Suit says White Euclid Cops Kicked Black Man in Face Breaking Bone After Unlawful Stop & Search in His Apartment Bldg

From [HERE] and [HERE] A black man, Emirius Spencer says in a lawsuit that he was kicked in the face, kneed in the groin and seriously hurt by a white suburban Cleveland police during an arrest for possession of marijuana.The same officer recently was fired for using excessive force on a black man in another case.

Spencer filed the suit Friday against the city of Euclid, former Euclid police officer Michael Amiott, current officer Shane Rivera and the owners of the apartment complex where he lived.

Amiott was fired in October from Euclid after dashboard camera video showed him repeatedly punching a different black man during a traffic stop.

A message seeking comment was left Monday for Euclid police. No phone listing could be found for Amiott or Rivera.

Spencer's lawsuit said Amiott and Rivera were moonlighting as security guards at his apartment building last December when they confronted him in a hallway, asking him if he had any warrants and whether he was armed.

Although there was no probable cause to arrest, detain or search Spencer and no crime had been reported, Amiott reached into Spencer's pocket and found less than a gram of marijuana.

According to the lawsuit: "Amiott immediately grabbed Spencer arm and began twisting it. Officer Amiott's response was sudden and unnecessarily aggressive. Spencer was pushed against the hallway wall and grabbed by both Officers Amiott and [Shane] Rivera. Spencer tried to be calm and asked the Officers why they were doing this, but he was ignored. Rather, Officer Amiott was shouting at Spencer to 'Stop Resisting!' despite the fact that Spencer was being compliant. Amiott then kneed Spencer in the groin and forcefully pushed Spencer to the ground."

Amiott then kneed him in the groin and shoved him to the floor while Rivera jumped on his back and restrained his arms and legs, according to Spencer's suit.

The lawsuit says Amiott kicked Spencer in the face when he called out for help and that both officers shocked him with stun guns before placing him in handcuffs. Amiott's partner, Shane Rivera, is also a named defendant.

"Spencer was eventually taken to Euclid Hospital. The medical staff at Euclid Hospital recommended Spencer be transferred to MetroHealth Hospital because MetroHealth has trauma unit and Spencer injuries were sufficiently severe," according to the lawsuit. "Later, Amiott and Rivera attempted to justify their use of force by alleging Spencer was violently uncontrollable Spencer, and 155 lbs., has no criminal felony record nor does he have any history of violence. Amiott, and 218 lbs., has history of misconduct, dishonesty and using excessive force."

Spencer was treated for a broken bone in his face.

He later was charged in Euclid Municipal Court with theft, resisting arrest, criminal damaging and drug abuse. Euclid eventually hired a special prosecutor, who dropped the first three charges in September. Spencer paid a fine for the drug charge.

Click to read more ...

New Investigation Finds U.S. [Uncle Sham] Special Forces Massacred Somali Civilians & Orchestrated a Cover-Up

Facial Recognition Software [built by white engineers] Most Likely to Mis-Identify Black People as Criminal Suspects

From [HERE] and [MORE] “You good?” a man asked two narcotics detectives late in the summer of 2015.

The detectives had just finished an undercover drug deal in Brentwood, a predominately black neighborhood in Jacksonville, Florida, that is among the poorest in the country, when the man unexpectedly approached them. One of the detectives responded that he was looking for $50 worth of “hard”– slang for crack cocaine. The man disappeared into a nearby apartment and came back out to fulfill the detective’s request, swapping the drugs for money.

“You see me around, my name is Midnight,” the dealer said as he left.

Before Midnight departed, one of the detectives was able to take several photos of him, discreetly snapping pictures with his phone held to his ear as though he were taking a call.

Two weeks later, police wanted to make the arrest. The only information they had about the dealer were the smartphone pictures, the address where the exchange had taken place, and the nickname Midnight. Stumped, the Jacksonville sheriff’s office turned to a new tool to help them track down the dealer: facial recognition software.

The technology helped them pin down a suspect named Willie Lynch. Lynch, who has been described by close observers of the case such as Georgetown University researcher Clare Garvie as a “highly intelligent, highly motivated individual” despite only having graduated high school – he even filed his own case motions, which could be mistaken for ones written by an actual lawyer – was eventually convicted and sentenced to eight years in prison. He is now appealing his conviction.

