New Orleans Newspaper Petitions for Documents Related to Prosecutorial Misconduct in Danziger Bridge Police Shootings to be Unsealed, Cops Seeking to Get Convictions Overturned

the fiveNOLA.comA week after Hurricane Katrina hit New Orleans, several police officers were involved in shooting and killing two unarmed men and wounding four others at the Danziger Bridge. The cops concocted a story about an officer down to cover up their actions. Seven of them were eventually indicted on charges of murder and attempted murder but a judge threw out those indictments because prosecutors shared secret grand jury testimony with a police officer who was a witness in the case. A few days later the Bush Justice Department stepped in with charges of their own. Federal prosecutors secured civil rights convictions against five cops in 2011, and last year they received sentences ranging from six to 65 years in prison.

The five are now seeking to have their convictions overturned in favor of a new trial due to prosecutorial misconduct in the federal trial; the judge in the case ordered prosecutors investigating leaks in their office and the Department of Justice is also investigating. An assistant US attorney and an assistant to the US attorney both admitted to commenting on the case online. The Times-Picayune is petitioning the judge to unseal documents related to the investigation. The newspaper explains:

NOLA.com | The Times-Picayune's attorneys argue that the public has a right to sealed court filings and transcripts of hearings that U.S. District Judge Kurt Engelhardt held behind closed doors. Those hearings came after the judge ordered prosecutors to investigate the source of leaked information about the probe of the shootings.

"The defendants have filed motions with the court asking that their convictions be overturned on the basis of prosecutorial misconduct," the newspaper's attorney Lori Mince said. "At some point the court is going to rule on those motions, and the public is entitled to know every piece of information the court considers in making its decision."

It’s hard to tell if or how much the case was tainted by prosecutorial indiscretion if the documents aren’t unsealed, though maybe someone will leak them?

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • Dweebston||

    BUUUUUU—wait, the Bush DoJ indicted murderer cops? Now I'm torn. On the one hand, I'm leery of federal meddling in state affairs, and the affairs of state police are nearly definitionally none of the feds' business. On the other hand, I'm always happy seeing cops face justice for their crimes.

    Wait, I'm not torn. Fuck 'em.

  • ||

    A few days later the Bush Justice Department stepped in with charges of their own. Federal prosecutors secured civil rights convictions against five cops in 2011, and last year they received sentences ranging from six to 65 years in prison.

    Bush prosecuted cops for civil rights violations? Unpossible! Republicans want to repeal all civil rights laws and give such cops medals.

    "The defendants have filed motions with the court asking that their convictions be overturned on the basis of prosecutorial misconduct," the newspaper's attorney Lori Mince said. "At some point the court is going to rule on those motions, and the public is entitled to know every piece of information the court considers in making its decision."

    Probably a good idea, since I can't imagine overturning the convictions of five murderers would go over well with the public. I hope they didn't screw it up.

  • EDG reppin' LBC||

    Bush hates black people! Kanye West told me so!

    Apparently, two black cops and some white cops hate black people, too? Does. Not. Compute.

  • Lady Bertrum||

    But are/were the victims black?

  • EDG reppin' LBC||

    Not sure of the race of the victims. But, I'm guessing, in post-Katrina New Orleans, they were black. Have you been to NOLA?

  • EDG reppin' LBC||

  • SweatingGin||

    "Bush prosecuted cops for civil rights violations? Unpossible! Republicans want to repeal all civil rights laws and give such cops medals."

    Obviously they only prosecuted so they could throw the case and the cops could appeal later.

  • PH2050||

    You just made me run and grab my tinfoil hat.

  • Lady Bertrum||

    Perhaps you can pissed at the feds for not unsealing the docs? That way you can be critical of both state and federal law enforcement? ;-)

  • John||

    At this point can you trust anything the DOJ does? Is there any case in which there is not prosecutorial misconduct?

  • ||

    Good question, to which the answer is probably "probably not".

