To those who think BLM haven't changed anything and that 'it hasn't happened since the slavery days'

Author: RationalMadman

Posts

Total: 41
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11

Tell me right now that the way she was treated in her trial and lack of representation she had would have happened if she were a Caucasian American.

Do not look '.co.uk' and tell me she was British, read the article. It was a British lawyer that saved her. That is irrelevant to the piece, I am just clarifying before people try to correct me on this. The British legal system also has needed a lot of work pushed forward by BLM protests and campaigns in order to improve, it's just further along the way, I believe.
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@RationalMadman
To those who think BLM haven't changed anything 
You can't credit BLM for the exoneration of Sabrina Butler Smith.

The conviction and sentence were set aside on August 25, 1992 by the Mississippi Supreme Court which ruled that the trial prosecutor, Lowndes County District Attorney Forrest Allgood, improperly commented on Butler's decision not to testify at the trial.
The British lawyer Stafford-Smith  did not get her death sentence overturned but did successfully represent Butler-Smith at her retrial in 1995.  Black Lives Matters was not formed until 2013, twenty-one years after Butler Smith was exonerated and did not come to prominence until Ferguson in 2014.

The Daily Mirror should never be used as source of information.  Yes, the article does relate that she has been free since '95 but the journalism is so deceptive- there's been no new updates to this story for 26 years so why is the Mirror running an EXCLUSIVE about a 26 year old story?  I guess it lets Brits feel a bit superior over capital punishment.

I have successfully debated the value of Black Live Matter but you can't credit BLM with this win.

There are many similar injustices at work in present day America. 

Kevin Strickland has been serving a life sentence since 1979- 43 years in prison for a crime that he clearly did not commit.  The two other men convicted in the crime have always maintained that Strickland was not part of their crime and the one witness who identified him withdrew her testimony in 2009 saying she was pressured to blame Strickland by prosecutors.  Those lawyers who prosecuted his case in 1979 now say that Strickland is innocent as does the current Jackson County prosecutor. 

Strickland is wheelchair bound and has suffered several recent heart attacks.  He hopes to see the ocean for once before he dies.

The Missouri Supreme Court refused to review the case without comment. 

Gov. Mike Parsons has been under regular international pressure  from WashPo to the Pope to pardon  Strickland for more than  three years but Parsons consistently says that the case is "not a priority" for him.  Last week, Parsons did find the time to pardon White Republicans Mark and Patricia McCloskey for waving an AR-15 at George Floyd protestors last summer.

Wylted
Wylted's avatar
Debates: 34
Posts: 5,754
3
4
11
Wylted's avatar
Wylted
3
4
11
-->
@oromagi
Gov. Mike Parsons has been under constant pressure  from the Washingon Post to the Pope to pardon for three years but Parsons consistently says that the case is not a priority for him.  Last week, Parsons did pardon White Republicans Mark and Patricia McCloskey for waving an AR-15 at George Floyd protestors last summer
Bringing up their race is perhaps racist itself, but looking past this. These people were liberals who actually sided with the BLM movement prior to and after this incident. 

They were merely a couple defending their home when their gate was smashed open. Once you start destroying property, it's a riot.  They were in the middle of a riot and they could have easily been overtaken by the mob. 

The mob whose political ideology the couple agreed with, had no right to target them for whatever malicious intent they had on the couple or the property. They also had the right to defend their property, but in this instance, I don't see them coming out of the ordeal without at the bare minimum serious injury after being in the angry mom's sight. 

This just goes to show that at any moment, any person can be turned into a political football. One day oromagi might have some apolitical thing happen to him, and he gets picked as a political football. Maybe a side he disagrees with also happens to be the only side that rightly supports him.

For this pro BLM liberal couple, the political agenda to hurt them came from the part of the political spectrum they agree with.  For the lady who sued for spilling coffee on herself, liberals defended her, even though she was a conservative.

