A disabled black man murdered for picking up his child

[blackamerica]

Even if he had a gun, he wasn't threatening anyone with it when he got shot. There's been people trying to get suicide by cop that get taken alive.

However, if he was holding a gun and not following commands to drop it, not sure I wouldn't have shot him if I was the cop. Rather be tried by 12 then carried by 6. Then again, I'm not a trained officer so...

That's where policy comes in. Right now cops follow need perceive an immediate threat to their lives. That's subjective as hell though. You can argue that the simple presence of a gun represents that. It's the whole reason why the police in America in general need a more defined use of force policy. Right now they can go from 0 to 100 instantly and not be in the wrong according to the established policy.

Given current gun laws and gun culture in the US, I don't think the presence of a gun should even necessitate lethal force. I know that's a fucked up thing to say, that a gun present is not a threat, but that's our country. We can legally carry. My having a gun is within my rights and cops can't violate that right until I threaten them. What's threatening? I guess that's the million dollar question.

That's exactly my point. But you still cant discount the fact that guns are deadly weapons. When one has been pulled, it doesn't take much to kill another person with it. I don't agree the presence of one alone should require a death sentence, but as it stands that's the argument these cops always make.

In a open carry state there's no excuse for shootings like these

 

[blackamerica]

I'm not gonna entertain the whole he had a gun thing anymore. I have not seen a gun in his hand or on his person in any video. I never heard the officers say anything about a gun. They tried to break the car window then shot dude then immediately ran up on him. No one seemed to concerned about a gun.

I mean there is nothin to really entertain. We SAW the cop drop the gun at the scene. Imo, that's a open & shut case. The white cop murdered a unarmed black man, had the black officer plant the gun, then BLAME THE BLACK COP for killing dude (when the black cop wasn't even there smh). Case closed. But wait this america

 

[The Lonious Monk]

Even if he had a gun, he wasn't threatening anyone with it when he got shot. There's been people trying to get suicide by cop that get taken alive.

However, if he was holding a gun and not following commands to drop it, not sure I wouldn't have shot him if I was the cop. Rather be tried by 12 then carried by 6. Then again, I'm not a trained officer so...

That's where policy comes in. Right now cops follow need perceive an immediate threat to their lives. That's subjective as hell though. You can argue that the simple presence of a gun represents that. It's the whole reason why the police in America in general need a more defined use of force policy. Right now they can go from 0 to 100 instantly and not be in the wrong according to the established policy.

Given current gun laws and gun culture in the US, I don't think the presence of a gun should even necessitate lethal force. I know that's a fucked up thing to say, that a gun present is not a threat, but that's our country. We can legally carry. My having a gun is within my rights and cops can't violate that right until I threaten them. What's threatening? I guess that's the million dollar question.

That's exactly my point. But you still cant discount the fact that guns are deadly weapons. When one has been pulled, it doesn't take much to kill another person with it. I don't agree the presence of one alone should require a death sentence, but as it stands that's the argument these cops always make.

In a open carry state there's no excuse for shootings like these

I agree in principle, but a state being open carry doesn't stop a gun from being a deadly weapon. If a gun is drawn in a tense situation, it's a threat whether its presence is open carry or not. If a nigga runs up on you and randomly pulls a gun, are you going to be like "Well it's an open carry state, so that's no big deal."

These cops are most definitely reacting wrong in these cases, but let's not act like the presence of a gun doesn't change the game.

 

[blackamerica]

Even if he had a gun, he wasn't threatening anyone with it when he got shot. There's been people trying to get suicide by cop that get taken alive.

However, if he was holding a gun and not following commands to drop it, not sure I wouldn't have shot him if I was the cop. Rather be tried by 12 then carried by 6. Then again, I'm not a trained officer so...

That's where policy comes in. Right now cops follow need perceive an immediate threat to their lives. That's subjective as hell though. You can argue that the simple presence of a gun represents that. It's the whole reason why the police in America in general need a more defined use of force policy. Right now they can go from 0 to 100 instantly and not be in the wrong according to the established policy.

Given current gun laws and gun culture in the US, I don't think the presence of a gun should even necessitate lethal force. I know that's a fucked up thing to say, that a gun present is not a threat, but that's our country. We can legally carry. My having a gun is within my rights and cops can't violate that right until I threaten them. What's threatening? I guess that's the million dollar question.

That's exactly my point. But you still cant discount the fact that guns are deadly weapons. When one has been pulled, it doesn't take much to kill another person with it. I don't agree the presence of one alone should require a death sentence, but as it stands that's the argument these cops always make.

