Connect with us

Legal

New California Bill Would Send ‘Karens’ to Jail Over Racist 911 Calls (Video)

Published

on

6251356_061620-karen-collage-FINAL-img

6251356_061620-karen-collage-FINAL-img

*California is now one step closer to making racially-motivated 911 calls a “hate crime” punishable by jail or a hefty fine.

AB 1775, by Assemblyman Reggie Jones-Sawyer (D-Huntington Park), would increase the criminal penalties imposed when a person knowingly makes a false 911 call for the purpose of harassing another. The maximum penalty would be up to $2,000 and a year in jail. The bill also classifies blatantly false reports as a form of intimidation, allowing the victim of these calls to file a lawsuit against the person who knowingly made the false report.

The legislation was inspired by countless racial encounters that have been recorded and gone viral to incite social media fury, including the white woman in New York City’s Central Park who called 911 on a Black man because he asked her to leash her dog. There was also BBQ Becky” at Oakland’s Lake Merritt, who called police on two African-American men using a grill. And don’t forget about “Permit Patty,” who called San Francisco police to report that an 8-year-old Black girl was selling bottles of water without a permit.

The bill already passed in both the Senate and Assembly. It’s now in the hands of Gov. Gavin Newsom for review.

AB 1775 was one of several criminal justice reform bills passed Friday in California’s Senate Public Safety Committee. If signed into law, police throughout California will no longer be able to use chokeholds or rubber bullets and tear gas. They’ll also have to intervene if they see a fellow officer committing misconduct.

Watch a report about the legislation below:

Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

crime

Tekashi 6ix9ine Sued For Sexual Assault Over 2015 Video Showing Abuse of Minor

Published

on

Tekashi 69
Tekashi69+Tekashi69+Arraignment+Houston+TX+XMLBYvJXluSl

GETTY

*Tekashi 6ix9ine is being sued by the woman he allegedly sexually abused at a party in 2015 when she was just 13. 

The woman, identified as Jane Doe,  claims that the rapper and Tauquan “Tay Milly” Anderson sexually assaulted her, and the incident was filmed and later posted online. 

The victim suffered “severe emotional and psychological injuries,” court documents state, TMZ reports. 

6ix9ine’s attorney, Lance Lazzaro, tells the outlet that the rapper will “defend the lawsuit vigorously” once he’s properly served. 

READ MORE: Attorneys for Tekashi 6ix9ine Are ‘Concerned’ for His Safety After Snitching on Gang

Tekashi69+Tekashi69+Arraignment+Houston+TX+i1GquE_fzZgl

Here’s more from TMZ:

Jane Doe claims, on top of being underage at the time, she was under the influence of drugs and alcohol and was unable to consent as 6ix9ine and another adult, Tay Milly, made 3 sexually explicit videos which she says they later posted online.

According to the docs … the first video featured Doe performing oral sex on Tay Milly while Tekashi did pelvic thrusts behind her — without engaging in sex — and he slapped her butt. The second vid allegedly featured the girl sitting on 6ix9ine’s lap in a bra and underwear, and in the third … she claims she was laying naked across their laps while Milly groped her.

Jane Doe is suing 6ix9ine and Tay Milly for child sexual assault, child sexual abuse and infliction of emotional distress, the report states. 

“By reason of her age, and being given drugs and alcohol which caused her to be in an impaired mental state without her knowledge, permission or consent, the plaintiff was incapable of consenting to the recording,” the document states.

“As an internationally known rap and hip hop artist and performer, defendant Hernandez uploaded [the videos] onto various social media accounts on the internet with the intention and expectation that millions of people would view the videos,” it added.

Tekashi previously took a plea deal in the criminal case in October 2018 for making a music video featuring sex with a minor. He was sentenced to 4 years probation.

Continue Reading

Legal

AG Daniel Cameron Hires Armed Security, Responds to Grand Juror’s Statement

Published

on

breonna taylor, daniel cameron


*Daniel Cameron is being guarded by armed security after citing “detailed threats against the attorney general, his wife and members of his family,” in the wake of his handling of the Breonna Taylor case. 

“The attorney general’s protective detail determined that given the credibility of such threats, additional personnel and resources were needed to provide the appropriate level of security,” Elizabeth Kuhn, a spokeswoman for Cameron, said in a statement Wednesday morning.

