http://www.assatashakur.org/forum/ Read About The Latest Happenings In Our Revolutionary Online Community. en Sat, 21 Nov 2009 03:33:51 GMT vBulletin 60 http://www.assatashakur.org/forum/images/misc_2/rss.jpg http://www.assatashakur.org/forum/ http://www.assatashakur.org/forum/hood-news/40426-nypd-attacks-juanita-young-all-night-vigil.html Wed, 18 Nov 2009 21:37:32 GMT THIS SISTA'S SON WAS MURDERED & ENTIRE FAMILY HAS BEEN ATTACKED FOR YEARS BY THE NYPD!

From: 10/22 Coalition to Stop Police Brutality
----------------------------

ALL NIGHT VIGIL AT THE HOME OF JUANITA YOUNG

After three weeks of attacks by the NYPD (see below), the household and
neighbors of Juanita Young live in heightened dread of the next attack.
Come for an hour, stay all night, stand with Juanita Young and her
family during the police shift in which the family has been terrorized
repeatedly.

November 19, 2009 Thursday night, 11:30pm to Friday morning, 9:00am
1772 East Tremont Avenue (between St. Lawrence & Commonwealth), Bronx
(Subway: 2/5 train to 180th Street, walk south on 180th Street, then
east on East Tremont for two and a half blocks. Bus: Bx40/Bx42)

If you can, please call Juanita at 646-294-8344 before you head over.
Also, if you have not yet signed the petition in support of Juanita,
please email info[at]october22.org with your name or the name of your
organization.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Petition initiated by the October 22nd Coalition to Stop Police
Brutality
HANDS OFF JUANITA YOUNG AND FAMILY!

Juanita Young's son, Malcolm Ferguson, was killed by a New York City
plainclothes cop on March 1, 2000. Since then Juanita has been deeply
involved in the struggle for justice and to stop police brutality.

She and her family have come under repeated assault from members of the
NYPD, increasing over this past summer, including a series of illegal
raids on her home.

This is outrageous and intolerable.
We the undersigned DEMAND THIS IMMEDIATELY STOP!

-------------------

• November 12, 2009, at 12:30am, plainclothes police broke open the
downstairs front door, then started pounding with a police battering ram
on the apartment door of Juanita Young and her family. As they did so,
all they kept saying was that they were the police and needed to get in,
despite Juanita and her kids repeatedly asking them why they were there.
After they busted the door open, they handcuffed Juanita and others and
threw them on the floor, kicking and beating Juanita and her younger son
Buddy. When Juanita began having an asthma attack, they initially
prohibited Juanita's daughter from getting an asthma pump to her mother,
stating that they would wait for an ambulance to arrive. They searched
the apartment, claimed they found drugs in "a room," and took Buddy away
in cuffs, explaining that he fit the description for a robbery incident.
Later in court the charges against Buddy included nothing but bogus
marijuana charges. According to police at the 43rd precinct, it was the
Anti-Crime Unit that invaded Juanita's home.

• November 3, 2009, a little before 6:00am, police broke open the
downstairs door and ordered Juanita to open her apartment door, saying
they heard someone was injured in the apartment. Juanita told them no
one was hurt, and they eventually left.

• October 27, 2009, about 6:00am, five plainclothes police raided
Juanita's home. They threatened to break down her door, climbed in
through her bathroom window, put a gun in Juanita’s face and took away
her son Buddy. The cops justified this by citing a warrant but refusing
to show it or say what the warrant was for. It was later determined
there was a warrant for failing to appear in court for a Desk Appearance
Ticket on October 13th, which in fact is not a legal justification for
this.

• August 8, 2009, During a cookout in her backyard, while Juanita with
friends and family, including two grandbabies, were hanging out in front
of her building, two plainclothes cops broke open the front door,
slammed Juanita's oldest son up behind the door, and beat him on the
head. Over a dozen cops immediately converged in the area. Before he
was taken away, while he was on the ground handcuffed, her son JJ was
beaten and maced, which was fortunately photographed and the images are
available on the Internet. The police then invaded Juanita's home,
sexually assaulted her older daughter, and arrested everyone inside the
apartment. They were all charged with disorderly conduct, and JJ was
given half a dozen bogus charges, including assaulting an officer.

• November 2006, After an ambulance call for her daughter, eight cops
entered her apartment and jumped Juanita, viciously punching and kicking
her. She was arrested and eventually taken to a hospital, where she was
handcuffed to the bed for four days, only to be handed a desk appearance
ticket on the last day, an hour after a press conference about her
attack took place. The bogus charges leveled against her kept changing
throughout the two years leading to her trial, but in October 2008, a
Bronx jury acquitted Juanita of all charges.

