Monday, April 28, 2008

"We know about the Blue Wall of Silence that exists within the NYPD." --Every1 of Us (as embodied by Jessica Sanclemente dn2008-0428 @26:10-15)

[[[(Absolute Supremacy for White Patriarchy)/NO 1'S LAND, Our CommonWeal/// (((Absolute Subjugation)))]]]

GROOVALUJAH, SISTER! Listen to Jessica Sanclemente: from c.25:35 on, she's talking purely in terms of feudalism:

  • involving decisions made between mostly elite white men
  • involving relations of lords to vassals, serfs
  • in a militaristic context
  • regarding land
  • esp. the conversion of our Commonweal into private property
  • under the color of law: perverting legal rights and powers of life, imprisonment, and death to private gain

JESSICA SANCLEMENTE: Can I also just add onto that? Because I think it’s very important—


JESSICA SANCLEMENTE: —to highlight that the response that the judge had about how he came down with his decision was not only very eyebrow-raising, definitely, and should be, because it shows that there is a sense of some sort of race issues, there’s also some class issues, about where the location was, that maybe that was something to be thinking about, and also bringing up the witnesses’ rap sheets. I mean, this shows that this city is not willing to defend people of color nor people who are shot down by fifty bullets by police officers, regardless of their color or not. We know about the blue wall of silence that exists within the NYPD. And to think that this continues to happen and judges in this city are not willing to prosecute shows that there is not only a level of some—there’s a serious division within the city. We’re getting priced out continuously—poor people are being pushed out through many means, and one of them is being killed by the NYPD—and feeling as if we’re constantly being under some sort of oppressive iron fist, and this isn’t right.

SANFORD RUBINSTEIN: Let me add something to that also. Reverend Sharpton pointed out that in the judge’s decision, the judge talked about factors that influenced his decision. One was the criminal record. And Joe Guzman, who had a criminal record, said on the witness stand, “My criminal record wasn’t on my forehead the night that happened. The police officers didn’t even know.” But that shouldn’t matter. When you charge a jury in a criminal case, a criminal record of what happened in the past shouldn’t matter in this case and should not really be considered.

In addition, there was a comment about the demeanor of the witness. Demeanor of witnesses? That is something that is, in this case, the demeanor of Joe Guzman. Does that mean that if someone has an attitude, the police—and I’m not saying that he even had an attitude, but if someone’s attitude results in being shot sixteen times—he was shot sixteen times! Four bullets remain in his body. He was shot six times in his back as he was trying to crawl out of this car!

No comments: