Police Seize White Teenage Girl from Black Legal Guardians Without Cause

Not the ideal example that racism still exists, but still:

A teenage Oklahoma hip hop dancer is still shaken after her dream trip to a Texas dance studio ended up with her in handcuffs and taken to Child Protective Services and her guardians in police custody. 

"They had nothing on us," dance instructor Emmanuel Hurd told ABCNews.com. "Instead of going the route they should have went, they took her to CPS. The only reason someone gave me was we were black and Landry was white." 

Landry Thompson, 13, has been dancing since she was 7. For the past few years, she has dreamed of traveling to Houston to dance with well-known hip hop dancer Chachi Gonzales at Planet Funk Academy. 

Over the weekend, Thompson's parents, instructor and dance partner made her dream come true. Landry flew to Houston from her Tulsa, Okla., home on Saturday and met up with Hurd, 29, and her dance partner Josiah Kelly, 22. 

The three spent the day at the dance academy and taking part in a video shoot. After wrapping and dinner, the exhausted trio stopped at a gas station around 3 a.m. to program their GPS to find their hotel, according to Hurd. He dozed off and awoke to find their car surrounded by police. 

"Everything was going amazing. It was a beautiful day .... and then everything went bad," Hurd told ABCNews.com today. 

Hurd and Kelly were pulled out of the car and police told them not to worry, they weren't be arrested, just detained, Hurd said. 

Hurd had forms from Landry's mother making him her guardian for the duration of the trip, her birth certificate and her insurance card, among other forms, which he said he tried to tell the officers. 

"[The officer] puts the handcuffs on very, very tight [and] throws me in the back and does the same to Josiah," Hurd said. "All the while I'm looking at Landry. She's terrified." 

Landry, still in the car, said she called her mother. 

"I was crying. I tried to put the police on the phone with my mom and they said they didn't want to," she told ABCNews.com. 

The teen said she was terrified and that the cops didn't believe she was giving them her real name, since she wasn't on the runaway list. 

Landry's mom, Destiny Thompson, said she wasn't surprised by the late-night call because rehearsals often go late into the night, but could tell something was wrong when she heard the commotion in the background and her daughter's upset voice. 

A police officer eventually took Landry's phone and spoke to her mother. 

"He got on the phone and he said, 'Are you aware your daughter is in Houston, Texas, with two black men?' And I said, 'Yes, I am aware of that,'" Destiny Thompson told ABCNews.com. "Then he started mumbling stuff about my parenting, why I would let her do that and then he proceeded to tell me the people she was with were intoxicated or on something." 

"There's no possible way these men were intoxicated, that's not how they live," the mom said. "I knew right then I had some trouble." 

RELATED:  Racism Not a Problem Anymore? Don't Be Ridiculous, It's Still a Big Issue

Politiks As Usual: In The News 9/15/13

Maryland Counties Join Movement to Secede from Largely Democrat-run State

On The Redskins Name Controversy 

California To Legalize Non-Physician Abortions

Senate Committee Passes Shield Law Defining “Journalist”

Congress: Hillary’s Benghazi Investigation Let Top Officials Escape Blame

Are Blacks Names ‘Weird,’ or Are You Just Racist? 

Airman Claiming Religious Discrimination Mirandized, May Face Court Martial

Matthew Shepard Narrative Challenged in New Book 

Bill Cosby Was Right: ‘Very Strong’ Statistical Link Between Fatherlessness, Gun Homicides 

Free Speech For Sports...But Not Gay Retorts? 

Barack Obama, the 98-pound Weakling

The 10 Best FCC Complaints Against Miley Cyrus’ MTV VMA’s Performance

Predictions Of Riots If George Zimmerman Acquitted Display Appalling Lack Of Faith In Black Community

Mediaite.com:

Imagine the pleasant surprise I encountered after reading the headline “just in case George Zimmerman walks free…” adorning the top of a post composed by hip hop mogul and GlobalGrind.com founder Russell Simmons. It was my hope that Simmons, a respected voice in the black community, would spell out for an attentive audience why pundits preparing their audiences for riots in the wake of a possible acquittal were wrong. Instead, Simmons identified a variety of “victories” that resulted from the killing of Trayvon Martin. He cited setbacks for the National Rifle Association and state-level “Stand Your Ground” laws which he believes the activists who turned the trial into a political proxy war made possible. Simmons’ post is just one of many reckless provocations that have become a lamentably familiar aspect of the coverage of this trial and its “effect of inflaming passions without enlightening,” as National Journal’s Matthew Cooper put it. 

But worse than the base impulse to score political points and threaten national comity by implying that one or another cultural worldview is threatened by a verdict in a far-flung murder trial are the pundits and officials readily preparing for – and, in some cases, stoking through innuendo – a violent reaction from African-Americans should the jury find Zimmerman not guilty. What is most striking is that few bristle with offense at the obscene implication that African-Americans will be unable to internalize such an outcome without lashing out in an uncivilized fashion. 

“Do you think bad things are going to happen if Zimmerman is acquitted?” Fox News Channel host Bill O’Reilly asked on Monday, not ruling out the “possibility” that a not guilty verdict could result in damage done to “the fabric of the nation.”

He was quick to note that, if Zimmerman is found guilty of second degree murder or a lesser charge, the threat of violence would dissipate entirely. 

“If George Zimmerman is acquitted, there will be racial animus,” O’Reilly predicted on Tuesday night’s program. 

“The only thing the American press will embrace is the specter of oppression,” he continued, lamenting the media’s disinterest in chronic black-on-black violence in favor of rarer instances of white-on-black or black-on-white crime. “That is, if a white American kills a black American, or any other minority, then the story gets covered. That’s wrong, and it causes racial division.”

Displaying an uncharacteristic lack of faith in his fellow Americans, O’Reilly correctly identifies the bait but also appears to presume that the public will take it.

But the specter of violence arising from Zimmerman’s shooting of Martin has always been a feature of the story. Indeed, CNN contributor and Columbia University associate professor, Marc Lamont Hill, told Piers Morgan on Tuesday night that Zimmerman was only charged in the first place because of the burgeoning “civil unrest.”

One of the reasons why there was burgeoning “civil unrest” before Zimmerman was charged was because one of MSNBC’s hosts, Rev. Al Sharpton, traveled to the Sunshine State last year to rally the public against the Florida Justice Department for not identifying a charge – any charge – with which to seek an indictment against Zimmerman. The result was that the state overcharged and seems unable to conclusively prove their case against Zimmerman in court. 

On Tuesday, as the writing on the wall grows ever more legible, the consistently irresponsible political commentator and Georgetown University professor, Michael Eric Dyson, warned the public that there would be no acceptance if justice – as he defines it – is not done in this case. 

Dyson identified the American “legal system” as the problem in this case because it does not “speak to the issues that are being raised here.” 

“Time and again, for one reason or another, young black people lose their lives and it is seen as the necessary condition for the justice system to prevail,” Dyson declared. “And the George Zimmermans of the world continue to get away, if it is true, with the killing of our children without necessarily facing the kind of consequences that a justice system would demand.”

Most unfortunately, the intentional inflaming of passions surrounding this case by the pundit class may have its desired effect. “Raise your voice, not your hands,” a headline on the Broward County Sherriff’s Department website warned residents. “Freedom of expression is a constitutional right. While raising your voice is encouraged, using your hands is not.”

The media has undoubtedly comported itself in an embarrassing and arguably immoral fashion in their coverage of Martin’s shooting. There is a detectable undercurrent in the editorializing coverage of Zimmerman’s trial that appears to tacitly welcome a violent reaction if the defendant is acquitted. 

But the media would be advised to display a bit more faith in the American public to react rationally if a not guilty verdict is the ultimate outcome of this trial. I may be wrong, and my pride will certainly be the last thing that I mourn should violence in the wake of a possible acquittal materialize, but I do not believe that I will be wrong. The American people are stronger – and better — than that. 

RELATED:  Florida Authorities Release PSAs To Warn Against Post-Zimmerman Trial Violence, The Five Hosts React

Disrespectful Behavior Only A Liberal Could Defend: Judge Sentences Florida Teen Penelope Soto To 30 Days In Jail For Cursing At Him

Mediaite.com:

18-year-old Penelope Soto taught an important lesson to millions of young Americans when she was called before a Florida judge yesterday on a drug possession charge. Soto laughed when the judge asked if she had consumed any drugs in the last 24 hours and then said “adios” after he set her bail at $5,000. She stopped laughing when he asked her to return and raised the bond to $10,000.

“Are you serious?” Soto asked. The judge replied, “I am serious. Adios.”

At that point, Soto apparently gave the judge the finger and shouted an expletive at him. He then asked Soto point blank, “Did you say ‘fuck me’?” When she said she did, he found her in criminal contempt of court and sentenced her to 30 days in a county jail.

Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio Cleared of Financial Improprieties

Mediaite.com:

Maricopa County sheriff Joe Arpaio has not been charged following an inquiry into allegations that the controversial lawman abused power in his role. The accusations against Arpaio included “claims of misuse of county-issued credit cards and federal money to pay for salaries, trips, meals and other expenses they should not have covered.”

Investigators looking into the charges said they found “insufficient evidence of criminal intent,” and Arpaio responded to the findings by saying he “never had any doubt” and thanking the federal government for its work in the inquiry.

The Sheriff currently faces a similar civil-rights lawsuit, with advocacy organizations alleging that Arpaio targeted Latinos in raids and other actions carried out by his deputies. The ruling in that lawsuit is still pending. 

Justice.

RELATED:  ‘America’s toughest sheriff’ Joe Arpaio still faces significant legal troubles

Politiks As Usual: In The News 8/27/12

A Look At Janna Ryan: 'She's Going To Bloom Where She's Planted'

Gritty N.J. City Of Camden To Scrap Police Department Amid Budget Woes

Should The NYPD Even Be Issued Firearms?

UPDATE: RNC Announces Modified Three-Day Convention Schedule

The Quest For A Reason To Re-Elect The President

Liberals Look To End Marriage Going 'Forward,' But There's Still Time To Turn Back

Spate of Documentaries Offers Ammunition To Conservatives

Oh Brother, I Mean Mother: Dem Mom and Daughter Pose as 'Republican Women for Obama,' Get Caught

Former Fla. Gov. Charlie Crist Endorses Obama

The Naked Truth About Nudity On TV

Immigration Agents Sue To Stop Obama’s Non-Deportation Policy 

Has Racism, Not Incompetence, Hobbled The Obama Presidency?

New York Appeals Court Rules That Viewing Child Porn Is Not A Crime

Unbelievable and despicable:

The line for acceptable behavior when it comes to child pornography just got blurrier in New York. The state's highest court just ruled that viewing child porn online isn't a crime, the Associated Press reports.

The decision came down in a hearing for James D. Kent. In 2007 a virus scan of Kent's computer uncovered child porn. Kent, 65, a former professor of public administration at Marist College, was subsequently convicted of 134 counts of possessing child porn and two counts of procuring it. He was sentenced to one to three years imprisonment.

The New York Court of Appeals' ruling dismissed two of Kent's possession charges because he only looked at the material.

While it might sound like odd reasoning, the court based its decision on New York's definition of possession and procurement under the law.

In order to prove either possession or procurement of child porn, it must be shown that a defendant had dominion or control over the material.

In its opinion, the court reasoned that dominion or control required Kent take "some affirmative act" to obtain the child porn. This could be anything from printing to saving or downloading the offending material. 

The reason the court overturned two of Kent's charges was that in those cases the child porn was found in his computer's Web cache. The judges viewed this as different from downloading the material because, in essence, it didn't show he actually had control of the images.

While the court agreed that child porn was an abomination, they argued holding Kent guilty for his Web cache would overextend New York law.

Kent claimed the images were part of a research project and that he "abhorred" child pornography.

While viewing child porn is not a crime in New York, it remains illegal under federal law.

RELATED: Child Porn Decision Turns On Downloading Intent

Supreme Court: Miranda Rights Don’t Have To Be Read To Prisoners

A victory for anyone whose ever been a victim to a crime. And to think even Elena Kagan saw the common sense in this decision:

The Supreme Court said Tuesday investigators don’t have to read Miranda rights to inmates during jailhouse interrogations about crimes unrelated to their current incarceration.


The high court, on a 6-3 vote, overturned a federal appeals court decision throwing out prison inmate Randall Lee Fields’ conviction, saying Fields was not in “custody’’ as defined by Miranda and therefore did not have to have his rights read to him.


“Imprisonment alone is not enough to create a custodial situation within the meaning of Miranda,’’ Justice Samuel Alito wrote in the court’s majority opinion.


Three justices, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer and Sonia Sotomayor, dissented and said the court’s decision would limit the rights of prisoners.


“Today, for people already in prison, the court finds it adequate for the police to say: `You are free to terminate this interrogation and return to your cell,’’’ Ginsburg said in her dissent. “Such a statement is no substitute for one ensuring that an individual is aware of his rights.’’


Miranda rights come from a 1966 decision that involved police questioning of Ernesto Miranda in a rape and kidnapping case in Phoenix. It required officers to tell suspects they have the right to remain silent and to have a lawyer represent them, even if they can’t afford one.


Previous court rulings have required Miranda warnings before police interrogations for people who are in custody, which is defined as when a reasonable person would think he cannot end the questioning and leave.


Fields was serving a 45-day sentence in prison on disorderly conduct charges when a jail guard and sheriff’s deputies from Lenawee County, Mich., removed him from his cell and took him to a conference room. The deputies, after telling him several times he was free to leave at any time, then questioned him for seven hours about allegations that he had sexually assaulted a minor. Fields eventually confessed and was charged and convicted of criminal sexual assault.


Fields was then sentenced to 10 to 15 years in prison but appealed the use of his confession, saying that he was never given his Miranda rights on the sexual assault charges.


On appeal, the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals in Cincinnati threw out his confession and conviction, ruling that it is required that police read inmates their Miranda rights anytime they are isolated from the rest of the inmates in situations where they would be likely to incriminate themselves.


The Supreme Court overturned that ruling.


“Not all restraints on freedom of movement amount to custody for purposes of Miranda,’’ Alito said.

Politiks As Usual: In The News 1/2/12

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Voter ID Laws Are Common Sense

Rick Santorum Would 'Invalidate' Gay Marriages

The Year In Obama Scandals -- And Scandal Deniers

An Uncomfortable Fact About Taxes: The Rich Do Pay Their Fair Share

Iran Says It's Produced First Nuclear Fuel Rod

Maryland Abortion Doctors Charged With Murder

Rachel Maddow: Fox Is All About Electing GOP, But MSNBC Has No Political Objective!

Ron Paul Angrily Rebuts Jake Tapper Over Question About 9/11 Conspiracies

Newt Gingrich: Romney 'Would Buy Election if He Could'

Taylor Marsh Throws In The Towel On Obama

Ten Most Ridiculous Lawsuits Of 2011

The Case For The Conservative Lesbian

George Carlin Wasn’t Funny: The Top Five Most Overrated Comedians

Politiks As Usual: In The News 4/11/11

Donald Trump Pushes For Obama's Birth Certificate

Gaddafi Accepts Peace Plan But Rebels Say He Must Go 


GOP, Obama Make 'Historic' Dead To Avoid Government Shutdown, Debt Cut


Texas May Ban Courts From Considering Foreign Laws


You Can Slaughter Christians, But You Can't Burn A Koran


J. Crew Pushes Transgender Child Propaganda

'Make No Mistake: I Oppose This Negotiated Dead,' Says Bachmann


Federal Judge Rules Against Anti-Gay Protesters, Gays Allowed To Adopt In Arkansas


Why No Outrage Over Democrat Saying Republicans Want To Kill Women?


Gov. Walker Vows: Unions Won't Steal Prosser Election Win


Why Conservatives Must Lead On Education Reform