Disgusting

Proud to be a Democrat:

The Senate voted 47-52 Wednesday to reject controversial nominee Debo Adegbile as an assistant attorney general.

Seven Democrats voted against moving forward with President Obama’s nomination of Adegbile, which the Fraternal Order of Police and other groups opposed because of his involvement in the defense of Mumia Abu-Jamal, who was convicted of killing a Philadelphia police officer in 1981.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) then switched his vote from yes to no in a move that allows him to bring the nomination up again for a future vote.
[…]
Along with Reid, the Democratic votes against Adegbile were Sens. Heidi Heitkamp (D-N.D.), Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.), Mark Pryor (Ark.), Joe Donnelly (Ind.), John Walsh (Mont.), Chris Coons (Del.) and Bob Casey (Pa.).

Adegbile was up for AAG for Civil Rights, so this is all about race. I understand why West Virginia, Arkansas, Indiana, Delaware and Pennsyltucky Democrats might chicken out and vote no, but race just isn’t much of an issue in Montana or North Dakota.

Structurally, even without the filibuster, population shifts make the Senate a place that caters to rural, white, small-minded ignorance and prejudice. And that will be the death of us all. As the story points out, John Roberts defended a man who had been convicted of murdering 8 people. IOKIYAR of course, but I wonder how many people will be denied competent representation because Democratic lawyers realize the they won’t ever be appointed to a judgeship or a DoJ position if they’ve defended a black man accused of killing a white cop.






150 replies
  1. 1
    Baud says:

    For the first time in my life, I want to free Mumia.

  2. 2

    Release the New Black Panther Party!

    Will make Megynnnn Kelly’s dreams come true.

  3. 3
    ruemara says:

    Let’s get those contact numbers up. I think their cages need to be rattled a bit.

  4. 4

    Why are most Dem Office holders afraid of their own shadow?

  5. 5
    c u n d gulag says:

    Oh, for fuckity-fuck-fuck-fuckity-fuck fuck’s sake – Founding Father, JOHN ADAMS, defended British Soldiers in court!!!!!

  6. 6
    Zam says:

    Honestly I don’t really think we live in a society that in anyway values rights to a fair trial and rights to an attorney. Fuck with half the courtroom drama shit we get from news stations these days I’m not even sure a lot of people think we should even have a trial, just let a bunch of assholes declare the guilty person then send em to the chair, probably a televised event.

  7. 7
    Belafon says:

    While those 7 Democrats are frustrating, 47 voted for him. That’s a majority, @schrodinger’s cat. Be pissed at those seven and the entire Republican party.

    It’s not THE Democrats that were the problem, it’s some Democrats, and all the Republicans.

  8. 8
    eyelessgame says:

    race just isn’t much of an issue in Montana or North Dakota.

    isn’t that mostly because Montana and North Dakota ain’t got no black people?

  9. 9
    KG says:

    @c u n d gulag: yeah, but he was a big government, Massachusetts, Harvard attending, liberal

  10. 10
    James E Powell says:

    but race just isn’t much of an issue in Montana or North Dakota.

    You’re kidding, right?

  11. 11
    c u n d gulag says:

    Outside of a handful of Democratic Senators who display some, I not only don’t see any other “Profiles in Courage” – on either side of the aisle – I don’t even see any “Nose-hairs in Courage!”

  12. 12
    evolved beyond the fist mistermix says:

    @James E Powell: Nope, black vs white has little traction there. Native American vs white, that’s another story.

  13. 13
    Another Holocene Human says:

    Even a guilty man deserves due process of law.

  14. 14
    Leo Artunian says:

    @c u n d gulag: c u n d – Kripes, John Adams defended the British soldiers responsible for the Boston Massacre and got most of them off!

  15. 15
    Zam says:

    @evolved beyond the fist mistermix: Having most of my family come from Montana and having lived there myself. I can tell you rural Montana is just as scared of blacks in the same way any other rural whites of many other states do.

  16. 16
    Another Holocene Human says:

    @c u n d gulag: Don’t those people screaming “Cop Killer!” vote GOP regularly anyway? Because I figure PA and DE is about cop union endorsements.

  17. 17
    Patrick says:

    Seven Democrats voted against moving forward with President Obama’s nomination of Adegbile, which the Fraternal Order of Police and other groups opposed because of his involvement in the defense of Mumia Abu-Jamal, who was convicted of killing a Philadelphia police officer in 1981.

    So are these Seven Democrats actually saying that some defendants do not have the right to an attorney? Interesting. Are they now going to work to change our constitution to accomplish this change? And which crimes and which defendants will this apply to?

    This is why I never ever donate money to the Democratic party or the DNC etc etc. I always donate to the individual.

    BTW – A few years back, a cop was murdered in my state. They arrested a man and charged him. It turned eventually out that he was innocent and had absolutely nothing to do with it. Without an attorney, they probably would have thrown away the key by now…

  18. 18
    Another Holocene Human says:

    @Patrick: Ditto. DSCC and DCCC can kiss my ass.

  19. 19
    Another Holocene Human says:

    Wtf word press, you suck.

    I just found out from Wonkette that Harry Reid voted “No” so he could bring it to a vote again. Fightin’ Harry is in the ring, boys!

  20. 20
    Bill B says:

    The State abides. No salaries, pensions or perks were harmed in the making of this legislation.

  21. 21
    Bobby Thomson says:

    Yawn.

    Anyone who didn’t see this outcome from a few light years away hasn’t been paying attention. Frankly, it was kind of a dick move for the administration to put Adegbile through this.

  22. 22
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @c u n d gulag: Forty-seven members of the Democratic caucus voted yes. Let’s focus our opprobrium on those who earned it. Like ruemara said, let’s light up their phone lines.

  23. 23
    WaterGirl says:

    @Another Holocene Human: Come on, Harry!

    I will second the request for contact info for these 7 democrats. Let’s make some noise!

    Edit: paging Tim F. to the courtesy phone; Tim F. to the courtesy phone please.

  24. 24
    James E Powell says:

    @evolved beyond the fist mistermix:

    I guess I’m thinking of the reports, from time to time, of white supremacist enclaves in Idaho, Montana, and North Dakota. I don’t keep track, but I do associate those places with that mindset.

  25. 25
    Another Holocene Human says:

    http://wonkette.com/543213/dar.....ore-543213

    This video CUTS.

    Okay, OT, House not Senate.

  26. 26
    WaterGirl says:

    Is my math right? We only need to switch 3 votes to make it 50 to 49, which means it would pass?

