MA Supreme Court says blacks are free to flee the police -- !!!!!!!!!

T

Text Drivers are Killers

Joe Biden - "Time to put Trump in the bullseye."
More black privilege. Only whites have to obey the law.

http://www.wnd.com/2016/09/massachusetts-supremes-give-blacks-green-light-to-flee-cops/

sep 21 2016 In a decision certain to influence the debate over police interactions with black suspects, the Massachusetts Supreme Court dismissed the gun conviction of a black man arrested by Boston police, ruling his fleeing from officers can be considered legitimate given black males’ fear of being racially profiled.

Jimmy Warren was arrested Dec. 18, 2011, by police who were investigating a break-in in nearby Roxbury. According to the victim, the suspects were three black men, one of whom was wearing a red hoodie, another a black hoodie and the third non-descript dark clothing. Warren was latter spotted with a second man, both wearing dark clothing, by officers.

Both men fled when approached by an officer seeking to question them. When Warren was later apprehended, he was accused of possession of an unlicensed .22-caliber pistol that police said he threw away during pursuit. While no items from the burglary were found in his possession, he was charged and convicted of unlawful possession of the weapon. Warren appealed.

The Massachusetts Supreme Court based it’s decision to overturn the conviction on two arguments. The witness description of the suspected burglars was too vague, the judges ruled, and there was no cause to question the pair just because they fit the “ubiquitous” clothing description or because the officer had a “hunch,” reported WBUR News.
Click to expand...
 
who'd have thunk! a liberal judiciary body applying laws selectively according to race and gender. so much for that whole 'equal protection under the laws' crap.
 
This seems pretty stupid to me(but I have to consider the source), unless the police are no longer allowed to chase fleeing suspects.
 
I'm pretty sure this goes towards "probable cause" and has nothing to do with race. If the arrest is bogus, then the gun charge is gotten thru tainted evidence
 
anatta said:
I'm pretty sure this goes towards "probable cause" and has nothing to do with race. If the arrest is bogus, then the gun charge is gotten thru tainted evidence
Click to expand...

Mostly right; this case revolves around the defense (Warren) "Motion to Suppress evidence". Warren (attorney) wanted the gun seized,and the defendants statement after arrest, thrown out. The Trial court Judge rejected the Warren argument to Suppress Evidence prior to trial. Warren was found guilty, and his lawyers appeal the denial of the Motion to the Appellate Court. The Appellate court found in favor of the Commonwealth in a split opinion. The State Supreme court heard the case, and dismissed the Appellate courts ruling,and found the Trial Judge erred in denying Defense Motion to Supress, overturning Warrens conviction.

That is the short answer. The court certainly did not hand down "special rights to Black defendants", and did not give any race a right to flee from the Police as the thread starter implies.
 
Last edited:
domer76 said:
I guess the cops should probably cease their disproportionate shaking down of blacks. Looks like they made their bed and are now sleeping in it.
Click to expand...

I would not take it that far, the Police in this case had sufficient cause to stop Warren,and ask questions. The Police did not automatically arrest him for being Black.
 
Billy Batts said:
I would not take it that far, the Police in this case had sufficient cause to stop Warren,and ask questions. The Police did not automatically arrest him for being Black.
Click to expand...

The court's ruling was based on the vague description and the disproportionate profiling in Boston.
 
domer76 said:
The court's ruling was based on the vague description and the disproportionate profiling in Boston.
Click to expand...

That is not what the opinion says. The victim of the home invasion reported to the police, the invader was a Black male, the court found the witness statement to be to vague of the rest. The case was not thrown out because of Racial profiling. The suspect was already identified as Black, by the victim,who was also black, in a Black neighborhood. The race of the perpetrator was never in question. The witness was unsure about: his height, weight,and could only describe two of the men cloths as dark,and the home invader of wearing a Red Hoody (Warren was not wearing a Red Hoody). That is what led the court to declare, insufficient cause for the stop.
 
domer76 said:
I guess the cops should probably cease their disproportionate shaking down of blacks. Looks like they made their bed and are now sleeping in it.
Click to expand...

" disproportionate shaking down of blacks"??? How about the disproportionate way blacks get welfare? At 10 times the rate of whites. You want to end that too?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top