Scott McCollister: GUILTY

Now that the city's elected have canceled the PPB's subscription to the FBI's JTTF trojan horse scam, the feds might be motivated to investigate the PPB's proclivity for performing extrajudicial executions on Portland's African Amercian residents. The pattern that these persistent executions have started to form suggests that there is a down-in-the-ranks policy--independent of PPB leadership and mayoral administrations--that results in racially based civil rights violations with extreme prejudice.

As ambivalent as one might be about drawing on the feds to dig into local affairs, there appears to be a PPB™ Gang operating under its own agenda within the larger PPB, and on the basis of a pattern of regular, periodic street executions of non-White "problem" citizens, an investigation--something local entities are unwilling to put their hearts into--is needed.

Run the PPB™ Gang through a federal Grand Jury!

It can begin with Officer Scott "Get out of the fucking car" McCollister.

While the literally-fascist police state that is in the preliminary stages of being propped up, the very idea of the 2nd Amendment may once again not be such a taboo subject to the radical progressives...meaning, us...in the not-too-distant future. Let's hope against it. But so far, with all of these cumulative mockeries of justice being carried out, the collective breaking point may not be far off. Because truly, in the real sense of the phrase...enough is enough. Enough is e-fucking-nough.

From the moment they began circling the car like vultures, waiting for the black man driving to do something, anything, that they could pull it over for, this was a violation of civil rights. We do NOT acquit. And WE are a jury of peers.

To "real root," I feel sad for you. Kendra James died because a crazed man with a gun shot her. No other reason. I do not know whether to hate you for your ignorance, or just hope you pull your head out of your ass. I should not hate the ignorant, but it is rampant ignorance like yours that allows this kind of slaying, and it's aftermath of no consequences for those who pulled the trigger. Blaming the victim is a very old crime, and you are guilty.

And regarding the 2nd amendment, as "can't take much more" mentioned, I think the time is long past. I am a mother and I do not like guns. I do not like the idea of people around me carrying guns. They're fucking dangerous. I hate them. And until very recently, I was very much in favor of gun control. The reason I felt this way was that the 2nd amendment was designed to protect us from a rogue, fascist government, not from the kid who burglerized our car. And I did not see all this coming. Honestly, I did not think we needed to protect ourselves from the government. I laugh at my naivete now. I still fear the misuse of guns against people who piss us off, or people who commit harmless property crimes, or people who are in the wrong place. It's a terrifying thing to have the kind of assholes who frequent this planet walking around armed. I cannot say I am in support of guns even now. But we obviously need to start protecting ourselves from this police state. Suddenly, all those weird survivalists who didn't want to have to register their weapons don't seem so crazy after all. What a weird world this has become.

Just a thought.

I am no fan of the police, but McCollister was acquited by a jury of citizens who heard both sides of the story. Do you believe these people are entirely unreasonable. I assume they heard much more information than we have here, or the oregonain prints...

I know the police are often out of control, but couldn't it just be possible that McCollister is not the monster you assume.

On a side note, a friend of mine who is a pacifist, vegan, pot-smoking, anarchist, found himself playing in a neighborhood softball game with McCollister--he didn't realize who it was until the game had been going on for over an hour. His opinion was that McCollister was a very nice and quiet person and was outgoingly friendly to someone who looks very anti-establishment.

Just food for thought.

Anyway, I don't want to distract from the larger issue which is that police reform is desperatly needed in this city and probably most of the world.