  27. 27
    James E Powell says:

    So are these Seven Democrats actually saying that some defendants do not have the right to an attorney? Interesting. Are they now going to work to change our constitution to accomplish this change? And which crimes and which defendants will this apply to?

    I think you already know the answer to that last question.

  28. 28
    a hip hop artist from Idaho (fka Bella Q) says:

    If Reid’s vote was strategic, so that he can bring the nomination back to the floor, I’m not annoyed with him. And my (state’s) D senator would dream of voting no (and he didn’t).

  29. 29
    MomSense says:

    This is depressing. Whenever things like this happen I am always left wondering just what these nay voting Senators think is in the US Constitution. Did they skip over the right to counsel part?

  30. 30
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @WaterGirl: Actually, it’s only two substantive votes that need to be switched. Reid will switch his procedural no to a yes.

  31. 31
    RSR says:

    I’m sure that all the angry Pennsylvanians clinging to their guns are sure to vote for Bob Casey now.

  32. 32
    Chyron HR says:

    @Bobby Thomson:

    Frankly, it was kind of a dick move for the administration to put Adegbile through this.

    We have achieved peak looking glass, people.

  33. 33
    WaterGirl says:

    @Omnes Omnibus: Ah. I had always wondered what they meant in the past when they said Reid voted “no” for procedural reasons.

  34. 34
    Tissue Thin Pseudonym (JMN) says:

    I’d be a lot more impressed with the outrage (which I share) if there weren’t plenty of people here who are just as likely to dismiss someone who has defended white supremecists or other right wing types. The same rules apply.

  35. 35
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @WaterGirl: Only a person who has voted no can bring something to the floor again.

  36. 36
    rikyrah says:

    fuck all them chickenshyt Dems.

  37. 37
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @Tissue Thin Pseudonym (JMN): A very significant group of people associate an attorney and his/her client. They are often wrong. The John Adams example given above is important.

  38. 38
    WaterGirl says:

    @Omnes Omnibus: Question:

    Two plus Reid gives us a majority (50-49), but don’t we need 51 to pass something?

  39. 39
    Mike E says:

    @WaterGirl: Joe Biden rides in on his Trans Am, sets up the keg and votes Yea, baby!

  40. 40
    RuhRow_Gyro says:

    The reason people in Montana and North Dakota are pretty neutral on the race issue is that they really don’t know many blacks.

  41. 41
    Patrick says:

    @WaterGirl:

    Nope. 50-50 is OK, because Biden will break any tie.

  42. 42
    WaterGirl says:

    @Mike E: @Patrick: That works for me! I love me some Joe Biden.

  43. 43
    Eric k says:

    This is especially outrageous:

    Pennsylvania Sen. Bob Casey (D) also opposed the nomination, explaining his position in a statement last week. “I respect that our system of law ensures the right of all citizens to legal representation no matter how heinous the crime. At the same time, it is important that we ensure that Pennsylvanians and citizens across the country have full confidence in their public representatives — both elected and appointed. The vicious murder of Officer Faulkner in the line of duty and the events that followed in the 30 years since his death have left open wounds for Maureen Faulkner and her family as well as the City of Philadelphia.”

    So Casey is arguing that everyone deserves a lawyer, but if he thinks the person is guilty they don’t deserve a good lawyer and any lawyer that takes the case is branded a pariah.

    Disgusting, this cowardly piece of S$&/ needs to be primaried

  44. 44
    CONGRATULATIONS! says:

    The lawyer was doing his job, and seems to have done it pretty well.

    As to who his clients are, I don’t give two shits if he’s representing Hitler. I want him to understand the law and fight like a madman for his clients interests, and that is literally all I care about, from any lawyer. If they can do that they are qualified.

  45. 45
    taylormattd says:

    Ralph Nader can cure this problem once and for all.

  46. 46
    xenos says:

    @Tissue Thin Pseudonym (JMN):

    I’d be a lot more impressed with the outrage (which I share) if there weren’t plenty of people here who are just as likely to dismiss someone who has defended white supremecists or other right wing types. The same rules apply.

    You mean like Matthew Hale’s lawyer?

  47. 47
    Caladan says:

    There is a lot of controversy still surrounding the Mumia Abu-Jamal case in the Philly Tri-State region. Kasey and Coons’ no votes don’t surprise me.

  48. 48
    Tissue Thin Pseudonym (JMN) says:

    @xenos: As one example. Note: I have a lot of problems with Glenn Greenwald. That’s not one of them.

  49. 49
    WaterGirl says:

    President Obama is pissed, too:

    “The Senate’s failure to confirm Debo Adegbile to lead the Civil Rights Division at the Department of Justice is a travesty based on wildly unfair character attacks against a good and qualified public servant. Mr. Adegbile’s qualifications are impeccable. He represents the best of the legal profession, with wide-ranging experience, and the deep respect of those with whom he has worked. His unwavering dedication to protecting every American’s civil and Constitutional rights under the law – including voting rights – could not be more important right now. And Mr. Adegbile’s personal story – rising from adversity to become someone who President Bush’s Solicitor General referred to as one of the nation’s most capable litigators – is a story that proves what America has been and can be for people who work hard and play by the rules. As a lawyer, Mr. Adgebile has played by the rules. And now, Washington politics have used the rules against him. The fact that his nomination was defeated solely based on his legal representation of a defendant runs contrary to a fundamental principle of our system of justice – and those who voted against his nomination denied the American people an outstanding public servant.”

  50. 50
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @xenos: For example. Sometimes representation demonstrates agreement with a cause; sometimes it demonstrates defense of a principle, and, often, it simply represents nothing more than having been retained as counsel.

  51. 51
    Anton Sirius says:

    @xenos:

    You mean like Matthew Hale’s lawyer?

    Zing!

  52. 52
    Botsplainer says:

    Meh. Fuck Mumia. Involvement in that post-conviction jeremiad after the initial proceedings is pretty much a disqualifier for any subsequent high office given the amount of victim smearing that occurred in that camp.

    I rank that in the same category as representing Gluteus Maximus Matthew Hale so vehemently that you describe his those family members seeking civil justice for his victims as “odious” while acting as a conduit for Hale’s messages to the outside. It comes down to bad lawyering and having an absence of ethics.

    The world has its Polanski and Allen defenders, too, all of whom are equally sucktastic as people. You can mount an effective defense without trashing the victims of crime.

