Black Lives Matter activist arrested and charged with 5 felonies – faces years behind bars

Share:

SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA – A New Jersey woman is facing years behind bars after organizing an unlawful protest that resulted in a child being hurt.

That woman is Tianna Arata, a so-called leader of the Black Lives Matter Movement.

The 20-year-old barely legal adult decided it was time to stage a protest against the big bad police for ‘targeting people of color unjustly’.  If only she had spent any amount of time in her so-called education to research for herself if there really is a problem in policing before she decided to mount a ‘protest.’ 

Arata would have found, if she had only spent the time, that police officers kill, unjustifiably or not, far more white people each year than they do people of any other race. 

Before we dive into the details of the protest… some facts are important here.

Sure, there are people that will argue that minorities make up a smaller portion of America so the rate would be less, but, given the demographics, if there were truly systemic racial issues with policing, regardless of race, the majority of people killed by police would show black people far more than white. 

However, the truth cannot be disputed, white people make up a majority of the population in the United States and, in fact, they are the most killed by police.

Let us focus on that point for the moment, in 2019, 998 people were killed by police.  998 people out of the entire population of the United States, roughly 328.4 million people.  998 people killed, not mentioning the reasoning behind why they were killed, regardless of race were done at the hands of police.

Of those people killed, justifiably or not, per the Washington Post, an extremely left leaning publication, 403 of those people were white, 250 were black, and so on. 

What the liberal media will not tell you is that those numbers perfectly match up to the makeup of the nation.  Therefore, if there was truly systemic racism in policing, the numbers would predominately show black people, or at least people of color, would be by far in the majority of those killed by police.

Since that obviously is not the case, (look for breakdown by race), then systemic racism in policing cannot be true.  It is like the errant OJ Simpson trial, only this time true, if the glove doesn’t fit, you must acquit.

In this case, Tianna Arata decided that she needed to stage a protest over what she errantly believes is racial inequality with policing.  She spoke to members of the San Luis Obispo Police Department and ensured them that the protest would be civil and peaceful. It turns out that she was wrong.

Whether or not Arata meant for the protest to remain civil does not matter.  It would be like you serving alcohol to someone that dies or goes out and kills someone because they are drunk. 

Regardless if you actually were the one who killed someone or not, you are responsible for providing the environment for that specific crime to occur.  In other words, if Arata had not planned that protest, no crime would have been committed.

In this case, the very young and naïve Arata staged a protest in which people got hurt.  In this specific case, a very young child.

The protest, rather planned this way or not, found almost 300 people in attendance.  People in attendance got out of hand and turned the peaceful nature into chaos.  Demonstrators entered the roadway while people were trying to drive down it. 

People in the crowd began throwing some type of objects which caused the damage to a vehicle and shattered a window, causing injury to a 4-year-old child inside.  Imagine, for a moment, regardless of race, you are driving anywhere with your 4-year-old child inside, and people start doing damage to your car.  What would the normal response be for that parent?

Any sane person would not indiscriminately attack a vehicle – let alone carry on their attacks on at least two separate vehicles in the area. 

With common sense apparently lacking, Arata and her friends do not believe that she should be held accountable for the actions she caused when she decided to do the protest. 

However, if a police officer does not intend, with all evidence proving that, for someone to get hurt, she and her supporters would believe that they should be responsible.  Where is the common sense in that mindset?

Apparently, the District Attorney in San Luis Obispo agrees that Arata should be held accountable for the actions she caused.  The DA filed charges on her for five felony charges, including four counts of felony false imprisonment and one count of conspiracy.

Her so called unintelligent friends believe that Arata should not have been arrested.  One of the people who claim to be her best friend call the arrest a kidnapping, which could not be farther from the truth.

A very simplified explanation of an arrest is this, when officers have determined there is probable cause (roughly 51%) that the person did the crime they are alleged of doing, it is a lawful arrest.  A kidnapping would be someone unlawfully grabbing someone and holding them against their will with no lawful reason.  There is more to kidnapping but that is a basic explanation. 

In this case, Arata was lawfully arrested with the least amount of force necessary. 

Video which shows her arrest shows that she is not willing to walk with officers to their cars, but, she does not actively resist their efforts.  This is what police refer to as passive resistance.  People in the crowd are heard saying Arata was not resisting, but, she in fact was by not walking to the police vehicle. 

Arata told the Tribune:

“I just turned 20 last month, there’s so much that I want to accomplish.  And I’ve been through so much struggle in my life that dealing with this, it’s just, like, I want to be able to overcome it and to go on to the new steps in my life.”

Perhaps Arata should consider what the facts are that she is marching against prior to staging one.  Even if she does not in the future, maybe, just maybe, she should ensure what she is organizing will not bring crime. 

