Americans are getting fatter — and so are the crash test dummies used to test the cars they drive
By Jerry Reynolds
The Car Pro Weekly
December 4, 2014
Plymouth, Michigan-based Humanetics has introduced a new obese dummy to reflect American’s growing size. The 273-pound dummy, officially called an anthropomorphic test device, is 106 pounds heavier than the traditional model, reflecting public health trends.
According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 34.9% of American adults — an estimated 78.6 million people — are obese and Humanetics President and CEO Chris O’Connor explained that how they fit in the seat, how their different centers of gravity could translate into car crash injuries, how seat belts and air bags work on them, and are different enough to warrant a new dummy body type.
“The average person has changed dramatically,” he said. “It was important to put out a piece of test equipment that auto companies and safety suppliers can use to decide what the best way is to restrain an obese person, since so many obese people are driving. … It’s not just weight. It’s the question of girth at the center area.”
A University of California-Berkeley study, published in 2013, found that obese drivers are up to 78% more likely to die in car crashes. Around since the 1980s, the traditional crash test dummy is often seen in car commercials to vividly show a vehicle’s safety level, but perhaps are best known by the talking crash test dummies in the Ad Council ads, which say: “You can learn a lot from a dummy,” starring the dummies Vince and Larry. Note that the new obese model is also 5 inches taller than the more commonly used 5-foot-9” version. It costs the same amount as the normal-weight dummy — $500,000 — and according to O’Connor, can be reused for decades.
Humanetics, believed to be the only designer and manufacturer of crash test dummies in the U.S., was founded in 1952 to make what were then called mannequins to test airplane ejector seats, but added car crash test dummies in the 1960s, according to O’Connor. Today, it has 500 employees, supplies OEMs, Tier 1 safety suppliers, government agencies and medical researchers and has an estimated $125 million in annual sales. Its dummy lineup also includes women and children of various ages. They’re made of metal bones wrapped in vinyl with rubber in certain joints and then loaded with sensors, O’Connor explained.
“Safety continues to evolve. A five-star rating from five years ago is probably a three-star today, because the bar goes up,” he said. “We need to have safety for all body types. We want everyone to be safe.”
Fatbodypolitics.com founder Amanda Levitt applauds Humanetics’ product expansion.
“Having the ability to test cars and use crash test dummies that reflect a wide variety of body types is positive,” said the 29-year-old activist and Wayne State University graduate student, who lives in Detroit’s Cass Corridor. “Fat people tend not have enough space between them and the steering wheel. They’re more likely to have physical impact with the car in a car crash. In contrast, thin people don’t have fat on their body to be protected from seat belts. All people are not the same size.”
However, the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety has no plans to incorporate the obese dummy into its testing program.
“It’s not clear what would we learn that’s different by using a heavy crash test dummy. When the structure (of the vehicle) holds up, that helps protect people of all shapes and sizes,” IIHS spokesman Russ Rader said. “When there is structural collapse, the risk of injury is higher, but it’s not clear that’s different for small people as compared to heavy people. … Obese people are at higher risk in crashes, but it’s not clear using heavier crash test dummies would reduce those risks.”
The Detroit Three don’t seem poised to make any changes, either.
“We are studying the modification made to an average male anthropomorphic test size to increase its mass and will evaluate the effects of the modifications when it becomes available. In the meantime, we look forward to the test results,” said Chrysler spokesman Nick Cappa.
The obese model goes on sale early next year.
“GM is committed to the development and application of the best safety technologies and test devices to ensure the protection of all occupants. To stay on the leading edge of vehicle safety testing, we constantly evaluate new trends and devices that may help us design our cars and trucks to deliver the highest levels of safety for our customers,” spokesman Klaus-Peter Martin said. He declined to say if GM plans to buy this type of dummy.
Ford spokeswoman Kelli Felker wouldn’t comment on whether it will purchase the new obese model, saying only, “We have robust testing procedures.”
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration is taking a wait-and-see approach: “NHTSA works to protect vehicle occupants of various sizes, ages and genders. We’re aware of the new dummy developed by Humanetics and look forward to learning more about it, but it’s too soon to speculate on if it would ever be added to our program or family of dummies.”
The UC-Berkeley study found that drivers with a a body mass index of 30 to 34.9 were 21% more likely to die in a crash versus those with a BMI of 35 to 39.9, who were 51% more likely and those with a BMI of 40 or above who were 81% more likely. Researchers also concluded that obese women had a greater chance of dying in car crashes than obese men.
Sunday, December 07, 2014
HERB’S WINKY
The Unconventional Gazette
December 6, 2014
Herb decided to propose to Sandy , but prior to her acceptance Sandy felt she had to confess to her man about her childhood illness. She informed Herb that she suffered a disease that left her breasts at the maturity of a 12 year old.
He stated that it was OK because he loved her so very much. However, Herb felt this was also the time for him to open up and admit that he had a deformity too.
Herb looked Sandy in the eyes and said, 'I too have a problem. My winky is the same size as an infant and I hope you can deal with that once we are married.'
She said, 'Yes, I will marry you and learn to live with your infant size winky..'
Sandy and Herb got married and they could not wait for the honeymoon. Herb whisked Sandy off to their hotel suite and they started touching, teasing, and holding one another.
As Sandy put her hands in Herb's pants, she began to scream and ran out of the room! Herb ran after her to find out what was wrong.
She said, 'You told me your winky was the size of an infant!'
'Yes, it is ... 7 pounds, 8 ounces, 19 inches long.'
December 6, 2014
Herb decided to propose to Sandy , but prior to her acceptance Sandy felt she had to confess to her man about her childhood illness. She informed Herb that she suffered a disease that left her breasts at the maturity of a 12 year old.
He stated that it was OK because he loved her so very much. However, Herb felt this was also the time for him to open up and admit that he had a deformity too.
Herb looked Sandy in the eyes and said, 'I too have a problem. My winky is the same size as an infant and I hope you can deal with that once we are married.'
She said, 'Yes, I will marry you and learn to live with your infant size winky..'
Sandy and Herb got married and they could not wait for the honeymoon. Herb whisked Sandy off to their hotel suite and they started touching, teasing, and holding one another.
As Sandy put her hands in Herb's pants, she began to scream and ran out of the room! Herb ran after her to find out what was wrong.
She said, 'You told me your winky was the size of an infant!'
'Yes, it is ... 7 pounds, 8 ounces, 19 inches long.'
Saturday, December 06, 2014
THUG PRAISED BY OBAMA BUSTED FOR ASSAULTING ST. LOUIS CITY MARSHAL
Rasheen Aldridge, a member of Missouri Gov. Nixon’s Ferguson Commission who was praised by Obama as a 'young outstanding leader,' gets busted for assaulting a guard while leading a mob of protesters trying to break into the St. Louis City Hall
On Monday, President Obama held a much heralded meeting with mayors, police officials, civil rights activists and others at the White House to discuss the racial tensions caused by the shooting of Michael Brown. A White House publicity photo of the meeting shows Philadelphia’s police chief, New York’s Sandinista-loving mayor and Rasheen Aldridge immediately to the right of the president in that order. Aldridge, 22, is a member of Young Activists United and had been appointed to a 16-member Ferguson Commission by Missouri Gov. Jay Nixon.
Here is what the president had to say about the young activist:
One of the most powerful things that happened today was I had the opportunity to meet with some young people, including a couple of young outstanding leaders from the Ferguson community, Brittany Packnett and Rasheen Aldridge.
And what made me concerned was the degree to which they feel as if they are not heard or that the reality of what they experienced has been denied.
What made me greatly encouraged was how clear their voices were when they were heard, and how constructive they are in wanting to solve these problems. And I think anybody who had the chance to listen to them here today felt the same way.
Following the White House meeting Rasheen said he was disappointed in Obama because he did not commit to action in Ferguson.
About his appointment to the commission, Rasheen said, “That was the most difficult part, to make sure I'm not turning my back on my people or betraying them or doing any backdoor deals because like I said at the end of the day, I stand with them.”
Well, Rasheen not only stands with them, but last week he led a mob of protesters that rushed the St. Louis City Hall and broke down a door while trying to get in. Rasheen was busted for shoving a City Marshal who was guarding the government building. Praised by Obama as a ‘young outstanding leader,’ the youngest member of Nixon’s commission was charged with assault.
Obama said he was greatly encouraged by how constructive Rasheen is in wanting to solve racial problems. Leading a mob, breaking into a government building and assaulting a cop is not my idea of a constructive solution to a problem.
Hmm, this is good. That race-baiter Al Sharpton is Obama’s ‘Go to Guy’ on racial matters. Gov. Nixon appoints a street thug to study racial unrest. Only in America!
On Monday, President Obama held a much heralded meeting with mayors, police officials, civil rights activists and others at the White House to discuss the racial tensions caused by the shooting of Michael Brown. A White House publicity photo of the meeting shows Philadelphia’s police chief, New York’s Sandinista-loving mayor and Rasheen Aldridge immediately to the right of the president in that order. Aldridge, 22, is a member of Young Activists United and had been appointed to a 16-member Ferguson Commission by Missouri Gov. Jay Nixon.
Here is what the president had to say about the young activist:
One of the most powerful things that happened today was I had the opportunity to meet with some young people, including a couple of young outstanding leaders from the Ferguson community, Brittany Packnett and Rasheen Aldridge.
And what made me concerned was the degree to which they feel as if they are not heard or that the reality of what they experienced has been denied.
What made me greatly encouraged was how clear their voices were when they were heard, and how constructive they are in wanting to solve these problems. And I think anybody who had the chance to listen to them here today felt the same way.
Following the White House meeting Rasheen said he was disappointed in Obama because he did not commit to action in Ferguson.
About his appointment to the commission, Rasheen said, “That was the most difficult part, to make sure I'm not turning my back on my people or betraying them or doing any backdoor deals because like I said at the end of the day, I stand with them.”
Well, Rasheen not only stands with them, but last week he led a mob of protesters that rushed the St. Louis City Hall and broke down a door while trying to get in. Rasheen was busted for shoving a City Marshal who was guarding the government building. Praised by Obama as a ‘young outstanding leader,’ the youngest member of Nixon’s commission was charged with assault.
Obama said he was greatly encouraged by how constructive Rasheen is in wanting to solve racial problems. Leading a mob, breaking into a government building and assaulting a cop is not my idea of a constructive solution to a problem.
Hmm, this is good. That race-baiter Al Sharpton is Obama’s ‘Go to Guy’ on racial matters. Gov. Nixon appoints a street thug to study racial unrest. Only in America!
OUR LIAR-IN-CHIEF MAY FINALLY SHOW HIS TRUE COLORS ON ISRAEL
Reports say that Obama is considering sanctions against Israel for its housing construction in Jerusalem and the West Bank settlements
For the past 60-plus years I’ve heard every president tell lies. There’s nothing strange about that because, after all, they are politicians. But Obama takes the cake. He’s made an art out of lying, telling lie after lie, thereby earning the title of ‘Liar-In-Chief.’
Obama keeps claiming to be a true friend of Israel, but with friends like our Liar-In-Chief, Israel sure as hell doesn’t need any enemies. Obama’s hatred of Israeli Prime Minister Binjamin Netanyahu has long been obvious and knows no bounds. And it looks like he may be getting ready to stab Israel in the back.
Reports say that Obama is considering sanctions against Israel for its housing construction in Jerusalem and the West Bank settlements. Now that he’s in the final term of his presidency, Obama is making it clear he doesn’t need the ‘Jewish vote’ anymore.
REPORT: OBAMA EYES SANCTIONS ON ISRAEL WHILE GIVING IRAN A PASS
By Joel Himelfarb
Newsmax
December 5, 2014
Senior White House and State Department officials have recently met to discuss the possibility of imposing sanctions on Israel in an effort to stop housing construction projects in eastern Jerusalem, Haaretz reported.
The report – which comes as the Obama administration is lobbying furiously against new sanctions on Iran over its illicit nuclear program – is likely to trigger new, bipartisan concern on Capitol Hill over the direction of U.S. Mideast policy.
The Israel sanctions discussions are said to have begun after Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu visited the White House in October and clashed with the administration over the construction of a new housing development in that part of the city.
The administration warned Israel that the project would raise questions about Israel’s commitment to peace with the Palestinians. Netanyahu replied that Israel does not accept restrictions on where Jews can live, and that Arabs and Jews in the Israeli capital should be allowed to purchase homes wherever they choose.
On Thursday, State Department spokeswoman Marie Harf dodged questions on whether the administration was considering sanctions against Israel, saying she would not comment on “internal” deliberations.
The possibility of sanctions has “prompted consternation on Capitol Hill and throughout the pro-Israel world,” The Washington Free Beacon reported.
“If these reports are true, this would mark a new era of unprecedented hostility from the White House against our strongest ally in the Middle East,” a senior congressional aide stated. “It’s impossible not to notice the irony of the administration mulling sanctions on Israel while threatening to veto new sanctions against Iran.”
“The president should be forewarned that taking such action against Israel would yield tremendous pushback from Congress,” the aide added.
Pro-Israel activists expressed similar concerns about reports that the administration is considering sanctions on Israel while fighting them on Iran, which opposes the Jewish state’s existence.
“Even this administration, which has been historically hostile to our Israeli allies, even as they worked overtime to bomb the enemies of Iranian proxies across the Middle East, could not possibly be so aggressively committed to undermining our alliances as to levy sanctions against Israel at the same time they’re lifting them on Iran,” a senior official with a pro-Israel organization told the Free Beacon.
For the past 60-plus years I’ve heard every president tell lies. There’s nothing strange about that because, after all, they are politicians. But Obama takes the cake. He’s made an art out of lying, telling lie after lie, thereby earning the title of ‘Liar-In-Chief.’
Obama keeps claiming to be a true friend of Israel, but with friends like our Liar-In-Chief, Israel sure as hell doesn’t need any enemies. Obama’s hatred of Israeli Prime Minister Binjamin Netanyahu has long been obvious and knows no bounds. And it looks like he may be getting ready to stab Israel in the back.
Reports say that Obama is considering sanctions against Israel for its housing construction in Jerusalem and the West Bank settlements. Now that he’s in the final term of his presidency, Obama is making it clear he doesn’t need the ‘Jewish vote’ anymore.
REPORT: OBAMA EYES SANCTIONS ON ISRAEL WHILE GIVING IRAN A PASS
By Joel Himelfarb
Newsmax
December 5, 2014
Senior White House and State Department officials have recently met to discuss the possibility of imposing sanctions on Israel in an effort to stop housing construction projects in eastern Jerusalem, Haaretz reported.
The report – which comes as the Obama administration is lobbying furiously against new sanctions on Iran over its illicit nuclear program – is likely to trigger new, bipartisan concern on Capitol Hill over the direction of U.S. Mideast policy.
The Israel sanctions discussions are said to have begun after Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu visited the White House in October and clashed with the administration over the construction of a new housing development in that part of the city.
The administration warned Israel that the project would raise questions about Israel’s commitment to peace with the Palestinians. Netanyahu replied that Israel does not accept restrictions on where Jews can live, and that Arabs and Jews in the Israeli capital should be allowed to purchase homes wherever they choose.
On Thursday, State Department spokeswoman Marie Harf dodged questions on whether the administration was considering sanctions against Israel, saying she would not comment on “internal” deliberations.
The possibility of sanctions has “prompted consternation on Capitol Hill and throughout the pro-Israel world,” The Washington Free Beacon reported.
“If these reports are true, this would mark a new era of unprecedented hostility from the White House against our strongest ally in the Middle East,” a senior congressional aide stated. “It’s impossible not to notice the irony of the administration mulling sanctions on Israel while threatening to veto new sanctions against Iran.”
“The president should be forewarned that taking such action against Israel would yield tremendous pushback from Congress,” the aide added.
Pro-Israel activists expressed similar concerns about reports that the administration is considering sanctions on Israel while fighting them on Iran, which opposes the Jewish state’s existence.
“Even this administration, which has been historically hostile to our Israeli allies, even as they worked overtime to bomb the enemies of Iranian proxies across the Middle East, could not possibly be so aggressively committed to undermining our alliances as to levy sanctions against Israel at the same time they’re lifting them on Iran,” a senior official with a pro-Israel organization told the Free Beacon.
ALL NEW YORKERS WILL PAY A PRICE BECAUSE THEIR MAYOR SLURRED THE POLICE
‘The city is in turmoil over the Staten Island case and the mayor throws gasoline on the fire by painting the entire police force as a bunch of white racist brutes’
New York Post columnist Michael Goodwin is spot on in the way he blasts Bill de Blasio over the way the NY mayor has been slurring the police in the wake of a grand jury’s decision not to indict the cop who took down Eric Garner.
DE BLASIO’S SLUR AGAINST NYPD IMPERILS US ALL
By Michael Goodwin
New York Post
December 5, 2014
That Mayor Bill de Blasio sure has a way with words. He says, with a straight face, that he has great respect for the police. Only instead of R-E-S-P-E-C-T, he is guilty of an S-L-U-R.
Determined not to let a crisis go to waste, the mayor has spent the last two days cranking up the volume and the vitriol of his anti-cop agenda. Predictably, he trots out his son, Dante, to put a personal spin on police-black relations, saying he is fearful the biracial teen will end up in a confrontation with a cop.
Imagine that. The city is in turmoil over the Staten Island case and the mayor throws gasoline on the fire by painting the entire police force as a bunch of white racist brutes. Has he no shame?
He certainly has no facts. In addition to the not-so-minor detail that the police force is now an impressive mix of races and ethnic groups, crime statistics leave no doubt that any harm to befall Dante de Blasio likely would come from another nonwhite, non-cop male. Those stats show that, year in, year out, about 90 percent of homicides involve a nonwhite man killing another nonwhite man.
That is the most compelling fact of murder, yet it’s the one de Blasio and his fellow travelers on the loony left never mention. To do so would require them to acknowledge the disproportionate levels of hideous violence that continue to ravage innocent people in black and Latino neighborhoods.
The mayor and his ilk don’t have the courage to confront that heartbreaking crisis, so they take the easy and ideologically convenient course of attacking cops, as though they committed the 330 murders in the city last year.
“We need a mayor to stand up with and for us,” police union head Pat Lynch said yesterday. He said his members feel as if de Blasio is “throwing them under the bus.”
That’s exactly what he’s doing, but the cops have plenty of company under the wheels. For in trashing them, de Blasio abandons any pretext that he is the mayor of all New Yorkers. He has sliced and diced the city, and decided that he will represent only the small piece that voted for him. Everybody else can take a hike, or get under the bus.
That includes anyone who trusts the cops and who recognizes with gratitude the man-made miracle the NYPD has achieved over the last 20 years. If you are one of those people, you are now a political orphan, without representation in City Hall.
The man in charge, by making common cause with cop haters, race baiters and violent anarchists, has abandoned his post to join the revolution.
This is a profound moment in modern Gotham history, one that, I am convinced, will set the city on a downhill course. There is no way to believe that slurring cops, undercutting them and turning on them will not have a huge impact on crime.
As union boss Lynch rightly suggested, cops who feel abandoned by their ostensible commander will be confused and uncertain, always second-guessing themselves because the mayor will. Their hesitancy will embolden the criminal class, and we’ve seen what happens then.