I continue to notice that we get upset with people [like the cops] and not the system. Grand Jury/Criminal Court and Civil Rights decisions are based on what is written into law and not necessarily what is moral or just. Saying "I didn't do anything wrong" is not the same as "I did not break the law." In this case, two juries from two separate branches of the court [criminal and civil] have said that the threshold for breaking the law was not met. The threshold for each court is different but if the James' family lawyer could not meet the requirement of "preponderance of the evidence" mark in a civil trial then he is either a horrible lawyer or had a terribly weak case. In either case, the best way to affect change in the system is to change the rules - change the law. Get involved. Of course, that can be a frustrating experience but if the majority of our society decide that our current laws reflect the will of the people then that is democracy in action. [ From someone who has been horribly frustrated by the last 5 years of elections I appreciate what a hard pill that can be to swallow....democracy can be bittersweet. ]

To Jason:

Someone can be "nice" and still do an act of recklessness that takes another's life. Especially someone granted the tools and training to use deadly force without the reasonableness of maturity and wisdom that living longer brings to some people. I know a lot of people assume that if things didn't happen like McCollister claims, it means he did it deliberately and because she was black. That might be the case, but not necessarily if it was recklessness. However, a prejudicial attitude can unconsciously make someone act differently - even act a little more recklessly or more aggressively without the person being aware of it. A "nice" person can also misrepresent the facts because self preservation is a strong instinct in us all. My personal opinion is that Scott didn't mean to take her life, but getting her out of the car became too important - maybe even an ego thing, where he strongly felt he couldn't "lose". He may justify it in his mind because he believes she was just a drug addicted criminal and so no loss to society.

Lemon,

It doesn't sound to me like you were present at the trial...I was there every day, and heard all the evidence, including some that the jury didn't hear. In my opinion, the James' family attorneys more than met their burden of proof of preponderance of the evidence. The problem with juries is that they are allowed to give evidence and testimony any weight they so choose...

And, they apparently chose to give no weight to the independent, unbiased witnesses (the forsensic evidence, Meilani Carruthers and Brician Williams), and all the weight to the police and their "experts".

Regarding the Grand Jury in the criminal case, that system is totally one side, and the DA decides what evidence to present. In my experiences, the DA only presents evidence that supports their case. The Grand Jury members never get a chance to review all of the actual evidence that a real jury in a criminal trial woud be exposed to.

Had the jury in the civil trial been comprised of Kendra's peers and _not_ just McCollister's peers (i.e. white middle class from the suburbs, with the exception of one Asian female), in my opinion, the outcome would have been far different.

A jury said OJ simpson was innocent too. Don't tell me you believe that.

A jury sentenced Sacco and venzetti to die. They were wrong.

Just a thought.

Court cases come down to psychology, not facts. It's all about "convincing" a jury, not presenting facts for a jury to examine. And right now, the mass psychology of the united states is one of clinging to safety, blind obedience to authority, and a near total disregard for the value and promise of liberty. This is a society of people locked in cages trying to stay on the warden's, or perhaps zookeeper's, good side. It is the illusion of safety over the practice of autonomy. The founders of this country had strong words for such poor choices, as I'm sure most are aware.

But I want to commend jason for a couple points raised. First, it is always good to come from a place of openness rather than dogmatism. Second, it is absolutely important to recognize that the jury wasn't "unreasonable". No, I would certainly argue that they were very reasonable, and chose exactly the course of action that made sense to them, in the context of wanting security above all else. However, though I am willing to consider further evidence that could be brought to light, as far as I can tell the facts in this case already have only 1 conclusion. No one has countered the fact that Scott McCollister shot Kendra James in the back while she was laying down facing away from him after she had been hit by a tazer. To me, that is indictment enough but let's use some critical thinking to examine the alleged scenarios a bit further.

Now, in the scenario that McCollister presented, which was different from his original story, he stood with one foot in the car and one foot on the ground as the car was moving. First, the incompetence of doing such a thing should have been enough to get him off the street. Then as the car was moving, slowly, James was tazered, fell to her right, and was then shot through the back by McCollister. All of this because, according to McCollister he was worried about falling. Does it even need to be stated that if one is concerned about falling one would probably act to regain one's balance, perhaps, in this case, by removing one's foot from the moving car, instead of acting in a way which would cause one to further lose balance, like the act of drawing a weapon and firing it.

