Separate but Equal, is never equal.

[SavannahMann]

One of the premises that was created in our Country when the Thirteen Independent States signed onto and ratified the Constitution, was the principle that nobody was above the law. Jury trials for everyone, not just the connected as one example. This principle has never been truly lived up to in our history, but it does not make the principle one we should shy away from. We should always be striving to make it better.

Let’s say that you are required to use force, deadly force, to defend yourself. You shoot someone. You call the police and report it, and the cops show up. The first question they are going to ask after identifying you, is what happened. What happened? You had better be ready to explain why you shot this other fellow.

Now, let me say that you are well within your rights to ask for a lawyer before answering the questions. I would suggest it absolutely. The police may even tell you of this right before getting down to the real questions. But the first question, what happened, is going to be asked.

Unless you are a cop. Then the first statement is going to be a little different.

Policeman Mohamed Noor is told to stay quiet by fellow cops after fatally shooting Justine Damond | Daily Mail Online

The first thing that was said was to tell Noor to say nothing before he had representation. Odd isn’t it? Can anyone remember a time when the police arrived at any sort of crime scene, and their first statement is that the individuals involved should shut their mouths, and say nothing, and make sure that everyone’s phone is off so there can be no accidental recordings of anything that the involved individual might say?

Now, you cop supporters who love to take me to task, or advise me of a ride along so I can learn something. Is that the right way to investigate a shooting? Telling the participants to say nothing until they have representation? Or if it was me, or thee, would they tell me something like, if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear?

There is ample evidence of bias in the injustice system. There is ample evidence of malfeasance of the participants on the side of justice. The only question is how long this will be tolerated?

 

[Vastator]

One of the premises that was created in our Country when the Thirteen Independent States signed onto and ratified the Constitution, was the principle that nobody was above the law. Jury trials for everyone, not just the connected as one example. This principle has never been truly lived up to in our history, but it does not make the principle one we should shy away from. We should always be striving to make it better.

Let’s say that you are required to use force, deadly force, to defend yourself. You shoot someone. You call the police and report it, and the cops show up. The first question they are going to ask after identifying you, is what happened. What happened? You had better be ready to explain why you shot this other fellow.

Now, let me say that you are well within your rights to ask for a lawyer before answering the questions. I would suggest it absolutely. The police may even tell you of this right before getting down to the real questions. But the first question, what happened, is going to be asked.

Unless you are a cop. Then the first statement is going to be a little different.

Policeman Mohamed Noor is told to stay quiet by fellow cops after fatally shooting Justine Damond | Daily Mail Online

The first thing that was said was to tell Noor to say nothing before he had representation. Odd isn’t it? Can anyone remember a time when the police arrived at any sort of crime scene, and their first statement is that the individuals involved should shut their mouths, and say nothing, and make sure that everyone’s phone is off so there can be no accidental recordings of anything that the involved individual might say?

Now, you cop supporters who love to take me to task, or advise me of a ride along so I can learn something. Is that the right way to investigate a shooting? Telling the participants to say nothing until they have representation? Or if it was me, or thee, would they tell me something like, if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear?

There is ample evidence of bias in the injustice system. There is ample evidence of malfeasance of the participants on the side of justice. The only question is how long this will be tolerated?

So long as people entertain the notion of “freedom”; and of the people, for the people, and by the people... While deferring to “authority”. Which in a nation “of the people, for the people, and by the people ... “ Which would actually be them....

 

[Mike Dwight]

I couldn't catch a single sentence from this post that is related to Separate but Equal? Should we talk about people's right to an attorney?

 

[emilynghiem]

One of the premises that was created in our Country when the Thirteen Independent States signed onto and ratified the Constitution, was the principle that nobody was above the law. Jury trials for everyone, not just the connected as one example. This principle has never been truly lived up to in our history, but it does not make the principle one we should shy away from. We should always be striving to make it better.

Let’s say that you are required to use force, deadly force, to defend yourself. You shoot someone. You call the police and report it, and the cops show up. The first question they are going to ask after identifying you, is what happened. What happened? You had better be ready to explain why you shot this other fellow.