To believe otherwise is to believe that New York became the safest large city in American because the people who live here are inherently more moral and more peaceful than the residents of Detroit, Chicago, Newark, Baltimore or Atlanta, all of which have sky-high crime and murder rates.
Nor did New York achieve its distinction by chance or divine providence. Aggressive, consistent, professional policing did it under the leadership of mayors whose first instinct was to trust and support the cops.
That’s not to suggest every cop is a hero every day. A force with 35,000 human beings will have some bad apples, and some very rotten ones. Even the best ones will make mistakes, and there will be tragedies of the kind we saw on Staten Island.
But mayors make mistakes, too, and theirs have larger and longer-lasting consequences. Bill de Blasio has just made such a mistake, and all New York will pay the price for his folly.
New York Post columnist Michael Goodwin is spot on in the way he blasts Bill de Blasio over the way the NY mayor has been slurring the police in the wake of a grand jury’s decision not to indict the cop who took down Eric Garner.
DE BLASIO’S SLUR AGAINST NYPD IMPERILS US ALL
By Michael Goodwin
New York Post
December 5, 2014
That Mayor Bill de Blasio sure has a way with words. He says, with a straight face, that he has great respect for the police. Only instead of R-E-S-P-E-C-T, he is guilty of an S-L-U-R.
Determined not to let a crisis go to waste, the mayor has spent the last two days cranking up the volume and the vitriol of his anti-cop agenda. Predictably, he trots out his son, Dante, to put a personal spin on police-black relations, saying he is fearful the biracial teen will end up in a confrontation with a cop.
Imagine that. The city is in turmoil over the Staten Island case and the mayor throws gasoline on the fire by painting the entire police force as a bunch of white racist brutes. Has he no shame?
He certainly has no facts. In addition to the not-so-minor detail that the police force is now an impressive mix of races and ethnic groups, crime statistics leave no doubt that any harm to befall Dante de Blasio likely would come from another nonwhite, non-cop male. Those stats show that, year in, year out, about 90 percent of homicides involve a nonwhite man killing another nonwhite man.
That is the most compelling fact of murder, yet it’s the one de Blasio and his fellow travelers on the loony left never mention. To do so would require them to acknowledge the disproportionate levels of hideous violence that continue to ravage innocent people in black and Latino neighborhoods.
The mayor and his ilk don’t have the courage to confront that heartbreaking crisis, so they take the easy and ideologically convenient course of attacking cops, as though they committed the 330 murders in the city last year.
“We need a mayor to stand up with and for us,” police union head Pat Lynch said yesterday. He said his members feel as if de Blasio is “throwing them under the bus.”
That’s exactly what he’s doing, but the cops have plenty of company under the wheels. For in trashing them, de Blasio abandons any pretext that he is the mayor of all New Yorkers. He has sliced and diced the city, and decided that he will represent only the small piece that voted for him. Everybody else can take a hike, or get under the bus.
That includes anyone who trusts the cops and who recognizes with gratitude the man-made miracle the NYPD has achieved over the last 20 years. If you are one of those people, you are now a political orphan, without representation in City Hall.
The man in charge, by making common cause with cop haters, race baiters and violent anarchists, has abandoned his post to join the revolution.
This is a profound moment in modern Gotham history, one that, I am convinced, will set the city on a downhill course. There is no way to believe that slurring cops, undercutting them and turning on them will not have a huge impact on crime.
As union boss Lynch rightly suggested, cops who feel abandoned by their ostensible commander will be confused and uncertain, always second-guessing themselves because the mayor will. Their hesitancy will embolden the criminal class, and we’ve seen what happens then.
To believe otherwise is to believe that New York became the safest large city in American because the people who live here are inherently more moral and more peaceful than the residents of Detroit, Chicago, Newark, Baltimore or Atlanta, all of which have sky-high crime and murder rates.
Nor did New York achieve its distinction by chance or divine providence. Aggressive, consistent, professional policing did it under the leadership of mayors whose first instinct was to trust and support the cops.
That’s not to suggest every cop is a hero every day. A force with 35,000 human beings will have some bad apples, and some very rotten ones. Even the best ones will make mistakes, and there will be tragedies of the kind we saw on Staten Island.
But mayors make mistakes, too, and theirs have larger and longer-lasting consequences. Bill de Blasio has just made such a mistake, and all New York will pay the price for his folly.
Friday, December 05, 2014
LOSS OF TEMPER COSTS COP HIS JOB, L.A. $550,000
If you’re a cop it doesn’t pay to get pissed off when someone cusses you out
“No quality is more indispensable to a policeman than a perfect command of temper.” – Sir Robert Peel, 1829
On August 21, 2012, LAPD officers Christopher Hajduk and Christopher Carr pulled Michelle Jordan, 34, into a parking lot after they had spotted her driving while talking on her cellphone. Although she was told to remain inside, Jordan got out of her car. She was told to get back in the car, and when she refused, Hajduk told her she was resisting arrest and threw Jordan to the ground. She was handcuffed, picked up, and leaned against the car. When she called one of the cops a motherfucker, she was body-slammed to the ground once again.
Unfortunately for the cops – and the City of Los Aneles – it was all caught on tape by the parking lot surveillance cameras. Charges against Jordan were dismissed. Hajduk, a 22-year LAPD veteran, was fired and Carr received a suspension. And it has just been revealed that in September, the City of Los Angeles settled an excessive force lawsuit Jordan had filed with a $550,000 payout.
It just doesn’t pay to get pissed off when someone calls you a motherfucker. It’s too bad Hajduk and Carr failed to heed the words of Sir Robert Peel, the ‘Father of Modern Law Enforcement.’ I suspect they were taught those words when they were going through their recruit training at the LAPD academy.
“No quality is more indispensable to a policeman than a perfect command of temper.” – Sir Robert Peel, 1829
On August 21, 2012, LAPD officers Christopher Hajduk and Christopher Carr pulled Michelle Jordan, 34, into a parking lot after they had spotted her driving while talking on her cellphone. Although she was told to remain inside, Jordan got out of her car. She was told to get back in the car, and when she refused, Hajduk told her she was resisting arrest and threw Jordan to the ground. She was handcuffed, picked up, and leaned against the car. When she called one of the cops a motherfucker, she was body-slammed to the ground once again.
Unfortunately for the cops – and the City of Los Aneles – it was all caught on tape by the parking lot surveillance cameras. Charges against Jordan were dismissed. Hajduk, a 22-year LAPD veteran, was fired and Carr received a suspension. And it has just been revealed that in September, the City of Los Angeles settled an excessive force lawsuit Jordan had filed with a $550,000 payout.
It just doesn’t pay to get pissed off when someone calls you a motherfucker. It’s too bad Hajduk and Carr failed to heed the words of Sir Robert Peel, the ‘Father of Modern Law Enforcement.’ I suspect they were taught those words when they were going through their recruit training at the LAPD academy.
NANCY AND HARRY’S LABRADOR RETRIEVER
The Unconventional Gazette
December 4, 2014
Nancy Pelosi called Harry Reid into her office one day and said, "Harry, I have a plan to win back Middle America in 2016!"
"Great Nancy , but how?" asked Harry.
"We'll get some cheesy clothes and shoes, like most Middle Class Americans wear, then stop at the pound and pick up a Labrador retriever. Then, we'll go to a nice old country bar in Montana and show them how much admiration and respect we have for the hard working people living there."
So they did, and found just the place they were looking for in Bozeman, Montana. With the dog in tow, they walked inside and stepped up to the bar.
The Bartender took a step back and said, "Hey! Aren't you Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi?"
"Yes, we are!" said Nancy, "And what a lovely town you have here. We were passing through and Harry suggested we stop and take in some local color."
They ordered a round of bourbon for the whole bar, and started chatting up a storm with anyone who would listen.
A few minutes later, a grizzled old rancher came in, walked up to the Labrador, lifted up its tail, looked underneath, shrugged his shoulders and walked out. A few moments later, in came another old rancher. He walked up to the dog, lifted up its tail, looked underneath, scratched his head and left the bar.
For the next hour, another dozen ranchers came in, lifted the dog's tail, and left shaking their heads.
Finally, Nancy asked, "Why did all those old ranchers come in and look under the dog's tail? Is it some sort of custom?"
"Shit no," said the bartender. "Someone's out there running around town, claiming there's a Labrador Retriever in here with two assholes!"
December 4, 2014
Nancy Pelosi called Harry Reid into her office one day and said, "Harry, I have a plan to win back Middle America in 2016!"
"Great Nancy , but how?" asked Harry.
"We'll get some cheesy clothes and shoes, like most Middle Class Americans wear, then stop at the pound and pick up a Labrador retriever. Then, we'll go to a nice old country bar in Montana and show them how much admiration and respect we have for the hard working people living there."
So they did, and found just the place they were looking for in Bozeman, Montana. With the dog in tow, they walked inside and stepped up to the bar.
The Bartender took a step back and said, "Hey! Aren't you Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi?"
"Yes, we are!" said Nancy, "And what a lovely town you have here. We were passing through and Harry suggested we stop and take in some local color."
They ordered a round of bourbon for the whole bar, and started chatting up a storm with anyone who would listen.
A few minutes later, a grizzled old rancher came in, walked up to the Labrador, lifted up its tail, looked underneath, shrugged his shoulders and walked out. A few moments later, in came another old rancher. He walked up to the dog, lifted up its tail, looked underneath, scratched his head and left the bar.
For the next hour, another dozen ranchers came in, lifted the dog's tail, and left shaking their heads.
Finally, Nancy asked, "Why did all those old ranchers come in and look under the dog's tail? Is it some sort of custom?"
"Shit no," said the bartender. "Someone's out there running around town, claiming there's a Labrador Retriever in here with two assholes!"
ARE YOU SURE YOU WANT TO GET MARRIED?
The Unconventional Gazette
December 4, 2014
This guy brings his best golfing buddy home, unannounced, for dinner at 6:30, after golf. His wife screams her head off while his friend sits open mouthed and listens to the tirade.
"My bloody hair and makeup are not done, the house is a fucking mess, the dishes aren't done. Can't you see I'm still in my fucking pajamas and I can't be bothered with cooking tonight! Why the fuck did you bring him home unannounced you fucking idiot?"
"Because he's thinking of getting married."
December 4, 2014
This guy brings his best golfing buddy home, unannounced, for dinner at 6:30, after golf. His wife screams her head off while his friend sits open mouthed and listens to the tirade.
"My bloody hair and makeup are not done, the house is a fucking mess, the dishes aren't done. Can't you see I'm still in my fucking pajamas and I can't be bothered with cooking tonight! Why the fuck did you bring him home unannounced you fucking idiot?"
"Because he's thinking of getting married."
Thursday, December 04, 2014
GRAND JURY REFUSES TO INDICT WHITE NY COP IN CHOKE HOLD DEATH OF BLACK MAN
Officer Daniel Pantaleo still faces NYPD administrative charges for applying what appeared to be a choke hold on Eric Garner, a huge black man who resisted being arrested for the illegal sales of cigarettes
Here we have another case where a white cop is accused of killing an unarmed black man. Last July, NYPD cops were trying to arrest Eric Garner, 43, for the illegal sales of cigarettes. Garner, a huge black man, resisted the attempt to arrest him. A video shows Officer Daniel Pantaleo applying what appeared to be a choke hold as he jumped in to assist other cops in trying to subdue the 350-pound the giant. Garner, who had a record of 31 arrests, was in poor health and died shortly after the arrest.
On Wednesday, a Staten Island grand jury decided not to indict Pantaleo on any criminal charges in the death of Garner. Because NYPD has banned choke holds, Pantaleo may still face administrative charges that could lead to him getting fired.
NYC GRAND JURY RETURNS NO INDICTMENT IN POLICE CHOKE HOLD CASE
Newsmax
December 3, 2014
A grand jury cleared a white New York City police officer Wednesday in the videotaped chokehold death of an unarmed black man who had been stopped on suspicion of selling loose, untaxed cigarettes, a lawyer for the victim's family said.
The decision in Staten Island not to indict Officer Daniel Pantaleo threatened to add to the tensions that have simmered in the city since the July 17 death of Eric Garner — a case that sparked outrage and drew comparisons to the fatal police shooting of 18-year-old Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri.
Jonathan Moore, an attorney for Garner's family, said he was told of the grand jury's decision.
"I am actually astonished based on the evidence of the video tape, and the medical examiner, that this grand jury at this time wouldn't indict for anything, is really just astonishing," Moore said.
The Staten Island District Attorney's office didn't immediately respond to a call. There was no immediate comment from Pantaleo's attorney nor the Patrolmen's Benevolent Association, a union that has strongly backed the officer.
The grand jury could have considered a range of charges, from murder to a lesser offense such as reckless endangerment. Sources told the New York Daily News that the jury consisted of 15 white and 8 black or Hispanic jurors.
A video shot by an onlooker and widely viewed on the Internet showed the 43-year-old Garner telling a group of police officers to leave him alone as they tried to arrest him.
Pantaleo responded by wrapping his arm around Garner's neck in an apparent chokehold, which is banned under NYPD policy. The heavyset Garner, who had asthma, was heard repeatedly gasping, "I can't breathe!" A second video surfaced that showed police and paramedics appearing to make no effort to revive Garner while he lay motionless on the ground. He later died at a hospital.
As with Brown's death in the St. Louis suburb of Ferguson, the Garner case sparked protests, accusations of racist policing and calls for federal prosecutors to intervene. But unlike the Missouri protests, the demonstrations in New York remained mostly peaceful. The case also prompted Police Commissioner William Bratton to order officers at the nation's largest police department to undergo retraining on use of force.
The medical examiner ruled Garner's death a homicide and found that a chokehold contributed to it. A forensic pathologist hired by Garner's family, Dr. Michael Baden, agreed with those findings, saying there was hemorrhaging on Garner's neck indicative of neck compressions.
Police union officials and Pantaleo's lawyer have argued that the officer used a takedown move taught by the police department, not a chokehold, because he was resisting arrest and that Garner's poor health was the main reason he died.
While details on the grand jurors were not disclosed, Staten Island is the most politically conservative of the city's five boroughs and home to many police and firefighters. The panel began hearing evidence in late September, including the video, autopsy results and testimony by Pantaleo.
Pantaleo had been stripped of his gun and badge and placed on desk duty while the case was under investigation. He is likely to remain on modified duty while the NYPD conducts an internal investigation that could result in administrative charges.
In anticipation of the announcement on the grand jury decision, police officials met with community leaders on Staten Island to head off a repeat of the response in Ferguson, where a grand jury decided not to indict the white officer who shot the black teen. Demonstrations there turned violent, resulting in more than 100 arrests and destruction of 12 commercial buildings by fire.
The last officer to be indicted in the death of a civilian was Richard Haste, charged in the February 2012 killing of Ramarley Graham in the Bronx. Graham was shot in a tiny bathroom in the three-family home where he lived with his grandmother. He was chased there by Haste who believed he was selling drugs.
Haste said he fired his weapon because he thought he was going to be shot. But no weapons were found in the apartment.
The officer was indicted on manslaughter charges in the summer of 2012, but the charges were dismissed by a judge who said prosecutors improperly instructed the grand jurors. A second grand jury decided not to re-indict the officer.
Here we have another case where a white cop is accused of killing an unarmed black man. Last July, NYPD cops were trying to arrest Eric Garner, 43, for the illegal sales of cigarettes. Garner, a huge black man, resisted the attempt to arrest him. A video shows Officer Daniel Pantaleo applying what appeared to be a choke hold as he jumped in to assist other cops in trying to subdue the 350-pound the giant. Garner, who had a record of 31 arrests, was in poor health and died shortly after the arrest.
On Wednesday, a Staten Island grand jury decided not to indict Pantaleo on any criminal charges in the death of Garner. Because NYPD has banned choke holds, Pantaleo may still face administrative charges that could lead to him getting fired.
NYC GRAND JURY RETURNS NO INDICTMENT IN POLICE CHOKE HOLD CASE
Newsmax
December 3, 2014
A grand jury cleared a white New York City police officer Wednesday in the videotaped chokehold death of an unarmed black man who had been stopped on suspicion of selling loose, untaxed cigarettes, a lawyer for the victim's family said.
The decision in Staten Island not to indict Officer Daniel Pantaleo threatened to add to the tensions that have simmered in the city since the July 17 death of Eric Garner — a case that sparked outrage and drew comparisons to the fatal police shooting of 18-year-old Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri.
Jonathan Moore, an attorney for Garner's family, said he was told of the grand jury's decision.
"I am actually astonished based on the evidence of the video tape, and the medical examiner, that this grand jury at this time wouldn't indict for anything, is really just astonishing," Moore said.
The Staten Island District Attorney's office didn't immediately respond to a call. There was no immediate comment from Pantaleo's attorney nor the Patrolmen's Benevolent Association, a union that has strongly backed the officer.
The grand jury could have considered a range of charges, from murder to a lesser offense such as reckless endangerment. Sources told the New York Daily News that the jury consisted of 15 white and 8 black or Hispanic jurors.
A video shot by an onlooker and widely viewed on the Internet showed the 43-year-old Garner telling a group of police officers to leave him alone as they tried to arrest him.
Pantaleo responded by wrapping his arm around Garner's neck in an apparent chokehold, which is banned under NYPD policy. The heavyset Garner, who had asthma, was heard repeatedly gasping, "I can't breathe!" A second video surfaced that showed police and paramedics appearing to make no effort to revive Garner while he lay motionless on the ground. He later died at a hospital.
As with Brown's death in the St. Louis suburb of Ferguson, the Garner case sparked protests, accusations of racist policing and calls for federal prosecutors to intervene. But unlike the Missouri protests, the demonstrations in New York remained mostly peaceful. The case also prompted Police Commissioner William Bratton to order officers at the nation's largest police department to undergo retraining on use of force.
The medical examiner ruled Garner's death a homicide and found that a chokehold contributed to it. A forensic pathologist hired by Garner's family, Dr. Michael Baden, agreed with those findings, saying there was hemorrhaging on Garner's neck indicative of neck compressions.
Police union officials and Pantaleo's lawyer have argued that the officer used a takedown move taught by the police department, not a chokehold, because he was resisting arrest and that Garner's poor health was the main reason he died.
While details on the grand jurors were not disclosed, Staten Island is the most politically conservative of the city's five boroughs and home to many police and firefighters. The panel began hearing evidence in late September, including the video, autopsy results and testimony by Pantaleo.
Pantaleo had been stripped of his gun and badge and placed on desk duty while the case was under investigation. He is likely to remain on modified duty while the NYPD conducts an internal investigation that could result in administrative charges.
In anticipation of the announcement on the grand jury decision, police officials met with community leaders on Staten Island to head off a repeat of the response in Ferguson, where a grand jury decided not to indict the white officer who shot the black teen. Demonstrations there turned violent, resulting in more than 100 arrests and destruction of 12 commercial buildings by fire.
The last officer to be indicted in the death of a civilian was Richard Haste, charged in the February 2012 killing of Ramarley Graham in the Bronx. Graham was shot in a tiny bathroom in the three-family home where he lived with his grandmother. He was chased there by Haste who believed he was selling drugs.
Haste said he fired his weapon because he thought he was going to be shot. But no weapons were found in the apartment.
