Baltimore Protests and Riots

[Simon_Jester]

I think the source of my assumption is the notion that the legal system is indeed relatively effective at squashing complaints by urban minorities against their police force. I then made the error of rhetorically exaggerating this as "hopelessly out of reach," when instead it should be more like "very hard to reach."

Eleven million dollars over a four year period in legal expenses is actually pretty low when you consider the cost to the citizenry of being subjected to a reign of terror by their own police force. Baltimore has a population of over six hundred thousand, so that averages to about four and a half dollars of each citizen's tax money per year. To have a deterrent effect the payouts would need to be a lot steeper, I suspect.

Granted, this is not the explanation for why individual officers seem to think they're above the law and can act this way with impunity. However, it helps to explain why the entire force seems to think that way. Which they must, or they'd have cleaned their own house, because it's not like that's an impossible task for a determined police commissioner.

Meanwhile, you have correctly identified a more likely explanation for individual officers' sense of impunity.

[Flagg]

I don't find your sense of humour particularly funny, especially when you are, in all seriousness, defending violence as a means for political reform in America in this thread. Clearly you don't have a problem with violence being visited on people you disagree with (or, for that matter, random bystanders, given the typical indiscriminate nature of riots).

Violence as a means for political reform CREATED The United States of America you dumb asshole. Something you clearly didn't pick up on in a decade and 1/3 living here. So if you don't know that about this country, then you don't know anything about this country nor understand it, so I see no reason to take anything you say about what transpires here seriously.

[The Romulan Republic]

I don't find your sense of humour particularly funny, especially when you are, in all seriousness, defending violence as a means for political reform in America in this thread. Clearly you don't have a problem with violence being visited on people you disagree with (or, for that matter, random bystanders, given the typical indiscriminate nature of riots).

Violence as a means for political reform CREATED The United States of America you dumb asshole. Something you clearly didn't pick up on in a decade and 1/3 living here. So if you don't know that about this country, then you don't know anything about this country nor understand it, so I see no reason to take anything you say about what transpires here seriously.

Listen to me you fucking lying condescending piece of shit.

You know as well as I do that I know how America was created. I also know that while the American Revolution turned out relatively well, compared to some revolutions, the Founding Fathers were not the saints some make them out to be. And I also know that now is not the 1800s. I expect better from people in the 21st. century.

The Founding Fathers also had slaves and wives who couldn't vote, if you want to use them as the basis for how things are done in the 21st. century.

If you have fuck all to bring to the conversation other than lies and personal abuse, why don't you fuck off until you grow a brain and a moral compass, you worthless little trolling advocate for brutality?

[Ralin]

I don't find your sense of humour particularly funny, especially when you are, in all seriousness, defending violence as a means for political reform in America in this thread. Clearly you don't have a problem with violence being visited on people you disagree with (or, for that matter, random bystanders, given the typical indiscriminate nature of riots).

Violence as a means for political reform CREATED The United States of America you dumb asshole. Something you clearly didn't pick up on in a decade and 1/3 living here. So if you don't know that about this country, then you don't know anything about this country nor understand it, so I see no reason to take anything you say about what transpires here seriously.

Revolutions are not political reform.

[Flagg]

Violence as a means for political reform CREATED The United States of America you dumb asshole. Something you clearly didn't pick up on in a decade and 1/3 living here. So if you don't know that about this country, then you don't know anything about this country nor understand it, so I see no reason to take anything you say about what transpires here seriously.

Listen to me you fucking lying condescending piece of shit.

You know as well as I do that I know how America was created. I also know that while the American Revolution turned out relatively well, compared to some revolutions, the Founding Fathers were not the saints some make them out to be. And I also know that now is not the 1800s. I expect better from people in the 21st. century.

If all I get for correcting your amateurish mistakes is being called a liar (I'm unaware that I was lying when I corrected your wildly inaccurate statement that violence is not a means of political reform in a nation created by violence being used as a means of political reform. Which you really should be ashamed of, as while I used the US as an example of one instance specifically because you made the dumbest statement in a thread full of incredibly dumb statements giving me an opening no intelligent person wouldn't take, it is but one of a number of successful Nations built upon violent political action. So you need to learn things called "history" and "facts" before you start mouthing off to people who know what they are talking about. So call me a liar again and I'll get the mods involved because I haven't lied once in this clusterfuck of a thread.