  • John||

    There is at least some in every or most cases. The sample size of misconduct is getting too large to conclude anything else.

  • MappRapp||

    That dude over tehre sure does talk a lot of smack!

    www.Mega-Anon.tk

  • ||

    OT, but race related: Weigel explains Rand Paul's view of racism

    "I think some of the things [Jack Hunter] wrote, or many were stupid, and I don't agree with," started Paul, without getting specific. After he cleared his name, he took a moment to defend Hunter. "I do think he was unfairly treated by the media, and he was put up as target practice for people to say he's a racist, and none of that was true. If you look at his writings, I think there are a lot of problems and a lot of disagreements and none of it do I support. But none of it was racist. He got along with everyone in the office, treated everyone fairly without regards to race or religion."

    By definition, since Hunter was nice to non-whites, he didn't fit Paul's idea of a "racist." This is how the Paul movement views the question. It won't accept the framework of "societal racism." Liberals can't be allowed to define what is racist. Racism is what's observable: Personal bias against non-whites. And on that count, Paul considers himself not just spotless but exemplary.
    "There is no greater defender, truly, of minority rights, if you consider minorities to be the color of your skin or the color of your ideology, than myself," he told Harwood. "I will stand up there with the most progressive members of the caucus."

  • John||

    Rand Paul says he's not a racist.

    But he doesn't support the government actually doing anything about racism.
    4 Minutes Ago from slate.com · Reply

    Behold the prog mind. If don't want the government to solve a problem, you must like things that way. Boy did Bastiat have these people down.

  • PH2050||

    Life is scary! I want to snuggle in the big, safe arms of government agencies.

    Gives me a fuzzy feeling inside.

  • General Butt Naked||

    I love the implicit belief that the government can actually solve a problem like racism. It's truly a magical thing to them...

    Just get some guys with guns to enforce what you think is right and it'll magically be!

  • ||

    It's amazing that their instinctive reaction is force, every time (the best part is it being force applied by thugs rather than themselves). Using the projection theory, my guess is that they are projecting their own unwillingness to stop being scum and the fact that they feel only force can get them to "behave", so it must be the same for the rest of us.

  • John||

    I am not even sure they know what they believe anymore. Projection requires some level of logic. They don't even have that. On the one hand they are convinced the government is the people. On the other, they are convinced the people are racist. But they just know the government, which is the people, can stop racism.

    They can't even put together simple syllogisms anymore. They just emote talking points and platitudes, not logic or consistency required.

  • John||

    Think about this Episiarch. If you really believed that the country was irredeemably and historically racist, which all liberals do, the last thing you would ever support is democracy. You would be a monarchist or a technocrat. You would want a small elite running the country keeping the racist mob from ruling.

    But liberals can't do that. They also have to tell themselves they are the party of the people. It is the right that is the 1% elitists. They are radical democrats and believe in fairness and voting rights and such.

    So they don't give up either view. They just give up logic and happily believe that both the country is hopelessly racist and must constantly be kept from returning to slavery and there must always be true democracy.

  • General Butt Naked||

    At least they aren't evil libertarians or anarchists that would inflict the tyranny of being left alone on an unwitting populace. The worst and most immoral thing a person can do is to not put a gun to his neighbor's head and tell him how to live.

  • John||

    Radical individualism is incredibly dangerous GBN. What, do you want people in Kansas bowling alone? Do you want that? You monster.

  • General Butt Naked||

    Individualism is racist because all black people need our help as smart, urban white people!

  • ||

    This is what they really believe. I have heard two say as much in the last two days.

  • John||

    I just called the liberals on slate paternal white supremacists. I am trolling the fuck out of them. You can't argue with them. All you can do is make fun of them.

  • Hyperion||

    You'll get tired of it. I used to post on Politico and HuffPo a lot.

    I spent untold wasted hours trying to have serious conversations with leftists. I was patient as hell, I never resorted to name calling or even sarcasm. I truly believed that I could get them to acknowledge that Libertarians have some really good ideas. But even when they completely agreed with me on an issue, they would manage to somehow contort themselves into disagreeing because I'm an evil right wing extremist puppet of the Kochtopus.

    After a while, I realized what a waste of time it was, so I started trolling them. I was getting pretty good at it too, they would go into foaming at the mouth fits of lunacy, screaming at me in all caps.

    It was fun for a while, but like I said, eventually the stupid will wear you down, and you won't be able to do it any longer. I haven't been back to either site in nearly a year. to post. I still read articles at HuffPo and laugh at the comments, but I never post, there is no one intelligent to read it, so why bother?

  • John||

    I rarely troll Hyperion for the reasons you give. I was just feeling a bit subversive tonight. You can't reason with liberals. They don't think. They pay no attention to facts. They just invent whatever facts fit their narrative. They can't think logically. And they can't defend their positions. All they can do is attack you personally. Call you a racist, homophobe or whatever buzzword they are using on that subject. It wouldn't bother me so much if they were not so utterly convinced how smart they are. It is just comical.

  • General Butt Naked||

    A response:

    A majority of liberals aren't white.

    Oh, is that right. They might need a citation for that one.

  • Hyperion||

    A majority of liberals aren't white

    Yeah... links please?

  • Mr Whipple||

    It's truly a magical thing to them...

    Magic is an illusion designed to fool people into believing something is real, when it is not.

  • General Butt Naked||

    From the comments (because I hate you):

    Historically, government has been the guarantor of minority rights-especially the federal government.

    It's local government entities which implemented and enforced overtly racist policies.

    And that's the kind of America Rand Paul wants us to return to.

    Oh wowzer, does the progressive trust of big government have any limit?

  • Andrew S.||

    Of course it does. When the wrong party is in charge, there's no trust. When the right party in charge, there's unlimited trust. What they do while they're in power is completely irrelevant.

  • John||

    I see your idiocy and raise you this little gem

    Rand Paul would object to all those policies? Really?

    If a racist company sues a black patron for using the whites only toilet, according to Rand Paul should the courts enforce a judgement against the black patron?

  • General Butt Naked||

    I call:

    No, Jim Crow was small government personified.

    BOOM! Jackpot.

  • John||

    They really have no idea what Jim Crow was. They just know it was bad and Republicans did it.

  • Gozer the Gozerian||

    Retort:

    Woodrow Fucking Wilson.

  • Metazoan||

    But it was still government keeping the policies (small government implies small at every level to me, maybe it doesn't to others).

  • General Butt Naked||

    Don't you see, Metazoan, we need really big government to offset racist big government.

    The bigger the government the less racist it is. People that want small government are racists. QED

    Oh, and don't respond to it. It's got another library account and thinks it's real people.

  • John||

    Like it or not, conservatives have to come to grip with the fact that it was at the municipal and state levels where most of the post-WWII racist legislation reigned, and federal intervention which helped people put a stop to it.

    What is there to come to grips about you half wit? It wasn't libertarians or conservatives who were passing those laws. It was big government dixiecrats. Libertarians sure as hell don't own that history and neither do conservatives. I believe people like Woodrow Wilson and FDR own it.

  • Dave C||

    Hey you stupid piece of shit, you were already told: Dixiecrats were neither libertarian or conservative.

    Now Mary go die in a fire.

  • Calidissident||

    The notion that all Southern Democrats were just all around right-wing conservatives who were only Democrats because they hated Lincoln is patently false. If you look at Congressional voting history in the Progressive Era, New Deal, Great Society, etc. Southern Democrats, while usually more conservative than Northern Democrats, were consistently more liberal on many issues than the Republicans were, and back then there was still an openly progressive wing of the Republican party. There were a lot of local and state level politicians that supported popular laws and causes during the Progressive Era, such as the notoriously racist Theodore Bilbo. And of all the Southern Democrats in Congress in 1964, only two ever switched parties in their lifetime.

