bureaucracybusters

Posts Tagged ‘LOOTING’

THE CHANGED FACE OF SAN FRANCISCO: PART TWO (END)

In Bureaucracy, History, Law, Law Enforcement, Politics, Social commentary on June 3, 2020 at 12:25 am

San Francisco has long been one of the most-loved cities in the United States.

Millions of tourists—from both other parts of the United States as well as around the world—visit this city every year to ride its famous cable cars and dine in its magnificent restaurants.

To visit the ruins of its infamous prison, Alcatraz, eat Ghiradelli ice cream in Ghiradelli Square and buy souveniers at nearby Fisherman’s Wharf. 

San Francisco Cable car

Thomas Wolf, http://www.foto-tw.de / CC BY-SA (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0)

But San Francisco today is not the city it has long been renowned for.

Its major tourist spots are deserted. Its sidewalks are largely free of pedestrians. Many of its best-known stores have been shuttered since mid-March—and many of them may never reopen owing to the financial losses they have incurred.

Its world-famous restaurants no longer offer in-house dining—only take-out or home delivery.

Many of its bus routes have been eliminated. With so many people “sheltering-in-place” in their apartments or houses, the passengers that once carried those routes have largely disappeared. 

On March 16, the San Francisco Department of Public Health imposed a shelter-in-place order on city residents. This required them to stay home except for essential needs such as shopping for groceries, getting medications, caring for others and exercising.

The goal of the order: To halt—or at least diminish—the spread of COVID-19.

SARS-CoV-2 without background.png

Coronavirus

The order banned activities considered non-essential: Going to bars, barbers and dinner parties. 

Many restaurants offer their fare via Grubhub, Doordash, Caviar or Uber Eats. Some restaurants—notably pizza parlors—use their own employees to deliver food.

This, in turn, demands that potential customers have not only a computer but Internet access. It also demands that they be willing to pay a higher price for food than would be the case if they could dine in.

Another drawback: Choosing what items to order from many restaurants is like choosing what to order in the military: You either accept what they offer—or you do without. Forget about substitutions or additions. 

Outdoor exercise is allowed, but gyms are closed.

Some businesses were deemed essential. Among these: Grocery stores, hardware stores, hospitals, drugstores, laundromats, funeral parlors, gas stations, airlines, taxis, rental car companies, childcare facilities, rideshare services. 

The effect of the shutdown order on businesses has been devastating.  

Walk along Market Street—the city’s best-known site for marches and storefronts—and you’ll find store after store not only closed but boarded up. The same for Powell Street, a major tourist magnet.

People are on edge right now': San Francisco businesses boarding ...

The city’s internationally famous cable car lines have all been shut down. With “social distancing” the new Golden Rule, cramming people onto small cable cars is no longer an option. 

Taxis are still available—but cab drivers have found business difficult to come by, with so many people staying indoors.

The order allowed most marijuana dispensaries to remain open. Bookstores, on the other hand, were ordered closed—and remain so more than two months later. 

So businesses selling toxic “medical marijuana” are considered essential. But if you want to buy a copy of Moby Dick at your local bookstore, you’ll have to do it online. 

Many businesses started boarding up in April. The reason: Fears that Coronavirus-inspired shortages of items like toilet paper, meat and hand sanitizer might lead to wholesale looting. 

Then, on May 25, as if facing a deadly pandemic wasn’t enough of a threat, a new and unexpected reason for fear emerged: The killing of George Floyd, a former black security guard, in Minneapolis, Minnesota.

While Floyd was handcuffed and lying face down on a city street during an arrest, Derek Chauvin, a white Minneapolis police officer, kept his knee on the right side of Floyd’s neck for eight minutes and 46 seconds.

Video shows Minneapolis cop with knee on neck of George Floyd, who ...

The death of George Floyd

Across the nation, cities were convulsed by protests—including those in the San Francisco Bay Area. Among these: Oakland, San Jose, Emeryville, Walnut Creek and San Francisco itself.

On May 30, an initially peaceful protest march exploded into looting shortly before 9 p.m. as looters broke off and began smashing shop windows and ransacking stores in Union Square and on Market Street.

