Black man taken to jail for sitting in public area

[MrPickins]

Exactly, and because he's black. If the amygdalas of folk weren't set off by tigers humanity might have gone extinct. How can you blame folk who live in a country with millions in jail, mostly black, and not experience terror seeing one sitting in a bank. It's only prudent to throw the notion we're all equal under the law when nervous anxiety can be so easily relieved at the black man's expense. Far be it for me to have to deal with my own ingrained prejudice. I might get robbed. And good grief, think of how much worse it must be for white women. I know I'd feel a lot better if black males wore burkas. I could have sexual fantasies riding in an elevator with one instead of pissing in my pants.

What does my quote have to do with your response?

 

[Moonbeam]

The writer of the article is making the assumption he was stopped because he was black, and many in this thread are making the same assumption.

The police were talking to him because they were responding to a call requesting assistance.

It may turn out that the only thing he was "guilty" of was for being black, but there is not sufficient information provided to reach that conclusion.

The economic and social conditions of black people, poverty and destruction of self respect over centuries has led to the phenomenon of wide spread black crime. This fact leads to the stereotyping of black people as undesirable. Constant harassment of black people by police acting on just such well founded stereotypes leads to stereotyping of police as folk who single out blacks for attention. This leaves law abiding black people in a fucking bad situation. But the logic that this guy was hassled because he is black is as sound as the notion that blacks are more likely than whites to commit crimes.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

http://www.mprnews.org/story/2014/08/28/st-paul-arrest-video-response

According to a report released this afternoon by the St. Paul Police Department, private security guards called officers to investigate a man who was trespassing in a private "employee only" lounge area of the building. The security guards told the officers that the man refused to leave after they told him he couldn't be there.

 

[Londo_Jowo]

Statement from the St Paul Police Dept.

http://www.myfoxtwincities.com/story/26398307/st-paul-police-statement-on-lollie-arrest

Below is the unedited statement from St. Paul Police Chief Tom Smith regarding the arrest of Christopher Lollie:

I would like to thank the community for the discussion regarding the video that was has recently been circulated from a January 31, 2014 arrest.

As is often the case, the video does not show the totality of the circumstances.

Our officers were called by private security guards on a man who was trespassing in a private area. The guards reported that the man had on repeated occasions refused to leave a private "employees only" area in the First National Bank Building.

With no information on who the man was, what he might be doing or why he refused to leave the area, responding Saint Paul police officers tried to talk to him, asking him who he was. He refused to tell them or cooperate.

Our officers are called upon and required to respond to calls for assistance and to investigate the calls. At one point, the officers believed he might either run or fight with them. It was then that officers took steps to take him into custody. He pulled away and resisted officers' lawful orders. They then used the force necessary to safely take him into custody.

The man was charged with trespassing, disorderly conduct and obstruction of the legal process. Those charges were dismissed in July.

 

[pauldun170]

https://tcdailyplanet.net/news/2014...sault-video-identified-claims-charges-dropped

Christopher Lollie, 28, said he was waiting to pick up his two year-old and four year-old children from New Horizon Academy’s daycare around 9:43 a.m. on Jan. 31, when a security guard from the First National Bank building asked him to leave the area where he was sitting. The guard then called the St. Paul Police Department when Lollie refused to do so, he said.

By the time the police arrived, Lollie said he had already left the spot to go meet his kids by the daycare and expected the officers to disregard the call, since he believed the areas to be public.

Since then, Lollie said he fought the charges and because of the teacher’s statement and the footage from the building’s security cameras, all charges against him were dropped as of July 31.

Minnesota does not currently have a 'stop and identify' statute in place that would give police the right to arrest someone for not identifying himself.

 

[Moonbeam]

What does my quote have to do with your response?

A business has every right in the world to ask a black man not to sit in their lobby. But it would be prudent not to mention the reason, racial bigotry.

 

[SOFTengCOMPelec]

A business has every right in the world to ask a black man not to sit in their lobby. But it would be prudent not to mention the reason, racial bigotry.

You can't sit in the employees ONLY lounge, if you are NOT an employee. Race has got NOTHING to do with that fact.

 

[s0me0nesmind1]

Incorrect
The video DID NOT begin during his arrest.

Read the thread, watch the video, or read the article. Any of those 3 would tell you that you are wrong tool. No wait scratch that. You are worse than a bag of tools.

Quote from the OP

The video, taken by Mr Lollie during his arrest, begins with a female police officer repeatedly asking his name as she escorts him away.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

I don't see any evidence of this being a racial issue. Looks more like a "being stupid" issue to me.

 

[BoberFett]

St. Paul... figures...

 

[Londo_Jowo]

Looks like a 2 x 4 on the shoulder issue.

 

[Thebobo]

Video Begins DURING HIS ARREST.

I reserve ANY and all judgement from a video that begins DURING an arrest,

No it DOESN'T

Also the charges were dropped against Mr Lollie.

I would go ballistic if this happened to me.

 

[CitizenKain]

Read the thread, watch the video, or read the article. Any of those 3 would tell you that you are wrong tool. No wait scratch that. You are worse than a bag of tools.

Quote from the OP

No surprise that rightwing idiot like you bends over backwards to defend police.

 

[MrPickins]

A business has every right in the world to ask a person not to sit in their lobby.

Fixed that for you.

I don't care why they asked him to leave. Legally, they had that right.

My only contribution to this thread is to point out that the statement he made was false.

I said nothing about bigotry or racial profiling, which I find to be abhorrent.

