Tag: police state

‘It’s Mind-Boggling’: State Trooper Called In K-9 Units, Helicopters, Officers with Rifles Just Because He Thought a Teenager Played ‘Ding-Dong Ditch’ at His Home, Families’ Lawsuit Says

A Delaware state trooper who was fired and jailed for violently assaulting two teenagers after learning one of them played a game of “ding-dong ditch” at his house is now facing a lawsuit from the boys’ families.

The lawsuit comes one year after Dempsey Walters pleaded guilty to assault and deprivation of civil rights, both felony charges. He also pleaded guilty to two misdemeanor counts of assault in the third degree and two misdemeanor counts of official misconduct in connection with the incident in August 2023.

According to a grand jury indictment, Walters spotted one teenage boy in his neighborhood on Aug. 17, 2023, and launched a verbal altercation after believing the boy was engaging in misconduct. He and local police took the boy home. The teen was not arrested or charged.

After that incident, officials say that Walters searched the teen’s background in a law enforcement database.

Three days after the altercation, a different teenage boy was walking in Walters’ neighborhood with three of his friends and decided to play “ding-dong ditch.” Ring doorbell footage shows the 15-year-old boy running up to the front door of Walters’ home, kicking it, and running away.

Walters’ girlfriend, who was at home at the time, called Walters and told him about the prank.

Walters, who was on duty, immediately headed home and called state troopers and officers from other law enforcement agencies for help.

Believing that the first teen he encountered in his neighborhood on Aug. 17 may have been involved, he looked up the boy’s address and went to his home, according to the indictment.

When the teen came to the front door, Walters “forcibly pulled” him out of the home and “forced him to the ground, causing injuries,” the indictment states. Walters cuffed the teen and detained him in the back of a police vehicle. The teen was later released without charges.

After detaining the first teen, Walters was contacted by a state trooper who located and detained the 15-year-old who kicked Walters’ door. Walters immediately headed to the scene.

Dashcam video shows the moments a trooper caught up with the teen and his friends. He’s seen ordering the boys to the ground, then pushing the 15-year-old to the ground as the boy screams, and swearing at him repeatedly.

When Walters arrived at the scene, he saw the teen “face-down on the ground” and the trooper struggling to cuff his hands behind his back, the indictment states.

Almost immediately after arriving, Walters is seen running over and placing his knee on the back of the teen’s head and neck, causing him to cry out in distress.

After the boy was cuffed and placed in the back of a trooper’s cruiser, Walters “turned off his body-worn camera and walked to the police vehicle,” the indictment states.

While the teen was seated in the vehicle with his hands cuffed behind his back, Walters struck the boy “in the right side of his face, causing an orbital fracture,” which broke his eye socket.

However, the punch had been recorded since Delaware law enforcement body-worn cameras capture 30 seconds of buffer video, without audio, when they are deactivated.

After reviewing the bodycam footage, state police contacted the state attorney general’s office.

Walters was immediately suspended from his job. A month later, he was indicted. After pleading guilty, he was sentenced to one year in jail and four years of probation.

“The Defendant’s rampage against two kids, and his subsequent attempt to conceal his misconduct, was brutal, dishonest, and unacceptable. It was a flagrant and felonious violation of his oath and an insult to his fellow officers,” Delaware Attorney General Kathleen Jennings said in a statement.

Keep reading

Marijuana Prohibition Is And Always Has Been A Sham

Since its inception, efforts to criminalize the marijuana plant and stigmatize those who consume it have been predicated almost entirely upon gross exaggerations, racial stereotypes, and outright lies.

The initial push for cannabis criminalization, which began in earnest more than a century ago, had little to do with promoting public health or safety. Instead, the decision to target and prosecute cannabis users was fueled by xenophobia and media sensationalism.

For instance, a July 6, 1927 story in the New York Times, headlined “Mexican Family Goes Insane,” farcically claimed: “A widow and her four children have been driven insane by eating the marihuana plant, according to doctors, who say there is no hope of saving the children’s lives and that the mother will be insane for the rest of her life.”

An academic paper titled “Marijuana,” published in 1933 in The Journal of Law and Criminology, similarly made over-the-top allegations about the plant’s supposed dangers. The authors wrote, “The inevitable result [of consuming cannabis] is insanity, which those familiar with it describe as absolutely incurable, and, without exception, ending in death.”

In 1937, Harry J. Anslinger — America’s first ‘Drug Czar’ — successfully lobbied Congress to ban cannabis nationwide. He did so through the continuous use of racist rhetoric. “There are 100,000 total marijuana smokers in the U.S., and most are Negroes, Hispanics, Filipinos, and entertainers. Their Satanic music, jazz and swing, result from marijuana use,” he asserted. “This marijuana causes white women to seek sexual relations with Negroes, entertainers, and any others.”

Fast-forward to 1971. That’s when the Nixon administration declared drug abuse to be “public enemy number one.” The lynchpin of this campaign was stamping out the use of marijuana, which Congress had just classified as a Schedule I controlled substance — the strictest federal category available. Yet, privately, Nixon acknowledged that he did not think cannabis was “particularly dangerous,” and he lamented the “ridiculous” penalties faced by those arrested for possessing it.

Keep reading

THE DAY AFTER: Zelensky Arrests Anti-corruption Officials, Signs Law Stripping Agencies of Power – Protesters Flood the Streets, and Ukraine Will Never Be the Same

The ‘defender of democracy’ is now openly challenged by his own citizens.

Many were caught by surprise by yesterday’s protests in Kiev, Lvov, Odessa, and other parts of Ukraine – after all, these are the absolute first since the war began three and a half years ago.

But here at TGP we have been closely following the escalating tensions inside the war-torn country.

Four days ago (19), we reported that Amid Collapsing Morale, Ukrainians ‘Lost Faith’ in Zelensky, With 70% Convinced That Kiev Regime Leaders Are Using the War to Enrich Themselves: REPORT.

The following day (20), there was this thought-provoking development: Pulitzer Prize Winner Seymour Hersh Reports That US May Move to Oust Zelensky, Even by Force – General Zaluzhny Would Be Tasked for Succession.

On Monday (21), we showed Zelensky’s efforts to change the image of his regime: CHARM OFFENSIVE: Zelensky Reshuffles His Government, Aiming to Show a Different Side of Ukraine for the US and the World.

Meanwhile, on the same Monday, Ukraine’s domestic security agency detained two NABU (Anti-corruption agency) officials on ‘suspicion of links to Russia’.

Finally, yesterday, after the Parliament voted to strip the Anti-Corruption agencies of any real power, it was the final straw, and Massive Protests Erupt Against Zelensky in Ukraine.

Keep reading

Ireland’s Dangerous War on Encryption

The Irish government’s proposed Communications (Interception and Lawful Access) Bill would significantly expand the state’s ability to monitor digital communications, thereby striking at the very foundation of end-to-end encryption. 

This form of encryption, used by services like WhatsApp, iMessage, and Signal, ensures that only the sender and the recipient can access the content of a message. Under the new bill, Gardaí, the Defence Forces, and the Garda Ombudsman would be allowed to intercept private messages in real time. Achieving this would require altering or bypassing encryption entirely.

Such a measure would introduce a permanent vulnerability into digital infrastructure. Once a system is designed to allow access for one party, others can and will exploit it. 

Backdoors do not stay private. They create a single point of failure that can be used by cybercriminals, hostile foreign governments, or commercial spyware operations. 

The government claims that oversight and warrant requirements will ensure the powers are used responsibly. However, no legal safeguard can address the underlying technical risk created by breaking encryption. 

The presence of a backdoor makes every message on a platform more exposed, whether or not it is the target of surveillance. Encryption cannot be selectively weakened. Any interference compromises the security of the system for all users.

Major technology companies have already taken strong positions against laws that would force them to degrade encryption. 

Apple recently removed some of its data protection features from the UK rather than comply with legislation that would have weakened user privacy. 

Keep reading

Pew Poll: Few Americans Support Feds’ Blanket Prohibition of Marijuana

Eight-seven percent of Americans say that marijuana ought to be legal for either medical or adult use, according to nationwide polling compiled by the Pew Research Center.

The results are consistent with those of prior Pew polls finding that only about ten percent of US adults support a blanket policy of cannabis criminalization.

“The federal government’s ‘Flat Earth’ position on marijuana policy is remarkably out of step with both scientific and public consensus,” NORML’s Deputy Director Paul Armentano said. “Federally elected officials who refuse to take action to end cannabis criminalization do so at their own political peril.”

Fifty-four percent of respondents said that cannabis should be legal for both medical and adult use, while 33 percent of those surveyed supported medical marijuana legalization only. Consistent with prior polls, support for legalizing cannabis is strongest among liberal-leaning and younger voters (those ages 18 to 29), and it is weakest among more politically conservative-leaning voters and those over the age of 75.

Keep reading

Mexico Mandates Biometric Digital ID by 2026

Mexico has formally mandated the use of a new biometric-based digital ID system, making compulsory a previously voluntary identification mechanism known as the Unique Population Registry Code, or CURP.

Under the new law, CURP IDs will now incorporate detailed personal biometric records, including fingerprints, iris scans, and photographs embedded within a QR code.

The government plans a phased rollout, expecting full nationwide adoption by February 2026.

Historically, CURP codes facilitated everyday interactions such as filing taxes, registering companies, school enrollments, and applying for passports.

Accompanying this shift is a broader initiative to consolidate multiple government databases into a single Unified Identity Platform. Within 90 days, the Ministry of the Interior and the Digital Transformation Agency must launch the unified platform, which will be integrated into various public and private institutions’ databases.

Additionally, a separate program aimed at systematically collecting biometric data from minors is slated to commence within 120 days.

Despite the obvious privacy concerns, Mexican authorities argue that existing privacy legislation already sufficiently guards against unauthorized surveillance or misuse of sensitive data.

President Claudia Sheinbaum responded to privacy concerns earlier this month, clarifying, “A wiretap can only be approved by a judge, according to the Constitution and the law,” though that doesn’t placate concerns about data breaches and the wider introduction of a checkpoint society.

Keep reading

Biden Justice Department Sought ‘Federal Hook’ To Go After Parents As ‘Domestic Terrorists’: Documents

The Department of Justice under former President Joe Biden actively sought a “federal hook” to justify sending federal law enforcement after parents it labeled “domestic terrorists” because they were concerned about their children’s education.

Documents obtained by America First Legal (AFL) show that prior to the infamous Oct. 4, 2021, “domestic terrorist” memo from former Attorney General Merrick Garland, staff were looking for any possible way to go after parents concerned with coronavirus mandates, critical race theory, and “transgender” policies.

“We’re aware; the challenge here is finding a federal hook. But WH has been in touch about whether we can assist in some form or fashion,” Kevin Chambers, then an associate deputy attorney general, wrote in an Oct. 1 email, trying to manufacture a way to respond to a teed-up letter sent by the National School Boards Association (NSBA).

Career staff at the time were even concerned, saying there was no authority or legal basis for going after parents speaking out at school board meetings, particularly since they were protected by the First Amendment.

AFL said the new tranche of documents allows the organization to “complete the timeline” of how the NSBA and Biden DOJ and White House were colluding in order to go after parents. The legal group’s president, Gene Hamilton, said the emails show a “conspiracy that was ultimately aimed at depriving parents of two fundamental rights — the right to speak, and the right to direct the upbringing of their children.”

“They did so with political intentions, most immediately by attempting to influence the Virginia gubernatorial election, and to more broadly chill dissent across the United States,” he added.

The day after Chambers’ “federal hook” email, Oct. 2, Sparkle Sooknanan — who was then in the associate attorney general’s office and was later appointed by Biden as a judge on the federal district court for the District of Columbia — asked at 8:17 a.m. if anyone in the Civil Rights Division could assist in a response to the NSBA letter.

The Biden administration had already collaborated with the NSBA to produce the NSBA anti-parent letter, but Oct. 2 was a Saturday, and the timing implies that these Biden officials were looking to send their thugs after parents as soon as humanly possible.

Keep reading

Reddit Now Requires Age Verification In UK To Comply With Nation’s Online Safety Act

The news and social media aggregation platform Reddit now requires its United Kingdom based users to provide age verification to access “mature content” hosted on its website.

Users must prove they are eighteen years or older to read or contribute such content.

UK regulator Ofcom stated “We expect other companies to follow suit, or face enforcement if they fail to act.” Internet content providers who fail to adopt such measures can face fines of up to eighteen million pounds or ten percent of their worldwide revenue, whichever is greater.

For continued violations or serious cases, UK regulators may petition the courts to order “business disruption measures” such as forcing advertisers to end contracts or preventing payment providers to provide revenue for the platforms. Internet service providers can be required to block access to their users.

Reddit announced a partnership with Persona to provide an age verification service. Users will be able to upload a “selfie” image or a photograph of their government issued identification or passport as proof of majority. The company stated the age verification is a one-time process and that it will only retain users’ date of birth and verification status. Persona proffered they would only retain the photos for seven days.

David Greene, civil liberties director at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, called the UK’s Online Safety Act a real tragedy: “UK users can no longer use the internet without having to provide their papers, as it were.”

The rules come as no surprise given the regulatory over-reach of many European governments.

The canards of Protecting the Children or Online Safety provide indirect tools to deny access or curtail speech, tools too tempting or useful for pro-censorship politicians and officials.

Keep reading

Trump’s “One, Big, Beautiful Bill” Greatly Expands Biometric Surveillance, Funds DHS’ ‘End-To-End Biometric Travel’ And Autonomous Surveillance Towers

Of the many things contained in President Donald Trump’s highly touted spending package, the “One, Big, Beautiful Bill” (BBB) which he signed earlier this month, the bill allocates hefty spending to drastically expand nationwide biometric surveillance in the United States, drastically bolstering the Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) and Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s (ICE) tracking capabilities.

Though not revealed by mainstream or alternative media, Biometric Update highlights how the 940-page BBB allocates hundreds of billions of dollars “in immigration-related funding for fiscal year 2025 alone, which is by far the largest such allocation in U.S. history and represents a dramatic technology buildout.”

“Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) would receive nearly $30 billion in funding through 2029, earmarked not only for personnel and deportation operations, but also for digital modernization efforts that lean heavily on AI and biometric surveillance,” the outlet added. “More than $5.2 billion within ICE’s share is dedicated to infrastructure modernization, including $2.5 billion specifically for artificial intelligence systems, biometric data collection platforms, and digital case tracking.”

Keep reading

Missouri Police Officer Shoots, Kills Blind & Deaf Dog …Community Outraged

A police officer in Missouri shot and killed a blind and deaf dog this week … and while the department’s saying the cop feared contracting rabies — the community’s calling BS.

Teddy — a five-year-old, 13-pound shih tzu mix was killed in Sturgeon, Missouri after escaping his yard. The owner gave the dog some water and called the police … who The Washington Post reports shot the dog twice within minutes of arriving.

Check out the body cam footage … little Teddy’s running around the field — away from the officer at first before turning around and moving toward him, though not seemingly in an aggressive way.

Keep reading