Woman calls cops another Black Jogger

Post Reply New Topic

This misapplication of the word is what causes the term to lose impact... And, unfortunately, those who are misapplying it seem oblivious to the fact that their own actions are objectively more racist than those they are accusing of racism (As I've discovered when trying to explain how their words\actions meet the actual definition of racism)... Sadly, those people appear to desire a return to the time before MLK spoke of his dream, rather than working to make that dream a reality.

i just don't get why so many here are defending that woman despite what she did.

[
Amy Cooper is another win for me.

The charges against her were dropped.

Nicholas Sandmann was another win for me.

Why not get on the winning team, and see the world for how it's, and not for what you want it to be?

jesus said to be in this world but not of it. the world is largely sociopathic, but i don't have to be of that, even if it is a stinking winning team.

I imagine there was a similar sentiment about joining a winning team in 1933 as well,

Yeah, me too.

On Monday, the Manhattan District Attorney announced that Ms Cooper — dubbed “Central Park Karen” — will face misdemeanour charges for allegedly telling police the man was threatening her life.

She will be charged with filing a false report, which is a misdemeanour punishable by up to a year in jail, reported The New York Times.

“Today our office initiated a prosecution of Amy Cooper for falsely reporting an incident in the third degree,” Cyrus R. Vance, the Manhattan District Attorney said.

“We are strongly committed to holding perpetrators of this conduct accountable.”

§ 240.50 Falsely reporting an incident in the third degree. A person is guilty of falsely reporting an incident in the third degree when, knowing the information reported, conveyed or circulated to be false or baseless, he or she:
1.
Initiates or circulates a false report or warning of an alleged occurrence or impending occurrence of a crime, catastrophe or emergency under circumstances in which it is not unlikely that public alarm or inconvenience will result; or
2.
Reports, by word or action, to an official or quasi-official agency or organization having the function of dealing with emergencies involving danger to life or property, an alleged occurrence or impending occurrence of a catastrophe or emergency which did not in fact occur or does not in fact exist; or
3.
Gratuitously reports to a law enforcement officer or agency (a) the alleged occurrence of an offense or incident which did not in fact occur; or
(b)
an allegedly impending occurrence of an offense or incident which in fact is not about to occur; or
(c)
false information relating to an actual offense or incident or to the alleged implication of some person therein; or
4.
Reports, by word or action, an alleged occurrence or condition of child abuse or maltreatment or abuse or neglect of a vulnerable person which did not in fact occur or exist to:
(a)
the statewide central register of child abuse and maltreatment, as defined in title six of article six of the social services law or the vulnerable persons’ central register as defined in article eleven of such law, or
(b)
any person required to report cases of suspected child abuse or maltreatment pursuant to subdivision one of section four hundred thirteen of the social services law or to report cases of suspected abuse or neglect of a vulnerable person pursuant to section four hundred ninety-one of such law, knowing that the person is required to report such cases, and with the intent that such an alleged occurrence be reported to the statewide central register or vulnerable persons’ central register. Falsely reporting an incident in the third degree is a class A misdemeanor.

It's a wonder some backbones haven't broken with all the weaving and gymnastics involved.

In a statement on Twitter, Amy Cooper’s lawyer, Robert Barnes, wrote: “After a thorough and honest inquiry, the New York [district attorney’s] office dismissed all charges today against Amy Cooper. We thank them for their integrity and concur with the outcome.”

Barnes also hinted at possible legal action arising from coverage of the confrontation, writing: “Others rushed to the wrong conclusion based on inadequate investigation and they may yet face legal consequences.”

Certain people here dragged every possible legal avenue for her to escape jail - in the end her intended victim was the one who decided not press charges, Instead of accepting the consequences and learning from her mistake she is now trying to monetise her conduct to inflict pain on her ex-employer and recoup lost wages.

Amy Cooper may not be racist but I think I have provided more than enough evidence fantasies to suggest her actions were racist in terms of weaponising race. Her only hope main risk is that she gets a judge who thinks like some of the folk here on WP and tries to defend her because they are sucked into her "white damsel in distress" performance. acts irrationally, ignoring the law as written, in favor of "feels".

An interesting question, of which I'm honestly curious as to the answer\explanation:

For those who claim she is guilty of "racist" actions (or that she is simply "racist"): Had events transpired as they did (same people, same words used), with the only difference being that Ms Cooper was also of "African American" descent, would you deem her actions racist (and why\why not)?

What if we only claim they are suggestive of racist attitudes, not by themselves conclusive evidence of those attitudes?

What if we believe that hypothetical would need to occur in order to comment on what might have motivated black Ms. Cooper?

In that case, the same would then be true were Ms Cooper to have been of "African American" descent, wouldn't they? Nothing else changed in the situation other than Ms Cooper's race, so the same attitudes\beliefs would still be present in the person of Ms Cooper.

Given people have not been claiming "they are suggestive of racist attitudes", but instead that she was categorically "racist", or that her actions were, this is why I am curious as to the answer to the question I asked.

How would you need this to occur? You already have the location, people, words spoken. The only change is in the race of one person.

Basically you're complaining that people assumed the sound of hooves were from horses when so far nothing has actually suggested they weren't from horses, it just has yet to be conclusively proven that they were from horses.

Sorry, I'm still in the 'most likely horses' camp and I don't feel the need to pretend like horses aren't still the most likely explanation.

I have an imaginary situation, not a real situation. With real situations you can look into a person's attitudes based on what they've said and how they've acted before.

It's not a difficult question: Were Ms Cooper of African American descent, would you consider her words\actions racist (and why\why not)?

Again, this is simply taking a known situation and changing one minor detail. Nothing else (background, "personal attitudes", etc.) is being changed, merely the ancestry of the person who's actions\motives are being judged by some here and whose judgement differs from professionals who investigated the situation.

It's not a difficult question: Were Ms Cooper of African American descent, would you consider her words\actions racist (and why\why not)?