Author Topic: DOJ Lawyer: Obama Admn is racist, lawless, and won't pursue cases vs. minorities  (Read 4267 times)

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39837
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
I don't think these fellas would try that in certain parts of North Cackalacka...... ;D

Not one lib has chimed in on this gross perversion of the the "justice system" .  Wonder why?   

The Showstoppa

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 26879
  • Call the vet, cause these pythons are sick!
Not one lib has chimed in on this gross perversion of the the "justice system" .  Wonder why?   

Not at all surprised.  Big believers in freedom of speech, as long as you don't disagree with them.....thats what I've found about vast majority of libs.

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39837
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Not at all surprised.  Big believers in freedom of speech, as long as you don't disagree with them.....thats what I've found about vast majority of libs.

The second clip says it all.  This is who obama and holder protect, a savage animal pofs who calls for murder, all while they sue AZ.

Notice Mal, KC, Blacken, mons, even 240, have not appeared in this thread?   

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39837
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Skip to comments.

BREAKING: A Third Former DOJ Official Steps Forward to Support J. Christian Adams (Updated)
Pajamas Media ^ | July 6, 2010 | Staff


Posted on Wednesday, July 07, 2010 3:01:38 PM by jazusamo

________________________ ________________________ ________________________ ____________

Former DOJ employees want to go on record praising Adams' outstanding work record, and — pay attention, DOJ press liaisons — maybe corroborate Adams' charges about DOJ hostility to race-neutral law enforcement. (Check back here for updates in the hours and days ahead, as PJM posts additional statements.)

Several former DOJ employees have been in contact with Pajamas Media, interested in publicly supporting J. Christian Adams as he comes forward about the DOJ’s failure to enforce the country’s laws from a race-neutral perspective.

These former DOJ employees have expressed a willingness to go on record regarding Adams’ professionalism, excellent performance, and outstanding record of enforcing the law without racial bias.

Additionally, they would like to corroborate Adams’ statements about the DOJ.

And perhaps — pay attention, DOJ press liaisons — offer their own accounts regarding the DOJ’s hostility to race-neutral law enforcement.

Watch this space today, and over the next few days, for additional statements from former DOJ employees.

First, here is Asheesh Agarwal. From 2006-2008, Asheesh Agarwal served as a deputy assistant attorney general in the Civil Rights Division. In that position, Agarwal supervised the Division’s Voting Section, which included Adams, and worked directly with Adams on several matters. Agarwal is currently an attorney in private practice.

During his tenure with the Department of Justice’s Voting Section, J. Christian Adams was a model attorney who vigorously enforced federal voting rights laws on behalf of all voters, without respect to race or ideology. Mr. Adams was also one of the most productive and successful voting attorneys in recent memory.

His victories include two cases on behalf of African-American voters under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, two cases on behalf of white voters under Section 2, and six cases on behalf of Hispanic voters under Section 203 of the Voting Rights Act. He also brought and won three cases on behalf of military voters. Having worked closely with Mr. Adams for several years, I can attest to the unsurpassed quality of his character, judgment, and commitment to the cause of civil rights on behalf of all Americans.

– Asheesh Agarwal

UPDATE: Mark Corallo, former Department of Justice director of public affairs, submits a statement to Pajamas Media:

As the Department of Justice director of public affairs under Attorney General John Ashcroft, I witnessed the hostility of the “career” Civil Rights Division attorneys firsthand.

Internal disagreements over policy routinely became matters for the press, via leaks to reporters or leaks to Democrat members of Congress. They had no compunction about breaking the ethical requirement of attorneys to keep those internal deliberations confidential.

I am not surprised that the Department is attacking J. Christian Adams. The Civil Rights Division attorneys have no interest in the rule of law as written and passed by Congress — the New Black Panther case is glaring proof that the Division has an agenda. If Congress was truly interested in oversight, there would be hearings on this case and others.

J. Christian Adams did the honorable thing in resigning and speaking out.

Democrats constantly complained about the lack of oversight when Republicans were the majority party in Congress. Can any reasonable person imagine the Democrats ignoring a case of blatant violations of the Voting Rights Act (captured on video) brought by career Civil Rights Division attorneys being dismissed by a Republican attorney general?

