#argue for harsher laws for rapists

[theamazingannie]

Just really wish the people who care so much about trans people sexually assaulting women in bathrooms would care more about cis men sexually assaulting women literally everywhere else

[blsm-m]

(Corrects typo in headline) SAO PAULO (Reuters) - Thousands of women protested on Saturday against a bill being pushed through Brazil's conservative Congress that would make abortion after 22 weeks of pregnancy the equivalent of murder and punishable by six to 20 years in prison. Protesters called the proposal the most repressive approach to women's reproductive rights in decades and marched down Sao Paulo's main street, Avenida Paulista, carrying banners of opposition. People of all ages, including many retirees and children, gathered in the streets, chanting "children are not their mothers, rapists are not their fathers." In Brazil, abortion is only permitted in cases of rape, fetal abnormalities or if the mother's life is at risk. A bill backed by evangelical lawmakers would make any abortion a rape victim's after 22 weeks of pregnancy considered murder. Feminist groups criticised the bill, saying it would impose harsher penalties than those currently meted out to rapists in Brazil. They also argue that the change will have a disproportionate impact on children who are abused by family members, who often lack the understanding and support to recognise that they are victims of crime, and who often find out they are pregnant late. Leftist President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva called the bill "madness" and said the government would defend current laws that punish rapists and treat victims with respect. "It is madness to try to punish women with harsher penalties than their rapists," Lula said at a press conference at the G7 summit in Italy. Protests began in major Brazilian cities on Thursday after Brazil's lower house of parliament voted to give the bill fast track approval, curtailing debate on the bill. Facing criticism that rape victims who seek abortions could face harsher penalties than their rapists, the bill's author, Sosthenes Cavalcante, said he would propose tougher penalties for rape, which currently carries a maximum prison sentence of 10 years. Cavalcante is an evangelical pastor and a member of the political party of far-right former President Jair Bolsonaro. House Speaker Arthur Lilla does not plan to bring the bill up for a vote anytime soon and expects changes to be made to the bill's language, and angry reactions on social media could slow the bill's progress, a source in his office said. Passage is even more uncertain in the Senate, where right-wing senators have less influence, and Senate President Rodrigo Pacheco has said the bill needs to be debated in committee. First Lady Rosángela da Silva criticised the bill, saying on social media that "Congress must work to guarantee access to legal and safe abortion through the National Health System (SUS)." Brazil's strict abortion laws force many Brazilian women who want to end their pregnancies to resort to unsafe, illegal abortions or botched procedures, resulting in dozens of deaths each year. (This story has been refiled to fix a typo in the headline) !function(f,b,e,v,n,t,s)if(f.fbq)return;n=f.fbq=function()n.callMethod? n.callMethod.apply(n,arguments):n.queue.push(arguments);if(!f._fbq)f._fbq=n;n.push=n;n.loaded=!0;n.version='2.0';n.queue=[];t=b.createElement(e);t.async=!0;t.src=v;s=b.getElementsByTagName(e)[0];s.parentNode.insertBefore(t,s)(window, document,'script','https://connect.facebook.net/en_US/fbevents.js');

[aftonfamilyvalues]

genuine question - where i live, the law considers rape to be a sexual assault committed by a male with a penis. women can only be convicted for rape if they play a role in someone else being raped by a man. do you that's right or do you think women who commit sexual assault also be considered the same crime with the same conviction?

obviously theres going to be differences between a woman raped by a man and a man raped by a woman. men cant get pregnant. theyll never be forcefully impregnated and in turn forced into carrying a pregnancy and going through childbirth through fucked up laws. theyll also never have their vaginas torn or experience the same physical pain during piv. the difference should be taken into account in court but lets be honest, courts judge women harsher than men for the same crimes so i could see it going poorly and women getting sentenced more harshly. especially since male rapists get next to nothing if anything already. its not the same, like the differences between the degrees of murder and manslaughter.

and then obviously men play into this narrative a lot too, far more than any woman. they view it as a fucking fantasy. just look at how they act when a teenage boy gets raped by his female teacher. had it happen at my school, actually. "wish i had her as a teacher when i went to school!" and they laugh. but i guess they view any rape as fantasy as long as it involves a man and a woman judging by, well, literally everything.

but again, im not arguing its worse for men or whatever, just that it is rape and should be classified as a form of such. however, i would fear it backfiring on women and women getting extreme sentences while men continue to get a slap on the wrist. there needs to be a real clean up on the subject of rape against women by men in order for any victim to be taken seriously at all.

[ninjakittenarmy]

The issue with police abolitionists is that they always assume we’re perfectly content with the system as is. They’re hopeless against police reform advocates because the argument that drug users and other minor criminals are unfairly locked up and treated disproportionately to their crimes. They have NO argument whatsoever for why it wouldn’t be possible to just not do that and lock up the murderers and rapists.

Now usually their idea for when those people come up is to (sometimes correctly) state that this is a deflection from the problems of the police force and prison system. However, in this case the reformists have literally just proposed a solution for said injustices that both rehabilitated minor offenders and punishes rapists and murderers while keeping them away from innocents. They can’t say it’s a deflection because we’ve addressed their arguments already, and it’s their turn to address ours.

This is when their argument falls apart. It quickly becomes apparent that they don’t really have a don’t actually have a plan. Either they’ll say that the current system is so bad that no replacement is still better than the current system, or that we could rehabilitate the sex offenders and serial killers too and we’re just not compassionate enough. Each argument is fundamentally flawed.

For the former, it assumes a false dichotomy. That there is no time to come up with an alternative to no plan. Except there are plans. Many in fact. Including the one i highlighted above. Usually this then results into trying to argue that violence is bad, but only when the state does it, no matter where it’s being applied or what results. And they say it’s because the state is inherently bad. Because they use violence. Because the state can’t use violence. Because it’s bad. It’s perfectly circular reasoning.

The latter is far more infuriating. It’s INCREDIBLY arrogant and self-righteous to say someone who takes issue with “rehabilitating” the worst, most dangerous humans in existence and releasing them on an honors system “lacks compassion”. If they say they aren’t suggesting that, they’re never able to come up with an actual plan. Sometimes they say violence against these people is fine if it isn’t the state, otherwise it’s fascist even though that’s not what fascism means. They of course have no answer for how to guarantee that violence can be contained or restricted to only when the people need it without any laws or law enforcement. You’re gonna go to the families of murder victims, abuse victims, rape victims, and csa survivors (like me) and tell them that if they don’t support the release of these people, they lack compassion? Fuck you. You freely admit you don’t have a solid plan and say the victims are wrong to be skeptical, and that they’re lacking in compassion if the idea of these people getting a second chance doesn’t even sound like a good thing, let alone a reason to go toward without a plan? Fuck you.

And the last argument is usually that a lot of police departments don’t handle that stuff too well anyway. In some areas that’s true, but how is that a justification for LESS law enforcement? It seems to me that a GREATER force should be concentrated in those areas, with MORE police and HARSHER punishments. “The police are barely doing anything! Let’s get rid of them and do nothing instead!” The issue will solve itself once we free up the police to focus on them instead of drug users.

This is why tankies shall always triumph. Because anarchism is dumb.

[bjeselson98]

The 13th

           The Netflix documentary, “The 13th” is a well understood documentary that can be shown to a wide audience of different people, in order to explain why the US has such high levels of mass incarceration. This documentary serves as a valid source because it not only breaks down current policies and cases, but emphasizes how important historical context is in today's society. Money makes the world go round and since the beginning of time, humans have taken advantage of others in order to financially benefit. The documentary begins explaining slavery and the economic gain of the South before the Civil war. When 4 million slaves were set free, a high economic decline was arising creating problematic issues for southerners who relied on slaves for production. The 13th amendment was enacted in 1865, stating that “Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been dully convictive, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction, congress shall have the power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation” providing a loop whole for politicians to manipulate the freedoms of a specific group of people. (Duvernay and Moran, YouTube). Alternating the old language of what it means to be black to new language such as “Criminals”. Resulting in increasing arrests for petty and minor crimes such as loitering. The criminal justice system at the time would then in turn make these “criminals” do forced labor as a way to accommodate for their financial losses after the Civil War. I argue that this proves that slavery exists now in different forms of policies that harm and target a specific group of people for once again financial gain.

The “Birth of Nation'' was a film released on February 8th, 1915 that explained how blacks were viewed in society during this era. Blacks were dehumanized and seen as monsters. Representations of blacks in this film were animalistic whereas the K.K.K was represented as a glorifying union. The Ku Klux Klan would murder African Americans in mobs, justifying it by stating they are rapists and criminals. During Reconstruction and WWII, segregation laws such as Jim Crow were passed as a way to make African Americans second class citizens in society. It is important to understand that public opinion was altered based on what was being fed from government officials. As the civil rights movement was progressing during this time, more arrests were spiking, resulting in doubling in funding for the criminal justice system. In this era, the drug war was a tactic to control the social mobility of poor, low income communities.