Oh, and since I'm on record as Thomas Jefferson being a rapist, you can take the idea that I'm not fully aware of the faults of the "founding fathers" and stick it up your ass where it came from, assuming it can fit in there with your "arguments", "positions", and head.

If you have fuck all to bring to the conversation other than lies and personal abuse, why don't you fuck off until you grow a brain and a moral compass, you worthless little trolling advocate for brutality?

You don't even know the basic fucking history of the country you are in a thread about, the only liar is you when you accuse me of lies, and I'm advocating for the abused minority making my moral compass fully functional. How the fuck can I be a troll if I'm correct in my facts, explain my thinking fully, and don't say things even remotely "advocating brutality" when I made it abundantly clear for those to whom it was not obvious that I use absurd hyperbole of barbaric violence in nothing but my own admittedly sick and warped humor? Frankly, if there's any trolls going around stirring shit up and telling lies to start shit it's people who know nothing of what they are talking about when it comes to modern American race relations, power dynamics, and out of control police forces but spout off anyway and then lash out when corrected. You know, like you. Oh, and I'm far from little.

[Dominus Atheos]

This seems like the perfect time to posts these:

Martin Luther King Jr

“Why is equality so assiduously avoided? Why does white America delude itself, and how does it rationalize the evil it retains?

The majority of white Americans consider themselves sincerely committed to justice for the Negro. They believe that American society is essentially hospitable to fair play and to steady growth toward a middle-class Utopia embodying racial harmony. But unfortunately this is a fantasy of self-deception and comfortable vanity.”

— Where Do We Go From Here, 1967

“I contend that the cry of "Black Power" is, at bottom, a reaction to the reluctance of white power to make the kind of changes necessary to make justice a reality for the Negro. I think that we've got to see that a riot is the language of the unheard. And, what is it that America has failed to hear? It has failed to hear that the economic plight of the Negro poor has worsened over the last few years."

— 60 Minutes Interview, 1966

"But it is not enough for me to stand before you tonight and condemn riots. It would be morally irresponsible for me to do that without, at the same time, condemning the contingent, intolerable conditions that exist in our society. These conditions are the things that cause individuals to feel that they have no other alternative than to engage in violent rebellions to get attention. And I must say tonight that a riot is the language of the unheard. And what is it America has failed to hear?...It has failed to hear that the promises of freedom and justice have not been met. And it has failed to hear that large segments of white society are more concerned about tranquility and the status quo than about justice and humanity."

— “The Other America,” 1968

“When machines and computers, profit motives and property rights are considered more important than people, the giant triplets of racism, extreme materialism and militarism are incapable of being conquered.”

— “Revolution of Values,” 1967

“Whites, it must frankly be said, are not putting in a similar mass effort to reeducate themselves out of their racial ignorance. It is an aspect of their sense of superiority that the white people of America believe they have so little to learn. The reality of substantial investment to assist Negroes into the twentieth century, adjusting to Negro neighbors and genuine school integration, is still a nightmare for all too many white Americans…These are the deepest causes for contemporary abrasions between the races. Loose and easy language about equality, resonant resolutions about brotherhood fall pleasantly on the ear, but for the Negro there is a credibility gap he cannot overlook. He remembers that with each modest advance the white population promptly raises the argument that the Negro has come far enough. Each step forward accents an ever-present tendency to backlash.”

— Where Do We Go From Here, 1967

"First, I must confess that over the past few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen's Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to "order" than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: "I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action"; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man's freedom; who lives by a mythical concept of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait for a "more convenient season." Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection."

— Letter From a Birmingham Jail, 1963

[Flagg]

I don't find your sense of humour particularly funny, especially when you are, in all seriousness, defending violence as a means for political reform in America in this thread. Clearly you don't have a problem with violence being visited on people you disagree with (or, for that matter, random bystanders, given the typical indiscriminate nature of riots).

Violence as a means for political reform CREATED The United States of America you dumb asshole. Something you clearly didn't pick up on in a decade and 1/3 living here. So if you don't know that about this country, then you don't know anything about this country nor understand it, so I see no reason to take anything you say about what transpires here seriously.

Revolutions are not political reform.

They are the definition of it if successful. Did the Cuban Revolution not reform the entire Cuban Government and economic system? Yeah, I'd say successful revolutions are pretty much the definition of political reform. They are just very, very, very, far from any kind of ideal political reform.

[Ralin]

Revolutions are not political reform.

They are the definition of it if successful. Did the Cuban Revolution not reform the entire Cuban Government and economic system? Yeah, I'd say successful revolutions are pretty much the definition of political reform. They are just very, very, very, far from any kind of ideal political reform.