  • Bryan C||

    "And how though I never mentioned party, but rather conservatives in the present tense, the response was to bash democrats (who were conservative in the south at that time, and the dominant party)."

    Of course not. Your type of revisionism always prefers we don't mention party. That way you can imply that the Democrats then, who demonstrated their "conservative" beliefs by hating black people, somehow stumbled into a Freaky Friday scenario and swapped their racist minds with today's Republicans, who are, as you put it, "conservative". And We All Know What That Means.

    The truth is simpler: Fifty years ago, the people who harbored deep-seated racist beliefs and implemented intrusive and paternalistic government policies to implement their beliefs were Democrats. Whereas today, the people who harbor deep-seated racist beliefs and implement intrusive and paternalistic government policies to implement their beliefs are Democrats.

  • Anonymous Coward||

    The feds didn't take a leading role, to be sure. The groundwork was largely done by mass protests and marches from citizens (many of them northerners bussed in, some of whom, as you may recall, were murdered).

    Aww, isn't that cute. Inaccurate, but cute. Jim Crow was killed in the courts, not in the streets. Starting with Buchanan v. Warley, then Irene Morgan v. Virginia, and finally in Brown v. Board of Ed.

    But they (the feds) did set an example by desegregating the armed forces, and it damn sure wasn't Arkansas state troopers making sure those kids could attend school there.

    *Turns an ear* And WHO segregated the military to begin with? Whisper it real soft-like.

  • Anonymous Coward||

    Yeah sure, those court cases happened in isolation. Those protestors had absolutely nothing to do with getting rid of Jim Crow. They were all down there getting beaten and murdered for absolutely nothing. How much does it cost to live in your fantasy world?

    So legal arguments don't matter in your fantasy world? Your take away from the 50s and 60s is that if you get enough people to protest, you should get your way? Nothing about the inherently incorrect position that laws that specifically unequal are inherently unjust?

    And the fact that the Feds cleaned up their act regarding segregation long before the states did disproves my argument how, exactly?

    And WHO segregated the military to begin with? Don't talk around it. Say his name.

  • Calidissident||

    "From the black perspective, historically the states CANNOT be trusted to police themselves when it comes to civil rights, but the Feds can."

    Really? Do I really need to bring out a laundry list of violations of minority rights by the federal government? Or instances where the feds supported state violations of rights? The feds historically have been better than some states and worse than others on such issues.

    Oh and I'm not the least bit surprised that Mary couldn't resist the temptation to write leftist screeds under this screen name, rather than the bizarre homophobic insults she was limiting herself to earlier.

  • Gozer the Gozerian||

    "...and Republicans did it."

    My favourite aspect of their People's History.

  • John||

    They just are totally ignorant of what Jim Crow was. They think Jim Crow was a set of laws that affirmed people's right to not serve blacks. In reality Jim Crow was a set of laws that mandated people segregate. That is a huge distinction that liberals are just too stupid to understand. So they think repealing the CRA is going back to Jim Crow.

  • Whahappan?||

    It's worse than that. Rand Paul, Ron Paul and Goldwater before them, didn't object to the parts of the CRA which restricts government from discriminating, just to the "public accommodation" part which restricts what private businesses can do. And of course, not because they condone racism, but because they rightly saw the wedge this was to enable so much more government meddling which has nothing to do with racism.

  • Hyperion||

    No. The proggies think that we still live in some type of untamed wild west and that only a lot more government can save us.

    Freedom is scary to these people. I am scary, you are scary, everything that is not the government or controlled down to the most minute detail by the government, is scary as hell to them.

  • John||

    I was stuck reading Flat Dunk and Stupid or whatever that Thomas Friedman book is in an Army Course last spring. And the fear of the lack of control is what really stood out. Most of the book was Friedman describing all of these changes to society and ending every point with "and no one is in charge!!" That was the whole point of the book. There is all this stuff going on and no one is in charge or controlling it and that is just horrible. Friedman's entire world view is driven by the fear of personal freedom and uncontrolled or planned change. He is like a sheep wandering the fields praying for a border collie to take control.