Among stores looted: A Sak’s Off Fifth Avenue, Old Navy clothing store, a Cartier Boutique, a Coach store. Looters especially targeted CVS and Walgreens drugstores. Liquor stores and a BevMo were also hit.

“Thirty businesses were looted or destroyed,” said David Perry, from Union Square Business Improvement District. A total of 33 arrests were made for “criminal activity.”

That night, San Francisco Mayor London Breed announced that she would impose a citywide curfew beginning May 31, running from 8:00 p.m to 5 a.m.

On the night of May 31, 87 people were arrested for violating the city’s curfew. 

Left unstated by city authorities—within San Francisco and across the nation—was this: With so many people massing in streets, many of them unmasked, would this spread COVID-19 even further?

Northern California—and San Francisco in particular—have closely cooperated with “stay-at-home” orders. As a result, COVID-19 cases have remained relatively stable in those areas.

But the street demonstrations may well reverse the results of those months of self-discipline. The truth will be known only weeks from now.

THE CHANGED FACE OF SAN FRANCISCO PART ONE (OF TWO)

In Bureaucracy, History, Law, Law Enforcement, Politics, Social commentary on June 2, 2020 at 12:05 am

Want to play a new game? Come to San Francisco and play “Count the Stupids.”

Just walk down any major street during a pandemic that’s killed more than 100,000 Americans and count:

  • The people who refuse to wear face masks;
  • The people wearing face masks below their noses;
  • The people wearing face masks around their necks like bandannas. 

On some days—depending on how far you walk—you might spot 10 to 60 or more such people. 

Those who wear masks below their nose negate the purpose of wearing a mask. If they have COVID-19 and sneeze on someone else who’s not wearing a mask, that person is going to be stricken. And if someone who’s also not wearing a mask sneezes or coughs on them, they will be infected.

Coronavirus prevention: Can using a mask help in eliminating COVID ...

Face masks

Many of those wearing masks as bandannas are smoking. Clearly they value getting their intake of cancer as more important than protecting themselves against a deadly virus. Many mask-less men sport heavy beards—which would make a mask impossible to seal properly.

And as for complying with social distancing requirements that put at least six feet between people: Countless people casually pass others only inches away without any apparent concern—for their own safety or that of others.

On May 28, San Francisco Mayor London Breed announced that a new policy would take effect the next day: 

San Francisco will enforce the wearing of masks or face coverings when people leave their home and are within 30 feet of anyone that doesn’t live in their household.

That includes when you’re waiting in line to go into a store and when you’re inside shopping. A mask or face covering will not be needed when: 

  • You’re in a car by yourself;
  • You’re with people you live with;
  • You’re picnicking with members of your own household and are more than six feet from other groups;
  • You’re walking, hiking, running or biking alone or with people you live with.

Even then, you should still have a mask or face covering on hand.

Of course, that will require police to enforce the new ordinance. This in a city where police have refused to crack down on “homeless” encampments—and their piles of feces, hypodermic needles and trash.

For all the kudos offered city residents by Mayor Breed for complying with social distancing, the blunt truth remains that many of them do not. And the fact that Breed felt forced to legally require citizens to wear face masks is a telling point in its own right.

But to return to life in San Francisco in the Age of COVID-19: 

Civic Center—which lies directly across from City Hall—might better be renamed COVID-19 Center. Once it housed farmers markets and offered easy access to the Civic Center BART (Bay Area Rapid Transit) station. 

Today it is fenced off and serves as shelter for countless “homeless” tents—and all the drugs, trash, alcohol, feces and hypodermic needles that come with this population.

Controversial San Francisco homelessness tax passes

Tent “city” in San Francisco

Of course, Civic Center isn’t the only place in San Francisco where you’ll find huge tents occupied by DDMB’s—Druggies, Drunks, Mentally Ill and Bums. 

Walk down almost any major sidewalk and odds are you’ll find your path blocked by one or more huge tents able to house two to four people. 

If you’re in a wheelchair or elderly or on crutches, you’ll likely be forced to step into the street or cross the street to continue your journey. 

If you call the police on your cell phone, expecting them to remove the tents, you’re in for a big surprise. In bum-loving San Francisco, that sort of action is no longer handled by police. 

Instead, they’ll refer you to a “help-the-homeless” agency that specializes in defending the rights of DDMBs over those of law-abiding, tax-paying San Francisco residents.