Whether or not Willie Lynch is “Midnight” remains to be seen. But many experts see the facial recognition technology used against him as flawed, especially against black individuals. Moreover, the way the Jacksonville sheriff’s office used the technology – as the basis for identifying and arresting Lynch, not as one component of a case supported by firmer evidence – makes his conviction even more questionable.

The methods used to convict Lynch weren’t made clear during his court case. The Jacksonville sheriff’s office initially didn’t even disclose that they had used facial recognition software. Instead, they claimed to have used a mugshot database to identify Lynch on the basis of a single photo that the detectives had taken the night of the exchange.

An ‘imperfect biometric’

The lack of answers the Jacksonville sheriff’s office have provided in Lynch’s case is representative of the problems that facial recognition poses across the country. “It’s considered an imperfect biometric,” said Garvie, who in 2016 created a study on facial recognition software, published by the Center on Privacy and Technology at Georgetown Law, called The Perpetual Line-Up. “There’s no consensus in the scientific community that it provides a positive identification of somebody.”

The software, which has taken an expanding role among law enforcement agencies in the US over the last several years, has been mired in controversy because of its effect on people of color. Experts fear that the new technology may actually be hurting the communities the police claims they are trying to protect.

“If you’re black, you’re more likely to be subjected to this technology and the technology is more likely to be wrong,” House oversight committee ranking member Elijah Cummings said in a congressional hearing on law enforcement’s use of facial recognition software in March 2017. “That’s a hell of a combination.”

Cummings was referring to studies such as Garvie’s. This report found that black individuals, as with so many aspects of the justice system, were the most likely to be scrutinized by facial recognition software in cases. It also suggested that software was most likely to be incorrect when used on black individuals – a finding corroborated by the FBI’s own research. This combination, which is making Lynch’s and other black Americans’ lives excruciatingly difficult, is born from another race issue that has become a subject of national discourse: the lack of diversity in the technology sector.

Click to read more ...

Like Interstate Crosscheck, Trump's "Extreme Vetting" Software to be Used as Pretext to Discriminate Against Non-White Immigrants

From [TheIntercept] THIS PAST AUGUST, technology firms lined up to find out how they could help build a computerized reality of President Donald Trump’s vague, hateful vision of “extreme vetting” for immigrants. At a Department of Homeland Security event, and via related DHS documents, both first reported by The Intercept, companies like IBM, Booz Allen Hamilton, and Red Hat learned what sort of software the government needed to support its “Extreme Vetting Initiative.”

Today, a coalition of more than 100 civil rights and technology groups, as well as prominent individuals in those fields, has formed to say that it is technically impossible to build software that meets DHS’s vetting requirements — and that code that attempts to do so will end up promoting discrimination and undermining civil liberties.

The new opposition effort, organized by legal scholars Alvaro Bedoya, executive director of Georgetown Law’s Center on Privacy & Technology, and Rachel Levinson-Waldman, senior counsel at NYU’s Brennan Center for Justice, includes two letters, one on the technical futility of trying to implement extreme-vetting software and another on the likely disturbing social fallout of any such attempt.

The first letter, signed by 54 computer scientists, engineers, mathematicians, and other experts in machine learning, data mining, and other forms of automated decision-making, says the signatories have “grave concerns” about the Extreme Vetting Initiative. As described in documents posted by DHS’s Immigration and Customs Enforcement branch, the initiative requires software that can automate and accelerate the tracking and assessment of foreigners in the U.S., in part through a feature that can “determine and evaluate an applicant’s probability of becoming a positively contributing member of society, as well as their ability to contribute to national interests.”

In 2017, this is a tall order for any piece of software. In the letter, experts affiliated with institutions like Google, MIT, and Berkeley, say the plan just won’t work: “Simply put, no computational methods can provide reliable or objective assessments of the traits that ICE seeks to measure,” the letter states. “In all likelihood, the proposed system would be inaccurate and biased.” Any attempt to use algorithms to assess who is and isn’t a “positively contributing member of society,” the letter argues, would be a muddled failure at best:

Algorithms designed to predict these undefined qualities could be used to arbitrarily flag groups of immigrants under a veneer of objectivity.

