Alabama Authorities Murder Mentally Ill White Man [Derrick Dearman] w/Lethal Injection

/

From [HERE] The State of Alabama executed Derrick Dearman, 36, by lethal injection today, despite evidence that he suffers from serious mental illness.

Mr. Dearman was convicted of capital murder in the August 19, 2016, killing of five people in Mobile County, Alabama. That day, he had been hearing voices, believed that people were “after” him, had used a large amount of methamphetamine, and had not slept for six days.

Mr. Dearman turned himself in, and while giving a statement to police, he cried and repeatedly expressed horror and remorse for what he had done. He later said of the crime: “It was like someone else had the steering wheel.”

Alabama Gov. Kay Ivey scheduled Mr. Dearman’s execution date after he sent a handwritten letter to state officials saying that he no longer wished to appeal his death sentence. Mr. Dearman has struggled with severe suicidal ideation for his entire life. But Alabama courts have repeatedly failed to adequately consider his serious mental illness.

Court filings show that, at just four years old, Derrick Dearman displayed symptoms of severe depression and spoke to his mother “about wanting to die.” He was prescribed antidepressants at age 12 and began self-medicating with crack cocaine at 14. That year, Derrick barely survived a car accident that left him feeling that he “should have died.” At 16, he started using methamphetamines, and at 19, he drove his car off the road in an attempt to kill himself. In his early 20s, he was hospitalized in a psychiatric unit. 

Mr. Dearman’s suicidal ideation continued after he was charged. In a report to the court, a psychiatric expert concluded that he was suicidal. 

But despite substantial evidence indicating Mr. Dearman suffered from lifelong and severe mental illness, including bipolar disorder with psychotic features, post-traumatic stress disorder, chronic depression, and neurocognitive disorder, the trial court refused to hold a competency hearing.

Instead, even after a psychiatrist who evaluated Mr. Dearman warned that “his probable mood disorder, suicidal thinking, and brain dysfunction [are] negatively affecting his thought processes and decision-making,” making it likely “he would self-sabotage and take whatever steps he deemed necessary to ensure a death verdict,” the trial judge allowed Mr. Dearman to fire his lawyers and plead guilty to multiple counts of capital murder without an agreement from the State not to seek the death penalty.

Mr. Dearman, representing himself, initially planned on presenting no evidence to convince the sentencer he deserved to live. Because of his family’s interest in sparing his life, 11 family members testified they loved Mr. Dearman deeply, described his struggles with addiction and mental illness, and begged the sentencer to impose a life sentence. 

The trial court nonetheless sentenced Mr. Dearman to death. His family urged Mr. Dearman to appeal his death sentence in an effort to save his life. The Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals denied relief and the Alabama Supreme Court refused to review the case. Then, while his postconviction petition was pending, Mr. Dearman sent a handwritten note to state officials asking them to set an execution date. The trial judge allowed Mr. Dearman, again, to fire his lawyers and then dismissed his postconviction petition, paving the way for Alabama Gov. Kay Ivey to schedule his execution.

Mental health issues permeate the capital punishment system. Even though lawmakers, mental health and legal experts, global human rights advocates, and the majority of Americans oppose executing people with serious mental illness, research suggests the death penalty actually targets this group.

Experts have found that 43% of people executed between 2000 and 2015 had a mental illness diagnosis such as bipolar disorder, schizophrenia, or PTSD. And it is estimated that at least 20% of people on death row have a serious mental illness.

Subjecting people with serious mental illness to the death penalty raises serious legal questions about a defendant’s competency to stand trial, the validity of a guilty plea, and whether the level of moral culpability necessary for the death penalty can be assigned to people impaired by delusions, hallucinations, or other symptoms of serious mental disorders. The Constitution requires courts to resolve these questions before sentencing someone to death. 

Yet courts regularly fail to satisfy these constitutional guarantees. 

In Mr. Dearman’s case, no Alabama court even conducted a hearing to evaluate his competency to plead guilty, waive his right to counsel, or stop his appeals.

And when sentencing Mr. Dearman, the court failed to consider his history of mental illness as a reason to impose a life-without-parole sentence rather than death—an unconstitutional error that defied Supreme Court precedent explicitly recognizing that this evidence must be considered in sentencing “because of the belief, long held by this society, that defendants who commit criminal acts that are attributable to … emotional and mental problems” are often “less culpable than defendants who have no such excuse.”1 

Derrick Dearman stopped his appeals only after a lifetime of severe mental illness and suicidal behavior that Alabama courts have repeatedly ignored. The State of Alabama has now executed him despite serious questions about the constitutionality of his conviction and death sentence.

Columbus Cop Trial for Murdering Andre Hill Begins Mon. White Cop Shot Black Man Holding a Cell Phone w/Screen Lit Up, Wasn't Under Arrest. 22 Cops Denied CPR, Stepped Over His Dying Handcuffed Body

/

Everywhere one finds a large population of black people living in metro areas controlled by elite, white liberals, the police stop, use force, detain, prosecute and kill blacks in grossly disproportionate numbers. Yet Blacks rarely question this extraordinary phenomenon and inexplicably and strongly believe that elite, white liberals are their political allies who help to ‘protect their rights.’

ACLU Finds Freedom of Movement Limited for Blacks in DC [in EVERY City Controlled by Elite White Liberals w/a Large Black Population, Cops Stop and Degrade Blacks in Grossly Disproportionate Numbers]

From [HERE] A white Columbus police officer fatally shot an unarmed Black man inside a Northwest Side garage in 2020, jury selection in his trial is scheduled to begin Monday.

Columbus police officer Adam Coy, 47, is charged with murder, felonious assault, reckless homicide and two counts of dereliction of duty in the Dec. 22, 2020, shooting death of 47-year-old Andre Hill.

On December 22, 2020, 47-year-old Andre Hill was shot and killed by Officer Adam Coy of the Columbus Division of Police in Columbus, Ohio. Coy had been called to the neighborhood in response to a non-emergency call from a neighbor who reportedly witnessed someone sit in an SUV and turn the car on and off.

Hill was leaving a friend's house when Coy shot him. Hill was unarmed and was carrying just his mobile phone when he was shot on 22 December while leaving the garage of a friend, was wearing a Black Lives Matter t-shirt when he was killed.

The body camera footage shows the fatal shooting of Hill, who was a guest at the residence police responded to. Around 1:30 a.m, the video shows Hill inside a garage, walking toward Coy with a cellphone in his hand, the screen lit up and visible. Within seconds, Coy fires his weapons and Hill falls as Coy continues to ask Hill to show his hands.

Coy points his flashlight into the dark garage with his gun drawn and suddenly shoots Hill several times. An autopsy found bullets struck Hill in the chest, twice in the right thigh and an additional time in the right leg.

Coy did not have his body camera on when he got out of his vehicle and approached Hill, a clear violation of police policy. After the shooting, he turned it on, which activated a 60-second "look back" feature and recorded the shooting without audio.

Five minutes after he was shot by Officer Adam Coy, who is white, another officer can be heard in the footage saying: "Let's cuff him up. He's still moving."Mr Hill is then rolled over on to his stomach before being handcuffed and put on his back as the officers wait for an ambulance.

After Hill was shot, several officers handcuffed him while he lay unresponsive on the ground.Video recordings from Coy and others show that none of the multiple officers on the scene made an attempt to render first aid to Hill until ten minutes after he was shot

Minutes later, a more senior officer arrives and asks "anybody doing anything for him?" He then orders an officer to start CPR. Mr Hill was later pronounced dead.

