Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Gawker)   Occupy Wall Street protester sentenced to seven years for elbowing a police officer after he grabbed her boob, therefore left wing activists are just as violent as right wing activists and Darren Huff is automatically president   (gawker.com) divider line 50
    More: Strange, Occupy Wall Street, objections, Wall Street, activists, Zuccotti Park, right-wing  
•       •       •

3575 clicks; posted to Politics » on 06 May 2014 at 11:47 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Archived thread
2014-05-07 12:05:57 AM  
8 votes:

Dafatone: TuteTibiImperes: Nabb1: TuteTibiImperes: Well, she faces up to 7 years, I doubt she'll get sentenced to that.

The NYT has a more detailed account of what happened.  She was drunk, yelling at another officer, which led the assaulted officer to try to lead her away.

7 years would certainly be excessive.  Time served and a probation would be about right.

She sure taught the 1% a lesson.

OWS had some great ideas and a ton of energy, but no direction and abysmal organization.  It's a shame that the potential there was mostly wasted.  They helped get the conversation started, but it could have been so much more if someone had managed to take charge, distill the message into some accessible soundbites, and do some halfway decent PR work to focus the media.

Actually, I think their impact in terms of moving the conversation was pretty substantial.

Nabb1 just used the term "the 1%".  That wasn't really in the common vocabulary before OWS.  Not that it was unheard of, but almost everybody today knows what it refers to.  That's actually a pretty large victory, simply to carve out a notion of the very (not super, but very) rich as a class, in a way that emphasizes their minority.


Especially considering the media, rather than organizing things directly and boosting them, was actively trying to bury them.

i75.photobucket.com
2014-05-07 12:33:44 AM  
6 votes:

TheBigJerk: Dafatone: TuteTibiImperes: Nabb1: TuteTibiImperes: Well, she faces up to 7 years, I doubt she'll get sentenced to that.

The NYT has a more detailed account of what happened.  She was drunk, yelling at another officer, which led the assaulted officer to try to lead her away.

7 years would certainly be excessive.  Time served and a probation would be about right.

She sure taught the 1% a lesson.

OWS had some great ideas and a ton of energy, but no direction and abysmal organization.  It's a shame that the potential there was mostly wasted.  They helped get the conversation started, but it could have been so much more if someone had managed to take charge, distill the message into some accessible soundbites, and do some halfway decent PR work to focus the media.

Actually, I think their impact in terms of moving the conversation was pretty substantial.

Nabb1 just used the term "the 1%".  That wasn't really in the common vocabulary before OWS.  Not that it was unheard of, but almost everybody today knows what it refers to.  That's actually a pretty large victory, simply to carve out a notion of the very (not super, but very) rich as a class, in a way that emphasizes their minority.

Especially considering the media, rather than organizing things directly and boosting them, was actively trying to bury them.

[i75.photobucket.com image 500x336]


And if OWS had some sort of central leadership, there would have been at least a 99% chance that the NYPD would have "found" 3 tons of meth (or something equally bad) in the leader's apartment, thus causing anyone who would have otherwise supported OWS to avoid them like the plague.


/at least until it was eventually revealed that the leader was railroaded by the NYPD Schutzstaffel
//and any officers who would have been involved in the plant-and-bust would have claimed they were Just Following Orders
i.kinja-img.com
2014-05-07 01:52:25 AM  
5 votes:
From the Guardian:

But the jury didn't hear anything about the police violence that took place in Zuccotti Park that night. They didn't hear about what happened there on November 15, 2011, when the park was first cleared. The violence experienced by Occupy protesters throughout its entirety was excluded from the courtroom. The narrative that the jury did hear was tightly controlled by what the judge allowed - and Judge Ronald Zweibel consistently ruled that any larger context of what was happening around McMillan at the time of the arrest (let alone Bovell's own history of violence) was irrelevant to the scope of the trial.

In the trial, physical evidence was considered suspect but the testimony of the police was cast as infallible. Despite photographs of her bruised body, including her right breast, the prosecution cast doubt upon McMillan's allegations of being injured by the police - all while Officer Bovell repeatedly identified the wrong eye when testifying as to how McMillan injured him. And not only was Officer Bovell's documented history of violent behavior deemed irrelevant by the judge, but so were the allegations of his violent behavior that very same night....

