Voter intimidation charges against Panthers dropped

[Cody Covey]

To me, and most people I converse with, would totally agree that a black panther in black panther attire would be JUST AS outrageous as a white man in a KKK outfit with a burning cross. Are black panthers less intimidating because of what reason exactly? Sounds a little biased and as Julie said very disingenuous. They are both on extreme fringes of their respective cultures. If someone in a KKK outfit was standing outside "intimidating voters" I can almost certainly say that no one on this board would come defending them yet here you sit saying that its okay because they were in a black neighborhood and didn't actually hit anyone....ridiculous.

[YardleyLabs]

To me, and most people I converse with, would totally agree that a black panther in black panther attire would be JUST AS outrageous as a white man in a KKK outfit with a burning cross. Are black panthers less intimidating because of what reason exactly? Sounds a little biased and as Julie said very disingenuous. They are both on extreme fringes of their respective cultures. If someone in a KKK outfit was standing outside "intimidating voters" I can almost certainly say that no one on this board would come defending them yet here you sit saying that its okay because they were in a black neighborhood and didn't actually hit anyone....ridiculous.

I guess I just don't see it. The outfit would attract little attention in Philly.



Notice that the door to the polling station is wide open. A young woman is talking on her cell phone completely unconcerned, and a man in an Eagles Jersey is just emerging from the polls behind him. This is at the height of the "confrontation". In the audio I hear no cursing and no threats. The only evidence of "political" affiliation are two small patches: one of the jacket and one one the hat. A boy scout wears a more military outfit.

[Cody Covey]

I guess I just don't see it. The outfit would attract little attention in Philly.



Notice that the door to the polling station is wide open. A young woman is talking on her cell phone completely unconcerned, and a man in an Eagles Jersey is just emerging from the polls behind him. This is at the height of the "confrontation". In the audio I hear no cursing and no threats. The only evidence of "political" affiliation are two small patches: one of the jacket and one one the hat. A boy scout wears a more military outfit.

And a man from the KKK wears none at all look how is that picture at all intimidating. I mean they are just standing there. Just because you may agree with the black panthers cause (please correct me if I'm wrong but they are a militant hate group just like the KKK so don't know why you defend them) doesn't mean they are any better or different at all than the KKK

[Henry V]

The problem with this entire discussion and the hysterical posts on conservative blogs is that no one seems to be addressing the facts of the situation at all. No "charges" were dropped because, as far as I know, no Federal charges were ever filed or expected to be filed regardless of who won the election. A civil complaint was filed (a very different process seeking to enjoin defendants from displaying weapons at a polling place to intimidate voters. Only one person ever displayed a weapon and he was arrested and charged by the Philadelphia police at the time as well as being disavowed and expelled by the NBPP. The Federal complaint only identified the single incident but sought an injunction against several defendants who were not part of the activity or present at the site in addition to an injunction against the individual who possessed the weapon. None of the defendants filed a response to the complaint allowing the DoJ to request a summary judgment. The DoJ did not request a judgment against the organizations not present. It is not clear to me from the stories but I believe an injunction was issued against the man who displayed the weapon and bizarre behavior as well as one or two other men who were present at the scene.

If anyone has references evidecing a different set of facts, I would certainly reconsider my opinion. For now, however, I still can't see any rationale for Federal action beyond what was already done by the City of Philadelphia. There was no conspiracy. There was no pattern of intimidating behavior. The incident was isolated and short lived with no noticeable impact on voting. It was not supported by any organization. It appears to have been an isolated, minor criminal act classified as disorderly conduct at the scene.

So, can anyone provide different facts than those presented here?

[Cody Covey]

no thats exactly how it went down they went to the DOJ and filed a complaint against the NBPP. So now that that has happened why did AG decide he needed to dismiss this case. It was long settled and yet here we are 8 months later after the incident and all of a sudden he decides he needed to drop the case. What am I missing that makes this not a federal case (as it was filed under the voter intimidation act to the DOJ) and why did the AG drop the charges.