The 2020 George Floyd/BLM/Police Brutality Protests Discussion Thread


In 2020, Brownback v. King became the first case in IJ’s Project on Immunity and Accountability argued before the United States Supreme Court. IJ is now asking the Supreme Court to hear the case for a second time and strike down a “tort immunity” the government convinced the lower courts to adopt to shield government officials—like members of police task forces—from constitutional accountability.

James King’s case began more than eight years ago when members of a task force misidentified and brutally beat him. King sued the officers, and the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals denied them qualified immunity. Before the case could proceed to a jury, however, the federal government asked the Supreme Court to take the case and recognize an immunity under a statute called the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA). Under this tort immunity, if a victim of federal abuse cannot sue the federal government for a state tort—like assault, battery, false arrest, etc.—he cannot hold the government’s employee liable for a constitutional violation either. This, even though state torts and constitutional claims have different elements and are designed to remedy different rights.

The Supreme Court heard the case but, at IJ’s urging, refused to recognize the new immunity requested by the government. Instead, the high court asked the Sixth Circuit to decide the issue first. Rather than seriously engaging with the issue, as the Supreme Court asked, the Sixth Circuit unthinkingly applied outdated caselaw, becoming the sixth federal appeals court to do so. Now, IJ is asking the Supreme Court to weigh in and deny the government one of its many tools to avoid the Constitution.
 




"You crooked cops need to stop it."

I guarantee fatty here who took a real good look at that cake is exactly the sort to shoot a fleeing individual in the back instead of giving chase because running is hard.

Screenshot-20230324-180802-Samsung-Internet.jpg


Are low physical fitness standards a reflection of low recruitment and retention?
 
Last edited:
Ohh man, that song was so bad, it's freaking hilarious. :lol:

Good, humiliate those 'officers'. Afroman should counter sue and intentionally turn it into a media circus to heap more humiliation on these cops.
 
Not only do law enforcement officers operating in their capacity as public servants not have any expectation of privacy whatsoever, documenting law enforcement officers operating in their capacity as public servants and public exhibition of that documentation is explicitly protected in constitutional jurisprudence barring exceptional circumstances not applicable here. They aren't private actors as documented and so they have no legal claim as private actors, even if that is their claim. Also mockery and humiliation aren't unprotected in the context of defamation (of which they have no claim anyway as stated above), and while "loss of reputation" may be a requirement for a defamation claim, substantive falsehood is another requirement that's not met here. It's more likely to be the case that their reputation as crooked is actually affirmed.

Afroman may sue. It's certainly not the only basis for a counter, but Ohio unfortunately has no anti-SLAPP statute.

Because the officers are bringing their suit privately, Qualified Immunity also isn't a possibility barring egregious expansion of the doctrine, which...especially given ideological capture in the judicial system...sadly isn't completely ruled out.
 


I don't know why this isn't on the radar of 2nd amendment enthusiasts. It is a real encroachment to the right to self-defense and to bear arms if doing so causes you to have a reasonable expectation of being shot if the police show up. Qualified immunity is coming directly into conflict with the 2nd amendment, and I don't seem to be hearing a peep from the right on it.

You don't have a second amendment right if police can target you for execution based on exercising that right.
 
I don't know why this isn't on the radar of 2nd amendment enthusiasts. It is a real encroachment to the right to self-defense and to bear arms if doing so causes you to have a reasonable expectation of being shot if the police show up. Qualified immunity is coming directly into conflict with the 2nd amendment, and I don't seem to be hearing a peep from the right on it.

You don't have a second amendment right if police can target you for execution based on exercising that right.
Because the answer can't plausibly be "more guns" because both parties in these incidents already have guns.
 
I don't know why this isn't on the radar of 2nd amendment enthusiasts. It is a real encroachment to the right to self-defense and to bear arms if doing so causes you to have a reasonable expectation of being shot if the police show up. Qualified immunity is coming directly into conflict with the 2nd amendment, and I don't seem to be hearing a peep from the right on it.

You don't have a second amendment right if police can target you for execution based on exercising that right.
There was talk to that effect on libertarian Twitter following the incident in Alabama a week ago. I don't expect similar from connies because they're too pro-cop and pro-carceral...so crickets instead.
 
I don't know why this isn't on the radar of 2nd amendment enthusiasts. It is a real encroachment to the right to self-defense and to bear arms if doing so causes you to have a reasonable expectation of being shot if the police show up. Qualified immunity is coming directly into conflict with the 2nd amendment, and I don't seem to be hearing a peep from the right on it.