No, it didn't. The Cuban Revolution smashed the old Cuban government and economic system and replaced it with a new one. Revolutions are what happens when reforms fail.

Reforms change a system, revolutions replace them with new systems. That's...basically the definition.

[cmdrjones]

Mussolini suffered a similar fate after getting Italy into a disastrous WAR, and I doubt that, say, the girls of the Po valley were mass raped by invading american troops.

A lot were, so I don't know what you are talking here.

I was comparing the inept, craven and evil leadership decisions of Mussolini to the inept, craven and evil leadership decisions of the Rotherham city fathers. In both cases, the women of the areas in question suffered terribly during an invasion of foreign men. In the former, the invasion was #1 Armed #2 by Americans and #3 over after a time and #4 the Mussolini loyalists (and Mussolini himself) were punished. In the latter the invasion was #1 UNarmed #2 by "asian" immigrants #3 ongoing #5 the city fathers were largely NOT punished or if they were punished they did not get what they deserved, oh AND #6 the latter was denied for years and visited almost exclusively on the most innocent and helpless part of the population. Say what you want about the Italian Fascists at least they fought the invasion to a point. The absolute cowards of Rotherham actively participated in and covered up a far GREATER evil than the american invasion of Italy in WWII.

[cmdrjones]

Nobody should ever be murdered by a mob. One of the key qualities of a civilized, just society is that it recognizes that even monsters have rights and that justice is decided in a court room, not a street. Granted, that may not always be practical in wartime, but America is not (yet) in a state of civil war, however much some seem to think that it should be.

Agreed, being murdered by a mob is what happens when people cover up problems rather than facing them. Rather like a boiling pot have a lid shoved on it.

[Gandalf]

No, it didn't. The Cuban Revolution smashed the old Cuban government and economic system and replaced it with a new one. Revolutions are what happens when reforms fail.

Reforms change a system, revolutions replace them with new systems. That's...basically the definition.

So it's not a revolution if there's continuity of government?

[Metahive]

So when Francisco Franco died and the government of Spain changed from an authoritarian dictatorship to a constitutional monarchy by his own will, was that a reform or a revolution?

[Ralin]

No, it didn't. The Cuban Revolution smashed the old Cuban government and economic system and replaced it with a new one. Revolutions are what happens when reforms fail.

Reforms change a system, revolutions replace them with new systems. That's...basically the definition.

So it's not a revolution if there's continuity of government?

More generally I think it's about whether there's a major systematic break. There's almost always some continuity. Matter of degree, but the terms aren't interchangeable.

Sort of like when we say a new technology revolutionizes an industry.

[Flagg]

No, it didn't. The Cuban Revolution smashed the old Cuban government and economic system and replaced it with a new one. Revolutions are what happens when reforms fail.

Reforms change a system, revolutions replace them with new systems. That's...basically the definition.

So it's not a revolution if there's continuity of government?

More generally I think it's about whether there's a major systematic break. There's almost always some continuity. Matter of degree, but the terms aren't interchangeable.

Sort of like when we say a new technology revolutionizes an industry.

I love your stance, Ralin. "It's not a revolution because I said so!" How... What's the word I'm looking for...? Revolutionary? Oh no, wait, it's a logical fallacy. Darn.

[Borgholio]

The State attorney has filed homicide charges against the police officers who arrested Freddie Gray.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/02/us/fr ... .html?_r=0

[Patroklos]

Police OFFICER. Only one charge against one individual is homicide.

[Borgholio]

You're right, I must have misread the article. I stand corrected. One charge of homicide, a couple more of manslaughter, and the rest for assault.

[Ziggy Stardust]

Listen to me you fucking lying condescending piece of shit.

You know as well as I do that I know how America was created. I also know that while the American Revolution turned out relatively well, compared to some revolutions, the Founding Fathers were not the saints some make them out to be. And I also know that now is not the 1800s. I expect better from people in the 21st. century.

The Founding Fathers also had slaves and wives who couldn't vote, if you want to use them as the basis for how things are done in the 21st. century.

If you have fuck all to bring to the conversation other than lies and personal abuse, why don't you fuck off until you grow a brain and a moral compass, you worthless little trolling advocate for brutality?

The American Revolution occurred due to a perception that there was no longer any peaceful recourse and that violent change was necessary. That is exactly how minorities in the United States currently feel.