John Ehrilichman, who was council and assistant to President Nixon stated, “The Nixon Campaign in 1968 and the Nixon White House after that, had two enemies: the antiwar left, and black people… you see what I’m saying? We knew we couldn’t make it illegal to either be against the war or black but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin and then criminalizing both heavily we could disrupt those communities, we could arrest their leaders, raid their homes, break up there meetings and vilify them night after night in the evening news, did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did'' proving racial intent in terms of policy but difficult to prove because of terminology. (Duvernay and Moran, YouTube). This small quote is a factor that contributes to institutionalized racism and a different form of slavery in the 21st century. Nixon is not the only president that centralized crime as a tactic to win the election, but presidents following him attempted to incorporate handling crime in America through harsher punishments and sentences

[dismantlexsjwsxfeminism]

Feminists fought against this...

Father’s rights group want shared parenting (equal custody) to be the default if both parents want custody and neither parent is unfit. They feel that men should not be punished for being men, and that women should not be awarded custody to their kids simply for being women. Currently women are awarded primary custody almost all the time, even if the husband was the stay-at-home Dad and the woman was the breadwinner.

Feminists fought against this...

Men want protection against false rape allegations. They feel that a man’s life should not be ruined simply on the allegation of a woman who may be a vindictive liar. Currently, a woman can accuse a man of rape for no reason, and the man’s name is splashed in the paper and his life is ruined. So, they fought for laws granting men anonymity until charged with the crime of rape—not convicted, just charged.

Feminists fought against this...

Men want an end to the justice system favouring women simply because they are women, and giving men harsher sentences simply because they are men.

Feminists fought against this...

Men want equal treatment when victims of domestic violence, and to not be arrested for the crime of “being male” under primary aggressor policies.

Feminists fought against this...by trying to suppress evidence showing that half of domestic violence is done by women, by threatening the researchers with bomb threats, death threats, etc.

Men want female rapists to be arrested, charged, and convicted with rape. In Western countries, women are rarely punished when raping men, due to the biased legal system. In some countries, women cannot be punished when raping men, since rape is defined as a male-perpetrated crime.

Feminists fought against this...

Men don’t want to be thrown in jail because they lost their jobs and temporarily cannot pay child support.

Feminists fought against this... trying to lower the amount to $5000 before a man is guilty of a felony for not paying child support. If a man loses a decent-paying job, he will now be a felon, go to jail, lose his right to vote, AND be unable to find future jobs—if he cannot regain an equal-paying job within a few months.

Men want equal economic support and help from the government. When the recession hit, male-dominated fields like construction lost millions of jobs, while female-fields like education and healthcare gained jobs. So the government proposed an economic stimulus for those fields.

Feminists successfully fought against this, arguing that it was discrimination to support men, and caused the government to give money to women who didn’t deserve it. Hundreds of professional feminists complained against the “sexism” of helping men (who had lost jobs) and not women (who had gained jobs).

As you can see, the claim that feminism fight for men’s rights is a blatant lie. Don’t believe any feminists that say that. Feminists fight for women’s rights. That is a good thing. Feminists also are happy to harm men’s rights, as shown above. That is a bad thing. Feminism is about female privilege, not equality.Some may argue that these cases of feminists harming men is not “representative” of feminism. I ask you: Are there any cases of feminists helping men? No. Yet, there are many cases of feminists harming men.

[mysteryfanfictheatre3000]

Verdict for Back to the Frollo

In chapter 18 of this (I believe) the story is interrupted by Danisha punching Esmeralda in the face and having her dragged away. Because Danisha is supposed to be the protagonist, this is treated as if it were not an issue. But, because I hate myself, I decided to look up what this would be if it happened in real life!  Let’s review what happened:

Esmeralda was arguing with her boyfriend. Danisha walked up to her, called her several racial slurs and punched her in the face before having her own boyfriend’s cronies drag her away.

What would the charges be?

Well, that’s definitely assault for the action of threatening Esmeralda, and  battery for the hit. Aggravated battery, because she was injured/vulnerable, Danisha had the intent to cause serious bodily harm and the racial aspect makes this a hate crime! Dragging her away is involuntary inprisonment and/or kidnapping. So we’re already looking at something bad here.

But to make matters worse: what do you think happened in that dungeon? This is the 1400s. Rape and torture is probably what happened if we’re being realistic, which makes Danisha aiding and abetting a rape, which would be treated the same as if she actually were the rapist. I’m going to view torture as battery here, because I don’t know how these specific laws are written, but long story short, this is probably aggravated assault and aggravated battery (aggravated assault for threatening with a deadly weapon, because that probably happened- in many adaptations Esmeralda is threatened with being killed and/or having her limbs slowly crushed in a vice. Aggravated battery because some of that probably was actually done to her), both of which Danisha is an accessory to.

What would the sentence be?

I’m going with modern laws here, because let’s face it, real 1400s laws would probably result in both women being burned as witches.

Aggravated battery is anywhere from 1-25 years.

Assault is up to 5 years.

The average sentence for a convicted rapist is around 10 years.

Kidnapping is around 20 years, but can be as long as a life sentence.

And guess what? The racial slurs and obvious anti-Roma attitude exhibited by Danisha throughout the story makes this a hate crime, which means an even harsher sentence!

So what’s going to happen to our friend Danisha here? 

Probably a very long time in prison, being put on the sex offender’s list and becoming a convicted felon, meaning she would definitely lose her job, as well as her right to vote, bear arms and several other things, even after she gets out of jail (if she ever does.)

So let this be a lesson: don’t beat up women in alleys because you’re jealous. 

And that’s to say nothing about Frollo’s charges... I’ll have to do a post on that someday.

[sft425]

@hijerking @ohthatblondechick   

Um no......

Father’s rights group want shared parenting (equal custody) to be the default if both parents want custody and neither parent is unfit. They feel that men should not be punished for being men, and that women should not be awarded custody to their kids simply for being women. Currently women are awarded primary custody almost all the time, even if the husband was the stay-at-home Dad and the woman was the breadwinner.

Feminists fought against this. You can read NOW’s own statement here (archived). Also note their usage of anti-male lies, i.e. “fathers are abusive, don’t give them custody.” (Archived) That is from 1997, but still remains valid today.

Men want protection against false rape allegations. They feel that a man’s life should not be ruined simply on the allegation of a woman who may be a vindictive liar. Currently, a woman can accuse a man of rape for no reason, and the man’s name is splashed in the paper and his life is ruined. So, they fought for laws granting men anonymity until charged with the crime of rape—not convicted, just charged.

Feminists fought against this, causing it to fail. Also see here, the London Feminist Network campaigning to defeat the proposal.

“The London Feminist Network is a campaigning organisation uniting London based feminist groups and individuals in activism.”

Men want an end to the justice system favouring women simply because they are women, and giving men harsher sentences simply because they are men.

Feminists fought against this, arguing that no woman should be sent to jail, even women who had murdered multiple people. (Archived)

Men want equal treatment when victims of domestic violence, and to not be arrested for the crime of “being male” under primary aggressor policies.

Feminists fought against this by trying to suppress evidence showing that half of domestic violence is done by women, by threatening the researchers with bomb threats, death threats, etc. Modern, younger feminists are doing it as well.

And sadly, they were successful in this effort of propaganda. For decades, and continuing today, violent men are (rightfully) convicted and punished by the state, while violent women are left to freely terrorize and harm their partners.

The feminist definition of domestic violence has skewed arrest and prosecution philosophies, resulting primarily in having only male batterers criminally pursued.

Men want female rapists to be arrested, charged, and convicted with rape. In Western countries, women are rarely punished when raping men, due to the biased legal system. In some countries, women cannot be punished when raping men, since rape is defined as a male-perpetrated crime.

Feminists fought against this in India, arguing that “there is a physicality [in] rape” and that it would make things “more complicated for judges.”

Men don’t want to be thrown in jail because they lost their jobs and temporarily cannot pay child support.

Feminists fought against this, trying to lower the amount to $5000(archived) before a man is guilty of a felony for not paying child support. If a man loses a decent-paying job, he will now be a felon, go to jail, lose his right to vote, AND be unable to find future jobs—if he cannot regain an equal-paying job within a few months.

Men want equal economic support and help from the government. When the recession hit, male-dominated fields like construction lost millions of jobs, while female-fields like education and healthcare gained jobs. So the government proposed an economic stimulus for those fields.

Feminists successfully fought against this (archived), arguing that it was discrimination to support men, and caused the government to give money to women who didn’t deserve it. Hundreds of professional feminists complained against the “sexism” of helping men (who had lost jobs) and not women (who had gained jobs).

