I probably dislike these t-shirts as much as you, but I see absolutely nothing illegal about them or the actions of those who support Wilson or are raising money for his defense. I also don't see how the supporters' Facebook page violates the Facebook terms of service, particularly in light of some the cr@p currently allowed on the site.

Even fools and bigots have the right to free speech in America. Just ask the ACLU and review many decades of jurisprudence.

Despite the suggestion of others, I also do not condone any illegal action against the Wilson supporters. Not only does it end up justifying their beliefs, diminishing the moral authority of those seeking to eliminate racial problems in the justice system and would ultimately be counterproductive, there are more than ample, and completely legal, means to support our side, including our own t-shirts, peaceful protests outside the stadiums and Barney’s Sports Pub, etc. Speech is countered with more speech, not attempting to silence opponents, no matter how disagreeable.

and even if they did, a trademark action might still prove very difficult.

In what way do you suggest that the t-shirts or wristbands violate any intellectual property of the Cardinals.

Last edited Sun Oct 12, 2014, 10:30 AM - Edit history (1)

Are you suggesting that the team is the only entity that can print the expression "Go Cards" absent the logo or other unique and registered team identifiers?

My area of law is not intellectual property, but I very much doubt that just the phrase has trademark protection, no less a copyright. If that is not the case, I would very much welcome an explanation to expand my professional knowledge.

The fact that other personal t-shirts and a multitude of other items have used the phrase over the years without incident, and the team has apparently taken no action as to this particular t-shirt, lead me to believe either they have waived use of any trademark, or the shirt and similar items were designed specifically to circumvent the issue.

I substantively responded to a benign statement with a question concerning topics that are both relevant to the overall discussion and interest me, free speech and intellectual property, in a thread in which I have been active.

However, you seem to find my mere presence objectionable, apparently because I hold views that differ from your own, and repeatedly make comments of a personal nature unrelated to the topic.

Before directing such sarcasm towards me, it might be best to first look in a mirror.

I am saying that

The Cardinals and any other entity has the right under law to control their trademarks and other intellectual property.

Just because they might have not allowed outside groups in the past doesn't mean that they can't or shouldn't do it now

I searched online for the t-shirts, and none seem to actually contain Cardinals trademarks or property (I have no desire to link to the actual shirts, but they can be found easily enough). They just contain basic text. Moreover, the team does not, and cannot, control all references to the "Cardinals," only specific logos and similar markings and designs.

Additionally, even if certain potentially trademarked material was at issue, it is my understanding that it order to protect a trademark, you must enforce your rights and usage. Selective enforcement might be considered a waiver of the trademark. If they allowed usage on t-shirts in the past without complaint, they may very well be barred from enforcement now. The fact that these particular t-shirts are very offensive would not matter.

It cannot be. Racism is wrong and we are right. Even the racists know it. We should use any means we have available to end it. And if we can get racist distributors of garbage shut down and push them underground, then we need to do so.

Remember, those people who sat at lunch counters in Woolworths were BREAKING THE LAW. So were the first women who voted. So were Mrs and Mr Loving. There were people like you around back then who wanted to wait until everybody was comfortable before doing anything. They were wrong then, and you are wrong now.

or the Cardinal offices.

MLB is very protective of their brand, and I bet neither the Commisioner nor Cardinal management has authorized this.

I see nothing about the shirts that would violate any trademark or similar protections. If so, the MLB and Cardinals certainly cannot prohibit the sales of shirts or wristbands.

Are you're suggesting that those who wear the t-shirt be prohibited from entering the stadium? If so, the t-shirts do not appear to violate the Busch Stadium rules, as the shirts may be of questionable taste, but are not "obscene or indecent" as those terms are currently understood, and I doubt the team would want to set a precedent that could bite them later with a variety of groups, both left and right. I also cannot imagine that MLB or Cardinals would see any advantage to inserting themselves in the middle of a political and legal matter like the Brown shooting. To the extent they, or anyone else, opposes the shirt, banning it will provide far more press in favor of Wilson, than simply ignoring a few t-shirts in a stadium full of people.

Again, why the urge to silence opponents, particularly when you could make and sell your own shirts, protest, etc.? Such inclinations are not liberal or progressive.

The inclination to reject racist bullshit and get pissed off and want to DO something about it , is most def, a liberal and/or progressive inclination.

I stated that the best (and usually legal) means to reject and oppose racist items like the t-shirt is more speech, like protesting, our own t-shirts, etc.