It's impossible to understand the whole story by just looking at it one picture, even if it's McMillan's of her injuries. But that is exactly what the jury in McMillan's case was asked to do. They were presented a close up of Cecily McMillan's elbow, but not of Bovell, and asked to determine who was violent. The prosecutors and the judge prohibited them from zooming out.


http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/may/05/cecily-mcmillan -o ccupy-guilty-police-violence

Judge Ronald Zweibel ordered that McMillan, 25, a graduate student at the New School, be detained. He rejected a request from her lawyers for bail.

"I see absolutely no reason why a remand would be appropriate here," Martin Stolar, her lead attorney, told the judge. "She is not likely to be somebody to cut and run." Zweibel replied: "Remanded pending sentencing."


http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/may/05/occupy-wall-street-ceci ly -mcmillan-guilty-assaulting-police-officer

She was railroaded.
2014-05-07 12:03:41 AM  
5 votes:
Remember, boys and girls:

msnbcmedia.msn.com

Class warfare.

www.thedailysheeple.com

Not class warfare.
2014-05-06 11:54:40 PM  
5 votes:

TuteTibiImperes: Nabb1: TuteTibiImperes: Well, she faces up to 7 years, I doubt she'll get sentenced to that.

The NYT has a more detailed account of what happened.  She was drunk, yelling at another officer, which led the assaulted officer to try to lead her away.

7 years would certainly be excessive.  Time served and a probation would be about right.

She sure taught the 1% a lesson.

OWS had some great ideas and a ton of energy, but no direction and abysmal organization.  It's a shame that the potential there was mostly wasted.  They helped get the conversation started, but it could have been so much more if someone had managed to take charge, distill the message into some accessible soundbites, and do some halfway decent PR work to focus the media.


Actually, I think their impact in terms of moving the conversation was pretty substantial.

Nabb1 just used the term "the 1%".  That wasn't really in the common vocabulary before OWS.  Not that it was unheard of, but almost everybody today knows what it refers to.  That's actually a pretty large victory, simply to carve out a notion of the very (not super, but very) rich as a class, in a way that emphasizes their minority.
2014-05-06 10:24:32 PM  
5 votes:

Nabb1: TuteTibiImperes: Well, she faces up to 7 years, I doubt she'll get sentenced to that.

The NYT has a more detailed account of what happened.  She was drunk, yelling at another officer, which led the assaulted officer to try to lead her away.

7 years would certainly be excessive.  Time served and a probation would be about right.

She sure taught the 1% a lesson.


OWS had some great ideas and a ton of energy, but no direction and abysmal organization.  It's a shame that the potential there was mostly wasted.  They helped get the conversation started, but it could have been so much more if someone had managed to take charge, distill the message into some accessible soundbites, and do some halfway decent PR work to focus the media.
2014-05-06 09:29:40 PM  
5 votes:
Well, she faces up to 7 years, I doubt she'll get sentenced to that.

The NYT has a more detailed account of what happened.  She was drunk, yelling at another officer, which led the assaulted officer to try to lead her away.

7 years would certainly be excessive.  Time served and a probation would be about right.
2014-05-07 01:57:53 AM  
3 votes:
Bovell was also in plain clothes and allegedly did not identify himself as a policeman when he decided to escort Ms. McMillan out. So some strange guy grabs you by the shoulder and starts hauling you away. What would you have done?
2014-05-07 01:44:43 AM  
3 votes:

Spaz-master: No one would ever stage an injury
[www.whudat.com image 440x330]


Yeah, I think I'm in that camp.

Go OWS and all, but she had an interview right after this happened, showing off the boob injury, on the very uppermost part of her chest, in above-the-shirt-collar territory.

In the video, nothing ever blocks her green shirt anywhere near that area.

And that wasn't just a pull-away reactionary elbow -- she leaned down and used her full body mass to inflict injury as much injury as she could and ran to get away.

It doesn't help me to believe her when she went into attention-whore mode in a Democracy Now interview, talking about her long history of activism and saying she was one of the OWS organizers, then in court she said she just happened to be at the park looking for a friend and wasn't there to protest. She also told that interview she didn't remember anything before the incident and the subsequent "seizure" (sure, honey. Sure.), but then she suddenly remembered that it was a sexual assault she was protecting herself from.

Screw the cops for using force, but screw her, too. Every time a woman lies about sexual assault, it makes it tougher for those who *are* being assaulted to gain any credibility.
2014-05-07 01:07:15 AM  
3 votes:

TuteTibiImperes: Well, she faces up to 7 years, I doubt she'll get sentenced to that.

