Transcription
Books and skills from the east to the west. Bringing education. Yeah, we're simply the best. Classes on fire. Brains burning with desire. Iteration driving like a tire through the mer. Math, science, history. We got the whole range. Kids hitting new heights. Teachers making a change. Used to be the teacher stacking up the grades. Future bright shining. No need for no shades. Got the youth thriving. Moving up the ladder. Smart and sharp. Brains growing fatter. Lesson so lit. Yeah, they stay in a blaze. Every mind sharp like a sword in the haze. Mr. be in the house breaking knowledge chains. Education came here. We repping the games. Who used to be the teacher.
Order yours today to experience all the benefits of Ashkicking body butter. With skin so smooth and soft, you'll thank us for it. Shop Ashkicking online. That's assh.com.
Hi, this is Brenda Star, creator of Poetry with a Purpose and author of the book Press But Not Crushed. Press But Not Crush is an anthology of political poems that address current and historical issues in American descendants of slave population and African-American population. The book describes slaveries and its residuals, Jim Crow segregation, social depradation, and other relevant issues to American descendants of slaves and Africanameans, including the current political climate that does not address our issues.
The IT team's John Dowing is live outside the Wake County Courthouse where that shooting happened earlier today. John, you're digging through some paperwork shedding light on what may have led to today's uh hearing there at the courthouse.
>> Well, Steve, Lauren, the biggest question on many people's minds tonight is what led up to this shooting. The IT team tonight combing through court records and uncovering a 5year timeline ahead of this case that all started with a request to obtain police body camera video. What started as an argument between neighbors 5 years ago resulting in the shooting of two attorneys in the heart of downtown Raleigh Friday. Eyewitness News obtaining this video showing Raleigh police taking the woman they believe is the shooter into custody. Police identified the suspect as Gwendelyn White. Court documents identify the victims as Mary Harris and Jeffrey Whitley, seen in bios posted on their law firm's website. Now, tonight, the IT team is learning more about the case that brought all three of them together to the same courtroom Friday morning. Court documents show it all started in March 2021 when Rollsville police responded to a verbal altercation between White and her two neighbors on this block. Police say the body camera video did not show White's neighbors committing any criminal activity. Her neighbors asked for a no contact order with White following the incident. In February 2022, White asked for a copy of that body camera video of the incident. The videos were found in April 2022, but court documents say White never got a copy of the videos until this year. She filed a motion of contempt against the Rollsville Police Department. In January of this year, a judge ruled Roseville police must give her the video, but said the department was not in contempt. Court documents say White got the videos 2 days after the judge's ruling. A day later, she filed another motion, this time asking for a new case related to the release of the body camera video. The North Carolina court database shows a hearing at 10 this morning to determine whether to reinstate the case. Raleigh police say during the hearing White became quote belligerent and left the courthouse just before the shooting. Now obviously courts closed early today after that shooting. So we still don't know the result of that case she was here for earlier today. Now White has posted for years on her social media about allegations of elderly abuse she said her mother experienced right up until her mother died last year. We're still working to learn more details here. We'll update you on air and
>> I've got questions. All I'm saying is I've got questions about what's going on. Is anybody going to fly the banner of self-defense here? Because I've seen this kind of thing happen so many times before. Are they going to fly the banner of self-defense here? Donald Trump and friends said that on January 6, they had the right to take whatever actions they needed to with a unresponsive government, unresponsive judiciary, and they made that legal. Please remember, they made that legal. That's not up for a debate. That's not up for an argument. They made that legal, folks. Remember, now they're trying to put together a multi-billion dollar fund for them. So, they made that legal. I just find all that to be very interesting. I want to remind you about what happened in Boca Raton, Florida. 13-year-old white kid is accosted by adults. And I dare say to you that they were very very eager to say that he the adults should have been punished a lot more harshly than just being arrested. They didn't give him the Trayvon Martin treatment at all. They didn't say why is he in the neighborhood? What is he doing there? They didn't do any of that at all.
