Courts

DOJ Investigation Finds Due-Process Violations, Discrimination in St. Louis County Juvenile Courts

A new report finds systematic failures to protect the rights of juveniles, as well as harsher treatment of black youths.

|

St. Louis County Old Courthouse
Wikipedia

A Department of Justice (DOJ) report released last Friday found a significant disparity in the treatment of black youths versus their white counterparts, as well as numerous systemic due-process violations for children of all races, in the juvenile justice system in St. Louis County, Missouri.

Law enforcement in Ferguson, Missouri, came under scrutiny after a police officer shot to death black teenager Michael Brown last year, an event that sparked its own DOJ investigation. While Ferguson is part of St. Louis County, the investigation into the county's juvenile courts began a year before Brown's death.

The DOJ found black children are less likely to have their cases handled through informal "diversion" programs, and more likely to be held in pretrial custody, custody for the juvenile equivalent of parole or probation violations, or custody after the juvenile equivalent of a conviction. The odds of being locked up were 2.5 to almost 3 times as great for black youths as for whites.

Based on the findings, which accounted for control factors such as "gender, age, risk factors, and severity of the allegation," the DOJ concluded that the disparity amounted to a violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

More broadly, the report found widespread violations of constitutionally protected due-process rights regardless of race. Children in the system are not provided adequate representation, according to the report, in part due to the "staggering caseload of the sole public defender assigned to handle all indigent juvenile delinquency cases in the county."

Just getting representation by the public defender is tricky—different judges and court officials apparently have different standards for determining eligibility, with at least one judge having no set standard at all.

Many of the other problems the report uncovered stemmed from this lack of adequate counsel. Per the report, St. Louis County fails to protect children's rights against self-incrimination; determinations on whether enough probable cause exists for the case to proceed are inadequate; kids facing trial as adults (a process called "certification" in Missouri) are denied due process by the court's "failure to consider, and permit adversarial testing of, the prosecutorial merit" of the case; and the court fails to "ensure that…guilty pleas are entered knowingly and voluntarily."

Additionally, the DOJ detailed how the structure of family courts in St. Louis County creates inherent conflicts of interest. Almost "every aspect of Family Court operations" are handled by Deputy Juvenile Officers (DJOs), employees of the court supervised by an administrative judge who "have authority to make arrests, but are likewise charged with protecting the interests of the children with whom they work." The Juvenile Office then employs "legal officers" who, unlike traditional prosecutors, act as representatives of the DJOs in court proceedings.

To make matters worse, "DJOs have a 'limited understanding…as to the role that defense counsel played throughout the proceedings, particularly during the investigation and fact-finding phases. As such, there was often little regard, and in some cases actual resistance, to youth representation at early stages in the proceedings or at all,'" according to a 2013 assessment by the National Juvenile Defender Center (NJDC) cited in the DOJ report.

"Youth are discouraged from and systematically denied counsel throughout the state [of Missouri]. This denial of due process is well known, and it is deeply entrenched in the culture of many juvenile courts," the NJDC found.

The DOJ report concludes with a list of recommended remedial measures. It is nearly six pages long.

NEXT: Rand Paul's SuperPACs Aren't Worried About Thursday's Fox News GOP Presidential Debate. Here's Why.

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.

  1. The DOJ report concludes with a list of recommended remedial measures. It is nearly six pages long.

    Any of those pages suggest the same remedy you and I get when we break the law?

    1. They concluded that it would be impossible to enforce sending all of the juvie court officials to bed without supper.

    2. “A Department of Justice (DOJ) report released last Friday found a significant disparity in the treatment of black youths versus their white counterparts, ”

      I wonder if any attention was given to the different actions and behaviors of the black youths vs. the white ( which encompass all non black ) youths ? I have yet to read of “rob mobs” and “knckout games” being a popular pastime of white (non black) youths.

      Since we have been told in a post just before this one that leftists now claim that it is a microagression to not treat people differentlly because of their race, why is this a bad thing ?

      Can’t they get their story straight ?

  2. One of the days these cops, no matter how slow they are, are going to realize that they need to stick to abusing whitey. Which will be totally ok and not even newsworthy.

    1. Cops have been assholes to blacks and immigrants at least as far back as the turn of the previous century and nobody ever seemed to give much of a shit until a few years ago.

      1. Cops are assholes to anyone who they perceive as unable to afford a lawyer and fight back in court. Skin color and immigration status doesn’t matter. If you’re white and obviously poor, you’ll get the same treatment as a black person or an immigrant.

        1. Just like con men look for easy marks, cops look for easy arrests with no consequences.

          1. Not even arrests. Their authority comes from their duty to enforce the law, but without any reason to suspect a crime has been committed they have no legal authority. But they still have power. Because they face no consequences for abusing their power when they have no authority to do so, especially when their victim has no ability to fight them in court, they seek out any opportunity to do so. Doesn’t have to mean an arrest. They just want to make people miserable because they have the power to do so. One of the great conundrums of life is that people who seek power should not have it, but people who can be trusted with it do not seek it out. That’s why libertarians will always lose. We do not want power over others, so we don’t seek out positions of power that would enable us to dismantle the power structure. The people who do seek out power do so to keep and increase the power structure. That’s how government remains a one-way ratchet.

            1. Well someones puppy has got to be shot. Or else, the fuzz are gonna get the blue ballz. They’ll probably make a new pig show and the name will be Blue Ballz.

              Officer Stedanko: Murray, I ain’t shot a puppy in like weeks, it hurts really bad, man. Look at this!

              Office Murray: Gawd, Stendanko, put that shit away! You’ll get to shoot a puppy soon, I promise my brother, if I have to arrest that puppy myself!

              1. One night after finishing cleaning the kitchen at this restaurant/bar where I worked, some drunk cops had taken over the bar. I overheard a conversation that was similar to that, except that Stedanko was complaining that he’d never had the opportunity to kill a person, that’s why he took the job, and Murray was assuring him that he’d have his chance. I’ve been terrified of cops since.

                1. I seriously think there is a kind of rite of passage in place.

                2. Did you ever consider that that conversation was meant to be overheard?

            2. “We do not want power over others, so we don’t seek out positions of power that would enable us to dismantle the power structure. ”

              Congrats Sevo. This nails it. Whether Libertarian or libertarian or any other affilaition THIS NAILS IT. ( please excuse the caps but I’ve had a few).

