Board 8 > Politics Containment Topic 322: Anarchist Jurisdiction Since 2016

(+) Yeah! (+)

https://www.cnn.com/2020/09/23/politics/ruth-bader-ginsburg-senate-resolution-schumer-cruz/index.html

---

Doesn't seem to matter if you're capable of following orders when the police will kill you anyways even if you do.

I don't disagree that cops end up brutalizing neurodivergency but this is a different (and occasionally overlapping) axis. So I think your initial statement is basically nonsense.

---

List of people cops won't brutalize:
Affluent white people

List of people cops will brutalize:
Everyone else

---

oh cool got my extra $300 payments. Yay money.

---

So this is kind of relevant.

I stumbled upon research on the Balloon Boy incident from a while back. You might remember it: it was the case where a family was building a science balloon and then it accidentally floated into the air and they thought their child was inside it, but it turned out that he was hiding inside the house. And everyone said it was a hoax for attention and the media just dogpiled on the family.

I learned that the police was firmly on the family's side until the kid had that interview where he said he "went into the balloon for the show", which he was referencing an expose thing where they wanted him to show them how he crawled inside, and then the media and everyone thought it was all staged. Which, I mean, flimsy explanation, but then I saw a video from the father where he went through everything the police did to screw him and his family over.

They pulled out tons of illegal stuff, they lied under oath and in paperwork to apply more pressure on him, and then outright tried to ruin these people's lives, presumably so the sheriff could get a conviction and get re-elected. The video was so precise to show side by side what was written in the reports and said in the hearings juxtaposed to video evidence of depositions and pictures and photos clearly showing they lied that it blew my mind.

Just something simple they lied about was that they claimed the family called the news before they called 911, but in the 911 call with the mother, you can hear the father saying "I'm going to call to see if they have a helicopter," referencing the news, and the police had records of when everyone was called by the family.

The father had every intention of fighting this, but the police had threatened to deport his wife if the father went to jail, because the wife was from I believe Japan and barely spoke English, and the children would then but put into foster care. Like, it was seriously sinister shit they were trying to do to them just to force a conviction on him so the sheriff could get elected. So he plead guilty and apologized because he didn't want to risk his family being torn apart because the police lied about a lot of the evidence, and he'd spend hundreds of thousands of dollars fighting it.

I can get into more of it if people care, but I think the most fucked up thing was that police can't interrogate children without express consent of the adults, and the father was in jail and they tried to trick the wife into giving consent but she didn't. So they called Child Protective Services and gave a list of questions for them to ask all related to the case, and all of it went right into evidence. There was video of the officer consulting with the actual CPS worker going over the questions she needed her to ask. Ultimately, the testimony of the children didn't amount to much because they all told the truth about what happened and CPS didn't see any cause whatsoever to go any further with the claim because they weren't being used or in danger.

But the reason I wanted to bring this up was to show the other way that cops are absolutely fucking scummy when it comes to the investigations as well, and a lot of them are politically charged, and they'll do whatever they have to, including threatening to break apart a family and lying completely in order to get a conviction. They can't even be trusted to fairly do an investigation, and if they lie or break the rules during it, they won't get punished for that either.

In 2009, it would be considered a conspiracy if you thought the police would lie and railroad this family so hard. Today, it's just a clear example about why you can't trust cops for anything.

---

PrivateBiscuit1 posted...

until the kid had that interview where he said he "went into the balloon for the show", which he was referencing an expose thing where they wanted him to show them how he crawled inside, and then the media and everyone thought it was all staged.

That wasn't the actual question. The kid didn't say he went into the balloon for the show. They asked the kid if he heard his parents calling for him and he said yes, which surprises the parents. Then the interviewer asked him why he remained hidden in the garage and didn't come out when they were calling for him, and the parents repeat it, and that's when he says "Well, you guys said that we did this for the show" to his parents. There's then a long pause before the mom goes "..No" and the dad starts tripping over his words.

---

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wI6UONWCq7A

Like, based on their reactions to his answers and how the dad's explanation after makes absolutely zero sense, it's no wonder everybody started questioning it. The dad even gives an "oh shit" sigh.

This is actually the first I heard that this wasn't a hoax, so I'd love to hear more.

---

StealThisSheen posted...

That wasn't the actual question. The kid didn't say he went into the balloon for the show. They asked the kid if he heard his parents calling for him and he said yes, which surprises the parents. Then the interviewer asked him why he remained hidden in the garage and didn't come out when they were calling for him, and that's when he says "Well, you guys said that we did this for the show." There's then a long pause before the mom goes "..No" and the dad starts tripping over his words.

