For Immediate Release: Community Activist Fight to Stop Governor from hosting event at A Historical Black Museum
On Today June 16, 2016 at 9:00 a.m. Community Activist leadership will hold a press conference to at City Hall (121 N LaSalle St, Chicago, IL 60602) to discuss their opposition and plans to prevent (Revoke) Illinois Governor Bruce Rauner and event sponsors (Chicago Minority Supplier Development Council) from coordinating an event at the Historic Dusable Museum on Juneteenth (See Invitation below).
We (activist) feel it is of bad taste and a serious offense that on Juneteenth Independence Day or Freedom Day, which is a holiday that commemorates the announcement of the abolition of slavery, more generally the emancipation of African-America slaves throughout the Confederate South-That the Conservative Right-Wing Governor and his team would coordinate such an effort. They believe-the effort is pure propaganda with no sincere interest from the Governor!
Freedom First International, Violence Interrupters, Black Lives Matter along with other community activist (groups) will conduct a Protest Rally and Press Conference outside of the Dusable, IL on June 20, 2016 calling for the local (south side) Chicago community to join together and protest in opposition of Governor Rauner. The Governors leads an oppressive organization-that is showing it doesn’t care.
Gov. Bruce Rauner and his team suspended billions of dollars in social services and public health grants as part of his push to whittle away at a $1.6 billion shortfall in the current state budget, making life a living hell- for seniors, the poor and inner city citizens.
The activist agree- The last straw was last week-was when Rauner used extremely demeaning language such as calling Chicago Public Schools a ” crumbling prison” to argue the school district doesn’t deserve an additional $100 million in funding-which shows he has no to little regard for the struggles of working and lower-income inner city Illinoisans.
For their effort, they (group) believe that the integrity of the black and poor minority community is being threatened by the violence, bad leadership, and lack of education and that ongoing and progressive solutions must be sought.
The group wants the community to call the DuSable 773.947.0600 and voice concerns about Rauner speaking. Also call the host organization-Chicago Minority Supplier Development Council 105 West Adams Street, Suite 2300, Chicago, IL 60603
Recent initiatives to address
◾Recent Case- Demand Justice , ect
◾CPS System Reform,
◾Community Violence Prevention on the Chicago (Southside)
◾Change Perceptions of People of Color and others in the system
WHAT: Protest Rally /Press Conference to Stop Governor Rauner.
WHERE: 121 N LaSalle St, Chicago, IL 60602-Second Floor
WHEN: Wednesday, June 16, 2016 at 9:00am
WHO: Local Advocacy and Community Activist Leadership
FACEBOOK EVENT LINK: https://www.facebook.com/events/980426072074505/
Freedom First International (SCLC), Violence Interrupters, Black Lives Matter, Faith and Social Justice Alliance and more.
Pastor Gregg L Greer, President -Freedom First International (Primary Organizer)
Tio Hardiman, President-Violence Interrupters (Primary Organizer)
Contact: Gregg L, Greer-Lead Activist-Media Advisor
The arrest of Sandra Bland may leave many questions and has left the masses confused once again. During the past two years many folks have marched in various cities, following grand jury decisions in Ferguson, Missouri and New York City that failed to indict police officers who killed citizens, a frequent sign that can be seen, carried by protesters, is: “Black lives matter. “Yes, in truth the case of Sandra Bland defiantly in spirit -highlights the true nature of the problem on the public streets of urban America. It is very likely that, as often alleged, while laws need to change for everyone-but blacks in urban cities are disproportionately stopped and harassed by police more often than whites or others. This, however, is not the full picture of the harassment and threats that occur on urban sidewalks-it goes much deeper.
But, singular as it may seem, there is no turning back from the fact that laws of our country are on a collision course with change. Our government has to determine all of the problems and flaws within the race oriented system and the criminal justice system problem they are confronted. To put it more directly, no doubt-the criminal justice system issue is a serious problem in the United States!
Video: I decided to add a laundry list of possible violations of Bland rights.
After my review of the video I decided to add a laundry list of possible violations of Bland’s constitutional rights. Ms. Bland was an African-American from the Chicago area who had come to Texas for a job at her alma mater, Prairie View A&M University, was arrested after she was stopped July 10, 2015 for failure to signal a lane change. This list doesn’t necessarily mean that the courts will find the officer coerced, forced or lied in the statement or anything else with his report about the incident. But if the courts rule that he did act out of policy, not only is the statement inadmissible, but so too is any evidence that the police obtain as the result of it. I’m hard pressed to find in most of the video, where the officer had the level of control that his training should have dictated.
