Kiss Your Civil Rights Goodbye (graffiti charges for chalk protest)

Joe Newman said:
That seems a little soft. Maybe on top of the community service, he should pay BoA for damages as well, eh? Or better yet, maybe we could all chip in like we did the last time the beyond corrupt banks broke the law, the economy, and the countless mashed up folks still roiling around in the wake of the bottom line shenanigans of BoA and the rest of the vipers.
Click to expand...

Even a bit of light (if you want heavy it's pay-per-view) public flogging - make great telly, wouldn't it? Think of the audience figures - - think of the advertising revenue....'justice' and spectacle, all in one - - it's the American Dream - Empire of Illusion.....
 
Oxymoron said:
I find it incredible that so many debunkers are eager to say ...'he committed a crime he needs to be held accountable' over a bit of chalk on a pavement and yet apart from a few 'I am no fan of the banks' statements... where are all outraged calls for them to be held accountable.

I am sorry but the disparity is palpable and highly disturbing.
Click to expand...


I don't give a hoot about this guy. I care vastly more about the evils of the banking industry. But it's not like we have to choose, is it?
 
lee h oswald said:
Even a bit of light (if you want heavy it's pay-per-view) public flogging - make great telly, wouldn't it? Think of the audience figures - - think of the advertising revenue....'justice' and spectacle, all in one - - it's the American Dream - Empire of Illusion.....
Click to expand...


Obviously it would also bring a lot of attention to his cause (which I support). I imagine you don't think that publicity is a bad thing?

It may well even backfire rather badly on the bank.
 
Mick West said:
I don't give a hoot about this guy. I care vastly more about the evils of the banking industry. But it's not like we have to choose, is it?
Click to expand...
Yes I know that Mick but I cannot help but notice the willingness of some on this forum to voice their condemnation of the heinous crime of chalking on the pavement whilst at the same time totally, (apart from you Mick), ignoring the issue of the banking crimes and make no mistake, the laws have been broken big time and millions have suffered tragically whilst they have enriched themselves to billions if not trillions of dollars.

Yes there is outrage about it throughout the world but debunkers on here choose to hold a guy accountable and justify prosecuting him for chalking on the pavement but again choose to say nothing against bank fraud.

https://www.metabunk.org/threads/too-big-to-fail-too-big-to-jail.1014/
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Oxymoron said:
Yes I know that Mick but I cannot help but notice the willingness of some on this forum to voice their condemnation of the heinous crime of chalking on the pavement whilst at the same time totally, (apart from you Mick), ignoring the issue of the banking crimes and make no mistake, the laws have been broken big time and millions have suffered tragically whilst they have enriched themselves to billions if not trillions of dollars.

Yes there is outrage about it throughout the world but debunkers on here choose to hold a guy accountable and justify prosecuting him for chalking on the pavement but again choose to say nothing against bank fraud.

https://www.metabunk.org/threads/too-big-to-fail-too-big-to-jail.1014/
Click to expand...

Well to be fair it is yourself conflating it into something it is not. A guy is been prosecuted for a relatively minor offence for which if found guilty he will probably get a fine or a community sentence. The emphasis on if. You were the one that opened with him facing 13 years in gaol even though the judge has said that is not the case.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Oxymoron said:
Yes I know that Mick but I cannot help but notice the willingness of some on this forum to voice their condemnation of the heinous crime of chalking on the pavement whilst at the same time totally, (apart from you Mick), ignoring the issue of the banking crimes and make no mistake, the laws have been broken big time and millions have suffered tragically whilst they have enriched themselves to billions if not trillions of dollars.

Yes there is outrage about it throughout the world but debunkers on here choose to hold a guy accountable and justify prosecuting him for chalking on the pavement but again choose to say nothing against bank fraud.

https://www.metabunk.org/threads/too-big-to-fail-too-big-to-jail.1014/
Click to expand...



This thread was not about the banks wrongdoings. I have not seen anyone that has come to the defense of the Bank of America, other than to say that it was their right to report the vandalism (it occurred 13 times) and that based on the law, that what he did constituted a crime of vandalism. As mentioned, this guy would get a slap on the wrist. The title of this thread is
"Kiss Your Civil Rights Goodbye (graffiti charges for chalk protest)" and the right to free speech does not confer the right to commit a crime in exercising the free speech.

If you want to start a thread devoted to bashing the BofA for their crimes, you would find few people come to the defense of them for the crimes. If you make a claim that is disputable, yeah... it is in the nature of debunkers to dispute the disputable.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Mick West said:
You are conflating issues. He vandalized some property. So it should be treated like any vandalism case. What BofA did is a different issue.
Click to expand...

I'm not conflating anything, Mick. I already said he committed vandalism. I'm fine with it being treated like any other vandalism case, and had it been, this thread wouldn't be here--unless I missed the DHS memo about vandalism being a 13 year in jail kinda crime, as stated in the headline.

Yes, what BofA did was a different issue. And a third issue is that between the two parties involved in this story, BofA is getting a pass for their crimes against humanity while the scrutiny is going to the poor guy's chalk outline on the sidewalk.

His story is a chopped down tree in a clear-cut forest of bank bullshit, yet the focus is on his petty crime while the mega-malfeasance of BoA is a side issue. We all have our own lines, and that kind of focus crossed mine, I guess, because I just don't get it.
 
Critical Thinker said:
This thread was not about the banks wrongdoings. I have not seen anyone that has come to the defense of the Bank of America, other than to say that it was their right to report the vandalism (it occurred 13 times) and that based on the law, that what he did constituted a crime of vandalism. As mentioned, this guy would get a slap on the wrist. The title of this thread is
"Kiss Your Civil Rights Goodbye (graffiti charges for chalk protest)" and the right to free speech does not confer the right to commit a crime in exercising the free speech.
Click to expand...
I am simply juxtaposing the reactions to the two threads and noting the multiple and vigorous condemnations of a guy who puts a few chalk marks on a pavement and the near total, (apart from Mick) lack of condemnation for the banksters in the too big to fail thread.
 
No one knows if he willl be found guilty or not or what the sentence will be if he is but it is no accident that the 13 years and 13k fine are being posited, it is 'the deterrent/scare factor' and who knows that he won't get charges and jail term as part of all that but even if he doesn't, he has had to live with that possibility hanging over his head and I suggest that is all part of the psywar.
 
Oxymoron said:
No one knows if he willl be found guilty or not or what the sentence will be if he is but it is no accident that the 13 years and 13k fine are being posited, it is 'the deterrent/scare factor' and who knows that he won't get charges and jail term as part of all that but even if he doesn't, he has had to live with that possibility hanging over his head and I suggest that is all part of the psywar.
Click to expand...


Maybe it's really simple:

  1. Guy chalks stuff on the sidewalk for a couple of months, even though the bank asked him to stop
  2. Bank bugs the city about it, because they want it to stop
  3. Eventually, after repeated complaints, the city charges him with vandalism.
  4. He's going to get at most a small fine, and a suspended sentence, unless he has priors. It's vandalism.
That's it.
But because it's a bank, suddenly it's the Illuminati trying to crush a noble man? What if it were a day care center?
 
Oxymoron said:
I am simply juxtaposing the reactions to the two threads and noting the multiple and vigorous condemnations of a guy who puts a few chalk marks on a pavement and the near total, (apart from Mick) lack of condemnation for the banksters in the too big to fail thread.
Click to expand...

I see participants in that thread focusing on your assertions rather than using it to express their dissatisfaction with the banking industry. You shouldn't unduly assume that others are turning a blind eye to incidents of fraud, or that people in this thread are somehow more interested in assigning blame to the little guy.

This incident could simply have been avoided if Olson had taken the time to familiarize himself with city ordinances and staged his protest accordingly.

(Edited to correct a verb tense gone awry...)
 
Mick West said:
Maybe it's really simple:

  1. Guy chalks stuff on the sidewalk for a couple of months, even though the bank asked him to stop
  2. Bank bugs the city about it, because they want it to stop
  3. Eventually, after repeated complaints, the city charges him with vandalism.
  4. He's going to get at most a small fine, and a suspended sentence, unless he has priors. It's vandalism.
That's it.
But because it's a bank, suddenly it's the Illuminati trying to crush a noble man? What if it were a day care center?
Click to expand...

If it were a day care center, he probably would have gone with hopscotch. And they probably would have brought him more chalk and brought the kids out to play, too. Or, connecting the Illuminati dots, what if it were a Death of Day Care center? He'd have to trade that chalk in for a bullhorn.
 
Joe Newman said:
If it were a day care center, he probably would have gone with hopscotch. And they probably would have brought him more chalk and brought the kids out to play, too. Or, connecting the Illuminati dots, what if it were a Death of Day Care center? He'd have to trade that chalk in for a bullhorn.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry, but I don't see what your point is.

The thread is titled "kiss your civil rights goodbye". Now nobody likes banks, but are civil rights actually being infringed here? Would it be different if he did the exact same thing outside some other business?
 
Let's make that a day care center where his child had been hurt. He blames the center, no charges have been found.

So he starts writing 'Little Brats mistreats kids' Little Brats is a criminal' Little Brats tortures your children".

He does that over and over and over. He is asked to stop. He gets a ticket for it, and another one, and another one. Till he has 13 of them.

The law is written in Cal, that each graffiti charge is separate and the penalty for each charge can UP to one year in jail and a $1,000 fine. That is where the 13 yrs came from. Some graffiti is worthy of that. Recently in Denver an artwork was vandalized. It cost the city over $11,000 to repair it.
 
I just wonder why people care so much about a minor case? Is it because the Mayor has been involved and made it a political? Here are a couple of cases from the UK.

Paul Saville.


When Paul Saville chalked pro-civil liberties messages on the pavement, he made sure that the chalk he used could be easily removed after his slogans had been read.
The water-soluble words included: 'Liberty. The right to question it. The right to ask: "Are we free?"' and have long since been washed away by the rain.
What he didn't expect was to be arrested by four policemen, DNA tested, photographed and fingerprinted and kept in a cell for more than two hours.
The student was charged with criminal damage and faced trial.
Content from External Source
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ed-case-student-civil-liberties-graffiti.html

Now that case had a first hearing at the Magistrates and was dropped by the CPS just prior to the second. Now was this a case of political pressure or the fact that he had admitted a previous offence and the CPS fancied their chances?

or some UCL students


POLICE have been called in to investigate possible “criminal damage” to University College London’s buildings during the student occupation last month, the New Journal can reveal.
UCL have paid more than £5,000 to clean up chalked messages on the walls of the Grade I-listed quad buildings and Slade School of Fine Art in Gower Street.
The dozen or so messages ranged from political slogans such as “Rise Like Lions”, to more blunt criticisms of the coalition Government including “Nick Clegg is a W****r”.
Content from External Source
http://www.camdennewjournal.com/new...ry-after-chalk-graffiti-damage-grade-1-listed

What was the motivation of UCL? Was it political or was it to try to gain recompense for the clean up costs? (That was settled within the University confines)

However just Google both cases and you will see what little outrage and press there was to both cases. One would think Liberty would be all over Paul Saville. Petty cases like this go to court all the time and usually have a habit of going away. More often than not minor cases like this are down to over zealous prosecution (it is good for the stats). However I feel that the mayor has jumped on this for his own political leverage.
 
Mick West said:
I'm sorry, but I don't see what your point is.

The thread is titled "kiss your civil rights goodbye". Now nobody likes banks, but are civil rights actually being infringed here? Would it be different if he did the exact same thing outside some other business?
Click to expand...

Uh, right. I got that the first time. I agree with you that it is not a cr issue. I thought we'd established that when I said it was a vandalism case. I think my legal team's done a good job, so I made a joke about Illuminati day care and Alex Jones. My bad.
 
Joe Newman said:
Uh, right. I got that the first time. I agree with you that it is not a cr issue. I thought we'd established that when I said it was a vandalism case. I think my legal team's done a good job, so I made a joke about Illuminati day care and Alex Jones. My bad.
Click to expand...


Sometimes sarcasm vs. joke is a difficult distinction online :)
 
Mick West said:
Sometimes sarcasm vs. joke is a difficult distinction online :)
Click to expand...

I thought the bullhorn nailed it to the bohemian grove tree, I did. Seeems words don't speak for themselves, anymore (lawyered up like the rest of them), so I do confess to having a wise ass gene that's not as recessive as some might wish. But genes, right? Whaddya gonna do? ;)
 
Joe Newman said:
I thought the bullhorn nailed it to the bohemian grove tree, I did. Seeems words don't speak for themselves, anymore (lawyered up like the rest of them), so I do confess to having a wise ass gene that's not as recessive as some might wish. But genes, right? Whaddya gonna do? ;)
Click to expand...

Have a chat with the guy from Monsanto. I am certain they could have a solution.
 
A friend of mine was prosecuted for spraying a single letter, over a much larger piece of graffiti, by Banksy. The irony that he was being prosecuted for committing an act of criminal damage that blemished a previous and more extensive act of criminal damage was pointed out to, and understood by, the judge. He was fined. I suspect he would've been prosecuted if he had attempted to clean the Banksy. Outside of law, the offence, or lack of offence, caused by writing letters, shapes or forms upon surfaces is entirely a matter of subjective interpretation. In my friend's instance, the owner of the property probably took offence at the Banksy, until he learned of the value it added to his property. Had he known of my friend's artistic "credentials", also, perhaps the charges would've been dropped. Damaging criminal damage, the irony.
 
Biggerdave said:
So anyway the guy has been found not guilty. This is just as I thought, a storm in a teacup. Even though I am cynical I do have a great deal of faith in the criminal justice system.

http://fox5sandiego.com/2013/07/01/...-chalk-not-guilty-of-vandalism/#axzz2XpGEHhie
Click to expand...
Thanks for that Dave.

I note this was a trial by jury and the jury found him not guilty... :)

I don't mean to be inflammatory but more along the lines of perhaps pricking people gently to re appraise their perceptions.

I also note the quote:

The prosecution of Olson brought condemnation of the City Attorney’s Office from Mayor Bob Filner, who called it a waste of time.
Click to expand...
​
And note that was not the consensus on this site, (and likely a high probability of a guilty verdict if this forum were the jurors) and I wondered if people may want to explore that... not in a recriminatory way but more as an analysis of the thought processes involved?​
If not, perhaps people may want to analyse it internally.​
 
I don't think there was a consensus on if it was a waste of time or not. I said I didn't give a hoot*. The argument was more about if "kiss your civil rights goodbye" was an accurate characterization of what happened.

*Owl reference unintentional. Not illuminati.
 
Oxymoron said:
And note that was not the consensus on this site, (and likely a high probability of a guilty verdict if this forum were the jurors)... <snipped>
Click to expand...

These are exaggerated assumptions, reminiscent of the earlier phrase you used: "vigorous condemnations" (which I'm just not seeing). I think most of the responses here are acknowledging that Olson's actions were against the law, and that there's no need to invoke a conspiracy to explain why he was charged nor to deprive anyone of free speech. You're somehow inferring that we want to see him prosecuted as a result, and would have voted as such -- that simply does not follow.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Mick West
  • Sticky
Escaping the Rabbit Hole - Updated Endnotes and References
Replies
9
Views
9K
Stealth777
Stealth777

Latest posts

Back
Top