Hillary Clinton comes to Philly with ‘Mothers Of The Movement’

An exclusive assembly of invite-only people met at 1000 Wallace St., Philadelphia, to listen to four members of the ‘Mothers of the Movement’ group, speak in a panel alongside presidential hopeful, Hillary Clinton, and former Attorney General, Eric Holder. 

On that panel of mothers was, Dontre Hamilton’s mother, Maria Hamilton  (Milwaukee, Wisconsin), Sean Bell’s fiancée, Nicole (Paultre)Bell (Jamaica, Queens), Sandra Bland’s mother, Geneva Reed-Veal, (Hempstead, Texas.) and finally, Brandon Tate-Brown’s mother, Tanya Dickerson-Brown (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.)

Upon arrival, I didn’t know what to expect -- being that I’m endlessly critical of Secretary Clinton. 

Part of me expected the event to be a Clinton rally, but a large part of me didn’t expect to hear anything new. 

But, was wrong. I did hear a lot of new information. 

With her voice still scratchy -- as it’s been all week -- Hillary spoke very little in comparison to the others on the panel. Each on the panel spoke very highly of Hillary. “If you want change, Hillary is [who you want to vote for.]” Sandra Bland’s mom exclaimed. “She didn’t ask for an endorsement.” Bland’s mother said, “and Hillary has followed up with us without being prompted.” she said as Sean Bell’s fiancee nodded enthusiastically. 

“In the beginning, I was going to vote for Hillary.” Tanya Brown said. “But, I was swayed away.” 

Despite Rev. Mark Tyler, the moderator of the event, telling the small assembly of locals that Brandon Tate Brown’s mother wasn’t a part of Hillary’s campaign, Mrs. Tanya implied in her thoughts, towards the North Philly assembly, that she was ready to “ride and die” with Hillary, if Hillary was ready to “ride and die” with her. 

Hillary’s response was much more tempered, as she replied with a “I think we should all ride and die with one another.” 

To be frank: This definitely had a campaign-stop pep-rally feel to it -- meant to promote her cause as a presidential hopeful, (I believe), first and foremost. 

But, in that effort, each of the women expressed that Clinton had been in touch with them constantly, in private, since their tragedies had occurred. 

The particular case that struck me, was Nicole Bell’s. 

The reason it struck me, was because when Sean Bell was riddled with bullets in Queens, I was but a child -- 21-years-old -- living in Brooklyn, on my own, for the first time. When I heard that story, I had become deathly afraid of the NYPD. Sean Bell’s story woke me up to the danger I, as a young black man, was in, had any authority figure thought I was doing something suspicious. 

My margin of error was much less than that of someone who had fair skin, blue eyes, and blonde, or brunette, hair. 

For the first time, this became actual, scary reality for me. 

It struck me that Nicole told me that Hillary had been in touch with her since that incident happened in 2006. That was something I did not know. 

I didn’t know Hillary had been in personal touch with the Bell family since that life-changing (for me) incident had occurred.

Even in that vain, my question became, however: “if you knew what our community faced -- and felt moved by that -- then why are you just now, in 2016, publicly, expressing your knowledge of these things?”

That’s a question I’ll leave for the various readers to deduce themselves, without my opinion. 

At any rate, “The Mothers Of The Movement” (I’d hesitate to include all of the slain men/women’s of this current movement’s mothers, since I don’t know them all.) expressed some interesting facts about their relationship with Clinton. It seemed like they had personal contact with her. 

The Story Behind The Ugly Jumper

What kind of psycho jumps after he shoots the ball, I asked.  

The answer is: 19-year-old, John Malone. That’s who. The Portland, Oregon native took the awkward shot in Charles Jordan Community Center on February 27. The next day, he posted it on his Twitter account. 

The video didn’t immediately get a lot of attention, he said.  “ a week after I posted it I hadn't really paid attention to it after the first few days” He told me early Thursday (Mar. 10) morning  “but [after that] I saw it had 300+ RTs and Likes”

From there, the tweet took off. After it started to grow, a few others posted the video to their Twitter accounts, and that’s when the video began to go viral. 

But, the main question I saw in my mentions was this: Why would any self-respecting baller shoot like that? (lol)

Answer: It’s not Malone’s actual jumper. But, I mean, of course it’s not. lol

Malone shared with me his real jumpshot. 

Clearly, his jumper is not totally abnormal. Why would anyone jump AFTER they shoot the ball? So, what’s the story? Why the crazy jumpshot in the video? 

Malone tells me,

So, there you have it. It’s a funny shot that Mr. Malone has been performing for years. The internet has been privileged to be able to witness this hilarity for the first time, this year. 

Activists, writers, and the Philly Daily News seek fresh conversation on police brutality

Highly emotional and tearful expressions from the cousin of Brandon Tate-Brown was the most profound thing that happened on Wednesday, September 30, during the screening of a police brutality documentary titled, Peace Officer. Head of Pennsylvania Black Lives Matter chapter, Asa Khalif, spoke to a conference table of people from different corners of the police brutality arena  when the various entities met to discuss policing in America. 

More confusion only leads to one solution: More transparency

Five days after Brandon Tate-Brown’s shooting, I had a conversation with a young lady named Angelica Santiago who had spoken to someone who had claimed to be an eyewitness.

It was 11 p.m. on December 17 — two days after Tate-Brown had been shot — and Brandon’s memorial had just been vandalized by someone in the hours before. Santiago and a friend had brought new materials to rebuild it. 

"Who’s that coming over here?" Santiago’s friend asked. Before Santiago could fully figure out what was going on, an average-sized, bald, white man with a tattoo on his neck spoke. “Are you family?” He asked. “I saw the whole thing, from my window.” he told them. “I didn’t speak to the police, cause I don’t [deal] with the police." The man went on to speak about a struggle between Brandon and the police. He glanced at the young lady and continued, “[The cop] was about your size.” He told her.

“Now I’m a size seven,” Santiago told me in our nearly one-hour December 20 conversation. “so I was confused by what he meant by that.” The man went on to describe what he heard that night from his window — which is on the south-bound side of the road’s sidewalk, approx. 20 meters away from the incident. He heard a conversation. The officer, who was talking to Tate-Brown, repeatedly asked Brandon “where’s the gun?” 

