Representative Darrell Issa calls it a way to promote transparency: a request for the names of hundreds of thousands of ordinary citizens, business executives, journalists and others who have requested copies of federal government documents in recent years.
Mr. Issa, a California Republican and the new chairman of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, says he wants to make sure agencies respond in a timely fashion to Freedom of Information Act requests and do not delay them out of political considerations.
But his extraordinary request worries some civil libertarians. It “just seems sort of creepy that one person in the government could track who is looking into what and what kinds of questions they are asking,” said David Cuillier, a University of Arizona journalism professor and chairman of the Freedom of Information Committee at the Society of Professional Journalists. “It is an easy way to target people who he might think are up to no good.”
Link: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/29/us/politics/29issa.html?_r=1
Favorite Quotes
Monday, January 31, 2011
Detroit: An audio recording of a confrontation with police should overturn man's conviction.
An attorney plans to use an inadvertent 21-minute recording from an officer's lapel microphone as grounds to overturn a misdemeanor conviction against a husband who allegedly was beaten by officers trying to mediate a dispute between the man and his wife.
The husband, Jeffrey Kodlowski, suspected his wife of cheating and initiated the March 18, 2009, incident when he took her cell phone in an attempt to prove her infidelity. Marlyn Kodlowski then began a series of phone calls to police that led to the arrival of officers Michael Little and Kyle Dawley to the Kodlowski residence on South Hanlon Street.
Jeffrey Kodlowski's attorney, Joseph Corriveau, says the recording, captured by Little's lapel microphone, shows the police overreached their authority and allegedly attacked his client, who was charged with assaulting the officers; he was acquitted of the assault charge and found guilty of resisting arrest.
Although assaulting a police officer is a felony in Michigan, Westland officials did not submit the case to the Wayne County Prosecutor's Office for review; instead, Kodlowski was charged in 29th District Court under city code violations of assault and resisting arrest.
"The audio shows these officers clearly stepped over the line," said Corriveau, who filed a motion with the Michigan Court of Appeals in December, after Wayne Circuit Judge Craig Strong refused to hear the case on appeal.
"If the microphone hadn't been on, this would've been just a 'he said, she said' situation. But the audio tells the story," the attorney said.
Corriveau said he also plans to file a civil lawsuit against the police seeking damages for the beating, but is waiting to see how the appeal plays out first.
"(District Judge Mark McConnell) didn't allow photos of my client's injuries, or any mention of the beating these officers gave him," Corriveau said. "The judge also wouldn't let the jury see a transcript of the audio."
Curt Benson, a professor at Cooley School of Law, said police officers are required to leave a private residence once they determine no crime has been committed, even if they were invited inside.
"If they believe someone has committed a crime, they can make an arrest," he said. "But in a case like this, if they weren't sure who owned the phone, as long as there was no evidence of a crime, they should have told them to talk to a lawyer. They're required to leave if they're asked to leave and there's no crime.
Link: http://detnews.com/article/20110130/METRO/101300309
The husband, Jeffrey Kodlowski, suspected his wife of cheating and initiated the March 18, 2009, incident when he took her cell phone in an attempt to prove her infidelity. Marlyn Kodlowski then began a series of phone calls to police that led to the arrival of officers Michael Little and Kyle Dawley to the Kodlowski residence on South Hanlon Street.
Jeffrey Kodlowski's attorney, Joseph Corriveau, says the recording, captured by Little's lapel microphone, shows the police overreached their authority and allegedly attacked his client, who was charged with assaulting the officers; he was acquitted of the assault charge and found guilty of resisting arrest.
Although assaulting a police officer is a felony in Michigan, Westland officials did not submit the case to the Wayne County Prosecutor's Office for review; instead, Kodlowski was charged in 29th District Court under city code violations of assault and resisting arrest.
"The audio shows these officers clearly stepped over the line," said Corriveau, who filed a motion with the Michigan Court of Appeals in December, after Wayne Circuit Judge Craig Strong refused to hear the case on appeal.
"If the microphone hadn't been on, this would've been just a 'he said, she said' situation. But the audio tells the story," the attorney said.
Corriveau said he also plans to file a civil lawsuit against the police seeking damages for the beating, but is waiting to see how the appeal plays out first.
"(District Judge Mark McConnell) didn't allow photos of my client's injuries, or any mention of the beating these officers gave him," Corriveau said. "The judge also wouldn't let the jury see a transcript of the audio."
Curt Benson, a professor at Cooley School of Law, said police officers are required to leave a private residence once they determine no crime has been committed, even if they were invited inside.
"If they believe someone has committed a crime, they can make an arrest," he said. "But in a case like this, if they weren't sure who owned the phone, as long as there was no evidence of a crime, they should have told them to talk to a lawyer. They're required to leave if they're asked to leave and there's no crime.
Link: http://detnews.com/article/20110130/METRO/101300309
Sunday, January 30, 2011
DHS's "See Something Say Something" Program at Walmart claims their first victim while on his cell phone!
Kirksville, Mo. A report of an armed man acting erratically in the Wal-Mart parking lot Wednesday led to the store being temporarily locked down before Kirksville Police responded to and defused the situation with no injuries.
According to Kirksville Police Chief Jim Hughes, a passerby stopped a Kirksville Police officer and said they had seen an individual acting erratically in a truck in the Wal-Mart parking lot shortly before 2:30 p.m. The passerby believed the individual had a gun to his head.
"We don't take these things lightly," Hughes said, "especially nowadays."
KPD responded to control the scene and ordered a lockdown of the store both to keep shoppers in and prevent the individual from entering the store.
After identifying the vehicle and person in question, Hughes said a decision was made on the scene for police to attempt contact. They were able to communicate with him and he voluntarily exited the vehicle. No weapon was found and the individual was taken into custody without incident less than 20 minutes after police arrived on scene.
The individual was talking on a cell phone at the time of the incident. It's likely that is the object the passerby identified as a gun.
Links:
http://www.kirksvilledailyexpress.com/features/x1791707599/Report-of-armed-man-leads-to-lockdown-at-Wal-Mart
DHS "See Something Say Something":
http://www.dhs.gov/ynews/releases/pr_1291648380371.shtm
According to Kirksville Police Chief Jim Hughes, a passerby stopped a Kirksville Police officer and said they had seen an individual acting erratically in a truck in the Wal-Mart parking lot shortly before 2:30 p.m. The passerby believed the individual had a gun to his head.
"We don't take these things lightly," Hughes said, "especially nowadays."
KPD responded to control the scene and ordered a lockdown of the store both to keep shoppers in and prevent the individual from entering the store.
After identifying the vehicle and person in question, Hughes said a decision was made on the scene for police to attempt contact. They were able to communicate with him and he voluntarily exited the vehicle. No weapon was found and the individual was taken into custody without incident less than 20 minutes after police arrived on scene.
The individual was talking on a cell phone at the time of the incident. It's likely that is the object the passerby identified as a gun.
Links:
http://www.kirksvilledailyexpress.com/features/x1791707599/Report-of-armed-man-leads-to-lockdown-at-Wal-Mart
DHS "See Something Say Something":
http://www.dhs.gov/ynews/releases/pr_1291648380371.shtm
Friday, January 28, 2011
Providence Community Corrections Inc. PPC operates in 45 states with obvious inherent problems associated with judges owning an interest in private probation companies.
NASHVILLE, TN. A class action accuses a private probation company of bilking and extorting probationers who must pay for its services. The class claims that Providence Community Corrections, which operates in 45 states, triples the probation term of its average "client" so it can milk monthly supervision fees from them, charges far more in fees than the courts or service providers do, and does it all without an agency to regulate it, or to whom probationers can complain. And the class notes that there are "obvious and inherent problems associated with judges owning an interest in private probation companies."
Misty Dawn Bell sued Providence in Davidson County Chancery Court, alleging violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act and the Consumer Protection Act. She seeks punitive damages for the class.
Bell claims that Providence overcharges probationers, extorts money from them, intimidates them into signing unfair contracts, adulterates urine samples to make it look like they used drugs and sexually harasses and sexually assaults them.
Armed sheriff's deputies act as Providence agents, adding to the intimidation and harassment, Bell says, and "PCC and judges incarcerate probationers based on their inability to pay." Bell claims this system has been recognized as corrupt for years.
Judge Craft noted that he was seeing a lot of what he felt was corruption and a lot of injustice resulting from the operation of private probation companies. Judge Craft noted the lack of requirements regarding owners and employees of private probation companies, in terms of their criminal records; i.e., the fact that persons with convictions for rape, forgery, embezzlement, drug convictions, armed robbery, etc. are able to serve as monitors of persons placed on probation. Judge Craft noted the conflict of interest, and opportunities for abuse based on the for-profit status of the private probation companies.
Pdf. Link:
http://www.courthousenews.com/2011/01/27/PrivateProbation.pdf
Link:
http://www.courthousenews.com/2011/01/27/33674.htm
Misty Dawn Bell sued Providence in Davidson County Chancery Court, alleging violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act and the Consumer Protection Act. She seeks punitive damages for the class.
Bell claims that Providence overcharges probationers, extorts money from them, intimidates them into signing unfair contracts, adulterates urine samples to make it look like they used drugs and sexually harasses and sexually assaults them.
Armed sheriff's deputies act as Providence agents, adding to the intimidation and harassment, Bell says, and "PCC and judges incarcerate probationers based on their inability to pay." Bell claims this system has been recognized as corrupt for years.
Judge Craft noted that he was seeing a lot of what he felt was corruption and a lot of injustice resulting from the operation of private probation companies. Judge Craft noted the lack of requirements regarding owners and employees of private probation companies, in terms of their criminal records; i.e., the fact that persons with convictions for rape, forgery, embezzlement, drug convictions, armed robbery, etc. are able to serve as monitors of persons placed on probation. Judge Craft noted the conflict of interest, and opportunities for abuse based on the for-profit status of the private probation companies.
Pdf. Link:
http://www.courthousenews.com/2011/01/27/PrivateProbation.pdf
Link:
http://www.courthousenews.com/2011/01/27/33674.htm
Private investigators and the public can take pictures or video of Federal builings (courthouses) without fear of being arrested.
The public has the right to take pictures of public buildings from public spaces. You might want to print out this version and tuck it in your camera bag in case you’re challenged in the future.
In an ideal world, there wouldn’t be anything exceptional about this statement. But nothing has been ideal for photographers since 9/11. The mere invocation of “security” seems to trump every other consideration, including logic and the law.
That’s why the New York Civil Liberties Union was so pleased with the settlement it reached in October with the Federal Protective Service of the Department of Homeland Security. (“You Can Photograph That Federal Building,” Oct. 18, 2010.) In the settlement, the agency pledged to inform its officers of the public’s general right to photograph the exteriors of federal courthouses.
Now, the civil liberties group has received a redacted version of the directive that was sent out last year. Significantly, it embraces federal buildings — not just courthouses — nationwide.
The three-page bulletin reminds officers, agents and employees that, “absent reasonable suspicion or probable cause,” they “must allow individuals to photograph the exterior of federally owned or leased facilities from publicly accessible spaces” like streets, sidewalks, parks and plazas. Even when there seems to be reason to intercede and conduct a “field interview,” the directive says:
Officers should not seize the camera or its contents, and must be cautious not to give such ‘orders’ to a photographer to erase the contents of a camera, as this constitutes a seizure or detention.
Pdf. link:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/47627164/FPS-Information-Bulletin
Link:
http://lens.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/01/27/see-officer-i-can-too-take-that-picture/
In an ideal world, there wouldn’t be anything exceptional about this statement. But nothing has been ideal for photographers since 9/11. The mere invocation of “security” seems to trump every other consideration, including logic and the law.
That’s why the New York Civil Liberties Union was so pleased with the settlement it reached in October with the Federal Protective Service of the Department of Homeland Security. (“You Can Photograph That Federal Building,” Oct. 18, 2010.) In the settlement, the agency pledged to inform its officers of the public’s general right to photograph the exteriors of federal courthouses.
Now, the civil liberties group has received a redacted version of the directive that was sent out last year. Significantly, it embraces federal buildings — not just courthouses — nationwide.
The three-page bulletin reminds officers, agents and employees that, “absent reasonable suspicion or probable cause,” they “must allow individuals to photograph the exterior of federally owned or leased facilities from publicly accessible spaces” like streets, sidewalks, parks and plazas. Even when there seems to be reason to intercede and conduct a “field interview,” the directive says:
Officers should not seize the camera or its contents, and must be cautious not to give such ‘orders’ to a photographer to erase the contents of a camera, as this constitutes a seizure or detention.
Pdf. link:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/47627164/FPS-Information-Bulletin
Link:
http://lens.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/01/27/see-officer-i-can-too-take-that-picture/
Thursday, January 27, 2011
Massachusetts: The Center for Constitutional Rights has filed an amicus brief Glik v. Cunniffe, et al. to protect citizens filming police.
The Center for Constitutional Rights:
CCR has submitted an amicus brief in Glik v. Cunniffe before the First Circuit Court of Appeals on behalf of Berkeley Copwatch, Communities United against Police Brutality, Justice Committee, Milwaukee Police Accountability Coalition, Nodutdol for Korean Community Development and Portland Copwatch. The brief argues that concerned individuals and Copwatch groups have the right to record public police activity and that that right is clearly protected under the First Amendment.
On October 1, 2007, Simon Glik held out his cellphone and made an audiovisual recording of three Boston police officers, John Cunniffe, Peter J. Savalis, and Jerome Hall-Brewster, making an arrest on Boston Common. Though Plaintiff held the cellphone in plain view and did not interfere with the arrest, the officers arrested Glik for violating the Massachusetts wiretap statute, Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 272, § 99, as well as aiding the escape of a prisoner and disturbing the peace. The Commonwealth voluntarily dismissed the aiding the escape charge, and the Boston Municipal Court dismissed the remaining two charges by written decision dated February 1, 2008.
Glik then brought suit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against the three officers and the City of Boston on February 1, 2010. He is represented by private attorney David Milton and ACLU attorney Sarah Wunsch. The complaint alleges that the individual Defendants violated the First and Fourth Amendments by arresting him for openly recording police officers carrying out their duties in public, and that the City’s policies and customs caused these violations. The complaint also brings state law claims against the individual officers for malicious prosecution and violation of the Massachusetts Civil Rights Act.
The brief is located at the bottom of the website in a Pdf.
Link: http://ccrjustice.org/ourcases/current-cases/glik
CCR has submitted an amicus brief in Glik v. Cunniffe before the First Circuit Court of Appeals on behalf of Berkeley Copwatch, Communities United against Police Brutality, Justice Committee, Milwaukee Police Accountability Coalition, Nodutdol for Korean Community Development and Portland Copwatch. The brief argues that concerned individuals and Copwatch groups have the right to record public police activity and that that right is clearly protected under the First Amendment.
On October 1, 2007, Simon Glik held out his cellphone and made an audiovisual recording of three Boston police officers, John Cunniffe, Peter J. Savalis, and Jerome Hall-Brewster, making an arrest on Boston Common. Though Plaintiff held the cellphone in plain view and did not interfere with the arrest, the officers arrested Glik for violating the Massachusetts wiretap statute, Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 272, § 99, as well as aiding the escape of a prisoner and disturbing the peace. The Commonwealth voluntarily dismissed the aiding the escape charge, and the Boston Municipal Court dismissed the remaining two charges by written decision dated February 1, 2008.
