Current events

Mass Supreme Judicial Court: Black Men Can Run From The Cops Because They Have Legitimate Reason To Fear For Their Life

Join the Revolution and Like Turtleboy Sports on Facebook, and/or follow us on Twitter.

Want to have your business advert viewed over 2 million times per month? Email us at [email protected] for more information, and check out our website about types of advertising we offer.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Is there anything more destructive towards law and order in Massachusetts than a Massachusetts judge? In one of the most insane rulings of all time, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court ruled yesterday that if you are black you have a right to run from the police. Swear to God:

WBURBlack men who try to avoid an encounter with Boston police by fleeing may have a legitimate reason to do so — and should not be deemed suspicious — according to a ruling by the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court. Citing Boston police data and a 2014 report by the ACLU of Massachusetts that found blacks were disproportionately stopped by the city’s police, the state’s highest court on Tuesday threw out the gun conviction of Jimmy Warren.

Warren was arrested on Dec. 18, 2011, by police who were investigating a break-in in Roxbury. Police had been given a description of the suspects as three black men — one wearing a “red hoodie,” one wearing a “black hoodie” and the other wearing “dark clothing.” An officer later spotted Warren and another man (both wearing dark clothing) walking near a park. When the officer approached the men, they ran. Warren was later arrested and searched. No contraband was found on him, but police recovered an unlicensed .22 caliber firearm in a nearby yard. Warren was charged with unlawful possession of a firearm and later convicted.

Oh good, one less unregistered gun off the streets. This is what the gun control advocates want right? Less guns on the streets? This is a good thing. Except they apparently only want criminals like Jimmy Warren to have these guns:

In its ruling, the court made two major findings: The justices said police didn’t have the right to stop Warren in the first place, and the fact that he ran away shouldn’t be used against him. On the first point, the court said the description of the break-in suspects’ clothing was “vague,” making it impossible for police to “reasonably and rationally” target Warren or any other black man wearing dark clothing as a suspect. The court said the “ubiquitous” clothing description and the officer’s “hunch” wasn’t enough to justify the stop.

“Lacking any information about facial features, hairstyles, skin tone, height, weight, or other physical characteristics, the victim’s description ‘contribute[d] nothing to the officers’ ability to distinguish the defendant from any other black male’ wearing dark clothes and a ‘hoodie’ in Roxbury.”

So let me get this straight. The cops knew the suspect’s race and color and type of their clothing. But this wasn’t enough evidence to question a criminal with an unregistered gun,  because they didn’t know the criminal’s “features, hairstyles, skin tone, height, or weight, before doing so? I’m pretty sure the skin tone matched up. So I guess cops have to say how black a person is that they’re looking for now. He was also wearing a hoodie, which would seem to make it difficult for the cops to know the hairstyle of the suspect they were looking for. And perhaps they should’ve had the suspect jump on a scale before running away from the scene of a crime so they can know his exact weight first. Yea, that sounds reasonable. 

On the second point, the court noted that state law gives individuals the right to not speak to police and even walk away if they aren’t charged with anything. The court said when an individual does flee, the action doesn’t necessarily mean the person is guilty. And when it comes to black men, the BPD and ACLU reports “documenting a pattern of racial profiling of black males in the city of Boston” must be taken into consideration, the court said.

Stop right there. Yes. Yes it does mean they’re guilty if they start to flee. If a cop tells you to stop running and you disobey his or her command, then by definition you are breaking the law. 

“We do not eliminate flight as a factor in the reasonable suspicion analysis whenever a black male is the subject of an investigatory stop. However, in such circumstances, flight is not necessarily probative of a suspect’s state of mind or consciousness of guilt. Rather, the finding that black males in Boston are disproportionately and repeatedly targeted for FIO [Field Interrogation and Observation] encounters suggests a reason for flight totally unrelated to consciousness of guilt. Such an individual, when approached by the police, might just as easily be motivated by the desire to avoid the recurring indignity of being racially profiled as by the desire to hide criminal activity. Given this reality for black males in the city of Boston, a judge should, in appropriate cases, consider the report’s findings in weighing flight as a factor in the reasonable suspicion calculus.”

The SJC concluded that police lacked reasonable suspicion for an investigatory stop in this case.

This is absolutely insane. This court just gave any black person the legal right to run from the cops because it would spare them the “indignity of being racially profiled.” This happened in real life. What’s even crazier is there are morons out there who seem to agree that this is a rational and logical decision:

screen-shot-2016-09-21-at-11-25-37-am screen-shot-2016-09-21-at-11-25-07-am screen-shot-2016-09-21-at-11-23-47-am

Notice anything about these people so far? Oh yea, they’re all white. And they all live in exclusively white towns, but yet they’re still experts on the day to day experiences that black people have with police. Joshua Evans-Lowell is from the ultra-wealthy whitewashed town of Needham:

screen-shot-2016-09-21-at-11-29-39-am

According to him, even if a black man does everything right he still has a legitimate reason to fear the police. And he would know. Sure he’s never never met a black person before, but he read a couple articles on The Atlantic and used a hashtag once on Twitter. Plus he’s got a hyphenated last name. So yea, he knows everything about the black American experience now. 

12553011_929247180475558_2203955391587606632_n

screen-shot-2016-09-21-at-11-23-36-am screen-shot-2016-09-21-at-11-23-07-am

White people in this country are out of control. They’ve lost their Goddamn minds. The fact that anyone would think this decision is anything except bonkers tells you everything you need to know about why our two candidates for President are Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump. Meanwhile courts are making it impossible for police to keep our street’s safe, because the judges making these decisions don’t have to live in these neighborhoods. 

This is a list of the justices on the Mass SJC Justices:

screen-shot-2016-09-21-at-11-36-57-am

 

Our courts are supposed to be politically unbiased. But that’s just not the case anymore. Deval Patrick appointed four of those judges, all of whom favored this ridiculous insanity about black men being allowed to run from the cops. Ballotpedia did some interesting background research into the political leanings of each judge:

In October 2012, political science professors Adam Bonica and Michael Woodruff of Stanford University attempted to determine the partisan ideology of state supreme court justices. They created a scoring system in which a score above 0 indicated a more conservative-leaning ideology, while scores below 0 were more liberal. The study is based on data from campaign contributions by the judges themselves, the partisan leaning of those who contributed to the judges’ campaigns, or, in the absence of elections, the ideology of the appointing body (governor or legislature).

Gants received a campaign finance score of -0.82, indicating a liberal ideological leaning. This is more liberal than the average score of -0.44 that justices received in Massachusetts

18sjc02

Botsford received a campaign finance score of -1.15, indicating a liberal ideological leaning. This is more liberal than the average score of -0.44 that justices received in Massachusetts

072607judge

Lenk received a campaign finance score of -0.85, indicating a liberal ideological leaning. This is more liberal than the average score of -0.44 that justices received in Massachusetts

screen-shot-2016-09-21-at-12-00-02-pm

So they actually went through and saw who these people contributed money to. Personally, I want a judge with a score of 0. Give some money to republicans and some to democrats. Or just don’t give money at all, because you’re a judge, not a politician. Gants and Lenk were twice as liberal as the average of score of all Massachusetts judges, which is one of the most liberal-dominated professions outside of college professors. Botsford was three times as left-leaning.

 

Meanwhile Kimbery Budd, who was appointed by Charlie Baker and is the newest member of the court, basically went on record to say that she thinks the second amendment doesn’t exist, and it’s her job as a judge to think about how punishment will affect criminals, rather than affect the victims of their crimes:

As a judge, Budd said she is able to look every defendant in the eye “to make sure they know I see them and I’ve considered the impact my decision has on their lives as persons not in positions of power.”

screen-shot-2016-09-21-at-11-58-45-am

“Persons not in positions of power” is code word for, “people who aren’t white.” She readily admits that she judges people differently based on the color of their skin. No wonder the court reached this decision. It’s loaded up with SJW moron activists in robes. This is why cops aren’t safe in Massachusetts. Where does this end? Next thing you know they’re gonna rule that suspects have the right to shoot at the police if they’re black. Why wouldn’t they? After all, if they can conclude that suspects have the right to run from cops because it is presumed that the cops are trying to kill them, wouldn’t the next step be giving the criminals the right to defend themselves from these racist killer cops? Hopefully Charlie Baker gets his head out of his ass and starts appointing people to the SJC who don’t want to make it harder for police to protect us and do their jobs.