Attempting to silence foes, no less serious or violent criminal behavior, is not liberal, its authoritarian. In fact, the vast majority of free speech jurisprudence was developed by the left and groups like the ACLU.

I most certainly will not reject important values like free speech, that often serve progressive causes, because of some bigots in a t-shirt.

I also believe that some of the suggestions here, including hacking attacks, are simply bad strategy. It will not stop the t-shirts or those few hardcore Wilson supporters, but will definitely result in the association of Brown supporters with criminality and erode their moral authority. As a trial attorney, I additionally believe such stunts will not predispose a jury pool in favor of a conviction at trial.

We need to bring attention to them and hold them up to ridicule. If I were on a jury, I know that I would not broad brush the supporters of a murdered teen, but I would be suspicious of the supporters of the man who killed him.

My point is. They do not play fair and they are not nice and they are not deserving of an easy time of it. Look at me as the Malcolm to your Martin. Both methods are necessary for change. And why should those black and brown players on the team have to deal with that racist crap at their games? I see those shirts as a racially motivated attack on black people. If movie theaters can ban 'bandanas', 'baseball caps', and 'gang attire', then the stadium can ban 'racist tshirts', ''klan kostumes', and anything that may cause a dangerous situation. Magic Johnson theater does it to prevent gang fights. The team can consider the clothing gang attire. I'm sure they don't want a group of racist tshirt gang members to get into a battle with innocent law abiding citizens at their games.

That's not "bringing attention," it's silencing.

Nevertheless, you make a Malcolm and Martin comparison, which I take as a compliment. As is obvious from my comments and my profession as an attorney, I almost always will take the legal and peaceful route to change, and heartily believe that the way of MLK changed far more minds and hearts, particularly over the long-term.

I'm also fully aware that MLK broke some laws. However, unlike in St. Louis, many of the laws themselves at the time were explicitly racist (i.e., Jim Crow) and other were arrests for things like trespassing for entirely peaceful civil disobedience. Time and culture have also changed, and many potential supporters now would be far less tolerant to such tactics.

If we want to change eliminate racism in the criminal justice system, as a matter of strategy, perceptions must change, and violence or serious criminality only reinforces crude racist notions.

As for the suggestion that the players sit-out, if they're willing to take the financial, legal and public relations hit, it would certainly get some attention. However, not only do I believe that there is little to no chance of the players acting as some wish, and therefore making us look weak, much of the attention that would be garnered would be against Brown supporters. To a great many, interference with baseball is truly a "Cardinal" sin.

I like the idea. Racists do not need reinforcing. Cannot make it our job to 'act right' in order to be considered human.

Calling them out is not suppression-it is answering their filthy hate with honest justice.

It is peaceful, legal and effective. However, conduct such as hacking and DDS attacks or threats of violence and destruction are most certainly not shaming, protest or argument, they are criminal, physical means to literally silence opponents.

If you condone such behavior against your ideological opponents, no matter how vile, do not be surprised if you are on the wrong end of the justice system, or worse, individuals and organizations you support suffer a similar fates.

Potentate of All Things Liberal.

Thanks for the advice, but I can decide for myself what's progressive.

The ACLU and decades of liberal initiated and supported jurisprudence would beg to differ.

If I wanted preaching this Sunday, I would have gone to church.

what's the matter?

didn't like the answer?

isn't that the opposite of your holier-than-thou preaching throughout this thread?

and tell them you will boycott their home games.

get free speech.

The Free Speech clause only protects us against government interference. There is no protection between private parties. As you state all over this board: "We must deal with the world we live in, not the one we wish existed."

Let me try it another way.

Anyone expecting a massive outcry over this will be sorely disappointed.

That is the world we live in, sadly.

and was shocked as all heck when it occured. Sometimes the world we live in pleasantly surprises me...and I enjoy that soul lifting, as infrequent as it is.

The First Amendment, and basic criminal law, certainly would prevent this.

Sadly, many believe that there is some sort of "hate speech" or related exception to the Constitution that could permit the authorities to restrict the Wilson supporters. That may be true in Europe, but it is certainly not the case in the USA.

Private companies, although generally not required to permit all speech, often do so as not to appear to favor any side of a controversial issue and comport with basic American values. These entities are concerned with finances and shareholder approval, and getting involved in political disputes is detrimental to both.

And a virus.

I live in KC, so that's one.
I hope both teams make the World Series so that the Royals can crush them.

[center]

[/center][font size="1"]Photo by Daniel Schwen (http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User: Dschwen) in Wikipedia
(Creative Commons License, Attribution/Share Alike)
[/font]

...but I would love for the Royals to do the soul crushing.

Wish them ill.

The Royals just beat the Orioles in game one. This is an amazing run by any measure!

GO GIANTS!!!

Supporters of Mr. Brown need to buy or better yet make copies of this shirt. Then video the destruction of the shirt.
Hang it on a tree and fill it full of holes.
Hang it on a tree and stab it.
Hang it on a tree and burn it.
Hang it on a tree and take a chain saw to it.
Blow it up.
Run over it with a track loader.
Put it in a blender.
Wood chipper.
Lawn mower.
Wood stove.
You get the idea, deep 6 the shirt!

put the video on Facebook and Youtube.

You got the idea.
Sometimes ya just need to explain things graphically.

That might be fun.

As long as the protests are peaceful, no objections from me. Just be careful you don't poke your eye out.

However, I wouldn't buy the t-shirts. All the money would go to Wilson.

A black kid had his brains blown out and was left to rot in a street for 5 hours. You don't think people are a little hostile???

If white people can hang Obama in their yards or make parade floats with him next to an outhouse, then what the poster said was mild in comparison. Hell...read the comments section of any daily newspaper and you'll find a 110 times more vitriol

but I don't think anyone is "feeling" you...........

At all right now.
Hostility is what those cop supporters feel towards black people. You damn straight we are hostile to racists. No tolerance for the intolerable. Get with it.

African American and Latino members** of the Cardinals should refuse to play in any games. If St. Louis wants to flaunt its racism, it deserves no enabling of same by any team members of color.

**And any Caucasian team member who recognizes racism and injustice.

America can have its baseball or it can have its racism, but it CAN'T HAVE BOTH!

If so, it's impossible, and you're essentially demanding the end to baseball, or at least to the end of the Cardinals. A unicorn will be elected president before that happens, and he'll be a Republican if it was our suggestion.

More pertinently, I'm confused whether your suggestion is actually more limited, and not playing is in protest of the Brown shooting or just the t-shirts?

Regardless, I really don't see what a player strike would achieve, other than the players' violation of their contracts and a great deal of public hostility toward both the players and Brown supporters.

The ethics of demanding an indictment from a grand jury, no less a conviction at trial, in return for playing, is of dubious ethical and moral standing, and could create havoc for selecting any jury needed for a conviction, chaos for any prosecution (state or federal), and runs contrary to the ultimate goal of a fair criminal justice system. Effectively throwing a playoff games(s) because of a few idiots with a legal t-shirt, also appears foolish, an overreaction, and more importantly, actually provides Wilson supporters with a great deal more press and a larger soapbox to air their views.

Peacefully protesting at the stadium, even encouraging players to speak-out or donate money, would seem to be a more advantageous strategy.

its white constabulary forces are gunning down its young black males like so many rabid dogs.

You seem to say St. Louis can 'have it all': its baseball AND its white supremacy and racism.

People here seem to have forgotten that Mohammed Ali relinquished his world heavyweight title as the price of refusing induction into the US. military to fight a racist war in Vietnam. If Ali could do it, I don't see why Cardinals' baseball players can't do the same. It's just a silly game.

And is obviously absolutely clueless about activism by athletes of color

and the Cardinals players are paid a lot of money to play a game, not be paragons of social activism. It sucks, but again we must deal with the world we live in, rather than the one we wished existed.

right with their world, when anyone with eyes to see or a heart that beats knows there's something rotten in the state of Denmark.

This T-shirt campaign is just the exclamation point on that disconnect.

There is some class analysis required to understand this issue ("the Cardinals players are paid a lot of money to play a game&quot , and I'm still noodling on it.

Question: would the universe as we know it cease to exist if the World Series was not played one year? I mean, really, what's more important, the lives of (now) two 18-year-old unarmed black men killed in the first blush of adulthood or a silly, stupid game?

is that most people care what happened in St. Louis. I am not being a jerk, or being rude, just trying to make a point that most people don't care what happens.

To many people the game is more important, and again we must confront the world as it is, not how we wish it was.

I've been having more and more since Michael Brown was executed.)

I have just decided to embrace my sadness and confront what is, not what I wish was.

Michael Brown was killed. (Whence my anti-baseball sentiments and sorry to sound so maudlin.) I keep thinking back to the peroration of Lincoln's Gettysburg Address:

It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us -- that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion -- that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain -- that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom -- and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.

you might find that you do not like their answer or result.