 

[Moonbeam]

Statement from the St Paul Police Dept.

http://www.myfoxtwincities.com/story/26398307/st-paul-police-statement-on-lollie-arrest

If he entered a private employee area and refused to leave thinking it was a public spot, then the actions that happened were inevitable. The fact that blacks are subjected to harassment by police can't protect them from law breaking. I wonder, however, why the charges were dropped if he were actually guilty. What did the camera see?

 

[pauldun170]

http://blogs.citypages.com/blotter/..._lawyers_question_aggressive_use_of_force.php

Lollie says he was sitting in a chair in the skyway's hallway when a security guard approached him, told him he was in a private area, and threatened to call police if he didn't leave. But Lollie didn't see any signs specifying that the area was employees-only or private in any other way, so he decided to hold tight, confident police would have his back if they showed up.
...
Asked why the charges were dropped, Lollie says one of his daughter's teachers saw the entire incident and corroborated his version of events. Lollie says another woman who works near the First National Bank Building told investigators she would often sit and have lunch in the stretch of skyway where Lollie was arrested and had never been badgered by security guards or police.

With those two witness statements working in Lollie's favor, prosecutors decided to drop the charges, and Lollie was finally reunited with his phone.

 

[SOFTengCOMPelec]

If he entered a private employee area and refused to leave thinking it was a public spot, then the actions that happened were inevitable. The fact that blacks are subjected to harassment by police can't protect them from law breaking. I wonder, however, why the charges were dropped if he were actually guilty. What did the camera see?

My understanding is that if the charged person, makes a lot of noise/trouble about what happens, and threatens to badly counter sue, charges tend to drop off the table (disappear), as long as the crimes are relatively trivial.

Or I have been watching too much American TV/films in the UK, over the years.

 

[Thebobo]

The police are around to help everything move smoothly, and to take appropriate action if there is criminal activities. So if for some reason they have decided to arrest you, then you should calmly let them do it.

If instead, you ignore their "you are under arrest", and you start swearing, kicking, ignoring/refusing/annoying the police, it will usually not go down well.

E.g. I think there is a thread about an 18 year old boy, who got shot dead, for resisting arrest, and acting aggressively to the officers. When he charged at the police officer, he got shot.

Yes, there may be issues, of the police harassing innocent people, but badly resisting arrest is NOT a good solution to this problem, if it exists.

Sometimes you have to take a stand and apparently that was his time.

 

[cubby1223]

The economic and social conditions of black people, poverty and destruction of self respect over centuries has led to the phenomenon of wide spread black crime. This fact leads to the stereotyping of black people as undesirable. Constant harassment of black people by police acting on just such well founded stereotypes leads to stereotyping of police as folk who single out blacks for attention. This leaves law abiding black people in a fucking bad situation. But the logic that this guy was hassled because he is black is as sound as the notion that blacks are more likely than whites to commit crimes.

You keep typing words and forming sentences as if you believe they have significance.

If you have direct information/knowledge of why that specific person called the police, by all means provide the info.

 

[cubby1223]

Sometimes you have to take a stand and apparently that was his time.

Sometimes. But you're making an assumption based on statistics, rather than seeking out a more complete set of facts (which may reach that conclusion, but at least it's a conclusion based more on facts, rather than based more on assumptions and probabilities).

 

[Moonbeam]

Fixed that for you.

I don't care why they asked him to leave. Legally, they had that right.

My only contribution to this thread is to point out that the statement he made was false.

I said nothing about bigotry or racial profiling.

I never said you said that. I did. I added it to what you said. I say it is far more likely for a black person minding his or her business in a public spot to encounter suspicion as to why they are there making it far more likely that that is the reason security got involved. My point is that blacks claim they are harassed on a continual basis just for being black and I am more inclined to believe that than white denial, more inclined to believe that if a black is asked to leave a public area it's more likely that it's because he or she is black than that some company is exercising a right they have. If rights aren't being exerted equally across race they are being abused. I would think, however, that if the man was in an employee area, his color probably didn't matter as much.

 

[pauldun170]

My understanding is that if the charged person, makes a lot of noise/trouble about what happens, and threatens to badly counter sue, charges tend to drop off the table (disappear), as long as the crimes are relatively trivial.

Or I have been watching too much American TV/films in the UK, over the years.

Sometimes, people are simply innocent.

http://www.officer.com/news/11672547/minn-police-defend-arrest-charges-dropped

Lollie was charged with three misdemeanors -- trespassing, disorderly conduct and obstructing legal process. All counts were dismissed July 31. Lollie said his attorney went to court with surveillance video from the skyway and witness statements.

Charges were dismissed a month ago. No legal action had been initiated by Lollie at that point.

 

[Thebobo]

Audio interview with Lollie

http://filterfreeamerika.podbean.com/

 

[Moonbeam]

You keep typing words and forming sentences as if you believe they have significance.

If you have direct information/knowledge of why that specific person called the police, by all means provide the info.

Pardon me for speaking to you in your handicapped condition. The CBD prevents any real understanding of the word 'significance'.

When I go out on a cloudy day and hear thunder and see water marks on my shirt, I have this horrible suspicion that it's rain. Do I know it's rain? How could I ever know it's really rain unless I asked the place where you have your head. Dear clouds, did you rain on me, or is cubby just pissing with his hose?

 

[SOFTengCOMPelec]

Sometimes you have to take a stand and apparently that was his time.

It is a VERY bad idea, to behave like that, with the police, however innocent or not, they may be.

Your statement, reminds me of this youtube video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uj0mtxXEGE8

Showing why it is a very bad idea (in a comedy style) to resist arrest and misbehave in front of police officers.