When the officer demanded loudly that Sandra Bland step out of her vehicle, Bland knew her rights and asked “Why am I being apprehended?” to which the officer simply replied, “I am giving you a lawful order” without articulating any reasonable suspicion of a crime. (Neither the stun gun nor the confrontation over the cigarette was mentioned in Trooper Encinia’s incident report according to police statement.) Why!!
It doesn’t matter whether an interrogation occurs in a jail, at the scene of a crime, on a busy downtown street, or the middle of an open field: If a person is in custody (deprived of his or her freedom of action in any significant way), the police must read the Miranda rights if they want to ask questions and use the answers as evidence at trial.
If someone is not in police custody, however, no Miranda warning is required and anything the person says can be used at trial. Police officers often avoid arresting people—and make it clear to them that they’re free to go—precisely so they don’t have to give the Miranda warning. Then they can arrest the suspect after getting the incriminating statement they wanted all along.
For more detail on these issues, see Miranda: The Meaning of ‘Custodial Interrogation.
Do you have to respond to police questions if you haven’t been arrested? Generally, no. (You typically don’t have to answer even if you’re under arrest.) A police officer generally cannot arrest a person simply for failure to respond to questions. (There are, however, situations where you might have to provide information like identification.
Video: I also decided to add a laundry list of possible violations on the video.
The video showed the officer pulling Ms. Bland over and their encounter escalating into a physical altercation in which he threatened her with a stun gun.
“I will light you up,” the trooper said, pointing the stun gun at her.
The video also confirmed an account from the family’s lawyer that the confrontation between Ms. Bland and the trooper, Brian T. Encinia, escalated after she refused his order to put out a cigarette.
But this conflicts with Officer Encinia’s seeming lies of omission in both his report and in his verbal recap to the Texas DPS dispatch.
- In fact, in frame 23:24 Officer Encinia claimed that he tried to de-escalate the situation when he encountered an unarmed woman with half of his body mass with a taser in hand.
Video: Minutes 23 through 24 the Officer produces a serious of incorrect statements that I subjectively one could conclude as lies.
Video: 25 though 34.05 video shows credible evidence of technical difficulties suggesting the possibility of editing or some undisclosed technical error combination
The audio sounds like a continuous stream of discussion between dispatch or phone and Officer Encinia, the video below shows the tow truck driver leaving his car multiple times without going back to the cab of his wrecker. The same vehicles can clearly be seen to pass multiple times. It is unknown at this time if the irregularities signal intentional editing, technical difficulties or a combination of both. A lot can happen in 2 minutes.
Other Problematic areas with this story.
Jim Harrington, director of the Texas Civil Rights Project, speaks with Texas Standard about the footage of the arrest, point-by-point. Here’s a transcript of the conversation, edited for brevity and clarity:
The trooper asks, “You mind putting out your cigarette please?” And Ms. Bland says, “Well, I’m in my car – why do I have to put out my cigarette?” Does she have to put out her cigarette?
No, she doesn’t have to put out her cigarette. And you wonder why the officer is even bothering with that. This is part of his escalation of the whole event that unfolded, unfortunately.
The next part: “Step out of the car.” Ms. Bland says, “You do not have the right.” He interrupts – “I do have the right, step out of the car or I will remove you.” Does he have the right, first, to order her to step out of the car? And second, to actually physically remove her from the car?
He does not have the right to say, get out of the car. He has to express some reason. ‘I need to search your car,’ or, whatever; he needs to give a reason. He can’t just say ‘get out of the car’ for a traffic offense.
Ms. Bland says, “I refuse to talk to you other than to identify myself.” Is she right or wrong.
She’s right. Unfortunately, officers don’t like it when you know the law. In this case, even if you are right, you are still in danger. And that’s what we see unfolding here.
The trooper says, “I am giving you a lawful order.” Now, is the lawful order to extinguish the cigarette, or to get out of the car, or neither.
Certainly, telling her to put out the cigarette was not a lawful order.
Just saying ‘Get out of the car,’ in and of itself, without an explanation, is not lawful. And you see him say that throughout the video without ever saying why [or] what’s .
It’s clear to me that he’s trying to assert authority that he probably does not have under the law, and he’s escalating the situation because he is upset. [He] doesn’t exercise the training that he needs to be exercising to de-escalate this situation.
“I’m gonna yank you out of here,” is what the trooper says. Can he physically “yank” her out of her vehicle?
He can’t do that either, unless she’s posing a threat to his welfare and safety. What he should have done was just wait for backup, if he couldn’t de-escalate it himself. But you don’t just pull somebody out of the car, and point that taser in her face. What if it had gone off? She’d have permanent brain damage.