Any veteran of the Justice Department should be outraged.

UPDATE: Robert Driscoll was a Deputy Assistant Attorney General from 2001-03. He is now an attorney in private practice:

When I served as chief of staff and deputy assistant attorney general in the Civil Rights Division under John Ashcroft, I became familiar with the internal politics of the Division, and am therefore not surprised by the accounts of J. Christian Adams describing the New Black Panther voting case.

While I met many excellent lawyers in the Division dedicated to the rule of law, too many of the the career staff (a term never to be confused with “apolitical”) viewed the role of the Civil Rights Division as simply that of a government-funded advocacy group whose responsibility was to work on behalf of favored political and agenda-driven constituencies — and not to neutrally apply the law (as written by Congress, and interpreted by the courts) to the facts.

In contrast, as a private attorney I encountered J. Christian Adams (and other voting section members, including then Chief Christopher Coates and Deputy Chief Tim Mellett) while handling a voting rights matter against the DOJ. Adams and the rest of the team acted professionally and consistent with their understanding of the law and facts. While I disagreed with Mr. Adams and the DOJ team on some matters of interpretation, I could not have told you the political views of Mr. Adams or any of the attorneys I encountered based on my interaction with them.

Moreover, the position taken by Mr. Adams in that case was certainly not pushing any conservative agenda, as the suit sought to increase African-American representation on an elected body (based on ambiguous evidence of vote dilution) and resulted in the adoption of a voting plan designed to enhance the ability of minority voters to influence the outcome of elections.

While it is certainly within the authority of the senior levels of the DOJ Civil Rights Division to make the final litigation decision on any case, including the New Black Panther matter, it would seem to me that dismissal of that case — after default has been entered and where video evidence exists — is a highly unusual decision that is worthy of congressional oversight. While some may cast such oversight in partisan terms, it need not be.

The video of the defendants in the Black Panther matter was seen by millions. While most have not studied civil rights law or the Voting Rights Act in detail, viewers of the video assume that the kind of conduct shown in the video is inappropriate at a polling place. A lawsuit was filed by experienced voting rights lawyers at DOJ to remedy the situation and prevent such future conduct. And yet the case was dismissed voluntarily by the DOJ (after a shift in administration), a result that seems — at a visceral level — strange to anyone who has seen the video.

The detailed testimony of the decision-makers (not the subsequent appointee who was not around at the time of the decision) would be enlightening and educational. If the dismissal of the case against the Black Panthers was a result of political influence (as Mr. Adams alleges — an allegation that does not seem far-fetched, based on my experience), that is important to know. Political decisions can have political consequences and one can imagine there would be consequences if a political appointee “weighed in” on behalf of a fringe group like the New Black Panthers. But even if the DOJ is correct that no political influence played a role, oversight is perhaps even more important.

If this is indeed the view of senior career DOJ staff — that after reviewing the facts of the New Black Panther case and the video, current laws against voter intimidation provide no ability for the DOJ to properly bring an action against the New Black Panther members shown on video and mentioned in the lawsuit — then Congress needs to have a conversation with Attorney General Holder about whether the problem lies with the Voting Rights Act itself, or with those whose job it is to enforce it.


Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39837
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Bump for Mal. 

Option D

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 17367
  • Kelly the Con Way
yeah i watched something this morning with my breakfast...The voter intimidation stuff right. So is it your claim that obama  ::) wont charge blacks with a crime? Or was there not enough evidence to prosecute. Or does the DOJ go to court with every single case put in front of them?

Stop reaching like a little bitch...and yeah..im gonna bust yo ass on every dumb ass thread you start and get to the foundation of why you so mad son. Your posts smell of partisan bullshit as you search for dumb ass articles that support your view. You search for non objective writers who contribute to a outlet that slants heavy to one side...then you repost it as gosepel and base your opinion off that...That = totally retarded...Dude you actually posted pictures that said Palin 2012..and get mad when i post her report card. Do us a favor...Do something that gains you a little bit of cred and then maybe ill think about takin you serious..

But for all of you that suscribe to the "it was all good just a week ago" theory that Obama came in and caused this recession and Obama caused the oil leak and Obama caused Bernie Madoff to rip niggas off and Obama is the reason you got gas after you eat beans...all that bull shit can suck it.


Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39837
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
yeah i watched something this morning with my breakfast...The voter intimidation stuff right. So is it your claim that obama  ::) wont charge blacks with a crime? Or was there not enough evidence to prosecute. Or does the DOJ go to court with every single case put in front of them?

Stop reaching like a little bitch...and yeah..im gonna bust yo ass on every dumb ass thread you start and get to the foundation of why you so mad son. Your posts smell of partisan bullshit as you search for dumb ass articles that support your view. You search for non objective writers who contribute to a outlet that slants heavy to one side...then you repost it as gosepel and base your opinion off that...That = totally retarded...Dude you actually posted pictures that said Palin 2012..and get mad when i post her report card. Do us a favor...Do something that gains you a little bit of cred and then maybe ill think about takin you serious..

But for all of you that suscribe to the "it was all good just a week ago" theory that Obama came in and caused this recession and Obama caused the oil leak and Obama caused Bernie Madoff to rip niggas off and Obama is the reason you got gas after you eat beans...all that bull shit can suck it.



The video speaks for itself.  I do voter fraud monitoring every 4 years in my legal capacity and this is an open and shut case.  And you have a career lawyer testifying as to what occurred here and that is not enough for you? 

 

Option D

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 17367
  • Kelly the Con Way
The video speaks for itself.  I do voter fraud monitoring every 4 years in my legal capacity and this is an open and shut case.  And you have a career lawyer testifying as to what occurred here and that is not enough for you? 

 

Are there any transcripts that have the evidence and a  precedence case to refer..Bro...all im saying is coming from you,....after the "obama calls the swat on grandmothers" thread was blown to bits...its hard taking anything you say serious

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39837
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Are there any transcripts that have the evidence and a  precedence case to refer..Bro...all im saying is coming from you,....after the "obama calls the swat on grandmothers" thread was blown to bits...its hard taking anything you say serious

I'm not asking you to take my word for it.   I posted the interview with the career DOJ lawyer for this about this case as well as the video of the incident. 

Those two leave one with only one conclusion - that political pressure was put from the top down to drop the case, mostl likely from holder, who himself has worked on behalf of terrorists and criminals his whole career like the FALN terrorists and Marc Rich. 

Option D

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 17367
  • Kelly the Con Way
What was the predominate race of the communities that the NEW  ::) black panthers terroized

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39837
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
What was the predominate race of the communities that the NEW  ::) black panthers terroized

They were not there to scare voters, they were there to make sure that people like myself, election monitors and fraud investigators, were intimidated and scared off from challenging questionable voters and ballots.

I have worked elections for the last 3 elections and know the system far better than most.  I was in Pittsburgh in 2008, Jax FL in 2004, and NYC in 2000. 

 

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39837
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Explosive New Evidence of DOJ’s Racial Discrimination, Obstruction and Perjury (Andy McCarthy)
National Review ^ | October 1, 2010 | Andy McCarthy




In my column on Tuesday (see here, with a Corner correction here), I suggested that candidates running for office should pledge to investigate the Obama Justice Department. Today, there is eye-popping new evidence to add to the already disturbing indications that the Department is engaged in racially discriminatory enforcement of the civil rights laws, and that high-ranking Department officials have both obstructed justice and provided intentionally false testimony in the Civil Rights Commission’s investigation of the New Black Panther

Party voter-intimidation case.


At the Standard’s blog, Daniel Halper has a must read post, relying on the tireless investigative work of Jen Rubin. It relates to DOJ attorney Christopher Coates, the whistleblower who recently defied DOJ’s efforts to block him from testifying before the Civil Rights Commission. The Commission sought to question him about, among other things, (a) whether the Obama/Holder Justice Department has followed a policy of racially discriminatory law-enforcement, and (b) whether DOJ Civil Rights Division chief Thomas Perez was truthful in May 2010 when he told the Civil Rights Commission, under oath, that he was unaware of any complaints within the Department that DOJ leadership had imposed a policy of racially discriminatory enforcement of the civil rights laws (see Jen’s Contentions post, here).