In a open carry state there's no excuse for shootings like these

I agree in principle, but a state being open carry doesn't stop a gun from being a deadly weapon. If a gun is drawn in a tense situation, it's a threat whether its presence is open carry or not. If a nigga runs up on you and randomly pulls a gun, are you going to be like "Well it's an open carry state, so that's no big deal."

These cops are most definitely reacting wrong in these cases, but let's not act like the presence of a gun doesn't change the game.

No. A nigga is not a imminent threat simply holding a gun. If you're walking with a gun in hand pointing it, then all is fair. But the line is clearly drawn what the difference is. In this case none of this applies because the man had no weapon and the cops planted the gun

 

[stringer bell]

https://twitter.com/TheShadeRoom/status/779896561681702912

That Transformers son has opinion about this situation...

 

[rapmusic]

Ok people who live in Charlotte. People are expected to show up to the city council meeting to demand that Jennifer Roberts and Chief Putney step down. I can understand Putney but do y'all feel that Jennifer Roberts should step down? Boy that's going to be a biiiiig mess once that shit gets started. She is not a mayor that you want to force out.. Not like this. Especially in a city that can't keep a mayor to save their lives

 

[iron man1]

Even if he had a gun, he wasn't threatening anyone with it when he got shot. There's been people trying to get suicide by cop that get taken alive.

However, if he was holding a gun and not following commands to drop it, not sure I wouldn't have shot him if I was the cop. Rather be tried by 12 then carried by 6. Then again, I'm not a trained officer so...

That's where policy comes in. Right now cops follow need perceive an immediate threat to their lives. That's subjective as hell though. You can argue that the simple presence of a gun represents that. It's the whole reason why the police in America in general need a more defined use of force policy. Right now they can go from 0 to 100 instantly and not be in the wrong according to the established policy.

Given current gun laws and gun culture in the US, I don't think the presence of a gun should even necessitate lethal force. I know that's a fucked up thing to say, that a gun present is not a threat, but that's our country. We can legally carry. My having a gun is within my rights and cops can't violate that right until I threaten them. What's threatening? I guess that's the million dollar question.

That's exactly my point. But you still cant discount the fact that guns are deadly weapons. When one has been pulled, it doesn't take much to kill another person with it. I don't agree the presence of one alone should require a death sentence, but as it stands that's the argument these cops always make.

In a open carry state there's no excuse for shootings like these

I agree in principle, but a state being open carry doesn't stop a gun from being a deadly weapon. If a gun is drawn in a tense situation, it's a threat whether its presence is open carry or not. If a nigga runs up on you and randomly pulls a gun, are you going to be like "Well it's an open carry state, so that's no big deal."

These cops are most definitely reacting wrong in these cases, but let's not act like the presence of a gun doesn't change the game.

Fuck that open and carry means open and carry. Dylan Roof clapped up a damn congregation and he's chilling I don't want to see that bs. They were looking for someone else with a warrant and decided to go at the first black man they saw. They were on a mission to kill a black man.

 

[The Lonious Monk]

Even if he had a gun, he wasn't threatening anyone with it when he got shot. There's been people trying to get suicide by cop that get taken alive.

However, if he was holding a gun and not following commands to drop it, not sure I wouldn't have shot him if I was the cop. Rather be tried by 12 then carried by 6. Then again, I'm not a trained officer so...

That's where policy comes in. Right now cops follow need perceive an immediate threat to their lives. That's subjective as hell though. You can argue that the simple presence of a gun represents that. It's the whole reason why the police in America in general need a more defined use of force policy. Right now they can go from 0 to 100 instantly and not be in the wrong according to the established policy.

Given current gun laws and gun culture in the US, I don't think the presence of a gun should even necessitate lethal force. I know that's a fucked up thing to say, that a gun present is not a threat, but that's our country. We can legally carry. My having a gun is within my rights and cops can't violate that right until I threaten them. What's threatening? I guess that's the million dollar question.

That's exactly my point. But you still cant discount the fact that guns are deadly weapons. When one has been pulled, it doesn't take much to kill another person with it. I don't agree the presence of one alone should require a death sentence, but as it stands that's the argument these cops always make.

In a open carry state there's no excuse for shootings like these

I agree in principle, but a state being open carry doesn't stop a gun from being a deadly weapon. If a gun is drawn in a tense situation, it's a threat whether its presence is open carry or not. If a nigga runs up on you and randomly pulls a gun, are you going to be like "Well it's an open carry state, so that's no big deal."