"Andre Hill should be alive today," said Police Chief Thomas Quinlan in a video statement Thursday. "A Columbus police officer is responsible for his death. I can't defend it, I can't make it right, but I will do what is in my power."

His daughter Karissa Hill said "It is just disgusting how they did my dad. These pictures that I got to look at, I got to memorise my dad on the floor for the rest of my life and how nobody helped him.

"How there's 22 officers on the scene with body footage and not one of them helped my dad. It's unbearable. All because of this state, and who they hire.

"I mean, he is lying on the ground dying. I mean, what is Andre Hill's crime? Is it because he's a black man, and for whatever reason, police in America shoot first and ask questions later?"

The T-shirt Mr Hill was wearing on the night he died called for justice for Mr Floyd.

Ben Crump, the Hill family's lawyer, said officers' actions were unforgivable."Where is the humanity for Andre Hill? Where is the humanity for this Columbus citizen who had committed no crime, had no weapon, was unarmed, only holding a cell phone? Where is the humanity for this citizen?

"He offered no verbal commands before he started shooting Andre Hill. He didn't say stop. He didn't say freeze. He didn't say, put your hands up. He didn't give Andre Hill a chance. He didn't give him a chance."

The bodycam video shows Coy telling an officer leading him away from the home: "I gotta figure out what I missed".

"We'll take care of that I promise you," officer Jared Barsotti responded.

The footage also captures a woman inside the house where Mr Hill was shot telling officers that he had been bringing her Christmas money.

She shouted: "He was bringing me Christmas money. He didn't do anything."

Coy pleaded not guilty; the court set bond at $3 million. His trial was initially scheduled for March 7, 2022, but was postponed until November to allow Coy to recover from a recent hip replacement surgery. The trial was delayed a second time on November 1 to allow the defence more time to prepare a rebuttal for the prosecution's expert witnesses. The court scheduled the trial to begin on April 24, 2023, but it was delayed indefinitely on April 3 when Coy was diagnosed with cancer.

Study of 1.7 Million Kids and Teens Who Got Pfizer COVID Injections Found Myopericarditis Only in Vaxed Groups

/

From [HERE] The Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine provided children and teens in England with only about 14 to 15 weeks of protection against testing positive for the virus, according to a preprint study of over 1.7 million children ages 5 to 15 in the English National Healthcare System (NHS).

Researchers investigating the safety and effectiveness of Pfizer’s vaccine in fully vaccinated, partially vaccinated, and unvaccinated children and teens, also found cases of myocarditis and pericarditis only in vaccinated children.

“This study clearly shows that Pfizer’s COVID vaccine provides almost no benefit to children and adolescents, but does increase their risk of myocarditis and pericarditis,” said Brian Hooker, Ph.D., chief scientific officer of Children’s Health Defense. “It begs the question: Why does the CDC continue to recommend these unlicensed shots for kids? Where is the data they use to support their statement that the benefits of these vaccines outweigh the risks?”

The study found that vaccinated children required slightly fewer emergency room visits and hospital stays, but that those outcomes were extremely rare in children and teens across all groups.

There were no COVID-19 deaths among any of the study subjects.

Public health agencies in the United Kingdom (U.K.) and in the U.S. granted authorization to the Pfizer vaccines based on clinical trials that measured immunogenicity — or how well the vaccine elicited an immune response in the body — and efficacy against infection.

The trials didn’t test how well the vaccines protected against severe disease. They also didn’t assess particular safety endpoints, like myocarditis and pericarditis, which have been reported globally. [MORE]

State Department Colluded With Social Media to Censor Content, Twitter Files Show

/

From [HERE] The latest release of the “Twitter Files” includes evidence that the U.S. Department of State worked closely with social media platforms, despite denials by government officials.

Independent journalist Paul D. Thacker published the documents today in The Disinformation Chronicle. Thacker’s previous “Twitter Files” installments revealed evidence of collusion between the federal government, social media platforms and private actors to censor content.

According to Thacker, the newly released documents add to existing evidence that the Biden administration worked closely with platforms like Twitter to censor content and influence social media content moderation policies.

“These emails [call] into sharp question claims by Democrats and their allies in the media that Twitter did not collude with federal agencies and was free from Biden administration pressure to make its own censorship decisions,” Thacker wrote.

According to the new “Twitter Files,” the Indian government pressured Twitter to censor accounts in 2021, including accounts critical of India’s COVID-19 policies.

This led Twitter to hire Albright Stonebridge, a lobbying firm “closely aligned with the Biden administration” — and previously funded by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation — to pressure the State Department for assistance.

“Around this same timeframe, emails show that the State Department was pressuring Twitter to censor accounts they didn’t like,” Thacker wrote.

Thacker told The Defender the Indian government “was going after Twitter for not suspending accounts critical of the government, and there were threats that Twitter employees in the country would be arrested.”

The State Department then began “working closely with Twitter to deal with the company’s problems in India,” Twitter’s third-largest market, at the same time that it “was leaning on Twitter to censor certain accounts and topics,” Thacker said.

The new “Twitter Files” release is the latest in a series of installments, based on internal company records, that suggest “close coordination between U.S. government officials and social media companies to censor viewpoints and accounts — often those that opposed Biden administration policies,” Thacker wrote. [MORE]

“Vaxxed 3” Recalls the SpokesPuppets who Tricked the Public Into Getting COVID Shots [Consent Obtained by Lies, Non-Disclosures or Coercion is Not Informed Consent; It's Battery, Negligence or Fraud]

/

Dr Yeardon and Dr Blynd: Authorities Own the Minds of Those who Believe “The COVID Lies." The False Narratives are Enemy Outposts in the Believer's Mind, Giving Rise to More Coercive Political Systems

Consent obtained by lies, halfTruths, non-disclosures, fraud, coercion is not lawful consent - it is induced consent, which is unlawful.

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. Likewise, an overt manifestation of assent or willingness would not be effective apparent consent if the defendant knew, or probably if he ought to have known in the exercise of reasonable care, that the plaintiff was mistaken as to the nature and quality of the invasion intended.... The decisions in this area have involved assent induced by fraud, in the sense that the defendant was either aware of the plaintiff's mistake or ignorance and failed to disclose the truth, or the defendant induced the mistake with representation which he knew was false. 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 (murder), 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.

Destroying Black Life Over Trivialities: A TX Cop Endangered Himself by Jumping Onto a Moving Rental Car. Then He Fatally Shot the Driver, Ashtian Barnes. Stopped for Toll Violations by Another Driver

/

SUPREME COURT TO HEAR CASE From [HERE] On a Thursday afternoon in April 2016, a 24-year-old Black man named Ashtian Barnes was driving his girlfriend's rental car on the Sam Houston Tollway in Harris County, Texas, when he was pulled over by a traffic enforcement officer. The officer, Roberto Felix Jr., stopped Barnes because the license plate of the rental car had been linked to toll violations by another driver. About three minutes into the stop, Barnes began to drive away. Felix reacted by jumping onto the door sill of the car with his gun drawn. Within two seconds, perceiving a threat to himself as the car accelerated, Felix fatally shot Barnes.

The offenses that led to the traffic stop, which had not even been committed by Barnes, were trivial, and Felix himself created the danger to which he responded by killing Barnes. That use of deadly force was plainly unreasonable, Barnes' mother, Janice Hughes Barnes, argued in a federal civil rights lawsuit against Felix.

