Anonymous said: I'm a little confused (I haven't slept in over 24hrs - I might just be too tired) the grand jury has until January to decide if they will CHARGE Darren Wilson, not CONVICT? Or they have until January to convict? Please tell me it's convict. Because regardless of your 'views' on his guilt, he needs to be charged and then a jury should decide on his guilt if he doesn't take a plea deal. Charging is a no brainer, he killed someone and it needs a criminal investigation.
The grand jury now has until January 7, 2015 to decide whether or not to charge Darren Wilson with the murder of Mike Brown. They can make a decision soon than that though.
Here’s some more info on the grand jury:
- Grand jury will begin hearing evidence on Aug. 20 in murder of Mike Brown. Darren wilson will have opportunity to testify (x)
- Grand jury might not hear all evidence until mid-October
- Possible outcomes from Grand Jury and DOJ investigation
- The grand jury in the killing of Mike Brown is only meeting once a week and are being treated as co-investigators. Also, legal experts say it’s unlikely that Darren Wilson will be charged with 1st degree murder. 2nd degree murder is possible but also unlikely if he argues that he feared for his life.
- A look at Prosecutor Bob McCulloch. McCulloch has presented 4 cases of a fatal police shooting to a grand jury. 0 indictments. McCulloch’s office also doesn’t keep detailed records. He also defended calling 2 black men shot by cops in 2000 “bums”.
- A Grand Jury Primer (storify)
- Bob McCulloch is VP of an organization that supports Darren Wilson? (x) McCulloch also won’t recommend charges against Darren Wilson to the grand jury. This is why a special prosecutor is needed.
- STL grand jury weighs charges in Ferguson shooting
- Grand jury now has until JANUARY to decide whether to charge Darren Wilson (x) (x) (x) (x)
this is so goddam ridiculous
- me: *sniffs air*
- me: ah september
- me: the time where bugs die
- me: and tv shows gradually return from hiatus
- me: aaah
why-hellostupid said: I often see you post about Gina-Torres and how important her role is as a black woman both on and off the set. My question is, how do you feel about her importance to the "black community" knowing that she does not consider herself "black"? She has verbally stated this on separate occasions....
[awkward silence] Um…well…I’ve never seen Gina deny the fact that she is black, as shown in that interview above. What I have seen Gina do is stand firmly when it comes to being recognized as latina despite the issue of colorism in the latino community (as well as the black community). She doesn’t have to explicitly state she’s black at every turn; we see that because we Americans must classify people on the spot by skin color, thanks to our wonderful history. We don’t see, however, that she’s latina because it’s not a physical trait but a diverse community that shares a culture, not a race. She’s stated on many occasions how she wasn’t even granted latina parts because she didn’t ‘look’ like a latina (meaning more european than black) to casting directors when, in reality, being latina has nothing to do with the color of her skin or what grade of hair she has…
"There are so many of us [Afro-Latinas] out there. And part of it is, we’re undercover. They don’t know, and if we stood and said "that’s it I’m not going to do any roles that are not Latina" we would not work. I don’t feel like I’m living a lie because the fact is the world sees me as an African American woman unless they ask the question. Therefore my experience in the world, outside of my family, is that of an African American woman."
Being born black does not automatically equate to being African-American (Like, face it, America, we’re not all there is on this planet). And being black and being latin@ are not mutually exclusive identifiers, so one must consider the fact her culture is not that of the African-American experience (although she is privy to it) but it’s how she’s portrayed on screen because it’s easier for Hollywood to swallow than giving her a role that’d they’d envision an Eva Mendes or a Jennifer Lopez having. But whether Hollywood lets her proposer or not, that doesn’t change the fact that Gina’s parents were Cuban immigrants, that her first language was Spanish, or that she is Afro-Cuban(-American), so being proud of that does not mean she denies the fact that she’s black because, frankly, even if she did (which I’d like to see proof of), she’d be wrong. And maybe it’s just me, but admitting to being AFRO-anything IS the acknowledgement of your African/black heritage however mixed in it may be.
The truth is Afro-Latinas have a struggle all their own to deal with here in America and beyond on TOP of being brown/black/whatever. They could bridge the gap between the black community and the latino community if both sides didn’t spend so much time rejecting them or speculating if they’re 100% anything. The issue here lies: we both want to be able to claim them as exclusively ours instead of realizing that they naturally *belong to us both.
*share something with/can relate to
Can we also talk about how the “black” community isn’t monolithic, either? That there isn’t just one way to be black, and that within the black community there are multiple ethnicities; afrolatinx being just one of many; afro-american/black american being another (which is what i’m going to guess the ask was framing the ‘black’ community as).
If you are african/afro-descendant, then let’s face it: we will all have some shared experiences. Our lives are connected by the melanin in our skin, the kinks in our hair, and so much more. See the last paragraph of the post for better expounded upon reasoning.