The minister, anti-police activist, public figure (but only when it suits him), and leader of the Next Generation Action Network, Dominique Alexander was arrested Thursday evening on two counts of family violence.
Multiple sources are reporting that the Dallas Police Department’s Fugitive Unit arrested Alexander on one felony and one misdemeanor charge stemming from a complaint received on Wednesday.
Lee Merritt, a federal rights civil attorney and Alexander were quick to take to social media to ask the public “not to pile on” regarding Alexander’s past criminal history and speculating before the investigation began to unfold.
A stark deviation from their usual tactic of publicly condemning and persecuting police officers accused of misconduct before an investigation is even started. Protests and invoking anger are all the rage when something happens they deem unacceptable. Only then is it okay to “pile on” and call for immediate justice and punishment well before facts regarding the incident are even released.
So why is this incident different? He’s a public figure. His actions, even private ones, are of public concern when you are a public figure. Especially when you are a public figure that inserts yourself into matters of criminal justice. If police officers need to be held to the highest standard of personal and professional conduct, then so too should those who seek influence over criminal justice matters.
Why does Alexander deserve a pause in judgement, yet he and Merritt have no issue telling the public how police officers are guilty before the ink is dry on the first page of the investigation paperwork?
Ah, the hypocrisy. It’s rich on this one.
Alexander took to social media as news broke about the allegation stating on Facebook, “People has been ready to take me down since day one, but the devil will not win at all.”
The victim card.
We knew it was coming.
Dominique Alexander is the victim here folks. Not the person who made the allegation. Not the person who was allegedly assaulted, it’s Dominique Alexander. In a statement issued on Facebook, Merritt asserted that the criminal justice system has an “acumen for prosecuting black men.” Once again, I’m confused. Should police have turned away the victim making the accusation once they learned the suspect was black? How would that be justice for the victim?
Which leads me to the next topic. I know some people will say, “Stop talking about them, just ignore them!” I get it, the issue with that idea is they will never stop. They constantly spread false narratives and anger toward law enforcement with no regard for the damage it does between the police and the communities they serve. They claim to be vigorous arbiters of justice; however, they only want justice when they aren’t the ones who stand accused. Furthermore, they believe their efforts are making things “better” between police and the communities they serve, but they’re wrong.
I’ve said it so many times, I’m surprised my computer doesn’t write this sentence for me. I believe in holding police officers to the highest standards of ethics and professionalism. However, if Merritt and Alexander truly cared about making things better between police and the community, they’d find ways to promote unity, understanding, and education, not division.
Instead, they sit on their activist perches determining themselves what our criminal justice system should look like. Apparently, to them, justice is selective. Justice is only justice when it’s convenient or fits their narrative. Justice should only be sought when they give their stamp of approval on which crimes should be taken seriously (not ones with black anti-police activist suspects). They also want to decide which crimes should be deemed a hate crime, or which police officer should be fired or thrown in prison. Again, all before any investigation is complete.
In true Merritt fashion, he immediately came out in support of Alexander. It wasn’t until he actually spoke to the victim of Alexander’s assault, did he reverse course in a released statement late Thursday in support of the victim. In that statement he also denounced the idea Alexander thought he could escape accountability due to his position as an activist. Good for Merritt on this one. But that doesn’t change his history of slinging premature guilty verdicts. This is just another example of him running to the spotlight before having any of the facts. I guess he will never learn.
In a move not surprising to most in the Dallas area, the newly elected District Attorney has recused himself from the case against Alexander, citing a conflict of interest. Also not surprisingly, Alexander campaigned for DA John Creuzot during the election process, which is why he will ask the judge to appoint a pro tem.
I won’t speculate on the outcome of this case when it comes to prosecution, but it sure seems like Dallas is following in the footsteps of Chicago when it comes to criminal justice and District Attorney’s policies.
I’ll let you decide if that’s a good thing or not.
The Officer Next Door