My point is that even if McCollister and his defenders were being honest, which they weren't, it would still be a heinous act. However, given that none of the witnesses nor the police at the scene would corroborate McCollister's story, I feel it's safe to conclude that McCollister was lying and was not inside the car at all and at no time "in danger" of being off balance. We all know that cops have no problem lying to stick up for one another so it would make sense for the other cops to readily agree to McCollister's story. The fact that they didn't corroborate his story under oath shows that they were not confident that McCollister would get off and they didn't want to face perjury charges if the jury didn't believe McCollister. Therefore it stands to reason that perhaps the witnesses were correct and McCollister had not stepped inside the car and was standing outside of it when he shot Kendra James through the back after she had been tazed and lay facing away from him.

So while I remain open to evidence being presented, no matter how much I exercise my imagination I can't think of anything that would even begin to justify what happened.

And I would like to further anon's statement that "Nice people kill, too." Not only do nice people kill, nice people do most of the killing. That is, most people that kill other people are perfectly decent people in other situations. Many people in my family are or were soldiers. They're great people but they did kill other people when they thought it was appropriate to do so. The first step for a killer is always to dehumanize the person you are killing, as cops and soldiers, in particular though not exclusively, are conditioned to do. And in this case, like so many others, the police were backed by the corporate media in their efforts to dehumanize Kendra James.

I tell you this, a culture that decides that it's ok to kill people because they are not "of value" is a culture that is going to experience a lot of pain and suffering as the lines of whose life is "of value" and whose life is "not of value" continue to shift.

While I think it's great that people want to encourage others to get involved with police reform and legal reform, which are very noble efforts and could have a real positive impact on our community I would also not neglect the cultural issues involved. I have no doubt that people will once again reject the notion that security and safety can be provided by a strong government and that the citizens of the united states will once again embrace the desire to "establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity." I also have no doubt that people will once again realize that safety with liberty is something one finds by being a part of and contributing to a strong, vibrant community that cares for all of its members and not by offering servitude to any government, corporation, or church.

your choice


Consider confronting a institution comprised with known and unknown individuals that perhaps conspired to cover up a unjust killing-Murder

You may face this group of killers and this institution in the community every day for the rest of your life.
You know these people know where you live.
You know these people kill.
You know their are more of these people in this institution that are unidentified that kill.
You know the killers(maybe)afford experts to cover up there killing.
You know the main stream media ruin the character of the opposition to this institution.

I suspect the more convinced that you are confronting a instiution that harbors murders the more likely you won't see them.

So Ms James was on drugs. Was mccollister NOT on drugs? How about steroids? Was he NOT on steroids? If he was, we wouldn't know, because cops are exempt from testing. And, it's common knowledge that steroids are psychotropic. I choose to think that mccollister was on "gear", because it's part of cop culture to be, for cops of a certain mentality, & he did not offer himself for testing, afaik. For any cop involved in killing, blood & urine testing should be standard practice. After all, when, let's say, a trucker is involved in a serious accident, s/he must be tested. Yet, when a cop kills, s/he walks. I choose to assume that mccollister & sery & others were/are on 'roids. Add that Springfield cop who killed a fifteen year old this week. And so on. I choose to so assume, because tho i do not see results of lab testing, i do see results of psychotropism: deaths from service revolvers.

I have been in PDX for about six months in which two people have been shot by officers "fearing for their lives." I've also heard the tale of the man shot while weilding a knife... shot while weilding a knife. It would appear to be that no matter what the training involved with the PPB, they are just a bunch of cowards. Here's a reality check for any future cops... Plan on getting shot, that way you don't have to "fear for your life," when putting your life on the line IS your job description. If I were an officer I would rather be injured in the line of duty and get some paid time off, or at the worst, die and be remembered as a hero that selflessly gave his life for the safety of the community. All Scott McCallister can be remembered as now is a monster with a gun. Oh, and the reason all you pigs HAVE those nifty little radios is to call for backup. It is almost impossible to escape from a fully mobilized law enforcement agency for long. True criminals are always caught... but I guess that puts it plainly. True criminals, if only the PDX police put the effort into finding more of those.*Kedra James you did not die in vain*...I promise.