No one would question that Justine Damond was the innocent victim of a police shooting. The 40-year-old Australian native and meditation teacher was shot to death in the alley behind her home last weekend, by police responding to a 911 call she placed to report a possble sexual assault. That is incredibly, incredibly fucked up and heartbreaking and terrible in every possible way. It is not a thing that should happen to people.
Having spent many years working with lawyers, I heard the exasperation of someone who's fought a number of these cases and finally feels like he has a shot at winning, just because of who this client is. And I think he finds it as awful as we do that this is the case.
I agree that he's doing the best for his client. The problem is that what's best for his client, is such blatant racist dogwhistling. His comment doesn't just point out the systemic racism of police shootings, it covers it with glow-in-the-dark paint.
He did seem to realize that and walked it back. Then again, if it's my ass on the line and I hire a lawyer, I don't really give a shit what it sounds like. I want that lawyer to do everything he can to advocate for me- not worry about fixing societal ills on my dime. Sure, it'd be nice to be able to do both. But it would be scant comfort for the Damond family if he fails to get them justice because he pulled his punches to be politically correct.
This is true. It's the same reason defence attorneys for accused rapists slut-shame the victims. It's a horrific commentary on social conditions that it's in their client's best interests to do that...but it is. And they're ethically obligated to use all legal means at their disposal, to do the best for their client. I can't really blame him, but it sucks. Hard.
So, the Minneapolis police chief was asked to resign, and did. Which leaves me partly saying--good, maybe police will start paying attention, now that there have been some real consequences; leaving me conflicted because she's a lesbian, and who knows how many cops will find it perfectly acceptable to fire her on for that reason alone; and disgust that this was the 2nd shooting, but the first blonde shooting, and we're back where we started, with black lives being treated as lesser.Happy Friday.
I don't have a problem with guns. I'm a progressive that owns a gun for home defense and the occasional trip to the range. It's a huge stress relief and a fun date with the hubby to head to the range for an evening and let off some steam. However, I do believe that there needs to be MUCH more gun control. There is NO reason for citizens to have assult rifles. They should be ban 100%. But in any case, private citizens isn't the problem here. The problem here is selective bias. White cop shooting PoC=innocent cop. PoC cop & moose-lamb to boot shooting pretty white lady=guilty cop. Like, seriously. What the actual fuck?
This is usually where wingnuts come in to declare that the person the cops decided to shoot was no angel, but in this case I guess they have decided that she was an angel, for reasons which are very mysterious and can't be explained by anyone.
I've seen the entire "bit" several times, this is just an abridged version as I'm sure you know. Anyway, he's so logical and on point that it drives the NRA types crazy (now there's a stretch!). I love in the longer version how he explains how the 2nd is an amendment, which means it can be "amended" - heads explode at 11:00. Keep on sharing.
No, they are blaming the fact that the cop who shot her was Somalian. Ditto Second City Cop;.
When old guys with wooden teeth wrote the rules, it was to own slaves and not let the commoners vote, why would we meddle with such?
Fox can always find a convenient POC to blame.
Having spent many years working with lawyers, I heard the exasperation of someone who's fought a number of these cases and finally feels like he has a shot at winning, just because of who this client is. And I think he finds it as awful as we do that this is the case.
I've got nothing except very angry and possibly rule breaking thoughts so:
...
I agree that he's doing the best for his client. The problem is that what's best for his client, is such blatant racist dogwhistling. His comment doesn't just point out the systemic racism of police shootings, it covers it with glow-in-the-dark paint.
He did seem to realize that and walked it back. Then again, if it's my ass on the line and I hire a lawyer, I don't really give a shit what it sounds like. I want that lawyer to do everything he can to advocate for me- not worry about fixing societal ills on my dime. Sure, it'd be nice to be able to do both. But it would be scant comfort for the Damond family if he fails to get them justice because he pulled his punches to be politically correct.
This is true. It's the same reason defence attorneys for accused rapists slut-shame the victims. It's a horrific commentary on social conditions that it's in their client's best interests to do that...but it is. And they're ethically obligated to use all legal means at their disposal, to do the best for their client. I can't really blame him, but it sucks. Hard.
Scaramucci, Scaramucci, do you do the fandango?
Yeah, but if he had any real principles he would've resigned the first time he was instructed to lie.
So, the Minneapolis police chief was asked to resign, and did. Which leaves me partly saying--good, maybe police will start paying attention, now that there have been some real consequences; leaving me conflicted because she's a lesbian, and who knows how many cops will find it perfectly acceptable to fire her on for that reason alone; and disgust that this was the 2nd shooting, but the first blonde shooting, and we're back where we started, with black lives being treated as lesser.Happy Friday.
I don't have a problem with guns. I'm a progressive that owns a gun for home defense and the occasional trip to the range. It's a huge stress relief and a fun date with the hubby to head to the range for an evening and let off some steam. However, I do believe that there needs to be MUCH more gun control. There is NO reason for citizens to have assult rifles. They should be ban 100%. But in any case, private citizens isn't the problem here. The problem here is selective bias. White cop shooting PoC=innocent cop. PoC cop & moose-lamb to boot shooting pretty white lady=guilty cop. Like, seriously. What the actual fuck?
This is usually where wingnuts come in to declare that the person the cops decided to shoot was no angel, but in this case I guess they have decided that she was an angel, for reasons which are very mysterious and can't be explained by anyone.
I've seen the entire "bit" several times, this is just an abridged version as I'm sure you know. Anyway, he's so logical and on point that it drives the NRA types crazy (now there's a stretch!). I love in the longer version how he explains how the 2nd is an amendment, which means it can be "amended" - heads explode at 11:00. Keep on sharing.
It's a head-scratcher.
Also too, that it's OK to blame the Somali-immigrant cop who shot her because of some mysterious reason I can't quite put my finger on.