Now we’ve got the opposite situation in Portland – where there’s a District Attorney who doesn’t seem to want to prosecute criminals.

PORTLAND, OR – After going on around 70-some-odd days of violent protests and riots in Portland, Multnomah County District Attorney Mike Schmidt decided the best move to do was to actually stop prosecuting certain crimes committed during these riots.

In a new policy announced on August 11th, DA Schmidt stated that in order to “promote a safe community” and “reduce the negative and lasting impacts” of an arrest record – people doing illegal things during the riots need to stop getting prosecuted.

According to the DA, the rationale for changing what does and does not get prosecuted is the following:

“If we leverage the full force of the criminal justice system on individuals who are peacefully protesting and demanding to be heard, we will cause irreparable harm to them individually and to our society.

“The prosecution of people exercising their rights to free speech and assembly in a non-violent manner takes away from the limited resources that we have to prosecute serious crimes and to assist crime victims.”

Well, lets examine what these “non-violent” charges would be that would no longer get prosecuted:

  • Interfering with a peace officer or parole and probation officer
  • Second-degree disorderly conduct
  • First and second-degree criminal trespass
  • Third-degree escape
  • Harassment
  • Riot (Unless accompanied by a charge outside of this list)

Oh, and in the event someone during a riot gets charged with resisting arrest, the DA’s office said they’ll take into consideration the “chaos of a protesting environment” when deciding whether to prosecute or not.

Now, let’s look at this first charge that DA Schmidt will no longer prosecute, that being interfering with a police officer as defined by Oregon state law. This means that someone can prevent police from fulfilling their lawful duties and not get into any trouble…like maybe creating a barricade not allowing officers to arrest a criminal.

Not only that, but this now creates a free pass for people to willingly disobey lawfully given orders. Because that also falls under ORS 162.247.

As for second-degree disorderly conduct, now people won’t get in legal trouble for blocking traffic, yelling “fire” in an apartment building, engages in “fighting or in violent, tumultuous or threatening behavior,” and many other forms of disorderly conduct.

Do you want to join our private family of first responders and supporters?  Get unprecedented access to some of the most powerful stories that the media refuses to show you.  Proceeds get reinvested into having active, retired and wounded officers, their families and supporters tell more of these stories.  Click to check it out.

LET Unity

And really? Criminal trespass in the first and second degree are now freebies too? That means when someone is lawfully told to leave a premises that they don’t own (say for instance, protesters invade your yard), no legal consequences will arise if they refuse to leave your property.

Harassment has to be one of the more absurd ones not going to be prosecuted either – because that means someone can subject “such other person to offensive physical contact,” or be allowed to berate someone in public and follow them around while doing so.

Rioting, which is a felony, will only get prosecuted if the alleged offender did something else illegal that wasn’t any of the aforementioned. Rioting is illegal for a reason, just like third-degree escape from police custody.

People have no been given the proverbial “okay” to riot in Portland and then escape from police custody and not get prosecuted.

But the madness doesn’t stop there.

So long as a rioter “only” commits a crime, whether felony or misdemeanor, during a protest that causes financial loss…they can have their cases dismissed if they pay restitution or abide by other outlines delineated by the DA’s office.

Here are the charges where people can have their criminal cases magically vanish if they abide by the court’s requests:

  • Second and third-degree criminal mischief – when the value is under $1,000
  • First, second and third-degree theft – when the value is under $1,000 or when the theft is committed during a riot
  • Second-degree burglary if combined with any criminal mischief or theft allegation

While the police department and the DA’s office said they won’t tolerate any violence toward police officers or other people in the community, they’re practically turning a blind eye to the menacing crowds that are terrorizing residents in Portland.

Pure, unadulterated madness.

It’s like he’s taking a page from the playbook of the San Francisco DA.  

In case you missed it… here’s that report from March:

SAN FRANCISCO, CA- San Francisco District Attorney Chesa Boudin, who was raised by Weather Underground terrorists, is not endearing himself to members of the San Francisco Police Department.

Mere weeks after “suspending” prosecution for a man who was shot after assaulting a SFPD officer with a deadly weapon, Boudin has taken his politically correct BS to a whole other level.

On Friday, Boudin announced new policies that would be taking effect immediately within his office. And, they’re beauties.

Prosecutors will no longer charge people with possession of contraband based on so-called stop-and-frisk style pretextual searches, or use status-based sentencing enhancements, such as prior strikes, or alleged gang-affiliation status, except in extraordinary circumstances.

“Pretextual stops and sentencing enhancements based on who you know rather than what you did are relics of the tough-on-crime era that failed to make us safer,” Boudin said in a statement.

