CANADA'S LONG-RUNNING MILGAARD ENQUIRY EVENTUALLY LURCHES TO A CLOSE

It cannot do anything to the disgraceful police involved so it sounds like an effort at a whitewash -- "poor misunderstood police" the most likely result

A judge who has spent nearly two years hearing testimony about why David Milgaard was wrongfully jailed for murder must now decide whether the case was a "recipe for disaster" cooked up by a flawed justice system or a star-crossed series of coincidences and "honest mistakes" by authorities. Justice Edward MacCallum heard final arguments Monday at a public inquiry into Milgaard's wrongful conviction. Milgaard spent 23 years behind bars for the 1969 rape and murder of Saskatoon nursing aide Gail Miller. It was a crime DNA evidence eventually proved he didn't commit.

Milgaard's lawyer, Hersh Wolch, argued that Milgaard was sent to prison because Saskatoon police and prosecutors had tunnel vision - they believed Milgaard was guilty and focused all their efforts on proving it. Milgaard was then prevented from clearing his name by a federal Justice Department that refused to admit it was wrong, even as Milgaard's mother Joyce and her supporters began to uncover evidence in the early 1990s that someone else may have committed the crime. "It's never been suggested that anybody was trying to frame an innocent person. It's that they went into a tunnel and they went down that tunnel and they did not deviate from going down that tunnel," Wolch told MacCallum. "Tunnel vision, indifference and blind loyalties to the system are recipes for disaster."

Wolch pointed to the rapist that was operating in Saskatoon around the time Miller was murdered. In the late 1990s DNA proved that the rapist, Larry Fisher, was the real killer. Fisher had lived in the basement of the home Milgaard was visiting on the morning of the attack. The inquiry has heard how police originally considered that the then-unidentified rapist could have killed Miller, but when one of Milgaard's friends came forward pointing the finger at Milgaard, that lead was never followed up on.

Wolch's comments were dismissed by lawyers representing police and prosecutors at the inquiry. Catherine Knox, the lawyer for Bobs Caldwell, the Crown prosecutor at the original trial, said mistakes were made, but there was never any intent to convict an innocent man. "Mr. Caldwell . . . is a man who acted with honour and with integrity throughout the course of this process," Knox said. "But he is a man and men . . . make mistakes. They were mistakes that were made in honest good faith."

That was echoed by Richard Elson, the lawyer for the Saskatoon Police Department, who recalled the inquiry testimony of an expert on the English system for reviewing wrongful convictions. "Wrongful convictions can and do occur . . . despite the honest and reasonable efforts of honest and reasonable people," Elson said.

Elson did offer an apology to Milgaard on behalf of Saskatoon police Chief Clive Weighill - something his predecessors never gave. Weighill "very much regrets the suffering" Milgaard endured and the role the police service played in that, said Elson, although he emphasized the apology was not an admission of improper conduct.

Knox scoffed at Wolch's assertion that Milgaard's supporters never suggested anybody was trying to frame an innocent person. She pointed to news articles from the 1980s, when the Milgaards were trying to build support for their cause. Knox called the allegations of wrongdoing the Milgaards made a "campaign of character assassination." Most of the allegations have not been borne out in the evidence brought forward at the inquiry.

Garrett Wilson, the lawyer acting on behalf of Serge Kujawa, the director of public prosecutions who handled Milgaard's original appeal, also took issue with Milgaard supporters and their "shotgun approach" to criticizing justice officials as they tried to get the case reopened. "That (prosecutors) could be accused of deliberate deception in the conduct of their responsibilities as members of the justice system of Saskatchewan is horrendous, monstrous," Wilson said.

MacCallum will now have to write his final report. He has heard from 114 witnesses over more than 190 hearing days since the inquiry began in January 2005. The previous testimony of 19 others was read into the record. Milgaard testified via video. The hearings are forecast to cost the Saskatchewan government about $10 million, the same amount Milgaard was paid in compensation for his ordeal.

The judge cannot find criminal or civil responsibility, but can make recommendations to try to prevent something similar from happening again. The inquiry has faced the perception from the start that everything was already known about the Milgaard case. MacCallum took a parting shot at anyone who might think the proceeding was a waste of money. "As I see it, the Milgaard affair has cast a long shadow over the administration of justice in this province," he said. "Money spent to maintain or restore public confidence in the administration of justice is an essential cost, just as is money spent to discover the causes of wrongful conviction and ways to avoid them."

Report here



(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today)

INDIANA: A DUBIOUS PROSECUTION FAILS -- FOR ONCE

A good precedent for stopping lazy prosecutions: "Justice delayed is justice denied"

Charges against an Anderson man have been dropped after prosecutors failed to bring him to trial in a timely manner, a judge ruled Wednesday. Two murder charges and a single count of arson resulting in bodily injury were dropped against Rex David Delph, 42, in connection with the 2004 deaths of his wife, Robynn, and son, Joshua.