"I couldn’t take it. I had to leave." Santiago told me. They were under the impression that he wasn’t telling the truth.

"He told me he hadn’t spoken to the police because he has issues with the police, himself." She said to me. 

And after our conversation was done, I never heard about him, again.

Until recently, that is. 

After months of silence and refusal to present any details about the incident beyond the preliminary police report, Commissioner Charles Ramsey and Philadelphia Police Internal Affairs Bureau decided to allow a select few to privately review evidence in a case that has otherwise been under tight lockdown. 

And since then, it’s been a rodeo show. 

The first to be able to observe some evidence was mother of Brandon Tate-Brown, Tanya Brown, and her lawyer, Brian Mildenberg, Esq., followed by several members of the Police Advisory Commission. Since then, in respective statements, there have been conflicting tones between the two parties as to what happened on the video and in the evidence.

The first time around, Ms. Brown and her attorney were invited to see the surveillance footage on February 19, they came back with an account that contradicted the PPD’s official account. They told the Philadelphia Daily News that the account didn’t mirror the police’s official version. “From the video, the moment he was shot, he was running away from the officer, across Frankford Avenue,”  Mildenberg told DN. “He was behind his vehicle, near the trunk of the vehicle - not near any doors - when he was shot and dropped down.” 

In the same article, Ramsey told the newspaper, “The investigation did not rely solely on the tape. You have the officers’ statements, and statements from four independent eyewitnesses who actually observed the incident as it took place.”

Following that, Ramsey invited the Police Advisory Commission to view the footage along with the eyewitness statements that accompanied them. PAC returned with a statement that seemed less suggestive than Brown’s family attorney. 

"I’ve spent two hours this morning reviewing the video and redacted witness statements." Executive Director of PAC, Kelvyn Anderson said in a two page statement. "I reviewed four witness statements, plus one from an emergency responder and one of the officers who stopped the vehicle. Two of the witness views are from nearby residents looking outside onto the scene, another is from a man who rode up to the scene on a bicycle and stood watching only a few feet away on the passenger side."  

Anderson goes on to speak about an eyewitness who was on the driver’s side describing part of the verbal exchange between Tate-Brown and the officer. “A witness who was on the driver’s side was within earshot and describes part of the verbal exchange. The officers repeatedly ask where’s the gun, and at one point, Brown says it’s in the vehicle.” 

That bit of detail has certainly left me in some confusion, and after the opportunity to revisit Internal Affairs to view the same materials PAC had, Mildenberg Law Firm says this detail is partly inaccurate. 

"Witnesses did not see Brandon carrying a gun or hear Brandon admit to having a gun, contrary to reports of others who have seen the statements." Mildenberg says in response to PAC’s statement.  "The closest a witness came to providing information supporting an inference that Brandon admitted to a gun was that one witness stated he overheard police, after Brandon complied and exited the vehicle, and during a time where a police officer had his gun drawn and was pointing it at Brandon’s back, asking Brandon to tell them whether he had a gun and where it was.  This witness overheard Brandon deny that he had the gun on him.  This has been misinterpreted and reported as Brandon admitted to having a gun, but just not on him.  This is not what the witness reported."

Saturday morning, I spoke to Ms. Brown about her visit to I.A. She began to tell me a bit of what she remembered. She said there are eight witness statements, altogether: two cops, two first responders,  one off-duty cop who volunteered to jump in and help officers, and three eyewitnesses. As Brown recalled her experience at I.A., one of the accounts she recalled to me rang a bell. I remembered my earlier conversation with Santiago and her friend the week of the incident. 

One of the four eyewitnesses describe the verbal exchange. Mr. Anderson says this witness was “within earshot” on the driver’s side. But that doesn’t seem to add up with the account I heard from my December 20 conversation with Angelica Santiago about her December 17 conversation with what’s apparently the “where’s the gun” eyewitness police used in their investigation. Anderson, in his statement, says there were four eyewitnesses. Two he says viewed from inside looking outside, and a bicyclist on the passenger side. Being that there are no residences directly across the street “within earshot” of the incident, who is this person on the driver’s side who heard Tate-Brown’s conversation with the officer? The off-duty cop who allegedly tried to help? Or was it the gentleman who told his story to Santiago two days after the shooting?

Mildenberg said of the off-duty cop who tried to help the police, “During the time where there was a struggle between Brandon and the police officers, a ‘good Samaritan,’ who appears to be an off duty law enforcement or security officer (we don’t know for sure because the Police Department redacted the part of the statement where the witness identifies his profession), was driving by the scene on Frankford Avenue with a female friend in his vehicle. Upon arriving at the scene, he noticed the struggle, and decided, against his female friend’s urging not to leave the car, to exit the vehicle to provide assistance to the officers.”

In the total of it all, we’ve gotten a lot of new info about the tragedy on Dec. 15. But, we’ve also gotten a lot of contradicting info, suggested inaccuracies and unclear mixed messages that can only be solved one way: more transparency. 

In my discussion with Ms. Brown, I was told that Chief Denise Turpin wouldn’t allow Brown’s lawyer to take notes of what they were reviewing. Despite that, she did know one thing for sure: “None of the statements were the same besides ‘there was a scuffle.’ None of [the eyewitnesses] said they saw a gun.” She said. But the video did absolutely show that Tate-Brown was not reaching for a gun — a situation that PAC almost completely neglected in their initial statement. PAC never once addressed anything in regards to what happened at the key moment when Tate-Brown was shot. Some hours later, PAC clarified on social media, that the video, indeed, revealed that Tate-Brown wasn’t reaching for a gun. “Updated our statement to clarify that video does not show Brandon Tate-Brown reaching for a gun.” PAC posted on Facebook and Twitter. 

Allowing others to see the evidence in this case is a great step towards transparency, but not allowing the viewers to take proper notation, has lead to some confusion on facts when conveying them to the public, who are invested in their streets’ safety, as well. 

The two parties — PAC and Mildenberg Law — continue to press for even more Philadelphia Police Department transparency, which means a release of the evidence that allowed anonymous officers in question back onto Philadelphia streets. “Family renews claim for police to release all videos and statements to the public.” Mildenberg Law says in a March 1st email.

NEW DETAILS: "A fight. Not a Struggle." Philadelphia Police Officer Discusses Brandon Tate-Brown

The producers of 900AM-WURD were nice enough to upload this portion of their Wednesday morning show at my request so that we can listen to one of the first times Philadelphia Police have publicly addressed Brandon Tate-Brown. 

Philadelphia police officer, Lieutenant John Stanford joined the Philadelphia radio station to discuss, among many other things, Brandon Tate-Brown's case. 

A few quick thoughts about the interview: 

The discussion about him begins at 11:40 to about 14:13. Listen to it in full here.  

In summary, this is John Stanford's walkthrough of what happened on December 15, 2014: 

"Why would you make an attempt to get back to the passenger side?" Stanford questions.

*bites tongue, for now.* 

Officer Stanford continues, "He reaches for the handgun which is in that center area forcing the officer to fire his weapon."

And that's when Brandon Tate-Brown was killed.

My take on what was said: 

I'm still very concerned. 

To me, this version of events still doesn't jive. Maybe even more so with these new nuggets of info. 

Officer Stanford questions why Brown would run back to the passenger side of the vehicle so as to imply that Brown must have been going for his gun with this action. This is terrible, revisionist, logic. 

'Why was he running to the passenger side?' 

You said they were fighting on the sidewalk, right? 

Being in a confrontation, it's not as outlandish as Stanford wants to make it sound that one would run to the passenger side of his car if they're on the sidewalk. 

Simply put, maybe it's because the passenger door is the closest door to the sidewalk. Ta-da! 

Maybe if you're running for refuge -- if you're being assaulted by a police department who have been known to assault civilians for no apparent reason -- the fastest route to refuge makes sense.  

My question is, what was the shooter's USELESS partner doing? And why wasn't the threat of the gun secured?

What's also not explained: If Brown was 'reaching for his gun' as the police continue to suggest, why does Brandon's postmortem injuries suggest that he didn't make it back to the car, at all? As pathologist Dr. Judy Melinek questions to me after viewing the photos of his injuries. 

To refresh you, here's the doctor's direct quote to me:  

One last thing: At 13:00 minutes in the interview, Officer Stanford seems to try to sell that Brown was running to the passenger side of his car to grab the gun as if it's not 100 percent clear he was reaching for the weapon. 

He says, "The passenger side. Not the driver's side. The passenger's side. Which is kinda -- in itself, a little bit..." he said before thinking for a second or two. "Why would you make an attempt to get back to the passenger side of the vehicle?" 

The line of reasoning -- that question -- seems to attempt to sell the fact that Brown was, without a doubt, going back to the car to get a gun, when later Stanford's language seems to indicate that Brown was literally clearly reaching for the gun in his center console inside his vehicle.  

"Well, what we know is, as he makes an attempt to get back to that passenger side of that vehicle, he reaches for that handgun which is in that center area. Forcing the officer, at that point, to fire his weapon, unfortunately striking the male and fatally wounding him." 

What? Did he 'attempt' to get back to the vehicle? Or did he actually make it back to the vehicle enough to reach for the handgun? 

Things still aren't adding up, Mr. Policeman. And you're going to have to do better than that. 

Related stories: 

What Happened To Brandon Tate-Brown - Philly Declaration

New Details on Brandon Tate-Brown's Final Hours - Philly Declaration

Addressing Brandon Tate-Brown Rumors - HeckPhilly 

A case for police bodycams: My Muskogee video breakdown

The arguments for whether police bodycams will actually work or not, are age-old arguments. 

Some want police bodycams under the impression that it will stop police from killing unjustly, while others say that the bodycam will only become another tool for the police officer to use against the civilian. 

I think there's some truth in both of those arguments. 

Either way, personally, I think bodycams are definitely needed for one major reason: It's amazing insight into this difficult issue that needs a proper diagnosing and solution. 

Take, for instance, the Muskogee Police shooting in Oklahoma (pictured in the video above.) This, I think, gives us a lot of the major issues in one 10 minute capture. 

I'm going to take you through it one thought at a time. 

Come walk with me.

Pre-incident:

00:00: The video begins recording the police officer before he arrives at the scene allowing us to put ourselves in his shoes, a bit. We even see the officer glance at the GPS directions on his cell phone at about 00:14.

He's responding to a call in which a young man is allegedly threatening to do harm to someone with a deadly weapon. 

00:43: The officer arrives. And at about 00:53 seconds he exits his vehicle.

01:10: A vehicle's alarm can be heard as the police officer opts to take the long walking route to the suspect, circling around a Honda SUV, (walking over 5 meters -- or 17 feet -- beyond the SUV) approaching the suspect, Terrance Walker, from behind. 

01:23: The approaching officer asks the suspect to take his hands out of his pocket so that he can see them. Walker complies. The officer begins to pat him down at 01:30. 

Both the officer and Walker are becoming nervous with one another. Walker is trembling, and that tremble is clearly making the officer nervous as he asks Walker "why are you shaking for?" and advises him several times to calm down. 

Incident: 

01:41: Suspect shakes free of police officer who drops one set of handcuffs.  Walker then twirls to the left away from the officer's attempt to re-secure him.

The (apparently) left-handed officer can be seen reaching for his gun in his shadow on the ground, but after three steps, he takes his hand off the gun. 

01:46: After 22 police officer steps, the suspect drops something and turns about 120 degrees around to pick what looks to be maybe two items up. First item with his left hand, and the second with his right. Possibly the left hand was to stable himself from falling. 

01:50: Officer draws weapon and is aiming at suspect who is now facing about 90 degrees and still picking up what possibly could be a third item with his right hand. It's also possible (and probable) that he kept dropping the same second item that he was trying to pick up. (See above photo) 

Still, no shots have been fired yet. 

To view a summary of what Walker did, here are a few freeze-frames:

In frames 1-5 the officer is still moving forward in pursuit. Frame 6 he stops and is drawing his weapon while Walker picks up first item (with right hand)  which isn't very visible.

Frame 7, Walker picks up item and in frame 8 is ready to flee again until frame 9 when something else (more visible... white) drops. (or possibly the same item re-drops).

Frame 10 Walker re-shuffles his feet to be able to pick up the white object. The officer is aimed at Walker but no shots have been fired yet.

 01:52: First shot has been fired after the suspect has turned back forward to begin running again as seen in this exact moment in the following frame:

In the next picture, two shots have already been fired.

It would take another two shots after the above screenshot before the suspect would go down into the ditch on the right.

That's four shots before he fell. Five shots fired, total.

Post-incident:

02:00: The pastor of the church begs to check on Walker as the officer denies him and orders him and the other locals to back up. 

Locals plead for the officer to put his gun away, and he tells them he will after they back up. Cop is obviously shaken up as he waits for back-up and attempts one-man crowd control. 

03:20: As another officer approaches the deceased body, he has his right hand on his weapon, despite the firing officer already with his weapon drawn and pointed. 

There's what appears, to me, to be a fresh pack of cigarettes laying next to Walker's body. (Fresh as in, it doesn't look like litter or trash to me. It looks like one of the items he may have dropped. Particularly the second white item.) 

03:27: The officer grabs Walker's right hand which was tucked under his belly and twists it behind his head while fetching a gun from his stomach area. Both of Walker's hands are now accounted for. 

03:41: After securing the suspect's gun, we see that the weapon is cocked. 

04:40: The officer tells his peers that the suspect ran, "dropped" what he indicates was the suspect's gun "picked it up" and "pointed it." 

Which is not 100 percent accurate. The inaccuracies do seem to come in key areas. 

From 03:20 to 07:00 we get an insightful sneak peek into real-time first responder activity, before the officer, very upset, slaps the back of a police cruiser and puts his head into his folded arms on the trunk of the car at 07:08.

07:14: Another officer comes to his comfort. "Let's go to my car." he says. On the way there, more officers console the visibly upset officer as he asks "Why'd he have to do that?" to himself at 07:43. 

08:26: Officer paces as he waits for his peer to clear the front seat for him. 

The shooting officer appears to reference to turning off the mic he's wearing, and his peer tells him to keep it running until they get to the station. 

He gets inside the car with one last frustrated expletive before they drive off. 

My overall analysis:

This video demonstrates two things to me: The difficulty of what's unexpected and decision making in adrenaline-filled situations. I also see the places where there may be some room for improvement. 

The cop was informed that the subject was armed before he arrived, but he never got far enough to be able to confirm for himself. So when the suspect became non-compliant, he was left to make that judgement call on his own in a split-second. 

While that is a difficult thing to prevent with your typical training, I think there are solutions in science. There are very effective brain exercises designed by neuroscientists that improve awareness, reaction and overall brain function. I think these sorts of things should be requirements for police who are usually trained to be more jumpy and scared, than actually aware. 

Watch this episode of police cadet training in split-second force situations: 

To teach cadets in police academy in this method makes sure police are paranoid. But, in my opinion, the teachers don't take enough time concentrating on properly preparing the brain for such an occurrence. The specific brain exercises I mentioned could be designed by neuroscientists well-versed in police work. It is something I think should be implemented in the effort to improve policing. Neuroplasticity is a beautiful and 100 percent real and effective thing -- If a police officer does his specially designed brain exercises daily, he will not only be trained by the academy, but his brain will have the capacity and neuro-connections needed to face the split-second, high-pressure, situations. 

The case for bodycams: 

In this time of public/officer mistrust, this sort of footage allows an extra ultimate and accurate eyewitness.

Overall, bodycams benefit the police in more ways than one. 

For one: Imagine if we had 10-15 minute footage of the before, during and after in all police-involved shootings. We'd be able to more accurately pin-point an issue, diagnose it, and attempt to fix it. Instead, now, we've got hearsay and a few varieties of science interpretations possibly marred by personal beliefs and/or political agendas. 

To see the before, during, and after of dozens of these events wont make those things go away completely, but it will make the analysis of the events more efficient and scientific. 

Every police station should have these. And I think the departments should have one week to release bodycam footage after the police-involved shooting.

This, I think, will gradually help police to be able to improve their training, and help the public be educated in police encounters. Furthermore, I think this step will help move towards healing the open wounds existing in police-public relations.  

I'm all for bodycams and complete transparency in police-involved shootings. 

Preview of Vincent Heck's new sci-fi novel

As the planet moves on a disastrous course towards the sun, Ardnassa learns, first hand, that we don’t know much about where we live.

It’s the dawn of the 81st Century in earthyears, and native earthling and scientist, Ardnassa Samured is on the verge of failing humankind. 

A leaf flurries down from the tallest tree in front of her. The sun’s heat seemingly grew hotter with each passing second. If she didn’t come up with a solution fast enough, the last seven scientists known to man were going to fry on the surface of planet Quantum.

She had been sitting in front of these tall, skinny, mostly-trunk group of trees for hours, thinking about the series of events that brought her to this privileged moment in mankind’s history.

It had become her job, as an anarchist, not to tear down, but to begin the rebuild.

The leaf floating down in front of her, reminded her of the people who had put in work before her; the past anarchists who had to fight against powerful human structures to provide her the final tear down, and the new canvas to work with.

The job had now fallen onto her shoulders. And all of those centuries of work seemed to be coming to an end as a failure right in front of Ardnassa’s face.

She was determined to not let this disaster happen on her watch.

She had known all along that the privilege to carry the torch came at a risky cost. She’d already accepted that before the trip.

It was a long road of risky sacrifices over the last six millennia.

After “The Great Push” in the 40th Century when humankind colonized an Earth-like planet outside of the solar system (named Xxeria) mankind had hit a wall in interstellar advancement. 

Using everything they had, at the time, to facilitate “The Great Push” they had depleted the advanced resources needed to make another significant interstellar leap. This set-back resulted in another long wait before newer, more efficient, ways of travelling and colonization could be developed.

Now, just into the 9th Millennium, it was time for man to start exploring and expanding, again. 

Settled on their home planet of Xxeria 38 lightyears from earth, the much more advanced science-governed Xxerian society reset its galactic sails, sending its brightest scientists to new potential planets 50 lightyears from Xxeria. 

Ardnassa, along with the top Xxerian scientist, professor Xeena Americus, are assigned to study a habitable moon orbiting a gas giant they name Quantum. The planet and its moon orbits a star on an elongated eccentric path with prolonged, bitter, winters and unlivable fiery summers. 

During its 26 month earthtime orbit, planet Quantum is only habitable for a few weeks before its irregular orbit swings too closely to its star. 

When an unexpected asteroid devastates their home on planet Xxeria while they’re still exploring Quantum, the scientists, with nowhere to go, are forced to push theoretical science to its limits in order to forge an escape plan or survive the extreme elements.

This is where Ardnassa stood. This is the risk she had bargained for.

The leaf Ardnassa watched finally reached the planet’s surface, where it immediately shriveled up and burned.

With that, Ardnassa knew planet Quantum had officially exited its habitable zone, and the countdown to her imminent death on a fiery planet was now in full effect.

19-FourSixOh House Publishing

This will be Vincent Heck’s first novel under his favorite genre of writing: sci-fi. It will be his third novel overall. 

There has been no date set for release, although mid-to-late 2016 is reasonable. 

If you’d like to sign up to be a beta-reader and preview the novel before its release, make a request as early as possible at vheckphilly@gmail.com, as spaces are very limited. 

Hope you all enjoyed this early novel blurb. 

Follow The Habitable Zone on Twitter.

Like The Habitable Zone on Facebook. 

Addressing Brandon Tate-Brown rumors

[Original post - January 15, 2015]

[Latest update June 12, 2015] 

(Scroll to the subheadings for latest updates) 

When police and/or government choose to go completely silent on subjects that interest the public, wild public rumors fly for a variety of obvious reasons. 

Brandon Tate-Brown of Philadelphia was shot by Philadelphia Police on December 15, 2014. Since then, the police have not said a single word about the case, leaving room for many rumors — a lot of them baseless.

It’s only natural. 

The human brain naturally seeks to make sense of everything that enters it. If it doesn’t have the extra information (expertise in the specific necessary fields) to make sense of things, it uses what information it has and pieces together a story that makes sense to you, individually. Then that’s what you personally latch onto and believe. 

While speculation can be healthy and helpful when it’s based on the right things, conversely, it can be very harmful when it’s wild and baseless. 

What this post will aim to do, is produce healthy speculation taken from the pieces we have, and come as close to fact as we can using the soundest reason and resources available. 

The residents of Philadelphia have good reason to question the Philadelphia Police Department at this point, but we want to be sure we’re asking the right questions and not wasting our time on erroneous rumors. That’s not very conducive to an efficient justice-quest. 

With that being said, here are the rumors against what we know to be true right now: This post will update regularly:

1. Brandon Tate-Brown was “reaching for his gun.” 

This comes from the police statement. A lot of folks who have read about this case state this as if it’s hardcore stone-cold fact. When, the truth is, we can only assume this based on what the police say happened and nothing else. We can not be sure this fact is true, at all.

I’ve spoken to Dr. Judy Melinek, M.D., a San Francisco forensic pathologist and author. She is in no way affiliated with the case, but she has lent her expertise to the situation based on what she knows from news reports and all the current updates. 

I’ve showed Brandon’s postmortem injuries to her in a photo. Here’s what she said: 

There were a couple news reports whose language makes it seem as if police investigators said that Brandon had made it back into the car before being shot.

As an example, here’s NBC 10’s wording:

If that’s, in fact, what investigators told NBC writer Dan Stamm, then it doesn’t seem to jive with Dr. Melinek’s expert thoughts. If he made it far enough to open the door and reach inside for it, then how did his face fall so hard onto the pavement?

On the other hand, if Brown hadn’t made it back to the car, as his injuries seem to suggest, then how would police know that he was reaching for his gun? Just assuming? Is that enough to be a justifiable homicide? 

There was a scuffle before the fatal shot. Terrell Tate, Brandon’s father, says Brandon had a fear of police. And in a phone interview, a woman who grew up with Brandon, Angelica Manzano, told me he was never a fighter. So, maybe one can wonder if Brandon was running for refuge. Not “reaching for a gun.” 

Update: 

It turns out, there was no evidence that Brandon Tate Brown ever reached for a gun. In fact, despite the police’s narrative staying the same, he never made it to the passenger side of his vehicle, at all.

On June 9, Brown’s family attorney, Brian Mildenberg, alerted me to a file dump issued by Mayor Nutter. Despite having 5 files of videos, only one works. And it’s a 30 minute video which shows the scuffle in the street, and the time Brandon was shot in the back of his head at the trunk of his vehicle. 

He never made it even to the back door of the car before he was struck down beside his vehicle. 

2. Shell casing over 100 inches to the left of Brandon’s body. 

Now this makes me incredibly curious. So incredibly curious that I went and found a study on shell casings. In fact, I dedicate a whole post to it, here. From what I read, there’s a very low chance that if the police officer was standing facing (the presumed direction) southwest down Frankford Ave., that the bullet casing would land in the position it did. 

The study by  Investigative Sciences Journal indicate that in order for that shell casing to have the best chances of landing in that particular end position, as seen in the above photo, the pistol would have had to been canted to the side and in a sweeping-left motion. 

And even with that being the case, only one shot was fired, and it hit Tate-Brown on target.

Something isn’t adding up.

It’s not impossible, it’s just HIGHLY unlikely. Unless we hit the lottery of scenarios in that case. 

In a similar comparison, I’ve spoken to Michael Bell Sr., whose son was also gunned down by police in 2004. In studying his case, I found that he was able to unearth law-enforcement inconsistencies of the same variety using this same science.

A theory that is very realistic, is that in the skirmish of things, the shell-casing could have been kicked by someone. The markings on the shell-casing would have to be examined to come to a full conclusion. 

