FREDDIE GRAY’S DEATH RULED A HOMICIDE!

FREDDIE GRAY’S DEATH RULED A HOMICIDE!

Parallel to the Baltimore Riot of 1968, Black Baltimore-ans find themselves at the disturbing end of the riot stick. The immediate cause of the “revolt” was the April 4th assassination of the civil rights leader Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. But has race relations improved in the United States?

Once again the city of Baltimore has been placed on lock-down and the National Guard has been called in to restore the peace. But this isn’t a Baltimore problem, this is a problem facing the nation. Police brutality is real and has to be irradiated before it causes this country to become unraveled. Everyone is so quick to rush to judge the effect rather than INVESTIGATING the cause. This story reminds me of the demonstrators, some disguised as American Indians, destroyed an entire shipment of tea sent by the East Indian Company, in defiance of the Tea Act of May 10, 1773. They boarded the ships and threw the chests of tea into Boston Harbor, ruining the tea. Sounds familiar?

So then the question remains, “Why is it so incomprehensible to understand the reaction of a group of people “protesting” for justice?” Protest is a statement or “ACTION” expressing a disapproval. Plain and simple! When a cat is backed into a corner, you can predict the outcome. The bottom line is it’s hard for people to voluntarily put hands behind their backs only to be assaulted, shot, beaten and murdered in cold blood. So how does a black father convince his son to trust a system that tolerates police brutality? If your hair is on fire, you are going to act like your hair is on fire. The CORE OF THE SITUATION IS RAGE!

Gray, 25, was taken into police custody in Baltimore April 12 and sustained a spinal injury during that time requiring medical attention. He went into a coma several days later and died a week after his apprehension. Police have never said why they took him into custody, noting only that he ran from officers, and they have not publicly explained how Gray received the spinal injury.

Officers Caesar Goodson Jr., (top left) William Porter (top center), Edward Nero (below left) and Garrett Miller (below center), Lt. Brian Rice (top right), and Sgt. Alicia Miller (below right) were arrested and charged in Gray’s death. WE QUESTION THE PROTESTER’S MOTIVES AND FAIL TO INVESTIGATE THE OFFICERS ACTS. CAUSE AND EFFECT!

A SEA OF FACES/ INJUSTICE IS REAL IN AMERICA

 

THESE LIVES MATTER

Fortunately, there is a light at the end of the tunnel. Black women have been instrumental in the fight on injustice against the Black man in America. Sojourner Truth, Harriet Tubman, Rosa Parks, Daisy Bates, Gwendolyn Brooks, Toni Morrison and now another sister Marilyn Mosby has refused to give her seat up on the bus.

Marilyn Mosby, Baltimore City State’s Attorney Marilyn Mosby announced charges against six police officers implicated in the death of a 25-year-old black Baltimore resident named Freddie Gray. Mosby’s handling of the high-profile case — and the strong statement she made at the press conference to announce it — has set the stage for her to become a political powerhouse, with some on Twitter already predicting she’ll one day be president (we won’t go that far).

I absolutely love my BLACK SISTERS and everything they have done for their race and mankind  as a whole. It has been said, “If God created anything greater than a women, he kept it for himself.”

This is your man Maestro and I’m out.

WHAT IS THE FUNCTION OF A GRAND JURY?

1. WHAT IS THE FUNCTION OF A GRAND JURY?

   It’s easy for me to sit here in the comfort of my home and weigh in on the situation unfolding in Ferguson. First and foremost we want to take this moment to send a shot out to the parents of Reginald Brown. It is a tragedy when we are still plagued with ignorance and racism at this day and age. What we plan to do is touch on a few topics which are in dire need of explanations. Lets look closely at what goes into a GRAND JURY and what its function is. We also are going to define what “DEADLY FORCE” AND WHY WE SHOULD BE CONCERNED ABOUT THE TRACKING LANGUAGE OF IT’S MEANING RATHER THAN THE ACTIONS TAKEN BY BIAS POLICE OFFICERS.

   

   Justice or Just Us?

   GRAND JURY

   The purpose of the grand jury is not to determine guilt or innocence, but to decide whether there is probable cause to prosecute someone for a felony crime. The grand jury operates in secrecy and the normal rules of evidence do not apply. The prosecutor runs the proceedings and no judge is present.