Specifically, Madison Circuit Court Judge Fredrick Spencer ruled the prosecutor’s office didn’t share evidence in a timely manner and violated Delph’s right to have a trial within a year of his being charged. “Now, on the eve of the trial, the state unearths physical evidence ... which the defendant had been told did not exist,” Spencer writes in his order dropping the charges. “The defense had been provided photographs of two decorative oil lamps that according to the state could be used to start or accelerate the fatal fire. This delay — so defense experts could examine the physical evidence crucial to both sides — is without question attributed to the state.”

Madison County Prosecutor Rodney Cummings disagreed with Spencer’s decision. “I think it’s very disappointing,” Cummings said, “and an insult to the Anderson Police Department and Anderson Fire Department.” He said the pair of oil lamps couldn’t be located and weren’t going to be introduced during trial, meaning they were grounds for delaying the case. He also said Spencer is blaming his office for the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms for not sharing potential evidence with the defense. “We objected to every continuance,” Cummings said. “ATF didn’t do it, and he blames the state. “His decision is just hard to understand. But we’ve grown used to that with Judge Spencer.” Cummings said his office will appeal Spencer’s decision, and Delph could yet face a jury trial. “We will make every attempt to appeal this case,” Cummings said.

Delph, reached by phone Wednesday, declined comment, referring questions to his attorney, Anderson-based Zaki Ali. “It is pleasing, however, there’s still a heck of a lot of road to travel on this,” Ali said, referring to the likelihood the case will be appealed. “If the state would have provided us with the evidence in a timely manner, like they were supposed to do, this trial would be over.’ Delph is still living in Madison County.

Report here

A comment:

Undoubtedly, some folks in Anderson are saying that releasing Rex David Delph is a miscarriage of justice. He was, after all accused of setting a fire that killed his wife and son. But the Madison Circuit Court judge released Delph because the prosecution botched some of the most basic preparations for trial, causing repeated delays.

Whether Delph committed the awful crime he was charged with, it’s a fact that innocent defendants are sometimes held on false charges, charges that could only be disproved through trials. Without centuries of custom and legal precedent compelling prosecutors to lay out their charges in open court in timely fashion, anyone could find themselves jailed indefinitely, awaiting a trial that never came to pass.

Safeguards such as the right to speedy trial protect the innocent. When lawyers stumble, they sometimes protect the guilty, too. That doesn’t make such rights any less essential to American freedom.

Report here



(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today)

Tyrannical drug conviction

Florida's drug trafficking laws were stretched beyond their logical limit when they were applied to Richard Paey, a Pasco County man now serving a 25-year mandatory minimum sentence. Paey suffers from debilitating and chronic pain, and he may have violated the law in order to obtain more pain medication. But Paey was convicted of a crime designed to put away drug kingpins and sentenced accordingly. It is a sentence that should not stand. This sentiment was well articulated in a stinging opinion by Associate Judge James Seals in the 2nd District Court of Appeal case of Paey vs. Florida, in which Paey appealed his sentence as cruel and unusual punishment. Unfortunately, Seals was writing in the dissent.

Two members of the three-member panel voted to uphold Paey's sentence in a ruling Wednesday that said there was no legal error. The court said that while conditions surrounding Paey's case would "naturally evoke sympathy," it was the executive branch that should be appealed to for a pardon or commutation of sentence, not the courts. "Mr. Paey's argument about his sentences does not fall on deaf ears, but it falls on the wrong ears," wrote Judge Douglas Wallace for the majority. There is no doubt that Paey's case is a prime candidate for executive clemency, and the governor and state clemency board should grant it. Paey applied immediately following the court's ruling. But the court showed remarkable indifference to the overzealous prosecution and miscarriage of justice to which Paey has been subjected.

Due to a catastrophic auto accident and botched back surgery, Paey, who uses a wheelchair, lives with unremitting back pain. He came to the attention of law enforcement when he filled prescriptions for 700 oxycodone pills and large quantities of other pain relief medications within 36 days. While Paey said his doctor okayed his treatment, there was evidence that suggested Paey tampered with the prescriptions. But there is no evidence Paey intended to do anything with the medicine other than relieve his own pain. Yet the state charged him under a draconian drug trafficking law.

Seals laid out the absurdity of this result: "I suggest that it is unusual, illogical, and unjust that Mr. Paey could conceivably go to prison for a longer stretch for peacefully but unlawfully purchasing 100 oxycodone pills from a pharmacist than had he robbed the pharmacist at knife point, stolen 50 oxycodone pills which he intended to sell to children waiting outside, and then stabbed the pharmacist." Seals said that he would quash the mandatory sentence as cruel and unusual, and send the case back for resentencing based on Paey's actual acts. That would have been a proper result. But if the courts won't afford Paey a sensible, fitting and just sentence, then the governor and clemency board have a moral duty to do so.

When the governor's daughter, Noelle Bush, was found guilty of prescription tampering, she received a referral to a drug treatment program. That kind of proportionate sentencing and balance between a defendant's guilt and punishment also should apply here.