A representative of the Michigan National Organization for Women testified in opposition to the Revocation of Paternity Act, which stopped the old law which stated that if a woman was married and cheated on her husband, the resulting child is considered to be legally the husband’s and the biological father had no legal rights to fight for custody or parenting time with his biological child.

As you can see, the claim that feminism fight for men’s rights is a blatant lie. Don’t believe any feminists that say that. Feminists fight for women’s rights. That is a good thing. Feminists also are happy to harm men’s rights, as shown above. That is a bad thing. Feminism is about female privilege, not equality.

Some may argue that these cases of feminists harming men is not “representative” of feminism. I ask you: Are there any cases of feminists helping men? No. Yet, there are many cases of feminists harming men.

It is reasonable to conclude from these facts that feminism fights to harm men.

This info is from draumbouy

Feminists threaten to kill woman for saying men need abuse shelters.

Feminists prevent a meeting about male suicide.

Feminists stage mock murders to scare men. (Archived)

Feminist attacks male cartoonist and is hailed a hero of feminism.

Feminists shut down forum for battered husbands.

Make it impossible to charge women with rape.

Female felons should serve home sentences.

Told judges to be lenient on women.

Feminists launch campaigns to help girls only while boys are doing worse in every facet of education.

Males who were raped as a child still have to pay child support. (It has multiple stories with sources to them)

Women should have the right to put a child up for adoption before the father gets custody.

Feminists against beyond reasonable doubt when it’s male rapists.

5 rights feminism ignores for men.

The primary aggressor clause where only men get charged with abuse.

Shame men into going to war.

Feminists dismiss female child rapists.

Feminists say men can’t talk about domestic abuse.

Feminists mock a man who has his dick cut off.

Strawmanning MRA members. (Archive)

Feminists attack church while members stand by and are assaulted.

Feminists transphobia.

Feminists slander the MRM

Again.

Call them terrorists.

Feminists say Men can’t be raped.

Feminists defend female raping minor.

Feminist defends why fucking an 8 year old boy isn’t rape.

Feminists primary aggressor clause discriminates against males.

Woman smashing bottle in mans face in public. Nobody gives a fuck.

Jezebel glorifies female on male domestic violence.

Feminists make sure the gov doesn’t spend money on male shelters or male research.

Female on male abuse in public is at best ignored, and at worst celebrated.

Public stops a man from abusing a woman in public, same crowd laughs when the roles are reversed.

No funding for male shelter.

Founder of Canadas only male shelter for abuse forced to close due to lack of funding before committing suicide.

Violent crimes? Only a few examples. One of which is their violent protest against Warren Farrell when he spoke in Toronto: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iARHCxAMAO0

Another would be this mob of pro-abortion Feminists in Argentina: http://www.lifesitenews.com/horror-mob-of-topless-pro-abort-feminists-attacks-rosary-praying-men-defend.html

Feminists disrupt a forum for battered men: http://youtu.be/qodygTkTUYM

Tumblr users sarah-bunny and feminism-is-your-friend harass and DOXX an Asexual rape victim: http://dontneedfeminism.tumblr.com/post/78589971327/abbeyxmae-serebrii

Tumblr user manhatingfeminist tells a user to kill themselves: http://dontneedfeminism.tumblr.com/post/78734991790/you-need-to-kill-yourself-lol

Tumblr user musemorplsunerd defends a woman who raped an 8 year old boy: http://dontneedfeminism.tumblr.com/post/81918411593/you-do-realize-that-8-year-olds-cannot-give-any-kind-of

Many feminist leaders were borderline genercidal. (Archive) In fact Valerie Solanas, who helped to shape modern patriarchy theory, and who’s writing is still taught today in womens studies classes, not only attempted to assassinate Andy Warhol, but also wrote a book called the S.C.U.M. Manifesto (or feminist Mein Kompf), which was about gendercide, and she is still hailed as a feminist hero to this day. this book is still used in womens studies classes despite the fact that it proposes reducing the male population to 10% and using them for breeding purposes.

Men actually have less rights than women. (Archived) Men are also demonized as rapists due to unequal rape laws that favor women. When you analyze the situation you’ll find that women rape almost as often as men (about 40% of rapists are women) and men are raped just as often if not more than women.

In 2008, a law was passed in England and Wales that allowed long-term domestic violence victims who killed their abuser to be charged with the lesser charge of manslaughter, but this only applies to women.

In California and Montana, a woman can name any man she likes as the father, he gets a letter in the mail, if he does not prove he isn’t the father within 30 days he is now the father and must pay. He cannot contest it. And DNA tests to prove paternity are not considered proof by the courts.

Women who falsely accuse a man of rape, who would be sent to prison for 10+ years if convicted, only gets fined or a slap on the wrist.

There is also the gender bias in the Probation Departments:

A higher score on the Probation Assessment Tool (PAT) means a recommendation that could lead to eventual dismissal of charges. A lower score means probation or lockup, not to mention the juvenile delinquent tag. [Judge] Hunt claims PAT routinely rewards girls with 14 extra points for gender alone, while boys get 0.

Then there are studies that show women who fail to pay child support are incarcerated only 1/8th as often as men with similar violations.

The feminist definition of domestic violence has skewed arrest and prosecution philosophies, resulting in having mostly male batterers criminally pursued, and female batterers left alone.

Men who are falsely accused of rape can have their names published and their lives ruined even if they are not convicted or charged - their accuser is protected and is likely to face no punishment, or a light one.

Feminists’ DV training hurts Police training

Feminist Mary Koss denies male rape victims. (three links, some archived)

Feminist Harriet Harman has publicly requested employers to hire women in preference to White men if both job candidates are equally qualified. (Archived)

Equality Minister,feminist Patricia Hewitt, was found guilty of breaching the Sex Discrimination Act by “overlooking a strong male candidate for a job in favour of a weaker female applicant”.

Elected in 2009, the lesbian feminist prime minister Johanna Sigurdardottir has vowed to “end of the Age of Testosterone.

Feminists want to peeing while standing illegal. Yes, really.

Erin Pizzey had to flee the UK because she and her family received death threats and her dog murdered all because feminists didn’t like that she discovered women were equally as violent as men.

Also Suzanne Steinmetz and her children received death threats and bomb threats she discovered that  the rate at which men were victimized by domestic violence was similar to the rate for women.

Richard Gelles and Murray Straus  have all received death threats from feminists, simply for publishing their findings (that female-to-male family violence was equal to the rate of male-to-female violence). (Two links)

Most feminists backed studies are bullshit.

Feminist changes mind on rape culture when her son is falsely accused.

Feminists shut down a festival about gender equality for including men.

Feminists hope MRA’s die in terrorist attack.

Feminists against fathers day.

Feminist makes up fake assault stories.

Female reporter bullied by feminists at the National Young Feminist Leadership Conference

[jacobhinkley]

Change.org Petition Attempts to Fight for Ross Ulbricht’s Freedom

After being denied a post-conviction relief extension in February 2018, Ross Ulbricht’s family and legal team filed a Petition of Certiorari with the U.S. Supreme Court based on constitutional violations in the investigation and at sentencing. The petition was supported by 21 organizations, however, the Court denied Ulbricht’s petition on June 28. The fight to free Ross Ulbricht, 33, is now reinforced with a new petition created on Change.org, 3 days ago by FreeRoss.org. There are currently 6,242+ signatures and the petition aims at reaching 7,500.

Also read: Ross Ulbricht Continues to Fight for Freedom With Supreme Court Petition

“It’s Not the End,” Mother Cried at Her Son When Taken Back to Prison Cell

“It’s not the end.” Lyn Ulbricht had cried at her son in the courtroom when a marshal set his hand on his back to signal it was time to return to the cell after hearing the sentence. That was in Manhattan’s U.S. district court in May 2015. That day, Lyn had declared she would never turn away from her son, whom she considers innocent. The fight to seek justice for their son is not over for this family.

“My son, Ross Ulbricht, is serving a double life sentence plus 40 years, without the possibility of parole, for a website he made when he was 26 years old and passionate about free markets and privacy. Ross, an Eagle Scout, scientist and peaceful entrepreneur, had all non-violent charges and no criminal history.” The petition says.

“A Sentence That Shocks the Conscience.”

Ulbricht was accused of being the creator of Silk Road, the infamous international dark site and drug bazaar created in 2011, under the pseudonym “Dread Pirate Roberts,” aka “DPR” and was arrested in 2013.

The physics graduate and alleged mastermind behind Silk Road, described in the petition as “an e-commerce platform similar to eBay, where individual users chose what to list for sale,” was convicted in February 2015 after a four-week trial on all seven counts, from drug trafficking and money laundering to maintaining an “ongoing criminal enterprise.” All to be served concurrently with no chance of parole. A sentence usually reserved to drug kingpins.