Although that conclusion might seem like a no-brainer, a federal judge dismissed the case, and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit upheld that decision last January. Both courts were bound by 5th Circuit precedent to focus on "the moment of the threat" that Felix confronted, ignoring both the nature of the stop and the officer's recklessness in jumping onto the car. On Friday, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to decide whether that approach, which has been embraced by four circuits and rejected by eight, is consistent with the Fourth Amendment.

In the 1985 case Tennessee v. Garner, which involved a suspected burglar, Edward Garner, who was shot while fleeing police, the Supreme Court held that the use of deadly force is unconstitutional in such circumstances "unless it is necessary to prevent the escape and the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious physical injury to the officer or others." To assess whether a use of force is "objectively reasonable" under the Fourth Amendment, the Court explained four years later in Graham v. Connor, judges should consider "the totality of the circumstances," paying "careful attention to the facts and circumstances of each particular case." The Court said relevant factors include "the severity of the crime at issue, whether the suspect poses an immediate threat to the safety of the officers or others, and whether he is actively resisting arrest or attempting to evade arrest by flight."*

Like Garner, Barnes was unarmed and did not plausibly pose "a significant threat of death or serious physical injury" to the general public. And unlike Garner, Barnes was not suspected of a felony or even an arrestable offense. Under the 5th Circuit's "moment of threat" standard, however, those circumstances were irrelevant. So was everything that happened before the two seconds in which Felix decided to shoot Barnes.

When Felix turned on his emergency lights, Barnes pulled over to the median on the left side of the tollway. Felix parked behind Barnes and approached the driver's side window. When Felix asked for Barnes' driver's license and proof of insurance, the 5th Circuit noted, "Barnes replied that he did not have the documentation and that the car had been rented a week earlier in his girlfriend's name." Seeing Barnes "digging around" in the car, Felix told him to stop. Claiming to smell marijuana (which a subsequent search did not find), Felix asked if Barnes had anything illegal in the car, at which point Barnes "turned off the vehicle, placing his keys near the gear shift." Barnes "told Officer Felix that he 'might' have the requested documentation in the trunk of the car."

Dash camera video showed what happened next. Felix ordered Barnes to pop the trunk, which he did. Felix asked Barnes to get out of the car, and Barnes opened the driver's side door. But then Barnes restarted the car, prompting Felix to draw his gun, point it at Barnes and say "don't fucking move." As the car began moving, Felix "stepped onto the car with his weapon drawn and pointed at Barnes," "'shoved' his gun into Barnes's head, pushing his head hard to the right," and fired two shots. When the car stopped, Felix "held Barnes at gunpoint until backup arrived [about two minutes later] while Barnes sat bleeding in the driver's seat."

One question raised by Barnes v. Felix, U.S. District Judge Alfred Bennett noted in 2021, is "whether the Court can consider the officer's conduct precipitating the shooting—which included jumping onto a moving vehicle and blindly firing his weapon inside—in determining whether the officer used excessive force in violation of the Fourth Amendment." Under 5th Circuit precedent, he concluded, "the answer is no."

Bennett was not happy with that answer. "By limiting the focus of the judicial inquiry so narrowly as to only examine the precise moment the officer decided to use deadly force," he wrote, "the Fifth Circuit has effectively stifled a more robust examination of the Fourth Amendment's protections when it comes to encounters between the public and the police." He urged the appeals court to "consider the approach applied by its sister courts," which makes it possible to "hold officers accountable when their conduct has directly resulted in the need for deadly force and infringed upon the rights secured by the Fourth Amendment."

In a 2022 ruling, Bennett considered only Felix's decision to draw his gun and point it at Barnes, which he deemed reasonable given that Barnes had restarted his car rather than exiting it as instructed. "The only issue before the Court today was Felix's decision to brandish his gun, not his decision to shoot it," Bennett wrote. But he again urged the 5th Circuit to "review its very narrow approach to deadly force claims."

Judge Patrick Higginbotham, who wrote the 5th Circuit panel opinion upholding the dismissal of Barnes v. Felix, took the extraordinary step of writing a separate concurrence to elaborate on the problems with that "very narrow approach." Bennett "rightfully found that [his] reasonableness analysis under the Fourth Amendment was circumscribed to the 'precise moment' at which Officer Felix decided to use deadly force against Barnes," he wrote. But he argued that "this Circuit's moment of threat doctrine" flouts "the Supreme Court's instruction to look to the totality of the circumstances when assessing the reasonableness of an officer's use of deadly force."

Expressing dismay that "a routine traffic stop has again ended in the death of an unarmed black man," Higginbotham warned that ignoring "an officer's role in bringing about the 'threat' precipitating the use of deadly force lessens the Fourth Amendment's protection of the American public, devalues human life, and 'frustrates the interest of the individual, and of society, in judicial determination of guilt and punishment.'" He noted that Garner's restrictions on the use of deadly force are especially important in light of subsequent Supreme Court rulings that approved pretextual traffic stops and allowed officers to order drivers out of their cars during any legally justified stop. Those decisions, he said, "brought fuel to a surge of deadly encounters between the police and civilians." Given that reality, he argued, it is reckless to undermine Garner by "refusing to look to the totality of the circumstances when a stop leads to the taking of a life."

The 5th Circuit and three other appeals courts "have narrowed the totality of circumstances inquiry by circumscribing the reasonableness analysis of the Fourth Amendment to the precise millisecond at which an officer deploys deadly force," Higginbotham wrote. "The moment of threat doctrine trims Garner with predictable results…eliding the reality of the role [an officer] played in bringing about the conditions said to necessitate deadly force."

But for that doctrine, Higginbotham said, it would be clear that Felix violated the Fourth Amendment. "Given the rapid sequence of events and Officer Felix's role in drawing his weapon and jumping on the running board, the totality of the circumstances merits finding that Officer Felix violated Barnes's Fourth Amendment right to be free from excessive force," he wrote. "This officer stepped on the running board of the car and shot Barnes within two seconds, lest he get away with driving his girlfriend's rental car with an outstanding toll fee. It is plain that the use of lethal force against this unarmed man preceded any real threat to Officer Felix's safety—that Barnes's decision to flee was made before Officer Felix stepped on the running board. His flight prompted Officer Felix to jump on the running board and fire within two seconds."

The "moment of threat" doctrine "is an impermissible gloss on Garner that stifles a robust examination of the Fourth Amendment's protections for the American public," Higginbotham concluded. "It is time for this Court to revisit this doctrine, [or] failing that, for the Supreme Court to resolve the circuit divide over the application of a doctrine deployed daily across this country."

That is what Janice Hughes Barnes is asking the Supreme Court to do. In two previous cases, her petition notes, the Court dodged the issue of how Garner and Graham apply when an officer uses deadly force after endangering himself. But during oral argument in one of those cases, Justice Sonia Sotomayor explained that a court should "look at everything the officer and the victim did that led up to the moment of confrontation." Justice Samuel Alito likewise assumed that "if an officer jumps in front of—or in this case onto—a moving vehicle, 'you look at the entire seizure, the jumping in front of the car plus the ultimate shooting, to determine whether it's reasonable.'"

Barnes "was no threat," his mother's lawyers note. "The threat that Officer Felix faced from the moving vehicle was the immediate consequence of his unreasonable act of
jumping onto the car. Officer Felix should bear responsibility for the foreseeable result of his own actions."

