The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection$
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 PodcastsGregory Hood Archive
Race Perverts Justice
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>
Credit: Screengrab/YouTube/CSPAN

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • B
Show CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

One of the great flaws of the Anglosphere is litigiousness. Almost everything important is decided in court. This shows the high trust Anglos have in their institutions. Unfortunately, these institutions can be turned into sophisticated tools for white dispossession. The court system has been corrupted and whites need to recognize this.

Whites just got a forceful reminder. Jared Taylor has summarized the fate of Travis McMichael, Greg McMichael, and William “Roddie” Bryan. They will probably all die in prison. Their sentences and charges were outrageous, and the judge acted shamefully.

These men were charged because Mr. Bryan publicly released a video he thought would clear them. Instead, the reaction was outrage. No charges would have been filed if everyone involved had been white. However, since Arbery was black, the media turned the shooting into a story about a lynching. That’s clearly not what the video shows, but that was the media message. This quickly led to another prosecutor bringing charges. The press encouraged the state to ruin three men’s lives.

Mr. Bryan sealed his fate by making the video public. He, and the lawyer who advised him to do so, had faith in American institutions and in the common sense of Americans. They were wrong.

In 2012, Professor James Duane of the conservative Regent University School of Law gave a lecture called “Don’t Talk to the Police.” More than 17 million people have watched it, not counting mirror copies. His point was that you can never talk your way out of legal trouble. Even if you are honest and completely innocent, you may doom yourself by mistaking a detail or confessing to something you didn’t know was a crime. The best thing to do is not talk at all and call your lawyer.

White Americans emotionally rebel against this. I rebel against this. We admire honesty and expect the truth to prevail. Our supreme law, the Constitution, has become a quasi-sacred text of a civic religion. By implication, the law itself becomes something sacred, beyond politics. Whites respect — even revere — the law and its servants, including police and judges. According to a recent Pew poll, Americans have more confidence in the Supreme Court than in Congress, newspapers, or the public schools.

We live in a society Anglos built. They came from high-trust, individualistic societies of northern Europe. The law and an abstract conception of justice matter to us. Unlike almost every other group, Northern European whites trust courts rather than clan-based patronage systems to settle disputes. We come from societies relatively low in corruption. When the highest court rules, we obey.

However, the Icelandic sagas and the history of Scottish feuds show that the rule of the clan is not foreign to us. Sicilians learned the rule of omertásilence — because foreign conquerors (Normans, Bourbons, Moors) were often ruling them and institutions were corrupt. In times of chaos, we might revert to these patterns. Much of the rest of the world still practices clan-based justice. In the Middle East, the clan may have more power than the state. Whites don’t want to be like Arabs. They may therefore cling more desperately to their rationalist, legalistic system. Unfortunately, this is naïve pride.

In the United States, the Supreme Court operates like a small legislature. The Framers may have intended for the judiciary to be the weakest branch, but they underestimated Anglos’ willingness to obey courts. Considering the terrible damage the Supreme Court has inflicted on this country, the Framers’ underestimation of the judiciary may have been their biggest mistake.

Critical Race Theory has already penetrated the legal system. Those in power have told non-whites that white racism causes all their problems. That is not just a temptation to non-whites to commit violence against us. The anti-white assumptions of those who rule us, constantly trumpeted by the media, make it hard for us get a fair trial if there is any taint of race in a case. Other groups see the courts for what they are: political bodies that often exercise power on behalf of groups and specific interests. Whites must see this too.

This is a lesson whites should have learned from the O.J. Simpson trial, in which an appeal to black solidarity led a jury to acquit a suspect with overwhelming evidence against him. What happens when whites are betrayed by the courts? Consider the murder of Jill Halliburton Su, a white woman married to an Asian named Nan Yao Su. Jurors agreed that a black man, Dayonte Resiles, killed Mrs. Su after she found him robbing her house. Mr. Resiles tied her up and then stabbed her 25 times, leaving her to die in a bathtub.

Dayonte Resiles achieved some fame by running out of a court hearing, making it past the bailiff, and remaining free for a week. After he was caught, the Miami Sun-Sentinel ran a story called “No escape this time for accused killer of Davie woman.”

However, he may still escape. Mr. Resiles had accomplices who helped him run from the courtroom, and has at least one support page on Facebook (American Renaissance is banned from Facebook). He also had sympathy from jurors. They agreed that he killed her; they were to decide only whether he was guilty of manslaughter or first-degree murder. During the trial, two black jurors in what the Sun-Sentinel called a “diverse jury,” accused the forewoman of not caring enough about Mr. Resiles’s race. The foreperson said this “narrative” about race was impossible to reverse once it set in. Three jurors “refused to sign off on a verdict [first-degree murder] that would send a young Black man to prison for the rest of his life.”

The jury finally agreed on manslaughter, even though the forewoman was convinced that Mr. Resiles was guilty of first-degree murder. She announced the verdict in open court. However, when the judge began to question each juror individually about the verdict — a standard ritual — she could not bring herself to say “yes.” As she later explained:

I looked at the defense table. They were just cheering and patting him on the back, like he graduated high school or made the winning touchdown at a football game. I thought, what have I done? Is this the world I am creating for my children, a world where someone can get away with murder because of the color of their skin?

She told the judge she did not agree with the verdict. The judge ordered the jury to keep deliberating, but it could not agree, so there was a mistrial.

This woman took a chance. She hoped another jury would convict Mr. Resiles of first-degree murder. But it might not. A lot will depend on the racial makeup of the jury.

During famous cases such as the Kyle Rittenhouse trial, sex and race of juries are very important to the media. But in all cases, prosecution and defense know that whites and blacks think differently. If you know the racial makeup of the jury, you may know the verdict, or at least whom you must convince. During elections, the same thing takes place on a larger scale. Journalists and analysts make projections based on the turnout of various groups because group behavior is predictable.

A jury acquitted Kyle Rittenhouse. He’s free and a hero to many conservatives, but he is lucky he didn’t kill any blacks. That alone might very well have led to a guilty verdict.

In 2016, Vox encouraged jury nullification to fight “unfair and racist laws.” Elie Mystal did the same in Above the Law. For blacks, jury nullification is a long-standing practice. Even a paper from the Cornell Journal of Law and Public Policy trying to debunk the supposed myth of black jury nullification admitted, “[I]n a racially divided society only whites have the luxury of claiming to be color blind.” (58) Blacks don’t forget they are black just because they are on juries. In theory, jury nullification should not be allowed, but acquittals can’t be overturned.

Credit: Screengrab/YouTube/CSPAN
Credit: Screengrab/YouTube/CSPAN

Some progressive District Attorneys want to cut back on law enforcement so they won’t arrest so many blacks. Robert Hampton noted in 2019 that a murder conviction was tossed out because a juror might have used a racial slur during deliberations (he denies it). In contrast, U.S. Army Sergeant Jonathan Pentland lost his career and a jury convicted him of assault for confronting a black youth who had allegedly been bothering neighborhood girls and women. Massive media coverage and loud mobs were part of this case, just as they were the Arbery case. It’s tempting to say media coverage drove the outcome.

We like to believe juries are sealed off from the world when they consider a case. However, myths about white privilege or negative media stereotypes about white Southerners go into the jury rom. Likewise, judges often worry about politics. If they want to advance to a higher court, they must rule in ways that please the media and win the support of a political faction. They won’t be promoted for helping white advocates, even if the law is on our side. It’s hard even to find a lawyer (or be a lawyer) if you are a white advocate.

An Anglo-Saxon legal code doesn’t work without Anglo-Saxons. The code assumes that jurors share assumptions and respect abstract justice. Many blacks don’t. They want their people to get the best outcome. Some inner-city blacks have a “no snitchin’” rule that means police can’t solve murder cases. This means more crime, but at least some in “the community” seems to prefer that.

The professor from Regent is right. There’s no reason to talk to the police. Let a lawyer do it for you. A white defendant in a racial case is unlikely to get a fair trial. If he’s a white advocate, that will be used against him. He cannot trust jurors — probably of any race — to rule fairly. Even posting a flyer could prove dangerous; prosecutors can overcharge you and get a conviction.

The courts aren’t totally lost. Victory is still impossible. But be very careful before filing a lawsuit or doing anything that could get you involved with the law. Courtrooms have become political battlegrounds.

Blacks and whites don’t agree on issues such as police power or free speech. Therefore, we shouldn’t judge each other, at least not in a courtroom. Point nine of the Black Panther Party’s 10 Point Program was a demand that blacks be tried only by black jurors. That is practical only in an all-black country. Today, non-whites are often demanding separation. The English Common law brought us many blessings, but we might be better of being tried by an arbitrary Star Chamber than by a “diverse jury.”

(Republished from American Renaissance by permission of author or representative)
 
Hide 18 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. Mike Tre says:

    I find myself a bit embarrassed that I must concede that a group of foul mouthed negroes came to this conclusion almost 30 years before i did, but Fuck the Police.

    Race traitors, pensioneers, welfare recipients with guns, covid enforcers, antifa enablers, harassers of the working class commuters, municipal stooges, rigid and robotic unthinking drones, modern day Sheriffs of Nottingham.

    I’d hang just about everyone of them.

    • Troll: 36 ulster
  2. The code assumes that jurors share assumptions and respect abstract justice.

    THAT is very commendable!

    Many blacks don’t. They want their people to get the best outcome. Some inner-city blacks have a “no snitchin’” rule that means police can’t solve murder cases. This means more crime, but at least some in “the community” seems to prefer that.

    Are you sure that that only happens with the Blacks?! Are you sure that that isn’t the same with the Whites on the international scene? Aren’t 5-eyed whites the same as “inner-city blacks?”

    Thus, naturally, these are the same crimes Western media accuse China of committing. There are few better examples of psychological projection (and psychopathy) than committing such abuses yourself, and then falsely accusing someone else of committing them. The more atrocities China can be accused of committing – the less guilty they feel about having actually committed theirs.

    Moreover, it takes away attention from your own real crimes and shifts the focus on China’s imaginary ones. The world can then spend more time discussing China’s unproven, imaginary genocide in Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region, and focus less on Canada’s real, proven genocide at home.

    https://news.cgtn.com/news/2021-06-26/China-is-paying-hypocritical-Western-nations-back-in-their-own-coin-11pbkcmfLyw/index.html

    And more

    • Troll: bro3886
  3. Franz says:

    Today, non-whites are often demanding separation.

    Nearly all articles like this make the same case: Separation is our salvation.

    Time to make it happen. If they want it and we want it, what’s the hold up?

    • Replies: @BuelahMan
  4. SafeNow says:

    I will re-post a few points: (1) even if a legal prosecution against you is preposterous and doomed to fail, that doesn’t matter, because the cost of defending it is crippling, and you are toast. (2) Your OWN attorney is part of the toaster, because his case-management paradigm is: complex, expensive, drawn-out and hostile. Thus, keep your head down. Troll me, cuck me, but that’s where we are.

    Group internment is probably coming, and if it does, the courts are not going to stop it. In Trump vs. Hawaii, the opportunity was presented legally to overrule Korematsu, the WWII group-internment case. The Roberts court wrote that Korematsu had been “overruled by history.” Group internment thus remains the law of the land, lying about like a loaded weapon ready to be fired, in Justice Jackson’s words, dissenting in Korematsu. Pro tip: Practice “the stupid look” in front of a mirror. They cannot take everybody, and when they see the stupid look, they will decide you are harmless, and go away. I have more pro tips on this subject, which I call “the stupid vocal style.”

  5. “If they want it and we want it, what’s the hold up?”
    Separation? As a practical real world answer?
    Separation is lick a divorce — there has to be a property settlement. Now, in the 2020’s I wonder how unbalanced, unfair & biased such a settlement would be? “Reperations” on steroids….. However, this is not to debate the question of whether it would be worth it (for all parties) at almost any price.

  6. ruralguy says:

    An Anglo-Saxon legal code doesn’t work without Anglo-Saxons.

    So true, .. not just in law. When I first started work, 40-50 years ago, work environments were polite and pleasant, homogenously white, and employees worked happily for decades in the same company. When I retired, 10 years ago, the work environments were in turmoil. They are filled with foreigners who seem pleasant in conversation, but it was obvious from their demeanor and actions that they were very hostile to whites who ruled over them. Turnover in our idealistic multicultural companies like Amazon and Google proves this hostility: the average employee tenure is a shocking 1.1 years. Recently, at Amazon, it has now dipped to 10 months! I lived next to many Amazon engineers who were just miserable.

    Anglo-Saxon law, work environments, and even nations don’t work without Anglo Saxons.

  7. Anglo-Saxon law, work environments, and even nations don’t work without Anglo Saxons.

    So, if China doesn’t even work, how come it becomes a “threat” to the 5-eyers?!!!

    • Replies: @ruralguy
  8. anarchyst says:

    In the Arbery case, the “powers that be” had to “shop” for a prosecutor in order to prosecute the three men.
    This is no different than “judge shopping” to get a friendly judge who will render a favorable verdict.
    Once the original prosecutor made his decision not to prosecute, any further actions by any other prosecutor should have been rendered “null and void”.
    There should have never been a “second prosecutor” from another jurisdiction pressing charges.
    The laws need to be changed to keep this from occurring again, let’s get it done.
    If “prosecutor shopping” is legal, we are all in danger…

    • Replies: @RickMcHale
    , @Mr. Roberts
    , @KenH
  9. ruralguy says:
    @Deep Thought

    You missed the distinction. Gregory Hood observed our Anglo-Saxon legal code which worked in our past homogenous society isn’t working in our multicultural nation. I noted the same applies to the 5-eye nations’ work environments. None are homogenously white anymore. China works well with its laws and work environments, because it is still homogenous.