Update: 

In connection with subheading one, we now know that the officer was standing in the street, and Brandon running behind the trunk, towards the sidewalk, when he was fatally shot. The position of the bullet shell-casing makes much more sense under this narrative. 

The true narrative. 

3. Investigators moved Brandon’s vehicle a few times after they arrived to the scene. 

This rumor stems from the above photos that surfaced taken from a variety of angles.

If the car moved, these photos are not the proof. Simply put, this is the result of a photographer’s change in point of views. 

4. Brandon Tate-Brown’s automatic headlights were on in a screenshot of Fox 29’s live broadcast. 

Citing the above photo, some argue against the police’s story that Brandon’s headlights were off with the fact that there appears to be light coming from his car in this photo. 

The newer model Chargers all have automatic lights that can be manually switched from automatic, to off, to parking, to fully on, if need be. Here’s a video demonstrating how the new-model Charger lights work: 

It does appear in the Fox photo above that there are lights on, but it seems to be only the parking lights, not the headlights. The car lights appear to be this position: 

If you want an argument on whether the lights were off or on, however, you could look towards comments from the Brown family’s private investigator who viewed 7-Eleven surveillance video from minutes before Brandon was pulled over. 

Brandon was en-route to dropping a young lady off at her brother’s house, as I detail in my report on The Declaration. The private investigator tells me he viewed the headlights on at the time in the video.

"He went into the store, she stayed in the car, and the lights were on.” the P.I. told me in a phone interview. 

UPDATE: The mother of Brandon and her attorney viewed footage of the incident. The lawyer, Mildenberg said the footage shows that the lights were on, along with the car’s turn signal.

Update: 

While, in the above photo, the lights don’t appear to be on, there’s new evidence that surfaces to suggest that Brandon’s lights were, in fact, on while he was pulled over. 

This evidence comes by way of video footage from the bank across the street. You can see stills from that video here in the family attorney’s tweets. 

5. His feet crossed at the ankles are like Trayvon Martin’s. (Insert any variety of police/government conspiracy.) 

I asked Dr. Melinek about this, as well. Here’s what she said to me: 

6. Brandon Tate-Brown was a “hardened criminal”.

Brandon Tate-Brown was 18 years and 6 months old when he was charged and convicted with aggravated assault, firearms not to be carried without license, and possession of instrument of crime with intent.

These were the only three things he’s ever been convicted of. It happened when he was 18.5-years-old.

As his friends and family recall the incident, the teenager was retaliating against someone who had beat his girlfriend in the face with a pipe. He served five and a half years in prison for the above charges.

He was released when he was 23, and had been free for 3 years before his death nearly one month after his 26th birthday. 

The summer of 2014, as a 25-year-old, he was connected to another incident that he was swiftly cleared of a couple months later.

By my count that’s, at the most, two run-ins with the law over a period of 26 years. 

When initially reporting this, Philadelphia media associated Brandon with having a “lengthy” rap sheet. Which, by my standards, at least, is a bit sensationalized.

George Zimmerman has had brushes with the law that are more severe than these, and he’s considered an upstanding American citizen to a lot of Americans. 

Hardened criminal? I wouldn’t say that. With the facts I have on hand — the court dockets I’ve looked at — personally, I’d call him a man who miscalculated to his own detriment. 

But, maybe I’m just a merciful man.

7. There’s surveillance video that the police have not mentioned yet.

There has been a rumor out since the first week of Brandon Tate-Brown’s death that there’s video of the incident. 

This rumor was confirmed to me by the Brown family’s P.I. Greg Brinkley. 

Furthermore, the gunshop whose camera captured the footage, Lock’s Philadelphia Gun Exchange, has told me via email: 

Needless to say, we can officially chalk this “rumor” up as true.

Update: 

We’ve already determined this was true. But, what we’ve learned is that there are at least four other videos. One of which the Brown family and their attorney believes we should all see. 

Mildenberg tweeted out on June 9,

8. Brandon was shot in the side of his head.

This was mentioned in a quote from Philadelphia Police spokesman, Lt. John Stanford, in a series of interviews he went on in the first two weeks of February 2015.

This is a matter of wording, that if you’re asking me, was used to reshape the narrative to justify the PPD’s killing of Brandon.

Prior to this small media tour, the PPD had mentioned that the fatal shot had entered Brandon in the back of his head. Now, according to the spokesman, it was “the side”.

I’ve seen the bullet wound, myself. It’s just above and behind his left ear.

Feel just above and behind your left ear, and tell me if you think that’s the side, or the back of your head.

___

Check back regularly for updates as I’m continuing to gather as much info on Brandon Tate-Brown’s death. 

VIDEO: Brandon Tate-Brown's dad speaks out "Stop hiding behind that blue shield"

Brandon Tate-Brown's father, Terrell Tate, stands in front of a collage of pictures filled with his son's beaming smile. In the 12 minute 26 second long video, he speaks about everything from his son's 'fear of police' to his physically active personal life. 

"He loved sports. That's what he did in his spare time." Mr. Tate says in the video. "Played basketball from sun-up to sun-down. Lifting weights. He played with his brothers and sisters." 

Tate speaks about the day before his son's death being his birthday. December 14. "My son called to wish me a happy birthday. 'Old man, your Cowboys are going down.' he said. Because he was an Eagles' fan. All he knew was Philadelphia pride." 

He calls what happen that night, "a misunderstanding." 

One major thing that isn't being said a lot, is that Tate-Brown had a baby-boy soon to be born. 

That's right, he was soon to be a father. It was going to be his first.

Watch the twelve minute video below:

Don't forget: Ms. Tanya Brown, Brandon Tate-Brown's mother, will be rallying at the site of his death on Frankford Ave, right in front of John Fanelly's Podiatrist, across the street from the TD Bank. 

The address is: 6650 Frankford Avenue, Philadelphia, Pa 19135

Please come out to support this amazing woman. 

~V

While the Philadelphia media has remained completely silent for an entire week about Brandon Tate-Brown, friends and witnesses tell what they've heard. 

Science asks: How did Brandon Tate-Brown die?