This shit happens all the time. Some apolitical moment gets turned into a political football event. It could be anyone getting their gates smashed down and stormed by an angry mob. That mob could have easily been right wing. If the mob was right wing, conservatives would have called this couple out of line and oromagi would have defended them, being reasonable in this rare moment and pointing out that everybody should be allowed to defend themselves from an enraged mob, swarming them and their property
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 26,113
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
Congress recently voted 99 to zero against BLM.


you're in the wrong country to be pushing this shit.
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
-->
@oromagi
Do you realise what they are trying to change, not trying, succeeding? That lawyer was counteracting a deeper issue.
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
GP they voted no to literally 'defunding the police'.

Try and cherry-pick harder. That is not voting no to BLM, what a ridiculous article.
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
-->
@oromagi
I have successfully debated the value of Black Live Matter but you can't credit BLM with this win.
I'm not. I even specified it was a white british lawyer who did it and it was the issue of systemic racism in the legal enforcement that I was focusing on.
Wylted
Wylted's avatar
Debates: 34
Posts: 5,754
3
4
11
Wylted's avatar
Wylted
3
4
11
I don't know if Strickland is guilty or not. It might be like the wm3 who were falsely exonerated. I doubt oromagi has read the trial transcripts and knows either. 

I do know that lot's of people are railroaded or innocent, it is usually because of witnesses misremembering things or being shady, like jailhouse informants who get deals

Prosecutors tend not to think of themselves as bad guys who put innocent people in jail, so fight these exonerations, but it isn't racially motivated, and it is kind of retarded to randomly think it is racially motivated based merely on the fact the defendant is black
TheMorningsStar
TheMorningsStar's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 398
2
3
7
TheMorningsStar's avatar
TheMorningsStar
2
3
7
-->
@RationalMadman
I'm not. I even specified it was a white british lawyer who did it and it was the issue of systemic racism in the legal enforcement that I was focusing on.
If your goal is to show that BLM is actually useful and that systemic racism is a problem today then why would you use a story from almost 30 years ago that BLM had nothing to do with?
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
-->
@TheMorningsStar
Because it is a perfect way to highlight how the system was before it even remotely began to get fixed.
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
The case struck me as one that never ever would have been how the case would be handled had she been caucasian.
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
Prosecutors tend not to think of themselves as bad guys who put innocent people in jail, so fight these exonerations, but it isn't racially motivated, and it is kind of retarded to randomly think it is racially motivated based merely on the fact the defendant is black
It is not only the prosecutors, but the interoggating detectives and COs afterwards. She was not even informed she had an appeal, how did that not happen, it is a mandatory part of the procedure as is her having an attorney throughout her interrogation. She was 17, AKA a minor.
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@Wylted
These people were liberals who actually sided with the BLM movement prior to and after this incident. 
This a lie. 

When Carlson introduced McCloskey Tuesday evening, he referred to him as a former Democrat who had his views changed by the 2020 incident. McCloskey said he has always been a Republican and that the description of him as a former Democrat was a “fake news slur,” which elicited laughter from the Fox News host.
This again demonstrates how you are incapable of independent thought.  Literally, McClosky himself tells Carlson that he is a lifelong Republican but because Tucker says it is true, you are not allowed to think otherwise and still report Carlson's falsehood a year later.  If Tucker tells you that night is day, you believe it until Tucker tells you otherwise.

They were merely a couple defending their home when their gate was smashed open.
This is a lie.  Videotape clearly shows that the gate was intact at the time of the armed confrontation.  
McCloskey has frequently reported that he watched the crowd tear down the gate but this is falsified by video and police inquiry.  There is no evidence that McCloskey himself inflicted the damage later that day to improve his impending case but he is certainly the only party with a motive to do so.

Once you start destroying property, it's a riot.  They were in the middle of a riot and they could have easily been overtaken by the mob. 
The video of the event clearly demonstrates that no property was destroyed by the protestors.  The protestors were on their way to the Mayor's house and the protestors only reacted vocally to having guns pointed at them.  The protestors did not try to defend themselves, they simply yelled at those assholes and walked on.

The mob whose political ideology the couple agreed with,
Lie.

had no right to target them for whatever malicious intent they had on the couple or the property.
Lie.  They were walking to the Mayor's house and had no business with the McCloskeys.  As the McCLoskey's next door neighbor reported: "There was no threat, except the threat that comes from frightened elites out of touch with the reality that resides a few inches outside their gate."  The gated community is a cluster of 96 mansions in the heart of St. Louis' black community- the gates date back to birth of automobiles.  Whites had cars and wanted paved roads, non-whites did not have cars and resented paying for white infrastructure, so rich communities were allowed to pave their own neighborhoods and build barriers across the previously public roads to prevent thru traffic.

This just goes to show that at any moment, any person can be turned into a political football.
The McCloskeys were already pretty well known as ambulance chasers in St. Louis before this incident.  They live in the prominent Busch mansion of Anheiser-Busch fame just off a busy street- everybody in St. Louis recognizes that house.   They appeared on Tucker four times in the week after this incident.  They also opened for the Republican National Convention with the claim that "they" (meaning black people) want to "abolish the suburbs."  (As I said, the McCloskeysl live in gated community in downtown St. Louis, 96 houses surrounded by middle class black communities on all sides- not the suburbs).  Mark McCloskey has been running for Missouri's US Senate seat in 2022 since spring.  The McCloskeys have been dreaming of the day that they could play political football since they went to law school.

For this pro BLM liberal couple,
lie.  doubling down on previous lies, really.

the political agenda to hurt them came from the part of the political spectrum they agree with.   For the lady who sued for spilling coffee on herself, liberals defended her, even though she was a conservative.
I can't find any evidence of Reed Morgan's political tendencies but he works for one the largest law firms in Texas and that firm donates heavily to exclusively Republican interests.  Did Tucker make you believe that one, too? 

This shit happens all the time.
So why did you go back to 1992 for your only example?





Wylted
Wylted's avatar
Debates: 34
Posts: 5,754
3
4
11
Wylted's avatar
Wylted
3
4
11
-->
@oromagi
they" (meaning black people) want to "abolish the suburbs
I, have literally been in discussions with leftists on bunkerchan about taking it right to the doorstep of everybody in the suburbs and have seen several news sites confirm that it wasn't just talked about on bunkerchan. I'll look into your claim about them being Republicans, but dude was literally wearing a pink shirt. Also I doubt he would destroy his own fence and try to become so hated
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@Wylted
I don't know if Strickland is guilty or not. It might be like the wm3 who were falsely exonerated. I doubt oromagi has read the trial transcripts and knows either. 

Why would I need to read the transcripts?  The lawyers who put Strickland in jail now admit that they falsified all of the evidence against him and are begging the Governor to remedy their misdeeds.  The only witness who put Strickland at the murder confessed twelve years ago that the lawyers pressured her to say "Strickland did it" when she knew it was not him.  The other two witnesses, the actual murderers have always maintained that Strickland had nothing to do with it.
The fingerprint on the trigger does not belong to Strickland.

You say you think he might be guilty- on what grounds?  What evidence makes you think he might be guilty when the prosecutors themselves assure us there is none?



StevenCrowder
StevenCrowder's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 21
0
0
4
StevenCrowder's avatar
StevenCrowder
0
0
4
this site would be better if it wasnt a liberal echochamber
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 26,113
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
That is not voting no to BLM, what a ridiculous article.

It's an article written by the BLM founder dumbass. Are you calling BLM ridiculous?