The officer was indicted on manslaughter charges in the summer of 2012, but the charges were dismissed by a judge who said prosecutors improperly instructed the grand jurors. A second grand jury decided not to re-indict the officer.
DE BLASIO BLASTS DECISION NOT TO INDICT COP IN CHOKE HOLD DEATH
After a Staten Island grand jury refuses to indict Officer Daniel Pantaleo in the death of Eric Garner, NY Mayor Billl de Blasio calls Garner a ‘good man’ despite his record of 31 arrests and blamed racism for Garner’s death and the grand jury’s decision
In an emotional rambling speech after a Staten Island grand jury on Wednesday refused to indict Officer Daniel Pantaleo in the death of Eric Garner, New York’s Sandinista-loving Mayor Bill de Blasio blasted the decision and said, "It's a very emotional day for our city. It's a very painful day for so many New Yorkers. We're grieving — again — over the loss of Eric Garner, who was a father, a husband, a son, a good man — a man who should be with us, and isn't."
The ultra-liberal de Blasio, who is hated by the rank-and-file cops, repeatedly sympathized with Garner’s family and made his statement personal by mentioning his own son Dante. De Blasio’s wife Chirlane McCray is black, as is Dante. The mayor said, "I couldn’t help but immediately think what it would mean to me to lose Dante. Life would never be the same for me after. Chirlane and I have had to talk to Dante for years about the dangers that he may face. No family should have to go through what the Garner family went through.”
De Blasio blamed racism for Garner’s death and the grand jury’s decision not to indict Pantaleo. He said, "We're not just dealing with a problem in 2014, we're not dealing with years of racism leading up to it, or decades of racism we are dealing with centuries of racism that have brought us to this day. That is how profound the crisis is."
De Blasio said President Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder are having the Justice Department conduct an investigation to see if the feds can indict Pantaleo and the other officers who participated in Garner’s arrest.
Last July, NYPD cops were trying to arrest Eric Garner, 43, for the illegal sales of cigarettes. Garner, a huge black man, resisted the attempt to arrest him. A video shows Officer Daniel Pantaleo applying what appeared to be a choke hold as he jumped in to assist other cops in trying to subdue the 350-pound the giant. Garner, an asthmatic, was in poor health and died shortly after the arrest.
As in the Michael Brown case where blacks demanded that Darren Wilson be arrested and tried for murder, black New Yorkers likewise demanded that the cops who arrested Garner be charged with murder.
Garner,43, has a record of 31 arrests, beginning when he was 16. At the time of the fatal arrest, Garner was free on $2,000 bail for selling untaxed cigarettes, driving without a license, marijuana possession and false personation.
Let’s see now. According to the mayor, Garner died because the arresting white cops were racists. Also, de Blasio says a man with a record of 31 arrests is a good man. And he’s been warning his black son Dante to be fearful of white cops. Those ‘smart’ New Yorkers proved how really ignorant they are when they elected that asshole their mayor.
In an emotional rambling speech after a Staten Island grand jury on Wednesday refused to indict Officer Daniel Pantaleo in the death of Eric Garner, New York’s Sandinista-loving Mayor Bill de Blasio blasted the decision and said, "It's a very emotional day for our city. It's a very painful day for so many New Yorkers. We're grieving — again — over the loss of Eric Garner, who was a father, a husband, a son, a good man — a man who should be with us, and isn't."
The ultra-liberal de Blasio, who is hated by the rank-and-file cops, repeatedly sympathized with Garner’s family and made his statement personal by mentioning his own son Dante. De Blasio’s wife Chirlane McCray is black, as is Dante. The mayor said, "I couldn’t help but immediately think what it would mean to me to lose Dante. Life would never be the same for me after. Chirlane and I have had to talk to Dante for years about the dangers that he may face. No family should have to go through what the Garner family went through.”
De Blasio blamed racism for Garner’s death and the grand jury’s decision not to indict Pantaleo. He said, "We're not just dealing with a problem in 2014, we're not dealing with years of racism leading up to it, or decades of racism we are dealing with centuries of racism that have brought us to this day. That is how profound the crisis is."
De Blasio said President Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder are having the Justice Department conduct an investigation to see if the feds can indict Pantaleo and the other officers who participated in Garner’s arrest.
Last July, NYPD cops were trying to arrest Eric Garner, 43, for the illegal sales of cigarettes. Garner, a huge black man, resisted the attempt to arrest him. A video shows Officer Daniel Pantaleo applying what appeared to be a choke hold as he jumped in to assist other cops in trying to subdue the 350-pound the giant. Garner, an asthmatic, was in poor health and died shortly after the arrest.
As in the Michael Brown case where blacks demanded that Darren Wilson be arrested and tried for murder, black New Yorkers likewise demanded that the cops who arrested Garner be charged with murder.
Garner,43, has a record of 31 arrests, beginning when he was 16. At the time of the fatal arrest, Garner was free on $2,000 bail for selling untaxed cigarettes, driving without a license, marijuana possession and false personation.
Let’s see now. According to the mayor, Garner died because the arresting white cops were racists. Also, de Blasio says a man with a record of 31 arrests is a good man. And he’s been warning his black son Dante to be fearful of white cops. Those ‘smart’ New Yorkers proved how really ignorant they are when they elected that asshole their mayor.
THREE CHEERS, NO MAKE THAT FIVE, FOR CHARLES BARKLEY
The basketball great blames the black community for some of the police shootings of blacks and defends white cops
As expected, Charles Barkley has come under blistering attacks for remarks he has made about the Michael Brown shooting. Here are some of the former basketball star’s infuriating (to blacks) comments:
There is no excuse for people to be out there burning down people's businesses, burning down police cars. Those aren't black people, those are scumbags.
We have to be really careful with the cops, because if it wasn’t for the cops we would be living in the Wild, Wild West in our neighborhoods. We can’t pick out certain incidentals that don’t go our way and act like the cops are all bad. Do you know how bad some of these neighborhoods would be if it wasn't for the cops?
We as black people, we got a lot of crooks
There's a reason they racially profile us at times. Sometimes it's wrong, sometimes its right.
The notion that white cops are out there just killing black people--that's ridiculous. That's just flat out ridiculous. And I challenge any black person to try to make that point.
We have to look at ourselves in the mirror,' he said of people in black communities. 'To act like we hold no responsibility for some of this stuff is disingenuous.
Barkley agreed with the grand jury’s decision not to indict Darren Wilson. “The true story came out from the grand jury testimony. Three or four witnesses, who were black, said exactly what the cop said. I can’t believe anything I hear on television anymore.”
Barkley also voiced his support for the New York cops in the recent choke hold death of Eric Garner, a huge black man who resisted being arrested of the illegal sales of cigarettes. “When the cops are trying to arrest you, if you fight back, things go wrong. I don't think they were trying to kill Mr. Garner. He was a big man and they tried to get him down.”
In 2013, Barkley also infuriated blacks when he publically supported the exoneration of George Zimmerman in the Trayvon Martin shooting.
Barkley, of course, is politically incorrect for speaking the truth about the Michael Brown shooting uproar and the distrust between the cops and the black community. That’s why I say, five cheers for Charles Barkley!
As expected, Charles Barkley has come under blistering attacks for remarks he has made about the Michael Brown shooting. Here are some of the former basketball star’s infuriating (to blacks) comments:
There is no excuse for people to be out there burning down people's businesses, burning down police cars. Those aren't black people, those are scumbags.
We have to be really careful with the cops, because if it wasn’t for the cops we would be living in the Wild, Wild West in our neighborhoods. We can’t pick out certain incidentals that don’t go our way and act like the cops are all bad. Do you know how bad some of these neighborhoods would be if it wasn't for the cops?
We as black people, we got a lot of crooks
There's a reason they racially profile us at times. Sometimes it's wrong, sometimes its right.
The notion that white cops are out there just killing black people--that's ridiculous. That's just flat out ridiculous. And I challenge any black person to try to make that point.
We have to look at ourselves in the mirror,' he said of people in black communities. 'To act like we hold no responsibility for some of this stuff is disingenuous.
Barkley agreed with the grand jury’s decision not to indict Darren Wilson. “The true story came out from the grand jury testimony. Three or four witnesses, who were black, said exactly what the cop said. I can’t believe anything I hear on television anymore.”
Barkley also voiced his support for the New York cops in the recent choke hold death of Eric Garner, a huge black man who resisted being arrested of the illegal sales of cigarettes. “When the cops are trying to arrest you, if you fight back, things go wrong. I don't think they were trying to kill Mr. Garner. He was a big man and they tried to get him down.”
In 2013, Barkley also infuriated blacks when he publically supported the exoneration of George Zimmerman in the Trayvon Martin shooting.
Barkley, of course, is politically incorrect for speaking the truth about the Michael Brown shooting uproar and the distrust between the cops and the black community. That’s why I say, five cheers for Charles Barkley!
COP OF THE YEAR TO COKE TRAFICKER
Two years ago NYPD cop Philip LeRoy was honored as the ‘Cop of the Year’ in his Queens precinct, but on Monday he got busted in Florida while trying to buy 10 kilos of cocaine
Philip LeRoy joined the NYPD in 2009. Two years ago, after he had been credited with making 188 arrests, he was honored as ‘Cop of the Year’ in his 100 officer Queens precinct.
On Monday, just before midnight, LeRoy, 28, got busted along with two other men in Sunrise City, Florida while trying to buy 10 kilos of cocaine. The former Cop of the Year has been charged with cocaine trafficking, conspiracy to traffic cocaine and felony weapons possession.
LeRoy is now roosting in jail with bail set at $250,000. He was immediately suspended by NYPD.
I predict that his resume will read: Cop of the Year – Cocaine Trafficker – Convict.
Philip LeRoy joined the NYPD in 2009. Two years ago, after he had been credited with making 188 arrests, he was honored as ‘Cop of the Year’ in his 100 officer Queens precinct.
On Monday, just before midnight, LeRoy, 28, got busted along with two other men in Sunrise City, Florida while trying to buy 10 kilos of cocaine. The former Cop of the Year has been charged with cocaine trafficking, conspiracy to traffic cocaine and felony weapons possession.
LeRoy is now roosting in jail with bail set at $250,000. He was immediately suspended by NYPD.
I predict that his resume will read: Cop of the Year – Cocaine Trafficker – Convict.
FLORIDA MOTHER STABBED HER NEIGHBOR THROUGH THE EYE WITH AN ICE PICK AND COOKED HIS REMAINS
Angela Stoldt had her children help dispose of the body, telling them she had run over a deer
The depravity of Angela Stoldt is hard to imagine. She stabbed her neighbor in the eye with an ice pick, then strangled him to death with a cord. After that she took the ice pick and stabbed him in the other eye. She then dismembered him with a hacksaw and cooked the body parts. She bagged the remains and then dumped them in several places. And she claims she acted in self defense.
WOMAN ACCUSED OF KILLING, COOKING DELTONA NEIGHB ON TRIAL
Much of Deltona limo driver’s body wasn’t recovered
By Frank Fernandez
The Daytona Beach News-Journal
December 3, 2014
DELAND — James Sheaffer's head has never been found. And only 56 of the Deltona limo driver's 206 bones were recovered, a medical examiner testified at the trial of the woman accused of killing him.
Angela Stoldt, 42, who charged with first-degree murder in the killing of James Sheaffer, 36, on April 3, 2013, sat next to her defense attorney and betrayed no emotions as the grisly details were recounted.
After the killing prosecutors say Stoldt cut up Sheaffer's body and first tried to cook it to conceal it then bagged the remains and dumped them in several places.
Stoldt is accused of first drugging Sheaffer, then driving him to the Osteen cemetery. That's where Prosecutor Ryan Will told a jury in Circuit Judge Randell H. Rowe III's courtroom that she stabbed a sleeping Sheaffer in the eye and then strangled him with a cord. Then she stabbed him in the other eye.
“You'll hear that when he stopped moving that she pulled the ice pick out of his eye and she jammed it in his other one just to be sure, her words not mine,” Will said.
Stoldt then wrapped Sheaffer's head in plastic, which she had bought at Wal-Mart along with some rubber gloves, just hours before the killing, Will said. She wrapped his head in plastic and drove back home, Sheaffer's body in the front seat, ice pick still in one eye.
Sheaffer, who had three children with his girlfriend and also a stepson, lived across the street from Stoldt in Deltona. Sheaffer had asked Stoldt to be the payee on his Social Security benefit checks but he kept overdrawing the account, which angered Stoldt, Will said.
So Stoldt stole some of her father's prescription-only muscle relaxant medicine, prosecutors said, then she picked up Sheaffer from his job and drove him to her house where she served him an alcoholic drink spiked with the drug, a combination that could have put him to sleep.
She told him to come with her to her parents' house where she would get some money to put in the overdrawn account.
“She tricked Jimmy and led him to a place of seclusion and vulnerability,” Will said. “Instead of going to get the money she drove him to the cemetery in the middle of the night.”
Stoldt had the ice pick and a cord in the backseat of her car. Stoldt told the police that she killed Sheaffer during a fight but she told her family that she ended his life as he slept, Will said.
Then she drove to her garage and she cut up Sheaffer's body using knives and a saw. She moved the body from her garage to her kitchen.
“She took him into the house piece by piece. ... The very same house she shares with her two teenage children and she cooked him in her oven and stove. She started with the oven but when the smoke and smell became unbearable she realized that she might get caught.”
So she took the body parts and put them in pots and boiled them, a foot, a leg, arms, Will said.
Stoldt told her family that she had hit a deer and asked them to help her get rid of it, Will said. So Stoldt and her two children went out and spread the body and his possessions throughout the county.
“She cooked him on Thursday and you'll hear her say she trashed him on Friday, Will said.
Sheaffer's head and torso were not found, testified Dr. Marie Herrmann, the medical examiner for Volusia County.
She also testified that she would not expect to find a lot of blood in Stoldt's car if Sheaffer had been stabbed in the eye, because there would not be a lot of bleeding. Will said that no blood was found in her car.
Herrmann testified that among the things recovered was a soup pot containing Sheaffer's thigh bone, knee cap and some soft tissue.
Angela Stoldt's sister, April Leach, testified that Stoldt told her and other family members that Sheaffer became angry and threatened to kill her when she told him she was going to close their bank account. She said she got behind Sheaffer and strangled him with the climbing device.
Stoldt asked how much time she had before Leach would call police. Leach said she told her sister she was going to call immediately.
The depravity of Angela Stoldt is hard to imagine. She stabbed her neighbor in the eye with an ice pick, then strangled him to death with a cord. After that she took the ice pick and stabbed him in the other eye. She then dismembered him with a hacksaw and cooked the body parts. She bagged the remains and then dumped them in several places. And she claims she acted in self defense.
WOMAN ACCUSED OF KILLING, COOKING DELTONA NEIGHB ON TRIAL
Much of Deltona limo driver’s body wasn’t recovered
By Frank Fernandez
The Daytona Beach News-Journal
December 3, 2014
DELAND — James Sheaffer's head has never been found. And only 56 of the Deltona limo driver's 206 bones were recovered, a medical examiner testified at the trial of the woman accused of killing him.
Angela Stoldt, 42, who charged with first-degree murder in the killing of James Sheaffer, 36, on April 3, 2013, sat next to her defense attorney and betrayed no emotions as the grisly details were recounted.
After the killing prosecutors say Stoldt cut up Sheaffer's body and first tried to cook it to conceal it then bagged the remains and dumped them in several places.
Stoldt is accused of first drugging Sheaffer, then driving him to the Osteen cemetery. That's where Prosecutor Ryan Will told a jury in Circuit Judge Randell H. Rowe III's courtroom that she stabbed a sleeping Sheaffer in the eye and then strangled him with a cord. Then she stabbed him in the other eye.
“You'll hear that when he stopped moving that she pulled the ice pick out of his eye and she jammed it in his other one just to be sure, her words not mine,” Will said.
Stoldt then wrapped Sheaffer's head in plastic, which she had bought at Wal-Mart along with some rubber gloves, just hours before the killing, Will said. She wrapped his head in plastic and drove back home, Sheaffer's body in the front seat, ice pick still in one eye.
Sheaffer, who had three children with his girlfriend and also a stepson, lived across the street from Stoldt in Deltona. Sheaffer had asked Stoldt to be the payee on his Social Security benefit checks but he kept overdrawing the account, which angered Stoldt, Will said.
So Stoldt stole some of her father's prescription-only muscle relaxant medicine, prosecutors said, then she picked up Sheaffer from his job and drove him to her house where she served him an alcoholic drink spiked with the drug, a combination that could have put him to sleep.
She told him to come with her to her parents' house where she would get some money to put in the overdrawn account.
“She tricked Jimmy and led him to a place of seclusion and vulnerability,” Will said. “Instead of going to get the money she drove him to the cemetery in the middle of the night.”
Stoldt had the ice pick and a cord in the backseat of her car. Stoldt told the police that she killed Sheaffer during a fight but she told her family that she ended his life as he slept, Will said.
Then she drove to her garage and she cut up Sheaffer's body using knives and a saw. She moved the body from her garage to her kitchen.
“She took him into the house piece by piece. ... The very same house she shares with her two teenage children and she cooked him in her oven and stove. She started with the oven but when the smoke and smell became unbearable she realized that she might get caught.”
So she took the body parts and put them in pots and boiled them, a foot, a leg, arms, Will said.
Stoldt told her family that she had hit a deer and asked them to help her get rid of it, Will said. So Stoldt and her two children went out and spread the body and his possessions throughout the county.
“She cooked him on Thursday and you'll hear her say she trashed him on Friday, Will said.
Sheaffer's head and torso were not found, testified Dr. Marie Herrmann, the medical examiner for Volusia County.
She also testified that she would not expect to find a lot of blood in Stoldt's car if Sheaffer had been stabbed in the eye, because there would not be a lot of bleeding. Will said that no blood was found in her car.
Herrmann testified that among the things recovered was a soup pot containing Sheaffer's thigh bone, knee cap and some soft tissue.
Angela Stoldt's sister, April Leach, testified that Stoldt told her and other family members that Sheaffer became angry and threatened to kill her when she told him she was going to close their bank account. She said she got behind Sheaffer and strangled him with the climbing device.
Stoldt asked how much time she had before Leach would call police. Leach said she told her sister she was going to call immediately.
COSBY LAWYER ASKS WHY ACCUSERS DIDN’T COME FORWARD TO BE SMEARED BY LEGAL TEAM YEARS AGO
The Onion
December 3, 2014
LOS ANGELES—Responding to recent allegations that his client sexually assaulted as many as 20 women over the course of his career, an attorney for comedian Bill Cosby asked Wednesday why none of the alleged victims came forward and allowed themselves to be smeared by the entertainer’s powerful attorneys years ago.
“One has to wonder why all these claims are being made now, when these women very easily could have spoken up 40 years ago and had my client’s legal team ruin them,” said Cosby lawyer Martin Singer, suggesting that if the assertions were indeed true, the purported victims have had more than ample time to let Cosby’s team of high-priced legal advisors assassinate their character and threaten them with countersuits for defamation. “It’s highly suspect that these women didn’t go public decades ago, when Mr. Cosby could have used his considerable influence to sabotage any chance these women had at a career in show business and obliterate their credibility in media outlets that were utterly smitten with him.”
Singer went on to say that he wouldn’t be surprised if other alleged victims surfaced, even though there wasn’t much left that could be done to destroy them.
December 3, 2014
LOS ANGELES—Responding to recent allegations that his client sexually assaulted as many as 20 women over the course of his career, an attorney for comedian Bill Cosby asked Wednesday why none of the alleged victims came forward and allowed themselves to be smeared by the entertainer’s powerful attorneys years ago.
“One has to wonder why all these claims are being made now, when these women very easily could have spoken up 40 years ago and had my client’s legal team ruin them,” said Cosby lawyer Martin Singer, suggesting that if the assertions were indeed true, the purported victims have had more than ample time to let Cosby’s team of high-priced legal advisors assassinate their character and threaten them with countersuits for defamation. “It’s highly suspect that these women didn’t go public decades ago, when Mr. Cosby could have used his considerable influence to sabotage any chance these women had at a career in show business and obliterate their credibility in media outlets that were utterly smitten with him.”
Singer went on to say that he wouldn’t be surprised if other alleged victims surfaced, even though there wasn’t much left that could be done to destroy them.
Wednesday, December 03, 2014
CONGRESSIONAL BLACK CAUCUS: HANDS UP! DON’T SHOOT!
Black members of the House of Representatives perpetuate the lies that Darren Wilson shot Michael Brown as he was surrendering with his hands up
On Monday, the Congressional Black Caucus treated the House of Representatives to a “Hands up! Don’t Shoot!” demonstration, together with some long winded speeches about the injustice of the Ferguson grand jury’s refusal to indict Darren Wilson. During their speeches, each one repeatedly raised their hands up.
I took special note of Sheila ‘Motormouth’ Jackson Lee and Al Green because both of these members of Congress are from Houston, my neck of the woods.
Ole motormouth praised the St. Louis Rams football players who demonstrated with their hands up before the start of Sunday’s Rams-Oakland Raiders game. Jackson Lee said, “Let me say that I also admire the young St. Louis Rams players who raised their hands, to be able to share in the dignity of those young peaceful protesters.”
Dignity of the peaceful protesters, my ass! Jackson Lee must have turned a blind eye to the protests in Ferguson, Oakland, Los Angeles and other cities where those ‘peaceful protesters’ blocked traffic at intersections and on freeways, interfered with Black Friday mall shoppers and on occasion smashed windows, looted stores and set them on fire.
Green said, “It was a John Carlos moment. Because this has become the new symbol, a new statement, a statement wherein people around the country now are calling to the attention of those who do quite understand that this is a movement that will not dissipate. It will not evaporate.”
When Green referred to ‘a John Carlos moment’, he was obviously counting on no one knowing who and what he was talking about. Carlos was one of the two black track stars who, during the medal award ceremony at the 1968 summer Olympics in Mexico, gave the disgraceful Black Power salute in which they each raised a black-gloved fist during the playing of our national anthem.
And Green also praised the Rams players. He said, “I want to make sure that those who participated on the Rams team, that their names are chronicled in history... I want Kenny Britt to be recognized, Tavon Austin to be recognized, Stedman Bailey to be recognized, Jared Cook, Chris Givens, and Tre Mason.”
Yeah right. I will recognize those asshole jocks for perpetuating the lie that Wilson shot Brown as he was surrendering with his hands up.
Among the speakers, Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) said, “Hands up, don’t shoot. It’s a rallying cry of people all across America who are fed up with police violence. In community, after community, after community, fed up with police violence in Ferguson, in Brooklyn, in Cleveland, in Oakland, in cities and counties and rural communities all across America.”
Jeffries makes it sound like the police have run amok all over the country, committing violence against people at will. How revolting! How shameful! How offensive to cops!
What is particularly troubling to me is that by their “Hands up! Don’t shoot!” demonstration, the Black Caucus members were perpetuating the lies that Darren Wilson shot Michael Brown as he was surrendering with his hands up, just as did the Rams football players. Credible testimony revealed that Michael Brown was not surrendering with his hands up when Officer Wilson shot him.
The perpetuation of those lies about Wilson is particularly offensive to law enforcement officers across the nation. The perpetrators of those lies ought to be ashamed because, in effect, the "Hands Up, Don't Shoot" symbolism accuses all cops of shooting down people in the act of surrendering. But apparently they have no shame.
On Monday, the Congressional Black Caucus treated the House of Representatives to a “Hands up! Don’t Shoot!” demonstration, together with some long winded speeches about the injustice of the Ferguson grand jury’s refusal to indict Darren Wilson. During their speeches, each one repeatedly raised their hands up.
I took special note of Sheila ‘Motormouth’ Jackson Lee and Al Green because both of these members of Congress are from Houston, my neck of the woods.
Ole motormouth praised the St. Louis Rams football players who demonstrated with their hands up before the start of Sunday’s Rams-Oakland Raiders game. Jackson Lee said, “Let me say that I also admire the young St. Louis Rams players who raised their hands, to be able to share in the dignity of those young peaceful protesters.”
Dignity of the peaceful protesters, my ass! Jackson Lee must have turned a blind eye to the protests in Ferguson, Oakland, Los Angeles and other cities where those ‘peaceful protesters’ blocked traffic at intersections and on freeways, interfered with Black Friday mall shoppers and on occasion smashed windows, looted stores and set them on fire.
Green said, “It was a John Carlos moment. Because this has become the new symbol, a new statement, a statement wherein people around the country now are calling to the attention of those who do quite understand that this is a movement that will not dissipate. It will not evaporate.”
When Green referred to ‘a John Carlos moment’, he was obviously counting on no one knowing who and what he was talking about. Carlos was one of the two black track stars who, during the medal award ceremony at the 1968 summer Olympics in Mexico, gave the disgraceful Black Power salute in which they each raised a black-gloved fist during the playing of our national anthem.
And Green also praised the Rams players. He said, “I want to make sure that those who participated on the Rams team, that their names are chronicled in history... I want Kenny Britt to be recognized, Tavon Austin to be recognized, Stedman Bailey to be recognized, Jared Cook, Chris Givens, and Tre Mason.”
Yeah right. I will recognize those asshole jocks for perpetuating the lie that Wilson shot Brown as he was surrendering with his hands up.
Among the speakers, Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) said, “Hands up, don’t shoot. It’s a rallying cry of people all across America who are fed up with police violence. In community, after community, after community, fed up with police violence in Ferguson, in Brooklyn, in Cleveland, in Oakland, in cities and counties and rural communities all across America.”
Jeffries makes it sound like the police have run amok all over the country, committing violence against people at will. How revolting! How shameful! How offensive to cops!
What is particularly troubling to me is that by their “Hands up! Don’t shoot!” demonstration, the Black Caucus members were perpetuating the lies that Darren Wilson shot Michael Brown as he was surrendering with his hands up, just as did the Rams football players. Credible testimony revealed that Michael Brown was not surrendering with his hands up when Officer Wilson shot him.
The perpetuation of those lies about Wilson is particularly offensive to law enforcement officers across the nation. The perpetrators of those lies ought to be ashamed because, in effect, the "Hands Up, Don't Shoot" symbolism accuses all cops of shooting down people in the act of surrendering. But apparently they have no shame.
SACRIFICIAL LAMB OF THE NFL
The NFL suspended Ray Rice for life not because the former Baltimore Ravens star running back cold-cocked his now wife, but because the league needed to appease its angry women fans
Let me make it crystal clear that no man should ever hit a woman, the lone possible exception being that he had to hit her in order to save himself from serious bodily injury.
Unless you are living under a rock, you know that Ray Rice knocked out his fiancé at the time while they were in a casino-hotel elevator. The first surveillance video showed Rice dragging her into the hotel hallway. Because of the resulting outcry from women, Rice was suspended for two games. Then out came the second video showing him cold-cocking his now wife inside the elevator. That created a real shitstorm from women. In order to appease the league’s women fans, Rice was banned from the NFL for life. To put it succinctly, Ray Rice was handed up as a sacrificial lamb.
As you probably know, an arbitrator has overturned the suspension and the NFL immediately reinstated Rice. But it is questionable whether a team will pick him up because none want to offend a swarm of uber-angry women.
In view of what Rice did, he should have received more than just a two-game suspension. But suspended for life? Come on, give me a break!
Let me make it crystal clear that no man should ever hit a woman, the lone possible exception being that he had to hit her in order to save himself from serious bodily injury.
Unless you are living under a rock, you know that Ray Rice knocked out his fiancé at the time while they were in a casino-hotel elevator. The first surveillance video showed Rice dragging her into the hotel hallway. Because of the resulting outcry from women, Rice was suspended for two games. Then out came the second video showing him cold-cocking his now wife inside the elevator. That created a real shitstorm from women. In order to appease the league’s women fans, Rice was banned from the NFL for life. To put it succinctly, Ray Rice was handed up as a sacrificial lamb.
As you probably know, an arbitrator has overturned the suspension and the NFL immediately reinstated Rice. But it is questionable whether a team will pick him up because none want to offend a swarm of uber-angry women.
In view of what Rice did, he should have received more than just a two-game suspension. But suspended for life? Come on, give me a break!
Tuesday, December 02, 2014
COPS INFURIATED BY ST. LOUIS RAMS HANDS-UP PROTEST
St. Louis police officers demand that five Rams football players be punished for their hands-up protest
As they entered the playing field before the start of the St. Louis Rams-Oakland Raiders game, five black Rams players stopped to make the "Hands Up, Don't Shoot" stance, the symbol of the Ferguson protests.
The head of the St. Louis Police Officers Association sent a strong statement to the National Football league demanding that the five players be punished and that the NFL apologize for their actions. Here is part of that SLPOA statement:
The St. Louis Police Officers Association is profoundly disappointed with the members of the St. Louis Rams football team who chose to ignore the mountains of evidence released from the St. Louis County Grand Jury this week and engage in a display that police officers around the nation found tasteless, offensive and inflammatory,
Now that the evidence is in and Officer Wilson's account has been verified by physical and ballistic evidence as well as eyewitness testimony, which led the grand jury to conclude that no probable cause existed that Wilson engaged in any wrongdoing, it is unthinkable that hometown athletes would so publicly perpetuate a narrative that has been disproven over-and-over again.
I'd remind the NFL and their players that it is not the violent thugs burning down buildings that buy their advertisers' products. It's cops and the good people of St. Louis and other NFL towns that do. Somebody needs to throw a flag on this play.
All week long, the Rams and the NFL were on the phone with the St. Louis Police Department asking for assurances that the players and the fans would be kept safe from the violent protesters who had rioted, looted, and burned buildings in Ferguson.
As the players and their fans sit safely in their dome under the watchful protection of hundreds of St. Louis' finest, they take to the turf to call a now-exonerated officer a murderer, that is way out-of-bounds, to put it in football parlance.
I believe that cops all over the U.S. have good reasons to be infuriated by the protests of the five players. In effect, the "Hands Up, Don't Shoot" stance accuses all cops of shooting down people in the act of surrendering.
The five players have every right to participate in the Ferguson protests, but the football field is for playing the game, not for a demonstration of anger against the police. Their protest on the field was reminiscent of the disgraceful Black Power salute given by two black track stars during the medal award ceremony at the 1968 summer Olympics in Mexico in which they each raised a black-gloved fist during the playing of our national anthem.
The Rams claim they were not aware that the players planned to protest. In this politically and racially charged atmosphere, don’t look for an NFL apology or for the players to be punished.
UPDATE: It did not take long for the NFL to respond. Spokesman Brian McCarthy told Reuters that the NFL would not fine or suspend any of the protesting players. "We respect and understand the concerns of all individuals who have expressed views on this tragic situation," he said.
And, of course, no apology was forthcoming from the no-balls NFL either. In other words, fuck the cops!
In view of that, it has been suggested that the cops should refuse to work at any future Rams games. But those cops at the games are moonlighting and getting paid by the NFL. While they may huff and puff about the player demonstration and the no-balls NFL’s refusal to punish the players or issue an apology, there’s no way those cops will give up that extra paycheck. And the St. Louis PD is not about to order their cops not to work those games. Even if the SLPD were to issue such an order, the St. Louis Police Officers Association would scream bloody murder. Money talks, bullshit walks!
As they entered the playing field before the start of the St. Louis Rams-Oakland Raiders game, five black Rams players stopped to make the "Hands Up, Don't Shoot" stance, the symbol of the Ferguson protests.
The head of the St. Louis Police Officers Association sent a strong statement to the National Football league demanding that the five players be punished and that the NFL apologize for their actions. Here is part of that SLPOA statement:
The St. Louis Police Officers Association is profoundly disappointed with the members of the St. Louis Rams football team who chose to ignore the mountains of evidence released from the St. Louis County Grand Jury this week and engage in a display that police officers around the nation found tasteless, offensive and inflammatory,
Now that the evidence is in and Officer Wilson's account has been verified by physical and ballistic evidence as well as eyewitness testimony, which led the grand jury to conclude that no probable cause existed that Wilson engaged in any wrongdoing, it is unthinkable that hometown athletes would so publicly perpetuate a narrative that has been disproven over-and-over again.
I'd remind the NFL and their players that it is not the violent thugs burning down buildings that buy their advertisers' products. It's cops and the good people of St. Louis and other NFL towns that do. Somebody needs to throw a flag on this play.
All week long, the Rams and the NFL were on the phone with the St. Louis Police Department asking for assurances that the players and the fans would be kept safe from the violent protesters who had rioted, looted, and burned buildings in Ferguson.
As the players and their fans sit safely in their dome under the watchful protection of hundreds of St. Louis' finest, they take to the turf to call a now-exonerated officer a murderer, that is way out-of-bounds, to put it in football parlance.
I believe that cops all over the U.S. have good reasons to be infuriated by the protests of the five players. In effect, the "Hands Up, Don't Shoot" stance accuses all cops of shooting down people in the act of surrendering.
The five players have every right to participate in the Ferguson protests, but the football field is for playing the game, not for a demonstration of anger against the police. Their protest on the field was reminiscent of the disgraceful Black Power salute given by two black track stars during the medal award ceremony at the 1968 summer Olympics in Mexico in which they each raised a black-gloved fist during the playing of our national anthem.
The Rams claim they were not aware that the players planned to protest. In this politically and racially charged atmosphere, don’t look for an NFL apology or for the players to be punished.
UPDATE: It did not take long for the NFL to respond. Spokesman Brian McCarthy told Reuters that the NFL would not fine or suspend any of the protesting players. "We respect and understand the concerns of all individuals who have expressed views on this tragic situation," he said.
And, of course, no apology was forthcoming from the no-balls NFL either. In other words, fuck the cops!
In view of that, it has been suggested that the cops should refuse to work at any future Rams games. But those cops at the games are moonlighting and getting paid by the NFL. While they may huff and puff about the player demonstration and the no-balls NFL’s refusal to punish the players or issue an apology, there’s no way those cops will give up that extra paycheck. And the St. Louis PD is not about to order their cops not to work those games. Even if the SLPD were to issue such an order, the St. Louis Police Officers Association would scream bloody murder. Money talks, bullshit walks!
PROMINENT BLACK PREACHER SAYS MICHAEL BROWN IS DEAD BECAUSE OF MICHAEL BROWN
Rev. Jesse Lee Peterson also blasts Brown’s parents for calling Darren Wilson a murderer
This Reverend Jesse, not to be confused with Jesse Jackson, is spot on. He just doesn’t get the media attention that the two charlatans, Jackson and Al Sharpton, get.
Referring to the Michael Brown case, Peterson had previously said, "I can't believe, man, that we have a thug that's being hailed as a hero who attacked a police officer. That is unheard of in America."
I would remind Rev. Peterson that they also made a hero out of another thug, Trayvon Martin. And instead of saying “unheard of in America,” he could have said, “Only in America.”
JESSE LEE PETERSON: MICHAEL BROWN’S DEATH HIS OWN FAULT
By Bill Hoffmann
Newsmax
December 1, 2014
A prominent African-American minister has come out swinging against the parents of Michael Brown, after his incensed father labeled the police officer who fatally shot his son "a murderer."
"I may be the only one in America who does not grieve for Michael Brown's parents," the Rev. Jesse Lee Peterson said Monday on "The Steve Malzberg Show" on Newsmax TV.
"The reality is Michael Brown is dead because of Michael Brown. It's not Officer Darren Wilson's fault."
In an interview with CNN, Brown's parents were asked about Wilson's declaration that he has a "clear conscience" about shooting their son in Ferguson, Mo. — an event that triggered weeks of racial unrest last summer.
"He’s a murderer," Michael Brown Sr. shot back. "He understood exactly what he was doing. You know, he didn’t have a second thought, a pushback thought or nothing. He was intending to kill someone."
But Peterson — president and founder of the Brotherhood Organization of a New Destiny (BOND) and host of the syndicated radio program, "The Jesse Lee Peterson Show" — tore into that scenario.
"[Brown] attacked the police officer in his car, tried to take his gun, the gun went off, and Michael's blood is all over the place," Peterson said.
"According to the report and witnesses, Michael, after running away from the officer, came back after him with a full force charge toward him. Michael Brown is dead because of Michael Brown.
"His parents are also hypocrites because they didn't raise Michael in the right way. They failed him. They failed to raise a decent citizen. They are in part responsible for the death of Michael Brown as well. [They] should be made to feel embarrassed for the way they raised their son."
Wilson was exonerated by a grand jury last week. He has quit the Ferguson police force in a bid to help the racially torn community heal.
But the Rev. Al Sharpton said Sunday that "the fight ain't over" in the wake of the grand jury declining to indict a white police officer in the killing of a black teenager.
Speaking at the Friendly Temple Missionary Baptist Church in St. Louis where Brown's funeral was held in August, Sharpton said Wilson's resignation is not enough.
Peterson told Steve Malzberg:
"America has set up situations like this all over the country because these thugs are going to feel as though they could go out and harass officers, fight with them, call them racists and get away with it.
"No one in the black community, for the most part, [is] telling the truth about what really happened there."
This Reverend Jesse, not to be confused with Jesse Jackson, is spot on. He just doesn’t get the media attention that the two charlatans, Jackson and Al Sharpton, get.
Referring to the Michael Brown case, Peterson had previously said, "I can't believe, man, that we have a thug that's being hailed as a hero who attacked a police officer. That is unheard of in America."
I would remind Rev. Peterson that they also made a hero out of another thug, Trayvon Martin. And instead of saying “unheard of in America,” he could have said, “Only in America.”
JESSE LEE PETERSON: MICHAEL BROWN’S DEATH HIS OWN FAULT
By Bill Hoffmann
Newsmax
December 1, 2014
A prominent African-American minister has come out swinging against the parents of Michael Brown, after his incensed father labeled the police officer who fatally shot his son "a murderer."
"I may be the only one in America who does not grieve for Michael Brown's parents," the Rev. Jesse Lee Peterson said Monday on "The Steve Malzberg Show" on Newsmax TV.
"The reality is Michael Brown is dead because of Michael Brown. It's not Officer Darren Wilson's fault."
In an interview with CNN, Brown's parents were asked about Wilson's declaration that he has a "clear conscience" about shooting their son in Ferguson, Mo. — an event that triggered weeks of racial unrest last summer.
"He’s a murderer," Michael Brown Sr. shot back. "He understood exactly what he was doing. You know, he didn’t have a second thought, a pushback thought or nothing. He was intending to kill someone."
But Peterson — president and founder of the Brotherhood Organization of a New Destiny (BOND) and host of the syndicated radio program, "The Jesse Lee Peterson Show" — tore into that scenario.
"[Brown] attacked the police officer in his car, tried to take his gun, the gun went off, and Michael's blood is all over the place," Peterson said.
"According to the report and witnesses, Michael, after running away from the officer, came back after him with a full force charge toward him. Michael Brown is dead because of Michael Brown.
"His parents are also hypocrites because they didn't raise Michael in the right way. They failed him. They failed to raise a decent citizen. They are in part responsible for the death of Michael Brown as well. [They] should be made to feel embarrassed for the way they raised their son."
Wilson was exonerated by a grand jury last week. He has quit the Ferguson police force in a bid to help the racially torn community heal.
But the Rev. Al Sharpton said Sunday that "the fight ain't over" in the wake of the grand jury declining to indict a white police officer in the killing of a black teenager.
Speaking at the Friendly Temple Missionary Baptist Church in St. Louis where Brown's funeral was held in August, Sharpton said Wilson's resignation is not enough.
Peterson told Steve Malzberg:
"America has set up situations like this all over the country because these thugs are going to feel as though they could go out and harass officers, fight with them, call them racists and get away with it.
"No one in the black community, for the most part, [is] telling the truth about what really happened there."
OBAMA’S ‘GO TO GUY’ ON RACE ACCUSED OF FUELING PROTESTS THAT TURN INTO RIOTS
Former NY Police Commissioner Bernard Kerik says Al Sharpton ‘inflames, he incites, he antagonizes and his rhetoric is one of the things that fuels these protests that turn into riots’
With great fanfare, the White House announced that President Obama would be hosting a meeting Monday with Vice President Joe Biden, the Cabinet, civil rights leaders, and law enforcement officials among others, to discuss the racial unrest in Ferguson. And one of those invited is race baiter and anti-Semite Al Sharpton, the President’s ‘go to guy’ on race matters. I wonder if Sharpton will announce “No Justice, No peace” to Obama and the other attendees. “No Justice, No Peace,” the motto of his National Action Network, in and of itself is a call for violent protests.
With the president relying on a charlatan like Sharpton for advice, no wonder the Obama administration’s policies are in shambles.
Former NY Police Commissioner Bernard Kerik accuses Sharpton of making matters worse in Ferguson by his rhetoric which ‘fuels protests that turn into riots.’
KERIK: SHARPTON’S RHETORIC ‘FUELS PROTESTS THAT TURN INTO RIOTS
By Courtney Coren
Newsmzx
December 1, 2014
Bernard Kerik, former commissioner of the NYPD, says that he's "disappointed" in Al Sharpton for the role he's played in the fallout of the shooting of black teenager Michael Brown by police officer Darren Wilson.
"As a civil rights leader, the number one civil right in this country is for people to live in communities safe and sound," Kerik told J.D. Hayworth on "America's Forum" on Newsmax TV Monday.
"What he does is inflames, he incites, he antagonizes and his rhetoric is one of the things that fuels these protests that turn into riots," he explained.
"People are calling these people peaceful protesters out in Ferguson, and they're not," he said. "What I've seen are riots — arsonists, burglaries, robberies, violent behavior, violent assaults — those aren't peaceful protesters.
"Every time Al Sharpton gets up there and spews his rhetoric, that's what we see as a result," he added.
Kerik asks why Sharpton isn't in "Chicago when they have 82 people shot on a weekend, predominantly with the most of them black" and "other urban communities where black-on-black crime is completely off the charts?"
With great fanfare, the White House announced that President Obama would be hosting a meeting Monday with Vice President Joe Biden, the Cabinet, civil rights leaders, and law enforcement officials among others, to discuss the racial unrest in Ferguson. And one of those invited is race baiter and anti-Semite Al Sharpton, the President’s ‘go to guy’ on race matters. I wonder if Sharpton will announce “No Justice, No peace” to Obama and the other attendees. “No Justice, No Peace,” the motto of his National Action Network, in and of itself is a call for violent protests.
With the president relying on a charlatan like Sharpton for advice, no wonder the Obama administration’s policies are in shambles.
Former NY Police Commissioner Bernard Kerik accuses Sharpton of making matters worse in Ferguson by his rhetoric which ‘fuels protests that turn into riots.’
KERIK: SHARPTON’S RHETORIC ‘FUELS PROTESTS THAT TURN INTO RIOTS
By Courtney Coren
Newsmzx
December 1, 2014
Bernard Kerik, former commissioner of the NYPD, says that he's "disappointed" in Al Sharpton for the role he's played in the fallout of the shooting of black teenager Michael Brown by police officer Darren Wilson.
"As a civil rights leader, the number one civil right in this country is for people to live in communities safe and sound," Kerik told J.D. Hayworth on "America's Forum" on Newsmax TV Monday.
"What he does is inflames, he incites, he antagonizes and his rhetoric is one of the things that fuels these protests that turn into riots," he explained.
"People are calling these people peaceful protesters out in Ferguson, and they're not," he said. "What I've seen are riots — arsonists, burglaries, robberies, violent behavior, violent assaults — those aren't peaceful protesters.
"Every time Al Sharpton gets up there and spews his rhetoric, that's what we see as a result," he added.
Kerik asks why Sharpton isn't in "Chicago when they have 82 people shot on a weekend, predominantly with the most of them black" and "other urban communities where black-on-black crime is completely off the charts?"
Monday, December 01, 2014
CHRIS ROCK WANTS TO INTERVIEW WHITE COPS
He wants to know why white cops never shoot white kids
CBS Sunday Morning had a Q&A segment between Mo Rocca and standup comedian Chris Rock. When Rock said he would like to work on the CBS TV show 60 Minutes, Rocca asked him, “If you did a story on 60 Minutes and you could interview anyone, who would you want to interview?”
Here is Chris Rock’s reply:
I would go to Ferguson right now and I would just interview white people. Whenever they do stories on race, they always interview black people. We know what black people feel about it. I would love to just interview white cops. The question isn’t why they shoot so many black kids, which is horrible. The real question is, how come you never shoot white kids? That’s the question.
Now if I were that cop, I would answer the question this way:
Chirs, we do shoot white kids. The trouble is that you never hear about it because when we do, it only makes the local news. But whenever we shoot a black kid, it sets off a national media frenzy that implies the shooting was racially motivated. No cop wants to shoot anyone – white, black, brown or purple – and especially not any kids, but sometimes our perception of their actions leave us no choice. Put yourself in our shoes. As a cop, what would you do if you feared that some kid was about to take your life?
CBS Sunday Morning had a Q&A segment between Mo Rocca and standup comedian Chris Rock. When Rock said he would like to work on the CBS TV show 60 Minutes, Rocca asked him, “If you did a story on 60 Minutes and you could interview anyone, who would you want to interview?”
Here is Chris Rock’s reply:
I would go to Ferguson right now and I would just interview white people. Whenever they do stories on race, they always interview black people. We know what black people feel about it. I would love to just interview white cops. The question isn’t why they shoot so many black kids, which is horrible. The real question is, how come you never shoot white kids? That’s the question.
Now if I were that cop, I would answer the question this way:
Chirs, we do shoot white kids. The trouble is that you never hear about it because when we do, it only makes the local news. But whenever we shoot a black kid, it sets off a national media frenzy that implies the shooting was racially motivated. No cop wants to shoot anyone – white, black, brown or purple – and especially not any kids, but sometimes our perception of their actions leave us no choice. Put yourself in our shoes. As a cop, what would you do if you feared that some kid was about to take your life?
OBAMA MAKES CHUCK HAGEL SACRIFICIAL LAMB
The president forced his Secretary of Defense to resign in order to make it appear as if Hagel was responsible for his foreign policy failures
In a video tape on ABC This Week, Martha Raddatz interviewed Chuck Hagel, the now fired Secretary of Defense. At the end of the video Raddatz said: “Add a thumping in the midterms, the president's approval rating on foreign affairs at a record low 31 percent and it was Hagel, seemingly the odd man out in White House debate, who was pressured to resign less than two years after he started.”
Raddatz then held a live interview about the Hagel firing with David Rothkopf, the CEO and editor of Foreign Policy, and The Wall Street Journal’s Bret Stephens. Here is a transcript of that interview:
RADDATZ: And I'm joined now by David Rothkopf, the CEO and editor of "Foreign Policy" and author of the book, "National Insecurity," and Bret Stephens, the national security columnist at "The Wall Street Journal" and author of the book, "America In Retreat."
Glad you're here this morning, gentlemen.
David, I want to start with you.
You had been urging in your writing for the president to shake up his cabinet, his national security team.
But do you think they got rid of the wrong man?
DAVID ROTHKOPF, CEO AND EDITOR, "FOREIGN POLICY": Oh, yes. This -- Hagel was a sacrificial lamb. The reality is, the problem is in the White House. The problem is that this administration takes too many decisions there, micromanages too much from there and has divided themselves within the White House about whether they take a strong stance on a group like ISIS or they take halfway measures.
That causes problems down the line. Hagel is a victim of those problems, not a cause of them.
RADDATZ: One of the things, Bret, there were some whisperings that Hagel had sort of gone native in channeling the frustrations of the military.
So does that matter?
Is that the point?
Or do you agree with David?
BRET STEPHENS, "THE WALL STREET JOURNAL": Well, I agree David in the sense that the whole Hagel -- Hagel saga from the moment of his nomination up until right now is so emblematic of everything that's wrong with Obama's management style.
I mean he went out of his way to pick a fight with Congress in -- in nominating Hagel. I don't think the White House then saw just the kind of opposition he would get or how poorly Hagel would -- would perform.
They also touted Hagel as an independent thinker, and yet when he turned out to be somewhat less politically pliant than they needed him to be, they -- they turned on him.
I mean I am almost tempted (INAUDIBLE) they should -- they should ask Ron Klain to be secretary of Defense, because if they want a political fixer in the Pentagon, they ought to get one.
RADDATZ: And -- and who -- we've heard the names. Michele Flournoy already turned it down. We've got Jack Reed, who wasn't interested either.
Does it matter who he puts in?
I know the names floating out there -- Jeh Johnson, Ash Carter?
ROTHKOPF: It -- it probably doesn't matter, because at the end of the day, because the White House micromanages, because so many of the decisions are taking place in the White House, this person is being seen as a -- somebody to follow through on that.
There are some names that are a little stronger. I mean Ash Carter is a -- is a very tough, independent guy. And they picked him, they would be sending a message that they do want diversity of opinion more than it seems to right now.
RADDATZ: Let -- let's move on to the crises that we're facing in the coming years.
A lot of presidents want a legacy in foreign policy. President Obama seems to be concentrating on domestic issues. But these crises are going to slap him in the face. ISIS isn't going away. Syria is not going away. Ukraine is not going away.
Just take us forward here, Bret.
STEPHENS: Well, the scary thing is that we have a series of crises and we have adversaries who think that there's a weak president in the White House who's not going to act against them. And I think that's true of Vladimir Putin. I think that's true of the Ayatollah Khamenei in Iran, throughout the world.
So it's important not to just put in the technocrat in the Pentagon.
You know, you have a kind of a flock of seagulls here with -- with the Obama administration team. There needs to be a hawk in there in a prominent position.
So I think the president would be making a mistake by putting in a technocrat like Ash Carter. He needs a strong voice.
RADDATZ: We've got about 10 seconds, David. And just looking forward with the foreign policy crisis.
ROTHKOPF: I think it's going to get worse, it's going to be very tough the last couple of years for the president.
RADDATZ: Well, on that note, thank you very much for joining us.
In a video tape on ABC This Week, Martha Raddatz interviewed Chuck Hagel, the now fired Secretary of Defense. At the end of the video Raddatz said: “Add a thumping in the midterms, the president's approval rating on foreign affairs at a record low 31 percent and it was Hagel, seemingly the odd man out in White House debate, who was pressured to resign less than two years after he started.”
Raddatz then held a live interview about the Hagel firing with David Rothkopf, the CEO and editor of Foreign Policy, and The Wall Street Journal’s Bret Stephens. Here is a transcript of that interview:
RADDATZ: And I'm joined now by David Rothkopf, the CEO and editor of "Foreign Policy" and author of the book, "National Insecurity," and Bret Stephens, the national security columnist at "The Wall Street Journal" and author of the book, "America In Retreat."
Glad you're here this morning, gentlemen.
David, I want to start with you.
You had been urging in your writing for the president to shake up his cabinet, his national security team.
But do you think they got rid of the wrong man?
DAVID ROTHKOPF, CEO AND EDITOR, "FOREIGN POLICY": Oh, yes. This -- Hagel was a sacrificial lamb. The reality is, the problem is in the White House. The problem is that this administration takes too many decisions there, micromanages too much from there and has divided themselves within the White House about whether they take a strong stance on a group like ISIS or they take halfway measures.
That causes problems down the line. Hagel is a victim of those problems, not a cause of them.
RADDATZ: One of the things, Bret, there were some whisperings that Hagel had sort of gone native in channeling the frustrations of the military.
So does that matter?
Is that the point?
Or do you agree with David?
BRET STEPHENS, "THE WALL STREET JOURNAL": Well, I agree David in the sense that the whole Hagel -- Hagel saga from the moment of his nomination up until right now is so emblematic of everything that's wrong with Obama's management style.
I mean he went out of his way to pick a fight with Congress in -- in nominating Hagel. I don't think the White House then saw just the kind of opposition he would get or how poorly Hagel would -- would perform.
They also touted Hagel as an independent thinker, and yet when he turned out to be somewhat less politically pliant than they needed him to be, they -- they turned on him.
I mean I am almost tempted (INAUDIBLE) they should -- they should ask Ron Klain to be secretary of Defense, because if they want a political fixer in the Pentagon, they ought to get one.
RADDATZ: And -- and who -- we've heard the names. Michele Flournoy already turned it down. We've got Jack Reed, who wasn't interested either.
Does it matter who he puts in?
I know the names floating out there -- Jeh Johnson, Ash Carter?
ROTHKOPF: It -- it probably doesn't matter, because at the end of the day, because the White House micromanages, because so many of the decisions are taking place in the White House, this person is being seen as a -- somebody to follow through on that.
There are some names that are a little stronger. I mean Ash Carter is a -- is a very tough, independent guy. And they picked him, they would be sending a message that they do want diversity of opinion more than it seems to right now.
RADDATZ: Let -- let's move on to the crises that we're facing in the coming years.
A lot of presidents want a legacy in foreign policy. President Obama seems to be concentrating on domestic issues. But these crises are going to slap him in the face. ISIS isn't going away. Syria is not going away. Ukraine is not going away.
Just take us forward here, Bret.
STEPHENS: Well, the scary thing is that we have a series of crises and we have adversaries who think that there's a weak president in the White House who's not going to act against them. And I think that's true of Vladimir Putin. I think that's true of the Ayatollah Khamenei in Iran, throughout the world.
So it's important not to just put in the technocrat in the Pentagon.
You know, you have a kind of a flock of seagulls here with -- with the Obama administration team. There needs to be a hawk in there in a prominent position.
So I think the president would be making a mistake by putting in a technocrat like Ash Carter. He needs a strong voice.
RADDATZ: We've got about 10 seconds, David. And just looking forward with the foreign policy crisis.
ROTHKOPF: I think it's going to get worse, it's going to be very tough the last couple of years for the president.
RADDATZ: Well, on that note, thank you very much for joining us.
CLASSLESS AND CLUELESS COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR
Elizabeth Lauten, communications director for a Republican congressman, was classless in her criticism of Malia, 16, and Sasha Obama, 13, and was obviously clueless as to what a faux pas she was committing
Dear Sasha and Malia, I get you’re both in those awful teen years, but you’re a part of the First Family, try showing a little class. At least respect the part you play. Then again your mother and father don’t respect their positions very much, or the nation for that matter, so I’m guessing you’re coming up a little short in the ‘good role model’ department. Nevertheless, stretch yourself. Rise to the occasion. Act like being in the White House matters to you. Dress like you deserve respect, not a spot at a bar. And certainly don’t make faces during televised public events.
So wrote Elizabeth Lauten, a former media director for the Republican National Committee and now communications director for Rep. Stephen Fincher (R-Tenn.), on her Facebook page after she saw a picture of the traditional turkey pardoning ceremony at the White House. Lauten obviously took offense at how Malia, 16, and Sasha Obama, 13, were dressed and the faces they made during the ceremony.
After receiving a shit-storm of criticism, Lauten deleted the offensive Facebook page and gave this contrived apology:
When I first posted on Facebook I reacted to an article and I quickly judged the two young ladies in a way that I would never have wanted to be judged myself as a teenager," she wrote. "After many hours of prayer, talking to my parents, and re-reading my words online I can see more clearly just how hurtful my words were.
Sorry, Ms. Lauten, but your apology does not sound genuine. It seems obvious that you hate Obama, which is your right, but taking your hatred out on his teenage daughters is beyond the pale. You are the one that is classless, not the Obama girls. And at the time, you were obviously clueless as to what a faux pas you were committing.
Lauten, a former media director for the Republican National Committee? The communications director for a Republican congressman? With spokespersons like Lauten, it’s no wonder that the Republicans keep losing the presidential elections.
Dear Sasha and Malia, I get you’re both in those awful teen years, but you’re a part of the First Family, try showing a little class. At least respect the part you play. Then again your mother and father don’t respect their positions very much, or the nation for that matter, so I’m guessing you’re coming up a little short in the ‘good role model’ department. Nevertheless, stretch yourself. Rise to the occasion. Act like being in the White House matters to you. Dress like you deserve respect, not a spot at a bar. And certainly don’t make faces during televised public events.
So wrote Elizabeth Lauten, a former media director for the Republican National Committee and now communications director for Rep. Stephen Fincher (R-Tenn.), on her Facebook page after she saw a picture of the traditional turkey pardoning ceremony at the White House. Lauten obviously took offense at how Malia, 16, and Sasha Obama, 13, were dressed and the faces they made during the ceremony.
After receiving a shit-storm of criticism, Lauten deleted the offensive Facebook page and gave this contrived apology:
When I first posted on Facebook I reacted to an article and I quickly judged the two young ladies in a way that I would never have wanted to be judged myself as a teenager," she wrote. "After many hours of prayer, talking to my parents, and re-reading my words online I can see more clearly just how hurtful my words were.
Sorry, Ms. Lauten, but your apology does not sound genuine. It seems obvious that you hate Obama, which is your right, but taking your hatred out on his teenage daughters is beyond the pale. You are the one that is classless, not the Obama girls. And at the time, you were obviously clueless as to what a faux pas you were committing.
Lauten, a former media director for the Republican National Committee? The communications director for a Republican congressman? With spokespersons like Lauten, it’s no wonder that the Republicans keep losing the presidential elections.
SUICIDE OR MURDER OF VENEZUELAN PRISONERS?
At least 35 inmates are dead and 20 in comas at the David Viloria Prison, with the Venezuelan government claiming they committed mass suicide and human rights groups suspecting they were poisoned by prison authorities
Last Monday, inmates at the David Viloria Prison in Lara, Venezuela went on a hunger strike for better conditions. Then a large group of inmates raided the prison infirmary where they drank pure alcohol which they mixed with prescription drugs. At least 35 of the inmates died and 20 out of 100 inmates being treated for drinking the mixture of alcohol and drugs are in comas.