“Instead they led to mass incarceration, targeted innocent black and brown drivers, and increased recidivism. They stand in the way of fairness and justice,” he said.

“Today we take action. We send a message that is loud and clear to the police department and communities of color. We will no longer participate in, condone, tolerate or amplify racist police tactics,” he said.

What a pure, unadulterated clown.

A pretextual stop is when an officer pulls over for a traffic violation and during that stop, he/she develops reasonable suspicion or probable cause and conducts a search of either the vehicle and/or the occupants.

According to Boudin’s office, research shows that pretextual stops erode trust in communities of color and result in disproportionate arrests and higher convictions.

 

Citing a 2020 Racial Identity and Profiling Advisory Board Report, Boudin said that black drivers in San Francisco are stopped five times more often than white drivers.

The report also claims that drugs were only found in 1.3 percent of traffic stops, while firearms or ammunition were seized in just 0.6 percent of the stops.

Supervisor Shamann Walton thought Boudin’s decision was simply awesome.

“Pretextual stops, just like stop-and-frisk, overwhelmingly target communities of color. These policies, along with gang enhancements and other status enhancements, have contributed to abhorrent racial disparities in this city’s criminal justice system, resulted in excessive sentences, and have not made us any safer.

The constitutionality of these stops has always been in question and it is time to end them.”

The new reforms are supposedly designed to reduce racial disparities in the city’s criminal justice system. The implementation of these policies makes San Francisco the first city in the country to implement such policies, according to Boudin’s office.

However, the San Francisco Police Association blasted Boudin for the new “reforms.”

In a statement, SFPOA President Tony Montoya said:

“In his short tenure, Chesa Boudin has demonstrated that he is a clear and present danger to the law abiding residents, businesses and visitors of San Francisco.

Get pulled over and have an illegal handgun or AR-15? No problem, Boudin will throw out your case. Have 10 pounds of meth all in small plastic bags ready for sale?

No problem, Boudin will throw your case out too. It’s unconscionable that Boudin would let someone with an illegal gun go free, only to allow them the opportunity to arm themselves again.

Chesa Boudin is emboldening criminals and we are all going to pay a steep price for this absurd practice.”

Here is a little more on Boudin. 

If you ever wonder why things are out of control in San Francisco, look no further than what just happened in the city since Boudin was sworn in. 

As mentioned, last month the San Francisco District Attorney’s office decided to “withdraw the complaint” against a man who attacked two San Francisco police officers without provocation in December.

Communications Manager Paula Lehman-Ewing released the following statement on behalf of the District Attorney’s office:

“We decided to remove this case from the calendar at this time so that we may have a chance to evaluate all the facts.

The health of any criminal case depends on internal clarity around the charges being filed, which becomes more complicated when you are dealing with an instance where there is potentially competing criminal liability. However, the case and underlying charges have not been dismissed.”

Frankly, this sounds like a load of horse manure. And the president of the San Francisco Police Officers Association agrees.

“That’s just lawyer talk, technically they said they’re withdrawing the complaint if you read between the lines, that’s exactly what they’re doing, they’re dropping the charges,” said union president Tony Montoya.

“His charging decision to not charge Mr. Hampton for feloniously assaulting two of my members is not only cause of concern to all of my members but should be cause of concern to all abiding persons that come to San Francisco,” Montoya said.

Jamaica Hampton’s assault on the two SFPD officers was caught on video from both surveillance video in the neighborhood, as well as from the body-worn cameras of the two police officers.

Boudin, the newly elected social-justice warrior District Attorney told ABC-7 in San Francisco that there’s a difference between dismissing the case and withdrawing the complaint.

“The decision we made was one that frankly is in the best interest of the officers because they’re both being investigated right now by our internal investigation bureau into their use of firearms in the incident.

It would be improper and unfair to put them on the witness stand, to testify against Mr. Hampton while they’re being investigated for their use of force.

Until both investigations can be completed, we’re going to withhold making a final decision about who to charge with what,” Boudin said.

LET has a private home for those who support emergency responders and vets called LET Unity.  We reinvest the proceeds into sharing untold stories of those patriotic Americans. Click to check it out.

Feds moving to stop passengers from flying with pets as 'emotional support animals'

 

Gee Mr. Boudin sounds to us like you are fixing to charge the two police officers for protecting themselves from an unprovoked attack with a dangerous weapon.

Internal investigations by the DA’s office are standard protocol after an officer-involved shooting, which they are in a majority of jurisdictions. We don’t know that the DA’s office in those other jurisdictions “remove the case from the calendar” while the IA is pending.

The assailant in the case is currently still in the hospital, having lost one of his legs after the shooting and is said to remain in serious condition.

Montoya says that Boudin’s decision sends the wrong message.