• November 2005, At an anti-war demonstration, after another
demonstrator was thrown to the ground at Juanita's feet and police began
beating the demonstrator, one of the cops said, "Get her too" and they
arrested Juanita. While in custody she was refused medical attention
that she needed for an asthma attack. Afterwards, Juanita was
hospitalized for three days and faced criminal charges, but before the
date of her arraignment she received notice in the mail that the charges
were dropped.

• June 2003, During what was in fact an illegal eviction carried out by
the NYPD, Juanita was arrested for trespassing in her own home. One of
the arresting officers told her, "No rallies for you today." She was
handcuffed and aggressively pushed out of her apartment and building,
falling twice and injuring her arm, then held for 35 hours, shuttled
back and forth between five different precincts. At a bench trial in
September 2005, Juanita was acquitted of all charges, and in October
2007, a Bronx civil jury determined that the arresting officer used
excessive force in her arrest.

-------------------

All these attacks are outrageous, illegitimate and illegal. We say:

HANDS OFF JUANITA YOUNG! The NYDP must stop this intimidation and
harassment of Juanita and her family. Speaking out against police
brutality is no crime. But targeting someone in retaliation for speaking
out is illegal.

From a statement from Juanita Young to supporters:

“Not only have my rights been violated in the most blatant ways, but I
feel physically and psychologically terrorized. I fear for my safety, my
very life, and the lives of my children and grandchildren.”
(October 29, 2009)

We refuse to allow Juanita Young, this fighter against police brutality
and injustice, to stand alone against this onslaught.
We demand:
1: The NYPD stop its persecution of Juanita Young!
2: Bronx DA Robert Johnson investigate the role of the 43rd Precinct in
this persecution.
3: An investigation of the Warrant Squad, particularly the instructions
given to them and their conduct in serving the warrant at Juanita
Young’s apartment on October 27th.
___________________

Stop Police Brutality, Repression and the Criminalization of a Generation
No More Stolen Lives!

Stop Police Brutality, Repression, and the Criminalization of a Generation ]]> Hood News nattyreb http://www.assatashakur.org/forum/hood-news/40426-nypd-attacks-juanita-young-all-night-vigil.html http://www.assatashakur.org/forum/hood-news/40269-judge-orders-change-venue-oscar-grant-case.html Wed, 04 Nov 2009 00:05:57 GMT Outrageous… and Unjust! On Friday, October 16, Alameda County Superior Court Judge Morris Jacobson ruled that the Oscar Grant trial would not take place in Alameda County where Oakland is located and where Oscar Grant was shot and killed on January 1, 2009 by Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) police... Outrageous… and Unjust!

On Friday, October 16, Alameda County Superior Court Judge Morris Jacobson ruled that the Oscar Grant trial would not take place in Alameda County where Oakland is located and where Oscar Grant was shot and killed on January 1, 2009 by Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) police officer Johannes Mehserle. Mehserle has been charged with murder. The Judge has now ruled that the venue (location) of the Oscar Grant trial has to be changed because Mehserle could not get a “fair trial” in Alameda County.

This is outrageous and unjust!
A History of Venue Changes to Prevent Justice

How many change-of-venue motions by defendants were granted in California during the entire year of 2008? None! And the legal trend is away from granting them (according to news reports and the Alameda County District Attorney’s motion opposing the venue change). Yet in this case, an exception was made.

Asking for a change of venue has been used repeatedly to acquit cops who’ve committed the most heinous crimes. And when these motions are granted, it usually means searching for a rural or suburban venue where a lot of people don’t believe a cop would murder a Black man in cold blood and for no reason in front of witnesses, as happened to Oscar Grant.

Two examples:

The police who killed Amadou Diallo in the Bronx in 1999 when he reached for his wallet were acquitted after the trial was moved to Albany in upstate New York, where people are more predisposed—due to their life experiences—to accept police lies than in New York City.

The Los Angeles police who were videotaped beating Rodney King were acquitted in their first trial, in 1992, when that trial was moved to suburban—and largely white—Simi Valley. The court’s decision to move the Rodney King trial out of Los Angeles (and the legal arguments it included) were repeatedly cited by Mehserle’s lawyer and the judge to move the Oscar Grant case.
Does Life Experience with Police Murder Cut Against Justice for Murdering Police?