>> We have an update to that viral West Bokea eBike confrontation from last month. A second man seen in the video has now been arrested. Now you may remember the clip. a 13-year-old surrounded by adults inside the gated Lotus community just screaming for his phone back. And now 53-year-old Ari Brooks, who's seen there wearing a black shirt and sunglasses, is facing the same felony robbery by sudden snatching charge as Mitchell Schuman. Now, investigators say video shows Brooks taking the child's phone, then walking out into the street, even holding it out as it appears to be ringing. And the kid is continuously asking for his phone back. Now, under Florida law, prosecutors say the victim only has to be aware that his property has been taken for it to become felony robbery, which is punishable by up to 5 years. Were you all aware that if somebody took your phone in Florida, that would be felony robbery. Were you all aware of that? Why is it nobody's ever mentioned this before? Now, were you all aware that the night that George Zimmerman attacked Trayvon Martin, did were you all aware? It's not about the value of the phone either, by the way. Were you all aware that people taking your property when that felony robber Were you aware that in Florida that's felony robbery? I mean, they didn't take the phone and sell it. They didn't take the phone and sell it. They didn't take the phone and pawn it. They just withheld it from him. Were you aware that that's felony robbery in Florida? that. So when you hear that, please explain to me how in the hell George Zimmerman was able to walk the streets after that because the police said ain't no issue. Isn't that amazing? And the comment section down here is defending the 13-year-old. I don't necessarily have a problem with that. What I'm saying is, by the way, a decade ago, these are the same people who were defending the asalent. A decade ago, they were defending the asalent. A decade ago, under these exact same circumstances, these folk were defending the asalent. That's the part I want you all to keep in mind. A decade ago, they were defending the asalent up to and including the point of murder. They were eagerly defending the asalent. How is it that 10 years later they're not saying the same things and making the same arguments under these circumstances? Why is that? What changed? What changed? When it was Kyle Writtenhouse, you had no less than congressmen and congressw women running to his defense. Please show me where any of these same congressmen and congress women have come to black folks defense anywhere. Show me a case where a black person has been attacked at all by anybody that these same Congress people showed up grinning and smiling to do a photo op. win. Luigi Manion is another one. A lot of the people are starting to ask different questions about the system in light of that and in face of that know Alex Jones used to condemn the US government right up until black folk took to the streets fighting the government and then all of a sudden Alex Jones became the biggest defender of the United States government that anyone's ever seen. Isn't that amazing? Everybody is anti-government. Everybody is don't tread on me. Everyone is all with the business right up until we take the vanguard. Once we take the point and once we become the face of it, then all of a sudden that changes. Isn't that amazing? Isn't that interesting to you all that nobody has a problem? I mean, taken to the streets. Donald Trump and friends, a sitting president of the United States can lead an outright revolt and revolution against them. Everything is fine. Everything's great. Everything's wonderful until we show up. Then everybody becomes super progovern. All of a sudden, everybody loves it. All of a sudden, the government is right about everything. All of a sudden, you don't have a right to self-defense, self-determination, anything. Isn't that interesting?
I'd like to have more details. I need to have more details. I must have more details because you see, there's another case here. I want you all to hear about this one right here. There's another part of that case in Raleigh. One day after Raleigh police say a woman targeted two attorneys outside of a Wake County courthouse. WL is looking into both her history and a bigger question of attorney and client safety. W's Bailey Stamos is live where that scene happened yesterday. Bailey, you spoke to an attorney that
>> I find that interesting. The man says that we're investigating her. He didn't say that they're investigating the police department. He didn't say that they're investigating the police department. He didn't say they're investigating the judge. He didn't say they're investigating the four-year delay in her getting body cam footage. No, we're we're only investigating one person, all these entities, and only investigating one person. I find that curious. Don't worry, they're going to keep going.
>> Attorneys outside of a Wake County courthouse. WL is looking into both her history and a bigger question of attorney and client safety. WL's Bailey Stamos is live where that scene happened yesterday. Bailey, you spoke to an attorney that once represented the woman now facing those two attempted murder charges.
>> This alley is where police say 57year-old Gwendelyn White shot two attorneys on Friday. Now, I spoke to an attorney who recently represented White in some previous legal cases, and he says this was very clearly a mental health crisis that this woman was dealing with. Seth Bloom represented White during a civil case involving her neighbors. He says she has shown a long history of mental health issues and gives us a look into just some of the legal battles she brought on leading up to Friday's scene. Seth Bloom.
>> Seth Bloom. I'm not sure if he's related to Ed Bloom. Not sure if they're related or not. Not certain. But should he even be talking about this? By the way, if he's a former attorney of hers, by the way, should he even be speaking on this? Just asking.
>> Scene. Miss White had some significant mental health problems that were being expressed unfortunately through uh the court system. She had at the time that I represented her called the police on her neighbors dozens of times. I think it was 37 times.