If so, I retract my Ad-Hom.
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@Wylted
-->@oromagi
they" (meaning black people) want to "abolish the suburbs
I, have literally been in discussions with leftists on bunkerchan about taking it right to the doorstep of everybody in the suburbs and have seen several news sites confirm that it wasn't just talked about on bunkerchan. I'll look into your claim about them being Republicans, but dude was literally wearing a pink shirt. Also I doubt he would destroy his own fence and try to become so hated
So I prove everything you've said is a lie and get no apology?

Also I doubt he would destroy his own fence and try to become so hated
What do you mean, hated?  This is Missouri.  Literally, an ambulance chasing lawyer with no public policy credentials in the least is  now the Republican front runner for Senator in 2022  exclusively because he waved a machine gun at some uppity niggers on TV and FOX/Trump instantly loved him for it. You can't get on the Republican ticket in Missouri these days without demonstrating some anti-black prejudice, which is why the Governor doesn't want to pardon Strickland, which is why Trump still wants to execute the Central Park Five even after they've been exonerated, which is why McCloskey thinks he's got a real shot-  it's not enough to be tough on crime in Missouri, you must demonstrate that you are tough on brown people to an extra-legal degree or else you're a communist.  

Does anybody really believe that McCloskey is propelled by some kind of  keen public policy agenda? No.   Does anybody really believe that rich accident lawyers are so well loved that they can just translate that history into national politics?  No.  Does anybody believe that if McCloskey had pointed his AR-15 at a bunch of white college kids he's be anything but legally fucked right now?  No.  He's not that smart or well-spoken.  He doesn't come from a famous family.  The only thing anybody knows about McCloskey is that he pointed his gun at some dark-skinned college kids and that qualification alone is now  apparently sufficient for a leadership role in the Republican Party.  If he had only  pulled trigger a few times, he'd probably be running for President now.
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
It's an article written by the BLM founder dumbass. Are you calling BLM ridiculous?
I am in that specific case and article, I would not agree with how he's worded it or how extremely he is describing what the 99-0 was specifically on. Literally defunding the police is of course going to send the nation into anarchy, that is obvious and not desirable. That is what was voted 99-0.

'defund' is extremely poor choice of word by the advocates, it wasn't what they really wanted. They wanted to reallocate some of the funding and retrain the cops with a period of tranquility hopefully that the citizens would allow.
Wylted
Wylted's avatar
Debates: 34
Posts: 5,754
3
4
11
Wylted's avatar
Wylted
3
4
11
-->
@oromagi
lawyers who put Strickland in jail now admit that they falsified all of the evidence against him and are begging the Governor to remedy their misdeeds.
It's possible that you can falsify records and that person still be guilty, but what am I missing.  Why aren't the prosecutors in prison? They should definitely be there if they are admitting to faking evidence.

Wylted
Wylted's avatar
Debates: 34
Posts: 5,754
3
4
11
Wylted's avatar
Wylted
3
4
11
-->
@oromagi
So I prove everything you've said is a lie and get no apology?
Why would I apologize for being wrong? I didn't attack your character. I appear to be wrong about them. I admit it. 

Trump still wants to execute the Central Park Five even after they've been exonerated
They were literally part of the mob that did the raping and random acts of violence. They are equally as guilty. This whole ideal they were innocent is ridiculous.  I don't think anyone ever thought they could pinpoint exactly who in the mob  did what specifically, only that they were a part of the violent mob and aided it. Everyone in that mob should have served time. The 5 have probably spent enough time in prison to be changed people, but were certainly a danger to society.

Other than that. Yes I appear to be wrong that the guy wearing a pink shirt was a Democrat. Yes you still seem to be exaggerating his actions. The footage I saw, it just appeared he was standing on his lawn holding a gun in a ready position, not an aimed position. 

Your assertion is not a single protestor was on his property though correct?
Conway
Conway's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 278
1
2
5
Conway's avatar
Conway
1
2
5
-->
@oromagi

I think Black Lives Matter is a slogan expressly made for anyone who perceives injustice, believing another person's life matters because THEY are black.