In order for your position to make any logical sense, you have to explain what the difference is. Appealing to "different times" (and oddly calling Flagg a liar for pointing out something that is categorically not a falsehood) doesn't cut it. That's not an argument, that's an evasion.

You are the one that has taken the stance that violence is NEVER a useful option for social reform. Which means you either think that the American Revolution in and of itself was morally repugnant, or you think that there was a strong moral incentive involved in the Revolution that is absent in modern America. You need to explain your thinking here if you don't want to look like a hypocrite.

[The Romulan Republic]

Listen to me you fucking lying condescending piece of shit.

You know as well as I do that I know how America was created. I also know that while the American Revolution turned out relatively well, compared to some revolutions, the Founding Fathers were not the saints some make them out to be. And I also know that now is not the 1800s. I expect better from people in the 21st. century.

The Founding Fathers also had slaves and wives who couldn't vote, if you want to use them as the basis for how things are done in the 21st. century.

If you have fuck all to bring to the conversation other than lies and personal abuse, why don't you fuck off until you grow a brain and a moral compass, you worthless little trolling advocate for brutality?

The American Revolution occurred due to a perception that there was no longer any peaceful recourse and that violent change was necessary. That is exactly how minorities in the United States currently feel.

You are entitled to speak for how all minorities in the US feel?

I very much doubt all or even most minorities support violent reform. If they did, we'd be fighting a full-blown civil war right now. And we obviously aren't, thank God, as much as some extreme elements of both the Left and the Right seem to want us to be.

In order for your position to make any logical sense, you have to explain what the difference is.

Every situation is unique. Anyway, your reasoning only works if you presume that the revolutionaries were right to do what they did. In truth, while I think that the revolutionaries had legitimate grievances and achieved great things, I don't condone all of their methods and had I lived at the time, I probably would have argued for further efforts at a peaceful revolution (and been tarred and feathered for my trouble, perhaps).

Moreover, again, I question your assertion that minorities in general feel the same as the revolutionaries did them.

Appealing to "different times" (and oddly calling Flagg a liar for pointing out something that is categorically not a falsehood) doesn't cut it. That's not an argument, that's an evasion.

Bull shit.

I think Flagg is a liar because he asserts ignorance and opinions on my part that I do not possess. Though I suppose I could, charitably, give him the benefit of the doubt by accepting that he may be simply a deluded imbecile rather than dishonest.

And I think the fact that Revolutionary America was a different society with different means of reform at its disposal is relevant, though it does not entirely justify everything that was done during that era. That's not an evasion, its an opinion.

You are the one that has taken the stance that violence is NEVER a useful option for social reform.

Pretty much, yes. I believe violence is only justified to the extent that it is necessary to protect oneself or someone else from an imminent threat. Not for retaliation or as a means of political change.

Which means you either think that the American Revolution in and of itself was morally repugnant,

I've already touched on this, but I would say that the revolutionaries had some legitimate grievances and achieved some great things, but that they didn't choose the optimal way of going about things. However, I also feel that the options may have been more limited due to concepts of non-violent resistance being less well-developed than they are today.

or you think that there was a strong moral incentive involved in the Revolution that is absent in modern America. You need to explain your thinking here if you don't want to look like a hypocrite.

I have tried to explain my thinking, and I don't see what's hypocritical about an evenly applied stance of "violence for political reform is bad".

And, of course, the situation in America at the time was substantially different from the situation toady. I can elaborate further if you wish, though it really should be self-evident.

[The Romulan Republic]

If all I get for correcting your amateurish mistakes is being called a liar (I'm unaware that I was lying when I corrected your wildly inaccurate statement that violence is not a means of political reform in a nation created by violence being used as a means of political reform.

What mistakes?

Yes, the US was created by violence. Obviously, being an American who has at least some familiarity with politics and history, I am aware of that. And I'd like you to quote, if you can, me saying "violence is not a means of political reform" or anything to that effect. Anyway, even if I did say that, it should be obvious that I did not mean it literally, that I meant it in the sense of "violence is not an acceptable/justifiable means of political reform" not "violence has literally never been used for political reform", which would require complete ignorance of history and current events. And I don't mean ignorance in the sense of not knowing very much, I mean ignorance in the sense of being detached from reality. If you're dumb enough to think that I literally wasn't aware of violence ever being used for political reform, you're a really dumb piece of shit. I mean, I've been accused of being too literal, but damn. Alternatively, you're a nitpicking liar trying to derail the debate.

