Gothamist: Sharpton Speaks Out About Upcoming Bell Trial Verdict

AnonEMouse

Thu, 24 Apr 2008 15:49:26 -0500

I'm so sick of this Bell case. All I want to know is if NYers should be worried about riots? Do I need to take Friday off from work and stay away from NYC?

HowBoutDemCowboys

Thu, 24 Apr 2008 14:22:01 -0500

There are a lot of DUMB laws, Mr. Rolltide! My point was this particular law seems to give an unfair advantage to the cops on trial. I'm sorry you missed it, but that's probably what happens when you get an edumacashun in Alabama.

Spear_Chucker

Thu, 24 Apr 2008 11:22:51 -0500

Or just cover the entire exposed surface of your brownstone with job applications. They won't go near that shit guaranteed.

ihateallbrokers

Thu, 24 Apr 2008 11:00:49 -0500

Sakebalboa... "...so any tips on riot proofing a brownstone?" watch I AM Legend, or the Charleston Heston original OMEGA MAN

ihateallbrokers

Thu, 24 Apr 2008 10:32:06 -0500

as a victim of police abuse & false arrest i can only hope that for 50 shots we have 50 dead cops...seriously, start with the 108th precint please

berniegoetz

Wed, 23 Apr 2008 21:57:54 -0500

Al Sharpton is just pissed off because that ship full of guns got cut off before it made its way to his best good buddy Mugabe.

ANGRYGOD11

Wed, 23 Apr 2008 20:42:30 -0500

As much as I hate Sharpton, you have to admit 3 unarmed white guys leaving Scores or any of the many strip clubs around late at night night are NEVER gunned down by NYPD. But, to the guy with the hat and the guy in the white t-shirt, WEAR A SUIT! SHOW SOME RESPECT! You look like you're waiting for the bus.

JacqueMehoff

Wed, 23 Apr 2008 19:54:34 -0500

and that's why there ain't no black criminals on law and order. there's only so many black actors in the pool. now white actors, they're everywhere. ain't no reason why a NYC actor can't get a bit part in ANY of the Law and order franchises, NO REASON. This goes for OZ, Third Watch etc. they recycle the same actors over and over again playing different parts.

Ph

Wed, 23 Apr 2008 19:02:15 -0500

All you people going on about rioting are idiots. There aren't enough black people left in this town to riot. I mean seriously now.

Rolltide23

Wed, 23 Apr 2008 18:30:27 -0500

Fishy to allow this? Its the freckin law you moron. Defendant has a RIGHT to a jury trial. You dont have to exercise that right. Something tells me the parade of drug dealing criminals the prosecution brought forth as witnesses, arent exactly going to be looked at as credible.

zodak

Wed, 23 Apr 2008 16:35:03 -0500

that picture rocks. the dude on the right in the t-shirt just noticed that the police recognize him!

zodak

Wed, 23 Apr 2008 16:34:07 -0500

SapphireSwell

Wed, 23 Apr 2008 16:22:23 -0500

i'm sure if each officer would cry some big crocodile tears in court and had his aunts come out to say it was an accident and he was a good person, it'd all be alright. wait, sharpton never addressed racism by blacks now, did he?

Gentrifier

Wed, 23 Apr 2008 16:17:30 -0500

Every night, before I go to bed, I pray for the end of racism. Mainly in the vain hope that the disappearance of racism will force this fat f*** to get a job.

HowBoutDemCowboys

Wed, 23 Apr 2008 16:11:33 -0500

Thanks to those who answered my question. I knew that there were circumstances where one could ask for a trial by judge instead of jury, but to me, it seems extremely fishy to allow this when the defendants - in this case, cops - work closely with judges on a frequent basis. If those cops are acquitted, I wouldn't worry about a riot. I'd worry if I were that judge. Jurors' names are withheld for privacy, judges' names are not.

poopmast

Wed, 23 Apr 2008 15:51:51 -0500

John Liu is the chinaman Al Sharpton

sakebalboa

Wed, 23 Apr 2008 15:19:29 -0500

...so any tips on riot proofing a brownstone?

theevilone

Wed, 23 Apr 2008 15:08:55 -0500

And the Rev Al reads from his carefully prepared notes on ...torn out looseleaf paper. It's like he ditched 7th period to have a news conference.

everydaydreamer

Wed, 23 Apr 2008 15:04:38 -0500

Black people are embarrassed to be represented by anyone other than themselves. There is no "great White spokesperson." Why must there be a Black one? There is no monolithic Black whole. Just saying...

Papercutninja

Wed, 23 Apr 2008 14:28:35 -0500

That's John Liu. Any time he can get on camera, he'll do it. Plus he represents Queens. Legitimately, as in he was elected.

aveB4life

Wed, 23 Apr 2008 14:23:02 -0500

the asian up there looks out of place

JacqueMehoff

Wed, 23 Apr 2008 14:22:53 -0500

This is a good sign, who'd would of thunk it?

MT

Wed, 23 Apr 2008 14:17:56 -0500

Al Sharpton has apparently made Al Sharpton the spokesman for all black people. People should be embarrassed to be represented by that walking joke.

kane

Wed, 23 Apr 2008 14:16:52 -0500

The media is the answer to both questions, UnrepentantFenian.

UnrepentantFenian

Wed, 23 Apr 2008 14:13:07 -0500

Who keeps putting a microphone in front of this animal?! Who made Al Sharpton the spokesman for all black people?

cgee

Wed, 23 Apr 2008 14:07:00 -0500

The Bell case was a bench trial; that is, tried before a judge only. In criminal matters, the accused has a constitutional right to a jury trial, but may waive this right and be tried by a judge acting as both a finder of law (the judge's usual role) and fact (the jury's usual role). Police defendants often choose bench trials when they believe that a jury would not treat them in an impartial manner; e.g., the homicide of a civilian minority. Given the makeup of most NYC juries, I would guess that this is a wise choice.

Muscley Armed Paper Boy

Wed, 23 Apr 2008 14:06:05 -0500

In the same article, somehow Bloomy knows for a fact that no one is going to riot, while Sharpton says an acquittal would not be justice (which is code for yes, you should riot).

Outter Burrougher

Wed, 23 Apr 2008 14:02:16 -0500

the defendants requested a bench trial, Cowboys; there is no jury.

babyhitler

Wed, 23 Apr 2008 14:01:37 -0500

Go sharpton Go! a riot is just what we need. It will give me the perfect cover to break into tiffany's.

kane

Wed, 23 Apr 2008 14:00:31 -0500

The defendants asked for a bench trial so that they would not have to have 12 Queens residents on the jury.

HowBoutDemCowboys

Wed, 23 Apr 2008 13:57:52 -0500

Why is the judge giving the verdict? Shouldn't it be a jury that does that?