Boston Police Commissioner William Gross Blasts Liberal Judges Releasing Violent Offenders Over Coronavirus Fears: “Let Them Stay at Your House With Your Family”

Boston Police Commissioner William Gross blasted liberal judges at a Thursday press conference on a surge in violence, blaming the judges for creating an atmosphere where offenders are not afraid to commit crimes because the courts are closed and violent prisoners–including an accused murderer–are being released by judges because of fears of the COVID-19 Chinese coronavirus spreading behind bars. Gross told the judges, “If you feel so comfortable releasing them, let them stay at your house with your family.”

Boston Police Commissioner William Gross speaks at a press conference May 28, screen image via WCVB-TV/YouTube

One case that Gross singled out was the release last month of accused murderer William James Utley who was out on bail with a GPS monitor for 2016 gun charges when he allegedly stabbed a man to death in a bar fight in 2018. The 40-year-old Utley was jailed awaiting trial after being indicted by a grand jury for second degree murder when he was ordered released by a judge because he has leukemia and would be susceptible to the coronavirus. The judge ordered him released with a GPS monitor.

Separately, on Wednesday night in the Boston neighborhood of Dorchester five people were shot in a mass shooting, one fatally. Two other victims showed up at a hospital–one with a gunshot and the other with a stab wound.

Gross went on rant on his private Facebook page, reported the Dorchester Reporter:

Police Commissioner William Gross last night expressed frustration on his Facebook account.

“On the way to Franklin Field for 8 people shot. Thank you Liberal Judges, for your release of a murderer and several violent persons, YOU have set the tone that people can do whatever they want because there will be no repercussions from the courts,” he wrote.

“Over 45 guns off of the streets from search warrants within a month’s time… 24 directly from a person. Out of the 24, 16 were verified gang members. Several have been bailed the next day or within weeks. It’s the judges, not the D.A. Stand up for your rights people!”

At Thursday’s press conference Gross went further, urging sympathetic judges to let the prisoners live in their homes, reported WHDH-TV:

…“Not one judge has ever provided a certificate that said any COVID-19 releases are fully rehabilitated,” Gross said. “So the mentality on the street is you can do whatever you want.”

As an example, Gross pointed to murder suspect William James Utley, 40, who was released from jail after his attorney argued that a health condition made him more susceptible to the coronavirus.

“If you [judges] feel so comfortable releasing them, let them stay at your house with your family,” Gross said.” Now see if things would change, come on! We’re in the middle of a pandemic!”

Gross said the current mentality on the streets of Boston is “do whatever we want” with no repercussions because the courts are closed.

“Look at the numbers. Five homicides in a row, the attempted murder of four police officers in broad daylight, a 10-year-old girl shot in her apartment, a 17-year-old girl murdered on the street,” Gross said. “Use your common sense and be fair to people in the community. The people are not rehabilitated.”…

Video via WCVB-TV in which Gross also commented it was in many ways unfair to the prisoners to release them under poor conditions, in many cases to areas more infected with the virus than the jails, and without being rehabilitated:

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/05/boston-police-commissioner-william-gross-blasts-liberal-judges-releasing-violent-offenders-coronavirus-fears-let-stay-house-family/

The Hydroxychloroquine Controversy Is a Reminder That Prescription Laws Are a Government Racket

After President Trump declared that he uses hydroxychloroquine, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) walked back its advice against the drug and seemingly all others as well. “The decision to take any drug,” the head of the agency said, is “between a patient and their doctor.”

The FDA has had two shining moments during the spread of the coronavirus. At neither time did the agency do something so much as it undid something.

The first moment was March 13, when the FDA dropped its onerous approval process for coronavirus test kits. It was still late to the game, but the move helped save face.

On Tuesday, there wasn’t much left to preserve after the FDA commissioner issued a statement essentially nullifying much of his own bureaucracy’s purpose for existing.

“The decision to take any drug is ultimately a decision between a patient and their doctor,” FDA commissioner Dr. Stephen Hahn said in an emailed statement to various news outlets, including the Hill and CNBC.

This came in response to President Trump’s remarks that same day that he had been taking hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) as a preventative measure against COVID-19 for “a couple weeks.”

“I think people should be allowed to,” Trump said.

The FDA would say that, technically, people are allowed to use HCQ. It’s just not government approved for anything other than malaria, lupus, and rheumatoid arthritis. And although doctors may, and do, prescribe it for “off-label” treatments, a prescription—a government-mandated document that controls public access—is still required.

What does it matter, beyond the legal consequences, whether a prescription is written for HCQ or not? In Trump’s case, the president merely requested HCQ from his doctor. It wasn’t even recommended to him. Suppose no prescription were required and HCQ were over the counter. Might Trump or anyone else consult their physician or a pharmacist anyway?

All the prescription law can do is potentially weaken the doctor-patient relationship.

As the late Dr. Thomas Szasz observed in his book Our Right to Drugs, a “colossal charade” between patients, doctors, insurance companies, and the government arises from this regulatory framework of prescription drug laws. He wrote:

The fact that our drug laws require people to secure a prescription for many of the drugs they want (but cannot get on the free market) fosters a mutually degrading dishonesty between physicians and patients.

https://mises.org/wire/hydroxychloroquine-controversy-reminder-prescription-laws-are-government-racket

Two can play Section 230 game: Trump’s EO uses key statute against social media censorship

Social media giants have long hid behind a law shielding them from litigation to censor content they did not like. President Donald Trump’s executive order just reminded them that laws can also be used as a sword.

Though the First Amendment to the US Constitution prohibits the government from restricting freedom of speech, social media platforms have long argued this does not apply to them as private companies. The executive order signed by Trump on Thursday points out that their status as platforms, and immunity from endless civil lawsuits, depends on their removal of controversial content being done “in good faith.”

The order instructs federal agencies to focus on that qualifier when considering Section 230 (C) of 47 US Code to social media companies, noting that this clearly does not apply when their practices are “deceptive” or “pretextual,” inconsistent with their own terms of service, and used to stifle viewpoints with which they disagree.

Until now, Facebook, Twitter, YouTube and others could have it both ways, insisting they were “platforms” and therefore not liable for user-generated content, while acting as "publishers" and actively deciding which content they would allow, using entirely arbitrary and ever-changing rules.

The issue became political after 2016, when Trump used social platforms to bypass the establishment media that overwhelmingly favored – and endorsed – his opponent. The ‘Russiagate’ conspiracy theory wasn’t just used in an attempt to get Trump out of office, but also to pressure social media giants to censor viewpoints the establishment did not like – overwhelmingly targeting Trump supporters, but also purging dissident voices on the left.

It made little difference whether the companies did so internally, or by outsourcing it to third parties – such as Facebook did recently – the people making these decisions invariably turned out to be passionately partisan.

https://www.rt.com/op-ed/490061-trump-executive-order-twitter-230/