Canada: B.C. man set free after 27 years in custody for wrongful conviction
Crooked prosecutors again
Ivan Henry's family burst into tears as an appeals court judge set him free after 27-years in custody because of a wrongful conviction. Speaking as a free man for the first time in nearly three decades, Ivan Henry, now 63-year-old, says he isn't angry.
"What for, it just wouldn't heal me if I was angry." said Henry, "I've got grandkids that I'm so proud of and I've got a little dog that I look after, he's my friend."
His daughter, Tanya Oliveras, said she couldn't be happier with the courts decision. "We're just going to move ahead, I mean it's going to take a long to try to lead a normal life. This has been a sentence for my dad but it's also been a sentence for my sister and I." said Oliveras,"It's 29 years. 29 years we have known nothing different than this."
Henry was found guilty on eight counts of rape and indecent assault in 1993.
Major holes were found in the original investigation and in his conviction after reviewing police practices and non-disclosure by the crown, including the judge allowing jurors to infer Henry was guilty because he refused to be in a police line-up. His lawyer Marilyn Sanford said Henry spent years trying to get those convictions overturned.
"I think one thing to keep in mind about Ivan Henry's case is this is not someone who just sat quietly in jail languishing for 27 years. He brought application after application to the courts." said Sanford. "(it was) shocking to read how many times he was asking to see the exhibits - I want to see the witness statements that I never got - and nobody paid attention for the longest time." Sanford says Henry wasn't treated fairly because he represented himself.
Henry has spent the last 18 months under house arrest during the appeals process. Henry's family says they would like to celebrate for a while before they decide whether not not to pursue compensation.
Original report here
(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress. If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where posts appear as well as on the primary site. I have reposted the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts HERE or HERE or here
Sunday, October 31, 2010
Saturday, October 30, 2010
Man sues NC city, police over wrongful conviction
A man who spent half his life in prison for a rape he didn't commit is suing a North Carolina city and its police, alleging negligence that kept him locked up for more than 18 years.
Multiple media organizations reported Friday that Dwayne Dail's federal lawsuit names Goldsboro, three current and former police chiefs, and several officers who worked on the case that led to his false imprisonment.
Dail was convicted in 1987 of raping a 12-year-old girl. DNA evidence cleared him of the crime in 2007. Another man was convicted in April and sentenced to life in prison.
Dail's lawsuit contends attorneys asked in 1995 that evidence in the rape case be DNA tested. Dail's attorney was told the evidence had been destroyed. Instead, it had been stored by Goldsboro police.
Original report here
Background
Dwayne Allen Dail served 18 years in North Carolina prisons for a 1987 rape before DNA testing on crime scene evidence proved his innocence. He was released from prison in 2007 after serving nearly half his life behind bars.
The Crime And Investigation
On September 4, 1987, a man crawled through the window of a Goldsboro, North Carolina, apartment and raped a 12-year-old girl living there. The girl identified Dwayne Allen Dail as her attacker and he was charged with burglary, rape and other related charged. Hairs collected from the crime scene were submitted for forensic testing and an expert found that Dail’s hairs were microscopically consistent with the evidence from the crime.
The Trial
Dail reportedly turned down an offer to plead guilty in exchange for three years of probation, and he went to trial in 1989. A jury heard that the victim had identified Dail as her attacker and also that forensic testing had shown the possibility that the hairs at the crime scene had come from him. The jury found him guilty as charged and he was sentenced to two terms of life in prison plus 15 years.
Post-Conviction
Dail filed numerous appeals over the years, and the North Carolina Center on Actual Innocence began working on his case in 2001. Attorneys at the center requested testing on evidence from Dail’s case, but were told that all evidence introduced at Dail’s trial was returned to the Goldsboro Police Department and subsequently destroyed. However, when they asked for a repeated search, officers found a box of evidence, including the victim’s nightgown, that had been saved.
Officials at the Wayne County District Attorney’s Office agreed to send the evidence for DNA testing, and semen was discovered on the victim’s nightgown. The DNA profile from the semen did not match Dail, proving he was not the man who attacked the victim in 1987.
Dwayne Dail was released from custody on August 28, 2007, after a state court judge agreed to vacate his conviction and dismiss all charges against him. He was 39 when released and had served 18 years in prison. In October 2007 Dail received a pardon from Gov. Mike Easley based on his actual innocence.
Original report here
(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress. If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where posts appear as well as on the primary site. I have reposted the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts HERE or HERE or here
29 October, 2010
Shocking video shows stab victim being repeatedly punched by British police sent out to help him
He decided that he didn't want treatment and tried to get away from them but that wasn't allowed, apparently. The cops even claimed that the escape attempt constituted an "assault" on the cops concerned. See for yourself in the video at the source given below
Darren Grace had staggered into Liverpool's Stanley Park in the early hours of Sunday, August 1 when three officers at first came to his aid.
However footage shows that as Mr Grace seems to try to resist treatment, one officer rains down a volley of eight punches onto his injured head while a female officer puts her hand on his arm.
Five minutes later, just before 8am, both she and the other officer appear to punch Mr Grace in the head and back as he lies face down on the ground.
The 31-year-old was later charged with two counts of assaulting a police officer - charges which were eventually dropped when Crown Prosecution Service lawyers saw the tape and realised there wasn't enough evidence 'to provide a realistic prospect of a conviction'.
After receiving basic treatment, Mr Grace was held in a cell for 11 hours.
Today Merseyside Police accused the Anfield joiner of being violent towards the officers adding 'CCTV images can never show the whole story'.
After being shown the tape by the Liverpool Echo, the force voluntarily referred the incident to the Independent Police Complaints Commission. But the watchdog said it was happy for Merseyside Police to conduct its own investigation and it is now the subject of a Professional Standards Department probe.
Mr Grace has not lodged a formal complaint with Merseyside Police and will not co-operate with the internal inquiry saying he has no confidence in the force. He said: 'I remember waking up in the cell with my face covered in blood, my head throbbing. I could feel the cut where I'd been stabbed.'
The three officers involved remain on duty and no disciplinary action has yet been taken.
Superintendent Mike Shaw, from Merseyside Police's Professional Standards Department, told the Liverpool Echo: 'As a police force we expect the highest standards from our officers. Where those standards are found to be breached, disciplinary action is taken.
'At about 7.45am on Sunday, August 1 officers were called to a disturbance in Butterfield Street in Anfield in which it was reported that a male had been stabbed. 'Enquiries led officers to Stanley Park. Upon arrival they found Mr Grace with head injuries in need of medical assistance. During the courts of administering medical assistance to Mr Grace he became violent towards the officers.
'In this case I understand that members of the public will be concerned when watching this footage. However I would like to stress that CCTV images can never show the whole story. 'The Professional Standards Department has been in contact with Mr Grace and his legal representatives and have been advised that there will be no complaint against police at this time and that Mr Grace does not want to take part in any misconduct investigation.
'Nevertheless, in order to understand the full circumstances of the incident the Professional Standards Department has launched an investigation. 'This will include looking at the circumstances that initially led police to Mr Grace, the circumstances around his arrest and the circumstances which led to the discontinuation by the CPS.
'It is important not to prejudge the outcome of the investigation. It would therefore be inappropriate to comment further at this time. 'This matter was voluntarily referred to the IPCC in recognition of the public concern it may generate and the IPCC are happy that Merseyside Police carry out its own local investigation.'
Mr Grace claims he now suffers nightmares and insomnia and feels anxious whenever he sees bobbies on the beat.
Original report here
(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress. If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where posts appear as well as on the primary site. I have reposted the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts HERE or HERE or here
A man who spent half his life in prison for a rape he didn't commit is suing a North Carolina city and its police, alleging negligence that kept him locked up for more than 18 years.
Multiple media organizations reported Friday that Dwayne Dail's federal lawsuit names Goldsboro, three current and former police chiefs, and several officers who worked on the case that led to his false imprisonment.
Dail was convicted in 1987 of raping a 12-year-old girl. DNA evidence cleared him of the crime in 2007. Another man was convicted in April and sentenced to life in prison.
Dail's lawsuit contends attorneys asked in 1995 that evidence in the rape case be DNA tested. Dail's attorney was told the evidence had been destroyed. Instead, it had been stored by Goldsboro police.
Original report here
Background
Dwayne Allen Dail served 18 years in North Carolina prisons for a 1987 rape before DNA testing on crime scene evidence proved his innocence. He was released from prison in 2007 after serving nearly half his life behind bars.
The Crime And Investigation
On September 4, 1987, a man crawled through the window of a Goldsboro, North Carolina, apartment and raped a 12-year-old girl living there. The girl identified Dwayne Allen Dail as her attacker and he was charged with burglary, rape and other related charged. Hairs collected from the crime scene were submitted for forensic testing and an expert found that Dail’s hairs were microscopically consistent with the evidence from the crime.
The Trial
Dail reportedly turned down an offer to plead guilty in exchange for three years of probation, and he went to trial in 1989. A jury heard that the victim had identified Dail as her attacker and also that forensic testing had shown the possibility that the hairs at the crime scene had come from him. The jury found him guilty as charged and he was sentenced to two terms of life in prison plus 15 years.
Post-Conviction
Dail filed numerous appeals over the years, and the North Carolina Center on Actual Innocence began working on his case in 2001. Attorneys at the center requested testing on evidence from Dail’s case, but were told that all evidence introduced at Dail’s trial was returned to the Goldsboro Police Department and subsequently destroyed. However, when they asked for a repeated search, officers found a box of evidence, including the victim’s nightgown, that had been saved.
Officials at the Wayne County District Attorney’s Office agreed to send the evidence for DNA testing, and semen was discovered on the victim’s nightgown. The DNA profile from the semen did not match Dail, proving he was not the man who attacked the victim in 1987.
Dwayne Dail was released from custody on August 28, 2007, after a state court judge agreed to vacate his conviction and dismiss all charges against him. He was 39 when released and had served 18 years in prison. In October 2007 Dail received a pardon from Gov. Mike Easley based on his actual innocence.
Original report here
(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress. If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where posts appear as well as on the primary site. I have reposted the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts HERE or HERE or here
29 October, 2010
Shocking video shows stab victim being repeatedly punched by British police sent out to help him
He decided that he didn't want treatment and tried to get away from them but that wasn't allowed, apparently. The cops even claimed that the escape attempt constituted an "assault" on the cops concerned. See for yourself in the video at the source given below
Darren Grace had staggered into Liverpool's Stanley Park in the early hours of Sunday, August 1 when three officers at first came to his aid.
However footage shows that as Mr Grace seems to try to resist treatment, one officer rains down a volley of eight punches onto his injured head while a female officer puts her hand on his arm.
Five minutes later, just before 8am, both she and the other officer appear to punch Mr Grace in the head and back as he lies face down on the ground.
The 31-year-old was later charged with two counts of assaulting a police officer - charges which were eventually dropped when Crown Prosecution Service lawyers saw the tape and realised there wasn't enough evidence 'to provide a realistic prospect of a conviction'.
After receiving basic treatment, Mr Grace was held in a cell for 11 hours.
Today Merseyside Police accused the Anfield joiner of being violent towards the officers adding 'CCTV images can never show the whole story'.
After being shown the tape by the Liverpool Echo, the force voluntarily referred the incident to the Independent Police Complaints Commission. But the watchdog said it was happy for Merseyside Police to conduct its own investigation and it is now the subject of a Professional Standards Department probe.
Mr Grace has not lodged a formal complaint with Merseyside Police and will not co-operate with the internal inquiry saying he has no confidence in the force. He said: 'I remember waking up in the cell with my face covered in blood, my head throbbing. I could feel the cut where I'd been stabbed.'
The three officers involved remain on duty and no disciplinary action has yet been taken.
Superintendent Mike Shaw, from Merseyside Police's Professional Standards Department, told the Liverpool Echo: 'As a police force we expect the highest standards from our officers. Where those standards are found to be breached, disciplinary action is taken.
'At about 7.45am on Sunday, August 1 officers were called to a disturbance in Butterfield Street in Anfield in which it was reported that a male had been stabbed. 'Enquiries led officers to Stanley Park. Upon arrival they found Mr Grace with head injuries in need of medical assistance. During the courts of administering medical assistance to Mr Grace he became violent towards the officers.
'In this case I understand that members of the public will be concerned when watching this footage. However I would like to stress that CCTV images can never show the whole story. 'The Professional Standards Department has been in contact with Mr Grace and his legal representatives and have been advised that there will be no complaint against police at this time and that Mr Grace does not want to take part in any misconduct investigation.
'Nevertheless, in order to understand the full circumstances of the incident the Professional Standards Department has launched an investigation. 'This will include looking at the circumstances that initially led police to Mr Grace, the circumstances around his arrest and the circumstances which led to the discontinuation by the CPS.
'It is important not to prejudge the outcome of the investigation. It would therefore be inappropriate to comment further at this time. 'This matter was voluntarily referred to the IPCC in recognition of the public concern it may generate and the IPCC are happy that Merseyside Police carry out its own local investigation.'
Mr Grace claims he now suffers nightmares and insomnia and feels anxious whenever he sees bobbies on the beat.
Original report here
(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress. If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where posts appear as well as on the primary site. I have reposted the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts HERE or HERE or here
Friday, October 29, 2010
Shocking video shows stab victim being repeatedly punched by British police sent out to help him
He decided that he didn't want treatment and tried to get away from them but that wasn't allowed, apparently. The cops even claimed that the escape attempt constituted an "assault" on the cops concerned. See for yourself in the video at the source given below
Darren Grace had staggered into Liverpool's Stanley Park in the early hours of Sunday, August 1 when three officers at first came to his aid.
However footage shows that as Mr Grace seems to try to resist treatment, one officer rains down a volley of eight punches onto his injured head while a female officer puts her hand on his arm.
Five minutes later, just before 8am, both she and the other officer appear to punch Mr Grace in the head and back as he lies face down on the ground.
The 31-year-old was later charged with two counts of assaulting a police officer - charges which were eventually dropped when Crown Prosecution Service lawyers saw the tape and realised there wasn't enough evidence 'to provide a realistic prospect of a conviction'.
After receiving basic treatment, Mr Grace was held in a cell for 11 hours.
Today Merseyside Police accused the Anfield joiner of being violent towards the officers adding 'CCTV images can never show the whole story'.
After being shown the tape by the Liverpool Echo, the force voluntarily referred the incident to the Independent Police Complaints Commission. But the watchdog said it was happy for Merseyside Police to conduct its own investigation and it is now the subject of a Professional Standards Department probe.
Mr Grace has not lodged a formal complaint with Merseyside Police and will not co-operate with the internal inquiry saying he has no confidence in the force. He said: 'I remember waking up in the cell with my face covered in blood, my head throbbing. I could feel the cut where I'd been stabbed.'
The three officers involved remain on duty and no disciplinary action has yet been taken.
Superintendent Mike Shaw, from Merseyside Police's Professional Standards Department, told the Liverpool Echo: 'As a police force we expect the highest standards from our officers. Where those standards are found to be breached, disciplinary action is taken.
'At about 7.45am on Sunday, August 1 officers were called to a disturbance in Butterfield Street in Anfield in which it was reported that a male had been stabbed. 'Enquiries led officers to Stanley Park. Upon arrival they found Mr Grace with head injuries in need of medical assistance. During the courts of administering medical assistance to Mr Grace he became violent towards the officers.
'In this case I understand that members of the public will be concerned when watching this footage. However I would like to stress that CCTV images can never show the whole story. 'The Professional Standards Department has been in contact with Mr Grace and his legal representatives and have been advised that there will be no complaint against police at this time and that Mr Grace does not want to take part in any misconduct investigation.
'Nevertheless, in order to understand the full circumstances of the incident the Professional Standards Department has launched an investigation. 'This will include looking at the circumstances that initially led police to Mr Grace, the circumstances around his arrest and the circumstances which led to the discontinuation by the CPS.
'It is important not to prejudge the outcome of the investigation. It would therefore be inappropriate to comment further at this time. 'This matter was voluntarily referred to the IPCC in recognition of the public concern it may generate and the IPCC are happy that Merseyside Police carry out its own local investigation.'
Mr Grace claims he now suffers nightmares and insomnia and feels anxious whenever he sees bobbies on the beat.
Original report here
(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress. If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where posts appear as well as on the primary site. I have reposted the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts HERE or HERE or here
He decided that he didn't want treatment and tried to get away from them but that wasn't allowed, apparently. The cops even claimed that the escape attempt constituted an "assault" on the cops concerned. See for yourself in the video at the source given below
Darren Grace had staggered into Liverpool's Stanley Park in the early hours of Sunday, August 1 when three officers at first came to his aid.
However footage shows that as Mr Grace seems to try to resist treatment, one officer rains down a volley of eight punches onto his injured head while a female officer puts her hand on his arm.
Five minutes later, just before 8am, both she and the other officer appear to punch Mr Grace in the head and back as he lies face down on the ground.
The 31-year-old was later charged with two counts of assaulting a police officer - charges which were eventually dropped when Crown Prosecution Service lawyers saw the tape and realised there wasn't enough evidence 'to provide a realistic prospect of a conviction'.
After receiving basic treatment, Mr Grace was held in a cell for 11 hours.
Today Merseyside Police accused the Anfield joiner of being violent towards the officers adding 'CCTV images can never show the whole story'.
After being shown the tape by the Liverpool Echo, the force voluntarily referred the incident to the Independent Police Complaints Commission. But the watchdog said it was happy for Merseyside Police to conduct its own investigation and it is now the subject of a Professional Standards Department probe.
Mr Grace has not lodged a formal complaint with Merseyside Police and will not co-operate with the internal inquiry saying he has no confidence in the force. He said: 'I remember waking up in the cell with my face covered in blood, my head throbbing. I could feel the cut where I'd been stabbed.'
The three officers involved remain on duty and no disciplinary action has yet been taken.
Superintendent Mike Shaw, from Merseyside Police's Professional Standards Department, told the Liverpool Echo: 'As a police force we expect the highest standards from our officers. Where those standards are found to be breached, disciplinary action is taken.
'At about 7.45am on Sunday, August 1 officers were called to a disturbance in Butterfield Street in Anfield in which it was reported that a male had been stabbed. 'Enquiries led officers to Stanley Park. Upon arrival they found Mr Grace with head injuries in need of medical assistance. During the courts of administering medical assistance to Mr Grace he became violent towards the officers.
'In this case I understand that members of the public will be concerned when watching this footage. However I would like to stress that CCTV images can never show the whole story. 'The Professional Standards Department has been in contact with Mr Grace and his legal representatives and have been advised that there will be no complaint against police at this time and that Mr Grace does not want to take part in any misconduct investigation.
'Nevertheless, in order to understand the full circumstances of the incident the Professional Standards Department has launched an investigation. 'This will include looking at the circumstances that initially led police to Mr Grace, the circumstances around his arrest and the circumstances which led to the discontinuation by the CPS.
'It is important not to prejudge the outcome of the investigation. It would therefore be inappropriate to comment further at this time. 'This matter was voluntarily referred to the IPCC in recognition of the public concern it may generate and the IPCC are happy that Merseyside Police carry out its own local investigation.'
Mr Grace claims he now suffers nightmares and insomnia and feels anxious whenever he sees bobbies on the beat.
Original report here
(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress. If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where posts appear as well as on the primary site. I have reposted the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts HERE or HERE or here
Thursday, October 28, 2010
Useless British police ignored mother's 102 warnings her daughter was being abused by her father... who then stabbed teenager to death
And the nergligent cops involved are going to be "supported" by their bosses!
A mother called police to report that her teenage daughter was being abused by her father 102 times before he killed her, an inquiry has found. Gary Fisher, 48, stabbed his 17-year-old daughter, Chanelle 'Sasha' Jones 22 times in a car and then drove her lifeless body around for ten hours before he was caught by police near her home town of Cardigan, West Wales.
Yesterday it emerged that the victim's mother Jayne Jones begged Dyfed Powys Police for help, contacting them over 100 times to report the abuse, but officers thought she was 'over-reacting'.
Fisher, who is separated from Miss Jones, was jailed for life in March this year for his daughter's murder. A jury at Swansea Crown Court rejected his claims that his daughter wanted to die because she had been raped.
Yesterday a report by the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) revealed that officers failed to take the victim's mother seriously, despite Fisher’s history of violence. Officers failed to notice that Fisher had a police record and that he was wanted for a serious assault by another police force. Four officers are now facing disciplinary action.
Tom Davies, the IPCC commissioner for Wales, said: 'This is one of those cases where the force was called out on numerous occasions and there was a tendency for some officers to characterise some of Sasha's mother's concerns and allegations as her 'tending to over-react'.” He added that the officers had not accorded with 'best practice and policy' for dealing with reports of possible domestic abuse.
However, the IPCC concluded that no individual errors 'had any impact on Fisher’s later actions when he murdered Sasha'. The report found officers acted properly during the search for the teenager after her mother had raised the alarm when she went missing in August last year.
Miss Jones called 999 to report that Sasha was visiting her father and she feared for her safety after she had failed to return home. But the IPCC said that she was likely to be already dead by the time police were called.
Yesterday Jackie Roberts, Deputy Chief Constable of Dyfed Powys Police, said: 'Firstly I would like to express my condolences to Sasha’s family for their sad loss. 'We have noted the findings of the independent IPCC investigation and acknowledge that there are areas in relation to the historic involvement with the family which could have been dealt with better. The IPCC acknowledge that the historic individual errors are not suggested to have influenced the tragic outcome in this case.
'We are committed to follow up the recommendations made from both policy and operational perspectives which will assist us in delivering a high quality of service and making improvements where necessary. 'The officers identified as having dealt with previous incidents will be supported in terms of advice and guidance on dealing with such matters and the lessons learnt communicated accordingly.'
Original report here
(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress. If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where posts appear as well as on the primary site. I have reposted the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts HERE or HERE or here
And the nergligent cops involved are going to be "supported" by their bosses!
A mother called police to report that her teenage daughter was being abused by her father 102 times before he killed her, an inquiry has found. Gary Fisher, 48, stabbed his 17-year-old daughter, Chanelle 'Sasha' Jones 22 times in a car and then drove her lifeless body around for ten hours before he was caught by police near her home town of Cardigan, West Wales.
Yesterday it emerged that the victim's mother Jayne Jones begged Dyfed Powys Police for help, contacting them over 100 times to report the abuse, but officers thought she was 'over-reacting'.
Fisher, who is separated from Miss Jones, was jailed for life in March this year for his daughter's murder. A jury at Swansea Crown Court rejected his claims that his daughter wanted to die because she had been raped.
Yesterday a report by the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) revealed that officers failed to take the victim's mother seriously, despite Fisher’s history of violence. Officers failed to notice that Fisher had a police record and that he was wanted for a serious assault by another police force. Four officers are now facing disciplinary action.
Tom Davies, the IPCC commissioner for Wales, said: 'This is one of those cases where the force was called out on numerous occasions and there was a tendency for some officers to characterise some of Sasha's mother's concerns and allegations as her 'tending to over-react'.” He added that the officers had not accorded with 'best practice and policy' for dealing with reports of possible domestic abuse.
However, the IPCC concluded that no individual errors 'had any impact on Fisher’s later actions when he murdered Sasha'. The report found officers acted properly during the search for the teenager after her mother had raised the alarm when she went missing in August last year.
Miss Jones called 999 to report that Sasha was visiting her father and she feared for her safety after she had failed to return home. But the IPCC said that she was likely to be already dead by the time police were called.
Yesterday Jackie Roberts, Deputy Chief Constable of Dyfed Powys Police, said: 'Firstly I would like to express my condolences to Sasha’s family for their sad loss. 'We have noted the findings of the independent IPCC investigation and acknowledge that there are areas in relation to the historic involvement with the family which could have been dealt with better. The IPCC acknowledge that the historic individual errors are not suggested to have influenced the tragic outcome in this case.
'We are committed to follow up the recommendations made from both policy and operational perspectives which will assist us in delivering a high quality of service and making improvements where necessary. 'The officers identified as having dealt with previous incidents will be supported in terms of advice and guidance on dealing with such matters and the lessons learnt communicated accordingly.'
Original report here
(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress. If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where posts appear as well as on the primary site. I have reposted the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts HERE or HERE or here
Gang of British police arrest man for improperly-parked car -- when it wasn't
It was not, it has to be said, one of the police’s finest hours. A traffic officer ended up arrested outside his own home by a squad of three of his colleagues… who had swooped on the address after a neighbour complained about nothing more than the way his car was parked.
Unfortunately for traffic cop Roderick Lund his neighbour happened to be one of the constabulary’s retired superintendents, Anthony Green.
The three-man parking squad began using tape measures and chalk to ascertain exactly where PC Lund’s Range Rover was, relative to the entrance to Mr Green’s driveway. When PC Lund refused to move his 4x4 with its personalised number plate, he was arrested for obstructing the police.
The farcical episode only ended yesterday when it emerged that PC Lund, 40, has won £5,000 in damages from his own force. The climbdown came after video footage showed that his Range Rover – parked in the road in front of his house – wasn’t overlapping his neighbour’s drive.
The police descended on the road in the village of Catterall in Lancashire last October when Mr Green complained he couldn’t get on his driveway. He said the narrow road meant it was impossible to drive his outsized American-built Dodge Nitro truck on to his property without mounting the kerb.
Three officers arrived led by Inspector Dave Vickers, and – prudently, as it turned out – PC Lund began filming what unfolded with his video camera.
PC Lund – who is married with three step-children – is recorded complaining he’d be breaking the law if he moved the vehicle, saying: ‘I can’t move it, I had a drink last night.’ With the camera continuing to point at his senior colleague, Inspector Vickers tells him: ‘I’m warning you now, you will be arrested for police obstruction if you continue to do that.’
The constable then retorts ‘Go for it then’ at which the inspector begins reading him his rights as he pleads: ‘I’m not being aggressive - how is this aggressive?’ After being led away in handcuffs, PC Lund was taken to a police station in Morecambe, put in a cell and detained for ten hours before being released on bail.
The other police officers all knew he was a member of the Lancashire Constabulary’s traffic division. Mr Lund feared that the incident could lead to charges, so he began legal action against Lancashire Constabulary for unlawful arrest, false imprisonment and using unreasonable force. In an out-of-court settlement he was awarded £5,000.
His solicitor Rex Makin said his client had been humiliated by the officers who visited his home and suffered severe anxiety following his arrest. He added: ‘It’s a real shocker of a case that demonstrates precisely how police should not conduct themselves.’
Neither PC Lund nor Mr Green was available for comment last night, but a neighbour said: ‘They’ve been arguing over parking for ages, it’s been the talk of the street. ‘As a retired superintendent it seems Anthony tried to pull rank on him, but it turned out to be rather an expensive mistake.’
Original report here
(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress. If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where posts appear as well as on the primary site. I have reposted the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts HERE or HERE or here
It was not, it has to be said, one of the police’s finest hours. A traffic officer ended up arrested outside his own home by a squad of three of his colleagues… who had swooped on the address after a neighbour complained about nothing more than the way his car was parked.
Unfortunately for traffic cop Roderick Lund his neighbour happened to be one of the constabulary’s retired superintendents, Anthony Green.
The three-man parking squad began using tape measures and chalk to ascertain exactly where PC Lund’s Range Rover was, relative to the entrance to Mr Green’s driveway. When PC Lund refused to move his 4x4 with its personalised number plate, he was arrested for obstructing the police.
The farcical episode only ended yesterday when it emerged that PC Lund, 40, has won £5,000 in damages from his own force. The climbdown came after video footage showed that his Range Rover – parked in the road in front of his house – wasn’t overlapping his neighbour’s drive.
The police descended on the road in the village of Catterall in Lancashire last October when Mr Green complained he couldn’t get on his driveway. He said the narrow road meant it was impossible to drive his outsized American-built Dodge Nitro truck on to his property without mounting the kerb.
Three officers arrived led by Inspector Dave Vickers, and – prudently, as it turned out – PC Lund began filming what unfolded with his video camera.
PC Lund – who is married with three step-children – is recorded complaining he’d be breaking the law if he moved the vehicle, saying: ‘I can’t move it, I had a drink last night.’ With the camera continuing to point at his senior colleague, Inspector Vickers tells him: ‘I’m warning you now, you will be arrested for police obstruction if you continue to do that.’
The constable then retorts ‘Go for it then’ at which the inspector begins reading him his rights as he pleads: ‘I’m not being aggressive - how is this aggressive?’ After being led away in handcuffs, PC Lund was taken to a police station in Morecambe, put in a cell and detained for ten hours before being released on bail.
The other police officers all knew he was a member of the Lancashire Constabulary’s traffic division. Mr Lund feared that the incident could lead to charges, so he began legal action against Lancashire Constabulary for unlawful arrest, false imprisonment and using unreasonable force. In an out-of-court settlement he was awarded £5,000.
His solicitor Rex Makin said his client had been humiliated by the officers who visited his home and suffered severe anxiety following his arrest. He added: ‘It’s a real shocker of a case that demonstrates precisely how police should not conduct themselves.’
Neither PC Lund nor Mr Green was available for comment last night, but a neighbour said: ‘They’ve been arguing over parking for ages, it’s been the talk of the street. ‘As a retired superintendent it seems Anthony tried to pull rank on him, but it turned out to be rather an expensive mistake.’
Original report here
(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress. If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where posts appear as well as on the primary site. I have reposted the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts HERE or HERE or here
Wednesday, October 27, 2010
Police Misconduct and Public Accountability
Why is it difficult to prosecute police officers for criminal misconduct even when the abuse is severe and unequivocal? A February news item from WSVN-TV in Miami/Ft. Lauderdale points to one reason:
"A homeless man’s attorney said surveillance video shows deputies used excessive force in his arrest. Gerald McGovern, 58 [said he] did not attack them, as charged. Instead, they attacked him. The public defender’s office said the surveillance video clears McGovern and implicates BSO [Broward Sheriff’s Office]. . . . A witness, Roberto Aguilara, backed up McGovern’s claim".
Note the omission. The news report names the alleged victim, the witness, and (elsewhere) the lawyer but not the accused deputies. Nor do their names appear in subsequent stories about an official investigation into allegations that the deputies used excessive force.
Few people outside law enforcement are familiar with Police Disclosure Laws (PDLs), which in most states, including Florida, block the release of information about an officer’s alleged misconduct until internal investigations are completed. Even then, the laws are often broadly interpreted to block such release. Some states do not make information public unless criminal charges are filed or the officer is dismissed. Other states leave the issue entirely to the police department’s discretion.
The declared purpose of restrictive PDLs is to protect accused officers. With sympathetic courts ruling in favor of PDLs, police unions staunchly defend the practice of granting officers more privacy than others who are criminally accused. A news story from the New Orleans Times-Picayune offers a glimpse into the vigor of their defense:
Police unions trying to block news organizations’ access to internal police investigations of New Orleans officers also are waging a campaign in the civil and criminal courts to keep such records out of the hands of the city’s public defender’s office. Steve Singer, general counsel of the Orleans Public Defenders, said his office has filed public records requests for the New Orleans Police Department’s Public Integrity Bureau files of arresting officers in the cases of more than 50 defendants. The office also has sought subpoenas through Criminal District Court to obtain some of these records.
Critics argue that PDLs obstruct justice. The laws allow police officers to violate rights because they can avoid both transparency and accountability. The laws deny victims information that may be necessary to sue or otherwise press a legal case against officers. And by shielding important aspects of accusations—for example, whether the unnamed officer has been similarly accused in the past—the laws discourage the reporting of police abuse, especially by the media, for whom a significant delay in obtaining information makes a story grow cold. In turn, the lack of coverage encourages the public to believe misconduct is rare; thus those abused by police are doubly victimized by having their accounts dismissed out of hand.
On what legal basis do police departments refuse public access to information on misconduct by their officers?
Almost every state uses the federal Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) as a model for its own statutes on the public disclosure of government records. FOIA was intended to give the public a general right of access to information held by government agencies. Nevertheless, the nondisclosure about police misconduct is generally justified by reference to two common exemptions: the “investigative record” and “privacy right” exemptions. The investigative record exemption can be invoked even after an investigation is completed.
Strong arguments can be made against both exemptions.
The Investigative Record Exemption. The police units that investigate accusations of misconduct are called “internal affairs” or something similar. But are such accusations an internal, private matter rather than one of compelling public interest? The question becomes more urgent when the alleged misconduct is criminal or involves the violation of constitutional protections such as the right to due process.
When anyone is given a gun and broad authority to use it in public, that same public needs to know if the gun and the authority are being misused. The public also needs to know the particulars of how abuse accusations are being investigated. For example, has a particular police department established such a high burden of proof that virtually no accusation against an officer can be sustained?
This compelling public interest is usually overridden by the argument that releasing information would have a “chilling effect” on law enforcement. In the essay “The Public’s Right of Access to Police Misconduct Files,” attorney Lynne Wilson comments, “A number of federal courts have seriously questioned the empirical basis for a finding that public disclosure of internal disciplinary files causes a ‘chilling effect’ on law enforcement. One judge said that ‘if the fear of disclosure . . . does have some real effect on officers’ candor, the stronger working hypothesis is that fear of disclosure is more likely to increase candor than to chill it.’”
The Privacy Right Exemption. The police are tax-supported public servants with the authority to violate your privacy rights. As such, officers should expect to receive a public review of their performance while on duty. The intent of the privacy exemption in FOIA is the preservation of “personal” privacy, such as sexual preference, that is not of legitimate concern to the public. But in its use by police departments, the privacy exemption closes off examination of the professional behavior of public servants.
“[I]t would be difficult to imagine a subject-matter of more legitimate concern to the public than how its police departments are managed,” Wilson writes. “At least one state court has held that police officers have no privacy rights in misconduct records because the records, by definition, ‘involve events which occurred in the course of public service . . . matters with which the public has a right to concern itself.’”