Report here



(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today)

STRANGE (AND FATAL) BRITISH POLICE PRIORITES AGAIN

A police force failed to investigate properly the violent robbery of a showjumper which led to murder because its officers were busy inquiring into stolen chickens. Documents obtained by The Sunday Times reveal Derbyshire police assigned only one detective to investigate the brutal beating and robbery of riding instructor Tania Moore, 26, in June 2003. She was attacked by a pair of thugs wielding baseball bats who had been recruited by her former boyfriend Mark Dyche. He went on to shoot her dead nine months later.

By contrast, the force deployed up to 40 officers, including an undercover team disguised as painters and decorators, to investigate the theft of chickens by staff from a poultry processing plant owned by a prominent businessman and former councillor, according to previously undisclosed documents. A police source said: "The `chicken job' came down from `on high' to the officers who had to investigate - they were told to do it and give it the emphasis it got." Even Detective Constable Louise Howarth, the sole officer assigned to investigate the attack on Moore, was subsequently told to focus on the hunt for the chicken thieves instead.

Moore's mother Stella said yesterday: "Everyone suspects that the police prefer to solve easier crimes rather than tackle the really vicious criminals. In my daughter's case, the results have been devastating. The police decided to investigate the missing chickens, possibly because it appeared more straightforward rather than finding out who was targeting my daughter, and as a result she was murdered."

The police failed to devote proper resources to the robbery and beating of Moore even though many clues pointed to Dyche, who had previously been arrested for harassing her and also had a conviction for making death threats against his ex-wife. The force even returned his guns which had been seized after an assault on Moore.

Moore's case was fully investigated and Dyche's role in orchestrating it was revealed only after his continued campaign of violence and death threats which resulted in him blasting his former girlfriend to death with a shotgun in March 2004. Dyche was sentenced to life imprisonment after his conviction in May last year of killing the talented rider, who lived with her mother near Ashbourne.

Until now the shocking lapses by police which allowed Dyche to murder Moore were thought to have been down to incompetence. But the documents show that much of the reason for the failure was because of manpower being diverted to search for the missing chickens. Last month the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) announced that six officers had been disciplined, although they were not named in the case.

Howarth was sacked, Detective Inspector Ian Annable was demoted to sergeant and four others - Detective Chief Inspector Richard Gooch, Sergeant Tracy Lewis, Detective Constable John Birch and Constable Wendy Foxon, were all reprimanded. Gooch was told he had been "close to being demoted". It has now emerged that Howarth, Gooch, Birch and Lewis were all involved in a two-month-long inquiry known as Operation Function - the theft of chickens at the Dove Valley processing plant in Ashbourne - at around the time of the attack on Moore in June 2003.

Prosecutor John Beggs wrote in a summary to the disciplinary hearing: "The panel may wish to compare and contrast activity levels in relation to Tania's robbery with those in relation to Operation Function." Beggs wrote that Lewis, Howarth's supervisor, "was able to manage this operation from April 28 2003] to her departure [to another station] in July 2003, including a `strike' [swoop] on June 20 which involved 40 staff from uniform, CID, taskforce and surveillance". Yet at no stage, Beggs said, did she consider discussing the glaring omissions in the baseball bat attack on Moore. Instead, officers' notebooks were full of references to stolen chickens.

When interviewed by the IPCC team Lewis admitted: "My level of supervision of [the robbery] was probably affected to a degree by my heavy involvement in Operation Function." The disciplinary document stated that Birch, brought in to replace Lewis, said that "at least 90% of his handover concerned Operation Function (stealing chickens by employees) and nothing was mentioned to him about the robbery of Tania".

Police sources said that Operation Function had been considered a "CV job", meaning it was likely to result in a significant number of convictions, making it an attractive addition to an officer's record. Christopher Trafford, then owner of Dove Valley, said this weekend that he had little recollection of the inquiry. "It is nothing unusual for things to go missing in a fresh food factory," said Trafford, who sold the business in 2004 and is now retired. "I'm amazed that we have been dragged into something which was the saddest thing that has happened around here." His son Nigel Trafford, who was managing director of Dove Valley at the time, said nobody went to jail over the chicken thefts. "It was annoying, it wasn't going to break us," he said. "No one went down for it, it was just a number of slapped wrists."

Derbyshire police, led by David Coleman, chief constable, refused to comment. Howarth, who is appealing against her dismissal, also refused to comment.

Report here


(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today)

Wrongly accused man settles bomb suit

The federal government has agreed to pay an Oregon lawyer $2 million to settle part of a lawsuit he filed after the FBI misidentified a fingerprint and wrongly arrested him in the 2004 Madrid terrorist bombings. "The pain and torture and humiliation that this (case) has caused my family is hard to put into words," Brandon Mayfield said after the settlement was announced Wednesday.