  53. 53
    RSR says:

    So, this is really a proxy on the death penalty (for certain people), right? Because Mumia is convicted and serving life, IIRC.

    Sure, they appealed the conviction, but that’s not uncommon. However, the bigger fight was about the punishment.

    But I guess it’s fine for white guy Arlen Specter to represent white killer Ira Einhorn. We needed to take the death penalty off the table to get Einhorn extradited and (re)convicted.

  54. 54
    🎂 Martin says:

    @Tissue Thin Pseudonym (JMN): FWIW, I could care less who GG has represented in the past. That’s his job.

    I dislike GG because he presents things he doesn’t understand as undeniable and then attacks his accusers when they point out he doesn’t know what the fuck he’s talking about.

  55. 55
    ericblair says:

    @Anton Sirius: The dustup over Greenwald being Hale’s lawyer was about how he represented him, not that he did. So, no, not the same thing.

  56. 56

    @Belafon: Yes you are right, its not most in this case. I should have phrased my sentence thus, why are so many Democratic officeholders so afraid of their own shadow.

  57. 57
    Chris says:

    Structurally, even without the filibuster, population shifts make the Senate a place that caters to rural, white, small-minded ignorance and prejudice. And that will be the death of us all

    I just want to quote this for truth. It’s been a paralyzing institution at least as far back as when it was considered “the South’s revenge for losing the Civil War” or something to that effect. Frankly, if you want to put a brake on change to make sure it doesn’t happen too fast or out of order (which is supposedly what the Senate is there for), innate voter conservatism (e.g. skepticism of changing the known for the unknown) will handle that for you all by itself. The Senate today isn’t a brake, it’s a car boot.

  58. 58
    wvng says:

    Speaking of “caters to rural, white, small-minded ignorance and prejudice” from a Facebook friend I just learned that so-called Dems in the state legislature did this today:

    32-0. ~vote of the West Virginia State Senate (which is comprised of 24 Democrats) on S.B. 317, a bill that would prohibit—that’s right, prohibit—cities and counties from creating ordinances to restrict the selling or the carrying of firearms and ammunition within their own jurisdictions (including on government property), summing up the contemporary wisdom on what it means to be a Democrat in West Virginia.

    79-17. ~vote of the West Virginia House of Delegates (which is comprised of 53 Democrats) on H.B. 4588, a bill that would make it a felony to perform abortions on fetuses after 20 weeks’ gestation even in cases of fetal nonviability, s

  59. 59
    Botsplainer says:

    I’ll remind all those who shed tears for poor Mumia that if he didn’t do it, all he had to do was to finger either his brother or his brother’s passenger at the time of trial.

    He declined to do so.

    Fuck him sideways.

  60. 60
    Jay C says:

    @Eric k:

    Utter chickenshit nonsense, as noted: but in this case, I think that if he had been associated with any other case than Mumia Abu-Jamal’s, Mr. Adegbile probably would be packing his boxes for his new job as we type.

    Mumia’s case still seems to hit too many buttons: One, “Free Mumia” is widely seen as a left-wing shibboleth, and thus, worth automatic, unthinking opposition from the Right: for whom it is always 1968, and who will let no opportunity for radical hippie-punching go unexploited. Two, open opposition from the FOP is a red flag for too many politicos: cops, when organized, can be a major negative factor in elections (though they never seem to be much of a positive one, as in most police org.’s call for sensible gun control) – and it’s likely the Senators just didn’t want to push the issue.

    That said, I agree with President Obama: travesty.

  61. 61
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @Botsplainer: Adegbile was involved in filing an amicus brief that argued that Mumia’s conviction was invalid due to discrimination during jury selection. How is this problematic? If here was discrimination should the conviction stand because Mumia’s didn’t finger someone else? And what the fuck?

  62. 62

    WH statement:

    The Senate’s failure to confirm Debo Adegbile to lead the Civil Rights Division at the Department of Justice is a travesty based on wildly unfair character attacks against a good and qualified public servant. Mr. Adegbile’s qualifications are impeccable. He represents the best of the legal profession, with wide-ranging experience, and the deep respect of those with whom he has worked. His unwavering dedication to protecting every American’s civil and Constitutional rights under the law – including voting rights – could not be more important right now. And Mr. Adegbile’s personal story – rising from adversity to become someone who President Bush’s Solicitor General referred to as one of the nation’s most capable litigators – is a story that proves what America has been and can be for people who work hard and play by the rules. As a lawyer, Mr. Adgebile has played by the rules. And now, Washington politics have used the rules against him. The fact that his nomination was defeated solely based on his legal representation of a defendant runs contrary to a fundamental principle of our system of justice – and those who voted against his nomination denied the American people an outstanding public servant.

  63. 63
    Botsplainer says:

    Mumia’s case from the vantagepoint of those who choose to remember Faulkner.

    http://justice.danielfaulkner......abu-jamal/

  64. 64
    Citizen_X says:

    @Botsplainer:

    without trashing the victims of crime.

    Besides “absolutely fucking nothing,” what does that have to do with Adegbile?

  65. 65
    Chris says:

    @ranchandsyrup:

    He represents the best of the legal profession, with wide-ranging experience, and the deep respect of those with whom he has worked.

    Everything that terrifies certain people about the Civil Rights Division, in other words.

    I remember reading somewhere years ago that under Bush, the Civil Rights Division had been pretty thoroughly gutted/politicized, with its emphasis shifting from protecting the voting and civil rights of minorities to protecting the evangelizing efforts of religious groups. Was that accurate and if so, how much of that is still at work (open question to the floor, namely, people who follow DOJ news better than I do)? Any success in reversing that since 2006/2008?

  66. 66
    Chyron HR says:

    @Botsplainer:

    So… do you even comprehend that Mumia isn’t the one who was nominated for an assistant attorney general position here?

  67. 67
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @Chris: Yes, it has.

  68. 68
    Botsplainer says:

    @Omnes Omnibus:

    Adegbile was involved in filing an amicus brief that argued that Mumia’s conviction was invalid due to discrimination during jury selection. How is this problematic?

    Because he got involved in a case with a perverse post-conviction crusade of victim and witness smearing, all due to his post-case status of being someone who punched all of the right trendy buttons with the right famous people – not because of anything he did before 1981. The taint rubbed off.

    Sucks to be him, but you have to be selective in your work.

    Before 1981, Jamal was a legend in his own mind – the police didn’t have a clue who he was, and the revenge story fell apart on cursory examination.

    If here was discrimination should the conviction stand because Mumia’s didn’t finger someone else?