The NYT has a more detailed account of what happened.  She was drunk, yelling at another officer, which led the assaulted officer to try to lead her away.

7 years would certainly be excessive.  Time served and a probation would be about right.


How many cops got jailed for their unnecessary violence... lets take the average of what they got and give it to her.
2014-05-06 08:59:28 PM  
3 votes:
this is outrageous. she is a political prisoner of the 1%
2014-05-07 03:50:29 AM  
2 votes:

some_beer_drinker: this is outrageous. she is a political prisoner of the 1%


whidbey: Maybe she'll get parole after a couple of years.

But yeah, this is bullshiat. I would be appealing the fark out of this ruling.


hurr durr derp derp derp.  How do appeals work? (hint: the appeals court only considers the law, not facts of the case already determined by the jury - what process or law did you think the judge missed or were you just hurr durring outrage?)

It's idiotic reasoning like yours that led her to court and felony conviction of violence.  I doubt she'll get any prison time that is beyond 3 months.  Her problem is turning down a misdemeanor plea bargain to double down with a violent felony.  That will show up on any future traffic stop on the cops computer (they flag assault on a LEO for the rest of her life) and every single job background report.  Also, she loses her right to vote and is pretty much banned from international travel as most countries reject visits by violent felons.  Congratulations on turning the misdemeanor disorderly conduct plea bargain into convicted felon!  I hope she was silver spoon protester that has a fat lawyer bill so the taxpayer isn't funding any more of her stupidity.

But keep choking that chicken.  You and she need this bit of Faber wisdom: "Fat, drunk and stupid is no way to go through life."

How about a face full of STFU?. (she lost at court too).

www.arktimes.com
2014-05-07 12:41:03 AM  
2 votes:
No one would ever stage an injury
www.whudat.com
2014-05-07 12:13:24 AM  
2 votes:
If they re-do the Occupy thing they should bring guns next time. Maybe then Fox News would cheer them on.
2014-05-06 09:10:02 PM  
2 votes:
Come on, you don't grab someone's boob unless she indicates that's okay. Not cool, Mr. Cop.
2014-05-07 11:26:33 AM  
1 votes:
Article: An Occupy Wall Street activist faces up to seven years in prison

Headline: Occupy Wall Street protester sentenced to seven years

I say this with all sincerity - fark you to whichever mod greenlit this. Seriously. I know that inaccurate and misleading headlines are often used for humor, or hyperbole, or clickbait, but this is just some stupid shiat right here.
2014-05-07 11:06:04 AM  
1 votes:

BeesNuts: If The Majority, had used their energy to voice support for what they ostensibly support


They would have been drowned out by all the morons (and I suspect you were one of them) crying that unilatterally occupying parks for days on end, blocking traffic, refusing to disperse, etc all falls under peaceable assembly and that people stopping them are symptoms of a police state and a conspiracy to shut down the message.

OWS got attention, and their "fans" and them instead of using that attention to work towards their goals they made it about supporting occupy as legal protest, and rejecting having a main message.
2014-05-07 11:04:25 AM  
1 votes:

Headso: mrshowrules: LIke I said, I'm not sure what your point is about OWS but if you are concerned with the growing income/wealth gap, you are in the majority.

I disagree, how can people be that concerned with wealth inequality if they are electing the people they elect and shopping at the places they shop. it's easy to say you are concerned in a poll but then you go out and vote with both your wallet and your ballot for growing wealth inequality.


Because people are too stupid to realize they have a right to be part of the ruling class. Occupy's headless strategy (which had to be concocted by someone) rendered the movement pointless. It could easily have become a party, built a platform, and elected nobody candidates to local offices. Instead they were focused on bullshiat like how to fight the cops.
2014-05-07 10:36:36 AM  
1 votes:

mrshowrules: Wendy's Chili: Headso: mrshowrules: LIke I said, I'm not sure what your point is about OWS but if you are concerned with the growing income/wealth gap, you are in the majority.


I disagree, how can people be that concerned with wealth inequality if they are electing the people they elect and shopping at the places they shop. it's easy to say you are concerned in a poll but then you go out and vote with both your wallet and your ballot for growing wealth inequality.

Wedge issues. They're called "wedge issues" because they drive a wedge between individuals who would otherwise agree with each other. Many conservative voters see their votes for Republicans as votes to end abortion, stop gay marriage, or protect the Second Amendment. I can't imagine very many go to the polls thinking, "Yeah, I'm going to make things more unequal!"