Inevitably, because these characteristics are difficult (if not impossible) to define and measure, any algorithm will depend on “proxies” that are more easily observed and may bear little or no relationship to the characteristics of interest. For example, developers could stipulate that a Facebook post criticizing U.S. foreign policy would identify a visa applicant as a threat to national interests. They could also treat income as a proxy for a person’s contributions to society, despite the fact that financial compensation fails to adequately capture people’s roles in their communities or the economy.

Click to read more ...

US Sleepwalking into Renewing Vast NSA Surveillance Law Allowing Warrantless Digital Surveillance

From [HRW] and [HERE] Several bills that would extend the US government’s ability to grab and search vast numbers of communications without a warrant – including users’ data from companies such as Google and Facebook – are marching toward passage in Congress with little public attention or debate.

US law currently allows these activities under Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, which was adopted in 2008. As former National Security Agency contractor Edward Snowden revealed, Section 702 is the basis for two enormous warrantless snooping programs: one in which the government demands communications from US-based internet companies, and one in which it allegedly scans massive amounts of the internet traffic that flows between the US and other countries. Although the government cannot legally target people in the US for this monitoring, it scoops up untold quantities of their correspondence “incidentally.”

For years, US human rights advocates have been urging Congress to rein in Section 702. Earlier this month, a key committee in the House of Representatives advanced a bill that would place some restrictions on the government’s ability to search through data gathered under Section 702 – but would harm civil liberties in other respects and extend the law for nearly six more years. Other bills that have been introduced in the Senate would impose more meaningful restrictions on searches of the data and require the authorities to be more transparent about how Section 702 monitoring affects people in the US, but would also renew the law.

If none of these bills pass, Section 702 will expire on December 31, 2017. Human Rights Watch believes this is exactly what should happen: Section 702 is and will always be a law that allows warrantless surveillance in violation of human rights. While the current Senate bills would make improvements, especially by requiring warrants for at least some searches of the data after the government has gathered it, the initial warrantless gathering would remain. This amassing of private e-mails, calls, and other personal information by the intelligence agencies without a judge’s approval is a recipe for abuse – and flies in the face of the Fourth Amendment to the US Constitution, which was adopted to prevent precisely such overreaching.

Anyone who is concerned about an extension of US secret surveillance powers should keep a close watch on Congress during the coming weeks. And senators and representatives who believe in civil liberties should be courageous enough to stand up to the intelligence agencies by saying, “Nine years of unaccountable spying on people in the US (and their friends and relatives elsewhere) is more than enough.”

Manchester to Pay $275,000 After White Cops Arrested Latino Man for Filming them in Public While On Duty

From [HERE] A city in New Hampshire is paying out $275,000 to settle a federal civil rights lawsuit for the arrest of a man who was filming the police.

The state chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union, which had filed the lawsuit, said Wednesday that Manchester agreed to make the payment to Alfredo Valentin. The city resident was arrested in 2015 on misdemeanor wiretapping charges after he used his phone to record two Manchester police officers who were on duty at the time.

The ACLU said the arrest violated Valentin's First Amendments rights. It said that Manchester countered that Valentin's rights weren't violated because he was trying to hide his phone from view.

An attorney for Manchester didn't respond to a request for comment.

Although Contracts are Voidable if they Offend Public Policy, White Judge Upholds Gag Order Preventing Black Woman From Discussing Foul Encounter w/Baltimore Cops

From [HERE] A white federal judge upheld a nondisclosure agreement Thursday that was part of a Baltimore police-brutality settlement, so Ashley Overbey will not be able to share the story of her 2012 assault and Tasering by three officers with an online news site.

U.S. District Judge Marvin Gardis granted summary judgment and dismissed the case.

The ACLU, co-counsel for Overbey, said it would appeal.