 

 

 

We urge you to support the Turtleboy Sponsors by doing business with them. Without them none of this is possible. Click on any of them to check out their sites or Facebook pages.

7e1fcfda-4de6-4da8-902b-1f429724deac

Screen Shot 2015-12-01 at 10.29.56 AM

4ba27317-991b-4352-b70d-f489eadcfdef (1)

screen-shot-2016-09-14-at-10-48-15-am

Screen Shot 2015-12-28 at 1.20.12 PM

Wormtown Brewery, Union TavernBennie’s Cafe,  JJM Insurance, Smokestack Urban BarbecueSmitty’s Tavern, Julio’s Liquors,  The Gun Parlor Range, Attorney Anthony Salerno, Rotti Power Equipment in West Boylston

Want to have your business advert viewed over 2 million times per month? Email us at [email protected] for more information, and check out our website about types of advertising we offer.

Follow us on Twitter and like us on Facebook

Click on the image to get your Turtleboy Sports Revolution hoodie or browse other merchandise from the Turtleboy store.

Click on the image to get your Turtleboy Sports Revolution hoodie or browse other merchandise from the Turtleboy store.

38 Comment(s)
  • Reality Bites
    September 26, 2016 at 9:17 am

    Alright “Turtle Man”, you complain about blacks being constantly harassed, well there is a valid reason for that. Blacks make up 13% of the population but commit 53% of all crimes. The police have to do this thing called “police work” to keep us all safe and that would involve something known as “profiling”. Like it or not, that’s reality. The police don’t do DWI checkpoints outside of churches on a Sunday afternoon, they do them around bars at 2 am because that’s where all the drunks are. Of course the police are going to view Blacks with suspicion, simply because of the overwhelming evidence and data to support that position. The sad irony is that the decent Black folks who are just trying to live their lives as law-abiding citizens get lumped in with the criminals by virtue of their skin tone; instead of cleaning up the criminal element in their own communities, they find it easier to blame the police for their woes.

  • Blue Lives Matter
    September 21, 2016 at 8:13 pm

    Honestly, it shouldn’t get to that point. Cops should be opening fire before blacks even think about running.

  • I luv Oprah
    September 21, 2016 at 7:33 pm

    Blacks are oppressed in America. I have a dream that someday we will have black athletes being paid millions, black actors, talk show hosts and entertainers earning millions. Maybe someday once this oppression stops we might even have a black Preside………………….WAIT A MINUTE!!!!! What in the fuck is going on here?

  • Boss Tweed
    September 21, 2016 at 4:10 pm

    WTF

  • Turtle Man
    September 21, 2016 at 3:58 pm

    What do any of you suggest instead? Do you honestly think that black men should continue to comply with the police harassing them? Put yourself in their shoes and see how long it takes before you realize you don’t have the same rights that you’re used to. When you get pulled over by the police on a weekly basis for no reason, how long would it take before you start getting sick of it? Whoever thinks that compliance guarantees your safety has never been in that situation. Not everyone agreed with equality for black people, those of you who can’t find enough compassion to even listen to what the other side is saying would’ve been the ones holding bats and standing in front of buses during segregation of the public schools. You should be ashamed but I know you don’t have enough sense to recognize that you are wrong.

    • MrSmiley
      September 21, 2016 at 4:26 pm

      There had to be one….. Look at the case. He had an unregistered gun hanging out in Roxbury, late at night. When he ran it had nothing to do with fearing for his life it had to do with… “Oh shit I have something that’s illegal in my pocket, I get caught it’s mando 18 months or more ahhhhh!” commence running. This has jack to do with equality. If that was true then mr. meth/heroin head with stolen guns can also beat feet and claim this right? Oh waaaaiiit…. They cant…GTFO. Go live in Roxbury with that attitude so when this guy who gets off scot free sticks the next illegal gun up your nose and robs you or just plain shoots you for being in the wrong area. Tell me how you feel then.

      • Turtle Man
        September 21, 2016 at 4:41 pm

        So, do you have a suggestion? Or just complain about it here like TB? Btw, the gun wasn’t found ON him.