Mayfield was arrested in May 2004 on the basis of a fingerprint found on a bag of detonators in Madrid that was mistakenly matched to him after the March 11, 2004, train bombings that killed 191 people and wounded more than 1,500. Mayfield was jailed on a material witness warrant but was released after the FBI acknowledged the fingerprint was not his. Mayfield, who was detained for two weeks, and his wife, Mona, maintained that he was arrested because of his Muslim faith. "We are Muslims. We are American. We are patriotic," Mona Mayfield said. "We are unhappy with the current administration stripping away our rights."

The local FBI office said it was proud of its work in the case [What assholes!] , and disagreed Mayfield's religion was a factor because it was discovered after the fingerprint identification, said agent Robert Jordan. "If a similar investigation was being conducted, and we were provided a fingerprint identification, we would do exactly what we did in the case of Mr. Mayfield," Jordan said. "Of course we regret what happened to Mr. Mayfield, but again, we are proud of what we did here."

The government did not admit liability or fault but issued a formal apology to Mayfield as part of the settlement, said Justice Department spokeswoman Tasia Scolinos. The FBI has since adopted suggestions for improving its fingerprint identification process "to ensure that what happened to Mr. Mayfield does not happen again," Scolinos said.

Two internal Justice investigations cleared the FBI and prosecutors of wrongdoing, she said. A December 2005 review by the department's Office of Professional Responsibility found that federal prosecutors who handled the investigation acted appropriately. A month later, Justice Inspector General Glenn A. Fine concluded that Mayfield's faith was not the reason the FBI began its investigation, and that the agency did not misuse provisions of the USA Patriot Act.

The government acknowledged in the settlement that it "performed covert physical searches of the Mayfield home and law office, and it also conducted electronic surveillance targeting Mr. Mayfield at both his home and law office," according to a news release from Mayfield's attorney, Elden Rosenthal. The settlement allows Mayfield to continue to pursue his challenge of the USA Patriot Act, Rosenthal said. Mayfield claims the act violates the Fourth Amendment because it allows government searches without probable cause that a crime has been committed. "I look forward to the day the Patriot Act is declared unconstitutional, and all citizens are safe from unwarranted arrest and searches by the federal government," Mayfield said in a statement.

Report here



(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today)

ONLY ONE YEAR FOR A FATAL BASEBALL BAT ATTACK!

Strange justice in the Australian State of Victoria again

Two brothers whose frail 61-year-old victim died after they attacked him with a baseball bat as he waited for a tram on a busy street have been jailed.

Ali Duran, who had suffered several strokes and used a walking stick, was standing at a Sydney Rd, Coburg, intersection when the pair saw him, pulled their car over in front of traffic and attacked in daylight in February last year.

Altaman and Asim Selcuk were deemed not to have been legally responsible for killing Mr Duran because he had existing health problems and doctors couldn't say for certain how the assault -- which left him with fractures, head injuries and severe bruising -- contributed to his death five days later.

The Supreme Court heard Mr Duran was their uncle but Altaman Selcuk, who had been married to Mr Duran's daughter, held a grudge over his marriage break-up and sought the older man out on the day of the attack. Asim Selcuk, 25, was driving his brother as they looked for Mr Duran but did not take part in the bashing. But he did nothing to help the injured man as he cowered bleeding by the road in front of horrified pedestrians, the court heard. He then helped his brother flee and both concocted a false story for police claiming Mr Duran had pulled a knife and they had to defend themselves.

Altaman Selcuk, 34, pleaded guilty to intentionally causing serious injury and affray, while his brother was found guilty by a jury of intentionally causing serious injury. Justice Elizabeth Hollingworth said she could not sentence the pair over Mr Duran's death, but could understand why his wife and six children blamed them for it. She said the attack not only traumatised relatives but left those who witnessed it in shock, with one likening it to a scene from a war zone. Yesterday she sentenced Asim Selcuk, of Flemington, to three years' jail with a minimum of one year, having earlier sentenced Altaman Selcuk, of Brunswick, to 6 1/2 years' jail with a minimum of four.

Report here

More on Victorian "justice:

A bank worker who stole $7.3m and blew more than $2600 an hour on pokies has been jailed for a minimum of four years - about the same for some child killers. Victims' and children's groups say Kate Leanne Jamieson's sentence was appropriate but highlighted anomalies in the justice system. Last week, David Scott Arney, 25, was sentenced to a minimum five years over the death of his daughter Rachael, who was repeatedly punched in the stomach.

The Herald Sun has identified 12 cases in the past decade where people charged with murdering children were allowed to cut deals and plead guilty to manslaughter, getting away with minimum sentences as low as three years in the Supreme Court. Australian Childhood Foundation CEO Joe Tucci said jail terms for child killers had to increase. He said Jamieson's sentence was a striking contrast to the average sentence for child killers. "It shows that the sentence structure is all wrong - that we have reduced acts of unbelievable cruelty and violence towards children to being equitable with other lesser crimes," Mr Tucci said. "It's not just the death, it's the torture and killing of a child, which should be seen as one of the most serious crimes in the community." Four of the 12 child killers convicted of manslaughter in the past 10 years received the same or lower minimum sentences than Jamieson did. They include:

JEFFREY Phillip Thompson, 22, who threw his six-month-old son Jordan, stuffed his mouth with a bib and put his head under water. In 2004 he was sentenced to 5 1/2 years with a minimum of three years.