             –  ORIGIN AND HISTORY OF THE GRAND JURY

   The grand jury has a long and honorable tradition. It was recognized in the Magna Carta, the first English constitutional document, which King John granted in 1215 at the demand of his subjects. The first English grand jury consisted of twelve men selected from the knights or other freemen, who were summoned to inquire into crimes alleged to have been committed in their local community. Thus, grand jurors originally functioned as accusers or witnesses, rather than as judges.

   Over the years, the hallmarks of our modern grand jury developed in England. For example, grand jury proceedings became secret, and the grand jury became independent of the Crown. As a result, a grand jury is able to vote an indictment or refuse to do so, as it deems proper, without regard to the recommendations of judge, prosecutor, or any other person. This independence from the will of the government was achieved only after a long hard fight. It can best be illustrated by the celebrated English case involving the Earl of  Shaftasbury, who, in 1681, fell under the suspicion of the Crown. Displeased with him, the Crown presented to the grand jury a proposed bill of indictment for high treason and recommended that it be voted and returned. After hearing the witnesses, the grand jury voted against the bill of indictment and returned it to the King,
   holding that it was not true.

               –  A GRAND JURY’S TASK

   The Grand Jury’s Tasks As stated above, the federal grand jury’s function is to determine whether a person shall be tried for a serious federal crime alleged to have been committed within the district where it sits. Matters may be brought to its attention in three ways:

             (1) by the United States Attorney or an Assistant United States Attorney;
   (2) by the court that impaneled it; and
   (3) from the personal knowledge of a member of the grand jury or from matters properly brought to a          member’s personal attention. In all these cases, the grand jury must hear evidence before taking action.

   

   What Is The Function Of A Grand Jury?

   After it has received evidence against a person, the grand jury must decide whether the evidence presented justifies an indictment, or “true bill,” which is the formal criminal charge returned by the grand jury. Upon the indictment’s being filed in court, the person accused must either plead guilty or nolo contendere or stand trial.
   If the evidence does not persuade the grand jury that there is probable cause to believe the person committed a
   crime, the grand jury will vote a “no bill,” or “not a true bill.” When this occurs, the person is not required to
   plead to a criminal charge, and no trial is required.

   DEADLY FORCE

   An amount of force that is likely to cause either serious bodily injury or death to another person.

   Police officers may use deadly force in specific circumstances when they are trying to enforce the law. Private citizens may use deadly force in certain circumstances in SELF DEFENSE. The rules governing the use of deadly force for police officers are different from those for citizens.

   During the twelfth century, the COMMON LAW allowed the police to use deadly force if they needed it to capture a felony suspect, regardless of the circumstances. At that time, felonies were not as common as they are now and were usually punishable by death. Also, law officers had a more difficult time capturing suspects because they did not have the technology and weaponry that are present in today’s world. In modern times, the courts have restricted the use of deadly force to certain, dangerous situations.

   In police jargon, deadly force is also referred to as shoot to kill. The Supreme Court has ruled that, depending on the circumstances, if an offender resists arrest, police officers may use as much force as is reasonably required to overcome the resistance. Whether the force is reasonable is determined by the judgment of a reasonable officer at the scene, rather than by hindsight. Because police officers can find themselves in dangerous or rapidly changing situations where split second decisions are necessary, the judgment of someone at the scene is vital when looking back at the actions of a police officer.

   The Supreme Court has defined the “objective reasonableness” standard as a balance between the rights of the person being arrested and the government interests that allow the use of force. The FOURTH AMENDMENT protects U.S. citizens from unreasonable searches and seizures, the category into which an arrest falls. The Supreme Court has said that a SEARCH AND SEIZURE is reasonable if it is based on PROBABLE CAUSE and if it does not unreasonably intrude on the rights and privacy of the individual. This standard does not question a police officer’s intent or motivation for using deadly force during an arrest; it only looks at the situation as it has happened.

   For deadly force to be constitutional when an arrest is taking place, it must be the reasonable choice under all the circumstances at the time.Therefore, deadly force should be looked at as an option that is used when it is believed that no other action will succeed. The MODEL PENAL CODE, although not adopted in all states, restricts police action regarding deadly force. According to the code, officers should not use deadly force unless the action will not endanger innocent bystanders, the suspect used deadly force in committing the crime, or the officers believe a delay in arrest may result in injury or death to other people.

   Circumstances that are taken into consideration are the severity of the offense, how much of a threat the suspect poses, and the  to resist or flee the police officer. When arresting someone for a misdemeanor, the police have the right to shoot the alleged offender only in self-defense. If an officer shoots a suspect accused of a misdemeanor for a reason other than self-defense, the officer can be held liable for criminal charges and damages for injuries to the suspect. This standard was demonstrated in the Iowa case of Klinkel v. Saddler,211 Iowa 368, 233 N.W. 538 (1930), where a sheriff faced a WRONGFUL DEATH lawsuit because he had killed a misdemeanor suspect during an arrest. The sheriff said he had used deadly force to defend himself, and the court ruled in his favor.

   I don’t know how many times we have to revisit this situation and think for one moment it’s going to change itself. The laws in this country are written in a way that it always protects the hierarchy. It’s difficult to bring a civil action against individual operating behind the corporate veil, let alone mount a defense against an over zealous cop once he has set his mind a subject is a “threat”.  The laws in this country are too ambiguous and typically affect the poorest in society. It’s a damn shame a persons liberty rest in his or her ability to afford an attorney to represent them once the government has brought up charges against them. I realize the constitution of the United States guarantees each citizens an attorney in criminal cases. But when has it been customary for an employee to fight against the hand that feeds them? This is Maestro man…Amplify the Mumble!

FERGUSON, CURFEW CONTINUES FOR THE SECOND DAY AS RACIAL TENSION CONTINUES TO MOUNT

Ferguson, Mo– curfew continues for the second day. People all over the world eyes are on the Racial tension building in

POLICE SHOT THIS UNARMED TEENAGER 6 TIMES

Ferguson MO. Riot police have taken to the streets of Ferguson to control protesters from taking their plight to the streets. This is crazy, I can’t keep up with the carnage on the streets. We have to take a look at the situation here in America and reconsider our position as leaders in the international community. Lets face it, WHITE police officers are at a point where they feel as though taking the life of a BLACK man is the thing to do. The government and other officials protect them when they act outside the constitution of their authority.

Rather than making violators accountable (rogue police) for their actions, police officer’s who take the lives of innocent people are generally placed on desk duty and in some cases placed on administrative leave…with pay. Of course given the circumstances one can’t help but empathize with the victims and the families who lose loved ones at the hand of  law enforcement officials who have sworn to protect and serve the citizens in their communities.  It is safe to say when individuals are protesting their emotions get involved and due to the fact these unprovoked acts keep recurring. Which has a lot to do with  the demonstrators getting out of hand. The media keeps saying that the individuals who are responsible for violence escalating on the streets in Ferguson.

An autopsy report demonstrates there were 6 shots fired into the body of an armed teenager Michael Brown. A second autopsy is

FACES DRIVEN TO HATE

expected to be performed to investigate the matter closer. In all actuality, the second autopsy was ordered to give public and local officials more time to make up excuses for not taking the murdering cop into custody. If you take a look at the entry point of the gun shots, the murdering cop aimed center mass with the intent to kill and not to control the suspect. Several reports state the teenager was unarmed and the heavy handed cop acted with malice intent. I typically try to report the news and stay neutral, but these escalating events are making it extremely hard to exercise patience. INJUSTICE AND CIVIL UNREST GO HAND-N-HAND! How do you expect civility when law officials blatantly disregard the rule of law.

In retrospect, the colonist here in North America felt the British rule was unjust and that there was no representation. Protesters raised up arms against the British and after bloodshed and thousands of innocent lives being caught in the cross fire–the United States were formed. The Declaration of Independence states that our government derives its just – or lawful – powers from the “consent of the governed.” The underlying principle implied in the Declaration was that “We the People” are the true and rightful government of the United States, and as Abraham Lincoln declared in his Gettysburg Address, “government of the people by the people and for the

EVERY BLACK COMMENTATOR MAKES EXCUSES FOR COPS

people shall not perish from this earth.” Elected and appointed officials are managers selected to work on our behalf in order to accomplish our collective will. We do not, however, elect them to dictate what our will is, or should be.

However, in the event that our government becomes one consisting of rulers rather than representatives, our government determined over 200 years ago what our course of action should be.

MARSHAL LAW CONTINUES TO RESONATE ACROSS THE UNION

Martial law occurs when the military or militarized law enforcement replaces civilian authorities in order to impose military rule during an emergency. Civil liberties are suspended. In the United States, a pivot point that signals  martial law is the suspension of habeas corpus – the right to a hearing on whether an imprisonment is lawful. In practice, habeas corpus means a person cannot be imprisoned without legitimate charges and due process. The U.S. Constitution recognizes the suspension of habeas corpus as an identifying feature of martial law in Article I, Section 9, “The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it.”

Ever since Obama took over the office of the President, there have been a number of people claiming that he was so

MILITARY ON THE STREETS “MARSHAL LAW”

 

interested in power, they could really see him taking steps to ensure that he never had to give it up. Of course, in the past, this kind of talk has been more or less confined to conspiracy theorists and others that mainstream society might consider to be, let’s just say, less than credible.

Now we already know that Obama has signed an executive order giving him the right to declare martial law any time he wants. This is a significant sign that he thinks there might be a good reason for him to need that authority. Say what you want, Obama is at least able to realize the signs of the times. He sees that the Republicans are very likely to capture the Senate, which would give them full control over both houses of Congress. This would put Obama in a very dangerous situation.

Now we already know that Obama has signed an executive order giving him the right to declare martial law any time he wants. This is a significant sign that he thinks there might be a good reason for him to need that authority. Say what you want, Obama is at least able to realize the signs of the times. He sees that the Republicans are very likely to capture the Senate, which would give them full control over both houses of Congress. This would put Obama in a very dangerous situation.

Once this happens, the question then becomes what do the Republicans do with that advantage? It is certainly possible that impeachment proceedings could be started. If this goes to its end, there is also the possibility that Obama could even be tried as a traitor to the USA. It is certainly obvious that he has no love lost for America and its traditional values and principles.

There are a number of people that have talked about this, even some within the government. Obama, being the prideful man and committed liberal that his, could simply not afford to let such a thing stop his extreme agenda. Personally, I think he feels as if no one else can accomplish or be trusted to push his agenda through and it doesn’t matter how many people oppose him…

WHEN MARSHAL LAW IS DECLARED, WHO WILL BE LEFT TO PROTECT AND SERVE?

So what does the government stand to gain by declaring Marshal Law on its own citizens? After the coming economic financial collapse, a state of world-wide martial law will be declared. Considering the current events which are in direct alignment with documented plans for totalitarian one-world government, (white paper plans published by the Tri-Lateral Commission, Council on Foreign Relations, and Club of Rome), martial law will be imposed without official dissent upon the various countries of the world. Martial law is military rule imposed upon civilian populations in a time of war or during a (sic) “State of Emergency”. The following elements can be expected to occur once the t.v. news anchors tell people not to panic, but that a State of Emergency has been declared due to the crash, and a (sic) temporary state of martial law has been declared, which will be rescinded once the State of Emergency has passed.
What the news people won’t tell you is that given the history of martial law, the suspension of such a draconian state is far more difficult to achieve than its original imposition…

1. CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS ARE ENDED-Under martial law, the U.S. Constitution is suspended and the citizens immediately lose all the protections, safeguards, and human rights guaranteed by that document. The citizens also lose every rights and privileges granted under The Bill of Rights. The constitutions of other countries will likewise be suspended with similar conditions imposed upon the citizens of those other countries.

2. CURFEW ENFORCEMENT-Anyone caught outside after curfew can be shot dead. There are no exceptions for personal emergencies unless of course, these people have some sort of official written permission or are in possession of other material which gives them a “Get Out Of Jail Free” card.

3. WRIT OF HABEUS CORPUS SUSPENDED-This means that soldiers can bust into your house, or arrest you on the street without warrants, and can throw you into prison without explanation or access to legal counsel. They can hold you there for months, even years, since there are no time limits imposed on how long you can be imprisoned.

4. PERSONAL FIREARMS WILL BE SEIZED-Armed forces can invade your home and force you to surrender any weapons you have, regardless of your constitutional right or need to bear arms for your self-defense. If you refuse, you could be shot dead in your living room, and all your possessions seized. If you’re lucky, you might just get Tasered, or butt-ended with an AK-47, to eventually wake up in a Federal Emergency Management Agency (F.E.M.A.) Detention Center with a Prison Identification Number which you will go by as a “name” instead of your old name, the one on your birth certificate.

5. PERSONAL PROPERTY CAN BE SEIZED-This means that under the excuse of “requisitioning”, soldiers can kick you out of your home, and seize both your home, all the contents inside that home, as well as any vehicles, or other items you have on your grounds. They also can claim the actual real estate of the acreage as well. If you refuse or resist in some way well….I guess you can fill in the blanks or use your imagination.