Police officers in New Mexico can take guns away from drivers who pose no threat. The state supreme court ruled on May 20 that "officer safety" is more important than any constitutional rights a gun-owning motorist might have. The ruling was handed down in deciding the fate of Gregory Ketelson who was a passenger in a vehicle pulled over on November 13, 2008.
During the stop, Hobbs Police Officer Miroslava Bleau saw a 9mm handgun on the back seat floorboard. Ketelson and the driver of the car were ordered out and away from the car while Officer Shane Blevins grabbed the gun. The officers later learned that Ketelson, as a convicted felon, could not legally possess a firearm. The court, however, only considered whether the officers acted properly in taking the gun before they had any reason to suspect Ketelson, who was entirely cooperative during the encounter, of committing a crime.
Ketelson and the National Rifle Association argued that even a brief seizure of a firearm without cause violates fundamental, constitutionally protected rights. Ketelson also argued the gun could not have been taken without a search warrant, consent or exigent circumstances. A district court and the court of appeals agreed with this reasoning. State prosecutors countered that anyone with a gun ought to be considered "armed and dangerous" and thus the gun could be seized at any time. The high court agreed with this line of reasoning.
"Neither the defendant nor the driver was restrained, and thus the risk that one of them would access the firearm was especially potent," Justice Petra Jimenez Maes wrote for the court. "Under such circumstances, Officer Blevins could constitutionally remove the firearm from the vehicle because he possessed a reasonable belief based on specific and articulable facts which warranted him in believing that defendant was armed and thus posed a serious and present danger to his safety."
Because a gun would only taken for the duration of the traffic stop, the court decided such seizures were reasonable.
Court Ruling: http://www.thenewspaper.com/rlc/docs/2011/nm-gungrab.pdf
Link: http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/34/3494.asp
Favorite Quotes
Tuesday, May 31, 2011
Are more criminals posing a police officers?
MIAMI, FL — A black BMW flashing red and blue lights suddenly filled Alexandria Armeley’s rearview mirror one evening last month. At a stoplight, the BMW’s driver pulled up next to her, waved a gold badge and told her “I’m a cop.”
But Ms. Armeley was suspicious. Before she pulled over, she called her stepfather, Alex Hernandez, a police detective in Biscayne Park, Fla., who warned her that the man was probably not a police officer. Speed away, he told her.
A terrified Ms. Armeley took off and was chased by the BMW for several miles through southern Miami-Dade County. Detective Hernandez had jumped in his car to help and eventually caught up to them.
So the real officer arrested the fake officer, whose name is Daniel A. Barros. Asked why he had tried to pull over Ms. Armeley, a 23-year-old college student, Mr. Barros, 22, told officers, “She was speeding.”
The BMW 7 Series car, outfitted with police lights and a siren, was “lit up like a Christmas tree,” Detective Hernandez recalled about the midnight encounter. “There are a lot of guys walking around with phony badges, but this guy had the whole works. Who knows what he would have done if he had gotten my stepdaughter to stop?”
Mr. Barros is facing several charges in the case, including impersonating an officer.
As long as police officers have worn uniforms and carried badges, criminals have dressed like them to try to win the trust of potential victims. Now the impersonators are far more sophisticated, according to nearly a dozen city police chiefs and detectives across the country.
In South Florida, seemingly an incubator of law-breaking innovation, police impersonators have become better organized and, most troubling to law enforcement officials, more violent. The practice is so common that the Miami-Dade Police Department has a Police Impersonator Unit.
Since the unit was established in 2007, it has arrested or had encounters with more than 80 phony officers in Miami-Dade County, and the frequency has increased in recent months, said Lt. Daniel Villanueva, who heads the unit.
“It’s definitely a trend,” Lieutenant Villanueva said. “They use the guise of being a police officer to knock on a door, and the victim lowers their guard for just a second. At that point, it’s too late.”
Link: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/29/us/29fakecops.html?_r=2&hpw
But Ms. Armeley was suspicious. Before she pulled over, she called her stepfather, Alex Hernandez, a police detective in Biscayne Park, Fla., who warned her that the man was probably not a police officer. Speed away, he told her.
A terrified Ms. Armeley took off and was chased by the BMW for several miles through southern Miami-Dade County. Detective Hernandez had jumped in his car to help and eventually caught up to them.
So the real officer arrested the fake officer, whose name is Daniel A. Barros. Asked why he had tried to pull over Ms. Armeley, a 23-year-old college student, Mr. Barros, 22, told officers, “She was speeding.”
The BMW 7 Series car, outfitted with police lights and a siren, was “lit up like a Christmas tree,” Detective Hernandez recalled about the midnight encounter. “There are a lot of guys walking around with phony badges, but this guy had the whole works. Who knows what he would have done if he had gotten my stepdaughter to stop?”
Mr. Barros is facing several charges in the case, including impersonating an officer.
As long as police officers have worn uniforms and carried badges, criminals have dressed like them to try to win the trust of potential victims. Now the impersonators are far more sophisticated, according to nearly a dozen city police chiefs and detectives across the country.
In South Florida, seemingly an incubator of law-breaking innovation, police impersonators have become better organized and, most troubling to law enforcement officials, more violent. The practice is so common that the Miami-Dade Police Department has a Police Impersonator Unit.
Since the unit was established in 2007, it has arrested or had encounters with more than 80 phony officers in Miami-Dade County, and the frequency has increased in recent months, said Lt. Daniel Villanueva, who heads the unit.
“It’s definitely a trend,” Lieutenant Villanueva said. “They use the guise of being a police officer to knock on a door, and the victim lowers their guard for just a second. At that point, it’s too late.”
Link: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/29/us/29fakecops.html?_r=2&hpw
Thousands of PACER documents could have failed redactions.
Since we launched RECAP a couple of years ago, one of our top concerns has been privacy. The federal judiciary's PACER system offers the public online access to hundreds of millions of court records. The judiciary's rules require each party in a case to redact certain types of information from documents they submit, but unfortunately litigants and their counsel don't always comply with these rules. Three years ago, Carl Malamud did a groundbreaking audit of PACER documents and found more than 1600 cases in which litigants submitted documents with unredacted Social Security numbers. My recent research has focused on a different problem: cases where parties tried to redact sensitive information but the redactions failed for technical reasons. This problem occasionally pops up in news stories, but as far as I know, no one has conducted a systematic study.
But vector-based formats also have an important disadvantage: they may contain more information than is visible to the naked eye. Raster images have a "what you see is what you get" quality—changing all the pixels in a particular region to black destroys the information that was previously in that part of the image. But a vector-based image can have multiple "layers." There might be a command to draw some text followed by a command to draw a black rectangle over the text. The image might look like it's been redacted, but the text is still "under" the box. And often extracting that information is a simple matter of cutting and pasting.
So how many PACER documents have this problem? We're in a good position to study this question because we have a large collection of PACER documents—1.8 million of them when I started my research last year. I wrote software to detect redaction rectangles—it turns out these are relatively easy to recognize based on their color, shape, and the specific commands used to draw them. Out of 1.8 million PACER documents, there were approximately 2000 documents with redaction rectangles. (There were also about 3500 documents that were redacted by replacing text by strings of Xes, I also excluded documents that were redacted by Carl Malamud before he donated them to our archive.)
Next, my software checked to see if these redaction rectangles overlapped with text. My software identified a few hundred documents that appeared to have text under redaction rectangles, and examining them by hand revealed 194 documents with failed redactions. The majority of the documents (about 130) appear be from commercial litigation, in which parties have unsuccessfully attempted to redact trade secrets such as sales figures and confidential product information. Other improperly redacted documents contain sensitive medical information, addresses, and dates of birth. Still others contain the names of witnesses, jurors, plaintiffs, and one minor.
Links:
http://freedom-to-tinker.com/blog/tblee/studying-frequency-redaction-failures-pacer
Redacting with Confidence by the National Security Agency :
http://www.fas.org/sgp/othergov/dod/nsa-redact.pdf
But vector-based formats also have an important disadvantage: they may contain more information than is visible to the naked eye. Raster images have a "what you see is what you get" quality—changing all the pixels in a particular region to black destroys the information that was previously in that part of the image. But a vector-based image can have multiple "layers." There might be a command to draw some text followed by a command to draw a black rectangle over the text. The image might look like it's been redacted, but the text is still "under" the box. And often extracting that information is a simple matter of cutting and pasting.
So how many PACER documents have this problem? We're in a good position to study this question because we have a large collection of PACER documents—1.8 million of them when I started my research last year. I wrote software to detect redaction rectangles—it turns out these are relatively easy to recognize based on their color, shape, and the specific commands used to draw them. Out of 1.8 million PACER documents, there were approximately 2000 documents with redaction rectangles. (There were also about 3500 documents that were redacted by replacing text by strings of Xes, I also excluded documents that were redacted by Carl Malamud before he donated them to our archive.)
Next, my software checked to see if these redaction rectangles overlapped with text. My software identified a few hundred documents that appeared to have text under redaction rectangles, and examining them by hand revealed 194 documents with failed redactions. The majority of the documents (about 130) appear be from commercial litigation, in which parties have unsuccessfully attempted to redact trade secrets such as sales figures and confidential product information. Other improperly redacted documents contain sensitive medical information, addresses, and dates of birth. Still others contain the names of witnesses, jurors, plaintiffs, and one minor.
Links:
http://freedom-to-tinker.com/blog/tblee/studying-frequency-redaction-failures-pacer
Redacting with Confidence by the National Security Agency :
http://www.fas.org/sgp/othergov/dod/nsa-redact.pdf
The Government's war on cameras what are police afraid of?
Who will watch the watchers? In a world of ubiquitous, hand-held digital cameras, that's not an abstract philosophical question. Police everywhere are cracking down on citizens using cameras to capture breaking news and law enforcement in action.
In 2009, police arrested blogger and freelance photographer Antonio Musumeci on the steps of a New York federal courthouse. His alleged crime? Unauthorized photography on federal property.
Police cuffed and arrested Musumeci, ultimately issuing him a citation. With the help of the New York Civil Liberties Union, he forced a settlement in which the federal government agreed to issue a memo acknowledging that it is totally legal to film or photograph on federal property.
Although the legal right to film on federal property now seems to be firmly established, many other questions about public photography still remain and place journalists and citizens in harm's way. Can you record a police encounter? Can you film on city or state property? What are a photographer's rights in so-called public spaces?
These questions will remain unanswered until a case reaches the Supreme Court, says UCLA Law Professor Eugene Volokh, founder of the popular law blog The Volokh Conspiracy. Until then, it's up to people to know their rights and test the limits of free speech, even at the risk of harassment and arrest.
Who will watch the watchers? All of us, it turns out, but only if we're willing to fight for our rights.
Link: http://reason.tv/video/show/you-cant-film-here-fighting-ba
In 2009, police arrested blogger and freelance photographer Antonio Musumeci on the steps of a New York federal courthouse. His alleged crime? Unauthorized photography on federal property.
Police cuffed and arrested Musumeci, ultimately issuing him a citation. With the help of the New York Civil Liberties Union, he forced a settlement in which the federal government agreed to issue a memo acknowledging that it is totally legal to film or photograph on federal property.
Although the legal right to film on federal property now seems to be firmly established, many other questions about public photography still remain and place journalists and citizens in harm's way. Can you record a police encounter? Can you film on city or state property? What are a photographer's rights in so-called public spaces?
These questions will remain unanswered until a case reaches the Supreme Court, says UCLA Law Professor Eugene Volokh, founder of the popular law blog The Volokh Conspiracy. Until then, it's up to people to know their rights and test the limits of free speech, even at the risk of harassment and arrest.
Who will watch the watchers? All of us, it turns out, but only if we're willing to fight for our rights.
Link: http://reason.tv/video/show/you-cant-film-here-fighting-ba
Hyannis, MA- Duane Alves claims he was attacked by off duty police officers.
A Cape Cod DJ claims he was attacked early Thursday at the Steak House Sports Bar by men attending the spring conference of the New England Narcotic Officers Association.
Duane Alves of Falmouth, better known as DJ Alvzie, also claims men he thinks were off-duty police officers blocked all the exits from the building, preventing him from leaving. When he did try to leave, he was attacked a second time, he said. The second attack resulted in serious injuries, including broken bones around his right eye and a damaged nasal cavity, said Alves' attorney, Robert Bianchi of Hyannis.
The Barnstable police confirmed Friday that two altercations took place that night at the bar, "the nature of which we're investigating," Lt. Sean Balcom said.
"I'm still in shock," Alves said Thursday at the Barnstable police station, where he gave a statement to investigating officers.
Alves said he was working as a DJ at the Steak House Sports Bar on Wednesday night. Just after midnight, he said, the bar was thick with off-duty police officers attending the annual conference that was held Wednesday, Thursday and Friday at the Resort and Conference Center in Hyannis.
Link:
http://www.capecodonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20110528/NEWS/105280316
Duane Alves of Falmouth, better known as DJ Alvzie, also claims men he thinks were off-duty police officers blocked all the exits from the building, preventing him from leaving. When he did try to leave, he was attacked a second time, he said. The second attack resulted in serious injuries, including broken bones around his right eye and a damaged nasal cavity, said Alves' attorney, Robert Bianchi of Hyannis.
The Barnstable police confirmed Friday that two altercations took place that night at the bar, "the nature of which we're investigating," Lt. Sean Balcom said.
"I'm still in shock," Alves said Thursday at the Barnstable police station, where he gave a statement to investigating officers.
Alves said he was working as a DJ at the Steak House Sports Bar on Wednesday night. Just after midnight, he said, the bar was thick with off-duty police officers attending the annual conference that was held Wednesday, Thursday and Friday at the Resort and Conference Center in Hyannis.
Link:
http://www.capecodonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20110528/NEWS/105280316
Monday, May 30, 2011
New web search "NEWSLE" tracks news articles and information about anyone in several places such as: Twitter, LinkedIn, Facebook.
Newsle scours the Internet for names and then uses complex algorithms to determine whether the person is the one you want to know about. In its first six weeks, the site has amassed more than 6,000 users tracking about 2 million people.
Right now, one of newsle’s cofounders, Jonah Varon, has a slightly higher “fame factor’’ than its other, Axel Hansen. The two, both 20 and computer science majors, joke that it only causes a bit of friction between them. (That’s mainly because Varon founded another Internet start-up a few years ago, FML, a network of sites at colleges that allowed users to vent about their lives.)
Eli Kozminsky, who just finished his freshman year at Harvard University and knows Varon casually, said he checks the site every day for updates about his friends, basketball star LeBron James, and some well-known academics.
“It’s like following a news feed with your friends in it,’’ said Kozminsky, of State College, Pa., who said he has found articles his friends have written and sports successes they were too modest to mention.
It’s basically like setting up a Google alert about each of your friends, Varon said, but rather than having to manually set up each one, you can let newsle track everyone on your list of contacts from Facebook or LinkedIn. And instead of filling your inbox as Google alerts for so many people would, newsle lets you check all of them in one place, as often — or as rarely — as you like.
“There’s definitely a bit of a stalker vibe to what we’re doing,’’ Varon, of San Francisco, said. But since all the information is public record already, all newsle is doing, he said, is making that search easier.
The people you follow don’t know you’re following them unless you tell them.
“One of the funnest things’’ about starting the site, Varon said, “has been to hear stories from people who have found crazy information about their friends. One user told us he got an article about his friend who had been arrested after biking around naked. And people have told us they found out about high school buddies who opened restaurants — all sorts of cool things.’’
“If someone were trying to truly ‘follow’ me online, they’d need to look in several places: Twitter, LinkedIn, Facebook, etc. Newsle could make that easier by having a single place to connect to news and updates about an individual,’’ he said.
Links:
http://www.newsle.com/
http://www.boston.com/business/technology/articles/2011/05/30/harvard_roommates_create_site_to_easily_follow_friends_and_the_famous_on_the_web/
Right now, one of newsle’s cofounders, Jonah Varon, has a slightly higher “fame factor’’ than its other, Axel Hansen. The two, both 20 and computer science majors, joke that it only causes a bit of friction between them. (That’s mainly because Varon founded another Internet start-up a few years ago, FML, a network of sites at colleges that allowed users to vent about their lives.)
Eli Kozminsky, who just finished his freshman year at Harvard University and knows Varon casually, said he checks the site every day for updates about his friends, basketball star LeBron James, and some well-known academics.
“It’s like following a news feed with your friends in it,’’ said Kozminsky, of State College, Pa., who said he has found articles his friends have written and sports successes they were too modest to mention.
It’s basically like setting up a Google alert about each of your friends, Varon said, but rather than having to manually set up each one, you can let newsle track everyone on your list of contacts from Facebook or LinkedIn. And instead of filling your inbox as Google alerts for so many people would, newsle lets you check all of them in one place, as often — or as rarely — as you like.
“There’s definitely a bit of a stalker vibe to what we’re doing,’’ Varon, of San Francisco, said. But since all the information is public record already, all newsle is doing, he said, is making that search easier.
The people you follow don’t know you’re following them unless you tell them.
“One of the funnest things’’ about starting the site, Varon said, “has been to hear stories from people who have found crazy information about their friends. One user told us he got an article about his friend who had been arrested after biking around naked. And people have told us they found out about high school buddies who opened restaurants — all sorts of cool things.’’
“If someone were trying to truly ‘follow’ me online, they’d need to look in several places: Twitter, LinkedIn, Facebook, etc. Newsle could make that easier by having a single place to connect to news and updates about an individual,’’ he said.
Links:
http://www.newsle.com/
http://www.boston.com/business/technology/articles/2011/05/30/harvard_roommates_create_site_to_easily_follow_friends_and_the_famous_on_the_web/
Friday, May 27, 2011
Internet Explorer flaw could allow hackers access to your Facebook, Gmail, Twitter accounts.
Regardless of the version of Windows you use, if you also use any versions of Microsoft's Internet Explorer, then you might not want to do any drag-and-dropping within your IE browser, or you might be done in by "cookiejacking." It's not the CookieMonster or Firesheep, but there is a zero-day hole in IE that allows an attacker to steal any session cookies from any website.
At the Hack In A Box conference in Amsterdam, Italian security researcher Rosario Valotta demonstrated a cookiejacking attack. A session cookie holds information like your username and your password. Once those cookies are stolen, it allows an attacker to access wherever the victim is logged in like Gmail, Facebook, Twitter or other online accounts. His code to exploit the flaw explicitly targets cookies issued by Facebook, Twitter and Gmail, but Valotta says his technique can be used on any website. The attacker is only as limited as his imagination.
The vulnerability was found in IE security zone mechanisms which are supposed to keep Internet zones from mixing; it's meant to prevent sites in the "untrusted" Internet zone from embedding content to the "trusted" local zone. Yet Valotta discovered that cookies were exempt from the security mechanism and could be loaded into iFrames. The cookies were marked with invisible text and moved by the HTML5 drag and drop feature to the main browser window. "This breaks the Cross zone interaction policy as a Internet page is accessing a local file," Valotta wrote on tentacoloViola where he explained the entire exploit.
Link:
http://www.networkworld.com/community/blog/ie-flaw-could-allow-hackers-access-your-faceb
At the Hack In A Box conference in Amsterdam, Italian security researcher Rosario Valotta demonstrated a cookiejacking attack. A session cookie holds information like your username and your password. Once those cookies are stolen, it allows an attacker to access wherever the victim is logged in like Gmail, Facebook, Twitter or other online accounts. His code to exploit the flaw explicitly targets cookies issued by Facebook, Twitter and Gmail, but Valotta says his technique can be used on any website. The attacker is only as limited as his imagination.
The vulnerability was found in IE security zone mechanisms which are supposed to keep Internet zones from mixing; it's meant to prevent sites in the "untrusted" Internet zone from embedding content to the "trusted" local zone. Yet Valotta discovered that cookies were exempt from the security mechanism and could be loaded into iFrames. The cookies were marked with invisible text and moved by the HTML5 drag and drop feature to the main browser window. "This breaks the Cross zone interaction policy as a Internet page is accessing a local file," Valotta wrote on tentacoloViola where he explained the entire exploit.
Link:
http://www.networkworld.com/community/blog/ie-flaw-could-allow-hackers-access-your-faceb
Utah's Sheriff Jim Winder unincorporated police departments within Salt Lake County and privatized them into one (corporate) police force.
Our current “elected” Sheriff of Salt Lake County, one Mr. Jim Winder, is of course a wealthy member of the local dairy tycoon family, aptly named Winder Farms. He recently won his reelection campaign in the 2010 elections due to the fact that the information I’m about to present to you is absent from the general consciousness and comprehension of the good people of the Salt Lake Valley.
The good Sheriff actually campaigned on and was voted into this honorable office toting the success of the newly formed Unified Police Department – the “unification” of the sheriff, municipal, and unincorporated police departments within Salt Lake County into one corporately structured private police force – an act of treason and an assault on everything remotely constitutional.
The people have no idea what this man has done…
As of January 1, 2010, the day that Salt Lake County became a police state, the Salt Lake County Sheriff’s Department was officially dissolved. In its place was created a brand new corporation, which is now described as “…responsible for all police operations”. This private company is called the “Unified Police Department of Greater Salt Lake”, or the “Unified Police Department” for short.
http://www.federaljack.com/?p=22967
http://theintelhub.com/2011/05/26/the-sheriff-who-sold-his-county/
http://grendelreport.posterous.com/the-sheriff-who-sold-his-county
Cities merge police agencies in light of budget realities.
The good Sheriff actually campaigned on and was voted into this honorable office toting the success of the newly formed Unified Police Department – the “unification” of the sheriff, municipal, and unincorporated police departments within Salt Lake County into one corporately structured private police force – an act of treason and an assault on everything remotely constitutional.
The people have no idea what this man has done…
As of January 1, 2010, the day that Salt Lake County became a police state, the Salt Lake County Sheriff’s Department was officially dissolved. In its place was created a brand new corporation, which is now described as “…responsible for all police operations”. This private company is called the “Unified Police Department of Greater Salt Lake”, or the “Unified Police Department” for short.
We interviewed the County Sheriff Jim Winder – “The Sheriff Who Sold His County” – on local AM radio (K-TALK – 630 AM) in Salt Lake County on June 6, 2011. This is extremely important, so please listen and read the following information.
Remember, this is an elected public office-holder that is talking here. This guy is slippery, but even the best of predators can eventually be backed into a corner…
“…We are moving towards a model that is much more efficient than a regular public entity.”
To listen to the entire audio interview, click the link below-
http://theintelhub.com/2011/05/26/the-sheriff-who-sold-his-county/
http://grendelreport.posterous.com/the-sheriff-who-sold-his-county
It was, Mayor JoAnn Seghini said, one of the ways Midvale —
population 30,000 — asserted its civic identity from the looming shadow of Salt
Lake City and Salt Lake
County.
Tony Mason had
been chief of the department for 4½ years, a run that abruptly ended last summer
when Midvale was forced to make a heart-wrenching decision.
Faced with mounting costs and declining revenue, the city grudgingly approved
the dissolution of its 102-year-old police force and fire department in favor of
an unusual merger with four other local police agencies and the Salt Lake County
Sheriff's Department.
Your location can be tracked using pictures posted online by your smartphone.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=emI5-Dz-iv0&feature=player_detailpage
LAPD's new Chevy Caprice PPV car.
If you thought the patrol car in the 1987 action movie “Robocop” was high-tech, wait until you see what L.A.’s finest will be soon be driving.
AOL’s Translogic caught a sneak peek of the new squad car of choice for the Los Angeles Police Department: the Chevrolet Caprice Police Patrol Vehicle (PPV).
Billed as the “sum total of all the law enforcement community has learned about patrol cars to date” by the report, the PPV boasts a 6.0L V-8 engine with 355 horsepower, 18-inch steel wheels, and a host of gadgets that puts any Hollywood squad car to shame.
The Caprice, which replaces the long-used Ford Crown Victoria, is equipped with an infrared night vision camera, automated license plate scanner, and a touch-screen center console that replaces the older computers traditionally used by officers.
According to LAPD police officer Jim Stover in three years they have read 32.5 million license plates.
LAPD officials say vehicle wrapping was used on all-black sedans instead of traditional paint to minimize repair expenses and protect resale value. This brings the expected taxpayer cost to be about $20,000.
Drivers can expect to see the new 2012 Chevrolet Caprice PPV cruising city streets as early as mid-2011.
http://translogic.aolautos.com/2011/05/23/translogic-55-lapd-chevy-caprice-ppv/
A Lawsuit alleges the NYPD of stopping random cabs and searching passengers.
New York Civil Liberties Union officials filed a lawsuit seeking to place restrictions on a program that allows police to pull over some taxis and liveries, alleging that officers are using these inspection stops to question and search passengers.
The lawsuit focuses on the New York Police Department’s Taxi/Livery Robbery Inspection Program, or TRIP, which allows officers to pull over without cause any taxi and livery cab whose company has voluntarily enrolled in the program. Participating vehicles are identified by a decal. The program guidelines stipulate that officers are allowed to visually inspect the vehicle and briefly question the driver.
In at least two cases, the NYCLU alleges that passengers were told they were subject to police questioning and searches because they riding in participating vehicles. The lawsuit states that nothing in the program allows officer to “detain, question, frisk, or search passengers without independent suspicion of wrongdoing.”
NYPD spokesman Paul Browne defended the practice. “Police stops save lives, so does the TRIP program,” he said in an email.
“We’re not challenging the program in general but we are challenging the police pulling passengers out of the cars and searching them without any suspicion or cause,” said Christopher Dunn, the NYCLU’s associate legal director.
Link:
http://blogs.wsj.com/metropolis/2011/05/26/lawsuit-challenges-nypds-taxi-stop-and-frisk-effort/
The lawsuit focuses on the New York Police Department’s Taxi/Livery Robbery Inspection Program, or TRIP, which allows officers to pull over without cause any taxi and livery cab whose company has voluntarily enrolled in the program. Participating vehicles are identified by a decal. The program guidelines stipulate that officers are allowed to visually inspect the vehicle and briefly question the driver.
In at least two cases, the NYCLU alleges that passengers were told they were subject to police questioning and searches because they riding in participating vehicles. The lawsuit states that nothing in the program allows officer to “detain, question, frisk, or search passengers without independent suspicion of wrongdoing.”
NYPD spokesman Paul Browne defended the practice. “Police stops save lives, so does the TRIP program,” he said in an email.
“We’re not challenging the program in general but we are challenging the police pulling passengers out of the cars and searching them without any suspicion or cause,” said Christopher Dunn, the NYCLU’s associate legal director.
Link:
http://blogs.wsj.com/metropolis/2011/05/26/lawsuit-challenges-nypds-taxi-stop-and-frisk-effort/
Utah- Debra Brown was released from prison after being found "factually innocent" of murder, but Attorney General Mark Shurtleff is appealing the decision.
Utah Attorney General Mark Shurtleff has flip-flopped on a decision not to appeal a Logan woman’s exoneration in a 1993 slaying, officials at the Rocky Mountain Innocence Center (RMIC) said Wednesday night.
The decision comes more than two weeks after 53-year-old Debra Brown was released from prison after being found "factually innocent" in her employer’s shooting death by a 2nd District Court judge.
"RMIC believes the attorney general’s decision is incredibly irresponsible to taxpayers and cruel to Debra Brown and her family and supporters," the innocence center said in a statement. "After being promised that the state would not appeal, Ms. Brown and her family were beginning to put their long ordeal behind them and to heal. Ms. Brown was looking forward to what she described lovingly as her ‘new, improved, restored life.’ The attorney general’s change of mind has left her and her family ‘broken-hearted.’ "
"It’s certainly disheartening for the family," said Debra Brown’s brother, David Scott.
Scott said the family has faith that Brown’s attorney, Alan Sullivan, will resolve the matter.
On Wednesday, the Attorney General’s Office said it planned to hold a news conference Thursday to "discuss the new factual-innocence law."
Brown was cleared under a 2008 statute that allows an inmate to seek a hearing to prove her innocence, even when no new DNA evidence exists.
Assistant Attorney General Scott Reed told The Salt Lake Tribune that the case could set a dangerous precedent for the state’s legal system.
The Attorney General’s Office, however, will not ask that Brown be returned to prison, where she spent nearly 17 years, even if the appeal is successful.
"It’s not fair to her, at this point," Reed said. "The conviction on the books is what’s important. Where she resides for the rest of her life is of little consequence to us."
Link:
http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/news/51887164-78/brown-appeal-attorney-reed.html.csp
The decision comes more than two weeks after 53-year-old Debra Brown was released from prison after being found "factually innocent" in her employer’s shooting death by a 2nd District Court judge.
"RMIC believes the attorney general’s decision is incredibly irresponsible to taxpayers and cruel to Debra Brown and her family and supporters," the innocence center said in a statement. "After being promised that the state would not appeal, Ms. Brown and her family were beginning to put their long ordeal behind them and to heal. Ms. Brown was looking forward to what she described lovingly as her ‘new, improved, restored life.’ The attorney general’s change of mind has left her and her family ‘broken-hearted.’ "
"It’s certainly disheartening for the family," said Debra Brown’s brother, David Scott.
Scott said the family has faith that Brown’s attorney, Alan Sullivan, will resolve the matter.
On Wednesday, the Attorney General’s Office said it planned to hold a news conference Thursday to "discuss the new factual-innocence law."
Brown was cleared under a 2008 statute that allows an inmate to seek a hearing to prove her innocence, even when no new DNA evidence exists.
Assistant Attorney General Scott Reed told The Salt Lake Tribune that the case could set a dangerous precedent for the state’s legal system.
The Attorney General’s Office, however, will not ask that Brown be returned to prison, where she spent nearly 17 years, even if the appeal is successful.
"It’s not fair to her, at this point," Reed said. "The conviction on the books is what’s important. Where she resides for the rest of her life is of little consequence to us."
Link:
http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/news/51887164-78/brown-appeal-attorney-reed.html.csp
Two New York city police officers acquitted of rape are fired.
A jury acquitted two New York police officers on Thursday of charges that they raped a drunken woman after helping her into her apartment while on patrol.
The woman had described snippets of a harrowing night in which the officers, called to help her because she was extremely intoxicated, instead abused her. They insisted no rape occurred, with one allowing only that he snuggled with her while she wore nothing but a bra.
The verdict brings to an end a criminal case that drew outrage across the city when the officers were indicted in 2009, and provides some measure of vindication for the officers, Kenneth Moreno and Franklin Mata.
The officers were convicted of three counts of official misconduct for entering the woman’s apartment, but the jury found them not guilty of all other charges, including burglary and falsifying business records. The Police Department said the officers were fired Thursday.
Prosecutors had accused Officer Mata, 29, of standing guard while Officer Moreno had sex with the woman. She was so sick that the officers should have called an ambulance, prosecutors said, while the defense argued that the woman, though drunk, was walking and talking.
After initially helping the woman into her apartment, the officers were captured by surveillance cameras as they re-entered the woman’s East Village building three times.
Officer Moreno, 43, testified that he was a recovering alcoholic and had developed a rapport with the woman that night, when she confided in him that her friends were angry at her because she drank too much. The two flirted, he sang Bon Jovi’s “Livin’ on a Prayer” to her and she actually came onto him, wearing nothing but a bra, he said. He testified that he kissed the woman on the forehead and snuggled with her in her bed, but insisted they did not have sex.
Link:
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/27/nyregion/two-new-york-city-police-officers-acquitted-of-rape.html?_r=2
The woman had described snippets of a harrowing night in which the officers, called to help her because she was extremely intoxicated, instead abused her. They insisted no rape occurred, with one allowing only that he snuggled with her while she wore nothing but a bra.
The verdict brings to an end a criminal case that drew outrage across the city when the officers were indicted in 2009, and provides some measure of vindication for the officers, Kenneth Moreno and Franklin Mata.
The officers were convicted of three counts of official misconduct for entering the woman’s apartment, but the jury found them not guilty of all other charges, including burglary and falsifying business records. The Police Department said the officers were fired Thursday.
Prosecutors had accused Officer Mata, 29, of standing guard while Officer Moreno had sex with the woman. She was so sick that the officers should have called an ambulance, prosecutors said, while the defense argued that the woman, though drunk, was walking and talking.
After initially helping the woman into her apartment, the officers were captured by surveillance cameras as they re-entered the woman’s East Village building three times.
Officer Moreno, 43, testified that he was a recovering alcoholic and had developed a rapport with the woman that night, when she confided in him that her friends were angry at her because she drank too much. The two flirted, he sang Bon Jovi’s “Livin’ on a Prayer” to her and she actually came onto him, wearing nothing but a bra, he said. He testified that he kissed the woman on the forehead and snuggled with her in her bed, but insisted they did not have sex.
Link:
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/27/nyregion/two-new-york-city-police-officers-acquitted-of-rape.html?_r=2
The Seattle police department will release names of officers who engage in misconduct.
The city attorney's office released a statement that they will ask King County Superior Court to review an arbitrator's decision to withhold the names of police officers who have engaged in misconduct.
The city attorney believes the arbitrator's decision violates the state's Public Records Act.
The Seattle Police Department (SPD) stated they will continue to release the names of officer's who are subject to sustained complaints.
ORIGINAL STORY: The Seattle Police Department (SPD) will no longer release the names of officers who have engaged in misconduct.
The decision comes as the department is under federal investigation for use of excessive force and after a two year contract dispute between the department and the Seattle Police Union.
An arbitrator sided with the Seattle Police Union in the dispute, ruling the public will no longer know the identity of police officers involved in misconduct.
Link:
http://www.q13fox.com/news/kcpq-seattle-police-officer-misconduct-20110525,0,6868779.story
The city attorney believes the arbitrator's decision violates the state's Public Records Act.
