Ads Top

An Accused Murderer versus a White Person: A Legal Comparison Under “Equity”

Written by John (the other John).

A person arrested for mass murder (or any other serious crime such as serial rape, robbery, assault, etc...) has more legal rights than a white person accused of “whiteness” under “equity”. Basically, the crime of murder (and all crimes) have specific legal elements that have to be met by the prosecution by a standard of “beyond a reasonable doubt” for the jury to convict them due to the “due process” rights for the accused criminal; not only that, but this person is “presumed innocent until proven guilty” under colour of the law. These are the Constitutional rights traditionally afforded to all American citizens.

Alternatively, a white person today accused of the “original sin” of “whiteness” lacks any due process rights under “equity”, and is thus pronounced “guilty by accusation” without any elements being required to be proven “guilty” for this violation; in other words, this person is presumed guilty under colour of their skin. Essentially, the effect of this is to put the white person outside of the protection of the law (i.e., it is not a statutory crime to being white, but rather it is such a mortal sin that no statute is even required to pronounce guilt). In this scenario, the white person’s status ranks below that of criminals, below non-citizens, and below stateless people. (Sort of like how the Democrats treated Africans in the 19 th century, and as the National Socialists did with the Jews in the 20 th century). And once a person is outside the protection of the law and the Constitution, then those people are susceptible to the Leftist goal of total domination of the person since that person lacks any legal protections for their violations.

Under equity, the sin of “whiteness” transforms us into “juridical persons” in which we are viewed upon as being non-human entities lacking any rights (which also ranks us below that of animals).
Powered by Blogger.