She says, “Dont touch me, I’m not under arrest.” Trooper says, “You are under arrest. She says, “Under arrest for what?” He then turns to his shoulder-mounted radio, and asks for another unit. Does he have an obligation as a law enforcement officer to tell her why she is under arrest?
Yes. He needs to – it’s not clear to her what’s going on. He needs to tell her, ‘You’re under arrest because …,’ but you can’t really tell her that.
Because you can’t tell from the video that there’s any reason to have her under arrest.
She asserts her right to record this with her cell phone. That’s a right that has been clearly established. Is that true?
- She has a right to do that. But that’s another example where the officer perceives this as a challenge to his authority – and it further escalates the whole scenario.
When he says “get out of the car, or I will light you up,” he is apparently referring to the use of a taser. Is that a legitimate threat? Is that something that’s okay for officers to do in that situation?
No – here’s the situation where he is clearly violating her constitutional rights.
This is excessive force on the part of the officer – to take that taser and point it in her face and say, “I’m going to harm you.”
Taser is the last recourse to a gun. And if he can’t get her out, he can’t de-escalate it, he’s got to wait for another officer to come and talk through this.
Right now, the trooper has been placed on administrative duty. He’s not on leave, he’s still working for DPS. It’s our understanding that there is a violation of policy here – he should not have allowed it to escalate.
We are talking about a certain level of discretion that the state apparently entrusts with its troopers. Should officers have that much discretion.
He clearly exceeded that….
The discretion here is, how do you de-escalate the situation? He could have just given her the ticket and walked away.
Just like that. But he had to go through this confrontation. Of course, there are questions of race that come up here. And the fact that this is an out-of-state car moving through the town – and we know in Texas that’s a pretty typical profiling event.
What bothers me a lot is that troopers are supposed to be the best-trained police officers we have in the state. This guy is clearly out of control – clearly shouldn’t be out on the streets dealing with people – [given] this level of escalation that he provokes.
I noted the time frames with digital Breaks (2 second drift)
8:45 – The altercation starts.
9:15 – Officer asks her to put out the cigarette, she refuses.
9:30 – Officer opens her car doors.
10:05 – Officer tells her she’s under arrest.
10:30 – Officer: “I will light you up.”
10:35 – Sandy gets out of the car.
10:44 – They leave the view of the dashcam.
12:20 – They briefly re-enter the frame.
13:20 – Struggle offscreen.
12:40 – Sandy: “You’re about to break my fucking wrist.”
13:15 – Sandy: “You’re about to break my wrist. Stop!”
14:15 – Officer tells bystander to stop filming
15:00 – Sandy claims her head was knocked into the ground.
15:50 – Sandy not heard after this point.
16:00 – Police officer claims he was kicked.
16:10 – Car is searched
22:15 – Tow truck arrives
31:05 – Officer starts talking about arrest.
32:38 – CAR DISAPPEARS
49:35 – Car is towed
CLEVELAND, Ohio – The 12-year-old boy wielding what turned out to be a BB gun when he was shot by police outside a Cleveland recreation center, whose name has not been officially released, was shot in the stomach, He was taken to a nearby medical center in serious condition, EMS officials said. Throughout the night his condition deteriorated and he died.
The shooting came after a man at the park adjacent to the rec center called police when he saw “a guy with a gun pointing it at people.“
The caller twice said the gun was “probably fake” and told dispatchers the person pulling the gun from his waistband was “probably a juvenile,” according to audio released by police officials late that Saturday.
The caller’s doubt was never relayed to the responding officers – one in his first year on the force, and the other with at least a decade of experience, Follmer said.
How could Cleveland Police Patrolmen’s Association President Jeff Follmer say “The shooting was in anyway justified.”?
In a television interview Jeff Follmer, not only refers to Tamir Rice, the 12 year old boy tragically shot down by cowboy police as a “man,” but put in no uncertain terms that the shooting was 100% justified. He said this as the All In show’s video crew played a side-by-side of Follmer talking and the heartbreaking security cam video of Tamir Rice’s death.
He (Jeff Follmer) go’s on to say, “”If you listen to us you wouldn’t be dead right now.” Remember folks — its easy! Just do everything we tell you exactly when we tell you and you wont be dead. By the way, you have 3 seconds before your life is over. No pressure!
The rookie officer saw the boy at a park bench pick up what looked like a gun and placed it in his waistband, Follmer said.
The officer ordered the boy to put his hands in the air. Instead, police said, the boy reached for his gun. Deputy Chief Edward Tomba said the boy made no verbal threats to the officer and there was no physical confrontation.
The officer fired twice at the boy, hitting him in the stomach at least once. The department’s Use of Deadly Force Investigation Team is investigating the shooting.