This is a simple reality, and our strategy must account for the world and human nature as it is, not necessarily as we would like it to be.

He crux of the issue is not whether WE force the American people to choose between sports and Mr. Brown but whether the players do. If the majority of players of color laid down their gloves, footballs and other sports gear until ol police brutality was dealt with, you think the "american" people would say "fuck it" no more games? Hell no! They would be saying fix this shit so we can get our sports on.

But as many posters hAve save, given today's players, ain't gonna happen but it has fuck All to do with the American people

I believe that if Brown supporters demanded a strike, and the players actually considered complying, it would be perceived, rightly or wrongly, as forcing a choice between baseball and Michael Brown, and the supporters of Brown would be on the losing end. I also do not necessarily believe a strike would do much to change implicit racism nationwide in the criminal justice system.

However, I do believe it possible to get players to speak-out in support of Michael Brown and racial justice (and donate money to related causes). Such actions by individual players or the union would be unlikely to have negative financial and legal consequences and would garner significant public attention.

You are totally missing the point because it's sailing way above your head.

First of all, I have heard no one.....NO ONE call for a strike of baseball because of the Michael Brown situation. I haven't heard anyone call for one in any other sport either. And I certainly didn't call for one anywhere in the thread

If players did lay down their equipment, there would be no perception about right or wrong. The only perception that counts would be that there's a lot of fucking money being lost and we need to fix this shit fast. A lot of southern football coaches warmed up to desegregation when they got some brothers in the backfield

See Post #16 by KingCharlemagne. He or she explicitly suggested that the players should sit-out and it was the progenitor of the entire baseball-related discussion.

I see from your post count, "our" strategy is new to you, so welcome to DU Branford. And in case you haven't met, let me introduce you to your kindred spirit, AnalystInParadise..

that multi-millionaires who pay baseball (and happen to be racial minorities) would stop playing for the championship trophy in their respective sport to display some kind of solidarity with those protesting the death of a young black man? I can only assume you don't know many professional athletes.

Muhammad Ali is the exception.....

I prefer the reality based world.

The poster you responded to actually makes more sense than you. Athletes of color have been staking out moral positions as long as there has been athletes of color

But as the poster you are responding to and the poster who also responded pointed out, it's about class and money and has shit all to do with your diatribe about a grand jury

although given the money involved, the legal and contractual ramifications, and the fact that they want to go to the World Series, I believe few to no players will sit-out.

Again, I also just believe it to be a poor strategy. Baseball will go on, and if Brown supporters are associated with trying to stop it (no less of other violent criminality), they will lose public support. This is not the 1960's, the legal, social and cultural mindsets are very different, the population is polarized, elections are looming (and we're at a disadvantage), and not only is popular support for police quite high, criminal and related conduct justifies such support.

I advocate and support peaceful protest at this time. Simply, I believe that it's a very bad idea to live up to the racist stereotypes we oppose.

You are free to do, act or say whatever you want, so long as you are prepared for the consequences. Good luck.

Myself and several other posters said way before you did

It's the "hostile much" and the whole grand jury diatribe that I think may be causing some posters in this thread to think you're full of shit.....

Not saying I think it but well that is what a lot of folks are reacting to

I'm a firm believer in free speech, even that of my adversaries. It is a classic liberal value. Regardless of the issue or news story, whenever I note that even Republicans, racists, or worse, also have free speech, even very offensive speech, it's often met with skepticism, scorn or hostility. I just wish that many would realize that the same laws that protect those we abhor also protect us. There have been many attempts to silence liberal voices, and we prevailed due to this jurisprudence, both historically and today.

I also fervently believe that the best path to changing hearts and minds is through legal and peaceful channels, and without alienating those whose minds we seek to change or whose support is necessary to achieve our goals. Violence, destruction, rampant criminality and unrealistic demands like an effective baseball strike, are counterproductive and alienate far too many potential supporters.

To see how your "hostile much" comment towards a poster expressing their "free speech" may have rubbed a lot of people the wrong way.

As a Black man and given the circumstances of Mr Browns death, you seem clueless to the slight that many peoe may have felt to your comment.

You're goddam right that there are people who might be hostile to t-shirts supporting Darren Wilson. Why belittle it "mr free speech"?

The post to which I responded contained a long litany of ways to physically attack the t-shirt that included everything short of a strategic nuclear attack. My "hostility" comment was in reference to extended list, and I even included a smiley " " in the subject line to denote the humor. It most certainly had no racial connotations, and I had no knowledge of anyone's race in the thread until any self-identification after the post.

Additionally, although not the point of my original comment, you or anyone else may certainly feel rage, but I believe it to be unhealthy, and if improperly directed, a detriment to the cause we mutually support.

If you were inadvertently offended because of my terminology, I gladly apologize. However, implying that I might support the sentiments in t-shirt because I oppose unlawful and unwise means to silent Wilson supporters is both ridiculous and wholly unacceptable, and I offer no apology for my views concerning free speech (that are in accordance with the Democratic Party and American courts, liberal and conservative, for many decades).

You posted a comment that a lot of people had an issue with so obviously your "free speech" needs some work in the communication department, smileys not withstanding. The poster you were referring to did not in any way shape or form talk about preventing Wilson supporters from expressing themselves, they just suggested what they would do to the t-shirts. Isn't that free speech?? And if so, why was your snark necessary?

People in ferguson were getting teR gassed and brutalized when they tried to express their freedom of speech. I don't seem to recall you on any of those threads with your impassioned defense of free speech

Or is that speech, like too many other things in this country, only reserved for White people.

It's also very offensive. I'm a very liberal, lifetime Democrat, white attorney in NYC who has fought for issues like eliminating racial disparity in the justice system doing everything from working at the National Institute of Justice, U.S. Department of Justice, in Washington, D.C., researching means to improve racial outcomes in the system, to protesting and lobbying, election assistance, and even some pro bono related work.

My bona fides are secure, I'm on your side, and yet you and others remain hostile because I may, at times, refuse to adopt the exact language and positions you demand. If you begin to lose people like me, how many are left?

Your binary analysis of the Ferguson protests is also simplistic. My lack of support for silencing Wilson proponents has nothing whatsoever to do with whether I support protesters in Ferguson and elsewhere. To the extent it's necessary, I support he peaceful protesters who are trying to improve the criminal justice system. I do not support rioting, looting, and other mayhem. If peaceful protesters intentionally or negligently suffered harm, they should seek and receive redress in the courts, which I assume will be forthcoming. I similarly think the looters should be prosecuted.

I also only comment on DU when I have time, which is very intermittent and not often, at best. You may notice that I have no posts at all on any topic from when the protests first started. Additionally, I tend to most on matters I find of significant personal interest, including constitutional, general legal and financial matters. Michael Brown is an important issue, but he is certainly not the only issue facing Americans, including minorities, and the Democratic Party today.

When I said you offended several people in this thread with "Hostile Much" comment you basically said in so many words "too fucking bad"

So you're offended by something I said???

Well guess what pardner??????

And one last thing before I go to bed...,

Who the fuck is this "American people" you keep referring to? Just who are they? Because I know a heck of a lot of Black, Brown and White people who would have no philosophical problems if certain players said I'm not playing till this get fixed

But it ain't gonna happen because...well... Follow the money. You should have gotten out if Manhattan more or came on up to the Bronx

the winner goes to the World Series.....

Feel about this

they may feel themselves insulated from this problem. There's an element of class analysis required to understand this, in addition to the racial component, I think. My thoughts are still evolving on this question.

Money in sports tempered the tenor of social activism in sports a long time ago

just a bit, as this CNN video clip suggests. I suck at trying to embed these videos, so apologize for formatting issues:

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=10153314053809152

And was proud of her.

But her position is infinitely different than a ball player making 7 figures and is on the brink of the Mecca of baseball.

Ali died when Michael Jordan refused to help Harvey Gannt beat Strom Thurmond oh so many years ago

to confess to not understanding the import of your Michael Jordan reference.

I fear Ms. Hostin may have made her life in the elite of mainstream broadcast media far more complicated going forward, as she will now be tagged as an "angry (read "uppity&quot black woman" which can be the kiss of death. Can you imagine how many times before now she had to bite her tongue when some yokel said "It's not about race" or similar nonsense?

Totally take your point though about her position relative to these multi-zillionaire pros.

Jesse Helms...not Strom Thurmond...
Boy, is my Black Face red!!!

Any ole Jesse was about as right wing a conservative US senator as there has ever been. Google him.

Anyway....after decades in the senate, he found himself in a nail biter of a race against a Black gentleman named Harvey Ganntv who had served as Mayor of Charlotte.

Michael Jordan, was a God in NC after his championship days at University of NC and his subsequent forays with the Chicago Bulls

Anyway, given that Mr gannt was black, there was a feeling that if Jordan came out in support of him, it would be a decisive factor in the race. He refused saying "even White people by my sneakers" or something to that effect. Helms won. I'm sure the "black hands" commercial was a factor too

Can you imagine Ali saying something like that? And if any DUers remember this a little better, please chime in

impressed with the latter. But I don't remember the Michael Jordan stuff at all (probably testament to my relative ignorance of professional athletics).

I cannot imagine Ali saying anything remotely like that. As you note, those were indeed far different times.

of denial at work. I think one's risk of suffering a fatality at the hands of the cops is positively correlated with economic class, but clearly class does not entirely innoculate anyone.

They may run for office or want your business someday.

that mentions the shirts. They're also selling wristbands

https://www.facebook.com/wearedarrenwilsonofficial

Branford must be very sad

I do not like the t-shirts or want Wilson supporters to garner more publicity.

You mistake my views on the First Amendment and the reality of how corporations behave as support for Wilson. That is most definitely not true.

Facebook, as a private company, is certainly free to pull the t-shirt page. I, for one, would not miss it. However, they don't like being in the middle of political disputes. They will often pull down a page after a complaint, but it goes right back up after a quick review. It happens all the time, and I would not be surprised if it happened here. As indicated by another poster, another t-shirt page is already up on Facebook.

Nevertheless, if you believe that trying to get rid of the Facebook page is appropriate and useful, I encourage you to complain. Who knows, you might find success where others usually fail.

because things didn't work out the way you wanted them to.

It doesn't take much to see where you're coming from.

I've been very open about my background and positions in this thread and others.

I would like to see racial disparities eliminated in the criminal justice system and believe the t-shirts are racist garbage, but do not support an "any means necessary" approach, as I find it morally tenuous, counterproductive and often unacceptably criminal.

I recognize that my opponents, even when they are truly horrid individuals with loathsome views, have constitutional rights. Freedom of speech is an indispensable liberal value that should never be compromised.

I recognize the fact that while private companies like Facebook legally need not do business with racists and other bad actors, they normally do not wish to be involved in political disputes and are primarily motivated by financial concerns. I was sincere when I told you to complain, but given the vast swath of horrible items that remain on Facebook, I believe trying to remove the page would be futile. Time and resources are best spent elsewhere.

I also believe that those who purchased the t-shirts represent a minuscule portion of the community, and as a matter of strategy, I have no desire to do anything that could inadvertently provide them with more publicity or a bigger forum for their views.

What I am sad about, however, is that many of my fellow Democrats only stand by their purportedly liberal and progressive views when it's convenient.

how about antebellum south

Yeah, that's me.

A liberal, Jewish, lifelong Democrat; a trial attorney, born, bred and practicing in New York City; grandson of Holocaust survivors, and child of two elementary schools teachers, both union members who worked in the NYC public schools.

I'm right out of Dixie . . .

figures!

Maybe they need a little "love" on their Yelp page

http://www.yelp.com/biz/barneys-sport-pub-saint-louis

Where is Darren Wilson? Oh yeah he's hiding. Why is he hiding? He's such a manly man with his guns, come on out Mr. Wilson.

I keep asking this, but what exactly is the money for again? these morans fail to realize that they'll already front the bill for any reward made in a civil case.

It will pay lawyers and related expenses, but if properly set-up and administered, will not be available to satisfy any civil judgment.

It's also possible that the department's insurance policy may pay for some or all of Wilson's legal expenses, and could even indemnify him in the event of a civil award. This would be common among policies for municipal agencies like police and fire departments.

If and when a civil suit happens, I'm certain we'll hear about who's paying for what. It might be very aggravating.

these shitbag cops never face any punitive or financial penalties.

If Wilson is prosecuted, even if acquitted, he will likely still have enormous unpaid legal and other expenses, as well as being virtually unemployable. If it offers any consolation, regardless of the outcome of any criminal matter, Wilson will still suffer financial difficulties. George Zimmerman is an example of this effect.

For taking out another one of us

as well as a giant FUCK YOU to "libtards."

an incident that was basically jaywalking that resulted in an instant death sentence, I think the team, or at least some of the players, really need to speak out against it.

They can, or not, it is free speech, but they will lose my support and respect, not that it matters much. But I think they will be losing something in their fan base.

<a href="http://imgur.com/QWZAgty"><img src="" title="source: imgur.com" /></a>