In my experience, just about anyone would be allowed to join in the mob of peaceful protesters, sometimes even more-so because of their different skin color.  
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@Wylted
-->@oromagi
lawyers who put Strickland in jail now admit that they falsified all of the evidence against him and are begging the Governor to remedy their misdeeds.
It's possible that you can falsify records and that person still be guilty, but what am I missing.  Why aren't the prosecutors in prison? They should definitely be there if they are admitting to faking evidence.

The first conspiracy you've ever expressed skepticism about in your entire life and its the most commonly agreed conspiracy in American history?  What the fuck but also typical.

Over the past decade, the most prominent voice on prosecutorial misconduct was probably that of Alex Kozinski, former Chief Judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. In a widely-quoted opinion in 2013, Judge Kozinski wrote that a major form of prosecutorial misconduct—concealing exculpatory evidence—had “reached epidemic proportions in recent years,” and that courts were partly responsible because they failed to take action against the offending prosecutors.

In a law review article two years later, Kozinski expanded at length on that critique, and observed that “there are disturbing indications that a non-trivial number of prosecutors—and sometimes entire prosecutorial offices—engage in misconduct that seriously undermines the fairness of criminal trials.” One of the main indications Judge Kozinski pointed to was the high number of exonerations since DNA exonerations began in 1989.

Prior research on official misconduct roughly tracks public attention. There has been a great deal of interest and writing about misconduct by police officers in their interactions with civilians on the street: corruption, violence, racial and ethnic prejudice.  That behavior, however abhorrent, is not the sort of misconduct we address here since it does not produce false evidence of guilt or conceal true evidence of innocence; and little of the writing on police misconduct analyzes systematic data on police behavior.

There is more systematic research on misconduct by prosecutors, mostly by journalists.

In 1999, Ken Armstrong and Maurice Possley reported in the Chicago Tribune that since 1963, at least 381 homicide convictions across the United States were reversed “because prosecutors concealed evidence suggesting innocence or presented evidence they knew to be false.”  Virtually no disciplinary actions were taken against the hundreds of prosecutors involved: one was fired but reinstated, another was suspended for 30 days. A later article in the same series identified 42 prosecutors in Chicago who obtained criminal convictions that were later reversed because of their misconduct, and who not only escaped any meaningful adverse consequences, but went on to become judges.    (oro: that is, zero prosecutors were charged with a crime)

In 2003, the Center for Public Integrity released a study of more than 11,000 state court criminal cases across the country since 1970 in which prosecutorial misconduct was alleged. Courts reduced sentences, dismissed charges, or vacated convictions in more than 2,000 of those cases, but only 44 prosecutors were the subject of state bar complaints, and of those, only two were disbarred and 12 were suspended.  (oro: that is, zero prosecutors were charged with a crime)

A study in the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette in 1998 found much the same thing for prosecutorial misconduct in federal criminal cases. The Department of Justice investigated only 9 percent of some 4,000 complaints of misconduct by its prosecutors over 20 years, and of those, only 4 percent were found to have merit—approximately 15 cases all told. Twelve years later, USA Today reported that little had changed. From 1997 to 2010, judges found misconduct by federal prosecutors in 201 cases, but only six were disciplined by bar authorities.   (oro: that is, zero prosecutors were charged with a crime)

The most detailed study on the subject was released by Kathleen Ridolfi and Maurice Possley of the Northern California Innocence Project in 2010. They collected all decisions in which courts found that state prosecutors in California had committed misconduct in trials that led to convictions, 707 cases from 1999 through 2007. Only 159 of those convictions were reversed—in the remainder, the misconduct was deemed “harmless”—and, despite a legal obligation that California courts report all such findings to the California State Bar, only six California prosecutors were disciplined in any manner for misconduct in a criminal case in that nine-year period.   (oro: that is, zero prosecutors were charged with a crime)

Taken together, the studies of prosecutorial misconduct reached two main conclusions:

(i) a substantial number of prosecutors commit misconduct in criminal cases, and
(ii) almost none are disciplined for it.