[Stop and Degrade Blacks EVERY DAY in Liberal Cities] NFL DT Christian Barmore was Just Another NGHR to Providence Cops who Subjected Black Man to Search, Fuckery; Freedom Destroyed Over Expired Tag

/

WHAT THE FUCK DO YOU WANT? Patriots DT Christian Barmore accused Providence police of acting "unprofessional" and racist during a traffic stop on Wednesday. However, body camera footage released by PPD seems to tell a different story.

"I just experienced for the first time 5 Providence cops being very unprofessional racism at it's finest," the 25-year-old former 2nd round draft pick wrote on X at 1:22 AM in a since-deleted tweet, describing the incident as he saw it. [more at TMZ]

The media, which is an enterprise owned and controlled by elite whites, functions to partner with police departments in their daily domination of Black people. Media probots generally parrot whatever authorities say and ignore the so-called 4th Amendment rights of Black people. Here, in this episode involving Barmore, witness all the rationalizations made by authority and media to justify the destruction of his; freedom of movement, freedom to be free from searches and seizures (car was impounded b/c tag expired 10 days ago) and his right to be left the fuck alone. According to FUNKTIONARY.

rationalization – a lame-ass attempt at self-justification. A vast majority of what man refers to as reason is simply rationalization—an egocentric (ego-sin-trick) process employed or deployed for self-serving ends. (See: Reason)

Legal truths however must give way to reality. Brazen cops so frequently abuse their power that no black shopper, pedestrian, motorist, juvenile, adult or black professional of any kind—could make a rational argument that so-called constitutional rights provide black people any meaningful protection from cops or the government in general. 4th Amendment rights exist in law books and courtrooms but such “rights” are a myth on the street for Black people. The stronger an individual’s belief is in the 4th Amendment, the further separated he is from reality and the more his expectations will be frustrated [MORE] and [more]. A more adequate description of “4th Amendment rights” are Master’s Favors which can be taken away and granted to a worthy citizen-servant by a governmental master or privileges turned on and off like a light switch in a system of free range slavery.

Most black people live in metro areas. The U.S. metropolitan areas with the 30 largest African-American populations are [HERE] Everywhere one finds a large population of black people living in metro areas controlled by elite, white liberals, the police stop, use force, detain, prosecute and kill blacks in grossly disproportionate numbers. Yet Blacks rarely question this extraordinary phenomenon and inexplicably and strongly believe that elite, white liberals are their political allies who help to ‘protect their rights.’

To trick the gullible black votary elite white liberals often pay lip service about police brutality and decarceration at election time, claiming that police unaccountability is somehow part of Democrats agenda, despite all evidence to the contrary and contravention of the reality that authorities in cities controlled by elite, white liberals are the main perpetrators of it;

DC

NYC

CHICAGO

BALTIMORE

BOSTON

NEWARK

PROVIDENCE

RICHMOND

MEMPHIS

COLUMBUS

CLEVELAND

CINCINNATI

CHARLOTTE

RALEIGH

ATLANTA

INDIANAPOLIS

NEW ORLEANS

ST. LOUIS

MINNESOTA

LOS ANGELES

OAKLAND

BERKELEY CA

SAN FRANCISCO

RIVERSIDE/SAN BERNADINO

HOUSTON

DALLAS

MIAMI

BIRMINGHAM

MILWAUKEE

PHOENIX

A FREE RANGE PRISON. Authorities and their media often mischaracterize police stops of Black drivers and Black citizens as ‘minor intrusions’ or temporary interferences with their freedom. For example, NYC mayor Michael Bloomberg attacked a NYC court decision which ruled stop and frisk unconstitutional, by claiming, “stop and frisk is not racial profiling.” In reality, the pervasive use of authority to arbitrarily stop law abiding Black people against their volition terrorizes and degrades their humanity and “citizenship” and chills their inherent human right to freedom of movement.

Black scholars Naa Kwate and Shatema Threadcraft explain that unlawful stops of Black people lead to “Embodied stress, fear and trauma” because “the subject knows that any encounter may well end in death—and moreover, that the death may go unpunished.” The frequency of such “routine” stops ‘produces bodies that are harassed, stressed and resource deprived, if not altogether dead.’ Kwate and Threadcraft state, “Even those who are not stopped fear being stopped, fear death, and thus also find themselves in the grip of this form of necropower.” The omnipresent threat of being stopped for no reason by police is a form of “torture-lite” according to scholar Paul Butler. Here, the difference between adherent rights and inherent rights should be understood. FUNKTIONARY explains,

adherent rights – privileges disguised as so-called “rights” created by men via deceptive word-manipulation in written form called “symbolaeography,” and legal documents. 2) privileges granted by an apparent or putative authority at the expense of one's inherent or unalienable ‘rights.’ Also, “rights deriving from the corporate government (against itself) that can be liened against or taken away at any time by the creator or grantor of the bestowed right or benefit.”

inherent rights – unalienable and unassailable rights. Also, “All individual’s have unalienable rights. “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.” THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE. [MORE]

“rights” – useful fictions declared in order to make agents of another type of fiction (“government”) have to play along in their deadly theatrical (tragicomedy) game. 2) mere fictions, the contemplation of which leads only to a progressive social, personal, racial and jurisprudential separation from reality. Discussion and debates about “rights” merely evades the FAQ, i.e., the frequently avoided question of who is to enforce any “right” and who will benefit from the pretense. [MORE]

unalienable rights –You can't surrender, sell or transfer unalienable rights, they are a gift from the creator to the individual and can't under any circumstances be surrendered or taken. [MORE]

Hans Buchheim explains, ‘The humanity of each person is the interior reference point of every natural or inherent right. We are all naturally endowed with rights - rights that we possess because we are human beings (regardless of whether we have earned them or are deemed worthy of them by a government authority) – these rights are not given or taken away. Said rights are necessary to human dignity and autonomy - among other things, these natural rights include the right of freedom of movement, the right to be free from detentions, seizures, searches and the right to be left the fuck alone.’

Pervasive, arbitrary stops function to “niggerize,” degrade humanity and humiliate Blacks in public, rendering them “unsafe, unprotected, subjected and subjugated to random violence” by government authority. The undeceiver Jeremy Locke points out that “slavery is not a concept of totality . . . The ultimate slavery is murder . . . Slavery is found both in the partial and complete destruction of freedom.” Prolific stops by cops everywhere a large number of Black people reside, inhibit their freedom of movement and function as a tool to keep Blacks confined to a physical, social and symbolic space. Thus, elites use arbitrary stops to help dominate Black people and control their movements by force. Such stops are a form of slavery. The result is a 2nd class citizenship for Blacks. Legal scholar Charles Epps observes, “police stops convey powerful messages about citizenship and equality. Across millions of stops, these experiences are translated into common stories about who is an equal member of a rule-governed society and who is subjected to arbitrary surveillance and inquiry.” FUNKTIONARY makes it plain, “People who are awake see cops as mercenary security guards that remind us daily, through acts of force, that we are simultaneously both enemies and slaves of the Corporate State”

The above is part of mounting evidence that voting for liberals and supporting their causes has been a complete disaster for Blacks. In metro areas controlled by elite white liberals Black people’s so-called “rights” are turned on and off like light switches as cops routinely surveil, stop, detain and search their clothing, possessions, cars and generally interfere with their freedom of movement as they attempt to go about their daily lives. Additionally, in the same places, police have mauled, injured and put thousands of Black people into greater confinement and murdered hundreds with impunity.[MORE]

Elite liberals and their Black probots loudly and dogmatically claim that voting will solve most of their problems. However, the quality of Black citizenship stays low where the majority of Blacks live and it does so despite high turnout by the black votary. Dr. Frances Cress Welsing explained Black people are currently in a “losing streak that is centuries long.” According to the Urban League’s report, “State of Black America,” “Black people haven’t progressed since 1965” and “the Black-White disparity persists across virtually every line or indicator of life and quality of life in the US. That is, Black people occupy the bottom of nearly every statistical category of life. [MORE]. To racist suspect elite white liberals, Black people and their welfare are not the end of the electoral process but merely the means for winning. “It’s high time to cut the leash.”