In the course of arguing for a change of venue, and in a motion that overall covered up and distorted reality, Mehserle’s lawyers presented some revealing truths in their change of venue motion. Mehserle’s motion states:

“...there can be no doubt that police officers shoot and kill black citizens of this county at a proportion far higher than their proportion of the population... it is impossible to dispute the impression left by the numbers, an impression held by significant numbers of potential jurors in this County: if you’re a black person in Alameda County, it’s dangerous to deal with the police.” (p. 62 of Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support of Motion for Change of Venue)

The motion then cites damning statistics: “...in this county blacks are the targets of police homicides determined to be justifiable at a rate about three times that of their proportion of the population. There were forty-eight such killings between 1999 and 2008 and African Americans were the targets of some 41% of these homicides, though they make up only about 13.5% of the population of the County.” (Motion, p. 8) Further, “between 2004 and 2008, there were 45 police shootings in Oakland alone. Although blacks make up about a third of Oakland’s population, they were the targets in 85 percent of the shootings.” (Motion p. 8, 9, italics in the original)

But Mehserle’s lawyers presented this as evidence for why the trial should be moved to a community where people are ignorant of this reality, and where their ideas about police and what they do are more conditioned by cop shows and mainstream media distortions. The underlying logic is that a “fair trial” of a police officer requires a jury, or a community and a trial environment, that is predisposed to look upon the police favorably, and doesn’t have the experience or sophistication or ability to think critically to be skeptical of police.

And the judge ruled Mehserle could not get a fair trial in Alameda County, in part, because a survey presented by Mehserle’s lawyers claimed that “70% of potential jurors have prejudged defendant’s guilt or innocence already.” Yet even according to this survey less than half the people questioned felt that Mehserle was guilty.
Humanizing the Victim: A Reason to Move a Trial?

In “The Status of the Victim” section of his ruling, the judge states that as a result of publicity, Oscar Grant “has been personified, humanized and cast in a sympathetic light since his death.” He concludes that these circumstances “favor changing venue.”

Stop and think about that. In this era of so-called “victims’ rights,” victims of at least certain kinds of crimes are routinely “personified, humanized and cast in a sympathetic light.” Yet in this case a whole different set of rules has been invoked, so that, bizarrely, the fact that the victim of a horrible crime has been recognized as a human being is invoked as a reason why the man who killed him cannot get a fair trial in the county where the crime took place.
Prosecutors Forget How to Prosecute

When have you ever heard of a criminal case, at any stage of trial, where the defense presents thousands of pages of evidence while the prosecution presents almost none? In this case, the District Attorney’s office—the prosecution—did formally oppose the change of venue motion, but it did not vigorously fight this and in many ways paved the way for the judge’s decision.

For instance, the judge noted in his ruling that “massive documentary exhibits were admitted into evidence at this hearing,” And, he acknowledged, “Almost all of the evidence offered and admitted in this hearing was produced by the defense.”

What would it have meant for a prosecutor in this case to actively oppose the change of venue? The prosecution would have to argue that people in the inner cities do live under systemic police terror, and that people who experience this would make them better judges of the evidence in this case. And that is something that no prosecutor in this system could or would do.

This, too, is part of a pattern. Repeatedly, when it is actually a cop on trial, the prosecutors act like they forgot how to prosecute. They present weak cases, cross-examine with kid gloves, and generally accept the terms of the cop’s defense lawyers.
Does protest prevent justice? Or is protest the only thing that has brought a chance for justice?

The judge’s main argument for moving the Oscar Grant trial is that there’s been too much protest. In his ruling, he states: “This intense political activity and local turmoil that is now, and has been, an ever-present part of this case, is a factor weighing very heavily in favor of a venue change.”

He added: “These jurors will be exposed to protestors’ angry demand for ‘justice for Oscar Grant’ each time they go in and out of the courthouse, a constant reminder of the impending civil unrest. These jurors also likely will be concerned about the real possibility of more riots and violence depending on the verdict they choose. Under these circumstances, there is a reasonable probability that defendant cannot get a fair trial. This situation is the present reality.”

First point: Protest is not illegal. People should protest terrible crimes and injustice. Second, point: Protest is the only reason why there is a chance for justice for Oscar Grant. The fact that protest, and fighting for justice for victims of police murder justifies moving a trial, that itself is a revealing exposure of the nature of this system, and its legal system.

Between 2004 and 2008, there were 45 “officer-involved shootings” by Oakland cops—80 percent of those shot were Black men. None were prosecuted or disciplined in any way. In the last 15 years, there have been over 2,000 police killings in the U.S.—yet there were only six cases in which murder charges were filed against police, and none resulted in convictions.

The trial of Johannes Mehserle is, according to his lawyers, the first trial of a police officer for a murder committed while on duty in the history of California. This is a searing exposure of how the system protects murdering cops—hundreds of people have been killed by cops in California, and not a single murder trial until now.

What was the difference in this case? And why is there a chance of justice? Only because people first defied police intimidation and threats to record the murder on their cell phones, and then because people persisted in courageously going into the streets to demand justice in the face of police brutality and arrests.

Again, where does everyday, ongoing, pervasive violence and intimidation come from for youth like Oscar Grant in this society? What violent force has already tried to terrorize witnesses in this case by trying to seize people’s cell phones who recorded the killing, and attacking and arresting people who have been in the streets demanding justice? The protestors who fought for justice for Oscar Grant have had to go up against the “threat of violence” by the police. People who testify against the police do so at great risk.