              Regardless of party label, regardless of who you identify with professionally, politically, or socially, this explains it all.

              “The love of money is the root of all evil” is the only phrase that explains the human condition. to a tee. There are those to whom the love of power is more important but they are enabled by those who love money.

              Those who love power are indeed evil , but they could not exist were it not for the support of those who love money above all.

            3. So the only “solution” would be a draft.

        2. Cops are indeed assholes to anybody without the wherewithal to defend themselves, but I have a hard time reconciling the idea that skin color doesn’t matter with the observation that black kids are locked up 3x more than white kids.

          1. I think we can effectively say that if you live in a poor neighborhood, your chance of being abused by cops is higher.

            But you are definitely not safe these days, no matter who you are. Unless you’re maybe a Senator of family member of one.

          2. Maybe black kids are more disruptive. That’s not to be racist, but more culturist (is that a word?). In my experience, black people from Africa or some place other than the USA have been a lot better at earning my trust than native blacks. Culture perhaps? I don’t know. But it wouldn’t surprise me if black kids are more disruptive than white kids. At least American black kids. In my experience, foreign black parents wouldn’t tolerate that shit, while American black parents seem to allow their kids to run wild.

            1. There’s no maybe about it. And I’m declaring myself the most unracist person ever, in this history of da murl!

              I work in Baltimore, dude. You know, I sometimes visit some clients in some neighborhoods that have surrounding areas that are not the best areas and mostly black. The black kids are always getting into trouble. They run around with their fucking pants half down to their knees, yelling at who the fuck knows who, and looking to snatch a cell from some dumbwit whitey that doesn’t have the discipline to get off their fucking phone for half a minute a day and pay attention to their surroundings.

              I really don’t care if that sounds racist or not, I’m immune to that crap.

              On the other hand, if you go into any poor area in appalachia, it’s almost the same, only the kids are white.

              And you’re right about foreign blacks, they are nothing like American blacks. I don’t care how poor the area was they lived in before. Thankfully for them, there was no hood culture. And they seem to know that pulling your pants up so everyone doesn’t have to see your underwear is a more socially acceptable norm.

              1. I went to cooking school in downtown Denver, and that really opened my eyes. We had done a buffet for the other kids in the school (it was a trade school where the cooking part was just a small aspect) and after it was done we of course had to clean up. I was one of three white people of a dozen in the class. As we’re carrying the stuff through the door, some black kid is holding it open. As I approached he made a show of letting the door close in my face. A security guard (yeah, there were regular gang fights there ) asked “Why did you shut the door?” and the kid responded “‘Cuz he’s white.” Absolute bullshit.
                Another time I’m walking from school to the bus stop, and some black chick offers me a smoking joint. Of course I accepted, and this guy who could have been a linebacker for the Broncos stands up and yells “Did I tell you to take a hit off my fucking joint?” I was like “No?” He started asking a bunch of questions and I said, thinking I was about to die, “You’re putting me on the spot and I really don’t like being put on the spot.” He laughed and said “Smoke up! I just wanted to scare the shit out of a white boy!” I said “You did, you did” and hurriedly walked away.
                On the other hand I’ve worked with blacks from foreign countries who I would give the shirt off my back to.
                Culture, not race.

                1. They are every bit as American as you are, so what causes the difference in culture you perceive?

                  Oooh lemme guess, they have too much money and leisure time compliments of Democrats and their secret welfare-for-blacks program.

                  1. Tony, Tony, Tony. I already know that you are distinction-challenged, so I won’t expect you to understand that there is a distinction between race and culture. Other people will laugh at you as they read this, smirking at your befuddled confusion. At least I know you are content, being so stupid that you don’t even know that you are stupid. I’d pat your head if I could. So stupid. So cute.

                    1. There isn’t a distinction between race and culture when you talk about it. You’re describing how all black people behave based on two anecdotes. White people are never treated this way by anyone. They are seen as individuals.

                      Culture is not an answer, even if it weren’t code for “blackness.” It’s something that must be explained. What causes a troublesome culture? Grannies and grampses all across the black population simultaneously made bad cultural choices and passed them down. You’re not explaining anything, you’re just being racist using the word culture instead of the word niggerness.

                    2. No, Tony, I’m not. I made a clear distinction between native blacks and blacks from other countries. I have seen a clear difference between the two, and it’s 100% cultural.

                    3. You’re still fucking talking about them as groups. Some libertarian. No white president was ever saddled with assumptions because of poor Appalachian white people, as Obama has with assumptions about inner-city blacks.

                      And are you saying you’ve been to Africa and observed reasonable sample sizes of natives? Not exactly a paragon of civilization in all places. Or are you referring to the self-selected group of African immigrants, who like all other self-selected groups of overseas immigrants at least had to possess the means to get here. (Of course the ancestors of American blacks were brought here for free.)

                    4. OK, Tony. So you’re saying that American blacks who were at one point enslaved, and then oppressed by Jim Crow laws, are not be culturally different from blacks from other countries who never had to endure that shit? That’s not race. That’s culture. Is it understandable? Perhaps. Excusable? I don’t think so. But it most certainly exists.

                    5. So you’re saying that American blacks who were at one point enslaved, and then oppressed by Jim Crow laws, are not be culturally different from blacks from other countries who never had to endure that shit?

                      One might describe these as causes of perpetual economic disadvantage, which, I’m trying to get you to understand, is the principal cause of all the problems real and alleged we’re talking about.

                      But you can’t talk about economic disadvantage because it would mean challenging your infantile economic fairy tales and opposition to social policy that addresses reality.

                    6. “One might describe these as causes of perpetual economic disadvantage, ”

                      One might, but they could be exposed as ignorant, and in your case partisan, were the truths to come out.

                      I have known blacks ( Matt for sure) who came here with nothing and now have it made because they didn’t come here with an expectation of entitlement. They worked. Long Hours. Many drove cabs and limos for long hours sometimes sleeping in their cars.

                      Now some of them own their own fleets. Black Americans, so called African Americans, don’t make that generational change in their families economic status.

                      It’s not Aabout skin color, it’s about work habits and cultural expectations.

                      American blacks are taught to complain if their EBT cards run dry and Blacks from Africa come here to find economic freedom and opportunity compared to where they came from.

                      It’s not complicated unless you listen to a politican trying to buy your vote.