The “homeless problem” has become so outrageous in San Francisco that Hastings College of the Law—one of the foremost law schools in the nation—recently filed a lawsuit against the city “to end dangerous and illegal conditions in the Tenderloin neighborhood.” 

Among its goals: To compel the City

  • To clear sidewalks to allow unfettered safe passage for neighborhood residents and workers; and
  • To provide healthy and safe solutions for “homeless” people who now use sidewalk encampments as their residence.

And when it comes to public transit: Forget about using the underground stations of the Municipal Railway (MUNI) bus system. Those have been closed since March—allegedly to protect riders and drivers from COVID-19. 

Inbound T Third train at Church station, September 2017.JPG

MUNI underground station

Pi.1415926535 / CC BY-SA (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0

MUNI, which serves only San Francisco, has 4,800 employees and an annual budget of $1.28 billion.

The Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) system serves 33 cities and has an annual budget of $2.3 billion. 

Yet BART, which uses many of the same stations is still providing railway service throughout northern California.

MUNI refuses to say why BART has managed to provide service for its passengers—while MUNI has made transit far more complex and time-consuming for its own.

THE TRUTH–AND THE DIRT–WILL OUT

In Bureaucracy, History, Law Enforcement, Social commentary on August 12, 2015 at 1:31 pm

On April 23, the family of teen thug Michael Brown filed a wrongful death lawsuit against the city of Ferguson, Missouri.

Brown, 18, was shot by a Ferguson police officer on August 9, 2014.  Brown was unarmed, but the officer–Darren Wilson, who has since left the police department–claimed self-defense.  According to him, Brown tried to seize his weapon.

The lawsuit claims that:

  • Brown, 18, was unarmed and walking in the street with a friend when Wilson told them to get on the sidewalk.
  • Wilson said: “Get the [expletive] out of the street.”
  • Without the “unnecessary and unwarranted profane language,” the encounter would have been “uneventful.”

Attorneys for Brown’s parents promised the case would reveal new forensic evidence and raise doubts about the police version of events. Some of that evidence, they said, had been overlooked in previous investigations.

Seal of the Ferguson Police Department

If it comes to trial, the lawsuit could force a full review of all the evidence in the shooting and bring key witnesses to be questioned in open court.

Civil cases generally require a lower standard of proof than criminal cases. Jurors must base their decision on a preponderance of evidence, not proof beyond a reasonable doubt, which is the standard needed to convict in a criminal trial.

The reason for this is that, in a criminal trial, the freedom of the accused is at stake. In a civil trial, only money is.

The lawsuit could prove embarrassing to the Ferguson Police Department, which has already been heavily criticized in a Justice Department investigation.

The report of those findings, released on March 4, stated:

“The Justice Department found that the Ferguson Police Department (FPD) engaged in a pattern or practice of conduct that violates the First, Fourth, and 14th Amendments of the Constitution….

Seal of the U.S. Department of Justice

“Our investigation showed that Ferguson police officers routinely violate the Fourth Amendment in stopping people without reasonable suspicion, arresting them without probable cause, and using unreasonable force against them….”

Federal investigators found that the FPD had a pattern or practice of:

  • Conducting stops without reasonable suspicion and arrests without probable cause in violation of the Fourth Amendment;
  • Interfering with the right to free expression in violation of the First Amendment; and
  • Using unreasonable force in violation of the Fourth Amendment.

Click here: Justice Department Announces Findings of Two Civil Rights Investigations in Ferguson, Missouri | OPA | Department

So there will be many opportunities for the Brown family to reveal highly damaging truths about the FPD.

But the trial promises to be highly embarrassing for the Brown family as well.

Consider the following:

Michael Brown (left) roughing up a store owner

Lesley Mcspadden

Louis Head calls for arson in Ferguson

No doubt the Ferguson police will be working overtime to turn up even more embarrassing truths–or at least charges–against the Brown family.

In the end, the outcome of the lawsuit may well turn on who can dig up more dirt on whom.

HONORING SAINT MICHAEL THE THUG

In History, Law Enforcement, Social commentary on August 11, 2015 at 12:39 am

In the last moments of his life, Michael Brown, an 18-year-old black in Ferguson, Missouri, robbed a grocery store.  Then he slugged it out with a white police officer.