These cops are most definitely reacting wrong in these cases, but let's not act like the presence of a gun doesn't change the game.

Fuck that open and carry means open and carry. Dylan Roof clapped up a damn congregation and he's chilling I don't want to see that bs. They were looking for someone else with a warrant and decided to go at the first black man they saw. They were on a mission to kill a black man.

Can't we have a conversation about one case without bringing in side shit. Dylan Roof deserved to be killed, but as far as I know, when the cops came, he didn't arrest and wasn't threatening in any way. I'm not saying I agreed with what happened in this case. I agree that even if he had a gun, he didn't deserve to be shot. But it seems like some niggas just can't make a point without taking it too far. The presence of a gun raises a person's threat level. I don't understand why ya'll are even arguing that. A nigga with a gun is more dangerous than a nigga without one, period. Is he an imminent threat just because he has a gun? I don't think so, but that's my point. It's some subjective shit that needs to be done away with. As it stands all a cop has to say is that he felt his life is in danger, and there are going to be people in any jury that will buy that as long as a gun is in a suspect's hand.

 

[1CK1S]

Somebody please kill this dude

 

[The Lonious Monk]

Somebody please kill this dude

You know this dude has made over 100K for all these appearances where he goes around blasting black people? All you niggas that like to overuse the terms "coon" and "sellout," here is the true gold standard for those words.

 

[desertrain10]

Even if he had a gun, he wasn't threatening anyone with it when he got shot. There's been people trying to get suicide by cop that get taken alive.

However, if he was holding a gun and not following commands to drop it, not sure I wouldn't have shot him if I was the cop. Rather be tried by 12 then carried by 6. Then again, I'm not a trained officer so...

That's where policy comes in. Right now cops follow need perceive an immediate threat to their lives. That's subjective as hell though. You can argue that the simple presence of a gun represents that. It's the whole reason why the police in America in general need a more defined use of force policy. Right now they can go from 0 to 100 instantly and not be in the wrong according to the established policy.

Given current gun laws and gun culture in the US, I don't think the presence of a gun should even necessitate lethal force. I know that's a fucked up thing to say, that a gun present is not a threat, but that's our country. We can legally carry. My having a gun is within my rights and cops can't violate that right until I threaten them. What's threatening? I guess that's the million dollar question.

That's exactly my point. But you still cant discount the fact that guns are deadly weapons. When one has been pulled, it doesn't take much to kill another person with it. I don't agree the presence of one alone should require a death sentence, but as it stands that's the argument these cops always make.

In a open carry state there's no excuse for shootings like these

I agree in principle, but a state being open carry doesn't stop a gun from being a deadly weapon. If a gun is drawn in a tense situation, it's a threat whether its presence is open carry or not. If a nigga runs up on you and randomly pulls a gun, are you going to be like "Well it's an open carry state, so that's no big deal."

These cops are most definitely reacting wrong in these cases, but let's not act like the presence of a gun doesn't change the game.

Fuck that open and carry means open and carry. Dylan Roof clapped up a damn congregation and he's chilling I don't want to see that bs. They were looking for someone else with a warrant and decided to go at the first black man they saw. They were on a mission to kill a black man.

Can't we have a conversation about one case without bringing in side shit. Dylan Roof deserved to be killed, but as far as I know, when the cops came, he didn't arrest and wasn't threatening in any way. I'm not saying I agreed with what happened in this case. I agree that even if he had a gun, he didn't deserve to be shot. But it seems like some niggas just can't make a point without taking it too far. The presence of a gun raises a person's threat level. I don't understand why ya'll are even arguing that. A nigga with a gun is more dangerous than a nigga without one, period. Is he an imminent threat just because he has a gun? I don't think so, but that's my point. It's some subjective shit that needs to be done away with. As it stands all a cop has to say is that he felt his life is in danger, and there are going to be people in any jury that will buy that as long as a gun is in a suspect's hand.

we need a necessity rule

even when the police have a reasonable belief that a person is dangerous, a necessity standard would not permit deadly force if non-deadly or less deadly alternatives are available and adequate to meet the threat

 

[The Lonious Monk]

Even if he had a gun, he wasn't threatening anyone with it when he got shot. There's been people trying to get suicide by cop that get taken alive.

However, if he was holding a gun and not following commands to drop it, not sure I wouldn't have shot him if I was the cop. Rather be tried by 12 then carried by 6. Then again, I'm not a trained officer so...