>> Okay. She called the police 37 times. Do you all realize that white people can call the police on your children an unlimited number of times? Is that ever categorized or classified as a mental illness issue? How many times are they allowed to call the police on you or your children? Does anyone ever classify that or characterize that as a mental issue on their part? I'm asking for a friend. Have you all ever heard that classified or characterized that way? it. They can call the police on your kids who call the police on you. They can do that like those ranchers out there in Colorado, the black man, the black woman ranchers out there in Colorado. You hear about white folk do that all the time. Why is it has does it ever get classified where people characterized as a mental health issue no matter how many times they do that to you? So, I'm just asking questions. Bloom tells WL he was contacted by police after the incident because they believe he was one of the attorneys White could have also been targeting. Now, we have reached out.
>> Do they have any proof of that? Oh, she might target you, too. Why? Why would they even say such a thing? What's their substantiation for that? Because the news is just saying it and reporting it. What is their basis for saying this? What's their basis for reporting this? And why are they not questioning the police about that? Wait a minute. What's your basis for saying that you think she would do something to her former attorney? On what grounds are you making that claim? They don't explain. They don't say. I wonder if they're going to come back to this and give some clarification to say this is why we suspected that she might do something to a former attorney cuz so far you're not showing any evidence of anything. You're just throwing it out there. So basically they're acting like she's just going to go on a rampage based on what? Because you're reporting this and you're saying this and she's attributing this to the police. Okay. And the police say this based on what exactly? Now, there are reports here that they were, as I showed you all before that she was talking about her mother being involved, that her mother had been abused. And what I'm saying is that did the system protect her and the mother. And I want to go even further here. You know what, Mr. Bloom, you might be on to something there, sir. You might be on to something. If this woman has been a target of frequent abuse by the system, then we may be looking at a situation where the system is responsible for what happened here. If this woman is suff the system may have cracked her, the system may have destroyed and deteriorated her mental state because of the repeated pattern of abuse. the system and its abuse of her may have been the key catalyst that precipitated this and that in her feelings of helplessness that she resorted to desperate means because of the targeting that she experienced under the system. So if anything, we need to be approaching it and examining the situation from that standpoint. We need to be approaching it and examining it from that standpoint. What's the system's responsibility here? What did the system do to cause this? Does the system have a pattern of doing this kind of thing there in Raleigh? We really need to go ahead and examine all of this all the way around.
In the last week, there have been a number of people who have attempted to replicate the white supremacist tactics of one Dalton Etherly, i.e. Trump the Builder. Some of these people have discovered that their attempts to replicate his white supremacist tactics have met with serious consequences. Some of these people have tried to replicate his white supremacist tactics and found that the community is very vigilant. that when you start signaling that you are a potential white supremacist terrorist, when you start signaling that you are a potentially white supremacist terrorist, that the people around you are starting to be a lot more vigilant. They're starting to be a lot more vigilant and a lot more proactive at neutralizing these potential white supremacist threats. Let's be clear, the time to defend yourself is not after somebody starts shooting and assaulting you. The time to defend yourself is before they start doing that. More and more people are finding out that folks not just sitting around being reactive, they're being proactive, which is what we were told to do. Remember? Remember Trayvon Martin was not armed. George Zimmerman got out of his car with a gun chasing down a teenage black kid. Now, how in the world can you justify that series of events that you can get out of your car with a gun as an adult and run up on an adolescent? There is no justification for it. And yet, the white supremacist system said, "We're white and we say so." Kyle Writtenhouse shot people who were not armed. Let's be clear about that. The folks that he shot, he didn't shoot a bunch of armed people. He was the one with a gun. And since you're going to defend him and say that, well, you have the right to have a weapon and to kill people who do not have a weapon and that's still self-defense. that just because the people that you shoot were unarmed, that does not mean that you are not still practicing self-defense. Well, if that's going to be the rule, it's got to be the rule for everybody. If that's going to be the rule, it has to be the rule for everyone. can't be the rule for just one person. If that's going to be the rule, fine. Those are the rules and it's going to be the rule for everyone. So, if you are going to say that you can have a gun and somebody else cannot have one and if you shoot the per the unarmed person, that can still be self-defense. Well, then what I'm saying is that okay, we got I got questions now. I have questions about a number of things. Now, what constitutes a threat and are you being consistent? Because if you are inconsistent, then our standards have to also become inconsistent. If you are going to pick and choose what the standards will be, then we are also going to have to pick and choose what the standards will be. So, if the system and the media and the courts are going to be inconsistent and they're going to take it on a case-byase basis, then also it is incumbent on us to do the same thing. I got questions. I need more information. And very clearly we don't have enough information yet. Very clearly we don't. We don't know what really caused this. We don't have the information about her mother, which is the event that precipitated this. We don't know what was going on with the neighbors. Why isn't anyone explaining to us why it took four years? What is the justification for it taking four years for them to give her the body cam footage? What reasonable explanation do you have for it taking four years? What is the reasonable explanation for that? And why is it that if that's not contempt of court, what in the world is? How is it that you can ignore a request for body cam footage for 4 years? That's not contempt. If that isn't, then what is? Once you tell us that that's not contempt, well then this is the rule for everybody. So if the police can ignore a request for body cam footage for four years, then likewise for the rest of us, that time frame needs to be defended for everyone. Remember, they found the footage couple of months after she requested it, but refused to turn it over for four years. Refused to turn it over for four years. And I'm saying, okay, that just needs to be the rule for everyone. If the police are defended in doing that, then that needs to be the rule for everybody. Now, some folks are asking about her having a lawyer. Well, here's the thing. What they're saying is that she's the one who filed the motions. So, this is a woman who had to press her own defense. You want to talk about against a monstrous system here. So, the police and the city, they got big shot lawyers for a law firm. And this woman is filing her own motions, okay, with the system ignoring her. This woman was filing her own motions, trying to follow the law. She was filing her own motions and the system was ignoring her. She had to She filed the motion and didn't get the footage for years.