I didn't point out a specific question asked. I was referring to the explanation given for why he said that, was because he was confused. I don't recall the conversation specifically or anything. And like I said, I thought the explanation was flimsy until I looked at everything else and the outright fabricated evidence and lies from the police.

What I saw wasn't looking into that part so much as the legal stuff concerning the case. The kid maintained the story with the CPS worker that it wasn't a hoax, and if the kid slipped up there or said anything to support it was planned, CPS wouldn't have dropped everything and the police would have ran with it in court.

Even the wife's "admission of guilt" wasn't anything like that. It was all leading questions to a person who didn't know English well and was threatened with being deported. The video of the deposition was absolutely gross to watch the way they were manipulating her.

---

StealThisSheen posted...

This is actually the first I heard that this wasn't a hoax, so I'd love to hear more.

I'll share more tomorrow after sleep. But a quick bulleted list.

• Police more or less force a man to take a lie detector test when he had low blood sugar (literally did the test in front of them), and they were aware he hadn't slept for 52 hours straight due to the media outside his house. They had to keep telling him he had to stay awake WHILE he was taking the lie detector test because he was dozing off during it--all in video.
• Not reading the wife her rights before the deposition, not defining what a hoax is to her when they ask her questions about hoaxes, and forcing her into a deposition on a Saturday when she can't get a lawyer.
• Trying to tell her she may get deported, but if she just "tells them the truth" then they might be able to sway things.
• Them giving purposefully improper measurements of the balloon to their expert scientist, so they could claim based on the scientist's math that it wouldn't have taken off with the weight of the boy in it (contradicting what the father said about it being big enough to hold the weight).
• Them claiming they didn't find any of the batteries the father said were in the balloon, despite pictures of the scene the police took with those batteries in them, with pictures of those batteries purposefully taken during the initial investigation.

That's just the stuff I saw video/image evidence of. There's other stuff that is just his word vs. the police that I'm not including such as him claiming he didn't want to address the media and being told they won't leave him alone until then, only for the police to tell him the sheriff will come out to make a statement with him (to make the sheriff look good for re-election). Or that during the initial video of the balloon taking off, the father is acting like a total asshole during it, which wouldn't play well if he was trying to use it to pitch a reality TV show.

It's honestly just a weird little dive I ended up doing. I like weird court cases. But I didn't expect there to be so much overwhelming evidence of police scumfuckery from it.

---

PrivateBiscuit1 posted...

Or that during the initial video of the balloon taking off, the father is acting like a total asshole during it, which wouldn't play well if he was trying to use it to pitch a reality TV show.

See, I disagree with this. He appears to be overacting, including kicking a chair which doesnt at all seem like a normal reaction to the situation. And considering the kind of shows they were pitching to try and get on at the time (they had just been on Wife Swap), it seemed like exactly the kind of thing youd do for tv, because those kind of shows banked on insane overreactions.

Now, dont get me wrong. I fully believe the police did scummy shit to get a confession. Im not arguing that, and its bad as it is. It is a clear example of them being willing to do scummy shit.

That said, after refreshing on the events, like that interview, the kid appearing to stress vomit on two occasions when asked about the comments the next day, the fact they were actively trying to get on reality tv shows, the questionable details about why they thought the kid was on it to begin with considering how much it weighed and how fast it rose, and so on, I have a really hard time believing theyre innocent in this. It very much screams of a hoax. That doesnt really excuse the police going about things the way they did at all, but I dont think this is a great example of innocent people being railroaded because they... Really dont seem innocent.

---

I'd say after everything else I read up/watch/etc. that there's a really solid chance it wasn't a hoax. I personally lean more on the side that I don't think it was a hoax, but I honestly don't feel strongly enough that it wasn't a hoax to be able to argue too much about it. You make good points though.

It's less of a case of a preponderance of evidence, it's a preponderance of guilt. Which, obviously, isn't how it should work. But I think the lengths the police went to try and get evidence is incredibly corrupt and messed up, and that they couldn't through actual legitimate police work actually find enough to convict them means a lot.

But I was mostly interested in the court stuff.

---

Trump's former Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff is expected to endorse Biden:

https://twitter.com/phildstewart/status/1309074122799013896

---

https://twitter.com/mattgertz/status/1309097166661615619?s=21

cool

---

Reg posted...

Related:
https://www.wave3.com/2020/09/22/jon-mattingly-officer-involved-breonna-taylor-shooting-sends-candid-email-lmpd-colleagues/

btw bringing this back up in light of the officers that got shot in Louisville last night

Reg posted...

btw bringing this back up in light of the officers that got shot in Louisville last night

?

Shouldn't you be denouncing the violence?

---

I am well past condemning people being pissed off tbh.

---

DoomTheGyarados posted...

I am well past condemning people being pissed off tbh.

Further, I can't find actual evidence that the shootings were done by protesters.