That's where policy comes in. Right now cops follow need perceive an immediate threat to their lives. That's subjective as hell though. You can argue that the simple presence of a gun represents that. It's the whole reason why the police in America in general need a more defined use of force policy. Right now they can go from 0 to 100 instantly and not be in the wrong according to the established policy.

Given current gun laws and gun culture in the US, I don't think the presence of a gun should even necessitate lethal force. I know that's a fucked up thing to say, that a gun present is not a threat, but that's our country. We can legally carry. My having a gun is within my rights and cops can't violate that right until I threaten them. What's threatening? I guess that's the million dollar question.

That's exactly my point. But you still cant discount the fact that guns are deadly weapons. When one has been pulled, it doesn't take much to kill another person with it. I don't agree the presence of one alone should require a death sentence, but as it stands that's the argument these cops always make.

In a open carry state there's no excuse for shootings like these

I agree in principle, but a state being open carry doesn't stop a gun from being a deadly weapon. If a gun is drawn in a tense situation, it's a threat whether its presence is open carry or not. If a nigga runs up on you and randomly pulls a gun, are you going to be like "Well it's an open carry state, so that's no big deal."

These cops are most definitely reacting wrong in these cases, but let's not act like the presence of a gun doesn't change the game.

Fuck that open and carry means open and carry. Dylan Roof clapped up a damn congregation and he's chilling I don't want to see that bs. They were looking for someone else with a warrant and decided to go at the first black man they saw. They were on a mission to kill a black man.

Can't we have a conversation about one case without bringing in side shit. Dylan Roof deserved to be killed, but as far as I know, when the cops came, he didn't arrest and wasn't threatening in any way. I'm not saying I agreed with what happened in this case. I agree that even if he had a gun, he didn't deserve to be shot. But it seems like some niggas just can't make a point without taking it too far. The presence of a gun raises a person's threat level. I don't understand why ya'll are even arguing that. A nigga with a gun is more dangerous than a nigga without one, period. Is he an imminent threat just because he has a gun? I don't think so, but that's my point. It's some subjective shit that needs to be done away with. As it stands all a cop has to say is that he felt his life is in danger, and there are going to be people in any jury that will buy that as long as a gun is in a suspect's hand.

we need a necessity rule

even when the police have a reasonable belief that a person is dangerous, a necessity standard would not permit deadly force if non-deadly or less deadly alternatives are available and adequate to meet the threat

Exactly. The Crutcher case is a good example. One of the cops was already in the process of tasing him. There was absolutely no reason for the chick to shoot him. She's being prosecuted, but if they had a necessity rule as you suggest and she was actually trained to that, that man might be alive today.

 

[stringer bell]

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/ne...lotte-shooting-protests/article104267321.html

Uprising activists: Charlotte mayor, police chief should resign

Local and state activists called Monday for Police Chief Kerr Putney and Charlotte Mayor Jennifer Roberts to resign, as the city’s latest round of tension between police and the black community moves into its second week.

At a Monday news conference held by Charlotte Uprising, a coalition that emerged during last week’s protests, speakers said both officials have failed to protect the city’s African American and working class citizens and withheld information about two fatal shootings last week.

Bree Newsome, a Charlotte organizer who rose to national fame when she removed the Confederate flag from the South Carolina statehouse in 2015, says the Sept. 20 shooting of Keith Lamont Scott by a Charlotte-Mecklenburg police officer was the latest in “an established pattern of cover-up and misconduct on the part of CMPD.” Scott was African American, as was Justin Carr, who was fatally shot during a protest in uptown Charlotte the next night.

“This moment represents a tipping point for a community that has had its trust repeatedly broken by the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police Department,” Newsome said.

Jose Mujica, a student and organizer, accused police of shooting Carr and framing another black man. The shooting occurred after an angry crowd surrounded police clad in riot gear, who fired tear gas and possibly other projectiles. Mujica, who was near the shooting, acknowledged that the scene was chaotic and he did not actually see any officer fire at Carr, but said many participants believe the shot came from the police.

Local ministers who were also near the shooting have said it was impossible to tell who fired the shot, while one eyewitness has said he saw another black man in the crowd fire the shot. On Friday police charged 21-year-old Rayquan Borum with murder in Carr’s death.

Uprising speakers and the local ministers agreed that the appearance of police in riot gear escalated tension just before the shooting.

The Uprising coalition called for a full investigation by the U.S. Justice Department, saying the state has been compromised by legislation that will limit release of police bodycam videos, by efforts to limit voting rights and by Gov. Pat McCrory’s comments comparing the shooting videos to watching football replays.