The Venezuelan government claims the inmates wanted to commit mass suicide. Human rights groups, however, suspect they were poisoned by prison authorities.
The government sent in the National Guard to control the situation and transferred hundreds of inmates to other prisons. On Thursday, police arrested the prison’s warden. He is expected to be charged in connection with the inmate deaths.
The International Center for Prison Studies says that Venezuela’s 32 prisons are the fifth-most crowded correctional facilities in the world, holding three times their intended capacity. The David Viloria Prison was designed to hold 850 inmates but it is believed the prison had 3,000 inmates when the hunger strike began.
Last Monday, inmates at the David Viloria Prison in Lara, Venezuela went on a hunger strike for better conditions. Then a large group of inmates raided the prison infirmary where they drank pure alcohol which they mixed with prescription drugs. At least 35 of the inmates died and 20 out of 100 inmates being treated for drinking the mixture of alcohol and drugs are in comas.
The Venezuelan government claims the inmates wanted to commit mass suicide. Human rights groups, however, suspect they were poisoned by prison authorities.
The government sent in the National Guard to control the situation and transferred hundreds of inmates to other prisons. On Thursday, police arrested the prison’s warden. He is expected to be charged in connection with the inmate deaths.
The International Center for Prison Studies says that Venezuela’s 32 prisons are the fifth-most crowded correctional facilities in the world, holding three times their intended capacity. The David Viloria Prison was designed to hold 850 inmates but it is believed the prison had 3,000 inmates when the hunger strike began.
Sunday, November 30, 2014
WILSON RESIGNS FROM FERGUSON PD
The much maligned officer really had no choice
On Saturday it was announced that Darren Wilson had resigned from the Ferguson Police Department. The much maligned officer really had no choice. There is no way that he could have returned to duty in Ferguson. The minute he became the object of a media frenzy his career in Ferguson was kaput.
The question now is: What’s going to happen to his new bride? Will she be able to continue working as a cop in Ferguson? I seriously doubt it. And will Wilson be able to continue working as a cop? That all depends on whether another law enforcement agency is willing to fade the heat by hiring him. Even if a police department is willing to absorb a shit-storm of condemnations, will its city council approve the hiring of Wilson? I seriously doubt that too. His best chance would be with a sheriff's department because an elected Sheriff does not have to obtain the county government's approval.
Here’s wishing Darren Wilson the best of luck with the hope that some other police agency will give him a chance to resume his career in law enforcement.
On Saturday it was announced that Darren Wilson had resigned from the Ferguson Police Department. The much maligned officer really had no choice. There is no way that he could have returned to duty in Ferguson. The minute he became the object of a media frenzy his career in Ferguson was kaput.
The question now is: What’s going to happen to his new bride? Will she be able to continue working as a cop in Ferguson? I seriously doubt it. And will Wilson be able to continue working as a cop? That all depends on whether another law enforcement agency is willing to fade the heat by hiring him. Even if a police department is willing to absorb a shit-storm of condemnations, will its city council approve the hiring of Wilson? I seriously doubt that too. His best chance would be with a sheriff's department because an elected Sheriff does not have to obtain the county government's approval.
Here’s wishing Darren Wilson the best of luck with the hope that some other police agency will give him a chance to resume his career in law enforcement.
PSYCHIATRIC BALONEY: SEXUAL ABUSE MITIGATION
Reducing the punishment of a cold-blooded murderer because he had a difficult childhood or had been sexually abused early in his life doesn’t pass the common sense test
In 1991, Bernie Tiede, an assistant funeral director in the East Texas town of Carthage, started living with Marjorie Nugent, a wealthy new widow 43 years his senior. He also became Nugent’s business manager. Their five-yhear relationship deteriorated as Nugent became increasingly belittling and scornful. In November 1996, Tiede picked up a rifle and shot the 81-year-old woman four times in the back. He stuffed her body in a freezer where she remained for nine months before her body was discovered.
According to the Houston Chronicle, between the time of the murder and the body’s discovery, “Tiede spent much of her fortune on others, bestowing college scholarships, cars, a home for a struggling couple and startup money for several small businesses.” He became a beloved figure in Carthage. Of course, he also lived high on the hog with the victim’s money.
After Tiede was arrested and charged with murder, people in Carthage besieged the prosecutor with pleas for leniency. However, because the prosecutor saw Tiede as “a cold-blooded killer who shot an old woman, then lived the high life for months as if nothing bad had happened,” he obtained a change of venue and got Tiede sentenced to life in prison.
Earlier this year, Tiede’s lawyers discovered that the killer had been sexually abused for six years by an uncle, starting around the age of 12. Psychiatrists who recently examined Tiede concluded that the sexual abuse had a devastating effect on his life. The shrinks claimed that is why he remained with Nugent despite the abuse she allegedly heaped upon him and why his mind snapped when he shot her.
In May, after 17 years behind bars, Tiede was released from prison and ordered to live in a garage apartment behind the Austin home of film director Richard Linklater who based his 2011 movie “Bernie” on the Tiede case. His lawyers had persuaded a court that the sexual abuse mitigated a shorter sentence. And on Thursday, the Court of Criminal Appeals, the state’s highest court for criminal cases, ruled 5-3 that Tiede be given a new sentencing phase trial.
What is surprising here is that the Court of Criminal Appeals agreed with Tiede’s lawyers. The usually conservative Court did not have to take any mitigating circumstances into consideration because the U.S. Supreme court has ruled that mitigation applies only to death penalty cases.
The prosecutor now says he would have called for no more than a 20-year sentence had he known about the sexual abuse. During the new sentencing trial, he will call for a sentence of time served. That means this cold-blooded murderer will be set free.
To all of this I say horseshit! Call me a dinosaur if you like, but I will not buy into this psychobabble about an abusive childhood contributing to a horrific crime. So what if a cold-blooded murderer’s mother looked backwards in the mirror while she was pregnant or daddy took his rubber ducky away while he was in the bathtub. So what if a cold-blooded murderer was beaten or sexually abused during his childhood.
Tiede did not remain in an abusive relationship with Nugent because he was sexually abused for six years. He remained with the old woman because he was able to live high on the hog with her money. And he shot Nugent, not because he snapped, but because he got tired of taking her abuse.
I say forget mitigating circumstances. Never mind all the psychiatric baloney. Let the punishment fit the crime! That just seems like common sense to me.
In 1991, Bernie Tiede, an assistant funeral director in the East Texas town of Carthage, started living with Marjorie Nugent, a wealthy new widow 43 years his senior. He also became Nugent’s business manager. Their five-yhear relationship deteriorated as Nugent became increasingly belittling and scornful. In November 1996, Tiede picked up a rifle and shot the 81-year-old woman four times in the back. He stuffed her body in a freezer where she remained for nine months before her body was discovered.
According to the Houston Chronicle, between the time of the murder and the body’s discovery, “Tiede spent much of her fortune on others, bestowing college scholarships, cars, a home for a struggling couple and startup money for several small businesses.” He became a beloved figure in Carthage. Of course, he also lived high on the hog with the victim’s money.
After Tiede was arrested and charged with murder, people in Carthage besieged the prosecutor with pleas for leniency. However, because the prosecutor saw Tiede as “a cold-blooded killer who shot an old woman, then lived the high life for months as if nothing bad had happened,” he obtained a change of venue and got Tiede sentenced to life in prison.
Earlier this year, Tiede’s lawyers discovered that the killer had been sexually abused for six years by an uncle, starting around the age of 12. Psychiatrists who recently examined Tiede concluded that the sexual abuse had a devastating effect on his life. The shrinks claimed that is why he remained with Nugent despite the abuse she allegedly heaped upon him and why his mind snapped when he shot her.
In May, after 17 years behind bars, Tiede was released from prison and ordered to live in a garage apartment behind the Austin home of film director Richard Linklater who based his 2011 movie “Bernie” on the Tiede case. His lawyers had persuaded a court that the sexual abuse mitigated a shorter sentence. And on Thursday, the Court of Criminal Appeals, the state’s highest court for criminal cases, ruled 5-3 that Tiede be given a new sentencing phase trial.
What is surprising here is that the Court of Criminal Appeals agreed with Tiede’s lawyers. The usually conservative Court did not have to take any mitigating circumstances into consideration because the U.S. Supreme court has ruled that mitigation applies only to death penalty cases.
The prosecutor now says he would have called for no more than a 20-year sentence had he known about the sexual abuse. During the new sentencing trial, he will call for a sentence of time served. That means this cold-blooded murderer will be set free.
To all of this I say horseshit! Call me a dinosaur if you like, but I will not buy into this psychobabble about an abusive childhood contributing to a horrific crime. So what if a cold-blooded murderer’s mother looked backwards in the mirror while she was pregnant or daddy took his rubber ducky away while he was in the bathtub. So what if a cold-blooded murderer was beaten or sexually abused during his childhood.
Tiede did not remain in an abusive relationship with Nugent because he was sexually abused for six years. He remained with the old woman because he was able to live high on the hog with her money. And he shot Nugent, not because he snapped, but because he got tired of taking her abuse.
I say forget mitigating circumstances. Never mind all the psychiatric baloney. Let the punishment fit the crime! That just seems like common sense to me.
PUTIN WILL SOON DEPLOY A SUPER WEAPON (UPPDATE)
The new TA-50 PAK FA Russian jet fighter outperforms America’s best jet fighters
As the mew cold war between the U.S. and Russia is heating up, the Russians are flexing their military muscles, both on the ground and in the air. U.S. military experts are marveling at the TA-50 PAK FA, Russia’s newest stealth fighter jet.
In addition to the new ‘super weapon’ fighter jet, the Russian navy is flexing its muscles with new nuclear submarines that are carrying the Bulava intercontinental ballistic missile which has a range of 5,000 miles and can carry up to 10 nuclear warheads.
RUSSIAN NAVY SUCCESSFULLY TESTS NEW MISSILE
By Vladimir Isachenkov
Associated Press
November 28,2014
MOSCOW -- The Russian Navy on Friday successfully test-fired a new intercontinental ballistic missile for a second time in as many months, proving its reliability following a troublesome development.
The Defense Ministry said the Alexander Nevsky nuclear submarine test-fired a Bulava missile from an underwater position in the Barents Sea. The missile's warheads reached designated targets at a testing range in Russia's far eastern Kamchatka Peninsula.
The Bulava suffered many failures during a decade of tests, raising doubts about the fate of Russia's most expensive and ambitious weapons program since the Soviet collapse. But a series of recent launches has been successful and the Navy now has three Borei-class nuclear submarines armed with the Bulava.
Two of them, the Alexander Nevsky and the Yuri Dolgoruky, named after medieval Russian rulers, already have entered service. The third one has been completed and is waiting to be formally commissioned by the Navy. Overall, eight Borei-class submarines are set to be built.
Like the previous Bulava launch on Oct. 29 from the Yuri Dolgoruky, Friday's test was essential for confirming the capability of the missile, which Russia touted as a key part of its nuclear deterrent.
With Soviet-built nuclear submarines approaching the end of their lifetime, the Kremlin has made replacing them a top priority in the arms modernization program, which envisages spending 20 trillion rubles (more than $400 billion) on new weapons through 2020.
According to Russian media reports, the Bulava has a range of more than 8,000 kilometers (nearly 5,000 miles) and is capable of carrying up to 10 nuclear warheads. Military officials have boasted about its ability to penetrate any prospective missile defense.
As the mew cold war between the U.S. and Russia is heating up, the Russians are flexing their military muscles, both on the ground and in the air. U.S. military experts are marveling at the TA-50 PAK FA, Russia’s newest stealth fighter jet.
In addition to the new ‘super weapon’ fighter jet, the Russian navy is flexing its muscles with new nuclear submarines that are carrying the Bulava intercontinental ballistic missile which has a range of 5,000 miles and can carry up to 10 nuclear warheads.
RUSSIAN NAVY SUCCESSFULLY TESTS NEW MISSILE
By Vladimir Isachenkov
Associated Press
November 28,2014
MOSCOW -- The Russian Navy on Friday successfully test-fired a new intercontinental ballistic missile for a second time in as many months, proving its reliability following a troublesome development.
The Defense Ministry said the Alexander Nevsky nuclear submarine test-fired a Bulava missile from an underwater position in the Barents Sea. The missile's warheads reached designated targets at a testing range in Russia's far eastern Kamchatka Peninsula.
The Bulava suffered many failures during a decade of tests, raising doubts about the fate of Russia's most expensive and ambitious weapons program since the Soviet collapse. But a series of recent launches has been successful and the Navy now has three Borei-class nuclear submarines armed with the Bulava.
Two of them, the Alexander Nevsky and the Yuri Dolgoruky, named after medieval Russian rulers, already have entered service. The third one has been completed and is waiting to be formally commissioned by the Navy. Overall, eight Borei-class submarines are set to be built.
Like the previous Bulava launch on Oct. 29 from the Yuri Dolgoruky, Friday's test was essential for confirming the capability of the missile, which Russia touted as a key part of its nuclear deterrent.
With Soviet-built nuclear submarines approaching the end of their lifetime, the Kremlin has made replacing them a top priority in the arms modernization program, which envisages spending 20 trillion rubles (more than $400 billion) on new weapons through 2020.
According to Russian media reports, the Bulava has a range of more than 8,000 kilometers (nearly 5,000 miles) and is capable of carrying up to 10 nuclear warheads. Military officials have boasted about its ability to penetrate any prospective missile defense.
Saturday, November 29, 2014
QUICK DRAW MCGRAW?
Did a Cleveland cop act too fast when he shot a 12-year-old boy armed with an Airsoft pellet gun?
On November 22, a Cleveland citizen called 911 to report that a juvenile was wandering around on the outside of the Cudell Recreation Center and waving a gun around, thereby scaring people. He told the 911 operator that he thought the gun was a fake. A police unit was dispatched, but the 911 operator failed to advise the responding officers about the caller’s belief that the gun was a fake.
The police unit was driven by Officer Frank Garmback, 46, a six-year veteran. His partner was Officer Timothy Loehmann, 26, who had only been with the Cleveland PD since March. When they arrived, 12-year-old Tamir Rice had just left a gazebo and was walking in the direction of the arriving police unit with the gun tucked in his waistband.
As soon as the car came to a stop, Lohmann jumped out and shouted three times for Tamir to show his hands. Instead the boy appeared to reach for his waistband, at which point Lohmann shot him from about 10 feet away. He then ducked behind the patrol car. The boy was shot before Garmback exited the car. Lohmann radioed in to report he had just shot someone he believed to be 20-years-old. Tamir was taken to a hospital where he died.
At the request of the boy’s parents, the Cleveland PD released surveillance camera footage of the event. It clearly showed Tamir walking around repeatedly drawing and pointing what appeared to a semi-automatic pistol. The video also showed that Lohmann shot the boy within 2 seconds after he got out of the car.
Unfortunately for Tamir, Lohmann was unaware that the caller thought the gun was a fake. To compound matters, those Airsoft guns are sold with an orange tip so it would be recognized as a toy gun, but someone had removed the tip.
Was Lohmann justified in shooting Tamir so quickly or do we have Quick Draw McGraw here?
That Airsoft gun looked real with the orange tip removed. But 2 seconds does seem like a tad fast to me. This tragic shooting probably would not have happened if (1) the 911 operator had advised the responding officers that the gun might be a fake and (2) if the patrol car had stopped at a greater distance from the boy.
Here we have another case in which a black boy was shot by white cops. To their credit and unlike Michael Brown’s mother and father, Tamir’s grief stricken parents have remained very calm and reasoned. Although questioning the need for the shooting, Tamir’s mother and father have not accused Lohmann of murdering their son. They are cooperating with the police, not condemning them, and have asked people to refrain from participating in any unruly demonstrations. That must be why that rabble rousing charlatan Al Sharpton has not shown up at their side.
One thing I'm sure of: Lohmann must be devastated over having shot a 12-year-old armed with a toy gun.
A grand jury will decide whether or not the shooting was justified.
On November 22, a Cleveland citizen called 911 to report that a juvenile was wandering around on the outside of the Cudell Recreation Center and waving a gun around, thereby scaring people. He told the 911 operator that he thought the gun was a fake. A police unit was dispatched, but the 911 operator failed to advise the responding officers about the caller’s belief that the gun was a fake.
The police unit was driven by Officer Frank Garmback, 46, a six-year veteran. His partner was Officer Timothy Loehmann, 26, who had only been with the Cleveland PD since March. When they arrived, 12-year-old Tamir Rice had just left a gazebo and was walking in the direction of the arriving police unit with the gun tucked in his waistband.
As soon as the car came to a stop, Lohmann jumped out and shouted three times for Tamir to show his hands. Instead the boy appeared to reach for his waistband, at which point Lohmann shot him from about 10 feet away. He then ducked behind the patrol car. The boy was shot before Garmback exited the car. Lohmann radioed in to report he had just shot someone he believed to be 20-years-old. Tamir was taken to a hospital where he died.
At the request of the boy’s parents, the Cleveland PD released surveillance camera footage of the event. It clearly showed Tamir walking around repeatedly drawing and pointing what appeared to a semi-automatic pistol. The video also showed that Lohmann shot the boy within 2 seconds after he got out of the car.
Unfortunately for Tamir, Lohmann was unaware that the caller thought the gun was a fake. To compound matters, those Airsoft guns are sold with an orange tip so it would be recognized as a toy gun, but someone had removed the tip.
Was Lohmann justified in shooting Tamir so quickly or do we have Quick Draw McGraw here?
That Airsoft gun looked real with the orange tip removed. But 2 seconds does seem like a tad fast to me. This tragic shooting probably would not have happened if (1) the 911 operator had advised the responding officers that the gun might be a fake and (2) if the patrol car had stopped at a greater distance from the boy.
Here we have another case in which a black boy was shot by white cops. To their credit and unlike Michael Brown’s mother and father, Tamir’s grief stricken parents have remained very calm and reasoned. Although questioning the need for the shooting, Tamir’s mother and father have not accused Lohmann of murdering their son. They are cooperating with the police, not condemning them, and have asked people to refrain from participating in any unruly demonstrations. That must be why that rabble rousing charlatan Al Sharpton has not shown up at their side.
One thing I'm sure of: Lohmann must be devastated over having shot a 12-year-old armed with a toy gun.
A grand jury will decide whether or not the shooting was justified.
JUDGE DENIES DEATH ROW INMATE KOSHER FOOD
Mass rapist-murderer Steven Hayes claims to be an Orthodox Jew and has sued the Connecticut Department of Corrections for depriving him of kosher food
On July 23, 2007, Hayes and Joshua Komisarjevsky broke in the Cheshire, Connecticut home of Dr. William Petit Jr. where they killed Jennifer Hawke-Petit and her children, Michaela, 11, and Hayley, 17. Hayes sexually assaulted and strangled Dr. Petit’s wife. Komisarjevsky, sexually assaulted Michaela. The house was set on fire, and the two girls, who were tied to their beds, died of smoke inhalation. Dr. Petit was severely beaten but managed to escape and survived to identify the two scumbags.