Which you really should be ashamed of, as while I used the US as an example of one instance specifically because you made the dumbest statement in a thread full of incredibly dumb statements giving me an opening no intelligent person wouldn't take, it is but one of a number of successful Nations built upon violent political action.

Already addressed your absurd overly literal nitpicking, asshole. See above.

So you need to learn things called "history" and "facts" before you start mouthing off to people who know what they are talking about. So call me a liar again and I'll get the mods involved because I haven't lied once in this clusterfuck of a thread.

This forum has a rule against back-seat moderators. In fact, its under Administrative Rule number 1. So don't threaten me, shit face. You think I've broken a rule, put your money where your mouth is and report me or shut the fuck up. If a moderator has a problem with my conduct, they can tell me, and then maybe I'll give a fuck.

Oh, and since I'm on record as Thomas Jefferson being a rapist, you can take the idea that I'm not fully aware of the faults of the "founding fathers" and stick it up your ass where it came from, assuming it can fit in there with your "arguments", "positions", and head.

If you are aware of the Founding Fathers' faults, then don't use the American Revolution to justify rioting today.

You don't even know the basic fucking history of the country you are in a thread about, the only liar is you when you accuse me of lies,

Hypocrite.

and I'm advocating for the abused minority making my moral compass fully functional.

You're also defending violence in the streets and attacking those who feel differently with either extreme idiocy or dishonesty (or both).

How the fuck can I be a troll if I'm correct in my facts, explain my thinking fully,

Correct in your facts. That's a laugh.

and don't say things even remotely "advocating brutality" when I made it abundantly clear for those to whom it was not obvious that I use absurd hyperbole of barbaric violence in nothing but my own admittedly sick and warped humor?

You're defending rioting, are you not? Or have I completely misunderstood your position on the subject?

Frankly, if there's any trolls going around stirring shit up and telling lies to start shit it's people who know nothing of what they are talking about when it comes to modern American race relations, power dynamics, and out of control police forces but spout off anyway and then lash out when corrected. You know, like you. Oh, and I'm far from little.

You have called me a liar without proof and insinuated that I am merely trying to pick a fight, when in fact I am defending a sincerely held opposition to political violence that I have consistently advocated for on this forum for years. As to what I know, I know a great deal more than you assumed/pretended I do.

Oh, and I meant emotionally/mentally little. Stunted. Pathetic.

Edited.

[KroLazuxy_87]

Teen Rioter Faces Higher Bail Than Baltimore Cops Accused of Murder

llen Bullock, a Baltimore teen arrested for smashing a police car window with a traffic cone amid the Freddie Gray protests last week, is reportedly being held on a higher bail than the officers charged on Friday in Gray’s death.

Bullock, 18, who voluntarily surrendered to authorities at the urging of his parents, is being held on $500,000 bail, while the six officers accused in the Gray case were held on a range of $250,000 to $350,000, according to the Associated Press. NBC News has confirmed that all six officers arrested for Gray’s death have since been bailed out. Bail hearings are not open to the public in the state of Maryland.


“It is just so much money,” Bullock’s mom, Bobbi Smallwood, told the British newspaper The Guardian. “Who could afford to pay that?”

After Bullock’s illegal act was captured on camera and broadcast nationwide, he was shamed by relatives, including his stepfather Maurice Hawkins. “By turning himself in, he also let me know he was growing as a man and he recognized what he did was wrong,” Hawkins told The Guardian in the same interview.

Still, Smallwood believes that the fee for Bullock’s release is “ridiculous.”

“I think that that goes to continuing strained police-community relations,” F. Michael Higginbotham, a law professor at the University of Baltimore, told NBC station WBAL of Baltimore. “We need to take a step back and say, OK, how do we go forward from here? What is the way to improve police-community relations, not exacerbate it?” he said. “I think these high bail amounts will exacerbate it.”

A campaign to help raise funds for Bullock’s family to make bail has begun on Indiegogo. “Although we can agree that destroying the police cruiser was unnecessary, this bail price is ridiculously high for anyone to pay on their own. The purpose of this fundraiser is to get as close to $500,000 as possible to help this young man,” reads the effort’s page. It has raised just over $2,600 since its launch on Friday.

Earlier on Friday, six Baltimore police officers were charged with a host a crimes in connection with the death of Gray, including second-degree murder, manslaughter and false imprisonment. Gray, a 25-year-old black man, died April 19 following a severe spinal cord injury suffered while in police custody. He was arrested on April 12, apparently for possession of a switchblade.