The Seattle Police Department (SPD) stated they will continue to release the names of officer's who are subject to sustained complaints.
ORIGINAL STORY: The Seattle Police Department (SPD) will no longer release the names of officers who have engaged in misconduct.
The decision comes as the department is under federal investigation for use of excessive force and after a two year contract dispute between the department and the Seattle Police Union.
An arbitrator sided with the Seattle Police Union in the dispute, ruling the public will no longer know the identity of police officers involved in misconduct.
Link:
http://www.q13fox.com/news/kcpq-seattle-police-officer-misconduct-20110525,0,6868779.story
CA-Democratic state Assemblyman Michael Allen seeks to change law which allow the police to use DUI checkpoints to seize cars.
SACRAMENTO, CA - A week after Nora Ramos gave birth by Caesarean section, she found herself walking five miles home with her husband and four children.
On their way from the hospital in Modesto, the family had been stopped at a DUI checkpoint. Ramos' husband, who had been driving because his wife was dizzy from morphine, did not have a license, and police impounded their car.
That was four years ago. Today, Ramos is joining civil liberties groups and those advocating for minority rights, who say dozens of sobriety checkpoints throughout California have been used to generate impoundment fees rather than arrest drunken drivers.
They support a proposed law from Democratic state Assemblyman Michael Allen that aims to restrict the inspections to their intended purpose of stopping drunken driving.
"Yes, I understand, if they are drunk drivers, grab them, throw them in jail," said Ramos, who is 33. "But what about people who have nothing to do with that?"
Allen, from Santa Rosa, said cities and police have strayed from the original mission of checkpoints, increasingly using them to seize vehicles.
Impoundments increased 53 percent statewide between 2007 and 2009, according to his bill, AB1389. It says that in many cities, the ratio of impoundments to DUI arrests is 20 to 1.
Jeannette Zanipatin, an attorney with the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund, says "It's a way for them to generate revenue, easy revenue that goes unchallenged."
"DUI checkpoints are exclusively about safety," the association's president, David L. Maggard, Jr., said in an e-mail.
Allen said that some cities do treat the checkpoints as a way to raise revenue but that his priority is the effect on drivers. A 2005 federal court case prohibits officers from confiscating vehicles if they can be moved to a safe place or picked up by a licensed driver, such as a relative.
Link:
http://www.mercurynews.com/breaking-news/ci_18127921?nclick_check=1
On their way from the hospital in Modesto, the family had been stopped at a DUI checkpoint. Ramos' husband, who had been driving because his wife was dizzy from morphine, did not have a license, and police impounded their car.
That was four years ago. Today, Ramos is joining civil liberties groups and those advocating for minority rights, who say dozens of sobriety checkpoints throughout California have been used to generate impoundment fees rather than arrest drunken drivers.
They support a proposed law from Democratic state Assemblyman Michael Allen that aims to restrict the inspections to their intended purpose of stopping drunken driving.
"Yes, I understand, if they are drunk drivers, grab them, throw them in jail," said Ramos, who is 33. "But what about people who have nothing to do with that?"
Allen, from Santa Rosa, said cities and police have strayed from the original mission of checkpoints, increasingly using them to seize vehicles.
Impoundments increased 53 percent statewide between 2007 and 2009, according to his bill, AB1389. It says that in many cities, the ratio of impoundments to DUI arrests is 20 to 1.
Jeannette Zanipatin, an attorney with the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund, says "It's a way for them to generate revenue, easy revenue that goes unchallenged."
"DUI checkpoints are exclusively about safety," the association's president, David L. Maggard, Jr., said in an e-mail.
Allen said that some cities do treat the checkpoints as a way to raise revenue but that his priority is the effect on drivers. A 2005 federal court case prohibits officers from confiscating vehicles if they can be moved to a safe place or picked up by a licensed driver, such as a relative.
Link:
http://www.mercurynews.com/breaking-news/ci_18127921?nclick_check=1
Thursday, May 26, 2011
Concerns grow over police department's use of unmanned drones to spy on Americans.
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.
"Drones raise the prospect of much more pervasive surveillance," said Jay Stanley, a senior policy analyst with the American Civil Liberties Union's Speech, Privacy and Technology Project. "We are not against them, absolutely. They can be a valuable tool in certain kinds of operations. But what we don't want to see is their pervasive use to watch over the American people."
The police are likely to use drones in tactical operations and to view clearly public spaces. Legal experts say they will have to obtain a warrant to spy on private homes.
In a 1986 Supreme Court case, justices were asked whether a police department violated constitutional protections against illegal search and seizure after it flew a small plane above the back yard of a man suspected of growing marijuana. The court ruled that "the Fourth Amendment simply does not require the police traveling in the public airways at this altitude to obtain a warrant in order to observe what is visible to the naked eye."
In a 2001 case, however, also involving a search for marijuana, the court was more skeptical of police tactics. It ruled that an Oregon police department conducted an illegal search when it used a thermal imaging device to detect heat coming from the home of an man suspected of growing marijuana indoors.
"The question we confront today is what limits there are upon this power of technology to shrink the realm of guaranteed privacy," Justice Antonin Scalia wrote in the 2001 case.
Still, Joseph J. Vacek, a professor in the Aviation Department at the University of North Dakota who has studied the potential use of drones in law enforcement, said the main objections to the use of domestic drones will probably have little to do with the Constitution.
"Where I see the challenge is the social norm," Vacek said. "Most people are not okay with constant watching. That hover-and-stare capability used to its maximum potential will probably ruffle a lot of civic feathers."
Links:
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2011/05/drones-becoming-pervasive-inside.html
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.
"Drones raise the prospect of much more pervasive surveillance," said Jay Stanley, a senior policy analyst with the American Civil Liberties Union's Speech, Privacy and Technology Project. "We are not against them, absolutely. They can be a valuable tool in certain kinds of operations. But what we don't want to see is their pervasive use to watch over the American people."
The police are likely to use drones in tactical operations and to view clearly public spaces. Legal experts say they will have to obtain a warrant to spy on private homes.
In a 1986 Supreme Court case, justices were asked whether a police department violated constitutional protections against illegal search and seizure after it flew a small plane above the back yard of a man suspected of growing marijuana. The court ruled that "the Fourth Amendment simply does not require the police traveling in the public airways at this altitude to obtain a warrant in order to observe what is visible to the naked eye."
In a 2001 case, however, also involving a search for marijuana, the court was more skeptical of police tactics. It ruled that an Oregon police department conducted an illegal search when it used a thermal imaging device to detect heat coming from the home of an man suspected of growing marijuana indoors.
"The question we confront today is what limits there are upon this power of technology to shrink the realm of guaranteed privacy," Justice Antonin Scalia wrote in the 2001 case.
Still, Joseph J. Vacek, a professor in the Aviation Department at the University of North Dakota who has studied the potential use of drones in law enforcement, said the main objections to the use of domestic drones will probably have little to do with the Constitution.
"Where I see the challenge is the social norm," Vacek said. "Most people are not okay with constant watching. That hover-and-stare capability used to its maximum potential will probably ruffle a lot of civic feathers."
Links:
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2011/05/drones-becoming-pervasive-inside.html
Companies accused of SEC violations investigate themselves.
As the U.S. government steps up investigations of companies suspected of paying bribes overseas, law enforcement officials are leaving much of the detective work to the very corporations under suspicion.
The probes are so costly and wide-ranging that the Justice Department and Securities and Exchange Commission often let the companies investigate themselves and then share the results.
The strategy is especially common in cases of foreign corruption but also extends to domestic investigations involving issues as varied as health-care fraud and shady accounting.
The corporations, sometimes at the request of the government, hire teams of lawyers and accountants to interview employees, gather electronic records and sift through documents. The government reviews the results and decides whether further legwork is warranted — and, ultimately, whether to pursue charges.
The private investigators help determine what evidence the government sees. They typically turn over only a small subset of the many documents they collect. Sometimes the lawyers who conduct the investigation are the same ones who represent the company in negotiations with the government over charges and penalties.
According to lawyers and accountants involved in internal investigations, current and former government officials, and records of cases in which internal probes have played a role, the practice is widespread.
For the government, the approach is a way to save money and claim relatively easy victories, corporate lawyers say.
For the companies under investigation, it is a way to win credit for cooperating, which can translate into lesser charges or lighter penalties.
Link:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/justice-department-sec-investigations-often-rely-on-companies-internal-probes/2011/04/26/AFO2HP9G_story.html
The probes are so costly and wide-ranging that the Justice Department and Securities and Exchange Commission often let the companies investigate themselves and then share the results.
The strategy is especially common in cases of foreign corruption but also extends to domestic investigations involving issues as varied as health-care fraud and shady accounting.
The corporations, sometimes at the request of the government, hire teams of lawyers and accountants to interview employees, gather electronic records and sift through documents. The government reviews the results and decides whether further legwork is warranted — and, ultimately, whether to pursue charges.
The private investigators help determine what evidence the government sees. They typically turn over only a small subset of the many documents they collect. Sometimes the lawyers who conduct the investigation are the same ones who represent the company in negotiations with the government over charges and penalties.
According to lawyers and accountants involved in internal investigations, current and former government officials, and records of cases in which internal probes have played a role, the practice is widespread.
For the government, the approach is a way to save money and claim relatively easy victories, corporate lawyers say.
For the companies under investigation, it is a way to win credit for cooperating, which can translate into lesser charges or lighter penalties.
Link:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/justice-department-sec-investigations-often-rely-on-companies-internal-probes/2011/04/26/AFO2HP9G_story.html
New study suggests people who use hand sanitizers could fail alcohol test.
LOS ANGELES, CA — A new study released on Monday shows people who use excessive amounts of hand sanitizer may absorb small amounts of alcohol into the body, which can result in testing positive for alcohol consumption.
Doctor Gary Ricefield, a co-author of the University of Florida study, told KNX 1070 that the excuse was previously met with skepticism before the study.
If the findings are not unique to doctors and nurses, it’s certainly characteristic of professionals who have frequent contact with patients, and therefore need to sanitize their hands many, many times during the course of the day,” Ricefield said.
The subjects were instructed to abstain from alcohol before the study, and for ten straight hours on each of these days cleansed their hands with Purell sanitizer every five minutes — a total of 120 “touches” for three straight days.
Using the alcohol-based sanitizers a few times a day is probably not enough to show up on a urine test. But for people whose jobs require repeated hand sanitizer use — such as doctors and nurses — the amount of alcohol absorbed through the skin could lead to a false positive.
Study co-author Dr. Gary Reisfield says he was inspired to do the study after coming into contact with people at Shands Recovery Center who tested positive but denied having consumed alcohol.
Link:
http://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2011/05/23/study-excessive-hand-sanitizer-users-may-fail-alcohol-test/
Doctor Gary Ricefield, a co-author of the University of Florida study, told KNX 1070 that the excuse was previously met with skepticism before the study.
If the findings are not unique to doctors and nurses, it’s certainly characteristic of professionals who have frequent contact with patients, and therefore need to sanitize their hands many, many times during the course of the day,” Ricefield said.
The subjects were instructed to abstain from alcohol before the study, and for ten straight hours on each of these days cleansed their hands with Purell sanitizer every five minutes — a total of 120 “touches” for three straight days.
Using the alcohol-based sanitizers a few times a day is probably not enough to show up on a urine test. But for people whose jobs require repeated hand sanitizer use — such as doctors and nurses — the amount of alcohol absorbed through the skin could lead to a false positive.
Study co-author Dr. Gary Reisfield says he was inspired to do the study after coming into contact with people at Shands Recovery Center who tested positive but denied having consumed alcohol.
Link:
http://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2011/05/23/study-excessive-hand-sanitizer-users-may-fail-alcohol-test/
Wednesday, May 25, 2011
A former Watertown police officer Roberto Velasquez Johnson is charged with informing on other officers to drug dealers.
MA- A fired Watertown police officer has been charged with giving information about an international drug investigation involving millions of dollars and several other Watertown men to the people being investigated, leading to them allegedly intimidating other law enforcement officers.
More than $2.7 million in drug proceeds in Newton and Bedford in October 2010 was seized during the course of the investigation, according to the U.S. Attorney’s Office. After searching Watertown and Waltham residences on May 24, officials reportedly seized more than $700,000 in U.S. currency, seven kilograms of gold bars, 80 pounds of marijuana, four weapons and several vehicles.
The police officer, Roberto Velasquez Johnson was charged with conspiring to defraud the government by impeding a drug investigation. He faces up to five years in prison to be followed by 3 years of supervised release and a fine up to $250,000 if convicted.
“It is our belief that a majority if not all of this occurred after Velasquez-Johnson left his employment with the Watertown Police Department,” Police Chief Edward Deveau told the Watertown TAB. “I have no knowledge or information that there are any other Watertown officers, current or former, as part of this investigation."
Velasquez-Johnson was put on paid administrative leave last year after failing to deliver a restraining order in July. He later defended himself at a public disciplinary hearing at Town Hall in October but was fired in November.
According to the indictment, the federal investigation began in February 2010 and involved law enforcement in Massachusetts, New York, Nevada, California and Canada. The investigation reportedly centered on Madarati’s suspected marijuana and ecstasy trafficking, which reportedly had a manufacturing and distributing base at a garden apartment at 10 Oakley Road in Watertown
According to the indictment, Madarati “used his personal connections with members of the Watertown Police Department, including Roberto Velasquez-Johnson aka George Diamond, to obtain information about law enforcement activity in order to impede and obstruct investigations into his drug trafficking activities.”
Link:
http://www.wickedlocal.com/newton/news/x1303846599/Fired-Watertown-cop-charged-with-informing-on-other-officers-to-drug-dealers#axzz1NJpwRy7f
More than $2.7 million in drug proceeds in Newton and Bedford in October 2010 was seized during the course of the investigation, according to the U.S. Attorney’s Office. After searching Watertown and Waltham residences on May 24, officials reportedly seized more than $700,000 in U.S. currency, seven kilograms of gold bars, 80 pounds of marijuana, four weapons and several vehicles.
The police officer, Roberto Velasquez Johnson was charged with conspiring to defraud the government by impeding a drug investigation. He faces up to five years in prison to be followed by 3 years of supervised release and a fine up to $250,000 if convicted.
“It is our belief that a majority if not all of this occurred after Velasquez-Johnson left his employment with the Watertown Police Department,” Police Chief Edward Deveau told the Watertown TAB. “I have no knowledge or information that there are any other Watertown officers, current or former, as part of this investigation."
Velasquez-Johnson was put on paid administrative leave last year after failing to deliver a restraining order in July. He later defended himself at a public disciplinary hearing at Town Hall in October but was fired in November.
According to the indictment, the federal investigation began in February 2010 and involved law enforcement in Massachusetts, New York, Nevada, California and Canada. The investigation reportedly centered on Madarati’s suspected marijuana and ecstasy trafficking, which reportedly had a manufacturing and distributing base at a garden apartment at 10 Oakley Road in Watertown
According to the indictment, Madarati “used his personal connections with members of the Watertown Police Department, including Roberto Velasquez-Johnson aka George Diamond, to obtain information about law enforcement activity in order to impede and obstruct investigations into his drug trafficking activities.”
Link:
http://www.wickedlocal.com/newton/news/x1303846599/Fired-Watertown-cop-charged-with-informing-on-other-officers-to-drug-dealers#axzz1NJpwRy7f
An FBI agent assigned to move a rare Ferrari wrecked it during a short drive in Kentucky and the U.S. Justice Department refuses to pay restitution.
DETROIT, MI — An FBI agent assigned to move a rare Ferrari wrecked it during a short drive in Kentucky, and its owner is now suing the U.S. Justice Department, which has refused to pay $750,000 for the car.
The Justice Department recently responded to the lawsuit by saying it's not liable for certain goods when they're in the hands of law enforcement. The government also has refused to release most documents related to the crash.
The Ferrari F50 was stolen in 2003 from a dealer in Rosemont, Pa., and discovered five years later. The FBI kept it in Lexington, Ky., as part of an ongoing criminal investigation.
FBI agent Fred Kingston was to move the Ferrari from a garage in May 2009. Assistant U.S. Attorney J. Hamilton Thompson said Kingston invited him on a "short ride."
"Just a few seconds after we left the parking lot, we went around a curve and the rear of the car began sliding," Thompson said in an email released to Motors Insurance Co., the dealer's insurer.
"The agent tried to regain control but the car fishtailed and slid sideways up onto the curb. The vehicle came to rest against a row of bushes and a small tree," Thompson said.
Link:
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2015105631_apusfbiwreckedferrari.html
The Justice Department recently responded to the lawsuit by saying it's not liable for certain goods when they're in the hands of law enforcement. The government also has refused to release most documents related to the crash.
The Ferrari F50 was stolen in 2003 from a dealer in Rosemont, Pa., and discovered five years later. The FBI kept it in Lexington, Ky., as part of an ongoing criminal investigation.