                    7. “You’re still fucking talking about them as groups. Some libertarian.”

                      You think being libertarian means thinking that cultures don’t actually exist? That’s a strange belief you’ve got there.

                      You know, I hear Rand Paul once said that people in France speak French. ZOMG SO UNLIBERTARIAN.

              2. Also, American blacks that work abroad:

                1 – They’re working,

                2 – The host country has no bullshit tolerance.

            2. Jesus fucking Christ.

              Yes, this is the definition of racism.

              1. THE MORON IS IN THE HOUSE! GIVE IT UP FOR TONY! WOO HOO!

                1. Tony is probably the most racist person you will ever not know.

                  Don’t worry, ignore him, because he’s about to pass out drunk again on his mommies basement floor in 5…4…3…

            3. “Maybe black kids are more disruptive.”

              Did you even read the article? It was 3x odds even controlling for risk factors, severity of allegations, and other differences.

              1. The controls are all politically correct. I’m not.

                1. There isn’t a distinction between race and culture

                  Wow, according to some people, race is the complete control factor in your behavior, cultures or other factors have nothing to do with it.

                  This is one of the most absurd things I’ve ever heard.

                  Come to think of it, 4 out of other 5 most absurd things I’ve ever heard were written by Tony.

                  I wonder if Tony is going to threaten us with cruise missiles again?

                  1. What the fuck is “culture” in this context?

                    1. What the fuck is “culture” in this context?

                      I’m done entertaining your stupidity. Have a nice day.

                2. “The controls are all politically correct. I’m not.”

                  What? Do you understand the purpose of controls in a study?

                  1. What? Do you understand the purpose of controls in a study?

                    Yes. I do understand the purpose. But those controls are only measurable metrics, like income and such. You can’t measure culture. Just as some while trailer trash kids are raise to hate blacks, some black kids are raise to hate whites. And as a result they are more disruptive when the authority figures are of the race they are raised to hate. You can’t measure or control for that.

                    1. “Yes. I do understand the purpose. But those controls are only measurable metrics, like income and such.”

                      Not necessarily. Controls for things like the severity of the allegation account for behavioral differences and differences in circumstance that affect sentencing. To give another example, saying Group A receives longer sentences than Group B is irrelevant without knowing what crimes we’re talking about, etc. You can control for things like that to see what happens when you account for those other variables. That happens in any halfway-decent criminal justice study.

                    2. OK Cali, you’ve got a point. I’d like to think that cops are equal opportunity assholes, but perhaps they’re racist as well. Either way, I don’t think that it’s all racism. I think black culture is a component as well. Though not the only one.

                    3. Now you two hurry up and kiss and make up, cause us libertarians got to get our groupthink on. You can’t be the borg, unless you become them!

                    4. beat the borg.

                      Fuck, even if we do beat the borg, we still won’t have an edit feature. I bet the borg have an edit feature…

                    5. Calidissident, why are you assuming that this is a “halfway-decent criminal justice study”? Jeebus, this is the Civil Rights Division of Obama’s DoJ, investigating a highly-charged issue that’s very dear to the left. Why assume they are more objective and trustworthy than, say, the IRS is about the Tea Party? Or the EPA when it comes to pollution regulations?

                      I’m not saying that I know what the situation is in the St. Louis juvenile courts, but I recommend skepticism about “studies” from obviously partisan and self-serving sources.

                    6. The Obama DOJ is hardly the first entity to ever claim the existence of racism in the American criminal justice system, something that has a well-documented history dating back hundreds of years, and something that not even the most out-of-touch conservative would claim was nonexistent or insignificant even 50 years ago. If they were making some earth-shattering claim of some surprising new discovery, I would be a lot more skeptical. This isn’t exactly shocking news, and I would assume St. Louis has access to these same documents (where else would the feds get them?) and could thus prove any false claims wrong. People thought the DOJ was surely going to bring the hammer down on George Zimmerman and Darren Wilson to appease the base and in neither case did that happen.

                      There are plenty of studies from groups other than DOJ that demonstrate bias in policing and criminal justice systems. The same studies that show men get longer sentences than women all else equal show that black people get longer sentences than white people. Stop and frisk data shows clear evidence of racial bias in who police stop without just cause. Etc etc. If Obama’s word was the only indication this stuff happens, I’d agree with you. But that isn’t the case.

                    7. The fact that racism has existed in the past, and even the present, does not prove that these statistics prove racism in this instance. I am sure that the DOJ did everything they could to try to nail Zimmerman and Wilson, but the facts were against them. In this case, though, we just have… statistics.

            4. For some reason, I keep wondering where Bo is tonight. I don’t know why, it’s the darndest thing.

              1. I was on last night and wondering where all trolls were. They’ll be here this weekend I’m sure.

                1. Bernie Sanders wasn’t mentioned.

            5. “That’s not to be racist, but more culturist (is that a word?)”

              Is it a word ? Not only is it a word it is a movement. Did you not read the post earlier where we were told that if you did not define people by race you were indead a racist.

        3. For people who make this argument, I’m curious how far back you think this extends. Do you really think cops were not racist against black people (or immigrants) 100 years ago, the beginning of the timeframe Hugh establishes? How about 50, in the midst of the Civil Rights Era? 25? 10?

          Classism exists, but so does racism and xenophobia. There’s a long history of all 3 in American policing, and there is little evidence that any of the 3 have been eradicated (or close to it). I’m not saying all, or even a majority, of cops nowadays are racist, but that isn’t necessary for there to be systemic racism in policing. People don’t have a hard time understanding this when it comes to other aspects (for example, it’s commonly understood here that many cops that don’t personally partake in a certain form of abuse will nonetheless cover for those who do), but for some reason racism is for many simply a bridge too far to accuse cops of, despite its long history in law enforcement in this country. I assume it’s just a kneejerk reaction against something that leftists claim. But just because leftists believe it and are often wrong or hyperbolic in their claims doesn’t mean it’s false. Leftists (especially the far left) would also tend to agree that police are classist, but that doesn’t stop anyone here from agreeing with that notion.

          1. I made that comment as a white guy who was routinely harassed by the cops when I had long hair and wore torn jeans with concert shirts, and after changing my appearance was suddenly treated differently by the cops.

            I do feel for black people who can’t change their skin color, though I do suspect that much of the harassment is as much classist as racist. I could be wrong.