In short, on-duty police conduct is not an internal or private matter but one of overriding public concern.
Everyone is vulnerable to police misconduct. Drivers can be arbitrarily pulled over; anyone can be stopped on the street and questioned. If you encounter the police, being “within the law” will not protect you against an overzealous or hostile officer who does not like your attitude. Making officers accountable for their actions is your greatest protection. Police Disclosure Laws are part of what appears to be a continuing attempt by police to avoid accountability.
Original report here
(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress. If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where posts appear as well as on the primary site. I have reposted the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts HERE or HERE or here
Why is it difficult to prosecute police officers for criminal misconduct even when the abuse is severe and unequivocal? A February news item from WSVN-TV in Miami/Ft. Lauderdale points to one reason:
"A homeless man’s attorney said surveillance video shows deputies used excessive force in his arrest. Gerald McGovern, 58 [said he] did not attack them, as charged. Instead, they attacked him. The public defender’s office said the surveillance video clears McGovern and implicates BSO [Broward Sheriff’s Office]. . . . A witness, Roberto Aguilara, backed up McGovern’s claim".
Note the omission. The news report names the alleged victim, the witness, and (elsewhere) the lawyer but not the accused deputies. Nor do their names appear in subsequent stories about an official investigation into allegations that the deputies used excessive force.
Few people outside law enforcement are familiar with Police Disclosure Laws (PDLs), which in most states, including Florida, block the release of information about an officer’s alleged misconduct until internal investigations are completed. Even then, the laws are often broadly interpreted to block such release. Some states do not make information public unless criminal charges are filed or the officer is dismissed. Other states leave the issue entirely to the police department’s discretion.
The declared purpose of restrictive PDLs is to protect accused officers. With sympathetic courts ruling in favor of PDLs, police unions staunchly defend the practice of granting officers more privacy than others who are criminally accused. A news story from the New Orleans Times-Picayune offers a glimpse into the vigor of their defense:
Police unions trying to block news organizations’ access to internal police investigations of New Orleans officers also are waging a campaign in the civil and criminal courts to keep such records out of the hands of the city’s public defender’s office. Steve Singer, general counsel of the Orleans Public Defenders, said his office has filed public records requests for the New Orleans Police Department’s Public Integrity Bureau files of arresting officers in the cases of more than 50 defendants. The office also has sought subpoenas through Criminal District Court to obtain some of these records.
Critics argue that PDLs obstruct justice. The laws allow police officers to violate rights because they can avoid both transparency and accountability. The laws deny victims information that may be necessary to sue or otherwise press a legal case against officers. And by shielding important aspects of accusations—for example, whether the unnamed officer has been similarly accused in the past—the laws discourage the reporting of police abuse, especially by the media, for whom a significant delay in obtaining information makes a story grow cold. In turn, the lack of coverage encourages the public to believe misconduct is rare; thus those abused by police are doubly victimized by having their accounts dismissed out of hand.
On what legal basis do police departments refuse public access to information on misconduct by their officers?
Almost every state uses the federal Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) as a model for its own statutes on the public disclosure of government records. FOIA was intended to give the public a general right of access to information held by government agencies. Nevertheless, the nondisclosure about police misconduct is generally justified by reference to two common exemptions: the “investigative record” and “privacy right” exemptions. The investigative record exemption can be invoked even after an investigation is completed.
Strong arguments can be made against both exemptions.
The Investigative Record Exemption. The police units that investigate accusations of misconduct are called “internal affairs” or something similar. But are such accusations an internal, private matter rather than one of compelling public interest? The question becomes more urgent when the alleged misconduct is criminal or involves the violation of constitutional protections such as the right to due process.
When anyone is given a gun and broad authority to use it in public, that same public needs to know if the gun and the authority are being misused. The public also needs to know the particulars of how abuse accusations are being investigated. For example, has a particular police department established such a high burden of proof that virtually no accusation against an officer can be sustained?
This compelling public interest is usually overridden by the argument that releasing information would have a “chilling effect” on law enforcement. In the essay “The Public’s Right of Access to Police Misconduct Files,” attorney Lynne Wilson comments, “A number of federal courts have seriously questioned the empirical basis for a finding that public disclosure of internal disciplinary files causes a ‘chilling effect’ on law enforcement. One judge said that ‘if the fear of disclosure . . . does have some real effect on officers’ candor, the stronger working hypothesis is that fear of disclosure is more likely to increase candor than to chill it.’”
The Privacy Right Exemption. The police are tax-supported public servants with the authority to violate your privacy rights. As such, officers should expect to receive a public review of their performance while on duty. The intent of the privacy exemption in FOIA is the preservation of “personal” privacy, such as sexual preference, that is not of legitimate concern to the public. But in its use by police departments, the privacy exemption closes off examination of the professional behavior of public servants.
“[I]t would be difficult to imagine a subject-matter of more legitimate concern to the public than how its police departments are managed,” Wilson writes. “At least one state court has held that police officers have no privacy rights in misconduct records because the records, by definition, ‘involve events which occurred in the course of public service . . . matters with which the public has a right to concern itself.’”
In short, on-duty police conduct is not an internal or private matter but one of overriding public concern.
Everyone is vulnerable to police misconduct. Drivers can be arbitrarily pulled over; anyone can be stopped on the street and questioned. If you encounter the police, being “within the law” will not protect you against an overzealous or hostile officer who does not like your attitude. Making officers accountable for their actions is your greatest protection. Police Disclosure Laws are part of what appears to be a continuing attempt by police to avoid accountability.
Original report here
(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress. If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where posts appear as well as on the primary site. I have reposted the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts HERE or HERE or here
Tuesday, October 26, 2010
FBI: Bureau of Frame-Ups, Bullying, and Intimidation
"We're going to make this much more difficult for you if you don't cooperate."
This stereotypically thuggish threat issued from a stereotypical thug named Vincent, an FBI agent who was among a half-dozen Feds and local police who descended on the Santa Clara home of 20-year-old Yasir Afifi earlier this month. A few days before that visit, Afifi had discovered a government-issue GPS tracking device attached to his car during an oil change.
A few days later, one of Afifi's friends posted a photo of the unit (an Orion Guardian ST820 tracking device, which is sold exclusively to law enforcement agencies) to an on-line file-sharing site. This sent the Stasi scurrying to Afifi's home to reclaim the surveillance gear it had surreptitiously planted on his car. They also took the opportunity to bully and brow-beat the college student, whom they had pestered several months before following an anonymous tip that the natural-born U.S. citizen was a "threat to national security."
During the earlier visit Afifi stiff-armed the Bureau of Frame-ups, Bullying and Intimidation, telling them he would answer their questions if his attorney approved. The Feds appeared to lose interest in Afifi after his attorney contacted the Bureau. In fact, they were continuing to keep him and his friends under surveillance: Not only did they secretly place a tracking device on Afifi's car, they also kept track of his travel plans, his employment status, and even shadowed him when he took his girlfriend out on dinner dates.
During their visit to reclaim their snooping device, the Feds seemed determined to wring from Afifi some kind of damaging statement about his friend Khaled, who had posted the photo of the GPS tracker. One of the interrogators produced a printout of a blog post written by Khaled that " had something to do with a mall or a bomb," Afifi related to Wired News. He was also told that the FBI had stationed other agents outside Khaled's house, a statement Afifi described as "weird.... I didn't really believe anything they were saying."
It is entirely reasonable to believe that every word uttered by a representative of the FBI is a deliberate falsehood. It's also something in the neighborhood of a certainty that Afifi's timely and unexpected discovery of the FBI's tracking device ruined the Bureau's plans to blackmail him into joining its ever-expanding stable of informant/provocateurs.
Just days before the FBI swarmed Afifi's home to recover its illicitly planted tracking device, federal prosecutors dropped charges against Afghan immigrant and Arabic language instructor Ahmadullah Sais Niazi, who was accused of concealing "ties to terrorist groups" in his citizenship application.
Niazi's supposed offense was neglecting to mention the fact that his sister was married to a Taliban leader who -- at the time -- was distantly allied with someone believed to be affiliated with al-Qaeda. This would mean that Niazi, who had settled in Orange County, California, was "linked" to terrorism in the same way that Dark Helmet was connected to Lone Star in "Spaceballs" ("I am your father's brother's nephew's cousin's former roommate").
As Niazi pointed out, he didn't choose his in-laws or be responsible for their chosen associations. But the FBI, like secret police in every despotism, are quick to capitalize on exploitable vulnerabilities of this kind.
Niazi was arrested by the FBI in early 2009. Thomas J. Ropel III, a Special Agent assigned to the Orange County Joint Terrorism Task Force, claimed that Niazi had approached an "undercover informant" and offered to send him to terrorist training camps in Yemen or Pakistan.
In fact, just shortly before the FBI abducted Niazi the Bureau had presented him with what could be called the "Randy Weaver Ultimatum": Either become an informant, or (as Niazi summarized the demand) "we'll make your life a living hell."
Ironically -- or, perhaps, not -- two years before being arrested as a supposed terrorist suspect, Niazi had actually reported a potential terrorist threat to the FBI before being presented with that demand. That threat had been issued by Craig Monteilh, aka "Farouk Aziz," the career criminal who had been planted by the FBI as an infiltrator/provocateur in the Irvine mosque attended by Niazi.
The first Friday of June 2007, Niazi and Monteilh -- who was posing as an Islamic convert of mixed French-Syrian ancestry -- were sharing a ride to the mosque in a car driven by Mohammed Elsisy, an Egyptian-born software engineer. A story published a few weeks later by In Focus News (a periodical covering matters of interest to Muslims in Orange County) described how, apropos of exactly nothing, Monteilh "started talking about the Iraq war," according to Niazi. "He went off on a rant against U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East."
The FBI's provocateur then asked if either Elsisy or Niazi "knew of an `operation' he could be part of." This wasn't the first time Monteilh had made that pitch: Irvine resident Ashruf Zied, who also attended the mosque, recalled that the informant "approached him one day claiming to have access to weapons and asking if he wanted to join him in `waging jihad.'"
Immediately after their unsettling conversation with Monteilh, Niazi and Elsisy approached Hussam Ayloush, director of the Southern California Chapter of the Committee on American Islamic Relations (CAIR). According to Ayloush, Niazi and Elsisy were worried that the guy they knew as "Farouk" had "gone crazy or is about to do something.... and they would be considered accomplices since they knew him."
Ayloush himself had been cooperating with the FBI since shortly after 9-11, in exchange for assurances (which, unfortunately, he accepted in good faith) that the Bureau would not infiltrate mosques and keep them under surveillance. He immediately contacted J. Stephen Tidwell, assistant FBI Director in Los Angeles, to warn him about "Farouk."
"I am calling to report a possible terrorist," Ayloush told Tidwell. "He is a white convert in Irvine."
"Okay -- thanks for letting us know," Tidwell curtly replied, cutting off Ayloush. What he should have said was: "I know -- he's one of ours." Instead, Tidwell dispatched Special Agent Ellis Kuppferman to interview Niazi, Elsisy, and several others who had met Monteilh. This was done to determine if the FBI could wring any more use out of its infiltrator, and also to learn if any of those who became suspicious of the undercover asset could be induced into becoming informants themselves.
Much more here
(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress. If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where posts appear as well as on the primary site. I have reposted the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts HERE or HERE or here
"We're going to make this much more difficult for you if you don't cooperate."
This stereotypically thuggish threat issued from a stereotypical thug named Vincent, an FBI agent who was among a half-dozen Feds and local police who descended on the Santa Clara home of 20-year-old Yasir Afifi earlier this month. A few days before that visit, Afifi had discovered a government-issue GPS tracking device attached to his car during an oil change.
A few days later, one of Afifi's friends posted a photo of the unit (an Orion Guardian ST820 tracking device, which is sold exclusively to law enforcement agencies) to an on-line file-sharing site. This sent the Stasi scurrying to Afifi's home to reclaim the surveillance gear it had surreptitiously planted on his car. They also took the opportunity to bully and brow-beat the college student, whom they had pestered several months before following an anonymous tip that the natural-born U.S. citizen was a "threat to national security."
During the earlier visit Afifi stiff-armed the Bureau of Frame-ups, Bullying and Intimidation, telling them he would answer their questions if his attorney approved. The Feds appeared to lose interest in Afifi after his attorney contacted the Bureau. In fact, they were continuing to keep him and his friends under surveillance: Not only did they secretly place a tracking device on Afifi's car, they also kept track of his travel plans, his employment status, and even shadowed him when he took his girlfriend out on dinner dates.
During their visit to reclaim their snooping device, the Feds seemed determined to wring from Afifi some kind of damaging statement about his friend Khaled, who had posted the photo of the GPS tracker. One of the interrogators produced a printout of a blog post written by Khaled that " had something to do with a mall or a bomb," Afifi related to Wired News. He was also told that the FBI had stationed other agents outside Khaled's house, a statement Afifi described as "weird.... I didn't really believe anything they were saying."
It is entirely reasonable to believe that every word uttered by a representative of the FBI is a deliberate falsehood. It's also something in the neighborhood of a certainty that Afifi's timely and unexpected discovery of the FBI's tracking device ruined the Bureau's plans to blackmail him into joining its ever-expanding stable of informant/provocateurs.
Just days before the FBI swarmed Afifi's home to recover its illicitly planted tracking device, federal prosecutors dropped charges against Afghan immigrant and Arabic language instructor Ahmadullah Sais Niazi, who was accused of concealing "ties to terrorist groups" in his citizenship application.
Niazi's supposed offense was neglecting to mention the fact that his sister was married to a Taliban leader who -- at the time -- was distantly allied with someone believed to be affiliated with al-Qaeda. This would mean that Niazi, who had settled in Orange County, California, was "linked" to terrorism in the same way that Dark Helmet was connected to Lone Star in "Spaceballs" ("I am your father's brother's nephew's cousin's former roommate").
As Niazi pointed out, he didn't choose his in-laws or be responsible for their chosen associations. But the FBI, like secret police in every despotism, are quick to capitalize on exploitable vulnerabilities of this kind.
Niazi was arrested by the FBI in early 2009. Thomas J. Ropel III, a Special Agent assigned to the Orange County Joint Terrorism Task Force, claimed that Niazi had approached an "undercover informant" and offered to send him to terrorist training camps in Yemen or Pakistan.
In fact, just shortly before the FBI abducted Niazi the Bureau had presented him with what could be called the "Randy Weaver Ultimatum": Either become an informant, or (as Niazi summarized the demand) "we'll make your life a living hell."
Ironically -- or, perhaps, not -- two years before being arrested as a supposed terrorist suspect, Niazi had actually reported a potential terrorist threat to the FBI before being presented with that demand. That threat had been issued by Craig Monteilh, aka "Farouk Aziz," the career criminal who had been planted by the FBI as an infiltrator/provocateur in the Irvine mosque attended by Niazi.
The first Friday of June 2007, Niazi and Monteilh -- who was posing as an Islamic convert of mixed French-Syrian ancestry -- were sharing a ride to the mosque in a car driven by Mohammed Elsisy, an Egyptian-born software engineer. A story published a few weeks later by In Focus News (a periodical covering matters of interest to Muslims in Orange County) described how, apropos of exactly nothing, Monteilh "started talking about the Iraq war," according to Niazi. "He went off on a rant against U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East."
The FBI's provocateur then asked if either Elsisy or Niazi "knew of an `operation' he could be part of." This wasn't the first time Monteilh had made that pitch: Irvine resident Ashruf Zied, who also attended the mosque, recalled that the informant "approached him one day claiming to have access to weapons and asking if he wanted to join him in `waging jihad.'"
Immediately after their unsettling conversation with Monteilh, Niazi and Elsisy approached Hussam Ayloush, director of the Southern California Chapter of the Committee on American Islamic Relations (CAIR). According to Ayloush, Niazi and Elsisy were worried that the guy they knew as "Farouk" had "gone crazy or is about to do something.... and they would be considered accomplices since they knew him."
Ayloush himself had been cooperating with the FBI since shortly after 9-11, in exchange for assurances (which, unfortunately, he accepted in good faith) that the Bureau would not infiltrate mosques and keep them under surveillance. He immediately contacted J. Stephen Tidwell, assistant FBI Director in Los Angeles, to warn him about "Farouk."
"I am calling to report a possible terrorist," Ayloush told Tidwell. "He is a white convert in Irvine."
"Okay -- thanks for letting us know," Tidwell curtly replied, cutting off Ayloush. What he should have said was: "I know -- he's one of ours." Instead, Tidwell dispatched Special Agent Ellis Kuppferman to interview Niazi, Elsisy, and several others who had met Monteilh. This was done to determine if the FBI could wring any more use out of its infiltrator, and also to learn if any of those who became suspicious of the undercover asset could be induced into becoming informants themselves.