This is an important contribution to our understanding of the problem. The journalists who conducted them did an impressive job of searching through thousands of cases to locate the small minority in which courts found that misconduct had occurred, and then determining whether the prosecutors involved were sanctioned.

These studies, of course, have limitations. The central one is that they are all based on official findings that misconduct occurred, usually in written opinions by judges (or in the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette study, internal Department of Justice memoranda). Most criminal cases, with or without misconduct, do not produce written court opinions; in fact, most convictions based on guilty pleas leave virtually no substantive records at all. In cases that do include court opinions, misconduct is often overlooked by lawyers and judges alike because nobody knew about it at the time. For other convictions, valid claims of prosecutorial misconduct are raised but rejected by courts because critical evidence to prove those claims has not yet come to light. We see that regularly in the records of cases that eventually do produce exonerations—and then, even when misconduct is an undisputed fact, the case may simply be dismissed with no formal finding.
Let's note that 90% of criminal cases in the US are pled guilty and never go to trial.  Only 1/5th of the "not guiltys" are convicted so all of this misconduct only comes to light regarding 2% of criminal cases. 

In short, if we locked up every prosecutor who faked evidence to get a conviction, we'd have to put the majority of our judges and DAs in jail- our legal system would collapse.


Wylted
Wylted's avatar
Debates: 34
Posts: 5,754
3
4
11
Wylted's avatar
Wylted
3
4
11
-->
@oromagi
In short, if we locked up every prosecutor who faked evidence to get a conviction, we'd have to put the majority of our judges and DAs in jail- our legal system would collapse.
Fine by me. Corrupt officials are more dangerous than street thugs. 

I don't think we have a shortage of lawyers ready to step in either, quite the opposite.


The first conspiracy you've ever expressed skepticism about in your entire life and its the most commonly agreed conspiracy in American history?  What the fuck but also typical.

I'm not expressing skepticism here. If they admitted to faking evidence that put a man in prison. They should go to prison. God knows how many people they did it too.

Other than that, you are preaching to the choir about the justice system. 

oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@Wylted

Trump still wants to execute the Central Park Five even after they've been exonerated
They were literally part of the mob that did the raping

that's false.

WIKIPEDIA:
Based on interviews and other evidence, the team believed that Reyes had acted alone: The rape appeared to have taken place in the North Woods area after the main body of the thirty teenagers had moved well to the south, and the timeline reconstruction of events made it unlikely that he was joined by any of the defendants. In addition, Reyes was not known to have been associated with any of the six indicted defendants. He lived at 102nd Street, in what locals considered another neighborhood. None of the six defendants in the rape mentioned him by name in association with the rape.

and random acts of violence. They are equally as guilty. This whole ideal they were innocent is ridiculous.  I don't think anyone ever thought they could pinpoint exactly who in the mob  did what specifically, only that they were a part of the violent mob and aided it. Everyone in that mob should have served time. The 5 have probably spent enough time in prison to be changed people, but were certainly a danger to society.
Interesting.  We should apply the same principle to the Jan 6th sedition.   They were a much larger gang attacking random people in a public space. 
  • The Central Park 5 injured 4, knocked 2 unconscious. 
  • The Trump 3000 killed 4,  injured  138 officers (73 Capitol Police and 65 Metropolitan Police), at least 5 beaten unconscious, at least 15 were admitted to hospital.  The last cop got out of the hospital in May.  At least 4 more police present that day suicided in the weeks immediately following.