However, in her statement Friday revealing the charges against the officers, Baltimore State Attorney Marilyn Mosby revealed that the knife would not be classified as a switchblade and was legal under Maryland law, making Gray’s arrest illegal.

The officers’ preliminary hearing is scheduled for May 27.

I don't know how Baltimore courts set their bail amounts and frankly I doubt it matters to most people that will see this news. This isn't going to help when trying to convince people that the system isn't biased. For me personally, it's encouraging to see that there is legal action being taken against people thought to have commited criminal acts.

A thought occurs to me - Should a new thread be established to discuss the future legal proceedings seperate from the conversation of (Pick One: A. social inequality B. unexcused criminal activity C. other) that this thread is now covering?

[Titan Uranus]

The thought occurs that the kid might have priors, which would probably push the judge towards a higher bail.

[KroLazuxy_87]

The thought occurs that the kid might have priors, which would probably push the judge towards a higher bail.

You would be correct sir.
Baltimore rioter turned himself in – but family can't afford $500,000 bail
Taken from the above:

All eight charges against Bullock are for misdemeanours. Rioting in Maryland carries a maximum sentence of life, according to state sentencing guidelines, but Bullock’s parents, who both have prior criminal convictions, said he could realistically face a sentence of between four and eight years.

The charges against Bullock are his first as an adult, according to his parents, who said he had been convicted of several minor offences as a juvenile over things like “theft and fighting”. They said Bullock earned roughly $15,600 a year working in sanitation for the city under a program for people in juvenile probation. He was staying in East Baltimore with a cousin.

Like I said though, I doubt it matters to most people that will see this news. They're not gonna look into the details, they're not gonna ask questions. They'll just skim for the headlines that support their viewpoint then move on.

[Dominus Atheos]

The man who filmed the Freddie Gray video has been arrested at gunpoint

Kevin Moore, the man who filmed Freddie Gray's brutal arrest, has now himself been arrested following "harassment and intimidation" from Baltimore police.

Moore was arrested at gunpoint last night along with two other members of Cop Watch, agroup dedicated to filming and documenting police work.

His video of Gray's arrest was shot shortly before the man suffered spinal injuries while in police custody that led to his death.

Moore claims that despite having co-operated with two detectives in the Baltimore Police Department’s Office of Internal Oversight and given them the video, police posted his photo and told the public that he was "wanted for questioning", asking people to identify him.

"What is so important that you have to plaster my picture over the Internet? I've already spoken," Moore said, suggesting that they posted it simply to intimidate him.

Moore was asleep in his home on the morning of 12 April, when his uncle yelled to him: "The police are tazing Freddie."

He ran out into the street and instantly started filming on his cell phone as Gray "screamed for his life", one officer putting his knee on his neck as the other bent his legs backwards.

"They had him folded up like he was a crab or a piece of origami. He was all bent up," Moore said.

At the time of writing it seems Moore has been released but his colleagues, Chad Jackson and Tony White, have not, with Cop Watch asking for help from lawyers.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world ... 17973.html

More information:

Man who Recorded Freddie Gray Video Arrested After Voicing Fears That Police Were Trying to Intimidate Him

The man who recorded one of two videos showing Baltimore cops dragging a screaming Freddie Gray into the back of a police van was arrested Thursday night, two days after voicing concerns that police were trying to intimidate him by plastering his photo all over the news, saying they wanted to interview him.

Unlike the woman who recorded the other video, Kevin Moore was not afraid to show his face to the cameras, describing to reporters how cops had Gray’s legs pulled up behind his neck as they held him face down on the ground with one cop planting a knee on the back of Gray’s neck.

Once his interview went viral, police put out a notice that they wanted to speak to him to help with their “investigation,” which he understood as an attempt to intimidate him into silence.

After all, he had already spoken to police about what he had seen during the Freddie Gray arrest. And he was aware of what New York City police officers did to Ramsey Orta, the man who recorded NYPD detective Daniel Pantaleo.

On Tuesday, he posted the following on Facebook:

OK y’all everyone by now know that I spoke up for Freddie and recorded all I could. But I would greatly appreciate if y’all could stop posting pics of me plz it’s very uncomfortable knowing that the law is looking for me!!Thank y’all(Kev)

The law caught up to him Thursday night, handcuffing him and two friends at gunpoint during a traffic stop that involved two police helicopters, one armored car, a police SUV and plenty of military looking cops with guns.