            1. Yeah, my experience exactly. As Mrs. LS notes below it’s about powerlessness. Mayor’s not going to get reelected if the local gentry are feeling persecuted.

            2. “I made that comment as a white guy who was routinely harassed by the cops when I had long hair and wore torn jeans with concert shirts, and after changing my appearance was suddenly treated differently by the cops.”

              I never said racism was the only thing affecting police perceptions of citizens (in fact, I explicitly said the opposite). One does not preclude the other. I grew up in a pretty white town, and certainly noticed cops treating certain types of white people differently. But in my time living in LA, I’ve also noticed cops treat black people and Latinos differently than they treat white people. This isn’t an either/or situation. Classism, perception of powerlessness, etc. all play a role in fomenting police misconduct. But so do racism and racial stereotypes, and there is a very long history of that in this country. And for the record, I wasn’t asking the questions in my last post rhetorically. If you genuinely feel that racism isn’t a significant factor in policing today, and concede that it was in the past (which you’d have to be astoundingly ignorant or stupid not to concede, and I know for a fact you are neither sarc), then I’m curious when you think it stopped being an issue (and this is an open question to anyone who feels that way).

              1. If your daily experience involved interacting with those who acted a certain way would you be so morally strong as to deny the main identity between those who acted that way ? Would you give everyone you enteracted with a clean slate untiil they proved themselves wrong, even if it endangered your life ?

                I’m trying to ask if you. on a personal level, if you were a cop, and green people shot at you every time they saw you ,would you try to engage the green people in conversation when you saw them. or would you just shoot back ?

            3. Again, I’m not saying there aren’t plenty of things wrong with modern law enforcement unrelated to racism, or that all claims of police racism are accurate. I’m just saying that the opposite extreme, that it doesn’t exist today or exists only in a trivial manner, is just as false.

              1. I wouldn’t say that racism isn’t sometimes the issue. i would say that if that is all anyone wants to focus on, then they will never ever solve the problem. Too many laws, too many cops, WOD, police SOP’s that include overreaction and escalation, a SWAT team for every minor disturbance, police unions protecting bad cops, the media and politicians with the cop worship, I could go on and on. Racism has always existed and will exist probably as long as there are races. #blacklivesmatter isn’t going to solve squat. Body cameras could help, accountability could help, ending the myriad of reasons and excuses cops have at their disposal to harrass anyone for any reason could help. Or you know we could have a “discussion” about race and light candles and get our bad feeling off our chest and blah blah blah.

                1. The vast majority of people who do drugs are otherwise law abiding citizens. Wouldn’t their job be a lot easier if cops had all those people on their side? Not gonna happen in the current environment.

                2. I don’t disagree AJB. I’m just arguing against the notion that it’s irrelevant.

                  In addition, I think it needs to be pointed out that it’s not like there’s a significant movement against police abuse aside from the #blacklivesmatter crowd. Most of the non-libertarian #alllivesmatter crowd don’t give a shit about police abuse except when they can use it to accuse the blacklivesmatter people of hypocrisy. Because of the disparity in treatment, something that has happened over the course of centuries, there naturally isn’t a consistent, uniform level of opposition to police misconduct across races (something that the poll in today’s AM links makes abundantly clear). Race is also relevant here in the sense that if every group got mistreated the same, there would be a lot more resentment of police among white people, and that would mean a much greater chance things might change. Obviously, white people get victimized by police all the time in this country, but for the average white person, their encounters with the police are generally rare and/or pleasant enough for them to not really care about these issues that much. That’s not nearly as true in the black community.

                  1. Racism isn’t irrelevant but seeing how you can’t read every cops mind or intention, what needs to happen is to change the policies so that even if the cop is a racist his ability to use his position of power to punish people he doesn’t approve of is limited. It’s the same idea as with government in general. Yeah I don’t trust them, but I shouldn’t have to. I think the police abuse is getting a little more traction recently then it ever did before thanks to video and not just among the #blm crowd. The videos are hard to argue with. Ohio is now looking at police body cameras. That’s huge. That needs to happen. There is a long way to go but isn’t that true of everything.

                    1. I think the idea of proportionate force has to start making headway. It’s interesting how when there are weed sit ins ,the cops just let it go because they can’t really do anything about it but are still there for crowd control. It all seems to work. Why not show that level of restraint all the freakin’ time?

                  2. I was watching this top ten lady cops of Maricopa County show or something like that. This was there top ten. 9 out of the 10 incidents were complete overreactions by the cops to the situation. The 10th was questionable. i don’t think it was just merely playing it up for the cameras either. It was incredible. I’m not sure how to stop that, but seems like if they had half the cops they would need to use a little more discretion. Maybe they wouldn’t cause they don’t really though care right?

                  3. Here we go. Body Cam cost Deputy his job after it shows excessive force used against a mentally disabled woman. There is another area where training is inadequate.

                    http://nbc4i.com/2015/08/05/wa…..complaint/

                3. Well said JB .

          2. If racism was the problem, we would expect racially diverse police forces to have fewer problems — but they don’t. We would expect black police to be friendlier to black suspects, but black police are famously viewed as being even worse to black people than white cops.

            The more likely explanation is power. If you give people unsupervised, unaccountable power and put them in authority over relatively powerless people, you get abuse just as reliably as you get higher prices when you restrict supplies in the face of steady demand. It is a law of human nature.

            1. If racism was the problem, we would expect racially diverse police forces to have fewer problems — but they don’t. We would expect black police to be friendlier to black suspects, but black police are famously viewed as being even worse to black people than white cops.

              Why couldn’t that be a result of racism? If the belief is widespread that blacks are worse than or less deserving of respect than whites, why wouldn’t you expect blacks & whites, not only in the police, but in general, to share it?

              1. ^This. People can hold negative stereotypes about their own race, and be outright self-loathing (no one has seems to have a problem calling certain types of Jews this). More commonly, black cops I assume simply choose to go along with the flow and/or prove to their white brothers in blue that they won’t take it easy on people of their race. Or maybe they were bullied as kids, and want to get back at the community that did it (this is commonly said about cops in general after all).

                I’m just throwing shit out there, obviously, but there are a million different reasons why people can participate in racism against their own race. There were Jews who collaborated with the Nazis, if that doesn’t prove such a possibility, I don’t know what would.

      2. Cops have been assholes to blacks and immigrants powerless people at least as far back as the turn of the previous century…..