    There wasn’t discrimination in the selection process.

    The conviction kept getting upheld, but the sentence became problematic due to defects in the instructions. It wasn’t as if the life sentence was handed out as the result of new considerations – the Commonwealth opted to forego death.

    And what the fuck?

    I don’t like him or his defenders.

  69. 69

    @Chris: From what I understand, there are still quite a few Liberty Law School grads are still in the CRD and other divisions, waiting for orders from God their masters.

  70. 70
    ruemara says:

    @Chyron HR: if Adegbile decides he’s got better things to do than go through it again, I await the condemnation of the administration for not “fighting hard enough”.

  71. 71
    Someguy says:

    @Bobby Thomson: Frankly, it was kind of a dick move for the administration to put Adegbile through this.

    I thought it was a political misjudgement. You can spike the football. You can dance around a bit. But if you go to the other team’s 50 yard logo and dance on the thing, you had better expect somebody on the other team to run out and drill you. Sure it’s a penalty to hit the dancing guy and the Republicans as usual are wrong. But what did the WH expect? Getting upset about this is like the Republicans getting upset when all democrats and a few Republicans vote down some bill infringing on abortion rights. You can only feed the base so much red meat at once before even the onlookers get a little shaky.

  72. 72
    Botsplainer says:

    @Citizen_X:

    Besides “absolutely fucking nothing,” what does that have to do with Adegbile?

    He touched the file in a case notorious for victim and witness smearing. Plus, Mumia has always acted the asshole in this.

    That taint always rubs off on people, and it is really, really hard to wash off. Sucks to be him, but he made that choice.

  73. 73
    Botsplainer says:

    @ruemara:

    if Adegbile decides he’s got better things to do than go through it again, I await the condemnation of the administration for not “fighting hard enough”.

    Count on it.

  74. 74
    CarolDuhart2 says:

    But what if he didn’t want to do that to his brother?

    In any case, a case that depends on his testimony is fundamentally weak. It should be the evidence that convicts, not whatever a defendant might say on the witness stand.

    Besides, he had no expectation that anything he said would have been believed. They were determined to convict him of something because he was a Black Panther, even if he had been blocks away at the time.

  75. 75
    Botsplainer says:

    @CarolDuhart2:

    They were determined to convict him of something because he was a Black Panther, even if he had been blocks away at the time.

    Does your Mumia sweatshirt have sparkle ponies on it?

  76. 76
    CarolDuhart2 says:

    One more thing rings bells in the Mumia case: the insistence that Mumia not get another trial, and that he must be executed even though things look fairly sketchy. To me that’s a tell-usually victims just want accountability-if Mumia spends the rest of his life in jail that’s enough for justice and public safety.

  77. 77
    Botsplainer says:

    http://justice.danielfaulkner......-evidence/

    Mumia Abu-Jamal Remained at the Scene and Was Physically Identified as the Killer By Several Eyewitnesses

    Though he attempted to flee, because of his wound Jamal was only able to move a few steps away from Officer Faulkner’s body, where he collapsed on the curb. This fact is verified by the testimony of four of the five eyewitnesses to Officer Faulkner’s murder. The Police Radio Tape Transmittal establishes that after pulling William Cook’s vehicle over and prior to exiting his patrol car, Officer Faulkner requested backup at 3:51:08 AM. The Radio Transmission Log also verifies that the first police vehicle arrived on the scene at 3:52:27 AM, just 90 seconds after Officer Faulkner exited his vehicle to question William Cook.

    Based on this information it is clear that less than a minute passed between the time when Officer Faulkner was shot and Mumia Abu-Jamal was spotted sitting on the pavement next to Officer Faulkner’s body, by Officers Shoemaker and Forbes, who were the first officers on the scene. The jury heard Officer Shoemaker state that upon seeing the gun next to Jamal, he ordered him to “freeze.” He further stated that instead of surrendering, as an innocent person would, Jamal attempted to raise his gun and fire at them. According to Shoemaker, as Mumia Abu-Jamal attempted to reach his gun, he chose not to use deadly force to subdue him, but instead chose to kick Jamal in the throat and then kicked the gun away from him.

    Officers then attempted to subdue Jamal, who resisted their efforts. After a violent struggle the arresting officers handcuffed Jamal and threw him into the back of the police van that Officer Faulkner had summoned to arrest Cook. (N.T. 6/19/82, 116)

    The jury also heard from each of 3 eyewitnesses (Robert Chobert, Cynthia White and Albert Magilton) who stated that just moments after Jamal was subdued, they were asked to look at him as he lay inside the wagon. Each stated that they physically identified Mumia Abu-Jamal as the man they had just seen run across the street and shoot Officer Faulkner. At trial, these individuals again identified Jamal as the killer. Chobert stated that he never lost sight of Jamal from the moment he shot Faulkner until he was placed in the van. (N.T. 6/19/82, 210-213)

  78. 78
    Citizen_X says:

    @Botsplainer:

    He touched the file

    Seriously? You’re going with this stupid voodoo bullshit?

    He’s a lawyer. He did his job. Good for him.

  79. 79
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @Botsplainer: Basically, you are suggesting that work that Adegbile did while working for the NAACP Legal Defense Fund disqualified him for a position at the Justice Department. Not a common point of view. Or maybe it is. I certainly disagree with you.

  80. 80
    Botsplainer says:

    @CarolDuhart2:

    One more thing rings bells in the Mumia case: the insistence that Mumia not get another trial, and that he must be executed even though things look fairly sketchy. To me that’s a tell-usually victims just want accountability-if Mumia spends the rest of his life in jail that’s enough for justice and public safety.

    Which is why the conviction was repeatedly upheld, with the only eventual remands coming due to defective sentencing instructions. (/eyeroll)

  81. 81
    CarolDuhart2 says:

    @Botsplainer: I’m old enough to remember that a lot of radical black activists were warred against regardless of what they did. Google “Fred Hampton” who was murdered in his bed, and others who were convicted on drug charges. The terror after the riots of black men carrying guns and being radical was such that the authorities justified just about any tactic. Add in what we learned about COINTELPRO and the Church Commission: it’s possible that informants have committed crimes in order to pin the blame on these people.

  82. 82
    CarolDuhart2 says:

    @Omnes Omnibus: I disagree with Botsplainer too. Keeping people who defend controversial defendants from being able to take these jobs means that not only these people can’t get good defense (sometimes the state really is against you), but also means that people with extensive experience in the justice system can’t be appointed. Only someone who his a patent attorney can avoid representing someone who the public doesn’t like.

