Quantifying systemic pressure towards injustice
jnn at synfin.org
Fri Jun 30 05:43:50 PDT 2017
> On Jun 30, 2017, at 6:57 AM, James A. Donald <jamesd at echeque.com> wrote:
>> On 13/06/2017 8:54 PM, \0xDynamite wrote:
>> The law ends at the courts, not the police. Let the
>> police use it and then argue for it's unconstitionality.
> The courts are corrupt. We need Duterte's solution to judicial corruption and lawlessness.
> The courts are no substitute for a disciplined police force - it is easier for judges to get away with wicked, abusive, and corrupt behavior than it is for police. As for example patent law and the silicone lawsuits.
> The various protections for criminals are part of an endless effort to get black conviction and imprisonment rates down to white levels, thus in practice these protections apply to black criminals, not to law abiding cishet whites. Consider, for example the conviction of Martha Stewart, supposedly for insider trading - but what she was actually convicted of was obstruction of justice, which she obstructed by not confessing to things that they they could not prove her guilty of.
> She sold a bunch of shares just before bad news hit, which is illegal if you know the bad news because of your insider position, and have neglected to make it public before you sell the adversely affected shares.
> But they could not prove that she knew the bad news before she sold the shares, so she was in fact convicted for obstructing injustice, convicted her for not confessing to a crime that they plausibly suspected, but were never able to prove.
> Compare the Martha Stewart case to a recent supreme court case, where some blacks in a car doing a drug deal drove in a reckless and dangerous manner, because they were distracted by the drug deal. The supremes ruled that though police could ordinarily arrest them for dangerous driving, and, surprise surprise, find the drugs, it was improper to do that in this case because the dangerous driving arrest might be motivated by the fact that they saw them dealing drugs, and seeing them dealing drugs has been deemed insufficient grounds for search.
> Had police not noticed the drug deal going down, then they could have arrested them for dangerous driving and found the drugs. But because police saw the drug deal going down, the drugs that they found were ruled inadmissable.
> If you are doing a characteristically black crime, police are not allowed to see what is right in front of them. If you are suspected of doing a characteristically white middle class crime, you are subject to the most lawless and arbitrary inquisition.
> Duterte for president in 2024!
You are so full of shit, your eyeballs are as black as the african skin you consider sub-human.
I'd scream "fake news!" for a laugh, but it's been successfully coopted by your bunch to the point of being totally meaningless.
More information about the cypherpunks