>> Courtroom Friday morning. Court documents show it all started in March 2021 when Rollsville police responded to a verbal altercation between White and A lot of rain. Uh, much needed though, Steve.
>> Much needed. Okay, we don't have to worry about rain there, but you all get the idea. Explain to me how it is exactly here that this woman is filing motions and they're ignoring her. So, she's got to go off and get lawyers. She's fighting these law firms. She's filing motions. The motions are correct and accurate and they're just Yeah, we ain't doing it. Yeah, we know she filed a motion, but we're not turning over anything. Where is the judge to come down on them like a ton of bricks? This woman shouldn't have to say a damn thing. Four years of them sitting on evidence that she requested. It doesn't matter whether they think that the evidence is relevant or not. She requested it. They haven't turned it in in four years. Why is the judge not holding all of them in contempt for that? What in the hell is the law? What the hell is this courtroom? What is she supposed to do under these circumstances where she's filing motions and the law firm for the city and the law firm for the police is ignoring the motions and the judge isn't even enforcing his own courtroom. They're not even not even enforcing their own courtroom in the chat room. Amarai 4404. Very glad you said that. Let me go ahead and get the Zoom up here for you so you can go ahead and call us up. Let's go ahead and get the Zoom up here so you can call us up and you can explain to all of us about what part of that that we're not getting or understanding. So, let's just go ahead and get that up and going here because we've got the relevant information here, but apparently you've got some information that nobody else has. So, let's go ahead and get that up here for you. All right, there's the link to the Zoom there in the chat room. some Ahmads. Go ahead and make sure Amarite there gets on the Zoom for us. We'll give them a couple of minutes. We'll give them a couple of minutes to go ahead and join us for that and they can explain to us exactly what it is we're allegedly not seeing. So, you got other folks out here, they're raising Goofundmemes and every damn thing else. And folks are just taking their word for it and it's all right and it's all good and they're not having to fight through all this. See, when your rights are just automatically being upheld, you don't have to go through all this stuff. Well, that's what it's supposed to be, isn't it? You know that your rights are being upheld and your rights are being defended. Um, if you have a judge in the courthouse there, he's supposed to be defending the law. Now, what part of the law says you can ignore these orders going on for years? That's a problem. show White's neighbors committing any criminal activity. Her neighbors asked for a no contact order with White following the incident. In February 2022, White asked for a copy of that body camera video of the incident. The videos were found in April 2022, but court documents say White never got a copy of the videos until this year. She filed a motion of contempt against.