  83. 83
    Botsplainer says:

    @Citizen_X:

    You’re going with this stupid voodoo bullshit?

    Not voodoo. Objective career reality.

    Shit like this creates perception, regardless of how minimal (or nonexistent) someone’s role was in the offensive, victim smearing sides of a case. If too much of it occurs, you get tainted with the group doing the smearing – it just happens.

    I work in an office with some high profile, topnotch criminal defense lawyers. There are also other high profile criminal defense lawyers on other floors in this building. They achieve quality results, and never resort to reflexive victim or witness smearing – they bend over backward to create a positive image of their client, and that includes the method of presentation and demeanor of the attorneys.

    Act like a jackass, and you will get annihilated.

    Any of these guys would be fine choices to take office, and nobody would gripe.

  84. 84
    Chyron HR says:

    @Botsplainer:

    In summary, you think Adegbile is unfit to hold office because he was “tainted” by “smearing”.

    No comment.

  85. 85
    Botsplainer says:

    @CarolDuhart2:

    Keeping people who defend controversial defendants from being able to take these jobs means that not only these people can’t get good defense (sometimes the state really is against you), but also means that people with extensive experience in the justice system can’t be appointed.

    Sometimes, you have to draw clear lines between you and your client’s more enthusiastically weird supporters; you can’t have the stupid shit bouncing back on you and making you look dumb.

  86. 86
    Mnemosyne says:

    @Botsplainer:

    Not voodoo. Objective career reality.

    Right now, it looks like you think that working for the NAACP disqualifies someone from working in civil rights law. You did notice that Adegbile was working for the NAACP Legal Defense Fund at the time and filed the brief on behalf of the NAACP, right?

    So are there any other civil rights organizations that you think should automatically disqualify people from working in civil rights for the government?

  87. 87
    Senyordave says:

    @Botsplainer: So you don’t have a problem with a death penalty handed down that had defects in the jury instructions? And not only do you not have a problem, you have a problem with an attorney who gets involved with such a case.

    How many damn times has the state gone after people because of their beliefs or color of their skin? People like you are enablers of state misbehavior.

  88. 88
    kc says:

    @Botsplainer:

    No one here is shedding tears for Mumia.

  89. 89
    some guy says:

    @Botsplainer:

    Sometimes, you have to draw clear lines between you and your client’s more enthusiastically weird supporters; you can’t have the stupid shit bouncing back on you and making you look dumb.

    care to share one single example where the counsel for the NAACP Legal Defense Fund crossed that line you have constructed in your imagination?

  90. 90
    CarolDuhart2 says:

    Victim blaming? Hardly. You don’t have to diss anyone to wonder if the trial was on the up and up here. It’s not (and wasn’t Faulkner’s ) fault that some people have questions about that trial. And nobody is saying that he deserved to die.

    But given the CIA/FBI surveillance and disruption of radical groups and the hounding of just about anyone who wanted change in the racial/sexual/social status quo, a higher standard of proof was needed in this case than eyewitness statements of some scared people.

  91. 91
    Senyordave says:

    @Mnemosyne: Apparently any civil rights organizations that defend his definition of controversial clients.

  92. 92
    kc says:

    @Omnes Omnibus:

    Not a common point of view. Or maybe it is.

    It is, among Republicans.

    Given Botsplainer’s commenting history, it’d be a surprise if he took any other position on this.

  93. 93
    Botsplainer says:

    @Chyron HR:

    In summary, you think Adegbile is unfit to hold office because he was “tainted” by “smearing”.

    He got stuck with a shitty file. It had career ramifications.

    If he has anyone to blame, it should be Jamal and those rabid celebrity and foreign supporters that created a climate where he was practically obligated due to pressure to take on a failure of an issue in a high profile case.

    Call him “collateral damage of hyperbolic and manipulated left activism”, if you will.

  94. 94
    Botsplainer says:

    @CarolDuhart2:

    a higher standard of proof was needed in this case than eyewitness statements of some scared people.

    The developmental history of several thousand years’ worth of jurisprudence across all cultures would beg to disagree.

  95. 95
    Senyordave says:

    And the cherry on top is that Adegbile is African-American. And worked for the NAACP. And ultimately, for many Republicans those facts are pretty much disqualify any chance of being confirmed.

  96. 96
    Elizabelle says:

    @Belafon:

    It’s not THE Democrats that were the problem, it’s some Democrats, and all the Republicans.

    Cannot be said enough.

    7 =/= 47

  97. 97
    CarolDuhart2 says:

    We now know that eyewitness testimony can sometimes be unreliable. People can be scared out of their wits, drunk, not see clearly. In a case like this, there needed to be more-physical evidence-perhaps other evidence. Given his profile, (and the times) Mumia really should have been tried out of town in front of a jury who was less likely to be prejudiced against him, and in front of a judge who would not have local pressure.

  98. 98
    Mike E says:

    Act like a jackass, and you will get annihilated.

    Or, get an entire B-J thread, seemingly.

  99. 99
    Botsplainer says:

    @Senyordave:

    So you don’t have a problem with a death penalty handed down that had defects in the jury instructions? And not only do you not have a problem, you have a problem with an attorney who gets involved with such a case.

    His involvement, as I understand, wasn’t about the instructions – it was about the mechanics of jury selection, which he lost in front of an arguably more liberal set of courts than exist today. I’m not scoring him for getting involved – I’m simply saying that involvement has consequences down the road.

    Frankly, that is part of the job, and young lawyers need to understand that on the way in.

    How many damn times has the state gone after people because of their beliefs or color of their skin? People like you are enablers of state misbehavior.

    Jamal wasn’t targeted because of his beliefs or the color of his skin.

    He was targeted because he was there with Faulkner’s body (before fighting with the officers on scene) after Faulkner had radioed in that he’d pulled over a car that, incidentally, was owned and operated by Jamal’s brother, and was identified as the shooter by a few eyewitnesses. Plus, neither Jamal nor Cook were talking.

  100. 100
    Sherparick says:

    This case by the way is a case study on how the Right-wing uses race to keep the white working class, in particular white working class males. Just check out the web site and its images. http://justice.danielfaulkner.com/. And there is not a story or a speech about Mumia’s case that does not have “Black Panther” and “Move” in it. The Daily Caller article, if you can stomach it, literally drips with racism and contempt for opposition to death penalty.