  • Gozer the Gozerian||

    He likes China, the political entity.

    What else need be said?

  • Hyperion||

    Like our fearless liar in chief said, it's easier to govern there.

    And he's right. You tell people what to do and when they don't, you disappear them.

    Wait... didn't our own government just grant themselves that authority? The only difference now is that the Chinese are probably jealous of how much our government can spy on us.

  • Mr Whipple||

    THE TRUTH IS INCORRECT!!!!

    THE TRUTH IS INCORRECT!!!!

  • Calidissident||

    The Northern states were the first places in the world to ban slavery. Vermont banned it more than fifty years before the British Empire (the first to do it at a countrywide level) did. Meanwhile, the feds went on to enforce the Fugitive Slave Act (and slavery in general) right up until the Civil War. Oh and they also tolerated Southerners kidnapping free blacks from the North. Yep, the feds have always been friends of blacks and minorities.

  • PapayaSF||

    Damn him for not opposing the scourge of non-observable racism!

  • ||

    "Racism is what's observable: Personal bias against non-whites. .....Hunter was nice to non-whites, did not fit Paul's idea of a racist."

    I am not getting it. Is racism for the left the ether of attitudes? It is there even if you cant see it, touch it, or observe it or it's effects in any way?

  • Lady Bertrum||

    "It is there even if you cant see it, touch it, or observe it or it's effects in any way?"

    Yes, even if your behavior is perfectly free from any outward expression of racism, you are a racist if you don't subscribe to the concept of institutional racism. And institutional racism is always present because of the obvious evidence provided by unequal outcomes.

  • John||

    That Lady Bertrum is what they believe. They absolutely believe in complete nonsense. There is no reasoning with them.

  • Gozer the Gozerian||

    I'm proud to say that I have been called a racist because of just this...

    I read The Bell Curve once too, and something or other by Walter Williams, so I am beyond the pale.

  • General Butt Naked||

    Dude, racism is everything a non-democrat white person does. Your post is racist.

    I have a bad feeling that the endless cries of racism are gonna give actual racists some traction. There's a lot of misguided people out there that could be convinced that dissent of progressive ideas being treated as evil racism is some sort of conspiracy.

  • John||

    That is exactly what is going to happen. Right now "racism" is nothing but a charge urban liberal whites use to put down other whites. Eventually the other whites are going to get tired of being called racist. And when they do, the sad fact they will probably just embrace being racist and take out their frustrations on black people rather than the urban liberal whites who so richly deserve their hatred.

    There really are very few white racists in this country. But white liberals are going to keep going until white identity returns. And when it does, it is going to be a real bitch. Those morons are going to cause so much harm.

  • Gozer the Gozerian||

    I see all of this as the inevitable result of "racism" being redefined, so as to mean "bigotry."

    It's all downhill from there...

  • Hyperion||

    Well, don't think they are going to stop. They aren't.

    The unbelievably shameful display that they put on during and before the Zimmerman trial, is a real testament to just how far they will go.

    I mean, they tried to actually get Zs parents murdered and tried to incite real race riots. So called celebrities and even our President involved in behavior like that.

    And if you think the lefties are bad now, wait until their power really starts to wane, and see what they are like in their death throes.

  • Nazdrakke||

    So much of the problem is the conflation of race with culture. 90% of the cries of "racist" in America are actually representative of cultural (or political) conflict.

    I've found racists of every color of the human rainbow, but they are in a sharp minority in America. What we do have in America is a death-grip cultural battle between a variety of competing forces and various percentages within those forces use race as a cheap, disgusting rhetorical tool for silencing their opponents.