Black Houston Cop Sentenced to 60 Years in Prison for Killing White Couple He Falsely Accused of Selling Heroin [question; if a white cop killed a Black . . never mind]

/

From [HERE] Gerald Goines, the mendacious former Houston narcotics officer who had a habit of framing drug suspects, received two concurrent 60-year prison sentences on Tuesday for causing the deaths of Dennis Tuttle and Rhogena Nicholas, who were killed during a 2019 raid that Goines instigated by falsely accusing them of selling heroin. Since Goines is 60 years old and won't be eligible for parole until he serves half of his prison term, the penalty probably amounts to a life sentence.

"This is historic because we believe this is the first-ever murder conviction of a Houston-area law enforcement officer [for a crime] committed while in uniform," said Harris County District Attorney Kim Ogg. The reason such verdicts have been so hard to obtain, she explained, is that "people want to believe in the police—that's who we're trained to trust from the time we're little."

In this case, that trust was sorely misplaced. Goines targeted Tuttle and Nicholas, a middle-aged couple who had lived at 7815 Harding Street for two decades, based on 911 calls from a neighbor, Patricia Garcia, who described them as armed and dangerous drug dealers who had sold her daughter heroin. Garcia, who did not even have a daughter, later admitted she had made the whole thing up, pleading guilty to federal charges related to her false reports.

After an officer visited the Harding Street house and saw no evidence of criminal activity, a supervisor asked Goines, a 34-year veteran assigned to Squad 15 of the Houston Police Department's Narcotics Division, to investigate Garcia's tip. Two weeks later, after an investigation that was cursory if not nonexistent, Goines obtained a no-knock search warrant, claiming a confidential informant had bought heroin at the house from "a white male, whose name is unknown." Goines reported that the informant had seen "a large quantity of baggies" containing heroin, along with "a semi-auto hand gun of a 9mm caliber"—a claim he used to bolster the justification for allowing him and his colleagues to enter the home without knocking and announcing themselves.

Police ultimately found personal-use quantities of marijuana and cocaine at the house. But there was no heroin, no other evidence of drug dealing, and no 9mm pistol. Goines later confessed he had invented the heroin purchase. [MORE]

Settlement Reached for Akron Police Massacre of Jayland Walker. White Cops Shot Black Man 47X as He Ran for His Life, Handcuffed His Corpse after Stop for Unknown Traffic Violation. No Cops Charged

/

GUNNED DOWN WHILE RUNNING FOR HIS LIFE. From [HERE] and [HERE] The settlement agreement between Walker's family and the city of Akron, Ohio was confirmed in a joint court filing on Tuesday, though specific details remain undisclosed. Family attorneys announced plans for a press conference "at the appropriate time" to discuss the agreement. Akron officials, meanwhile, have refrained from commenting until the legal process is complete.

The lawsuit, filed in June 2023, followed an incident where officers fired 94 bullets at Walker during a high-speed chase two years ago and sought a minimum of $45 million in damages from the officers, the city and its officials.

The lawsuit accused the police of excessive force and claimed a "culture of violence and racism" within the Akron Police Department. The complaint came months after a grand jury decided not to indict the officers involved. Authorities have yet to release the names of those officers.

Mr. Walker was murdered on June 27, 2022 Eight officers fired dozens of rounds at Walker following a car and foot chase. Autopsy records show that eight officers fired more than 90 rounds at Walker, with more than 60 striking his body. Seven of the cops were white. Police said it began when they tried to pull him over for unknown, minor equipment violations and he failed to stop, cops then claim he fired a shot from his car 40 seconds into the pursuit.

Police body camera video showed Walker eventually bailed from his slowly moving car while wearing a ski mask and ran into a parking lot, where pursuing officers opened fire. On video police chased Walker for about 10 seconds before officers fired from multiple directions in a burst of shots that lasted 6 or 7 seconds. A county medical examiner said Walker was shot at least 40 times. A handgun, loaded magazine and wedding ring were found on the driver’s seat of the car.

Unnamed Officer(s) claim that they thought Mr. Walker had fired a weapon from his car during the high speed chase and that they feared he would fire again, prompting them to shoot him. How police could hear one gun shot during such a high speed chase is a white supremacy mystery. Nevertheless, whether a gun was fired is simply police misdirection and distraction from the only material issue which is whether the black man posed a threat when he fled on foot from police. He had no object in his hand and the cops never saw a gun, because it was on the car seat.

Insofar as it applies to white citizens, the Supreme Court has explained, ‘a police officer can use deadly force to prevent the escape of a fleeing felon ONLY where he has probable cause to believe the suspect poses a threat of death or serious physical harm to the officer or to others.’ Tenn v Garner, 475 US 1 (1985). The Court stated,

The use of deadly force to prevent the escape of all felony suspects, whatever the circumstances, is constitutionally unreasonable. It is not better that all felony suspects die than that they escape. Where the suspect poses no immediate threat to the officer and no threat to others, the harm resulting from failing to apprehend him does not justify the use of deadly force to do so. It is no doubt unfortunate when a suspect who is in sight escapes, but the fact that the police arrive a little late or are a little slower afoot does not always justify killing the suspect. A police officer may not seize an unarmed, nondangerous suspect by shooting him dead. [MORE]

Walker was not a fleeing felon, he had no criminal record and police manically chased him over an unknown traffic violation. He posed no reasonable threat to police as no officers even claimed to have seen him brandish a weapon and he was running away from police when he was shot over 90 times. As such, it is not rational that police reasonably believe they faced an imminent threat of death or serious bodily harm.

Akron is a city run by elite, white liberals as Democrats control all branches of government.

MASSACRE OF JAYLAND WALKER SOUNDED LIKE FIREWORKS. ON VIDEO AN ARMY OF LATHERED-UP, WHITE AKRON COPS SHOT UNARMED BLACK MAN 60 TIMES AS HE FLED ON FOOT. COPS CLAIM HE DIDN'T STOP FOR AN UNKNOWN TRAFFIC VIOLATION. ABOVE IS APPARENTLY THE ONLY BODYCAM VIDEO RELEASED BY THE PUBLIC MASTERS -EVEN THOUGH AT LEAST 7 OTHER COPS WERE PRESENT

Jayland was murdered for failing to comply with an order to pull over and an order to remain in his vehicle or to stop. In other words, he was murdered for failing to comply with authority. All laws or commands by authorities are threats backed by the ability and willingness to use violence/force against those who disobey. The reality is simply obey authority or go to jail or be murdered. Fool yourself if you want to, but there is nothing consensual or voluntary in our legal system. The legal system is entirely based on and anchored in physical coercion, violence.

