Total Posts:12|Showing Posts:1-12
Jump to topic:

#BLM Leader Charged With Felony

roun12
Posts: 177
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/2/2016 1:44:07 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/2/2016 12:32:28 PM, YYW wrote:
http://www.pasadenanow.com...

lol

And BLM wonders why people don't like them.
"No, I disagree. 'R' is among the most menacing of sounds. That's why they call it MURDER, not Muckduck." - Dwight

"Tell people there's an invisible man in the sky who created the universe, and the vast majority will believe you. Tell them the paint is wet, and they have to touch it to be sure." - George Carlin
Burzmali
Posts: 1,310
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/2/2016 5:28:07 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
I'm assuming she was trying to keep a fellow protester from getting arrested. How terrible! Truly something for anti-BLM folks to crow about!
keithprosser
Posts: 2,053
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/2/2016 9:43:07 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
As Mr. Spock would say 'insufficient data'.

But that never stops people making uninformed comments about it. Pre- (as in premature) judice (as in judgement) is to the fore.

Personally, I'll wait until I get all the facts and then condemn this as another example of the institutionalised racism inherent in the American judicial system.
someloser
Posts: 1,377
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/4/2016 7:05:34 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
actually a great representative
Ego sum qui sum. Deus lo vult.

"America is ungovernable; those who served the revolution have plowed the sea." - Simon Bolivar

"A healthy nation is as unconscious of its nationality as a healthy man of his bones. But if you break a nation's nationality it will think of nothing else but getting it set again." - George Bernard Shaw
Emmarie
Posts: 1,907
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/4/2016 11:28:30 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/2/2016 9:43:07 PM, keithprosser wrote:
As Mr. Spock would say 'insufficient data'.

But that never stops people making uninformed comments about it. Pre- (as in premature) judice (as in judgement) is to the fore.

Personally, I'll wait until I get all the facts and then condemn this as another example of the institutionalised racism inherent in the American judicial system.
+1
keithprosser
Posts: 2,053
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/4/2016 3:01:37 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
It's still not clear what Jasmine did in terms of physical acts. Did she merely hold on to the arrestee while he was being grabbed by a cop in the heat of the moment? Or was she head of a threatening mob and premiditatively use significant force or the threat of such force in an attempt to intimidating a cop into releasing someone?

My guess is that each side will spin it as being one way or the other. Maybe the cops arrested Jasmine and had to come up with something to charge her with and a slight brush with another arrestee becomes a 'lynching'. Who knows? And of course no-one can be relied on the tell the simple truth, not even at the trial. Perhaps that is the saddest aspect of all.
YYW
Posts: 36,375
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/5/2016 8:24:55 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/4/2016 3:01:37 PM, keithprosser wrote:
It's still not clear what Jasmine did in terms of physical acts.

Unlawfully attempting to remove someone in police custody, from police custody. Essentially, interfering with the police keeping someone under arrest.

Did she merely hold on to the arrestee while he was being grabbed by a cop in the heat of the moment? Or was she head of a threatening mob and premiditatively use significant force or the threat of such force in an attempt to intimidating a cop into releasing someone?

That is of no consequence. She was found guilty, meaning that she has been tried by a jury of her peers who evaluated the facts and they determined that she was culpable.

My guess is that each side will spin it as being one way or the other. Maybe the cops arrested Jasmine and had to come up with something to charge her with and a slight brush with another arrestee becomes a 'lynching'. Who knows? And of course no-one can be relied on the tell the simple truth, not even at the trial. Perhaps that is the saddest aspect of all.

Regarding your earlier comment about "not enough information," that's not a reasonable thing to say. What she did was do a thing that was illegal, for which she has now been convicted. This is not a complicated concept, and your effort to make it more complicated than it is really serves no purpose other than frustrating your comprehension of what transpired.
Tsar of DDO
keithprosser
Posts: 2,053
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/6/2016 8:49:38 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
Unlawfully attempting to remove someone in police custody, from police custody. Essentially, interfering with the police keeping someone under arrest.


I can read, YYW.

In British law, the merest of touches counts as an 'assault' - I am not sure if the same applies in the US. The point being that 'attempting to remove someone from police custody' could mean almost anything in terms of what actually happened.

I am not an unconditional supporter of 'the rule of law'. Apartheid in South Africa was law, but it was a vile and unfair law and breaking it was the morally right thing to do. Also, laws can also be applied unfairly. Stop and Search laws did not mention race, but it was used against black youths almost exclusively.

There is something higher than law and that is justice. Laws at their best codify justice, but at their worst (or even if they are good laws applied badly) they instituionalise injustice.

I do argue the letter of the law was not followed - but I do not have the information needed to say if it was just. And I suspect, neither do you.
keithprosser
Posts: 2,053
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/6/2016 8:51:50 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
Correction:
The last line should have been:

I do NOT argue the letter of the law was not followed - but I do not have the information needed to say if it was just. And I suspect, neither do you.
Hiu
Posts: 1,015
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/6/2016 10:26:47 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/2/2016 12:32:28 PM, YYW wrote:
http://www.pasadenanow.com...

lol

This happened last year oh and by the way:

"Jasmine Richards isn't the moving on type. So, in August of 2015, as she often did, she was protesting police violence. She was right to do so. In 2015, an astounding 1,207 people were killed by American police " the highest number ever recorded. More unarmed African-Americans were killed by police last year than in any single year of lynching since 1902. That should shock and disturb all of us. In fact, I have argued many times that police murders of unarmed men, women, and children are our modern-day lynchings.

As often happens across the country, police were irritated by Jasmine's protest in August of 2015. Below is a video of police attempting to arrest a young woman who they were told refused to pay for her meal at a local restaurant. The young woman was not a protestor, but Jasmine Richards and several protestors who happened to be in the area for a completely unrelated event saw police manhandling her and decided to take up for her. She was a complete stranger to Jasmine and the others.

What you may have seen in the midst of all of the commotion was Jasmine Richards and several other people trying to take up for a petite young woman who was being arrested. That happens at protests every day in this country.

Not a single protestor was arrested over this incident. Yet, three days later Jasmine was arrested and charged with a host of bogus crimes. All of the charges were dropped except for one " a felony lynching charge.

Yeah " really. The irony is as sick and twisted as it gets. Jasmine Richards" a humanitarian who protests police violence " was charged with felony lynching."

http://www.nydailynews.com...