It's been over 100 hours, and we have not heard a peep from the Philadelphia Police Department about the details of Brandon Tate-Brown's death. So, we're left with what we have. A handful of pictures, speculation and a police statement.

If it's worth anything, at this point, I've got a little science for you. 

First let's recap: 

Here's the police's printed statement: 

To clarify, this encounter happened at around 2:40 a.m. on the 6600 block of Frankford Ave, just in front of Dr. John Fanelly's Foot Specialist business, and across the four-lane street from TD Bank. (A close friend of Tate-Brown says that Tate-Brown may have actually already parked in his vehicle, and not pulled over, at all.)

The police have said that after approaching Tate-Brown, they saw a gun poking out of his center console, and asked him to exit the vehicle. It would appear that he did so, compliantly, as photos of his lifeless body have surfaced of him laying by the open passenger-side door of his Dodge Charger. 

Police say, on this sidewalk is where Tate-Brown became belligerent and non-compliant. After a scuffle, police say Tate-Brown forced his way back to the passenger-side of his car to retrieve the aforementioned gun. 

That's where police say Tate-Brown was shot once in the back of the head, and killed with a single-fired shot. 

This is all they've provided -- four days ago.

Now, besides all of the other obvious questions one could have about this account, my (non-accusatory) question about that story immediately became science-based: How did this bullet casing end up over approx. 100 inches to the left, being that police service pistols typically have shell case ejection ports on the right side of the gun? 

For the preliminary story given by the police, the bullet shell casing had rolled/bounced to a very exotic ending position. 

I found a study from the Investigative Sciences Journal, who have lent their scientific expertise to the ongoing study of what's known as force science -- science that helps us understand police/civilian gun encounters. 

Experts typically tend to judge a police officer's position partly by looking at the end positions of the weapon-ejected bullet shell-casings. The study seems to conclude that you can't come to a definite conclusion based on bullet-shell casings, alone, but the results of the experiments are still useful, nonetheless.

In the Tate-Brown case, it's even that much more difficult, being that there's only one casing. Only one bullet casing leaves for any number of random positions that shell could have bounced/rolled. Still, with this particular shell casing, as we'll see in the study, this end position is quite exotic. 

In the ISJ's study, after 7.6K bullets fired, this is the overall scatter chart if the shooter is facing forward. (Forward being towards the top of the chart and backwards being the bottom. Left and right being in their respective positions.) 

The red line is how far left I place the PPD shell from the curb. (Approx. 85ish inches). The true distance out would be from where the shooter is standing. And that, of course, I don't have. 

The above scatter chart of every shot they took under all circumstances shows that the most likely place for a bullet-shell casing to land is behind and to the right of the shooter.

A lot of these shell-casings did seem to land back and to the left -- but they were in an open space, and didn't have a Dodge Charger next to them. 

In addition to that, most of the shell casings landing in the bottom left quadrant came when the participating shooter was holding the pistol with one hand, downward, and cocked in a 45 degree angle. Like this:

I mean, Tate-Brown's shooter was, indeed, a rookie cop having only been a part of PPD for a year and a half. But could he have hit Tate-Brown with such precision and accuracy with such an unprofessional and untrained hand position?

Here's what ISJ has to say about this hand position:

Here's what the scatter plot looks like with just the downward, inward-canted firing: 

Other scenarios that led to reasons a shell casing would bounce into the lower left quadrant (or back and to the left of shooter)  is weapon movement. A portion of this study, shows the effect weapon motion plays in where the shell casing lands. 

In a lot of the examples, the shell casing end position seemed to reach its limit at about 8 feet -- which interestingly enough is about the range the PPD's bullet shell casing is seen in the scene photos.

The force research info we have via ISJ could seem to indicate that a rookie cop had an untrained hand grip (one hand, inward-canted, firing downward?) or with some drastic weapon motion as he fired his weapon. But then the question would be in such extreme circumstances (1. inward-canted, 2. weapon in motion 3. Dodge Charger in the way) could he hit Tate-Brown with precision to the back of head? Or he was standing positioned in another way than we're imagining -- which may have more dubious implications?

The full study, which you can read in its entirety, here, makes for a lot of un-thought-of bullet shell-casing paths. 

The overall conclusion of the ISJ study?

What do you think? 

What happened to Brandon Tate-Brown?

In any situation that wants to be thorough and fair, there are systematic protocols. In the case of how police deal with the public, these exist.

In the case of how the public deals with the police, however, usually the media is tasked with the job of getting the story from police for the public. That's typically our (the public's) system, or protocol, of sorts, used for getting answers out of the local authority. But, in the last 24 hours, Brandon Tate-Brown's case has gone silent. 

In the few articles the Philly media provided, they made it a point to emphasize that he had a "detailed" criminal past. Yes, we get that he's had a past. Philadelphia police, themselves, have a not so shiny past.  But as we can clearly see from his journaling via social media, he was very much in the process of regretting and righting his wrongs.

Tate-Brown, in the last two weeks on social media had detailed, almost every morning, his excitement about going to work. He announced his new apartment and car in the subsequent weeks after getting a new 9-to-5. He was even working overtime due to the amount of money it produced. Just days before he was gunned down, he posted on Facebook that he was going to be attending school.

If it weren't for his Facebook profile being set to public, we would not have known any of that.

 It seems, these days, the media has become more of a mouthpiece for the police and government than they are for the local people. 

I was able to speak to a childhood friend of Tate-Brown's a few days after his shooting. Her name is Angelica Manzano, and she's adamant about Brown not being a combative person.

She grew up with him on Glenloch Street. He'd come over to play sports with the guys. "He was very active; he was a very active kid." She recalls. "He was always smiling. He was always happy. It was rare that you'd see Brandon be mad. He's never had an issue with anybody that I can even think of. I've never even seen him fight." 

She speaks about the issue that everyone not close to him judges him on, the 2008 charges. 

"It was aggravated assault he did the time for -- and for having a gun. That's what gave him that five-and-a-half years. Not attempted murder." She said. "The reason he got that was because his girlfriend was hit by another man." Which is what his mother has gone on record to say about the charges, as well. Brown's mother says that the man hit his girlfriend in the face with a pipe, and Brown retaliated. 