“Because of the sensitive nature of the threats, we cannot provide further information.”

The $300,000 retroactive security contract was approved by legislators and began at the end of August and ends on Dec. 31, Yahoo reports.

READ MORE: Ben Crump Statement Following Release of Grand Juror Statements in Breonna Taylor Case

Following news that a judge ruled that members of the grand jury can speak publicly about the case, Cameron is standing by his work as Special Prosecutor. 

Cameron claims he did not offer the grand jury the option to indict the officers on charges related to Taylor’s death in her own home.  As reported by TMZ, he made the decision to present charges “that could be proven under Kentucky law.”

He also says he disagrees with the judge’s decision to allow an anonymous grand juror to speak publicly about the proceedings, but he’s not going to appeal, the report states.

The juror in question claims Cameron misrepresented the case. Check out the statement below, per Complex:

“Being one of the jurors on the Breonna Taylor case was a learning experience. The three weeks of service leading up to that presentation showed how the grand jury normally operates. The Breonna Taylor case was quite different. After hearing the Attorney General Daniel Cameron’s press conference, and with my duty as a grand juror being over, my duty as a citizen compelled action. The grand jury was not presented any charges other than the three wanton endangerment charges against Detective Hankison. The grand jury did not have homicide offenses explained to them. The grand jury never heard anything about those laws. Self defense or justification was never explained either. Questions were asked about additional charges and the grand jury was told there would be non because the prosecutors didn’t feel they could make them stick. The grand jury didn’t agree that certain actions were justified, nor did it decide the indictment should be the only charges in the Breonna Taylor case. The grand jury was not given the opportunity to deliberate on those charges and deliberated only on what was presented to them. I cannot speak for other juror, but I can help the truth be told.”

On Tuesday, Cameron posted a statement on Twitter about the judge’s decision involving the anonymous Grand Juror, check out the tweet below. 

Continue Reading

Black Celebrity Gossip - Gossip

Dr. Dre’s Wife Nicole Young Calls Him Out on ‘Ironclad Prenup’

Published

on

Dr Dre & Nicole Young1 (Getty)
Dr Dre & Nicole Young (Getty)

Dr Dre & Nicole Young (Getty)

*Dr. Dre’s wife Nicole Young has filed legal docs demanding he turn over the original version of the “ironclad prenup” at the center of their divorce battle. 

Here’s more from TMZ:

In the docs, she says Dre’s failed to produce the prenup even though the law is clear he must turn over all relevant financial, business and personal documents.

She says because Dre hasn’t produced it … she doesn’t know which version of the alleged prenup he’s referring to, and calls his refusal to share the info an “intentional abuse” of the divorce process.

Young, 50, filed for divorce over the summer after 24 years of marriage, citing irreconcilable differences. The couple married on May 25, 1996 and share two adult children, son Truice, 23, and 19-year-old daughter Truly.

READ MORE: Dr. Dre’s Wife Could Be Charged with Embezzlement Amid Divorce Battle

Dr Dre and Nicole Young in happier times

In his response to the divorce filing, Dre noted that the couple have a prenuptial agreement that he wants enforced.

The hip-hop mogul reportedly has no issue paying spousal support, but any distribution of property should be controlled by the prenup.

Young reportedly filed documents contesting the prenuptial agreement. 

“I was extremely reluctant, resistant and afraid to sign the agreement and felt backed into a corner. Given the extraordinary pressure and intimidation by Andre, I was left with no option but to hire a lawyer (of course, with the help of Andre’s team of professionals) and unwillingly signed the agreement very shortly before our marriage,” Young alleges in legal documents filed to the court, per TMZ

She claims they mutually decided to void the agreement two years later. 

“Andre acknowledged to me that he felt ashamed he had pressured me into signing a premarital agreement and he tore up multiple copies of the agreement in front of me,” Young claims in the  filing. “Since the day he tore up the agreements, we both understood that there was no premarital agreement, and that it was null and void.”

In her new filing, Young challenge Dre’s claim that he tore it up 22 years ago. Meanwhile, Dre denies ever tearing up the agreement. 

Continue Reading

TV Calendar: Coming to Small Screens

Trending