        FIFY

        1. Let’s try again:

          Cops have been assholes to blacks and immigrants powerless people at least as far back as the turn of the previous century forever.

      3. “nobody ever seemed to give much of a shit until a few years ago”

        Thank You Smartphone Cameras!

          1. I’m filming this:)

            1. Aww, great! Next, a visit from Animal Control…

              /quietly prays JB doesn’t have an fb or youtube account

              1. Once all 3 people who read my fb posts see this, you’ll be just like that dentist

                1. I’ll have a medical degree?!? Yippee!!!!

  3. Based on the findings, which accounted for control factors such as “gender, age, risk factors, and severity of the allegation,”

    Good. It’s too easy to do a half-assed job and then the report gets dismissed.

    More broadly, the report found widespread violations of constitutionally protected due-process rights regardless of race. Children in the system are not provided adequate representation, according to the report, in part due to the “staggering caseload of the sole public defender assigned to handle all indigent juvenile delinquency cases in the county.”

    There’s no lobbying for government spending on defending the rights of the accused.

  4. Which is the worst offense? Throwing bricks at a woman or Racial slurs or Hitting her dog with one of the bricks?

    http://nbc4i.com/2015/08/05/du…..ck-attack/

    1. 1, then 3 then 2? Plus the property damage to the vehicle.

      What is up with the comments on that link? People bitching about a racial double standard while literally having Hitler as their avatar? WTF?

      1. So last week on this same website there was an article about Dylan Roof posting on a local neo-nazi website. Only two comment for days including my “I hate Worthington Nazis” comment. Worthington is the local suburb were the nazi site was supposedly run out of. I get an email Saturday that some skinhead asshole had replied to my comment with some racist bullshit. So I go and reply to him, somebody else replies to me and before you know it the place is crawling with skinhead idiots spewing hate and stupidity. I had posted something about it here and a few of our friends like Warty and JW went over and made fun of them:) Website eventually took down the comments like Monday or Tuesday. It;s still going on Disqus though. Last reply I received was to “stop breeding with your low IQ breeder genetics”. LOL:) I think the idiot referred to in the article linked to it on his Daily Stormer retard central website so now the place is infested with cockroaches.

        1. Here was the original article. Like I said the comments are gone now. Some of them were pretty vile.

          http://nbc4i.com/2015/07/30/ex…..rthington/

          1. They are actual all of the place now. I’m sure the news site is hoping they’ll eventually get bored. I get the feeling most of them aren’t local.

        2. Took me about a 1.5 mins. to distinguish Dylan Roof from Damon Root in my mind. Why do people have similar names, or even written in the same alphabet?

      2. This is a reply to both you and AlmightyJB.

        Skinheads have an unsettling ability to roll deep and infect Internet comment boards with their insanity, despite their small numbers in the general population. I suppose they have nothing better to do with their lives, and their echo chambers like Stormfront are convenient for finding each other and organizing Internet brigades.

        1. It’s sad really. Their level of ignorance is mind blowing.

        2. Also, you can never tell a real racist Stormfronter from a 4-Chan troll who purposefully says racist stuff he doesn’t actually mean.

          Although in this case, they keep talking about Duane Pohlman (who is a reporter at that news channel) so I googled him and found this article from neo-Nazi website The Daily Stormer in which some neo-Nazi had a tiff with Duane Pohlman because Pohlman asked his mom questions about the neo-Nazi.

          So I assume that website has a bunch of racists because the readers of the Daily Stormer all went over there to throw a hissy-fit about Pohlman.

          1. Yeah, that was the article I was referring to and linked above.

            1. Andrew Anglin is such a piece of shit in so many ways, which just makes his bizarre paranoid fantasies even funnier:

              “Andrew Anglin Mod Jeff Traube ? 4 days ago
              They’re [the Jews] also to blame for black-on-black violence, selling them all these drugs and producing music that tells them to kill each other.

              Black-on-black violence wasn’t a thing when Whites controlled America.

              How dare these Jews accuse me of inciting violence?”

              1. They’re fucking idiots. In the words of the great Carla Tortelli, they are the scum that scum scrape off their shoes.

              2. Neo-Nazi conspiracy theories are up there with those of the far left, or the classic “Moonlanding/Fluoride/Mind Control” ones. Often involving Jews manipulating the brown hordes into oppressing the poor white majority who are brainwashed by the Jews into accepting this. A common example I’ve seen is interracial marriage and sex, which is apparently a Jewish plot to commit White Genocide.

                1. This Cristiano Ronaldo GIF sums up Neo-Nazi thoughts on everything bad (and everything they perceive to be bad) in the world.

                  http://imgur.com/r/gif/aiEJH

          2. “Also, you can never tell a real racist Stormfronter from a 4-Chan troll who purposefully says racist stuff he doesn’t actually mean.”

            Idk, I feel like I usually can tell. To me, the 4channers almost always have a certain style that just subtly screams “Troll!” that isn’t there in the posts by the died-in-the-wool white supremacist-types.

        3. “Skinheads have an unsettling ability to roll deep and infect Internet comment boards with their insanity,”

          And liberals are different how ?

    2. Most definitely racial slurs.

      The new mantra goes something like:

      Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will make me get my mattress and flee to a safe place and forever traumatize my delicate snowflake self.

      1. I think it’s a toss up between that and hitting the dog

    3. A grown man with that many neck chains causing trouble? No. Way.

        1. Police should be profiling grown men in NFL jerseys (with a player’s name on the back who has been off the team for at least five years) who are wearing at least two visible “gold” chains around their necks. Chances are they are selling bags of oregano to middle schoolers and giving herpes to high schoolers.

          1. An oddly specific assumption

            1. and yet perfectly logical

  5. We have the same problem here in the greater Los Angeles metropolitan area with poor Chinese kids. They’re always either committing a crime or mixing it up with street-wise cops to show them they know the system and how it works. In jail on Monday and out on Wednesday. Don’t do it on a Thursday because then you might be not be out until Monday. Serve the time, but don’t overdue it.

    I’m being flippant, but that’ Thursday bust’ problem is something American black kids know about when they’re 9 or 10.

  6. Oh, so the Civil Rights Division of Obama’s DoJ accounted for all possible “control factors,” leaving only racism as the explanation for this disparity? Well, I guess the science is settled! I’m sure everything was done in an objective, non-partisan manner. You know, the way the IRS does things.

    Next up: a DoD study proves that only more defense spending can make the country more secure.

    1. You were wondering yesterday why the Sierra Club promotes immigration:

      Critics also say Muir’s vision of wilderness is rooted in economic privilege and the abundant leisure time of the upper class.

      Rather than accessing Muir’s beloved Sierra Mountains as backpackers, skiers or rock climbers, they argue, Californians would benefit more from the creation of urban parks, additional roads and trails in wild lands

      http://www.latimes.com/local/c…..tml#page=1

      Who’s in the zoo?

    2. I just skimmed the findings section of the report. ( http://www.justice.gov/opa/file/641971/download the data starts around p. 40). It appears neither particularly rigorous or damning.

  7. I’ve looked at the “control factors” and note one that’s missing: the behavior of the juveniles involved, i.e. contrition. Isn’t it possible that juvenile offenders who show contrition, act scared, etc., might be treated more leniently by the system than offenders who scowl or sneer? I’m not saying that explains the entire disparity, but it’s an example of the sort of thing that might make a difference, but not show up in official statistics.

    1. If you’re actually innocent of the charge(s) and know that you’re being railroaded, who says you’re required to act contrite?

      1. In that case it’s not required, but I think you’re dreaming if you think most of the kids in the juvenile justice system are innocent. In any case, the point is that the disparity in treatment might well be due to something other than racism.

        1. You remember that gal in MI who was arrested over a tardy $10 dog licence?

          My local county paper listed a local arrest for under 2g of pot, which can be bought in state-licensed stores elsewhere. That person’s guilt or innocence clearly is predicated on which patch of dirt they are standing on at any given moment in time.

          What did Sandra Bland go to jail for again?

          Everyone who thinks of themselves as innocent is dreaming. The problem isn’t that juvenile offenders may be guilty, it’s that we are all one chance meeting with cops away from being just as guilty.

    2. Even if that is true, it still reflects poorly on the justice system. “Having a bad attitude” is not illegal.

      1. “Having a bad attitude” is not illegal.

        B.A. Baracus pities the fool who thinks it is.

      2. The justice system is not, and can never be, some Platonic ideal beyond human judgment. When they try to make it so, it often screws up. Mandatory minimums are an example. The different levels (police, judges, juvenile courts, etc.) all need a certain amount of discretion. Ideally, that means cutting slack to some kid who doesn’t seem like a hard case, and being tougher with one who seems to need it. Yes, that could involve racism, but maybe not. So while “having a bad attitude” is not illegal, it’s the sort of thing the system takes into account, and should.

  8. Based on the findings, which accounted for control factors such as “gender, age, risk factors, and severity of the allegation,” the DOJ concluded that the disparity amounted to a violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

    But not controlling for household income?

    We could have a bunch of poor blacks and rich non-whites here.

    1. Household income is a risk factor.

  9. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=27N3TBjBfAE

    Sargon discusses the Air Conditioning is Sexist meme.

    1. Oh for da lub of bejeebus.

      In my office space, if any of the wiminz are cold, they complain and all the guys immediately jump to their rescue. I like totally do not believe this screeching harpy.

      Is it just that women have run out of things to complain about and they need to make shit up now?

      I swear that every time my wife and I go to Brazil, she turns the AC down in our house so fucking cold that I wake up freezing and then I wind up getting a cold. She never does that here and if it gets under 70 degrees, she claims she’s cold.

      Women are just crazy, accept it.

      /I know, why there are no libertarian women

    2. Got to the fisherman scene. That was funny. I like air conditioning. Only if I could set it so cold that it gave women THO’s, and I did so for that specific reason would she maybe have a point, but I would not recognize it anyways.

    3. I watched about 3 minutes of the video, so I might be missing something, but I’m on team feminist. Every day, I walk through my own home adjusting the many thermostats. Living with 3 men, they’re constantly adjusting them down. Damn man and your fever high body temps.

      1. I am guilty of the meat locker house. I hate the humidity.

      2. “Living with 3 men, they’re constantly adjusting them down.”

        I’m sorry, did we say you could talk?

        Geez, women always coming in here and talking without asking male permission first, like you don’t even know your place.

        1. You shouldn’t talk to men who pretend to be female libertarians like that. We need the perception that female libertarians exist even though we know they don’t really.

        2. like you don’t even know your place.

          Just watch your mouth, Sonny, or I’ll pull out the time-out chair. You may now offer a tearful apology.

          1. You do know he likes that treatment don’t you? It fine if you do, it’s just an friendly fyi.

          2. Wait just a minute here. Mrs, what? Look here, Struthers, you are aware that there are no female libertarians, right? And if you aren’t aware of that, then you can’t be one of us.

            We don’t take kindly to your kind round here.

            1. You do know she has more than one time out chair don’t you? Or is that what you’re counting on?

              1. Me thinks you have personal experience with this ‘timeout chair’.

        3. Damn you Irish fuckers, this is why us Welsh defeated you in the great potato war and vanquished you from magical isle. Please tell me that you fuckers are not also the reason I like really curvy women and don’t have that gene that allows us to like women with the body of a 10 year old boy, like sarcasmic, who is my hero.

          And I got a sunburn at Fort McHenry over the weekend cause of my whiteness. That’s probably your fault also, you racist teabagging ratfucker.

      3. “Living with 3 men, they’re constantly adjusting them down.”

        I find it annoying too, but mostly because I’m thrifty. Does being more comfortable always have to require spending money? Here’s a thought: put down your soda and drink some damn water

        1. Or put more ice in your Mountain Dew (or Mellow Yellow, which I’ve heard exists in your parts).

      4. Maybe you shouldn’t be walking around half naked. Or….

    4. The only solution: ban nipples.

      I have said it before and I will say it again: nipples are ruining our society.

      1. You are really gunning for that worst position aren’t you Crusty?

          1. I didn’t say you weren’t fun, just that you are horrible.

      2. You know all mammals have nipples, right?

        1. You can milk anything with nipples!

      3. I see that it’s necessary to quickly pass legislation to let one week olds vote. In case they’re breastfeeding you know. Why do you hate the children? You want the terrorists to win too, don’t you?

      4. I think a more realistic plan is to reveal all of the nipples and ban male arousal

        1. Seeing how I tend to ignore bans, I’m pretty on board with this.

        2. No way that would backfire.

    5. On top of her ridiculousness, the interviewee really should avoid cameras.

      ‘Cause, damn.

    6. In my experience, it’s females who mostly complain of heat, men of cold.

      1. Exact opposite of my experience. The women are always cold.

        1. and still…….don’t forget still

  10. Awesome.

    Matthew Yglesias is hilariously dumb.

    1. Seriously? No one’s going to comment on Yglesias being hilarious?

      1. Wait. Who? Is that the one also known as SadBeard?

    2. I think it’s bizarre for anyone to say that “polite people” don’t call attention to racism and misogyny. Is he kidding? That’s about all that “polite people” talk about these days.

  11. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Up7b2d12OBs

    More hilarious shit. This one is Sargon talking about a black guy who supports white genocide, and it’s pretty amazing. The guy is completely nuts.

    1. Damn, that shit is hilarious. Who is this guy, I’ve never heard of him. He sounds British.

      1. Damn, do you think that could be Tony?

    2. Quiver ladies, quiver.

    3. Ruby Rhod, is that you before you sold out to the white corporate power structure?

  12. Here is a too-long piece in the NYT (“fashion and style” section, to be fair) about resting bitch face.

    1. Carl reads the fashion and style section of the Times? How cosmopolitan of him!

      Women judging women and blaming men, which is of course every wave feminism.

    2. “”One of my biggest pet peeves is when people come up to me in a social setting, where I am having fun, and ask, ‘Are you O.K.?’ ”

      Those Assholes!

      1. The “you should smile more” thing is a lame pick-up line, but when I am miserable (which is constant duh) people have asked me if I was okay. I was not appalled by their question.

      2. Charitably, I don’t think she’s saying they’re bad for doing it; I think she’s saying it happens so often that it peeves her.

        1. I didn’t put that much thought into it.

        2. When I saw they were using that photo of January Jones (who does not possess the ability to ever look bad), as an example, I became angry. The entire article seems to be “crazy women acting crazy.”

          1. OTOH, here’s a woman with reason to look angry:
            http://www.examiner.com/articl…..-being-joe

            1. The idea that he’s going to be a viable candidate for president with pictures like that just amuses me. But this is my favorite Biden picture.

              1. There are so many. It is a 1a and 1b choice for me.

                Henessey needs to get him on the payroll.

                1. It’s nice that the dude in 1b is both a Troll AND an Ordained Minister. His buddy’s looking at him like, so you gonna punch him or what?

            2. I recognize that creature…

              …Creepasaurus Rex

              1. I knew he was related to you!

    3. TL;DR – did it say anything about trying to be cheerful for other peoples’ sake – and, yes, that would apply to the male of the species as well?

    4. “You should smile” used to bother me until I started doing the psycho sarcastic smile back at them. It has the dual benefit of entertainment and creeping people the fuck out at the same time..

      1. and btw, yes I do have trouble holding down a job. Why do you ask?

  13. Republikkkins is stoopid

    The gasoline tax is currently 18.4 cents a gallon, and was last hiked by Bill Clinton in 1993, after a raise by George Bush in 1990. Average gasoline prices have fallen roughly a dollar a gallon in the last year, so a 5-cent increase would hardly be noticed. No matter, the Senate last week passed a six-year transportation bill, but funded it for only three years. And because Senate Republicans refused to pay for any of it with a gas tax, they raise the funds instead, in part, by selling oil from our Strategic Petroleum Reserve, which is our insurance against another oil crisis. I’m not making this up.

    House Republicans have yet to weigh in. Perhaps they’ll propose paying for it by selling gold from Fort Knox or paintings from the National Gallery.

    1. “The gasoline tax is currently 18.4 cents a gallon, and was last hiked by Bill Clinton in 1993, after a raise by George Bush in 1990. Average gasoline prices have fallen roughly a dollar a gallon in the last year, so a 5-cent increase would hardly be noticed.”

      Yes, and we all know gas prices never go up!

      You just know if gas prices were high the Times would be saying “Well, with gas at $4.50 a gallon, a 5 cent hike is really not that much because it’s such a small percentage of the overall price.”

    2. Gasoline taxes are regressive. How much has the average hourly wage of an American gone up since 1993?

      Why does Thomas Friedman hate poor and working class people?

  14. Why is this such a key question? Because it cuts to the core of what is undermining the Republican Party today and, indirectly, our country: There is no longer a Republican center-right that would have no problem raising the gas tax for something as fundamental as infrastructure. Sure, there are center-right candidates ? like Jeb Bush and John Kasich. But can they run, win and govern from the center-right when the base of their party and so many of its billionaire donors reflect the angry anti-science, anti-tax, anti-government, anti-minorities, anti-gay rights and anti-immigration views of the Tea Party and its media enforcer, Fox News?

    ———

    The Republican Bruce Bartlett, writing in Politico last week, said he hoped that Donald Trump becomes the G.O.P. presidential nominee, riding the Tea Party wave, and is so badly defeated in the national election that the party has to return to the center-right. “The Trump phenomenon perfectly represents the culmination of populism and anti-intellectualism that became dominant in the Republican Party with the rise of the Tea Party,” wrote Bartlett, who served in Reagan’s administration. “I think many Republican leaders have had deep misgivings about the Tea Party since the beginning, but the short-term benefits were too great to resist. A Trump rout is Republican moderates’ best chance to take back the G.O.P.”

    1. So Bruce Bartlett is a hypocritical fuck. What a shock.

    2. That did seem to happen w Goldwater for prez.

      1. Except Reagan won election 16 years later on a platform very similar to Goldwater, although Reagan played up social conservatism to a greater degree.

        1. Anything can happen in 16 yrs., from any cause.

  15. Obviously, not wanting to spend infinite amounts of money is the defining characteristic of a deranged political fringe.

    Note Friedman’s complete and utter disinterest in prioritizing spending. Just squeeze more from the rubes.

    1. Didn’t you learn from the anti-austerians that any reduction of the size of government is genocidal?

  16. Being ready to compromise to get fundamentals like a transportation bill passed and making a distinction between an “expenditure” and an “investment.” There is a big difference between funding energy research, bioscience or a new university ? and some pork-barrel project.

    Oh.

    1. “There is a big difference between funding energy research, bioscience or a new university ? and some pork-barrel project.”

      Yeah, if it’s in his district, it’s “investment”. Somewhere else? “Pork”.
      Several years back, the local firsh-wrap was whinging on about pork (this was during the great ‘set-aside’ distraction).
      But right in the middle of ti, here comes a front-page puff piece on how that smelly bag of ectoplasm named Pelosi got millions for bike trails in Marin County.
      I’m sure the poor people in Marin were thrilled. Both of them.

      1. “smelly bag of ectoplasm”

        a great description and a great band name.

  17. On-topic: Vancouver police officer *convicted* of assault after video of him punching cyclist in the face

    http://news.nationalpost.com/n…..n-the-face

    Booyah. Sentencing in November.

    1. “Akhavan was stopped in March 2013 for allegedly running a red light”

      I see a contest amongst mammals with no winners, yet doubly amusing.

  18. Derpbook post from a unknown friend of a friend that cracked me up today:

    “Smug “metalheads” who are annoyed with people at shows or parties for being loud are wimps that need to be shoved into woodchippers. You may think you’re worthy of the coffee shop where you boast about the obscure titles in your vinyl collection. Nope. You’re worthy of the woodchipper.”

    1. He has stolen our woodchipper meme!

  19. Two movie trailers of interest:

    first, for you nerds, the Deadpool trailer looks twisted and juvenile and fun.

    Second, for you homos and other people who think homosexuals should have rights, a trailer from the movie about the Stonewall riots.

    The story about the stonewall riots has a lot of potential (the story is amazing, which I first learned about here in the comments. Vile commenters!), but it is p.c. Hollywood so who knows how that will turn out.

    1. IIRC, the patrons were squeezed between the Mafia and the police, and eventually got fed up with the abuse.

      Perhaps the movie will find a way to blame the bakers, too.

      1. Reason as written about it before, but I believe the police would generally harass women in gay bars harass the women and then arrest them for crazy reasons (something like they needed to be wearing a specific amount of women’s clothing). One night, as they had the women lined up to get into the paddy wagon, one of the cops punched one of the women in the head, and all hell broke loose.

    2. That movie is going to fucking blow because the trailer starts with an Obama quote and is also clearly meant to be a propaganda piece rather than an interesting work of drama.

      It is to gay activists what Kirk Cameron movies are to Christianity.

      It’s also directed by Roland Emmerich, which guarantees that it will be terrible.

      1. I don’t know, a gay activist movie directed by the guy who made 10,000 BC sounds like it could be in “so bad it’s good” territory

      2. It’s also directed by Roland Emmerich, which guarantees that it will be terrible.

        Stargate was a good movie, and Independence Day featured a lot of Jeff Goldblum, and that is always a winning formula.

        1. Independence Day featured a lot of Jeff Goldblum, and that is always a winning formula.

          1. That is one of the worstest things I have ever read. I typed that in the comment after the quote and the awfulness of the quote deleted it.

            Seriously, fuck Goldblum. He was NOT good in Jurassic Park.

        2. If this movie has James Spader and Jeff Goldblum it will be the best movie ever made.

          1. Masterpiece Theatre has a production of Poldark that’s quite good.

            1. I didn’t know anything about it so I googled it and found this..
              “Aidan Turner Does Not Care That People Are Writing About His Abs on Poldark”
              http://time.com/3975478/poldark-aidan-turner/

              1. Yep. He’s clearing a field shirtless and it’s a memorable scene. He looks shocking good in a tricorne hat, too. He’s like a sexy founding father.

      3. It’s also the most offensive whitewashing, in that the change makes the whole thing boring: the star is some young white gay dude, instead of a black transvestite.

        1. That’s actually incredibly offensive and I didn’t even know that.

          Why would you do that? It’s a movie whose primary audience should be gay activists, so of course you do something that is guaranteed to piss off gay activists. That’s immensely stupid, and the exact sort of nonsense I expect from Roland Emmerich.

    3. The Deadpool trailer and pre-trailer for the trailer were great. “From the studio that sewed his fucking mouth shut in the first place…five-time academy award viewer Ryan Reynolds”.

      And then Ryan in the actual trailer saying something along the lines of “I’ll wear a suite as long as it isn’t green or animated”.

    4. I’m ridiculously excited about Suicide Squad. Margot Robbie should make a terrific Harley Quinn. I hope they don’t fuck it up.

      1. Yeah, I’m excited about that one too.

      2. Agreed. I think that should be good.

        A lot of people have been shitting on Jared Leto as the Joker, but Leto is the exact sort of crazy actor who can absolutely pull that off.

        1. Also, if you ladies get to gush over Aidan Turner, mmmmmmm. Margot Robbie.

          I’m sure when I hit puberty in 5-6 years I’ll find her very attractive.

  20. From the report: “Our consultant found that initially, the odds of formal processing are nearly three
    times higher (odds ratio of 2.90) for Black youth; however, after using control variables, the odds
    ratio for race was reduced to 1.465.”

    Obvious problem: Perhaps you need to control for more stuff.

    Less obvious problem: Race can’t be controlled out of the regression even if the treatment is exactly the same. The blacks are much more criminal than the whites, which means that in every bin (crime) the average black crime is worse than the average white crime. The judge can see this, but the regression can’t. Mandatory height analogy: if we assume men and women are telling the truth, 6’1″ tall men are taller than 6’1″ women.

    1. This sounds convincing to me. Perhaps Calidissident has a response.

      1. The logic is sound. This is just a problem with using a binned variable. There’s relatively simple ways around it, but they’re unlawyerly. The correct response is “well, how big is the effect?” And my answer is “I don’t know, but it it doesn’t need to be particularly big. Then again, I don’t think it is particularly big.”

  21. Everyone in St. Louis knows that the county cops and courts are assholes. St. Louis City is better, albeit slightly, and even City employees see the county as impressive. The DOJs accusations are sadly not surprising at all.

  22. What is that thing that Michael Crichton talked about/ The Gell-Mann Amnesia effect? You know, where you read an article in the paper about something you know about, find that it’s riddled with errors, scoff at the media….and then go on to read the next article–about a subject you know less well, and treat it like it’s correct.

    I see that going on here–praise for the work of Obama’s known-to-be-corrupt DOJ simply because one holds a belief that coincides with it.

    It is well known that Obama and his cronies would like to make ‘disparate impact’ law enforcement the law of the land–knowing that, can anything his administration says about justice be taken as anything other than a travesty?

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.