“We feel the situation in Charlotte and in North Carolina represents a crisis of injustice and we urge the Department of Justice to intervene immediately,” Newsome said. “The governor has called in the National Guard to protect the windows at Bank of America, but we ask who is being called in to protect the people of Charlotte and North Carolina?”

The Charlotte-Mecklenburg and North Carolina NAACP branches also issued a call for a federal investigation Monday, as well as “an end to the immoral acts of racial profiling, excessive force and the systematic killing of African Americans and people of color by law enforcement.”

Tamika Lewis, another member of the Uprising coalition, read a list of demands that includes firing and criminally charging all officers involved in Scott’s shooting and dropping charges against everyone arrested during protests. Mujica highlighted looting charges that have been filed against 23-year-old Jamil Gill, known on social media as Mills Shaka Zulu Gill. Mujica says the charges are false and were filed after Gill did widely-viewed livestreaming from the front lines of the first two nights of protest.

Mujica said Gill, who describes himself on his Facebook page as a Mallard Creek High graduate who studied at UNC Charlotte, was one of the first leaders of Charlotte Uprising. He said Gill is now in hiding.

“CMPD is currently hunting him to make an example of those who dare show the truth,” Mujica said.

On Monday afternoon the police department posted on Facebook that Gill was arrested in Greensboro and faces three counts of assault with a deadly weapon for striking officers with his car on I-85 and additional charges related to looting at Jimmy John’s. Gill had posted earlier that he planned to turn himself in even though the charges are false: “I guess they think I’m stupid enough to risk my life for some chips.”

Cherrell Brown of the Beloved Community Center, a social justice group in Greensboro, said she has been in Charlotte supporting local groups. She noted that police violence against African Americans is part of a statewide and national pattern: “What is happening here is not an isolated event. This is a call to action to our family across the Carolinas to get involved.”

“We will continue to strategize, to organize and to mobilize across the state in our campuses, in our churches, in the hoods,” Brown said.

Speakers said Uprising does not plan to organize street protests this week, but will be on hand to provide legal and medical support for those who do turn out.

The NAACP and the Charlotte Clergy Coalition for Justice plan a “unity rally for justice and transparency” at 6:30 p.m. Monday. Because of rain the location was changed from Marshall Park to Little Rock AME Zion Church, 401 N. McDowell St

 

[stringer bell]

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/ne...lotte-shooting-protests/article104228581.html

Charlotte officer didn’t activate body camera until after fatal police shooting

Charlotte-Mecklenburg police did not capture key video footage of last week’s fatal shooting of Keith Lamont Scott because a responding officer apparently didn’t turn on his body camera until after police had already shot the victim – a violation of department policy.

On Saturday, the Charlotte Mecklenburg Police Department released portions of video footage, captured by a dashboard camera and a body camera, showing the moments immediately before and after the Sept. 20 shooting.

Roughly the first half-minute of body-camera footage includes no sound. A police spokesman said that’s because the body cameras worn by patrol officers don’t begin recording audio until officers activate them. But the body cams do have a function that silently captures video for a short period before they’re activated.

In last week’s police shooting, the silent portion of the body cam video shows an officer next to Scott’s SUV with his gun drawn, pointing toward the front seat. It also shows the officer who is wearing the camera striking a baton against a passenger-side window. No sound is recorded in that video until Scott is already lying on the pavement after the shooting.

According to CMPD policy, uniformed officers are supposed to activate their body cameras before interactions with citizens that involve traffic stops, suspicious vehicles, “voluntary investigative contact” and arrests. “Voluntary investigative contact” is defined as what police do when they suspect criminal activity, as they did when they approached Scott after reportedly seeing marijuana and a gun in his car.

Susanna Birdsong, Policy Counsel for the ACLU of North Carolina, said it’s clear to her that the officer wearing the body camera violated policy by not activating the device sooner.

“A body camera policy is not worth the paper it’s written on if officers aren’t abiding by the standards and protocols we expect them to be using,” Birdsong said.

If the officer had activated the camera earlier, she said, it might have provided more insight into what – if any – efforts police had taken to deescalate the situation and why they felt a need to use deadly force.

CMPD has not identified the officer who was wearing the body cam in Scott’s case.

In January 2015, Charlotte City Council agreed to spend $7 million on about 1,400 new body cameras for police. CMPD Chief Kerr Putney said that the new body cameras are being rolled out across the department and not all tactical officers have them yet.