“The gag provision challenged in this lawsuit is part of a broader and by now well-documented pattern by the city of Baltimore of trying to close down avenues for the public to learn about abuses of the city’s residents by the Baltimore Police Department,” said ACLU attorney Deborah Jeon. “This strikes us as a blatant snubbing of our clients’ First Amendment rights, and we are optimistic that the Fourth Circuit will agree with us.”

In 2012, Ashley Overbey, then a 25-year-old Black woman, called the Baltimore City Police Department for help, reporting a burglary at her apartment. Three sets of police officers were dispatched to her apartment at various times. The crime lab unit radioed for police officers to return and one of them, Officer Fred Hannah, forcefully entered and began searching her apartment without her permission. When Ms. Overbey asked him to explain he became violent and aggressive. Another officer, Martin Richardson, came soon after and together they beat, tackled, choked, Tased and handcuffed Ms. Overbey, who was transported to the hospital, then jailed for 24 hours, and charged with six counts of assault and one count of resisting arrest.

All charges against Ms. Overbey were dropped and she successfully sued the Baltimore Police Department for wrongful arrest and unwarranted physical abuse. But as a condition of settling the case, the city and police department required Ms. Overbey to agree to a gag order that silenced her from talking publicly about her experience. Ms. Overbey was victimized again by the police misconduct when half of her settlement was taken away just because she defended herself in comments on a blog where members of the public disparaged her personal character for suing the police and accepting a settlement, without any understanding of the level of excessive and illegal force used by the police. The Baltimore Police Department is punishing her by withholding half of her settlement amount for exercising her right to free speech

Click to read more ...

White Cop to be Sentenced: Said He Was Under Attack by an Unarmed, Fleeing Black Man [Walter Scott] He Shot in the Back from 20 Ft Away

From [HERE] and [HERE] The execution of Walter Scott by South Carolina police officer Michael Slager was an unambiguous example of racist police abuse. Cell phone footage clearly shows Slager, who is white, pumping eight bullets into the retreating figure of Scott, who was black, as he fled from the officer. The distance between the two at the moment Slager began firing on the unarmed Scott appears to be anywhere from 18 to 20 feet, much too far for Scott to have been any kind of credible danger to the officer. Yet Slager falsely reported that Scott ran at him and attempted to wrestle away his Taser, causing the officer to feel "threatened" and necessitating use of lethal force.

The shooting of Scott occurred following a daytime traffic stop for a non-functioning brake light.  

Immediately following the shooting, Slager radioed a dispatcher, stating, "Shots fired and the subject is down. He grabbed my Taser." In the report of the shooting filed before the video surfaced, Slager said he had feared for his life because Scott had taken his Taser, and that he shot Scott because he "felt threatened".

Bystander video proved all of this to be false. After video surfaced contradicting his police report and showing that he planted a gun by Scott's dead body, Slager was charged with murder 

Despite an abundance of evidence, a state judge had declared a mistrial on December 5 after jurors failed to reach a verdict following 22 hours of deliberation. The jury was made up of 11 white jurors and one black juror. [MORE]

In May 2016, Slager was indicted on federal charges including violation of Scott's civil rights and obstruction of justice.

In a May 2017 plea agreement, Slager pled guilty to federal charges of civil rights violations. In return for his guilty plea, murder charges from the state were dropped. The guilty plea carries a maximum sentence of life imprisonment. His sentencing hearing begins today.

A report prepared by a probation officer recommended to U.S. District Judge David Norton, who is also white [photo below], a prison term of between 10 and nearly 13 years. Prosecutors disagreed, pegging the suggested term at life, though numerous factors make that penalty unlikely. 

Scott's older brother, Anthony, hopes to see Slager spend at least two decades in prison.

"This judge has an opportunity to set a precedent," Anthony Scott said, "to tell police officers that they aren't going to get away with murder." Yes, in a civilized, better society. But in the system of racism/white supremacy white cops have the right to legally execute Black peeople anytime and anyplace. In their relations with Blacks most whites function as psychopaths but in their relations with one another, by and large, white folks treat each other humanely. Despite the fact that Slager was already hooked up first by a white jury [state case] and now by avoiding a murder conviction, expect a lenient sentence from the white judge.    