Much more here
(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress. If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where posts appear as well as on the primary site. I have reposted the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts HERE or HERE or here
Monday, October 25, 2010
Canadian man given $4.25m for wrongful conviction
The culmination of a long saga and another example of incompetent forensic science. Note: Nearly 3 years from acquittal to compensation. Not remotely good enough
An Ontario man who spent 12 years in prison for a sexual assault and murder he did not commit has been given $4.25 million for his wrongful conviction. William Mullins-Johnson was convicted in 1994 in connection with the death of his niece.
The Sault Ste. Marie, Ont., man was one of several people impacted by the work of now-discredited pathologist Dr. Charles Smith. Smith said the girl had shown signs of strangulation despite the child's history of vomiting in bed.
"On behalf of the Government of Ontario, I offer my deepest and most sincere apologies to Mr. Mullins-Johnson and his family for the miscarriage of justice that occurred and the pain they had to endure," Attorney-General Chris Bentley said in a statement.
"Mr. Mullins-Johnson has been working hard to rebuild his life and we wish him well as he continues that process."
In 2005, the Chief Coroner of Ontario ordered a review of 44 of Smith's autopsies. The ensuing report led Ontario's attorney-general to open a public inquiry into Smith's work in November, 2007. The inquiry, headed by Justice Stephen Goudge, released its report in October 2008, and heavily criticized Smith's work, finding fault with 20 of the autopsies.
Mullins-Johnson was acquitted of both charges in 2007, following a review by a panel of pathology experts. During the inquiry, Smith apologized to Mullins-Johnson, asking for his forgiveness.
Original report here
(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress. If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where posts appear as well as on the primary site. I have reposted the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts HERE or HERE or here
The culmination of a long saga and another example of incompetent forensic science. Note: Nearly 3 years from acquittal to compensation. Not remotely good enough
An Ontario man who spent 12 years in prison for a sexual assault and murder he did not commit has been given $4.25 million for his wrongful conviction. William Mullins-Johnson was convicted in 1994 in connection with the death of his niece.
The Sault Ste. Marie, Ont., man was one of several people impacted by the work of now-discredited pathologist Dr. Charles Smith. Smith said the girl had shown signs of strangulation despite the child's history of vomiting in bed.
"On behalf of the Government of Ontario, I offer my deepest and most sincere apologies to Mr. Mullins-Johnson and his family for the miscarriage of justice that occurred and the pain they had to endure," Attorney-General Chris Bentley said in a statement.
"Mr. Mullins-Johnson has been working hard to rebuild his life and we wish him well as he continues that process."
In 2005, the Chief Coroner of Ontario ordered a review of 44 of Smith's autopsies. The ensuing report led Ontario's attorney-general to open a public inquiry into Smith's work in November, 2007. The inquiry, headed by Justice Stephen Goudge, released its report in October 2008, and heavily criticized Smith's work, finding fault with 20 of the autopsies.
Mullins-Johnson was acquitted of both charges in 2007, following a review by a panel of pathology experts. During the inquiry, Smith apologized to Mullins-Johnson, asking for his forgiveness.
Original report here
(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress. If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where posts appear as well as on the primary site. I have reposted the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts HERE or HERE or here
Sunday, October 24, 2010
NY: Lawyers Demand Independent Investigation into police Killing Citing Witness Intimidation, Racism
Speaking at a Friday press conference, attorney Bonita Zelman blasted police officials and the Westchester County District Attorney for their handling of the investigation into the death of Danroy Henry.
Henry was killed over the weekend when Pleasantville police Officer Aaron Hess and Mount Pleasant police Officer Ronald Beckley opened fire on his vehicle after an alleged brawl took place at Finnegan's Bar and Grill in Thornwood. The shooting also wounding 20-year-old Easton, MA native Brandon Cox, who sat in the passenger seat.
Zelman is the attorney for a number of witnesses who were at the scene when the Pace University football player was killed, including those who were in the car with Henry at the time he was shot. On Friday, she demanded an outside investigation into the incident by the New York Attorney General or the U.S. Justice Department, citing witness intimidation, conflict of interest and possible race issues that could taint internal investigations being conducted by Mount Pleasant Police and the District Attorney's Office.
Zelman said they were "outraged" DA Janet DiFiore was allowing the local police department involved in the shooting to investigate.
DiFiore issued a statement asking anyone with information make themselves known to investigators. "I encourage all those with any relevant information to come forward," she said Friday.
The major case unit of the New York State Police is also investigating the shooting.
At the Westchester Marriott in Tarrytown, Zelman claimed that witnesses were being intimidated and that race played a key factor in Henry's death. She said Henry's friends were brutalized, tasered, and threatened with deadly force when they tried to help the dying 20-year-old student.
In a press conference earlier in the day, Mount Pleasant Police Chief Lou Alagno said the medical response was made three minutes after police saw Henry's condition and detailed the efforts to help Henry and Cox. "It is a tragedy to the Henry family and to the police community. No police officer wants to take a life," he said.
One of the students making allegations against police was Daniel Parker, of Lauderhill, FL. The 22-year-old said he demanded to give CPR on the dying Henry, but police allegedly put a gun to his ribs and told him to back off or he would be the next one to suffer a gunshot wound. His account could not be confirmed. "'Can I help him, I know CPR.' That is all I asked," Parker told dozens of reporters in attendance. "I said, 'He's dying, can I help him.'"
About 50 students and a number of civil rights activists stood behind Parker as he gave his brief statement. A number of current and former law enforcement officials also chimed in, blaming the police for misconduct and poor judgement.
Anthony Miranda, chair of the National Latinos Officers Association, said the use of force was uncalled for. He claimed the police officers put themselves at risk by jumping in front of Henry's car. "They responded to a call that did not require the level of force they used," he said. "The fear has to be real and the fear they receive can not be created by their own actions. Poor tactics should never be the excuse to use deadly force."
Pleasantville police union officials have been telling a different story, speaking up for the officers involved in the shooting. They said Hess and Beckley shot in self-defense after Henry ignored instructions to stop and seemed intent on running them over.
Charles Barron, of the New York City Council, called Henry's death one of the "most inhumane acts" he has seen, and said it would be a "cold blooded" crime to let anyone involved in the killing off the hook without proper justice being served. "I've been through a lot of these cases...We've been this way too many times," Barron said. "When you have a district attorney that will not prosecute police, that sends a signal that they can take our lives and get away with it. This madness must stop."
Those in attendance said the Westchester DA's office had a conflict in the case because they have a "working relationship" with local police departments including Pleasantville and Mount Pleasant.
Zelman also refuted some of the insinuations made about the incident, saying that Henry was not someone who drank, and that he had been told to leave a 'no parking' area before Hess, the Pleasantville officer, jumped in front of the car with his gun pulled. Hess allegedly ended up on the hood of the car, and started firing at Henry.
ABC Channel 7 is reporting that a source told them Henry had a blood alcohol level of .13 percent when he was shot and killed. The legal limit in New York State is .08 percent. Official toxicology reports have not been made public.
Zelman also called for an immediate dismissal of all charges pending against numerous Pace football players who were booked on the "trumped up charges" of obstructing government administration.
When asked about the fight that allegedly took place in the bar, she asked why those involved in the fight had not been charged, and why those that witnessed the killing of Henry were.
During a question period, many classified the statements made by Alagno as a cover-up for the"misconduct and brutality of the police" involved in the incident, said Zelman.
Earlier in the day, Alagno said the department was looking for a white blond-baired woman who had administered CPR and first aid to Hess and Henry. Those at the Tarrytown press conference said they knew who the woman was, but said the point was irrelevant. They questioned why police had let a white woman, who didn't reveal her medical experience, to give aid over Henry's own friends who had CPR training.
They disputed the police's account of the incident, saying that aid was not offered immediately to Henry and that police had failed in their duty to provide aid in the man's final moments of life, alleging they placed him under arrest and put handcuffs on him as he lay bleeding.
Alagno's account told a different story. He told reporters Henry was loaded into an ambulance just five minutes after police first noticed his "grave" condition and medical treatment began even earlier.
Zelman ended the conference with a warning: "I give you 48 hours to identify the other members of the Westchester County Police and other police departments who brutalized my clients," she said. "We want the ID's of the cops that were running around with tasers and guns pulled... The public has a right to know. No student or citizen is safe while those other police are walking the streets of this county."
Original report here
(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress. If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where posts appear as well as on the primary site. I have reposted the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts HERE or HERE or here
Speaking at a Friday press conference, attorney Bonita Zelman blasted police officials and the Westchester County District Attorney for their handling of the investigation into the death of Danroy Henry.
Henry was killed over the weekend when Pleasantville police Officer Aaron Hess and Mount Pleasant police Officer Ronald Beckley opened fire on his vehicle after an alleged brawl took place at Finnegan's Bar and Grill in Thornwood. The shooting also wounding 20-year-old Easton, MA native Brandon Cox, who sat in the passenger seat.
Zelman is the attorney for a number of witnesses who were at the scene when the Pace University football player was killed, including those who were in the car with Henry at the time he was shot. On Friday, she demanded an outside investigation into the incident by the New York Attorney General or the U.S. Justice Department, citing witness intimidation, conflict of interest and possible race issues that could taint internal investigations being conducted by Mount Pleasant Police and the District Attorney's Office.
Zelman said they were "outraged" DA Janet DiFiore was allowing the local police department involved in the shooting to investigate.
DiFiore issued a statement asking anyone with information make themselves known to investigators. "I encourage all those with any relevant information to come forward," she said Friday.
The major case unit of the New York State Police is also investigating the shooting.
At the Westchester Marriott in Tarrytown, Zelman claimed that witnesses were being intimidated and that race played a key factor in Henry's death. She said Henry's friends were brutalized, tasered, and threatened with deadly force when they tried to help the dying 20-year-old student.
In a press conference earlier in the day, Mount Pleasant Police Chief Lou Alagno said the medical response was made three minutes after police saw Henry's condition and detailed the efforts to help Henry and Cox. "It is a tragedy to the Henry family and to the police community. No police officer wants to take a life," he said.
One of the students making allegations against police was Daniel Parker, of Lauderhill, FL. The 22-year-old said he demanded to give CPR on the dying Henry, but police allegedly put a gun to his ribs and told him to back off or he would be the next one to suffer a gunshot wound. His account could not be confirmed. "'Can I help him, I know CPR.' That is all I asked," Parker told dozens of reporters in attendance. "I said, 'He's dying, can I help him.'"
About 50 students and a number of civil rights activists stood behind Parker as he gave his brief statement. A number of current and former law enforcement officials also chimed in, blaming the police for misconduct and poor judgement.
Anthony Miranda, chair of the National Latinos Officers Association, said the use of force was uncalled for. He claimed the police officers put themselves at risk by jumping in front of Henry's car. "They responded to a call that did not require the level of force they used," he said. "The fear has to be real and the fear they receive can not be created by their own actions. Poor tactics should never be the excuse to use deadly force."
Pleasantville police union officials have been telling a different story, speaking up for the officers involved in the shooting. They said Hess and Beckley shot in self-defense after Henry ignored instructions to stop and seemed intent on running them over.
Charles Barron, of the New York City Council, called Henry's death one of the "most inhumane acts" he has seen, and said it would be a "cold blooded" crime to let anyone involved in the killing off the hook without proper justice being served. "I've been through a lot of these cases...We've been this way too many times," Barron said. "When you have a district attorney that will not prosecute police, that sends a signal that they can take our lives and get away with it. This madness must stop."
Those in attendance said the Westchester DA's office had a conflict in the case because they have a "working relationship" with local police departments including Pleasantville and Mount Pleasant.
Zelman also refuted some of the insinuations made about the incident, saying that Henry was not someone who drank, and that he had been told to leave a 'no parking' area before Hess, the Pleasantville officer, jumped in front of the car with his gun pulled. Hess allegedly ended up on the hood of the car, and started firing at Henry.
ABC Channel 7 is reporting that a source told them Henry had a blood alcohol level of .13 percent when he was shot and killed. The legal limit in New York State is .08 percent. Official toxicology reports have not been made public.
Zelman also called for an immediate dismissal of all charges pending against numerous Pace football players who were booked on the "trumped up charges" of obstructing government administration.
When asked about the fight that allegedly took place in the bar, she asked why those involved in the fight had not been charged, and why those that witnessed the killing of Henry were.
During a question period, many classified the statements made by Alagno as a cover-up for the"misconduct and brutality of the police" involved in the incident, said Zelman.
Earlier in the day, Alagno said the department was looking for a white blond-baired woman who had administered CPR and first aid to Hess and Henry. Those at the Tarrytown press conference said they knew who the woman was, but said the point was irrelevant. They questioned why police had let a white woman, who didn't reveal her medical experience, to give aid over Henry's own friends who had CPR training.
They disputed the police's account of the incident, saying that aid was not offered immediately to Henry and that police had failed in their duty to provide aid in the man's final moments of life, alleging they placed him under arrest and put handcuffs on him as he lay bleeding.
Alagno's account told a different story. He told reporters Henry was loaded into an ambulance just five minutes after police first noticed his "grave" condition and medical treatment began even earlier.
Zelman ended the conference with a warning: "I give you 48 hours to identify the other members of the Westchester County Police and other police departments who brutalized my clients," she said. "We want the ID's of the cops that were running around with tasers and guns pulled... The public has a right to know. No student or citizen is safe while those other police are walking the streets of this county."
Original report here
(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress. If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where posts appear as well as on the primary site. I have reposted the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts HERE or HERE or here
Saturday, October 23, 2010
WA: City sued over 2007 killing by lying police
The family of a 23-year-old man shot and killed in 2007 by Vancouver police during an execution of a search warrant has filed a $4.25 million lawsuit against the city, alleging the death was unnecessary and unjustified.
Sean Makarowsky was killed June 16, 2007, when members of a Vancouver police team served a search warrant at Makarowsky’s home at 3010 N.E. 162nd Ave.
Vancouver police officers knocked loudly twice and shouted warnings as they served a search warrant at the home just after midnight, Police Chief Cliff Cook said shortly after the shooting. At that point, Makarowsky came to a window next to the front door, moved aside the miniblinds and was holding a handgun, Cook said.
Vancouver Cpl. Steve Lobdell was positioned near the window and spotted Makarowsky, the chief said. Lobdell yelled “gun!” before firing two shots through the window. One bullet hit Makarowsky in the heart, the other in his shoulder, the lawsuit says. Officers also shot, once, a six-month-old pit bull inside the home.
The suit, filed by Vancouver attorney Beau Harlan, alleges “gross police misconduct and use of excessive force” caused the “untimely and unnecessary death” of Makarowsky.
The lawsuit claims that witnesses contradict Cook’s official statement. Makarowsky’s girlfriend, who was on the phone with him at the time of the shooting, did not hear any warning call identifying the nine officers at his front door, Harlan said. Another witness, Richard Ives, who lived in a trailer behind the house, also said he was awake and did not hear the officers knock or announce their presence. The team was dressed in civilian clothes under tactical vests labeled police.
Makarowsky had no idea what was going on, and by coming to the window with a gun, he “was responding in a reasonable manner to a threat of unknown severity and source. Lobdell’s use of deadly force was without provocation, legal justification, and was objectively unreasonable,” according to the lawsuit.
“If you believe (witness) testimony and you believe what they say, then a police officer shot and killed Makarowsky without any warning when he was inside his own house, holding a gun,” Harlan said.
It seeks $3 million for loss of life, and for Makarowsky’s pain and suffering before he was pronounced dead at 12:45 a.m.; $1 million for “reckless disregard and callous indifference” to Makarowsky’s right to life and due process; and $250,000 for his lost earning capacity.
The lawsuit was filed in June in U.S. District Court in Tacoma on behalf of Makarowsky’s mother, Louise Gast of Eugene, Ore., and his young daughter, Emilee, of Camas. It names the city of Vancouver, Lobdell, former officer Bryan Acee and Vancouver Sgt. Duane McNicholas, who was the supervisor of the unit that served the search warrant.
Lobdell has since left the department and works for the Port of Seattle, and Acee is now employed by the FBI, Assistant City Attorney Dan Lloyd said. A trial is set for Oct. 24, 2011.
Lloyd said that officers were following all proper procedures the night that Makarowsky was shot.
The police unit’s tactical vests clearly labeled them as law enforcement officers. They also clearly announced their presence in loud voices, he said. An investigation by the Clark County Prosecuting Attorney’s office and an internal Vancouver Police Department investigation both cleared Lobdell of any wrongdoing in the shooting.
Makarowsky’s weapon, a .40-caliber handgun, was loaded and the safety was off, Lloyd said. “If Cpl. Lobdell had hesitated, we could easily have lost one or more officers,” he said. “That’s why the law authorizes police officers to use deadly force if they believe either he or she, or another person, is about to be seriously injured or killed.”
Harlan countered that since Makarowsky had no idea who was at his front door, he was within his rights to come to the window with a weapon.
“If I’m in my own home at midnight, and I hear a commotion outside the front of the house and I grab a gun and go to investigate that disturbance, does that give law enforcement license to shoot and kill me when I’m in my own home?” he questioned.
Police were not looking for Makarowsky, who had no criminal record, when they came to his door, both sides acknowledge. They were serving a “high-risk” warrant to find a man named Erik Paulsen, then 38, after Vancouver police were contacted by members of the Portland police gang task force. They had information that Paulsen was being targeted for a home invasion robbery. Members of the Career Criminal Apprehension Team, the Neighborhood Response Team and the SWAT team waited for word that the potential burglars were under arrest before arriving at the home.
Portland police believed Paulsen was being targeted because he had drugs, guns and cash in his home. Paulsen was living in a camper on the property, not in the home, which officers did not know at the time, Lloyd said.
Harlan questioned the use of the career criminal team to go after Paulsen, a man with five misdemeanor warrants. That team, he said, was primarily used to go after felons.
But Paulsen was also arrested that night, and evidence of a “substantial” marijuana grow operation was found in the home occupied by Makarowsky, Lloyd said. “We expect the court to fully vindicate Cpl. Lobdell, his fellow officers and the city,” he said.
Original report here
(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress. If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where posts appear as well as on the primary site. I have reposted the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts HERE or HERE or here
The family of a 23-year-old man shot and killed in 2007 by Vancouver police during an execution of a search warrant has filed a $4.25 million lawsuit against the city, alleging the death was unnecessary and unjustified.
Sean Makarowsky was killed June 16, 2007, when members of a Vancouver police team served a search warrant at Makarowsky’s home at 3010 N.E. 162nd Ave.
Vancouver police officers knocked loudly twice and shouted warnings as they served a search warrant at the home just after midnight, Police Chief Cliff Cook said shortly after the shooting. At that point, Makarowsky came to a window next to the front door, moved aside the miniblinds and was holding a handgun, Cook said.
Vancouver Cpl. Steve Lobdell was positioned near the window and spotted Makarowsky, the chief said. Lobdell yelled “gun!” before firing two shots through the window. One bullet hit Makarowsky in the heart, the other in his shoulder, the lawsuit says. Officers also shot, once, a six-month-old pit bull inside the home.
The suit, filed by Vancouver attorney Beau Harlan, alleges “gross police misconduct and use of excessive force” caused the “untimely and unnecessary death” of Makarowsky.
The lawsuit claims that witnesses contradict Cook’s official statement. Makarowsky’s girlfriend, who was on the phone with him at the time of the shooting, did not hear any warning call identifying the nine officers at his front door, Harlan said. Another witness, Richard Ives, who lived in a trailer behind the house, also said he was awake and did not hear the officers knock or announce their presence. The team was dressed in civilian clothes under tactical vests labeled police.
Makarowsky had no idea what was going on, and by coming to the window with a gun, he “was responding in a reasonable manner to a threat of unknown severity and source. Lobdell’s use of deadly force was without provocation, legal justification, and was objectively unreasonable,” according to the lawsuit.
“If you believe (witness) testimony and you believe what they say, then a police officer shot and killed Makarowsky without any warning when he was inside his own house, holding a gun,” Harlan said.
It seeks $3 million for loss of life, and for Makarowsky’s pain and suffering before he was pronounced dead at 12:45 a.m.; $1 million for “reckless disregard and callous indifference” to Makarowsky’s right to life and due process; and $250,000 for his lost earning capacity.
The lawsuit was filed in June in U.S. District Court in Tacoma on behalf of Makarowsky’s mother, Louise Gast of Eugene, Ore., and his young daughter, Emilee, of Camas. It names the city of Vancouver, Lobdell, former officer Bryan Acee and Vancouver Sgt. Duane McNicholas, who was the supervisor of the unit that served the search warrant.
Lobdell has since left the department and works for the Port of Seattle, and Acee is now employed by the FBI, Assistant City Attorney Dan Lloyd said. A trial is set for Oct. 24, 2011.
Lloyd said that officers were following all proper procedures the night that Makarowsky was shot.
The police unit’s tactical vests clearly labeled them as law enforcement officers. They also clearly announced their presence in loud voices, he said. An investigation by the Clark County Prosecuting Attorney’s office and an internal Vancouver Police Department investigation both cleared Lobdell of any wrongdoing in the shooting.
Makarowsky’s weapon, a .40-caliber handgun, was loaded and the safety was off, Lloyd said. “If Cpl. Lobdell had hesitated, we could easily have lost one or more officers,” he said. “That’s why the law authorizes police officers to use deadly force if they believe either he or she, or another person, is about to be seriously injured or killed.”
Harlan countered that since Makarowsky had no idea who was at his front door, he was within his rights to come to the window with a weapon.
“If I’m in my own home at midnight, and I hear a commotion outside the front of the house and I grab a gun and go to investigate that disturbance, does that give law enforcement license to shoot and kill me when I’m in my own home?” he questioned.
Police were not looking for Makarowsky, who had no criminal record, when they came to his door, both sides acknowledge. They were serving a “high-risk” warrant to find a man named Erik Paulsen, then 38, after Vancouver police were contacted by members of the Portland police gang task force. They had information that Paulsen was being targeted for a home invasion robbery. Members of the Career Criminal Apprehension Team, the Neighborhood Response Team and the SWAT team waited for word that the potential burglars were under arrest before arriving at the home.
Portland police believed Paulsen was being targeted because he had drugs, guns and cash in his home. Paulsen was living in a camper on the property, not in the home, which officers did not know at the time, Lloyd said.
Harlan questioned the use of the career criminal team to go after Paulsen, a man with five misdemeanor warrants. That team, he said, was primarily used to go after felons.
But Paulsen was also arrested that night, and evidence of a “substantial” marijuana grow operation was found in the home occupied by Makarowsky, Lloyd said. “We expect the court to fully vindicate Cpl. Lobdell, his fellow officers and the city,” he said.
Original report here
(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress. If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where posts appear as well as on the primary site. I have reposted the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts HERE or HERE or here
Friday, October 22, 2010
Four years in jail without trial!
In Australia! Justice delayed is justice denied
A MAN accused over a multi-million dollar cocaine syndicate will finally stand trial almost four years after he was charged, a Supreme Court judge today resoundingly criticising the delays in his case as "significant" and "oppressive".
Justice Stephen Rothman today refused bail for Luke John Sparos, but said there were a number of "troubling" aspects to his decision. One was the delay, he said, and leant his judicial weight to comments by a local court magistrate Geoff Bradd that the case led by the NSW Crime Commission had long been in disarray.
He endorsed the comments made by Magistrate Bradd, who accused the DPP and the Crime Commission of trying to "have it both ways." "(Magistrate Bradd said) you either prosecute this matter or you don’t - to say this is a fishing expedition … well it is just beyond the pale."
Had it not been for the seriousness of the charges and the risk of flight if given his freedom, Justice Rothman said bail would likely have been granted.
"Fatboy" Sparos was allegedly one of two principals to an international cocaine cartel responsible for the importation of around 200kg of cocaine. He was charged in early 2007 with offences relating to alleged proceeds of crime funds, but later charged along with a number of others with a long-running conspiracy to import a commercial quantity of cocaine in July of that year.
Justice Rothman described the Crown case as being strong, but said unacceptable that Sparos had been unable to adequately prepare for his trial due to his lengthy and restrictive situation in custody.
The court even heard how some of the brief provided to Sparos in custody had been "lost" as Department of Corrective Services officials moved him around the prison system.
"It’s inappropriate for a person to be unduly delayed on remand while the Crown get’s its act together," Justice Rothman said. "Of course not all time spent is a delay … but in this case there (have been) significant delays."
Justice Rothman directed the Crown and Corrective Services "to take all steps" necessary to provide Sparos or his legal team with the documents that were originally in his possession.
The District Court registry had notified the Crown prosecutor that Sparos’ trial could begin by the end of February.
Original report here. (Via Australian Politics)
(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress. If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where posts appear as well as on the primary site. I have reposted the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts HERE or HERE or here
In Australia! Justice delayed is justice denied
A MAN accused over a multi-million dollar cocaine syndicate will finally stand trial almost four years after he was charged, a Supreme Court judge today resoundingly criticising the delays in his case as "significant" and "oppressive".
Justice Stephen Rothman today refused bail for Luke John Sparos, but said there were a number of "troubling" aspects to his decision. One was the delay, he said, and leant his judicial weight to comments by a local court magistrate Geoff Bradd that the case led by the NSW Crime Commission had long been in disarray.
He endorsed the comments made by Magistrate Bradd, who accused the DPP and the Crime Commission of trying to "have it both ways." "(Magistrate Bradd said) you either prosecute this matter or you don’t - to say this is a fishing expedition … well it is just beyond the pale."
Had it not been for the seriousness of the charges and the risk of flight if given his freedom, Justice Rothman said bail would likely have been granted.
"Fatboy" Sparos was allegedly one of two principals to an international cocaine cartel responsible for the importation of around 200kg of cocaine. He was charged in early 2007 with offences relating to alleged proceeds of crime funds, but later charged along with a number of others with a long-running conspiracy to import a commercial quantity of cocaine in July of that year.
Justice Rothman described the Crown case as being strong, but said unacceptable that Sparos had been unable to adequately prepare for his trial due to his lengthy and restrictive situation in custody.
The court even heard how some of the brief provided to Sparos in custody had been "lost" as Department of Corrective Services officials moved him around the prison system.
"It’s inappropriate for a person to be unduly delayed on remand while the Crown get’s its act together," Justice Rothman said. "Of course not all time spent is a delay … but in this case there (have been) significant delays."
Justice Rothman directed the Crown and Corrective Services "to take all steps" necessary to provide Sparos or his legal team with the documents that were originally in his possession.
The District Court registry had notified the Crown prosecutor that Sparos’ trial could begin by the end of February.
Original report here. (Via Australian Politics)
(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress. If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where posts appear as well as on the primary site. I have reposted the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts HERE or HERE or here
Thursday, October 21, 2010
CA: Oakland settles suit with family of slain youth
The city of Oakland agreed Tuesday to pay $500,000 to settle a federal civil rights suit filed by the parents of a 15-year-old boy who was shot and killed by three gang-unit officers in 2008.
Jose Luis Buenrostro was killed March 19, 2008, at 79th Avenue and Rudsdale Street in East Oakland. Police have said several gang-unit officers shot Buenrostro when he pulled a sawed-off rifle from his sweatpants and pointed it at them.
But in a lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court in San Francisco, Jose and Maria Buenrostro said Sgt. Randy Brandwood and Officers Eric Milina and Robert Roche drove up to their son in an unmarked car, stopped and shot him without cause.
Roche has been involved in at least two other fatal police shootings.
In court documents, city officials said the officers were driving on Rudsdale when they saw the youth walking along the sidewalk and apparently fumbling with something in his pants.
They backed up to where he was standing and fired in self-defense when the youth pulled the rifle from his pant leg and pointed it at the officers, who were clad in blue jeans and raid jackets emblazoned with "Oakland Police" on the back, city officials said.
The family's attorney, John Burris, acknowledged that the youth had a rifle in his possession. But he said the teenager, an aviation-school student, never brandished the weapon at police.
"It's a real tragic case," Burris said Tuesday. "The police overreacted, and although he may have had possession of a (rifle), he did not point the gun at the officers. Witnesses said he was putting his hands up when he was shot."
Within a week of the shooting, police took the unusual step of showing a picture of the rifle that the boy was carrying. They said the youth had ties to a street gang.
Original report here
(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress. If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where posts appear as well as on the primary site. I have reposted the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts HERE or HERE or here
The city of Oakland agreed Tuesday to pay $500,000 to settle a federal civil rights suit filed by the parents of a 15-year-old boy who was shot and killed by three gang-unit officers in 2008.
Jose Luis Buenrostro was killed March 19, 2008, at 79th Avenue and Rudsdale Street in East Oakland. Police have said several gang-unit officers shot Buenrostro when he pulled a sawed-off rifle from his sweatpants and pointed it at them.
But in a lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court in San Francisco, Jose and Maria Buenrostro said Sgt. Randy Brandwood and Officers Eric Milina and Robert Roche drove up to their son in an unmarked car, stopped and shot him without cause.
Roche has been involved in at least two other fatal police shootings.
In court documents, city officials said the officers were driving on Rudsdale when they saw the youth walking along the sidewalk and apparently fumbling with something in his pants.
They backed up to where he was standing and fired in self-defense when the youth pulled the rifle from his pant leg and pointed it at the officers, who were clad in blue jeans and raid jackets emblazoned with "Oakland Police" on the back, city officials said.
The family's attorney, John Burris, acknowledged that the youth had a rifle in his possession. But he said the teenager, an aviation-school student, never brandished the weapon at police.
"It's a real tragic case," Burris said Tuesday. "The police overreacted, and although he may have had possession of a (rifle), he did not point the gun at the officers. Witnesses said he was putting his hands up when he was shot."
Within a week of the shooting, police took the unusual step of showing a picture of the rifle that the boy was carrying. They said the youth had ties to a street gang.
Original report here
(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress. If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where posts appear as well as on the primary site. I have reposted the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts HERE or HERE or here
Wednesday, October 20, 2010
Baby snatched for dad's politics back with parents after court tosses ignorant complaint
Reunited! Newborn returned to family where father accused of being 'Oath Keeper'
A tiny baby girl snatched from her parents' custody a week ago when her father was accused of being an "Oath Keeper" was returned to her parents today.
According to WND sources close to the case, the accusations against the father, Johnathon Irish, whose fiancée, Stephanie Taylor, is the mother of Cheyenne, have been dropped.
WND originally reported on the case last weekend when the state took the baby, ordering the father to stand with his hands behind his back and frisking him while social workers took the child. The affidavit supporting the actions cited the father's affiliation with the patriotic organization Oath Keepers.
Irish, reached today by telephone by WND, said New Hampshire state law prevents disclosure of details of family court disputes. But the WND source confirmed that the little girl had been returned to the family and there were no future court dates scheduled in the case.
Officials with the state Family Court system could not be reached by WND.
Just hours earlier a protest was held outside the court where the hearing was going on, and as WND reported, officials with Oath Keepers submitted a demand letter to the state's social services agency to remove the reference in the affidavit in the Irish case.
The organization collects affirmations from soldiers and peace officers that they would refuse orders that violate the U.S. Constitution in light of what they perceive as the advance of socialism in the U.S.
Irish had told WND that an affidavit signed by Child Protective Service worker Dana Bickford seeking government custody of newborn Cheyenne a week ago said the agency "became aware and confirmed that Mr. Irish associated with a militia known as the 'Oath Keepers.'"
While officials with Oath Keepers confirmed that there were other issues involved in the case, they were stunned to learn that the court ruling had described their organization as a militia and had referenced participation with them as an accusation.
"This poorly conducted investigation used unsubstantiated and unsupported information regarding our organization. A journey to our website, and a reading of our bylaws, could have easily confirmed what we are and are not," said the Oath Keepers letter, delivered today to state officials.
"We are an association of currently serving and retired police, military, and emergency personnel. We are not a militia. Our goal is simply to educate all current service personnel on their obligations under the law and in particular our Constitution."
WND reported earlier when the dispute erupted, including when Oath Keepers founder Stewart Rhodes wrote on his website that the citation of his organization sends a seriously troubling message.
Details of the resolution of the case were withheld behind the curtain of Family Court restrictions. But Rhodes described it as a "fundamental point" to have government agencies condemning defendants for their political affiliations.
"Talk about chilling speech! If this is allowed to continue, it will chill the speech of not just Mr. Irish, but all Oath Keepers and it will serve as the camel [nose] under the tent for other associations being considered too risky for parents to dare," he continued. "'Don't you dare associate with such and such group, or you could be on 'the list' and then child protective services might come take your kids.'"
While Oath Keepers is not a militia, he said, it would make no difference if it was. "A parent associating with a militia is not engaged in child endangerment and is not evidence of child endangerment," he said.
Oath Keepers' members promise not to obey any order "to disarm the American people," conduct warrantless searches, "detain American citizens as 'unlawful enemy combatants,'" work to impose martial law, invade or subjugate any state, blockade American cities, put Americans in detention camps or "make war against our own people."
Rhodes himself was a U.S. Army paratrooper injured in an parachuting accident, a former firearms instructor and a former member of U.S. Rep. Ron Paul's Washington staff.
The organization's board of directors includes Army veteran Sgt. Dave Freeman, Army veteran Capt. Chauncey Normandin, Navy veteran Capt. Gregory Gooch, Celia S. Hyde of the International Association of Chiefs of Police, all retired.
Others are Marines, members of the Air Force, local law enforcement and even of the U.S. Army Special Forces.
The demand letter apparently was addressed by the court's action, although Rhodes said he'd been given no direct response to the concerns. It said, "As police officers, we have been called all manner of vile names by criminal suspects, but nothing compares to the offensive assertion that to associate with us and our military counterparts is child endangerment. We respectfully request that any reference to Oath Keepers be removed from your affidavit by whatever mechanism New Hampshire law allows or requires."
The letter continued, "On behalf of all of the active duty and retired police and sheriff personnel within our organization, as well as our military and firefighter brothers and sisters, we demand that you remove the offensive verbiage in the affidavit filed by your investigator, Dana Bickford, which states, 'the Division became aware and confirmed that Mr. Irish associated with a militia known as the 'Oath Keepers …''
"By so listing the political associations of a parent as a reason to take a newborn baby from her mother's arms, the affidavit politicizes child protective services. That politicization was unfortunately furthered by the judge in this case who adopted Bickford’s entire affidavit as the Court's 'findings of fact' setting forth the reasons for issuing the order to take the baby."
The letter explains Oath Keepers members "have seen first-hand the heart-rending abuse that children can suffer at the hands of dysfunctional adults. It is to prevent such abuse that child protective services is given great latitude and power. Politics has no place in this process precisely because of the immense power you wield. All that should matter is the welfare of the children, not the politics of the parents. Such politicization not only hurts the families and children involved, but also chills the speech of other parents who now will worry that their political affiliations will be used as grounds for taking their children."
It was signed by Capt. Chauncey Normandin, retired, from the Lowell, Mass., police department; Sgt. David Freeman, retired, from the Las Vegas police department; Chief Celia S. Hyde, retired, of the Bolton, Mass., police department; retired Graham County, Ariz., Sheriff Richard Mack; and almost half a dozen actively serving law enforcement officers in Texas, Pennsylvania, Utah and others.
According to the original court documents, copies of which were posted by Oath Keepers, "Mr. Irish was court ordered to attend Ending the Violence with Scott Hampton, however, to date, has not completed this program." The court affidavit continued, "The Epsom Police Department stated they were very familiar with Mr. Irish, as they have responded to multiple calls, which involved Mr. Irish and firearms, one of which resulted in a pending charge for possession of a concealed weapon without a permit.
"The division became aware and confirmed that Mr. Irish associated with a militia known as the 'Oath Keepers,' and had purchase several different types of weapons including a rifle, handgun and taser," the court documents said.
Original report here
(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress. If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where posts appear as well as on the primary site. I have reposted the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts HERE or HERE or here
Reunited! Newborn returned to family where father accused of being 'Oath Keeper'
A tiny baby girl snatched from her parents' custody a week ago when her father was accused of being an "Oath Keeper" was returned to her parents today.
According to WND sources close to the case, the accusations against the father, Johnathon Irish, whose fiancée, Stephanie Taylor, is the mother of Cheyenne, have been dropped.
WND originally reported on the case last weekend when the state took the baby, ordering the father to stand with his hands behind his back and frisking him while social workers took the child. The affidavit supporting the actions cited the father's affiliation with the patriotic organization Oath Keepers.
Irish, reached today by telephone by WND, said New Hampshire state law prevents disclosure of details of family court disputes. But the WND source confirmed that the little girl had been returned to the family and there were no future court dates scheduled in the case.
Officials with the state Family Court system could not be reached by WND.
Just hours earlier a protest was held outside the court where the hearing was going on, and as WND reported, officials with Oath Keepers submitted a demand letter to the state's social services agency to remove the reference in the affidavit in the Irish case.
The organization collects affirmations from soldiers and peace officers that they would refuse orders that violate the U.S. Constitution in light of what they perceive as the advance of socialism in the U.S.
Irish had told WND that an affidavit signed by Child Protective Service worker Dana Bickford seeking government custody of newborn Cheyenne a week ago said the agency "became aware and confirmed that Mr. Irish associated with a militia known as the 'Oath Keepers.'"
While officials with Oath Keepers confirmed that there were other issues involved in the case, they were stunned to learn that the court ruling had described their organization as a militia and had referenced participation with them as an accusation.
"This poorly conducted investigation used unsubstantiated and unsupported information regarding our organization. A journey to our website, and a reading of our bylaws, could have easily confirmed what we are and are not," said the Oath Keepers letter, delivered today to state officials.
"We are an association of currently serving and retired police, military, and emergency personnel. We are not a militia. Our goal is simply to educate all current service personnel on their obligations under the law and in particular our Constitution."
WND reported earlier when the dispute erupted, including when Oath Keepers founder Stewart Rhodes wrote on his website that the citation of his organization sends a seriously troubling message.
Details of the resolution of the case were withheld behind the curtain of Family Court restrictions. But Rhodes described it as a "fundamental point" to have government agencies condemning defendants for their political affiliations.
"Talk about chilling speech! If this is allowed to continue, it will chill the speech of not just Mr. Irish, but all Oath Keepers and it will serve as the camel [nose] under the tent for other associations being considered too risky for parents to dare," he continued. "'Don't you dare associate with such and such group, or you could be on 'the list' and then child protective services might come take your kids.'"
While Oath Keepers is not a militia, he said, it would make no difference if it was. "A parent associating with a militia is not engaged in child endangerment and is not evidence of child endangerment," he said.
Oath Keepers' members promise not to obey any order "to disarm the American people," conduct warrantless searches, "detain American citizens as 'unlawful enemy combatants,'" work to impose martial law, invade or subjugate any state, blockade American cities, put Americans in detention camps or "make war against our own people."
Rhodes himself was a U.S. Army paratrooper injured in an parachuting accident, a former firearms instructor and a former member of U.S. Rep. Ron Paul's Washington staff.
The organization's board of directors includes Army veteran Sgt. Dave Freeman, Army veteran Capt. Chauncey Normandin, Navy veteran Capt. Gregory Gooch, Celia S. Hyde of the International Association of Chiefs of Police, all retired.
Others are Marines, members of the Air Force, local law enforcement and even of the U.S. Army Special Forces.
The demand letter apparently was addressed by the court's action, although Rhodes said he'd been given no direct response to the concerns. It said, "As police officers, we have been called all manner of vile names by criminal suspects, but nothing compares to the offensive assertion that to associate with us and our military counterparts is child endangerment. We respectfully request that any reference to Oath Keepers be removed from your affidavit by whatever mechanism New Hampshire law allows or requires."
The letter continued, "On behalf of all of the active duty and retired police and sheriff personnel within our organization, as well as our military and firefighter brothers and sisters, we demand that you remove the offensive verbiage in the affidavit filed by your investigator, Dana Bickford, which states, 'the Division became aware and confirmed that Mr. Irish associated with a militia known as the 'Oath Keepers …''
"By so listing the political associations of a parent as a reason to take a newborn baby from her mother's arms, the affidavit politicizes child protective services. That politicization was unfortunately furthered by the judge in this case who adopted Bickford’s entire affidavit as the Court's 'findings of fact' setting forth the reasons for issuing the order to take the baby."
The letter explains Oath Keepers members "have seen first-hand the heart-rending abuse that children can suffer at the hands of dysfunctional adults. It is to prevent such abuse that child protective services is given great latitude and power. Politics has no place in this process precisely because of the immense power you wield. All that should matter is the welfare of the children, not the politics of the parents. Such politicization not only hurts the families and children involved, but also chills the speech of other parents who now will worry that their political affiliations will be used as grounds for taking their children."
It was signed by Capt. Chauncey Normandin, retired, from the Lowell, Mass., police department; Sgt. David Freeman, retired, from the Las Vegas police department; Chief Celia S. Hyde, retired, of the Bolton, Mass., police department; retired Graham County, Ariz., Sheriff Richard Mack; and almost half a dozen actively serving law enforcement officers in Texas, Pennsylvania, Utah and others.
According to the original court documents, copies of which were posted by Oath Keepers, "Mr. Irish was court ordered to attend Ending the Violence with Scott Hampton, however, to date, has not completed this program." The court affidavit continued, "The Epsom Police Department stated they were very familiar with Mr. Irish, as they have responded to multiple calls, which involved Mr. Irish and firearms, one of which resulted in a pending charge for possession of a concealed weapon without a permit.
"The division became aware and confirmed that Mr. Irish associated with a militia known as the 'Oath Keepers,' and had purchase several different types of weapons including a rifle, handgun and taser," the court documents said.
Original report here
(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress. If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where posts appear as well as on the primary site. I have reposted the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts HERE or HERE or here
Tuesday, October 19, 2010
Murderous Seattle cop could be in trouble
A preliminary finding by Seattle police is that the Aug. 30 fatal shooting of a homeless woodcarver by an officer isn't justified, The Seattle Times reported.
A source confirmed to seattlepi.com that Ian Birk, the officer who fired the fatal shots, has surrendered his gun and badge.
The department has not made a final determination on the shooting. That will come after a six-person jury holds an inquest on the shooting. Inquests, called by the King County Executive, are routine after fatal officer-involved cases. The inquest hasn't been scheduled.
Tim Ford, attorney for Williams' family, said reports of the preliminary finding would be "gratifying" if true.
Ford said neither he nor Williams' family have been given access to the information gathered by the firearms review board. "We are still very eager to see evidence and what information the police have gathered ourselves," Ford said. "We hope this means they'll be releasing that to us soon."
The city's firearms review board concluded its hearing Oct. 4 and presented preliminary findings to Police Chief John Diaz that week. Those findings are confidential. The Times' story cited people familiar with the case.
"Per department policy and to support the integrity of the upcoming King County inquest the department will not comment on any findings or recommendations," a Police Department spokesman said in an October 5. "The firearms review board will reconvene following the evaluation of criminal liability by the inquest jury and King County prosecutor."
Police say during the Aug. 30 confrontation at Boren Avenue and Howell Street, Williams refused multiple commands to drop a knife from 9 feet away -- a distance that police say can present a lethal threat. Williams also had a decades-long history of gross misdemeanor and misdemeanor offenses, and some violent incidents in his past. Birk, who started with the department two years ago, was placed on administrative leave after the shooting.
Rich O'Neill, president of the Seattle Police Officer's Guild and part of the review board, did not comment Thursday on the preliminary findings. In general, he cautioned people making an assumption when the inquest and work of the firearms review board is not completed.
Critics have said Williams was deaf in one ear and was not presenting a threat to the officer, Ian Birk, who was hired in 2008. Williams' knife had a 3-inch blade -- one that is legal under the Seattle Municipal Code. Hundreds of people protested the shooting last month.
In interviews last month, his two brothers said they didn't know if Williams had headphones on at the time of the shooting, but believe he had difficulty understanding the officer's command.
The day after the shooting, Diaz said any blade that can cause a lethal injury would be considered a deadly weapon, and that the 3-inch knife Williams had was definitely capable of causing a lethal injury.
Birk, who fired FOUR rounds, was not armed with a Taser. Seattle Deputy Chief Clark Kimerer, who is heading the firearms review board for the Williams shooting, said 422 officers -- primarily those on patrol -- will be armed with Tasers by the end of the year.
The firearms review board is an internal Seattle Police Department group that reviews any discharge of a firearm by a Seattle police officer. Its purpose is to determine whether an officer's actions conformed to department policy and regulations, training guidelines, and applicable law, according to city officials.
Based upon its findings, the board, which includes a citizen observer, may recommend to the police chief further action or make referrals for further investigation.
Original report here
(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress. If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where posts appear as well as on the primary site. I have reposted the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts HERE or HERE or here
A preliminary finding by Seattle police is that the Aug. 30 fatal shooting of a homeless woodcarver by an officer isn't justified, The Seattle Times reported.
A source confirmed to seattlepi.com that Ian Birk, the officer who fired the fatal shots, has surrendered his gun and badge.
The department has not made a final determination on the shooting. That will come after a six-person jury holds an inquest on the shooting. Inquests, called by the King County Executive, are routine after fatal officer-involved cases. The inquest hasn't been scheduled.
Tim Ford, attorney for Williams' family, said reports of the preliminary finding would be "gratifying" if true.
Ford said neither he nor Williams' family have been given access to the information gathered by the firearms review board. "We are still very eager to see evidence and what information the police have gathered ourselves," Ford said. "We hope this means they'll be releasing that to us soon."
The city's firearms review board concluded its hearing Oct. 4 and presented preliminary findings to Police Chief John Diaz that week. Those findings are confidential. The Times' story cited people familiar with the case.
"Per department policy and to support the integrity of the upcoming King County inquest the department will not comment on any findings or recommendations," a Police Department spokesman said in an October 5. "The firearms review board will reconvene following the evaluation of criminal liability by the inquest jury and King County prosecutor."
Police say during the Aug. 30 confrontation at Boren Avenue and Howell Street, Williams refused multiple commands to drop a knife from 9 feet away -- a distance that police say can present a lethal threat. Williams also had a decades-long history of gross misdemeanor and misdemeanor offenses, and some violent incidents in his past. Birk, who started with the department two years ago, was placed on administrative leave after the shooting.
Rich O'Neill, president of the Seattle Police Officer's Guild and part of the review board, did not comment Thursday on the preliminary findings. In general, he cautioned people making an assumption when the inquest and work of the firearms review board is not completed.
Critics have said Williams was deaf in one ear and was not presenting a threat to the officer, Ian Birk, who was hired in 2008. Williams' knife had a 3-inch blade -- one that is legal under the Seattle Municipal Code. Hundreds of people protested the shooting last month.
In interviews last month, his two brothers said they didn't know if Williams had headphones on at the time of the shooting, but believe he had difficulty understanding the officer's command.
The day after the shooting, Diaz said any blade that can cause a lethal injury would be considered a deadly weapon, and that the 3-inch knife Williams had was definitely capable of causing a lethal injury.
Birk, who fired FOUR rounds, was not armed with a Taser. Seattle Deputy Chief Clark Kimerer, who is heading the firearms review board for the Williams shooting, said 422 officers -- primarily those on patrol -- will be armed with Tasers by the end of the year.
The firearms review board is an internal Seattle Police Department group that reviews any discharge of a firearm by a Seattle police officer. Its purpose is to determine whether an officer's actions conformed to department policy and regulations, training guidelines, and applicable law, according to city officials.
Based upon its findings, the board, which includes a citizen observer, may recommend to the police chief further action or make referrals for further investigation.
Original report here
(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress. If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where posts appear as well as on the primary site. I have reposted the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts HERE or HERE or here
Monday, October 18, 2010
Inexcusable failure to prosecute accomplices of thug Australian cop
See previous post here on 14th. There is plenty of precedent for the prosecution of all cops present at the attacks -- e.g. R v Dytham [1979] Q.B. 722
THE Crime and Misconduct Commission has been urged to re-investigate the Airlie Beach police bashings following the release of disturbing video footage of assaults by jailed former officer Benjamin Price.
The videos show other officers watching and in one case assisting Price during his assaults on handcuffed offenders, but the police service has said there is not enough evidence to charge them.
In a letter sent to the CMC, Queensland Council of Civil Liberties vice-president Terry O'Gorman said there were indications the police handling of the case had been "less than rigorous". "It is submitted there are a number of unaddressed issues in relation to the Airlie Beach matter, which bear an unfortunate similarity to the steps engaged in by various police in relation to the cover-up of the Palm Island affair," the letter reads.
Mr O'Gorman said there were "unsatisfactory aspects" to the Price case that warranted a thorough investigation.
"Why have criminal charges not been laid against the other officers who were present when a fire hose was shoved down the complainant's throat?" Mr O'Gorman said. "Why was Mr Price charged with the lesser offence of assault occasioning bodily harm when on the facts publicly known a charge of torture was clearly open?"
He said other senior criminal lawyers were of the opinion that under the law, the other officers who were present during the assaults could be charged. "Presence in something like that is regarded as encouragement," Mr O'Gorman said. "Secondly, the bloke who hands the police officer the hose is an alleged accomplice. That's criminal law 101."
A CMC spokeswoman said the investigation into officers who observed the assaults was "ongoing". "The CMC will be provided with a report from the QPS Ethical Standards Command. This report will outline the action the ESC is recommending against the officers," she said.
The videos posted by Queensland Police on YouTube have now been viewed by almost 200,000 people and have also been uploaded to other websites in India, New Zealand, the UK and the US.
Mr O'Gorman also criticised the "doctoring" of the footage including the lack of audio, but the CMC spokeswoman said the release of the video was a matter for the QPS.
Original report here
Airlie beach abuse sounds the alarm over a rotten Queensland police culture
The violence dealt out by former officer Benjamin Price points to a grand-scale breakdown within our police force: "They showed no more caution than a bunch of druggies raiding a servo with a stick"
All Queensland police would have been shamed, embarrassed, humiliated and angered by videos showing former officer Benjamin Price strong-arming tiny Renee Toms and water-torturing Timothy Steele. Along with most ofthe 172,000 people who had watched the events on YouTube (as of Friday morning) they would have thought it was one of the lowest, most cowardly and disgusting displays of sadistic power-tripping they had seen.
Well, not of all of them, because the videos seemed to suggest that it was nothing much out of the ordinary at Airlie Beach police station, where officers are seen walking around the violence like you and I might step around a floor cleaner. It was very much business as usual, with a little bit of professional courtesy thrown in as one officer was seen handing Price the fire hose. There didn’t even seem to be the slightest bit of concern - let alone criminal cunning - over the fact that unsavoury events were being captured by video cameras, which they must have known about. They showed no more caution than a bunch of druggies raiding a servo with a stick.
This is the real problem for the Queensland Police Service as it deals with the backwash of a series of appalling events. That one policeman abused his authority is sad but no great surprise. But the fact that of nine police oticers on the periphery of the events that led to Price’s jailing only one, Constable Bree Sonter, did her duty as an officer and human being is shocking.
Five have quit and three are under investigation. Only Sonter has emerged with any credit, although her future in the force might not be a happy one. Throw in Price, and a failure rate of nine out of l0 is not too flash in any circumstance.
Airlie Beach is not exactly Gotham City, so this represents a failure of discipline, purpose, professionalism, process and moral courage on a grand scale. The force is justly proud of the fact that about a quarter of all complaints against officers are now made by police themselves but that cannot alter the fact that more than 50 per cent of those assigned to Airlie Beach were derelict in their duty.
If you subscribe to the rotten apple theory of policing, this barrel was pretty putrid, leaving a smell that has got right up the noses of most Queenslanders. It's not a question of police bashing. lt’s a question of squandered resources and squandered trust.
Think about it. One rogue cops gets off on brutalising people and, because of sins of omission, we lose five other trained officers and have three more under a very dark cloud. One rogue cop goes ape and all the good deeds, good policing and good reputations of thousands of others are trashed. And probably a million bucks is blown on compo for Price’s victims.
Attorney-General Cameron Dick says he is considering an appeal against the leniency of Price’s sentence because of the community outrage over the security camera footage.
They could throw away the key for all I care, but that’s not really the point. The point is that after an individual meltdown there was a collective breakdown in professionalism and process in a force that has more brass than a South American army, more regions than we have states, more districts than a red-headed kid has freckles, more inspectors and sergeants than there are bouncers at a Valley pub and more cops per capita driving desks than any other force in Australia.
Yet, it still seems to go off course with monotonous regularity, We need to know more, including just what happened to the mid-rampage reports of serious misconduct allegedly made about Price by his station oflicer.
ln a hierarchical institution, authority goes downward and responsibility goes upward. Sometimes, responsibility seems to hit a very low ceiling.
The article above by Terry Sweetman appeared (print only) in the Brisbane "Sunday Mail" on 17 October, 2010
(Via Australian Politics)
(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress. If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where posts appear as well as on the primary site. I have reposted the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts HERE or HERE or here
See previous post here on 14th. There is plenty of precedent for the prosecution of all cops present at the attacks -- e.g. R v Dytham [1979] Q.B. 722
THE Crime and Misconduct Commission has been urged to re-investigate the Airlie Beach police bashings following the release of disturbing video footage of assaults by jailed former officer Benjamin Price.
The videos show other officers watching and in one case assisting Price during his assaults on handcuffed offenders, but the police service has said there is not enough evidence to charge them.
In a letter sent to the CMC, Queensland Council of Civil Liberties vice-president Terry O'Gorman said there were indications the police handling of the case had been "less than rigorous". "It is submitted there are a number of unaddressed issues in relation to the Airlie Beach matter, which bear an unfortunate similarity to the steps engaged in by various police in relation to the cover-up of the Palm Island affair," the letter reads.
Mr O'Gorman said there were "unsatisfactory aspects" to the Price case that warranted a thorough investigation.
"Why have criminal charges not been laid against the other officers who were present when a fire hose was shoved down the complainant's throat?" Mr O'Gorman said. "Why was Mr Price charged with the lesser offence of assault occasioning bodily harm when on the facts publicly known a charge of torture was clearly open?"
He said other senior criminal lawyers were of the opinion that under the law, the other officers who were present during the assaults could be charged. "Presence in something like that is regarded as encouragement," Mr O'Gorman said. "Secondly, the bloke who hands the police officer the hose is an alleged accomplice. That's criminal law 101."
A CMC spokeswoman said the investigation into officers who observed the assaults was "ongoing". "The CMC will be provided with a report from the QPS Ethical Standards Command. This report will outline the action the ESC is recommending against the officers," she said.
The videos posted by Queensland Police on YouTube have now been viewed by almost 200,000 people and have also been uploaded to other websites in India, New Zealand, the UK and the US.
Mr O'Gorman also criticised the "doctoring" of the footage including the lack of audio, but the CMC spokeswoman said the release of the video was a matter for the QPS.
Original report here
Airlie beach abuse sounds the alarm over a rotten Queensland police culture
The violence dealt out by former officer Benjamin Price points to a grand-scale breakdown within our police force: "They showed no more caution than a bunch of druggies raiding a servo with a stick"
All Queensland police would have been shamed, embarrassed, humiliated and angered by videos showing former officer Benjamin Price strong-arming tiny Renee Toms and water-torturing Timothy Steele. Along with most ofthe 172,000 people who had watched the events on YouTube (as of Friday morning) they would have thought it was one of the lowest, most cowardly and disgusting displays of sadistic power-tripping they had seen.
Well, not of all of them, because the videos seemed to suggest that it was nothing much out of the ordinary at Airlie Beach police station, where officers are seen walking around the violence like you and I might step around a floor cleaner. It was very much business as usual, with a little bit of professional courtesy thrown in as one officer was seen handing Price the fire hose. There didn’t even seem to be the slightest bit of concern - let alone criminal cunning - over the fact that unsavoury events were being captured by video cameras, which they must have known about. They showed no more caution than a bunch of druggies raiding a servo with a stick.
This is the real problem for the Queensland Police Service as it deals with the backwash of a series of appalling events. That one policeman abused his authority is sad but no great surprise. But the fact that of nine police oticers on the periphery of the events that led to Price’s jailing only one, Constable Bree Sonter, did her duty as an officer and human being is shocking.
Five have quit and three are under investigation. Only Sonter has emerged with any credit, although her future in the force might not be a happy one. Throw in Price, and a failure rate of nine out of l0 is not too flash in any circumstance.
Airlie Beach is not exactly Gotham City, so this represents a failure of discipline, purpose, professionalism, process and moral courage on a grand scale. The force is justly proud of the fact that about a quarter of all complaints against officers are now made by police themselves but that cannot alter the fact that more than 50 per cent of those assigned to Airlie Beach were derelict in their duty.
If you subscribe to the rotten apple theory of policing, this barrel was pretty putrid, leaving a smell that has got right up the noses of most Queenslanders. It's not a question of police bashing. lt’s a question of squandered resources and squandered trust.
Think about it. One rogue cops gets off on brutalising people and, because of sins of omission, we lose five other trained officers and have three more under a very dark cloud. One rogue cop goes ape and all the good deeds, good policing and good reputations of thousands of others are trashed. And probably a million bucks is blown on compo for Price’s victims.
Attorney-General Cameron Dick says he is considering an appeal against the leniency of Price’s sentence because of the community outrage over the security camera footage.
They could throw away the key for all I care, but that’s not really the point. The point is that after an individual meltdown there was a collective breakdown in professionalism and process in a force that has more brass than a South American army, more regions than we have states, more districts than a red-headed kid has freckles, more inspectors and sergeants than there are bouncers at a Valley pub and more cops per capita driving desks than any other force in Australia.
Yet, it still seems to go off course with monotonous regularity, We need to know more, including just what happened to the mid-rampage reports of serious misconduct allegedly made about Price by his station oflicer.
ln a hierarchical institution, authority goes downward and responsibility goes upward. Sometimes, responsibility seems to hit a very low ceiling.
The article above by Terry Sweetman appeared (print only) in the Brisbane "Sunday Mail" on 17 October, 2010
(Via Australian Politics)
(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress. If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where posts appear as well as on the primary site. I have reposted the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts HERE or HERE or here
Sunday, October 17, 2010
Thuggish AZ cop finally kills an innocent
More information on the past behavior of a Phoenix police officer charged with second-degree murder reveals a video of him playing what he called a "prank" on a homeless woman.
In 2005, Phoenix police Officer Richard Chrisman and his partner were field training fellow officers when a surveillance video caught them pulling the "prank" on a homeless woman who was mentally ill.
The video at first shows Chrisman as he twirls his police baton in front of the woman, eventually leaning toward her.
As two other officer observe the woman, Chrisman and his partner walk to the the trunk of their squad car. The video clearly shows Chrisman slip his partner some drug paraphernalia so she could pretend she found it on the woman.
Chrisman and his partner later admitted they were just messing with the woman to see how she would respond. "I guess me and all my wisdom thought it would be a good idea, funny you know, to play a prank," Chrisman states in a police department internal affairs report.
Chrisman and his partner smile as they leave the car. The female officer approaches the woman from behind to search her. While's she's patting her down, she reaches behind her back and Chrisman hands her the paraphernalia.
The female officer at first looks down the back of the woman's dress. Next, she reaches down the back of the woman's dress as if retrieving something. She pulls out the paraphernalia and shows the woman, pretending that she just found it.
Police arrested the woman on a warrant that day but did not charge her with possession. Chrisman was suspended for one day without pay as a consequence.
Chrisman has found himself in much more serious trouble lately. He was indicted on Friday for second-degree murder in the shooting death of 29-year-old Daniel Rodriguez.
Chrisman is accused of shooting and killing Rodriguez during a domestic disturbance call. According to police reports, Chrisman pulled his handgun, placed it against Rodriguez's head and told him he didn't need a warrant after Rodriguez ordered him out of his Phoenix home Oct. 5.
Chrisman shocked Rodriguez with a stun gun, fatally shot his pit bull, then finally shot and killed Rodriguez, according to a court document. A Maricopa County Superior Court Judge issued a summons for Chrisman.
Chrisman initially faced charges of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon. He was arrested after Officer Sergio Virgillo, who provided backup the day of the shooting, claimed that Chrisman's actions were extreme. Virgillo told investigators that Rodriguez did not have a weapon and did not pose a threat.
Mehrens has said that his client was simply doing his job and drew his weapon in self-defense.
There have been other times Chrisman's actions have come under scrutiny. Harris said Chrisman and another officer had been disciplined and suspended in the past after being accused of playing a "joke" on someone during an arrest.
"I think the community should be outraged and upset. Any of us would be," Harris said. "But the real question is how do we react and what is our response?" "We will do everything humanly possible to make sure this doesn't happen again," Harris said.
Original report here
(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress. If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where posts appear as well as on the primary site. I have reposted the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts HERE or HERE or here
More information on the past behavior of a Phoenix police officer charged with second-degree murder reveals a video of him playing what he called a "prank" on a homeless woman.
In 2005, Phoenix police Officer Richard Chrisman and his partner were field training fellow officers when a surveillance video caught them pulling the "prank" on a homeless woman who was mentally ill.
The video at first shows Chrisman as he twirls his police baton in front of the woman, eventually leaning toward her.
As two other officer observe the woman, Chrisman and his partner walk to the the trunk of their squad car. The video clearly shows Chrisman slip his partner some drug paraphernalia so she could pretend she found it on the woman.
Chrisman and his partner later admitted they were just messing with the woman to see how she would respond. "I guess me and all my wisdom thought it would be a good idea, funny you know, to play a prank," Chrisman states in a police department internal affairs report.
Chrisman and his partner smile as they leave the car. The female officer approaches the woman from behind to search her. While's she's patting her down, she reaches behind her back and Chrisman hands her the paraphernalia.
The female officer at first looks down the back of the woman's dress. Next, she reaches down the back of the woman's dress as if retrieving something. She pulls out the paraphernalia and shows the woman, pretending that she just found it.
Police arrested the woman on a warrant that day but did not charge her with possession. Chrisman was suspended for one day without pay as a consequence.
Chrisman has found himself in much more serious trouble lately. He was indicted on Friday for second-degree murder in the shooting death of 29-year-old Daniel Rodriguez.
Chrisman is accused of shooting and killing Rodriguez during a domestic disturbance call. According to police reports, Chrisman pulled his handgun, placed it against Rodriguez's head and told him he didn't need a warrant after Rodriguez ordered him out of his Phoenix home Oct. 5.
Chrisman shocked Rodriguez with a stun gun, fatally shot his pit bull, then finally shot and killed Rodriguez, according to a court document. A Maricopa County Superior Court Judge issued a summons for Chrisman.
Chrisman initially faced charges of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon. He was arrested after Officer Sergio Virgillo, who provided backup the day of the shooting, claimed that Chrisman's actions were extreme. Virgillo told investigators that Rodriguez did not have a weapon and did not pose a threat.
Mehrens has said that his client was simply doing his job and drew his weapon in self-defense.
There have been other times Chrisman's actions have come under scrutiny. Harris said Chrisman and another officer had been disciplined and suspended in the past after being accused of playing a "joke" on someone during an arrest.
"I think the community should be outraged and upset. Any of us would be," Harris said. "But the real question is how do we react and what is our response?" "We will do everything humanly possible to make sure this doesn't happen again," Harris said.
Original report here
(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress. If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where posts appear as well as on the primary site. I have reposted the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts HERE or HERE or here
Saturday, October 16, 2010
A chance to help Bradford Metcalf, an American political prisoner
Of all the commentaries I’ve written in my 20 years as publisher of Backwoods Home Magazine, the one that still haunts me to this day is titled, “America, land of the free …ha, ha, ha!,” which appeared in Issue No. 104, the March/April 2007 issue. It is about Matt Bandy and Bradford Metcalf, both wrongfully prosecuted by the U.S. Government.
Bradford Metcalf remains in prison these past 12 years on trumped-up charges concerning weapons possession, but the Supreme Court may hear his case. I got the following email this evening from the Metcalf family:
The Supreme Court will confer regarding “10-6452 Metcalf v. US” on Oct. 15, 2010.
Metcalf was convicted in 1998 of Conspiracy to Possess Automatic Weapons and 8 other possession charges (no violence) and sentenced to 40 years (he acted as his own attorney – his jury thought he would get 3 to 5 years…). You can contact the Supreme Court Public Information Office to urge their consideration at this address:
http://www.supremecourt.gov/contact/contact_pio.aspx
Please join me in contacting the Supremes to consider this case. Bradford Metcalf is a political prisoner left over from the Janet Reno/Bill Clinton crackdown on conservative dissidents in the wake of Waco and Ruby Ridge. Unfortunately, he is not the only political prisoner still languishing in federal penitentiaries.
Here is a chance to at least speak up on behalf of one nearly forgotten political prisoner.
Original report here
Background
Metcalf was indicted, tried and convicted for a “conspiracy,” which was created solely in the mind of federal prosecutor, Lloyd K. Meyer. Meyer had political ambitions and needed a “big case” to make a name for himself. So, he created one.
One of the elements of this prosecutor-created conspiracy was “possession of machine-guns.” But Metcalf had no machine-guns and Meyer knew it. Prior to the trial, Meyer furnished Metcalf with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (BATF) regulations concerning machine-guns, which plainly stated that the Browning .50 caliber and .30 caliber “machine-guns” in his possession without the right sideplates are not “machine-guns.”
This didn’t stop Meyer. In his closing argument to the jury, Meyer said Metcalf had the right sideplates buried on his property. But no evidence was introduced during the trial to show that Metcalf had the sideplates in his possession.
The jury dutifully convicted Metcalf of all the charges on the indictment. Judge Richard Alan Enslen of the Western District of Michigan then sentenced Metcalf to 40 years in federal prison.
The first count of the Metcalf indictment charged a “conspiracy.” A federal conspiracy charge consists of an agreement to commit an illegal act with an act performed. The agreement to commit the illegal act—the object of the conspiracy—is whatever the prosecutor says it is when he drafts the indictment.
Metcalf and his two co-defendants, Randy Graham and Ken Carter, had a few telephone conversations about the sorry state of the federal government in general and the federal judiciary in particular. Those telephone conversations were secretly wire-tapped and recorded by the government.
Meyer wrote the Metcalf indictment before he submitted it to the grand jury for the usual rubber-stamp approval. The original reason for a grand jury investigation and grand jury secrecy was to keep governmental attorneys out of the criminal investigation and out of the grand jury room.
Metcalf, along with Graham, submitted 15 pre-trial motions that pointed out the defect in their case and the indictment. They received a detailed six-page denial of all their motions on Sept. 23, 1998, signed by Judge Enslen. More than a month later, in open court, Judge Enslen told Metcalf he hadn’t read the indictment and didn’t even know what Metcalf was charged with.
Judge Enslen refused to allow Metcalf an expert witness to testify as to the legality of his weapons. His reason: “Because you didn’t have a lawyer.” Metcalf fought his case pro se because he didn’t trust anyone who was part of the system to fight the system.
More here
(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress. If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where posts appear as well as on the primary site. I have reposted the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts HERE or HERE or here
Of all the commentaries I’ve written in my 20 years as publisher of Backwoods Home Magazine, the one that still haunts me to this day is titled, “America, land of the free …ha, ha, ha!,” which appeared in Issue No. 104, the March/April 2007 issue. It is about Matt Bandy and Bradford Metcalf, both wrongfully prosecuted by the U.S. Government.
Bradford Metcalf remains in prison these past 12 years on trumped-up charges concerning weapons possession, but the Supreme Court may hear his case. I got the following email this evening from the Metcalf family:
The Supreme Court will confer regarding “10-6452 Metcalf v. US” on Oct. 15, 2010.
Metcalf was convicted in 1998 of Conspiracy to Possess Automatic Weapons and 8 other possession charges (no violence) and sentenced to 40 years (he acted as his own attorney – his jury thought he would get 3 to 5 years…). You can contact the Supreme Court Public Information Office to urge their consideration at this address:
http://www.supremecourt.gov/contact/contact_pio.aspx
Please join me in contacting the Supremes to consider this case. Bradford Metcalf is a political prisoner left over from the Janet Reno/Bill Clinton crackdown on conservative dissidents in the wake of Waco and Ruby Ridge. Unfortunately, he is not the only political prisoner still languishing in federal penitentiaries.
Here is a chance to at least speak up on behalf of one nearly forgotten political prisoner.
Original report here
Background
Metcalf was indicted, tried and convicted for a “conspiracy,” which was created solely in the mind of federal prosecutor, Lloyd K. Meyer. Meyer had political ambitions and needed a “big case” to make a name for himself. So, he created one.
One of the elements of this prosecutor-created conspiracy was “possession of machine-guns.” But Metcalf had no machine-guns and Meyer knew it. Prior to the trial, Meyer furnished Metcalf with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (BATF) regulations concerning machine-guns, which plainly stated that the Browning .50 caliber and .30 caliber “machine-guns” in his possession without the right sideplates are not “machine-guns.”
This didn’t stop Meyer. In his closing argument to the jury, Meyer said Metcalf had the right sideplates buried on his property. But no evidence was introduced during the trial to show that Metcalf had the sideplates in his possession.
The jury dutifully convicted Metcalf of all the charges on the indictment. Judge Richard Alan Enslen of the Western District of Michigan then sentenced Metcalf to 40 years in federal prison.
The first count of the Metcalf indictment charged a “conspiracy.” A federal conspiracy charge consists of an agreement to commit an illegal act with an act performed. The agreement to commit the illegal act—the object of the conspiracy—is whatever the prosecutor says it is when he drafts the indictment.
Metcalf and his two co-defendants, Randy Graham and Ken Carter, had a few telephone conversations about the sorry state of the federal government in general and the federal judiciary in particular. Those telephone conversations were secretly wire-tapped and recorded by the government.
Meyer wrote the Metcalf indictment before he submitted it to the grand jury for the usual rubber-stamp approval. The original reason for a grand jury investigation and grand jury secrecy was to keep governmental attorneys out of the criminal investigation and out of the grand jury room.
Metcalf, along with Graham, submitted 15 pre-trial motions that pointed out the defect in their case and the indictment. They received a detailed six-page denial of all their motions on Sept. 23, 1998, signed by Judge Enslen. More than a month later, in open court, Judge Enslen told Metcalf he hadn’t read the indictment and didn’t even know what Metcalf was charged with.
Judge Enslen refused to allow Metcalf an expert witness to testify as to the legality of his weapons. His reason: “Because you didn’t have a lawyer.” Metcalf fought his case pro se because he didn’t trust anyone who was part of the system to fight the system.
More here
(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress. If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where posts appear as well as on the primary site. I have reposted the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts HERE or HERE or here
Friday, October 15, 2010
Killer Cops in Your Town?
On New Year’s Day, 2009, Bay Area Rapid Transit policeman Johannes Mehserle shot an unarmed black man as he lay face down on an Oakland, California BART station platform. Oscar Grant died the next morning. Like the Rodney King beating, the event was video-recorded by bystanders. As a result, there is absolutely no doubt Oscar Grant was face down, policemen kneeling on him, when Mehserle drew his pistol and shot Grant in the back at point blank range.
When a Los Angeles jury found Mehserle guilty of the lesser charge of involuntary manslaughter, instead of voluntary manslaughter or second degree murder, Oakland rioted.
An isolated case? Hardly. If you have a strong stomach, then Google “Police Brutality.” You will be astounded by scenes of unnecessary violence and videos of policemen using clubs and fists to beat women and children, the aged, and other defenseless citizens. The videos include a prone man being kicked in the head, an innocent young man slammed into a wall leaving him in a coma, and a handcuffed woman being beaten in a police station. Other stories include a 15-year old shot and killed while he was playing ‘cops and robbers,’ an 11-year old ‘unruly’ child Tasered at school, a 15-year old Tasered to death, and a citizen beaten by Scott Crawford, a Chicago policeman accused of brutality on seven occasions.
Even worse are policemen using deadly force—their guns—to kill unarmed people. Like the 2009 killing in Oakland, seven New Orleans policemen shot Adolph Grimes fourteen times on New Year’s Day. He was hit twelve times in the back. And now there is the killing of Erik Scott by three policemen of the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police.
An army veteran, Erik Scott graduated from the U.S. Military Academy at West Point in the class of 1994, earned a Masters Degree from Duke, and was engaged in a career selling medical devices for Boston Scientific. On July 10th, Scott and his girlfriend were shopping in a Las Vegas Costco when an employee noticed he had a gun under his shirt and demanded he leave the store. Scott protested, saying he had a concealed weapon license, but the employee insisted and Scott left. The employee called the Las Vegas police anyway. When Scott reached the parking lot, he was confronted by three policemen with drawn guns. Scott tried to comply with their various demands, but they shot him in the chest and leg.
When Scott fell, the three Las Vegas policemen shot him five more times—in the back.
Testimony at the coroner’s inquest was confused, but Scott family lawyer Ross Goodman has a list of 25 eyewitnesses who will testify Erik Scott did not threaten the three policemen. Goodman did not bring his witnesses to the inquest because he feared that the district attorney’s office, which works closely with police and questions inquest witnesses, would “browbeat” them. After six days of testimony, the coroner’s verdict was the killing of Erik Scott was justified. The family will sue the police.
Is police brutality and police killings increasing? Judging from the number of photographs and videos on the internet, it appears it is rising all across the country—or that Americans are finally outraged by police excesses.
Numbers are difficult to find, since police departments are not cheerfully forthcoming. That is in spite of the Police Accountability Act requiring the Attorney General to compile data on excessive police force. Of course, Congress failed to fund the law. Not only that, there is nothing in the law requiring police to keep records. Nor does the law criminalize excessive force by police as human rights violations. One must assume our diligent police unions had a hidden hand in drafting the toothless legislation.
There is an aspect to the Scott case that applies to your city. The policeman who fired first, William Mosher, had his photograph in the Las Vegas Sun. His face appeared puffy and swollen. Such symptoms may be from use of a legal steroid (Prednisone) for treatment of Crohn’s Disease. A side effect of that steroid is mania and emotional instability. But even if Mosher is not taking Prednisone, the question arises: Is he taking any controlled substance? Drugs? Alcohol? Are the police unions doing anything besides promoting higher pay and benefits?
Police refer to citizens as “civilians,” as if they are an army. But real soldiers are held to a higher standard than citizens because they carry deadly weapons. Real soldiers do not take unauthorized controlled substances when on duty, or they are severely punished. Are police held to that standard?
Do you think police unions champion drug testing and promote the public’s safety from killer cops?
Original report here
(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress. If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where posts appear as well as on the primary site. I have reposted the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts HERE or HERE or here
On New Year’s Day, 2009, Bay Area Rapid Transit policeman Johannes Mehserle shot an unarmed black man as he lay face down on an Oakland, California BART station platform. Oscar Grant died the next morning. Like the Rodney King beating, the event was video-recorded by bystanders. As a result, there is absolutely no doubt Oscar Grant was face down, policemen kneeling on him, when Mehserle drew his pistol and shot Grant in the back at point blank range.
When a Los Angeles jury found Mehserle guilty of the lesser charge of involuntary manslaughter, instead of voluntary manslaughter or second degree murder, Oakland rioted.
An isolated case? Hardly. If you have a strong stomach, then Google “Police Brutality.” You will be astounded by scenes of unnecessary violence and videos of policemen using clubs and fists to beat women and children, the aged, and other defenseless citizens. The videos include a prone man being kicked in the head, an innocent young man slammed into a wall leaving him in a coma, and a handcuffed woman being beaten in a police station. Other stories include a 15-year old shot and killed while he was playing ‘cops and robbers,’ an 11-year old ‘unruly’ child Tasered at school, a 15-year old Tasered to death, and a citizen beaten by Scott Crawford, a Chicago policeman accused of brutality on seven occasions.
Even worse are policemen using deadly force—their guns—to kill unarmed people. Like the 2009 killing in Oakland, seven New Orleans policemen shot Adolph Grimes fourteen times on New Year’s Day. He was hit twelve times in the back. And now there is the killing of Erik Scott by three policemen of the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police.
An army veteran, Erik Scott graduated from the U.S. Military Academy at West Point in the class of 1994, earned a Masters Degree from Duke, and was engaged in a career selling medical devices for Boston Scientific. On July 10th, Scott and his girlfriend were shopping in a Las Vegas Costco when an employee noticed he had a gun under his shirt and demanded he leave the store. Scott protested, saying he had a concealed weapon license, but the employee insisted and Scott left. The employee called the Las Vegas police anyway. When Scott reached the parking lot, he was confronted by three policemen with drawn guns. Scott tried to comply with their various demands, but they shot him in the chest and leg.
When Scott fell, the three Las Vegas policemen shot him five more times—in the back.
Testimony at the coroner’s inquest was confused, but Scott family lawyer Ross Goodman has a list of 25 eyewitnesses who will testify Erik Scott did not threaten the three policemen. Goodman did not bring his witnesses to the inquest because he feared that the district attorney’s office, which works closely with police and questions inquest witnesses, would “browbeat” them. After six days of testimony, the coroner’s verdict was the killing of Erik Scott was justified. The family will sue the police.
Is police brutality and police killings increasing? Judging from the number of photographs and videos on the internet, it appears it is rising all across the country—or that Americans are finally outraged by police excesses.
Numbers are difficult to find, since police departments are not cheerfully forthcoming. That is in spite of the Police Accountability Act requiring the Attorney General to compile data on excessive police force. Of course, Congress failed to fund the law. Not only that, there is nothing in the law requiring police to keep records. Nor does the law criminalize excessive force by police as human rights violations. One must assume our diligent police unions had a hidden hand in drafting the toothless legislation.
There is an aspect to the Scott case that applies to your city. The policeman who fired first, William Mosher, had his photograph in the Las Vegas Sun. His face appeared puffy and swollen. Such symptoms may be from use of a legal steroid (Prednisone) for treatment of Crohn’s Disease. A side effect of that steroid is mania and emotional instability. But even if Mosher is not taking Prednisone, the question arises: Is he taking any controlled substance? Drugs? Alcohol? Are the police unions doing anything besides promoting higher pay and benefits?
Police refer to citizens as “civilians,” as if they are an army. But real soldiers are held to a higher standard than citizens because they carry deadly weapons. Real soldiers do not take unauthorized controlled substances when on duty, or they are severely punished. Are police held to that standard?
Do you think police unions champion drug testing and promote the public’s safety from killer cops?
Original report here
(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress. If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where posts appear as well as on the primary site. I have reposted the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts HERE or HERE or here
Thursday, October 14, 2010
Footage shows Australian cop bashing handcuffed tourists
POLICE have posted disturbing video footage of a Queensland officer's thuggish assaults on alleged offenders at Airlie Beach police station, a day after he was sentenced to jail over the incidents.
The first video shows the then Senior Constable Benjamin Price throwing a slightly built, handcuffed woman to the ground then pulling her up by the hair.
Another officer walks around him while the assault is going on, and does not appear to say anything - although there is no sound in the videos.
In the second, Price is out of screen for part of the video before he drags a handcuffed offender up to a wall.
There is blood over the man’s nose and mouth and another officer then hands Price a fire hose, which he shoves in the victim’s face. The assault goes on for several minutes and is difficult to watch.
Police said the videos had been made publicly available online in recognition of the public interest in the matter. Acting Commissioner Ian Stewart said there was no place for such conduct in the Queensland Police Service.
Price was yesterday sentenced in the Townsville District Court to 27 months jail after pleading guilty to four counts of serious assault. He will be eligible for parole after nine months, in July 2011.
In sentencing, Judge Stuart Durward condemned his actions as “gratuitously violent, callous and contemptible”. “Your actions were grossly excessive. You abused your authority.”
Original report here
(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress. If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where posts appear as well as on the primary site. I have reposted the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts HERE or HERE or here
POLICE have posted disturbing video footage of a Queensland officer's thuggish assaults on alleged offenders at Airlie Beach police station, a day after he was sentenced to jail over the incidents.
The first video shows the then Senior Constable Benjamin Price throwing a slightly built, handcuffed woman to the ground then pulling her up by the hair.
Another officer walks around him while the assault is going on, and does not appear to say anything - although there is no sound in the videos.
In the second, Price is out of screen for part of the video before he drags a handcuffed offender up to a wall.
There is blood over the man’s nose and mouth and another officer then hands Price a fire hose, which he shoves in the victim’s face. The assault goes on for several minutes and is difficult to watch.
Police said the videos had been made publicly available online in recognition of the public interest in the matter. Acting Commissioner Ian Stewart said there was no place for such conduct in the Queensland Police Service.
Price was yesterday sentenced in the Townsville District Court to 27 months jail after pleading guilty to four counts of serious assault. He will be eligible for parole after nine months, in July 2011.
In sentencing, Judge Stuart Durward condemned his actions as “gratuitously violent, callous and contemptible”. “Your actions were grossly excessive. You abused your authority.”
Original report here
(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress. If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where posts appear as well as on the primary site. I have reposted the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts HERE or HERE or here
Wednesday, October 13, 2010
New Orleans DA's office trying to dodge penalty for deliberate wrongful comviction
The Supreme Court back went back into session Monday, and one case that will watched closely in New Orleans is set for oral arguments Wednesday.
In the case of Thompson vs. Connick, former death row inmate John Thompson was awarded $14 million to compensate for his wrongful conviction for murder. Thompson was 22 years old when he was convicted of killing hotel executive Ray Liuzza during a robbery.
He was weeks away from execution when his attorneys showed that prosecutors under former District Attorney Harry Connick intentionally withheld a crime lab report that helped prove his innocence. Thompson served 18 years in prison – 14 on death row – before he was retried in 2003.
At that second trial, a jury came back with a not guilty verdict after deliberating for only 35 minutes.
At issue before the high court is whether district attorneys can be forced to pay damages for failing to properly train prosecutors on how to handle evidence favorable to defendants. Lower courts upheld Thompson’s civil court judgment, putting the district attorney’s office on the defensive to overturn a judgment it says will bankrupt the office.
Assistant Attorney General Kyle Duncan will argue on behalf of the district attorneys office, while a team of out-of-state attorneys will represent Thompson. Several local attorneys are flying to Washington to hear the oral arguments first-hand, including Emily Maw, director of Innocence Project New Orleans.
“For prosecutors who withhold evidence, there actually are very rarely consequences, except the reversal of convictions down the line,” Maw said. “When people withhold evidence, innocent people go to prison. And there, as yet, has been no good system of accountability put in place.”
Thompson now serves as the director of Resurrection After Exoneration, a local organization he started after his release to help exonerated inmates readjust to society.
Original report here
(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress. If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where posts appear as well as on the primary site. I have reposted the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts HERE or HERE or here
The Supreme Court back went back into session Monday, and one case that will watched closely in New Orleans is set for oral arguments Wednesday.
In the case of Thompson vs. Connick, former death row inmate John Thompson was awarded $14 million to compensate for his wrongful conviction for murder. Thompson was 22 years old when he was convicted of killing hotel executive Ray Liuzza during a robbery.
He was weeks away from execution when his attorneys showed that prosecutors under former District Attorney Harry Connick intentionally withheld a crime lab report that helped prove his innocence. Thompson served 18 years in prison – 14 on death row – before he was retried in 2003.
At that second trial, a jury came back with a not guilty verdict after deliberating for only 35 minutes.
At issue before the high court is whether district attorneys can be forced to pay damages for failing to properly train prosecutors on how to handle evidence favorable to defendants. Lower courts upheld Thompson’s civil court judgment, putting the district attorney’s office on the defensive to overturn a judgment it says will bankrupt the office.
Assistant Attorney General Kyle Duncan will argue on behalf of the district attorneys office, while a team of out-of-state attorneys will represent Thompson. Several local attorneys are flying to Washington to hear the oral arguments first-hand, including Emily Maw, director of Innocence Project New Orleans.
“For prosecutors who withhold evidence, there actually are very rarely consequences, except the reversal of convictions down the line,” Maw said. “When people withhold evidence, innocent people go to prison. And there, as yet, has been no good system of accountability put in place.”
Thompson now serves as the director of Resurrection After Exoneration, a local organization he started after his release to help exonerated inmates readjust to society.
Original report here
(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress. If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where posts appear as well as on the primary site. I have reposted the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts HERE or HERE or here
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
