Criminal apologist writes letter to Red Star
Ms. Thorne must have some knowledge of the case that the general public doesn't have because she says "it's surprising" that an investigation revealed no discrimination or excessive force. Her knowledge of the arrest superceded that of even the jury. Ms. Thorne opines:
"Despite the jury's findings there's no question that Jindra inflicted trauma on this teenager. Certainly the verdict was traumatizing as well. As the Star Tribune put it: "Jindra did nothing wrong when he questioned and handcuffed a 14-year-old boy." Was nothing wrong done? Traumatizing a young man isn't wrong?"Rambix asks: How does this woman know the boy was traumatized? How does she know that the boy isn't a criminal by history, who, like many of his peers, has no respect for the police or authority? How does she know he isn't a gangster with a big mouth? We don't think it's a stretch to imagine some verbal abuse of officer Jindra by the nice young criminal.
More wisdom from the omniscient Ms. Thorne:
"Damani and his family, friends and community have the power to heal. But I wonder if the jurors in this case bothered to wonder how their verdict would affect this young man. Somehow the jurors should have found some other way to say, "Yes, you have been wronged. You didn't deserve this." Would they do any less for a 14-year-old boy they happened to know?"Ms Thorne, Rambix asks you, what makes you think the young punk didn't deserve to be "put on the ground"? Yes, dear reader, Rambix does make the assumption the young man is a punk and criminal-in-training. That theory might be a good bet.
Urban officers have a tough, tough job, especially in a city like Minneapolis. You are up against criminal apologists like Ms. Thorne; your own administration, which will stab you in the back in an instant; and "community activists" like Spike Moss, who have no real jobs and plenty of time on their hands to make life miserable for our men in blue. God bless 'em all.