Tag Archives: corruption

Officers in Unwarranted No Knock Raid Terrorize Family and Murder Child

Civil Rights Violations by Unwarranted No Knock Raid a Growing Police Problem

The frequency of civil rights violations carried out daily across this nation by out of control police departments is as alarming as is their sickening and shocking natures, but unwarranted no knock raids are the worst kind.  Just over four years ago an innocent seven year old girl was shot in the head and killed by an over-zealous SWAT team officer in an out of control no-knock raid  carried out on the wrong address in Detroit, MI.

Here’s what happened on May 16, 2010 in Detroit.  A “Special Response Team”, or SRT in police lingo (don’t you love the official sounding names?)  had prepared to carry out a surprise no-knock raid on a wanted man. It had been determined he was living in one half of a duplex rental unit in a Detroit neighborhood.  Another family lived in the other half of the duplex.

The SWAT Team had obtained a warrant for the unit in which they had determined the wanted man was living.  The big mistake the team made in their midnight raid was to raid both sides of the duplex.  They did have a warrant for the address of the wanted man, but not for the innocent family who lived in the other half of the duplex.

Officers arrived in armored vehicles armed with automatic rifles and battered down the doors on both sides of the duplex.  A neighbor who was outside walking his dog when the police arrived tried to warn the cops that there were children and innocent people inside the second residence the cops were about to mistakenly raid.  The children’s toys all over the yard should have tipped them off too, but that neighbor was pinned to the ground and restrained by other officers while the unjust raid proceeded.

What they found inside the residence they had no authority to enter was a sleeping family – Mom, Dad, Grandma, and four young children.  Grandma was asleep on the couch with her 7 year old granddaughter.  The raid began and ended in tragedy in less than 30 seconds. One officer broke a window and tossed a percussion grenade inside, while others rammed the front door open. In the next 6 seconds of total confusion, the SWAT team leader, Joseph Weekley, shot and killed an innocent child.

What is worse, several hours more of mayhem and abuse ensued.  Aiyana Jones, 7, was dead.  Cops restrained her distraught grandmother  on the floor in handcuffs and forced her to lie in the child’s blood and the broken glass from the window that has been shattered.  Further abuses not only to the grandmother, but to both of the murdered child’s parents occurred over the next several hours.

Aiyana’s father was also required to lie face down in a pool of his daughter’s blood, while he pleaded for some kind of explanation for what had just happened.  He was given none.  Aiyana’s grieving and frightened mother was detained for several hours, forced to stay sitting sitting on the couch in the blood of their murdered daughter, after which she was transported to a facility where she was forced to undergo — a drug test!

Police at first claimed they had a rightful warrant.  They can apparently do no wrong.

The suspect that the police had sought was arrested and taken into custody in the raid.  He was in the other duplex unit, the side for which the police had initially obtained a signed warrant.  As soon as police realized the error they had made, the police chief took action to get a CYA warrant for the second residence – after it was broken into and Aiyana was killed.

Shouldn’t we expect some admission of error from someone on the part of the police department, and not just a massive cover up of a blunder that resulted in the death of an innocent child?  Shouldn’t we expect to see some kind of admission of error on the part of the officer who pulled the trigger and put a bullet through seven year old Aiyana’s brain?  Shouldn’t we expect remorse from the trigger man?

Apparently, every action taken by a police raid is infallible and justified.

Four years and two mistrials later, the gunman is held unaccountable

Prior to this incident, Joseph Weekley, the officer who pulled the trigger on Aiyana, had 14 years of law enforcement experience.  In 2007 he was under investigation as a member of another police raid team in which guns were pointed at children, and two family pets were shot.

Weekley also aspires to be a hero in the SWAT team raid business.  A&E’s pro-police-state reality show, “The First 48”, glorifies the aggressive use of police power.  The team of which Weekley was the leader in this particular raid was accompanied by a full TV crew from the show.  Their video illustrates just how hyped the team was when the shooting occurred.  They were in full aggression mode. Their macho police raid was, after all, going to be on TV, and they were going to be the stars!

Even more sickening is the involvement of the Chief of Police of Detroit, Warren Evans.  Evans had been positioning himself to be featured in the A&E program as the lead police officer, directing cops to take back the streets of Detroit.  Evans’ self aggrandizing plans backfired on May 16, 2010.

Weekley is Free.  Why?

Weekly was tried in June 2013 on a charge of manslaughter.  A mistrial was declared due to a hung jury.  In September 2014 ,Weekley stood trial once again.  The charge was reduced from manslaughter to reckless firing of a weapon causing death.  Conviction would have carried a possible 2 year sentence. It didn’t matter.  The jury was hung again, and another mistrial was declared.  According to the system, that’s the end of legal proceedings against Weekley for this crime.

If you’re not familiar with this case, here are several relevant links filled with greater detail to build and justify your outrage.  This case was big enough to be summarized in Wikipedia already.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Aiyana_Jones

http://www.freep.com/story/news/local/michigan/detroit/2014/10/06/joseph-weekley-aiyana-stanley-jones-appeals-court/16803207/

http://new.livestream.com/wildabouttrial/events/3402923

http://www.mlive.com/news/detroit/index.ssf/2013/06/grandmother_testifies_aiyana_j.html

That’s plenty to keep your blood boiling, I’m sure.

Facebooktwitterrss

Terry Holcomb Sr. Goes to Jail for Defending Liberty For YOU!

Terry Holcomb Sr. Stands Up for Himself  (and other Constitutional Commentary)

Take a good listen to the details of this event. The actions of this judge are despicable. Here is KrisAnne Hall’s plea for you to listen to this broadcast and take action:

“What is Liberty worth to you? To Terry Holcomb, Sr. it is worth going to jail. Mr. Holcomb refused to allow his voice to be silenced by tyrannical government and that tyrannical government put him in jail. He stood his ground peacefully, while others watched on in submission to tyranny. Mr. Holcomb defended Liberty for YOU and YOUR CHILDREN. Will YOU stand with him NOW?”

Just three days ago, a judge in a Texas county decided to adjourn a meeting which was held for the purpose of hearing public redress of an issue to which there was public opposition.

The County didn’t want to hear any opposition. So what did the judge do? He adjourned the meeting before anyone had a chance to speak contrary to the intentions of the County……. and of course that was the designated reason for the meeting in the first place.

One man, Terry Honcomb, Sr.,  protested and demanded that he be allowed to speak. . Inspite of the fact that the meeting was already formally adjourned when Mr. Holcomb spoke up, he was arrested and jailed on a bogus charge because he had refused to be denied the opportunity to be heard.  Mr. Holcomb broke no law, and only stood up for his right to be hear and not to be run over by a judge’s abuse of authority.

 

—>  Listen to the audio commentary by KrisAnne Hall  here

 

Why there even is a Bill of Rights

Why would I take the position that the Constitution was written to protect the people against the unjust actions of a tyrannical government? Maybe it’s because the history of the activities of the Continental Congress in 1789 verifies that position. The Federalists actually argued against the creation of the Bill of Rights, but not because they disagreed with its proposed contents.

Alexander Hamilton, representing the Federalist point of view, argued against the creation of a Bill of Rights, and it was a hotly contested issue in the Constitutional debates.  His motivations for taking that position were also quite reasonable. Hamilton contended that as soon as you spell out a defined set of individual rights, those specific words would be used to rule in favor of the allowance or prohibition of anything that was not specifically spelled out in the Bill of Rights  as prohibited or allowed.  Hamilton was quite perceptive.

The Bill of Rights WAS created, and now we can see exactly that happening today. Liberals.  in their interpretation of the Bill of Rights, take exactly the same position that Hamilton feared would be taken.

For instance, in the modern  liberal view, you can outlaw certain kinds of weapons, because their allowance was not specifically spelled out when the Constitution was penned in 1789. After all, automatic rifles did not exist back then. Therefore, by their argument, we can outlaw them without ever infringing on the rights that existed in 1789.

Likewise, in the liberal view, we can define what comprises “the press” to exclude bloggers and Facebook particpants because the press was nothing more than newspapers back in 1789. The internet did not exist yet. Therefore, by their argument, bloggers and people who do not fit a government definition of “press” can be excluded from the freedom of press rights guaranteed in the Constitution.

Those are only two examples and both pf them typify exactly the kind of Constitutional abuse that Hamilton warned against. On the other hand, although that’s why Hamilton didn’t favor adopting a Bill of Rights, where would we be without it to lean on today? Hamilton lost that argument, and the Bill of Rights DOES exist. So now, we have this resulting interpretation debate to deal with, just as Hamilton predicted would happen.

What is the only logical answer to this Constitutional interpretation debate?

In my mind, original intent is the only argument behind which anyone can stand with any sort of logical validity. Original intent is easy enough to understand on the basis of the history that transpired in the debates of the Continental Congress, resulting in the penning of the final documents. If we can establish what the Framers intended, that is, what the absolute meaning behind their words was, that must certainly take precedence over any sort of opinion about it. Rulings about whatever the Constitution DIDN’T ever say, can logically be nothing but baseless and personally biased opinions. Such opinions are easy to spot, because they without exception walk on someone’s inalienable rights.


The narrator, KrisAnne Hall, in the piece linked above well explains the debate in 1789 over whether or not there even should have been a Bill of Rights included in the Constitution. If you really read and dig into history, you will learn that the party which believed that the purpose of the Constitution was to give the people power over potential tyrannical government, was the same party that WON the debate over the issue of whether or not there should even BE be an enumerated Bill of Rights. Because they won that argument, the Bill of Rights was created and ratified.

I have been told by liberal minded friends that I need to read the Constitution because I am supposedly misinterpreting it.

Well, I did. I carry a copy in my briefcase. I also read history, and I also considered the tyrannical actions of King George, who inspired the Colonists to revolt and to declare independence from his tyrannical government.

What I have not done, and which makes me incapable of Constitutional interpretation, according to one of my esteemed well meaning liberal friends, is to take a course from a liberal arts college law department which teaches students to interpret the Constitution in exactly the manner against which Alexander Hamilton warned it is not to be interpreted.

Be sure to listen to the audio and take action.

Facebooktwitterrss

Is PUTIN Planning To Release Info Exposing 9/11 as an Inside Job?

As tensions between the U.S. and Russia remain at an all time high comparable to that of the Cold War, it seems that strong-armed Putin has had just about enough of Obama’s petty nuisances. Several analysts have recently speculated that to put Obama in his place once and for all, Putin was set to release evidence (i.e. satellite imagery) in his position that revealed the 9/11 terror attacks as an inside job.

These so called “inside jobs” are better known as false-flag attacks in which they were specifically and strategically designed so as to deceive the public into thinking something that isn’t true. In other words, U.S. officials would plan and execute an attack on America and its people that would look as though a certain enemy entity had carried out the atrocity.

This is only the case when America has proven interests in the homeland of the attributed group. As many have explained before, from both sides of the aisle, the United States had a heavy oil interest and is thought to have been the motive for the alleged false flag attacks.

Several documented cases have been exposed showing that this would be nothing new in the military realm of America in the pursuit of selfish interest. That being the case, it appears as though the rest of the world is growing tired of the impact America is having as it carries out its agenda.

In an effort to expose the government for what it is doing – killing Americans in an effort to invade elsewhere, and then killing nationals wherever they go – some have threatened to leak military details exposing America’s atrocities. The most recent of speculation has fallen upon Putin as he is said to have certain satellite images that prove, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that America was complicit in a false flag attack.

Supposedly demonstrating that the 9/11 attacks were carried out by American officials – well, you could imagine the repercussions. All faith and trust in government would disintegrate, riots would break out in the streets and perhaps a civil uprising would commence.

That being said, imagine what America would look like upon the world stage. An easy target for Muslim extremists or maybe a takeover by a foreign competing superpower? Although these scenarios may be a stretch, you could see how other forces could easily take advantage of such a situation.

What do you guys think – could Putin have such evidence in his possession? Could this be why Obama has gone so soft on Putin throughout the past month – perhaps he was blackmailed? Let us know what you think of this in a comment below.

http://www.secretsofthefed.com/breaking-putin-planning-release-evidence-exposing-911-inside-job-video/

Facebooktwitterrss
Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!