STEWART Thomas Clay, 35, who was sentenced to six years' jail with a minimum of three years in 2003 for killing son Zachary. The three-week-old suffered skull fractures.

ROSA Maria Richards, 41, and her then de facto husband Lindsay Gregory, 38, who were charged over the death of Ms Richards' son Dillion Palfrey, 20 months, from a brain haemorrhage in May, 1995. Richards violently shook the toddler after Gregory had hit him across the face. Dillion hit his head on the floor and convulsed. Richards' sentence was reduced on appeal to five years with a 3 1/2 minimum. Gregory, who pleaded guilty to recklessly causing serious injury, was given five years with a non-parole period of three.

MARK Mietto, 31, who was sentenced to six years with a minimum of four in 2002. He smashed in the skull of his girlfriend's son Jonathan Guiver, 3.

Report here

December 2009 update

I have received a number of abrupt emails from a "Natalie Angove" [nangove@ausmed.com.au] about the above postings. She wants them deleted. She has refused to say why, however, and my enquiries about her reasons have not produced any rationale other than a claim that they are inaccurate in some unspecified way. I do not even know which of the above postings she is steamed up about. Her most recent email in reply to my enquiries simply said: "Listen here what part don’t you understand remove article or I will commence legal proceedings"

In the circumstances, the post will remain until she discovers some manners. My provisional impression is that the lady is not quite sane.




(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today)

SWAT Overkill

SOLDIERS AND POLICE are supposed to be different. Soldiers are aimed at enemies from outside the country. They are trained to kill those enemies, and their supporters. In fact, “killing people and breaking things” are their main reasons for existence. Police look inward. They’re supposed to protect their fellow citizens from criminals, and to maintain order with a minimum of force.

It’s the difference between Audie Murphy and Andy Griffith. But nowadays, police are looking, and acting, more like soldiers than cops, with bad consequences. And those who suffer the consequences are usually innocent civilians. The trend toward militarizing police began in the ’60s and ’70s when standoffs with the Black Panthers, the Symbionese Liberation Army, and the University of Texas bell tower gunman Charles Whitman convinced many police departments that they needed more than .38 specials to deal with unusual, high-intensity threats. In 1965 Los Angeles inspector Daryl Gates, who later became police chief, signed off on the formation of a specially trained and equipped unit that he wanted to call the Special Weapons Attack Team. (The name was changed to the more palatable Special Weapons and Tactics). SWAT programs soon expanded beyond big cities with gang problems.

Abetting this trend was the federal government’s willingness to make surplus military equipment available to police and sheriffs’ departments. All sorts of hardware is available, from M-16s to body armor to armored personnel carriers and even helicopters. Lots of police departments grabbed the gear and started SWAT teams, even if they had no real need for them. The materiel was free, and it was fun. I don’t blame the police. Heck, if somebody gave me a Bradley Fighting Vehicle to play with, I’d probably start a SWAT team, too—so long as I didn’t have to foot the maintenance bill.

Thus, the sheriff’s department in landlocked Boone County, Ind., has an amphibious armored personnel carrier. (According to that county’s sheriff-elect, the vehicle has been used to deliver prescriptions to snow-bound elderly residents, and to provide protection during a suspected hostage situation.) Jasper, Fla.,—with 2000 inhabitants and two murders in the past 12 years—obtained seven M-16s from the federal government, leading an area newspaper to run a story with the subhead, “Three stoplights, seven M-16s.”

This approach, though, has led to problems both obvious and subtle. The obvious problem should be especially apparent to readers of this magazine: Once you’ve got a cool tool, you kind of want to use it. That’s true whether it’s a pneumatic drill, a laser level or an armored fighting vehicle. SWAT teams, designed to deal with rare events, wound up doing routine police work, like serving drug warrants. The subtle effect is also real: Dress like a soldier and you think you’re at war. And, in wartime, civil liberties—or possible innocence—of the people on “the other side” don’t come up much. But the police aren’t at war with the citizens they serve, or at least they’re not supposed to be.

The combination of these two factors has led to some tragic mistakes: “no knock” drug raids, involving “dynamic entry,” where the wrong house has been targeted or where the raid was based on informants’ tips that turned out to be just plain wrong.

On Sept. 23, 2006, a SWAT team descended on the home of a farmer and his schoolteacher wife in Bedford County, Va. “I was held at gunpoint, searched, taunted and led into the house,” A.J. Nuckols wrote to his local paper. “I was scared beyond description. I feared there had been a murder and I was a suspect.” When the couple’s three children came home, the police grilled them, too. The family was held under guard for five hours as the SWAT team ransacked the place, seizing computers, a digital camera, DVDs and VHS tapes. Ten days later, the cops returned the belongings. It turned out that a special anti-child-porn police unit had made a mistake while tracing an computer address and sent the SWAT team to the wrong home.

