This Week in Police Violence

warrenellis:

"Nearly all of the highest-profile domestic terrorism plots in the United States since 9/11 featured the "direct involvement" of government agents or informants, a new report says."

vicenews:

Baby pictures and explicit webcam shots are among the “incidental” mass surveillance content that the NSA is capturing — and keeping.

"“The jury has the right to judge both the law as well as the fact in controversy.” And it remains entirely legal for a jury to acquit, regardless of the evidence, as a means of resisting unjust laws and sentencing. Juries have nullified to protest injustices throughout American history—in defense of the Boston Tea Party, against the Fugitive Slave Act, against Prohibition.

Despite this proud tradition, nullification has been a well-kept secret since 1895, when the Supreme Court ruled that while juries had the right to nullify, judges were not required to inform them of this power. “

Nullification: Jurors’ Secret Weapon Against Harsh Sentencing | The Nation

Whenever you see someone posting on social media about having jury duty, send them information on juror nullification. Its a very important right we have that can be used to resist the police state and the prison industrial complex.

(via audaciaray)

Unlike inmates convicted of crimes, who often participate in prison work programs and forfeit their rights to many wage protections, these immigrants are civil detainees placed in holding centers, most of them awaiting hearings to determine their legal status. Roughly half of the people who appear before immigration courts are ultimately permitted to stay in the United States — often because they were here legally, because they made a compelling humanitarian argument to a judge or because federal authorities decided not to pursue the case.

“I went from making $15 an hour as a chef to $1 a day in the kitchen in lockup,” said Pedro Guzmán, 34, who had worked for restaurants in California, Minnesota and North Carolina before he was picked up and held for about 19 months, mostly at Stewart Detention Center in Lumpkin, Ga. “And I was in the country legally.”

As people of color, many non-profit leaders used their credibility in communities of color to sell police and media instigated rumors demonizing ‘white anarchist outside agitators’ as responsible for the riots. By following this narrative, in one move they stripped rebellious youth of their agency and ignored the existence of non-white anarchists and militants.
Enemies on the Left (via ninjabikeslut)
Don’t get arrested because police interrogation sucks

lolmythesis:

Psychology and Legal Studies, Claremont McKenna College

Cops kinda suck at believing rape victims

lolmythesis:

Women’s Studies, Florida International University

"Placing Blame: The Effect of Rape Myths on the Progression of Acquaintance Rape Cases through the U.S. Legal System and Possible Solutions."

guardian:

The underground acrobats who flip, somersault and pole-dance among New York City subway riders are drawing a new audience — police officers.
NYPD is cracking down on  subway showmen who use trains as moving stages for impromptu — and illegal — pass-the-hat performances. 
More than 240 people have been arrested on misdemeanors related to acrobatics so far this year, compared with fewer than 40 at this time a year ago. Full story here
Photo: Bebeto Matthews/AP

guardian:

The underground acrobats who flip, somersault and pole-dance among New York City subway riders are drawing a new audience — police officers.

NYPD is cracking down on  subway showmen who use trains as moving stages for impromptu — and illegal — pass-the-hat performances.

More than 240 people have been arrested on misdemeanors related to acrobatics so far this year, compared with fewer than 40 at this time a year ago. Full story here

Photo: Bebeto Matthews/AP

cyderpunk:

vivianvivisection:

sinidentidades:

Massachusetts SWAT teams claim they’re private companies and don’t have to tell you anything
After the ACLU sent open records requests as part of its investigative report on police militarization, SWAT teams in Massachusetts claimed they were exempt because they were private corporations.
Some SWAT teams in the state operate as law enforcement councils (LECs) which are funded by several police departments and overseen by an executive board largely made up of local police chiefs.
Member police departments pay annual membership dues to the LECs which share technology and oversee crime scene investigators or other specialists.
Some of these LECs have also incorporated 501(c)(3) organizations, which they say exempts them from open records requests.
“Let’s be clear,” wrote Radley Balko for The Washington Post. “These agencies oversee police activities. They employ cops who carry guns, wear badges, collect paychecks provided by taxpayers and have the power to detain, arrest, injure, and kill. They operate SWAT teams, which conduct raids on private residences. And yet they say that because they’ve incorporated, they’re immune to Massachusetts open records laws. The state’s residents aren’t permitted to know how often the SWAT teams are used, what they’re used for, what sort of training they get or who they’re primarily used against.”
The ACLU reported earlier this week that about 240 of the 351 police departments in Massachusetts belong to an LEC, which are set up as corporations but are funded by local and federal taxpayer funds.
“Police departments and regional SWAT teams are public institutions, working with public money, meant to protect and serve the public’s interest,” the ACLU said in its report. “If these institutions do not maintain and make public comprehensive and comprehensible documents pertaining to their operations and tactics, the people cannot judge whether officials are acting appropriately or make needed policy changes when problems arise.”
The ACLU sued the North Eastern Massachusetts Law Enforcement Council, which has about 50 member agencies, saying the LEC used government grants and taxpayer funds to purchase its equipment.
“NEMLEC can’t have it both ways,” said ACLU attorney Jessie Rossman. “Either it is a public entity subject to public records laws, or what it is doing is illegal.”
The ACLU survey found that only 7% of SWAT missions involved incidents they were originally designed to handle – such as hostage situations or shootings – while 62% of their mission involved drug searches.