Judge Katherine Forrest said she would give Ross “the severest sentence possible.” Restrained by law from issuing the death penalty, she gave him a walking death sentence instead. “Ross’s appeal points out “grotesque disparity” between Ross’s life sentence—which is unheard of for a young man with no criminal history and all non-violent charges, and the sentences of other Silk Road defendants.” FreeRoss.org writes.

Ulbricht’s new legal team, Williams & Connolly, also argue that there have been discrepancies in the investigation, namely with the participation of two rogue agents leading the federal investigation into Silk Road.

“Ross is condemned to die in prison, not for dealing drugs himself but for a website where others did. This is far harsher than the punishment for many murderers, pedophiles, rapists and other violent people.” The petition says.

Ulbricht has been relocated from New York to a maximum-security penitentiary called USP Florence. The family says this prison is meant for some of the country’s most violent offenders and they don’t understand why Ross is being kept there for his life sentence.

Do you think the sentence faced by Ross Ulbricht was fair and do you think the Change.org petition will be heard? Let us know in the comments section below.

Images courtesy of Freeross.org and Shutterstock.

Need to calculate your bitcoin holdings? Check our tools section.

The post Change.org Petition Attempts to Fight for Ross Ulbricht’s Freedom appeared first on Bitcoin News.

Change.org Petition Attempts to Fight for Ross Ulbricht’s Freedom published first on https://medium.com/@smartoptions

[bowsetter]

Change.org Petition Attempts to Fight for Ross Ulbricht’s Freedom

After being denied a post-conviction relief extension in February 2018, Ross Ulbricht’s family and legal team filed a Petition of Certiorari with the U.S. Supreme Court based on constitutional violations in the investigation and at sentencing. The petition was supported by 21 organizations, however, the Court denied Ulbricht’s petition on June 28. The fight to free Ross Ulbricht, 33, is now reinforced with a new petition created on Change.org, 3 days ago by FreeRoss.org. There are currently 6,242+ signatures and the petition aims at reaching 7,500.

Also read: Ross Ulbricht Continues to Fight for Freedom With Supreme Court Petition

“It’s Not the End,” Mother Cried at Her Son When Taken Back to Prison Cell

“It’s not the end.” Lyn Ulbricht had cried at her son in the courtroom when a marshal set his hand on his back to signal it was time to return to the cell after hearing the sentence. That was in Manhattan’s U.S. district court in May 2015. That day, Lyn had declared she would never turn away from her son, whom she considers innocent. The fight to seek justice for their son is not over for this family.

“My son, Ross Ulbricht, is serving a double life sentence plus 40 years, without the possibility of parole, for a website he made when he was 26 years old and passionate about free markets and privacy. Ross, an Eagle Scout, scientist and peaceful entrepreneur, had all non-violent charges and no criminal history.” The petition says.

“A Sentence That Shocks the Conscience.”

Ulbricht was accused of being the creator of Silk Road, the infamous international dark site and drug bazaar created in 2011, under the pseudonym “Dread Pirate Roberts,” aka “DPR” and was arrested in 2013.

The physics graduate and alleged mastermind behind Silk Road, described in the petition as “an e-commerce platform similar to eBay, where individual users chose what to list for sale,” was convicted in February 2015 after a four-week trial on all seven counts, from drug trafficking and money laundering to maintaining an “ongoing criminal enterprise.” All to be served concurrently with no chance of parole. A sentence usually reserved to drug kingpins.

Judge Katherine Forrest said she would give Ross “the severest sentence possible.” Restrained by law from issuing the death penalty, she gave him a walking death sentence instead. “Ross’s appeal points out “grotesque disparity” between Ross’s life sentence—which is unheard of for a young man with no criminal history and all non-violent charges, and the sentences of other Silk Road defendants.” FreeRoss.org writes.

Ulbricht’s new legal team, Williams & Connolly, also argue that there have been discrepancies in the investigation, namely with the participation of two rogue agents leading the federal investigation into Silk Road.

“Ross is condemned to die in prison, not for dealing drugs himself but for a website where others did. This is far harsher than the punishment for many murderers, pedophiles, rapists and other violent people.” The petition says.

Ulbricht has been relocated from New York to a maximum-security penitentiary called USP Florence. The family says this prison is meant for some of the country’s most violent offenders and they don’t understand why Ross is being kept there for his life sentence.

Do you think the sentence faced by Ross Ulbricht was fair and do you think the Change.org petition will be heard? Let us know in the comments section below.

Images courtesy of Freeross.org and Shutterstock.

Need to calculate your bitcoin holdings? Check our tools section.

The post Change.org Petition Attempts to Fight for Ross Ulbricht’s Freedom appeared first on Bitcoin News.

READ MORE http://bit.ly/2uHKRbY

[rolandfontana]

Can the U.S. Abolish Life Sentences?

Why is the U.S. almost alone among Western democracies in condemning people to life sentences? Marc Mauer and Ashley Nellis, co-authors of a new book calling for an end to the practice, say life terms are the consequence of outdated tough-on-crime strategies fueled by the drug war.

The publication of their book, “The Meaning of Life: The Case for Abolishing Life Sentences,” coincides with the launch of a campaign spearheaded by The Sentencing Project. Mauer, executive director of The Sentencing Project, and Nellis, a senior research analyst, argue that the maximum term of incarceration for all offenses should be 20 years. Their book also features profiles of six people who have been affected by life sentences, written by Kerry Myers, a former “lifer.”

In a conversation with TCR, Nellis discussed the abolition campaign and its chances for success in today’s political climate.

The Crime Report: Should nonviolent offenders be receiving life sentences?

Nellis: We point out the 17,000 lifers (imprisoned for nonviolent offenses) as evidence as how the system has gotten so far off track that even nonviolent individuals are caught in the mix. We oppose life sentences whether someone is in there for violent or nonviolent crimes. We use that as an example to impress on people how unfair the sentence is allowed to be.

TCR: Should nonviolent offenders currently serving life sentences be released from prison?

 Nellis: There should be a limit on all prison sentences that caps at about 20 years, and only in very rare circumstances should someone serve the whole thing, such as where public safety is going to be threatened. And the review should begin around 15 years. Though it’s hard to imagine someone (in prison) after 20 years with a nonviolent drug offense would be danger to the community.

TCR: What crimes would require a 20-year sentence?

Nellis:  Something where someone was a serial rapist and also refused treatment for the entire 20 years of their incarceration and made the promise they would commit more sexual crimes. This would be someone who wasn’t just resistant to treatment, but refused treatment.

 TCR: One of the points you emphasize throughout the book is that lawmakers have used tough on crime policies as a way to get elected.

Nellis: It’s definitely very popular, historically, to be tougher on crime than your opponent. That had the unfortunate consequence of getting endorsement for policies that didn’t make us safer, such as mandatory minimums and the abolishment of parole. Both parties are responsible for those policies. Former President Bill Clinton is responsible in large part for the 1994 crime bill which incentivized sentencing to the states—that is why we have such long parole times for life sentences.

Ashley Nellis

TCR: You write, “The rhetoric of the time (in the 1980s) created a bidding war in which political candidates and lawmakers competed to endorse even harsher sentencing policies.” Do we still see this today?

Nellis:  No. You see bipartisan support for criminal justice reform. Maybe for the past ten years or so, that’s been the case. As reform of life sentences, there hasn’t been much if any progress. Worst-case scenarios, life sentences are deliberately excluded from reforms to make sure policy recommended is palpable to both sides. If a lifer has been incarcerated for 30 or 40 years, they are excluded from reforms.

TCR: Do you see that changing any time soon?

Nellis:  We live in unusual times. It’s hard to know what the next move will be. In the states, there has been more political cover for ambitious reforms, but that’s not to say those reforms have been undertaken yet. It’s getting there, but mass incarceration is an enormous problem in our budgets, and in American society; so we have to quicken the pace if we want to see substantial change in mass incarceration.

TCR: How can America speed up the process?

Nellis:  Some of it is in the hands of legislatures, or places like [The Sentencing Project]. We have launched a national campaign to end life imprisonment. We are actively engaged in public education campaign to get most people to know that so many people are serving life sentences. Individuals who go in on a life sentence change over time. There is this widely agreed on phenomena of aging out that happens among people who go to prison, or don’t go to prison. We all change over time.

TCR: Do you believe fear-mongering is one of the reasons we still have life sentences for non-violent offenders?

Nellis:  I think that’s some of it. We no longer live in the time of early 1990s, when we had a substantial increase in violent crime. We actually have a downward trend in violent crime over the past 20 years, so it’s changed. You know, it used to be that we were afraid of people and we needed to incarcerate people. Now we don’t have more crime, but we say criminals don’t deserve to come out of prison because of what they did.

TCR: Why might that be?

Nellis: Because of crimes imposed on their victims, individuals think there’s always a chance the incarcerated could commit a new crime, or they won’t participate in society in a positive way. There are a lot of misconceptions about those in prison because of the lack of information about people who change when they are incarcerated. And that’s why we have parole systems to make sure that person has changed. The victims’ rights movement has become the judge of when someone can get out, instead of someone who is more educated to make that decision based on public safety.

 TCR: You write, “Perhaps the most glaring omission of relevant data was the failure of the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS), the well- regarded research arm of the Department of Justice, to document the scale of life imprisonment.” Do you think this omission was on purpose or by accident? And why?

Nellis: I think it’s not on purpose, there just a lack of resources in the research arms. There’s also a lack of general interest from the public, so there was no incentive to document the expansion of life sentences. We shouldn’t be surprised that there hasn’t been data on the expansion because it goes along with laws and policies of the 1990s.

[The BJS] is not a political entity, but it seems to be. If you pass legislation at federal level that is bound to increase your incarcerated population… you should probably document the impact of those policies. If you pass mandatory minimums with the elimination of parole, it seems wise to document how many people go to prison because you did that. Once a lot of the public sees the dramatic growth of life sentences— nearly five-fold increase over time— then they ask “why did nobody notice this before?” The answer is because nobody was recording it.

TCR: You also mention that the number of women serving life sentences has risen at a faster rate than for men in recent years. However, you continue that domestic violence cases in which the woman kills her abuser are prevalent. What did your research reveal about the link between  domestic violence and life sentences?

Nellis:  Most of the work around domestic violence and life sentences is still in anecdotal stage, but there is a growing interest in understanding that. Some states have felt deeper than others. Michigan and Missouri have developed female lifer advocacy groups that focus on getting the stories of women out there that have killed out of self- defense. But because of mandatory life sentences or weak domestic violence laws, they are unable to avoid a life sentence themselves. We want to focus on this in the coming years.

The growth of women lifers has risen about twice as fast as male lifers. It’s still very much the case that life sentences are served by men, but the pace of growth is increasing more for women than for men.

 TCR: Are some states more equipped than others to handle domestic violence cases? You mention very few women receive help from the legal system.

Nellis: : I’m not sure about more equipped, but I know California, Georgia, Texas, and Ohio all have a considerable amount of women serving life sentences (300 or more).

 TCR: You also write, “The United States is virtually alone among nations in sentencing juveniles to life imprisonment.” What are the implications for youth, and the rest of the county, if young people are put away for life? 

Nellis: It sets us apart internationally, and we consider ourselves world leaders on human rights. But this violates human rights treaties. It’s against who we say we are. And it’s against what we know about adolescent brains.

There’s a fair amount of research and documented proof that children are different than adults. That’s been confirmed through cases we talk about; we can’t just view juveniles as little adults because they are not. Even if they commit tragic offenses they are held to a different standard. They should be incarcerated for some period of time, but a life sentence is completely inappropriate and that is recognized across the world.

 TCR: What about mental health care for people serving life sentences? In your research, did you find any prisons who supported this?

Nellis:  Not for lifers. Lifers, by in large, form their own groups with other lifers and support each other. But they are often excluded from programing because of their sentences. Programming slots are reserved for nearing release date individuals. So lifers are put at the back of the line or removed from consideration all together.

Megan Hadley is a senior staff writer for The Crime Report.

Can the U.S. Abolish Life Sentences? syndicated from https://immigrationattorneyto.wordpress.com/

[coin-river-blog]

News

After being denied a post-conviction relief extension in February 2018, Ross Ulbricht’s family and legal team filed a Petition of Certiorari with the U.S. Supreme Court based on constitutional violations in the investigation and at sentencing. The petition was supported by 21 organizations, however, the Court denied Ulbricht’s petition on June 28. The fight to free Ross Ulbricht, 33, is now reinforced with a new petition created on Change.org, 3 days ago by FreeRoss.org. There are currently 6,242+ signatures and the petition aims at reaching 7,500.

Also read: Ross Ulbricht Continues to Fight for Freedom With Supreme Court Petition

“It’s Not the End,” Mother Cried at Her Son When Taken Back to Prison Cell

“It’s not the end.” Lyn Ulbricht had cried at her son in the courtroom when a marshal set his hand on his back to signal it was time to return to the cell after hearing the sentence. That was in Manhattan’s U.S. district court in May 2015. That day, Lyn had declared she would never turn away from her son, whom she considers innocent. The fight to seek justice for their son is not over for this family.

“My son, Ross Ulbricht, is serving a double life sentence plus 40 years, without the possibility of parole, for a website he made when he was 26 years old and passionate about free markets and privacy. Ross, an Eagle Scout, scientist and peaceful entrepreneur, had all non-violent charges and no criminal history.” The petition says.

“A Sentence That Shocks the Conscience.”

Ulbricht was accused of being the creator of Silk Road, the infamous international dark site and drug bazaar created in 2011, under the pseudonym “Dread Pirate Roberts,” aka “DPR” and was arrested in 2013.

The physics graduate and alleged mastermind behind Silk Road, described in the petition as “an e-commerce platform similar to eBay, where individual users chose what to list for sale,” was convicted in February 2015 after a four-week trial on all seven counts, from drug trafficking and money laundering to maintaining an “ongoing criminal enterprise.” All to be served concurrently with no chance of parole. A sentence usually reserved to drug kingpins.

Judge Katherine Forrest said she would give Ross “the severest sentence possible.” Restrained by law from issuing the death penalty, she gave him a walking death sentence instead. “Ross’s appeal points out “grotesque disparity” between Ross’s life sentence—which is unheard of for a young man with no criminal history and all non-violent charges, and the sentences of other Silk Road defendants.” FreeRoss.org writes.

Ulbricht’s new legal team, Williams & Connolly, also argue that there have been discrepancies in the investigation, namely with the participation of two rogue agents leading the federal investigation into Silk Road.

“Ross is condemned to die in prison, not for dealing drugs himself but for a website where others did. This is far harsher than the punishment for many murderers, pedophiles, rapists and other violent people.” The petition says.

Ulbricht has been relocated from New York to a maximum-security penitentiary called USP Florence. The family says this prison is meant for some of the country’s most violent offenders and they don’t understand why Ross is being kept there for his life sentence.

Do you think the sentence faced by Ross Ulbricht was fair and do you think the Change.org petition will be heard? Let us know in the comments section below.

Images courtesy of Freeross.org and Shutterstock.

Need to calculate your bitcoin holdings? Check our tools section.

[kidsviral-blog]

How A 12-Year-Old Rape Victim Lost His Mom To “Failure To Protect” Law

New Post has been published on https://kidsviral.info/how-a-12-year-old-rape-victim-lost-his-mom-to-failure-to-protect-law/

How A 12-Year-Old Rape Victim Lost His Mom To “Failure To Protect” Law

Collin Grant’s stepfather repeatedly raped him — but under laws exposed in a BuzzFeed News investigation, Collin’s mom went to prison for more time than his rapist. Today, Collin wants his mother pardoned.

Collin Grant wishes he had never told anyone that his stepfather raped him.

Jimmy Don Mackey would hold Collin down, punch him in the back if he tried to move, and cover his mouth if he tried to scream. On one occasion, Jimmy Don duct-taped Collin’s mouth shut. He told Collin that if he ever disclosed the abuse to anyone, he would kill him.

Yet Collin eventually did tell the authorities in Muskogee County, Oklahoma, about Jimmy Don’s abuse. Collin testified about it in court, where it also emerged that Jimmy Don had repeatedly beaten his mother, Alishia Mackey. Jimmy Don pled guilty to rape, forcible sodomy, and other sex crimes, and was sent to prison.

Yet Collin’s mother was also sent to prison for failing to protect her son.

Jimmy Don got 15 years for raping Collin. For permitting the rape to happen, Collin’s mother got an even harsher sentence: 20 years.

As a 12-year-old recovering from repeated sexual abuse, Collin was cut off from his mother.

Today, Collin is 22. He said he misses his mom and believes she does not deserve to be in prison. She should be pardoned, he said.

He also wishes he had never come forward about what his stepfather was doing to him. “Honestly,” Collin told BuzzFeed News, “I would rather have gone through the abuse for the rest of my life.”

View this image ›

Jimmy Don Mackey Oklahoma Department of Corrections

A recent BuzzFeed News investigation exposed cases in which mothers have been given sentences of up to life in prison for failing to protect their children from their violent partners — even when, as in Alishia’s case, there is evidence that the mother herself was battered.

In Texas, for example, Arlena Lindley was sentenced to 45 years, despite the fact that she tried to grab her 3-year-old son from her partner the day he beat the boy to death, and despite the fact that she herself had been beaten viciously for months. The prosecution said she should have called 911.

Collin Grant’s case illuminates what domestic violence advocates say is a different problem: the collateral damage to the children of mothers sent away to prison for years.

“What are we really doing on behalf of that child who is the victim of the crime?” said Deborah D. Tucker, executive director of the National Center on Domestic and Sexual Violence. “How is that” — imprisoning the mother — “helpful to them?”

At least 29 states have laws that explicitly criminalize parents’ failure to protect their children from abuse. In addition, prosecutors in at least 19 states can use other, more general laws against criminal negligence in the care of a child or placing a child in a dangerous situation.

Only a handful of state laws provide specific defenses for parents who reasonably feared they would be harmed if they stepped in to stop child abuse.

Many prosecutors defend the laws and the harsh sentences as sending a message that mothers must defend their children, even if their own safety is at risk. Domestic violence advocates counter that such sentences are unjust — and a sign that the criminal justice system does not understand how battering victimizes women.

Altogether, BuzzFeed News found 28 cases in which mothers were sentenced to at least a decade in prison despite evidence they themselves were victims of their violent partners. Alishia Mackey was one of those mothers. She was tried under Oklahoma’s “enabling child abuse” law, which has the same maximum sentence — life in prison — as actually committing child abuse.

View this image ›

Jimmy Don and Alishia married in 1995. His beatings waxed and waned — bad in the early years of their marriage, for example, then bad again not long before Collin’s abuse came to light.

Alishia testified that Jimmy Don “would punch me repeatedly, hit me with things, choke me, hold the back of — hold a gun to my head, threaten to kill me and my kids if I even told anybody” that he beat her. A former friend told the court that Alishia had confided in her at the time that Jimmy Don was battering her. Collin testified that he saw his mom get beaten. She escaped once, he told the court, but Jimmy Don “tracked us down.”

One night, Alishia woke up to find she was alone in bed. She got up and went to her son’s bedroom. What exactly she saw is unclear. Collin testified that Jimmy Don was molesting him, and Alishia first told police that she saw Jimmy Don on top of Collin with both of their pants down. But in court, she and Collin testified that he and Jimmy Don were both clothed.

On the stand, Alishia changed many parts of her story and contradicted herself. “She was her own worst enemy,” David Pierce, the prosecutor, said in an interview.

That’s not uncommon. In its investigation, BuzzFeed News found that many battered mothers lie and take other actions that make them look guilty. The terror they feel sometimes lasts even after their partner has been arrested. Then too, repeated trauma, like PTSD, can harm a person’s mental health. “There are many times when victims don’t put their best foot forward for a host of reasons — including their own sense of guilt and failure,” Tucker said.

Alishia also testified that she suffered from petit mal seizures that led her to have a faulty memory.

At trial, prosecutors alleged that the moment when Alishia walked in on her husband and her son came two years before authorities learned of it. Police pointed to an interrogation in which she allegedly said the incident happened in January of 2002, but officers didn’t tape that interview. Collin testified that it happened in the fall of 2003, which would mean that the abuse came to light within a few months of her seeing it.

Whatever the details, prosecutors argued that Alishia failed to protect her son by neither leaving the relationship nor going immediately to the authorities. On the stand, Collin estimated that Jimmy Don molested him “maybe” five more times after his mother first learned of the abuse and before Jimmy Don was arrested.

Pierce, the prosecutor, declared in court that Collin wanted his mother put away. “He’d like to see her spend the rest of her life in prison,” Pierce told the judge. Asked about this, Collin told BuzzFeed News he was on psychotropic medication at the time of the trial and, because he was screened off from his mother during his testimony, did not realize he was testifying at her trial. He said he thought he was at his stepfather’s trial.

One thing that Pierce never disputed was the fact that Jimmy Don had violently abused Alishia. Indeed, Pierce cited his battering of Alishia as evidence of her poor decision-making. “She made the decision to stay,” he told the jury.

Jurors found Alishia guilty and recommended 20 years in prison. Alishia’s attorney, Corrine O’Day, protested that the prosecution had sought only 15 years when Jimmy Don pled guilty to raping Collin. “The state is not fully consistent,” she said. But the judge went with the jury’s recommendation.

Told that Collin recently said his mother should not be in prison, Pierce said, “I’m not surprised with that at all. It’s his mother.”

But that does not change Pierce’s view on Alishia’s sentence. “I believe that that was an appropriate punishment for what she did,” he said.

Jimmy Don’s case was handled by a different prosecutor, Sejin Brooks. Now an attorney in Austin, Texas, Brooks said “you’re absolutely right” that it might look strange that Alishia, who was convicted of permitting abuse, got a harsher punishment than Jimmy Don, who actually raped Collin. But, Brooks said, Alishia did not plead guilty but instead went to trial, risking the wrath of a judge and jury.

View this image ›

Visitors leave the Mabel Bassett Correctional Center in McLoud, Oklahoma. Sue Ogrocki / AP Photo

The courthouse would be the last place Collin saw his mother for more than five years, until he turned 18. During those years, he said, he was shuttled among group homes and shelters, never quite feeling like he fit in anywhere.

Without his mother, he lacked someone to confide in as he grew up, he said. “The one person I was supposed to be able to turn to for almost anything — I didn’t have that.”

He and his siblings now live with Collin’s grandmother. Alishia is more than 100 miles away, and visiting hours at Mabel Bassett Correctional Center are on weekend mornings. They make it out there about once a month.

“My mother is one of the most caring people in the world,” Collin said. “And I will say that to anyone.”

View this image ›

Ellie Hall contributed reporting to this story.

Read more: http://www.buzzfeed.com/alexcampbell/mothers-imprisonment-leads-rape-victim-to-wish-he-had-never

[dcoloneyes]

Coloured in America?: How institutions view you.

(NB - this is an adapted piece of work that I wrote as an examined component as part for my CIE Pre-U GPR IRR. I’ve adapted it because this part of my essay focussed on the question whereas the previous part focussed on outlining Critical Race Theory and its reputations, which was required as part of the mark scheme)

The last 10 years in America have reignited the issue of race and what it means to be coloured in the United States, but it has also raised the question of how far the civil rights effort of the mid-1900s and the fight against racism has progressed since then. The election of Barack Obama in 2008 as president had transformed to some extent what it means to be coloured in America. This sentiment is undoubtedly highlighted by Kimberlé Crenshaw and how “it seemed like a mirage … as if awakening from a bad dream, we opened our eyes to find an African American in the White House.”[1] Quite evidently the oppression and hurt caused by hundreds of years of systemic racism would not dissipate just because a black man was elected president. “We are not saved;”[2] this quote from Derrick Bell concerning the election of Barack Obama refers to how the journey for racial equality was not complete, just as “the collapse of formal segregation did not dismantle racial power in the mid-20th Century”[3]. This half of the current decade exemplifies how racism is still rife in America and is still being perpetrated and supported by the most powerful institutions – namely the police. Issues concern; how POC are treated by the judicial system - the police, the education system and the institution of media. Kim M. LeDuff states that “when it comes to race and representation in mass media, the view in the mid-2010s is not hopeful or positive.”[4] To be honest, what she’s saying is widely true.

Police hostility as a dominant form of racism in America has come to light as a serious issue laced with years of oppression and tension, between the coloured communities and the police. With the mention of black men being the primary victims, it was interesting to understand that Kimberlé Crenshaw published a document about the relationship between police brutality and black women, highlighting not only the horrific oppression received by women of colour but actually providing a voice to black women, who are so often erased from society as a result of an ingrained misogynoir ideology.  Statistics concerning the number of people killed by police nationwide in America is not readily available nor is it documented, however Crenshaw has utilised her resources and collated some information on the extent to which black women, particularly in America suffer at the hands of the judicial system – with the police being the face of it. In 2013, 55.7% of Black men that took part in the study were stopped by the police in New York City[5], which is a similar number to the number of women stopped by police with 53.4%.[6] The same year 10.9% of white men were stopped by police in New York[7], and 13.4% of white women were stopped[8]. The Latina demographic saw a 27.5% stop by police[9], and their Latino counterparts peaked was recorded at 29.3%[10]. What is interesting is regarding demographic and race as constants the proportion of which one is stopped is likely to predict, as a result of a positive congruence thanks to the statistics.  These statistics raise a few pivotal points regarding tenets of Critical Race. Whiteness is seen as a property, something that is valued and used to ‘pass’ through situations, and this study, though not wholly representative of the situation in Ameica, seems to show that. Another interesting concept concerns the level of which one is stereotypically privileged. According to this study it seems that white people are at the top of the hierarchy, and the darker you are the less privilege you have, which means you are more likely to be stopped if you are black compared to white. The same is seen with gender, men are the most privileged and if you identify or present as anything other; so as a woman, a transgender woman, a non-binary person, ultimately you do not hold as much power or standing and are more likely to be stopped by the police.