Prosecutors say it’s murder. “The defendant’s conduct after the shooting demonstrates that he was not acting in fear or rage,” they said in a filing. “The defendant maintained his composure. ... He was not confused, disoriented or enraged.”

Slager picked up the Taser and dropped it near Scott’s lifeless body, only to return it to his belt moments later. This attempt to fit the evidence to his self-defense story, the prosecutors contended, deserves a heightened sentence.

Slager, they added, has continued in court testimony to lie and has “conveniently” failed to remember crucial moments that would harm his defense.

“But for the existence of bystander cellphone video,” the prosecutors said, “it is likely that the defendant would have succeeded in covering up his criminal conduct." [MORE]

Suit Filed: White Bridgeport Cop Standing on Drivers Side of Car Believed He Might Get Run Over So He Shot Black Teen Driver to Death

From [HERE] His “Little brother” shot dead by police, and the bullets wounds to his own chest and arm still healing, Julian Fyffe said he was still trying to make sense of what happened just over a week earlier.

“I would be happy to get justice for what happened,” Fyffe said Wednesday while recovering at home. “They (the police) chose to do it the wrong way.”

The 21-year-old Fyffe’s lawyer, Peter Finch, son of former Bridgeport Mayor Bill Finch, said he is seeking $6 million in a federal civil rights lawsuit against the city and its police department.

“The public perception right now is that the police stopped a danger to the community, when in fact the police created the danger,” Finch said.

City Attorney R. Christopher Meyer responded to the suit by saying, “This was a very tragic and sad event, and I’m surprised that anyone would file a lawsuit at this time before the final investigation detailing what happened is complete.”

State police and Bridgeport Police Chief Armando Perez have said Fyffe was wounded and 15-year-old Jayson Negron shot to death by police on May 9, after officers pursued the stolen vehicle in which they were riding.

But the two police agencies’ versions of what happened differ from each other — and from Fyffe’s.

State police have said that Negron, the driver of the stolen car, backed at police, and that an officer they wouldn’t identify fired, hitting Negron and Fyffe.

Perez said Negron put the car in reverse and backed at officer James Boulay, and that Boulay was about to be “sucked under the car” when he fired at Negron and Fyffe.

Wrong-way turn

Fyffe told Hearst Connecticut Media a completely different version of the events. He said he and Negron had been on their way to a studio recording session when they were followed by police, and that he had no knowledge of whether the vehicle the teen was driving had been stolen. In photo, racist suspects Bridgeport mayor and police chief. 

Fyffe said that while riding, he suggested they stop at a corner store to get some drinks and snacks.

“On our way, I thought I saw a cop behind us, but he didn’t have his lights or siren on,” Fyffe said. “I didn’t know if he was following us, but I told Jayson there was a cop behind us, and he told me he was going to drive into the Walgreens parking lot to see if he was following us.”

Fyffe said the parking lot was “busy” so Negron decided to exit onto Fairfield Avenue, but turned the wrong way onto the one-way street.

“We can see that cars are coming in our direction and I told him it was the wrong way,” Fyffe said. “He is looking nervous, and he puts the car into reverse gear, but doesn’t move, when these two cops on foot came running up to the car. One goes to the driver’s side window and the other goes to my window. The cops both had guns out and I thought they were ready to shoot us, so I put my hands up.”

Fyffe said one officer grabbed at Negron.

“As he is doing that, Jayson’s foot is on the gas and the car is reversing. The door is open and the car is going back, and the cop jumps out of the way. The car hits another car and that’s when the first shot went off. Jayson is yelling, ‘Ouch,’ and his body just went up on mine, like he got thrown on top of me.

“Then the second shot went off and hit me in the back of the arm, and my body jerked to the side, and that’s when the third shot went from my back through my chest.”

Fyffe said that while he was bleeding, “there was this cop at my window yelling, ‘Get out of the (expletive) car.’ I tried to keep my hands up, but I was feeling too weak. The cop opened the door and he grabbed me up and slammed me on the ground and handcuffed me. I could see Jayson from under the car, and he was handcuffed and still breathing.”

Click to read more ...