(Haven't looked into it beyond basic review of some news articles, but "Its not clear if the shooting was related to any protests" seems to be all of the info we have currently on that front. Somebody is in custody, but LMPD has not disclosed their identity. Personally, I'd be a bit surprised if they're passing up a chance to demonize protesters if it was done by one. Or even somebody they could pass off as one)

DoomTheGyarados posted...

I am well past condemning people being pissed off tbh.

So you get a free pass to do whatever if you are pissed off?

---

Reg posted...

Further, I can't find actual evidence that the shootings were done by protesters.

(Haven't looked into it beyond basic review of some news articles, but "Its not clear if the shooting was related to any protests" seems to be all of the info we have currently on that front. Somebody is in custody, but LMPD has not disclosed their identity. Personally, I'd be a bit surprised if they're passing up a chance to demonize protesters if it was done by one. Or even somebody they could pass off as one)

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/24/us/breonna-taylor-live-updates.html

I'm sure Louisville police officers getting shot at high rates the same night as the protests is just a coincidence, Reg. *Rolls eyes*


---

Corrik7 posted...

So you get a free pass to do whatever if you are pissed off?

The police get a free pass to do whatever if they're scared, so...

---

um it's not a free pass

it's a paid vacation

at the taxpayer's expense

---

wow, I thought justifying looting and burning down buildings was bad, now it's okay for protestors to shoot at, even kill people? If I felt you guys had any credibility at all, it just went out the window. Listen to yourself for goodness sake; it's disgusting what I'm reading here.

---

Actually we think it is horrible to shoot and kill people, but the police and law enforcement apparently disagree.

---

guffguy89 posted...

wow, I thought justifying looting and burning down buildings was bad, now it's okay for protestors to shoot at, even kill people? If I felt you guys had any credibility at all, it just went out the window. Listen to yourself for goodness sake; it's disgusting what I'm reading here.

I don't believe you said a word when protestors were murdered in Wisconsin so you have no ground to stand on here.

Not to mention literally no one is justifying it.

---

guffguy89 posted...

wow, I thought justifying looting and burning down buildings was bad, now it's okay for protestors to shoot at, even kill people? If I felt you guys had any credibility at all, it just went out the window. Listen to yourself for goodness sake; it's disgusting what I'm reading here.

corrik thinks the war on terror is good. he has 0% credibility when it comes to complaining about people looting, destroying buildings and killing other people.

---

guffguy89 posted...

wow, I thought justifying looting and burning down buildings was bad, now it's okay for protestors to shoot at, even kill people? If I felt you guys had any credibility at all, it just went out the window. Listen to yourself for goodness sake; it's disgusting what I'm reading here.

It's NOT okay for any of those things. But there is ZERO outrage from the the anti-protestor side about police being given carte blanche to shoot and kill innocents (or shoot and kill "criminals" who should have been presumed innocent until proven guilty). It's reached a point, at least for me, where our country does not give a fuck about holding police accountable for their actions, so why should I give a shit about the actions of untrained civilians who AREN'T being funded by my tax dollars? I've become numb to this shit.

---

guffguy89 posted...

wow, I thought justifying looting and burning down buildings was bad, now it's okay for protestors to shoot at, even kill people? If I felt you guys had any credibility at all, it just went out the window. Listen to yourself for goodness sake; it's disgusting what I'm reading here.

You value property over people, you have no moral high ground. You're arguing for the taxes you pay to be used in warfare against you? Listen to yourself for goodness sake, have some self respect.

---

TotallyNotMI posted...

I don't believe you said a word when protestors were murdered in Wisconsin so you have no ground to stand on here.

Rules for thee, not for me. It's the Republican motto.

---

But guffguy is totally a centrist. The fact that he only posts in right wing talking points is a total coincidence.

---

You're right, I don't believe I commented about that Wisconsin shooting, which obviously was wrong. I also didn't praise that shooter or make excuses to justify his actions, which is what some of you were doing on here for the recent protestor shooting. I'm glad not all of you hold that sentiment at least.

---

I dont want anyone to shoot anyone. However I am not going to get upset about police being shot until they start giving a fuck about murdering people in their homes.


---

This is tangentially related but this seems to be the tact being taken in the House race in my district.

Ads started popping up a while ago and the first from each candidate (Dem challenger, Republican incumbent) was about responding to COVID. (R one was some shameless bullshit but I digress.)

New ones started showing up in last few days. Dem ones still about COVID. Republican one is SCARY IMAGES about how they'll RELEASE VIOLENT CRIMINALS INTO THE STREETS and they haven't DENOUNCED THE RIOTS

House Dem PAC also jumped in the last few days with an attack ad, the ones from the challenger herself have all been positive.