Now, if that is not obstruction, what in the world is this woman filing her own motions and back in 2022 and lo and behold, four years later, why isn't the judge enforcing the rules of his own courtroom? Now, that's the only question you have to ask. Hey, judge, why are you not enforcing the rules of your own courtroom? Now, at what point is a judge's actions causing his courtroom to be completely illegitimate? At what point has he lost his legitimacy? And what do you do after that? Because you see, nobody has a right to tell you that well this is the law and the law says you don't have any rights. The law says that we are not required to respect your rights. Now this is where you jump wrong. When you start sitting up here and saying that they are not required to observe your rights, your very presence as the court means that you are obligated to observe and protect their rights. Because you see, the system says that you are innocent until proven guilty. when she filed the correct motions, it is incumbent on the judge to enforce those rules. It is unreasonable, people. It is a violation of due process when they sit there and refuse to comply with a request for four years. People, that's not a minor delay. That is a complete denial of your due process. And they are the government. The police department, the city, they are the government structure. The government structure does not have the right to deny you due process. If you filed for that information for years later, that is obstruction of justice and denial of due process. That's denial of due process. You have a right to due process. So this woman sitting there for four years, please understand, anything could have happened to her. She could have gotten hurt. She could have been killed. You do not have a right as the government to just sit on a case for four years, deny evidence. The judge is supposed to step in and put folks in handcuffs. She shouldn't have to say anything. The judge is supposed to be saying, "These are the rules of the courtroom." Folks, how many people have their cases tossed out or have themselves put in jail because they showed up for court late? Folks, how many people sit up here and find themselves in jail because they showed up for court late? You're in contempt of court for showing up late. But Roseville police is not in contempt of court for four years of refusing to turn over information. They are four years late turning in information that was lawfully and accurately requested. So that's not contempt of court. But if you showed up late for court, why that could be contempt? You think that's accidental? So, I'm asking a question here. What's self-defense? What's self-defense? What is self-defense in a system of injustice where the court, the judge, and the police are both on the same side? they are when they are targeting according to her former attorney. Well, okay, you're targeting allegedly mentally ill people. However, I'm asking the question, what is your part that you played in this? Since the local news media is not going to ask that question, by the way, I'm asking the question, what what part did you play in this? Are you liable for what occurred? Because I'm asking the question here about whether or not they have liability for this. If indeed they if indeed their actions led to this, if indeed the actions of the Roseville Police Department and now the judge, if their actions led to this, then I submit to you this, she is not the one to blame. They are that their actions, they are the ones actually responsible for leading to this unfortunate series of events. since they have flatly refused to execute their duties that they're obligated to under the law. And so everything after that is actually a consequence of their actions. People, I'm not just making this up as I go along. What I'm saying is that this is a sound legal argument. If you are going to claim that she's got mental issues and whatnot, it's like, okay, well then if you are responsible for this, after all, if you did not do what you did, do these events still happen as they did? If the police and the judge were not acting in concert with each other, both acting in collusion against her rights. Why are they not upholding her rights? Because people, if denying evidence for four years, if that's not contempt, please explain to me what is. How is not complying with that request for 4 years? How is that not contempt? Please explain to me how you can deny and refuse to respond to a motion for four years and neither the court nor anybody else has enforced it. And that's not contempt. I'm not even going five miles deep off into it. I'm just going just off of what you heard on the news. How is that not contempt? So, when these kind of situations here unfold, that's the next step that we have to go to here. And I'm asking questions and I'm submitting to you all that in the era of Luigi Manion, people are looking at these kind of cases differently. In the era of Luigi Manion, people are looking at these cases differently and they are demanding that the government actually fulfill its mandate to the people. If the government begins to disregard the law, then the signal that the government sends to everyone else is that there is no law. When the government deliberately disregards the law, the signal that they send to everyone is that there is no law. And as a result, people will start doing things on their own. That is why it is critical and pivotal for courts and judges to uphold the law. You have to do that because otherwise you send the immediate signal to everyone else that there is no law to observe. Well, then they will start putting their own parameters on it. So, this is why it is incumbent on the judges not to collude with police. This is why it is incumbent on the judges to observe the law and to enforce the law as is written. This woman shouldn't even had to show up for court. She should not have had to show up for this. The judge should have been all over the police department. He should have had the chief of police there. You should have had everybody in your courtroom called out on the carpet and somebody should have been spending 30 days in jail for refusal to comply. This woman filed a motion and no, we don't even have to go beyond that. She filed a motion. They have a responsibility to observe that motion. If they did not follow a rightful order after four years, a