of periods (11,363); and other reproductive system effects.”
Furthermore, since at least early 2021 Pfizer knew its injections were causing myocarditis and pericarditis, especially in teenagers and children.
According to the lawsuit, while Pfizer kept advertising and promoting the so-called “vaccine” as effective against COVID they knew that it was not effective at preventing infection or hospitalization. It states, Pfizer’s concealment, suppression, and omission of the waning effectiveness of its COVID-19 vaccine allowed Pfizer to profit from vaccinations of Kansans who may have been deterred from Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine had they known about its waning effectiveness.
The suit also claims that Pfizer never even tested the COVID shots to determine whether they were effective on stopping transmission. It explains, “Despite admissions by Pfizer Chairman and CEO Dr. Bourla and Board Member Dr. Scott Gottlieb that Pfizer did not know if its vaccine prevented transmission, Pfizer Chairman and CEO Dr. Bourla warned Kansans on multiple occasions that not receiving a COVID-19 vaccine would affect the lives of those around them, thus implying that Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine prevented transmission.” Specifically, Pfizer Chairman and CEO Albert Bourla said;
on December 2020, “I repeat once more, that this choice not to vaccinate will not affect only your health or your life. Unfortunately, it will affect the lives of others and likely the lives of the people you love the most, who are the people that usually you are in contact with.” CNBC’s ‘Squawk Box’ Today
on January 2021: “What I would say to people who fear the vaccine is that they need to recognize that the decision to take it or not will not affect only their own lives. It will affect the lives of others. And most likely it will affect the lives of people that they love the most, who are the people that they socialize the most with.” Bloomberg
on June 2021: “I try to explain to them that the decision to vaccinate or not is not only going to affect only your life. . . . But unfortunately will affect the health of others and likely will affect the health of people you like and you love the most. . . . When you try to explain that their fear could stand in the way of protecting their loved ones, I think this is the argument that mostly works.” CBS NEWS
on November 2021: “The only thing that stands between the new way of life and the current way of life, frankly, is the hesitancy to get vaccinated, the people that are afraid to get the vaccines, and they create issues not only for them. Unfortunately, they are going to affect the lives of others and, frankly, the lives of the people that they love the most because they are putting at risk the people that they hug, they kiss, [and] they socialize with.” Pfizer’s Albert Bourla on how the pandemic ends, ATLANTIC COUNCIL
“In other words, on multiple occasions, Pfizer Chairman and CEO Dr. Bourla represented to Kansans that Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine prevented transmission since not getting vaccinated threatened the lives of loved ones with whom a person closely interacted.”
According to the filing, “Pfizer’s concealment, suppression, and omission of the waning effectiveness of its COVID-19 vaccine allowed Pfizer to profit from vaccinations of Kansans who may have been deterred from Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine had they known about its waning effectiveness.”
The lawsuit seeks an unstated amount of financial damages.
Dennis Behreandt: Depopulation by Design
/From [HERE] Here is a bit of bad news: We are in the end stage of a multi-pronged, multi-front, multi- decadal war against life itself. It gets worse: Most people have only a vague idea, at best, that this war is raging around them and that they and their families and their nations are the target. The enemy’s objective is to destroy the family, the nation that inevitably has its roots in the family, the religion that supports and breathes life into this superstructure, and even a majority of the individual people who live within this “vital framework.” The goal is simply the complete revolution of life, resulting in a globally managed state run through the United Nations and its affiliate NGOs and peopled by a carefully “curated” and “managed” population of humans “who own nothing and are happy.”
One of the most significant battles in this war that is now in its “kinetic” phase in Ukraine and Israel is biowarfare — specifically the Covid pandemic and the seemingly insane response to it. The global “insane” response to the pandemic, in fact, was the “skeleton key” that unlocked the pathway to the truth about what was happening. From a public-health standpoint, none of the policies instituted did a single thing to help human health and well-being. From standing six feet apart, following arrows on the floor in grocery stores, wearing masks, and telling people that for the most part they were “non- essential workers,” pandemic response policies had zero to do with actually helping people stay healthy, but everything to do with controlling and managing a population through fear and peer pressure. And this was pandemic policy at its best.