    Basically, it is a chance to wave the bloody flag and remind whites why they need to vote Republican to keep “those people in their place. So as a case study, it is interesting to see it as so successful.

  101. 101
    Botsplainer says:

    @CarolDuhart2:

    Given his profile

    What profile? Nobody knew him, which is how far down the obscurity scale he resided in, considering that he was having to earn a living as a cab driver.

    Cole probably has a bigger audience, and he can’t support himself on B-J revenues alone.

    Mumia really should have been tried out of town in front of a jury who was less likely to be prejudiced against him, and in front of a judge who would not have local pressure.

    ROFLMAO – His only shot was in Philadelphia. Would you try him out there in the hinterlands of Pennsyltucky?

  102. 102
    CarolDuhart2 says:

    Bot, do you even see why folks may be skeptical of this case at all?

  103. 103
    Botsplainer says:

    @CarolDuhart2:

    Bot, do you even see why folks may be skeptical of this case at all?

    What I see is patchouli-reeking, knit-hat wearing, hackey sack players who are proclaiming solidarity with the daring radical journalist who never sold out in order to make a living, and who wants to “stick it to the man, man”. They’re so eager to embrace his tale of oppression and set-up that they refuse to consider that he snapped under the conditions of the failure and pathos of his life when he saw his own flesh and blood brother get pulled over.

    Drum circles are calling you.

  104. 104
    Chyron HR says:

    @Botsplainer:

    Will you be working to primary all 47 Democrats who were tainted by voting to confirm someone who touched the Mumia file? Does Reid get a pass because of his procedural “no” vote, or does he also have cop killer cooties?

  105. 105
    Botsplainer says:

    @Chyron HR:

    Will you be working to primary all 47 Democrats who were tainted by voting to confirm someone who touched the Mumia file?

    Nope.

    Now, if they start making speeches in the well about the ugliness of the injustice to Mumia in imprisoning him, I’ll tend to think of that along the same lines as I did the vote to save Terry Schiavo.

    Here’s a hint – I wouldn’t be a fan.

  106. 106
    Hal says:

    Honestly, does the Mumia case have anything to do with this? Remember Lani Guinier? Republicans do not like folks, particularly black folks in these positions who have a history of dealing with the very issues they are being hired to deal with. Go with a person like Clarence Thomas, and administrative desk jockey with no real world experience, less you frighten old white people.

    which the Fraternal Order of Police and other groups opposed because of his involvement in the defense of Mumia Abu-Jamal, who was convicted of killing a Philadelphia police officer in 1981.

    As to this, people are entitled to a defense. The police know that better than anyone. They are opposing this appointment because someone dared to exercise their constitutional rights.

  107. 107
    Keith G says:

    Disgusting? Are you trolling?

    Mr. Adegbile seems like a troublesome choice to be nominated for such an important spot. When a major independent news organization, owned in part by a prominent Democrat fundraiser feels that he is unfit for the Justice post, there is a big problem.

    As part of this cause [the Abu-Jamal defense], the lawyers supervised by Adegbile promoted the myth that Abu-Jamal was an innocent man who was framed because of his race

    There was never any merit to these claims of racism – a conclusion reached by both state and federal courts. The jury that convicted and sentenced Abu-Jamal to death included two African Americans and would have included one more, except that Abu-Jamal ordered his lawyer not to seat the juror.

    If such claims against Mr. Adegbile have merit (and that I do not know), it is not that hard to see why some might have problems with Mr. Adegbile. whether or not he otherwise is a lawyer with a great resume.

    I wonder how much effort was put into gaming this nomination process out? Did they check to see how this would play out or did the West Wing just assume that with the new process in the Senate, they were home free?

  108. 108
    Chyron HR says:

    @Botsplainer:

    Dude, why are you giving these Mumia-abeters (the “Mumia 47”, if you will) a free pass? By voting to confirm Adegbile, they’re practically playing hackey sack with the patchouli of justice with Obama leading the drum circle!

    Sparkles also, too.

  109. 109
    Senyordave says:

    @Botsplainer: Drum circles are calling you.

    What a great argument point! You obviously win the debate by attempting to insult (BTW, this sounds like a Mark Levin insult) someone who disagrees with you.

    I’m guessing that you have a major sad that Abu-Jamal did not end up being executed, despite serious issues regarding jury instructions (according top Wikipedia, that was the major point the Appeals Court referred to in overturning the death penalty), as well as the deposed testimony of a court reporter, who said:

    Judge Sabo was discussing the case of Mumia Abu-Jamal. During the course of that conversation, I heard Judge Sabo say, “Yeah, and I’m going to help them fry the nigger.” There were three people present when Judge Sabo made that remark, including myself.

    But of course, there was no extreme public pressure to convict and execute Abu-Jamal.

  110. 110
    Chyron HR says:

    @Keith G:

    I wonder how much effort was put into gaming this nomination process out?

    Silly Obummer. Did you actually believe the True Progressives when they said you should nominate the best qualified candidates regardless of whether or not they can pass a Senate confirmation vote?

    Silly, silly Obummer.

  111. 111
    RareSanity says:

    @Botsplainer:

    OK, first you say this:

    Sometimes, you have to draw clear lines between you and your client’s more enthusiastically weird supporters; you can’t have the stupid shit bouncing back on you and making you look dumb.

    Then it is pointed out to you that it wasn’t his client, it was the client of his employer, and he filed a brief in that role.

    Then you say this:

    He got stuck with a shitty file. It had career ramifications.

    Inferring that it was the NAACP’s fault for assigning him the file…but then you go on to say this:

    If he has anyone to blame, it should be Jamal and those rabid celebrity and foreign supporters that created a climate where he was practically obligated due to pressure to take on a failure of an issue in a high profile case.

    Saying that if anyone is to blame, it’s Mumia Abu-Jamal and all the other related groups that supported his innocence.

    It seems to me, all you’re really saying is that you are too emotional about this subject to speak rationally about it.

    Because, rationally, the details of the Mumia Abu-Jamal case are irrelevant to whether or not Adegbile acted competently and ethically as a civil rights attorney while employed by the NAACP.

    He filed a brief in defense of the civil rights of Abu-Jamal, not his innocence…and unless you have quotes and/or video of him personally “smearing” victims, you are just finding him guilty by association. Which, I might add, is a pretty weak association (other groups that supported the same semi-related cause…arguing for protection of civil rights, is NOT the same as arguing for innocence).

    I’m sure you’d be pretty pissed off if someone tried to apply the same judgment to you.