Officer Brentley Vinson, who police said fired four shots at Scott, was not wearing a body cam, so his visual perspective was not part of the footage.

 

[stringer bell]

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/ne...lotte-shooting-protests/article104339096.html

Charlotte civil rights, clergy leaders issue demands in police shooting

Led by North Carolina NAACP President William Barber, a coalition of civil rights and clergy leaders announced a list of demands Monday in the wake of the fatal police shooting of Keith Lamont Scott.

The 13-point list of demands includes calling for a federal investigation of the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police Department; releasing all video footage of Scott’s shooting; national standardization of the use of force by police; a retrial of Randall Kerrick, the white police officer who shot and killed Jonathan Ferrell, a black man, in 2013; and making it a firing offense if a police officer fails to turn on – or turns off – a body camera during an arrest.

Barber also singled out Rep. Robert Pittenger, who in an interview last week said protesters hated white people. Pittenger later apologized.

“You’re wrong,” Barber said. “White people are marching, too. All people of conscience are upset.”

Barber’s demands did not include the resignations of Charlotte Mayor Jennifer Roberts and police Chief Kerr Putney. Calls from activists and City Council public speakers for the leaders to step down grew louder Monday.

The rally at Little Rock AME Zion Church included the Charlotte NAACP and the Charlotte Coalition for Justice. Speakers included people who said their loved ones were killed by police violence.

Barber opened the rally by asking the multiracial clergy group and young people under age 23 to stand together up front. Later, Barber said reporters had asked him if there’s a young-old divide in the nightly Charlotte protests launched last Tuesday after Scott’s shooting.

Barber said he tells reporters that that’s their storyline, and not the movement’s. Yet later, during a portion of the rally that included other clergy making remarks, a young speaker moved on stage and tried to speak.

“Not tonight, brother,” Barber said, as others moved the man off the stage.

The hour-and-a-half rally ended with attendees marching to Marshall Park.

 

[stringer bell]

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/ne...lotte-shooting-protests/article104252096.html

Charlotte mayor faces furious crowd at City Council meeting

A furious crowd of citizens criticized and often shouted down Charlotte City Council on Monday night, calling for resignations across the city and chanting, “Hands Down! Shoot Back!” and “No Justice, No Peace!”

Mayor Jennifer Roberts, who allowed people to speak for two hours, repeatedly had to stop the meeting, pleading for quiet. Sometimes the crowd quieted to allow people to speak. At other times, her requests were met with heckles and chants for justice.

Even after the meeting, protesters gathered in the lobby of the Government Center. More than 20 protesters sat down after one young man urged them to “occupy this space.” Dozens more stood, chanted and demanded a federal investigation into the shooting.

“Release. Release. The whole damn tape,” they chanted.

There have been larger crowds for some issues, such as House Bill 2. But rarely, if ever, has Charlotte seen a council meeting as tense or passionate as Monday night’s.

It was the first meeting held by council members since Tuesday’s fatal police shooting of Keith Lamont Scott, which led to days of protest, some of them violent.

Hours before the meeting, Roberts said in an op-ed that the city’s “lack of transparency and communication” about the release of video footage in the Tuesday police shooting of Scott “was not acceptable.”

She also said she asked the U.S. Justice Department to monitor the state’s investigation into the fatal shooting. Roberts also called for a review of the department’s policies on use of force.

“Our city must be more open, honest, and transparent in investigating police shootings if we are to restore trust,” she wrote.

More than 40 people signed up to speak about the Scott shooting and the city’s handling of the investigation and protests.

Some speakers were near tears. Others chanted and shouted down Roberts, who ran the meeting. Some called for her and Charlotte-Mecklenburg police Chief Kerr Putney to resign.

“I’m here to ask for Chief Putney’s and your resignation, mayor,” said speaker Henry Lee. “The way it was handled, the secrecy, the lies. We don’t deserve this. People are losing their lives, and you are backing these people with these policies. You don’t deserve to be the mayor of this fine city. You are on verge of bringing this fine city to its knees – step down.”

Several people began their speeches with the chant “No Justice!” while the crowd shouted “No Peace!”

Another woman began her speech saying “All Lives Matter!” while the crowd shouted “When Black Lives Matter!”

Speaker Raymond Carver said the city needs to spend more money on after-school programs and less money on police.

“White society has the opportunity to only worry about where their next dollar is spent,” he said. “We have to settle for worrying about how we will make our next dollar. Stop spending money on the police force and start spending money on children.”