“It looked like something out of a video game,” he said during a telephone interview with Photography is Not a Crime Early this morning.
“We asked them why are we being detained. They said it was because we made an illegal turn.”

That illegal turn, according to police, consisted of the driver using a left turn signal to make a right turn, which Moore finds very dubious.

Moore said he did not have identification on him, but when he told them his name, a flash of recognition crossed their faces and they ordered the paddy wagon.

Moore and his two friends were handcuffed and transported to the Western District police station.

But was released two hours later with no explanation and no charges.

However, his two friends, who had driven up to Baltimore from Ferguson to help establish a We Copwatch chapter, were not released.

Moore was never told why, but he believes it was because they were from out-of-town, so they wanted to send a message to scare outsiders away.

“I know think didn’t like the Missouri tag,” he said.

Moore said he recorded video of the traffic stop, which will be edited by We Copwatch and posted today.

We also interviewed Moore on PINAC Live! early this morning as you can see in the video below. The video last 20 minutes before his phone heated up and shut off.

The incident began as Moore and his two friends were driving away from a protest demanding justice for Freddie Gray. Moore was in the passenger seat and wearing a Guy Fawkes mask, which is something you see at every protest these days. They drove by some cops in an SUV and Moore made eye contact with one of the cops while wearing the mask.

Making eye contact with cops is apparently considered suspicious in Baltimore as we learned from the Freddie Gray incident, so naturally, the SUV began following the men.

Moore said they were driving southeast on Pennsylvania Avenue from North Avenue, where the protest had taken place, when the cops started following them. They then made a right on Cumberland Street with the cops following. You can make out the scene in the map below.

At some point on Cumberland, the cops turned on their emergency lights, but the men did not stop because it was in a dark area with no witnesses around. And after what Moore witnessed what they did to Gray, he has absolutely no trust in them.

“I told them to keep driving to Bruce Court where my people will be at,” he said.

So they maintained a steady speed of 30 mph for another four blocks before coming to a stop at Bruce Court where there was up to 30 people milling about.

“They had a fucking army on us,” he said.

A national guardsman involved in the stop pointed a shotgun at his pregnant wife, who was among two dozen people standing in the area where they had been pulled over.

“I told him, ‘can’t you see she’s pregnant?’

“He said, ‘she can be pregnant up on the sidewalk.'”

At West District, he was separated from the two Copwatch members, Chad Jackson and Tony White aka Talal Ahmad, and believes they were transported to either Central Booking or Baltimore City Detention Center. He said the car was impounded and transported to West District where they searched it.

“They said they had probable cause to search it because we did not pull over but we did not pull over because we did not feel safe,” he said.
“We wanted to pull over in front of witnesses.”

http://photographyisnotacrime.com/2015/ ... idate-him/

[Dominus Atheos]

Baltimore’s Refusal to Permit Legal Observers to Witness Police Enforcing Curfew Resulted in Mass Arrest

At least ten legal observers with the National Lawyers Guild were arrested on Saturday night and effectively blocked by police and the city of Baltimore from witnessing the enforcement of a curfew. The observers were released throughout the day on Sunday.

The arrests were a result of police refusing to recognize the observer status of legal volunteers and allow them to be on the streets past a curfew, which the city’s mayor rescinded yesterday.

The curfew was imposed after rioting that took place on Monday days after Freddie Gray was killed by Baltimore police while he was in a police van. The uprising was, to a large extent, fueled by the city and police’s own conduct in the mid-afternoon, especially because public transit was shut down leaving numerous young people stranded with no way to get home.

The arrests violated a right to observe that is typically recognized throughout the United States and was recognized in Ferguson, Missouri, when a curfew was imposed in a somewhat similar circumstance after Mike Brown was killed by a Ferguson police officer.

This also disrupted the NLG’s ability to provide legal support to protesters and Baltimore residents rounded up for being outside past the 10 pm.

Colin Starger of the NLG Maryland Chapter called the arrest of legal observers an “extraordinary action and a wholly unjustified one.” He explained that the legal observers were not participating in any protest “activities.” They were “not obviously interfering with the police in any way” and are trained not to interfere with police.

Even though the organization believes the curfew was “unconstitutional” and they opposed it, the NLG attempted to obtain permission to be out past curfew. If the press and Amnesty International were going to be permitted to do their jobs, legal volunteers wanted to be out there “to observe what the police were actually doing,” NLG Mass Defense Coordinator Abi Hassen explained. But the group was denied passes.