Good point.  There should be two elected Governments.  One for social issues and one for economic issues.



there are already two governments. one is the one you see (the facade), and the other, hidden behind the scenes, consists of Billionaires and their billionaire big oil/banker buddies who actually run things.

ain't Freedom great!
2014-05-07 10:33:25 AM  
1 votes:

BitwiseShift: Maybe they could let Bernie Madoff out, to make room for her.

He could then go on and do what he's good at, managing the police pension fund.



the only reason bernie man is in prison is because he stole from wealthy people.  you don't do that in 'murica.

if he had stolen only from the middle/working classes, he'd be a free man today.
2014-05-07 10:28:52 AM  
1 votes:

lilbjorn: Yet the government continues to do jack shiat about the Bundy brigade.



well, he is wealthy, you know.  how would that look if Wealthy people in 'murica had to follow the law??


geez!
2014-05-07 10:27:03 AM  
1 votes:
WILL EVERYONE JUST SETTLE DOWN!


the Wealthy and Big Business have a Police State to finish setting up, and you all keep interrupting.  please stop it.


--a concerned Citizen.
2014-05-07 10:24:35 AM  
1 votes:

Headso: mrshowrules: LIke I said, I'm not sure what your point is about OWS but if you are concerned with the growing income/wealth gap, you are in the majority.


I disagree, how can people be that concerned with wealth inequality if they are electing the people they elect and shopping at the places they shop. it's easy to say you are concerned in a poll but then you go out and vote with both your wallet and your ballot for growing wealth inequality.


Wedge issues. They're called "wedge issues" because they drive a wedge between individuals who would otherwise agree with each other. Many conservative voters see their votes for Republicans as votes to end abortion, stop gay marriage, or protect the Second Amendment. I can't imagine very many go to the polls thinking, "Yeah, I'm going to make things more unequal!"
2014-05-07 10:23:14 AM  
1 votes:

BeesNuts: A guy, possibly affiliated with OWS, possibly just there, shat on one cop car. I'm sure drug dealing went on, but again, just because a drug dealer notices a 'target rich environment' doesn't mean the occupy movement was "dealing drugs, looting and robbing nearby local businesses, shiatting in public everywhere and raping each other."


I never sadi theyw ere dealing drugs, I said it went on during the protests.


BeesNuts: "Oh I agree with them 100%, but everything they do is wrong and illegal


Fixed that to reflect what I actually said.

You are lying again when you say "everything they do is wrong and illegal".

You linked what I said, you know you are pulling it out of your ass.

BeesNuts: and while the police weren't always correct for spraying them with pepper spray, arresting them en masse and hitting them with stuff, it's what happens when you break the law." people.


One true thing, holy shiat that is amazing.

When people break the law and resist cops when they are arrested for it, I am ok with police using more force.

BeesNuts: The main point I'm trying to make is that there was a concerted effort to avoid conversation about what OWS was saying by pointing out everything they were doing.


The point you are making is that you will lie about what people said and what they are saying now to aqvoid any conversation on if OWS made the right moves.


BeesNuts: You were part of that effort, and remain such to this day.


I ma and have been open to conversations on theri goals.

The only people sidetracking it now is clowns like yourself who biatch, lie and whine abotu how unfair media was about their actions instead oftalking about goals.

One of your very few honest comments was that I support their goals, yet you are sitting here crying and lying abotu what I said with regards tot ehir actiosn rather than discussing their goals.
2014-05-07 09:20:48 AM  
1 votes:
Yeah, that's not a "reflexive" elbow, regardless of where the cop grabbed her. Doesn't mean that the cop didn't have her by the boob, but her claim that it was pure reflex is pure bullshiat.
2014-05-07 09:11:44 AM  
1 votes:

BeesNuts: Also it was private property.


I was talking abotut he movement in general.

And them taking over private property in NYC makes it that much worse.


BeesNuts: Also the "progressive stack"? You're now zeroing in on the way they were communicating with one another? A way they all agreed ahead of time was appropriate for them? As a reason to "hate" them


Yeah, I don't like racism or sexism, call me crazy.
2014-05-07 09:01:26 AM  
1 votes:
Real dilemma is, if we execute all the dirty pigs, we will be left with only...
*Puts on sunglasses*
The 1%
2014-05-07 09:00:06 AM  
1 votes:

BeesNuts: The problem wasn't how they conducted themselves, it's how people just outright HATED them for some reason. The PR campaign against them was absolutely incredible and had nothing to do with whether they had a "leader" or not.