After a 10-year-old, Taje Gaddy, spoke about his fear of the police, the crowd erupted to support him. When Roberts asked for quiet, people in the crowd shouted back at her, asking, “Where are your tears?”

Roberts had to stop the meeting for several minutes while she asked for calm.

Sanchez Huntley questioned whether Roberts and council members cared about the speakers.

“All of you have your hands on your chin,” he said. “I only see three black members on that board.”

He then looked at council member Al Austin, who is African-American.

“Come with us,” he said. “That’s all I got to say … Black Lives Matter!”

Speaker Braxton Winston, like a number of other speakers, called for the resignations of Roberts and Putney.

He decried the practice of arresting protesters.

“You should not lock people up for trying to show people the truth,” he said. “You are making a mockery of the Constitution. And we are making the Constitution live.”

Then he led the crowd in a chorus of “My Country ’Tis of Thee.”

Members of the audience repeatedly shouted down council members as they attempted to talk.

“You’re telling me you’re coming to my house. You tell me I look like Donald Trump. You tell me I’m smirking. That doesn’t feel good,” council member Kenny Smith said. “… But we need to talk. We need to do it together.”

When council member Ed Driggs said, “We have to continue to support our chief, who is an honest man,” he was shouted down.

But by the end of the meeting, protesters came to talk with Roberts and other council members, and tensions were lowered.

Roberts and Putney received heavy criticism nationwide for their initial refusal to release body camera and dashboard camera video from the shooting.

In a Friday morning news conference, both said that the release of the videos could jeopardize the State Bureau of Investigation’s probe. Putney also said it wasn’t the city’s decision to make, since the SBI was now handling the probe.

But the SBI said later that day that the city was free to release the video – an announcement that reportedly surprised elected officials and city staff. And attorneys for the Scott family released their own cellphone video of the shooting, which showed Scott’s wife pleading with police officers not to shoot her husband.

The city changed its position and released the videos Saturday.

The N.C. Republican Party Monday criticized Roberts over the city’s handling of the aftermath of the shooting and blamed her in part for Wednesday’s violence.

The party said she didn’t call a curfew soon enough. It also said Roberts refused the state’s offer for additional law enforcement help on Wednesday, before the worst night of civil unrest.

The party said those decisions “led to the most violent night of riots, including injuries to many law enforcement officers and the death of a civilian.”

On Thursday the city declared a State of Emergency, which allowed Gov. Pat McCrory to send the National Guard to help protect property for Thursday night’s demonstrations.

The mayor’s office has said that Roberts consulted with Charlotte-Mecklenburg police Chief Putney on whether the city was prepared. As soon as Putney requested additional help on Thursday, the mayor’s office has said she immediately called a State of Emergency.

The N.C. GOP did not criticize the mayor for the city’s reluctance in not releasing the footage from a body camera and dashboard camera that showed part of the police encounter with Scott.

McCrory did not call for the footage to be released. But he said he agreed with Putney’s decision to release the video.

 

[stringer bell]

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/opinion/opn-columns-blogs/o-pinion/article104476211.html

In polite Charlotte, ‘Bless your heart’ meets ‘F--- all y’all’ as protesters upend status quo

Here in Charlotte, our conversations about racial wrongs and social justice usually unfold as earnest, polite affairs.

Not so at Monday’s Charlotte City Council meeting. One of my colleagues has rightfully dubbed it the night “Bless Your Heart” met “F--- all y’all.”

An audience member hurled that verbal firecracker at Mayor Jennifer Roberts and Charlotte City Council members during a raucous public comments period in the council’s first meeting since the fatal police shooting of Keith Lamont Scott.

Roberts wanted to give the community a chance to vent after a long week of unrest and protests sparked by the controversial shooting.

And boy, vent they did.

Speaker after angry speaker called for resignations. The mayor’s, the council’s, Police Chief Kerr Putney’s. People hooted and cat-called from the audience, raining abuse down on city leaders they accused of ignoring their problems and harassing them with police power. Roberts struggled to keep control of the room, pleading over and over for quiet.

We are trying to hear you, she kept saying.

She was Polite Charlotte, whispering in the face of a Category 5 hurricane.

One man, in his turn at the speaker’s podium, branded the mayor and City Council as “devils.” Their time as the oppressors of poor and minority people has reached its end, he told them.

He turned the old “Hands up! Don’t shoot!” protest chant in an ominous new direction.

“Hands down!” he called out.