    Proggies seem to be the worst offenders in this area, probably having to do with so much of their positive self-image being tied up with their politics, and the habit of dehumanizing their opponents they so frequently succumb to.

  • Gozer the Gozerian||

    You forgot to mention the "multi-culti" aspect of their identity.

    If you have any reservations about someone's culture (unless they are white, rural, Christian, etc.), then you are a "racist."

  • Hyperion||

    Liberals, ummm, so called liberals, they are funny critters. Well, they really are not funny, but it's best to laugh since it's still illegal to shoot them.

    I remember getting into a fight with some of them on a blog featuring an article about a previously undiscovered tribe in the upper Amazon, near the Peru/Brazil border.

    They were all screaming about how the innocent natives need to be protected, by them of course, so that the evil white patriarchy couldn't destroy their culture as it has done to the rest of the world.

    2 things that I told them that got them all bent out of shape. And both were true.

    One, most of the libbies there were some type of researchers or anthropologists, and they want to keep these people in their own little zoo and study them like monkeys.

    Two, what they are trying to do is fucking inhumane as hell. Who are they to stop these folks from living a brutish life of eating bugs and dying of preventable diseases in their 20s or 30s, by that time looking as if they are 80, just so that they can study them like monkeys? What those folks really want is the intertoobs, air conditioning, designer clothes, and some real food, that isn't bugs.

    Liberals are nothing more than 'I am holier than thou' assholes, nothing more.

  • Invisible Finger||

    There's a reason why it's called "Slate" and not "Coal".

  • John||

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvs.....-Ride.html

    Helen Hunt looks good for 50. Damn I can't believe she is 50. I feel so old.

  • Hyperion||

    If they would just sew some boobies on her.

    I remember thinking that she looked really hot in that movie 'As good as it gets'. Well, at least she was purdy beside Jack Nicholson, maybe that was it...

  • Eduard van Haalen||

    Danny DeVito is pretty next to Jack Nicholson.

  • Hyperion||

    dat true

  • Simon from Around||

    Is there evidence these documents exist?

  • Sevo||

    Well,
    ..."the public has a right to sealed court filings and transcripts of hearings that U.S. District Judge Kurt Engelhardt held behind closed doors."...

    If they don't exist, someone is going to have to come up with a very good story.

  • Sevo||

    So the SF Bay Area transit (threatened) strikes really got moonbeam's attention. He's appointed an "impartial" board of three to, well, uh, 'inform his thinking'.
    One was an SEIU rep for 14 years, the second worked as a functionary for the building trades union for 11 years and the third is a state bureaucrat.
    I'm pretty sure his "thinking" has already been "informed".
    http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/.....php#page-2

  • Irish||

  • ||

    Wait, wait. What part of New York is she referring to? She's not only lily white, but is the daughter of New York high society types and went to a private liberal arts college.

    Who the is the 'our' in that statement?

  • Irish||

    Wait, wait. What part of New York is she referring to? She's not only lily white, but is the daughter of New York high society types and went to a private liberal arts college.

    At this point, isn't worrying about the gentrification of New York like worrying about someone's diet after they've already died of a heart attack?

  • Hyperion||

    The fact that anyone even knows who that stupid cunt is, is what is fucked up.

  • Gozer the Gozerian||

    Self-consciousness is not Socratic self-knowledge, example 482,453.

  • MJGreen||

    "A 1 bedroom apt shouldn't cost 6k but Europeans don't know that & they'll pay whatever

    European JOOS, maybe.

    I swear, Dunham is a full time troll. There is no way she dressed up the way she did, went to that fundraiser, and genuinely said all these things. She looks like the Platonic ideal of White Urban Liberal. It can't be real.

  • Anonymous Coward||

    Obama Attempts Jedi Mind Meld on America: "We don't have a domestic spying program"



    "We don't have a domestic spying program," Obama said, describing the NSA efforts as "mechanisms that can track a phone number or an e-mail address that is connected to a terrorist attack ... That information is useful."