---

TotallyNotMI posted...

But guffguy is totally a centrist. The fact that he only posts in right wing talking points is a total coincidence.

he's remarkably similar to corrik!

---

xp1337 posted...

Republican one is SCARY IMAGES about how they'll RELEASE VIOLENT CRIMINALS INTO THE STREETS

I wish the Dems were as cool as Republicans made them sound

---

DoomTheGyarados posted...

I dont want anyone to shoot anyone. However I am not going to get upset about police being shot until they start giving a fuck about murdering people in their homes.

---

DoomTheGyarados posted...

I dont want anyone to shoot anyone. However I am not going to get upset about police being shot until they start giving a fuck about murdering people in their homes.

This

Especially when cops are actively promoting the "it's an Us vs Them war" among themselves. Hence me bringing Mattingly's email back up. Cops are actively provoking this, and while I do very much wish people wouldn't rise to the provocation, it's hard to get actively mad about it.

Cops aren't just provoking in the sense of 'rile them up', they're actively attacking, seriously injuring, and sometimes killing protesters. None of that ever gets mentioned by anti-protest types, and if it does, it's in the vein of "of course the cops shouldn't do that, but...", with the implication that it's not as bad when police do it.

---

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0QmBJuZKgCk

fuck the police

it's fucking infuriating how cops are given an authoritative press platform during the days to describe the events of their own brutal actions in the nights

---

HeroDelTiempo17 posted...

I wish the Dems were as cool as Republicans made them sound

Right?

---

KamikazePotato posted...

Cops aren't just provoking in the sense of 'rile them up', they're actively attacking, seriously injuring, and sometimes killing protesters. None of that ever gets mentioned by anti-protest types, and if it does, it's in the vein of "of course the cops shouldn't do that, but...", with the implication that it's not as bad when police do it.

Yes, true, my wording was understating things, which is bad.

This is also the same crowd that tends to "They knew what they signed up for" when soldiers get shot at overseas, too.

guffguy89 posted...

wow, I thought justifying looting and burning down buildings was bad, now it's okay for protestors to shoot at, even kill people? If I felt you guys had any credibility at all, it just went out the window. Listen to yourself for goodness sake; it's disgusting what I'm reading here.

They don't realize that their bubble keeps moving their extremism further and further.

Not condemning violence because people are upset.
Not upset if police get shot.
Rationalize looting and arson because "they have insurance".

It's definitely wild seeing these things run rampant openly on forums.

---

corrik: tons of innocent people dying in a war is awesome.
also corrik: tHiS bUBBlE kEePs MoViNg ExTrEmIsM

---

btw literally less than 24 hours ago Corrik was refusing to condemn a legal system that lets cops get away with murder consequence-free.

Just to put things in perspective.

Absolute joke, there's no reason to read his posts.

The funny part is the people against violence are labeled as trolls in these topics or "far-right" and responded with nonsense like Lasa just posted which is literally just made up on the spot.

---

Corrik7 posted...

nonsense like Lasa just posted which is literally just made up on the spot.

do i really need to pull up your post where you stated you supported the war on terror

---

Mr Lasastryke posted...

do i really need to pull up your post where you stated you supported the war on terror

Bring the post up where I said this.

corrik: "tons of innocent people dying in a war is awesome."

Stop wasting my time with nonsense.


---

Reg posted...

btw literally less than 24 hours ago Corrik was refusing to condemn a legal system that lets cops get away with murder consequence-free.

Just to put things in perspective.

Absolute joke, there's no reason to read his posts

Honestly may as well just block anyone who continues to repeatedly engage with him. Corrik-19, gotta stop the spread.

---

https://www.cnn.com/2020/09/24/economy/unemployment-benefits-coronavirus/index.html

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/09/24/goldman-cuts-fourth-quarter-gdp-forecast-in-half-as-further-stimulus-hopes-fade.html

---

Corrik7 posted...

The funny part is the people against violence are labeled as trolls in these topics or "far-right" and responded with nonsense like Lasa just posted which is literally just made up on the spot.

Corrik, you're really not against violence though. You're against violence on the other side of the debate, but you're not against violence. You're on the record of saying that the current state of policing shouldn't change because you, personally, feel safe with how cops are trained to react. A lot of this reactionary violence on the left is a direct result of violence being committed by the police and subsequently being brushed under the rug as acceptable and legal.

---

UshiromiyaEva posted...

Honestly may as well just block anyone who continues to repeatedly engage with him. Corrik-19, gotta stop the spread.

No: putting someone on ignore also hides any gamefaqs posts from people quoting the person.

So no, people can reply to Corrik all they want as long as they quote him when replying and you just have to put Corrik on ignore if you're not interested in that part of the topic.

---