Sometimes, homeowners are killed in these actions; other times, it’s the officers. When a narcotics task force raided a duplex apartment in Jefferson Davis County, Miss., in 2001, they arrested one tenant, then burst into the adjacent apartment of Cory Maye. Thinking a burglar had broken into the bedroom he shared with his toddler daughter. Maye shot the officer fatally. Maye was convicted of murder and sentenced to death. However, his sentencing was overturned, and a motion for a new trial is still pending.

And, in a case that is now drawing national attention, 92-year-old Kathryn Johnston, who lived in a high-crime neighborhood of Atlanta, recently opened fire on police when they broke down her door while executing a drug warrant. They returned fire, killing her. It’s hard to believe any of this would have happened had the police taken a less aggressive approach in the first place.

It used to be that police came to the door, announced themselves and, once a homeowner responded, entered the premises. Most policemen still work this way. But an alarming number now break down doors first and ask questions later. Don’t get me wrong: Police often do dangerous work and they need equipment that’s going to protect them. And dynamic entry is valid when dealing with desperate criminals, but these tactics put ordinary citizens—and the police—at risk. And when they do, it’s often hard to get redress. Lawsuits against police and supervisors face strict legal limits in the form of “qualified immunity,” and prosecutors, who work with the police on a regular basis, are unlikely to bring criminal charges against officers who negligently kill people. But homeowners confronted with tactics like flash-bang grenades and shouting that are intended to disorient targets, tend to be held to a much higher standard. The result, as in the Cory Maye case, is that people who do the laudable thing and defend their homes against unknown, armed intruders sometimes wind up being prosecuted for murder.

I discussed the issue with political commentator Radley Balko, who wrote a troubling report titled “Overkill: The Rise of Paramilitary Police Raids in America.” Balko said that the problem is more common than people realize. He suggests that accountability and transparency are what we need. I agree. Police raids should be videotaped, in an archival format that discourages tampering. And I think we need legal reform, too. Police who raid the wrong house, or who fail to give homeowners adequate warning except in truly life-or-death situations, shouldn’t benefit from official immunity. Our homes are supposed to be our castles. The police shouldn’t treat them like enemy camps.


Report here




(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today)

Once more: Child abuse is cheap in Australia

See the previous post here of Nov. 29

A father who became his four-year-old son's tormentor, abused him for days and ignored his slow death could walk from prison in four years. Justice Peter Evans yesterday sentenced Shane Michael Shanks, 29, who pleaded guilty to his son Danny Dell's manslaughter, to 10 years' jail. He will be eligible for parole in October 2010.

Danny's maternal grandfather Leigh Dell angrily branded the sentence pathetic and said Shanks had robbed Danny of a long life. "If I shot you, I'd get 20 years," he said. "If I stabbed you, I'd get 20 years. "I can beat a child to death over a two-week period, basically torture a person to death, and do less than five years. "I'd like to go back to hanging." Danny's grim-faced mother Crystel Dell, 23, listened with her new baby Shenae who was born this year, months after her half-brother's death.

Justice Evans said Danny and his father had enjoyed a normal relationship that had descended into an utterly deplorable state for no clear reason. He said Danny had first shown signs of abuse two weeks before his death and concluded that Shanks had caused a great majority, if not all, of his injuries. "His abuse of his son extended over a period of days," Justice Evans said. He said Shanks had witnessed his son's deterioration but had not called the doctor because of his "selfish concern that it would reveal the extent of his abuse". "Horrendous as Danny's injuries were, they were treatable and, had he received timely treatment, his life may have been saved," Justice Evans said.

Danny died in October last year at the Royal Hobart Hospital after his father had called 000, claiming his son had fallen from a bunk bed and was "spewing out of his nose". A friend of Shanks saw Danny five days before his death in a distressed state walking from his bedroom to the bathroom to vomit.

Justice Evans said Shanks had failed to protect and provide for Danny and instead had become "his son's tormentor and ultimately the instrument of his death". Doctors found "very, very, very extensive superficial bruising" on Danny's body, probably caused by multiple beatings of the head, abdomen and chest. A doctor who examined Danny's battered body after his death said an implement had likely been used to inflict the extensive bruises on his pelvis, buttocks and thigh. She said the bruising around his neck and the angle of his jaw was consistent with his having been forcibly grabbed around the throat. The autopsy report listed 79 separate or composite signs of violence or injury and concluded head injuries and bruising probably contributed to Danny's death. Another potentially fatal internal injury was probably inflicted three days to a week before the death when Danny was trailbike-riding with his dad.

Shanks was originally charged with murder but prosecutors then offered him the opportunity to plead to manslaughter.

Report here




(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today)

Wrong door

The Supreme Court ruled this June that evidence seized in an illegally performed "no-knock" police raid can still be used against a defendant. Though disturbing in its own right, Hudson v. Michigan touched on only a small part of a larger problem -- the trend toward paramilitary tactics in domestic policing.