  112. 112
    Amir Khalid says:

    @Botsplainer:
    If I understand you right, you reckon that it’s just too bad for Debo Adegbile that his being on Mumia Abu-Jamal’s defence team is now being held against him. And you accept US Senators doing that, even though it doesn’t reflect at all on his fitness for the job that Obama nominated him to.

    Like the majority on this thread, I disagree with you.

  113. 113
    Mnemosyne says:

    @Botsplainer:

    Frankly, that is part of the job, and young lawyers need to understand that on the way in.

    So, in your opinion, young lawyers should never take jobs with the NAACP or any other civil rights organization in case it comes back to haunt them later.

    How very Republican of you.

  114. 114
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @RareSanity: This.

  115. 115
    Mnemosyne says:

    @Amir Khalid:

    If I understand you right, you reckon that it’s just too bad for Debo Adegbile that his being on Mumia Abu-Jamal’s defence team is now being held against him.

    This is the thing, though: Adegbile was not on Abu-Jamal’s defense team. Ever. He was on a team from the NAACP Legal Defense Fund that filed an amicus brief during one of Abu-Jamal’s appeals. So apparently no one involved in any aspect of Abu-Jamal’s defense in any way, no matter how remote, can be trusted.

  116. 116
    RareSanity says:

    @Omnes Omnibus:

    Maybe that semester of debate team in high school wasn’t the complete waste of time I thought it was…

  117. 117
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @Keith G: Someone in Philly is bothered by anyone providing any defense for Mumia? Color me shocked.

    As far as Mumia’ guilt, innocence, or sentencing go, I really don’t have an opinion. As far as attorneys who defend unpopular individuals through every legal avenue, I have nothing but respect. Obama appointed someone who’s exactly that. Good for him.

  118. 118
    Keith G says:

    @Chyron HR: No dude(tte), wake up. Just like no trial lawyer should ask a question in court when he/’she doesn’t know the factual answer, no vote should be brought up in Congress unless you know the Whip count is in your favor. If it isn’t, find out what needs to happen to make it so.

    Obviously, I am not anti Obama (as your silly retort implies) I am just curious as to what happened behind the curtain. Dick Durban’s job is to know the votes and to advise Reid and the White House accordingly. I just wonder why put Mr. Adegbile in that position if you know the votes are not there – and if they didn’t know the votes were not there….why?

  119. 119
    Keith G says:

    @Omnes Omnibus: Whether you or I are shocked by such opinions is immaterial. What matters is the seven Democrats who voted against confirmation (actually what matters is five of those seven, I guess). Were they polled by Durbin? How firm was their opposition? What was their price?

  120. 120
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @RareSanity: One of the easiest ways to make sure that unpopular people and/or ideas are kept down is to demonize the attorneys who defend them. Whether Mumia killed Faulkner or not, he deserved a fair trial and he deserved to have every aspect of the trial litigated to the fullest extent available. Not one has shown any evidence that Adegbile did anything other than participate in litigation on behalf an unpopular client. That should not be a standard for disqualifying someone from public service.

  121. 121
    CarolDuhart2 says:

    Maybe the count was there at first, then the hometown rightwing noise machine started up, and they got cold feet.

    Bot’s anger towards the “patchoul-wearing” supporters of Mumia makes me wonder if the real anger is that people actually care about “cop-killer” Mumia and his rights.

    But as we have seen in the Innocence Project, and the releases of Geronimo Pratt (RIP-2011), and Marshall “Eddie” Conway, sometimes informants, sometimes the police, had a vested interest in slanting the truth in order to put black activists away ,

  122. 122
    MTmofo says:

    According to the 2010 census there are 4,027 blacks in MT, around 30-40 thousand Hispanics and 60-70 thousand Native Americans. Out of one million people.

    MT is the home base of April Gaede and a number of other white domination groups (see SPLC listings). Race is an issue in MT.

  123. 123
    Amir Khalid says:

    @Mnemosyne:
    Thank you for clarifying that for me. So Adegbile had no involvement at all in Mumia’s defence? Then I understand even less Botsplainer’s serves-him-right take on the unsuccessful vote to confirm Adegbile.

  124. 124
    CONGRATULATIONS! says:

    So Adegbile had no involvement at all in Mumia’s defence?

    @Amir Khalid: Correct. This is all excuse-making for Congress. Republican racism, Democratic terror. You’ll never see another African-American confirmed for any office that requires Congressional approval so long as Obama is president – votes to do so will be used to great effect against those Democrats who are vulnerable.

    That count of vulnerable Dems appears to be seven.

  125. 125
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @Amir Khalid: The NAACP Legal Defense Fund filed a friend of the court brief on behalf of Mumia in 2009; Adegbile’s name is on the brief. The LDF joined Mumia’s defense team in 2011; Adegbile was in management at the LDF at the time. The state of play on the appeals right now is that things have gotten highly technical about what should or should not have happened in every aspect of the trials and whether any mistakes made violated Mumia’s rights.

  126. 126
    CarolDuhart2 says:

    What angered the people about Adegbile’s involvement is that the appeal lead to a ruling that Mumia’s civil rights were violated, vacating the death penalty. So while Mumia will remain in prison, he won’t be executed. That’s what the howling is about here. Mumia won’t serve a death sentence. They won’t have the satisfaction of his execution. Think about it. Once it looked like things were pretty sketchy, they could have settled for a sentence that was practically a life sentence if the evidence stood up. Few thought that Mumia would be released short of extreme age or a complete exoneration.

    Add the rage that anyone really cared about him, and that was enough right there.

  127. 127
    Keith G says:

    @Amir Khalid: This is a bit of a primer on the case.

  128. 128
    Samuel Lockhart says:

    No lawyer should be disqualified on the basis of a client they represented. Lawyers are ethically bound to represent all of the accused without bias. To do otherwise would to be a craven hypocrite. Oh, yes, that’s what they’re in favor of.

  129. 129
    gelfling545 says:

    the Fraternal Order of Police and other groups opposed because of his involvement in the defense of Mumia Abu-Jamal, who was convicted of killing a Philadelphia police officer in 1981.

    It is extremely disturbing that an organization of police officers does not understand the right to representation by an attorney when one is accused of a crime. Don’t they have to mention it in the Miranda warning every time they arrest someone?

  130. 130
    GHayduke (formerly lojasmo) says:

    In before some nattering fuckwit criticizes Reid for his vote despite the explaination in the original post.

    Too late?

    Third day in rehab, and I’m still a bitter angry man, right?

    Awaiting an email from some butthurt FPer telling me to be more civil.

  131. 131
    David Koch says:

    130 comments and nobody has blamed Obama?

    Is it a snow day?

  132. 132
    dollared says:

    @evolved beyond the fist mistermix: Bullroar. Places like that are full of prejudice against those big city blacks. Very, ,very fertile Fox territory.

  133. 133
    Amir Khalid says:

    @gelfling545:
    The crime in this case was the murder of a fellow cop, so that may have affected their objectivity somewhat.

  134. 134
    Keith G says:

    @Omnes Omnibus: The Philly Inquirer is the “hometown” paper for this controversy, as Philly was where the murder case originated. That being so, I went deep into their links to try to get a handle on this issue as it would appear to a US Senator.

    For the life of me, the best that I can conclude is that this vote was not about morality, the intellectual arguments, the Constitution, or legal ethics. It seems to be all about how much utility there was in casting a yea vote as opposed to a nay vote (How do I get helped? How do I get hurt?). The nay side had a bigger hammer I guess. The yea side was either under resourced or at least out gunned, so to speak.

    The result of the vote may well have been a travesty, but often in legislative politics avoiding a travesty takes a lot of effort.

  135. 135
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @Keith G: How is this related to my reply to Amir? Further, haven’t you been arguing that Obama should lead and do the right thing? If he thought Adegbile was the best person for the the job, should he not have nominated him and damn the consequences? I think it is shitty, and as mm said disgusting, that an eminently qualified person is being delayed because of one out of literally hundreds of cases in which he has been involved – especially since there is no indication that he did anything wrong and there are definite indications that aspects of the jury trial bore closer scrutiny.

  136. 136
    Gene108 says:

    @RSR:

    The Mumai case was in Philadelphia. This could be about keeping the Phily suburban vote, which used line up for Republicans like Specter, but has become reliably Democrativ votes as Republicans have drifted hard right.

  137. 137
    pseudonymous in nc says:

    @gelfling545:

    It is extremely disturbing that an organization of police officers does not understand the right to representation by an attorney when one is accused of a crime.

    s/disturbing/predictable.

    Big Cop knows who’s boss.

  138. 138
    nancydarling says:

    @Zam: This. My sister-in-law is from small town Wyoming and she can barely stand to go back since her parents died because her siblings are such racists.

  139. 139
    Keith G says:

    @Omnes Omnibus:

    If he thought Adegbile was the best person for the the job, should he not have nominated him and damn the consequences?

    Damn the consequences? I am not sure how many executives use that as their guide star. Often it’s more about finding the most qualified person “I” am willing to fight for and win, if a fight there must be. Those damned consequences can give one a hell of a thumping if one is not careful.

    I replied to you since you were clarifying the role Mr. Adegbile had in the appellate case. I think those considerations were secondary to (most of) those Democratic Senators. I bet they are fully informed and have a good take on the issues involved and still feel the need to vote in such a way as to give them the most benefit in future fund raising and campaigning activities.

  140. 140
    Cervantes says:

    @Omnes Omnibus:

    The NAACP Legal Defense Fund filed a friend of the court brief on behalf of Mumia in 2009; Adegbile’s name is on the brief. The LDF joined Mumia’s defense team in 2011; Adegbile was in management at the LDF at the time.

    Yes, it’s not accurate to say that Adegbile’s involvement was limited to the filing of an amicus brief.

    And (needless to say) it is harmful, unfair, and wrong …

    … that an eminently qualified person is being delayed because of one out of literally hundreds of cases in which he has been involved – especially since there is no indication that he did anything wrong and there are definite indications that aspects of the jury trial bore closer scrutiny.

    But it’s not a surprise that they think they will get away with it, not in a civic culture where Miranda v. Arizona — and Gideon v. Wainwright — and even the Bill of Rights — are threatened.

  141. 141
    Cervantes says:

    @Keith G:

    I bet they are fully informed and have a good take on the issues involved

    Is there any evidence for this proposition? Or are you giving them the benefit of the doubt?

  142. 142
    JoyfulA says:

    @Botsplainer: As somebody who lived there then, Mumia was not a nobody. He’d had a radio show and written for newspapers, and he was a known figure in the area.

    As far as I remember, he had no background of violence (unlike the Philadelphia police, especially under Frank Rizzo).

  143. 143
    Bobby Thomson says:

    @Someguy: Agreed.

  144. 144
    Mutaman says:

    “but race just isn’t much of an issue in Montana or North Dakota.”

    Race is an issue everywhere. Even on the Upper West Side of Manhattan.

  145. 145
    demit says:

    @JoyfulA: Thank you. I was at the journalists’ after hours club when a Daily News columnist came in & said in shock, Mumia was just arrested. So you’re right. Botsplainer is wrong. The thing was, he was getting more & more radicalized in his politics, more involved, and I think that was part of how he lost his radio gig. So he definitely was on the cops’ radar. Remember, this was only a couple of years after the first MOVE confrontation. That the cops handled so well (sarcasm thingy). Tensions were high.

    I don’t know what happened that night. He probably did it. But that trial was a mess. Nobody performed well in Philadelphia when it came to MOVE related stuff. To say the least.

  146. 146
    Cervantes says:

    @demit: Pen & Pencil?

  147. 147
    demit says:

    @Cervantes: Hah! Yup, the really divey one on the 2nd floor, on Chancellor, was it? Did you used to go?

  148. 148
    Darkrose says:

    @Botsplainer:

    The jury heard Officer Shoemaker state that upon seeing the gun next to Jamal, he ordered him to “freeze.” He further stated that instead of surrendering, as an innocent person would, Jamal attempted to raise his gun and fire at them.

    I can’t envision a scenario where a police officer would order me to freeze. I imagine I’d do so, if only out of reflex. But I’d also be looking around for cover in case a cop decided to start shooting. I’m actually nervous about being pulled over and having to get my license, because black people’s wallets look a lot like guns. If I were male? Not sure what I’d do, but the assumption that an innocent person wouldn’t be pants-shitting scared of the police only applies in certain specific conditions.

  149. 149
    TomParmenter says:

    Mumia Abu-Jamal, the man found in the street at 2 am with a dead cop and discharged pistol in his lap. Screw that guy.

  150. 150
    Cervantes says:

    @TomParmenter: With the right sort of Philadelphia-oriented “Stand your ground” law on the books, he might have been acquitted in a heart-beat.

Comments are closed.