However, authority is not real, it is simply a belief. Authority is the belief in the government’s implied right to rule over people in the first place. Authority is the belief that some people have the legal and moral right to forcibly control others, and that, consequently, those others have a legal and moral obligation to obey.’ Michael Huemer defines political authority as “the hypothesized moral property in virtue of which governments may coerce people in certain ways not permitted to anyone else and in virtue of which citizens must obey governments in situations in which they would not be obligated to obey anyone else.”

In real life authority is a granfalloon, an unreality. FUNKTIONARY explains Authority “has no meaning in reality,” it “is the means by which society uses to control its population.” Authority is a “cartoon” or an “image of law” because among other things the social contract is a lie told to you by your masters. Consequently, there is no rational justification for anyone or entity to rule over other human beings. Authority is rule through coercion.” Coercion here means physical force. “Laws” are threats backed by the ability and willingness to use violence/force against those who disobey. Huemer explains ‘the legal system is anchored by a non-voluntary intervention, a harm that the state can impose regardless of the individual’s choices.’ The only actual choice authority presents to citizens is to obey commands and laws or go to jail. Locke states, “The lie of tyranny is that you will maintain the freedom of life by obeying authority. The choices it offers you are a lifetime of obedience or death.”

White Liberal DA Fails to Charge White Aurora Cop Who Murdered Kilyn Lewis; Shot Black Man While He was Holding a Phone w/Both Hands Up [white supremacy is not about hate, but Domination of Blacks]

/

From [HERE] Aurora Police Department SWAT Officer Michael Dieck will not face criminal charges in the death of 37-year-old Kilyn Lewis, who Dieck fatally shot outside an apartment complex in May while trying to arrest him on suspicion of attempted murder.

Arapahoe County District Attorney John Kellner found Dieck “reasonably believed there was an imminent danger of death or serious bodily injury,” justifying the deadly use of force under Colorado law, Kellner wrote in a decision letter published Friday. Lewis was unarmed during the encounter.

Dieck was among a team of Aurora and Denver police officers who surveilled Lewis for two days before trying to arrest him as he exited a car outside an apartment complex on South Ironton Street on May 23.

Lewis was a suspect in a May 5 first-degree attempted murder in Denver.

Lewis reached behind his back after police surrounded him with guns drawn and ordered him to show his hands and get on the ground, according to the decision letter and body-worn camera footage released by Aurora police. 

He removed a phone and white tubes of fruit snacks from his pocket and was holding them in his hands as he raised them in the air when Dieck shot him once in the stomach, according to the decision letter. Lewis died from the gunshot wound on May 25.

Kellner’s review of the shooting found officers identified themselves and yelled repeated commands for Lewis to show his hands and get on the ground. Lewis walked several feet toward officers and the front driver-side door of the car, then put his hand into his rear pocket and removed it, according to the letter.

Dieck told investigators he thought Lewis had pulled out a gun and was preparing to shoot at him and other officers. Other officers at the scene also told investigators they thought Lewis was pulling out a gun.

COPS WERE LESS THAN 30 FEET AWAY AND THOUGHT A CELL PHONE WAS GUN? It is true that cops have the power to use force offensively to kill when they face an imminent threat of deadly harm. Nevertheless, Mr. Lewis had his hands up - the universal way of obeying authority. There is obvious probable cause for murder; just hit play and watch one of the 3 videos. The media, which is controlled by elite white folks is doing its best to rationalize the decision not to charge the white cop. In order to do this, the media attempts to make it seem reasonable that a cell phone could like a gun from less than 25 feet away. At least it does to racist suspects in a Black person’s hand. Such a misperception of reality has lead to perhaps thousands of Black murders in which phones look like guns, tasers look like guns, immobile cars are dragging cops, guns underneath shirts are still visible, hands up means an attack is imminent, etc. Such deluded thinking can only rationalize itself in a racist mind (or the enslaved mind of a non-white individual) when it encounters color.

Kellner presented a half-hearted case to an Arapahoe County grand jury for consideration, which declined to accept the case for further investigation, according to the letter.

The Justice for Kilyn E. Lewis Action Team released a statement from the family expressing disappointment and outrage on how the family heard the decision.

“For nearly five months, our family has been left in the dark, waiting for answers. Without advance notice or any communication, we learned through the media that District Attorney John Kellner had released findings, a 20-page document made public without our knowledge or opportunity to review,” the statement said. “The lack of respect and regard for our family is staggering as we have been present and begging for answers and transparency since we lost Kilyn.”[MORE]

Lewis’ death has sparked protests at Aurora City Council meetings and other events. His family did not have advance notice that Kellner was releasing the decision letter on Friday, according to a statement from the Justice for Kilyn E. Lewis Action Team.

“This decision is not only a failure of justice but a message that the life of an unarmed Black man like Kilyn means nothing to the very system that is supposed to protect us,” organizers wrote in the statement.

The group is holding a community rally to “demand answers (and) demand accountability” at 5:30 p.m. Monday at the Aurora Municipal Center, 15151 E. Alameda Parkway.

White DA (GOP) Finds Omaha Cop's Murder of Steven Phipps Justified: Claims a Fleeing Black Man Posed a Threat b/c He "Pointed" a Gun at Cops While Upside Down, in Mid-Air and Jumping Over a Fence

/

Above DID STEVEN PHIPPS POSE A THREAT WHILE UPSIDE DOWN IN MID-AIR? COPS FIRED BEFORE HE HIT THE GROUND. IN PHOTO WHITE authorities; 2 OMAHA COPS, COUNTY ATTORNEY, POLICE CHIEF AND MAYOR. WHITE MEDIA MISSING FROM PHOTO. WHAT IS COLLECTIVE WHITE POWER? WHEN WHITE COPS KILL A BLACK MAN who POSed NO IMMINENT THREAT TO THE COP AND HIS FELLOW WHITE OFFICERS, the white mayor, white prosecutor AND THE WHITE MEDIA SUPPORT AND DEFEND THAT WHITE POLICE OFFICER’S “RIGHT” TO DO SO.  MORE]

 From [HERE] The officer who fired his gun at Steven Phipps Jr. eight times in less than three seconds won’t face charges.

Douglas County Attorney Don Kleine said in a release Monday that the actions of Omaha Police Officer Noah Zendejas during the Sept. 28 traffic stop and subsequent foot pursuit were justified.

“After careful review of the video evidence and statements made, the actions of Mr. Phipps in producing a firearm at a traffic stop, not complying with the officer’s commands and Mr. Phipp’s gun barrel being pointed toward the officer during the incident justified the officer’s decision to use deadly force.”

Statement from Douglas County Attorney Don Kleine

OPD Chief Todd Schmaderer said during a news conference last week that Phipps, 22, died after he was shot by Officer Zendejas while scaling a fence after he fled from officers during a traffic stop at about 5:45 p.m. Saturday, Sept. 28, just south of 31st Street and Ames Avenue.

Police maintain that most of the 8 shots were fired while Phipps was in midair

Nevertheless, the video speaks for itself. Police claim that somehow while Phipps jumped head first over a high fence and was upside down and in mid air while falling to the ground, he managed to point a gun at police. Said narrative appears to be contradicted by the video.