You didn't need a PR campagn to hate them.

I like a lot of the big ideas about the problems with wealth inequality on the US, and how much power big banks, or more importantly the rich have.

However when they advocate a system like "progressive stack" where priority to speak is based upon race or sex, yes there is plenty of reason to hate them.

A group claiming the have the right to unilaterally control public property, plenty of reason to hate them.
2014-05-07 08:50:39 AM  
1 votes:

Snatch Bandergrip: Frank N Stein: Why are leftist protestors such pushovers in the country compared to rightist protestors?


Because racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic cretins who fetishize a pro-corporate military state tend not to get maced, bludgeoned, unfairly prosecuted or trashed by the media.

Imagine if right-wingers were as oppressed as they think they are.


If the Occupy movement spent more time organizing and less time, dealing drugs, looting and robbing nearby local businesses, shiatting in public everywhere and raping each other, they would have accomplished more. Remember the "No Rape Zones" OWS had to put in place.  She probably got fondled more by her Occupy crowd than the pig officer.

Once the crime and filth got out of hand, Obama laid down the hammer. The DOJ coordinated a nation-wide crackdown on the movement promptly ending it and making it a mere footnote in a random history book. The mace spraying and beatings we saw the cops issue were all on the hands of Eric Holder.

Then you battered children vote them all back into office.
2014-05-07 08:15:44 AM  
1 votes:

Slappy McLongstockings: Can someone tell me how many days they actually occupied a building in Wall St.?

I can't seem to find a reference...


First of all, that would miss the point.  But the big "occupation" was a several week long gathering at Zuccotti Park.  Which technically belongs to Brookfield Holdings, a real estate company.

The real point, however, wasn't to disrupt wall street, but to be a visible, long-term statement.  Even if they got denigrated at every turn, we all had to look at them for about a month.  And then we talked about them for another 3.  And now we're seeing raises in the minimum wage, and the issues of wealth condensation and income inequality are not part of our public consciousness.

Not exactly "mission accomplished" but I guarantee it's better than what the chucklefarks who get on the internet to hate on them would come up with.
2014-05-07 08:02:47 AM  
1 votes:

TuteTibiImperes: Nabb1: TuteTibiImperes: Well, she faces up to 7 years, I doubt she'll get sentenced to that.

The NYT has a more detailed account of what happened.  She was drunk, yelling at another officer, which led the assaulted officer to try to lead her away.

7 years would certainly be excessive.  Time served and a probation would be about right.

She sure taught the 1% a lesson.

OWS had some great ideas and a ton of energy, but no direction and abysmal organization.  It's a shame that the potential there was mostly wasted.  They helped get the conversation started, but it could have been so much more if someone had managed to take charge, distill the message into some accessible soundbites, and do some halfway decent PR work to focus the media.


You know, if people spent as much time and energy throwing support behind them instead of ho-humming about the lack of organization, if we'd spent as much time and energy listening to what they were saying instead of complaining about how their message was confusing, and spent as much time and energy distilling that message instead of acting all concerned and sharing "helpful" ideas about how they "should be doing things"... their potential might not have been so "wasted".
2014-05-07 07:14:33 AM  
1 votes:

WhyteRaven74: If the prosecutor had a lick of sense the instant the boob grab thing came to light, especially with the picture of her being bruised in the area, the best course of action would've been to drop the charges. Especially in light of the offending officers past.




Why?
If its not going to trigger a public response (which it probably won't) and neither the judge nor the jury call him on it, its just one more victory in the prosecutors ledger.
His interest is in tending to his scorebook, not justice for the accused.

/and people are too infatuated with having a system of laws to realize the execution of law has gone entirely off the rails.
2014-05-07 06:48:25 AM  
1 votes:
If the prosecutor had a lick of sense the instant the boob grab thing came to light, especially with the picture of her being bruised in the area, the best course of action would've been to drop the charges. Especially in light of the offending officers past.
2014-05-07 04:51:44 AM  
1 votes:
firefly212:
tbeatty, the judge made some questionable decisions by not allowing the jury to hear that the officer in question has numerous violations on his record for excessive force, and has filed inaccurate police reports. In a case that hedged so heavily on testimony, as the video was not allowed into evidence, the judge made it a he said/she said case, but nixed the ability of the defense to point out that the officer in question has been caught lying before and using excessive force before. IMO, if she gets decent lawyers, she has a shot on ...