FBI agent Fred Kingston was to move the Ferrari from a garage in May 2009. Assistant U.S. Attorney J. Hamilton Thompson said Kingston invited him on a "short ride."
"Just a few seconds after we left the parking lot, we went around a curve and the rear of the car began sliding," Thompson said in an email released to Motors Insurance Co., the dealer's insurer.
"The agent tried to regain control but the car fishtailed and slid sideways up onto the curb. The vehicle came to rest against a row of bushes and a small tree," Thompson said.
Link:
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2015105631_apusfbiwreckedferrari.html
NY- Oswind David is still In jail 5 years after charges were dismissed.
A Brooklyn man whose assault charges were dismissed remains in prison after already serving five years. ABC7 reports that Oswind David was sentenced to 23 years in Sing Sing because a jury was not aware that a judge has tossed out David's indictments due to a prosecutorial error. "They have a Judge, a DA, a defense counsel, and everybody miss this?" David asks.
He first learned of the mistake after the DA's office acknowledged it in their response to a recent motion of David's, but they argued that David should remain in jail because a first degree assault charge "automatically includes a second degree charge," and those "charges" weren't dismissed. Makes perfect sense! Every lawyer who took a "Double Secret Ghost Law" seminar knows this. David's original attorney resigned and he's now represented pro bono by Rita Dave, who says "this was just a complete utter mess-up, on every level."
Link:
http://gothamist.com/2011/05/24/brooklyn_man_remains_in_jail_5_year.php
He first learned of the mistake after the DA's office acknowledged it in their response to a recent motion of David's, but they argued that David should remain in jail because a first degree assault charge "automatically includes a second degree charge," and those "charges" weren't dismissed. Makes perfect sense! Every lawyer who took a "Double Secret Ghost Law" seminar knows this. David's original attorney resigned and he's now represented pro bono by Rita Dave, who says "this was just a complete utter mess-up, on every level."
Link:
http://gothamist.com/2011/05/24/brooklyn_man_remains_in_jail_5_year.php
With so many surveillance cameras at intersections etc. why do police not want to be videotaped?
What's good for the police apparently isn't good for the people -- or so the law enforcement community would have us believe when it comes to surveillance.
That's a concise summary of a new trend first reported by National Public Radio last week -- the trend whereby law enforcement officials have been trying to prevent civilians from using cellphone cameras in public places as a means of deterring police brutality.
Oddly, the effort -- which employs both forcible arrests of videographers and legal proceedings against them -- comes at a time when the American Civil Liberties Union reports that "an increasing number of American cities and towns are investing millions of taxpayer dollars in surveillance camera systems."
Then again, maybe it's not odd that the two trends are happening simultaneously. Maybe they go hand in hand. Perhaps as more police officers use cameras to monitor every move we make, they are discovering the true power of video to independently document events. And as they see that power, they don't want it turned against them
Police officers, he told NPR, "need to move quickly, in split seconds, without giving a lot of thought to what the adverse consequences for them might be." He added that law enforcement authorities believe "that anything that's going to have a chilling effect on an officer moving -- an apprehension that he's being videotaped and may be made to look bad -- could cost him or some citizen their life."
Obviously, nobody wants to stop officers from doing their much-needed job (well, nobody other than budget-cutting politicians who are slashing police forces). In fact, organizations such as the NAACP have urged citizens to videotape police precisely to make sure police are doing ALL of their job -- including protecting individuals' civil liberties.
This is not some academic or theoretical concern, and video recording is not a needless exercise in Bill of Rights zealotry. The assault on civil liberties in America is a very real problem and monitoring police is absolutely required in light of recent data.
As USA Today reported under the headline "Police brutality cases on rise since 9/11," situations "in which police, prison guards and other law enforcement authorities have used excessive force or other tactics to violate victims' civil rights increased 25 percent" between 2001 and 2007. Last year alone, more than 1,500 officers were involved in excessive force complaints, according to the National Police Misconduct Statistics and Reporting Project.
Link:
http://www.salon.com/news/david_sirota/2011/05/20/police_surveillance
That's a concise summary of a new trend first reported by National Public Radio last week -- the trend whereby law enforcement officials have been trying to prevent civilians from using cellphone cameras in public places as a means of deterring police brutality.
Oddly, the effort -- which employs both forcible arrests of videographers and legal proceedings against them -- comes at a time when the American Civil Liberties Union reports that "an increasing number of American cities and towns are investing millions of taxpayer dollars in surveillance camera systems."
Then again, maybe it's not odd that the two trends are happening simultaneously. Maybe they go hand in hand. Perhaps as more police officers use cameras to monitor every move we make, they are discovering the true power of video to independently document events. And as they see that power, they don't want it turned against them
Police officers, he told NPR, "need to move quickly, in split seconds, without giving a lot of thought to what the adverse consequences for them might be." He added that law enforcement authorities believe "that anything that's going to have a chilling effect on an officer moving -- an apprehension that he's being videotaped and may be made to look bad -- could cost him or some citizen their life."
Obviously, nobody wants to stop officers from doing their much-needed job (well, nobody other than budget-cutting politicians who are slashing police forces). In fact, organizations such as the NAACP have urged citizens to videotape police precisely to make sure police are doing ALL of their job -- including protecting individuals' civil liberties.
This is not some academic or theoretical concern, and video recording is not a needless exercise in Bill of Rights zealotry. The assault on civil liberties in America is a very real problem and monitoring police is absolutely required in light of recent data.
As USA Today reported under the headline "Police brutality cases on rise since 9/11," situations "in which police, prison guards and other law enforcement authorities have used excessive force or other tactics to violate victims' civil rights increased 25 percent" between 2001 and 2007. Last year alone, more than 1,500 officers were involved in excessive force complaints, according to the National Police Misconduct Statistics and Reporting Project.
Link:
http://www.salon.com/news/david_sirota/2011/05/20/police_surveillance
Margart Lin Owens claims the St. Louis police department fired a chemist in its crime lab after she complained about mistakes in criminal cases.
The St. Louis Police Department fired a chemist in its crime lab after she complained about mistakes in criminal cases, the woman claims in City Court. The plaintiff has an advanced degree in chemistry and more than 25 years experience.
Margart Lin Owens claims the department fired her after more than 25 years of service under the pretext of insubordination, but its real intent was to punish her for reporting fellow chemist Allyson Seger's mistakes in drug analysis in two cases.
Owens said Seger erred in two cases by finding tablets recovered by police to be negative, though they were both controlled substances.
Owens claims the mistakes were never corrected in department records, even after she brought her concerns to her superiors. Instead, Owens claims, the heat was turned on to her.
"Plaintiff acknowledges that on May 5, 2010 her supervisor, Joe Crow, had informed her that she would be written up for insubordination after Crow and Sergeant John Ruzicka complained to Lt. Angela Coonce that plaintiff was disrespectful and insubordinate by having successfully worked on numerous drug cases and an unsolved homicide/arson case, and not prioritizing just drug cases, which Crow had ordered plaintiff to do in his capacity as one of plaintiff's supervisors," the complaint states.
Owens claims that the insubordination charge was a pretext for firing her. Owens says the defendant St. Louis Metropolitan Police Department Board of Police Commissioners violated the Whistleblower Act by firing her and that she suffered lost wages, injury to her professional reputation and employability, and loss of eligibility to serve as an adjunct professor at Concordia University Wisconsin - St. Louis Center. Owens claims her non-economic damages total $350,000. She is represented by W. Bevis Schock.
Owens has a B.S. in Chemistry from Southeast Missouri University and an M.S. in Chemistry from Saint Louis University.
She says she developed a new method of detecting gunshot residue on clothing, which was described in a 1991 article in the Association of Firearm and Tool Mark Examiners Journal. In 2002, Owens was certified by the U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency to be a clandestine laboratory investigator.
Court Filing: http://www.courthousenews.com/2011/05/24/StLCop.pdf
Link: http://www.courthousenews.com/2011/05/24/36782.htm
Margart Lin Owens claims the department fired her after more than 25 years of service under the pretext of insubordination, but its real intent was to punish her for reporting fellow chemist Allyson Seger's mistakes in drug analysis in two cases.
Owens said Seger erred in two cases by finding tablets recovered by police to be negative, though they were both controlled substances.
Owens claims the mistakes were never corrected in department records, even after she brought her concerns to her superiors. Instead, Owens claims, the heat was turned on to her.
"Plaintiff acknowledges that on May 5, 2010 her supervisor, Joe Crow, had informed her that she would be written up for insubordination after Crow and Sergeant John Ruzicka complained to Lt. Angela Coonce that plaintiff was disrespectful and insubordinate by having successfully worked on numerous drug cases and an unsolved homicide/arson case, and not prioritizing just drug cases, which Crow had ordered plaintiff to do in his capacity as one of plaintiff's supervisors," the complaint states.
Owens claims that the insubordination charge was a pretext for firing her. Owens says the defendant St. Louis Metropolitan Police Department Board of Police Commissioners violated the Whistleblower Act by firing her and that she suffered lost wages, injury to her professional reputation and employability, and loss of eligibility to serve as an adjunct professor at Concordia University Wisconsin - St. Louis Center. Owens claims her non-economic damages total $350,000. She is represented by W. Bevis Schock.
Owens has a B.S. in Chemistry from Southeast Missouri University and an M.S. in Chemistry from Saint Louis University.
She says she developed a new method of detecting gunshot residue on clothing, which was described in a 1991 article in the Association of Firearm and Tool Mark Examiners Journal. In 2002, Owens was certified by the U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency to be a clandestine laboratory investigator.
Court Filing: http://www.courthousenews.com/2011/05/24/StLCop.pdf
Link: http://www.courthousenews.com/2011/05/24/36782.htm
MA- The Supreme Judicial Court claims a technician's records will suffice in Breathalyzer cases.
The state’s highest court ruled yesterday that prosecutors in drunken driving cases do not have to call a technician to testify that the breath-analysis device used by police worked properly.
The Supreme Judicial Court rejected arguments by a woman convicted of drunken driving in Greenfield that the annual certification of the machine and accompanying records constituted testimony from a witness and thus required that the defense be given a chance to cross-examine the person who had prepared them.
The Sixth Amendment to the US Constitution says people have a right to cross-examine the witnesses against them.
The Massachusetts court said instead that the records were “business records’’ primarily intended “to guarantee, internally, as a matter of course, and, when necessary, in court, the accuracy and standardization of all breathalyzer testing across the various police departments of the Commonwealth.’’
Linl:
http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2011/05/25/records_suffice_for_breath_evidence_in_dui_court_says/
The Supreme Judicial Court rejected arguments by a woman convicted of drunken driving in Greenfield that the annual certification of the machine and accompanying records constituted testimony from a witness and thus required that the defense be given a chance to cross-examine the person who had prepared them.
The Sixth Amendment to the US Constitution says people have a right to cross-examine the witnesses against them.
The Massachusetts court said instead that the records were “business records’’ primarily intended “to guarantee, internally, as a matter of course, and, when necessary, in court, the accuracy and standardization of all breathalyzer testing across the various police departments of the Commonwealth.’’
Linl:
http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2011/05/25/records_suffice_for_breath_evidence_in_dui_court_says/
Tuesday, May 24, 2011
Sen. Rand Paul Speaks on PATRIOT ACT
Sen. Paul is introducing the following amendments to the extension bill:
■ Burden-Shifting Suspicious Activity Report Amendment: Requires law enforcement to initiate requests for suspicious activity reports (SARs). Shifts the burden for generating suspicious activity reports to law enforcement, requiring FBI/other law enforcement to initiate requests for SARs, rather than requiring financial institutions to automatically generate these reports.
■ Supported by Kentucky Bankers Association and National Association of Federal Credit Unions
■ National Security Letters Issued by Judges: States that no officer or employee of the United States may issue a National Security Letter (NSL) unless a FISA court judge finds that probable cause exists to issue the NSL. Brings NSLs into compliance with plain text of Fourth Amendment.
■ Firearm Records Amendment: Clarifies that the authority to obtain info under the USA PATRIOT Act does not include authority to obtain certain firearm records. Supported by Gun Owners of America.
■ Roving Wiretaps Amendment: This amendment eliminates the possibility of "John Doe" roving wiretaps that identify neither the person nor the phone to be wiretapped. Also requires government agents to ascertain the presence of the target of a roving wiretap before beginning surveillance of a particular phone or email, using the same standard that is already required for criminal roving taps.
■ Leahy/Paul Amendment: This amendment consists of the substance of Sen. Patrick Leahy's (D-Vt.) PATRIOT Act reform bill (S. 193) as reported from the Judiciary Committee. The vote was 10-7 (those voting in favor included Sen. Mike Lee [R-Utah]).
■ Sen. Paul is co-sponsoring Sen. Leahy's amendment.
■ Section 215/Access to Business Records: Restores the pre-PATRIOT Act standard for obtaining records.
■ Supported by the American Library Association (ALA) and the Association of Research Libraries (ARL).
■ "Good Faith Standard" Suspicious Activity Report Amendment: This amendment would implement a reform that was previously proposed by the Financial Services Roundtable. This reform will help reduce the high number of "defensive filings" submitted by financial institutions due to their fear of being penalized for failure to file a suspicious activity report (SAR). It codifies a "good faith standard" to ensure that if a financial institution has established a SAR decision-making process, has followed existing policies, procedures, and processes, and determines not to file a SAR, the bank or credit union would not be penalized for its failure to file the SAR unless the failure was accompanied by evidence of bad faith.
■ Supported by Kentucky Bankers Association and National Association of Federal Credit Unions
■ Judicial Review of Suspicious Activity Reports: States that the Secretary of the Treasury may not require any financial institution to submit a suspicious activity report unless an appropriate district court of the United States issues an order finding that probable cause exists to obtain the information.
■ Minimization/Destruction of NSL and Section 215 Business Records Info: Directs the Attorney General to establish minimization and destruction procedures governing the acquisition, retention, and dissemination of private information by the FBI. The purpose is to ensure that private information obtained outside the scope of an NSL or Section 215 order is appropriately disposed of or destroyed.
Link: http://paul.senate.gov/?p=press_release&id=159
Medical examiners may not be immune to bias
Should forensic scientists know as little or as much as possible about the facts of the underlying case?
An article from the University of California, Irvine, school of law addresses this question and presents the following anecdote:
An evolutionary biologist studying the lineage of the Australian finch utilizes DNA testing to determine whether more brightly colored males mate more and produce more young and whether the male in a bonded pair is always the father of his partner’s offspring.
The biologist is adamant that DNA test results must be examined blind (the scientist can’t know, for instance, which birds are a bonded pair when determining offspring lineage) because it’s human nature to seize upon evidence that supports the investigator’s hypothesis and minimize or discredit evidence to the contrary.
Because the danger of bias is well-known, a scientist using less rigorous procedures would never be able to obtain financial support or publish in peer-review journals, the biologist says.
The interpretation of forensic evidence often has a major influence on the outcome of criminal prosecutions, so it’s extremely important, too, but rarely do forensic scientists interpret evidence blind.
They usually know the basic facts and nature of the case, and they understand how their determinations will influence the investigation and the likelihood of successful prosecution.
Link: http://durangoherald.com/article/20110509/COLUMNISTS09/705099988/-1/s
An article from the University of California, Irvine, school of law addresses this question and presents the following anecdote:
An evolutionary biologist studying the lineage of the Australian finch utilizes DNA testing to determine whether more brightly colored males mate more and produce more young and whether the male in a bonded pair is always the father of his partner’s offspring.
The biologist is adamant that DNA test results must be examined blind (the scientist can’t know, for instance, which birds are a bonded pair when determining offspring lineage) because it’s human nature to seize upon evidence that supports the investigator’s hypothesis and minimize or discredit evidence to the contrary.
Because the danger of bias is well-known, a scientist using less rigorous procedures would never be able to obtain financial support or publish in peer-review journals, the biologist says.
The interpretation of forensic evidence often has a major influence on the outcome of criminal prosecutions, so it’s extremely important, too, but rarely do forensic scientists interpret evidence blind.
They usually know the basic facts and nature of the case, and they understand how their determinations will influence the investigation and the likelihood of successful prosecution.
Link: http://durangoherald.com/article/20110509/COLUMNISTS09/705099988/-1/s
Texas- Harris County police do not agree with a Medical Examiners findings and then cast doubt on her credibility.
County officials are investigating a medical examiner who Houston police union officials say gave questionable findings in a recent trial of an off-duty officer acquitted of killing a bar patron.
Executive Assistant County Attorney Robert Soard confirmed his office is investigating a complaint against assistant medical examiner Dr. Mary Anzalone lodged by the Houston Police Officers Union. The union says the doctor's diagnosis that veteran officer Tommy L. Harris caused the victim's death by briefly placing him in a bear hug was not supported by the evidence and was disputed by another medical expert.
"Our office has received the complaint," Soard said. "We are looking into it and interviewing all the appropriate folks."