“Shoot back!” a contingent in the audience called back.

It amounted to a direct threat – chilling amidst the dialed-up emotions surging through the city right now. It was impossible not to think of the fatal ambush attack on police officers in Dallas this summer.

Charlotte’s leadership was surely appalled. This was not a Polite Conversation about a Tough Social Problem. This was a wall of raw, churning rage shoved in their faces by the people who don’t show up for the Polite Conversations.

Make no mistake, threats against government officials are not OK, as I trust the authorities warned the “Hands Down! Shoot Back!” guy. Violence only begets more violence.

I watched a livestream of the meeting. White people watching online wrote comments expressing outrage at what they were seeing and hearing. One man suggested the best way to communicate with the “Hands down! Shoot back!” guy was with the business end of a gun.

It all left me sad for this city, and anxious about what lies ahead.

But if we really want to have a meaningful conversation about poverty, about economic mobility, about policing and criminal justice, the people who turned that City Council meeting upside down Monday need to be a part of it.

They didn’t have Ph.Ds like the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. They didn’t come wearing their Sunday best, as John Lewis and other civil rights protesters did the day they became legends staring down Alabama troopers on the Edmund Pettus Bridge.

Their rage mirrored the rage of some of today’s Charlotte protesters, who have been dropping F-bombs like confetti during demonstrations. The folks facing the City Council weren’t just asking to be heard, they were demanding, in the strongest language they could muster, that their concerns be addressed.

Many of you surely want to turn away, to change the channel, to chastise them for embarrassing Charlotte. But they are raising real issues, in their own raw, authentic voices, that the city’s movers and shakers have been having polite discussions about for decades.

The people who shouted and chanted in the City Council chamber Monday night cannot and will not be tuned out.

We kept saying we wanted a conversation about race and poverty and social mobility. Well, here it is.

Your move, Charlotte.

 

[stringer bell]

A furious crowd of citizens criticized and often shouted down Charlotte City Council on Monday night, calling for resignations across the city and chanting, “Hands Down! Shoot Back!”

One man, in his turn at the speaker’s podium, branded the mayor and City Council as “devils.” Their time as the oppressors of poor and minority people has reached its end, he told them.

He turned the old “Hands up! Don’t shoot!” protest chant in an ominous new direction.

“Hands down!” he called out.

“Shoot back!” a contingent in the audience called back.

https://twitter.com/nickochsnerwbtv/status/780550815979143168

 

[1CK1S]

And the character assassination continues...

Gun recovered at fatal Charlotte police shooting was reported stolen, sources say

CHARLOTTE, N.C. — The gun police say they found in Keith Lamont Scott's possession last week after he was fatally shot by a Charlotte-Mecklenburg police officer was reported stolen, multiple sources confirmed to The Charlotte Observer's news partner WBTV.

The gun was reportedly stolen in a residential breaking and entering, WBTV reports, adding that sources also say the man accused of stealing the gun was interviewed and is on record stating he sold the gun to Scott.

Police have not released any information about the man accused of stealing the gun and selling it to Scott.

Scott, 43, was shot Sept. 20 during a confrontation that started when undercover officers saw him smoking what appeared to be marijuana and holding a gun in his car at The Village at College Downs apartment complex on Old Concord Road, in northeast Charlotte. His death sparked protesting, some violent, across the city.

Scott's family has said he did not own a gun, but police said they recovered a gun at the scene of the shooting.

The Observer has reported that Scott was convicted of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon in 2005, after he shot and injured a man in San Antonio. He fired more than 10 rounds from a 9-mm pistol, a spokesman for the Texas Department of Criminal Justice told the Observer.

In October 2015, Scott's wife, Rakeyia, filed for a restraining order against him, the Observer has reported. In her petition, she said that law enforcement officials should consider her husband a potential threat because he carried a 9-mm gun.

Friday, a police source confirmed to WBTV that the gun reportedly found near the body of Scott has Scott's fingerprints, DNA and blood on it. The source also told WBTV the gun was loaded.

 

[blackamerica]

Bruh we already seen a fuckin VIDEO of this black coon cop dropping a gun on the scene. Why are we still debating whether the guy had a weapon? We have PROOF of the police planting evidence. We have PROOF the cops LIED and said the black cop killed ol buddy, but the video CLEARLY shows the black cop not even there when shooting occurred. Wtf is wrong with ppl???? These are basic questions anybody would want answered. Yet the media is still running stories as if the guy may of had a weapon. This case is beyond easy to see the cops LIED they azz off