This Sadistic Pathetic Cowboy (Follmer) has the audacity to call a dead youth’s murder justified. This is why, we see harm with the relationship between law enforcement and the communities they are sworn to protect, sowing suspicion where trust is urgently needed. False sentiment and absolute ignorance will continue to have an impact in targeted communities. The results can be catastrophic for all ,This must stop!
In the mean time my organization Freedom First International and the Guilty In Innocence Project have both asked for the immediate removal of Jeff follmer Please join us:
Jeff Follmers Conact Information below:
1303 West 58th Street
Cleveland, OH 44102
Homelessness and poverty are inextricably linked. Poor people are frequently unable to pay for housing, food, childcare, health care, and education. Difficult choices must be made when limited resources cover only some of these necessities. Often it is housing, which absorbs a high proportion of income that must be dropped. If you are poor, you are essentially an illness, an accident, or a paycheck away from living on the streets.
- In 2011, the official poverty rate was 15.0%. There were 46.2 million people in poverty.
The CES defines homeless people
In its Recommendations for the Censuses of Population and Housing, the CES identifies homeless people under two broad groups:
(a) Primary homelessness (or rooflessness). This category includes persons living in the streets without a shelter that would fall within the scope of living quarters.
(b) Secondary homelessness. This category may include persons with no place of usual residence who move frequently between various types of accommodations (including dwellings, shelters and institutions for the homeless or other living quarters). This category includes persons living in private dwellings but reporting ‘no usual address’ on their census form.
The CES acknowledges that the above approach does not provide a full definition of the ‘homeless’.
What can you do!
Who’s Mission is to End Mass Incarceration, the War on Drugs (Us), and its collateral consequences: The New Jim Crow.
The events that destroyed a thriving Black Oklahoma community 93 years ago were much more than a ‘race riot’
By Gregg L Greer, Editor for One World
As one of the most successful and wealthiest African American communities in the United States during the early 20th Century, it was popularly known as America’s “Black Wall Street” until the Tulsa Race Riot of 1921. The invasion was one of the most devastating massacres in the history of US race relations, destroying the once thriving Greenwood community.
The Riot and What HappenedThe riot began because of the alleged assault of a white elevator operator, 17-year old Sarah Page, by an African-American shoeshiner, 19-year old Dick Rowland (the case against Mr. Rowland was eventually dismissed). The Tulsa Tribune got word of the incident and chose to publish the story in the paper on May 31, 1921. Shortly after the newspaper article surfaced, there was news that a white lynch mob was going to take matters into its own hands and kill Dick Rowland. A group of armed white men congregated outside the jail and, subsequently, a group of African-American men joined the assembled crowd in order to protect Dick Rowland. There was an argument in which a white man tried to take a gun from a black man, and the gun fired a bullet up into the sky. This incident promoted many others to fire their guns, and the violence erupted on the evening of May 31, 1921. Whites flooded into the Greenwood district and destroyed the businesses and homes of African-American residents. No one was exempt from the violence of the white mobs; men, women, and even children were killed by the mobs. Troops were eventually deployed on the afternoon of June 1, but by that time there was not much left of the once thriving Greenwood district. Over 600 successful businesses were lost.
The AftermathWithin five years after the massacre, surviving residents who chose to remain in Tulsa rebuilt much of the district. They accomplished this despite the opposition of many white Tulsa political and business leaders. It resumed being a vital black community until segregation was overturned by the Federal Government during the 1950s and 1960s. Desegregation encouraged blacks to live and shop elsewhere in the city, causing Greenwood to lose much of its original vitality. Since then, city leaders have attempted to encourage other economic development activity nearby. “After the riot, black Tulsans, who were living in tents and forced… to wear green identification tags in order to work downtown, still managed to turn the tragedy into triumph. Without state help, they rebuilt Greenwood, and by 1942 the community had more than 240 black-owned businesses.”
What Economic Discrimination means?Investing in economic empowerment sets a direct path towards gender equality, poverty eradication and inclusive economic growth. We all must make enormous contributions to economies, whether in businesses, on farms, as entrepreneurs or employees, or by doing unpaid care work at home in order to grow. But there also exist those who are disproportionately affected by poverty, discrimination and exploitation. Economic Discrimination means people often end up in insecure, low-wage jobs, and constitute a small minority of those in senior positions. It curtails access to economic assets such as land and loans for the many. It limits participation in shaping economic and social policies. And, because some have to perform the bulk of the work load, they often have little time left to pursue economic opportunities. – Together-We must learn from the past and work toward the future. Related Articles:http://www.ebony.com/black-history/the-destruction-of-black-wall-street-405#ixzz3FTqKfYYn
Follow us on Facebook – https://www.facebook.com/pages/One-1-World/132992030077890