        • Turtle Man
          September 21, 2016 at 4:46 pm

          Plus, you realize that TB is way out of context here, you must’ve read other articles besides TB’s tunnel vision opinion, right?

        • JRod
          September 21, 2016 at 4:56 pm

          yes, follow the rules, you’ll be fine, not shot, not going to court, not a drain on society, not rioting when someone you never knew gets shot.

          • Turtle Man
            September 21, 2016 at 5:05 pm

            As stated in the article, black men are disproportionately harassed by law enforcement. So, your suggestion isn’t going to work in those instances where no crime has been committed. Why don’t you find the unnecessary harassment just as frustrating as you found this ruling?

        • September 21, 2016 at 10:15 pm

          Hey dumb dumb ever been confronted by a black man with a gun?

          How about one trying to rob your store?

          How about after you freak out take the gun from the loser and kick the shit out of him and he has the balls to hire a lawyer to sue you.

          So go screw yourself, that piece of garage had a gun for what a party, no to cause harm, the streets of Boston are knee high in blood from BLACK men killing BLACK men!

          Good I hope the useless bag of crap kill each other and I hope the Boston cops don’t
          give a shit what happens to the losers, they deserve what they get kids killing kids.

          • Turtle Man
            September 22, 2016 at 3:13 am

            “Hey dumb dumb…….” Lol.
            Just an FYI, unlike what your racist rhetoric would suggest, not all criminals are black. If the guy in your story who robbed this store were an Irish redhead covered in freckles, would you still hate black people? I’m guessing you still would.

          • Johnny Cock-ring
            September 22, 2016 at 10:05 am

            Hey “Turtle Man”…

            Not all criminals are black… Not all racists are white… Not all accountants are jewish… Not all kung fu masters are asian… Not all Indians work/own the casinos…

            I don’t see many white/asian/indian people smashing windows and stealing stuff in Charlotte right now…

            If the show fits, you gots to wear it.

    • Chris From Georgia
      September 21, 2016 at 4:47 pm

      How about not not breaking the law for starters?? Yes they should comply with the lawful orders of law enforcement! Another stat that you overlooked is that most blacks killed are killed by other blacks not the police, but don’t let the facts get in your way here.

      • Turtle Man
        September 21, 2016 at 4:54 pm

        Black men do not have to break any laws in order to get harassed by police. It happens all the time, it’s happening all over the country as I type this. Most whites are killed by other whites as well, not sure where you were going with that one. Just had to throw it in I’m guessing?

        • Chris From Georgia
          September 21, 2016 at 5:30 pm

          You keep going back to your false narrative. Must really piss you off that no one’s buying it any longer.

          • Turtle Man
            September 21, 2016 at 5:40 pm

            What false narrative? You’re just avoiding answering my question. I can only be “pissed off” at myself for expecting to have an intelligent civil debate on the subject in the comment section of Turtleboy Sports.

        • sick of it all
          September 22, 2016 at 5:47 am

          Where’s the outrage for the innocent blacks in the cities who are preyed upon by other blacks and are having their neighborhoods destroyed. They can’t go to the police for help for fear of their own lives and the lives of their children by retaliation from other blacks. No headlines for these people.

          If the blacks who are constantly harassed by the police were always (or almost always) “clean”, don’t you think they would stop getting harassed? Remember most of this happens were blacks are not the minority – inner cities run by Democrats – and crime committed by blacks on percentage basis dwarfs other groups.

          If the police are so bad, they would have stopped trying to help in many cities, but they haven’t. But maybe they should take a couple weeks off in some of the neighborhoods and then we’ll see who’s crying harassment

  • Georgewashington
    September 21, 2016 at 3:54 pm

    WHAT THE HELL IS GOING ON. I NEED TO GET OUT OF HERE.

  • Bill P.
    September 21, 2016 at 3:30 pm

    Good! Let them act like wild animals. The wider the divide between the proverbial ‘us’ and ‘them’ the deeper the fear, the harder the racist resolve. And when white people start taking law into their own hands because of this silly ruling then the left will eventually realize just what they’ve created, we hope.

  • Ed Augustus
    September 21, 2016 at 3:24 pm

    Just the other night I was chased around my davenport by a big, burly man in a police uniform, and boy was I scared — scared he wouldn’t catch me!