The second action proved a fatal mistake–with Brown being shot dead by that officer, Darren Wilson, on August 9, 2014.

During a subsequent grand jury investigation of the shooting, Wilson testified that:

  • Brown reached for Wilson’s pistol.
  • A struggle for the gun followed.
  • Fearing for his life, Wilson fired two shots, striking Brown.
  • Brown fled, and Wilson pursued him.
  • Brown turned and charged Wilson.
  • The officer fired several more shots, kiling Brown.

According to the Ferguson County Medical Examiner, the physical evidence supports Wilson’s testimony.

Related image

Darren Wilson

The physical evidence in the Michael Brown case supported the officer [updated with DNA evidence] – The Washington Post

On the night of Brown’s shooting, blacks–who make up 67.4% of the Ferguson population–found an appropriate way to honor a dead thug. They erupted in rioting, looting and arson.

Their victimized stores were not responsible for Brown’s killing. And most of their owners were blacks–not white police officers. But unarmed store owners were more tempting targets than armed police.

And gorcery, electronics and liquor stores offered a treasury of goodies not found at police stations.

A state of emergency was declared.

On August 9, 2015, Ferguson blacks observed the one-year “anniversary” of Brown’s shooting the same way–with more rioting, looting and arson.

Once again, a state of emergency was declared by Missouri authorities.

With protesters intent on canonizing Brown, it’s long past time to set the record straight.

Shortly after the killing of Michael Brown, police released a video showing him robbing a grocery store and manhandling its owner.

SURVEILLANCE VIDEO: Police say Michael Brown was suspect in Ferguson store robbery – YouTube

FACT: Blacks were outraged–not because they believed it wasn’t Michael on the videotape, but because it showed their anointed hero as a robbing thug.

Michael Brown (left) roughing up a store owner

Following the shooting of Brown on August 9, 2014, police deployed massive force to prevent rioting–which erupted anyway. Ferguson’s blacks charged that it was militarized overkill.

Riot police deploying in Ferguson, Missouri

FACT: When the grand jury released its findings on November 24, Ferguson blacks once again started looting and burning stores.

Then blacks raged that the police should have had a massive presence to keep their brethren in line.

Many Ferguson blacks complained that the grand jury was taking too long (three months) interviewing scores of witnesses before reaching its verdict.

FACT: When the verdict was released, Ferguson blacks said the grand jurors should have examined less evidence, so they wouldn’t have been confused by conflicting statements.

Ferguson blacks generally and the Brown family in particular have repeatedly called Michael Brown “a child.”

FACT: Michael Brown was 18–legally an adult who could obtain a credit card, enter the armed forces and drive a car.  He also stood 6’3″ and weighed 300 pounds.

The Brown family has claimed that Michael didn’t have a criminal record as an adult.

FACT: But he may have had a juvenile one.

The citizen journalism website GotNews has filed a lawsuit against St. Louis authorities seeking the release of Brown’s juvenile record. The suit alleges that Brown was a gang member and faced a second-degree murder charge.

Lawsuit seeking release of Michael Brown’s juvenile records claims slain teen was a murder suspect – AOL.com

Michael’s mother, Lesley Mcspadden, has claimed that “My son was running for his life.”

FACT:  The autopsy of Michael Brown demonstrates that he was facing Darren Wilson when he was hit by police bullets.

FACT:  Lesley Mcspadden herself could face felony armed robbery charges. 

On Octiber 18, 2014, she allegedly led a group of 20 to 30 people to beat and rob vendors in a Ferguson parking lot for selling “Justice for Mike Brown” T-shirts. Among the victims: Her former mother-in-law.

One person was hospitalized and another unidentified victim was reportedly beaten with a pipe.

The Ferguson Police Department is investigating.

Michael Brown’s mom may face robbery charges: report – NY Daily News

Michael Brown’s stepfather, Louis Head, may stand trial for incing arson.

FACT: When the grand jury released its findings on November 24, 2014, Louis Head, standing atop a platform surrounded by hundreds of frenzied protesters, screamed at least 10 times: “Burn this motherfucker [Ferguson] down!” and “Burn this bitch down!”