You should read all of Dan’s post, but here is the gist:

Jen Rubin previously reported in THE WEEKLY STANDARD that an April 2010 letter documented Coates’s key allegations. THE WEEKLY STANDARD has learned that the letter came from Coates himself and was sent to Jody Hunt, director of federal programs. Hunt participated in the briefing of Civil Rights head Thomas Perez on May 13, 2010, which Coates and other members of the trial team attended. At that briefing, Coates’s concerns were related to Perez. Perez nevertheless testified under oath before the Commission that hostility toward race neutral enforcement of civil rights laws was news to him.

In addition, sources now tell THE WEEKLY STANDARD that after 11 pm on September 23, the night before Coates was to testify before the Commission, the same individual, Jody Hunt, sent Coates a letter advising him again not to testify. Only 6 hours earlier Rep. Frank Wolf had sent [attorney general] Eric Holder a letter warning him that Coates was protected under federal whistleblower laws. Jen Rubin contacted the Justice Department for comment. Spokesman Tracy Schmaler’s only reply: “The letter speaks for itself.” She did not respond to a follow up question as to whether DOJ would take disciplinary action against Coates. Coates could not be reached for comment.

To sum up: Coates puts his explosive allegations about unequal enforcement of civil rights laws in writing. The same official who gets the letter sits in a briefing with Perez when the allegations are repeated. And then at literally the 11th hour before Coates testifies he sends out a letter which makes one last stab at keeping the story under wraps. Jen Rubin’s sources tell us that it’s not remotely possible that all of this would have occurred without the express knowledge and direction of senior DOJ officials.

The vast majority of Americans wants race-neutral law-enforcement, would be profoundly offended by any other kind, and minimally expects the Justice Department to be forthright and forthcoming in legal proceedings — particularly given that Justice demands nothing less of ordinary Americans. It is Congress’s job to hold DOJ to account. The Democratic Congress clearly has no intention of examining the policies and practices of the Obama Justice Department. That’s a huge reason why we need a new Congress. The mainstream media has tried to suffocate this story by inattention, but it hasn’t worked because race-neutral law-enforcement is something people care about. Congressional candidates, take note.

BM OUT

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 8229
  • Getbig!
Do you see how stupid libs are?They defend this crap and STILL wont say Obama is a racist.Two seperate guys on opposite ends of the political spectrum both testified UNDER OATH that the Obama administration has a policy to not investigate voter intimidation cases if the victim is white and these fool ass idiot libs defend it!!!

See you in Nov. libs!!!

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39837
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Do you see how stupid libs are?They defend this crap and STILL wont say Obama is a racist.Two seperate guys on opposite ends of the political spectrum both testified UNDER OATH that the Obama administration has a policy to not investigate voter intimidation cases if the victim is white and these fool ass idiot libs defend it!!!

See you in Nov. libs!!!

I got my assignment this week for November 2, 2010 to do voter fraud watch.   I can't wait.  I plan on wearing my combat boots, bdu pants, and have my attorney ID hanging from my neck.

Maybe I will wear a whistle and bring the clip board for more effect.   ;D

BM OUT

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 8229
  • Getbig!
Where is 240 or Mal or Blacken to defend this...oh wait they love racism against whites,nevermind.

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39837
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Bump for bezerkfury

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39837
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Progressives, Islamists huddle at Justice Department -(crimalize criticism of Islam)
Daily Caller ^ | October 21, 2011 | Neil Munro
Posted on October 24, 2011 6:20:41 PM EDT by opentalk

Top Justice Department officials convened a meeting Wednesday where invited Islamist advocates lobbied them for cutbacks in anti-terror funding, changes in agents’ training manuals, additional curbs on investigators and a legal declaration that U.S. citizens’ criticism of Islam constitutes racial discrimination.

The department’s “civil rights lawyers are top of the line — I say this with utter honesty — I know they can come up with a way” to redefine criticism as discrimination, said Sahar Aziz, a female, Egyptian-American lawyer.

“I’d be willing to give a shot at it,” said Aziz, who is a fellow at the Michigan-based Muslim advocacy group, the Institute for Social Policy & Understanding.

The audience of Islamist advocates and department officials included Tom Perez, who heads the department’s division of civil rights.

(Excerpt) Read more at dailycaller.com ...