[anything could be a gun to a racist] White Euclid Cop Believed Colostomy Bag was a Gun: Tased Black Man who Pulled Over to Use Cellphone

From [HERE] and [HERE] An Ohio police department is under fire again for alleged police brutality after a Black man filed a lawsuit claiming white officers used excessive force when arresting him in November 2016, Cleveland Scene reported. Video of the incident, captured by one of the officer's body cameras, was uploaded to YouTube this week.

Lamar Wright filed a civil complaint (published by Cleveland Scene and Cleveland.com) against the City of Euclid and two of its officers, in which he alleges police unlawfully attacked him after he pulled into a driveway to "safely use his cell phone." Wright claims that two officers, Kyle Flagg and Vashon Williams, came over to his car, and Wright noticed a gun in one of the officer's hands. He says he then put his hands up in the air.

According to the lawsuit, "Flagg yanked on Wright's left arm. Wright was still seated in the car at this time, and had staples in his stomach and a new colostomy bag. This, in combination with Flagg yanking on his left arm, prevented Wright from extending his right arm toward Flagg....Flagg’s conduct caused Wright extreme pain. Wright cried out to Flagg several times that he was hurting his arm, but Flagg ignored him." The video shows that an officer then tased Wright, and the suit notes that Williams pepper-sprayed Wright at the same time.

As the officers instructed Wright to get on the ground and not move, he can be heard yelling, "I got a sh*t bag!" After Williams placed Wright in handcuffs, Flagg said he thought Wright "had a gun" and asked why the man was "reaching with [his] right hand," to which Wright once again responded that he had "a sh*t bag."

In his lawsuit, Wright said that that the officers "had the duty and opportunity to intervene to protect Wright and to prevent the unconstitutional use of force against Wright. Neither Flagg nor Williams did anything to prevent this unlawful attack."

According to Cleveland.com, Wright was charged with obstructing official business and resisting arrest in addition to other traffic violations. The lawsuit states that Wright was taken to a hospital following the incident, where he alleges officers "mocked Wright for the pain he continued to suffer in relation to the pepper spray remaining on his skin." He was then jailed, but the suit states that Wright was unlawfully held in custody even after posting the $900 bond. He wasn't released until after undergoing a full-body x-ray scan at another jail, some four-to-five hours after posting bail. According to Cleveland.com, charges against Wright were dismissed in June 2017.

Wright was also allegedly charged $1,000 for the pepper spray stains on his rental car, and he was placed on a "Do Not Rent List" with the rental company, according to the suit.

In a public statement, Wright said that he "filed this case to stand up against police brutality, and to stand with other victims of senseless attacks by officers from the Euclid Police Department."

In October 2017, a wrongful death lawsuit was brought against the city of Euclid and two officers for the March 2017 shooting and death of Luke Stewart at the hands of Officer Matthew Rhodes (who was not criminally charged). And the following week, another officer, Michael Amiott, was fired after beating Richard Hubbard III during a traffic stop.

"These officers' illegal treatment of people in the city must stop," Wright said in his statement. "We need justice for all the victims of the EPD."

To Justify Search, Cop Pretended to Smell Non-Existent Weed & Then Slammed Black Teen on His Head - Albany Considers Settlement

From [HERE] A proposed settlement will be before Albany city commissioners during a Tuesday night meeting to settle an excessive force lawsuit tied to an incident in April involving an Albany-Dougherty Drug Unit officer.

According to the City of Albany's Tuesday night meeting agenda, City Attorney Nathan Davis will be presenting the settlement offer of $372,500 for commissioners to vote upon.

If approved, that settlement would go to Llewellyn Glover Jr., who stated he suffered head, hand and foot injuries on April 25 that were caused by ADDU Officer Jamie Sutton during a traffic stop.

According to the agenda item, dash cam video of the event was persuasive.

July 2017, Llewellyn Glover Jr. was pulled over by a cop for a broken tail light. The officer said he smelled weed in the car. He proceeded to try and force the situation. When it was all said and done Glover's family said he suffered a broken hand, which required surgery, a fractured foot, and had to have three staples placed in his head. An internal Albany Police report also states a deadly force chokehold was used against him. No marijuana was found. 