Glik then brought suit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against the three officers and the City of Boston on February 1, 2010. He is represented by private attorney David Milton and ACLU attorney Sarah Wunsch. The complaint alleges that the individual Defendants violated the First and Fourth Amendments by arresting him for openly recording police officers carrying out their duties in public, and that the City’s policies and customs caused these violations. The complaint also brings state law claims against the individual officers for malicious prosecution and violation of the Massachusetts Civil Rights Act.
The brief is located at the bottom of the website in a Pdf.
Link: http://ccrjustice.org/ourcases/current-cases/glik
Florida, police claim citizens filming them or buildings is suspicious and they could be arrested.
"As more professionals and amateurs use equipment to record police activity, they're facing the ire of officers who just don't want to be recorded," says David Ardia, director of Harvard University's Citizen Media Law Project. "We need a clear answer from courts that this is legal, or else police officers' instincts will always be to snatch the camera."
It might seem like an open-and-shut argument — cops are public figures, after all, and they're operating in plain view on the street. But it isn't, at least in the dozen states, including Florida, that require both parties in any conversation to consent to audio recording.
Since video cameras also record voices, police argue, citizen journalists are breaking the law when they record cops without permission. Publishing cops' photos also jeapordizes their safety, says Detective Juan Sanchez, a spokesman for Miami Beach police.
In Massachusetts, courts have upheld several similar convictions, including one against Jeffrey Manzelli, a Cambridge sound engineer who recorded police at a public antiwar rally.
"It really is a perversion of this statute to try to apply it to filming or recording what public officials are doing in public," says Randall Marshall, legal director of ACLU Florida.
Sanchez, the Miami Beach Police Department spokesman, says the trio acted suspiciously. "[They] were claiming they were filming in part for a documentary, [but] they had no credentials," Sanchez writes in an email statement. "Post 9/11, and in keeping with homeland security, the filming of any possible location which could be considered a target... arouses suspicion."
Aren't almost all buildings on Google street view, how can anyone possibly go along with this line of reasoning? Since when do you need to provide identification or press credentials to photogragh or videotape in public?
Link:
http://www.miaminewtimes.com/2011-01-27/news/cops-vs-cameras-filming-cops-illegal/
It might seem like an open-and-shut argument — cops are public figures, after all, and they're operating in plain view on the street. But it isn't, at least in the dozen states, including Florida, that require both parties in any conversation to consent to audio recording.
Since video cameras also record voices, police argue, citizen journalists are breaking the law when they record cops without permission. Publishing cops' photos also jeapordizes their safety, says Detective Juan Sanchez, a spokesman for Miami Beach police.
In Massachusetts, courts have upheld several similar convictions, including one against Jeffrey Manzelli, a Cambridge sound engineer who recorded police at a public antiwar rally.
"It really is a perversion of this statute to try to apply it to filming or recording what public officials are doing in public," says Randall Marshall, legal director of ACLU Florida.
Sanchez, the Miami Beach Police Department spokesman, says the trio acted suspiciously. "[They] were claiming they were filming in part for a documentary, [but] they had no credentials," Sanchez writes in an email statement. "Post 9/11, and in keeping with homeland security, the filming of any possible location which could be considered a target... arouses suspicion."
Aren't almost all buildings on Google street view, how can anyone possibly go along with this line of reasoning? Since when do you need to provide identification or press credentials to photogragh or videotape in public?
Link:
http://www.miaminewtimes.com/2011-01-27/news/cops-vs-cameras-filming-cops-illegal/
David Icke: Wake up America your country is a police state.
Interesting food for thought...
Milo Nickels had this to say:
"Honestly, how much of a stretch would FEMA camps really be? With all of the rules, laws, taxes, license plate readers, face scanners, traffic cameras, security cameras, metal detectors, speed cameras, and recently unmanned spy drones we are pretty much in a giant camp already--they just haven't built the fence yet."
Link:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9gq6N8B1Djc
Milo Nickels had this to say:
"Honestly, how much of a stretch would FEMA camps really be? With all of the rules, laws, taxes, license plate readers, face scanners, traffic cameras, security cameras, metal detectors, speed cameras, and recently unmanned spy drones we are pretty much in a giant camp already--they just haven't built the fence yet."
Link:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9gq6N8B1Djc
Wednesday, January 26, 2011
Domestic spying by your local police department using "aerial unmanned drones" is a cause for concern.
AUSTIN, TX. The suspect's house, just west of this city, sat on a hilltop at the end of a steep, exposed driveway. Agents with the Texas Department of Public Safety believed the man inside had a large stash of drugs and a cache of weapons, including high-caliber rifles.
As dawn broke, a SWAT team waiting to execute a search warrant wanted a last-minute aerial sweep of the property, in part to check for unseen dangers. But there was a problem: The department's aircraft section feared that if it put up a helicopter, the suspect might try to shoot it down.
So the Texas agents did what no state or local law enforcement agency had done before in a high-risk operation: They launched a drone. A bird-size device called a Wasp floated hundreds of feet into the sky and instantly beamed live video to agents on the ground. The SWAT team stormed the house and arrested the suspect.
"The nice thing is it's covert," said Bill C. Nabors Jr., chief pilot with the Texas DPS, who in a recent interview described the 2009 operation for the first time publicly. "You don't hear it, and unless you know what you're looking for, you can't see it."
But the operation outside Austin presaged what could prove to be one of the most far-reaching and potentially controversial uses of drones: as a new and relatively cheap surveillance tool in domestic law enforcement.
But by 2013, the FAA expects to have formulated new rules that would allow police across the country to routinely fly lightweight, unarmed drones up to 400 feet above the ground - high enough for them to be largely invisible eyes in the sky.
Such technology could allow police to record the activities of the public below with high-resolution, infrared and thermal-imaging cameras.
One manufacturer already advertises one of its small systems as ideal for "urban monitoring." The military, often a first user of technologies that migrate to civilian life, is about to deploy a system in Afghanistan that will be able to scan an area the size of a small town. And the most sophisticated robotics use artificial intelligence to seek out and record certain kinds of suspicious activity.
But when drones come to perch in numbers over American communities, they will drive fresh debates about the boundaries of privacy. The sheer power of some of the cameras that can be mounted on them is likely to bring fresh search-and-seizure cases before the courts, and concern about the technology's potential misuse could unsettle the public.
Link:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/01/22/AR2011012204111.html?nav=hcmodule
As dawn broke, a SWAT team waiting to execute a search warrant wanted a last-minute aerial sweep of the property, in part to check for unseen dangers. But there was a problem: The department's aircraft section feared that if it put up a helicopter, the suspect might try to shoot it down.
So the Texas agents did what no state or local law enforcement agency had done before in a high-risk operation: They launched a drone. A bird-size device called a Wasp floated hundreds of feet into the sky and instantly beamed live video to agents on the ground. The SWAT team stormed the house and arrested the suspect.
"The nice thing is it's covert," said Bill C. Nabors Jr., chief pilot with the Texas DPS, who in a recent interview described the 2009 operation for the first time publicly. "You don't hear it, and unless you know what you're looking for, you can't see it."
But the operation outside Austin presaged what could prove to be one of the most far-reaching and potentially controversial uses of drones: as a new and relatively cheap surveillance tool in domestic law enforcement.
But by 2013, the FAA expects to have formulated new rules that would allow police across the country to routinely fly lightweight, unarmed drones up to 400 feet above the ground - high enough for them to be largely invisible eyes in the sky.
Such technology could allow police to record the activities of the public below with high-resolution, infrared and thermal-imaging cameras.
One manufacturer already advertises one of its small systems as ideal for "urban monitoring." The military, often a first user of technologies that migrate to civilian life, is about to deploy a system in Afghanistan that will be able to scan an area the size of a small town. And the most sophisticated robotics use artificial intelligence to seek out and record certain kinds of suspicious activity.
But when drones come to perch in numbers over American communities, they will drive fresh debates about the boundaries of privacy. The sheer power of some of the cameras that can be mounted on them is likely to bring fresh search-and-seizure cases before the courts, and concern about the technology's potential misuse could unsettle the public.
Link:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/01/22/AR2011012204111.html?nav=hcmodule
Memphis, TN. Police & the FBI surround a church while peace activists were inside and claim it was only a misuderstanding.
When a police SWAT team and an FBI anti-terrorism squad showed up Tuesday at a Memphis church where peace activists were staging an event, a scene reminiscent of the turbulent 1960s ensued.
The activists, members of the Mid-South Peace and Justice Center who oppose the war in Afghanistan, characterized the encounter as police intimidation and a case of illegal surveillance.
FBI and Memphis Police Department representatives countered it was all a misunderstanding. They said they were there to protect the activists from potential harm by extremists who might oppose their views.
"We don't buy that at all,'' said Jacob Flowers, executive director of the nonprofit center.
"Never (before) have we encountered the situation where we've had eight to 10 marked and unmarked police cars, including tactical units, sitting there monitoring us. We find it too coincidental.''
About 15 to 20 activists gathered Tuesday afternoon at First Congregational Church, where the Peace and Justice Center rents office space, to fill out Freedom of Information requests aimed at discovering if the FBI or MPD is keeping surveillance files on the activists. Flowers said 16 individuals filled out FOIA forms at the event.
Activists grew alarmed when three members of the FBI's local Joint Terrorism Task Force stopped by the church, followed by MPD patrol cars and unmarked, black SUVs manned by TACT unit officers. The police units surrounded the church on South Cooper, and the black SUVs slowly crept through the church parking lot.
Link:
http://www.commercialappeal.com/news/2011/jan/25/protest-earns-guarded-reaction/?partner=yahoo_feeds
The activists, members of the Mid-South Peace and Justice Center who oppose the war in Afghanistan, characterized the encounter as police intimidation and a case of illegal surveillance.
FBI and Memphis Police Department representatives countered it was all a misunderstanding. They said they were there to protect the activists from potential harm by extremists who might oppose their views.
"We don't buy that at all,'' said Jacob Flowers, executive director of the nonprofit center.
"Never (before) have we encountered the situation where we've had eight to 10 marked and unmarked police cars, including tactical units, sitting there monitoring us. We find it too coincidental.''
About 15 to 20 activists gathered Tuesday afternoon at First Congregational Church, where the Peace and Justice Center rents office space, to fill out Freedom of Information requests aimed at discovering if the FBI or MPD is keeping surveillance files on the activists. Flowers said 16 individuals filled out FOIA forms at the event.
Activists grew alarmed when three members of the FBI's local Joint Terrorism Task Force stopped by the church, followed by MPD patrol cars and unmarked, black SUVs manned by TACT unit officers. The police units surrounded the church on South Cooper, and the black SUVs slowly crept through the church parking lot.
Link:
http://www.commercialappeal.com/news/2011/jan/25/protest-earns-guarded-reaction/?partner=yahoo_feeds
Monday, January 24, 2011
Santa Monica, CA. Mall security will record your license plates and send them to the police.
Malls in California will record your license plate and send it to the police and other states want to adopt this policy! How much longer will this invasion of privacy continue?
Anyone who has ever tramped through a dim, Escher-esque parking garage in search of a "lost" automobile might welcome an abracadabra technology that could help locate it.
But what if that magic involved an array of 24/7 surveillance cameras and was also available to police and auto repossessers? What if it could be tapped by jilted lovers, or that angry guy you accidentally cut off in traffic? Would the convenience be worth the loss of privacy?
Those are some of the questions civil libertarians and others are asking as technology capable of spying on motorists and pedestrians is converted to widespread commercial use.
Santa Monica Place recently unveiled the nation's first camera-based "Find Your Car" system. Shoppers who have lost track of their vehicle amid a maze of concrete ramps and angled stripes can simply punch their license plate number into a kiosk touch screen, which then displays a photo of the car and its location.
In Sacramento, the Police Department and Arden Fair Mall partnered to install license plate readers on mall security vehicles. The vehicles roam parking lots and garages in search of "hot list" vehicles provided by the state Department of Justice. If a car with a "hot" plate is spotted, mall security guards view closed-circuit TV footage to locate the vehicle's driver and alert police.
To date, the scans have helped police recover 44 stolen vehicles and arrest 38 individuals, according to mall security manager Steve Reed.
Both shopping centers are owned by the U.S. mall giant Macerich Co., which extols the surveillance systems' ability to locate lost and stolen cars. However, some wonder whether the convenience of such systems justifies their intrusive nature.
Under U.S. law, the entity taking the video owns it and can largely use or share it however it likes as long as the video is taken in public. There is, however, a difference between being allowed to share and being required to share. Police do have the power to compel the owner of the video to share it, usually through a subpoena.
"What should give people pause is that this technology is advancing upon us without anyone having chosen it," said Steven Aftergood, a senior research analyst at the Federation of American Scientists, which studies national security issues. "We have not decided as a society or as individuals that we want this convenience. It is being thrust upon us."
Link:
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-santa-monica-parking-20110123,0,5779844.story
Anyone who has ever tramped through a dim, Escher-esque parking garage in search of a "lost" automobile might welcome an abracadabra technology that could help locate it.
But what if that magic involved an array of 24/7 surveillance cameras and was also available to police and auto repossessers? What if it could be tapped by jilted lovers, or that angry guy you accidentally cut off in traffic? Would the convenience be worth the loss of privacy?
Those are some of the questions civil libertarians and others are asking as technology capable of spying on motorists and pedestrians is converted to widespread commercial use.
Santa Monica Place recently unveiled the nation's first camera-based "Find Your Car" system. Shoppers who have lost track of their vehicle amid a maze of concrete ramps and angled stripes can simply punch their license plate number into a kiosk touch screen, which then displays a photo of the car and its location.
In Sacramento, the Police Department and Arden Fair Mall partnered to install license plate readers on mall security vehicles. The vehicles roam parking lots and garages in search of "hot list" vehicles provided by the state Department of Justice. If a car with a "hot" plate is spotted, mall security guards view closed-circuit TV footage to locate the vehicle's driver and alert police.
To date, the scans have helped police recover 44 stolen vehicles and arrest 38 individuals, according to mall security manager Steve Reed.
Both shopping centers are owned by the U.S. mall giant Macerich Co., which extols the surveillance systems' ability to locate lost and stolen cars. However, some wonder whether the convenience of such systems justifies their intrusive nature.
Under U.S. law, the entity taking the video owns it and can largely use or share it however it likes as long as the video is taken in public. There is, however, a difference between being allowed to share and being required to share. Police do have the power to compel the owner of the video to share it, usually through a subpoena.
"What should give people pause is that this technology is advancing upon us without anyone having chosen it," said Steven Aftergood, a senior research analyst at the Federation of American Scientists, which studies national security issues. "We have not decided as a society or as individuals that we want this convenience. It is being thrust upon us."
Link:
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-santa-monica-parking-20110123,0,5779844.story
MA. Governor Patrick wants to end the Committee for Public Counsel Services, the state’s public defender agency.
If Governor Deval Patrick of MA has his way The Commonwealth of MA will prosecute, defend and sentence the indigent. Could anyone expect a fair trial for the indigent if this passes? Welcome to the future of justice for the indigent in MA.
Governor Deval Patrick wants to eliminate the use of private attorneys to represent indigent defendants, an entrenched $200 million system that has been attacked as unfair by prosecutors across the state.
The sweeping measure, which will be contained in the governor’s fiscal year 2012 budget, would end the state’s practice of farming out roughly 90 percent of the work defending poor clients in criminal cases. The state instead would hire about 1,000 full-time staff attorneys to replace the 3,000 private lawyers the state draws on to represent poor people.
Staff lawyers will cost less, officials argue, because they have no incentive to run up huge bills like private lawyers, who are paid $50 to $100 an hour, depending on the type of case. The Public Counsel Services budget, the administration official said, has soared by $100 million since 2003.
But the head of the Committee for Public Counsel Services said the plan is misguided.
“What the governor is proposing is taking a model system by all accounts and an agency that is extremely well run and turning it into a system similar to others in the country,’’ that have been beset by problems, said Anthony Benedetti, the agency’s chief counsel. “In states where the public defenders are all public, public defenders are overworked, underfunded, and provide ineffective representation.’’
Benedetti said he believes officials have overestimated the potential cost savings by misapplying national caseload standards.
Link:
http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2011/01/24/patrick_wants_to_end_use_of_private_attorneys_for_public_defense/
Governor Deval Patrick wants to eliminate the use of private attorneys to represent indigent defendants, an entrenched $200 million system that has been attacked as unfair by prosecutors across the state.
The sweeping measure, which will be contained in the governor’s fiscal year 2012 budget, would end the state’s practice of farming out roughly 90 percent of the work defending poor clients in criminal cases. The state instead would hire about 1,000 full-time staff attorneys to replace the 3,000 private lawyers the state draws on to represent poor people.
Staff lawyers will cost less, officials argue, because they have no incentive to run up huge bills like private lawyers, who are paid $50 to $100 an hour, depending on the type of case. The Public Counsel Services budget, the administration official said, has soared by $100 million since 2003.
But the head of the Committee for Public Counsel Services said the plan is misguided.
“What the governor is proposing is taking a model system by all accounts and an agency that is extremely well run and turning it into a system similar to others in the country,’’ that have been beset by problems, said Anthony Benedetti, the agency’s chief counsel. “In states where the public defenders are all public, public defenders are overworked, underfunded, and provide ineffective representation.’’
Benedetti said he believes officials have overestimated the potential cost savings by misapplying national caseload standards.
Link:
http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2011/01/24/patrick_wants_to_end_use_of_private_attorneys_for_public_defense/
Chicago police want to prosecute citizens who record them without their permission but the police can do just that without your permission!
Christopher Drew could be sent to prison for up to 15 years.
The crime they are accused of is eavesdropping.
The authorities say that Mr. Drew and Ms. Moore audio-recorded their separate nonviolent encounters with Chicago police officers without the officers’ permission, a Class 1 felony in Illinois, which, along with Massachusetts and Oregon, has one of the country’s toughest, if rarely prosecuted, eavesdropping laws.
“Before they arrested me for it,” Ms. Moore said, “I didn’t even know there was a law about eavesdropping. I wasn’t trying to sue anybody. I just wanted somebody to know what had happened to me.”
The Illinois Eavesdropping Act has been on the books for years. It makes it a criminal offense to audio-record either private or public conversations without the consent of all parties, Mr. Schwartz said. Audio-recording a civilian without consent is a Class 4 felony, punishable by up to three years in prison for a first-time offense. A second offense is a Class 3 felony with a possible prison term of five years.
Although law-enforcement officials can legally record civilians in private or public, audio-recording a law-enforcement officer, state’s attorney, assistant state’s attorney, attorney general, assistant attorney general or judge in the performance of his or her duties is a Class 1 felony, punishable by up to 15 years in prison.
On Aug. 18, Ms. Moore and her boyfriend went to Police Headquarters to file a complaint with Internal Affairs about the officer who had talked to her alone. Ms. Moore said the officer had fondled her and left his personal telephone number, which she handed over to the investigators.
Ms. Moore said the investigators tried to talk her out of filing a complaint, saying the officer had a good record and that they could “guarantee” that he would not bother her again.
“They keep giving her the run-around, basically trying to discourage her from making a report,” Mr. Johnson said. “Finally, she decides to record them on her cellphone to show how they’re not helping her.”
The investigators discovered that she was recording them and she was arrested and charged with two counts of eavesdropping, Mr. Johnson said. But he added that the law contains a crucial exception. If citizens have “reasonable suspicion” that a crime is about to be committed against them, they may obtain evidence by recording it.
ACLU vs. Alavrez(Chicago police) link:
http://volokh.com/2011/01/14/court-rejects-claim-of-a-first-amendment-right-to-audio-record-police-officers/
Links: http://reason.com/blog/2011/01/19/federal-judge-says-theres-no-f
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/23/us/23cnceavesdropping.html
http://www.chicagonewscoop.org/eavesdropping-laws-mean-that-turning-on-an-audio-recorder-could-send-you-to-prison/
The crime they are accused of is eavesdropping.
The authorities say that Mr. Drew and Ms. Moore audio-recorded their separate nonviolent encounters with Chicago police officers without the officers’ permission, a Class 1 felony in Illinois, which, along with Massachusetts and Oregon, has one of the country’s toughest, if rarely prosecuted, eavesdropping laws.
“Before they arrested me for it,” Ms. Moore said, “I didn’t even know there was a law about eavesdropping. I wasn’t trying to sue anybody. I just wanted somebody to know what had happened to me.”
The Illinois Eavesdropping Act has been on the books for years. It makes it a criminal offense to audio-record either private or public conversations without the consent of all parties, Mr. Schwartz said. Audio-recording a civilian without consent is a Class 4 felony, punishable by up to three years in prison for a first-time offense. A second offense is a Class 3 felony with a possible prison term of five years.
Although law-enforcement officials can legally record civilians in private or public, audio-recording a law-enforcement officer, state’s attorney, assistant state’s attorney, attorney general, assistant attorney general or judge in the performance of his or her duties is a Class 1 felony, punishable by up to 15 years in prison.
On Aug. 18, Ms. Moore and her boyfriend went to Police Headquarters to file a complaint with Internal Affairs about the officer who had talked to her alone. Ms. Moore said the officer had fondled her and left his personal telephone number, which she handed over to the investigators.
Ms. Moore said the investigators tried to talk her out of filing a complaint, saying the officer had a good record and that they could “guarantee” that he would not bother her again.
“They keep giving her the run-around, basically trying to discourage her from making a report,” Mr. Johnson said. “Finally, she decides to record them on her cellphone to show how they’re not helping her.”
The investigators discovered that she was recording them and she was arrested and charged with two counts of eavesdropping, Mr. Johnson said. But he added that the law contains a crucial exception. If citizens have “reasonable suspicion” that a crime is about to be committed against them, they may obtain evidence by recording it.
ACLU vs. Alavrez(Chicago police) link:
http://volokh.com/2011/01/14/court-rejects-claim-of-a-first-amendment-right-to-audio-record-police-officers/
Links: http://reason.com/blog/2011/01/19/federal-judge-says-theres-no-f
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/23/us/23cnceavesdropping.html
http://www.chicagonewscoop.org/eavesdropping-laws-mean-that-turning-on-an-audio-recorder-could-send-you-to-prison/
Sunday, January 23, 2011
Cracking the credit card code, what do all the numbers on your credit card mean?
Click on the jpg. for a larger view.
There’s hardly a more prominant financial product in America today than the almighty credit card. Nearly everybody has at least one — almost 80% of consumers in 2008, according to the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston – and many use it on a daily basis. Without a doubt, there are also those consumers who know their credit card numbers by heart (makes online shopping and booking travel so much easier, if anything). But how many of you know what those numbers really mean? Contrary to what you may think, they aren’t random. Those 16 digits are there for a reason and, knowing a few simple rules, you could actually learn a lot about a credit card just from its number. This infographic shows you how to crack that code.
Link: http://www.mint.com/blog/trends/credit-card-code-01202011/
Saturday, January 22, 2011
Fusion Center in Chicago claims to predict crimes and it's spreading to other Fusion centers.
What scientific programs can predict crime with near 100% accuracy?
Meteoroligsts can't predict the weather accurately and we're supposed to believe the Predictive Analytics Group is any different?
Want to know where our tax dollars are being wasted, read the following report:
In October, the Chicago Police Department’s new crime-forecasting unit was analyzing 911 calls for service and produced an intelligence report predicting a shooting would happen soon on a particular block on the South Side.
Three minutes later, it did, police officials say.
That got police Supt. Jody Weis thinking.
He wondered if the department could produce intelligence reports even quicker. Next time, officers might have an hour’s notice before a shooting — instead of just a few minutes.
The solution: Weis is now consolidating the department’s various intelligence-gathering units under his direct command to improve the flow of information.
The Deployment Operations Center, which gathers gang intelligence, will move into his office from the Bureau of Investigative Services.
The “DOC,” created in 2003, tracks human intelligence on gangs and holds a daily conference call with department leaders to decide where to deploy roving teams of officers.
The Predictive Analytics Group was already in the superintendent’s office.
Brett Goldstein, director of predictive analytics, said the change will allow his office to send out intelligence reports more quickly.
“We’re running against a clock,” he said.
The Predictive Analytics Group, which sorts through crime statistics and demographic data, was formed by Weis last spring.
At the time, the department was generating weekly citywide intelligence reports on violent crime and identifying “hot spots” of more than a square mile.
But the science behind the reports remains a mystery. Goldstein won’t give specifics on how his unit makes its predictions or identify the targeted areas, saying he does not want to tip off criminals.
Link:
http://www.suntimes.com/news/3295264-418/intelligence-crime-police-weis-department.html
Meteoroligsts can't predict the weather accurately and we're supposed to believe the Predictive Analytics Group is any different?
Want to know where our tax dollars are being wasted, read the following report:
In October, the Chicago Police Department’s new crime-forecasting unit was analyzing 911 calls for service and produced an intelligence report predicting a shooting would happen soon on a particular block on the South Side.
Three minutes later, it did, police officials say.
That got police Supt. Jody Weis thinking.
He wondered if the department could produce intelligence reports even quicker. Next time, officers might have an hour’s notice before a shooting — instead of just a few minutes.
The solution: Weis is now consolidating the department’s various intelligence-gathering units under his direct command to improve the flow of information.
The Deployment Operations Center, which gathers gang intelligence, will move into his office from the Bureau of Investigative Services.
The “DOC,” created in 2003, tracks human intelligence on gangs and holds a daily conference call with department leaders to decide where to deploy roving teams of officers.
The Predictive Analytics Group was already in the superintendent’s office.
Brett Goldstein, director of predictive analytics, said the change will allow his office to send out intelligence reports more quickly.
“We’re running against a clock,” he said.
The Predictive Analytics Group, which sorts through crime statistics and demographic data, was formed by Weis last spring.
At the time, the department was generating weekly citywide intelligence reports on violent crime and identifying “hot spots” of more than a square mile.
But the science behind the reports remains a mystery. Goldstein won’t give specifics on how his unit makes its predictions or identify the targeted areas, saying he does not want to tip off criminals.
Link:
http://www.suntimes.com/news/3295264-418/intelligence-crime-police-weis-department.html
Friday, January 21, 2011
Private investigator Andy Spieler from NY is hired by parents to spy on teens.
Youtube video from Fox news interviews private investigator Andy Spieler in NY who charges $75.00 an hour to spy on teens.
Link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UAgYZonBCH8
Link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UAgYZonBCH8
Traffic safety campaigns like the "move over" law have no factual basis.
High-profile traffic safety campaigns are being mounted at the state and federal levels against behavior that rarely causes the most serious types of accidents. In the past several years, lawmakers have enacted measures designed to increase the punishments for driving past stopped school buses in the name of protecting children. They have also enacted "move over" laws to stop police officers from being killed at the roadside. Statistics released this month by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) indicate that accidents involving either situation are exceedingly rare.
Forty-nine states impose similarly stiff penalties for passing a police vehicle stopped on the side of the road without first changing lanes. These so-called "move over" laws were adopted in the name of saving the lives of law enforcement officers, but according to the NHTSA analysis, "Characteristics of Law Enforcement Officers' Fatalities in Motor Vehicle Crashes," there were only 16 accidents involving police officers stopped in a traffic lane from 1982 to 2008 (view report, 650k PDF). In fact, of all types of collisions involving a law enforcement vehicle striking or being struck by another car, there were 15 police driver fatalities in 2009, according to the latest edition of NHTSA's "Traffic Safety Facts." This represents 0.05 percent of all traffic fatalities.
Out of the 30,797 fatalities in 2009, 21 involved a school bus and people walking nearby. Of these, however, 13 were caused by the bus driver slamming into the pedestrians -- including 7 children under the age of fifteen. Motorists were the cause in only 8 fatal accidents, or 0.0026 percent of motor vehicle fatalities. Despite the risk level, states have ramped up the penalties for passing a stopped school bus. West Virginia authorized private companies to use photo enforcement cameras on school buses last year in the name of saving children from this type of accident. Other states like Virginia impose a penalty of up to $2500.
Links: http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/Pubs/811402EE.pdf
http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/33/3382.asp
Forty-nine states impose similarly stiff penalties for passing a police vehicle stopped on the side of the road without first changing lanes. These so-called "move over" laws were adopted in the name of saving the lives of law enforcement officers, but according to the NHTSA analysis, "Characteristics of Law Enforcement Officers' Fatalities in Motor Vehicle Crashes," there were only 16 accidents involving police officers stopped in a traffic lane from 1982 to 2008 (view report, 650k PDF). In fact, of all types of collisions involving a law enforcement vehicle striking or being struck by another car, there were 15 police driver fatalities in 2009, according to the latest edition of NHTSA's "Traffic Safety Facts." This represents 0.05 percent of all traffic fatalities.
Out of the 30,797 fatalities in 2009, 21 involved a school bus and people walking nearby. Of these, however, 13 were caused by the bus driver slamming into the pedestrians -- including 7 children under the age of fifteen. Motorists were the cause in only 8 fatal accidents, or 0.0026 percent of motor vehicle fatalities. Despite the risk level, states have ramped up the penalties for passing a stopped school bus. West Virginia authorized private companies to use photo enforcement cameras on school buses last year in the name of saving children from this type of accident. Other states like Virginia impose a penalty of up to $2500.
Links: http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/Pubs/811402EE.pdf
http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/33/3382.asp
Thursday, January 20, 2011
The FBI and local police want your garbage collectors to spy on U. S. citizens under their new program called "Waste Watch".
"Waste Watch" Is a program that employs former FBI agents to train drivers and other employees to look out for anything out of the ordinary and gives them the tools to properly document and report the possibly significant events.
The sanitation workers are given cell phones with cameras and short forms to fill out if they spot anything unusual. They're taught to use their experience on the job, noting vehicles that may be out of place or doors left open. Most importantly they're reminded they're NOT police officers, just extra eyes and ears on the road. If they see something suspicious, they don't intervene. They call their dispatcher or 9-1-1.
"We hope that all of our drivers would do this anyway..." explains Charlie Cunningham, East Coast Security Director for Waste Management and a 24 year veteran of the FBI, "And with a little bit of training with a little big of guidance they know what to look for and they know how to report it."
We're trying to get the drivers to be proactive" Cunningham continues. "Not to wait for something to happen but to see something and call it in. This is about being a good neighbor, this is about being an engaged employee for Waste Management, this is about being linked to the community we live in. We live in these communities, we work in these communities and that's what we're trying to get across not only to our drivers but to the police."
Waste Watch is now in effect in more than 100 communities and almost every state in the nation, all in coordination with local law enforcement who recognize the benefit of having the men (and some women) at work in the best and worst neighborhoods in town, often in the middle of the night.
Waste Management says the program is free to the participating communities and will continue to expand to more cities. The company is also offering regular refresher courses to employees to keep them focused not just on collecting garbage but possibly stopping crimes and saving lives.
Link:
http://liveshots.blogs.foxnews.com/2011/01/19/garbage-collectors-as-crime-stoppers/?test=latestnews
The sanitation workers are given cell phones with cameras and short forms to fill out if they spot anything unusual. They're taught to use their experience on the job, noting vehicles that may be out of place or doors left open. Most importantly they're reminded they're NOT police officers, just extra eyes and ears on the road. If they see something suspicious, they don't intervene. They call their dispatcher or 9-1-1.
"We hope that all of our drivers would do this anyway..." explains Charlie Cunningham, East Coast Security Director for Waste Management and a 24 year veteran of the FBI, "And with a little bit of training with a little big of guidance they know what to look for and they know how to report it."
We're trying to get the drivers to be proactive" Cunningham continues. "Not to wait for something to happen but to see something and call it in. This is about being a good neighbor, this is about being an engaged employee for Waste Management, this is about being linked to the community we live in. We live in these communities, we work in these communities and that's what we're trying to get across not only to our drivers but to the police."
Waste Watch is now in effect in more than 100 communities and almost every state in the nation, all in coordination with local law enforcement who recognize the benefit of having the men (and some women) at work in the best and worst neighborhoods in town, often in the middle of the night.
Waste Management says the program is free to the participating communities and will continue to expand to more cities. The company is also offering regular refresher courses to employees to keep them focused not just on collecting garbage but possibly stopping crimes and saving lives.
Link:
http://liveshots.blogs.foxnews.com/2011/01/19/garbage-collectors-as-crime-stoppers/?test=latestnews
Worcester, MA. police officer Carlos Burgos found guilty of conspiracy to distribute marijuana.
Suspended city police officer Carlos L. Burgos was found guilty of conspiracy to distribute marijuana today in federal court, a finding that stunned his family and lawyer.
Police officials will now move to fire the officer from the job he held for over a decade before his arrest in May 2009.
“We will move quickly in making a recommendation to the city manager's office for termination of Mr. Burgos's employment,” Police Chief Gary J. Gemme said this evening.
“It is a sad day for the Police Department when an officer is found guilty of violating his oath of office and violating the public's trust,” the chief said. “It is particularly egregious when a sworn officer provides information to drug dealers that put the lives of police officers in danger.”
Link: http://www.telegram.com/article/20110119/NEWS/110119608/1116
Police officials will now move to fire the officer from the job he held for over a decade before his arrest in May 2009.
“We will move quickly in making a recommendation to the city manager's office for termination of Mr. Burgos's employment,” Police Chief Gary J. Gemme said this evening.
“It is a sad day for the Police Department when an officer is found guilty of violating his oath of office and violating the public's trust,” the chief said. “It is particularly egregious when a sworn officer provides information to drug dealers that put the lives of police officers in danger.”
Link: http://www.telegram.com/article/20110119/NEWS/110119608/1116
Wednesday, January 19, 2011
The Justice Department created an internal watchdog which it claims will punish prosecutorial misconduct.
The Justice Department created a new internal watchdog office on Tuesday to make sure federal prosecutors face swifter and more consistent punishment if investigators find that they committed misconduct.
The change follows a USA TODAY investigation that identified 201 criminal cases in which federal courts had found that Justice Department prosecutors had broken laws or ethics rules — violations that put innocent people in jail and set guilty people free. Although each of the cases was so serious that judges overturned convictions or rebuked the prosecutors for misconduct, USA TODAY found that the department often took years to investigate what went wrong, and that prosecutors faced little risk of being fired.
Attorney General Eric Holder said in a statement Tuesday that while most federal prosecutors meet their ethical obligations, the current procedures for disciplining those found to commit misconduct "consume too much time, and risk inconsistent resolution." He said the new unit "will help change that by providing consistent, fair, and timely resolution of these cases."
The unit, called the Professional Misconduct Review Unit, will be responsible for disciplining career prosecutors when the department's ethics investigators conclude that they engaged in intentional or reckless misconduct. Until now, those decisions had been made by the prosecutors' supervisors, most often U.S. attorneys. The department has faced criticism for not doing enough to investigate and punish misconduct.
Holder wrote in a memo that those procedures "have resulted in delays" because the officials in charge of discipline are also busy with other things. The new unit will have to make decisions more quickly, and will also be able to report misconduct to state bar associations. It will review findings of misconduct that occur after it is fully staffed.
This quote was taken from The Office of Professional Responsibility website:
"Some allegations of misconduct by Department attorneys do not fall within the jurisdiction of OPR and are investigated by the Office of the Inspector General (OIG). OPR's jurisdiction is limited to reviewing allegations of misconduct made against Department of Justice attorneys and law enforcement personnel that relate to the attorneys' exercise of authority to investigate, litigate, or provide legal advice."
The Office of Professional Responsibility link:
http://www.justice.gov/opr/
Link:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/judicial/2011-01-18-prosecutors_N.htm
The change follows a USA TODAY investigation that identified 201 criminal cases in which federal courts had found that Justice Department prosecutors had broken laws or ethics rules — violations that put innocent people in jail and set guilty people free. Although each of the cases was so serious that judges overturned convictions or rebuked the prosecutors for misconduct, USA TODAY found that the department often took years to investigate what went wrong, and that prosecutors faced little risk of being fired.
Attorney General Eric Holder said in a statement Tuesday that while most federal prosecutors meet their ethical obligations, the current procedures for disciplining those found to commit misconduct "consume too much time, and risk inconsistent resolution." He said the new unit "will help change that by providing consistent, fair, and timely resolution of these cases."
The unit, called the Professional Misconduct Review Unit, will be responsible for disciplining career prosecutors when the department's ethics investigators conclude that they engaged in intentional or reckless misconduct. Until now, those decisions had been made by the prosecutors' supervisors, most often U.S. attorneys. The department has faced criticism for not doing enough to investigate and punish misconduct.
Holder wrote in a memo that those procedures "have resulted in delays" because the officials in charge of discipline are also busy with other things. The new unit will have to make decisions more quickly, and will also be able to report misconduct to state bar associations. It will review findings of misconduct that occur after it is fully staffed.
This quote was taken from The Office of Professional Responsibility website:
"Some allegations of misconduct by Department attorneys do not fall within the jurisdiction of OPR and are investigated by the Office of the Inspector General (OIG). OPR's jurisdiction is limited to reviewing allegations of misconduct made against Department of Justice attorneys and law enforcement personnel that relate to the attorneys' exercise of authority to investigate, litigate, or provide legal advice."
The Office of Professional Responsibility link:
http://www.justice.gov/opr/
Link:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/judicial/2011-01-18-prosecutors_N.htm
Our government routinely gains access to Americans’ private online information through secret court orders.
Our government routinely gains access to Americans’ private online information through secret court orders. Worse yet, these proceedings are one-sided, with only the government presenting arguments. In a legal system based on openness and adversarial process, this has led to troubling results that threaten our privacy.
Many of us spend a great deal of time online and it should come as no surprise that law enforcement has followed. People type things into Google they wouldn’t tell their spouses and store years of their most intimate correspondence with Yahoo! Internet service providers complain that the volume of requests for their customers’ private online information is so huge that they now have entire departments dedicated to responding to court orders.
The public has been largely unaware of this trend, due to the secrecy of courts and the failure of corporations to put up much of a fight. When the government wants someone’s private online information, it files an application under seal asking the court for permission. The government presents its arguments, but there is no one on the other side — because the person whose information is at stake does not know it is happening and because corporations have little incentive to spend time and money objecting. Even worse, the government’s applications are sealed until someone requests they be unsealed, and since the person under surveillance typically never learns about it, these applications usually stay sealed forever. The net result is a system in which individuals’ electronic privacy is regularly put in jeopardy, with no chance to fight it, in a context vastly favorable to the government.
Link:
http://www.aclu.org/blog/national-security/what-government-wants-know-about-you?v=1
Many of us spend a great deal of time online and it should come as no surprise that law enforcement has followed. People type things into Google they wouldn’t tell their spouses and store years of their most intimate correspondence with Yahoo! Internet service providers complain that the volume of requests for their customers’ private online information is so huge that they now have entire departments dedicated to responding to court orders.
The public has been largely unaware of this trend, due to the secrecy of courts and the failure of corporations to put up much of a fight. When the government wants someone’s private online information, it files an application under seal asking the court for permission. The government presents its arguments, but there is no one on the other side — because the person whose information is at stake does not know it is happening and because corporations have little incentive to spend time and money objecting. Even worse, the government’s applications are sealed until someone requests they be unsealed, and since the person under surveillance typically never learns about it, these applications usually stay sealed forever. The net result is a system in which individuals’ electronic privacy is regularly put in jeopardy, with no chance to fight it, in a context vastly favorable to the government.
Link:
http://www.aclu.org/blog/national-security/what-government-wants-know-about-you?v=1
Washington, DC. If you refuse a bag search and leave the subway you could be followed by the FBI, Homeland Security etc.
A person who refuses a bag search at transit police checkpoints in the Washington, DC, subway system and walks away could come under further observation by Federal Bureau of Investigation or Department of Homeland Security agents once outside the rail system, said a civil rights activist group.
The group, the Montgomery County Civil Rights Coalition, posted transcripts from an early January meeting about the searches. The meeting, between Washington Metropolitan Area Transportation Authority (WMATA) Riders Advisory Council (RAC), transit officials and the public, was a forum on concerns about the searches.
Montgomery County Civil Rights Coalition vehemently opposes them on Fourth Amendment grounds.
At the meeting, according to the coalition, the chief of the subway’s police force said a person who refuses a bag search and exits a station could face closer watch by other law enforcement agencies. “Well I can tell you without any uncertainty that that person would be observed. And what that means to you is different than what it means to me, but that person would be observed,” said Metro Transit Police Chief Taborn in the transcripts posted on the Web site.
Link: http://www.gsnmagazine.com/node/22223?c=infrastructure_protection
The group, the Montgomery County Civil Rights Coalition, posted transcripts from an early January meeting about the searches. The meeting, between Washington Metropolitan Area Transportation Authority (WMATA) Riders Advisory Council (RAC), transit officials and the public, was a forum on concerns about the searches.
Montgomery County Civil Rights Coalition vehemently opposes them on Fourth Amendment grounds.
At the meeting, according to the coalition, the chief of the subway’s police force said a person who refuses a bag search and exits a station could face closer watch by other law enforcement agencies. “Well I can tell you without any uncertainty that that person would be observed. And what that means to you is different than what it means to me, but that person would be observed,” said Metro Transit Police Chief Taborn in the transcripts posted on the Web site.
Link: http://www.gsnmagazine.com/node/22223?c=infrastructure_protection
Tuesday, January 18, 2011
Looking For Rights At Harvard by Kaveh L. Afrasiabi Ph.D
Looking For Rights At Harvard is a fantastic book which shows people the behind the scenes battle of Kaveh L. Afrasiabi vs. Harvard.
Link:
http://www.amazon.com/dp/1439268835/ref=asc_df_14392688351375664?creative=395261&creativeASIN=1439268835&linkCode=asn&tag=section_book-20
Link:
http://www.amazon.com/dp/1439268835/ref=asc_df_14392688351375664?creative=395261&creativeASIN=1439268835&linkCode=asn&tag=section_book-20
FBI say's crime is down arcoss the country, homicides are down 40% and the list goes on!
According to FBI statistics, there is NOT an "increasing amount of criminal activity directed against children of all ages." There is, in fact, a stunning DECREASE of criminal activity against children - and adults. Look at these numbers:
U.S. homicides: down 40 percent 1992-2005.
Juvenile homicides: down 36 percent 1993-2005 (kids younger than 14).
Juvenile homicides: down 60 percent 1993-2005 (ages 14-17).
Forcible rapes: down 28 percent 1992-2006.
Does that look like a crime wave? It's the opposite - a crime plunge.
A massive federal study released last year found all child abuse down by 26 percent from 1993-2006 and child sex abuse down even more - 38 percent! As David Finkelhor, head of the Crimes Against Children Research Center, told The Associated Press, "it's the first time since we started collecting data about these things that we've seen substantial declines over a long period, and that's tremendously encouraging."It sure is! What it ISN'T is tremendously well-known. No, most people are still convinced that "times have changed" - for the worse. In fact, when a Gallup Poll asked Americans in 2009 whether crime was going up or down in this country, 74 percent said "up" - even though from 2008 to 2009, the FBI found a 10 percent drop in the murder rate. That is double-digit good news that did not get through to the vast majority of us.
Link: http://www.pasadenastarnews.com/opinions/ci_17037808
U.S. homicides: down 40 percent 1992-2005.
Juvenile homicides: down 36 percent 1993-2005 (kids younger than 14).
Juvenile homicides: down 60 percent 1993-2005 (ages 14-17).
Forcible rapes: down 28 percent 1992-2006.
Does that look like a crime wave? It's the opposite - a crime plunge.
A massive federal study released last year found all child abuse down by 26 percent from 1993-2006 and child sex abuse down even more - 38 percent! As David Finkelhor, head of the Crimes Against Children Research Center, told The Associated Press, "it's the first time since we started collecting data about these things that we've seen substantial declines over a long period, and that's tremendously encouraging."It sure is! What it ISN'T is tremendously well-known. No, most people are still convinced that "times have changed" - for the worse. In fact, when a Gallup Poll asked Americans in 2009 whether crime was going up or down in this country, 74 percent said "up" - even though from 2008 to 2009, the FBI found a 10 percent drop in the murder rate. That is double-digit good news that did not get through to the vast majority of us.
Link: http://www.pasadenastarnews.com/opinions/ci_17037808
Sunday, January 16, 2011
Study reveals top ten violence-inducing prescription drugs.
When people consider the connections between drugs and violence, what typically comes to mind are illegal drugs like crack cocaine. However, certain medications most notably, some antidepressants like Prozac have also been linked to increase risk for violent, even homicidal behavior
The Institute for Safe Medication Practices (ISMP) recently published a study in the journal PLoS One highlighting the worst prescription drug offenders that cause patients to become violent. Among the top-ten most dangerous are the antidepressants Pristiq (desvenlafaxine), Paxil (paroxetine) and Prozac (fluoxetine).
Concerns about the extreme negative side effects of many popular antidepressant and antipsychotic drugs have been on the rise, as these drugs not only cause severe health problems to users, but also pose a significant threat to society. The ISMP report indicates that, according to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) Adverse Event Reporting System, many popular drugs are linked even to homicides.
Most of the drugs in the top ten most dangerous are antidepressants, but also included are an insomnia medication, an attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) drug, a malaria drug and an anti-smoking medication.
Links:
Prescription Drugs Associated with Reports of Violence Towards Others:
http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0015337
http://healthland.time.com/2011/01/07/top-ten-legal-drugs-linked-to-violence/
The Institute for Safe Medication Practices (ISMP) recently published a study in the journal PLoS One highlighting the worst prescription drug offenders that cause patients to become violent. Among the top-ten most dangerous are the antidepressants Pristiq (desvenlafaxine), Paxil (paroxetine) and Prozac (fluoxetine).
Concerns about the extreme negative side effects of many popular antidepressant and antipsychotic drugs have been on the rise, as these drugs not only cause severe health problems to users, but also pose a significant threat to society. The ISMP report indicates that, according to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) Adverse Event Reporting System, many popular drugs are linked even to homicides.
Most of the drugs in the top ten most dangerous are antidepressants, but also included are an insomnia medication, an attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) drug, a malaria drug and an anti-smoking medication.
Links:
Prescription Drugs Associated with Reports of Violence Towards Others:
http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0015337
http://healthland.time.com/2011/01/07/top-ten-legal-drugs-linked-to-violence/
Saturday, January 15, 2011
Why are FOIA requests in MA being stonewalled?
Last March, Boston Globe business reporter Todd Wallack asked each of Gov. Deval Patrick's eight executive agencies for copies of any "separation, severance, transition, or settlement agreements" made since January 1, 2005 between the agencies and their employees that include compensation, benefits, or other payments worth more than $10,000, which he subsequently narrowed to $50,000 or more. According to Wallack, each of the eight agencies assembled the documents, but instead of handing them over to him, forwarded them on to the governor's office.
About three months after he filed his eight requests, the records were turned over to Wallack by the governor's office, but with the names and other identifying information regarding the employees redacted based on a variety of claimed exemptions. "While we understand that employee names, positions, and salaries are publicly available, the types of agreements you have requested are far more personally sensitive," wrote Mark Reilly, the governor’s attorney, in a letter to Wallack contained in a file at the Secretary of State’s office. “The agreements relate to personnel disputes often involving employee discipline including termination.”
In an appeal filed with Secretary of State William Galvin’s office, Wallack seeks unredacted versions of the documents, noting the settlements involved millions of taxpayer dollars. In one case, according to Wallack, an employee was awarded more than $300,000. "I can’t imagine the courts intended to give the state a loophole to hide deals involving millions of dollars in taxpayer funds," Wallack writes in his appeal.
Mike Beaudet, an investigative reporter for Channel 25, the local Fox outlet, asked the Massachusetts Film Office in August 2009 for records related to in- and out-of state travel by its employees and board members as well as their non-travel expenses, all since July 1, 2008. The film office denied Beaudet's request, arguing that it is not a government entity and is thus not subject to the Massachusetts Public Records Law. Beaudet appealed.
Court decisions in Massachusetts have established a five-factor test that can be used for determining whether an organization is actually a government entity and thus covered by the Public Records Law: the means by which the entity was created, whether the entity performs an essentially governmental function, whether the entity receives or expends the public funds, the involvement of private interests, and the extent of control and supervision exercised by governmental officials, agencies or authorities. These factors are cumulative, with no one factor being weighed more than another.
After applying this five-factor test, Cote ruled last February that the Massachusetts Film Office "is not a public instrumentality for the purposes of the Public Records Law," and is thus not covered by the Public Records Law. He noted that there is no statute, regulation, or executive order that establishes the film office, and so it is not a public entity.
Link:
http://www.commonwealthmagazine.org/News-and-Features/Online-exclusives/2011/Winter/Sifting-through-records-appeals.aspx
About three months after he filed his eight requests, the records were turned over to Wallack by the governor's office, but with the names and other identifying information regarding the employees redacted based on a variety of claimed exemptions. "While we understand that employee names, positions, and salaries are publicly available, the types of agreements you have requested are far more personally sensitive," wrote Mark Reilly, the governor’s attorney, in a letter to Wallack contained in a file at the Secretary of State’s office. “The agreements relate to personnel disputes often involving employee discipline including termination.”
In an appeal filed with Secretary of State William Galvin’s office, Wallack seeks unredacted versions of the documents, noting the settlements involved millions of taxpayer dollars. In one case, according to Wallack, an employee was awarded more than $300,000. "I can’t imagine the courts intended to give the state a loophole to hide deals involving millions of dollars in taxpayer funds," Wallack writes in his appeal.
Mike Beaudet, an investigative reporter for Channel 25, the local Fox outlet, asked the Massachusetts Film Office in August 2009 for records related to in- and out-of state travel by its employees and board members as well as their non-travel expenses, all since July 1, 2008. The film office denied Beaudet's request, arguing that it is not a government entity and is thus not subject to the Massachusetts Public Records Law. Beaudet appealed.
Court decisions in Massachusetts have established a five-factor test that can be used for determining whether an organization is actually a government entity and thus covered by the Public Records Law: the means by which the entity was created, whether the entity performs an essentially governmental function, whether the entity receives or expends the public funds, the involvement of private interests, and the extent of control and supervision exercised by governmental officials, agencies or authorities. These factors are cumulative, with no one factor being weighed more than another.
After applying this five-factor test, Cote ruled last February that the Massachusetts Film Office "is not a public instrumentality for the purposes of the Public Records Law," and is thus not covered by the Public Records Law. He noted that there is no statute, regulation, or executive order that establishes the film office, and so it is not a public entity.
Link:
http://www.commonwealthmagazine.org/News-and-Features/Online-exclusives/2011/Winter/Sifting-through-records-appeals.aspx
Secrets of a former credit card thief.
DeFelippi, 29, mostly made fake credit cards with real credit card information he bought online. "I would make fake IDs to go with them, and then I'd buy laptops or other expensive items in the store and sell them on eBay," he says. DeFelippi was also involved in several other kinds of scams, including phishing schemes that exploited AOL and PayPal customers. Committing credit card fraud is still "ridiculously easy to do," he says. "Anyone with a computer and $100 could start making money tomorrow."
CreditCards.com: What's your No. 1 tip on how consumers can protect themselves?
DeFilippi: You've probably heard this before, but the most important thing really is to watch your accounts. And I don't mean just checking your statement once a month. If you're only checking your statement once a month, someone can start using your card at the beginning of the billing cycle, and they can do a lot of damage before you catch it. You're talking thousands of dollars, and it will be a lot harder to catch them and dispute it. I use Mint.com, which is a free aggregation service that allows you to put all your accounts on there and monitor everything at once. I check that every day. It's also a good idea to check your credit report at least twice a year to make sure no one has stolen your identity.
Link:
http://finance.yahoo.com/banking-budgeting/article/111759/secrets-of-a-former-credit-card-thief?mod=bb-creditcards
CreditCards.com: What's your No. 1 tip on how consumers can protect themselves?
DeFilippi: You've probably heard this before, but the most important thing really is to watch your accounts. And I don't mean just checking your statement once a month. If you're only checking your statement once a month, someone can start using your card at the beginning of the billing cycle, and they can do a lot of damage before you catch it. You're talking thousands of dollars, and it will be a lot harder to catch them and dispute it. I use Mint.com, which is a free aggregation service that allows you to put all your accounts on there and monitor everything at once. I check that every day. It's also a good idea to check your credit report at least twice a year to make sure no one has stolen your identity.
Link:
http://finance.yahoo.com/banking-budgeting/article/111759/secrets-of-a-former-credit-card-thief?mod=bb-creditcards
Friday, January 14, 2011
Private investigators beware, Homeland Security releases a list of what could be considered suspicious activity.
The following should cause a heightened sense of suspicion:
•Suspicious or unusual interest
•Surveillance (suspicious in nature)
•Inappropriate photographs or videos
•Note-taking
•Drawing of diagrams
•Annotating maps
•Using binoculars or night vision devices
Unusual or suspicious activity does not necessarily mean that terrorist activity is happening, but be aware of the following suspicious behaviors:
•Individuals acting furtively and suspiciously
•Individuals avoiding eye contact
•Individuals departing quickly when seen or approached
•Individuals in places they don’t belong
•A strong odor coming from a building or vehicle
•An overloaded vehicle
•Fluid leaking from a vehicle, other than the engine or gas tank
•Over dressed for the type of weather.
Link:
http://www.ok.gov/reddirtready/REPORT_ACTIVITY/Examples/index.html
•Suspicious or unusual interest
•Surveillance (suspicious in nature)
•Inappropriate photographs or videos
•Note-taking
•Drawing of diagrams
•Annotating maps
•Using binoculars or night vision devices
Unusual or suspicious activity does not necessarily mean that terrorist activity is happening, but be aware of the following suspicious behaviors:
•Individuals acting furtively and suspiciously
•Individuals avoiding eye contact
•Individuals departing quickly when seen or approached
•Individuals in places they don’t belong
•A strong odor coming from a building or vehicle
•An overloaded vehicle
•Fluid leaking from a vehicle, other than the engine or gas tank
•Over dressed for the type of weather.
Link:
http://www.ok.gov/reddirtready/REPORT_ACTIVITY/Examples/index.html
National Oil Spill Commission Report claims the Deepwater Horizon oil spill could have been prevented.
The National Oil Spill Commission on Tuesday released its final report on the Deepwater Horizon oil spill, and found that the spill could have been prevented. The 398-page report concludes that "the immediate causes of the Macondo well blowout can be traced to a series of identifiable mistakes made by BP, Halliburton, and Transocean that reveal such systematic failures in risk management that they place in doubt the safety culture of the entire industry."
It called for the oil industry to develop and enforce its own world-class safety standards, to adopt a more active approach to reducing risks, such as safety measures used in the North Sea, and to pay for tougher federal regulation through permit and licensing fees.
"Because regulatory oversight alone will not be sufficient to ensure adequate safety, the oil and gas industry will need to take its own, unilateral steps to increase dramatically safety through the industry, including self-policing mechanisms that supplement governmental enforcement," the report states.
Link:
https://s3.amazonaws.com/pdf_final/DEEPWATER_ReporttothePresident_FINAL.pdf
It called for the oil industry to develop and enforce its own world-class safety standards, to adopt a more active approach to reducing risks, such as safety measures used in the North Sea, and to pay for tougher federal regulation through permit and licensing fees.
"Because regulatory oversight alone will not be sufficient to ensure adequate safety, the oil and gas industry will need to take its own, unilateral steps to increase dramatically safety through the industry, including self-policing mechanisms that supplement governmental enforcement," the report states.
Link:
https://s3.amazonaws.com/pdf_final/DEEPWATER_ReporttothePresident_FINAL.pdf
Thursday, January 13, 2011
Seattle, WA.- The Aug. 30th. fatal shooting of John T. Williams leaves many unanswered questions.
Telling his side of the Aug. 30 fatal shooting of John T. Williams for the first time publicly, Seattle police officer Ian Birk described the Native American woodcarver as an angry-looking man, with his jaw clenched, showing signs Birk thought might have indicated an oncoming attack based on his department training.
On the stand Tuesday morning, Det. Jeffrey Mudd acknowledged to Ford that that none of the witnesses to the Seattle shooting saw the man as a threat. Mudd said later in the inquest that none of the witnesses reported seeing Williams' knife.
Asked whether Birk was trained to shoot someone within four seconds of making contact, Mudd said officers are trained to address people who are a threat.
Last month, King County District Court Judge Arthur Chapman, who is leading the inquest, ordered that the video from Birk's patrol car be released. The footage showed it was roughly 16 seconds from the time Birk turned on his lights to the point when Williams was shot multiple times, after Birk yelled multiple times to get Williams' attention. Police initially said the confrontation lasted about a minute.
The city's firearms review board concluded its hearing Oct. 4 and presented preliminary findings to Police Chief John Diaz that week. The board found the shooting not justified.
Link: http://www.seattlepi.com/local/433244_inquest12.html
On the stand Tuesday morning, Det. Jeffrey Mudd acknowledged to Ford that that none of the witnesses to the Seattle shooting saw the man as a threat. Mudd said later in the inquest that none of the witnesses reported seeing Williams' knife.
Asked whether Birk was trained to shoot someone within four seconds of making contact, Mudd said officers are trained to address people who are a threat.
Last month, King County District Court Judge Arthur Chapman, who is leading the inquest, ordered that the video from Birk's patrol car be released. The footage showed it was roughly 16 seconds from the time Birk turned on his lights to the point when Williams was shot multiple times, after Birk yelled multiple times to get Williams' attention. Police initially said the confrontation lasted about a minute.
The city's firearms review board concluded its hearing Oct. 4 and presented preliminary findings to Police Chief John Diaz that week. The board found the shooting not justified.
Link: http://www.seattlepi.com/local/433244_inquest12.html
Brooklyn College, NY- A hidden camera accusation landed a student an involuntary two-week stay at a psychiatric hospital.
Your housing situation can be one of the most stressful aspects of the whole college experience. Especially if your roommates are writing nasty things about you on the Internet and your landlord has planted a hidden camera in your bedroom. Such was the situation for Chinemerem Eze, a Nigerian student at Brooklyn College, in December 2008, according to a lawsuit she’s filed in New York Supreme Court.
When a college student complains about secret surveillance — as Tyler Clementi did last year — I’ve said before that they should be offered other housing arrangements. Eze did get new digs, but they weren’t very attractive ones. When she went to the Brooklyn College Campus Security and Safety Office to complain about her suspicions, they offered her an involuntary two-week stay at a psychiatric hospital.
Eze says that when she talked to security officers about being defamed on the Internet and secretly filmed by her landlord in her off-campus apartment, they brought in a psychologist. After asking her a few questions, the psychologist called an ambulance and had her committed to Kings County Psychiatric Hospital. Her One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest’s experience lasted two weeks.
When she flew the nest, she discovered that there was a hidden camera in her apartment. (On the defamation front, I see no nasty results in her Google search results.) She missed her final exams and was not able to complete them, and wound up losing a scholarship she’d received from the school, according to her attorney.
Brooklyn College had no comment on the suit. It will be defended by the New York Attorney General’s office since the college is governed by the state. The AG’s office also had no comment.
Link:
http://blogs.forbes.com/kashmirhill/2011/01/12/brooklyn-college-student-committed-to-mental-institution-after-hidden-camera-complaint/
When a college student complains about secret surveillance — as Tyler Clementi did last year — I’ve said before that they should be offered other housing arrangements. Eze did get new digs, but they weren’t very attractive ones. When she went to the Brooklyn College Campus Security and Safety Office to complain about her suspicions, they offered her an involuntary two-week stay at a psychiatric hospital.
Eze says that when she talked to security officers about being defamed on the Internet and secretly filmed by her landlord in her off-campus apartment, they brought in a psychologist. After asking her a few questions, the psychologist called an ambulance and had her committed to Kings County Psychiatric Hospital. Her One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest’s experience lasted two weeks.
When she flew the nest, she discovered that there was a hidden camera in her apartment. (On the defamation front, I see no nasty results in her Google search results.) She missed her final exams and was not able to complete them, and wound up losing a scholarship she’d received from the school, according to her attorney.
Brooklyn College had no comment on the suit. It will be defended by the New York Attorney General’s office since the college is governed by the state. The AG’s office also had no comment.
Link:
http://blogs.forbes.com/kashmirhill/2011/01/12/brooklyn-college-student-committed-to-mental-institution-after-hidden-camera-complaint/
Wednesday, January 12, 2011
Police Pdf's. of manuals, General Orders and Protocols of the Richmond, VA. police department offers insight into how police departments operate.
Here are links to PDFs of various Manuals, General Orders, and Protocols of the Richmond Police Department. You can check them out for a better understanding of what the police are and are not supposed to be doing. This can help with fully understanding your rights, as well as when engaged in activities such as copwatching. It is important for citizens to know when cops are breaking their own rules so we can hold them accountable.
Attorneys for the recipient of police documents obtained through the Virginia Freedom of Information Act report that the city of Richmond, Va., and its police chief intend to drop their court case seeking the return of the produced documents.
The ACLU of Virginia's website reports that attorneys for the police no longer intend to pursue the case. However, Telfair could not be reached to confirm this, and a hearing on the city and police chief's emergency motion remains on the court calendar for Jan. 24.
Links: http://wingnutrva.org/richmond-police-department-documents/
Lawsuit dropped:
http://www.rcfp.org/newsitems/index.php?i=11674
Attorneys for the recipient of police documents obtained through the Virginia Freedom of Information Act report that the city of Richmond, Va., and its police chief intend to drop their court case seeking the return of the produced documents.
The ACLU of Virginia's website reports that attorneys for the police no longer intend to pursue the case. However, Telfair could not be reached to confirm this, and a hearing on the city and police chief's emergency motion remains on the court calendar for Jan. 24.
Links: http://wingnutrva.org/richmond-police-department-documents/
Lawsuit dropped:
http://www.rcfp.org/newsitems/index.php?i=11674
Steroid use amongst police is a national problem.
Lawmakers in New Jersey are considering measures that would crack down on steroid use by police and firefighters, some of whom abuse the drugs in their efforts to keep physically fit, experts say.
The state Assembly bills introduced on Monday, believed to be the first of their kind in the nation, would require health evaluations before law enforcement could be prescribed anabolic steroids and growth hormones, and would add such drugs to a list of substances for which law enforcement employees are randomly tested.
"This is focused on uniformed public employees, but this is really a nationwide problem," said Assemblyman John McKeon, the Deputy Speaker who introduced the bills.
"A lot of these anti-aging clinics and charlatans are selling these products, and we need to examine the long-term health problems."
Law enforcement steroid use is a problem around the country and, given that steroid use can cause aggression, can invite problems for police, said Larry Gaines, chairman of the Department of Criminal Justice at California State University in San Bernadino, California.
"Aggression is not very common but nonetheless it's a possible problem," Gaines said. "If it does occur, you could see lawsuits against police departments regarding citizens injured from steroid rage."
Competitiveness is a major reason why police and firefighters might use steroids, he said.
"A number of departments focus very highly on physical fitness and ability," Gaines said.
"Secondly, a lot of these officers see substantial dangers on the job so they feel they should be in some kind of top level of physical fitness."
Link: http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20110110/us_nm/us_newjersey_steroids
The state Assembly bills introduced on Monday, believed to be the first of their kind in the nation, would require health evaluations before law enforcement could be prescribed anabolic steroids and growth hormones, and would add such drugs to a list of substances for which law enforcement employees are randomly tested.
"This is focused on uniformed public employees, but this is really a nationwide problem," said Assemblyman John McKeon, the Deputy Speaker who introduced the bills.
"A lot of these anti-aging clinics and charlatans are selling these products, and we need to examine the long-term health problems."
Law enforcement steroid use is a problem around the country and, given that steroid use can cause aggression, can invite problems for police, said Larry Gaines, chairman of the Department of Criminal Justice at California State University in San Bernadino, California.
"Aggression is not very common but nonetheless it's a possible problem," Gaines said. "If it does occur, you could see lawsuits against police departments regarding citizens injured from steroid rage."
Competitiveness is a major reason why police and firefighters might use steroids, he said.
"A number of departments focus very highly on physical fitness and ability," Gaines said.
"Secondly, a lot of these officers see substantial dangers on the job so they feel they should be in some kind of top level of physical fitness."
Link: http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20110110/us_nm/us_newjersey_steroids
Tuesday, January 11, 2011
San Francisco, CA. Another crime lab accused of producing misleading results.
A highly regarded prosecutor and DNA expert who was employed for three years at the San Francisco District Attorney's office authored a critique of work at the San Francisco Police Department crime lab earlier this year expressing significant misgivings about the performance of the lab's DNA section supervisor.
The critique, obtained by SF Weekly in response to multiple public-records requests filed with the DA's office, shows that Rockne Harmon -- a veteran of the O.J. Simpson case whom Harris has called "the guru of DNA evidence in the state" -- believed DNA lab unit supervisor Cherisse Boland had written a "misleading" forensic report on evidence found at the scene of a 2007 murder in Visitacion Valley.
The critique also challenges Boland's decision not to search for a match for the majority of the DNA found at the crime scene. The analyst chose instead to focus on trace amounts of DNA that she said linked two suspects arrested by police to the murder.
The release of Harmon's report could further call into question work performed at the crime lab's DNA unit, which is already under attack because of the recent disclosure of an unrelated DNA sample switch in a 2008 homicide case. Defense lawyers say the lab sought to cover up that mistake, and that the DA's office has been slow to share information about problems with DNA evidence with defendants, as it is constitutionally obligated to do.
Harmon has said he is "concerned" that his critique was not shared with defense attorneys through a mass disclosure -- as he suggested to the DA's office -- since it could potentially be used as exculpatory evidence in future cases that involve Boland. Defense lawyers could theoretically use the document to cast doubt on the quality of Boland's work and testimony, particularly in light of Harmon's stature within the criminal justice community.
Link:
http://blogs.sfweekly.com/thesnitch/2010/12/kamala_harris_dna_crime_lab.php
The critique, obtained by SF Weekly in response to multiple public-records requests filed with the DA's office, shows that Rockne Harmon -- a veteran of the O.J. Simpson case whom Harris has called "the guru of DNA evidence in the state" -- believed DNA lab unit supervisor Cherisse Boland had written a "misleading" forensic report on evidence found at the scene of a 2007 murder in Visitacion Valley.
The critique also challenges Boland's decision not to search for a match for the majority of the DNA found at the crime scene. The analyst chose instead to focus on trace amounts of DNA that she said linked two suspects arrested by police to the murder.
The release of Harmon's report could further call into question work performed at the crime lab's DNA unit, which is already under attack because of the recent disclosure of an unrelated DNA sample switch in a 2008 homicide case. Defense lawyers say the lab sought to cover up that mistake, and that the DA's office has been slow to share information about problems with DNA evidence with defendants, as it is constitutionally obligated to do.
Harmon has said he is "concerned" that his critique was not shared with defense attorneys through a mass disclosure -- as he suggested to the DA's office -- since it could potentially be used as exculpatory evidence in future cases that involve Boland. Defense lawyers could theoretically use the document to cast doubt on the quality of Boland's work and testimony, particularly in light of Harmon's stature within the criminal justice community.
Link:
http://blogs.sfweekly.com/thesnitch/2010/12/kamala_harris_dna_crime_lab.php
Worcester, MA. A woman filed a lawsuit against a police officer claiming she was falsley arrested and beaten.
A Chicago woman has filed a civil rights suit in U.S. District Court alleging that a city police officer beat and arrested her without justification.
Wakeelah A. Cocroft said that the action of Patrolman Jeremy Smith on Dec. 29, 2008, was in retaliation for her objecting to the way he addressed her and her sister and for asserting her rights. The American Civil Liberties Union of Massachusetts announced the suit, which was filed Dec. 28 by Beverly B. Chorbajian and Marina R. Matuzek, two Worcester ACLU cooperating lawyers.
Ms. Cocroft was a passenger in the car of her sister, Clytheia Mwangi, when she pulled the 2006 Saturn Ion into the Mobil station at Park Avenue and Institute Road. The suit alleges that Patrolman Smith stopped his cruiser behind the Saturn at the gas pumps “and began screaming at her” that she had been speeding.
The officer pulled Ms. Cocroft away from the car and threw her “face-first onto the pavement, causing her face to scrape against the cement.” He yanked her arms behind her back and pushed his knee into her back, remaining there for several minutes, with Ms. Cocroft telling him she could not breathe.
Ms. Mwangi called 911 on her cell phone but was ordered by the officer to end the call and place the phone on the roof of her car so that she could not seek assistance. When another Worcester officer arrived, Patrolman Smith told him he arrested Ms. Cocroft “when she started ‘yapping about her rights.’”
Link:http://www.telegram.com/article/20110110/NEWS/110119958/1116
Wakeelah A. Cocroft said that the action of Patrolman Jeremy Smith on Dec. 29, 2008, was in retaliation for her objecting to the way he addressed her and her sister and for asserting her rights. The American Civil Liberties Union of Massachusetts announced the suit, which was filed Dec. 28 by Beverly B. Chorbajian and Marina R. Matuzek, two Worcester ACLU cooperating lawyers.
Ms. Cocroft was a passenger in the car of her sister, Clytheia Mwangi, when she pulled the 2006 Saturn Ion into the Mobil station at Park Avenue and Institute Road. The suit alleges that Patrolman Smith stopped his cruiser behind the Saturn at the gas pumps “and began screaming at her” that she had been speeding.
The officer pulled Ms. Cocroft away from the car and threw her “face-first onto the pavement, causing her face to scrape against the cement.” He yanked her arms behind her back and pushed his knee into her back, remaining there for several minutes, with Ms. Cocroft telling him she could not breathe.
Ms. Mwangi called 911 on her cell phone but was ordered by the officer to end the call and place the phone on the roof of her car so that she could not seek assistance. When another Worcester officer arrived, Patrolman Smith told him he arrested Ms. Cocroft “when she started ‘yapping about her rights.’”
Link:http://www.telegram.com/article/20110110/NEWS/110119958/1116
Monday, January 10, 2011
Pittsburgh, PA. Drugs burned before trials, jeapordizes DA's cases.
Twice last week Pittsburgh narcotics detectives went to the bureau's property room to retrieve drug evidence in pending cases, one a major heroin bust.
Twice they left empty handed because the evidence had been prematurely destroyed due to oversights by police and the Allegheny County district attorney's office.
The mistakes have led local prosecutors to back off of one of the cases and could present challenges for federal prosecutors, who are pursuing the other.
The snafus, the first of their kind in recent memory, also have exposed communication gaps that officials have pledged to fix.
Detectives last week learned that about 14,000 stamp bags of heroin worth more than $107,000 on the street had been burned after prosecutors filed notice not to prosecute the case at the state level. Prosecutors were removing themselves from the case because it had been taken over by the U.S. attorney's office.
The property room periodically reviews cases to determine whether evidence can be destroyed.
The heroin case appeared to be closed to Sgt. Lynn DeVault, who supervises the property room, and to the district attorney's office, which reviewed and authorized her request that the evidence be destroyed.
Although state charges were not being pursued, the defendant, Tiona Jones, 31, of Beechview, was federally indicted on charges that included drug possession with intent to deliver and firearms violations.
Up until these errors came to light, there was no mechanism in place to ensure that evidence in cases not prosecuted at the state level is preserved if a case moves to federal court.
Prosecutors don't necessarily need drug evidence to prevail in a drug case, legal experts say, but problems can arise for them without it. They must be able to explain how the evidence was handled and the circumstances of its destruction, and generally must rely on documentation or testimony from the county's crime lab and technicians.
"It doesn't shoot the case dead, but it introduces a series of problems for the prosecutors and opportunities for the defense," said University of Pittsburgh law professor David Harris.
Link: http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/10356/1112489-53.stm
Twice they left empty handed because the evidence had been prematurely destroyed due to oversights by police and the Allegheny County district attorney's office.
The mistakes have led local prosecutors to back off of one of the cases and could present challenges for federal prosecutors, who are pursuing the other.
The snafus, the first of their kind in recent memory, also have exposed communication gaps that officials have pledged to fix.
Detectives last week learned that about 14,000 stamp bags of heroin worth more than $107,000 on the street had been burned after prosecutors filed notice not to prosecute the case at the state level. Prosecutors were removing themselves from the case because it had been taken over by the U.S. attorney's office.
The property room periodically reviews cases to determine whether evidence can be destroyed.
The heroin case appeared to be closed to Sgt. Lynn DeVault, who supervises the property room, and to the district attorney's office, which reviewed and authorized her request that the evidence be destroyed.
Although state charges were not being pursued, the defendant, Tiona Jones, 31, of Beechview, was federally indicted on charges that included drug possession with intent to deliver and firearms violations.
Up until these errors came to light, there was no mechanism in place to ensure that evidence in cases not prosecuted at the state level is preserved if a case moves to federal court.
Prosecutors don't necessarily need drug evidence to prevail in a drug case, legal experts say, but problems can arise for them without it. They must be able to explain how the evidence was handled and the circumstances of its destruction, and generally must rely on documentation or testimony from the county's crime lab and technicians.
"It doesn't shoot the case dead, but it introduces a series of problems for the prosecutors and opportunities for the defense," said University of Pittsburgh law professor David Harris.
Link: http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/10356/1112489-53.stm
The Legal Information Institute
The co-founder of the world’s first legal information website will be heading a project to improve digital access to federal legislative information.
Thomas Bruce, an ABA Journal Legal Rebel, helped Cornell Law School put legal information online before the web even existed. He is director of the school’s Legal Information Institute, a nonprofit group dedicated to making the law available online, without charge. Now he will work with the Library of Congress to better organize and present materials such as congressional bills, presidential documents, committee reports, public laws, and the U.S. Code, according to a press release.
The project will redesign “legislative-metadata models” for the Library of Congress, the Legal Information Institute says on its website. The aim is to improve the material that can be retrieved, linked and referenced by the free THOMAS search system used by the public as well as by Congress’ own internal searching system. “This sounds like really geeky stuff (and it is), but the effects for government and for citizens should be pretty big,” the Legal Information Institute says on its LII Announce blog.
“The discovery we’ve made is that there is an enormous audience and appetite for legal information that goes well beyond lawyers and the population lawyers think of,” says Bruce, 55, who isn’t a lawyer, but rather describes himself as a computer guy who wandered into a law school one day and never left.
“Legal research is like insurance,” Bruce says. “People buy insurance only up to the value of the goods they are insuring. My thought is the less expensive it is to do good, competent legal research, the lower the cost to avoid risk.” And in a field dominated by costly legal research behemoths, Bruce hopes to provide “insurance” not only to lawyers but also to everyday business people.
Link: http://www.law.cornell.edu/
Thomas Bruce, an ABA Journal Legal Rebel, helped Cornell Law School put legal information online before the web even existed. He is director of the school’s Legal Information Institute, a nonprofit group dedicated to making the law available online, without charge. Now he will work with the Library of Congress to better organize and present materials such as congressional bills, presidential documents, committee reports, public laws, and the U.S. Code, according to a press release.
The project will redesign “legislative-metadata models” for the Library of Congress, the Legal Information Institute says on its website. The aim is to improve the material that can be retrieved, linked and referenced by the free THOMAS search system used by the public as well as by Congress’ own internal searching system. “This sounds like really geeky stuff (and it is), but the effects for government and for citizens should be pretty big,” the Legal Information Institute says on its LII Announce blog.
“The discovery we’ve made is that there is an enormous audience and appetite for legal information that goes well beyond lawyers and the population lawyers think of,” says Bruce, 55, who isn’t a lawyer, but rather describes himself as a computer guy who wandered into a law school one day and never left.
“Legal research is like insurance,” Bruce says. “People buy insurance only up to the value of the goods they are insuring. My thought is the less expensive it is to do good, competent legal research, the lower the cost to avoid risk.” And in a field dominated by costly legal research behemoths, Bruce hopes to provide “insurance” not only to lawyers but also to everyday business people.
Link: http://www.law.cornell.edu/
8 Springfield, MA. officers named in police brutality lawsuit.
A Westfield man is suing eight police officers in federal court, alleging brutality and arguing in his lawsuit that police roughed him up and broke his ankle during a 2008 arrest in the city’s club quarter.
Guy Larkins, 37, was arrested just before 2:30 a.m. on Nov. 16, 2008, as the bars let out on Worthington Street, according to a police report. He was charged with disorderly conduct, resisting arrest and assault and battery on a police officer following a dispute with a woman in a bar, police said.