    These are not the spy programs you're looking for.

  • Sevo||

    Bubba's been coaching him.

  • Anonymous Coward||

    P.S. The greatest orator of our generation laments that cars kill more people than terrorists.

    "The odds of dying in a terrorist attack are a lot lower than they are of dying in a car accident, unfortunately," Obama said when asked by Leno if it is still safe for Americans to travel abroad in light of recent heightened terrorist threats.

    Oh Barry! *SWOONS*

  • BuSab Agent||

    Wait, what? I she saying he wants the odds of dying in a terrorist attack to be higher than that of dying in a car accident?

  • Calidissident||

    ... so why all the spying Barack?

  • Gozer the Gozerian||

    Yup, and that gift card I have is "a mechanism that can provide a shirt or some rice for an impoverished Haitian." Those resources are useful.

    I'm still buying a fifth with it.

  • Gozer the Gozerian||

    This is a few days old now, but I liked it, so you should too!

    (It ran in the WSJ, but there are some good extras on his blog.)

  • Nazdrakke||

    Cool read. Comments were predictable derptastic.

  • Archduke Trousersenthusiast||

  • Archduke Trousersenthusiast||

  • ||

    Guess I'm going to Scandinavia, land of large breasted women.

  • Hyperion||

    Looks like Snowden will be up to his eyeballs in D-cup boobies. I can't imagine how that could be better than turning yourself into the Obama goons to be tortured.

  • ||

    How does Canada rank higher in press freedom than the US?

  • Hyperion||

    If they piss off the gubmint, they don't subsequently crash their Mercedes into a tree at 100mph where it spontaneously combusts?

  • Gozer the Gozerian||

    I don't actually have a clue, but my best guess would be "campaign finance reform" or political speech in general.

  • Archduke Trousersenthusiast||

    Motörhead guitarist Phil Campbell put fans' concerns to rest when he tweeted "Contrary to some reports, Lem is alive and kicking so take no notice of these rumors from [expletive] tweeters."

  • Hyperion||

    I still remember the first time that I ever saw Motorhead, on MTV, when they still played music.

    It was that video 'The Ace of Spades'.

    And I remember thinking, man, that is one ugly mofo.

  • Archduke Trousersenthusiast||

    you need to see the Lemmy documentary.
    dunno if it's still streaming on Netflix.

  • Hyperion||

    I'll check Netflix to see.

  • EDG reppin' LBC||

    Stood next to Lemmy at a Shonen Knife concert back in 1993. One ugly motherfucker.

  • Archduke Trousersenthusiast||

    Bass Reeves could well have been one of the greatest lawmen of the Wild West. An some believe was almost certainly the real-life inspiration for the Lone Ranger

  • Gozer the Gozerian||

    It's like if you crossed Anthony Quinn with Shaft, and gave him Rooster Cogburn's job...

  • Gozer the Gozerian||

    I wish Lucy posted more often, so we could have Late-Night Links™ over there...

  • Hyperion||

    That's pretty damn cool. I will always remember when Megadeth Symphony of Destruction came out, one of my fav Megadeth songs, but I like most of their stuff.

    Did you see the tweet over there from Lindsey Graham about Snowden? I bet that Lucy could kick his ass.

    I hope the fuck that McCain and Graham go to Egypt and are never seen again.

  • Gozer the Gozerian||

    I had to look it up, because that was way back in June, but, yes...

    I remember laughing pretty hard at the stretched, but nevertheless amusing reference to Carpenter's The Thing.

  • Paul.||

  • MappRapp||

    Cops will cover for cops, always!

    www.Mega-Anon.tk

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online

  • Progressive Puritans: From e-cigs to sex classifieds, the once transgressive left wants to criminalize fun.
  • Port Authoritarians: Chris Christie’s Bridgegate scandal
  • The Menace of Secret Government: Obama’s proposed intelligence reforms don’t safeguard civil liberties

SUBSCRIBE

advertisement