lawful motion after four years, she shouldn't even had to show up to make an argument. The judge should have taken care of all that. But in a system of white supremacy and a system of injustice, this is what happens. And then you are surprised that these people follow your lead. they follow your lead that there is no law to observe and everyone just can make up whatever rules they want to. So we really need to examine the place and the part that the judge in the courtroom and the police played in this unfortunate incident. We really need to examine what part they played in it. We need to take a look at that. Yes, we've already talked about her mother being one of the catalysts of this or what happened with her mom. Absolutely. And if the system has been ignoring all of this all this time, we have to examine that, hey, the system is ultimately at fault. The court, the judges, you are ultimately to blame for what occurred here. Folks, judges and courts, they have broad powers. That's the whole reason why you have judges in courts is because they're supposed to be the parents in the room. So, they have broad powers to enforce the law. And if they are not doing it now, if there's a data center coming to your town, they can ignore all the laws immediately. But when you're there with dead family members, you have dead people in your family and the system is lawless. You have dead people in your family and the system is lawless. At that point right there, I'm placing the finger of blame and pointing responsibility at the system. I'm pointing it to the judge. I'm pointing it at the police. I'm pointing it at the media for characterizing this as we need to look at her with no investigation of the police department. Hey, what took you all four years? Why is it you found it within a matter of weeks and then sat on it for four years? Why is there no investigation of that? Give the woman her footage. It doesn't matter whether you think it's relevant or not. Give her her footage and let's get on with it. She has a right to have it. If she wants to make a crazy incoherent argument, then she needs to be allowed to do that. She's supposed to have her day in court for a reason. And it looks pretty damn suspicious to all of us that there's nothing. You're going to probably allege that there's nothing on the body cam footage. Okay. If there's nothing there, then what took you four years to show us nothing? Please remember people, when these police departments got a leg to stand on, they release information quick. You see, when the police departments can defend themselves, they release all the body cam footage and all the other foot, they release that immediately. That shows up on the news the very same night. You don't have to file a court case, file a lawsuit, freedom of information. When the police feel like they're in the right and they got footage that's sympathetic to them, they release that immediately. They release that right then. They let everybody see exactly what happened, right? Then you don't have to file a case. You don't have to file a lawsuit. You ain't got to do nothing. The police force it in your face. We are defending the blue line. Okay. Well, yet everything needs to be done just like that. So, when we have a case here where this woman has asked for the footage and four years later still doesn't have it, yeah, you look pretty suspicious. You look pretty suspicious. So, at that point right there, I'm looking at the police is guilty and you're going to have to convince me that you're not on account of the fact that you got evidence. Now, this woman has been showing up for court. She's been filing her motions. She's been showing up for court. She's been doing everything she's supposed to do. How in the hell is it, folks, that you have a police department, this is their job, interacting with the courts, and their the woman who's accusing them is doing everything she's supposed to do, and the police aren't? How is it you have a whole police department, this is what they do day in and day out, and yet they're not file, they're not filing their paperwork and not submitting evidence? How in the world can that be? We're not talking about some large metropolitan police department. So, if they're not handing over the evidence that she's demanded, that's because they've decided, "Oh, don't worry. The judge has got our back. This is just showing you this is this backwater hillbilly stuff here. Well, don't worry. The judge has got our back. And I submit to you that if we want to avoid unfortunate incidents, you cannot have a lawless court and a lawless judiciary. You cannot have that. They are inspiring lawlessness. A lawless judge and a lawless police department are inspiring more lawlessness. People are following your example. They weren't doing this until they saw you show them that you are lawless. So if anybody is upset or mad about what occurred, the blame falls at the feet of the police and the judge because they had every opportunity to do something about this and they decided to both collude together and we will be lawless based on what we've seen so far. They decided to collude on lawlessness. But it goes back further than that because you see, you have a long history of promoting lawlessness. You have a long history of promoting that. Which is why I've shown you all over and over again that this is a long sad parade of promoting this kind of lawless behavior, not just in one place. So eventually you're going to be showing people that these are the actual rules. You're going to be shown that. If you don't want people to respond that way, you have to be the ones who lead first. You got to go first. this idea that you're going to say everybody else is a free citizen and we're going to protect their rights and we're even going to give them rights to break the law but not you. No, that's the part right there. This meeting with resistance. So that's why I'm asking that question. I'm asking that question here. And I think a lot of more folk are going to be asking the question about the case of Gwindelyn Wright and what is self-defense? How did the system promote this? How did the system promote this and push this? How did the police and the judge precipitate this and cause this to occur? What were their actions beforehand? We need to examine what they did because they were in the driver's seat and they were in control. people. It does