WATCH: Police Take Turns Beating Bronx Man After Search Turns Up Nothing

http://7online.com/news/exclusive-bronx-man-claims-police-brutality-caught-on-camera/296032/

A Bronx man has accused a half-dozen NYPD officers of taking turns beating and kicking him after he asked an officer why he had been searched when she was responding to a noise complaint, according to  ABC7.

According to Santiago Hernandez, 23, he was standing in front of a home in the Melrose section of the Bronx on August 18th when a uniformed NYPD officer stopped and asked to frisk him.

“I turned around and put my hands up,” Hernandez explained, saying the officers told him they were investigating a noise complaint.

When the search turned up nothing, Hernandez asked why he had been searched. At that point the female officer grabbed his arm and slapped a handcuff on him.

“I’m like, ‘Miss what you doing? You are hurting my arm,’ ” Hernandez said. “She just was telling me to put my hands behind my back, but ‘I’m like trying to understand what are you are arresting me for. Can you please tell me?’.”

Moments after  refusing to comply to an order to  put both his hands behind his back, a half-dozen uniformed officers appeared and dog-piled on Hernandez, punching and kicking and dragging him onto the sidewalk.

Cellphone video backs up his account of the assault.

“They was taking turns on me. One kicks me, he steps back. Another one comes to punch me and he steps back,” Hernandez said. “And another one comes and grabs my arm and hits me like 10 times with the baton. Another one comes and pepper sprayed me, they were taking turns like a gang.”

The video shows a subdued Hernandez then being dragged to a waiting patrol car.

Photos show Hernandez covered in bruises and scrapes after the incident.

Hernandez was charged with disorderly conduct and resisting arrest, however the Bronx DA declined to prosecute the case.

Hernandez told Eyewitness News reporter N.J. Burkett that he had reason to be concerned about being arrested since he is on parole following six years in prison for a conviction related to gang activity when he was fourteen.

Asked why he didn’t just comply and allow himself to handcuffed, Hernandez replied, “Because I’m a person to ask questions. If I didn’t do nothing wrong, I’m trying to understand the reason, what they are thinking of me, or what was the reason at all to arrest me.”

Jay Heinrich, Hernandez’s attorney, said, “Unfortunately, for young men like Santiago, I think this incident is all too common.”

Hernandez’s attorney said he would be filing a civil suit against the city.

The NYPD claims they are investigating the matter.

Watch the video below from ABC7:

http://www.alternet.org/watch-police-take-turns-beating-bronx-man-after-search-turns-nothing

 

 

U.S. Spied on 5 American Muslims, a Report Says…

http://www.northjersey.com/news/report-rutgers-university-professor-among-five-muslim-american-leaders-subjected-to-nsa-fbi-email-surveillance-1.1048486

Civil rights leaders claim the alleged surveillance is part of a pattern by law enforcement and intelligence agencies that targets people based on religion or political activity. Recently, the New York Police Department was accused of widespread surveillance on Muslim student groups, businesses and houses of worship as part of counter-terrorism work in New York and New Jersey, including Paterson, Newark and Rutgers University.

http://www.nationaljournal.com/tech/raghead-slur-in-snowden-leak-prompts-white-house-call-for-discrimination-review-20140709

“As the NSA has said, the use of racial or ethnic stereotypes, slurs, or other similar language by employees is both unacceptable and inconsistent with the country’s core values,” White House spokeswoman Caitlin Hayden said in a statement. “The administration takes all such allegations extremely seriously, and upon learning of this matter, the White House immediately requested that the director of National Intelligence undertake an assessment of Intelligence Community policies, training standards or directives that promote diversity and tolerance, and as necessary, make any recommendations changes or additional reforms.”

http://thehill.com/policy/technology/211676-snowden-leak-nsa-fbi-targeted-prominent-us-muslims

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/10/us/politics/nsa-snowden-records-glenn-greenwald-first-look.html

https://firstlook.org/theintercept/article/2014/07/09/under-surveillance/

 

http://blogs.rollcall.com/beltway-insiders/hobby-lobby-ruling-fuels-amendment-push/?dcz=

The Hobby Lobby ruling has stoked liberal anger over the court’s expanding “corporate personhood” doctrine, which critics on the left argue threatens a host of environmental, civil rights and consumer safety laws. Now some Democrats on Capitol Hill are considering additional amendments that go beyond campaign financing to more explicitly spell out that corporations are not people.

On the day of the Hobby Lobby ruling, Sen. Edward J. Markey, D-Mass., announced that he would sign onto a joint resolution authored by Sen. Jon Tester, D-Mont., that proposes a constitutional amendment stating the terms “people,” “person” or “citizen” as used in the Constitution do not include corporations, limited liability companies or other corporate entities. Rep. Jim McGovern, D-Mass., is rounding up support for a House version of the measure.

“From Citizens United to Hobby Lobby, Supreme Court majorities continue to extend our basic Constitutional rights — the inalienable rights held by individuals — to corporations,” Markey said in a statement. “Corporations are not people, period.”

Markey and Tester are also co-sponsors of Democrats’ amendment to limit campaign spending, which is authored by Sens. Tom Udall of New Mexico and Michael Bennet of Colorado and is slated for a vote this summer. Senate Democrats also plan a vote on the newly reintroduced campaign disclosure bill known as the DISCLOSE Act. Democrats say the various measures go hand in hand.

“It’s going to take a comprehensive approach to campaign finance reform to make sure that elections are in the hands of people and not corporate voices,” said Tester spokeswoman Marnee Banks.

The Hobby Lobby ruling hinges on religious freedom, not the First Amendment, but it has campaign finance implications, legal scholars say. The ruling challenges the traditional distinction between nonprofit and for-profit corporations, noted law professor Tamara Piety at the University of Tulsa. The administration had exempted religious nonprofit corporations from its contraception mandate, but not for-profit companies. The high court rejected that approach, saying tax-exempt and for-profit corporations must be treated the same.

Sorensen

http://www.alternet.org/civil-liberties/hmm-supreme-court-enjoys-much-bigger-buffer-zone-one-it-just-took-away-abortion

“On Thursday, the Court ruled that women seeking abortions and healthcare in Massachusetts are no longer entitled to the 35 foot buffer zones where they can enter and exit unmolested by right-to-lifers. The plaza between the [Supreme] Court’s entrance and the sidewalk is subject to a number of rules banning activity that ‘is reasonably likely to draw a crowd or onlookers’ and saying these rules are necessary ‘to maintain suitable order and decorum within the Supreme Court building and grounds.’ The plaza is at least five times as big as the 35 foot buffer zone.”

Associated Press

“For a problem shown to arise only once a week in one city at one clinic, creating 35-foot buffer zones at every clinic across the Commonwealth is hardly a narrowly tailored solution,” Roberts said. He wrote the majority opinion after asking no questions – exceedingly rare for him – at the argument in January.

Roberts noted that no other state has a similar law and that he is aware of only five cities that have created fixed buffer zones around abortion clinics: Burlington, Vermont; Pittsburgh; Portland, Maine, and San Francisco and Santa Barbara in California.

Read More – USA Today