You don't have a second amendment right if police can target you for execution based on exercising that right.
The 2nd Amendment is only for certain people. That person was not one of the right ones, so it is okay that they were shot and killed. Or something to that effect.
 
The 2nd Amendment is only for certain people. That person was not one of the right ones, so it is okay that they were shot and killed. Or something to that effect.
Mulford Act.
 
Mulford Act.
The Mulford Act is one of the best examples of rights for me, but not for thee. KKK protesting with firearms? A-ok! Black Panthers? We can't be having uppity blacks (probably insert a different word here for many) having guns.
 
Last edited:
Was tried and convicted unanimously by a jury. Hasn't even been sentenced yet, either or appealed the verdict.

Abbott so foolishly uptight on Perry "standing his ground" that he purposefully forgets Perry ran a red light when he drove into the group & made premeditated posts about harming them. Perhaps, maybe Foster might have had a stronger argument to "standing his ground" by watching what Perry drive into their group.
 
Last edited:
Language warning in addition to the graphic content warning.


Madness. How the police can get the wrong address is beyond me, especially when it’s such a pressing issue like this.

Also did the home owner open fire on them, I can’t tell, also did the lady open fire too? If they did then, why? A total cluster ****.
 
Madness. How the police can get the wrong address is beyond me, especially when it’s such a pressing issue like this.

Also did the home owner open fire on them, I can’t tell, also did the lady open fire too? If they did then, why? A total cluster ****.
Robert Dotson was armed at the time that he opened the door. It was 11:30 at night. Robert Dotson did not fire his weapon. A statement from the Farmington Police Department alleges that Dotson's wife was armed and fired after the initial volley that killed Mr. Dotson, though this isn't shown in the footage, and that prompted another volley from the officers. The statement also indicates that she complied with commands once she realized they were police officers and that she hasn't been charged with a crime.
 
Robert Dotson was armed at the time that he opened the door. It was 11:30 at night. Robert Dotson did not fire his weapon. A statement from the Farmington Police Department alleges that Dotson's wife was armed and fired after the initial volley that killed Mr. Dotson, though this isn't shown in the footage, and that prompted another volley from the officers. The statement also indicates that she complied with commands once she realized they were police officers and that she hasn't been charged with a crime.
Thanks for a bit more background. Craziness.

I’m guessing being armed means nothing while on his doorstep unless he pointed the gun at police, even then there was not attempt to talk to him to put the gun down.
 
While I'm totally not making excuses for barging through the wrong doorsteps, but are the police using Google/Apple Maps? They're notorious for not getting addresses exactly correct, and even less so in residential neighborhoods. The homes in our suburban tract (which is roughly a decade old) are all out of alignment, and some house numbers don't even exist. And it's the same in the neighborhood next to us; I've had delivery drivers ask for homes that were at least a half-block away and even two census takers looking for non-existing house numbers (which makes sense that there's some boots on the ground check that out).

These folks have access to a massive amount of public and private data and still can't get to the right place is absolutely pathetic.
 
So are the officers going to be charged with manslaughter since that's exactly what they committed? Oh wait, I can answer this, of course they aren't.
 
A couple of late followups:
Jesus Christ.

"A defense attorney said the flashlight in question was smaller than a pen, and the teen’s pants were on. The defense attorney said Roman was merely trying to deescalate the situation."

Is...is this supposed to be a defense?
The tasering a granny incident is what astonishes me. No doubt he was completely innocent of that one, right? Forty misconduct allegations. Tell me there's systemic abuse, without telling me there's systemic abuse.



Unbelievable thread and article

 
Last edited:
Yeah, turns out when cops are shown to be unaccountable for so long, the public just accepts it. That and FOP's fearmongering over a lack of police subsequent to efforts to weed out bad actors, and this is to be expected, even as the act that the rat perpetrated served no functional purpose beyond abuse.

In related news...

 

How can you possibly rehabilitate this when the culture of corruption is so rooted in? Still not revealed/known is why Floyd was targeted instead of his brother. "Back the blue," right?
 
How can you possibly rehabilitate this when the culture of corruption is so rooted in? Still not revealed/known is why Floyd was targeted instead of his brother. "Back the blue," right?
This is what I can't understand. Why did they intentionally convict an innocent man and let let someone they knew was the murderer go free?
 
Language warning in addition to the graphic content warning.




Screenshot-20230502-084349-Samsung-Internet.jpg


That from the killer cops' lawyers is idiotic. Coming to the door armed isn't a crime. (Note that I'm not criticizing the poster above.)
 
Last edited:
Back