Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
A New York judge has upheld a nearly 15-year-old murder conviction despite a former judge's claim that his own racial bias caused him to wrongly convict the defendant, according to court documents.
A judge decided he convicted a man of murder unfairly due to racial bias. His ruling was upheld and the guy gets to stay in jail.
NYC court Racial bias did not lead to conviction - CNN.com
A New York judge has upheld a nearly 15-year-old murder conviction despite a former judge's claim that his own racial bias caused him to wrongly convict the defendant, according to court documents.
I wouldn't call that racism or reverse racism, just a judge who's not fit to be on the bench.
A New York judge has upheld a nearly 15-year-old murder conviction despite a former judge's claim that his own racial bias caused him to wrongly convict the defendant, according to court documents.
I assumed the problem was inherent (and uncorrectable) racism in our judiciary. If it is not, please explain why you posted this article.
I assumed the problem was inherent (and uncorrectable) racism in our judiciary. If it is not, please explain why you posted this article.
Make a correction in your approach and you too can avoid making the wrong assumptions. Ask questions so you have clarity when you post.
I posted the article because I found it an interesting case of possible reverse racism and was interested in seeing the replies to the article. Do you have a list of approved subjects I should follow when posting?
So you are trolling and lying? Where did I claim no purpose to my post?I assumed the problem was inherent (and uncorrectable) racism in our judiciary. If it is not, please explain why you posted this article.
Make a correction in your approach and you too can avoid making the wrong assumptions. Ask questions so you have clarity when you post.
I posted the article because I found it an interesting case of possible reverse racism and was interested in seeing the replies to the article. Do you have a list of approved subjects I should follow when posting?
Sounds like a fancy definition of trolling. People undermine their credibility when they claim no serious purpose to their posts.
So you are trolling and lying? Where did I claim no purpose to my post?I assumed the problem was inherent (and uncorrectable) racism in our judiciary. If it is not, please explain why you posted this article.
Make a correction in your approach and you too can avoid making the wrong assumptions. Ask questions so you have clarity when you post.
I posted the article because I found it an interesting case of possible reverse racism and was interested in seeing the replies to the article. Do you have a list of approved subjects I should follow when posting?
Sounds like a fancy definition of trolling. People undermine their credibility when they claim no serious purpose to their posts.
Why are you commenting on the OP? Why are you questioning me?So you are trolling and lying? Where did I claim no purpose to my post?I assumed the problem was inherent (and uncorrectable) racism in our judiciary. If it is not, please explain why you posted this article.
Make a correction in your approach and you too can avoid making the wrong assumptions. Ask questions so you have clarity when you post.
I posted the article because I found it an interesting case of possible reverse racism and was interested in seeing the replies to the article. Do you have a list of approved subjects I should follow when posting?
Sounds like a fancy definition of trolling. People undermine their credibility when they claim no serious purpose to their posts.
"I posted the article because I found it an interesting case of possible reverse racism and was interested in seeing the replies to the article." Why did you find it interesting and why were you interested in seeing replies?
P.S. How about a serious response instead of a "clever" retort?
I do not stand corrected.reverse racism would mean you show a race, not your own, preferential treatment or consider it to be better
a black guy hating a white guy b/c he's white is racist, not reverse racism
Hey retard. It was a white guy that put him prison.
You can squat, slither, or run around on all fours. I just corrected you.I do not stand corrected.reverse racism would mean you show a race, not your own, preferential treatment or consider it to be better
a black guy hating a white guy b/c he's white is racist, not reverse racism
Hey retard. It was a white guy that put him prison.
no you didn't, not in any reality did you correct me.You can squat, slither, or run around on all fours. I just corrected you.I do not stand corrected.reverse racism would mean you show a race, not your own, preferential treatment or consider it to be better
a black guy hating a white guy b/c he's white is racist, not reverse racism
Hey retard. It was a white guy that put him prison.
You are too ignorant to merit much more of my attention. Only a retard such as yourself would miss that the white judge sent the white guy to prison due to racial bias. Where did you get your diploma? We need to shut that school down.no you didn't, not in any reality did you correct me.You can squat, slither, or run around on all fours. I just corrected you.I do not stand corrected.reverse racism would mean you show a race, not your own, preferential treatment or consider it to be better
a black guy hating a white guy b/c he's white is racist, not reverse racism
Hey retard. It was a white guy that put him prison.
I provided a proper definition for reverse racism and then you confirmed that I was correct.
the white judge showed no favoritism to a person of another color since both are white
your idea of reverse racism is fucking ignorant and is not my fault that you learned it from tv and can't unlearn it