Good luck with that.  Assault cases are narrowly limited to the evidence of assault. The defense contends it was accidental, not that it didn't happen.  Prejudicial evidence is generally not allowed (i.e. her past convictions for alcohol or arrests or history of violence is not allowed either).  This isn't new law or outside the normal practice so it's chance of success is virtually 0.  Her best bet now is take it and apply for clemency or expungement terms.
2014-05-07 04:30:41 AM  
1 votes:

Cathedralmaster: From the Guardian:

But the jury didn't hear anything about the police violence that took place in Zuccotti Park that night. They didn't hear about what happened there on November 15, 2011, when the park was first cleared. The violence experienced by Occupy protesters throughout its entirety was excluded from the courtroom. The narrative that the jury did hear was tightly controlled by what the judge allowed - and Judge Ronald Zweibel consistently ruled that any larger context of what was happening around McMillan at the time of the arrest (let alone Bovell's own history of violence) was irrelevant to the scope of the trial.

In the trial, physical evidence was considered suspect but the testimony of the police was cast as infallible. Despite photographs of her bruised body, including her right breast, the prosecution cast doubt upon McMillan's allegations of being injured by the police - all while Officer Bovell repeatedly identified the wrong eye when testifying as to how McMillan injured him. And not only was Officer Bovell's documented history of violent behavior deemed irrelevant by the judge, but so were the allegations of his violent behavior that very same night....

It's impossible to understand the whole story by just looking at it one picture, even if it's McMillan's of her injuries. But that is exactly what the jury in McMillan's case was asked to do. They were presented a close up of Cecily McMillan's elbow, but not of Bovell, and asked to determine who was violent. The prosecutors and the judge prohibited them from zooming out.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/may/05/cecily-mcmillan -o ccupy-guilty-police-violence

Judge Ronald Zweibel ordered that McMillan, 25, a graduate student at the New School, be detained. He rejected a request from her lawyers for bail.

"I see absolutely no reason why a remand would be appropriate here," Martin Stolar, her lead attorney, told the judge. "She is not likely to be somebody to cut and run." Zweibel replied: "Remanded pending sentencing."


She was railroaded.

2014-05-07 03:56:09 AM  
1 votes:

lucksi: Lenny_da_Hog:

And that wasn't just a pull-away reactionary elbow -- she leaned down and used her full body mass to inflict injury as much injury as she could and ran to get away.

That is what I would do to get away from someone assaulting me.


It still goes beyond the lawyer's tale of "it was an accident." She formulated a strike to the face. It wasn't like she just jumped away and accidentally hit his face. And I still doubt the boob-grab story, between the video evidence and number of other continuity problems she has.
2014-05-07 03:16:15 AM  
1 votes:

Wessoman: There you go. With erect nipple. Yes, the cop totally made a fungrab. And yes, she was found guilty of felony assault. Which is BS--You grab a ladies boobs without asking, she will elbow you. We all know that.

Honestly, it's just the police making her an example.


Did you watch the video in TFA? The bruise she later shows off is above acceptable necklines. In the video, nothing ever blocks the vibrant green of her t-shirt. A hand to the top of her boob (and really, if you're going to grope someone, why would you grope there?) would have been evident from that angle against that bright green, and it's just not there.
2014-05-07 03:08:24 AM  
1 votes:

whidbey: Maybe she'll get parole after a couple of years.

But yeah, this is bullshiat. I would be appealing the fark out of this ruling.


She'll probably get a short time in a jail and a long time suspended, which would piss her off as a professional protester to have jail time hanging over her head for the next few years.

And they're already talking about appealing, but I really doubt it will overturn anything. Most of what they're talking about was stuff that was disallowed because it was immaterial.

The video is pretty damning, and doesn't support her titty-twister tale.
2014-05-07 03:04:26 AM  
1 votes:

MFAWG: I just can't make a judgement without a picture of the boob in question.


assets.vice.com

There you go. With erect nipple. Yes, the cop totally made a fungrab. And yes, she was found guilty of felony assault. Which is BS--You grab a ladies boobs without asking, she will elbow you. We all know that.

Honestly, it's just the police making her an example.
2014-05-07 02:29:56 AM  
1 votes:
Maybe she'll get parole after a couple of years.