* * *

Under capitalism, the law protects exploitation, and all the social relations in this society. In theory, the law—unjust as it is—is enforced equally; both the rich and the poor are prohibited from stealing a loaf of bread to feed their hungry children. But in reality, not only is the law unjust, enforcement of the law is wildly skewed when the interests of the system are at stake.

In justifying his change of venue ruling, the judge in this case wrote: “Defendant’s status as a police officer is a factor that weighs heavily in favor of a venue change…” In other words: a special set of rules applies to killer cops.

The only reason that there is a chance for justice for Oscar Grant is that there has been protest and public outrage. And the only hope that there will be justice in this case is ongoing and more protest and outrage. And that anger, that outrage, and that courageous protest can become part of building up a revolutionary movement to bring to an end the system that routinely murders young Black and Latino men with impunity. ]]> Hood News Moorbey http://www.assatashakur.org/forum/hood-news/40269-judge-orders-change-venue-oscar-grant-case.html http://www.assatashakur.org/forum/hood-news/40240-behind-spook-who-sat-door.html Sun, 01 Nov 2009 19:09:56 GMT OUT OF THE SIZZILING SIXTIES!

"THE SPOOK
WHO SAT BY THE DOOR"


Why was this film suppressed
by the American government?

Why did this film effectively
end the screen careers of Lawrence Cook, Paula Kelly and Janet League?

Why was actor J. A. Preston
written out of a soap opera?

Why did director Ivan Dixon
never direct another feature film?

Why was the book and film
banned in South Africa and Jamaica?

Why was it necessary for the
book to be first published in London?

Why was Sam Greenlee targeted
by the FBI, CIA & IRS?

Why has the FBI refused to
release Sam Greenlee´s secret files?

Ask these questions and
more. Bring author\filmmaker, Sam
Greenlee and his award winning film to your campus.

Contact:

Sam Greenlee
773-288-6877
samgreenlee@sbcglobal.net ]]> Hood News nattyreb http://www.assatashakur.org/forum/hood-news/40240-behind-spook-who-sat-door.html http://www.assatashakur.org/forum/hood-news/40238-take-back-land-vqr-magazine.html Sun, 01 Nov 2009 19:03:08 GMT Please check out and support the courageous work of Bro. Max!! =================== Greetings All: After an appearance in the new Michael Moore movie, Capitalism: A Love Story, where we liberated the Trody home from foreclosure, Take Back the Land is featured in the latest issue of the... Please check out and support the courageous work of Bro. Max!!
===================

Greetings All:

After an appearance in the new Michael Moore movie, Capitalism: A Love Story, where we liberated the Trody home from foreclosure, Take Back the Land is featured in the latest issue of the Virginia Quarterly Review in a lengthy piece by Paul Reyes.

Check out the VQR piece at VQR Opportunity Knocks

We are back at work which means you will be hearing alot more about us in the very near future and in many other cities other than Miami. Stay tuned for announcements very, very soon.

In the mean time, please support the work of Take Back the Land by visiting our site and donating generously to our cause at Donate

If you are not already on our listserv, but want to receive updates regarding our work, please sign up at groups.google.com/group/take-back-the-land

forward,

Max Rameau


--
takebacktheland.org
takebacktheland@gmail.com ]]> Hood News nattyreb http://www.assatashakur.org/forum/hood-news/40238-take-back-land-vqr-magazine.html http://www.assatashakur.org/forum/hood-news/40081-lil-wayne-going-jail.html Fri, 23 Oct 2009 05:19:31 GMT Lil Wayne Going to Jail for One Year - Bodog Beat (http://beat.bodoglife.com/entertainment/lil-wayne-going-to-jail-for-one-year-96563.html) well another brother will be in jail. dont get me wrong i dont like lil wayne but i do not wish imprisionment on anyone. but on the bright side we wont see... Lil Wayne Going to Jail for One Year - Bodog Beat

well another brother will be in jail. dont get me wrong i dont like lil wayne but i do not wish imprisionment on anyone. but on the bright side we wont see any new wack lil wayne singles!

and what does lil wayne need a gun for? that man has so much money he needs to get some body guards if he feels so unsafe and not keep putting his career in the line like this. ]]> Hood News teenageRBG http://www.assatashakur.org/forum/hood-news/40081-lil-wayne-going-jail.html http://www.assatashakur.org/forum/hood-news/39861-assata-radio.html Sun, 11 Oct 2009 03:32:39 GMT Looking for some one who would like to be a co-host on Assata Radio. No experience needed but must be energetic and likes to talk....Please PM me if interested Looking for some one who would like to be a co-host on Assata Radio. No experience needed but must be energetic and likes to talk....Please PM me if interested ]]> Hood News Moorbey http://www.assatashakur.org/forum/hood-news/39861-assata-radio.html