At its worst, the most extreme pandemic responses were and remain outright deadly attacks on human life. The virus itself almost certainly was bioengineered. Many public policies directly intermingled the sick with the weak and elderly, in a barely concealed attempt to do in the old and infirm. Globally, life- saving medications such as ivermectin were ridiculed and removed from the market, while dangerous concoctions were prescribed to the sick and hospital “protocols” including “ventilation” turned healthcare facilities into killing fields and medical practitioners, mostly unknowingly, into executioners. Finally, the vax with a raft of deadly side effects was unleashed on billions who believed with starry- eyed faith that everything being done to them was for the their own good.
Worldwide, this was a globally managed operation to lead billions of good and trusting people to injury, sickness, and, in far too many cases, death. But Covid was just the most recent, and perhaps most egregious, event in the biowarfare front of the Deep State global war on everyone else. The triple aims sought by the Deep State on this front are population transformation, control, and reduction. As this special report of The New American will demonstrate, the Deep State death cult has made significant advances, to the bloody detriment of millions around the globe, just since 2019. [MORE]
Study: COVID Shots Possibly Fueled Millions of Deaths in 47 Countries Since Beginning of the Pandemic Due to “Adverse Events”
/From [HERE] A recently released significant study has confirmed the suspicions of so-called COVID “conspiracy theorists” by suggesting a link between the COVID-19 shot and millions of excess deaths worldwide.
As GB News reported on Tuesday, scientists from the Netherlands’ Vrije Universiteit discovered despite the rollout of 13.5 billion COVID vaccines across the globe, excess mortality remained shockingly high. These findings were published in BMJ Public Health.
The scientists wrote that this “new” information raised “serious concerns.” They then elaborated on adverse events that have been reported following the introduction of the Fauci ouchie, including severe injuries and deaths.
“Although COVID-19 vaccines were provided to guard civilians from suffering morbidity and mortality by the COVID-19 virus, suspected adverse events have been documented as well,” the authors wrote. “Both medical professionals and citizens have reported serious injuries and deaths following vaccination to various official databases in the Western World.”
“During the pandemic, it was emphasized by politicians and the media on a daily basis that every Covid-19 death mattered and every life deserved protection through containment measures and Covid-19 vaccines,” they continued. “In the aftermath of the pandemic, the same moral should apply.”
The scientists went on to cite numerous studies which revealed that COVID-19 vaccination may induce myocarditis, pericarditis, and autoimmune diseases.
“This commonality hinders clinical suspicion and consequently its detection as adverse vaccine reactions,” the authors wrote. [MORE]
Most Studies Show COVID Vaccine Affects Menstrual Cycles, BMJ Review Finds
/From [HERE] Women experienced menstrual cycle disruption following COVID-19 vaccination, including changes in cycle length, flow and menstrual pain, according to a new “state of the science” review published Monday in BMJ Sexual & Reproductive Health.
Although women comprised about half of the participants in the original COVID-19 vaccine trials, no data were collected on how the shots affected their menstrual cycles.
Soon after the shots were rolled out, many women started reporting longer periods and heavier-than-normal bleeding, and many women who did not normally menstruate — including women on long-acting contraceptives and post-menopausal women — also reported unusual bleeding.
Tens of thousands of women reported symptoms to researchers and medical regulators in the U.S. and the United Kingdom respectively by mid-2021.
At the time, women’s concerns were often “blown off” and they felt “gaslighted,” Dr. Alison Edelman, one of the review article authors, told NBC.
Researchers called for studies into the issue, in part because they said disrupted menstrual cycles were driving “misinformation” that the vaccines were dangerous and fueling “vaccine hesitancy.”
Since then, dozens of studies have been published on the issue.
For the BMJ review, researchers from Harvard, Boston University, Michigan State University and Oregon Health & Science University surveyed and summarized the existing published literature in the PubMed database — which contains peer-reviewed research in the biomedical and life sciences literature — on the COVID-19 vaccines and menstruation. [MORE]