    • Thanks: Deep Thought
    • Replies: @Wokechoke
  10. Wokechoke says:
    @ruralguy

    One of the reasons the British and US forces disintegrated when the Japanese struck into Malaya, Philippines and Borneo, Indonesia was the multicultural armies that the two Allies had deployed there.

  11. This is both infuriating and gratifying.

    Infuriating because these migrant-invader scum treat the native French worse than animals. Utterly vile behavior.

    Yet also gratifying because most of these urban retirees voted for globalist and ‘progressive’ parties and condemned as ‘racist’ any French patriot who opposed le grand remplaçant.

    All these French sided with the invaders against their own people who were silenced as ‘racist’.

    Well, live with it, morons.

  12. @anarchyst

    Agree completely. It is notable that this twisted application of injustice went almost unmentioned by the mainstream media so, it must be concluded, that they support this type of unethical behavior where it suits their political / racial agenda. Sick. Now innocent men will spend the rest of their lives in prison. Where are our elected officials who should be speaking up on this issue ? As you ended, “we are all in danger”. Truly.

    • Replies: @Bear666
  13. The Satilla Three are political prisoners like Derek Chauvin.

    There’s still the matter of the orc who lied in order to sneak onto the Chauvin jury.

    https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.the-sun.com/news/2832643/blm-supporting-chauvin-juror-accused-lying-infiltrate-trial/amp/

  14. Bear666 says:
    @RickMcHale

    “Our elected officials” are stooges with (((handlers))). Not a single one has the ability to protect YT. In my 50 years, only Jim Traficant was worthy of his role. Each and every one should be hanged and their handlers eliminated.
    This is all the result of allowing the parasite into the host.

  15. @anarchyst

    This is correct, sir. There will always be an affirmative action negro who was gifted a law license from a historically black college ready and willing to prosecute a White person for even the smallest perceived grievance against his brothas and sistas. negroes love to grandstand, especially in the persecution of White people.

  16. anarchyst says:

    Racial differences manifest themselves in many ways, but are dismissed as “racism”, despite there being proof of such differences. Racial differences are immutable, despite the protestations and declarations of “social scientists” and other “race-mongers” who insist that “there are no differences between the races”, and their holy mantra: “there is only one race–the human race”. However, they could not be more wrong. Racial differences manifest themselves with differences in the efficacy of many drugs and medical treatments which have different, measurable outcomes depending on race.
    Cultural differences are also evident, but dismissed by “social scientists” who should know better. Blacks are loud, obnoxious in white society, one example being that blacks like to “talk back” to the movie screen in theaters, disturbing other patrons in the process. Their behavior is “normal” within their black society but can be unacceptable to others.
    American football player Kapaernick is PROOF that “race” IS NOT just a “social construct” but is real. Kapaernick is a prime example of black DNA asserting itself when coming of age. In a non-racial construct, Kapaernick should love his white adoptive parents who gave him every advantage when growing up. Instead, he rejects his white adoptive parents and his white societal upbringing and has allowed his black DNA to affect his judgment. Despite never being negatively discriminated against, he is a prime example for voluntary separation of the races. Nothing good has or can come of forced racial integration. We are seeing the results of this “failed grand experiment” in (forced) “racial integration” as we speak.

  17. KenH says:
    @anarchyst

    In the Arbery case, the “powers that be” had to “shop” for a prosecutor in order to prosecute the three men.

    This shouldn’t be allowed and the state AG shouldn’t be allowed to appoint special prosecutors to placate the left wing media and black twitter as happened in this case. They did “shop” for a prosecutor who was more than willing to engage in malicious prosecution and overcharge all three men.

    Secondly, the Jewish occupied federal government should not be able to pile on with civil rights and/or hate crimes charges out of racial hatred of whites and partisan vindictiveness. This is double jeopardy and people should be tried at the state level or federally but not both for the same crime.

    The first two prosecutors who reviewed the case determined that the McMichael’s acted within the law.

    • Agree: ruralguy
Current Commenter
says:

Leave a Reply -


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
$
Submitted comments have been licensed to The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Commenting Disabled While in Translation Mode
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Gregory Hood Comments via RSS
PastClassics
Analyzing the History of a Controversial Movement
Becker update V1.3.2
The Surprising Elements of Talmudic Judaism
The Shaping Event of Our Modern World
How America was neoconned into World War IV