Sutton, a Black cop who was trying to please his masters, no longer works for the Albany Police Department, but was not charged for the incident by white prosecutors. 

Unwelcome Strangers: Report says [Mostly White] Cops Watched as Nazis Incited Violence & Committed Crimes in Charlottesville

html5 video converter by EasyHtml5Video.com v3.9.1

From [HERE] Law enforcement failed to adequately plan for or respond to a violent white nationalist rally this summer in Virginia, leading to "deep distrust of government" in the Charlottesville community, an independent review released Friday found.

Former U.S. Attorney Tim Heaphy's monthslong investigation found a lack of coordination between state and city police and a passive response by officials to the chaos. The report also found that police removed an officer from an area where a car plowed into counterprotesters and killed a woman and injured 19 others, leaving only a small sawhorse in place at the time.

"Supervisors devised a poorly conceived plan that under-equipped and misaligned hundreds of officers. Execution of that plan elevated officer safety over public safety," the report found.

The City of Charlottesville also did not protect free expression on Aug. 12, the report said.

"This represents a failure of one of government's core functions — the protection of fundamental rights," it said. "Law enforcement also failed to maintain order and protect citizens from harm, injury, and death. Charlottesville preserved neither of those principles on Aug. 12, which has led to deep distrust of government within this community."

Armed White nationalists descended on Charlottesville in part to protest plans to remove a statue of Confederate General Robert E. Lee. They began fighting in the streets with counterdemonstrators before the event even officially began and the brawling went on for nearly an hour in front of officers until the event eventually disbanded. Later, as counterdemonstrators were peacefully marching through a downtown street, a car drove into the crowd, killing 32-year-old Heather Heyer and injuring many more.

Public works officials had suggested using large barriers that can be filled with water to block vehicular traffic but Heaphy said "it just didn't happen."

The report was put together based on about 150 interviews, and the review of photos, video and over half a million documents.

Click to read more ...

Amnesty Pledges to Take on Israeli Apartheid -“a systemic attack on a civilian population clearly linked to their ethnic or racial identity"

From [MintPress] In an unprecedented development, Amnesty International has pledged to consider whether the Israeli government is committing the crime of apartheid in the occupied Palestinian territory (oPt).

This marks the first time that the global rights NGO has said it will investigate Israeli practices specifically with regards to whether they meet the international definition of apartheid.

The statement came as Amnesty today published a new report in which the group charges Myanmar with practicing apartheid in Rakhine State, describing “an institutionalized system of segregation and discrimination of Muslim communities”.

For the Rohingya, Amnesty concluded, this system “is so severe and extensive that it amounts to a widespread and systemic attack on a civilian population…clearly linked to their ethnic (or racial) identity.” It thus “legally constitutes apartheid, a crime against humanity under international law.”

The report details a number of ways in which the Myanmar authorities have imposed state-sponsored segregation and discrimination on the Rohingya, including violence, denial of citizenship, travel restrictions and other forms of social, political and economic exclusion.

‘‘Caged Without a Roof: Apartheid in Myanmar’s Rakhine State” unpacks the international law basis for its headline claim of apartheid, beginning with reference to the definition of crimes against humanity in the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court – which includes apartheid.

Click to read more ...

Blacks Subjected to Movement Restrictions in Jacksonville, Stopped for Pedestrian Violations 3X More than Whites

In a June viral video, a young black man named Devonte Shipman captured his interaction with white cops in Jacksonville, Florida, as they dealt him two tickets with hefty fines: one for jaywalking, and another for walking without an ID. (Which, to be clear, is not an actual law for pedestrians.) [MORE]

Don't Blame the Pedestrian Laws. The operating system (OS) of White supremacy is the cause and effect of white people's genocidal conduct towards non-whites - not stop & frisk laws, stand your ground self defense laws or here, pedestrian ordinances in Jacksonville or sidewalk laws in Flint used by white cops to stop Black people. It is the application of such laws by racist citizens, police, prosecutors, jurors and judges that creates injustice for non-whites.