He ended up spending 5 years in jail for it -- five years he deeply regretted.

I'm hoping the next wave of Philly media information not only keeps away from re-killing a dead man via his reputation, but that it represents the info that people want to -- need to -- know about what happened on that night Tate-Brown was pulled over. 

In light of the recent events in Ferguson, Ohio, and New York City, I would think there should be a heightened sense of getting a steady stream of information on a case like this to the inquiring public. Because, after all, if you want to win back or keep the trust of the locals, you have to do a little extra work -- especially if times are tough. That's just how human interaction typically works. 

So, what happened that early morning? So far, we've only got the typical police response to a fatal shooting. 

On Monday morning, December 15, 2014, Brandon Tate-Brown, 26, was gunned down on the 6600 block of Franklin Ave in Philadelphia at the hands of law-enforcement. The story, which immediately garnered attention from the public and media, produced a steady stream of information, to begin. 

The story went as such: Tate-Brown was pulled over somewhere around 2:40 a.m. According to police, he was driving with his headlights off, and that's why he was pulled over. Police said, when they approached the car -- a Dodge Charger with Florida tags -- they saw a handgun on/in the center console.

They asked Tate-Brown to exit. 

From there, the first flag goes up for me. Here are two different ways Philadelphia reporters have phrased the story transition from that point: 

The first reporter, Philadelphia Inquirer writer, Aubrey Whelan, writes: 

Later, a Daily News reporter, Vinny Vella,  posted this description of the transition: 

Which leaves me to ask, what, exactly, happened after a compliant Brandon Tate-Brown pulled over, and a compliant Brandon Tate-Brown exited his vehicle at request of the police officers? 

According to another close friend of Brown who wishes to remain nameless,  an eyewitness heard a police officer (who is either Asian or white) say "Where's the gun?!" several times before a scuffle broke out. 

Also, another close source says one officer did not get involved in the confrontation, at all. (The one who went to the hospital in shock). 

Even if we don't know all the details for certain, one thing we do know is that, something happened in between that we haven't been officially told yet by the police.

There have been pictures floating around (that I won't post on this blog) of Tate-Brown's body laying twisted on the sidewalk by the open passenger side door of his Dodge Charger. 

The police say he went for his gun, and that's when he was shot -- with a single bullet -- to the back of his head, and he died. 

As mentioned, the shooter has been described as either Asian or white from a couple different eyewitnesses. He was put on desk duty, and his partner went to the hospital for anxiety. 

Being that the alleged struggle happened on the sidewalk, I'm having difficulty imagining what happened, being that the bullet shell-casing was marked on the driver's side several inches left of his bumper/muffler. (Note: the following pictures are from live shots taken just over two hours later.) 

If the Philly police's narrative is going to be: "We asked him to get out of the car, and a struggle ensured, and he forced his way back into the car to go for gun." My questions are:

My thoughts: If we're to believe the police's version, the shell-casing landed in one of the most exotic places it possibly could have.

There's no way Tate-Brown would have been able to have been hit in the back of the head from the driver side if he's diving to get his gun from the passenger side. 

Here's another reason "Why did the struggle start" is important: Because how do they KNOW he was going for his gun? Are they just assuming? How can we assume he was going for gun? We need to know from their point of view what happened during the encounter. Dash cam video (which I'm almost positive Philly police have) would be very clutch. We've seen plenty of cases where cops have reacted prematurely in fear letting shots off even after telling the vehicle driver to reach for something. 

We need more answers, Philly PD. It's been over 24 hours since we've heard anything, and what we have just isn't quite enough. 

American government truth. 

#Ferguson: The Beginning of a New Revolution

There's a local politician. He just can't be trusted anymore.

He MUST be replaced.

That's what the locals say, anyway.

On a normal early evening, he sits in his home having a hot plate of dinner with his family. For the time being, the day is not unlike any other day. He's eating well, he's wealthy, a prominent figure, and his family is healthy. In his work as a government official, he's facing some difficulty. Despite being a public servant for many years, there has been a rumble growing within his district by the people who he claims to serve. They call his integrity into question. 

Outside of his window he hears a rumbling of unrest. A shouting, crashing and glass breaking makes its way closer to his diningroom window where he and his family gradually notice the commotion.

Not too much longer after that, a brick soars through his window and leaves his family scrambling for cover as a drunken angry mob of rioters break in to vandalize his home. 

That marks the beginning of an increasing danger he, his family and his town are forced to face every day. 

The angry locals go on to, as some call it, "terrorize" their own town -- especially individuals who sided with the government -- with fire and destruction. News organizations were vandalized, government officials and pro-government media members were harassed, and despite the weaponized push back from local authority, the wild crowd held firm to their chaotic, seemingly aimless stance, fighting back against the strong arm of the law.

This civilian fight-back not only attempted to put a cramp in every day local logistics, but at times, the rioters targeted the pockets of the empire that ruled over them by boycotting and looting commercial products in effort to force their voices to be heard. 

After the unrest grew beyond containment, the government dispatched specialized military to monitor the area. The protesters fearlessly faced off with them. They couldn't fire any firearms at them, so they'd resort to mocking, insulting, and hurling objects in their direction.

The increased contention, is said to have heightened the awareness of law-enforcement. Naturally, in "fear for their well-being", a few civilians were killed at the hands of these law-enforcers. 

These civilian deaths serve to increase anger among the protesters, leak into the rest of the general population, giving the protesters more support, and turn up the dial on the unrest. Despite the civilian killings, very close to all of the shooters escape conviction. 

These crazy events cause many uninvolved citizens to view the rambunctious tactics used by the protesters as not useful or helpful to their cause. They're labeled uncivilized, animals, drunkards, and traitors. Their actions are viewed as strong-handed and unjustified.

Despite all of this, the protesters had a definite cause, and they weren't going to quit until the government recognized their demands. 

Read the SHOCKING comments from cops on the non-indictment of #EricGarner's killer.

Think racism isn't a factor in police work?

Check this out: