Mediaboss Marketing

Syracuse, N.Y. Syracuse mayoral candidates Ben Walsh and Khalid Bey both said they would amplify the voices of the Black Lives Matter movement if elected as the citys next leader.

Their comments came during a forum on public safety hosted by WCNY. Moderated by David Lombardo, host of the stations Capitol Pressroom, the forum featured all three candidates for mayor: Democrat Bey, Republican Janet Burman and independent Walsh, the incumbent.

Questions mostly derived from a six-part documentary that the station aired earlier this month on policing and police reform.

Walsh called the Black Lives Matter movement critically important to such reform and touted his actions while protesters took to the streets of Syracuse last year, saying he met one-on-one with both activists and police officers.

Weve heard loud and clear from thousands of citizens in the community that they felt that they were not being heard, that they felt that they were not being valued, and thats unacceptable, Walsh said, adding that he wants the city to be a leader in this area.

Burman was less direct, focusing on ways to address the concerns of those involved in the BLM movement without saying she would amplify the cause. She called for a community policing method, with the same officers assigned to smaller precincts, to improve trust between the public and the police.

But Bey, who also advocated for community policing, said BLMs goal is one that deserves attention.

I think were headed in a horrible direction when the preservation of life is going to be political, Bey said. We have to do our best to ensure that everybody is protected.

He compared the difference in videos circulating on the internet of armed white people being arrested safely while unarmed Black people have been shot or otherwise harmed.

One such video shows a now-infamous arrest on Grace Street in May 2019. In the video, a driver is pulled from his car and an officer punches him in the head two or three times. The driver had been stopped for loud music.

Syracuse Police Chief Kenton Buckner defended the officers actions as the necessary result of a suspect who refused a lawful order to leave his vehicle and continued to resist after being pulled from the drivers seat. He said the officers hadnt violated the departments use of force policy a policy that was revised shortly after the incident and has been updated again since.

Bey said he thought the mayor and police chiefs changes to the use of force policy actually made it worse.

Before, our only concern was a closed fist to the face, and we thought that created opportunity for too many injuries, Bey said. But its now been changed to include a host of other things that police officers could potentially do that I think creates a greater chance for injury to citizens.

Bey didnt elaborate on what other actions officers are now permitted to take under the policy.

Walsh defended the policy changes, saying constant review and revision is necessary. He also pointed to de-escalation training provided to officers under his administration as a way to stop the need for use of force in some cases.

Bail reform

Violent crime has emerged as a defining topic of the mayoral race, with the candidates sparring over the statistics. According to data from the Syracuse Police Department, violent crime is up 4% over the same time last year, and homicides are on pace with 2020s record-breaking number. Overall crime is down 12%.

Bey and Burman say violent crime in Syracuse has exploded under the Walsh administration.

The spike in violence has created an environment where so many people feel our city is approaching lawlessness, Bey said.

Walsh said the trend is concerning. He pointed to national trends showing an increase in violent crime across the country since the start of Covid.

But candidates disagreed over whether the rise in violent crime in Syracuse is related to the hot-button issue of bail reform.

In New York, bail reform mandates the automatic release of most people arrested and charged with non-violent crimes. Raise the Age legislation is targeted at juveniles and encourages that more young people even some charged with violent crimes be sent to Family Court instead of criminal court.

Buckner and Onondaga County District Attorney William Fitzpatrick have both spoken out about the reform measures, linking them to the premature release of violent criminals.

Burman said she thinks younger kids are getting involved in crime because of Raise the Age and that bail reform has handicapped law enforcements ability to keep the community safe.

I think its important that the mayor act as advocate for our citizens and speak up and speak to our legislative representatives about the consequences that these laws have unleashed in our community, Burman said.

Walsh said the intent of the laws is right: We should not be criminalizing poverty; it shouldnt matter how much money you have. That shouldnt determine whether or not you have to stay in jail.

Children make mistakes and deserve second chances, Walsh said. He pointed to his own privilege as a reason hed been given the benefit of the doubt when he made errors in his youth.

Bey said its clear that nonviolent crimes should be treated differently than violent crimes.

He pointed to the cost of housing someone in the Onondaga County Justice Center as a reason to keep fewer nonviolent criminals in jail overnight.

We can do much better by simply empowering and employing people, spending our money that way, Bey said.

The candidates will meet again Wednesday when Syracuse.com hosts at a debate at 6 p.m. View that debate live on this site.

Got a tip, comment or story idea? Call or text Megan Craig at 315-925-7137, email her at mcraig@syracuse.com or send a direct message on Twitter @megcraig1.

Link:
Khalid Bey and Ben Walsh say they would amplify voices of Black Lives Matter if elected - syracuse.com

Demonstrators march in the streets on August 26, 2020 in Kenosha, Wisconsin. As the city declared a state of emergency curfew, a fourth night of civil unrest occurred after the shooting of Jacob Blake, 29, on August 23. Brandon Bell/Getty Images hide caption

Demonstrators march in the streets on August 26, 2020 in Kenosha, Wisconsin. As the city declared a state of emergency curfew, a fourth night of civil unrest occurred after the shooting of Jacob Blake, 29, on August 23.

Gaige Grosskreutz, who was shot by Kyle Rittenhouse during racial justice protests in Kenosha, Wisconsin last year, is suing the city, the county and several law enforcement officers, claiming they condoned the efforts of white nationalists to violently dispel demonstrators protesting a police shooting.

A wave of protests erupted in Kenosha in August of last year following the shooting of Jacob Blake, a Black man who was shot multiple times by a white police officer at point-blank range and left paralyzed from the waist down.

At one of the protests, the then 17-year-old Rittenhouse shot and killed two people Anthony Huber and Joseph Rosenbaum and wounded Grosskreutz, who says he lost 90% of his right bicep. Prosecutors have charged Rittenhouse with killing the two men and shooting Grosskreutz. Rittenhouse, whose trial has been delayed until November, claims the shootings were in self-defense and has pleaded not guilty.

According to Grosskreutz's federal lawsuit filed in the Eastern District of Wisconsin on Thursday, authorities in Kenosha not only knew that armed vigilantes planned to patrol the protest attended by Black Lives Matter supporters, but also encouraged their participation.

"It was not a mistake that Kyle Rittenhouse would kill two people and maim a third on that evening," the lawsuit claims. "It was a natural consequence of the actions of the Kenosha Police Department and Kenosha Sherriff's office in deputizing a roving militia to 'protect property' and 'assist in maintaining order.'"

Grosskreutz says the coordination between authorities and armed citizens like Rittenhouse deprived the protestors of their constitutional right to freedom of speech, endangering them during the demonstration.

"Defendants' open support of and coordination with the armed individuals in the minutes and hours before the shootings deprived Anthony Huber and the other protestors of the basic protections typically provided by police," the lawsuit says. "It was a license for the armed individuals to wreak havoc and inflict injury."

The lawsuit also alleges that the police treated Rittenhouse the way they did because he was white, and that if an armed Black man had offered to patrol the protest, "he most likely would have been shot dead."

Sam Hall, the attorney representing Kenosha County and Sheriff David Beth, said in a statement that the allegations against his clients were false.

"The lawsuit also fails to acknowledge that Mr. Grosskreutz was himself armed with a firearm when he was shot and Mr. Grosskreutz failed to file this lawsuit against the person who actually shot him," Hall said. "Sheriff Beth and Kenosha County plan to promptly file a motion to dismiss this case."

In an interview with the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, Grosskreutz said he has a concealed carry permit to carry a gun.

NPR also reached out to the city of Kenosha and its police department. The city declined to comment.

Since the shootings, Rittenhouse has received support from conservative groups and Blue Lives Matter activists. President Trump declined to condemn his actions in the days after the shootings.

The Kenosha Police Department announced in April that Rusten Sheskey, the officer who shot Blake, acted within department policy and wouldn't face discipline. Federal prosecutors said this month that they would not file charges against Sheskey.

Blake has filed a federal lawsuit against Sheskey, accusing him of excessive force.

Read this article:
Protester shot by Kyle Rittenhouse in Kenosha is now suing Wisconsin authorities - NPR

A prominent protest leader in Des Moines was sentenced to probation and 150 hours of community serviceafter pleading guilty todamaginga police vehicle during a June 2020 protest at a south Des Moines Hy-Vee store.

Mat Farrakhan Muhammad, 26, of Des Moines, formerly known as Matthew Bruce, pleaded guilty Sept. 14 to first-degree criminal mischief, a felony, after being charged with vandalizing a police car during a June 20, 2020, protest at the Hy-Vee store at 3221 SE 14th St.

JudgeJeffrey Farrell gave Muhammad a deferred judgment Monday,a type of legal remedy where a defendant is placed on probation and a guilty verdict is withheld.

Muhammad helped organize protests throughout Des Moines after the death of George Floyd in Minneapolis on May 25, 2020.On June 20, 2020, a protest was organized at theHy-Vee store after a former employee said she experienced racial discrimination at work and had to take down a Black Lives Matter sign at her cash register.

Muhammad and several other protesters spray-painted a police SUV and danced on its roof.Some protesters took the police decal off the vehicle and burned it.

Muhammad was arrested four other times for other alleged protest-related crimes. His arrests prompted allegations of targeted harassment, intimidation and retaliationby Des Moines police and the Polk County Attorney's office againstMuhammad and other prominent protest leaders critical of law enforcement.

Muhammad had no criminal record before getting arrested on protest charges in Polk and Johnson counties last year. He has not been arrested since September 2020.

In exchange for pleading guilty in the Hy-Vee case, all remaining protest charges againstMuhammad in Polk County were dropped.

"His anger and resentment at racial injustice led him to make a bad decision and encourage others in that bad decision," Parrish wrote in a brief before Muhammad's sentencing. "He has since tried to use his leadership abilities to help others make positive changes in their own lives."

Muhammad knew he was doing wrong things in the moment, but "did not fully comprehend the seriousness of the offense," Parrish wrote.

Parrish continued: "While he still does not agree with everything the Des Moines Police Department does, he knows and has admitted that his conduct was outside of the confines of the law and should be punished."

In court Monday morning prosecutorOlu Salamiasked that Farrell find Muhammad guilty, but sentence him to probation and community service.

"I refuse to tie his conduct to the cause," Salami said. "There's a way to accomplish the cause without destroying law enforcement property."

Parrish asked Farrell for a deferred judgment. He told the judge that Floyd's death had a profound effect on Black Americans.

"If he messes up in some way he's going to get the felony any way," Parrish said. "This is the type of leader we need in this community."

Muhammad told Farrell that he took responsibility for his actions in this incident.

"This was not an event that was planned," Muhammad said. "Moving forward ... if we're going to have people gathering we need to do so within the parameters of the law."

In a victim impact statement on behalf of the Des Moines Police Department, chief Dana Wingert said the squad car was a criticalpiece of equipment to keep residents safe.

"It's more than symbolism," Wingert said. "We already paid for that squad car once. We shouldn't have to pay for it again."

If Muhammad violates the terms of his probation he faces 10 years in prison. Havingthat prison sentence hanging over Muhammad reassured Farrell that Muhammad will stay out of trouble, he said.

A Johnson County judge in January dismissed nine felony charges againstMuhammad after he was charged with shining a laser in the eyes of several University of Iowa police officers during an Aug. 31, 2020, protest in Iowa City. The judge said at the time that the charges were filed one day later than the 45 days allowed by law.

Muhammad still faces sixaggravated misdemeanor assault charges related to the same incident. A trial in that case is scheduled for Dec. 14.

Philip Joens covers breaking news for The Des Moines Register. He can be reached at 515-443-3347at pjoens@registermedia.com or on Twitter @Philip_Joens.

Link:
Des Moines protest leader sentenced to probation for vandalizing police car at Hy-Vee in 2020 - Des Moines Register

As a resident of the wider community and a member of the Waterbury Area Anti-Racism Coalition (WAARC), I am writing to urge you to fly the Waterbury Stands With Black Lives Matter banner. Flying the banner in the past has been an important example of moral leadership by your group, and therefore the town of Waterbury, from which others who live in the area, as well as countless visitors, have benefitted. I also support displaying some version of the Declaration of Inclusion. The two messages are complementary and hesitation to fly the BLM banner in fact contradicts the Declaration of Inclusion.

I watched the recording of the Oct. 4 Select Board meeting and I was struck by a few things.

On the question of whether this is in the lane of the Select Board, your Declaration of Inclusion makes it clear that equity is part of the Boards purview. Furthermore, the Vermont League of Cities and Towns Statement of Equity and Racial Justice makes it clear that racial justice is crucial to effective town governance:

The Vermont League of Cities and Towns (VLCT) stands with our members and commits to being more visible, vocal, and supportive in our efforts to ensure equity and racial justice, and to directly address systemic and overt racism and implicit bias. We are ready to assist and, with local officials, will do our best to make a difference.

To be clear, Black Lives Matter is a decentralized social movement. It is distinct from political organizations like the Black Lives Matter Global Network. Saying we stand with BLM is a statement about values and inclusion. The U.S. government agrees - our Office of Special Counsel has ruled that BLM is not political or partisan (see here). Employees of the federal government can wear BLM while working, for example. So there is nothing keeping you from doing this, and to hide behind a veneer of neutrality is to work against inclusion.

It is contradictory for the Board to say that it stands behind the Declaration of Inclusion but not BLM. The Declaration names several protected classes, including race. This is because people with these identities have historically been and continue to be all too often discriminated against interpersonally and systemically. The Declaration makes the point that we cant just say we want to be inclusive or treat everybody the same; we need to be particularly mindful when it comes to some people due to the broader context of society and our own internal implicit biases. BLM simply restates this principle by reminding us that even when it comes to race, anti-Black racism deserves special attention because in our society, anti-Black racism has been the backbone of all other racism (and perhaps other types of oppression too). So for the Board to support the Declaration but not BLM suggests a misunderstanding of BLM.

I hope that you fly both banners. Not on behalf of WAARC, but to show your own commitment to and understanding of inclusion and equity. I applaud the boards efforts to deepen collective understanding of these issues, and for making symbolic yet important actions such as flying the BLM banner in the past and developing the Declaration of Inclusion. I plan to urge the Select Board in Duxbury to follow in Waterburys footsteps.

I have heard some board members express worry that supporting BLM is divisive in our community. If you accept the points I made above, it is clear that there are only two reasons somebody would feel threatened by BLM: (1) they dont understand it or (2) they dont think Black lives matter as much as white lives.

This moment is a powerful opportunity for the Board to both (1) help educate people about why it is important for Waterbury and its residents to support BLM specifically and inclusion generally and (2) reinforce that Waterbury does not support white supremacy specifically or any form of discrimination generally.

The board has huge influence in our community and could use this as a moment to educate and unite our community around fairness, interconnectedness, and growing our understanding of ourselves and each other.

Thank you,

Life LeGeros

Duxbury

Read more here:
LETTER: Fly the banner and display the Declaration of Inclusion Waterbury Roundabout - Waterbury Roundabout

Views expressed in opinion columns are the authors own.

As a writer, I understand the joy that comes from manipulating the English language to find that perfect play on words. So, Id like to brush off Gov. Larry Hogans proposed Re-fund the Police initiative as a harmless attempt to get a joke out of Marylanders, specifically those who are part of the Black Lives Matter movement and advocates who push to defund the police.

Yet, no one is laughing, and this initiative is far from harmless.

In his new plan, Hogan is looking to provide $150 million to increase the police presence in the state of Maryland. Hogan will allocate $24 million to increased accountability resources, which will manifest in things such as increased body cameras and de-escalation training. Additionally, he looks to provide $10 million to neighborhood lights and security cameras and $20 million for victim services and protection.

However, a bulk of the plan a combined $95 million, to be exact will be focused on increasing both police officer salaries and police aid across Maryland. Its evident that Hogan feels as though there are inefficiencies with law enforcement in Maryland, and that he believes he will fix them, at least in part, with this plan.

However, Hogans plan creates even more questions without resolving the original question at hand: how can we fix the growing crime problem in America?

To begin, this initiative is grossly out of touch with calls among many to defund the police and makes no attempt to meet in the middle to find a solution that works for all.

While the argument to defund the police put forward by the Black Lives Matter movement does call for funding to be moved away from law enforcement, it does not hope to abolish community security and create a lawless society. Calls to defund the police often cite the history of law enforcement terrorizing minority communities as a reason why further reforms would do nothing but prolong the problem and suggest moving funds toward other alternative programs in order to decrease crime from its root.

Ultimately, movements to defund the police want to move away from police officers as a way to fix Americas growing crime problem.

Even if one disagrees with the methodology of defunding the police, its easy to discern that the goal of defunding the police makes protecting American communities a main priority.

Therefore, its unsettling to see Hogan poke fun at an idea that is only trying to protect some of the most vulnerable Americans. Especially considering that the calls to defund the police are rooted in historical racism of Black communities, it is alarming even borderline offensive to know that our governor has no problem turning their hardships into a joke. It all just seems to be in bad taste.

Even after pushing the programs offensive nature aside, this plan is simply not the most effective way to reduce crime in our cities.

Hogan attempts to justify his obscenely large police budget by citing growing crime in Baltimore. However, he conveniently leaves out the fact that the Baltimore police budget rose by $28 million this past year, and the crime rate has continued to grow with it. If the crime rate is growing despite continued investment in policing, then what purpose does continued investment in policing serve?

Aside from wasting millions in taxpayer dollars, increased policing will only contribute to more harm in our most vulnerable communities and lead us back to this same conversation over and over.

If Hogan wanted to get to the root of Marylands crime, he could invest in mental health officers or social workers to psychologically assist community members.

He could provide small business subsidies to help grow the communitys economic outlook. He could invest in community programs in order to pull kids away from crime and help create a more connected community without divisions.

Almost anything is better than perpetuating this age-old, racist cycle of increased policing without examining the root of the crime and absolutely everything is better than turning Black fear and oppression into the punchline of a regressive policy announcement.

Anthony Liberatori is a junior environmental science and economics major. He can be reached at alib1204@umd.edu.

See the original post:
Advocates to defund the police want to protect communities. Hogan shouldn't mock that. - The Diamondback