Neely Fuller explains that a "non-law" is any law that is used in such a manner as to promote injustice. It is deception or delusional to believe that the elimination of such laws  will have an affect on the way in which white people (including law enforcement) relate to non-whites. [MORE] and [MORE] If you don't understand the context of white supremacy/racism you will only be confused by these issues.

From [ACLU] Walking is a lot of things. It’s great exercise. It’s a cost-free mode of transportation. But for Black people in Jacksonville, Florida, evidence suggests that it’s leading to discriminatory encounters with police.

Black pedestrians in Jacksonville are ticketed a stunning three times as often for pedestrian violations, like jaywalking, as white pedestrians, according to ProPublica and The Florida Times-Union. In a recently published exposé, the outlets examined 2,200 tickets issued in Jacksonville between 2012 and 2016. They found that although representing only 29 percent of the city’s population, Black people received a whopping 55 percent of all pedestrian tickets. Disproportionate enforcement also occurred for lesser known offenses. For instance, 68 percent of people who received tickets for “failing to cross the road at a right angle or the shortest route” were Black.

In Jacksonville, crossing the street on a yellow light or walking on the street where there is no sidewalk can result in getting a ticket with a $65 price tag. If you are poor or working but struggling to make ends meet, this is an especially hard pill to swallow. Failure to pay may impact your credit score or possibly result in suspension of your driver’s license.

The disparate citation rates in Jacksonville raise serious concerns about racial profiling. The ProPublica/Times-Union story even includes pictures of police officers doing the exact same thing that Black pedestrians have been ticketed for.

Click to read more ...

In Service of White Supremacy Virginia DOC is Keeping Nonviolent Convicts in Prison Longer than Murderers

Putting a Black Face on White Power. In photo, Black Clone, Harold W. Clarke, director of the Virginia Department of Corrections.

From [VAPilot] Snagged by a short-lived state law, some Virginia inmates have served more time behind bars than many murderers, even though they harmed no one in their crimes and had never been in prison before.

In some cases, their prison terms will stretch far longer than those of convicts who fatally shot, stabbed or bludgeoned people, a Virginian-Pilot investigation has found.

This disparity stems from a 1982 “three-strikes” law that, largely during a 12-year period, has caught inmates in its clutches for decades.

Young men barely old enough to vote went from first-time offender to three-striker in one swift motion. They weren’t the career criminals for which three-strikes laws are generally written. More often than not, their crimes were committed in a single spree. And plenty of them had little or no prior criminal history.

The Virginia Department of Corrections dished out this heavy punishment – ineligibility for discretionary parole – behind closed doors. It didn’t come from a prosecutor , nor did it happen in a courtroom in front of a judge, as is generally the case in other states. Nameless and faceless government bureaucrats within the DOC wielded the power to classify inmates as three-strikers when they entered prison.

But in some cases, the inmates say, the DOC didn’t inform them that their prison term was being dramatically extended until after they’d been locked up for many years – sometimes more than two decades. And those inmates say they never knew such a change was even a possibility.

Snagged by a short-lived state law, some Virginia inmates have served more time behind bars than many murderers, even though they harmed no one in their crimes and had never been in prison before.

In some cases, their prison terms will stretch far longer than those of convicts who fatally shot, stabbed or bludgeoned people, a Virginian-Pilot investigation has found.

This disparity stems from a 1982 “three-strikes” law that, largely during a 12-year period, has caught inmates in its clutches for decades.

Young men barely old enough to vote went from first-time offender to three-striker in one swift motion. They weren’t the career criminals for which three-strikes laws are generally written. More often than not, their crimes were committed in a single spree. And plenty of them had little or no prior criminal history.

The Virginia Department of Corrections dished out this heavy punishment – ineligibility for discretionary parole – behind closed doors. It didn’t come from a prosecutor , nor did it happen in a courtroom in front of a judge, as is generally the case in other states. Nameless and faceless government bureaucrats within the DOC wielded the power to classify inmates as three-strikers when they entered prison.

But in some cases, the inmates say, the DOC didn’t inform them that their prison term was being dramatically extended until after they’d been locked up for many years – sometimes more than two decades. And those inmates say they never knew such a change was even a possibility.

Click to read more ...