Chrystale Wilson was born in Atlanta, Georgia, but spent most of her school years in Sacramento, CA. After completing college in Sacramento, she moved back to Atlanta where she worked for several major law firms before auditioning for and receiving her first major film role.
In l998, Chrystale debuted in The Players Club, written and produced by Ice Cube. As Ronnie, a scene-stealing villainess, she received rave reviews.
Chrystale’s talents are not only manifested in front of the camera, but in other domains of filmmaking as well. She has written, produced and secured mainstream talent for two films: Groupies and The Kudzu Christmas. Groupies is a cult classic with first time appearances by rap artists Ludicris and Lil’ John. Kudzu was the first movie to be shown on the successful television station TV One!
Having earned the reputation for being a starlet as well as a producer, Chrystale has gone on to work behind the scenes on other major productions: The 2010 Trumpet Awards, Stomp the Yard 2, Teen Wolf, Think Like a Man; just to name a few.
This talented woman continues to tour the country with inspirational stage plays and has done so for the past eight years, working with some of today’s top playwrights, including Tyler Perry.
This woman’s heart is not only displayed in her love for the arts but also in her love for all humanity. She is an advocate for the better treatment of our elderly and through a self-funded and organized annual event “Injured Angel Mixer”; Chrystale encourages her friends to donate products, which she personally distributes to inner city nursing homes. She also displays her love for animals as a volunteer at local “no kill” animal shelters. She lends her gift of speaking to high schools and colleges addressing the important of acceptance and tolerance among people from different cultural backgrounds. Chrystale is loved and respected in the gay and lesbian community and hosts many events pertaining to the equal treatment of people choosing an alternative life style.
And just when you thought this young lady had done it all, Chrystale will be making her debut back into our living room in Ex-“R&B Diva’ Nicci Gilbert’s New Docu-Series, ‘From the Bottom Up’. The show is backed by non-other than Queen Latifah, it seems like everything she touches these days turns to gold and this show will prove to be no exception. Now, who said content was a thing of the past? ‘From the Bottom Up’ is a docu-series guaranteed to provide the viewing audience with something more than a cat fight or predictable twist. ‘From the Bottom Up’ takes its viewers into the lives of successful women who have somehow or another lost everything they had worked for, but the show doesn’t stop there. These strong women refused to accept defeat and will do what it takes to get back on top. Watch this unique team of women go against the odds and triumph over adversity when it seemed as if there was no hope in sight. Chrystale shares the stage with the likes of Sarah Strokes, Christine Beatty, Stacii Jae Johnson and Kim Smedley in what is anticipated to be, one of the best shows on television this year.
“Media Women Television” meets “Shark Tank” with “American Idol” audience participation. The lives of talented and hardworking women competing for a position in a publishing company in a big city are showcased. See these journalist, writers and editors at work, gossiping in the office and doing whatever it takes to make the cut. At key moments during the show the audience is polled and the women use the audience feedback as a virtual life coach to help them with their business decisions.
Synopsis: “Media Women” fills the void that women everywhere experienced with being disenfranchised, inserting the audience into the cast as a 5th “virtual interviewer”.
Get inside the minds of extremely talented women who have the desire to make it big in the publishing world. See them juggling the demands of creating a hot new concept for a magazine every week in search of landing a jobs with a publishing company. Watch their assertive demeanor in the office as they race to meet deadlines and earn points to maintain their place in the competition. Go on their interviews, with publishers and writers in the industry that test the limits of each contestant’s talents. Participate in the intricate day to day operations of a publishing company, editing, completion, The best part of it all, is each week the four groups will meet in the “War Room” to unveil their spread for the magazine.
And when you disagree with or support the contestants, let them know. The audience will be instructed to vote on the contestant who failed to pull their weight as a team player in that episode. Should she be fired, demoted or promoted will depend on points each contestant receive from the viewer. Each team will be afforded to release/fire one contestant each week and select a different contestant from HR. After the audience votes with a phone call, text message, or website poll, the women will be pulled aside and given the feedback from the audience real-time. Then watch how our women deal with the audience scrutiny and their team mates decisions. Then have the audience take to the website forums to discuss how it all played out and take surveys on what topic they would like covered in the coming week’s episode.