So, objectively. Trump's 3000 were a much more violent gang of thugs than the Central Park Five's 32 teens.  Trump's 3000 were all adults while  only one of the CP5 32 were over 18 yrs old and the majority were 14 years old.   The principle of equal justice demands that Trump's 3000 receive harsher punishments than the CP5 who all served 6-13 years in prison.  Agreed?

random acts of violence.
check

They are equally as guilty. This whole ideal they were innocent is ridiculous. 
check.  The CP5 were all forced to confess to rape and exculpatory DNA evidence was deliberately concealed.  The Trump 3000 literally streamed their wilding live on Facebook.  We can be far more confident regarding the collective guilt of all the seditionists.

I don't think anyone ever thought they could pinpoint exactly who in the mob  did what specifically, only that they were a part of the violent mob and aided it. Everyone in that mob should have served time.  
Okay, let's agree that everyone of those anti-American motherfuckers should do at least six years hard time.

The [3000 should] probably spen[d] enough time in prison to be[come] changed people, but were certainly a danger to society.
Equal justice demands we should agree to this much.



dfss9788
dfss9788's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 152
1
2
2
dfss9788's avatar
dfss9788
1
2
2
-->
@RationalMadman

Tell me right now that the way she was treated in her trial and lack of representation she had would have happened if she were a Caucasian American.

Do not look '.co.uk' and tell me she was British, read the article. It was a British lawyer that saved her. That is irrelevant to the piece, I am just clarifying before people try to correct me on this. The British legal system also has needed a lot of work pushed forward by BLM protests and campaigns in order to improve, it's just further along the way, I believe.



The other side of the story is not represented in this article. There is not even a statement to the effect that the journalist attempted to contact the prosecuting attorney for comment, nor does there appear to have been any investigation in to legal record. That a not guilty verdict in a retrial was characterized as an "exoneration" strikes me as a bit misleading. Such a verdict means merely that a jury found there was reasonable doubt as to the defendant's guilt. Smells like fake news to me.
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
-->
@dfss9788
LOoK aT yOu, dfss, the one to go 'huh a dumb jury said it, it doesn't matter' when a woman was going to be literally killed and trapped in a cell losing several years of her life branded as a baby killer because of a misinformed, potentially racist all-white jury and the verdict they gave her.

What is most unforgivable is that you sit there on some fucking high horse about hearing the other side when that's the very thing they never did to her in the first place. Fuck the other side, they're rich and powerful enough to get their side heard of they had an iota of defense worth publishing.
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 26,113
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
because of a misinformed, potentially racist all-white jury and the verdict they gave her.

Not nearly as misinformed as the readers of the article with zero info from the other side of the story.

Discipulus_Didicit
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 5,758
3
4
10
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Discipulus_Didicit
3
4
10
-->
@RationalMadman
If an innocent person was released after being falsely convicted then I would agree that is a good result.

Did BLM influence this result?
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
Over the course of many years, they have not only helped others in this exact way but tried time and time again to open people's eyes to the irrefutable systemic racism present in both society, the general law enforcement, corporations at the higher ranks and the judicial courtroom.

Whenever I find a genuine BLM opposer, I have found they tend to resort to denying systemic racism to be real and pretend shit like what I linked to in that article happened to caucasians just as much.

That case encapsulates so many different areas of systemic racism (including, beyond law enforcement, how the mother was presumed guilty even by the witnesses who saw her not murder her own infant) and happened to be a case I think not many have gotten to know well. A lot of other cases where there were multiple layers of racism (such as the Central Park Five and many others, such as Stephen Lawrence in UK) have both as accused perpetrators and victims seen both sides of systemic racism in law enforcement.

Blacks are (or were until very recently though I'm skeptical it's been eradicated) liberally presumed guilty based on very little evidence and alternatively were held to extreme skepticism when it came to 'my word against theirs' when/if the black was the victim. Stephen Lawrence was murdered yet to convict the hate crime perpetrators took so much time because the cops refused to believe this wasn't a gang war or drug deal gone wrong and went so far as to accuse the parents of potentially lying about Stephen's hobbies and activities, when in fact he was simply beaten up by strangers for being black in the wrong place and at the wrong time.