Hayes and Komisarjevsky are among the few murderers that have been sentenced to death in the liberal death penalty-aversion state of Connecticut. (The state repealed the death penalty in 2012, but the repeal was not retroactive.) Hayes claimed he converted to Judaism after his arrival on death row. What a crock of supreme shit! I cannot envision any rabbi in his right mind who would convert this worthless piece of shit.
If Hayes is a Jew, then I am Jesus Christ. He is gaming the system by claiming that he is an Orthodox Jew and, as such, is required by his religion to eat only kosher food. Because his death row meals have not been kosher, Hayes claimed in a federal lawsuit that the Connecticut Department of Corrections deprived him of his First Amendment rights to freedom of religion. He also claimed that denying him kosher food is a violation of his Eighth Amendment protection against cruel and unusual punishment because he is forced to eat non-kosher meals in order to survive.
The prison system contends that it does offer kosher food. It has two rabbis who periodically monitor the kosher food preparation and certify that the food and its preparation process comply with Orthodox dietary laws. However, Hays contends the food is not really kosher because of cross-contamination.
On Tuesday, U.S. District Judge Alvin Thompson rejected Hayes’ motions for a hearing and a temporary injunction. The judge noted that although Hayes “raises as an issue the lack of a reliable orthodox certificate or an onsite Jewish overseer, he provides no evidence suggesting that their absence leads to a finding that the meals are not kosher.” The judge did not throw out the lawsuit, but he found it unlikely that it will succeed.
From what I know about Orthodox Judaism, Hayes is probably correct in asserting that the food is not really kosher. So what! In my opinion, death row inmates do not deserve to be fed kosher food. And certainly not an ersatz Jew like Hayes. Fuck him!
Hayes says he has been subjected to “almost two years of emotional injury from having to choose between following God and starving or choosing sin to survive.” Yeah, right, and tell that to Dr. Petit.
On July 23, 2007, Hayes and Joshua Komisarjevsky broke in the Cheshire, Connecticut home of Dr. William Petit Jr. where they killed Jennifer Hawke-Petit and her children, Michaela, 11, and Hayley, 17. Hayes sexually assaulted and strangled Dr. Petit’s wife. Komisarjevsky, sexually assaulted Michaela. The house was set on fire, and the two girls, who were tied to their beds, died of smoke inhalation. Dr. Petit was severely beaten but managed to escape and survived to identify the two scumbags.
Hayes and Komisarjevsky are among the few murderers that have been sentenced to death in the liberal death penalty-aversion state of Connecticut. (The state repealed the death penalty in 2012, but the repeal was not retroactive.) Hayes claimed he converted to Judaism after his arrival on death row. What a crock of supreme shit! I cannot envision any rabbi in his right mind who would convert this worthless piece of shit.
If Hayes is a Jew, then I am Jesus Christ. He is gaming the system by claiming that he is an Orthodox Jew and, as such, is required by his religion to eat only kosher food. Because his death row meals have not been kosher, Hayes claimed in a federal lawsuit that the Connecticut Department of Corrections deprived him of his First Amendment rights to freedom of religion. He also claimed that denying him kosher food is a violation of his Eighth Amendment protection against cruel and unusual punishment because he is forced to eat non-kosher meals in order to survive.
The prison system contends that it does offer kosher food. It has two rabbis who periodically monitor the kosher food preparation and certify that the food and its preparation process comply with Orthodox dietary laws. However, Hays contends the food is not really kosher because of cross-contamination.
On Tuesday, U.S. District Judge Alvin Thompson rejected Hayes’ motions for a hearing and a temporary injunction. The judge noted that although Hayes “raises as an issue the lack of a reliable orthodox certificate or an onsite Jewish overseer, he provides no evidence suggesting that their absence leads to a finding that the meals are not kosher.” The judge did not throw out the lawsuit, but he found it unlikely that it will succeed.
From what I know about Orthodox Judaism, Hayes is probably correct in asserting that the food is not really kosher. So what! In my opinion, death row inmates do not deserve to be fed kosher food. And certainly not an ersatz Jew like Hayes. Fuck him!
Hayes says he has been subjected to “almost two years of emotional injury from having to choose between following God and starving or choosing sin to survive.” Yeah, right, and tell that to Dr. Petit.
Friday, November 28, 2014
NO ONE BEARS GREATER BLAME THAN MICHAEL BROWN, FOR MICHAEL BROWN’S DEATH
Brown was little more than an out-of-control hoodlum under the influence of marijuana
Greg ‘Gadfly Doyle’ gives us an excellent perspective on the Michael Brown shooting, on an officer’s decision to shoot, and on the refusal of law enforcement to respond adequately to the rock and bottle throwing, to the looting of stores, and to the burning of Ferguson.
ONE BAD ACTOR, MANY BAD ACTS
By Greg ‘Gadfly’ Doyle
PACOVILLA Corrections blog
November 27, 2014
This Thanksgiving, peace officers all across America have something of great significance to be grateful about. In the wake of a grand jury decision in the Show-Me State, which found no probable cause that a crime was committed on the part of former Ferguson police officer Darren Wilson, peace officers of all jurisdictions within the United States should be breathing a collective sigh of relief. For the time being, law enforcement officers may still discriminate against unarmed assailants (by using deadly force) if they believe their lives are in imminent danger, regardless of ethnicity.
It is indeed unfortunate that Michael Brown was killed by a police officer; but not for the reasons regurgitated by the mainstream media. According to the evidence presented to a grand jury (as reiterated by the prosecutor after the decision was announced), Michael Brown engaged a law enforcement officer while under the influence of a mind-altering intoxicant (Marijuana.)
To make matters worse, Mr. Brown matched the description of someone who had just committed a felony (a strong-arm robbery of a box of cigars from a convenience store) prior to this encounter with a Ferguson police officer. (A video from the victimized business confirmed Brown was indeed the suspect.) When Officer Wilson attempted to contact him, Brown shoved Wilson back into his unit, forcing the door closed.
To complicate things further, Brown decided to challenge and assault an armed, uniformed officer. Officer Wilson had a duty to perform, which was to detain a suspect. Brown opted to ignore Wilson’s commands and escalated the situation through violence.
And that was a stupid decision on the part of Michael Brown. In fact, it was a fatal one. No one bears greater blame than Michael Brown, for Michael Brown’s death. At any point, prior to the discharge of Officer Wilson’s gun, Mr. Brown had ample opportunities to comply with the lawful commands given to him by Officer Wilson. Yet Brown not only failed to comply, he continued to up the ante by aggressively assaulting the officer and attempting to grab the officer’s firearm.
At what point can we agree that deadly force was an appropriate response? That is what the rule of law requires in the use of deadly force. Would a reasonable person, faced with similar circumstances, be compelled to defend themselves with the use of deadly force? Yes or No?
How many times should Officer Wilson have allowed Micheal Brown to punch him before deciding to draw his weapon? (Remember the officer was trapped in the driver seat of his patrol vehicle while Brown leaned in the window to assault him.) If you consider yourself a reasonable person, at what point would you believe your life was in imminent danger?
In my estimation, the mainstream media picked one terrible poster-child to assert racism as the catalyst of this shooting death. This incident was less about color and more about criminality. Bad behavior is the best determinant of criminal intent. Not only did Brown match the description of an alleged felony suspect, he continued to prove he was one bad actor when confronted by the police. And many bad acts have followed as a result.
In its eagerness to paint Ferguson Police Department as a racist and discriminatory arm of local government, the media failed to collect and review the facts. Instead, they took the word of a potential accomplice to a felony and projected his words across every television screen in the nation as if what he had to say was gospel truth. Those inflammatory and incendiary words were later discredited after a thorough investigation and review by Ferguson Police Department, State authorities, and the FBI.
The rush to judgment by the mainstream press was relentless. Unchallenged accusations of racism were regurgitated for months. Rioting, arson, and looting were treated as a natural and justifiable response to an ethnic perception of a systemic injustice. By most press accounts, one might deduce that White police officers regularly selected and killed unarmed Black males in Missouri for target practice.
But the truth, as presented by witness statements, physical evidence, and corroborating video tape suggests that Michael Brown was little more than an out-of-control hoodlum leading up to his demise. And this is where the press refuses to do its due diligence in reporting factually on this case. Mister Brown’s actions are mulled over and dismissed; Officer Wilson’s are scrutinized and ridiculed because the facts won’t fit the narrative of racism otherwise.
America is a nation that subscribes to the rule of law. Last time I checked, rioting was illegal. Looting and arson are still felonies. Throwing rocks and bottles at police officers constitutes assault with intent to commit great bodily injury. Where are all of the arrests? For all the rioting in Ferguson and elsewhere, where was the enforcement to quell the unrest?
It seemed fairly clear from what I could observe that the police were allowing the agitators to vent (however unlawfully) at the direction of the body politic. In other words, they were merely appeasing the protesters until the energy was spent. Meantime, the rule of law has been largely ignored.
Did that discourage unlawful protests and rioting? No. It just signaled a weak government unwilling to act or enforce the law in the face of willful violence and lawlessness; appeasement, plain and simple.
That is no way to run a government. That is no way to lead a nation. And that is what we have to look forward to—more lawlessness—if laws are not properly and immediately enforced. It was indeed a stunning contrast to see our president making a speech after the grand jury decision juxtaposed against the rioting in Ferguson, Missouri.
That image reminded me of his great effectiveness in the Middle East, especially against ISIS; all talk and little action; no law and lots of lawlessness.
I do feel sorry for the Brown family. No parent wants to believe their child is a criminal. And certainly no parent wants to see their child killed at the hands of anyone, let alone the police.
But if the Brown’s truly want change within their community, perhaps they should consider what’s wrong within their own neighborhood and ethnic community. What reasonable person condones strong arm robbery, assault on a peace officer, rioting, looting, and arson as acceptable behavior?
In my opinion, Michael Brown’s death was not an injustice, nor was the decision handed down by the grand jury. The true injustice appears to be disenfranchisement—a community that feels disaffected from its government and is entrenched in its own unique brand of self-fulfilling discrimination. Regardless of a universe of evidence to the contrary, for this specific ethnic community, the White cops ALWAYS have it out for the Black kids, and no one can convince them otherwise.
Let’s all breathe a collective sigh over the Ferguson incident. There are only losers in this scenario. Michael Brown is dead. Officer Wilson’s career is dead. Much of Ferguson lies in ashes.
Greg ‘Gadfly Doyle’ gives us an excellent perspective on the Michael Brown shooting, on an officer’s decision to shoot, and on the refusal of law enforcement to respond adequately to the rock and bottle throwing, to the looting of stores, and to the burning of Ferguson.
ONE BAD ACTOR, MANY BAD ACTS
By Greg ‘Gadfly’ Doyle
PACOVILLA Corrections blog
November 27, 2014
This Thanksgiving, peace officers all across America have something of great significance to be grateful about. In the wake of a grand jury decision in the Show-Me State, which found no probable cause that a crime was committed on the part of former Ferguson police officer Darren Wilson, peace officers of all jurisdictions within the United States should be breathing a collective sigh of relief. For the time being, law enforcement officers may still discriminate against unarmed assailants (by using deadly force) if they believe their lives are in imminent danger, regardless of ethnicity.
It is indeed unfortunate that Michael Brown was killed by a police officer; but not for the reasons regurgitated by the mainstream media. According to the evidence presented to a grand jury (as reiterated by the prosecutor after the decision was announced), Michael Brown engaged a law enforcement officer while under the influence of a mind-altering intoxicant (Marijuana.)
To make matters worse, Mr. Brown matched the description of someone who had just committed a felony (a strong-arm robbery of a box of cigars from a convenience store) prior to this encounter with a Ferguson police officer. (A video from the victimized business confirmed Brown was indeed the suspect.) When Officer Wilson attempted to contact him, Brown shoved Wilson back into his unit, forcing the door closed.
To complicate things further, Brown decided to challenge and assault an armed, uniformed officer. Officer Wilson had a duty to perform, which was to detain a suspect. Brown opted to ignore Wilson’s commands and escalated the situation through violence.
And that was a stupid decision on the part of Michael Brown. In fact, it was a fatal one. No one bears greater blame than Michael Brown, for Michael Brown’s death. At any point, prior to the discharge of Officer Wilson’s gun, Mr. Brown had ample opportunities to comply with the lawful commands given to him by Officer Wilson. Yet Brown not only failed to comply, he continued to up the ante by aggressively assaulting the officer and attempting to grab the officer’s firearm.
At what point can we agree that deadly force was an appropriate response? That is what the rule of law requires in the use of deadly force. Would a reasonable person, faced with similar circumstances, be compelled to defend themselves with the use of deadly force? Yes or No?
How many times should Officer Wilson have allowed Micheal Brown to punch him before deciding to draw his weapon? (Remember the officer was trapped in the driver seat of his patrol vehicle while Brown leaned in the window to assault him.) If you consider yourself a reasonable person, at what point would you believe your life was in imminent danger?
In my estimation, the mainstream media picked one terrible poster-child to assert racism as the catalyst of this shooting death. This incident was less about color and more about criminality. Bad behavior is the best determinant of criminal intent. Not only did Brown match the description of an alleged felony suspect, he continued to prove he was one bad actor when confronted by the police. And many bad acts have followed as a result.
In its eagerness to paint Ferguson Police Department as a racist and discriminatory arm of local government, the media failed to collect and review the facts. Instead, they took the word of a potential accomplice to a felony and projected his words across every television screen in the nation as if what he had to say was gospel truth. Those inflammatory and incendiary words were later discredited after a thorough investigation and review by Ferguson Police Department, State authorities, and the FBI.
The rush to judgment by the mainstream press was relentless. Unchallenged accusations of racism were regurgitated for months. Rioting, arson, and looting were treated as a natural and justifiable response to an ethnic perception of a systemic injustice. By most press accounts, one might deduce that White police officers regularly selected and killed unarmed Black males in Missouri for target practice.
But the truth, as presented by witness statements, physical evidence, and corroborating video tape suggests that Michael Brown was little more than an out-of-control hoodlum leading up to his demise. And this is where the press refuses to do its due diligence in reporting factually on this case. Mister Brown’s actions are mulled over and dismissed; Officer Wilson’s are scrutinized and ridiculed because the facts won’t fit the narrative of racism otherwise.
America is a nation that subscribes to the rule of law. Last time I checked, rioting was illegal. Looting and arson are still felonies. Throwing rocks and bottles at police officers constitutes assault with intent to commit great bodily injury. Where are all of the arrests? For all the rioting in Ferguson and elsewhere, where was the enforcement to quell the unrest?
It seemed fairly clear from what I could observe that the police were allowing the agitators to vent (however unlawfully) at the direction of the body politic. In other words, they were merely appeasing the protesters until the energy was spent. Meantime, the rule of law has been largely ignored.
Did that discourage unlawful protests and rioting? No. It just signaled a weak government unwilling to act or enforce the law in the face of willful violence and lawlessness; appeasement, plain and simple.
That is no way to run a government. That is no way to lead a nation. And that is what we have to look forward to—more lawlessness—if laws are not properly and immediately enforced. It was indeed a stunning contrast to see our president making a speech after the grand jury decision juxtaposed against the rioting in Ferguson, Missouri.
That image reminded me of his great effectiveness in the Middle East, especially against ISIS; all talk and little action; no law and lots of lawlessness.
I do feel sorry for the Brown family. No parent wants to believe their child is a criminal. And certainly no parent wants to see their child killed at the hands of anyone, let alone the police.
But if the Brown’s truly want change within their community, perhaps they should consider what’s wrong within their own neighborhood and ethnic community. What reasonable person condones strong arm robbery, assault on a peace officer, rioting, looting, and arson as acceptable behavior?
In my opinion, Michael Brown’s death was not an injustice, nor was the decision handed down by the grand jury. The true injustice appears to be disenfranchisement—a community that feels disaffected from its government and is entrenched in its own unique brand of self-fulfilling discrimination. Regardless of a universe of evidence to the contrary, for this specific ethnic community, the White cops ALWAYS have it out for the Black kids, and no one can convince them otherwise.
Let’s all breathe a collective sigh over the Ferguson incident. There are only losers in this scenario. Michael Brown is dead. Officer Wilson’s career is dead. Much of Ferguson lies in ashes.
FABRICATIONS AND INCONSISTENCIES
Witnesses against Officer Darren Wilson fed the Ferguson grand jury and the FBI a pack of lies
The Ferguson grand jurors were fed a pack of lies by witnesses trying to convince them Michael Brown had been shot down in cold blood.
One witness, who told the FBI that Wilson shot Brown in the back and then "stood over him and finished him off," admitted that he had not seen that part of the shooting, and that what he told the FBI was "based on me being where I'm from, and that can be the only assumption that I have.” Obviously, he was speaking as a black person who is convinced that white cops mistreat blacks, and that probably applies to most of the other witnesses who gave false testimony against Wilson.
Al Sharpton, Benjamin Crump and their ilk, however, continue to insist that the false versions of how Brown was shot are true.
FERGUSON GRAND JURY PAPERS FULL OF INCONSISTENCIES
By Holbrook Mohr, David A. Lieb and Phillip Lucas
Associated Press
November 26, 2014
FERGUSON, Mo. -- Some witnesses said Michael Brown had been shot in the back. Another said he was face-down on the ground when Officer Darren Wilson "finished him off." Still others acknowledged changing their stories to fit published details about the autopsy or admitted that they did not see the shooting at all.
An Associated Press review of thousands of pages of grand jury documents reveals numerous examples of statements made during the shooting investigation that were inconsistent, fabricated or provably wrong. For one, the autopsies ultimately showed Brown was not struck by any bullets in his back.
Prosecutors exposed these inconsistencies before the jurors, which likely influenced their decision not to indict Wilson in Brown's death.
Bob McCulloch, the St. Louis County prosecutor, said the grand jury had to weigh testimony that conflicted with physical evidence and conflicting statements by witnesses as it decided whether Wilson should face charges.
"Many witnesses to the shooting of Michael Brown made statements inconsistent with other statements they made and also conflicting with the physical evidence. Some were completely refuted by the physical evidence," McCulloch said.
The decision Monday not to charge Wilson with any crime set off more violent protests in the St. Louis suburb of Ferguson and around the country, fueled by claims that the unarmed black 18-year-old was shot while surrendering to the white officer in the mostly African-American city.
What people thought were facts about the Aug. 9 shooting have become intertwined with what many see as abuses of power and racial inequality in America.
And media coverage of the shooting's aftermath made it into the grand jury proceedings. Before some witnesses testified, prosecutors showed jurors clips of the same people making statements on TV.
Their inconsistencies began almost immediately after the shooting, from people in the neighborhood, the friend walking with Brown during the encounter and even one woman who authorities suggested probably wasn't even at the scene at the time.
Jurors also were presented with dueling versions from Wilson and Dorian Johnson, who was walking with Brown during the Aug. 9 confrontation. Johnson painted Wilson as provoking the violence, while Wilson said Brown was the aggressor.
But Johnson also declared on TV, in a clip played for the grand jury, that Wilson fired at least one shot at his friend while Brown was running away: "It struck my friend in the back."
Johnson held to a variation of this description in his grand jury testimony, saying the shot caused Brown's body to "do like a jerking movement, not to where it looked like he got hit in his back, but I knew, it maybe could have grazed him, but he definitely made a jerking movement."
Other eyewitness accounts also were clearly wrong.