Crenshaw published another document regarding the status and position of black girls in schools in New York. The primary finding from her investigation states that “in New York and Boston, Black boys and girls were subject to larger achievement gaps and harsher forms of discipline than their white counterparts.”[11] Historical systemic racism from institutions like the police and education boards will result in chaos, and negatively impact black children. This study somewhat links with the previous one, another finding of this study showed that “increased levels of law enforcement and security personnel within schools sometimes made girls feel less safe and less likely to attend school.”[12] From a judicial point of view, another finding proves itself of interest – “punitive rather than restorative responses to conflict contributes to the separation of girls from school and to their disproportionate involvement in the juvenile justice system.”[13] This further highlights how the ‘school to prison pipeline’ is a prevalent issue for black women, in spite of the fact as of 2016, black women represented the most educated demographic in the United States[14]. Racism in education seems to have penetrated deeper than what is believed to have occurred. In 2011-2012 the United States Department of Education released statistics that showed Black girls were suspended up to 6 times more than White girls[15], and Black boys were suspended 3 times more than white boys[16]. Furthermore, only 2% of white females were subjected to exclusionary suspensions in comparison to 12% of Black girls[17]. Black Children in the state of New York are the most likely to be disciplined (Girls – 56% and Boys 48%) despite making up close to one third of the enrolled class[18]. In New York alone, black girls are 53 times more likely to be expelled than white girls[19], whereas black boys are only 10 times more likely[20]. It must be noted that these statistics were chosen to represent children in New York and do not wholly represent the United States of America, however they do provide a snapshot to the plight these children face as a result of their skin colour. These staggering statistics present the precarious position of the black child in New York. Again, whiteness as a property, as a form of currency seems to reign, and black children are stigmatised and regarded as trouble makers. On a larger view, this disadvantages the prospects of black children compared to white children. The study reported instances where the police were called for menial matters such as a fight in school between two children, who presented no large threat with weapons, and as a result of this, it has undoubtedly encouraged a culture of blackness being associated with danger. It seems clear that those who take America as being post-racial such as Peter Wood, have not considered the interaction of communities of colour and the educational and judicial authorities.

Social Media as a mechanism to organise and formulate intersectional protest has proved to be one of the most successful initiatives that has come out of this period. It has provided a means for a change in narrative and new platform for revolutionary movements. The international engagement of Black Lives Matter showed a widespread support for the showing of the horrific deaths of black people in America by predominantly white male police officers. Simultaneously, the rise of social media has also highlighted the lack of reporting on these issues by big news corporations. LeDuff’s argument regarding the media holds the premise that these news outlets did not reveal the true extent of racism in America after the Civil Rights Movement period. Instead “the media perpetuated the myth by avoiding the stories that indicated the true price of oppression […] they focused on sensational stories to increase their viewership for ratings.”[21] As a result of this belligerence, LeDuff argues that now “hegemonic thoughts and practices in relation to race persisted and festered, and today it seems that many of the old challenges that society faced in pre-Civil Rights America are coming back to haunt us with a new and different twist.”[22] LeDuff continues the idea that American media failed to “address the true ills that are so ingrained in our society when it comes to race relations”[23] by failing to report on race related crimes. This ultimate frustration has resulted in a more democratic sharing of information, something that is accessible by people all over the world and something that did not need to be approved in the interest of a rich white conservative man and their traditional political interests. This was found on social media like Facebook and Twitter. This for the new generation has become “one of the places where we can witness first-hand the great divides among race and class in modern society”[24], as people of this generation are dictating the narrative and ‘calling out’ hateful posts. This idea of calling out hateful ideas and posts is linked with how people of colour are presented in the media. It seems interesting to see that an awareness of how colour influences the type of headline one gets or the type of tone received. For example, a lot of attention surrounding Brock Turner, a convicted rapist was brought to light with the way white media manipulated headlines to soften his image. Many outlets focussed on his academic achievements – the fact that he went to Stanford or the fact that he was a successful swimmer as opposed to how the crime he committed. This in comparison to how black people, in particular black women who are missing have mugshots used, and there is a complete lack of affection to soften their image.

Writing this conclusion now months after I had originally wrote this essay, what do I think now? Well, race relations in America have undoubtedly got worse. White supremacy has been allowed to thrive. Just yesterday the world saw how violent this depraved ideology can be, clutching on to the last of its history, it reared its demon face and caused destruction amongst the largely left wing community of Charlottesville. There were reports of people being beaten and murdered by white terrorists, yet still the largest and most powerful institution in the country: The President and the White House wanted to ‘All lives Matter’ this situation, by condemning both parties. Dangerous fascist ideologies are being allowed to thrive and the Establishment do not seem to care. My final thoughts are this; What needs to happen before someone powerful takes this seriously? Does the President need to be impeached? Does a race war really need to occur? 

Rahul Dhulipala

[1] Christopher Campbell and Kim M. LeDuff, The Routledge Companion To Media And Race (1st edn, 2017). P.39

[2] Ibid

[3] Ibid

[4] Christopher Campbell and Kim M. LeDuff, The Routledge Companion To Media And Race (1st edn, 2017). p. 39

[5] Kimberlé Crenshaw, Say Her Name: Resisting Police Brutality Against Black Women (1st edn, 2015). p.3

[6] Ibid

[7] Ibid

[8] Ibid

[9] Ibid

[10] Ibid

[11] Kimberlé Crenshaw and Jyoti Nanda, Black Girls Matter: Pushed Out, Overpoliced And Underprotected (1st edn, 2015). P.11

[12] Ibid, p.12

[13] Ibid

[14] Samuel Osborne, 'Black Women Become Most Educated Group In US' The Independent (2016) <http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/black-women-become-most-educated-group-in-us-a7063361.html> accessed 13 February 2017.

[15] Kimberlé Crenshaw and Jyoti Nanda, Black Girls Matter: Pushed Out, Overpoliced And Underprotected (1st edn, 2015). P.19

[16] Ibid

[17] Ibid

[18] Ibid, p.21

[19] Ibid, p.23

[20] Ibid

[21] Christopher Campbell and Kim M. LeDuff, The Routledge Companion To Media And Race (1st edn, 2017). p. 44

[22] Ibid

[23] Ibid

[24] Ibid

[newstfionline]

Christian Governor in Indonesia Found Guilty of Blasphemy Against Islam

By Joe Cochrane, NY Times, May 9, 2017

JAKARTA, Indonesia--An Indonesian court found the Christian governor of the country’s capital, Jakarta, guilty of blasphemy against Islam on Tuesday, sentencing him to two years in prison in a case widely seen as a test of religious tolerance and free speech.

The governor, Basuki Tjahaja Purnama, was defeated last month by Anies Baswedan, a former minister of education and culture, in an election in which the blasphemy case, and religion, became a major issue.

Blasphemy is a crime in Indonesia, a secular democracy with the world’s largest Muslim population.

The sentence was harsher than what prosecutors had asked for. They had recommended a sentence of two years’ probation on a lesser charge, which would have spared Mr. Basuki prison time. He began his sentence on Tuesday. The vice governor is to serve as acting governor until October, when Mr. Anies takes office.

Mr. Basuki told reporters that he would appeal the ruling, as supporters outside the North Jakarta District Court looked on in shock.

Hard-line Islamic groups opposing Mr. Basuki were seen celebrating.

Shortly after the verdict, the governor was taken to Cipinang Penitentiary in Jakarta, which houses criminals including drug dealers and rapists. Under Indonesia’s procedural code, the governor was not eligible to remain free during his appeal because the possible sentence he faced was at least five years, according to legal experts.

Mr. Basuki became governor of Jakarta, the country’s political, social and economic center, in 2014 when his predecessor and chief political ally, Joko Widodo, became president. Mr. Basuki, known as Ahok, was only the city’s second non-Muslim governor and had hoped to become its first directly elected non-Muslim leader.

He had been leading in the polls last year, but in September his campaign faltered when he tried to address attacks from Muslim hard-liners who argued that the Quran forbade Muslims from voting for a non-Muslim. Mr. Basuki said those making that argument were misleading Muslims, a statement that was interpreted by some as insulting the Quran.

Conservative Muslim groups organized several mass rallies against him, demanding that he be jailed for blasphemy. Mr. Basuki and his supporters claimed the protests were orchestrated by his political rivals to sabotage his chances of re-election.

His 16-point defeat last month was seen as a sign of the increasing power of Islamic conservatives, who have pressed for the adoption of Islamic law, or Shariah, throughout the archipelago.

Indonesia has more than 190 million Muslims and smaller numbers of Christians, Hindus and Buddhists among its population of 250 million.