not take four years to resolve something like this. So, we need to examine the judge, the police. We need to examine why it is that the police refused to turn over the body cam footage and why the judge was running interference to protect them. What did Miss White see? Cuz you see, when I see stuff like this, you have a harder time convincing me that she had mental issues. Because if she's the one with the mental issues, then why in the hell was it the police and the judge taking four years to give up body cam footage, but she's the one quote unquote with the issues? Did you all get that there? So, did her quote mental health issues caused the police department to sit on that footage for four years? Because now you have to convince me that four years of delay of turning over lawfully requested footage that that's somehow legal and permissible. Cuz you see, if you all had footage on your cell phones that the police department requested, you ain't going to get no four years to decide to turn it over. Did you get that? If you had footage that the police department wanted, you're not going to get four years to hand it over. You're not going to get four years where they requested it and you tell them a couple weeks later you found it and you got it and then four years later you have still neglected to hand it over. Y'all tell me, when do you think you're going to be in a court case where you got four years and you just haven't turned over to the police? they requested it and the judge is gonna go along with it. That the judge is gonna sit there and say, "Well, I know it's been four years, but that's not really contempt to court or nothing." Tell me, when do you get to do that? When do you have the right to do that? When are you allowed to do that? So tell me, what part, Mr. Bloom, of her alleged mental health issues caused the police department to stall for four years to hand over the body cam footage? Tell me, what part of her mental health issues caused that? What part of her mental health issues led the judge to ignore all of that? Because if any of us tried some garbage like that, the judge would be real quick to let us know that you're in Hazard County Jail. That's the part I'm telling you. So no folks, whether it's Chud the Builder or anybody else here, George Zimmerman and Kyle Writtenhouse have let folks know that by the way, you cannot jump to conclusions about what qualifies as self-defense. So I've got questions here and I think a lot of folks have questions based on the results of the events as we witnessed them. We got questions about that. We got questions and I think it's incumbent on us to re-examine what these things mean. We certainly will. I want to thank everyone who has contributed for tonight's program on PayPal, Super Chat, Vinmo. Shout out to Nancy King. Thank you very much to you, Sport Night here, sister. Thank you, New Black Media, for covering this story. Salute to you. Salute to you sister here. Also to my man Mr. Richberg, thank you very much for your support here tonight. To Mark B, Naji, Logic for Emotion, Tom Slick, Claude Neely, and everybody else here. Thank you very much for your supporting here tonight. We appreciate that. And folks, I'm not being incendiary here. I mean that literally. I'm asking a very serious question. In the 21st century today, after what we've seen, people, we have to ask questions. Is is it self-defense? Is it self-defense? If you are being targeted by the system under these circumstances, by the way, is it self-defense? I'm asking a question. And I think that these people need to be held to account. They need to be held to account for their part in it. And no, I don't think we need to let them off the hook. This woman been fighting this case now for five years. She's been forced to file her own motions. And that just tells you these lawyers in the court got together and said, "Well, we'll just string this out as long as we can. We'll just string this out and she'll just be sitting up here getting drug along." Because you see, if the idea was to bankrupt her, the city and the police have hired lawyers. So, they're charging her tax dollars. Okay. If their plan was to bankrupt her legally, that didn't work. If she's going to fight the case herself, so if she's going to file her own motions and fight the case herself, then you're not going to be able to bankrupt her. So that's when they start stalling for time. Okay. Well, since we can't bury her under motions, we'll just go ahead and drag this out. We'll just drag it out and hope that she doesn't live long enough to finish this. A judge is supposed to prevent that from occurring. A judge is not supposed to allow stall and delay to be used. Do you all understand that? A judge isn't supposed to allow a municipality or a police department to utilize stalling and delay. There should be a reasonable amount of time to file your motions and a reasonable amount of time to submit and comply with the motions. Four years is not reasonable. Four years is oppressive. Four years is unjust. And the a judge is never supposed to have allowed this to get four years along. Do you understand that the judge isn't supposed to allow this to get four years along? He was supposed to have stopped this before it ever got there. So, we have to blame the judge for these events because your responsibility was to make sure this never got this far along. It doesn't matter how quote unquote major or minor her concerns seemed to you. When she filed that motion, the judge was told to be Johnny on the spot. A year later is not reasonable. four years later is not just unreasonable, that's outrageous. So that is why we are discussing this in very clear terms. You're going to have to convince me that we need to turn any attention to her because as far as I can tell, this is a system that all the way around colluded against a woman by herself and on her own and a bunch of lawyers who figure that they're big enough and strong enough that they can victimize you because they got the city and the judge behind their backs. when they all get together to collude against you right there. No, we're not supposed to support that. We're not supposed to support that ever. There will be some folks who don't like what we hear here, but by the way, remember you still got folks trying to defend Chud the Builder on strictly racist grounds. So, you're in the wrong place to try