One woman, who said she was smoking a cigarette with a friend nearby, claimed she saw a second police officer in the passenger seat of Wilson's vehicle. When quizzed by a prosecutor, she elaborated: The officer was white, "middle age or young" and in uniform. She said she was positive there was a second officer — even though there was not.
Another woman testified that she saw Brown leaning through the officer's window "from his navel up," with his hand moving up and down, as if he were punching the officer. But when the same witness returned to testify again on another day, she said she suffers from mental disorder, has racist views and that she has trouble distinguishing the truth from things she had read online.
Prosecutors suggested the woman had fabricated the entire incident and was not even at the scene the day of the shooting.
Another witness had told the FBI that Wilson shot Brown in the back and then "stood over him and finished him off." But in his grand jury testimony, this witness acknowledged that he had not seen that part of the shooting, and that what he told the FBI was "based on me being where I'm from, and that can be the only assumption that I have."
The witness, who lives in the predominantly black neighborhood where Brown was killed, also acknowledged that he changed his story to fit details of the autopsy that he had learned about on TV.
"So it was after you learned that the things you said you saw couldn't have happened that way, then you changed your story about what you seen?" a prosecutor asserted.
"Yeah, to coincide with what really happened," the witness replied.
Another man, describing himself as a friend of Brown's, told a federal investigator that he heard the first gunshot, looked out his window and saw an officer with a gun drawn and Brown "on his knees with his hands in the air." He added: "I seen him shoot him in the head."
But when later pressed by the investigator, the friend said he had not seen the actual shooting because he was walking down the stairs at the time and instead had heard details from someone in the apartment complex.
"What you are saying you saw isn't forensically possible based on the evidence," the investigator told the friend.
Shortly after that, the friend asked if he could leave.
"I ain't feeling comfortable," he said.
The Ferguson grand jurors were fed a pack of lies by witnesses trying to convince them Michael Brown had been shot down in cold blood.
One witness, who told the FBI that Wilson shot Brown in the back and then "stood over him and finished him off," admitted that he had not seen that part of the shooting, and that what he told the FBI was "based on me being where I'm from, and that can be the only assumption that I have.” Obviously, he was speaking as a black person who is convinced that white cops mistreat blacks, and that probably applies to most of the other witnesses who gave false testimony against Wilson.
Al Sharpton, Benjamin Crump and their ilk, however, continue to insist that the false versions of how Brown was shot are true.
FERGUSON GRAND JURY PAPERS FULL OF INCONSISTENCIES
By Holbrook Mohr, David A. Lieb and Phillip Lucas
Associated Press
November 26, 2014
FERGUSON, Mo. -- Some witnesses said Michael Brown had been shot in the back. Another said he was face-down on the ground when Officer Darren Wilson "finished him off." Still others acknowledged changing their stories to fit published details about the autopsy or admitted that they did not see the shooting at all.
An Associated Press review of thousands of pages of grand jury documents reveals numerous examples of statements made during the shooting investigation that were inconsistent, fabricated or provably wrong. For one, the autopsies ultimately showed Brown was not struck by any bullets in his back.
Prosecutors exposed these inconsistencies before the jurors, which likely influenced their decision not to indict Wilson in Brown's death.
Bob McCulloch, the St. Louis County prosecutor, said the grand jury had to weigh testimony that conflicted with physical evidence and conflicting statements by witnesses as it decided whether Wilson should face charges.
"Many witnesses to the shooting of Michael Brown made statements inconsistent with other statements they made and also conflicting with the physical evidence. Some were completely refuted by the physical evidence," McCulloch said.
The decision Monday not to charge Wilson with any crime set off more violent protests in the St. Louis suburb of Ferguson and around the country, fueled by claims that the unarmed black 18-year-old was shot while surrendering to the white officer in the mostly African-American city.
What people thought were facts about the Aug. 9 shooting have become intertwined with what many see as abuses of power and racial inequality in America.
And media coverage of the shooting's aftermath made it into the grand jury proceedings. Before some witnesses testified, prosecutors showed jurors clips of the same people making statements on TV.
Their inconsistencies began almost immediately after the shooting, from people in the neighborhood, the friend walking with Brown during the encounter and even one woman who authorities suggested probably wasn't even at the scene at the time.
Jurors also were presented with dueling versions from Wilson and Dorian Johnson, who was walking with Brown during the Aug. 9 confrontation. Johnson painted Wilson as provoking the violence, while Wilson said Brown was the aggressor.
But Johnson also declared on TV, in a clip played for the grand jury, that Wilson fired at least one shot at his friend while Brown was running away: "It struck my friend in the back."
Johnson held to a variation of this description in his grand jury testimony, saying the shot caused Brown's body to "do like a jerking movement, not to where it looked like he got hit in his back, but I knew, it maybe could have grazed him, but he definitely made a jerking movement."
Other eyewitness accounts also were clearly wrong.
One woman, who said she was smoking a cigarette with a friend nearby, claimed she saw a second police officer in the passenger seat of Wilson's vehicle. When quizzed by a prosecutor, she elaborated: The officer was white, "middle age or young" and in uniform. She said she was positive there was a second officer — even though there was not.
Another woman testified that she saw Brown leaning through the officer's window "from his navel up," with his hand moving up and down, as if he were punching the officer. But when the same witness returned to testify again on another day, she said she suffers from mental disorder, has racist views and that she has trouble distinguishing the truth from things she had read online.
Prosecutors suggested the woman had fabricated the entire incident and was not even at the scene the day of the shooting.
Another witness had told the FBI that Wilson shot Brown in the back and then "stood over him and finished him off." But in his grand jury testimony, this witness acknowledged that he had not seen that part of the shooting, and that what he told the FBI was "based on me being where I'm from, and that can be the only assumption that I have."
The witness, who lives in the predominantly black neighborhood where Brown was killed, also acknowledged that he changed his story to fit details of the autopsy that he had learned about on TV.
"So it was after you learned that the things you said you saw couldn't have happened that way, then you changed your story about what you seen?" a prosecutor asserted.
"Yeah, to coincide with what really happened," the witness replied.
Another man, describing himself as a friend of Brown's, told a federal investigator that he heard the first gunshot, looked out his window and saw an officer with a gun drawn and Brown "on his knees with his hands in the air." He added: "I seen him shoot him in the head."
But when later pressed by the investigator, the friend said he had not seen the actual shooting because he was walking down the stairs at the time and instead had heard details from someone in the apartment complex.
"What you are saying you saw isn't forensically possible based on the evidence," the investigator told the friend.
Shortly after that, the friend asked if he could leave.
"I ain't feeling comfortable," he said.
SPECIAL OP BURGLARY TEAM IN CHICAGO SMASH AND GRAB
A team of 20 burglars smashed into a high-end clothing store with a van and grabbed designer jeans, shoes and belts worth tens of thousands of dollars in 2-1/2 minutes, an operation that would even make the Navy SEALs envious
CISCO NYC is a chain of high-end clothing stores. Around 4 a.m. on Wednesday, a CISCO NYC store in Chicago’s West Garfield Park neighborhood was attacked by a 20-man special op burglary team that smashed into the store with a van. Three cars pulled in behind the van and parked in front of the store. Four men were inside the van and 16 additional men rushed into the store from the parked cars. They tried but were unable to back the van out.
The burglars must have planned the heist well ahead of time because they emptied the shelves only of the most expensive jeans, shoes and belts in the store. They grabbed Giuseppe-brand shoes that cost as much as $1,000 a pair, jeans that go for $400 to $800, and belts that run as high as $350 and up. Their loot was worth tens of thousands of dollars.
Some of the thieves entered the store carrying large garbage bags. They loaded up the parked cars. Some of them reentered the store to grab more loot. And several even reentered the store a second time. The whole operation was over in 2-1/2 minutes. The burglar alarm was going off the whole time, but by the time the cops arrived, the burglars were long gone. The swiftness and precision of this operation would even make the Navy SEALs envious.
Lately there has been a rash of similar burglary operations at high-end stores in Chicago and its suburbs, but none of them involved as many thieves as the smash and grab operation at the CISCO NYC store.
CISCO NYC is a chain of high-end clothing stores. Around 4 a.m. on Wednesday, a CISCO NYC store in Chicago’s West Garfield Park neighborhood was attacked by a 20-man special op burglary team that smashed into the store with a van. Three cars pulled in behind the van and parked in front of the store. Four men were inside the van and 16 additional men rushed into the store from the parked cars. They tried but were unable to back the van out.
The burglars must have planned the heist well ahead of time because they emptied the shelves only of the most expensive jeans, shoes and belts in the store. They grabbed Giuseppe-brand shoes that cost as much as $1,000 a pair, jeans that go for $400 to $800, and belts that run as high as $350 and up. Their loot was worth tens of thousands of dollars.
Some of the thieves entered the store carrying large garbage bags. They loaded up the parked cars. Some of them reentered the store to grab more loot. And several even reentered the store a second time. The whole operation was over in 2-1/2 minutes. The burglar alarm was going off the whole time, but by the time the cops arrived, the burglars were long gone. The swiftness and precision of this operation would even make the Navy SEALs envious.
Lately there has been a rash of similar burglary operations at high-end stores in Chicago and its suburbs, but none of them involved as many thieves as the smash and grab operation at the CISCO NYC store.
PUTIN WILL SOON DEPLOY A SUPER WEAPON
The new TA-50 PAK FA Russian jet fighter outperforms America’s best jet fighters
As the mew cold war between the U.S. and Russia is heating up, the Russians are flexing their military muscles, both on the ground and in the air. U.S. military experts are marveling at the TA-50 PAK FA, Russia’s newest stealth fighter jet.
NEW RUSSIAN STEALTH JET FIGHTER CALLED ‘SUPER WEAPON’ GIVING RUSSIA EDGE OVER U.S. IN SKIES
The Inquisitr News
November 26, 2014
A new Russian jet fighter, using stealth technology designed to conceal the plane from radar, is being called a “super weapon” by military experts who say that the fifth-generation Russian fighter jet actually surpasses United States fighters and could give Russia an advantage in the skies.
Known as the TA-50 PAK FA, the new Russian stealth fighter is developed by the Russian aeronautic giant Sukhoi and is set to go into action in 2016. Russia is developing the new super fighter together with India, which is kicking in 25 percent of the T-50 program’s $20 billion projected cost.
Each T-50 PAK FA stealth jet fighter costs about $50 million to build. Russia is India’s second-biggest supplier of weapons, behind only the United States.
Russian President Vladimir Putin has called the new fifth-generation stealth fighter “superior to our main competitor, the F-22, in terms of maneuverability, weaponry and range.”
The Lockheed F-22 Raptor is one of the two most sophisticated stealth fighters in the U.S. arsenal, matched only by another fifth-generation Lockheed plane, the F-35 Lightning II. And according to U.S. military aviation experts, Putin’s claim was not just an empty boast.
“The analysis that I have seen on the PAK-FA indicates a pretty sophisticated design that is at least equal to, and some have said even superior to, U.S. fifth-generation aircraft,” said former U.S. Air Force intelligence head Lt. Gen. Dave Deptula, in an interview with the National Interest magazine. “It certainly has greater agility with its combination of thrust vectoring, all moving tail surfaces, and excellent aerodynamic design, than does the F-35.”
A top U.S. military aviation official, who spoke anonymously to the National Interest, seconded Deptula’s opinion.
“Performance-wise it certainly looks to compete with the Raptor,” the official told the magazine.
While the new Russian stealth fighter is said to be less “stealthy,” that is, able to evade radar detection, than its U.S. counterparts, it makes up for that slight disadvantage with its incredible maneuverability in the skies that experts say is at least on par with the Raptor and far exceeds the Lightning II.
But the U.S. fighters still hold one advantage — data technology. The U.S. fighter jets still have better “sensor and data fusion,” in other words, technology for processing information about the jet fighter’s surroundings and feeding it to the pilot in a way that lets him make quick decisions.
“In the future — while aerodynamic performance will continue to be important — [planes require] speed, range and payload to a greater degree than maneuverability,” Deptula said. “Even more important will be the ability to ubiquitously share knowledge to the point that we have faster decision advantage than any adversary.”
The Russians, however, are already at work on their sixth-generation jet fighters, which could solve the data problems and are scheduled to be ready for action by 2025.
As the mew cold war between the U.S. and Russia is heating up, the Russians are flexing their military muscles, both on the ground and in the air. U.S. military experts are marveling at the TA-50 PAK FA, Russia’s newest stealth fighter jet.
NEW RUSSIAN STEALTH JET FIGHTER CALLED ‘SUPER WEAPON’ GIVING RUSSIA EDGE OVER U.S. IN SKIES
The Inquisitr News
November 26, 2014
A new Russian jet fighter, using stealth technology designed to conceal the plane from radar, is being called a “super weapon” by military experts who say that the fifth-generation Russian fighter jet actually surpasses United States fighters and could give Russia an advantage in the skies.
Known as the TA-50 PAK FA, the new Russian stealth fighter is developed by the Russian aeronautic giant Sukhoi and is set to go into action in 2016. Russia is developing the new super fighter together with India, which is kicking in 25 percent of the T-50 program’s $20 billion projected cost.
Each T-50 PAK FA stealth jet fighter costs about $50 million to build. Russia is India’s second-biggest supplier of weapons, behind only the United States.
Russian President Vladimir Putin has called the new fifth-generation stealth fighter “superior to our main competitor, the F-22, in terms of maneuverability, weaponry and range.”
The Lockheed F-22 Raptor is one of the two most sophisticated stealth fighters in the U.S. arsenal, matched only by another fifth-generation Lockheed plane, the F-35 Lightning II. And according to U.S. military aviation experts, Putin’s claim was not just an empty boast.
“The analysis that I have seen on the PAK-FA indicates a pretty sophisticated design that is at least equal to, and some have said even superior to, U.S. fifth-generation aircraft,” said former U.S. Air Force intelligence head Lt. Gen. Dave Deptula, in an interview with the National Interest magazine. “It certainly has greater agility with its combination of thrust vectoring, all moving tail surfaces, and excellent aerodynamic design, than does the F-35.”
A top U.S. military aviation official, who spoke anonymously to the National Interest, seconded Deptula’s opinion.
“Performance-wise it certainly looks to compete with the Raptor,” the official told the magazine.
While the new Russian stealth fighter is said to be less “stealthy,” that is, able to evade radar detection, than its U.S. counterparts, it makes up for that slight disadvantage with its incredible maneuverability in the skies that experts say is at least on par with the Raptor and far exceeds the Lightning II.
But the U.S. fighters still hold one advantage — data technology. The U.S. fighter jets still have better “sensor and data fusion,” in other words, technology for processing information about the jet fighter’s surroundings and feeding it to the pilot in a way that lets him make quick decisions.
“In the future — while aerodynamic performance will continue to be important — [planes require] speed, range and payload to a greater degree than maneuverability,” Deptula said. “Even more important will be the ability to ubiquitously share knowledge to the point that we have faster decision advantage than any adversary.”
The Russians, however, are already at work on their sixth-generation jet fighters, which could solve the data problems and are scheduled to be ready for action by 2025.
Thursday, November 27, 2014
WARRANTLESS DWI BLOOD TESTS
Texas High Court: Warrantless DWI Blood Draws Are Unconstitutional
By Craig Malisow
Houston Press
November 26, 2014
Just in time for the holiday weekend, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals [the state’s highest court for criminal cases] has upheld a lower court's ruling that warrantless blood-drawing in DWI cases is unconstitutional.
In a split 5-4 decision Wednesday, the majority justices disagreed with prosecutors' argument that driving on Texas roads is a privilege -- not a right -- and that "the driving public" is presumed to have read the statute outlining no-refusal blood draws. (We must say, there are plenty of roads in Houston that don't really feel like a "privilege" to drive on [because of the potholes].)
The case stemmed from felony DWI charges against a Neuces County nuisance named David Villarreal, who was stopped for suspicion of DWI and found to have "multiple prior convictions" for DWI as well.
The arresting officer argued at an evidentiary hearing that he did not believe he had to obtain a warrant to draw Villareal's blood "in light of the mandatory-blood-draw provision" in the Texas Transportation Code that requires a blood or breath sample anytime someone's been convicted of at least two prior DWIs.
But the majority justices found that the Code's provisions "do not, taken by themselves, form a constitutionally valid alternative to the Fourth Amendment warrant requirement."
The lesson from this ruling is clear: you might want to stay off the streets when Villareal's behind the wheel.
By Craig Malisow
Houston Press
November 26, 2014
Just in time for the holiday weekend, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals [the state’s highest court for criminal cases] has upheld a lower court's ruling that warrantless blood-drawing in DWI cases is unconstitutional.
In a split 5-4 decision Wednesday, the majority justices disagreed with prosecutors' argument that driving on Texas roads is a privilege -- not a right -- and that "the driving public" is presumed to have read the statute outlining no-refusal blood draws. (We must say, there are plenty of roads in Houston that don't really feel like a "privilege" to drive on [because of the potholes].)
The case stemmed from felony DWI charges against a Neuces County nuisance named David Villarreal, who was stopped for suspicion of DWI and found to have "multiple prior convictions" for DWI as well.
The arresting officer argued at an evidentiary hearing that he did not believe he had to obtain a warrant to draw Villareal's blood "in light of the mandatory-blood-draw provision" in the Texas Transportation Code that requires a blood or breath sample anytime someone's been convicted of at least two prior DWIs.
But the majority justices found that the Code's provisions "do not, taken by themselves, form a constitutionally valid alternative to the Fourth Amendment warrant requirement."
The lesson from this ruling is clear: you might want to stay off the streets when Villareal's behind the wheel.
IS THE NEW YORK TIMES TRYING TO GET OFFICER DARREN WILSON MURDERED?
By Bob Walsh
PACOVILLA Corrections blog
November 26, 2014
The New York Times did something very interesting today. They published an article about Ferguson PD Officer Darren Wilson. Part of that story was a copy of his recent marriage license, showing the home address of Officer Wilson and presumably that of his new wife, also a Ferguson PD Officer.
Did the NY TIMES purposefully set up Officer Wilson to be murdered? Probably not. Did they act with reckless disregard to his safety. I think so. Were they journalistically irresponsible? Definitely. In some jurisdictions this would also be illegal.
They have pulled the image of the marriage license from their website.
I sincerely hope that nothing bad happens as a result of this AT BEST incredibly irresponsible act. If something bad does happen I hope the Wilson’s sue the living crap out of the NY TIMES. Whether they would be successful or not is doubtful. It would never the less be worthwhile.
PACOVILLA Corrections blog
November 26, 2014
The New York Times did something very interesting today. They published an article about Ferguson PD Officer Darren Wilson. Part of that story was a copy of his recent marriage license, showing the home address of Officer Wilson and presumably that of his new wife, also a Ferguson PD Officer.
Did the NY TIMES purposefully set up Officer Wilson to be murdered? Probably not. Did they act with reckless disregard to his safety. I think so. Were they journalistically irresponsible? Definitely. In some jurisdictions this would also be illegal.
They have pulled the image of the marriage license from their website.
I sincerely hope that nothing bad happens as a result of this AT BEST incredibly irresponsible act. If something bad does happen I hope the Wilson’s sue the living crap out of the NY TIMES. Whether they would be successful or not is doubtful. It would never the less be worthwhile.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)