Larkins’ lawsuit states that once he had surrendered to police, “he was violently taken to the ground.”
“One officer stepped on his right foot, while another officer tackled him from behind, intentionally breaking his ankle,” states the complaint, filed Jan. 3 in U.S. District Court.
It further argues police made him hop through a metal detector and stand on his broken ankle while yelling at him: “We’re not doctors, we can’t do nothing for you!” and “Jesus Christ, what a baby!”
Larkins was arrested by Toledo and Ward, and his pleas for medical help were generally ignored by the others, the lawsuit said. Randolph flatly refused him medical attention, it says, and Aguirre taunted him during the booking process.
Link:
http://www.masslive.com/news/index.ssf/2011/01/westfield_police_brutality_law.html
Guy Larkins, 37, was arrested just before 2:30 a.m. on Nov. 16, 2008, as the bars let out on Worthington Street, according to a police report. He was charged with disorderly conduct, resisting arrest and assault and battery on a police officer following a dispute with a woman in a bar, police said.
Larkins’ lawsuit states that once he had surrendered to police, “he was violently taken to the ground.”
“One officer stepped on his right foot, while another officer tackled him from behind, intentionally breaking his ankle,” states the complaint, filed Jan. 3 in U.S. District Court.
It further argues police made him hop through a metal detector and stand on his broken ankle while yelling at him: “We’re not doctors, we can’t do nothing for you!” and “Jesus Christ, what a baby!”
Larkins was arrested by Toledo and Ward, and his pleas for medical help were generally ignored by the others, the lawsuit said. Randolph flatly refused him medical attention, it says, and Aguirre taunted him during the booking process.
Link:
http://www.masslive.com/news/index.ssf/2011/01/westfield_police_brutality_law.html
Thursday, January 6, 2011
Cornelius Dupree Jr.'s exoneration is a classic case of eyewitness misidentification.
Texas leads the nation in identifying wrongly convicted prisoners through DNA testing. Since 2000, the state has exonerated 42 inmates. Two others, including Cornelius Dupree Jr., have been released pending formal exoneration by the state. Bogus eyewitness identifications played a role in all but six of the convictions.
Nine Harris County inmates, convicted at least in part through eyewitness identifications, have been cleared through DNA testing.
"What this indicates to me," Scheck said, "is that there are a lot more prisoners that just didn't commit the crime. We just can't find them."
Picked in photo lineup:
Dupree was convicted of robbing a 26-year-old Dallas woman in November 1979. Authorities reported two men forced their way into the woman's car after she and her boyfriend stopped at a Dallas liquor store to buy cigarettes and use a pay phone. The men forced the woman's companion from the car, then drove her to a park where they raped her at gunpoint.
The woman later picked Dupree's picture from a photo lineup.
The Houston man also was charged, but not tried, for rape. Dupree's alleged accomplice, Anthony Massingill, also was cleared by DNA testing, but he remains imprisoned pending DNA testing in another robbery-rape.
James Bethke, director of the Timothy Cole Advisory Panel on Wrongful Convictions, called mistaken eyewitness identification a "leading contributor" to wrongful convictions.
The bipartisan state committee is named for a Lubbock man who died in prison after being wrongly convicted of rape based, in part, on faulty eyewitness identification.
In an August report, the committee called on the state to require Sam Houston State University's Blackwood Law Enforcement Management Institute to draft a model policy and training materials for law enforcement agencies conducting photo and live lineups.
Under its proposal, police agencies would be required to abide by the guidelines, which would be reviewed annually. Whether the standards were followed would be admissible at trial.
The standards would address such things as instructions given to witnesses and who should conduct and be included in lineups.
Such guidelines would represent a major step in unifying police lineup procedures statewide. Of 750 state police agencies responding to a Cole committee query, only 88 had written procedures for conducting lineups.
Link:
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/metropolitan/7366110.html
Nine Harris County inmates, convicted at least in part through eyewitness identifications, have been cleared through DNA testing.
"What this indicates to me," Scheck said, "is that there are a lot more prisoners that just didn't commit the crime. We just can't find them."
Picked in photo lineup:
Dupree was convicted of robbing a 26-year-old Dallas woman in November 1979. Authorities reported two men forced their way into the woman's car after she and her boyfriend stopped at a Dallas liquor store to buy cigarettes and use a pay phone. The men forced the woman's companion from the car, then drove her to a park where they raped her at gunpoint.
The woman later picked Dupree's picture from a photo lineup.
The Houston man also was charged, but not tried, for rape. Dupree's alleged accomplice, Anthony Massingill, also was cleared by DNA testing, but he remains imprisoned pending DNA testing in another robbery-rape.
James Bethke, director of the Timothy Cole Advisory Panel on Wrongful Convictions, called mistaken eyewitness identification a "leading contributor" to wrongful convictions.
The bipartisan state committee is named for a Lubbock man who died in prison after being wrongly convicted of rape based, in part, on faulty eyewitness identification.
In an August report, the committee called on the state to require Sam Houston State University's Blackwood Law Enforcement Management Institute to draft a model policy and training materials for law enforcement agencies conducting photo and live lineups.
Under its proposal, police agencies would be required to abide by the guidelines, which would be reviewed annually. Whether the standards were followed would be admissible at trial.
The standards would address such things as instructions given to witnesses and who should conduct and be included in lineups.
Such guidelines would represent a major step in unifying police lineup procedures statewide. Of 750 state police agencies responding to a Cole committee query, only 88 had written procedures for conducting lineups.
Link:
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/metropolitan/7366110.html
Cursing in PA is now legal, do we live in the dark ages?
The American Civil Liberties Union represents Pennsylvanians who have been ticketed for cursing at an overflowing toilet, a swerving motorcyclist and a parking ticket issuer.
The citations can lead to hundreds of dollars in fines and legal costs, not to mention the occasional jail stint.
"Using profanity toward someone, whether an officer or not, is just not one of those things that you can put someone in jail for," ACLU lawyer Mary Catherine Roper said Tuesday. "It may not be very smart, but you have a constitutional right to do that."
Yet state troopers issued more than 700 disorderly conduct citations for swearing in a recent one-year span, and local police hundreds more, the ACLU learned during the court case.
The Pennsylvania Supreme Court years ago deemed such speech legal as long as it's neither threatening nor obscene, Roper said.
The case settled Tuesday involves Lona Scarpa, a 35-year-old Luzerne County woman who called police after a motorcyclist swerved toward her as she walked with a friend. When troopers investigated, they ended up charging Scarpa for the string of epithets she admits uttering at the offender.
Scarpa successfully challenged the disorderly conduct ticket, which carried a $300 fine. But she also let the ACLU pursue the free-speech lawsuit.
"I'm obviously very happy about it," Scarpa said Tuesday night. "I'm really happy no one else is going to go through the distress I went through, because my citation said I could get 90 days in jail."
State police have agreed to pay $17,500 to Scarpa, her criminal lawyer and the ACLU, and to retrain officers and monitor the agency's disorderly conduct tickets. A lawyer for the department did not immediately return a phone message Tuesday.
Link:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40921110/ns/us_news-crime_and_courts/
The citations can lead to hundreds of dollars in fines and legal costs, not to mention the occasional jail stint.
"Using profanity toward someone, whether an officer or not, is just not one of those things that you can put someone in jail for," ACLU lawyer Mary Catherine Roper said Tuesday. "It may not be very smart, but you have a constitutional right to do that."
Yet state troopers issued more than 700 disorderly conduct citations for swearing in a recent one-year span, and local police hundreds more, the ACLU learned during the court case.
The Pennsylvania Supreme Court years ago deemed such speech legal as long as it's neither threatening nor obscene, Roper said.
The case settled Tuesday involves Lona Scarpa, a 35-year-old Luzerne County woman who called police after a motorcyclist swerved toward her as she walked with a friend. When troopers investigated, they ended up charging Scarpa for the string of epithets she admits uttering at the offender.
Scarpa successfully challenged the disorderly conduct ticket, which carried a $300 fine. But she also let the ACLU pursue the free-speech lawsuit.
"I'm obviously very happy about it," Scarpa said Tuesday night. "I'm really happy no one else is going to go through the distress I went through, because my citation said I could get 90 days in jail."
State police have agreed to pay $17,500 to Scarpa, her criminal lawyer and the ACLU, and to retrain officers and monitor the agency's disorderly conduct tickets. A lawyer for the department did not immediately return a phone message Tuesday.
Link:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40921110/ns/us_news-crime_and_courts/
Chicago: Analysis shows drug sniffing dogs are often wrong and can lead to unjustified searches.
Drug-sniffing dogs can give police probable cause to root through cars by the roadside, but state data show the dogs have been wrong more often than they have been right about whether vehicles contain drugs or paraphernalia.
The dogs are trained to dig or sit when they smell drugs, which triggers automobile searches. But a Tribune analysis of three years of data for suburban departments found that only 44 percent of those alerts by the dogs led to the discovery of drugs or paraphernalia.
For Hispanic drivers, the success rate was just 27 percent.
Dog-handling officers and trainers argue the canine teams' accuracy shouldn't be measured in the number of alerts that turn up drugs. They said the scent of drugs or paraphernalia can linger in a car after drugs are used or sold, and the dogs' noses are so sensitive they can pick up residue from drugs that can no longer be found in a car.
But even advocates for the use of drug-sniffing dogs agree with experts who say many dog-and-officer teams are poorly trained and prone to false alerts that lead to unjustified searches. Leading a dog around a car too many times or spending too long examining a vehicle, for example, can cause a dog to give a signal for drugs where there are none, experts said.
Civil rights advocates and Latino activists say the findings support complaints that police unfairly target Hispanic drivers for invasive and embarrassing roadside vehicle searches.
"We know that there is a level of racial profiling going on, and this is just another indicator of that," said Virginia Martinez, a Chicago-based staff attorney for the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund.
Adam Schwartz, an attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union in Illinois, said the innocent suffer from unjustified searches.
Experts said police agencies are inconsistent about the level of training they require and few states mandate training or certification. Jim Watson, secretary of the North American Police Work Dog Association, said a tiny minority of states require certification, though neither he nor other experts could say exactly how many.
A federally sponsored advisory commission has recommended a set of best practices, though they are not backed by any legal mandate.
Link:
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/ct-met-canine-officers-20110105,0,7119364.story
The dogs are trained to dig or sit when they smell drugs, which triggers automobile searches. But a Tribune analysis of three years of data for suburban departments found that only 44 percent of those alerts by the dogs led to the discovery of drugs or paraphernalia.
For Hispanic drivers, the success rate was just 27 percent.
Dog-handling officers and trainers argue the canine teams' accuracy shouldn't be measured in the number of alerts that turn up drugs. They said the scent of drugs or paraphernalia can linger in a car after drugs are used or sold, and the dogs' noses are so sensitive they can pick up residue from drugs that can no longer be found in a car.
But even advocates for the use of drug-sniffing dogs agree with experts who say many dog-and-officer teams are poorly trained and prone to false alerts that lead to unjustified searches. Leading a dog around a car too many times or spending too long examining a vehicle, for example, can cause a dog to give a signal for drugs where there are none, experts said.
Civil rights advocates and Latino activists say the findings support complaints that police unfairly target Hispanic drivers for invasive and embarrassing roadside vehicle searches.
"We know that there is a level of racial profiling going on, and this is just another indicator of that," said Virginia Martinez, a Chicago-based staff attorney for the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund.
Adam Schwartz, an attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union in Illinois, said the innocent suffer from unjustified searches.
Experts said police agencies are inconsistent about the level of training they require and few states mandate training or certification. Jim Watson, secretary of the North American Police Work Dog Association, said a tiny minority of states require certification, though neither he nor other experts could say exactly how many.
A federally sponsored advisory commission has recommended a set of best practices, though they are not backed by any legal mandate.
Link:
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/ct-met-canine-officers-20110105,0,7119364.story
Wednesday, January 5, 2011
6 Computer Security Issues Every Layman Must Worry About.
The terms “security” and “computer” are usually associated with the terms “hacking” and “secrecy”, especially in the post-Wikileaks period where we’re still being hit with shocking and not-so-shocking revelations and secrets, thanks to the work of hackers who think the world must know what’s going on behind the closed doors of a government. However, it’s not just those who have secrets and something to hide who must be worried about computer and online security. Even if you’re someone with the most mundane and open life, here are five security issues that you must be aware of and prepared for, if you want to avoid trouble:
Content you post online: They may seem like the greatest things going on in your life and the best ways to stay informed and entertained, but social networks and other online forums are a Pandora’s Box waiting to happen. The moment you post content that’s private and which could be misconstrued (like inappropriate comments about your work and employer and photos that could damage your personal and professional credibility), you’re a ripe target to lose your job and your reputation. It’s not exactly a security issue, more one of common sense and exercising discretion.
Keeping sensitive information on your computer/phone: With all the credit cards and debit cards we hold, all the bank accounts that we open, and all the email accounts that we create, it’s hard to keep track of all the PIN and CVV numbers and passwords. So you think storing them on a file on your phone or computer is the answer to your memory problems; however, if someone accesses your computer and finds this information, they’ve hit on a veritable treasure trove – they can steal your identity and so much more. Protect your computer using a password, and don’t allow people you don’t know to use your personal system.
Using passwords that are easy to guess: It has been repeated time and again, but people never wise up and instead continue to use the names of loved ones and birthdays and anniversaries as their passwords. When your password is predictable, there’s no use of protecting your account with one.
Allowing others to use your computer: The problem with this is that people can install malicious key-logging software on your system; so your passwords are recorded when you type them and the perpetrator can use your information to steal your money and play around in your life. Invest in software that detects key-logging and other applications that are used to snoop.
Leaving your system unprotected: If you don’t have a proper firewall and an antivirus system in place when you use the Internet, you’re leaving yourself open to cyber attacks that could steal your data and information.
Engaging in careless online behavior: Don’t open emails and attachments from or click on links in mails from people you don’t know. This could install a virus onto your computer. Also avoid visiting sites that could harm your computer, and don’t believe emails that claim you’ve won the lottery and ask for help in retrieving money from the locked bank accounts of deceased royalty and state heads in Africa – they’re all spam and they’re out to take you for a ride.
This guest post is contributed by Cathy Thomas, she writes on the topic of Online Computer Technician Schools. She welcomes your comments her email id: [email protected].
Link: http://www.computertechnician.net/
Content you post online: They may seem like the greatest things going on in your life and the best ways to stay informed and entertained, but social networks and other online forums are a Pandora’s Box waiting to happen. The moment you post content that’s private and which could be misconstrued (like inappropriate comments about your work and employer and photos that could damage your personal and professional credibility), you’re a ripe target to lose your job and your reputation. It’s not exactly a security issue, more one of common sense and exercising discretion.
Keeping sensitive information on your computer/phone: With all the credit cards and debit cards we hold, all the bank accounts that we open, and all the email accounts that we create, it’s hard to keep track of all the PIN and CVV numbers and passwords. So you think storing them on a file on your phone or computer is the answer to your memory problems; however, if someone accesses your computer and finds this information, they’ve hit on a veritable treasure trove – they can steal your identity and so much more. Protect your computer using a password, and don’t allow people you don’t know to use your personal system.
Using passwords that are easy to guess: It has been repeated time and again, but people never wise up and instead continue to use the names of loved ones and birthdays and anniversaries as their passwords. When your password is predictable, there’s no use of protecting your account with one.