Criminologist Peter Kraska estimates that the number of SWAT team "call-outs" soared past 40,000 in 2001 (the latest year for which figures are available) from about 3,000 in 1981. The vast majority are employed for routine police work -- such as serving drug warrants -- not the types of situations for which SWAT teams were originally established. And because drug policing often involves tips from confidential informants -- many of whom are drug dealers themselves, or convicts looking for leniency -- it's rife with bad information. As a result, hundreds of innocent families and civilians have been wrongly subjected to violent, forced-entry raids.

Last year, for example, New York City police mistakenly handcuffed Mini Matos, a deaf, asthmatic Coney Island woman during a pre-dawn raid. While her young son and daughter burst into tears, Ms. Matos's plea to use her asthma pump was ignored until an officer realized they entered the wrong apartment.

Home invasions can also provoke deadly violence because forced-entry raids offer very little margin for error. Since SWAT teams began proliferating in the late 1980s, at least 40 innocent people have been killed in botched raids. There are dozens more cases where low-level, nonviolent offenders and police officers themselves have been killed.

Last summer a SWAT team in Sunrise, Fla., shot and killed 23-year-old Anthony Diotaiuto -- a bartender and part-time student with no history of violence -- during an early-morning raid on his home. Police found all of an ounce of marijuana. This January a member of the Fairfax, Va. SWAT team accidentally shot and killed Salvatore Culosi, a local optometrist with no criminal record, no history of violence and no weapons in his home. Police were investigating Culosi for wagering on sporting events with friends.

Public officials are rarely held accountable when mistakes happen. The Culosi family has yet to be given access to documents related to the investigation of his death, including why a SWAT team was sent to apprehend him in the first place. More than a year after Diotaiuto's death, his family too has been denied access to any of the documents it needs to move forward with a lawsuit.

New York City provides perhaps the most egregious example of public officials' reluctance to rein in the excessive use of paramilitary tactics. Throughout the 1990s, the city's newspapers reported a troubling, continuing pattern of "wrong door" drug raids. In many cases, tactical teams raided homes based solely on uncorroborated tips from unproven informants.

Members of the city's Civilian Complaint Review Board cautioned that they were seeing increasing complaints of botched raids, but limited jurisdiction and bureaucratic turf wars prevented them from doing anything about it. The principal result of the CCRB's warnings was the creation of a special police unit for the sole purpose of fixing locks, doors and windows in cases where forced-entry searches were performed on the wrong premises. Civil rights attorneys warned that without more substantial changes, it was only a matter of time before an innocent person would be killed in a botched drug raid.

They were right. In 2003, acting on a bad tip from an informant, police mistakenly raided the Harlem home of Alberta Spruill, a 57-year-old city worker. The violence of the incursion literally scared Spruill to death; she died of a heart attack at the scene. The raid spurred public outrage, calls for reform, and promises from the city to change its ways. The NYPD published new guidelines calling for more reliability when taking tips from informants. The city also promised greater vigilance in conducting surveillance and double-checking addresses before a SWAT team was sent in. But later, during the course of a lawsuit stemming from another, mistaken raid -- in 1992, on corrections officer Edward Garrison, his elderly mother and two young daughters -- the city declared that all of the post-Spruill reforms it had promised were merely discretionary, not enforceable in court, and could be revoked at will by any future mayor or police commissioner.

In any case, botched raids have not stopped. In 2004, police arrested a Brooklyn father of two in a drug raid and held him for six months at Riker's Island. In March of this year they dropped all the charges, conceding that he had been wrongly targeted. The man's lawyer called it the worst case of malicious prosecution she'd ever seen. Also in 2004, police mistakenly raided the home of Martin and Leona Goldberg, a Brooklyn couple in their 80s, when an informant provided bad information. "It was the most frightening experience of my life," Mrs. Goldberg later said. "I thought it was a terrorist attack."

The NYPD goofed again in 2005, when a SWAT team raided the Brooklyn apartment of the Williams family, instead of the targeted apartment on the same floor. Police continued to search the apartment even after it was obvious they were in the wrong home. This year, according to the CCRB, there have already been at least 15 mistaken raids.

A few cities, such as New Haven, Conn., and San Jose, Calif., restrict the use of SWAT teams to cases where a suspect presents an immediate threat. Denver dramatically cut back the number of "no-knock" raids conducted after a SWAT team shot and killed an innocent man in a botched raid in 1999, and follow-up investigations revealed severe deficiencies in the how police had obtained "no-knock" warrants.

But these examples are few and far between. Most of the country is moving toward more militarization, more aggressive drug policing -- and less accountability when things go wrong.

Report here




(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today)

The jockey who strangled a guy twice his size -- what a nonsense!