The five-judge panel unanimously voted that Mr. Basuki was “proved legally and convincingly guilty of committing the criminal act of blasphemy,” the head judge, Dwiarso Budi Santiarto, said in reading the ruling.

The blasphemy law was created in 1965, and only a handful of people were prosecuted under that law during the next 40 years, according to Andreas Harsono, an Indonesian researcher for Human Rights Watch.

However, he said, the number of people convicted of blasphemy skyrocketed to 106 from 2004 to 2014, during the presidency of Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, Mr. Joko’s predecessor. Mr. Yudhoyono’s son was eliminated in the first round of the governor election in February.

Mr. Yudhoyono twice publicly denied that he had orchestrated the protests to damage Mr. Basuki’s candidacy.

“It’s a sad day, and it’s frightening,” Mr. Andreas said. “If the governor of Indonesia’s largest and most complex city, and who is an ally of the Indonesian president, can be brought down and humiliated this way, what will happen to normal Indonesian citizens?”

[kidsviral-blog]

How A 12-Year-Old Rape Victim Lost His Mom To “Failure To Protect” Law

New Post has been published on https://kidsviral.info/how-a-12-year-old-rape-victim-lost-his-mom-to-failure-to-protect-law/

How A 12-Year-Old Rape Victim Lost His Mom To “Failure To Protect” Law

Collin Grant’s stepfather repeatedly raped him — but under laws exposed in a BuzzFeed News investigation, Collin’s mom went to prison for more time than his rapist. Today, Collin wants his mother pardoned.

Collin Grant wishes he had never told anyone that his stepfather raped him.

Jimmy Don Mackey would hold Collin down, punch him in the back if he tried to move, and cover his mouth if he tried to scream. On one occasion, Jimmy Don duct-taped Collin’s mouth shut. He told Collin that if he ever disclosed the abuse to anyone, he would kill him.

Yet Collin eventually did tell the authorities in Muskogee County, Oklahoma, about Jimmy Don’s abuse. Collin testified about it in court, where it also emerged that Jimmy Don had repeatedly beaten his mother, Alishia Mackey. Jimmy Don pled guilty to rape, forcible sodomy, and other sex crimes, and was sent to prison.

Yet Collin’s mother was also sent to prison for failing to protect her son.

Jimmy Don got 15 years for raping Collin. For permitting the rape to happen, Collin’s mother got an even harsher sentence: 20 years.

As a 12-year-old recovering from repeated sexual abuse, Collin was cut off from his mother.

Today, Collin is 22. He said he misses his mom and believes she does not deserve to be in prison. She should be pardoned, he said.

He also wishes he had never come forward about what his stepfather was doing to him. “Honestly,” Collin told BuzzFeed News, “I would rather have gone through the abuse for the rest of my life.”

View this image ›

Jimmy Don Mackey Oklahoma Department of Corrections

A recent BuzzFeed News investigation exposed cases in which mothers have been given sentences of up to life in prison for failing to protect their children from their violent partners — even when, as in Alishia’s case, there is evidence that the mother herself was battered.

In Texas, for example, Arlena Lindley was sentenced to 45 years, despite the fact that she tried to grab her 3-year-old son from her partner the day he beat the boy to death, and despite the fact that she herself had been beaten viciously for months. The prosecution said she should have called 911.

Collin Grant’s case illuminates what domestic violence advocates say is a different problem: the collateral damage to the children of mothers sent away to prison for years.

“What are we really doing on behalf of that child who is the victim of the crime?” said Deborah D. Tucker, executive director of the National Center on Domestic and Sexual Violence. “How is that” — imprisoning the mother — “helpful to them?”

At least 29 states have laws that explicitly criminalize parents’ failure to protect their children from abuse. In addition, prosecutors in at least 19 states can use other, more general laws against criminal negligence in the care of a child or placing a child in a dangerous situation.

Only a handful of state laws provide specific defenses for parents who reasonably feared they would be harmed if they stepped in to stop child abuse.

Many prosecutors defend the laws and the harsh sentences as sending a message that mothers must defend their children, even if their own safety is at risk. Domestic violence advocates counter that such sentences are unjust — and a sign that the criminal justice system does not understand how battering victimizes women.

Altogether, BuzzFeed News found 28 cases in which mothers were sentenced to at least a decade in prison despite evidence they themselves were victims of their violent partners. Alishia Mackey was one of those mothers. She was tried under Oklahoma’s “enabling child abuse” law, which has the same maximum sentence — life in prison — as actually committing child abuse.

View this image ›

Jimmy Don and Alishia married in 1995. His beatings waxed and waned — bad in the early years of their marriage, for example, then bad again not long before Collin’s abuse came to light.

Alishia testified that Jimmy Don “would punch me repeatedly, hit me with things, choke me, hold the back of — hold a gun to my head, threaten to kill me and my kids if I even told anybody” that he beat her. A former friend told the court that Alishia had confided in her at the time that Jimmy Don was battering her. Collin testified that he saw his mom get beaten. She escaped once, he told the court, but Jimmy Don “tracked us down.”

One night, Alishia woke up to find she was alone in bed. She got up and went to her son’s bedroom. What exactly she saw is unclear. Collin testified that Jimmy Don was molesting him, and Alishia first told police that she saw Jimmy Don on top of Collin with both of their pants down. But in court, she and Collin testified that he and Jimmy Don were both clothed.

On the stand, Alishia changed many parts of her story and contradicted herself. “She was her own worst enemy,” David Pierce, the prosecutor, said in an interview.

That’s not uncommon. In its investigation, BuzzFeed News found that many battered mothers lie and take other actions that make them look guilty. The terror they feel sometimes lasts even after their partner has been arrested. Then too, repeated trauma, like PTSD, can harm a person’s mental health. “There are many times when victims don’t put their best foot forward for a host of reasons — including their own sense of guilt and failure,” Tucker said.

Alishia also testified that she suffered from petit mal seizures that led her to have a faulty memory.

At trial, prosecutors alleged that the moment when Alishia walked in on her husband and her son came two years before authorities learned of it. Police pointed to an interrogation in which she allegedly said the incident happened in January of 2002, but officers didn’t tape that interview. Collin testified that it happened in the fall of 2003, which would mean that the abuse came to light within a few months of her seeing it.

Whatever the details, prosecutors argued that Alishia failed to protect her son by neither leaving the relationship nor going immediately to the authorities. On the stand, Collin estimated that Jimmy Don molested him “maybe” five more times after his mother first learned of the abuse and before Jimmy Don was arrested.

Pierce, the prosecutor, declared in court that Collin wanted his mother put away. “He’d like to see her spend the rest of her life in prison,” Pierce told the judge. Asked about this, Collin told BuzzFeed News he was on psychotropic medication at the time of the trial and, because he was screened off from his mother during his testimony, did not realize he was testifying at her trial. He said he thought he was at his stepfather’s trial.

One thing that Pierce never disputed was the fact that Jimmy Don had violently abused Alishia. Indeed, Pierce cited his battering of Alishia as evidence of her poor decision-making. “She made the decision to stay,” he told the jury.

Jurors found Alishia guilty and recommended 20 years in prison. Alishia’s attorney, Corrine O’Day, protested that the prosecution had sought only 15 years when Jimmy Don pled guilty to raping Collin. “The state is not fully consistent,” she said. But the judge went with the jury’s recommendation.

Told that Collin recently said his mother should not be in prison, Pierce said, “I’m not surprised with that at all. It’s his mother.”

But that does not change Pierce’s view on Alishia’s sentence. “I believe that that was an appropriate punishment for what she did,” he said.

Jimmy Don’s case was handled by a different prosecutor, Sejin Brooks. Now an attorney in Austin, Texas, Brooks said “you’re absolutely right” that it might look strange that Alishia, who was convicted of permitting abuse, got a harsher punishment than Jimmy Don, who actually raped Collin. But, Brooks said, Alishia did not plead guilty but instead went to trial, risking the wrath of a judge and jury.

View this image ›

Visitors leave the Mabel Bassett Correctional Center in McLoud, Oklahoma. Sue Ogrocki / AP Photo

The courthouse would be the last place Collin saw his mother for more than five years, until he turned 18. During those years, he said, he was shuttled among group homes and shelters, never quite feeling like he fit in anywhere.

Without his mother, he lacked someone to confide in as he grew up, he said. “The one person I was supposed to be able to turn to for almost anything — I didn’t have that.”

He and his siblings now live with Collin’s grandmother. Alishia is more than 100 miles away, and visiting hours at Mabel Bassett Correctional Center are on weekend mornings. They make it out there about once a month.

“My mother is one of the most caring people in the world,” Collin said. “And I will say that to anyone.”

View this image ›

Ellie Hall contributed reporting to this story.

Read more: http://www.buzzfeed.com/alexcampbell/mothers-imprisonment-leads-rape-victim-to-wish-he-had-never