ah yes, capitalism

how can they be a private company and then invade people’s houses tho…..

cyderpunk:

vivianvivisection:

sinidentidades:

Massachusetts SWAT teams claim they’re private companies and don’t have to tell you anything

After the ACLU sent open records requests as part of its investigative report on police militarization, SWAT teams in Massachusetts claimed they were exempt because they were private corporations.

Some SWAT teams in the state operate as law enforcement councils (LECs) which are funded by several police departments and overseen by an executive board largely made up of local police chiefs.

Member police departments pay annual membership dues to the LECs which share technology and oversee crime scene investigators or other specialists.

Some of these LECs have also incorporated 501(c)(3) organizations, which they say exempts them from open records requests.

“Let’s be clear,” wrote Radley Balko for The Washington Post. “These agencies oversee police activities. They employ cops who carry guns, wear badges, collect paychecks provided by taxpayers and have the power to detain, arrest, injure, and kill. They operate SWAT teams, which conduct raids on private residences. And yet they say that because they’ve incorporated, they’re immune to Massachusetts open records laws. The state’s residents aren’t permitted to know how often the SWAT teams are used, what they’re used for, what sort of training they get or who they’re primarily used against.”

The ACLU reported earlier this week that about 240 of the 351 police departments in Massachusetts belong to an LEC, which are set up as corporations but are funded by local and federal taxpayer funds.

“Police departments and regional SWAT teams are public institutions, working with public money, meant to protect and serve the public’s interest,” the ACLU said in its report. “If these institutions do not maintain and make public comprehensive and comprehensible documents pertaining to their operations and tactics, the people cannot judge whether officials are acting appropriately or make needed policy changes when problems arise.”

The ACLU sued the North Eastern Massachusetts Law Enforcement Council, which has about 50 member agencies, saying the LEC used government grants and taxpayer funds to purchase its equipment.

“NEMLEC can’t have it both ways,” said ACLU attorney Jessie Rossman. “Either it is a public entity subject to public records laws, or what it is doing is illegal.”

The ACLU survey found that only 7% of SWAT missions involved incidents they were originally designed to handle – such as hostage situations or shootings – while 62% of their mission involved drug searches.

ah yes, capitalism

how can they be a private company and then invade people’s houses tho…..

cultureofresistance:

sinidentidades:

Albuquerque police department infiltrates, films anti-police brutality protest with undercover cop who killed someone

The Albuquerque Police Department insisted that it sent an undercover officer who shot someone to infiltrate and film protests against deadly force in order to ensure the safety of demonstrators.

Last Saturday, protesters gathered at Roosevelt Park for a mock trial of Police Chief Gorden Eden because officers had shot at least 36 people since 2010, killing 26.

While reporting on the mock trial, KRQE observed an undercover officer posing as a protester, and filming other demonstrators. The station noted that the officer “wore a tie-dyed T-shirt, long hair brushed back out of his eyes, dark sunglasses and a lengthy, unkempt beard.”

Albuquerque Police Department spokesperson Daren DeAguero told KRQE the officer was recording the mock trial to “ensure [the protesters’] safety and the safety of the community.”

But event organizer Sayrah Namaste said that the explanation just didn’t “make sense.”

“I don’t understand how protecting us is infiltrating us,” Namaste pointed out. “We are peaceful, we were lawful, there was no issue with the people who were marching today, so why were they surveilling us? That doesn’t make sense.”

KRQE declined to identify the officer, but reported he had shot 20-year-old Domonick Solis-Mora in the stomach during a 2010 drug sting.

“If that is true, that someone who has [shot] a member of our community, and that’s what we were talking about today, that is very upsetting for people to hear that,” Namaste remarked. “There’s no need for that.”

She said organizers had worked with the Albuquerque Police Department for months while planning the event, so infiltrating the protest should not have been necessary.

“It’s very upsetting when we know that today, we exercised our right to peacefully assemble, and we were in constant contact with our police liaison with APD,” Namaste insisted. “So, this is inappropriate.”

“We don’t know what the APD is doing,” she added. “If they’re undercover, we don’t know. There isn’t any need. Nothing we’re doing is illegal … This is inappropriate that they would be putting us under surveillance because we were peaceful and we have the right to assemble. And they were aware that we were doing this. We were in communication with them.”

The name of the officer who shot Domonik Mora-Solis is Sergeant Jason Peck, according to the DA report on the shooting. Policecomplaints.info says this is his photo, though I’d like another source on that: