Attackerandvictim1
CHRISTIAN SCIENCE MONITOR’S Prescription For Peace: (1) Bribe Blacks, Regardless Of Guilt; (2) Crucify Whites, Regardless Of Innocence
Thumb stixmike
October 09, 2015, 06:20 PM
A+
|
a-
Print Friendly and PDF
See also: The Case Of Michael Slager: Not Just Lynching, A Crucifixion

An astonishing reportorial in the Christian Science Monitor claims that North Charleston’s “response to police officer Michael Slager's fatal shooting of Mr. Scott as a blueprint for communities around the United States” [What cities can learn from North Charleston's handling of police shooting by Corey Fedde, October 9, 2015]. The “blueprint” consists of (1) massive bribes to blacks, regardless of guilt; (2) crucifixion of whites, regardless of innocence. Chillingly absent: any consciousness of facts or law. It’s just politics—another step in the Regime’s systematic de-policing of America, egged on by Main Stream Media.

I last wrote about the Slager case to report an exclusive interview with his lawyer, Andy Savage, in which he made serious allegations about suppression of exculpatory evidence and other politically-motivated prosecutorial misconduct. Savage also told me that a bond hearing for Slager had finally been scheduled—in an extraordinary move, his client had been held in custody, in solitary confinement, since April 7.

Judge Clifton NewmanBut on September 14, over five months since Michael Slager’s arrest, black Judge Clifton Newman (pictured right) refused his request for bond. Newman claimed:

After careful consideration of all of the evidence presented and the nature of the circumstances of the offense, the Court finds that release of [Slager] would constitute an unreasonable danger to the community and the request for release on bond should be denied.

[Slager's release constitutes 'unreasonable danger to the community,' judge says, ABCNEWS4, Sep 14, 2015].

When Judge Newman refused Slager’s request for bond, I presumed he was saying that Slager was some sort of maniac, who was going to go around murdering people. Of course, there was no basis for any such fear of Slager, whose pre-Scott history was exemplary, and whose wife was about to give birth. (Mrs. Slager has since given birth, but her husband has still not been permitted to hold his only child in his arms.)

feddeBut the Christian Science Monitor’s Fedde (right) however, makes clear that Judge Newman wasn’t talking about the defendant at all. “The unreasonable danger to the community” was apparently… the community itself!

Judge Newman was twisting the English language to rationalize violating a defendant’s rights, based on criminal acts that other people might commit, if the defendant’s rights were respected.

In First Amendment law, this is called a “heckler’s veto,” and it is unconstitutional.

Judge Newman’s obvious bias requires that he be removed from the case, which must also have a change of venue.

Meanwhile, on October 8, the City Council of North Charleston voted 10-0 yesterday to pay Scott’s family a $6.5 million windfall—even though the case had not yet even been adjudicated in criminal court.

According to Fedde, North Charleston Mayor Keith Summey began offering to throw money at Scott’s family (and its lawyers) immediately:

The settlement came without protests or violence, and with the support of the community and city.

[NS: Why would “the community” not support making a black criminal’s family rich?]

“People mention Baltimore. People mention Ferguson. People mention New York,” North Charleston City Attorney Brady Hair told the Associated Press, noting where violence broke out. “What’s different here is there were no acts of violence... none of us did anything to escalate this into an uncontrolled environment.”

[NS: What’s different in North Charleston is that riotmaster George Soros did not pay Black Lives Matter or the Nation of Islam to riot there. But that could change.]

An attorney for the Scott family, Chris Stewart, agreed with Mr. Hair that the handling of the situation by both sides has been “almost a blueprint of how these situations should be handled.”…

The city also took forward-thinking steps to address the situation. Mayor Summey contacted the family about reaching a settlement within days of the event….

The swift arrest and denouncement of Slager's actions contrasted with the stark divisions between police and the community that arose following other shootings of black men at the hands of white police officers….

Slowly, and perhaps inconsistently, the wide latitude that society has long given police officers who say their lives are in danger is beginning to change.

Fedde’s reportorial praised everything that is wrong about the handling of the Slager-Scott case: the violation of Slager’s rights by officials who immediately prejudiced the case by denouncing him; Slager’s police fraternal organization’s desertion of him; his being fired without due process; the violation of his Eighth Amendment right to reasonable bail or bond; the authorities’ capitulation to the implicit threat of mob violence, instead of doing their duty and meeting it with ruthless coercion.

Fedde’s sort of anti-police/pro-criminal bias inevitably results in de-policing and the rule of crime.

Far from being precedent-setting, North Charleston leaders’ buying of “peace” by sacrificing white policemen and paying off the families of black criminals with millions of dollars confiscated from white net taxpayers has a long, ugly history. Recent cases include:

  • New York City’s Communist mayor Bill de Blasio’s paying off the family of career criminal Eric Garner to the tune of $5.9 million, even though a grand jury had refused to indict the white officer, Daniel Pantaleo, whom Garner had fought while resisting arrest. (No one so much as criticized the black female sergeant, Kizzy Adoni, in charge at the scene, leaving no doubt as to the racial motivation behind the campaign against Officer Pantaleo.)
  • Black Baltimore (City) Mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake paying off the family of career criminal Freddie Gray, who had died while in police custody, to the tune of $6.4 million—again, before the trumped-up case against six Baltimore City police officers had been adjudicated.
But in fact, this approach of railroading (mostly) white policemen, treating black felons like victims, and attempting to buy peace, goes back at least as far as the Rodney King case in 1991.

Blacks have since committed regular de-policing riots, e.g., Cincinnati in 2001, Ferguson in 2014-2015 (as well as sympathy riots around the country), Baltimore last spring, and the countless of racially-motivated black mob attacks, chronicled in recent years by Colin Flaherty.

The new dispensation: In any use-of-force incident involving a white policeman and a black suspect, the policeman is to be presumed guilty, while the black is to be presumed innocent, regardless of the evidence at hand.

The orders for the white policeman are: “Go directly to jail, do not pass go, do not collect $200.”

The orders for law-abiding Americans, especially whites: suffer.

Nicholas Stix [email him] is a New York City-based journalist and researcher, much of whose work focuses on the nexus of race, crime, and education. He spent much of the 1990s teaching college in New York and New Jersey. His work has appeared in Chronicles, The New York Post, Weekly Standard, Daily News, New York Newsday, American Renaissance, Academic Questions, Ideas on Liberty and many other publications. Stix was the project director and principal author of the NPI report, The State of White America-2007. He blogs at Nicholas Stix, Uncensored.