Louis Head calling for arson in Ferguson

Head may well find himself the target of criminal prosecution and civil lawsuits.

Missouri Lieutenant Governor Peter Kinder called for Head’s arrest for inciting to riot.

And those whose stores were burned and/or looted could file civil lawsuits against Head as being liable for their losses.

In honoring this family of thugdom, the residents of Ferguson dishonor themselves.

THE TRUTH-AND THE DIRT–WILL OUT

In Bureaucracy, History, Law Enforcement, Politics, Social commentary on May 12, 2015 at 12:02 am

On April 23, the family of teen thug Michael Brown filed a wrongful death lawsuit against the city of Ferguson, Missouri.

Brown, 18, was shot by a Ferguson police officer on August 9.  Brown was unarmed, but the officer–Darren Wilson, who has since left the police department–claimed self-defense.  According to him, Brown tried to seize his weapon.

The lawsuit claims that

Brown, 18, was unarmed and walking in the street with a friend on Aug. 9 when Wilson told them to get on the sidewalk.

The lawsuit claims that Wilson said: “Get the [expletive] out of the street.”  Without the “unnecessary and unwarranted profane language,” the encounter would have been “uneventful.”

Attorneys for Brown’s parents promised the case would reveal new forensic evidence and raise doubts about the police version of events. Some of that evidence, they said, had been overlooked in previous investigations.

If it comes to trial, the lawsuit could force a full review of all the evidence in the shooting and bring key witnesses to be questioned in open court.

Civil cases generally require a lower standard of proof than criminal cases. Jurors must base their decision on a preponderance of evidence, not proof beyond a reasonable doubt, which is the standard needed to convict in a criminal trial.

The reason for this is that, in a criminal trial, the freedom of the accused is at stake.  In a civil trial, only money is.

The lawsuit could prove embarrassing to the Ferguson Police Department, which has already been heavily criticized in a Justice Department investigation.

The report of those findings, released on March 4, stated:

“The Justice Department found that the Ferguson Police Department (FPD) engaged in a pattern or practice of conduct that violates the First, Fourth, and 14th Amendments of the Constitution….

“Our investigation showed that Ferguson police officers routinely violate the Fourth Amendment in stopping people without reasonable suspicion, arresting them without probable cause, and using unreasonable force against them….

Federal investigators found that the FPD had a pattern or practice of:

  • Conducting stops without reasonable suspicion and arrests without probable cause in violation of the Fourth Amendment;
  • Interfering with the right to free expression in violation of the First Amendment; and
  • Using unreasonable force in violation of the Fourth Amendment.

Click here: Justice Department Announces Findings of Two Civil Rights Investigations in Ferguson, Missouri | OPA | Department

So there will be many opportunities for the Brown family to reveal highly damaging truths about the FPD.

But the trial promises to be highly embarrassing for the Brown family as well.

Consider the following:

Michael Brown (left) roughing up a store owner

Lesley Mcspadden

Louis Head calls for arson in Ferguson

No doubt the Ferguson police will be working overtime to turn up even more embarrassing truths–or at least charges–against the Brown family.

In the end, the outcome of the lawsuit may well turn on who can dig up more dirt on whom.

IN THE NAME OF SAINT MICHAEL THE THUG

In Bureaucracy, History, Law, Law Enforcement, Social commentary on December 1, 2014 at 12:00 am

A grand jury declined to indict a white police officer, Darren Wilson, for the killing of Michael Brown, a black teenager.

And blacks in Ferguson, Missouri, erupted in looting and arson–with demonstrations breaking out in cities across the country.

These events have dominated news coverage–especially on TV–since November 24.

But there has been much that the media has not dared to mention.

Most importantly: From the beginning, a double standard has reigned in this case:

CHARGE: Shortly after the killing of Michael Brown, police released a video showing him robbing a grocery store and manhandling the its owner.

Click here: SURVEILLANCE VIDEO: Police say Michael Brown was suspect in Ferguson store robbery – YouTube

TRUTH:  Blacks were outraged–not because they believed it wasn’t Michael on the videotape, but because it showed their anointed hero as a robbing thug.

Michael Brown (left) roughing up a store owner

CHARGE: Following the shooting of Brown on August 9th, police deployed massive force to prevent rioting. Ferguson’s blacks charged that it was militarized overkill.