Allowing others to use your computer: The problem with this is that people can install malicious key-logging software on your system; so your passwords are recorded when you type them and the perpetrator can use your information to steal your money and play around in your life. Invest in software that detects key-logging and other applications that are used to snoop.
Leaving your system unprotected: If you don’t have a proper firewall and an antivirus system in place when you use the Internet, you’re leaving yourself open to cyber attacks that could steal your data and information.
Engaging in careless online behavior: Don’t open emails and attachments from or click on links in mails from people you don’t know. This could install a virus onto your computer. Also avoid visiting sites that could harm your computer, and don’t believe emails that claim you’ve won the lottery and ask for help in retrieving money from the locked bank accounts of deceased royalty and state heads in Africa – they’re all spam and they’re out to take you for a ride.
This guest post is contributed by Cathy Thomas, she writes on the topic of Online Computer Technician Schools. She welcomes your comments her email id: [email protected].
Link: http://www.computertechnician.net/
Tuesday, January 4, 2011
Seatbelts were not worn in nearly 1/2 of the fatal police police car crashes in the U. S.
At least 42% of police officers killed in vehicle crashes over the past three decades were not wearing seat belts or other safety restraints, according to a federal review.
The study by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), which analyzed 733 crashes from 1980 through 2008, comes less than a week after a separate report found that fatal traffic incidents in 2010 were the leading cause of officer deaths for the 13th straight year.
"This points to a real problem," says Craig Floyd, chairman of the Washington, D.C.-based National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial Fund, which closely tracks officer deaths.
Some officers resist wearing seat belts because the restraints slow their movement in and out of the cars, Floyd says. Others complain that the straps get tangled in utility and gun belts.
The memorial fund reported a 37% overall increase in line of duty deaths in 2010, reversing two consecutive years of decline. Included in that number, traffic-related fatalities jumped from 51 in 2009 to 73 in 2010.
Link:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2011-01-04-1Acopdeaths04_ST_N.htm
The study by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), which analyzed 733 crashes from 1980 through 2008, comes less than a week after a separate report found that fatal traffic incidents in 2010 were the leading cause of officer deaths for the 13th straight year.
"This points to a real problem," says Craig Floyd, chairman of the Washington, D.C.-based National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial Fund, which closely tracks officer deaths.
Some officers resist wearing seat belts because the restraints slow their movement in and out of the cars, Floyd says. Others complain that the straps get tangled in utility and gun belts.
The memorial fund reported a 37% overall increase in line of duty deaths in 2010, reversing two consecutive years of decline. Included in that number, traffic-related fatalities jumped from 51 in 2009 to 73 in 2010.
Link:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2011-01-04-1Acopdeaths04_ST_N.htm
Crime Labs across the country in crisis: Are shoddy forensics being used to secure convictions?
By Matt Clarke:
Crime lab workers are not necessarily scientists. In fact, sometimes only a high school diploma is required for employment as a forensic technician or arson investigator. Nor are lab examiners and their supervisors always the unbiased investigators portrayed on TV; in fact, many crime labs are run by or affiliated with police departments, which have a vested interest in clearing unsolved crimes and securing convictions.
Police often share their suspicions regarding suspects with lab workers before forensic examinations are performed. This has been shown to prejudice lab personnel in areas as diverse as fingerprint examination and chemical testing for accelerants in arson investigations. Further, some lab examiners feel they are part of the prosecution team, helping the police and prosecutors convict suspects regardless of the results of forensic testing. In such cases, forensic experts and other lab personnel may lie about test results, be misleading about the reliability of their methods, and/or cover up test outcomes when they are beneficial to the defendant.
Some forensic examiners “dry-lab” their tests, writing down results for tests they never performed. They may be motivated by understaffing and excessive workloads, a belief that tests required by lab protocols are unnecessary, an inability to perform the tests due to a lack of training, education and experience, or even the belief that the police have already arrested the right person, so evidence testing would be superfluous.
Then there are the forensic “experts” who lie about their academic credentials or accreditation, either on their résumés or in perjurious testimony. They initially may have been motivated to pad their résumé to secure employment, but might also seek to discourage defense attorneys from questioning their test results and conclusions by presenting overwhelming evidence of expertise they do not actually possess. This often works. Giving a bite of truth to the old adage that lawyers went to law school because they couldn’t do math, few judges, prosecutors or defense attorneys can keep up with complicated developments in the field of forensic science.
These types of problems have led to scandals at dozens of crime labs across the nation, resulting in full or partial closures, reorganizations, investigations or firings at city or county labs in Baltimore; Boston; Chicago; Colorado Springs, Colorado; Dallas; Detroit; Erie County, New York and more...
The 2009 National Academy of Sciences report noted that the techniques used to connect a person with a crime scene often lack any type of scientific validation. This includes frequently-used forensic methods such as handwriting analysis and comparison of hairs, fibers, tool marks, tire treads, shoe prints and even fingerprints.
To validate these techniques, controlled studies would have to be performed such as blind testing (where the answer is known to the evaluators but not to the persons performing the forensic analysis) and statistical testing (in which a large number of samples are compared to see how often a random “match” occurs). Further, issues of investigator bias, unknown error rates, lack of crime lab independence, underfunding, poor training, lack of lab personnel qualifications, low academic requirements, and lab personnel making exaggerated claims about the accuracy of forensic techniques were noted in the NAS report.
Crime lab officials reacted with predictable outrage, claiming that the report says fingerprint and other identification techniques should be discarded, and blaming the slew of crime lab scandals on a few bad employees.
Link:
https://www.prisonlegalnews.org/%28S%28i001qdqasckgwize3bnwelj0%29%29/displayArticle.aspx?articleid=22698&AspxAutoDetectCookieSupport=1
Crime lab workers are not necessarily scientists. In fact, sometimes only a high school diploma is required for employment as a forensic technician or arson investigator. Nor are lab examiners and their supervisors always the unbiased investigators portrayed on TV; in fact, many crime labs are run by or affiliated with police departments, which have a vested interest in clearing unsolved crimes and securing convictions.
Police often share their suspicions regarding suspects with lab workers before forensic examinations are performed. This has been shown to prejudice lab personnel in areas as diverse as fingerprint examination and chemical testing for accelerants in arson investigations. Further, some lab examiners feel they are part of the prosecution team, helping the police and prosecutors convict suspects regardless of the results of forensic testing. In such cases, forensic experts and other lab personnel may lie about test results, be misleading about the reliability of their methods, and/or cover up test outcomes when they are beneficial to the defendant.
Some forensic examiners “dry-lab” their tests, writing down results for tests they never performed. They may be motivated by understaffing and excessive workloads, a belief that tests required by lab protocols are unnecessary, an inability to perform the tests due to a lack of training, education and experience, or even the belief that the police have already arrested the right person, so evidence testing would be superfluous.
Then there are the forensic “experts” who lie about their academic credentials or accreditation, either on their résumés or in perjurious testimony. They initially may have been motivated to pad their résumé to secure employment, but might also seek to discourage defense attorneys from questioning their test results and conclusions by presenting overwhelming evidence of expertise they do not actually possess. This often works. Giving a bite of truth to the old adage that lawyers went to law school because they couldn’t do math, few judges, prosecutors or defense attorneys can keep up with complicated developments in the field of forensic science.
These types of problems have led to scandals at dozens of crime labs across the nation, resulting in full or partial closures, reorganizations, investigations or firings at city or county labs in Baltimore; Boston; Chicago; Colorado Springs, Colorado; Dallas; Detroit; Erie County, New York and more...
The 2009 National Academy of Sciences report noted that the techniques used to connect a person with a crime scene often lack any type of scientific validation. This includes frequently-used forensic methods such as handwriting analysis and comparison of hairs, fibers, tool marks, tire treads, shoe prints and even fingerprints.
To validate these techniques, controlled studies would have to be performed such as blind testing (where the answer is known to the evaluators but not to the persons performing the forensic analysis) and statistical testing (in which a large number of samples are compared to see how often a random “match” occurs). Further, issues of investigator bias, unknown error rates, lack of crime lab independence, underfunding, poor training, lack of lab personnel qualifications, low academic requirements, and lab personnel making exaggerated claims about the accuracy of forensic techniques were noted in the NAS report.
Crime lab officials reacted with predictable outrage, claiming that the report says fingerprint and other identification techniques should be discarded, and blaming the slew of crime lab scandals on a few bad employees.
Link:
https://www.prisonlegalnews.org/%28S%28i001qdqasckgwize3bnwelj0%29%29/displayArticle.aspx?articleid=22698&AspxAutoDetectCookieSupport=1
DNA clears Texas man who spent 30 years in prison.
There have been 21 DNA exonerations in Dallas since 2001, more than any other county in the nation. Only two states - Illinois and New York - have freed more of the wrongly convicted through DNA evidence than Dallas, according to the Innocence Project, a New York-based legal center representing Dupree that specializes in wrongful conviction cases.
Dallas' record of DNA exonerations is unmatched nationally because the county crime lab maintains biological evidence even decades after a conviction, leaving samples available to test. In addition, Watkins has cooperated with innocence groups in reviewing hundreds of requests by inmates for DNA testing. Watkins, the first black DA in Texas history, has also pointed to what he calls "a convict-at-all-costs mentality" that he says permeated the DA's office before he arrived in 2007.
Dupree's 30 years in prison will surpass James Woodard, who spent more than 27 years in a Texas prison for a murder that he was cleared of in 2008.
Nationally, there are at least two other DNA exonerees who spent more time in prison, according to the Innocence Project. James Bain was wrongly imprisoned for 35 years in Florida and Lawrence McKinney spent more than 31 years in a Tennessee prison. Phillip Bivens was locked up for more than 30 years in Mississippi, but it wasn't immediately clear whether he or Dupree were in longer.
Link:
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_DNA_EXONERATION?SITE=DCSAS&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT
Dallas' record of DNA exonerations is unmatched nationally because the county crime lab maintains biological evidence even decades after a conviction, leaving samples available to test. In addition, Watkins has cooperated with innocence groups in reviewing hundreds of requests by inmates for DNA testing. Watkins, the first black DA in Texas history, has also pointed to what he calls "a convict-at-all-costs mentality" that he says permeated the DA's office before he arrived in 2007.
Dupree's 30 years in prison will surpass James Woodard, who spent more than 27 years in a Texas prison for a murder that he was cleared of in 2008.
Nationally, there are at least two other DNA exonerees who spent more time in prison, according to the Innocence Project. James Bain was wrongly imprisoned for 35 years in Florida and Lawrence McKinney spent more than 31 years in a Tennessee prison. Phillip Bivens was locked up for more than 30 years in Mississippi, but it wasn't immediately clear whether he or Dupree were in longer.
Link:
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_DNA_EXONERATION?SITE=DCSAS&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT
Saturday, January 1, 2011
Surveillance and censorship in Britain and the EU is it coming to the U. S.?
By Mugur Kevin Galalae:
To shield itself from international opprobrium at the European Union level and from being forced to adhere to the laws it professes to obey by a European court of law, the UK has refused to be bound by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU and its elements of judicial and penal policy. This amounts to a free pass to trample the rights and freedoms of any European citizen (or indeed of any citizen period) without fear of being held accountable in a court of law outside the UK. And inside the UK, of course, no lawyer or law society will contest the legitimacy of CONTEST and SAC. I should know, for I tried and failed to get any solicitor’s interest.
Between 2003 and 2007, thus prior to SAC’s implementation, the UK totally redesigned its public bodies so as to ensure that no claim for human rights violations or discrimination can find an independent and impartial investigating body. This was done systematically and intentionally to ensure that SAC meets with no opposition and that it cannot be exposed or challenged in a court of law. In the process, the rule of law has been suspended and replaced with government diktats (edicts), reducing the entire officialdom to systemic dishonesty and state-sanctioned fraud and
turning the nation’s higher education institutions into propaganda and indoctrination machines.
Since no secret program can stay secret long enough in a democracy with a functioning and free press, the British Government had to also silence the media. It did and continues to do so by imposing publication bans on any and all newspapers and media channels that get a whiff of SAC. Defence Advisory Notices, which are official requests to news editors not to publish or broadcast items on specified subjects for reasons of national security are slapped on editors’ desks to keep their newspapers or TV stations quiet.(http://www.dnotice.org.uk/standing_da_notices.htm)
The greatest damage to our democracies and threat to our rights and freedoms come not from Al Qaeda or other real or fictitious foes, but from our own allies and from our prejudices run wild, for the damage done to date by all terrorist attacks put together pales by comparison to the
damage done to our societies by the application of covert methods of surveillance and censorship designed to control what we say and how we think, and to ensure that we acquiesce. In the name of defending our “shared values” and “community cohesion” the free, pluralist and multicultural societies that made western nations successful and free are being turned into xenophobic and repressive societies that have abandoned the very principles of democracy and freedom. The time has come to ask ourselves if a society that needs this kind of defences deserves to survive, and if a world order obsessed with security when it should be concerned with humanity has a right to exist.
In any case, those who rob us of our rights in the name of security are no better than those who rob us of our security in the name of religion. Both live among us under false pretenses and both seek the destruction of our noblest values.
Link:http://cryptome.org/0003/great-secret.pdf
To shield itself from international opprobrium at the European Union level and from being forced to adhere to the laws it professes to obey by a European court of law, the UK has refused to be bound by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU and its elements of judicial and penal policy. This amounts to a free pass to trample the rights and freedoms of any European citizen (or indeed of any citizen period) without fear of being held accountable in a court of law outside the UK. And inside the UK, of course, no lawyer or law society will contest the legitimacy of CONTEST and SAC. I should know, for I tried and failed to get any solicitor’s interest.
Between 2003 and 2007, thus prior to SAC’s implementation, the UK totally redesigned its public bodies so as to ensure that no claim for human rights violations or discrimination can find an independent and impartial investigating body. This was done systematically and intentionally to ensure that SAC meets with no opposition and that it cannot be exposed or challenged in a court of law. In the process, the rule of law has been suspended and replaced with government diktats (edicts), reducing the entire officialdom to systemic dishonesty and state-sanctioned fraud and
turning the nation’s higher education institutions into propaganda and indoctrination machines.
Since no secret program can stay secret long enough in a democracy with a functioning and free press, the British Government had to also silence the media. It did and continues to do so by imposing publication bans on any and all newspapers and media channels that get a whiff of SAC. Defence Advisory Notices, which are official requests to news editors not to publish or broadcast items on specified subjects for reasons of national security are slapped on editors’ desks to keep their newspapers or TV stations quiet.(http://www.dnotice.org.uk/standing_da_notices.htm)
The greatest damage to our democracies and threat to our rights and freedoms come not from Al Qaeda or other real or fictitious foes, but from our own allies and from our prejudices run wild, for the damage done to date by all terrorist attacks put together pales by comparison to the
damage done to our societies by the application of covert methods of surveillance and censorship designed to control what we say and how we think, and to ensure that we acquiesce. In the name of defending our “shared values” and “community cohesion” the free, pluralist and multicultural societies that made western nations successful and free are being turned into xenophobic and repressive societies that have abandoned the very principles of democracy and freedom. The time has come to ask ourselves if a society that needs this kind of defences deserves to survive, and if a world order obsessed with security when it should be concerned with humanity has a right to exist.
In any case, those who rob us of our rights in the name of security are no better than those who rob us of our security in the name of religion. Both live among us under false pretenses and both seek the destruction of our noblest values.
Link:http://cryptome.org/0003/great-secret.pdf
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)