First of all the incident happened in less than 2 seconds. That is, Phipps was running at a high speed when he jumped head first over the fence. He did not “point” or aim the gun at police while he was upside down in mid air. The jump happened so fast it would have been impracticable for Phipps to “aim” a gun and impossible for the cop to see a gun aimed at him. It is quite obvious that police 1) obtained the surveillance video 2) watch it super slow motion over and over again and 3) then created a false narrative to justify the murder. White media believed it.

Contrary to media myth-information that “video showed Phipps still had the gun in his hand as he jumped the fence and only dropped it after being shot,” stills from video show that the gun falls out of his hand before he hits the ground. Regardless, to justify the use of deadly force the threat must be an imminent one. As such, without more facts, mere possession of the gun does not constitute an imminent threat. The Black man was fleeing. There are no facts that tend to show he posed a threat.

His aunt, Angela Phipps, said after seeing the police footage, she heard Phipps repeatedly say "don't shoot me" after he hit the ground while holding his hands and one leg up in a defensive position.

Michigan AG Charges 2 Sterling Heights Officers for Felony Assault: White Cop Ordered Police Dog to Attack Black Man who had Surrendered and was on the Ground Surrounded by a Gang of White Cops

/

From [HERE] Two Sterling Heights police officers were charged for misconduct and felonious assault for K-9 deployment on Tuesday during an arrest of a suspect where questions of excessive force had been raised.

Officers James Sribniak, 31, and Jack Currie, 29 were criminally charged announced Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel. Each officer is charged with one count of Misconduct in Office, a 5-year felony, and Felonious Assault, a 4-year felony.

The case stems from a Feb. 25 case during the pursuit and arrest of Garry Young, of Roseville, accused of assaulting a police officer, resisting arrest, fleeing, domestic violence, operating with a suspended license. The two officers had been on paid leave amid the investigation.

While the suspect was on the ground, surrounded by officers, and after having received two Taser deployments, Officer Currie allegedly urged Officer Sribniak to deploy his K9 to bite the suspect.

Prosecutors say Officer Sribniak, controlling the K9, ordered the dog to bite the suspect, which he did, on the suspect's right hip.

The use of force lasted about a minute police say, and after it happened, Young was taken for medical attention for minor injuries.

"K9 assistance can be a valuable tool for law enforcement but must be deployed with good judgment," said Nessel. "K9 Officers are rigorously trained in the proper use of police dogs and should be held to the highest standards of conduct.

"We should be able to trust them to not deploy a dog as an unnecessary and unlawful punitive measure to brutally attack a human being. In this incident, deploying a K9 on a suspect already on the ground and well-surrounded by officers is not only horrific but illegal.

"My office remains committed to thoroughly investigating and prosecuting police misconduct."

Sribniak and Currie have not yet been arraigned, and future court dates have not yet been set.

Young is accused of beating his girlfriend, ripping her clothes off — and choking her 16-year-old daughter, who tried to stop him. Young then returned to the house while officers are there. They tried to get him to exit his vehicle.

Young fled in his vehicle — but stop sticks deployed by police blew out one of his tires. Police, knowing he was drunk and already allegedly hurt a child, pursued.

"We wanted to get him in custody and we wanted to make sure the people inside that house were safe," said Dwojakowski. "And we thought that was the most prudent thing to do."

According to police, the chase lasted 13 miles — going through six red lights, almost hitting a pedestrian — and with Young receiving two more flat tires.

After Family Called Mental Health Hotline Seeking Advertised Mobile Outreach from Trained Professionals, Jersey City SWAT Cops Arrived and Murdered Black Man. Liberal Mayor Defended Cops - Suit Filed

/

UNDER ARREST FOR ?? From [HERE] The family of a Jersey City man killed by city police last year has filed a wrongful death lawsuit against the city, Hudson County, and a local hospital, claiming the defendants’ failure to follow standard law enforcement de-escalation techniques during the man’s mental health crisis led to his death and violated his civil rights.

The lawsuit, filed Wednesday morning, comes one year after police shot and killed Andrew “Drew” Washington at his home, where they were dispatched when his family members say they called a hotline seeking mental health professionals to help him.

The plaintiff, Courtnie Washington, Andrew’s sister and the administrator of his estate, alleges that her brother’s death could have been avoided and is seeking unspecified damages. She claims that established state and federal law enforcement guidelines for dealing with individuals with mental health conditions were not followed by Jersey City police officers, and also alleges that medical health professionals failed to show adequate care with Washington.

“Everything the police did was wrong. My brother was not dangerous and they knew that,” Washington told the New Jersey Monitor. “If my brother had a heart attack or he had cancer, would you act this way as police officers? No.”

The suit cites a series of events that culminated in Washington’s death on August 27, 2023.

Family members called a mental health hotline asking for the advertised mobile outreach of trained mental health professionals to help Washington, 52, who suffered from multiple mental health disabilities, including bipolar disorder, schizophrenia, and bouts of psychosis that involved auditory hallucinations. However, the mental health team was never dispatched, according to the suit, which says officials instead sent paramedics untrained in mental health issues and a heavily armed “SWAT-like” force trained to respond to armed criminal suspects and terrorism suspects.

The complaint states,

“In direct contradiction to basic de-escalation principles…[officers] unnecessarily treated the situation like a dangerous standoff that could only be resolved through use of force.” Drew was alone in his apartment, not suspected of any crime, and not a threat to anyone. His family had sought assistance from a mental health professional. But instead, armed with tactical gear, guns, and shields, officers taped over the peephole of Drew’s door and tied a rope around the doorknob, ignoring his requests for them to leave. Losing patience, officers decided to blow the door open—an action that predictably terrified Drew, who officers found in his apartment holding a kitchen knife. Moments later, he was shot and tased by officers. Family members waiting outside were not told that Drew had been shot and were prohibited from talking to him or going with him to the hospital, where he later died alone.

Attorney Amelia Green said the entire incident that resulted in Washington’s death didn’t have to happen. Washington was alone in his home, not at risk of harm to anyone, and had asked police to leave, Green told the New Jersey Monitor.

“The violence ensued when the police broke down his door without justification,” said Green, who is lead counsel for the plaintiff. “What the Jersey City police did was unnecessarily escalate the situation in contravention of every basic principle of policing. The New Jersey Attorney General’s Office has issued clear directives, aligned with the national standard, that when you’re dealing with individuals with mental health issues, you’re supposed to de-escalate, disengage, and ensure you’re not doing anything to create a situation where there might be the use of force. Here, the police did the exact opposite of those basic principles.”

After the shooting, Jersey City Mayor Steve Fulop defended the officers’ actions, telling reporters, “We do feel those police officers acted properly, we want the public to know that.” Fulop said anyone would be “hard-pressed” to say officers and medical personnel dispatched by Jersey City Medical Center “could have acted differently in this situation.”

Fulop also claimed Washington charged at officers with a knife. The complaint says Washington was holding a kitchen knife because “he was scared for his life.” Fulop is seeking the Democratic nomination for governor in 2025.

Green categorically rejected the city’s official response, saying the actions of police officers last August were “a clear violation of New Jersey state directives that they’re required to follow.”

“The mayor should have taken accountability, because the Jersey City Police Department botched this entire incident, killing a man. Instead, he has made comments to try and cover up the misconduct in this case and justify what’s happened, even going as far as suggesting things that simply are not true,” Green said. “The city should be taking accountability for this and make sure this never happens again.”

Courtnie Washington knows she cannot get her brother back. But she believes his death doesn’t have to be in vain.

