So this is an open accountable government. Where cops kill people and refuse to talk about it. But say it was justifiable murder. If it was a justifiable murder the cops should be telling us what happened. Not hiding. It may be legal, but it ain't right. The government should be accountable for the murders the government commits. http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/chi-ferguson-officer-darren-wilson-20141122-story.html#page=1 How Ferguson Officer Darren Wilson mastered the disappearing act ST. LOUIS — One morning late last month, a St. Louis courtroom filled up with prosecutors, lawyers and press who wondered if they'd catch a glimpse of a vanished man. The man, police officer Darren Wilson, hadn't been seen in public since Aug. 9, when he shot and killed an unarmed black teenager and found himself in a wave of national fury. But here, at this unrelated preliminary hearing, Wilson had incentive to appear. He'd been asked to show up to provide testimony against an alleged low-level drug dealer — somebody he'd wrestled to the ground and handcuffed 20 months earlier, in an arrest that won him a Ferguson city commendation. Now Wilson just had to recount the story to a judge. The courtroom players took their places for just one in a series of rapid-fire hearings. A few minutes passed. The judge called the defense attorney and prosecutor into whispering range, and soon it became clear: Wilson wasn't going to show, his absence emblematic of a remarkable period in which the central character of an explosive national story has gone totally dark. Judge Mary Schroeder then dismissed the drug case for what she called a "failure to prosecute." "The defendant and I, we walked out the door, said thank you Jesus and shook hands," said Nick Zotos, attorney for the defendant, Christopher Brooks. "You could not make that case without [Wilson]." For 3 1/2 months, Wilson has been the officer that almost everybody has an opinion on and almost nobody knows. With a grand jury set to determine as soon as this weekend whether Wilson's shooting was justified, the 28-year-old white officer hasn't given a public account of what transpired before Brown's death. Neither have his attorneys. Both his lead attorneys have ignored multiple requests for comment. Experts and lawyers familiar with other racially charged cases emphasize that Wilson has no obligation to speak publicly — and even doing so might not change many opinions after the volatile protests that followed Brown's death. What makes Wilson's case notable, they said, is the completeness of the information void: Wilson left no traces on social media. His police chief says they haven't spoken since the aftermath of the shooting. Even at pro-Wilson rallies, most who show up say they're simply showing support for police officers and due process. Nobody in Wilson's far-flung family has spoken on his behalf. "If anything is going to be said, it will come straight from him," said Wilson's sister, Kara Sosko. Wilson is believed to be in police protection, having left his suburban ranch-style brick home, where the blinds are drawn and leaves collect in the front yard. He is on paid leave, but Ferguson Police Chief Thomas Jackson said this week that Wilson is unlikely to return to the job, regardless of whether he is indicted. Ferguson waits anxiously for grand jury decision on Michael Brown CNN has reported that Wilson may be negotiating his resignation. It's unclear to what extent Wilson's safety would be in jeopardy if he appeared in public, but one longtime Wilson acquaintance, speaking on the condition of anonymity, rattled off a series of online threats put out against the officer, including a $5,000 bounty posted on Twitter by a self-described urban militia group. The acquaintance said Wilson faced such backlash that there seemed to be little public desire to hear about other key aspects of his life: why he became a policeman, how he interacted with black people, what he's been thinking about since the shooting. "He was put into a position any cop could have been put in, and he was in fear for his life," said the acquaintance, who said she has not spoken with Wilson since the shooting. The acquaintance requested anonymity because she didn't want her family's name to become public. "Then we'd be harassed by only God knows who," she said. In mapping Wilson's steps since the shooting, there are just a few shards of evidence. Surveillance videos taken hours after Brown's death show Wilson leaving the Ferguson police station for the hospital and then returning 2 1/2 hours later, according to the St. Louis Post-Dispatch. Wilson, with big ears and short hair light enough to blend with his skin, is seen for a matter of seconds in the footage. Separately, sources have told The Washington Post that Wilson testified in front of the grand jury that's deciding on whether to indict him. The controversial leaks from the grand jury proceedings have so far appeared favorable to Wilson and have left many in the St. Louis area bracing for the officer to be cleared of wrongdoing. According to sources, Wilson testified to the jury that Brown lunged for the officer's gun. What little is known about Wilson comes mostly from public records uncovered in the aftermath of the shooting. He comes from a fractured family, his mother marrying three times and then dying at age 35 after being convicted of financial crimes. Wilson himself divorced last year. He began his police career in another St. Louis neighborhood, Jennings, whose department was disbanded over racial relations problems and a corruption scandal. Wilson then latched on at Ferguson. With Wilson in hiding, some of what he accomplished on that force is being undone. Days after Wilson no-showed at the Brooks hearing, the St. Louis County prosecutors' office said that several other pending felony cases were being dismissed because they "could not proceed without the testimony of Wilson." Some legal experts said this week that Wilson will have a hard time reviving his career, even if he is not indicted, although public opinion could still swing based on grand jury findings. Should Wilson be cleared of wrongdoing, the St. Louis County prosecutors' office has pledged to release a trove of documents that will provide much-needed details on the confrontation that led to the shooting. For somebody in Wilson's shoes, there is no perfect way to handle the aftermath of a volatile controversy, and experts who have advised in similar cases have conflicting feelings about what Wilson should say or do. "For me, it's real simple," said Ira Salzman, the lawyer who represented Stacey Koon, the ranking officer during the 1991 Rodney King beating. "There is a hue and cry, and people are looking at things through a racial prism. It is my strong position that anybody under that kind of glare in a noteworthy case should make all their statements under oath." But Mark O'Mara, the lawyer who represented George Zimmerman — a neighborhood watch volunteer who fatally shot black teenager Trayvon Martin — said that Wilson and his attorneys should make an effort to speak to the public. That is especially important, O'Mara said, during all the little flare-ups that happen as a case develops. Earlier this week, old video surfaced of an officer that looked like Wilson threatening to arrest a man videotaping him. Neither Wilson nor his legal team addressed the video. "If the Brown family is saying what they want, silence from Darren Wilson is really devastating," O'Mara said. "He could just say, 'I was being a cop. I always wanted this. I always wanted to serve.' Seeing those words would give him a persona that's sorely lacking. Any vacuum you create will come back to haunt you. Silence — that may have been a strategy in 2001. Not in 2014, in a national event."
http://www.latimes.com/opinion/editorials/la-ed-surveillance-and-privacy-20141123-story.html Editorial ACLU offers a smart safeguard for using surveillance technology By The Times Editorial Board contact the reporter Advances in technology have given police agencies vastly expanded surveillance capabilities. Facial recognition software that can identify suspects, databases that can be tapped to track suspects' movements and locations, automatic license plate readers, social media monitoring, body cameras and drones are just some of the innovations that can make it easier and faster to investigate and solve crimes. But used in secret or indiscriminately, the same technology presents major threats to citizens' privacy and civil rights, and can erode public trust in law enforcement. The Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department learned this the hard way earlier this year when Compton officials and residents were outraged to discover that it had secretly conducted aerial surveillance of the city for nine days in 2012. Sheriff's officials didn't tell anyone they were being captured on video that was beamed back to the station; the experiment was revealed by an investigative news outlet. And the Sheriff's Department is not unique. New and arguably more invasive technologies, such as mass cellphone tracking, are being put into service by police agencies with little or no public discussion. That's unfortunate. Communities should be able to debate and decide how much privacy, if any, they are willing to give up in pursuit of public safety. The American Civil Liberties Union of California has produced a guide for communities on how to evaluate surveillance proposals and how to put in place security and civil liberties safeguards before these new tools are used. The ACLU's approach to vetting new technologies is so pragmatic that cities, counties and law enforcement agencies throughout California would be foolish not to embrace it. Communities should be able to debate and decide how much privacy, if any, they are willing to give up in pursuit of public safety. - For example, the guide urges communities and police departments to figure out what problem the surveillance is intended to address and whether that technology is really the best tool for the job. There may be a temptation to roll out the latest whiz-bang gadget, especially when it's paid for with federal grants, without considering the practical value and implementation costs, or developing protocols to measure results or get feedback. To ensure a proper review for every new technology, cities and counties in California should require that law enforcement agencies within their jurisdiction have a formal surveillance technology review and use process. That policy should spell out how communities will be consulted on new programs; establish rules for who can use the data that are collected and why; and guard against abuse or security breaches of personal information. These new technologies could result in safer, more secure communities — if managed correctly. But "trust us" is not enough.
Here is a series of articles in the San Jose Mercury news on how the state of California dopes up kids in government foster homes. Yea, aren't these the same folks that gave us the "Just say NO to drugs" message Drugging Our Kids http://webspecial.mercurynews.com/druggedkids/?page=pt1 http://webspecial.mercurynews.com/druggedkids/?page=pt2 http://webspecial.mercurynews.com/druggedkids/?page=pt3 http://webspecial.mercurynews.com/druggedkids/?page=pt4
One of the lines of BS our government masters give us is that prisons are there to rehabilitate people. But when they treat people like that you realized that is just a big line of BS. http://www.azcentral.com/story/opinion/op-ed/2014/11/21/arizona-solitary-confinement-mentally-ill/19339499/ For mentally ill, solitary confinement is torture Max Dine, AZ I See It 5:13 p.m. MST November 21, 2014 Max Dine: Seriously mentally ill inmates can be out of their cells for 19 hours a week. They shouldn't be there at all. Imagine life in a cell the size of a bathroom. A bed, a small table and a toilet are your companions. The lights are on all day and all night. The noise of huge metal doors banging open and shut is non-stop. You are in the cell 22 or more hours a day. Your food is given to you by a slit in the door. You are allowed one hour of exercise a day. To walk to the enclosed cage, you are handcuffed and shackled. You can only have about one telephone call and one family visit once a week. This can go on for months, years or even decades. It's difficult for a healthy inmate to endure solitary confinement. For an inmate with serious mental illness, it's a punishment that increases the chances of harm or death. Solitary confinement is called various names, including administrative segregation, segregated housing units, isolation or simply "the box." Super-maximum-security prisons are generally composed of solitary-confinement cells. They are more costly to build than a regular prison. Recently, Arizona built another super-max prison for $50 million. A year in isolation costs taxpayers $50,000 vs. $20,000 for the general inmate population. Prison safety and disciplinary enforcement are typically touted as primary reasons for the use of prolonged administrative segregation. Not so. Tour Arizona's new max security prison: Department of Corrections Director Charles Ryan, gives a media tour of their newest Max Custody facility: the 500 bed addition to the Rast Unit of the Lewis Prison Complex in Buckeye on Friday Nov. 7, 2014. (Photo: Nick Oza/The Republic) Four years ago, Mississippi safely reduced its solitary-confinement population by more than 75 percent by evaluating and reforming the policies determining how prisoners are classified for placement in isolation. Institutional safety improved as a result. Violent episodes fell 50 percent. It is still working. Millions of dollars were saved that helped Mississippi's economy. Today, in the United States, correctional officers can place seriously mentally ill inmates in long-term isolation for essentially any reason. A minor infraction, like being caught with too many postage stamps, passing notes or refusing to return a lunch tray, can land someone in solitary. Prison officials sometimes claim that solitary is a tool for managing the uncontrollably violent "worst of the worst." In reality, few prisoners actually meet that description. However, emergency situations may require the temporary isolation of the inmate. Solitary confinement is well known to induce a psychiatric disorder characterized by hallucinations, panic attacks, cognitive deficiencies, paranoia, psychosis and hopelessness. Seriously mentally ill individuals are much more likely to kill or harm themselves when they are held in solitary. Administrative segregation increases the likelihood that former inmates, after release, will wind up back in prison. Solitary confinement exposes corrections systems to time-consuming and burdensome lawsuits. Last month, a settlement was reached in a lawsuit against the state and the Arizona Department of Corrections on behalf of the 33,000 prisoners in the state's 10 prisons and all future prisoners One stipulation of the landmark settlement is that seriously mentally ill inmates must be out of their isolation cells 19 hours per week. I believe they should not be in solitary-confinement cells at all. In 2011, the United Nations issued a report claiming that long-term social isolation is a form of torture — a cruel, inhumane and degrading treatment prohibited by international laws. In the United States, a number of organizations are railing against solitary confinement, including the American Civil Liberties Union and the Center for Constitutional Rights. Charles Ryan, the director of the Arizona Department of Corrections, has repeatedly denied that state prisons use solitary confinement. However, former prisoners and family members have described the conditions that they or their loved ones had to endure while in prison. It certainly sounds like solitary confinement. The mental-health community, including a coalition of seriously mentally ill, or SMI, individuals, their family members, mental-health advocates, civil-rights lawyers, mental-health professionals, psychiatrists and psychologists, are united in their belief that solitary confinement for SMI inmates in state prisons should be eliminated. I urge the Arizona Legislature to pass a bill in the upcoming legislative session banning SMI individuals from being placed in solitary confinement. Dr. Max Dine is a longtime advocate of improved mental-health care in Arizona.
As usual, government is the CAUSE of the problem, not the solution to the problem. http://www.azcentral.com/story/opinion/editorial/2014/11/22/downtown-phoenix-parking-meters/19366711/ Parking meter truism: Tax more, get less Editorial board, The Republic | azcentral.com 6:51 p.m. MST November 22, 2014 Our View: Downtown Phoenix business owners are frustrated with higher parking rates. And for It is a taxpayer truism that governments through the ages have trouble grasping: If you tax something, you will get less of it. Phoenix, facing a budget deficit of $37 million or more, needed more revenue. So, it raised downtown parking-meter rates. In some situations and locations, drastically. MACEACHERN: Winners, losers in parking-meter war Yes, the decision was prompted by more than the pursuit of additional cash. It was supposed to encourage downtown visitors to arrive via mass transportation or bicycle. And it was intended to encourage parking-space "churn" — opening up more spaces for more visitors by limiting time at a meter to just two hours as opposed to four. The driving force, though, was increasing revenue. But, just as with taxes, the city ultimately may be getting less revenue overall, not more. And fewer people downtown. If disgruntled downtown business owners are to be believed, the city could start losing revenue if unresolved parking headaches convince some business people to take their entrepreneurship elsewhere. The owner of one popular downtown ale house told a council member he wouldn't open another bar downtown because of parking. To its credit, the city seems to be responding. "(City officials) are doing some of the things that we are asking for, which is great. It shows they are listening," said Mat Englehorn to The Republic's Ryan Van Velzer. Still, the city has extended the hours for metered parking, and other business owners fear that, too, may be driving away patrons. They also have serious concerns about parking for their employees, some of whom must leave their cars miles from work. Parking meters effectively are the portals through which visitors pass when they come downtown. If those portals are more barrier than entryway, the result may be fewer visitors. Just like regular taxes, if you make parking downtown too much of a burden, you'll get fewer people parking there. And less revenue as a result.
I love Washington D.C. Mayor Marion Barry because when I say my line of: More of the old "Do as I say, not as I do" from our religious leaders, government masters and police??? Everybody knows what I am talking about. If you don't know Mayor Marion Barry is Washington D.C.'s crack smoking mayor. http://www.azcentral.com/story/news/nation/politics/2014/11/23/marion-barry-dies/19442003/ Former DC Mayor Marion Barry dies at 78 Associated Press 7:59 a.m. MST November 23, 2014 WASHINGTON — Divisive and flamboyant, maddening and beloved, Marion Barry outshone every politician in the 40-year history of District of Columbia self-rule. But for many, his legacy was not defined by the accomplishments and failures of his four terms as mayor and long service on the D.C. Council. Instead, Barry will be remembered for a single night in a downtown Washington hotel room and the grainy video that showed him lighting a crack pipe in the company of a much-younger woman. When FBI agents burst in, he referred to her with an expletive. She "set me up," Barry said. Barry died Sunday at 78. His family said in statement that Barry died shortly after midnight at the United Medical Center, after having been released from Howard University Hospital on Saturday. No cause of death was given, but his spokeswoman LaToya Foster said he collapsed outside his home. Speaking at a 4 a.m. press conference at United Medical Center, the city's mayor-elect Muriel Bowser called Barry an "inspiration to so many people and a fighter for people." "Mr. Barry, I can say this, lived up until the minute the way he wanted to live," said Bowser, who had served with Barry on the D.C. Council. The year was 1990, and crack cocaine had exploded in the district, turning it into the nation's murder capital. In his third term, the man known as the "Mayor for Life" became a symbol of a foundering city. Federal authorities had been investigating him for years for his alleged ties to drug suspects, and while he denied using drugs, his late-night partying was taking a toll on his job performance. The arrest and subsequent conviction — a jury deadlocked on most counts, convicting him of a single count of drug possession — was a turning point for Barry. He had been elected to his first term as mayor in 1978 with broad support from across the city. With his good looks, charisma and background in the civil rights movement, he was embraced the dynamic leader the city's young government needed. The Washington Post endorsed him in each of his first three mayoral runs, although the 1986 endorsement was unenthusiastic. Barry's six-month term in federal prison was hardly the end of his political career. But it forever changed how it was perceived. To some, he was a pariah and an embarrassment. But to many district residents, particularly lower-income blacks, he was still a hero, someone unfairly persecuted for personal failures. Barry returned to the D.C. Council in 1992, representing the poorest of the city's eight wards. Two years later, he won his fourth and final term as mayor. The electorate was starkly divided along racial lines, and Barry advised those who had not supported his candidacy to "get over it." "Marion Barry changed America with his unmitigated gall to stand up in the ashes of where he had fallen and come back to win," poet Maya Angelou said in 1999. Barry's triumph, though, was short-lived. In 1995, with the city flirting with bankruptcy from years of bloated, unaccountable government, much of it under Barry, Congress stripped him of much of his power and installed a financial control board. Barry held authority over little more than the city's parks, libraries and community access cable TV station. He decided against seeking a fifth term. Barry spent a few years working as a municipal bond consultant, but he couldn't stay away from politics. In 2004, he returned to the council, again representing Ward 8, where he remained beloved. Many constituents still referred to him as "Mayor Barry," and he was re-elected in 2008 and 2012. Barry was born March 6, 1936, to Marion and Mattie Barry, in the small Mississippi delta town of Itta Bena, and was raised in Memphis, Tenn., after the death of his father, a sharecropper. While an undergraduate at LeMoyne College (now LeMoyne-Owen College), Barry picked up the nickname "Shep" in reference to Soviet propagandist Dmitri Shepilov for his ardent support of the civil rights movement. Barry began using Shepilov as his middle name. Barry did graduate work in chemistry at Fisk University in Nashville, Tenn., earning a master's degree. He left school short of a doctorate to work in the civil rights movement. His political rise began in 1960, when he became the first national chairman of the Student Non-Violent Coordinating Committee, which sent young people into the South to register black voters and became known as one of the most militant civil rights groups of that era. Barry's work with the committee brought him to Washington, where he became immersed in local issues, joining boycotts of the bus system and leading rallies in support of the city's fledgling home rule efforts. In 1970, The Post wrote: "Four years ago widely considered a young Black Power Militant with almost no constituency, (Barry) has become a man who is listened to — if not fully accepted — on all sides." Barry's activism propelled him into local politics, first as a member of the Board of Education and then in 1974 as a member of the first elected city council organized under home rule legislation. In 1977, he was wounded by a shotgun blast in the Hanafi Muslim takeover of D.C.'s city hall. A young reporter was killed. The shooting was credited with strengthening him politically. In 1978, he defeated incumbent Mayor Walter Washington — the city's first home rule mayor — in the Democratic primary and went on to easily win the general election. Barry's early years in office were marked by improvement in many city services and a dramatic expansion of the government payroll, creating a thriving black middle class in the nation's capital. Barry established a summer jobs program that gave many young people their first work experience and earned him political capital. In his second term, the district's finances were rockier, and some of his appointees were caught up in corruption scandals. The city's drug-fueled decline mirrored Barry's battles with his personal demons, leading to the infamous hotel room arrest on Jan. 19, 1990. The video of Barry was widely distributed to the media and made him infamous worldwide. A few months after his arrest, long-time civil rights advocate and educator Roger Wilkins, a past supporter, wrote in The Post: "Marion Barry used the elders and lied to the young. He has manipulated thousands of others with his cynical use of charges of racism to defend his malodorous personal failures." Even after his comeback, controversy continued to dog Barry. Several times after his 1990 arrest, Barry sought treatment or counseling for problems with prescription medications or other substances. In 2002, he made an attempt to seek an at-large seat on the D.C. Council but abandoned his bid amid allegations of renewed illegal drug use. In 2006, Barry was given three years of probation after pleading guilty to misdemeanor charges for failing to file tax returns from 1999 to 2004. As part of a plea bargain, he agreed to file future federal and local tax returns annually, a promise prosecutors later said he had failed to keep. In 2010, he was censured by the council and stripped of his committee assignments for steering a government contract to a former girlfriend. The council censured him again in 2013 for accepting cash gifts from city contractors. Barry played the role of elder statesman in his later years on the council, but he sometimes exasperated his colleagues with his wavering attention at meetings and frequent, rambling references to his tenure as mayor. He suffered numerous health problems over the years. In addition to kidney failure, he survived prostate cancer, undergoing surgery in 1995 and a follow-up procedure in 2000. In late 2011, he underwent minor surgery on his urinary tract. In early 2014, he spent several weeks in hospitals and a rehabilitation center battling infections and related complications. In a statement Sunday, current Mayor Vincent C. Gray expressed deep sadness after learning about Barry's death. Gray spoke with Barry's wife, Cora Masters Barry, late Saturday and shared his condolences and sympathies with her. The couple was long estranged but never divorced. "Marion was not just a colleague but also was a friend with whom I shared many fond moments about governing the city," Gray said. "He loved the District of Columbia and so many Washingtonians loved him." Mayor Gray said that he would work with Barry's family and the Council to plan official ceremonies "worthy of a true statesman of the District of Columbia." Barry was married four times and is survived by his wife, Cora, and one son, Marion Christopher Barry. ___ Associated Press reporter Jessica Gresko contributed to this report.
Like most police departments, most of the people arrested by the ASU cops are arrested for victimless drug war crimes like smoking marijuana or liquor violation. Maybe if the ASU police stopped shaking people down for these victimless crimes they would have more time to solve REAL crimes like all the rapes in this article. You may want to go to the URLs I include with these articles, because they don't display very well as only text. http://www.azcentral.com/story/news/local/tempe/2014/11/19/asu-sex-assault-responds-allegations/19297777/ How ASU responds to allegations of sexual assault Anne Ryman, The Republic | azcentral.com 10:47 p.m. MST November 22, 2014 Arizona State University released the following statement in response to The Arizona Republic's questions about how it handles sexual assaults: Arizona State University is committed to the health and safety of our community. We work to ensure that all students, faculty and staff feel safe on campus and have the opportunity to engage in and benefit from the many programs and activities available at ASU. The policies establishing the standards of conduct for our community prohibit a wide range of sexual misconduct, which includes sexual violence and sexual harassment. ASU takes all reports of such conduct seriously and is committed to taking appropriate action to hold violators accountable and to prevent any recurrence. To combat this complex social problem, ASU provides a variety of resources and educational programs designed to prevent sexual violence and other acts of sexual misconduct, including sexual harassment, provide information about what to do when an incident has occurred, and increase awareness of campus and community resources for support and response. ASU takes these situations seriously and works to continuously improve our prevention, response, support, and investigation of sexual harassment, sexual assault and other forms of sexual violence. Once a complaint is filed with the Office of Student Rights and Responsibilities, a representative meets with the student to discuss the situation, interviews any possible witnesses and gathers all facts and information. Additionally, the office representative contacts the student accused of committing the alleged offense to hear both accounts of the situation and interview any additional witnesses. The office will follow the Arizona Board of Regents Amended Disciplinary Procedures in addressing any reported case of sexual violence. Upon completing a thorough assessment, the office determines if the student is in violation of the Student Code of Conduct. The office uses a "more likely than not" or "preponderance of the evidence" standard when evaluating each case. Based on the findings, the office determines the sanction to be imposed, which could include suspension or expulsion from school. Ways an ASU student can report an incident: Contact ASU police Contact the office of Student Rights and Responsibilities. Call the ASU Hotline. The office works closely with the ASU Police to advise the department when they have a report of a sexual assault and ensure any person reporting an incident is aware of reporting options, including the police. If the person making the report would like to file a police report, the office will connect the student to the appropriate police agency. If the student is uncomfortable with contacting ASU Police directly, he or she can consult with other members of the university staff, who will connect the student with the proper support and services. ASU Police may secure emergency medical treatment for the student and file a police report on behalf of the student and coordinate with the Office of Student Rights and Responsibilities, if the student chooses to file a student conduct complaint. A student conduct complaint is a separate process from any criminal proceeding, and a student code of conduct complaint may be filed without filing a police report. http://www.azcentral.com/longform/news/local/tempe/2014/11/23/asu-sexual-assault-few-arrests-convictions/19286329/ ASU sexual-assault cases: Few convictions This is the story of two women at ASU whose experiences reflect college sexual-assault cases in Arizona and nationwide. Anne Ryman, The Republic | azcentral.com Allegations of sexual assault ASU's student-discipline office has handled 65 allegations of sexual assault by fellow students during the past five years. Ten of the alleged attackers have been expelled. Share This Story 25 33 Share Email Comment The U.S. Department of Education is investigating 88 colleges, including Arizona State University, for possible violations of federal law for their handling of sexual-violence complaints. This is the story of two women at ASU whose experiences reflect college sexual-assault cases in Arizona and nationwide. Their full names are not being used to protect their privacy. The Arizona Republic is referring to them as Alexandra and M. with their permission. M. M. woke up in bed with a man. She had no idea where she was. The room was dark. Clothes were strewn around. It was the morning of Oct. 29, 2010. She didn't know the guy sleeping next to her. She wasn't wearing any clothes. Her mind raced as she lay there, trying to remember what happened. Her last memory was doing a shot at a fraternity party the night before. Alexandra On the morning of March 31, 2013, Alexandra woke up half-naked in her apartment. Someone was on top of her. She tried to move but couldn't. Her arms were crossed and pinned over her chest. The man wasn't her boyfriend. He was an acquaintance. He had been at her apartment for a party the night before but had left. She told him to stop and tried to push him off. He said nothing. He kept going. Alexandra and M. are among at least 65 students at Arizona State University who say they were sexually assaulted in the last five years and who called either local or campus police and/or filed complaints with the university's student-discipline office. More on ASU sexual assaults A breakdown of complaints, statistics, advice for building a case How ASU responds to allegations of sexual assault How this story was done Video: ASU student shares sexual-assault story Video: Advice for a sexual-assault victim The suspects were not kicked out of school permanently or arrested in either case, which is representative of the outcomes of the vast majority of sexual-assault allegations at ASU and nationwide. ASU officials say they hold students accountable for sex offenses. But it can be difficult to sanction or arrest someone. The nature of the crime complicates the investigation. Sexual assaults often occur behind closed doors. There are no witnesses. Suspects often claim the sex was consensual and deny wrongdoing. Universities that get federal funding are required by law to promptly investigate complaints of sexual violence and harassment and take appropriate steps to resolve the situation. This must be separate from any law-enforcement investigation that may occur. The U.S. Department of Education has declined comment on why it's looking at ASU or any of the schools. ASU officials have said they are cooperating with the investigation. The Arizona Republic reviewed hundreds of pages of police reports and the sanctions handed down in sexual-offense cases involving ASU students during the past five years. The Republic interviewed students, law-enforcement officials, victim advocates, attorneys and others and found: • Victims declined to press charges in 17 of 43 cases dealing with on-campus sexual offenses between 2011 and 2013. Of the remaining 26 cases, two suspects were convicted of a crime between 2011 and 2013, according to records provided by the university. One case is still being reviewed by the Maricopa County Attorney's Office. • ASU's discipline office during the last five years has found 37 students in 65 cases responsible for sexual violence and/or other non-consensual sexual contact. That includes incidents such as forced sexual intercourse, attempted forced sex and unwanted groping. Of these cases, 10 students were expelled, 17 were suspended and another 10 received probation. University officials didn't find suspects responsible for code of conduct violations in 28 cases, despite using a lower burden of proof than the criminal-justice system. Discipline cases use "preponderance of the evidence," or a "more likely than not" chance the allegation happened, rather than "beyond a reasonable doubt." • Complaints to ASU's student-discipline office have surged. ASU received 27 allegations of sexual violence and/or other non-consensual sexual contact in the last school year. The total for the previous four years was 38, an average of about nine per year. ASU has added more education programs designed to raise ASU has added more education programs designed to raise awareness and help prevent sexual assault. (Photo: Cheryl Evans/The Republic) University officials attribute the increase to growing enrollment and more awareness of how to report allegations. • Sexual-assault cases can be handled differently depending on the agency investigating. Tempe has the added resources of a special-victims unit. ASU detectives handle a variety of investigations. ASU officials declined to make a university official available for an in-person interview for this story but answered questions by e-mail. In a statement, Dean of Students Kevin Cook said the university takes all reports of sexual violence seriously and holds students accountable for their actions. "Sanctions against individual students resulting from a Student Code of Conduct investigation are determined by the facts of the specific case, and may include degree revocation, suspension and/or expulsion from the university," he said. The university also provides resources and education programs designed to prevent sexual assault and help victims. A task force set up by ASU President Michael Crow in August is examining policies and procedures for dealing with sexual violence and on Friday announced enhanced measures to combat sexual violence. These will include mandatory training for students, faculty and staff and additional support services for victims. ASU students M. and Alexandra both wanted someone held accountable for what happened. They took different paths to pursue justice in their cases. M. filed a complaint with the university's discipline office in hopes of getting the other student expelled. Alexandra pursued criminal charges with the Tempe police. Neither of the men was punished. How the assaults began M. was unaware that as a college freshman, she was at the greatest risk for sexual assault than at any other time in her college career. M. M. headed across the Tempe campus with a group of friends on a Thursday night in October 2010. They were on their way to a fraternity party on Alpha Drive, where the fraternity houses were located on campus. The 18-year-old was in a good mood. Her freshman year was going well. She had a full scholarship. Her classes were easier than expected. M. was unaware that as a college freshman, she was at the greatest risk for sexual assault than at any other time in her college career. The time between the start of fall semester and Thanksgiving is known as "the red zone" on college campuses. Freshmen are enjoying freedom away from their parents, experts say. Alcohol is often part of the culture. They can be vulnerable to people who want to take advantage. M. didn't know any of that as she entered the crowded fraternity house. She had two vodka-and-cranberry drinks earlier in the evening and felt excited but not drunk. She and her friends were led to an outside bar and were immediately offered a shot. That's the last thing she remembers. Alexandra On a Saturday evening in March 2013, Alexandra attended a soccer game on the ASU campus with friends. After the game, they went to an off-campus apartment complex where many of them lived. Alexandra's two roommates were gone. The 20-year-old sophomore volunteered her apartment for the party. They listened to music, danced and drank beers and shots. Shortly after midnight, the students began to filter out. Only one person remained. He tried to kiss Alexandra as soon as they were alone. She told him to knock it off. She began tidying up the apartment, then went into her bedroom to charge her cellphone. He followed her and tried to kiss her again. She told him to stop. The party's over, she remembers telling him. It's time to leave. He left the bedroom. She heard the apartment front door open and close. She went to sleep without locking the door — a practice common among students in the complex. At some point, the man returned to the apartment and entered her bedroom. Seeking justice Report: One in five women is a victim of sexual assault or attempted sexual assault while in college. One in five women is a victim of sexual assault or attempted sexual assault while in college, according to a report prepared for the National Institute of Justice. A federal law called Title IX requires schools that get federal financial assistance to take steps to prevent sexual assault on their campuses. Schools also must respond promptly and effectively when an assault is reported. This includes completing investigations within the recommended 60 days and conducting impartial investigations, with opportunities for both parties to present witnesses and evidence. At ASU, sexual-assault victims can file a police report and, if the suspect is a university student, they also can file a complaint with the university's Office of Student Rights and Responsibilities. The ASU discipline office investigates complaints that appear to violate the university's student code of conduct. The code prohibits sex or sexual contact "by force or without consent." ASU student Alexandra filed a report with Tempe Police These investigations are separate from any investigations by ASU police or Tempe police. Students who are found responsible can face educational sanctions such as probation, suspension or expulsion. Nancy Hogshead-Makar, a civil-rights attorney specializing in Title IX, was concerned that only 37 students at ASU were found responsible and that only 10 were expelled. "If your goal is you're trying to make it safe for women on campus, I would not take heart with those numbers," she said. Schools aren't required to report discipline outcomes to the federal government, so there's no way to compare ASU's record with a national average. A review of 130 colleges and universities in 2010 by the Center for Public Integrity found that universities permanently kicked out 10 to 25 percent of students found responsible. ASU's results in the last five years were 27 percent. Another Title IX consultant, W. Scott Lewis, doesn't find ASU's disciplinary outcomes unusual. He would be concerned if a university were too extreme in either direction, finding everyone responsible or no one responsible, he said. He predicts the sexual-assault complaints will spike, as they have already done at ASU, as colleges face increased scrutiny from the federal government over sexual assaults. President Barack Obama has made ending sexual violence on college campuses a priority. In 2011, the U.S. Department of Education issued new guidance for colleges on how to handle sexual-violence complaints. Earlier this year, the White House created a task force to work with colleges on developing best practices. ASU student M. is among those who feel her case wasn't properly handled by the university after she was assaulted in 2010. She wanted the suspect expelled to send the message that sexual assault won't be tolerated. What happened in their cases That year, 2010, ASU’s discipline office received seven complaints of sexual assault. M. M. is sure that the shot she drank at the fraternity party four years ago was laced with a drug because she blacked out for eight hours shortly after. Tests at the hospital showed no traces of drugs in her system, but some date-rape drugs can be undetectable after eight hours to 12 hours. M. said she didn't get to the hospital until about 1 p.m., roughly 14 hours after she blacked out. The nurse examining M. discovered a tampon shoved deep inside her, an indication of sexual assault or a lack of consent. M. filed a police report with Tempe police but declined a forensic exam because it would have required her to travel to another location. In a second interview with police, the detective said he discussed with her "the limitations of the investigation based on her memory and lack of items of evidentiary value." M. decided to pursue discipline sanctions instead of criminal charges. About a month after the incident, she filed a complaint with ASU's student-discipline office. The university offered her counseling. She said she wasn't allowed to be present for the interviews with the suspect or others who were present at the party. The university won't comment on specific cases citing student-privacy laws. At first she was told the university wouldn't be able to tell her whether the accused student was disciplined, she said. She threatened to call an attorney. Her case representative called back and said the university could disclose the outcome. About eight weeks after she reported the assault, M. was called into a meeting. The woman in charge of her case told her the investigation had been completed. They had spoken with everyone involved. There wasn't enough evidence to hold the other student accountable. M. began to cry. She was handed a tissue. She gathered herself and walked out. She felt like a victim all over again. That year, 2010, ASU's discipline office received seven complaints of sexual assault. One person was found responsible. That person got probation, according to records. Alexandra Unlike M., Alexandra says she didn't know she had the option of filing a complaint with the discipline office about the assault by a student at her off-campus apartment in 2013. She called the Tempe Police Department, which has jurisdiction over sexual assaults that occur off campus. Police took the clothing she wore that night and her bedsheets as evidence. A nurse conducted a forensic exam. Alexandra twice called the suspect on a tape-recorded telephone line under police supervision and tried to get him to admit he sexually assaulted her. Police use this investigative technique to try to force a confession. The suspect said in the call that he did not remember the incident because he consumed alcohol, according to the police report. He said the sex was consensual in a later interview with police. A detective told Alexandra that the next step would be to interview the people at her apartment the night of the party. Alexandra got the impression that the party atmosphere with alcohol wouldn't help her case, she said. She recalls the detective telling the possibility of the suspect being prosecuted was slim to none. She decided she was done. "This investigation will be closed due to the victim's request," the police report says. Few convictions Sexual-assault cases can be extremely challenging to prove, legal experts say. Compared with the general population, those accused of committing sexual assaults on the ASU campus are less likely to be convicted of a crime. From 2011 to 2013, ASU police investigated 43 forcible sex offenses, a category which includes sexual assault and sexual abuse, with two cases ending in convictions, according to police. A 2012 case is still under review for possible charges by the Maricopa County Attorney's Office. Police said victims declined to prosecute in 17 of the cases and nine cases submitted to the county were turned down or did not proceed based on "no likelihood of conviction." Nationally, among the public at large, one-fifth of sexual assaults reported to police result in prosecution, according to the U.S. Department of Justice. Of those who are prosecuted, about half are convicted of felonies. In 2013, Tempe police identified 13 cases that involved ASU students assaulted off campus and made arrests in three of those cases, documents say. Two of those suspects agreed to plea bargains on lesser felony charges. The third suspect is accused of drugging and raping women in multiple states, including Arizona. His case in Tempe is ongoing. Sexual-assault cases can be extremely challenging to prove, legal experts say. Corwin Townsend, a Phoenix attorney who specializes in felony crimes, said there has to be evidence that ties the suspect to the victim, such as a witness or DNA. It has to be more than the victim saying, "I was assaulted," he said. "That's not how you get to court." Townsend said tape-recorded telephone calls between the victim and suspect can be "devastating" for suspects. Police routinely use them to try to get a confession in situations where the victim knows the suspect. A review of 2013 police reports show Tempe police used confrontation calls in six of the 13 cases involving ASU students like Alexandra that occurred off campus. Statements obtained through these calls can be powerful evidence in court and are sometimes the key evidence linking the suspect to the crime, according to the International Association of Chiefs of Police. The Republic found one ASU case with references to a tape-recorded call out of 14 cases in which a suspect was identified from 2011 to 2013. Police have not yet released another 19 cases requested by The Republic during this time frame, saying some of those cases are still under investigation. ASU, in a statement, did not comment on the use of tape-recorded calls, saying police use a series of investigative techniques to obtain evidence. To charge someone with criminal sexual assault in Arizona, police need to show it occurred without the victim's consent. Tempe police Lt. Michael Pooley said many assault allegations are difficult to prove and can be "he said-she said" cases. "We do everything we can to help these victims out," he said. "It's not only difficult for victims not to see justice, it's also difficult for our detectives to walk away from a case where there's not enough evidence." The Arizona Board of Regents, which oversees the state universities, has changed the student code of conduct since 2012 to clarify that a person is incapable of giving consent "due to drugs and alcohol." This warning was also added for students in September: "The use of alcohol or drugs does not diminish one's responsibility to obtain consent and does not excuse conduct that violates this student code of conduct." ASU's Crow spoke about the university's efforts to prevent sexual assaults when asked about it by a student at a town-hall meeting earlier this fall. "What I'm hopeful of is that we can greatly reduce the incidents of these very traumatic events," he said. Both M. and Alexandra would like to see additional measures put in place, including more education on what sexual assault is. "More males need to be taught it doesn't have to be a physical 'no,' " Alexandra said. "If she's drunk and asleep, that's a pretty good sign she's not interested in having sex with you." Where they are now Both M. and Alexandra considered transferring to other universities. Alexandra Alexandra went home to California in 2013 after the semester ended. She had a long talk with her dad, who told her: Don't let one person ruin your entire college career. We're going to make sure your last years of college are what they should be. Her parents helped her find a new place to live and arranged for counseling. Alexandra has difficulty trusting men. Some days she feels down and it's hard to leave her apartment. She expects to graduate in May. "It was very hard to come back," Alexandra said. "But I'm very happy I did come back, and that I didn't let it ruin the rest of my college experience." M. M. would have lost her scholarship if she left ASU after the 2010 incident. Her parents live in Arizona, so she wasn't sure where else she would go to school. She stayed, graduated and is now pursuing a career. M. no longer thinks of herself as a victim. "I am a survivor," she said. Reach the reporter at 602-444-8072 or anne.ryman@arizonarepublic.com.
President of Lake Havasu PTA accused of credit card fraud Remember this next time your local school board has one of those override elections to give the teachers more money to educate the kids. http://www.azcentral.com/story/news/local/arizona/2014/11/21/president-lake-havasu-parent-teacher-assocation-credit-card-fraud/19357027/ President of Lake Havasu PTA accused of credit card fraud Agnel Philip, The Republic | azcentral.com 2:40 p.m. MST November 21, 2014 The president of a Parent Teacher Association at a Lake Havasu elementary school was arrested this week on suspicion of credit card fraud after she allegedly used a PTA debit card to pay for a phone bills and a trip to McDonald's, among other personal expenses, according to a police report. Lisa Badding, president of the PTA at Starline Elementary School, allegedly used more than $1,200 dollars from the PTA account for personal expenditures, according to a police report from the Lake Havasu City Police Department. Badding denied improperly using the funds and said she did not remember why certain charges appeared on the bank statement. Police began investigating the case after being alerted to suspicious activity on the account on Tuesday, according to the report. A school official contacted police after noticing payments that did not seem to make sense and withdrawals that were not allowed under PTA policy. After contacting Badding and another PTA board member, police arrested Badding on one count of credit card fraud. Suspicious expenses on the account included cable and phone bills, a trip to McDonald's and gas charges, according to the report. Badding told police she may have mixed up her personal cards with the school card and that she did not remember why those expenses were charged to the account, according to the report.
I support our right to keep and bear arms. The Founders didn't write the Second Amendment so we could go rabbit hunting and target shooting. They wrote the 2nd Amendment so we could kill government tyrants. I suspect that if George Washington and Thomas Jefferson were around to day they would consider Emperor Bush and Emperor Obama a 1,000 times worse then King George. While this guy had every right to do what he did, I think he did his stunt in a lousy way which makes gun owners look like jerks. I don't know if this is true, but this sure sounds like another Ernie Hancock stunt that blew up in his face. http://www.azcentral.com/story/opinion/op-ed/2014/11/22/open-carry-sky-harbor-airport/19344603/ Why I carried an AR-15 rifle through Sky Harbor Peter Steinmetz says he brought his AR-15 to the airport purely to make a statement at a place where he says American liberties are stripped. Peter Steinmetz, AZ I See It 8:29 p.m. MST November 22, 2014 Peter Steinmetz: Our rights should not be jeopardized by others' irrational fears. Since I peacefully, legally and openly carried an AR-15 semi-automatic rifle through the Phoenix Sky Harbor Airport last July, many people have wondered, both privately and publicly, why I would do such a thing. Indeed, many have speculated on my motives in most unkind terms. Having recently emerged from the threat of prosecution on two felony "dangerous nature" criminal charges, I can now freely address the important reasons for this protest. In brief, I must protest a now nearly institutionalized attempt to intimidate us into surrendering our civil rights to other people's irrational fears. We all have fears, but what do I mean by irrational fears? Some fears are, of course, quite rational; for example, being fearful of burning your finger after touching a hot burner as a child. But the responses to other fears are simply not based on a reasonable assessment of reality. They are are irrational. Extreme examples can be psychotic or delusional beliefs, such as being afraid to get out of bed at night because of a fixed false belief that a ghost will emerge from the closet to harm you. Other fears are irrational because the assessment of the likelihood of the event is completely out of proportion to reality. An example would be an unwillingness to leave the house because a meteor might strike and kill you. While a meteor could suddenly come out of the sky and kill you, it only happens 1 time in every 74.8 million years of life. Unfortunately, our airports are now prime sites where people's irrational responses to their fears are used as an excuse to bully, intimidate or force us into giving up our liberties. Here are three such fears: One argument given for why it is just terrible to carry an AR-15 to the airport is that these are such dangerous and awful weapons that no civilian needs them, let alone to carry them at the airport. FEAR OF PARTICULAR FIREARMS PER SE However, as recently noted in the piece "The Assault Weapon Myth" (Sept. 12), this type of rifle is scarcely ever used to commit a crime. From a statistical perspective, these are not the weapons to be concerned about if one is actually worried about firearm injuries and death. Fearing an AR-15 to a much greater extent than a handgun is simply not supported by facts, and as such, is irrational. Kory Watkins, coordinator for Open Carry Tarrant County, carries his rifle during a May demonstration in Texas.(Photo: Tony Gutierrez/AP) FEAR OF PEOPLE OPENLY CARRYING FIREARMS Another common argument is that it is awful to openly carry a rifle because it might scare people who can't tell if you are a terrorist. The simple fact is that no mass-shooting or terrorist attack committed with a rifle has ever started with the assailant peacefully and openly carrying the rifle about and then suddenly changing into a mass killer. Criminals don't want the attention that openly carrying a firearm invites. Paul Ciancia carried his rifle inside a bag into LAX until he opened fire in the middle of a TSA checkpoint line. One should rationally be more afraid of people carrying bags that might contain an AR-15, or afraid of concealed carriers of handguns than of people peacefully and openly carrying a firearm. FEAR OF TERRORIST ATTACKS ON AIR TRAVEL Finally, there is the argument that people are, of course, very afraid of terrorist attacks at the airport, and so one shouldn't carry a firearm there given this increased sensitivity. Sadly, foreign terrorists attacked the rights of Americans 13 years ago on Sept. 11 using hijacked airplanes. Since that time the U.S. government has attacked all of our rights to privacy by introducing vastly expanded airport-screening procedures performed by the Transportation Security Agency. Unfortunately, the TSA actually decreases our security. It has not thwarted a single terrorist attack. According to the study "Terror, Security and Money," the funds spent on the TSA could be spent 100 times more effectively in terms of saving lives with other simple interventions, such as purchasing more bicycle helmets or constructing tornado shelters. The fear of terrorist attacks that the TSA's security theater engender and play upon is blown completely out of proportion and is irrational. All of these fears have been used to argue that peacefully carrying an AR-15 rifle to the airport is an outrage. Unfortunately, these are all based on irrational responses. One of the delightful things about human beings is our individuality. We all have our own interests and joys, as well as our fears and sorrows. We each have an inherent right to decide how our efforts should be invested, including which of our fears are worth the effort of overcoming and which should simply be tolerated. I don't begrudge anyone having a fear of firearms per se in his or her own time and space. Perhaps those people simply don't think it is worth the effort to learn about them given their limited exposure. What I protest most strongly, however, is the attempt to deal with irrational fears by intimidating and forcing others, including myself, to give up our natural rights of self defense and privacy. These are attempts to demand that others change their behavior in public places to allow the holder of the irrational fear to avoid reality. I cannot in good conscience abide such irrational behavior and intimidation; thus I peacefully and openly carried an AR-15 to the airport as an emphatic form of protest. I believe it is critical for Americans to reclaim their civil liberties by peacefully defending and exercising them, lest they be further lost. Dr. Peter Steinmetz is a Valley physician.
Pigs have a tendency to blow things completely out of proportion. I suspect this guy was arrested not for punching a Tempe pigs horse, but for petting the pigs horse. And of course they used that as a lame excuse to search him, which led to them finding the marijuana. http://www.azcentral.com/story/news/local/tempe/2014/11/22/phoenix-man-accused-of-punching-tempe-police-horse/19422077/ Phoenix man accused of punching Tempe police horse Associated Press 5:32 p.m. MST November 22, 2014 A Phoenix man has been arrested for allegedly punching a police horse in Tempe. Tempe police said 20-year-old Bryson Albert was taken into custody for harming a service animal, possession of marijuana and possession of drug paraphernalia. Police said an officer was trying to break up a fight on Mill Avenue on Nov. 1 when Albert punched the officer's horse. Officers also reported finding marijuana and drug paraphernalia in Albert's pants pocket. He reportedly told police that the pants belonged to his brother. It was unclear Friday whether Albert has a lawyer yet for his case.
I may have posted an earlier version of this article. The time stamp says it only 8 hours old, but I think I may have posted an earlier version of the article. http://www.azcentral.com/story/news/local/phoenix/2014/11/20/arpaio-lawsuit-civil-rights-federal-court-maricopa-sheriff/70030578/ Judge warns Arpaio with contempt, more investigation Sean Holstege and Megan Cassidy, The Republic | azcentral.com 6:32 p.m. MST November 22, 2014 The federal judge presiding over a long-standing civil-rights lawsuit against the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office warned the agency during a routine hearing on Thursday that he has run out of patience and could order more action. U.S. District Court Judge G. Murray Snow told attorneys for Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio he is inclined to cite the agency for contempt of court and to issue a court order for new investigations into how it treated Latinos and the degree to which the county's lawmen buried evidence of it. The case, filed in 2007, had appeared to be in the final stages after the court appointed a monitor to oversee the sheriff's efforts to reform its discriminatory policing of Latinos during traffic stops. Snow complained of foot-dragging in May and attacked the progress again this week. "There is ample evidence," Snow told county officials and their lawyers, "at least some people at MCSO are abusing this process." His remarks came before the county's private attorney, Timothy Casey, disclosed that new evidence was uncovered as recently as this month and that plaintiffs' attorneys in the class-action suit still haven't seen much of it. "There is a substantial volume of material. It will be an undertaking," Casey said when asked if it could be turned over. Casey reported that, in pursuing its internal investigation of possible policy violations, the agency uncovered audio and video tapes from interviews of human smuggling suspects taken between 2009 and 2011. That and other materials - such as Miranda cards and cellphones - were linked to investigations and marked with crime report numbers, but never catalogued into evidence, he said. Also, he said, deputies opened a locker on Sheriff's Office premises Nov. 5 and found two purses with cellphones, keys, ID cards and indications that they, too, were related to a case file. Then, five days later, deputies were cleaning departmental offices and uncovered 164 ID cards, mainly bearing Hispanic last names and issued in foreign countries. Deputies told investigators 111 of them were used for "training," while no explanation was offered for the remainder. Then, Casey, said, deputies found 35 license plates, which were supposed to have been indexed as evidence and returned to the state's Motor Vehicle Division. Of these, 13 were linked by computer files to Deputy Ramon "Charlie" Armandariz, who testified in the civil rights trial and was suspected of targeting Latinos illegally during traffic stops. Unlike evidence taken from his house after he committed suicide, the new evidence was found at the Sheriff''s Office. Judge Snow had clearly reached his limit on Thursday. He told attorneys he will issue an order telling MCSO to spell out what it plans to continue investigating internally. Anything else, he said, could be investigated by himself or by the court-appointed monitor, Snow signaled. He plans to hold a hearing on Dec. 4 into the proposed order and to call deputies as witnesses as part of his own independent inquiries, he said. "I have given your client opportunity after opportunity after opportunity," Snow said. "In opportunity after opportunity after opportunity, your client has violated the law, violated my express orders or subverted the investigation I ordered." Snow said he had the right, and maybe the inclination, to cite MCSO with civil or criminal contempt of court. "I am not going to be tolerant any more," he warned. Casey, who was in court asking to be removed from the case, said he disagreed with Snow's characterization. "Despite some of the things that have been said here, my clients' belief is that they have followed this court's orders in good faith," he said. Last year, Snow found that the agency had racially profiled Latinos during its patrol operations and later ordered sweeping reforms to prevent discriminatory policing in the future. Snow ordered multi-million dollar reforms, including in-vehicle recording devices, bias-free training for deputies, increased data collection and a court-appointed monitor to oversee the agency's compliance. But his initial reforms expanded this spring following revelations that Armendariz had been stashing drugs, identification cards, license plates and torn-up citations in his home, signaling what appeared to be a shake-down operation that stretched for years. Armendariz also secretly recorded thousands of his own traffic stops, documenting his own misconduct and signaling to Snow that the Sheriff's Office did not turn over all of the traffic-stop data that was required for the lawsuit. Complicating the issue was Armendariz himself — he was one of a handful of deputies to testify during the trial. Snow soon extended his purview to include the agency's internal investigation into Armendariz and the possibility of widespread corruption within MCSO's Human Smuggling Unit. Snow has become increasingly agitated over the investigation in recent hearings. Sheriff's officials poured thousands of man hours into inquiry, but court-appointed monitor Robert Warshaw deemed the investigation insufficient. The monitoring team described a lax inquiry into which deputies also employed recording devices and said investigators disregarded another former deputy's allegations that HSU members had pocketed evidence.
Cop's story in shooting of WWII vet doesn't wash http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/columnists/kass/ct-john-wrana-kass-met-1123-20141121-column.html Cop's story in shooting of WWII vet doesn't wash Chicago Tribune jskass@chicagotribune.com The World War II vet was 95 years old, just a few weeks shy of his 96th birthday. He was active and sharp, he liked to gamble, tell jokes and have a drink. He was alive. But he wasn't stupid. He knew he was very old. He knew he wouldn't live forever. But he didn't have to die the way he did. Nobody should die like that, an old man shot in the guts by high-speed beanbag rounds from a 12-gauge Mossberg police pump shotgun. What was he? Some kind of ninja? - John Kass The rounds travel at some 190 miles per hour. And Wrana, frail and using a cane, was shot at a distance of around 6 feet. Manufacturers warn police not to shoot such beanbag (supposedly "less lethal") rounds at such close range. According to investigators, the police officer fired five rounds at the old man. Wrana was in his room at the Victory Centre nursing facility in Park Forest, suffering from delusions, when five policemen came to get him. One had a police riot shield and a Taser. Another had the shotgun loaded with beanbags. Another had his handgun drawn, and two had their hands free to subdue him. The cops said they were afraid for their lives. All those young healthy cops, with all that equipment afraid of an old man who used a cane. They said he had a machete, but that turned out to be a shoehorn. They said he had a 12-inch knife, but that turned out to be a knife with a 7-inch blade. And they said — in fearing for their lives — that he might have thrown the knife at them. lRelated 'Justice' likely to ring hollow in death of WWII veteran What was he? Some kind of ninja? And police shot him down like a dog. Now lawyers are doing what lawyers do, crawling over it, getting ready for trial, making it seem as if the old man was some kind of super martial arts expert or deadly Bruce Lee jungle fighter, and that what happened to him was reasonable. It wasn't reasonable. He wasn't a Bruce Lee jungle fighter. And shooting a WWII vet repeatedly in the guts at close range so that he bleeds to death internally isn't exactly reasonable. I told you more than a year ago that I wouldn't let this one go and I won't. Wrana was killed in July of 2013. I've written 12 columns since then, and I'll write more now that a trial date has been set for early next year. Park Forest police Officer Craig Taylor, the one with the shotgun, has been charged by prosecutors with felony reckless conduct. The trial is set for Jan. 13 in the courtroom of Associate Judge Luciano Panici in Markham. The reason I'm writing today is that Craig Taylor came forward — coached by his attorney Terry Ekl — in a Tribune story about the killing. "My job was to protect and serve," Taylor told the Tribune. "And that's what I did that night." It was a fascinating story, and I read it and reread it. Taylor said his piece in Ekl's office, I'm glad he's finally saying something. But it was a cop asserting his innocence in his lawyer's office without having to worry about cross-examination under oath. Ekl is a very good lawyer, one I've called brilliant for his understanding of police misconduct cases. He's argued against cops, too. In Chicago, Ekl won a federal civil case against the city in the police beating of a tiny Polish barmaid. Ekl outlined what he called the police "code of silence" in the coverup. Now in south suburban Park Forest, Ekl is on the side of a police officer, and I'm sure the court will hear all about Taylor's story, his time in the Boy Scouts and the church choir, that he played baseball, that his mom was strict, that he loves his daughters. But none of that matters. What matters is that five police officers have come up with a ridiculous story that they were afraid that Wrana would kill them. The old man "jumped out of the chair with the speed of an MMA fighter," Chya Hughes, a paramedic on the scene, told state investigators. An MMA fighter? A 95-year-old man just weeks shy of his 96th birthday? It sounds like the description of a Denzel Washington action flick, the latest one in which Denzel plays an old guy who can use common household items to kill a room of thugs within 18 seconds. Wrana was 5 feet, 5 inches tall and 160 pounds. He used a cane. He was so tired and sore that he had to leave the craps tables in the middle of a winning streak a day or two before he was shot. And if five police officers with a riot shield and a Taser and guns and muscle couldn't handle one 95-year-old man, they shouldn't be cops. They didn't need all that. All they needed was a spaghetti mop and a blanket. In an interview for this column months ago, Dr. Judy Melinek — an acclaimed forensic pathologist and author — studied Wrana's autopsy report. She noted many calcium deposits on his pelvis, and other signs of old age, and old injuries. Not exactly Jason Bourne. Taylor's defense argues that the old man wanted to die because he didn't want to risk surgery that would likely have left him in a vegetative state. But that's not wanting to die. That's a man who wanted to live with dignity. And they took that away from him, with five shots at close range in his room at the nursing home. NOTE: Check out chicagotribune.com on Monday for my special online-only column on brining and cooking your turkey for Thanksgiving. jskass@tribune.com Twitter @John_Kass
L.A. County settles suit alleging horrific conditions for disabled inmates Remember our govenrment masters are compassionate rulers who are public servants that help us make our lives better!!!! Well at least that's what the *ssholes tell us!!! http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-disabled-inmates-20141121-story.html L.A. County settles suit alleging horrific conditions for disabled inmates By Cindy Chang contact the reporter Six years after disabled jail inmates sued, alleging horrific conditions for those who used wheelchairs, Los Angeles County officials have agreed to a settlement. In the lawsuit, filed in 2008 by the ACLU and other disability rights attorneys, inmates described soiling themselves in an intake area because the bathroom was not wheelchair accessible. An earlier version of this post incorrectly said the county is agreeing to reforms five years after the lawsuit was filed. It is six years. They said they were given wheelchairs without working brakes and that they fell when trying to use jail toilets because there was no grab bar on the wall. Showers had ledges that made it dangerous to enter in a wheelchair, they said. Some said they were sent to "the hole" when they did not obey orders to stand up and relinquish their wheelchairs. The settlement, which must be approved by a judge at a hearing on Monday, calls for jail officials to make improvements, including providing working wheelchairs and giving disabled inmates access to work and educational programs. A wing of the Twin Towers jail has already been fitted with wheelchair-accessible toilets and showers. The county jail system now employs an Americans With Disabilities Act coordinator, and inmates may appeal when they are denied the use of a wheelchair or walker. For more news on the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department and jails, follow @cindychangLA.
Woman ruled innocent in 1997 slaying; payment for prison time expected You think you are going to get a fair trial??? Don't make me laugh!!!!! Whooppie!!!! The woman will get $100 a day for each day she spent in prison. That's a lousy $4.17 an hour. If the state of California were a business the Feds would shake them down for not paying the woman over time. http://www.latimes.com/local/crime/la-me-1122-prisoner-innocent-20141122-story.html# Woman ruled innocent in 1997 slaying; payment for prison time expected By Corina Knoll contact the reporter Judge rules woman freed after 17 years is factually innocent of murder in 1997 slaying Innocence ruling in murder case means woman is due compensation of $100 for each day in prison, about $600,000 A woman freed last month after 17 years behind bars for murder was declared factually innocent Friday by a Los Angeles County judge. "I'm sorry for what happened to you," Judge Mark S. Arnold told Susan Mellen after he issued his ruling in a Torrance courtroom. "It is my wish that you have a happy life … and I suspect this is going to be a far better Thanksgiving than the ones you've had previously." Declared innocent Arnold's ruling paves the way for Mellen, 59, to receive compensation from the state of $100 for each day she was wrongfully imprisoned — about $600,000. Mellen can also legally answer "no" when asked whether she has ever been charged with a serious crime, and can request that her records be destroyed. "I feel like I'm flying and having a new adventure," Mellen said outside the courthouse. "I feel like I have wings now." Arnold's apology, she said, took her by surprise and added to her feelings of gratitude for the judge who ordered her Oct. 10 release. Since then, Mellen has been living with her oldest daughter and son-in-law and their two children. She sleeps on a pull-out sofa in the living room of a two-bedroom apartment. Financially dependent on her three children, Mellen has said she wants to unburden her family and provide for herself. In 1998, Mellen was found guilty of the murder of Richard Daly, a 30-year-old transient and father of two. For years she insisted she had nothing to do with the killing. I feel like I'm flying and having a new adventure. I feel like I have wings now. - Susan Mellen, who was freed last month after 17 years behind bars for murder and declared factually innocent Friday Her case was resurrected last year by attorney Deirdre O'Connor, who runs Innocence Matters, a nonprofit organization dedicated to preventing and overturning wrongful convictions. O'Connor learned that Mellen's case relied on the testimony of a woman named June Patti who was notorious for being dishonest. Arnold ruled in October that the only evidence against Mellen was the testimony of a "habitual liar" and said the case was "a failure of the criminal justice system," then ordered her freed. "I believe that not only is Ms. Mellen not guilty — I believe, based on what I've read, she's innocent — and for that reason, I believe the criminal justice system failed," he said. The Los Angeles County district attorney's office filed paperwork earlier this week that called Patti's incriminating testimony "doubtful" and said it would not stand in the way of Mellen's petition for factual innocence — a distinction made for accused criminals who don't merely have charges dropped due to lack of evidence, but who have proven there is no actual evidence of guilt. Mellen — who had been incarcerated at a state prison in Chowchilla —- now spends her days baby-sitting her toddler grandson and enjoying simple pleasures, like going grocery shopping and stopping at the park. Her newfound freedom to raid the refrigerator, she joked, has added to her weight gain, and she has learned how to send text messages. According to O'Connor, it could take months for Mellen to receive her state money, after a victim compensation board verifies the amount. The attorney said Mellen was also looking into the possibility of a civil suit. corina.knoll@latimes.com Twitter: @corinaknoll
Cameras that read 263,430 license plates in Menlo Park net a single arrest Do you think the purpose of the police is to spy on us 24/7 to make sure we don't do anything wrong? Do you think the Founders would have voted to create a government whose sole purpose was to spy on them 24/7, just in case they did something wrong? Note: Menlo Park is a city in the San Francisco Bay area. http://www.mercurynews.com/peninsula/ci_26990245/cameras-that-read-263-430-license-plates-menlo Cameras that read 263,430 license plates in Menlo Park net a single arrest By RHEA MAHBUBANI Daily News Staff Writer Posted: 11/22/2014 05:00:00 AM PST0 Comments Three license plate readers that Menlo Park police began using this summer captured images of more than 250,000 plates between July 1 and Oct. 1, according to a police staff report. Out of all those images, however, only one could be tracked to a crime. Police recovered a stolen car and arrested the thief. The readers, which cost a total of $57,914, are mounted on the roofs of two marked patrol cars and one unmarked vehicle used by detectives. Each has four high-speed cameras that take pictures of license plates in front of, behind and alongside police cars. The collected data is then uploaded to a server managed by the Northern California Regional Intelligence Center, part of the Department of Homeland Security. According to the staff report, 263,430 license plates were photographed in the first three months that the readers were used. Of those, 141 plate numbers registered as a "hit," matching those of vehicles on an active wanted list that were stolen or associated with missing people. "The vast majority of the hits were subsequently deemed to be a 'false read' after further review by the [Automated License Plate Reader] operator," the report states. Police spokeswoman Nicole Acker said a "false read" occurs when the photo of a license plate differs from the computer-generated image of the plate. "A simplified example of a type of false read would be when an 8 is read as a B and vice versa," she wrote in an email. The Menlo Park City Council in September 2013 approved the license plate readers' purchase and several months later adopted a privacy ordinance that requires data to be deleted six months after being obtained unless it is part of an ongoing investigation. The police department is supposed to produce quarterly reports detailing the number of plates captured citywide, how many were on the wanted list, and the number of police inquiries they generated. The report, listed as an informational item on the council's Nov. 18 meeting agenda, is the first one produced since the readers were obtained. Police Commander David Bertini said concerned Menlo Park residents came up with the idea of investing in license plate readers. "Citizens of the Belle Haven came to us during neighborhood meetings and wanted to know what could be done to reduce the crime in that specific neighborhood," he said. "And it was the residents who said, 'Hey, why don't you put [surveillance] cameras up there? Why don't you put license plate readers out there?' ... "I don't want to jinx this, but I have to tell you, since January 1, we have not had one shooting in the Belle Haven, which is unheard of in that neighborhood." Bertini said the license plate readers' role in locating stolen vehicles is "almost secondary" to its value as a "deterrent to bad guys" and an investigative tool for solving crimes. It would be premature to judge the technology's effectiveness after only three months, he added. "Why don't you ask me in two or three years and I can probably give you a better idea," Bertini said. Mayor Ray Mueller said Friday that although license plate readers are "another tool in the arsenal of our police department," their use was hotly debated by council members. "To my knowledge, we are the first city to actually enact an ordinance to regulate how long the city can keep drivers' data," he said. "Not only can the information only be kept for six months, but it is an ordinance, which means that if anyone, including a police officer or government official, misuses that information, they have committed a crime." Mueller also noted that such technology requires a continuing assessment of public safety concerns versus the community's right to privacy. "Technology is improving," he said. "Technology such as this one, while it may be OK with safeguards today, in the future, it may not be. As the government's ability to aggregate information and apply complex algorithms and artificial intelligence to track people's lives increases, the balancing test of whether or not that technology is infringing upon the public's right to privacy will change. It's something that public servants need to continually monitor and appraise." Email Rhea Mahbubani at rmahbubani @dailynewsgroup.com or follow her at twitter.com/RMahbubani.
If you want to really f*ck up things you need government!!!! It seems like the police jobs program of arresting folks for marijuana will shift to be a police jobs program of arresting people for failing to pay for their marijuana tickets or failing to show up for court. It's time to end the war on drugs!!! http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/22/opinion/will-pot-pack-new-yorks-courts.html?hpw&rref=opinion&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&module=well-region®ion=bottom-well&WT.nav=bottom-well Will Pot Pack New York’s Courts? By KENNETH P. THOMPSONNOV. 21, 2014 THIS week the New York City Police Department shifted from making arrests to issuing tickets for possessing small amounts of marijuana. The problem is that most people, frankly, do not understand how summons court, which processes such tickets, operates. A key concern is that issuing summonses for marijuana possession will result in an excessive amount of bench warrants for those who fail to appear in court, and the influx of these cases is sure to swell our already overburdened summons-court dockets. As of May 2014, there were already more than 73,000 bench warrants arising from summonses issued in 2013. These active warrants can ensnare a person in the criminal justice system in ways that the new approach tries to avoid. A person may completely forget about that seemingly innocuous ticket; if he or she is again stopped by the police, even for jaywalking or littering, the warrant will pop up, and the person will be arrested and held until he or she can be arraigned before a judge, which can take up to 24 hours. Summonses are most often issued for so-called quality-of-life offenses, and police officers write up a majority of them. In 2013, among the most frequent offenses were public consumption of alcohol (116,054 tickets), public urination (19,612) and being unlawfully in a park after dark (14,809). Unlawful marijuana possession, a violation, was in seventh place (12,495), but will rocket in the rankings under the new policy. The high number of petty offense tickets naturally invites scrutiny. Are they being issued in a fair manner? A recent report by the John Jay College of Criminal Justice found that between 1980 and 2013, young minority men accounted for the greatest increases in misdemeanor arrests in New York City. Is the same true for the issuance of summonses? We do not know, because currently the summons form does not require information about the race and ethnicity of the summons recipient. That glaring omission should be remedied. Undoubtedly, most people would prefer to receive a ticket on the street instead of being taken away in handcuffs. However, many people wrongly believe they have received the equivalent of a parking ticket. Although people charged with public drinking or public urination can plead guilty and pay fines by mail, those charged with other offenses, like marijuana possession, must appear in the summons court on a designated date, often almost two months in the future. A failure to appear almost inevitably leads to a bench warrant. Even if the summons recipient does appear in court, there will probably be a significant wait before his or her case is called. Long lines plague most of the summons courts. Attorneys for indigent defendants have almost no time to discuss the merits of cases with clients and no privacy to confer, and the discussions often last less than 30 seconds once the case is called, which raises serious due process concerns. Although convictions for violations will not saddle defendants with criminal records, they are a matter of public record and may have consequences for, say, eligibility for public housing or application for citizenship. Those who do not contest their guilt and agree to pay a fine often request “time to pay” — that is, several weeks to mail in a check or money order. (Marijuana possession does not qualify for mail-in status at this time, though that may change in the future.) Unsurprisingly, even with additional time, many impoverished defendants find it difficult to pay a $100 fine for riding a bicycle on the sidewalk or a mandatory $50 fine for public urination. Failure to pay automatically triggers the entry of a civil judgment. As more employers are running credit checks on job applicants, civil judgments can sabotage hopes of securing employment (and, paradoxically, of having the money to satisfy the judgment). The city and the courts must commit to providing the summons operation with more and better resources. Most Brooklyn summonses go to a courtroom in Lower Manhattan; the city should move them back to Brooklyn, and seriously consider an alternative model, like community justice centers. The Red Hook Community Justice Center in southwest Brooklyn, which opened in 2000 thanks to a federal grant and serves three Brooklyn precincts, is well worth replicating. Summonses issued in the neighboring precincts are heard one day a week at the center. The process is orderly and efficient. If a defendant fails to appear, the warrant is often stayed while the court clerk tries to contact the defendant. The prosecutor, judge and defense counsel have time to consider each case. Fines are frequently not imposed, but the offender may have to participate in a “quality of life” class at the center. With this approach, the center successfully fosters justice and helps build stronger relationships between law enforcement and the community. As the number of summons cases grows with the administration’s new marijuana policy, justice will stagger under the increasing weight. Before that happens, the city needs to overhaul its summons system.
Maybe I was on drugs and missed something? Didn't Emperor Obama declare that we won the war in Afghanistan a few years back??? Or maybe that was Emperor Bush??? Remember those folks who called themselves "Billionaires for Bush" and always showed up at the anti-war demonstrations to support Emperor Bush??? Yea, the ones who used $100 bills to light their cigars. I think they should start a "War Party" to compete with the Democrats and Republicans. The "War Party" will support a perpetual state of war in American in order to guarantee high profits for the military industrial complex and a full time jobs program for generals. Just joking. Some folks like that idiot Mike Renzulli will think I am serious. That's just my opinion. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/22/us/politics/in-secret-obama-extends-us-role-in-afghan-combat.html In a Shift, Obama Extends U.S. Role in Afghan Combat By MARK MAZZETTI and ERIC SCHMITTNOV. 21, 2014 WASHINGTON — President Obama decided in recent weeks to authorize a more expansive mission for the military in Afghanistan in 2015 than originally planned, a move that ensures American troops will have a direct role in fighting in the war-ravaged country for at least another year. Mr. Obama’s order allows American forces to carry out missions against the Taliban and other militant groups threatening American troops or the Afghan government, a broader mission than the president described to the public earlier this year, according to several administration, military and congressional officials with knowledge of the decision. The new authorization also allows American jets, bombers and drones to support Afghan troops on combat missions. In an announcement in the White House Rose Garden in May, Mr. Obama said that the American military would have no combat role in Afghanistan next year, and that the missions for the 9,800 troops remaining in the country would be limited to training Afghan forces and to hunting the “remnants of Al Qaeda.” The decision to change that mission was the result of a lengthy and heated debate that laid bare the tension inside the Obama administration between two often-competing imperatives: the promise Mr. Obama made to end the war in Afghanistan, versus the demands of the Pentagon that American troops be able to successfully fulfill their remaining missions in the country. The internal discussion took place against the backdrop of this year’s collapse of Iraqi security forces in the face of the advance of the Islamic State as well as the mistrust between the Pentagon and the White House that still lingers since Mr. Obama’s 2009 decision to “surge” 30,000 American troops to Afghanistan. Some of the president’s civilian advisers say that decision was made only because of excessive Pentagon pressure, and some military officials say it was half-baked and made with an eye to domestic politics. Mr. Obama’s decision, made during a White House meeting in recent weeks with his senior national security advisers, came over the objection of some of his top civilian aides, who argued that American lives should not be put at risk next year in any operations against the Taliban — and that they should have only a narrow counterterrorism mission against Al Qaeda. But the military pushed back, and generals both at the Pentagon and in Afghanistan urged Mr. Obama to define the mission more broadly to allow American troops to attack the Taliban, the Haqqani network and other militants if intelligence revealed that the extremists were threatening American forces in the country. The president’s order under certain circumstances would also authorize American airstrikes to support Afghan military operations in the country and ground troops to occasionally accompany Afghan troops on operations against the Taliban. “There was a school of thought that wanted the mission to be very limited, focused solely on Al Qaeda,” one American official said. But, the official said, “the military pretty much got what it wanted.” On Friday evening, a senior administration official insisted that American forces would not carry out regular patrols or conduct offensive missions against the Taliban next year. “We will no longer target belligerents solely because they are members of the Taliban,” the official said. “To the extent that Taliban members directly threaten the United States and coalition forces in Afghanistan or provide direct support to Al Qaeda, however, we will take appropriate measures to keep Americans safe.” In effect, Mr. Obama’s decision largely extends much of the current American military role for another year. Mr. Obama and his aides were forced to make a decision because the 13-year old mission, Operation Enduring Freedom, is set to end on Dec. 31. The matter of the military’s role in Afghanistan in 2015 has “been a really, really contentious issue for a long time, even more contentious than troop numbers,” said Vikram Singh, who worked on Afghanistan policy both at the State Department and the Pentagon during the Obama administration and is now at the Center for American Progress in Washington. American officials said that while the debate over the nature of the American military’s role beginning in 2015 has lasted for years, two issues in particular have shifted the debate in recent months. The first is the advance of Islamic State forces across northern Iraq and the collapse of the Iraqi Army, which has led to criticism of Mr. Obama for a military pullout of Iraq that left Iraqi troops ill-prepared to protect their soil. This has intensified criticism of Mr. Obama’s Afghanistan strategy, which Republican and even some Democratic lawmakers have said adheres to an overly compressed timeline that would hamper efforts to train and advise Afghan security forces — potentially leaving them vulnerable to attack from Taliban fighters and other extremists in the meantime. This new arrangement could blunt some of that criticism, although it is also likely to be criticized by some Democratic lawmakers who will say that Mr. Obama allowed the military to dictate the terms of the endgame in Afghanistan. The second factor is the transfer of power in Afghanistan to President Ashraf Ghani, who has been far more accepting of an expansive American military mission in his country than his predecessor, Hamid Karzai. According to a senior Afghan official and a former Afghan official who maintains close ties to his former colleagues, in recent weeks both Mr. Ghani and his new national security adviser, Hanif Atmar, have requested that the United States continue to fight Taliban forces in 2015 — as opposed to being strictly limited to operations against Al Qaeda. Mr. Ghani also recently lifted the limits on American airstrikes and joint raids that Mr. Karzai had put in place, the Afghan officials said. The new Afghan president has already developed a close working relationship with Gen. John F. Campbell, the allied commander in Afghanistan. “The difference is night and day,” General Campbell said in an email about the distinction between dealing with Mr. Ghani and Mr. Karzai. “President Ghani has reached out and embraced the international community. We have a strategic opportunity we haven’t had previously with President Karzai.” American military officials saw the easing of the limits on airstrikes imposed by Mr. Karzai as especially significant, even if the restrictions were not always honored. During the summer, Afghan generals occasionally ignored Mr. Karzai’s directive and requested American air support when their forces encountered trouble. Now it appears such requests will no longer have to be kept secret. One senior American military officer said that in light of Mr. Obama’s decision, the Air Force expects to use F-16 fighters, B-1B bombers and Predator and Reaper drones to go after the Taliban in 2015. “Our plans are to maintain an offensive capability in Afghanistan,” he said. The officer said he expected the Pentagon to issue an order in the next several weeks detailing the military’s role in Afghanistan in 2015 under Operation Resolute Support, which will become the new name for the Afghanistan war. The Pentagon plans to take the lead role in advising and training Afghan forces in southern and eastern Afghanistan, with Italy also operating in the east, Germany in the north and Turkey in Kabul. But by the end of next year, half of the 9,800 American troops would leave Afghanistan. The rest would be consolidated in Kabul and Bagram, and then leave by the end of 2016, allowing Mr. Obama to say he ended the Afghan war before leaving office. America’s NATO allies are expected to keep about 4,000 troops of their own in Afghanistan in 2015. The allies are expected to follow the American lead in consolidating and withdrawing their troops. The United States could still have military advisers in Kabul after 2016 who would work out of an office of security cooperation at the United States Embassy. But the administration has not said how large that contingent might be and what its exact mission would be. And it remains unclear how the continuing chaos in Iraq — and Mr. Obama’s decision to send troops back there — will affect the administration’s plans for an Afghanistan exit. As the president said in the Rose Garden in May, “I think Americans have learned that it’s harder to end wars than it is to begin them.” Matthew Rosenberg contributed reporting.
I guess the 2nd Amendment is null and void in Washington D.C. Sadly that's why the Founders passed the Second Amendment - to allow the people to protect themselves from the tyrants in the Federal government. http://www.cnn.com/2014/11/21/politics/woman-with-gun-arrested-white-house/ Woman arrested outside of White House faces felony gun charge By Jeremy Diamond and Steve Almasy, CNN updated 7:24 PM EST, Fri November 21, 2014 Washington (CNN) -- A woman who was arrested with a handgun outside of the White House Thursday night has been charged with a felony, accused of carrying a pistol without a license. April Debois, 23, of Mount Morris, Michigan, faces up to five years in prison after the Secret Service arrested her just minutes after President Barack Obama delivered his immigration speech. Debois, who was initially identified by authorities as April Lenhart, made her first court appearance on Friday in Superior Court. She will spend the weekend in jail and will be back in front of a judge on Monday morning. Her brother told CNN's Pamela Brown that he is stunned by her arrest. His sister is a caring person and an Obama supporter, he told CNN. He has no idea why she went to the White House, allegedly carrying a gun. People chant during a demonstration in front of the White House in Washington, Thursday, Nov. 20, 2014, as President Barack Obama announced executive actions on immigration during a nationally televised address. People chant during a demonstration in front of the White House in Washington, Thursday, Nov. 20, 2014, as President Barack Obama announced executive actions on immigration during a nationally televised address. Secret Service agents searched her home in Michigan on Friday. CNN affiliate WJRT said reporters saw agents remove a long gun from the house and another item that was wrapped in plastic. Debois was arrested at about 8:30 p.m. on Thursday on Pennsylvania Avenue near the North Lawn of the White House after she was spotted with a gun holstered under her shirt, Secret Service spokesman Ed Donovan said. A court document described the weapon as a purple and silver 9mm pistol. The incident occurred as dozens of people were demonstrating outside the White House after the President delivered his immigration speech at 8 p.m. The people rallying outside the White House were moved off of Pennsylvania Avenue as the arrest was made, Donovan said.
Sure these 2 guys spent a total of almost 80 years in prison for a crime they didn't commit. But the cops will tell us it's no that bad. They were probably guilty of something else. Yea, that's the sick mentality of cops. It's impossible for them to make mistakes. http://www.cleveland.com/court-justice/index.ssf/2014/11/finally_exonerated_friends_lea.html Ricky Jackson and Wiley Bridgeman: Exonerated friends leave prison after 39 years behind bars John Caniglia, The Plain Dealer By John Caniglia, The Plain Dealer on November 21, 2014 at 4:27 PM, updated November 22, 2014 at 7:48 AM CLEVELAND, Ohio – Ricky Jackson and Wiley Bridgeman walked out of the hell known as the Ohio prison system Friday, exonerated of a horrific slaying that they didn't commit. Separately, they stepped out into the bitter winds and gray skies of Cleveland and beamed, hugging friends, lawyers and family. They took their first steps of freedom after they each spent 39 years behind bars for the murder of a businessman at a convenience store. They were set free just days after the key witness in their jury trials recanted his testimony during a hearing in Cuyahoga County Common Pleas Court. But neither said he was angry with Eddie Vernon, the witness who, as a 12-year-old boy, told police a lie about something he did not see. Jackson's attorneys, Mark Godsey and Brian Howe from the Ohio Innocence Project, called witnesses who corroborated that Vernon had lied. Hours after Vernon stepped off the witness stand Tuesday, Prosecutor Timothy McGinty said his case had fallen apart and dismissed objections to Jackson's motion for a new trial. Prosecutors later dismissed the charges against the men, effectively clearing the names of Jackson, Bridgeman and Bridgeman's brother, Ronnie, who served 27 years in prison before he was released in 2003. "Finally! finally!'' Jackson said as he left the jail. "It's extraordinary. I'm glad to be out. ... It has been an emotional roller coaster. The English language doesn't have the words to express how I'm feeling right now.'' Jackson, 57, has been in prison since he was 18. He has served more time behind bars – 39 years – than anyone who has ever been released from prison on a wrongful conviction, according to the National Registry of Exonerations. Wiley Bridgeman is close behind him. Bridgeman, 60, couldn't stop smiling as he dove into the arms of his younger brother, Ronnie, as he took three steps out of the jail. Ronnie Bridgeman also goes by Kwame Ajamu, a name he took after leaving prison. "It's amazing," Wiley Bridgeman said. "The bitterness is over with. I carried that too long." Ronnie Bridgeman continued to hug his brother for most of Friday morning. The two men were never three steps apart. "I don't know what to say," Ronnie Bridgeman said. "I can die tomorrow, and I would be fine with it because those boys made it through the fire.'' For Jackson and Wiley Bridgeman, the two men who spent nearly four decades in prison -- some of it on death row -- the key events of Friday went by in a matter of minutes. First, Common Pleas Judge Richard McMonagle had a 3-minute hearing in which he set Jackson free. "Life is filled with small victories, and this is a big one,'' said McMonagle, who watched Vernon testify for several hours during the hearing in his courtroom. "Know who your friends are because everybody will want a piece of you. You better trust the people who you can trust.'' McMonagle's, father, George, was the judge that presided over Jackson's original trial. Jackson thanked McMonagle, as well as prosecutors. He said they showed integrity in dropping the charges against him. In another twist, it was McGinty, then a young probation officer, who interviewed Jackson before he was sentenced to prison. When McMonagle freed him, Jackson looked to the ceiling and closed his eyes. In the back of the courtroom, members of a former prison fraternity, including Clarence Elkins and Robert McClendon watched. They, like Jackson and Bridgeman, had been exonerated. They said they came to show support to a man who would need a great deal of it in the coming years. "The first few days, the first few years are so difficult,'' said Elkins, who was the first person exonerated by the Ohio Innocence Project in 2005. He had been convicted of rape and murder in Summit County in 1999. "I felt like I didn't belong anywhere,'' he said. "Even though you have the support of your family and friends, you just feel like you don't belong. He needs to surround himself with good, positive people.'' Two hours after Jackson left the Justice Center, Common Pleas Judge David Matia released Bridgeman. Moments after the hearing, Ronnie Bridgeman smiled and howled, "That's my big brother!'' Wiley Bridgeman's attorneys, Terry Gilbert and David Mills, worked with the Ohio Innocence Project, which represented Jackson. They said that after 39 years of being told how to perform every basic function in life, Bridgeman will need to time for re-adjustment. "I don't think you can plan for freedom,'' Gilbert said. "It is something that you have to experience. Hopefully, he can deal with it. I think he'll succeed.'' In 1975, authorities built their case against Jackson and the Bridgemans on Vernon, who said this week he simply wanted to help police. He said a friend gave him the three men's names, and Vernon told police he saw the slaying. In fact, he said, he wasn't close, as the school bus he rode was not near the crime scene, the Fairmont Cut-Rite on Fairhill Road, which is now Stokes Boulevard. Authorities said two men attacked Harold Franks as he walked to the store. They beat him, threw acid in his face and one of the men shot him twice with a .38-caliber. The shooter also fired a round that hit Anna Robinson, the wife of the store's owner. The men stole Franks' briefcase and fled to a waiting car. Authorities accused Jackson of shooting Franks. There was no evidence linking the three men to the crime. Vernon said that once he told authorities the names of the three and the fact that he saw the slaying, Cleveland police fed him information about the crime and what happened. In 2011, Scene Magazine examined the case and Vernon's testimony. Vernon came forward after he spoke with his pastor, the Rev. Anthony Singleton of the Emmanuel Christian Center, last year. But his conscience apparently bothered him for years. In the early 2000s, Wiley Bridgeman was released on parole for the killing. In a chance meeting just months after leaving prison, he ran into Vernon. The two talked, and Vernon testified this week that he asked for Bridgeman's forgiveness. Someone saw the two men together and told Vernon that he must report the meeting to Bridgeman's parole officer, as Bridgeman was told he could not meet with any witnesses in the case. Bridgeman was soon sent back to prison for a parole violation. Attempts to reach Vernon Friday were unsuccessful. The Franks family could not be reached either, though the prosecutor's office said they were being kept up to date on the case. Jackson said he wished Vernon the best in the future. He said he could not hate him, adding that it took courage for him to come back and testify. "He is a grown man today; he was a child back then,'' Jackson said, adding that he believed police manipulated him. Jackson seemed upbeat with reporters afterward and joked with them. Asked what his first meal would be, he said he didn't care, as long as it "wasn't prison food.'' He said he wasn't sure what he would do next. He simply wanted to bask in his new freedom. A few hours later, the Bridgeman brothers walked out of the Justice Center arm-in-arm. They stopped for photos and hugs. But they never veered too far away from each other. "I'm never going to let you go,'' Ronnie Bridgeman told his older brother. Plain Dealer reporters Rachel Dissell and Tom Feran contributed to this story.
The insane "War on Drugs" has turned America into a police state where you almost need a note from your mom and doctor to buy over the counter cold medicine. And despite the fact that honest people have to kiss a politicians butt to get the drugs they need any high school kid can score any drug they want in a high school restroom. The "war on drugs" is a dismal failure that needs to be ended. http://www.azcentral.com/story/opinion/op-ed/2014/11/21/meth-arizona-into-mind/19339621/ Making meth: Are we making a dent? The Republic | azcentral.com 5:13 p.m. MST November 21, 2014 Into the Mind: State Rep. Heather Carter explains the success of a tracking system for ingredients used to make the drug. You've been pointing to the success of a tracking system you helped put in place two years ago to stop the illicit manufacture of methamphetamines. What's the proof it's working? The National Precursor Log Exchange has blocked the sale of more than 14,000 boxes of pseudoephedrine, or PSE, in Arizona, keeping nearly 39,000 grams off the streets. Without this system being in place, people were going from pharmacy to pharmacy purchasing more than the legal limit of PSE (which is used in the production of meth). There was no way to track their purchases. The retailers were collecting information as required by previously enacted legislation, but no system pulled it all together in a meaningful way. For example, a person who wanted to buy large quantities of PSE to make methamphetamine could go to a retailer in Cave Creek, purchase the maximum allowed by state statute, and then go to a different retailer in Gilbert and get the maximum allowed again. The electronic system also makes it much easier for police to assemble collected data related to attempted illegal purchases. What brought this issue to your attention? I knew that methamphetamine, and substance abuse in general, is a very serious problem in Arizona. As the House Health Committee chairwoman, stakeholders brought the exchange system to my attention. After learning about this system, it appeared to be an effective tool to help solve the problem of illegal PSE purchases. How does the tracking system work? The federal Combat Methamphetamine Epidemic Act of 2005, as well as numerous state and local laws, require retailers of products containing pseudoephedrine and ephedrine to capture customer data at the point of sale. The pharmacy scans government identification or enters the data into the secure MethCheck portal. The information is transmitted instantly to the database, where it is available for review by law enforcement. Are there holes in the system? This system is just one piece to a very complicated problem. As of 2013, 27 states have implemented this system. While there is still work to be done in other states, this is a big step in the right direction. We have the data in Arizona to show it is working. sr-horses0512 Heather Carter(Photo: handout) Do you know if meth manufacturers have changed their operations because of the tracking system? Many retailers were already collecting the data, but there was no way to track purchases between different retailers, municipalities or states. Now we are able to put into a larger database that can be used to stop criminal activity. Obviously, based on the data, we have stopped many illegal purchases; however, there is more work to be done. What has been the response of the pharmacies to the tracking system? The pharmacies and retailers collected this information prior to the implementation of the exchange system. This system simply put the information in a useable format, at no charge to the pharmacies or retailers. Now their efforts are being put to good use, and it is easy for them to implement. One of the greatest rewards of serving on the Legislature is putting forth legislation to address some of the complicated problems we face in Arizona.To be able to show that legislation we passed has an immediate benefit and serves the objective we set out to achieve is fantastic.
Cops KNOW EVERYTHING!!!! Well at least that's the line of BS they give when they commit perjury in the courtroom. Sorry, I shouldn't have said commit perjury. Cops NEVER commit perjury when they lie. They call it testilying. And for some reason they consider testilying a moral and ethical thing to do. Which means I will make one of my usual statements. You think you will get a fair trial? Don't make me laugh!!! http://www.azcentral.com/story/news/local/mesa/2014/11/21/jodi-arias-expert-miss-porn-computer/19369563/ Jodi Arias' expert: 'You couldn't miss' porn on computer Michael Kiefer, The Republic | azcentral.com 5:48 p.m. MST November 21, 2014 A Mesa police forensics expert testified during the course of two trials that he had examined a computer in the Jodi Arias case and found no pornography on it. On Friday, a computer forensics expert for Arias' defense team said that there was so much porn found on Travis Alexander's computer that "you couldn't miss it." "It wasn't the elephant in the room, it was the aircraft carrier in the room," the expert said. Bryan Neumeister, an Arizona-based computer expert who does work for defense and prosecutors around the country, said on the witness stand that thousands of the files had been deleted accidentally when police or attorneys turned the computer on and off without taking proper precautions used in criminal investigations. Tens of thousands more files were scrubbed, "zeroed out" by some program not on the computer, he said. The computer had countless viruses that are usually associated with porn, even though Alexander had 19 different anti-virus, debugging or malware programs installed on the machine. Neumeister also pointed out that all the cellphones he was asked to examine in the case were missing the SIM or data cards that make them function, rendering them useless and impossible to examine. Prosecutor Juan Martinez blamed Arias' former attorney, Maria Schaffer. He also blamed Neumeister. But the hearing ended abruptly so that Martinez could have his own technicians re-evaluate the materials in question. Friday's hearing was conducted outside the presence of the jury; it will continue Dec. 4. The penalty-phase retrial itself will reconvene on Monday with the jury, as cross-examination continues with a psychologist who evaluated the sexual relationship between Arias and Alexander. Arias, 34, is on trial in Maricopa County Superior Court to determine whether she should be sentenced to life or death for killing her lover, Alexander, in June 2008. Alexander, 30, was discovered in the shower of his Mesa home with a bullet in his head, a slit throat and nearly 30 stab wounds. Arias was found guilty of first-degree murder in May 2013, but the first jury was unable to reach a unanimous verdict on the death penalty. A second trial in front of a new jury began in October. Arias' defense attorneys had asked to take another look at one of Alexander's computers, which police and prosecutors said had no viruses or pornography on it, contrary to what Arias had said. They got it the day before the new trial. Then, on Nov. 10, attorneys Jennifer Willmott and Kirk Nurmi filed a motion to dismiss the charges, or at least the death penalty, on grounds of prosecutorial misconduct because they found porn on the computer and learned that thousands of files had been deleted. Martinez claimed that Arias' former attorneys, Schaffer and Greg Parzych, had made the deletions during an examination of evidence, if any deletions were made. Schaffer denied the allegation. Schaffer took the stand Friday during the evidentiary hearing. She described how she and her co-counsel and an investigator had met with Martinez and Detective Esteban Flores at the Mesa Police Department to take inventory of all the evidence, ranging from documents to cellphones. Flores, she said, powered up the computers, and Martinez looked through random files. On cross-examination, Martinez asked Schaffer if she remembered commenting on the number of photos on the computer. "You made that comment," she answered. He asked about her looking at files, and she countered that he was the only one who did so. "If Mr. Martinez had told us that turning on the computers would destroy evidence, we would not have allowed that," Schaffer said. Schaffer was followed on the stand by Neumeister, who examined the computer for the defense attorneys. Neumeister explained that forensic examination is done by first installing a device called a "write-blocker" to prevent any changes to data. Then, a clone is made, and that is what is examined. The first rule of computer forensics, Neumeister said, is "Change nothing." When a computer is turned on, he explained, the machine immediately starts downloading updates, checking e-mails and doing other tasks that are written over existing files in the computer cache and deleting data. And when the computer is turned off, the memory is erased and other data may disappear. But the Alexander computer was turned on twice without using a write-blocker, Neumeister said, once the day after Alexander's body was discovered in June 2008 and again in June 2009, when the attorneys came to examine it. Files were erased both times, he said, and when the machine was not turned off correctly, it suffered more data loss. The machine was rife with viruses that are spread through viewing pornography, he said. The viruses themselves downloaded some porn files, an explanation offered by Martinez in motions. But there were others that were the result of searches. Neumeister found thousands of sites accessed when he entered search words like "teen." Arias claimed that she caught Alexander masturbating to photos of young boys. Martinez dismissed that assertion as a lie. And Alexander had apparently visited escort-service websites, as well, Neumeister said. Furthermore, the number of virus-protection programs was extreme, and some were intended to completely erase the viewer history, he said. "If you don't want anyone seeing what you're doing, you would use something like that," Neumeister said. The protection did not work, he said. On cross-examination, Martinez asked Neumeister why the porn had not been discovered before the first trial, and Neumeister theorized that the first analyst had only evaluated what he had been given, perhaps a less complete clone. But he did not know. Martinez pressed him, and Neumeister answered the prosecutor by telling him he, Martinez, didn't understand computers. When Martinez asked if Neumeister had broken one of the computers, the expert answered, "That's just sliming." The hearing ended abruptly, and Neumeister was asked to provide more copies of the clone he had worked from for the Dec. 4 hearing.
A year in prison for a victimless crime that hurt no one? That's not justice, that's tyranny!!! In fact Danny Hendon should get a medal for helping people come to this country and better themselves by giving them jobs Americans refuse to do!!! http://www.azcentral.com/story/news/local/2014/11/21/dannys-car-wash-sentence-abrk/19370181/ Danny's Family Car Wash ex-owner gets 1 year in prison Jim Walsh, The Republic | azcentral.com 6:11 p.m. MST November 21, 2014 A federal judge sentenced the former owner of a Valley car-wash chain to 12 months and one day in prison and 12 months of home detention for his role in an illegal hiring scheme that federal agents shut down last year. Family members testified on behalf of Danny Hendon, who owned and operated the Danny's Family Car Wash chain in the lengthy hearing Friday afternoon in U.S. District Court in downtown Phoenix, telling Judge Neil V. Wake that Hendon suffers from Parkinson's disease and lost virtually everything in a bankruptcy case. Hendon was given a self-surrender date of Jan. 20. Hendon's sentencing culminates one of the largest federal work-site enforcement cases in Arizona. Authorities are hoping his downfall discourages the hiring of undocumented workers. Federal prosecutors recommended a sentence of 18 months in prison for Hendon, 64, followed by 19 months of home confinement, according to a federal sentencing memorandum. PREVIOUS: Federal agents raid Phoenix-area Danny's Car Wash locations Hendon, a former Detroit police officer before he built his Valley business empire through the Danny's Family Car Wash chain, pleaded guilty on July 24 in U.S. District Court to conspiracy commit identity theft and agreed to divest himself from the company. Hendon faced a maximum sentence of five years in prison and a $250,000, but his attorneys were hoping for no prison time, noting that Hendon took responsibility for the scheme in entering the plea agreement. "In the United States' view, the most important of these considerations are the need to achieve a general deterrence and to promote respect for the law – that is, the need to send a message to the Arizona business community that unlawful hiring practices like Hendon's will be punished severely," the prosecutors' sentencing memorandum said. "Only a sentence of imprisonment can send such a message." The case against Hendon started when federal authorities with the Homeland Security Investigations unit received tips between 2005 and 2008 that Danny's Family Car Wash hired undocumented workers. An audit in March 2011 revealed 942 employees had not presented sufficient work authorization documents at the time they were hired. A month after Danny's was notified of the findings, the company told Homeland Security that it had terminated all of those illegal workers. However, when the illegal workers' replacements proved too expensive or ineffective, Hendon instructed company managers to rehire the undocumented workers, according to court documents. Hendon pressured managers who initially opposed his order with termination if they failed to carry out his instructions, the court document said. Some undocumented workers posed as legal relatives or acquaintances to pass through the E-Verify background checks. Others posed as a legal former employees, using false identities supplied by the company. Prosecutors said Hendon didn't want to know the details and told managers to get the job done. "In short, I turned a blind eye toward the hiring of unauthorized aliens that was occurring at DFC,'' Hendon acknowledged in his plea agreement. Prosecutors said the audit identifying the undocumented workers could have served as a "wake up call'' for Hendon, but instead, he decided to "double down" by hatching the illegal rehiring scheme. "Hendon formulated and implemented a massive, multi-year, company-wide scheme to employ unauthorized aliens,'' the court document said. "All told, the scheme involved hundreds of instances where documents were falsified, identities were stolen, and false statements were made under penalty of perjury.'' Prosecutors admitted, however, that no victims of identity theft came forward to file complaints.
A top UN official says marijuana legalization in the US violates international law I know that in the US Constitution it says that any treaties the US government makes with foreign nations have a higher priority then the other laws that Congress makes. But I suspect it would also be illegal for the US government to sign any treaties that are in violation of the US Constitution. I also suspect that all of the treaties the US government has entered into regarding the "war on drugs" are illegal and unconstitutional because of the 10th Amendment. Many legal scholars say the 10th Amendment makes the "war on drugs" unconstitutional because the Constitution doesn't give Uncle Sam the power to regulate or control drugs. The 10th Amendment says: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people. Because of the 10th Amendment, before the Federal government could begin it's "war on liquor", which was called the Prohibition, Uncle Sam had to pass the 18th Amendment. That's because the US Constitution doesn't give Uncle Sam the power to regulated liquor. Many legal scholars also say the same thing is true about the "war on drugs". As of today, no Constitutional amendment has been passed to give Uncle Sam the power to enter a "war on drugs". But don't tell that to the US Supreme Court. Lawyers for Uncle Sam have argued before the Supreme Court that the "Interstate Commerce clause" gives Uncle Sam the power to do anything under the Sun. And sadly the US Supreme Court has bought that line of BS. Of course if that is true why the Uncle Sam waste all that time and effort passing the 18th Amendment, and then waste more time passing the 21st Amendment, which repealed the 18th Amendment??? http://www.vox.com/2014/11/12/7205927/weed-legalization-alaska-oregon A top UN official says marijuana legalization in the US violates international law Updated by German Lopez on November 20, 2014, 4:20 p.m. ET @germanrlopez german@vox.com The debate over international drug treaties and state-by-state legalization Keith Humphreys, a Stanford University professor and drug policy advisor, previously argued that states aren't signatories to international drug control treaties — only the federal government is. So the federal government is meeting its international obligations as long as marijuana remains illegal under federal law, even if some states allow pot. But Wells Bennett of the Brookings Institute argues that international drug control treaties require participants to actually enforce drug prohibition, not just enact a law. If that's the case, the US is required under international obligations to wage a war on marijuana regardless of what voters decide at the state level — and it can't turn a blind eye to legalization in Colorado, Washington, and other states as it has since 2013. A report by the Congressional Research Service suggested marijuana legalization in Washington, DC, could produce a particular sticking point with the international treaties since DC is a federal jurisdiction and Congress could directly overturn the legalization law, the Washington Times reported. "This line of reasoning suggests that if Initiative 71 is permitted to take effect, this inaction by the federal government may strengthen the Board's argument that the United States has not fulfilled its commitments under the Single Convention," the report stated. The debate and confusion may eventually lead to reform. During the 2016 UN General Assembly Special Session on drugs, reformers hope to change international drug laws to allow legalization and other drug policy experiments. How much of the war on drugs is tied to international treaties? If lawmakers decided to stop the war on drugs tomorrow, a major hurdle could be international agreements that require restrictions and regulations on certain drugs. There are three major treaties: the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs of 1961, the Convention on Psychotropic Drugs of 1971, and the UN Convention against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances of 1988. Combined, the treaties require participants to limit and even criminalize the possession, use, trade, and distribution of drugs outside of medical and scientific purposes, and work together to stop international drug trafficking. There is a lot of disagreement among drug policy experts, enforcers, and reformers about the stringency of the treaties. Several sections of the conventions allow countries some flexibility so they don't violate their own constitutional protections. The US, for example, has never enforced penalties on inciting illicit drug use on the basis that it would violate rights to freedom of speech. Many argue that any move toward legalization of use, possession, and sales is in violation of international treaties. Under this argument, Colorado, Washington, and Uruguay are technically in violation of the treaties because they legalized marijuana for personal possession and sales. Others say that countries have a lot of flexibility due to the constitutional exemptions in the conventions. Countries could claim, for instance, that their protections for right to privacy and health allow them to legalize drugs despite the conventions. When it comes to individual states in the US, the federal government can also argue that America's federalist system allows states some flexibility as long as the federal government keeps drugs illegal. "It's pretty clear that the war on drugs was waged for political reasons and some countries have used the treaties as an excuse to pursue draconian policies," said Kasia Malinowska-Sempruch, director of the Open Society Global Drug Policy Program. "Nevertheless, we've seen a number of countries drop criminal penalties for minor possession of all drugs. We've seen others put drugs into a pharmaceutical model, including the prescription of heroin to people with serious addictions. This seems completely possible within the treaties." Even if a country decided to dismantle prohibition and violate the treaties, it's unclear how the international community would respond. If the US, for example, ended prohibition, there's little other countries could do to interfere; there's no international drug court, and sanctions would be very unlikely for a country as powerful as America. Still, Martin Jelsma, an international drug policy expert at the Transnational Institute, argued that ignoring or pulling out of the international drug conventions could seriously damage America's standing around the world. "Pacta sunt servanda ('agreements must be kept') is the most fundamental principle of international law and it would be very undermining if countries start to take an 'a-la-carte' approach to treaties they have signed; they cannot simply comply with some provisions and ignore others without losing the moral authority to ask other countries to oblige to other treaties," Jelsma wrote in an email. "So our preference is to acknowledge legal tensions with the treaties and try to resolve them." To resolve such issues, many critics of the war on drugs hope to reform international drug laws in 2016 during the next General Assembly Special Session on drugs. "There is tension with the tax-and-regulate approach to marijuana in some jurisdictions," Malinowska-Sempruch said. "But it's all part of a process and that's why we hope the UN debate in 2016 is as open as possible, so that we can settle some of these questions and, if necessary, modernize the system."
Americans are a bunch of superstitious dopes??? And Republicans are much more superstitious then Democrats??? http://finance.yahoo.com/news/americans-brits-really-different-ideas-195700270.html Americans And Brits Have Drastically Different Ideas About How Life Began Business Insider By Erin Brodwin 12 minutes ago When it comes to ideas about how life on Earth originated, Americans and Brits see things very differently. While 40% of British adults think living things arose because "conditions here on Earth happened to be suitable," (a basic tenet of evolution) just 15% of Americans believe that's what happened, according to a Statista chart that's based on a YouGov survey of 994 Americans and 2003 Brits. Practically the reverse is true for creationism, which is much more popular in the US. While just 15% of adults in the UK think all living things were created by God, more than half of Americans (53%) do. What's particularly alarming about this 53% figure is that it's far higher than the 33% of Americans who said in a Pew Poll at the end of 2013 that they did not believe in evolution. (The questions in the two polls were not identical, however, so it's possible that people with complicated views might answer that life "was created by God" and that they believe in evolution.) American beliefs about evolution fall pretty strictly along political party lines. While just 43% of Republicans said in 2013 that they believe humans and other living things have evolved over time, 67% of Democrats said they think that's the case, a strong — though not overwhelming — majority. It's a gap that's growing, mainly because belief in evolution among Republicans is dropping so starkly. Just four years ago, more than half (54%) of Republicans said they believed in evolution, while 64% of Democrats said they did. Basic science tells us that without evolution, none of us could exist. Aside from the extensive fossil record which shows our ancestors transitioning from tiny, single-celled creatures into mammals and eventually modern humans, our own DNA undeniably links us to the primates that came before us. Most recently, Philae, the lander that made historic contact with a comet last week, found evidence of carbon-based, organic molecules that could have theoretically fallen to Earth and brought the planet its first building blocks for life. As the polls show, seeing isn't always believing.
Andrew Myers wants to get rich selling marijuana???
On this issued I think Billy Hayes is 100% right!!!!
I don't know if Billy Hayes agrees with me on this, but personally I suspect that Andrew Myers and his Arizona Dispensary Association tried to give themselves a government monopoly on growing and selling medical marijuana when they allegedly wrote Prop 203, which is Arizona's Medical Marijuana Act.
So that they can all become rich, using their government monopoly on growing and selling marijuana to allow them to sell us medical marijuana at rip off prices of $300+ an ounce.
I also suspect that Andrew Myers and his Arizona Dispensary Association, and the folks at MPP or Marijuana Policy Project are attempting to write an initiative to place on the Arizona ballot which will also give them a government monopoly on growing and selling recreational marijuana.
I am not quite sure who wrote Prop 203. Some people say Andrew Myers wrote Prop 203. Some folks say Andrew Myers managed the team that wrote Prop 203.
With many eyes around the nation looking at Arizona as one of the states likely to have a legalization initiative on the ballot in 2016, Hayes wants to have a hand in writing the proposed measure -- and he doesn't appreciate the pro-dispensary influence of Myers and the dispensary industry. His arguments touch on some of the same issues in the national debate on marijuana laws, such as the best way to regulate use and sales of the plant. This month, for example, voters in the District of Columbia approved a law that makes growing and possession of marijuana legal for adults 21 and older, but the statute doesn't allow for Colorado-style retail shops.
Inman says she didn't know she and Hayes were at odds on any issue when he started railing against her to other marijuana supporters and in various online forums. Hayes was "relentless," she says.
She grew tired of accusations by Hayes and others that she was too supportive of dispensaries and the Marijuana Policy Project. Hayes "became the final straw," she says, so she quit her NORML post. She's continued her activism in other pro-cannabis groups.
"I try not to take it personally," she says of Hayes' campaign against her. "He's so nice. He's got wonderful kids. I like his wife . . . I don't want to see him go to jail, but when you play with fire, you might get burned."
Inman says she believes in staying within certain bounds but says Hayes "is willing to push the envelope every which way."
Ultimately, she thinks Hayes' recklessness is harmful to the legalization cause. She doesn't want to see prohibitionists like Bill Montgomery win, saying Hayes is good for the anti-legalization campaign.
Hayes, with other advocates in a group he leads called Registered Arizona Medical Marijuana Patients, continues to try to influence the drafting of the 2016 measure. He met with a national representative of the Marijuana Policy Project, he says, and lobbied to limit Andrew Myers' involvement in the drafting process "as much as possible." Hayes claims that Myers isn't trusted by some dispensary operators, as well as by some in the grassroots community.
Myers, who represents an industry that has publicly called on the authorities to close unauthorized clubs or other businesses acting as dispensaries, disputes this.
The Marijuana Policy Project, successful at passing the Arizona Medical Marijuana Act in 2010, is spearheading the legalization campaign. "The current drafting group," Myers says, "is the DPA [Drug Policy Alliance], the MPP, Lisa Hauser, Ryan Hurley, Gina Berman, the ACLU, and key in-state stakeholder groups and organizations, which will include representation from patient/consumer advocates. We don't plan on including black market operators [like Hayes] in the drafting process."
Kathy Inman resigned because of Billy Hayes???
>Kathy Inman is a pro-marijuana activist
>who formed the Phoenix chapter of the
>National Organization for the Reform of
>Marijuana Laws in 2008 and became director
>of Arizona NORML, which incorporated in
>2012. She quit that job in August, she
>says, because of Billy Hayes.
I would like to think that Kathy Inman quit or resigned because she had a big time conflict of interest as Billy Hayes was saying.
From this article it seems to be painting Billy Hayes as a bad guy who forced her to quit.
I think Billy Hayes was 100% right.
Woody Harrelson: There's what we call victimless crimes. In my opinion, if you don't actually have a victim who's a human being, someone who's been hurt or their property has been hurt, there's no crime. Gee, that just happens to be my opinion. I think we should legalize ALL victimless crimes. Crimes like gambling, illegal drugs, pornography and of course religious crimes like blasphemy. http://www.usatoday.com/story/life/movies/2014/11/20/woody-harrelson-hunger-games-mockingjay-jennifer-lawrence/19271883/ Woody Harrelson: 'I'm an anarchist' Donna Freydkin, USA TODAY 3:53 p.m. EST November 20, 2014 NEW YORK — Give Woody Harrelson a piece of yarn, and he'll knit you a full-on, multicolored sweater. Here's his take on playing crafty mentor Haymitch Abernathy sober, as opposed to falling-down drunk in the past two Hunger Games films. "I wanted to give him a little more of a tortured expression: Jesus Christ, sobriety! Honestly, when I was first playing him — I will generally go over the top if allowed," says Harrelson, who credits directorial restraint for his more muted performance in The Hunger Games: Mockingjay — Part 1 (opens today in select cities and Friday nationwide). "A guy who's an alcoholic, a lot of times you have no idea they're drunk." One heavy drinker of Harrelson's acquaintance, "he was big on grapefruit and vodka, with very little grapefruit. He could carry the thing and never spill a drop. He was so functional. It was impressive. He has since passed. He was a good character." In a sense, Harrelson, 53, is the epitome of Haymitch, the shambling former games champion who hides a pointed intelligence and canniness under a cloak of cluelessness. But don't be fooled by Harrelson's at-times dopey grin, or apparent obtuseness, or his oft-referenced penchant for controlled substances — which came up last weekend in his Saturday Night Live opening dialogue, when he had trouble recalling 1989.("The memories are a little fuzzy, because of the drugs," he joked, referencing the past 25 years.) USATODAY Review: 'Mockingjay' is best 'Games' yet Director Francis Lawrence says Harrelson kept him at arm's length when he signed on for the second installment of the four-part film series, replacing Gary Ross. Lawrence (no relation to series star Jennifer Lawrence) called up each cast member to introduce himself and give them his take on the material. "Woody took the longest time to connect with me," says Lawrence. "His trust has to be earned. I had to fly to New York to see his play Furthest From the Sun and hang out at his apartment. It took a while." ENTERTAIN THIS! Woody Harrelson still stunned by Philip Seymour Hoffman's death Their partnership bears dark, violent fruit in Mockingjay, with Harrelson's Haymitch now clean, sober and bitter about leaving the booze in his past. He's still mentoring freedom fighter Katniss Everdeen (Jennifer Lawrence) in her quest to overthrow the totalitarian regime of Panem. Though Harrelson's onscreen time in this movie isn't hefty, "he's very central," the director says. "He's betrayed Katniss and he has to make amends." And Harrelson himself understands Katniss' unwillingness to live by rules that are meaningless to her. "I'm an anarchist. You've got to defy certain unnecessary rules. But there are certain very good rules around traffic that are not adhered to in this town. I'm one of the idiots breaking them," says Harrelson, who rode to this interview on his motorcycle, with his wife, Laura, sitting behind him. "For the important ones, I'm always on target. I had precious cargo in the back. That's not even funny." Harrelson lives mostly in Hawaii with his wife and three daughters, staying largely out of the spotlight. So how does his rebelliousness manifest itself? USATODAY 'Mockingjay' lands in Los Angeles "I don't believe in government. In other words, I think we can all look after ourselves. You want some mechanism that controls the traffic, absolutely. But generally, what the government accomplishes, 99% of that is (expletive)," he says. "I look at government as businessmen working for bigger businessmen. There's obvious things — don't steal, the Ten Commandments. There's what we call victimless crimes. In my opinion, if you don't actually have a victim who's a human being, someone who's been hurt or their property has been hurt, there's no crime." Those are the values he instills in his brood: Deni, 21; Zoe, 18; and Makani, 8. His daughters don't give him special treatment because he's buddies with Lawrence, or one of the stars of one of the decade's most lauded and profitable movie franchises. "If that's what made me a cool dad, I don't know how much I'd respect them. It shouldn't be any external factor that determines that," he says. "But they do like it. They're so immune to all this. They don't live in L.A. They watch the movies, and they are great about it, but they don't get caught up in things the way a lot of kids do."
Attorney General Tom Horn gets a slap on the wrist for his crimes. The reason I don't like Attorney General Tom Horn is because he tried to flush Arizona's Medical Marijuana Act down the toilet by filing a frivolous lawsuit in Federal Court with Jan Brewer. http://www.azcentral.com/story/news/arizona/politics/2014/11/20/tom-horne-pays-settlement-campaign-violations-allegations/70012868/ Horne pays $10,000 settlement in campaign-violations case Julia Shumway, Phoenix 1:21 p.m. MST November 20, 2014 The Arizona Citizens Clean Elections Commission voted Thursday to end its investigation into allegations Attorney General Tom Horne used his state office to run his failed reelection campaign. Horne did not admit guilt by agreeing to the settlement, but personally paid a $10,000 fine, acknowledged state employees cannot campaign while on state time and will amend his campaign finance reports if the Arizona Secretary of State's Office finds it's necessary based on a separate, ongoing investigation into the allegations. ROBERTS: Can Horne spin $10K fine for breaking the law? The commission, meanwhile, will end its investigation and will not pursue further legal action against Horne. The settlement does not preclude separate civil or criminal investigation, including a complaint filed with the Secretary of State. That case was referred to the state Solicitor General and is being investigated by the Gilbert town attorney. By agreeing to the settlement, Horne also recognizes the commission's legitimacy, Clean Elections Executive Director Thomas Collins said. "Mr. Horne has argued in court that this process and this agency is not legitimate," he said. "If there was any doubt that the commission has the authority to enforce Clean Elections, this settles it." However, Horne in a prepared statement called the settlement a "nuisance" and said that there was no truth to the allegations. "The settlement with Clean Elections is a nuisance settlement of $10,000 – compared to the more than $300,000 initially claimed by the commission," he said. "There is no admission of guilt because there is no truth to the claims made by a disgruntled employee." Former Attorney General Office employee Sarah Beattie alleged in May that Horne used the office as a campaign headquarters with top staffers working on his campaign during state time. Arizona law bans politicking on state time. Beattie's affidavit submitted to the Clean Elections Commission states she spent an average of two hours per day doing her state duties. She spent the rest of her time doing campaign work for Horne, including creating a statement about Horne's "17 Major Achievements." In the affidavit Beattie also contends other Horne employees worked on his campaign by soliciting donatitions while in the office, participating in meetings about the campaigns of Horne challengers Republican Mark Brnovich and Democrat Felecia Rotellini and using a state vehicle to attend a campaign event. Horne categorically denied the accusations and said campaign work was done outside of office hours. He noted that employees are expected to work eight hours a day for the state and that he had no control over what they chose to do during personal time throughout the day. "I want to be clear that these allegations were not true," Horne said. "They were created by a person with a history of making false claims when leaving other employers. I am very pleased to have this behind me." The $10,000 fine is the maximum the commission is allowed to levy for a rules violation. It's 10 times the fine newly elected Corporation Commissioners Tom Forese and Doug Little received for violating campaign finance laws. Commissioner Timothy Reckart said the fine is appropriate. "It does give me comfort in some regards to know that the maximum fine under our rules has been assessed," he said.
Why do the members of the Phoenix City Council bend over backwards and kiss the *sses of crooked cops??? Probably because the police union and the 3,000+ crooked cops can deliver them 3,000+ votes at election time. Sadly government is all about money and power, not truth and justice. Yes, I will agree PTSD sucks. But even if PTSD sucks, the government shouldn't let mentally ill cops with PTSD terrorized the citizens of Phoenix. http://www.azcentral.com/story/opinion/letters/2014/11/20/phoenix-police-chief-dui/70027422/ We don't get DUI 2nd chances, why should police? Julie Hughes 4:27 p.m. MST November 20, 2014 I agree with Phoenix Police Chief Daniel Garcia. The officer's suicide is horrible and tragic. But I believe DUI involving an officer should be handled with firing on the first offense. I seriously doubt that our officers attending court cases for DUI ever think about giving Joe Citizen another chance. Many people other than officers have PTSD, caregivers' fatigue or a number of issues that could alter the way you manage or handle your job. I am sure these folks are not given another chance when it comes to DUI. The calling of "no confidence" is a sign of much deeper issues, officer entitlement and union-mandated special treatment. — Julie Hughes, Phoenix
Union: Ferguson officer does not expect charges When most police officers have the attitude of "Look mutherf*cker, I got a gun and a badge and that means you ain't got no f*cking Constitutional rights", did you expect anything else? I suspect this White *sshole pig also thinks that since he has a gun and a badge he can also practice genocide on people of races he considers inferior to his. Pretty much like Hitler did to the Jews. http://www.azcentral.com/story/news/nation/2014/11/20/ferguson-police-does-not-expect-charges/70020876/ Union: Ferguson officer does not expect charges Associated Press 2:50 p.m. MST November 20, 2014 JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. (AP) — A police union official says the suburban St. Louis officer who fatally shot Michael Brown does not expect to face criminal charges. Jeff Roorda is the business manager for the St. Louis Police Officers' Association. He says he met Thursday with Ferguson officer Darren Wilson, who has kept out of the public eye since the Aug. 9 shooting. A grand jury has been meeting to decide whether to indict the white officer in the death of the black 18-year-old. A decision could come soon. Roorda says Wilson has incurred significant legal, medical and relocation expenses and that a police charity has raised close to $500,000 for him.
According to the Joe Arpaio playbook, which the sheriff has followed successfully for over 20 years, every time you get into trouble you must do something that diverts attention away from yourself. It's a classic misdirection strategy. You know that sounds a lot like this quote from H. L. Mencken "The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary." http://www.azcentral.com/story/ejmontini/2014/11/21/president-barack-obama-sheriff-joe-arpaio-lawsuit-immigration-judge-murray-snow/19338075/ More likely to be jailbate - Obama or Arpaio? EJ Montini, columnist | azcentral.com 9:12 a.m. MST November 21, 2014 In a shocking development, Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio filed a lawsuit against President Obama within minutes of the president announcing his executive actions concerning immigration reform. The shocking part is: What took the sheriff so long? "This unconstitutional act by the President will have a serious detrimental impact on my carrying out the duties and responsibilities for which I am encharged as Sheriff," Arpaio said in a statement. Actually, what appears to be having a detrimental impact on the sheriff carrying out his duties is the possibility that he is in contempt of court. U.S. District Court Judge G. Murray Snow apparently is growing increasingly frustrated with Arpaio and the way his department is complying -- or not -- with the court-ordered changes to his discriminatory policing of Latinos. The case goes back to 2007 lawsuit. A court-appointed monitor is overseeing the sheriff's efforts, such as they are. In an Arizona Republic article by Sean Holstege and Megan Cassidy, Snow says, "There is ample evidence at least some people at MCSO are abusing this process." According to the Joe Arpaio playbook, which the sheriff has followed successfully for over 20 years, every time you get into trouble you must do something that diverts attention away from yourself. It's a classic misdirection strategy. In this instance, you sue the president. You throw up a smokescreen, as if the president is more likely to wind up in jail than you are. Which isn't the case. And while an old-school misdirection play might work with the people who continue to reelect Arpaio and who dump more and more money into his campaign war chest, it doesn't seem to be working with Judge Snow. "I have given your client opportunity after opportunity after opportunity," Snow told Arpaio's lawyer. "In opportunity after opportunity after opportunity, your client has violated the law, violated my express orders or subverted the investigation I ordered." Snow said he might cite MCSO with civil or criminal contempt of court. "I am not going to be tolerant any more," he said. Good. Then again, I can't image why the judge was tolerant in the first place.
Only amateurs blame Phoenix's police chief I think the theme behind this article is that the police unions think that mentally ill cops deserve to keep their jobs. And that the police unions think crooked cops deserve to keep their jobs. And that Police Chief Daniel Garcia is a bad guy for firing mentally ill or crooked cops. And sadly the members of the Phoenix City Council seem to listen to the police unions, because of the 3,000+ votes they can get from the members of the Phoenix Police force at election time. http://www.azcentral.com/story/dougmaceachern/2014/11/20/tiger-phoenix-police-garcia/70012032/ Only amateurs blame Phoenix's police chief Doug MacEachern, columnist | azcentral.com 7:26 a.m. MST November 21, 2014 Contrary to what has become popular opinion, the late Craig Tiger has not lacked for therapists. Both professional and self-appointed. Tiger, a former Phoenix police officer who ended his tragic life by his own hand earlier this month, had long-running mental-health issues long before the 2013 driving-under-the-influence arrest that would end his career as a policeman. Those issues were made plain last night and today. First, in a report on Wednesday by Joe Dana of 12News, and today in a story by Megan Cassidy of The Republic, with reporting by Dana. The stories detail Tiger's long-running mental misery and his descent into depression and alcohol abuse, all of which became a source of turmoil for Tiger and his family long before the 2012 shooting incident that added still more to his emotional burden. And long before he was fired from the force in 2013 following a DUI arrest. Not being a therapist, I can't say exactly how much Tiger's firing contributed to his mental health issues. You can't doubt it compounded it. Losing your job, to say nothing of losing your health benefits, is a crushing blow. Taking it even further, it is reasonable to question whether the draconian, no-excuses Phoenix PD policy that led to Tiger's firing is a fair policy. I don't think it is, even if it was put into effect in good faith, in the belief that the community the Phoenix PD serves has a right to a department that excludes officers with criminal records. Even if that record is no more than a DUI. And even if that DUI is the result of long-running alcoholism and mental health problems. You can debate the policy. In light of Tiger's sad fate, there's lots for Police Chief Daniel Garcia and City Manager Ed Zeurcher to talk about. Maybe, even for a police chief committed to running a tight-ship department, the policy is too heavy-handed. Too lacking for reasonable wiggle room. The Phoenix policy mirrors a new policy instituted about the same time by the widely respected Arizona Peace Officer Standards and Training Board. But maybe the AZPOST policy needs some review too. But that hasn't been what we've seen since Tiger's death, has it? No, what we have seen since Tiger took his own life earlier this month has been an explosion of rage, fueled by ignorance and shallow, shameless pseudo-psychoanalysis about what really killed Craig Tiger. About who was really responsible for his death. What we have seen is a burst of political opportunism the likes of which Phoenix hasn't witnessed since… well, since the last police chief was run off the job by the city's police unions. Now we're seeing the start of it happening again. As it has for years, the Phoenix Law Enforcement Association wants to job-share with the chief. Garcia won't job-share. So, as in the past, we are swamped now with "no confidence" polls of union members, vague grousing about "heavy handed policies" and low department morale. We are seeing accusing fingers pointed at Garcia, mitigating facts be damned. I just saw an absolutely hysterical ambush interview of the chief – the most insultingly stupid, self-promoting piece of verbal-assault "journalism" I've seen in a very long time. It had "you're to blame" written all over it. Already showing signs of emotional instability after his mother's death in 2009, Tiger lost a brother. Because of what were described as deep personality disorders resulting from heavy drinking, Tiger's wife left him in 2012. And, a few weeks later, he shot to death a bat-wielding suspect in a park. But all we hear about what "caused" Tiger's suicide was a no-excuses policy instituted by the chief of police. We are seeing Chief Garcia being set up for a city council majority that is well known to be deep in the pockets of its employee unions. This council wants to find a way to show him the door. Craig Tiger was diagnosed with anxiety disorders and was placed on strong medications years before he was involved in a traumatizing shooting incident in 2012. The alcoholism that ruined his marriage started long before the incident, too. The shooting incident would add post-traumatic stress syndrome, PTSD, to the list of Craig's emotional ailments. But just how different was the debilitating depression, anxiety and sense of withdrawal that Tiger was experiencing in 2009 from the PTSD he endured after the shooting three years later? How much worse did his struggle with alcoholism become? The armies of fake psychiatrists out there are telling us they know. They know that Dan Garcia is to blame for Craig Tiger's death. They want his head for it. Even if they haven't the first clue what they're talking about.
Border Patrol sued for harassing at Arivaca checkpoint More of the old "Do as I say, not as I do" from our religious leaders, government masters and police??? And of course the usual line from the police of "Look motherf*cker, I got a gun and a badge and that means you ain't got no stinking Constitutional rights." http://www.azcentral.com/story/news/politics/immigration/2014/11/20/border-patrol-aclu-lawsuit-arivaca-checkpoint-harassment/70021978/ Border Patrol sued for harassing at Arivaca checkpoint Bob Ortega, The Republic | azcentral.com 3:09 p.m. MST November 20, 2014 A federal lawsuit filed Thursday accuses Border Patrol agents of violating the First Amendment rights of people trying to monitor a contentious Border Patrol checkpoint near Arivaca, Ariz. The suit was filed in U.S. District Court in Tucson by two Arizona residents and the American Civil Liberties Union. It seeks a court order to stop what it calls harassment, threats, retaliation and interference by agents against citizens trying to observe and take photos at a checkpoint on the road between the towns of Arivaca and Amado. "They've cordoned us off far away from the checkpoint, parked their trucks to block our view and even threatened to arrest us," said Peter Ragan, one of the plaintiffs. "All of this is on top of the harassment and abuse community members were already experiencing at this checkpoint, which necessitated this campaign in the first place." Ragan said agents also have engaged in petty harassment, such as parking Border Patrol vehicles with their engines running for hours, with the exhaust aimed at the monitors. Customs and Border Protection spokesman Victor Brabble said that CBP doesn't comment on pending litigation, but he provided a written statement that "Border Patrol traffic checkpoints are a critical enforcement tool for carrying out the mission of securing our nation's borders against transnational threats." The statement also said that CBP doesn't tolerate agent misconduct and that "we are dedicated to continued meetings with local representatives and community members of Arivaca, Green Valley and Tubac to address their concerns." The Border Patrol has operated what it terms a "temporary" checkpoint on the road from Interstate 19 to Arivaca for seven years. A group of area residents began to monitor the checkpoint last February, saying that the Border Patrol's Tucson Sector leaders had ignored their repeated complaints about long traffic delays, harassment and abusive behavior by agents stopping vehicles. Leesa Jacobson, one of the plaintiffs, in February said of the checkpoint that "this is over seven years now, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, and we have no idea if they've ever apprehended anyone ... We think the monitoring is going to reveal that nothing much happens there," that would justify the inconvenience to local residents. In late summer, the Arivaca group said that after more than 200 hours of monitoring and 2,700 traffic stops, they had determined that the agents "systematically discriminate against Latino motorists." Across both the northern and southern border states, the Border Patrol operates scores of similar checkpoints on roads and highways up to 100 miles from the border. CBP publicly acknowledges 35 "permanent" checkpoints, mostly on interstates and larger highways, but has declined to specify where or how many ostensibly temporary or "tactical" checkpoints the agency operates. Agency documents reviewed by The Arizona Republic indicate the capacity to operate as many as 200 checkpoints. The U.S. Supreme Court upheld the Border Patrol's use of checkpoints away from the border to verify residency status in a 1976 ruling, U.S. vs. Martinez-Fuerte. That case upheld the conviction of a man for transporting two undocumented immigrants. In that ruling, the court said that questions at immigration checkpoints must be brief, minimally intrusive and immigration-focused, and that any "further detention … must be based on consent or probable cause." But as the number of interior Border Patrol checkpoints has grown since 9/11, so have complaints that agents routinely expand the scope of their questions and searches far beyond what that ruling envisioned, that interior checkpoints and patrols interfere with constitutionally protected rights and that the checkpoints effectively militarize huge swaths of U.S. territory. Jacobsen said Thursday that "as long as the checkpoint is here, I want to do everything I can to document abuses and protest the ongoing militarization of our communities and the border region." CBP's statement said that "checkpoints deny major travel routes from the borders to smugglers intent on delivering people, drugs and other contraband to the interior of the United States and allow the Border Patrol to establish an important second layer of defense."
Judge warns Arpaio with contempt, more investigation I suspect this is mostly talk and that Sheriff Joe Arpaio will never get more then a slap on the wrist for terrorize the citizens of Maricopa County and all the people that pass thru here. I suspect the Founders gave us the 2nd Amendment for that reason. Because they realized that it is impossible for the government to police itself. http://www.azcentral.com/story/news/local/phoenix/2014/11/20/arpaio-lawsuit-civil-rights-federal-court-maricopa-sheriff/70030578/ Judge warns Arpaio with contempt, more investigation Sean Holstege and Megan Cassidy, The Republic | azcentral.com 5:59 p.m. MST November 20, 2014 The federal judge presiding over a long-standing civil-rights lawsuit against the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office warned the agency during a routine hearing on Thursday that he has run out of patience and could order more action. U.S. District Court Judge G. Murray Snow told attorneys for Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio he is inclined to cite the agency for contempt of court and to issue a court order for new investigations into how it treated Latinos and the degree to which the county's lawmen buried evidence of it. The case, filed in 2007, had appeared to be in the final stages after the court appointed a monitor to oversee the sheriff's efforts to reform its discriminatory policing of Latinos during traffic stops. Snow complained of foot-dragging in May and attacked the progress again this week. "There is ample evidence," Snow told county officials and their lawyers, "at least some people at MCSO are abusing this process." His remarks came before the county's private attorney, Timothy Casey, disclosed that new evidence was uncovered as recently as this month and that plaintiffs' attorneys in the class-action suit still haven't seen much of it. "There is a substantial volume of material. It will be an undertaking," Casey said when asked if it could be turned over. Casey reported that, in pursuing its internal investigation of possible policy violations, the agency uncovered audio and video tapes from interviews of human smuggling suspects taken between 2009 and 2011. That and other materials - such as Miranda cards and cellphones - were linked to investigations and marked with crime report numbers, but never catalogued into evidence, he said. Also, he said, deputies opened a locker on Sheriff's Office premises Nov. 5 and found two purses with cellphones, keys, ID cards and indications that they, too, were related to a case file. Then, five days later, deputies were cleaning departmental offices and uncovered 164 ID cards, mainly bearing Hispanic last names and issued in foreign countries. Deputies told investigators 111 of them were used for "training," while no explanation was offered for the remainder. Then, Casey, said, deputies found 35 license plates, which were supposed to have been indexed as evidence and returned to the state's Motor Vehicle Division. Of these, 13 were linked by computer files to Deputy Ramon "Charlie" Armandariz, who testified in the civil rights trial and was suspected of targeting Latinos illegally during traffic stops. Unlike evidence taken from his house after he committed suicide, the new evidence was found at the Sheriff''s Office. Judge Snow had clearly reached his limit on Thursday. He told attorneys he will issue an order telling MCSO to spell out what it plans to continue investigating internally. Anything else, he said, could be investigated by himself or by the court-appointed monitor, Snow signaled. He plans to hold a hearing on Dec. 4 into the proposed order and to call deputies as witnesses as part of his own independent inquiries, he said. "I have given your client opportunity after opportunity after opportunity," Snow said. "In opportunity after opportunity after opportunity, your client has violated the law, violated my express orders or subverted the investigation I ordered." Snow said he had the right, and maybe the inclination, to cite MCSO with civil or criminal contempt of court. "I am not going to be tolerant any more," he warned. Casey, who was in court asking to be removed from the case, said he disagreed with Snow's characterization. "Despite some of the things that have been said here, my clients' belief is that they have followed this court's orders in good faith," he said. Last year, Snow found that the agency had racially profiled Latinos during its patrol operations and later ordered sweeping reforms to prevent discriminatory policing in the future. Snow ordered multi-million dollar reforms, including in-vehicle recording devices, bias-free training for deputies, increased data collection and a court-appointed monitor to oversee the agency's compliance. But his initial reforms expanded this spring following revelations that Armendariz had been stashing drugs, identification cards, license plates and torn-up citations in his home, signaling what appeared to be a shake-down operation that stretched for years. Armendariz also secretly recorded thousands of his own traffic stops, documenting his own misconduct and signaling to Snow that the Sheriff's Office did not turn over all of the traffic-stop data that was required for the lawsuit. Complicating the issue was Armendariz himself — he was one of a handful of deputies to testify during the trial. Snow soon extended his purview to include the agency's internal investigation into Armendariz and the possibility of widespread corruption within MCSO's Human Smuggling Unit. Snow has become increasingly agitated over the investigation in recent hearings. Sheriff's officials poured thousands of man hours into inquiry, but court-appointed monitor Robert Warshaw deemed the investigation insufficient. The monitoring team described a lax inquiry into which deputies also employed recording devices and said investigators disregarded another former deputy's allegations that HSU members had pocketed evidence.