Will prosecutors ever be held accountable for their actions?

When a federal judge in California blew away charges of fraud and conspiracy in a controversial stock-option backdating case in December, observers were stunned.

Prosecutors had claimed that Henry T. Nicholas III and William Ruehle, the high-profile co-founder and former CFO, respectively, of Broadcom Corp., concealed millions by illegally altering the stock options awarded to employees of the Irvine, Calif.-based technology firm.

But U.S. District Judge Cormac J. Carney instead found that prosecutors had tried to prevent three key witnesses from testifying, improperly contacted attorneys for defense witnesses and leaked grand jury information.
It isn’t just the California backdating cases that have sparked courts to criticize prosecutors for questionable tactics. Recent prosecutions involving tax evasion, public corruption and terrorism have pushed judges beyond irritation into seething anger.

In cases throughout the country, including the high-profile pursuit of former Sen. Ted Stevens of Alaska, judges have reprimanded prosecutors for deliberately failing to produce potentially exculpatory information. In rulings like those for Broadcom and Brocade, prosecutors have been publicly slammed for manipulating the outcome.

But in United States v. Ruehle, Judge Carney found plenty of prosecutorial misconduct to complain about. The government, he said, “intimidated and improperly in fluenced” three witnesses critical to Ruehle’s defense.

One witness, who had left Broadcom, lost her new job after government investigators paid a visit to the company’s general counsel. Thus intimidated, she was told she would have to plead guilty to a felony to make her testimony “more convincing to a jury.” Another witness was threatened with prosecution if he stuck with earlier, truthful statements made to the SEC. And a third, the judge said, was forced to plead guilty to a crime he didn’t commit, in an effort to discredit any testimony that might benefit the defense.

The judge was so infuriated by the government’s witness intimidation that he dismissed all charges against them, as well as the stock-related counts against Ruehle and Nicholas. But for Nicholas, a flamboyant billionaire, he went even further.

Nicholas had been facing another spectacular set of charges that accused him of using and distributing a wide range of recreational drugs—including cocaine and Valium—and even threatening to kill anyone who talked about it. The second case was the subject of newspaper and magazine stories, including a Vanity Fair article, “Dr. Nicholas and Mr. Hyde: Sex, Lies and Underground Lairs,” based on allegations that Nicholas kept a specially constructed tunnel under his home to entertain himself and guests with prostitutes.

Citing a prosecution threat to subpoena Nicholas’ 13-year-old son to testify against his father, Carney gave the government three weeks to show cause why he shouldn’t drop the Nicholas drug case. On Jan. 7, the government dropped the drug charges


Link: http://www.abajournal.com/magazine/article/aggressive_justice

Recover lost files on your computer using an Unbutu Live CD

"There are lots of utilities to recover deleted files, but what if you can’t boot up your computer, or the whole drive has been formatted? We’ll show you some tools that will dig deep and recover the most elusive deleted files, or even whole hard drive partitions.

We’ve shown you simple ways to recover accidentally deleted files, even a simple method that can be done from an Ubuntu Live CD, but for hard disks that have been heavily corrupted, those methods aren’t going to cut it. In this article, we’ll examine four tools that can recover data from the most messed up hard drives, regardless of whether they were formatted for a Windows, Linux, or Mac computer, or even if the partition table is wiped out entirely."

Link:
http://www.howtogeek.com/howto/15761/recover-data-like-a-forensics-expert-using-an-ubuntu-live-cd/

FAA tells pilots not to play games or use their laptops in the cockpit!

The Information for Operators (InFO) guidance reminds crewmembers and air carriers that any cockpit distraction that diverts attention from required duties can “constitute a safety risk.” This includes the use of personal electronic devices for activities unrelated to flight.

Last October the pilots of Northwest 188 over-flew their destination by 150 miles because they were using their laptop computers for personal activities and lost situational awareness.

“Every aviation professional needs to take the issue of distractions in the cockpit seriously,” said FAA Administrator Randy Babbitt. “And when there are two or more professionals on the flight deck, they must hold each other to the highest safety standards. Allowing distractions is unacceptable.”

Links: http://www.faa.gov/news/press_releases/news_story.cfm?newsId=11338
http://www.faa.gov/other_visit/aviation_industry/airline_operators/airline_safety/info/all_infos/media/2010/InFO10003.pdf

Flaws Are Found In State Child-Abuse Registries Across The Country.

Combatting child abuse is a cause with universal support. Yet a push to create a national database of abusers, as authorized by Congress in 2006, is barely progressing as serious flaws come to light in the state-level registries that would be the basis for a national list.

In North Carolina, an appeals court ruled last month that the registry there is unconstitutional because alleged abusers had no chance to defend themselves before being listed.

In New York, a class-action settlement is taking effect on behalf of thousands of people who were improperly denied the chance for a hearing to get removed from the state registry.

And the U.S. Supreme Court is scheduled to hear a case this fall arising from the plight of a California couple whose names remain on that state's registry years after they were cleared of an abuse allegation made by their rebellious teenage daughter.

A person doesn't have to be convicted or even charged with a crime to get listed. Under the general practice in most states, entries are based on a child protection investigator's assertion that the person committed an act of abuse or neglect; hearings or appeals, if granted at all, often come long after the name is entered.

"Nobody wants to be seen as soft on child abuse — and that's gotten us where we are," said Carolyn Kubitschek, a New York attorney who has waged several court battles over the registries. "In the state of New York, it is still almost impossible to get off the list."

"Anybody can call a child abuse hotline and report abuse — anybody, including your ex-spouse who hates you, your landlord who's trying to evict you," Kubitschek said.


Link: http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=10473661

Must a citizen provide their ID to a police officer?

When in doubt, just identify yourself when a cop asks, said Jim Chanin, a prominent civil rights lawyer in Oakland, Ca.

But if you are arrested for not providing identification in California, you owe it to others to fight it in court, he said. Chances are the collaring was illegal, and the initial contact between a cop and a citizen is a place where constitutional rights are paramount.

"I would fight those cases and I might consider suing as a result," he said.

But knowing for sure whether you must identify yourself to a cop will take some research. It depends on where you are.

In states like California and New York, the courts have ruled you can't be busted for balking on ID, said Santa Cruz lawyer Katya Komisaruk, who has practiced in both states and written on the subject. Some attorneys say in Washington you can ignore a command to stop if you are innocent of any crime.

If you are driving, of course, you must produce a driver's license when stopped because motoring is a privilege.

The nation's various obstruction, "stop and identify" and "stop and frisk" laws are so vague "you can chose to enforce it against whoever you want to," said Jeffrey Fagan, a law professor at Columbia and Yale. "This has severe consequences."

They're also known as "contempt of cop laws" or "cover charges", because police are suspected of using them to punish attitude or justify injurious force.

Link: http://www.seattlepi.com/local/418803_videoside.html

Blippy.com can show a private investigator what online purchases people make using a debit or credit card.

When you register with Blippy, you provide some personally identifiable information to us, such as your name, username, password, and email address, and any other information or data that you provide to the Services, such as the login credentials for any of your webmail or social networking site accounts that you link to your Blippy account, or any of your accounts on websites that you make purchases from which you link to your Blippy account. Personally identifiable information that we may also collect in order to provide the Services may include your IP address, city, time zone, telephone number, and other information that you decide to provide us with, or that you decide to include in your public profile.

Your user name and image, if you decide to upload one, are displayed to people in the Blippy network to enable you to connect with people on Blippy, as specified in your privacy settings. Once a member, you may provide additional information in the profile section, including but not limited to your bio, your location, as well as your personal web site, if you have one. Providing additional information beyond what is required at registration is entirely optional, but enables you to better identify yourself and find new friends and opportunities in the Blippy system. You may customize your account with information such as a cell phone number for the delivery of SMS messages or your address book so that we can help you find Blippy users that you know. Our services are primarily designed to help you share information about your purchases with others. This information will be public by default, but you may make it more private by editing your account settings. You should be careful about all information that will be made public by Blippy.

Link: http://www.blippy.com/

Digital copiers hard drives retain records of files etc.

At a warehouse in New Jersey, 6,000 used copy machines sit ready to be sold. CBS News chief investigative correspondent Armen Keteyian reports almost every one of them holds a secret.

Nearly every digital copier built since 2002 contains a hard drive - like the one on your personal computer - storing an image of every document copied, scanned, or emailed by the machine.

In the process, it's turned an office staple into a digital time-bomb packed with highly-personal or sensitive data.

If you're in the identity theft business it seems this would be a pot of gold.

"The type of information we see on these machines with the social security numbers, birth certificates, bank records, income tax forms," John Juntunen said, "that information would be very valuable."

Juntunen's Sacramento-based company Digital Copier Security developed software called "INFOSWEEP" that can scrub all the data on hard drives. He's been trying to warn people about the potential risk - with no luck.

This past February, CBS News went with Juntunen to a warehouse in New Jersey, one of 25 across the country, to see how hard it would be to buy a used copier loaded with documents. It turns out ... it's pretty easy.

Juntunen picked four machines based on price and the number of pages printed. In less than two hours his selections were packed and loaded onto a truck. The cost? About $300 each.

Until we unpacked and plugged them in, we had no idea where the copiers came from or what we'd find.

We didn't even have to wait for the first one to warm up. One of the copiers had documents still on the copier glass, from the Buffalo, N.Y., Police Sex Crimes Division.

Link: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/04/19/eveningnews/main6412439.shtml

An online journalist working for the Michigan Messenger locates a sex offender using social networking sites.

The arrest of a man convicted of sex crimes involving children — a man on the Michigan State Police’s most-wanted fugitives list for failing to register as a sex offender in 2007 — has given rise to questions about how well the state and law enforcement are monitoring and searching for wanted sex offenders.
Michigan State Police arrested Adrian Hill Wednesday night in Jackson, police say. He was picked up on two warrants. The first was a warrant issued in October of 2009 for failing to verify or register his address as a sex offender. The second was a March 26, 2010 bench warrant for failing to appear in court on a traffic violation. Police say the violation was operating a vehicle without a driver’s license.

Cops say they sought multiple warrants in October for Hill’s multiple failures to register.

Hill, 37, made little effort to conceal his identity or location, which were easily uncovered by a Michigan Messenger investigation. The information about Hill was discovered on publicly available websites including Facebook, where Hill maintained a page under his own name, using his actual birth date. In addition, that website indicated that the convicted sex offender was actively involved in a Jackson daycare center and was preparing a large event to feed the homeless at a community center frequented by many of Lansing’s poorest youth. The profile also indicates Hill had been running a non-profit ministry reaching out to support the disabled and their families.

Michigan Messenger turned over the results of its investigation to Lansing Police Capt. Ray Hall, who runs the city of Lansing’s North Precinct. Hall said Hill was one of Michigan’s most-wanted fugitive sex offenders, and his detectives, using Michigan Messenger–provided information, worked with the Michigan State Police to track Hill down and arrest him. Michigan Messenger agreed not to publish this story until Hill was arrested, in order to prevent him from being tipped off and fleeing.

Link:
http://michiganmessenger.com/36610/arrest-of-most-wanted-sex-offender-raises-policy-questions

False imprisonment charges lead people to be categorized as sexual offenders!

A decade ago, when James Smith was 17, he and an accomplice forced another 17-year-old into a car with them near Green Bay, Wisconsin. The two wanted to collect drug money from a friend of the boy, and they forced him go along for the ride, making clear to him that if he didn’t, “he is going to get what is coming to him,” according to the criminal complaint in the case. After the incident, Smith was convicted of a crime called “false imprisonment.” No one disputes that Smith was guilty of the crime for which he was convicted and sentenced to two years in prison. What Smith and many others watching his case found surprising was that the state of Wisconsin ordered him to register as a sex offender. Although his crime was not in any way sexual in nature, Smith’s photo was posted in an online registry. He also faced restrictions in some parts of the state on how close he can live to schools, parks and other places where children commonly gather.
Last month, the highest court in Wisconsin held that Smith does, in fact, belong on the sex-offender registry. Just days earlier, the Supreme Court of Georgia came to the same conclusion in another case in which a man named Jake Rainer had been convicted on the same charge as Smith. The crime of false imprisonment, both courts found, counts as a sex offense under state law, even if nothing sexual happened.

The cases of Smith and Rainer illustrate a larger debate that is emerging in courts and legislatures around the nation: Have states gone too far in categorizing criminals as sex offenders? Already, the number of registered sex offenders is growing quickly, and it will only keep rising as more states comply with the federal Adam Walsh Act. That law requires all states to make false imprisonment a sex offense, as Georgia and Wisconsin already do, by July. The Adam Walsh Act also requires the states to post more information about sex offenders on their registries, such as their work addresses. So far, only Ohio has fully complied with the law.

Critics argue that the court’s decision implies that nearly anyone convicted of almost any crime could be added to the sex-offender registry. That’s what Ann Walsh Bradley, a Wisconsin Supreme Court justice who dissented in Smith’s case, thinks. “Because traffic offenders may create a danger to the public,” Bradley wrote in her dissenting opinion, “any offender found guilty of a traffic infraction could be required to register as a ‘sex offender.’”


Link: http://www.stateline.org/live/details/story?contentId=476264

Crime lab in San Francisco has more problems. How is evidence stored in other states?

San Francisco's police crime lab, already plagued by a drug-skimming scandal, is quietly dealing with another pesky problem - cats.

A multiplying army of feral felines has moved into a lab hangar at the former Hunters Point Naval Shipyard where the Police Department stores evidence from old crimes. The cats have been sleeping, eating rodents and going to the bathroom around evidence items and police files, some of them boxed up, some out in the open.

One piece of evidence in the area of Building 606 where the cats have been living, police say, is the suit that Mayor George Moscone was wearing Nov. 27, 1978, when former Supervisor Dan White shot him to death in his City Hall office. The suit was not in a box, police say, but was tied up in a paper bundle and was not damaged by the cats.


Link:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/04/04/MNN71CLD65.DTL&type=newsbayarea#ixzz0kEh6inLp

A judge in MA calls into question forensic evidence.

In a move that some legal scholars said may be the first by a federal judge, Gertner has ordered defense lawyers and prosecutors not to assume that evidence routinely accepted in the courts for decades is reliable. Defense lawyers, she wrote, should vigorously challenge fingerprints, bullet identification, handwriting, and other trace evidence, and prosecutors should be prepared to show it is valid.

“In the past, the admissibility of this kind of evidence was effectively presumed, largely because of its pedigree — the fact that it had been admitted for decades,’’ Gertner wrote in a March 8 order. “As such, counsel rarely challenged it, and if it were challenged, it was rarely excluded or limited.’’

That needs to change, she said. A critique last year by the National Academy of Sciences, she noted, concluded that forensic evidence used to convict thousands of defendants for nearly a century is hardly the infallible proof of police procedurals on television. Too often, the study found, it is the product of sloppy practices that should be improved and standardized.

Spurred by the report and criminal cases she has presided over, Gertner wrote that the validity of such evidence “ought not to be presumed’’ and that defense attorneys should contest it at pretrial hearings, or explain why they do not. She will allow the evidence to go before a jury only if it meets sound scientific principles.


Link:
http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2010/03/29/us_judge_urges_skepticism_on_forensic_evidence/

Buying judges, coming to a state near you.

Illinois is home to the nation’s costliest judicial election ever: the 2004 contest between Lloyd Karmeier and Gordon Maag. The two candidates in Illinois's fifth judicial district together raised almost $9.4 million, nearly double the previous national record. It topped the money raised in 18 of 34 U.S. Senate races decided that year. Even Karmeier, the winner of the race, described the money poured into the campaign as “obscene.”

The eye-popping fundraising resulted from a parade of special interests on both sides of the “tort wars." The fifth district had been known for large damage awards against corporate interests, and the election’s winner was expected to play a crucial role on a closely divided Illinois supreme court. Trial lawyers funneled millions to Maag, while Karmeier got buckets of cash from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. Karmeier also got a boost from a company with a very real interest in the race's outcome: State Farm Insurance Company, which happened to be appealing a damage award of more than $450 million. Karmeier got $350,000 in contributions from employees, lawyers, and others directly involved with State Farm and another $1 million from larger groups affiliated with the company. After he won the election, Karmeier cast the deciding vote that saved State Farm roughly a half-billion dollars.

The Illinois election wasn’t an anomaly. In the last decade, state judicial elections across the country have evolved from quiet, civil contests into extravagant affairs with exorbitant spending, mud-slinging, and bitter personal attacks. Special interests in particular have helped engineer many of these races, pouring money into campaign coffers and negative TV ads. For instance, in a 2006 race in Washington—the most expensive judicial election that state had ever seen—every TV spot was paid for by a special interest group. As an Ohio AFL-CIO official put it, “We figured out a long time ago that it’s easier to elect seven judges than to elect one hundred and thirty-two legislators.”

And now, the problem is likely to get a lot worse. Much has been made about how Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission (FEC), the recent Supreme Court decision that lifted the ban on corporate spending in elections, will allow special interests to dump money into presidential and congressional races as never before. But the decision was handed down, in the words of Justice John Paul Stevens, just “when concerns about the conduct of judicial elections have reached a fever pitch.” Indeed, thanks to Citizens United, the likely explosion of special-interest spending in this year's judicial races threatens to further erode the judiciary's independence.

Link: http://www.tnr.com/article/politics/judging-dollars