Skeletor

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 15877
  • Silence you furry fool!
Progressives, Islamists huddle at Justice Department -(crimalize criticism of Islam)
Daily Caller ^ | October 21, 2011 | Neil Munro
Posted on October 24, 2011 6:20:41 PM EDT by opentalk

Top Justice Department officials convened a meeting Wednesday where invited Islamist advocates lobbied them for cutbacks in anti-terror funding, changes in agents’ training manuals, additional curbs on investigators and a legal declaration that U.S. citizens’ criticism of Islam constitutes racial discrimination.

The department’s “civil rights lawyers are top of the line — I say this with utter honesty — I know they can come up with a way” to redefine criticism as discrimination, said Sahar Aziz, a female, Egyptian-American lawyer.

“I’d be willing to give a shot at it,” said Aziz, who is a fellow at the Michigan-based Muslim advocacy group, the Institute for Social Policy & Understanding.

The audience of Islamist advocates and department officials included Tom Perez, who heads the department’s division of civil rights.

(Excerpt) Read more at dailycaller.com ...


WTF

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39837
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
that Tom Perez at DOJ is BAD NEWS.   

Fury

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 21026
  • All aboard the USS Leverage
Progressives, Islamists huddle at Justice Department -(crimalize criticism of Islam)
Daily Caller ^ | October 21, 2011 | Neil Munro
Posted on October 24, 2011 6:20:41 PM EDT by opentalk

Top Justice Department officials convened a meeting Wednesday where invited Islamist advocates lobbied them for cutbacks in anti-terror funding, changes in agents’ training manuals, additional curbs on investigators and a legal declaration that U.S. citizens’ criticism of Islam constitutes racial discrimination.

The department’s “civil rights lawyers are top of the line — I say this with utter honesty — I know they can come up with a way” to redefine criticism as discrimination, said Sahar Aziz, a female, Egyptian-American lawyer.

“I’d be willing to give a shot at it,” said Aziz, who is a fellow at the Michigan-based Muslim advocacy group, the Institute for Social Policy & Understanding.

The audience of Islamist advocates and department officials included Tom Perez, who heads the department’s division of civil rights.

(Excerpt) Read more at dailycaller.com ...


Muslims bashing Christians, Jews and Hindus will be OK, though. Nothing discriminatory about that. How dare you embrace the first amendment!  ::)

Islam = incompatible with free speech.

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39837
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
I have been keeping tabs on this Tom Perez figure.   He is at the heart of nearly every outrage along w holder. 

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39837
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.

U.S. Justice Department to investigate shootings by Miami police
By CHARLES RABIN AND JAY WEAVER
crabin@miamiherald.com

 
MARICE COHN BAND / MIAMI HERALD STAFF



The 3rd Ave. Supermarket & Restaurant, 1649 NW 3rd Ave., in Miami, was where Decarlos Moore was shot by a City of Miami Police officer on Monday, July 5, 2010. The U.S. Justice Department will investigate whether Miami police violated the constitutional rights of seven black men who were shot to death by officers over an eight-month span, raising tensions in the inner city and sparking demands for an independent review.
The civil investigation — known as a “pattern and practice’’ probe — will examine Miami police policies and training involving deadly force. The goal: to determine if systemic flaws made shootings of black men more likely, rather than unfortunate, last-choice actions, as the officers’ supporters maintain.

A source close to the investigation confirmed Wednesday night that Thomas E. Perez, head of Justice’s civil rights division, and Miami U.S. Attorney Wifredo Ferrer will announce the investigation during a press conference in downtown Miami Thursday morning.

Family members of the deceased, church leaders and activists have been invited to meet with Ferrer Wednesday afternoon, but they were not told why. They reacted with relief when told the news.

“Oh, that’s great, great, really good,” said Sheila McNeil, whose unarmed son Travis McNeil, 28, was shot to death in his car in Little Haiti Feb. 10 by Officer Reinaldo Goyo. The officer said McNeil was driving erratically. No weapon was ever found.

“I’m just glad to know it’s not forgotten,’’ McNeil told The Miami Herald. “Right now I don’t know more than I did the night he died, so I’m just waiting to hear what they have to say.”

But Nathaniel Wilcox, executive director of People United to Lead the Struggle for Equality, or PULSE, who has stood with many of the dead men’s families during a series of emotional public meetings, criticized federal authorities for not opening a criminal investigation into the shooting deaths. They spanned July 2010 to February 2011.

“We think they really took too long and we feel abandoned,’’ Wilcox said. “We expected the Obama administration to do a lot more and a lot quicker than they did.”

The Justice Department will not conduct criminal investigations into the seven shootings, which are under review by the Miami-Dade State Attorney’s Office. But Justice will look into the Miami Police Department’s training methods, leadership and practices. Any adverse findings could lead to court-enforced reforms, but more frequently, Justice works with a police department to iron out any problems.

The U.S. Attorney’s Office in Miami declined comment Wednesday.

Acting Miami Police Chief Manuel Orosa did not respond to interview requests. But spokesman Delrish Moss said the department is being revamped under the new chief, who assumed the post in September and is conducting a “top to bottom review of everything, from training to hiring.”

Miami Mayor Tomás Regalado did not return calls.

The impending investigation marks the second time in a decade that federal authorities have conducted an investigation into alleged systemic violations of constitutional rights by Miami police officers.

In 2002, Justice conducted a much broader civil probe, concluding in 2003 that the department had serious flaws in the way it conducted searches and seizures, used firearms, defined use of force and worked with police dogs. The inquiry began at the city’s request after several controversial police shootings.

However, the report did “not reach any conclusion” about whether the police department’s policies caused civil rights violations.

Since the latest spate of shootings began in July 2010, the public and families of the slain men have clamored for answers, repeatedly seeking transparency from police and the Miami-Dade state attorney’s office.

The police, under the leadership of then-Chief Miguel Exposito, who was terminated in September for insubordination, took heat for keeping quiet. Exposito even refused to turn over information to a civilian oversight panel when it sought details on the first shooting, of DeCarlos Moore in Overtown in July 2010.

Exposito blamed the shootings on a turf war created after his officers took guns off the streets. He also criticized State Attorney Katherine Fernandez Rundle for taking too long to close out her investigations, ham-stringing his ability to speak about the shootings.

Friction over the shootings intensified as the number of incidents grew. The NAACP and the American Civil Liberties Union called for a federal investigation. In late February, U.S. Rep. Frederica Wilson asked U.S. Attorney Eric Holder, the nation’s top law enforcement officer, to look into Miami police policies involving deadly force.

Regalado also requested an investigation, in August.

On Tuesday, Wilson called the investigation “a step in the right direction.” “I think it’s important because of the injustice that happened,” Wilson told The Herald. “I want [Miami police] to respect each other, and drop the racist tactics in training.”

The ACLU praised the development. “We have a crisis in this community where the police department is too quick to use deadly force, especially aimed at young black men, and it doesn’t have the mechanism to control itself,” said Howard Simon, executive director of the ACLU of Florida.

Locally, the state attorney’s office has closed only one criminal review, clearing the officer in the Moore shooting. Police said Moore disobeyed an order to stay put, and returned to his car where officers thought they saw him holding a shiny object, possibly a weapon. No weapon was found at the scene.

The other men killed by police were Joell Lee Johnson, Tarnorris Tyrell Gaye, Gibson Junior Belizaire, Brandon Foster, Lynn Weatherspoon, and McNeil, who was followed by police from a lounge on Northwest 79th Street. McNeil’s friend, Kareem Williams, was shot too, but survived.

The Justice investigation into Miami police will be the 18th being conducted by the Obama administration, which has stepped up civil rights investigations across the country. The federal effort has won praise from advocacy groups and experts on police brutality.

Perez, the assistant attorney general for civil rights, said recently that the investigations into local police are “really a cornerstone of our work.” He was speaking to reporters about a Justice report on Puerto Rico, which accused officers of widespread brutality, unconstitutional arrests and targeting people of Dominican descent. That followed a Justice Department report in March that said the New Orleans Police Department repeatedly violated constitutional rights by using excessive force, illegally arresting people and targeting black and gay residents.
 




Read more: http://www.miamiherald.com/2011/11/16/v-print/2505941/us-justice-department-to-investigate.html#ixzz1dzWxSwxe







Figures.