[Thread] - CWB Blog Posts Racist, Dishonest, Inflammatory and Unethical Blog Piece

https://cwbchicago.com/2020/07/videos-by-suburban-rapper-spark-2-cpd-investigations-in-july.html

#Chicagoland #1stAmendment #CivilRights #RapMusic #IllinoisPolitics #CrimeisDown

Right away in their July 23rd, 2020 blog rambling, CWB uses a racial slur. It flies under the radar, but it IS a slur. "Wannabe rapper" is used as a dogwhistle.

While white rappers are rare, the phrase is still a slur because it refers to disdain for a mostly Black genre

CWB intentionally misleads readers and uses that deception to distract from the fact that police have very specific policies they must follow in any investigation directed toward 1st Amendment related activity

They are G.O. G02-02-01 and S02-02-01

#Chicagoland #CrimeisDown

Both policies together are 12 pages long, each being 6 pages.

Next, not sure how or why CPD is involved when the guy is from Oak Lawn.

#Chicago #CrimeisDown #Chicagoland

Next, let's look at the CBS 2 news piece by Charlie DeMar and how the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled on this kind of matter

Remember, having a criminal background doesn't cancel out a person's 1st Anendment rights

https://chicago.cbslocal.com/2020/07/22/aspiring-rapper-questioned-by-police-over-video-with-apparent-threat-to-illinois-ag-kwame-raoul-former-ag-lisa-madigan/

Before I present the SCOTUS ruling I referred to, the fact that this man had a prior case against him wherein he was unhappy or aggrieved with the handling of the case, gives rise to legitimate political expression...even by creative means

#Chicago #Chicagoland

The government must remain content neutral. See this: https://mtsu.edu/first-amendment/article/937/content-neutral and Ward v. Rock Against Racism

#Chicago #Chicagoland #CrimeisDown #1stAmendment #CivilRights

Next, see https://mtsu.edu/first-amendment/article/1025/true-threats and States v Kelner for a ruling in what "true threats" means (this isn't the only ruling on true threats)

#Chicago #Chicagoland #CrimeisDown #1stAmendment #CivilRights

People who argue the internet isn't a public space, are wrong according to Reno v ACLU, and Packingham v North Carolina

#Chicago #Chicagoland #CivilRights #1stAmendment

https://harvardlawreview.org/2017/11/packingham-v-north-carolina/

Now for that U.S. Supreme Court ruling I mentioned earlier....Elonis V U.S.

#Chicago #Chicagoland #CrimeisDown #1stAmendment #Civilrights

https://www.uscourts.gov/educational-resources/educational-activities/elonis-v-us

So, back this thread. I had some interruptions to attend to.

Earlier I pointed out the coded language used by CWB in their blog post, which goes beyond the first paragraph.

Now, when we examine the different ways CWB's language can be interpreted....

#Chicago #Chicagoland

When we give CWB the fairness of the different intents and the spirits in which their post can be taken in, and we place it side-by-side with CPD policies regarding 1st Amendment Investigations, one thing sticks out like a sore thumb

#Chicago #Chicagoland #CivilRights

CWB is using their blog, their ISP connection, and their "platform" to communicate with CPD so as to incite officers and court officials to act corruptly.

The use of language is both a science and an art. CWB uses language to communicate very dark wishes.

#Chicago

Moving forward....

There are two other CPD 1st Amendment policies that go with G02-02-01 and S02-02-01....they are G02-02 and G02-02-02, and in having posted the SCOTUS rulings, along with an analysis of CWB's language usage, we look to these policies

#Chicago #Chicagoland

For the most part, the attached portions of G02-02-01 apply to the kind of investigation CWB is talking about.

CWB omitted these policies from their blog post because their intent was to incite public emotion instead of being truthful and informing the public

#Chicago

What does CPD need to do to engage in a 1st Amendment investigation, and to provide proper protection to the speaker accused of prohibited and unprotected speech?

S02-02-01 tells us those answers.

What purpose does S02-02-01 have? I've attached it for you!

#Chicagoland

G02-02-01 states that officers have to stay in the proper scope of an investigation directed towards 1st Amendment activity.

It doesn't say what that scope will *always* be, but it *does* give examples.

#Chicago #Chicagoland #1stAmendment #CivilRights

S02-02-01 lays out what steps need to be taken for a 1A investigation requiring dept authorization

In the end, that scenario means they have to file this form attached here. (CPD 11.440)

#Chicago #Chicagoland #1stAmendment #CivilRights

What did this guy in Oak Lawn say to get CPD to take-on these extremely troublesome legal steps?

He didn't actually lay-out a threat. He is so-far riding the thin line between imminent threat and protected speech.

#Chicago #Chicagoland

In Elonis v U.S. the Supreme Court was VERY clear. The speaker's words must have no other interpretation other than a specific threat of harm.

That ruling raised the bar across all 50 states for arrest in this kind of case.

Can he still be arrested?

#Chicago #Chicagoland

Maybe a disorderly conduct charge. Maybe.

Reckless conduct won't apply here unless someone got injured during conduct that was otherwise legal, but done with reckless disregard

#Chicago #Chicagoland

Btw...if any of this thread is in any way incorrect, or I missed anything, please DO let me know.

I welcome correction and engagement, but not from people who want to be disruptive, insulting, disorderly, etc.