“This idea of villainizing people with mental health disabilities needs to stop,” Washington said. “Drew was pretty easy to love. He had a really beautiful heart, and he had unwavering faith. He made you feel hope after you talked to him. Drew was the reason why our family even began to talk about mental health, because we had to. I want people to know that. He was our light.”

Honolulu Cops Pose as Citizens at Meeting to Delay City Payment for Black Man They Killed. Cops Shot Lindani Myeni After Running Up on Him at Night w/o ID'ing Themselves, Initiated Unprovoked Assault

/

GOVERNMENT ACTS ON BEHALF OF ITSELF - NOT THE PEOPLE. From [HERE] Dozens of Honolulu police officers appeared alongside other city officials Wednesday in a strong show of opposition to a proposed $1.5 million city settlement over a 2021 officer-involved shooting of an unarmed Black man.

City Council members ultimately postponed voting on whether to approve the settlement of a wrongful death lawsuit filed on behalf of 29-year-old Lindani Myeni. Myeni was fatally shot on April 14, 2021, after a struggle with officers outside a Honolulu vacation rental he was accused of having entered without permission.

Civil rights activist the Rev. Al Sharpton is condemning the Honolulu Police Department for the fatal shooting of a Black man as various versions of what led to the death continue to emerge.

“Lindani Myeni’s killing is yet another sensational racialization and criminalization of an innocent unarmed black man at the hands of police not following the law and proper police procedures,” Sharpton said in a statement.

The two officers who shot Myeni, Brent Sylvester and Garrick Orosco, who was seriously injured, were cleared of wrongdoing in June 2021 by Alm’s office, which declined to pursue charges against them. 

The officers had responded to the scene of an alleged unlawful entry call in April after Lindani mistakenly entered a house which was an Airbnb where an Asian couple was staying. Lindani, who was a tourist on vacation with his wife and 2 children, believed it to be the temple next door.

When he entered he alarmed the couple. A doorbell video shows the 29-year-old arriving at the house, taking off his shoes before entering through an open door and then quickly leaving after his presence confused the Asian couple. In the video Myeni is heard repeatedly apologizing to them as he exited. The couple frantically overreacted and called 911 and during an emotional call reported him as dangerous and claimed to be terrified. 

Due to the fact that the door was open and there was no signage indicating “no trespass” to the public, said entry most likely was not unlawful - despite being unwanted. in other words, Lindani did not commit a crime. Additionally, the couple gave inconsistent stories about what happened - and definitely did not appear to be “terrified” on the video. [MORE]

ON VIDEO ASIAN WOMAN IS STANDING OUTSIDE SAYING TO 911, "im SO AFRAID TO GO OUTSIDE." SHE ALSO CLAIMED TO BE TERRIFIED BUT ON THE VIDEO SHE DOESN'T LOOK OR SOUND SCARED . [MORE]

Police responding to the 911 call immediately approached and then shot and killed him a short time later outside the house. 

The video reveals the fact that cops never announced themselves in a very dark area at night as they shined a bright light into the Black man’s face. As the cops quickly ran up on him and put their hands on him he defended himself.

A lawsuit filed on his behalf said he likely mistook the home for a temple next door that’s open to the public. Unarmed, the Black man from South Africa was wearing a traditional Zulu headband with a tuft of fur at the forehead.

Doorbell and police bodycam camera footage had shown Myeni ignoring commands to get on the ground. The camera then shows a stun gun fired by police either malfunctioning or having no effect on Myeni.  

Most importantly the video also shows that an officer fired several gunshots at Myeni before identifying themselves as 'Police!' 

In this matter the cops were the aggressors who initiated a violent assault in the dark on a Black man without announcing themselves. The Black Man was unarmed and apparently trying to get away from his unknown assailants. Thus, deadly force, which was already unavailable to them because they were the aggressors, could not have been applied because the cops were not facing an imminent, deadly attack from an unarmed Black man defending himself against their aggression and trying to flee. [MORE]

Council members said they wanted time to review evidence and ask more questions of the Honolulu Prosecutor’s Office in closed-door sessions of the Executive Matters and Legal Affairs Committee. The matter will be taken up again at the council’s next meeting in November. If the settlement is not approved, the case will go to civil trial next year, said James Bickerton, a lawyer for Myeni’s widow.

Lindsay Myeni, who filed the lawsuit in 2021, testified tearfully in support of the settlement and held up her husband’s bloodied shirt with bullet holes that he had been wearing that night. 

Mayor Rick Blangiardi, Honolulu Prosecutor Steve Alm, Jonathan Frye, Honolulu chapter chair of the state’s police union and police Chief Joe Logan - all government authorities - encouraged council members to vote against the settlement and said they felt the police did nothing wrong. 

Bickerton also objected to the presence of so many armed officers in the City Council chambers during testimony. 

“I’ve never seen anything like it,” he said later in a telephone interview. “It’s literally a show of force. It has no place in a democracy. If you want to come down and testify in a civil matter, leave your guns back in the station.”

‘How Could They Be Acting in Self Defense While My Hands Were Restrained?’ Riverdale (IL) Cops Sued for Attacking Black Man in Alley after Stopping Him for No Reason

/

From [HERE] South suburban police officers are accused of using excessive force, hitting a man several times during an arrest.

Dashcam video captured the incident, and the man now suing Riverdale police is speaking out.

Abraham Carmichael said he needs several surgeries to recover from injuries after a run-in with two Riverdale police officers earlier this year.

The lawsuit filed against those officers and their department says Carmichael suffered from "emotional anxiety, fear, humiliation,"

Now, he's calling for justice.

"I felt like I was a punching bag, like a UFC punching bag," Carmichael said.

Police dashcam video from February of this year, obtained by Carmichael's legal team, appears to show a Riverdale police officer hitting Carmichael several times, while Carmichael's hands appear to stay behind his back.

"He just grabbed me, slammed me against that car," Carmichael said. "I felt something hit me on my nose, and I probably, he probably knocked me out for like, a couple of seconds."

Just moments beforehand, Carmichael said he was taking his girlfriend's car to get fixed by a friend. He ran into a man he said he doesn't know, and started a conversation. That's when he said two Riverdale police officers blocked the alley to arrest that man before quickly involving Carmichael.

"I kept asking him, what was going on. 'What did I do wrong?'" Carmichael said.

Carmichael's legal team showed ABC7 Chicago the police report from the incident. It said there was use of force by officers, defining it as defensive tactics.

"I don't know how you can defend yourself against a person whose hands are, who is on the car," Carmichael said.

Carmichael said police called an ambulance, and he was taken to the hospital.

The lawsuit against Riverdale police and the two officers says Carmichael was left with a fractured nose and ribs and several bruises.

Carmichael said the day plays on repeat in his mind.

"I've been scared; they bother my family. I got to take all these medicines now. It's unreal. It's unreal," Carmichael said. "I thought I was gonna get killed."

Carmichael said he thought, after being treated at the hospital, he'd get to go home, but instead he was charged with resisting arrest and obstruction of justice. His lawyer said Carmichael initially pleaded not guilty, but the state's attorney's office later dropped the charges.

"If they doing this to me, they did it to someone else. What are we waiting on? We have a ticking time bomb running the streets," Carmichael said.

Carmichael's legal team said Carmichael spoke with the Riverdale chief of police after the incident, and was told the department did not believe the officers' actions needed discipline.