For more information about this new REALITY TV SHOW visit www.mediawomennetworkcom
Stay tuned for our new format coming soon.
After it has received evidence against a person, the grand jury must decide whether the evidence presented justifies an indictment, or “true bill,” which is the formal criminal charge returned by the grand jury. Upon the indictment’s being filed in court, the person accused must either plead guilty or nolo contendere or stand trial.
If the evidence does not persuade the grand jury that there is probable cause to believe the person committed a
crime, the grand jury will vote a “no bill,” or “not a true bill.” When this occurs, the person is not required to
plead to a criminal charge, and no trial is required.
An amount of force that is likely to cause either serious bodily injury or death to another person.
Police officers may use deadly force in specific circumstances when they are trying to enforce the law. Private citizens may use deadly force in certain circumstances in SELF DEFENSE. The rules governing the use of deadly force for police officers are different from those for citizens.
During the twelfth century, the COMMON LAW allowed the police to use deadly force if they needed it to capture a felony suspect, regardless of the circumstances. At that time, felonies were not as common as they are now and were usually punishable by death. Also, law officers had a more difficult time capturing suspects because they did not have the technology and weaponry that are present in today’s world. In modern times, the courts have restricted the use of deadly force to certain, dangerous situations.
In police jargon, deadly force is also referred to as shoot to kill. The Supreme Court has ruled that, depending on the circumstances, if an offender resists arrest, police officers may use as much force as is reasonably required to overcome the resistance. Whether the force is reasonable is determined by the judgment of a reasonable officer at the scene, rather than by hindsight. Because police officers can find themselves in dangerous or rapidly changing situations where split second decisions are necessary, the judgment of someone at the scene is vital when looking back at the actions of a police officer.
The Supreme Court has defined the “objective reasonableness” standard as a balance between the rights of the person being arrested and the government interests that allow the use of force. The FOURTH AMENDMENT protects U.S. citizens from unreasonable searches and seizures, the category into which an arrest falls. The Supreme Court has said that a SEARCH AND SEIZURE is reasonable if it is based on PROBABLE CAUSE and if it does not unreasonably intrude on the rights and privacy of the individual. This standard does not question a police officer’s intent or motivation for using deadly force during an arrest; it only looks at the situation as it has happened.
For deadly force to be constitutional when an arrest is taking place, it must be the reasonable choice under all the circumstances at the time.Therefore, deadly force should be looked at as an option that is used when it is believed that no other action will succeed. The MODEL PENAL CODE, although not adopted in all states, restricts police action regarding deadly force. According to the code, officers should not use deadly force unless the action will not endanger innocent bystanders, the suspect used deadly force in committing the crime, or the officers believe a delay in arrest may result in injury or death to other people.
Circumstances that are taken into consideration are the severity of the offense, how much of a threat the suspect poses, and the to resist or flee the police officer. When arresting someone for a misdemeanor, the police have the right to shoot the alleged offender only in self-defense. If an officer shoots a suspect accused of a misdemeanor for a reason other than self-defense, the officer can be held liable for criminal charges and damages for injuries to the suspect. This standard was demonstrated in the Iowa case of Klinkel v. Saddler,211 Iowa 368, 233 N.W. 538 (1930), where a sheriff faced a WRONGFUL DEATH lawsuit because he had killed a misdemeanor suspect during an arrest. The sheriff said he had used deadly force to defend himself, and the court ruled in his favor.
I don’t know how many times we have to revisit this situation and think for one moment it’s going to change itself. The laws in this country are written in a way that it always protects the hierarchy. It’s difficult to bring a civil action against individual operating behind the corporate veil, let alone mount a defense against an over zealous cop once he has set his mind a subject is a “threat”. The laws in this country are too ambiguous and typically affect the poorest in society. It’s a damn shame a persons liberty rest in his or her ability to afford an attorney to represent them once the government has brought up charges against them. I realize the constitution of the United States guarantees each citizens an attorney in criminal cases. But when has it been customary for an employee to fight against the hand that feeds them? This is Maestro man…Amplify the Mumble!