“It’s smoke and mirrors. Mr. Hampton is a free man, so the minute he’s able to walk out of that hospital he can make the next person he runs into the victim like he did Saturday morning December 7th.

The chief of the San Francisco Police Department sent the following message to his officers:

Members of San Francisco’s Finest,

I want to provide you with an update regarding last month’s attack on two of our Mission Station officers in which an officer involved shooting occurred. The District Attorney has informed me that at this time he will withdraw charges against the suspect. The DA indicated that his withdrawal is not a dismissal of the case.

This unprovoked attack was a violent, criminal act. I want you to know that we remain committed to working with the DA to see that justice is done in this case for our officers.

Be Safe out there!

Bill Scott.

In case you’re not familiar with Boudin, let’s introduce you. He was the son of Weather Underground radicals. If you’re not familiar with the Weather Underground, they were a left-wing terrorist organization that was active in the late 60’s and early 70’s. They were responsible for a series of bombings, jailbreaks and riots.

Among their “greatest hits” was the bombing of the U.S. State Department in Washington, DC in January 1975. Just hours later, another bomb was found at a military induction center in Oakland, California. The Weather Underground claimed responsibility for both incidents.

By the next year, the group had claimed responsibility for 25 bombings, which included the U.S. Capitol, the Pentagon, the California Attorney General’s office, and a police station in New York City.

So now, we have the son of radicals running the San Francisco District Attorney’s Office. What could possibly go wrong?

When Boudin was running for election, he used his experiences to “remind voters that more than half of Americans have a family member behind bars.” He also claimed that he was “running for district attorney because I know how to fix it.

Yes, apparently by releasing criminals that assault police officers. Also, not for nothing Boudin, your 50% of Americans with family members in jail number seems a bit skewed, just saying.  

He also signed on to the Andrew Cuomo “get out of jail free” approach to criminal justice reform. He recently announced that his office was eliminating cash bail as a condition for the pretrial release of defendants from jail.

“For years I’ve been fighting to end this discriminatory and unsafe approach to pretrial detention,” Boudin said. “From this point forward, pretrial detention will be based on public safety, not on wealth.”

That’s working out well in New York, as we’ve reported ad nauseum.  

The shooting on Dec. 7 occurred after Hampton attacked officers with a glass bottle. In video, he can be seen running up to a marked police cruiser after the officer on the passenger side opened the door to speak with him.

KPIX-TV said that police had responded to the area after police received a so-called “hot prowl burglary” in which an adult male forced open an apartment door on the 900 block of Capp Street.

Police arrived approximately five minutes after, however the suspect had fled on foot. As police were investigating that call, a second call came in about a male trying to break into cars. Officers began to search the area and came across Hampton, who matched the physical and clothing descriptions of the suspect.

When officers attempted to contact him, Hampton “aggressively advanced” toward the police cruiser, with a 200ml glass vodka bottle and started attacking the officer on the passenger side.

The driver of the cruiser got out, and went to go to his partner’s aid, when Hampton repeatedly struck him with the bottle in the head and face. The officer received lacerations to his cheek and head and was knocked down after trying to use his impact weapon.

Hampton then chased the injured officer, and which time the second officer drew his sidearm. Both officers had their weapons drawn and gave Hampton verbal commands, but he turned and ran.

Officers then attempted to use pepper spray on Hampton with no success. With the glass bottle still in his hands, he charged at the two police officers. One of them fired at Hampton as he came closer.

Hampton, even after being shot, got back up and started moving toward the other officer, who also discharged his weapon at him. Hampton finally was taken down.

Both officers remained on scene and administered aid to Hampton until the arrival of medical personnel. The injured officer and Hampton were transported to the hospital for treatment.

Only one of the body-worn camera’s footage was released because the second officer’s camera was knocked off in the scuffle with Hampton.

As a result of the shooting, Hampton received life-threatening injuries after being struck three times. He was charged with two counts of assault with a deadly weapon and vandalism by the District Attorney’s Office. Those are the charges that were “dropped” this past week.

Of course, after the shooting, the outrage mob was out in full force, minus Al Sharpton. Friends, family members and Mission District activists were “outraged” by the shooting, saying that Hampton battled addiction and homelessness and was a mentor for at-risk youth. Yup, just the kind of person you want to “mentor at risk youth.”

 Had the two officers been psychics and known that Hampton was such a great guy when he wasn’t assaulting cops with vodka bottles, perhaps this whole episode could have been avoided.

Want to make sure you never miss a story from Law Enforcement Today? With so much “stuff” happening in the world on social media, it’s easy for things to get lost.

Make sure you click “following” and then click “see first” so you don’t miss a thing! (See image below.) Thanks for being a part of the LET family!

Facebook Follow First

 

Share:
Related Posts