to figure that. What a lot of folks are out here learning here right now is that it is in your best interest to stop supporting mechanisms and systems and practices of injustice. It is in your best interest to get to justice. Enforce it quickly. Stop trying to be a rubber stamp on police departments or whatever. If you're corrupt or crooked judges, if you don't want to be characterized or stated as corrupt and crooked, best piece of advice is stop acting corrupt and crooked. If you don't want to be accused of that, stop behaving in a corrupt and crooked manner. And since you started behaving that way, you will be characterized that way unless or until you can prove otherwise. But folks, right there, nobody should have to wait four years to get this taken care of, to get body cam footage. No one should have to wait four years. That's not just unreasonable. That's unjust. I do not care what's on the body cam footage. It's not reasonable to tell her she has to wait four years for it. I don't care if the body cam footage just shows lightning bugs flying around. It is a miscarriage of justice that four years later she doesn't have it. We're not talking about a major metropolitan police department. That is the definition of injustice. When the police want to drag you into court, you get your date and then that is your date and you better be there or there will be consequences. So, how is it that she can do this with the system and there are no consequences for the system not following their own rules. Stop subjecting people that you think you're going to put in positions of powerlessness. Stop doing that. Empowering the people is one of the major ways that you prevent these kind of things from occurring. Give them their day. Give them their hearing. Make sure that they are empowered. Make sure everything's where it's supposed to be. And that's how you prevent situations like this from occurring. If you want to create situations like this, start by being a corrupt police department, corrupt judges behaving in a corrupt manner, and then you're flaunting it. Start by doing that. And that's how you create messes like this. I think this is a very important case here because a lot of folks flipped out when they saw this. They're not accustomed to seeing females do this. They're certainly not accustomed
to seeing black females do this. In some people's eyes, they probably saw this as a Harriet Tubman moment. In some people's eyes, they probably saw this as a Harriet Tubman moment.
You see, when Luigi Manion took matters into his own hands, he was heralded as a hero of the people. He was heralded as a hero fighting the system. The optics of a black female doing the exact same thing. They are very, very worried about the optics of that because right now, eventually, don't worry, folks are going to start asking questions of this police department about what really went on, what really caused her to be so desperate. She had to do this. What really happened?
And as people start gathering to start asking more and more questions along those lines about, hey, what's the rest of the story and what really happened? I submit to you that that's going to cause more things to occur when people start asking, "By the way, what was your police department? What was the Roseville Police Department covering up? That was so important to them that they're hiring lawyers and withholding body cam footage. If this is such a minor thing and she's just emotionally unhinged, why do you need multiple lawyers and to hide the body cam footage if she's just whacked out of her head and she's just in court blabbering and there really isn't anything to it? If there's really nothing to it, why do you need a bunch of lawyers and to withhold the footage? That doesn't make sense, people. If she's just irrational and there's nothing to it, why do you need lawyers and to withhold footage for almost half a decade? That doesn't sound like she's got nothing. That's not the behavior of folks who are up against nothing. That's not how you act when somebody's just going to be irrationally babbling in court. That's not the way you behave. You don't behave that way.
If somebody's just going to go to court and babble, you would want to get them into court quickly so you can show quickly that they're babbling quickly so you can get everybody on your side quickly so you can get this dismissed and removed quickly. But that's not what they did. They did the exact opposite. And the if people actually start asking questions, which we have begun the process of tonight. Yeah. And now you have to explain exactly what you all were really doing. And is Gwindelyn right as crazy as you want to try to make it seem? Or did she have a rational, desperate response in the face of organized injustice? And right now this police department and this judge have to prove to all of us that this was not organized injustice. Because right now that's exactly what it looks like as a textbook case of organized injustice and you are responsible for everything that happened to everyone as a result of your practice of organized injustice. So no until you can prove to me that it was not organized injustice. Freewind Gwindelyn white. Freewind and white until you can prove to us that you are not practicing organized injustice. Until then, you don't have a leg to stand on. So, right now, we accuse you of organized injustice based on what we've seen. And until you do that, you are the bad guys and you are responsible for this. And she is a victim of you and your system. She's the victim. Now, where is your evidence? Otherwise, we're going to go ahead and wrap things up here tonight.
If you are new here to the Black Channel, welcome to the Haven of Intelligent Black Thought. We do this every weekend, holidays, some days in between. So, click that subscribe button and notification button. Join us each and every time that we're here. If you haven't been to blackchannelms.com, check out our groundbreaking, bestselling documentary work at blackjunfilms.com. I want to thank all of you for tuning in tonight's program, live or recorded. Thank you for liking, subscribing, and sharing. And this concludes tonight's broadcast of the Black Channel. I am your host, your brother, your humble servant, the Black Authority. And until next time, my brothers and my sisters from around the world. Remember, black is the future and the future.