A few nights prior to the mass arrest of legal volunteers during Saturday night, police stopped some of the legal observers and detained them. They were essentially informed they were not allowed to “do any legal observation.”

Amnesty International was able to obtain the right to have human rights observers on the ground. But the city abruptly “revoked permission” to observers to monitor police operations during curfew. Amnesty International announced on May 1 that they were informed the badges issued to four observers were “invalid due to counterfeits.”

Because the legal observers lacked any sort of passes or credentials, an entire group of volunteers were placed under arrest and spent many hours in jail.

Hassen made it clear that the NLG was not solely concerned with getting legal volunteers out of jail. Hundreds of people, besides the observers, were arrested by police—in mass—over the past days and a number were held over the 24-hour period that is generally permitted.

Primarily, the majority of these people were arrested for the simple fact of being out after curfew, which the organization views as outrageous.

Several juveniles were arrested, which is nothing new for Baltimore. Hassen said there is a “kiddie jail” for children. Juveniles face a year-round curfew that remains in place and that will continue to lead to juveniles being picked up and jailed.

Legal observers, who are easily identified by widely recognized bright green hats, typically focus on getting personal identifying information from individuals when they are being arrested so they can be found by family and friends, who may call the legal support hotline to ask about them.

It usually becomes the responsibility of legal observers to track injuries a person may sustain during an arrest. The police and jailers are not concerned about those injuries so legal observers push for medical treatment to be given.

Throughout the week, there were reports of disparate enforcement of the curfew in neighborhoods of Baltimore. Activist Deray McKesson captured video of an officer providing white protesters in Hampden three rather polite warnings to disperse on Saturday night. By comparison, poor black neighborhoods were given one warning and then police unleashed pepper spray or tear gas to clear out an area.

Both were protesting for the same reason: they viewed the curfew as illegitimate and unjust.

In many ways, the curfew fueled “unrest” after Tuesday. Any problems were “created by the police and also by the curfew itself,” Starger suggested. No police had been directly attacked or injured. No more rioting or looting was reported after Monday. The community was elated to hear the six police officers involved in killing Gray were charged.

The Pretrial Justice Institute (PJI) reported that there had been “excessive use of detention for protesters held without charges and assigned exorbitant bond amounts.”

“Jailing people pretrial because they cannot afford bond is not only inhumane, it is unconstitutional. The use of sky-high bail amounts in Baltimore this week amount to premature guilty sentences for citizens who have not been convicted of any crime,” PJI executive director Cherise Fanno Burdeen declared. “The damage cannot be overstated: even short stints in jail before trial can lead to job and housing loss, destabilize families, and dramatically increase the likelihood of a person committing a crime in the future.”

“Pretrial release decisions only should be made in consideration of two factors—flight risk or danger to the community,” Burdeen added.

On May 2, Dominique Christina, an author and educator from New York, described the terrifying experience of what it was like when police enforced the curfew.

“At 10 minutes before 10pm EST tanks and police in riot gear started warning us about curfew. Problem was, we were far away from our car,” Christina shared. “There were a lot of people out. Joseph Kent, who CNN captured being snatched by police earlier in the week, led a march.

Police had apparently told Kent they would not bother him. Christina and others followed him anyways because the “energy was right.”

By 10 pm, police lined up. “A tank flanked us on the righthand side,” Christina recalled. “Riot police started moving in.”

Christina and others could smell the pepper spray. People attempted to flee. Kent was unable to get away before being snatched by police again.

“Violations of basic human dignity,” Christina stated, are not being shown on CNN.

Christina’s experience is but a small piece of what Baltimore residents experienced over the past week as the National Guard setup an occupation and police escalated their presence by deploying even more teams with paramilitary-style gear.

As one person put it, “It’s 2015 and American citizens are hiding in safe houses like runaway slaves from militarized police and the National Guard. And another acknowledged that people needed “papers” to be outside past curfew.

The policies imposed recalled a racist past that ancestors of black residents likely endured and survived. Baltimore residents had to have their own version of freedom papers to go to work in the middle of the night or to travel anywhere they needed to be after 10 pm.

It is this kind of policing that the National Lawyers Guild deployed legal observers to witness. But, unlike Ferguson, which had a similar situation in August, the authorities would not permit the volunteers to be out on the streets to see how police enforced the curfew.

http://dissenter.firedoglake.com/2015/0 ... ss-arrest/