TRUTH: When the grand jury released its findings on November 24, Ferguson blacks started looting and burning stores.

Then blacks raged that the police should have had a massive presence to keep their brethren in line.  No one has conceded that originally deploying large numbers of anti-riot police had been a good idea after all.

CHARGE: Many Ferguson blacks complained that the grand jury was taking too long (three months) interviewing scores of witnesses before reaching its verdict.

TRUTH: When the verdict was released, Ferguson blacks said the grand jurors should have examined less evidence, so they wouldn’t have been confused by conflicting statements.

CHARGE: Ferguson blacks generally and the Brown family in particular have repeatedly called Michael Brown “a child.”

TRUTH: Michael Brown was 18–legally an adult who could obtain a credit card, enter the armed forces and drive a car.  He also stood 6’3″ and weighed 300 pounds.

CHARGE: The Brown family has claimed that Michael didn’t have a criminal record as an adult.

TRUTH:  But he may have had a juvenile one.

The citizen journalism website GotNews has filed a lawsuit against St. Louis authorities seeking the release of Brown’s juvenile record.  The suit alleges that Brown was a gang member and faced a second-degree murder charge.

If true, it would explain why he was determined to avoid arrest–it would have meant his being tried as an adult.

Click here: Lawsuit seeking release of Michael Brown’s juvenile records claims slain teen was a murder suspect – AOL.com

CHARGE: Michael’s mother, Lesley Mcspadden, has appeared on a series of news and interview programs, including “Today” and the prestigeous PBS “Charlie Rose Show.” As the parent of a dead son, she has been treated with great deference, even when making such charges as “My son was running for his life.”

TRUTH:  But what has not come up in any of these interviews is this: She herself could face felony armed robbery charges.  She has been accused of attacking people in a Ferguson parking lot for selling “Justice for Mike Brown” T-shirts.  Among the victims: Her former mother-in-law.

Click here: Michael Brown’s mom may face robbery charges: report – NY Daily News

CHARGE: Michael Brown’s stepfather, Louis Head, is a victim of his emotions of rage and grief.  At least, that’s the official line of Benjamin Crump, an attorney for the Brown family:

“God forbid your child was killed …and then they get that just devastating announcement in the manner it was announced, and somebody put a camera in your face. What would be your immediate reaction?”

TRUTH: On the night of November 24, Louis Head urged his fellow residents of Ferguson to “burn this bitch down!”  By “bitch” he meant Ferguson itself.

Standing atop a platform in the midst of several hundred frenzied protesters, he screamed at least 10 times: “Burn this motherfucker down!” and “Burn this bitch down!”

Head may well find himself the target of criminal prosecution and civil lawsuits.

Missouri Lieutenant Governor Peter Kinder has called for Head’s arrest for inciting to riot.

And those whose stores were burned and/or looted could file civil lawsuits against Head as being liable for their losses.

A legal precedent for such lawsuits emerged 24 years ago, and still remains viable.

On November 13, 1988 in Portland, Oregon, three white supremacist members of East Side White Pride and White Aryan Resistance (WAR) beat to death Mulugeta Seraw, an Ethiopian man who came to the United States to attend college.

Morris Dees and the Southern Poverty Law Center filed a civil suit (Berhanu v. Metzger) against Tom Metzger, founder of WAR.  They argued that WAR influenced Seraw’s killers by encouraging their group, East Side White Pride, to commit violence.

Tom and John Metzger were found civilly liable under the doctrine of vicarious liability, in which one can be liable for a tort committed by a subordinate or by another person who is taking instructions.

In October 1990, the jury returned a verdict—$12.5 million—against Metzger and WAR. The Metzgers’ house was seized, and most of WAR’s profits go to paying off the judgment.

Thus, a law applied to whites who agitate violence can be applied to blacks who do the same.

SHOUTING “FIRE!” WITH INTENT TO CAUSE IT

In History, Law, Law Enforcement, Social commentary on November 27, 2014 at 1:04 am

“The most stringent protection of free speech would not protect a man in falsely shouting fire in a theatre and causing a panic.”

So wrote United States Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes in the 1919 case, Schenk vs. the United States.

On the night of November 24, Louis Head urged his fellow residents of Ferguson, Missouri, to “Burn this bitch down!”

