alp227 (13,316 posts) Profile Journal Send DU Mail Ignore
Occupy Oakland protesters face hate-crime trial
Last edited Wed Mar 21, 2012, 12:13 AM USA/ET - Edit history (1)
Source: SF Chronicle
An Alameda County judge on Tuesday sent three Occupy Oakland demonstrators to trial on robbery and hate crime charges after three days of testimony about an altercation they had with a woman who confronted them at a rally.
The preliminary hearing offered a window into the contentious case. Prosecutors said one of the protesters repeatedly called the woman a "dyke bitch" as another grabbed her wallet, while defense attorneys said the alleged victim had been the aggressor - and had herself used racial slurs.
Judge Paul Delucchi said there was probable cause to hold each of the defendants: Michael Davis, 32, Nneka Crawford, 23, and Randolph Wilkins, 25. The judge ordered them to return April 3 to each be arraigned on a charge of felony robbery, along with a sentencing enhancement for the hate crime.
(...)
(Robbery victim Kelly) Stowers said she felt a tug on her over-the-shoulder satchel, and looked down to see Davis pull his hand from inside it before putting the same hand behind his back. Davis also ripped an Obama campaign pin off the bag, Stowers said.
Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2012/03/20/BAJ71NM4G9.DTL
DocMac (732 posts) Profile Journal Send DU Mail Ignore
1. Yeah...ok.
I smell bullshit!
geek tragedy (18,950 posts) Profile Journal Send DU Mail Ignore
4. You think that one single woman attacked those three?
Something is bullshit.
DocMac (732 posts) Profile Journal Send DU Mail Ignore
9. No, i'm thinking that
these three fools are not part of OWS. Just thieves working the crowd.
They aren't part of the 1% so by OWS's own defintition that makes them part of the group OWS claims to represent.
Yo_Mama (2,319 posts) Profile Journal Send DU Mail Ignore
12. They were probably there to loot and wanted a riot
Their motivations hardly seem typically OWS. Any crowd situation you will have a few misfits.
Um-m-m...OWS has no purpose except to take shit that they never worked to earn and cause as much damage if they don't get their way.
DocMac (732 posts) Profile Journal Send DU Mail Ignore
13. Yep, idiots are everywhere.
As soon as you leave your house you can find em. On your way to work, at work, at the grocery store after work, at the movie theatre that night...everywhere.
They're fenced-in pretty thick at DU.
MADem (69,609 posts) Profile Journal Send DU Mail Ignore
2. I don't care for thieves.
This does not sound good for the defense:
The hearing revolved around the testimony of the alleged victim, Kelly Stowers, a 42-year-old emergency medical technician. She said she had come out of a comic book store on Piedmont Avenue on the evening of Feb. 22 to find the three demonstrators screaming, "Let's start a f- riot."
Stowers said she told the defendants that they shouldn't call for a riot and, because of their actions, didn't belong in the neighborhood. She said Crawford shoved her, told her she looked "ridiculous," repeatedly called her a "dyke bitch," and accused her of wanting to perform a sex act on Wilkins.
Sounds like Rush Limbaugh....
Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2012/03/20/BAJ71NM4G9.DTL#ixzz1pjI33Zfd
geek tragedy (18,950 posts) Profile Journal Send DU Mail Ignore
3. Every movement will attract human scum like this.
Not a reflection on OWS.
Gerad Loughner believes Bush stole 2 elections, lied us into war and staged 9/11...
...and he's supposed to typify the RW.
FedUp_Queer (918 posts) Profile Journal Send DU Mail Ignore
5. Perhaps it's true.
However, this sounds staged. Something seems very fishy to me about this. Having been to Zucotti Park in NY and mingled with the OWS folks, it just doesn't fit. "Let's start a f------ riot" also seems to transparently and obviously silly. I don't doubt the woman at all. I doubt whether these people were really OWS people, but perhaps so.
Enrique (17,356 posts) Profile Journal Send DU Mail Ignore
10. this is fishy
Defense attorneys attacked the integrity of the investigation. A police report taken at the scene quoted Stowers saying she recognized the person who reached into her satchel as an Occupy Oakland demonstrator named Sean Palmer.
But both Stowers and the officer who took the report said they had never heard of Palmer before that day. It's unclear how the name got on the report.
Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2012/03/20/BAJ71NM4G9.DTL#ixzz1pnDYV9Tx
lunatica (21,196 posts) Profile Journal Send DU Mail Ignore
14. Occupy General Assemblies can and should vote on a public statement rejecting members
who use them and their non-violent activities to further their criminal behavior. This puts distance between the Occupy mission and those who would use them or those who are plants to destroy the movement.
If you espouse a non-violent methodology as the manner in which you want to further your goals and violent people flock to you then it's wise and ethical to reject such activity because it's contrary to the mission.
It's patently ridiculous to paint all Occupy as anarchists itching to draw blood and break laws. If law enforcement arrests them then they're doing their jobs of protecting and serving. Occupy can support the police in these types of arrests.
To quote Sandra "Slut Monkey" Fluke, "Not accepted."
And because you knew is was coming like a half-drunk Sandra Fluke on welfare check day:
bitchkitty (6,158 posts) Profile Journal Send DU Mail Ignore
15. Agents provocateurs
Expect more "incidents" like this as Occupy regains momentum now that the warmer weather is here.
Bodhi BloodWave (1,838 posts) Profile Journal Send DU Mail Ignore
16. mostly out of curiosity
but how come that every single time a person claiming to be a part of occupy does something wrong/illegal/criminal then they 'never were a part of occupy' or 'were agent provocateurs' or 'were undercover cops'.
even when a person have been around from near the start of his/her cities occupy movement then does something wrong/illegal/criminal then he suddenly wasn't 'really a part of the movement', its a danged weak excuse considering the lack of lack of requirements on membership and its lack of leaders, Be open to anybody and their dog and you open the movement for people who are not all of a flowers and rainbows mindset.
geek tragedy (18,950 posts) Profile Journal Send DU Mail Ignore
17. The No True Scotsman logical fallacy. nt
Witnesses testified that this was--in fact--a true Scotsman:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/101478946