Now, let me say that you are well within your rights to ask for a lawyer before answering the questions. I would suggest it absolutely. The police may even tell you of this right before getting down to the real questions. But the first question, what happened, is going to be asked.

Unless you are a cop. Then the first statement is going to be a little different.

Policeman Mohamed Noor is told to stay quiet by fellow cops after fatally shooting Justine Damond | Daily Mail Online

The first thing that was said was to tell Noor to say nothing before he had representation. Odd isn’t it? Can anyone remember a time when the police arrived at any sort of crime scene, and their first statement is that the individuals involved should shut their mouths, and say nothing, and make sure that everyone’s phone is off so there can be no accidental recordings of anything that the involved individual might say?

Now, you cop supporters who love to take me to task, or advise me of a ride along so I can learn something. Is that the right way to investigate a shooting? Telling the participants to say nothing until they have representation? Or if it was me, or thee, would they tell me something like, if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear?

There is ample evidence of bias in the injustice system. There is ample evidence of malfeasance of the participants on the side of justice. The only question is how long this will be tolerated?

Dear SavannahMann
I agree with Mike Dwight that you are actually bringing up more than one issue.
1. For separate but equal, you bring up how police are treated differently from other citizens.
2. Then you bring up the issue of legal representation and access to defense, which
brings up a whole SLEW of issues of unequal representation and defense (in addition to police vs. citizens or govt IMMUNITY vs. citizens and taxpayers PAYING for legal defense of govt officials but not having equal defense which they are expected to pay for)

To set the stage for equality, this is how I would approach and restructure democratic due process
1. First ensure all citizens have equal KNOWLEDGE of the laws to begin with
and equal access to assistance with mediation and conflict resolution. If only people in
law enforcement and govt have access to legal defense and knowledge of the laws,
people are never going to be equal to begin with.
2. Agree to systems of RESTORATIVE JUSTICE that focus on corrections and restitution
(this is where conflict resolution and mediation work better than adversarial systems).
Where people have equal protections of their interests and representation, this reduces
the POLITICS of hiding wrongs and projecting blame elsewhere for defense.
3. Also I would implement programs for screening out mental health, criminal abuse and
addition issues, and other disorders or disability so that people who are dangerous threats
to health and safety can be diagnosed and receive help in advance BEFORE crimes, abuses or violations occur.

You bring up multiple issues, which will take reforms on different levels to address and resolve.
These are THREE reforms I would recommend, that would help prevent and correct the root causes of disparity
in protections of the laws.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

One of the premises that was created in our Country when the Thirteen Independent States signed onto and ratified the Constitution, was the principle that nobody was above the law. Jury trials for everyone, not just the connected as one example. This principle has never been truly lived up to in our history, but it does not make the principle one we should shy away from. We should always be striving to make it better.

Let’s say that you are required to use force, deadly force, to defend yourself. You shoot someone. You call the police and report it, and the cops show up. The first question they are going to ask after identifying you, is what happened. What happened? You had better be ready to explain why you shot this other fellow.

Now, let me say that you are well within your rights to ask for a lawyer before answering the questions. I would suggest it absolutely. The police may even tell you of this right before getting down to the real questions. But the first question, what happened, is going to be asked.

Unless you are a cop. Then the first statement is going to be a little different.

Policeman Mohamed Noor is told to stay quiet by fellow cops after fatally shooting Justine Damond | Daily Mail Online

The first thing that was said was to tell Noor to say nothing before he had representation. Odd isn’t it? Can anyone remember a time when the police arrived at any sort of crime scene, and their first statement is that the individuals involved should shut their mouths, and say nothing, and make sure that everyone’s phone is off so there can be no accidental recordings of anything that the involved individual might say?

Now, you cop supporters who love to take me to task, or advise me of a ride along so I can learn something. Is that the right way to investigate a shooting? Telling the participants to say nothing until they have representation? Or if it was me, or thee, would they tell me something like, if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear?

There is ample evidence of bias in the injustice system. There is ample evidence of malfeasance of the participants on the side of justice. The only question is how long this will be tolerated?

This has nothing to do with ‘separate but equal.’

 

[harmonica]

so the cop does not have rights?

You have the right to remain silent.

--it's the FIRST sentence !!!!!
What Are Your Miranda Rights?