Roxanne Mena, spokeswoman for the Harris County Institute of Forensic Sciences, confirmed her office has requested court documents as part of an internal investigation of the doctor's testimony. Anzalone, who joined the medical examiner's office in May 2004 and earns $193,232, remains on staff performing her regular duties, Mena said.
In addition to disputing her ruling on the death, the union has accused Anzalone of bias against Harris, who was found not guilty by a Fort Bend County jury in March.
We believe that impeachment evidence that was brought to light during the cross-examination of Dr. Anzalone by Officer Harris's attorneys seriously undermined her credibility and the basis of her medical opinion," reads the complaint from police union president Gary Blankinship.
Link: http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/metropolitan/7574541.html
Executive Assistant County Attorney Robert Soard confirmed his office is investigating a complaint against assistant medical examiner Dr. Mary Anzalone lodged by the Houston Police Officers Union. The union says the doctor's diagnosis that veteran officer Tommy L. Harris caused the victim's death by briefly placing him in a bear hug was not supported by the evidence and was disputed by another medical expert.
"Our office has received the complaint," Soard said. "We are looking into it and interviewing all the appropriate folks."
Roxanne Mena, spokeswoman for the Harris County Institute of Forensic Sciences, confirmed her office has requested court documents as part of an internal investigation of the doctor's testimony. Anzalone, who joined the medical examiner's office in May 2004 and earns $193,232, remains on staff performing her regular duties, Mena said.
In addition to disputing her ruling on the death, the union has accused Anzalone of bias against Harris, who was found not guilty by a Fort Bend County jury in March.
We believe that impeachment evidence that was brought to light during the cross-examination of Dr. Anzalone by Officer Harris's attorneys seriously undermined her credibility and the basis of her medical opinion," reads the complaint from police union president Gary Blankinship.
Link: http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/metropolitan/7574541.html
Patients are not being informed when doctors use their own medical devices which can pose a potential conflict of interest.
Antonitsa Vlahoulis knew as she slipped into unconsciousness on the operating room table that her surgeon would choose which medical device she would receive to fix her leaky heart valve.
But when a warranty card arrived in the mail for the device stitched into her heart, Vlahoulis got the first of several shocks.
The card referred to the device by its original name: the McCarthy Annuloplasty Ring. That's when she realized that Dr. Patrick McCarthy, her surgeon at Northwestern Memorial Hospital, had invented it.
Vlahoulis, of Niles, said McCarthy had told her he would choose a ring from those listed in a booklet he gave her. She flipped through it, but this ring wasn't there.
She checked the Food and Drug Administration's website, looking for the ring on the agency's list of approved devices. But she couldn't find it. When she contacted the FDA to ask about it, she received a startling email in reply.
"Due to our confidentiality concerns we are unable to provide any information about a product until after it is approved," the public affairs specialist wrote.
Patients in need of permanently implantable, life-sustaining medical devices may assume that the products have undergone rigorous clinical and regulatory scrutiny and that rules put in place to protect their rights are enforced to the letter of the law.
Link:
http://www.chicagotribune.com/health/ct-met-medical-devices-patients-20110522,0,3161920.story
But when a warranty card arrived in the mail for the device stitched into her heart, Vlahoulis got the first of several shocks.
The card referred to the device by its original name: the McCarthy Annuloplasty Ring. That's when she realized that Dr. Patrick McCarthy, her surgeon at Northwestern Memorial Hospital, had invented it.
Vlahoulis, of Niles, said McCarthy had told her he would choose a ring from those listed in a booklet he gave her. She flipped through it, but this ring wasn't there.
She checked the Food and Drug Administration's website, looking for the ring on the agency's list of approved devices. But she couldn't find it. When she contacted the FDA to ask about it, she received a startling email in reply.
"Due to our confidentiality concerns we are unable to provide any information about a product until after it is approved," the public affairs specialist wrote.
Patients in need of permanently implantable, life-sustaining medical devices may assume that the products have undergone rigorous clinical and regulatory scrutiny and that rules put in place to protect their rights are enforced to the letter of the law.
Link:
http://www.chicagotribune.com/health/ct-met-medical-devices-patients-20110522,0,3161920.story
Los Angeles, CA- 2,100 police departments across the country have volunteer police working in some capacity.
The new budget for Los Angeles would cut $100 million from the city's police department. Officials hope to save the money by granting less overtime. And one way to do that is through the use of volunteers.
The Los Angeles Police Department already has more than 700 unpaid workers in its Reserve Corps. These volunteers save the city about $5 million each year. But some in the legal profession have concerns.
For anyone interested in becoming a reserve officer, the first step is the orientation meeting.
Lt. Craig Herron runs LAPD's reserve unit. At a recent gathering, he surveys the room and asks how many want to join the reserves in order to become full-time officers. A few raise their hands.
"The rest of you I assume always wanted to be a cop but you found an opportunity to have fame and fortune elsewhere and said, 'You know what, I can still be a reserve officer — and still do my full-time job,' " Herron says.
According to the International Association of Chiefs of Police, more than 2,100 police departments nationwide have volunteer programs. And while training and duties vary widely, the use of volunteers in criminal investigations can raise legal and safety concerns.
Stan Goldman, a law professor, says that while many of the volunteers might do good work and provide valuable input, he has some concerns "if you bring somebody in who rides along and actually gets involved in criminal circumstances involving crime."
Goldman, who teaches at Loyola Law School in Los Angeles, says the police volunteers "may have been trained well and may have other experiences in life — but they're still only doing it a couple days a month."
Link:
http://www.npr.org/2011/05/19/136436405/in-tight-times-l-a-relies-on-volunteer-police
The Los Angeles Police Department already has more than 700 unpaid workers in its Reserve Corps. These volunteers save the city about $5 million each year. But some in the legal profession have concerns.
For anyone interested in becoming a reserve officer, the first step is the orientation meeting.
Lt. Craig Herron runs LAPD's reserve unit. At a recent gathering, he surveys the room and asks how many want to join the reserves in order to become full-time officers. A few raise their hands.
"The rest of you I assume always wanted to be a cop but you found an opportunity to have fame and fortune elsewhere and said, 'You know what, I can still be a reserve officer — and still do my full-time job,' " Herron says.
According to the International Association of Chiefs of Police, more than 2,100 police departments nationwide have volunteer programs. And while training and duties vary widely, the use of volunteers in criminal investigations can raise legal and safety concerns.
Stan Goldman, a law professor, says that while many of the volunteers might do good work and provide valuable input, he has some concerns "if you bring somebody in who rides along and actually gets involved in criminal circumstances involving crime."
Goldman, who teaches at Loyola Law School in Los Angeles, says the police volunteers "may have been trained well and may have other experiences in life — but they're still only doing it a couple days a month."
Link:
http://www.npr.org/2011/05/19/136436405/in-tight-times-l-a-relies-on-volunteer-police
The D.C. medical examiner's office loses accreditation.
The D.C. medical examiner's office has lost its national accreditation because the agency's chief lacks board certification, weakening the prosecution of criminal cases in court and potentially keeping the agency from moving into the city's $220 million forensics lab set to open next year, city officials said.
The Office of the Chief Medical Examiner is tasked with conducting autopsies in homicide cases. It also does the urine analysis for suspected drunk drivers in the District ?-- the only means available for testing blood-alcohol levels as the city works to revive its alcohol breath-test program, which was shut down in February 2010 because the police department poorly calibrated the equipment.
Now that the long-troubled agency has lost its accreditation, defense attorneys can more easily attack in court the evidence that comes out of the office.
"It does make the government prosecution of criminal cases more difficult," said at-large D.C. Councilman Phil Mendelson, whose committee oversees the medical examiner's office. "It's another issue a defense attorney can raise during trial."
Without accreditation, the medical examiner also won't be able to move into the new crime lab, he said.
"We want everything accredited that goes into the lab," Mendelson said.
The medical examiner's office did not respond Wednesday to a request for comment.
Link:
http://washingtonexaminer.com/local/dc/2011/05/dc-medical-examiners-office-loses-accreditation
The Office of the Chief Medical Examiner is tasked with conducting autopsies in homicide cases. It also does the urine analysis for suspected drunk drivers in the District ?-- the only means available for testing blood-alcohol levels as the city works to revive its alcohol breath-test program, which was shut down in February 2010 because the police department poorly calibrated the equipment.
Now that the long-troubled agency has lost its accreditation, defense attorneys can more easily attack in court the evidence that comes out of the office.
"It does make the government prosecution of criminal cases more difficult," said at-large D.C. Councilman Phil Mendelson, whose committee oversees the medical examiner's office. "It's another issue a defense attorney can raise during trial."
Without accreditation, the medical examiner also won't be able to move into the new crime lab, he said.
"We want everything accredited that goes into the lab," Mendelson said.
The medical examiner's office did not respond Wednesday to a request for comment.
Link:
http://washingtonexaminer.com/local/dc/2011/05/dc-medical-examiners-office-loses-accreditation
The Indianapolis Crime lab errors could date back to 2004 affecting numerous cases.
INDIANAPOLIS – Errors in evidence testing that raise questions about possible wrongful convictions go back at least three years more than had been previously reported, according to new emails obtained from the Indiana State Department of Toxicology.
The Indianapolis Star reported Tuesday that about 2,000 emails it obtained from the lab show the agency was beset by incorrect test results from 2004 to 2006. A current audit of the lab’s work is covering only 2007 to 2009.
The lab tests blood and urine samples for evidence in criminal cases. The emails obtained by the Star show inadequate staffing and funding produced an environment in the lab ripe for errors, including the kind that could lead to people being denied justice, or escaping it.
The emails are correspondence to and from Peter Method, who was acting director of the department from 2003 to 2008.
They suggest benign neglect on the part of the Indiana University School of Medicine, which did not authorize an audit of test results until 2008, at least four years after the first testing errors were reported by email.
Link:
http://www.journalgazette.net/article/20110518/NEWS07/305189942/1002/LOCAL
The Indianapolis Star reported Tuesday that about 2,000 emails it obtained from the lab show the agency was beset by incorrect test results from 2004 to 2006. A current audit of the lab’s work is covering only 2007 to 2009.
The lab tests blood and urine samples for evidence in criminal cases. The emails obtained by the Star show inadequate staffing and funding produced an environment in the lab ripe for errors, including the kind that could lead to people being denied justice, or escaping it.
The emails are correspondence to and from Peter Method, who was acting director of the department from 2003 to 2008.
They suggest benign neglect on the part of the Indiana University School of Medicine, which did not authorize an audit of test results until 2008, at least four years after the first testing errors were reported by email.
Link:
http://www.journalgazette.net/article/20110518/NEWS07/305189942/1002/LOCAL
Monday, May 23, 2011
A Florida report suggests workers insurance fraud cases are on the rise in the U.S.
CLEARWATER, FL - Even during a troubled economy, and possibly because of it, business has never been better for Paul Colbert.
His Meridian Investigative Group in St. Petersburg grew 50 percent last year, snooping on workers who fake on-the job-injuries to get workers' compensation checks.
That tracks with figures from the Florida Division of Insurance Fraud, which reported double-digit increases in workers compensation fraud during 2010.
"Some people make it a career," Colbert said. "They're career claimants."
Colbert has 100 investigators in 14 states, armed with covert cameras and producing about 100 surveillance tapes a week that show able-bodied workers who are suspected of pretending to be lame or sick.
In Florida, courts ordered restitution totaling more than $63 million in 1,676 cases of worker's compensation fraud in 2010, according to a report for the Florida Division of Insurance Fraud.
Workers faking or exaggerating work-related injuries make up the biggest share of the fraud, 39 percent, though employer fraud – including companies pretending to carry worker's compensation insurance when they don't – is the fastest-rising.
Link:
http://www2.tbo.com/news/consumer/2011/may/18/worker-insurance-fraud-up-but-bosses-do-it-too-ar-208002/
His Meridian Investigative Group in St. Petersburg grew 50 percent last year, snooping on workers who fake on-the job-injuries to get workers' compensation checks.
That tracks with figures from the Florida Division of Insurance Fraud, which reported double-digit increases in workers compensation fraud during 2010.
"Some people make it a career," Colbert said. "They're career claimants."
Colbert has 100 investigators in 14 states, armed with covert cameras and producing about 100 surveillance tapes a week that show able-bodied workers who are suspected of pretending to be lame or sick.
In Florida, courts ordered restitution totaling more than $63 million in 1,676 cases of worker's compensation fraud in 2010, according to a report for the Florida Division of Insurance Fraud.
Workers faking or exaggerating work-related injuries make up the biggest share of the fraud, 39 percent, though employer fraud – including companies pretending to carry worker's compensation insurance when they don't – is the fastest-rising.
Link:
http://www2.tbo.com/news/consumer/2011/may/18/worker-insurance-fraud-up-but-bosses-do-it-too-ar-208002/
A recent NYU School of Law study suggests U.S. government entrapment in bombing cases.
A study from New York University's Center for Human Rights and Global Justice, profiling three terrorism cases in New York and New Jersey, blasts the "myth" of the homegrown threat of Islamic radicalization and says that "government-manufactured" terrorism cases pose "intolerable threats to basic human rights across the country."
All three of the cases in the 92-page report - called "Targeted and Entrapped: Manufacturing the 'Homegrown Threat' in the United States" - relied on evidence from FBI informants that recruited Muslims to shoot, bomb or destroy targets selected by the agents.
The first of three cases is the so-called Newburgh Four, residents of the impoverished city in Orange County, N.Y., ensnared for plotting to blow up synagogues and shoot down military airplanes. They say an FBI informant picked the targets, provided mock weapons and promised them $250,000, along with other material and afterlife rewards.
The men - James Cromitie, David William, Onta Williams and Laguerre Payan - failed to convince the jury that they were entrapped and were convicted in October.
A federal judge dismissed their appeals, despite finding there was "some truth" to their position that the "Government 'created the criminal and manufactured the crime."
The NYU study, however, calls the "home-grown threat" a "myth" perpetuated by the 2007 NYPD report "Radicalization in the West: The Homegrown Threat," which identified "wearing traditional Islamic clothing and growing a beard" as signs of the "self-identification" phase of radicalization.
The authors say that dozens of other cases may involve religious profiling, untrained informants or government-created terror plots.
"Our research came across at least 20 other terrorism prosecutions in recent years against Muslim defendants that involved some combination of paid informants, selection for investigation based on perceived religious identity, or a plot that was created by the government," the report states, in three pages of citations.
A second study suggests that Muslims are targeted by the U.S. as dangerous threats to national security. This Briefing Paper by the Center for Human Rights and Global Justice (CHRGJ) and the Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund (AALDEF) documents the U.S. government’s deployment of lower evidentiary standards and lack of due process guarantees in the immigration system against Muslims to further marginalize this targeted group in the name of national security and counterterrorism.
http://chrgj.org/projects/docs/undertheradar.pdf
NYU School of Law Report:
http://www.chrgj.org/projects/docs/targetedandentrapped.pdf
Link:
http://www.courthousenews.com/2011/05/20/36745.htm
All three of the cases in the 92-page report - called "Targeted and Entrapped: Manufacturing the 'Homegrown Threat' in the United States" - relied on evidence from FBI informants that recruited Muslims to shoot, bomb or destroy targets selected by the agents.
The first of three cases is the so-called Newburgh Four, residents of the impoverished city in Orange County, N.Y., ensnared for plotting to blow up synagogues and shoot down military airplanes. They say an FBI informant picked the targets, provided mock weapons and promised them $250,000, along with other material and afterlife rewards.
The men - James Cromitie, David William, Onta Williams and Laguerre Payan - failed to convince the jury that they were entrapped and were convicted in October.
A federal judge dismissed their appeals, despite finding there was "some truth" to their position that the "Government 'created the criminal and manufactured the crime."
The NYU study, however, calls the "home-grown threat" a "myth" perpetuated by the 2007 NYPD report "Radicalization in the West: The Homegrown Threat," which identified "wearing traditional Islamic clothing and growing a beard" as signs of the "self-identification" phase of radicalization.
The authors say that dozens of other cases may involve religious profiling, untrained informants or government-created terror plots.
"Our research came across at least 20 other terrorism prosecutions in recent years against Muslim defendants that involved some combination of paid informants, selection for investigation based on perceived religious identity, or a plot that was created by the government," the report states, in three pages of citations.
A second study suggests that Muslims are targeted by the U.S. as dangerous threats to national security. This Briefing Paper by the Center for Human Rights and Global Justice (CHRGJ) and the Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund (AALDEF) documents the U.S. government’s deployment of lower evidentiary standards and lack of due process guarantees in the immigration system against Muslims to further marginalize this targeted group in the name of national security and counterterrorism.
http://chrgj.org/projects/docs/undertheradar.pdf
NYU School of Law Report:
http://www.chrgj.org/projects/docs/targetedandentrapped.pdf
Link:
http://www.courthousenews.com/2011/05/20/36745.htm
Our privacy matters and we should all be concerned about the Government keeping files on its citizens.
When the government gathers or analyzes personal information, many people say they're not worried. "I've got nothing to hide," they declare. "Only if you're doing something wrong should you worry, and then you don't deserve to keep it private."
The nothing-to-hide argument pervades discussions about privacy. The data-security expert Bruce Schneier calls it the "most common retort against privacy advocates." The legal scholar Geoffrey Stone refers to it as an "all-too-common refrain." In its most compelling form, it is an argument that the privacy interest is generally minimal, thus making the contest with security concerns a foreordained victory for security.
The nothing-to-hide argument is everywhere. In Britain, for example, the government has installed millions of public-surveillance cameras in cities and towns, which are watched by officials via closed-circuit television. In a campaign slogan for the program, the government declares: "If you've got nothing to hide, you've got nothing to fear." Variations of nothing-to-hide arguments frequently appear in blogs, letters to the editor, television news interviews, and other forums. One blogger in the United States, in reference to profiling people for national-security purposes, declares: "I don't mind people wanting to find out things about me, I've got nothing to hide! Which is why I support [the government's] efforts to find terrorists by monitoring our phone calls!"
In a less extreme form, the nothing-to-hide argument refers not to all personal information but only to the type of data the government is likely to collect. Retorts to the nothing-to-hide argument about exposing people's naked bodies or their deepest secrets are relevant only if the government is likely to gather this kind of information. In many instances, hardly anyone will see the information, and it won't be disclosed to the public. Thus, some might argue, the privacy interest is minimal, and the security interest in preventing terrorism is much more important. In this less extreme form, the nothing-to-hide argument is a formidable one. However, it stems from certain faulty assumptions about privacy and its value.
Commentators often attempt to refute the nothing-to-hide argument by pointing to things people want to hide. But the problem with the nothing-to-hide argument is the underlying assumption that privacy is about hiding bad things. By accepting this assumption, we concede far too much ground and invite an unproductive discussion about information that people would very likely want to hide. As the computer-security specialist Schneier aptly notes, the nothing-to-hide argument stems from a faulty "premise that privacy is about hiding a wrong." Surveillance, for example, can inhibit such lawful activities as free speech, free association, and other First Amendment rights essential for democracy.
A related problem involves secondary use. Secondary use is the exploitation of data obtained for one purpose for an unrelated purpose without the subject's consent. How long will personal data be stored? How will the information be used? What could it be used for in the future? The potential uses of any piece of personal information are vast. Without limits on or accountability for how that information is used, it is hard for people to assess the dangers of the data's being in the government's control.
Yet another problem with government gathering and use of personal data is distortion. Although personal information can reveal quite a lot about people's personalities and activities, it often fails to reflect the whole person. It can paint a distorted picture, especially since records are reductive—they often capture information in a standardized format with many details omitted
Link:
http://chronicle.com/article/Why-Privacy-Matters-Even-if/127461/
The nothing-to-hide argument pervades discussions about privacy. The data-security expert Bruce Schneier calls it the "most common retort against privacy advocates." The legal scholar Geoffrey Stone refers to it as an "all-too-common refrain." In its most compelling form, it is an argument that the privacy interest is generally minimal, thus making the contest with security concerns a foreordained victory for security.
The nothing-to-hide argument is everywhere. In Britain, for example, the government has installed millions of public-surveillance cameras in cities and towns, which are watched by officials via closed-circuit television. In a campaign slogan for the program, the government declares: "If you've got nothing to hide, you've got nothing to fear." Variations of nothing-to-hide arguments frequently appear in blogs, letters to the editor, television news interviews, and other forums. One blogger in the United States, in reference to profiling people for national-security purposes, declares: "I don't mind people wanting to find out things about me, I've got nothing to hide! Which is why I support [the government's] efforts to find terrorists by monitoring our phone calls!"
In a less extreme form, the nothing-to-hide argument refers not to all personal information but only to the type of data the government is likely to collect. Retorts to the nothing-to-hide argument about exposing people's naked bodies or their deepest secrets are relevant only if the government is likely to gather this kind of information. In many instances, hardly anyone will see the information, and it won't be disclosed to the public. Thus, some might argue, the privacy interest is minimal, and the security interest in preventing terrorism is much more important. In this less extreme form, the nothing-to-hide argument is a formidable one. However, it stems from certain faulty assumptions about privacy and its value.
Commentators often attempt to refute the nothing-to-hide argument by pointing to things people want to hide. But the problem with the nothing-to-hide argument is the underlying assumption that privacy is about hiding bad things. By accepting this assumption, we concede far too much ground and invite an unproductive discussion about information that people would very likely want to hide. As the computer-security specialist Schneier aptly notes, the nothing-to-hide argument stems from a faulty "premise that privacy is about hiding a wrong." Surveillance, for example, can inhibit such lawful activities as free speech, free association, and other First Amendment rights essential for democracy.
A related problem involves secondary use. Secondary use is the exploitation of data obtained for one purpose for an unrelated purpose without the subject's consent. How long will personal data be stored? How will the information be used? What could it be used for in the future? The potential uses of any piece of personal information are vast. Without limits on or accountability for how that information is used, it is hard for people to assess the dangers of the data's being in the government's control.
Yet another problem with government gathering and use of personal data is distortion. Although personal information can reveal quite a lot about people's personalities and activities, it often fails to reflect the whole person. It can paint a distorted picture, especially since records are reductive—they often capture information in a standardized format with many details omitted
Link:
http://chronicle.com/article/Why-Privacy-Matters-Even-if/127461/
Wakefield, NH- Police chief Ken Fifield justifies DUI checkpoints by claiming driving is suspicious behavoir.
Ossipee, NH — A Carroll County man is questioning authorities about the constitutionality of sobriety checkpoints. But local police chiefs say that question has been settled.
The topic came up at Wednesday's county commission meeting when Ed Comeau, of Brookfield, asked commissioners whether they considered the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution when they signed off on some paperwork for a state grant to fund the sheriff's office involvement in an upcoming sobriety checkpoint.
"When you were sworn in as commissioners, did you swear an oath the the constitution?" said Comeau. "The Fourth Amendment states you need probable cause in order to pull someone over if they haven't done a crime. Was that taken into consideration?"
Comeau films county commission meetings for his website, www.governmentoversite.com.
In order to conduct a checkpoint, police must get approval from a Superior Court judge. Right now Wakefield police are in the process of writing the application to seek approval from the Superior Court.
The application to the court includes a detailed accounting of the purpose of the checkpoint, how long the checkpoint will be conducted, how long each stop can last, how the vehicles will be pulled over, and what the officer will do when he or she has someone pulled over, said Wakefied Police chief Ken Fifield.
"This is very much the same as a warrant for a search or an arrest because it's done with cause and court approval not just the whim of an executive who says go stop cars on Route 16 and let's see what we get," said Fifield. "It's not what I think, it's what the courts have already determined."
During a stop, an officer has several responsibilities, said Fifield. Those include: informing the motorist of the checkpoint, identifying the motorist, and checking license and registration. The person is let go within three minutes if there's no problem. Police will not be looking for broken headlights and overdue inspections.
"I'm still trying to get over the Fourth Amendment issue of where is the probable cause," Comeau replied. "Where is the suspicion."
But Fifield said the standard isn't probable cause, it's actually "reasonable and articulable suspicion." Officers need that standard to make a stop. Officers need to meet the higher standard of "probable cause" to make an arrest or do a search warrant. Fifield stressed that the checkpoints are legal because they have gotten permission from a judge.
Link:
http://www.conwaydailysun.com/featured/story/man-challenges-proposed-sobriety-checkpoint
The topic came up at Wednesday's county commission meeting when Ed Comeau, of Brookfield, asked commissioners whether they considered the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution when they signed off on some paperwork for a state grant to fund the sheriff's office involvement in an upcoming sobriety checkpoint.
"When you were sworn in as commissioners, did you swear an oath the the constitution?" said Comeau. "The Fourth Amendment states you need probable cause in order to pull someone over if they haven't done a crime. Was that taken into consideration?"
Comeau films county commission meetings for his website, www.governmentoversite.com.
In order to conduct a checkpoint, police must get approval from a Superior Court judge. Right now Wakefield police are in the process of writing the application to seek approval from the Superior Court.
The application to the court includes a detailed accounting of the purpose of the checkpoint, how long the checkpoint will be conducted, how long each stop can last, how the vehicles will be pulled over, and what the officer will do when he or she has someone pulled over, said Wakefied Police chief Ken Fifield.
"This is very much the same as a warrant for a search or an arrest because it's done with cause and court approval not just the whim of an executive who says go stop cars on Route 16 and let's see what we get," said Fifield. "It's not what I think, it's what the courts have already determined."
During a stop, an officer has several responsibilities, said Fifield. Those include: informing the motorist of the checkpoint, identifying the motorist, and checking license and registration. The person is let go within three minutes if there's no problem. Police will not be looking for broken headlights and overdue inspections.
"I'm still trying to get over the Fourth Amendment issue of where is the probable cause," Comeau replied. "Where is the suspicion."
But Fifield said the standard isn't probable cause, it's actually "reasonable and articulable suspicion." Officers need that standard to make a stop. Officers need to meet the higher standard of "probable cause" to make an arrest or do a search warrant. Fifield stressed that the checkpoints are legal because they have gotten permission from a judge.
Link:
http://www.conwaydailysun.com/featured/story/man-challenges-proposed-sobriety-checkpoint
Friday, May 20, 2011
A public records request has revealed a systemic problem with the Commission on Accreditation of Law Enforcement Agencies that affects more than 800 law enforcement agencies.
A public records dispute with the Clark County Sheriff’s Office has revealed a systemic problem with the nation’s largest law enforcement accreditation agency that affects more than 800 law enforcement agencies and millions of Americans across the country.
The company, the Commission on Accreditation of Law Enforcement Agencies (often referred to as CALEA) is a private non-profit organization that certifies law enforcement agencies meet industry standards. Despite its formal sounding name, CALEA is not a government entity.
Currently, 16 agencies in Washington, including the Clark County Sheriff’s Office, the Seattle Police Department, and Washington State Patrol are certified CALEA clients.
CALEA describes its certification process as a way to “enhance professional excellence” via compliance with “459 state-of-the-art standards,” covering topics ranging from use of force to evidence handling. Ironically, the company that seeks to uphold professional standards mandates its law enforcement clients violate public record laws.
The contract between the Sheriff’s Office and the company contains a provision that ambiguously claims the company’s written standards and “related materials” are protected by “U.S. and International Copyright Laws” and therefore cannot be released to the public without the company’s “express written permission.” Specific laws are not referenced in the contract.
CALEA staff and phone calls to more than 30 law enforcement agencies across the country confirm that the non-disclosure provision is standard in CALEA’s contracts with law enforcement agencies.
Although public record laws differ slightly from state-to-state, no state allows a government agency to use a contract to avoid disclosing public records. Additionally, no state lists copyright protection as a reason, by itself, to withhold records (a user-friendly state-by-state comparison of public record law is maintained by the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press at www.rcfp.org/ogg).
Link:
http://vanvoice.com/article?articleTitle=hidden+violations--1305751026--807--top-stories
The company, the Commission on Accreditation of Law Enforcement Agencies (often referred to as CALEA) is a private non-profit organization that certifies law enforcement agencies meet industry standards. Despite its formal sounding name, CALEA is not a government entity.
Currently, 16 agencies in Washington, including the Clark County Sheriff’s Office, the Seattle Police Department, and Washington State Patrol are certified CALEA clients.
CALEA describes its certification process as a way to “enhance professional excellence” via compliance with “459 state-of-the-art standards,” covering topics ranging from use of force to evidence handling. Ironically, the company that seeks to uphold professional standards mandates its law enforcement clients violate public record laws.
The contract between the Sheriff’s Office and the company contains a provision that ambiguously claims the company’s written standards and “related materials” are protected by “U.S. and International Copyright Laws” and therefore cannot be released to the public without the company’s “express written permission.” Specific laws are not referenced in the contract.
CALEA staff and phone calls to more than 30 law enforcement agencies across the country confirm that the non-disclosure provision is standard in CALEA’s contracts with law enforcement agencies.
Although public record laws differ slightly from state-to-state, no state allows a government agency to use a contract to avoid disclosing public records. Additionally, no state lists copyright protection as a reason, by itself, to withhold records (a user-friendly state-by-state comparison of public record law is maintained by the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press at www.rcfp.org/ogg).
Link:
http://vanvoice.com/article?articleTitle=hidden+violations--1305751026--807--top-stories
Harvey, Miss- Jessica Cheatteam a 15 year old teen is afraid to testify and is jailed for contempt of Court.
A 15-year-old Harvey girl who is Jefferson Parish prosecutors' key witness in a second-degree murder case spent a night in jail after she refused to testify against the accused killer Wednesday, a silence apparently based in her fear of the defendant or his family.
Jessica Cheatteam was held in contempt of court Wednesday after she flatly refused to say in open court and in front of a jury that Michael Williams shot Terry Redmond on April 26, 2009, in Harvey's Scotsdale neighborhood, a claim she shared with Sheriff's Office detectives who were investigating the slaying two years ago.
Cheatteam, who was 13 years old when Redmond was shot several times, was sitting at the witness stand only feet from Williams, 18, while members of his family sat in the audience yards behind him.
Her refusal to testify led Judge June Darensburg of the 24th Judicial District Court to send the jury out of the courtroom and arrange for a public defender, Graham Bosworth, to provide legal advice to the teenager. But after conferring privately with Bosworth, Cheatteam again refused to testify.
"Are you refusing to testify and answer our questions?" asked Assistant District Attorney Sunny Funk, who is prosecuting Williams with David Hufft.
"That's correct," Cheatteam said.
Darensburg then found Cheatteam in contempt of court and sentenced her to six months in jail, the maximum for contempt. Cheatteam seemed unfazed as she was escorted out of court to the Rivarde Juvenile Detention Center in Harvey.
What's changed in the South? A teen is afraid for her and her families safety is jailed for contempt of Court.
Link:
http://www.nola.com/crime/index.ssf/2011/05/scared_teen_witness_refuses_to.html
Jessica Cheatteam was held in contempt of court Wednesday after she flatly refused to say in open court and in front of a jury that Michael Williams shot Terry Redmond on April 26, 2009, in Harvey's Scotsdale neighborhood, a claim she shared with Sheriff's Office detectives who were investigating the slaying two years ago.
Cheatteam, who was 13 years old when Redmond was shot several times, was sitting at the witness stand only feet from Williams, 18, while members of his family sat in the audience yards behind him.
Her refusal to testify led Judge June Darensburg of the 24th Judicial District Court to send the jury out of the courtroom and arrange for a public defender, Graham Bosworth, to provide legal advice to the teenager. But after conferring privately with Bosworth, Cheatteam again refused to testify.
"Are you refusing to testify and answer our questions?" asked Assistant District Attorney Sunny Funk, who is prosecuting Williams with David Hufft.
"That's correct," Cheatteam said.
Darensburg then found Cheatteam in contempt of court and sentenced her to six months in jail, the maximum for contempt. Cheatteam seemed unfazed as she was escorted out of court to the Rivarde Juvenile Detention Center in Harvey.
What's changed in the South? A teen is afraid for her and her families safety is jailed for contempt of Court.
Link:
http://www.nola.com/crime/index.ssf/2011/05/scared_teen_witness_refuses_to.html
Arson cases are being challenged more often as uncertainty about the origin of fires has increased.
Around the country, defendants in arson cases are challenging their convictions as new research has blown holes in investigators' long-held assumptions about how fires start and spread.
As in the investigation into the fire that destroyed J.J.'s Pub in rural Marquette County on Sept. 11, 2006, many of those investigators work for insurance companies with a stake in the outcome.
John Lentini, a prominent fire investigator and one of the harshest critics of the current state of fire science, said some of the probes amount to little more than "witchcraft and folklore."
He cited a 2005 test designed by the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms in which fire investigators were asked to identify the general area where two test fires were started in separate rooms. The fires were extinguished less than three minutes after achieving "flashover" — the point when, Lentini says, "a fire in a room becomes a room on fire."
Each time, just three of the 53 investigators got the area of origin right, and it was a different three each time, Lentini said. Subsequent tests have produced similar results.
Another series of test burns in 2008 called into question the widely held belief that V-shaped burn patterns on walls — like the one cited in the arson case against J.J.'s Pub owner Joseph "Joey" Awe —indicate where a fire started. In fact, the markings "bore no relationship to either of the fires' origins, which were approximately six feet from the apex of each ‘V,'" the bureau reported.
Unlike improvements in DNA technology, which have helped police solve more crimes, advances in fire investigation may have had the opposite effect: As knowledge about fire grows, uncertainty about the origin of fires has increased and the number of fires declared intentional has plummeted.
Since 1980, the number of intentionally set fires has been on "a long-term downward trend," currently accounting for about 8 percent of all structure fires, down from about 20 percent 30 years ago, the National Fire Protection Association reported last year. Roughly half a million buildings in the United States are damaged or destroyed by fire each year, the NFPA estimates.
Link:
http://host.madison.com/wsj/news/local/crime_and_courts/article_86bf8be2-8138-11e0-af5f-001cc4c002e0.html
As in the investigation into the fire that destroyed J.J.'s Pub in rural Marquette County on Sept. 11, 2006, many of those investigators work for insurance companies with a stake in the outcome.
John Lentini, a prominent fire investigator and one of the harshest critics of the current state of fire science, said some of the probes amount to little more than "witchcraft and folklore."
He cited a 2005 test designed by the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms in which fire investigators were asked to identify the general area where two test fires were started in separate rooms. The fires were extinguished less than three minutes after achieving "flashover" — the point when, Lentini says, "a fire in a room becomes a room on fire."
Each time, just three of the 53 investigators got the area of origin right, and it was a different three each time, Lentini said. Subsequent tests have produced similar results.
Another series of test burns in 2008 called into question the widely held belief that V-shaped burn patterns on walls — like the one cited in the arson case against J.J.'s Pub owner Joseph "Joey" Awe —indicate where a fire started. In fact, the markings "bore no relationship to either of the fires' origins, which were approximately six feet from the apex of each ‘V,'" the bureau reported.
Unlike improvements in DNA technology, which have helped police solve more crimes, advances in fire investigation may have had the opposite effect: As knowledge about fire grows, uncertainty about the origin of fires has increased and the number of fires declared intentional has plummeted.
Since 1980, the number of intentionally set fires has been on "a long-term downward trend," currently accounting for about 8 percent of all structure fires, down from about 20 percent 30 years ago, the National Fire Protection Association reported last year. Roughly half a million buildings in the United States are damaged or destroyed by fire each year, the NFPA estimates.
Link:
http://host.madison.com/wsj/news/local/crime_and_courts/article_86bf8be2-8138-11e0-af5f-001cc4c002e0.html
MA- Police want to work with Insurance companies to help pay for services.
Promoting an auto insurance surcharge as the solution, police officials told lawmakers yesterday that the police training system is nearing a crisis stage across Massachusetts, with specialty training halted and insufficient opportunities available to 17,000 municipal officers.
Legislation pushed by Mark Leahy, president of the Massachusetts Chiefs of Police Association, and Wayne Sampson, executive director of the association, would produce training funds with a surcharge on auto insurance policies that the officials said would add between $2 and $2.50 per year to policies.
Governor Deval Patrick included the auto insurance surcharge in his budget proposal for fiscal 2012 filed in January, calling it a “modest assessment’’ similar to the property insurance surcharge used to fund firefighter training.
Neither the House nor the Senate adopted the governor’s proposal in their budget proposals.
But while the House offered no alternative funding mechanism, the Senate on Wednesday proposed tacking a $5 fee onto all moving violation traffic tickets.
As a tradeoff for taxpayers, the Senate has also proposed making the $25 fee for challenging a traffic violation refundable if the ticket is dismissed.
Sampson said the auto insurance surcharge would generate about $8 million, funds that would be split between municipal police and the State Police. He said areas that have been casualties of the lack of funds include training in interrogation, homicide, rape, and detective work.
Doesn't anyone see a conflict of interest here? The insurance companies already provide the police with Lidar guns. When you get cited for a moving violation your insurance rates increase and the Town or State recieve the money from your fine. Why don't the insurance companies openly pay for all police services and raise surcharges? We'd have a National Insurance Police force openly funded and not hiding behind Legislation. It doesn't get anymore brazen than the police working with insurance companies and asking Americans not to see the conflict of interest.
Link for insurance companies providing Lidar guns to police:
http://forums.officer.com/forums/showthread.php?79163-LIDAR-Jammer-question
Link:
http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2011/05/20/police_officials_push_insurance_surcharge_to_fund_training_programs/
Legislation pushed by Mark Leahy, president of the Massachusetts Chiefs of Police Association, and Wayne Sampson, executive director of the association, would produce training funds with a surcharge on auto insurance policies that the officials said would add between $2 and $2.50 per year to policies.
Governor Deval Patrick included the auto insurance surcharge in his budget proposal for fiscal 2012 filed in January, calling it a “modest assessment’’ similar to the property insurance surcharge used to fund firefighter training.
Neither the House nor the Senate adopted the governor’s proposal in their budget proposals.
But while the House offered no alternative funding mechanism, the Senate on Wednesday proposed tacking a $5 fee onto all moving violation traffic tickets.
As a tradeoff for taxpayers, the Senate has also proposed making the $25 fee for challenging a traffic violation refundable if the ticket is dismissed.
Sampson said the auto insurance surcharge would generate about $8 million, funds that would be split between municipal police and the State Police. He said areas that have been casualties of the lack of funds include training in interrogation, homicide, rape, and detective work.
Doesn't anyone see a conflict of interest here? The insurance companies already provide the police with Lidar guns. When you get cited for a moving violation your insurance rates increase and the Town or State recieve the money from your fine. Why don't the insurance companies openly pay for all police services and raise surcharges? We'd have a National Insurance Police force openly funded and not hiding behind Legislation. It doesn't get anymore brazen than the police working with insurance companies and asking Americans not to see the conflict of interest.
Link for insurance companies providing Lidar guns to police:
http://forums.officer.com/forums/showthread.php?79163-LIDAR-Jammer-question
Link:
http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2011/05/20/police_officials_push_insurance_surcharge_to_fund_training_programs/
MA- Defense attorney Barry Wilson objected to juror selection and a judge gives him jail time.
The fiery attorney who represented former Boston city councilor Chuck Turner in his bribery trial is now headed to jail himself, sentenced yesterday to three months behind bars after drawing the ire of a judge during jury selection for a murder trial earlier this month.
“Mr. Wilson, your behavior before me two weeks ago was atrocious,’’ said Suffolk Superior Court Judge Patrick F. Brady to Barry P. Wilson. He called Wilson’s conduct “the worst I’ve seen in 20 years on the bench.’’
Wilson, a criminal defense attorney who has practiced law for almost 36 years, recently shaved his trademark scraggly gray beard, but he replied to the judge in his well-known booming voice and effusive manner.
“I don’t think my conduct was egregious or out of line in terms of what occurred in court,’’ he said.
Wilson also represented Garrett Jackson, who was sentenced Tuesday to life in prison for killing a rival drug dealer. During the jury selection phase, Wilson lashed out at the court’s decision to seat a man with a law enforcement background, after dismissing a woman who told the court that her two sons had criminal records.
“How can I look at my client and say he should think this is legitimate after you make a ruling like that and you excuse a woman who had two children. . .’’ Wilson told Brady during the May 5 empanelment.
“No way I’m gonna try a case with that man,’’ he said referring to the former Department of Homeland Security employee Brady chose to sit on the jury. “That’s ridiculous. Fifteen years as a federal agent and he’s gonna be unbiased? Are you kidding me? I can’t do it, I won’t do it.
“And the other thing is I think maybe if he’s standing outside there you better go ask him if he heard me screaming because I think you gotta excuse him now cause I think he knows I don’t like him,’’ Wilson said, according to a typed transcript provided by the Suffolk County District Attorney’s Office.
Link:
http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2011/05/20/criminal_defense_lawyer_ordered_to_jail_on_contempt_charge/
“Mr. Wilson, your behavior before me two weeks ago was atrocious,’’ said Suffolk Superior Court Judge Patrick F. Brady to Barry P. Wilson. He called Wilson’s conduct “the worst I’ve seen in 20 years on the bench.’’
Wilson, a criminal defense attorney who has practiced law for almost 36 years, recently shaved his trademark scraggly gray beard, but he replied to the judge in his well-known booming voice and effusive manner.
“I don’t think my conduct was egregious or out of line in terms of what occurred in court,’’ he said.
Wilson also represented Garrett Jackson, who was sentenced Tuesday to life in prison for killing a rival drug dealer. During the jury selection phase, Wilson lashed out at the court’s decision to seat a man with a law enforcement background, after dismissing a woman who told the court that her two sons had criminal records.
“How can I look at my client and say he should think this is legitimate after you make a ruling like that and you excuse a woman who had two children. . .’’ Wilson told Brady during the May 5 empanelment.
“No way I’m gonna try a case with that man,’’ he said referring to the former Department of Homeland Security employee Brady chose to sit on the jury. “That’s ridiculous. Fifteen years as a federal agent and he’s gonna be unbiased? Are you kidding me? I can’t do it, I won’t do it.
“And the other thing is I think maybe if he’s standing outside there you better go ask him if he heard me screaming because I think you gotta excuse him now cause I think he knows I don’t like him,’’ Wilson said, according to a typed transcript provided by the Suffolk County District Attorney’s Office.
Link:
http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2011/05/20/criminal_defense_lawyer_ordered_to_jail_on_contempt_charge/
Thursday, May 19, 2011
Up to 20 million Americans 'overcharged' by AT&T for data usage.
AT&T are 'systematically overcharging' up to 20 million Americans who use their IPhone or IPad to access data on the go, an investigation has uncovered.
The lawsuit alleges the phone giant routinely over charges customers between 7 and 14 per cent, and in some cases up to 300 per cent.
In tests, engineers said they found the company charged for downloading data and surfing the web even when the iPhones remained untouched.
Speaking to MSNBC, lawyer Barry Davis who worked on the suit, said: 'It's like a rigged gas pump.
"Where when you go to the gas station and ask for a gallon of gas but only get 9/10's."
When asked by a reporter whether his team found overcharging for every single transaction, he replied: "yes, every single one."
The reporter the asked: "Did you ever find a discrepancy where the customer was undercharged?"
Mr Davis replied: "Never. Always an overcharge, never an undercharge"
Link:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1388796/Up-20-million-Americans-systematically-overcharged-AT-T-data-usage.html
The lawsuit alleges the phone giant routinely over charges customers between 7 and 14 per cent, and in some cases up to 300 per cent.
In tests, engineers said they found the company charged for downloading data and surfing the web even when the iPhones remained untouched.
Speaking to MSNBC, lawyer Barry Davis who worked on the suit, said: 'It's like a rigged gas pump.
"Where when you go to the gas station and ask for a gallon of gas but only get 9/10's."
When asked by a reporter whether his team found overcharging for every single transaction, he replied: "yes, every single one."
The reporter the asked: "Did you ever find a discrepancy where the customer was undercharged?"
Mr Davis replied: "Never. Always an overcharge, never an undercharge"
Link:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1388796/Up-20-million-Americans-systematically-overcharged-AT-T-data-usage.html
The Indiana Supreme Court ruling brings threats to police and Courts.
Court ruling brings threats:
An Indiana Supreme Court ruling that says people don't have the right to resist if police enter a home illegally has riled some Hoosiers so much that police are investigating threats against police and the court.
Indiana State Police and officials of the state's highest court wouldn't discuss details about the threats, which were made by email and phone. But Supreme Court spokeswoman Kathryn Dolan said she couldn't recall another ruling that received such a response.
"I would say this is uncommon," she said. "This opinion has sparked more discussion than other opinions that have been handed down."
Link:
http://www.indystar.com/article/20110518/NEWS02/105180319/Ruling-brings-threats-Indiana-Supreme-Court
An Indiana Supreme Court ruling that says people don't have the right to resist if police enter a home illegally has riled some Hoosiers so much that police are investigating threats against police and the court.
Indiana State Police and officials of the state's highest court wouldn't discuss details about the threats, which were made by email and phone. But Supreme Court spokeswoman Kathryn Dolan said she couldn't recall another ruling that received such a response.
"I would say this is uncommon," she said. "This opinion has sparked more discussion than other opinions that have been handed down."
Link:
http://www.indystar.com/article/20110518/NEWS02/105180319/Ruling-brings-threats-Indiana-Supreme-Court
Fraudsters and hackers target computerized medical records.
The nation’s push to computerize medical records has failed to fully address longstanding security gaps that expose patients’ most sensitive information to hackers and snoops, government investigators warn.
Two reports released Tuesday by the inspector general of the Health and Human Services Department find that the drive to connect hospitals and doctors so they can share patient data electronically is being layered on a system that already has glaring privacy problems. Connecting it up could open new pathways for hackers, investigators say.
The market for illicit health care information is booming. In recent years, the case of a former UCLA Medical Center worker who sold details from the files of actress Farah Fawcett, singer Britney Spears and others to the National Enquirer gained notoriety.
Most cases don’t involve celebrities or get much attention. Yet fraudsters covet health care records, since they contain identifiers such as names, birth dates and Social Security numbers that can be used to construct a false identity or send Medicare bogus bills.
The shortcomings in the system “need to be addressed to ensure a secure environment for health data,” said the main report, adding that the findings “raise concern” about the effectiveness of security safeguards for personal health care information.
The inspector general has not issued general security requirements for the computer systems at hospitals and doctors’ offices, systems on which the information would be created, shared and stored. It’s a little like putting a big lock on the front door of the house, but leaving the garage door open.
To underscore the point, the second audit examined computer security at seven large hospitals in different states and found 151 security vulnerabilities, from ineffective wireless encryption to a taped-over door lock on a room used for data storage.
Link:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/hhs-inspector-general-says-push-for-electronic-medical-records-overlooks-some-security-gaps/2011/05/16/AFpaH54G_story.html
Two reports released Tuesday by the inspector general of the Health and Human Services Department find that the drive to connect hospitals and doctors so they can share patient data electronically is being layered on a system that already has glaring privacy problems. Connecting it up could open new pathways for hackers, investigators say.
The market for illicit health care information is booming. In recent years, the case of a former UCLA Medical Center worker who sold details from the files of actress Farah Fawcett, singer Britney Spears and others to the National Enquirer gained notoriety.
Most cases don’t involve celebrities or get much attention. Yet fraudsters covet health care records, since they contain identifiers such as names, birth dates and Social Security numbers that can be used to construct a false identity or send Medicare bogus bills.
The shortcomings in the system “need to be addressed to ensure a secure environment for health data,” said the main report, adding that the findings “raise concern” about the effectiveness of security safeguards for personal health care information.
The inspector general has not issued general security requirements for the computer systems at hospitals and doctors’ offices, systems on which the information would be created, shared and stored. It’s a little like putting a big lock on the front door of the house, but leaving the garage door open.
To underscore the point, the second audit examined computer security at seven large hospitals in different states and found 151 security vulnerabilities, from ineffective wireless encryption to a taped-over door lock on a room used for data storage.
Link:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/hhs-inspector-general-says-push-for-electronic-medical-records-overlooks-some-security-gaps/2011/05/16/AFpaH54G_story.html
The FTC claims your "Dropbox" files are not secure.
Dropbox, the wildly popular online storage system, deceived users about the security and encryption of its services, putting it at a competitive advantage, according to an FTC complaint filed Thursday by a prominent security researcher.
The FTC complaint charges Dropbox (.pdf) with telling users that their files were totally encrypted and even Dropbox employees could not see the contents of the file. Ph.D. student Christopher Soghoian published data last month showing that Dropbox could indeed see the contents of files, putting users at risk of government searches, rogue Dropbox employees, and even companies trying to bring mass copyright-infringement suits.
Soghoian, who spent a year working at the FTC, charges that Dropbox “has and continues to make deceptive statements to consumers regarding the extent to which it protects and encrypts therir data,” which amounts to a deceptive trade practice that can be investigated by the FTC.
The keys used to encrypt and decrypt files also are in the hands of Dropbox, not stored on each user’s machines.
Those architecture choices mean that Dropbox employees can see the contents of a user’s storage, and can turn over the nonencrypted files to the government or outside organizations when presented with a subpoena.
FTC Complaint pdf.
http://www.wired.com/images_blogs/threatlevel/2011/05/dropbox-ftc-complaint-final.pdf
Link: http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2011/05/dropbox-ftc/
The FTC complaint charges Dropbox (.pdf) with telling users that their files were totally encrypted and even Dropbox employees could not see the contents of the file. Ph.D. student Christopher Soghoian published data last month showing that Dropbox could indeed see the contents of files, putting users at risk of government searches, rogue Dropbox employees, and even companies trying to bring mass copyright-infringement suits.
Soghoian, who spent a year working at the FTC, charges that Dropbox “has and continues to make deceptive statements to consumers regarding the extent to which it protects and encrypts therir data,” which amounts to a deceptive trade practice that can be investigated by the FTC.
The keys used to encrypt and decrypt files also are in the hands of Dropbox, not stored on each user’s machines.
Those architecture choices mean that Dropbox employees can see the contents of a user’s storage, and can turn over the nonencrypted files to the government or outside organizations when presented with a subpoena.
FTC Complaint pdf.
http://www.wired.com/images_blogs/threatlevel/2011/05/dropbox-ftc-complaint-final.pdf
Link: http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2011/05/dropbox-ftc/
Wednesday, May 18, 2011
A security hole has been discovered in Google's Android operating system for smartphones.
A significant security hole has been discovered in Google's Android operating system for smartphones, which can allow attackers to gain access to users' personal information without their permission.
The flaw, discovered by three research assistants at Ulm University in the southern part of Germany, affects approximately 97 percent of Android users.
In a recent blog post, the researchers found that users of Android devices running versions 2.3.3 and below could be susceptible to attack when they are connected to unencrypted Wi-Fi networks. Anyone else on that network could gain access to, modify or delete Android users' calendars, photos and contacts.
"It is quite easy," the researchers wrote in a blog post. "The implications of this vulnerability reach from disclosure to loss of personal information."
Link:
http://www.chicagobreakingbusiness.com/business/chibrkbus-security-hole-found-in-android-google-says-its-covered-20110518,0,3751774.story
The flaw, discovered by three research assistants at Ulm University in the southern part of Germany, affects approximately 97 percent of Android users.
In a recent blog post, the researchers found that users of Android devices running versions 2.3.3 and below could be susceptible to attack when they are connected to unencrypted Wi-Fi networks. Anyone else on that network could gain access to, modify or delete Android users' calendars, photos and contacts.
"It is quite easy," the researchers wrote in a blog post. "The implications of this vulnerability reach from disclosure to loss of personal information."
Link:
http://www.chicagobreakingbusiness.com/business/chibrkbus-security-hole-found-in-android-google-says-its-covered-20110518,0,3751774.story
Mountain View, CA- Bank card "skimmers" found at 5 gas stations which stole more than 3,600 credit card numbers.
A pair of high-tech bandits were able to steal more than 3,600 credit card numbers with six electronic devices -- known as "skimmers" -- planted at five gas stations in Mountain View and Los Altos, according to the county district attorney.
Boris Tumasyan, 24, and Sarkis Sarkisyan, 23, -- both from Glendale, were charged with eight felony counts, including conspiracy, altering a computer and acquiring credit card information with intent to defraud, after Mountain View police successfully implemented a sting to catch the two men.
Police were initially tipped off on Dec. 6, 2010, when a gas station attendant discovered a small skimmer -- capable of harvesting credit card numbers from unwitting customers -- attached to the circuit board inside a gas pump, according to a press release issued March 8 by the Santa Clara County District Attorney's office.
An investigation by the Rapid Enforcement Allied Computer Team (REACT) -- a Bay Area high-tech and identity theft task force -- recovered six identical skimming devices installed at five gas stations.
Link:http://www.mv-voice.com/news/show_story.php?id=4026
Boris Tumasyan, 24, and Sarkis Sarkisyan, 23, -- both from Glendale, were charged with eight felony counts, including conspiracy, altering a computer and acquiring credit card information with intent to defraud, after Mountain View police successfully implemented a sting to catch the two men.
Police were initially tipped off on Dec. 6, 2010, when a gas station attendant discovered a small skimmer -- capable of harvesting credit card numbers from unwitting customers -- attached to the circuit board inside a gas pump, according to a press release issued March 8 by the Santa Clara County District Attorney's office.
An investigation by the Rapid Enforcement Allied Computer Team (REACT) -- a Bay Area high-tech and identity theft task force -- recovered six identical skimming devices installed at five gas stations.
Link:http://www.mv-voice.com/news/show_story.php?id=4026
Washington, DC- Prosecutors are under investigation for possible unethical behavior in the prosecution of drunk driving cases.
WASHINGTON - FOX 5 has learned at least one prosecutor in the D.C. Office of the Attorney General is under investigation. The Office of Bar Council is looking into claims of unethical behavior in the prosecution of drunk driving cases.
As many as a half a dozen police officers and defense attorneys have been interviewed so far.
No one would talk about the investigation on the record Tuesday. In fact, the Office of Bar Council, which is the city agency that investigates attorneys, wouldn't even confirm an investigation.
But sources familiar with the probe say at least one prosecutor is under investigation for allegedly asking police officers to lie under oath on the stand.
But it goes deeper than that.
In the last several months, three D.C. Police officers, the Fraternal Order of Police along with three defense attorneys, have publicly questioned the behavior of prosecutors in the D.C. Office of the Attorney General.
Officers Ben Fetting, Andrew Zabavsky and Jose Rodriguez even took their stories to the D.C. City Council.
Back in February, an affidavit was prepared by the FOP and sent to the Inspector General in a request for an investigation.
It reads in part:
“Both Officer Jose Rodriguez and Andrew Zabavsky were advised by the Office of the Attorney General to limit their testimony at DUI trials with regards to the problems with the Intoxilyzers.
“They were told not to answer questions about when they became aware of the problems with the equipment and told to say that they were not familiar with the problems or investigations even if they did know the answer. Both officers indicated they were unwilling to alter their testimony or perjure themselves.”
Link:
http://www.myfoxdc.com/dpp/news/dc/dc-prosecutor-under-investigation-for-unethical-behavior-in-prosecution-of-drunk-driving-cases-051011
As many as a half a dozen police officers and defense attorneys have been interviewed so far.
No one would talk about the investigation on the record Tuesday. In fact, the Office of Bar Council, which is the city agency that investigates attorneys, wouldn't even confirm an investigation.
But sources familiar with the probe say at least one prosecutor is under investigation for allegedly asking police officers to lie under oath on the stand.
But it goes deeper than that.
In the last several months, three D.C. Police officers, the Fraternal Order of Police along with three defense attorneys, have publicly questioned the behavior of prosecutors in the D.C. Office of the Attorney General.
Officers Ben Fetting, Andrew Zabavsky and Jose Rodriguez even took their stories to the D.C. City Council.
Back in February, an affidavit was prepared by the FOP and sent to the Inspector General in a request for an investigation.
It reads in part:
“Both Officer Jose Rodriguez and Andrew Zabavsky were advised by the Office of the Attorney General to limit their testimony at DUI trials with regards to the problems with the Intoxilyzers.
“They were told not to answer questions about when they became aware of the problems with the equipment and told to say that they were not familiar with the problems or investigations even if they did know the answer. Both officers indicated they were unwilling to alter their testimony or perjure themselves.”
Link:
http://www.myfoxdc.com/dpp/news/dc/dc-prosecutor-under-investigation-for-unethical-behavior-in-prosecution-of-drunk-driving-cases-051011
Breath tests performed by a DataMaster DMT machine at a Vermont State Police barracks could be faulty.
MONTPELIER, Vt.— A mistake in the software set-up on a breath analysis machine and whistleblowers' complaints about unethical lab work threaten dozens of drunken-driving prosecutions in Vermont.
At issue are breath tests performed by a DataMaster DMT machine at a Vermont State Police barracks that authorities say wasn't set up properly. Amid a broadening inquiry by two defense attorneys, dozens of criminal convictions could be reopened and a handful of civil license suspensions are being overturned.
The state Health Department, which is being stripped of the breath-testing program, says the machines didn't give any erroneous readings. At issue, officials say, is human error that resulted in one machine at a Vermont State Police barracks operating for almost a year without a self-check function that assures it's working properly.
"People can go to jail and lose their driver's licenses based on this science," says George Ostler, a defense attorney in Norwich who has clients who were prosecuted using test results from the machine. "When they don't maintain the machines like this, it's disturbing."
The machines, which cost about $6,150 each, use infrared light to detect the presence of alcohol. Each machine is supposed to conduct a self-check to measure the alcohol content of a control sample before it analyzes a subject's breath.
The issue with the one at the state police barracks in Royalton is that two state Department of Health chemists failed to activate the self-check function, called a tolerance detector, before it went into use in May 2010.
Link:
http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2011/05/15/vermonts_dui_breath_testing_program_under_fire/?rss_id=Boston.com+--+Local+news
At issue are breath tests performed by a DataMaster DMT machine at a Vermont State Police barracks that authorities say wasn't set up properly. Amid a broadening inquiry by two defense attorneys, dozens of criminal convictions could be reopened and a handful of civil license suspensions are being overturned.
The state Health Department, which is being stripped of the breath-testing program, says the machines didn't give any erroneous readings. At issue, officials say, is human error that resulted in one machine at a Vermont State Police barracks operating for almost a year without a self-check function that assures it's working properly.
"People can go to jail and lose their driver's licenses based on this science," says George Ostler, a defense attorney in Norwich who has clients who were prosecuted using test results from the machine. "When they don't maintain the machines like this, it's disturbing."
The machines, which cost about $6,150 each, use infrared light to detect the presence of alcohol. Each machine is supposed to conduct a self-check to measure the alcohol content of a control sample before it analyzes a subject's breath.
The issue with the one at the state police barracks in Royalton is that two state Department of Health chemists failed to activate the self-check function, called a tolerance detector, before it went into use in May 2010.
Link:
http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2011/05/15/vermonts_dui_breath_testing_program_under_fire/?rss_id=Boston.com+--+Local+news
Americans are being searched at airports and their belongings seized without probable cause.
Whether you’re a member of the ACLU, the Tea Party, or the Beer Lovers Party, one of the things that distinguishes you from people living in more authoritarian regimes--Iran, China, Libya, to name a few--is your right to form political associations without fear of government reprisal.
Freedom of association is so vital to our democracy that the framers put it in the First Amendment, alongside freedoms of speech, press, religion, and petition. After all, what good is the right to speak, pray, or petition the government if you can’t freely associate with other people who support your cause?
Defending that right for all Americans is why the ACLU today is filing a lawsuit in Federal Court in Boston on behalf of a 24-year-old computer programmer and Cambridge activist named David House. The case challenges the government’s targeting and suspicionless search and seizure at the border of David’s computer and camera, which occurred as a result of his association with the Bradley Manning Support Network.
The Bradley Manning Support Network, which David helped to create, is a group of people and organizations who advocate for the legal defense of Pfc. Bradley Manning--the soldier who was charged and subsequently held in solitary confinement for allegedly accessing and disclosing a video and documents about the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan to the website WikiLeaks.
Although the Support Network engages solely in lawful and constitutionally protected advocacy, members of the group have apparently been targeted by the Feds for exercising the right to free association. David has been visited by agents from the FBI, Department of State, and the military--who repeatedly question him about his political beliefs and associations. Then, last November, when David arrived at the Chicago airport from a vacation in Mexico en route to Boston, he was again stopped--this time by two Homeland Security agents--who not only questioned him again about his political beliefs, but seized his laptop, flash drive, and video camera--all without David’s consent and without any reason to believe a search would turn up evidence of wrongdoing.
Link:
http://boston.com/community/blogs/on_liberty/2011/05/suspicionless_searches_and_sei.html
Freedom of association is so vital to our democracy that the framers put it in the First Amendment, alongside freedoms of speech, press, religion, and petition. After all, what good is the right to speak, pray, or petition the government if you can’t freely associate with other people who support your cause?
Defending that right for all Americans is why the ACLU today is filing a lawsuit in Federal Court in Boston on behalf of a 24-year-old computer programmer and Cambridge activist named David House. The case challenges the government’s targeting and suspicionless search and seizure at the border of David’s computer and camera, which occurred as a result of his association with the Bradley Manning Support Network.
The Bradley Manning Support Network, which David helped to create, is a group of people and organizations who advocate for the legal defense of Pfc. Bradley Manning--the soldier who was charged and subsequently held in solitary confinement for allegedly accessing and disclosing a video and documents about the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan to the website WikiLeaks.
Although the Support Network engages solely in lawful and constitutionally protected advocacy, members of the group have apparently been targeted by the Feds for exercising the right to free association. David has been visited by agents from the FBI, Department of State, and the military--who repeatedly question him about his political beliefs and associations. Then, last November, when David arrived at the Chicago airport from a vacation in Mexico en route to Boston, he was again stopped--this time by two Homeland Security agents--who not only questioned him again about his political beliefs, but seized his laptop, flash drive, and video camera--all without David’s consent and without any reason to believe a search would turn up evidence of wrongdoing.
Link:
http://boston.com/community/blogs/on_liberty/2011/05/suspicionless_searches_and_sei.html
Tuesday, May 17, 2011
Why are Americans silent about losing our Fourth Amendment?
On June 10, 1215 AD, after prolonged rebellion and frustrating negotiation, a group of England’s most influential barons entered London to force the disastrous King John Softsword into accepting a revolutionary charter of individual freedoms.
Five days later in the Runnymede meadow of Surrey County, John affixed his royal seal onto what became known as the Magna Carta. It still exists on the books today in England and Wales.
This document was one of the more important antecedents to the US Constitution; its proclamations ended the absolutism of England’s monarchy and spelled out very clear rights and freedoms, including, among others, the right of a man to enjoy his private property without trespass from government officials.
Over 550 years later, the framers of the Constitution codified this right in the 4th Amendment to be secure in one’s private property. Last week, the Indiana Supreme Court effectively rejected both documents in two separate cases.
Two recent Supreme Court cases have served to virtually abolish the Fourth Amendment in the United States of America, with citizens no longer being “secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures.”
In a precedent described by dissenting justices as “breathtaking” and “unnecessarily broad,” the Indiana Supreme Court ruled last week in a 3-2 vote that doing anything to resist police busting down your door and conducting an illegal search is now a criminal act.
“We hold that the right to reasonably resist an unlawful police entry into a home is no longer recognized under Indiana law,” the court ruled in the case of Richard L. Barnes v. Indiana.
Dissenting Justices Brent E. Dickson and Robert D. Rucker made it clear that the ruling represented a total rejection of rights enshrined in the Fourth Amendment of the US Constitution.
“In my view, the wholesale abrogation of the historic right of a person to reasonably resist unlawful police entry into his dwelling is unwarranted and unnecessarily broad,” Dickson wrote.
“In my view it is breathtaking that the majority deems it appropriate or even necessary to erode this constitutional protection based on a rationale addressing much different policy considerations,” added Rucker. “There is simply no reason to abrogate the common law right of a citizen to resist the unlawful police entry into his or her home.”
The ruling was made under the justification that resisting a police officer had the potential to escalate and cause violence against the officer, meaning that the God-like status bestowed upon police officers now trumps both the 220-year-old Fourth Amendment and the 796-year-old Magna Carta on which it is based.
In a separate case, on Monday the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 8-1 that the police can now also bust down a door and enter your property without a warrant if they smell marijuana or hear sounds that are suggestive of destruction of evidence. The case revolved around the warrantless search of an apartment in Kentucky, Lexington.
“Where, as here, the police did not create the exigency by engaging or threatening to engage in conduct that violates the Fourth Amendment, warrantless entry to prevent the destruction of evidence is reasonable and thus allowed,” Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. wrote for the majority.
Links:
http://www.infowars.com/while-you-were-sleeping-they-abolished-the-fourth-amendment/
http://www.infowars.com/indiana-supreme-court-dispenses-with-magna-carta-constitution/
Five days later in the Runnymede meadow of Surrey County, John affixed his royal seal onto what became known as the Magna Carta. It still exists on the books today in England and Wales.
This document was one of the more important antecedents to the US Constitution; its proclamations ended the absolutism of England’s monarchy and spelled out very clear rights and freedoms, including, among others, the right of a man to enjoy his private property without trespass from government officials.
Over 550 years later, the framers of the Constitution codified this right in the 4th Amendment to be secure in one’s private property. Last week, the Indiana Supreme Court effectively rejected both documents in two separate cases.
Two recent Supreme Court cases have served to virtually abolish the Fourth Amendment in the United States of America, with citizens no longer being “secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures.”
In a precedent described by dissenting justices as “breathtaking” and “unnecessarily broad,” the Indiana Supreme Court ruled last week in a 3-2 vote that doing anything to resist police busting down your door and conducting an illegal search is now a criminal act.
“We hold that the right to reasonably resist an unlawful police entry into a home is no longer recognized under Indiana law,” the court ruled in the case of Richard L. Barnes v. Indiana.
Dissenting Justices Brent E. Dickson and Robert D. Rucker made it clear that the ruling represented a total rejection of rights enshrined in the Fourth Amendment of the US Constitution.
“In my view, the wholesale abrogation of the historic right of a person to reasonably resist unlawful police entry into his dwelling is unwarranted and unnecessarily broad,” Dickson wrote.
“In my view it is breathtaking that the majority deems it appropriate or even necessary to erode this constitutional protection based on a rationale addressing much different policy considerations,” added Rucker. “There is simply no reason to abrogate the common law right of a citizen to resist the unlawful police entry into his or her home.”
The ruling was made under the justification that resisting a police officer had the potential to escalate and cause violence against the officer, meaning that the God-like status bestowed upon police officers now trumps both the 220-year-old Fourth Amendment and the 796-year-old Magna Carta on which it is based.
In a separate case, on Monday the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 8-1 that the police can now also bust down a door and enter your property without a warrant if they smell marijuana or hear sounds that are suggestive of destruction of evidence. The case revolved around the warrantless search of an apartment in Kentucky, Lexington.
“Where, as here, the police did not create the exigency by engaging or threatening to engage in conduct that violates the Fourth Amendment, warrantless entry to prevent the destruction of evidence is reasonable and thus allowed,” Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. wrote for the majority.
Links:
http://www.infowars.com/while-you-were-sleeping-they-abolished-the-fourth-amendment/
http://www.infowars.com/indiana-supreme-court-dispenses-with-magna-carta-constitution/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)