The 2020 George Floyd/BLM/Police Brutality Protests Discussion Thread

This doesn't surprise me in the least. Wayne County has some of the most corrupt politicians and Highland Park especially is steeped in racism and bigotry. There's a huge racial divide between Highland Park and its neighboring city Hamtramck which only makes it more pronounced.
 
This doesn't surprise me in the least. Wayne County has some of the most corrupt politicians and Highland Park especially is steeped in racism and bigotry. There's a huge racial divide between Highland Park and its neighboring city Hamtramck which only makes it more pronounced.
According to the 2020 US Census, Highland Park MI is the poorest urban municipality in the United States, with an average household income of a mere $20,800 and poverty rate of 47%. It seems no different than any other blighted neighborhood in Detroit, except HP is a separate municipality.

For whatever reason Michigan has plenty of urban areas with staggeringly high poverty and blight in a way that other states do not. Detroit and Flint are the obvious ones, but other cities like Highland Park, Pontiac, Saginaw, Muskegon, Benton Harbor, River Rouge, and Inkster have consistently made the lists of poorest cities in the US. These places all have average incomes in the 20k range and home prices less than $50,000. They also happen to be majority Black cities surrounded by wealthier, predominantly white towns. Shows that the effects of racial segregation and redlining goes well beyond the South.
 

snow-flakes.gif
 
Second-degree murder might be difficult to prove here and the DA should've probably gone with manslaughter too, but at least there will be a trial:
 
Ten states are currently home to a version of California’s “Marsy’s Law.” This law is a “victim’s rights” law, named after a California murder victim. It was written with the intent of involving crime victims in the criminal justice process, giving them a “right” to be heard during court proceedings, choose their own representation (rather than be solely represented by the prosecution), and — as is most relevant here — prevent crime victims’ names from being released publicly.

That’s where these laws have become convenient for cops. When cops deploy excessive force (including killing people), the person subjected to police violence is often hit with criminal charges. Resisting arrest is a popular one. So is “assaulting an officer,” which may mean nothing more than a person bumped into an officer while being detained. Since those are criminal charges, the cops turn themselves into victims, despite having performed far more violence than the person they restrained (to death, in some cases).

States where victim rights laws are in force allow officers to prevent their names from being published by media covering deadly force incidents. Since the cops are nominal “victims,” the law applies to them. A law enforcement officer in South Dakota used the state’s law to keep their name out of the papers following their shooting of driver during a traffic stop.

The same thing happened in Florida a few years later. Two cops who deployed deadly force were able to convince a judge the state’s Marsy’s Law applied to them — even superseding the public’s right to this information through the state’s public records laws.

It has happened again. Same state, same law, same outcome. Here’s Scott Shackford for Reason:
In Sarasota County, three deputies were sent to a condo in April to help evict 52-year-old Jeremiah Evans. According to Sarasota County Sheriff Department’s report, Evans pulled out a knife and threatened the deputies. One of the deputies shot and killed Evans.

Prosecutors determined that the shooting was justified. The Sarasota Herald-Tribune submitted a public records request to the State Attorney’s Office, and among the information they received were the unredacted last names of the deputies involved.

Then the Sarasota County Sheriff’s Office swung into action, going to a judge to invoke Marsy’s Law to try to prohibit the newspaper from publishing the names of the officers involved. On Friday evening a judge granted a temporary injunction preemptively prohibiting the newspaper from publishing the officers’ names. Despite failing to redact the names by accident, the State Attorney’s Office also supported the sheriff’s department and joined the action against the newspaper, essentially attempting to shift responsibility onto the newspaper for the office’s own supposed breach of the law.
The Herald-Tribune, which had already obtained some of this information (last names only) from the state attorney’s office, is rightfully upset at this turn of events. It has filed a motion in opposition to this injunction — one secured by both the Sheriff’s Office and the state attorney — pointing out that this is an unjustified abuse of the victim’s rights law in hopes of memory-holing information already provided to the paper.
In the newspaper’s motion, attorneys said nothing in Marsy’s law creates a private right of action against third parties or empowers courts to “censor private persons, such as respondents.” If disclosure of the deputies’ names violated Marsy’s Law, the motion argues, the violator was the State Attorney’s Office, not the newspaper.

“Petitioners cite no case law that places Marsy’s Law above the free-speech guarantee in Article I, Section 4 of the Florida Constitution. And any reading of Marsy’s Law that prohibits the news media from publishing publicly disclosed information also would bring Marsy’s Law into conflict with the United States Constitution,” the motion states.
First and foremost, the law cannot be used to stuff the genie back into the bottle. The newspaper already has access to the involved officers’ last names, thanks to a public records response by the state attorney’s office. The emergency injunction does not prevent the paper from publishing information it already has because the public release, as the paper points out, was performed by the state attorney.

Second, the injunction process appears to have abandoned the concept of due process entirely. It was obtained by the sheriff and state attorney with zero opportunity for input from the party directly affected by the injunction. The paper was not notified the injunction was being sought and was not informed of law enforcement’s efforts until after the order was secured. And it was obtained on Friday evening at 6:30 pm, presumably to maximize the length of the questionably obtained opacity, preventing the paper from engaging in any challenge of the order until the following Monday.

This certainly isn’t the way those writing these laws expected them to be used. But that’s what these laws enable when they’re abused by public employees who deploy deadly force: a larger gap between state law enforcement officers and the already distant accountability that rarely serves to deter future misconduct.
Simultaneously totally ****ed up and completely predictable.
Am I reading this correctly? Have the Supremes added Miranda to the list of rights they've revoked?
Yep, they’ve eliminated the ability to sue over lack of Miranda rights.
Prior to overruling Roe, the most heinous of the most recent holdings by the conservative activist majority Roberts Court was easily that of Vega v. Tekoh. It's just ****ing insane.
 
They've literally set a precedent now that any right decided or interpreted in the constitution can be overturned.

The second amendment is an amendment, not original text. Gun owners should be freaking the **** out but I don't think they realize what kind of hot water they're in lol. Based on the precedent set here in the past week, the second amendment could be stripped tomorrow.
 
They've literally set a precedent now that any right decided or interpreted in the constitution can be overturned.

The second amendment is an amendment, not original text. Gun owners should be freaking the **** out but I don't think they realize what kind of hot water they're in lol. Based on the precedent set here in the past week, the second amendment could be stripped tomorrow.
Bears on the other hand, should be worried that their arms might be removed from their bodies.
 
Language warning for the article proper.
On the evening of June 19th, New Haven police arrested Randy Cox, 36, on a handgun possession charge. Hours later, Cox was in a local hospital, having been rushed into emergency surgery for a neck injury he sustained in police custody. According to Cox's family and attorneys, Cox is now paralyzed from the chest down, and on a ventilator.

According to New Haven Police Chief Regina Rush-Kittle, New Haven police officers arrested Randy Cox after responding to a "weapons complaint" call. Rush-Kittle says Cox was charged with criminal possession of a firearm, possessing a gun without a permit, and breach of the peace. At 8:33 p.m., body camera footage shows a handcuffed Cox being transferred from a police cruiser to the back of a van. According to a press release from New Haven mayor Justin Elicker, the van, which was not outfitted with seatbelts, was driving Cox to a detention center.

In a video from inside the police van, Cox is seen banging his back on the walls of the vehicle. At one point, the handcuffed Cox lays down on the floor of the van, and repeatedly kicks the door of the vehicle. However, at 8:36 pm—just over two minutes into the drive—Cox got up, and began sitting on a bench inside the van. Around 15 seconds later, the van came to a sudden stop, and Cox flew headfirst into the back door of the van.

At the time of the stop, body camera footage shows the driver, officer Oscar Diaz, appearing to suddenly break and honk the van's horn. An audible 'thud' can be heard in the background. According to Rush-Kittle, Diaz was making an "evasive maneuver" to avoid an accident with another vehicle.

Body camera footage shows that Diaz eventually stopped the van to check on Cox. "What, you fell?" Diaz asked Cox, who replied, saying that he couldn't move. During the encounter, Cox repeatedly told Diaz, "I can't move." Diaz then informed Cox he was going to call an ambulance. Cox, still face-down in the van, told Diaz "I fall. I cannot move my arms." Diaz then returned to the driver's seat of the van, and called an ambulance. He then preceded to drive Cox to the detention center.

While at the detention center, body camera footage shows a team of officers attempting to remove Cox from the back of the van. The officers repeatedly questioned Cox, and appeared to doubt his claims that he "can't move."

"You're not even trying!" one officer says to Cox, after he tells her that he cannot move. After officers drag Cox out of the van the same officer says "You're cracking, you just drank too much"—earlier footage showed Cox's arresting officers refer to him as "under the influence." The officers then placed Cox into a wheelchair, and took him to processing.

During processing, officers continue to appear to think Cox's condition is due to alcohol intoxication. Body camera video shows officers ask him how much he had to drink, and demand that he sit up. When officers began lifting Cox out of the wheelchair, intending to place him in a holding cell, Cox cried out "Oh my god, [inaudible] I ****ing broke my neck."

However, officers seemed to take little note of Cox's distress. After dragging Cox into a holding cell, one officer declared "He's perfectly fine," before cuffing Cox's ankles.

According to Elicker, when the ambulance arrived, Cox was taken to Yale New Haven hospital where he underwent surgery on his neck. "Sadly," wrote Elicker in a press release, "Mr. Cox's injury may result in his paralysis and he remains in critical condition."

Civil rights attorney Ben Crump announced on Tuesday that he would lead a legal team in suing the city of New Haven on Cox's behalf. "This is shocking. This is horrific. This is inhumane. We are better than this, New Haven. We are better than this, America." said Crump during a Tuesday press conference. He continued "This is Freddie Gray on video. And all the world is watching[.]"

According to Jack O'Donnell, an attorney representing Cox on criminal weapons charges, Cox is now paralyzed from the chest down, and is currently on a ventilator. "The treatment of him was a disgrace" said Cox's sister LaToya Bloomer on Tuesday. "Where's the person that see's what's going on and says maybe he's not joking, maybe he's not drunk, maybe he's in distress?"

"We can never forget that this is a real life, that Randy Cox's life matters," said Crump during Tuesday's press conference, "We can never forget that."
 
I'm going to laugh when Ziegler ends up with a longer sentence. Judge Matis was a family court judge too and is very pro-kid so I can't see him taking too kindly to someone who shot at a 14-year-old who was actively trying to get to school. He's also a Rochester native too.
I am way late on this update but:
 
Last edited:
Albuquerque police raid the wrong house, start a fire, resulting in a dead 15 year old.

 
Back