But yeah, this is bullshiat. I would be appealing the fark out of this ruling.
2014-05-07 02:21:44 AM  
1 votes:

gaspode: she leapt in the air and clocked him in the face full on. Unless you can PROVE sexual assault then that is assault 100% of the time. That said actual prison time would be utterly ridiculous.

2014-05-07 02:03:17 AM  
1 votes:

log_jammin: Lenny_da_Hog: a Democracy Now interview

pretty much all I need to know about this case


Suppose it would have been proper for me to post it for everyone to ignore.
2014-05-07 02:02:12 AM  
1 votes:
That she's looking at seven years is ridiculous. Even if she did purposely elbow a cop, that's retarded. That she's getting railroaded makes this painful.

 Arm up next time, America.
2014-05-07 01:56:35 AM  
1 votes:

Cathedralmaster: She was railroaded.


I think it's more to the point that it doesn't matter if other chaos was happening or other people were being treated wrongly in order to determine if she, herself, had elbowed a cop in the face.
2014-05-07 01:54:57 AM  
1 votes:

Dafatone: TuteTibiImperes: Nabb1: TuteTibiImperes: Well, she faces up to 7 years, I doubt she'll get sentenced to that.

The NYT has a more detailed account of what happened.  She was drunk, yelling at another officer, which led the assaulted officer to try to lead her away.

7 years would certainly be excessive.  Time served and a probation would be about right.

She sure taught the 1% a lesson.

OWS had some great ideas and a ton of energy, but no direction and abysmal organization.  It's a shame that the potential there was mostly wasted.  They helped get the conversation started, but it could have been so much more if someone had managed to take charge, distill the message into some accessible soundbites, and do some halfway decent PR work to focus the media.

Actually, I think their impact in terms of moving the conversation was pretty substantial.

Nabb1 just used the term "the 1%".  That wasn't really in the common vocabulary before OWS.  Not that it was unheard of, but almost everybody today knows what it refers to.  That's actually a pretty large victory, simply to carve out a notion of the very (not super, but very) rich as a class, in a way that emphasizes their minority.


This.  OWS unfortunately led to no direct changes, but they did effectively transform the terms of debate, very effectively.
2014-05-07 01:18:47 AM  
1 votes:

firefly212: TuteTibiImperes: Well, she faces up to 7 years, I doubt she'll get sentenced to that.

The NYT has a more detailed account of what happened.  She was drunk, yelling at another officer, which led the assaulted officer to try to lead her away.

7 years would certainly be excessive.  Time served and a probation would be about right.

How many cops got jailed for their unnecessary violence... lets take the average of what they got and give it to her.


Officer Bovel should know: he's got at least two incidents of excessive force in his background.

So we're talking now about a cop with:

1) a known character for lying, and
2) a known character for violence.

Evidently, the Honorable Kangaroo presided over this court.
2014-05-07 12:58:38 AM  
1 votes:

MFAWG: I just can't make a judgement without a picture of the boob in question.


Just read the article. There's a picture of it.
2014-05-07 12:56:12 AM  
1 votes:

Baz744: js34603: Looks like she got punched above her tit to me.

Whatever, 7 years is still way too long.

The officer's testimony doesn't even make sense. He claims she asked another protestor "are you filming this," and then immediately and for no reason elbowed him. I guess she wanted to get the incriminating evidence on camera?

More likely, cop testalied. She asked about filming because she was being manhandled by aggressive cops. Cop grabs her tit (probably not specifically aiming for the tit) trying to restrain her, she reflexively elbows him.


Yeah, protesting attention whores have never prepped a camera before acting for it?
The medical reports show not bruises until her third trip to the hospital.  She might get more credibility if the marks had been visible as early as the cop's were.
2014-05-07 12:51:21 AM  
1 votes:

js34603: Looks like she got punched above her tit to me.

Whatever, 7 years is still way too long.


The officer's testimony doesn't even make sense. He claims she asked another protestor "are you filming this," and then immediately and for no reason elbowed him. I guess she wanted to get the incriminating evidence on camera?

More likely, cop testalied. She asked about filming because she was being manhandled by aggressive cops. Cop grabs her tit (probably not specifically aiming for the tit) trying to restrain her, she reflexively elbows him.
2014-05-06 10:03:17 PM  
1 votes:
I don't remember seeing any boobs at those demonstrations worth grabbing.
 
Displayed 50 of 50 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report