  • True Reality Speaks
    Mirror Mirror
    September 21, 2016 at 2:34 pm

    Thank a lib next time you see one.

    • JRod
      September 21, 2016 at 2:39 pm

      Technically, you could rob them, run because you are afraid, be freed by the judge because jail doesn’t work for you and then ask the court clerk on a date. Of course you might have to start a GoFundMe for legal fees.

      • JRod
        September 21, 2016 at 2:40 pm

        After that you’re ready to run as a reformed Democratic nominee for any office you want if you can pay off some people.

  • Brian Northboro
    September 21, 2016 at 1:54 pm

    So if the Supreme Court of Assachusetts rules that they CAN run because they FEAR for their LIFE…that is the definition of the acceptable use of deadly force in the Mass firearms laws..If you are in a dead end alley and the police try to stop you and you fear for your life and cannot flee because the alley is a dead end then your only choice, according to the Mass Supreme court, because you FEAR FOR YOUR LIFE…is to fight back…and if you have a gun I guess they supreme court wants you to shoot at police officers rather than comply with a lawful order to halt and identify yourself…

    uuuughhhhh….

    • Johnny Cock-ring
      September 21, 2016 at 2:18 pm

      Stop it… You’re twisting their legal argument into a different legal argument… 😉

      • Turd Burglestein
        September 21, 2016 at 5:06 pm

        Haha man…love that name.

        • Johnny Cock-ring
          September 22, 2016 at 10:00 am

          If the ring don’t fit, you must be limp…

  • Publius
    September 21, 2016 at 1:53 pm

    Is it a racial thing not comply with Police but to run or grab for an object in the lose fitting pants or in the glove box?

  • Chris From Georgia
    September 21, 2016 at 1:34 pm

    Well its now official!!! The inmates are running the asylum!!! I thank the good Lord every day that I finally came to my senses and moved out of that hell hole!!! FYI the weathers just fine down here in Georgia especially the winters!!!!

    • eric
      September 21, 2016 at 1:53 pm

      Until there is a dusting of snow. Then all hell breaks loose.

      • Chris From Georgia
        September 21, 2016 at 2:07 pm

        Yup and that’s the fun part!!

        • JRod
          September 21, 2016 at 2:35 pm

          Texas is great too, except for Austin, it’s almost as bad as Northampton there.

  • KimberlyS
    KJDS
    September 21, 2016 at 1:05 pm

    So, do we call criminals “justice impaired individuals” now?

  • Cis white male
    September 21, 2016 at 12:33 pm

    The deep irony here is that they wouldn’t have to fear for their life if they resisted/ran from police. This is telling black people to resist arrest and will actually put them in greater danger. If you comply, you will not die. This is classic Democrat nonsense, pandering to black people under the guise of helping them but in reality this just keeps them down… If you comply. You will not die…

    • Cis white male
      September 21, 2016 at 12:34 pm

      If they didn’t* resist/run… You get the point

    • MA SJC
      September 21, 2016 at 1:14 pm

      But… they black. They don’t know no better, sir. Mebee if we learn them better, they will be better.

    • AJ
      September 21, 2016 at 2:41 pm

      Complete joke in every sense. Essentially, the SJC has given every scum bag, regardless of color (if they’re intelligent enough to read the ruling) a free pass to flee the police and the excuse that they were in fear of their life. Don’t forget, this ruling can bite everyone in the ass, I’m sure there’s plenty of white dirt bags that will say they’re in fear of black police officers now.

      We’ve arrived at the point now where there’s no more deadly force, every police shooting is now being considered murder. Complete bullshit.

      SJWs once again cannot get it right. They lit Charlotte, NC on fire this week because a black cop killed an armed black man. Has that cop been called a racist yet?

      If The SJC ruled the other way on this, Boston would be on fire as well, for no good reason. Same as Charlotte.
      Patients running the asylum is definitely an understatement…..

Comment on this Post

RELATED POSTS
Insane Abuse Story Involving Dog The Bounty Hunter, MMA Psychopath “War Machine”, And Porn Star Christy Mack Is Better Than Any Reality TV Ever
Social Darwinism: Yet Another Example Of How Much Herd-Thinning We Need
The “Race Police” Are Running Out Of Stuff To “Bitch” About, So They Are Branching Out to Sexism