By “bitch” he meant Ferguson itself.

Louis Head yells “Burn this bitch down!” and soon Ferguson erupts in flames.

The reason: A grand jury had just refused to indict Darren Wilson, the Ferguson police officer who had shot Head’s thuggish stepson, Michael Brown, last August.

Brown had just strong-armed a grocery store for some cigarillos before running into Wilson.

Wearing a white shirt emblazoned with “I AM MIKE BROWN” in black lettering, Head stood atop a platform in the midst of several hundred frenzied protesters.

“Burn this motherfucker down!” and “Burn this bitch down!” he screamed at least 10 times.

At one point he yelled for a microphone so he could reach an even larger audience.

Click here: “Burn this bitch down” – Michael Brown stepfather caught making those comments last night » The Right Scoop –

But Benjamin Crump–an attorney for the Brown family–offered a ready excuse for Head’s incitement to arson.

After saying that Head’s remarks were “raw emotion” and “completely inappropriate,” Crump sought to excuse such criminal behavior:

“God forbid your child was killed …and then they get that just devastating announcement in the manner it was announced, and somebody put a camera in your face,” he said. “What would be your immediate reaction?”

For most people, their “immediate reaction” would not be to incite others to arson.

During the previous week, Michael Brown Sr., father of the slain thug, had recorded a public service announcement: “Destroying property is not the answer.”

So what would Justice Holmes think about Louis Head urging his fellow citizens to “burn this bitch down”?

No doubt Holmes would vote to lock him up.

Holmes did, in fact, cast just such a vote in one of the most famous cases in Supreme Court history: Schenk vs. the United States.

After America entered World War I in 1917, Congress passed the Espionage Act. The law said that, during wartime, obstructing the draft and inciting soldiers to disloyalty or disobedience were crimes.

Charles Schenck, opposing the war, mailed thousands of anti-war pamphlets to men who had been drafted into the armed forces.

The government charged Schenck with violating the Espionage Act.

Schenck’s attorney argued that the Espionage Act was unconstitutional. He said that it violated the First Amendment: “Congress shall make no law…abridging the freedom of speech.”

After Sehenk was convicted, his case was appealed to the Supreme Court–which unanimously upheld his conviction.

Holmes–who wrote the decision–said that it did not violate his First Amendment right to free speech.

Oliver Wendell Holmes

“In many places and in ordinary times,” wrote Holmes, Schenck would have had a right to say everything that he said in his pamphlets.

But Holmes added that how far a person’s freedom of speech extends depends on the circumstances.

It’s hard imagining Holmes extending a person’s freedom of speech to include inciting others to arson–and potential murder.

While making his incitements, Head wore a shirt, on whose back was emblazoned: “I AM MIKE BROWN.”

According to The Smoking Gun website:

“Head is an ex-convict whose rap sheet includes two felony narcotics convictions, according to state records.

“He pleaded guilty in 1997 to a marijuana distribution charge and was put in a shock incarceration program and placed on probation for five years. After violating probation, Head’s release was revoked and he was remanded to state prison.

“In mid-2003, Head was charged with narcotics trafficking, a felony count to which he later pleaded guilty. The St. Louis native was sentenced to seven years in prison. He was released in June 2008 after serving about five years in custody.”

Click here: Michael Brown’s Stepfather Urged Protesters To “Burn This Bitch Down” After Grand Jury Announcement | The Smoking

Just before Michael Brown was shot by Darren Wilson, he had stolen a box of cigarellos from a local liquor store.  As he walks out the door, he can be seen on video arrogantly pushing aside the store owner.

In the immediate aftermath of Louis Head’s remarks:

  • At least 29 people were arrested and a dozen buildings damaged or destroyed.
  • At least six businesses were set on fire.
  • Looting was reported at multiple locations.
  • Gunfire was reported throughout the night.
  • At times, the bullets were so thick that firefighters were forced to evacuate the scenes of burning buildings.
  • Owing to gunfire aimed at the sky, the Federal Aviation Administration diverted at least 10 flights from St. Louis.

It will be interesting to see if the St. Louis District Attorney’s Office has the courage to hold Louis Head accountable for inciting the arson, rioting and looting that ravaged Ferguson.