There is no truth in the suggestion that jailed Carrick-on-Suir man Christy McGrath will have to formally admit to a murder he denies if he wants to be transferred home from Britain, his family and supporters stated this week. Some media reports claimed earlier this week that the 29 year-old jockey from Sean Treacy Park, Carrick would be forced to formally admit to the murder and promise not to launch any further appeals, if his request for a transfer from Gartree Prison in Leicestershire to an Irish prison was to be granted. But his family has denied this. His sister, Caroline told The Nationalist that Christy had already been granted repatriation and both the Irish and British governments had already agreed to the transfer.

The family had been hoping that he would be home for Christmas but it now appears as if the transfer will be delayed until early in the New Year. Caroline McGrath said that he didn't have to plead guilty, and was still entitled to apply for a re-trial or appeal in the British courts. That appeal wouldn't be allowed in an Irish court.

The son of Christy (senior) and Ann McGrath, Christy McGrath has been at the centre of a high-profile alleged miscarriage of justice case since being convicted in January 2001 of the murder of Gary Walton in Coundon, Durham the previous July. Christy McGrath and his many supporters on both sides of the Irish Sea, who include 130 TDs [Members of the lower house of the Irish parliament] and Senators and more than 50 British MPs, have always maintained his innocence.

More here

Background:

On leaving a Co. Durham pub on the night of the 16th of July 2001, Christy McGrath was accosted, racially abused and assaulted by Gary Walton. Attempting to regain entrance to the pub, Christy was again attacked by Walton with a brick and forced to defend himself. Walton was alive when Christy left the scene.

Other men, two wearing balaclavas, are known to have approached Walton on the night after Christy left. One returned to the scene more than once. The body was found by police the following morning

The day before his trial for murder, Christy's lawyer put pressure on him to change his plea to guilty. He was told that if he did not, he would serve 25 - 30 years in prison. Christy's family were not involved in the discussion. Isolated, confused and fearful, Christy submitted to the advice, and admitted, as he thought, manslaughter. The next day he was convicted of murder and sentenced. None of the witnesses scheduled to testify on his behalf were ever heard

Walton died of strangulation; he was strangled with such force that neck vertebrae were broken.

Walton was over 6 feet tall and heavily built, while Christy, a jockey, is a more lightly built, shorter man.

Throughout the course of their investigations police referred to him as "the Irish lad."

He had no motive to kill Gary Walton.

Christy tried to avoid the fight by running back to the pub.

Witnesses in Christy's favour were never heard. One admitted washing bloodstained clothes, another stated seeing "a murder by men in balaclavas."

Police claim they are unable to state the time of Gary Walton's death

Christy only learned that the victim had died of strangulation after he had pleaded guilty in court.



(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today)

NC TRYING TO REINVENT PROHIBITION

In the state's continuing war against the consumption of alcohol, North Carolina Governor Mike Easley signed a new law on Monday that will not only make it harder to buy kegs of beer, but will also diminish the legal rights of defendants to challenge illegally or incorrectly obtained evidence by the state in regards to driving under the influence charges.

The new law also makes it a crime to have any alcohol in the system of anyone under 21 years of age and allows police officers to demand a chemical test of citizens under 21, whether or not they are driving a vehicle. It also allows police officers who are investigating crashes to request medical information about anyone in any vehicle accident and to request blood tests from accident victims even if they are unconscious.

In addition, the new laws will allow police officers to charge drivers operating a vehicle with a DUI offense even if they are on private property and even if the business is closed. Previously, only those drivers that were on "public" roadways or areas open to the public fell under the domain of DUI laws.

Furthermore, the new laws also allows police officers to introduce tests from field breathalyzers as evidence, as opposed to the more accurate machine breathalyzer tests that are usually done at police headquarters or police stations. In the past, those more accurate automated tests were usually used as evidence in DUI cases instead of the field breathalyzer units.

The Governor's DWI Task Force, which was a group composed almost entirely of law enforcment officials, was established by executive order in December 2003. The task force was asked by Easley to review current laws and come up with proposals for further reducing and deterring driving while impaired. The new law is effective December 1st, 2006.

In North Carolina, citizens who are 18 years old or older without a criminal history may purchase a shotgun or long rifle without filling out any paperwork or getting a permit. As one reader pointed out, it is indeed true that in order to buy a new shotgun or rifle, even a person without a criminal history has to show identification and fill out federally required paperwork to buy a new or used shotgun or long-gun from a federal firearms dealer. However, under North Carolina law, a person without a criminal record and who meets other requirements may legally buy a rifle or shotgun from an individual who is not a dealer. As such, in the secondary market (person to person), there is absolutely no permit required or paperwork at all to purchase a shotgun. In other words, a shotgun can be bought with no permit at all legally.

However, because of state and federal liquor laws, there is no such secondary market in North Carolina where people can purchase kegs from individuals (at least legally anyway). As a result, all citizens must buy them from a store and now under the new law, everyone must get a permit to buy a keg. Under the new law that takes effect in December, no one -- not even those over 21 -- in North Carolina will be able to buy a keg of beer without a permit. And of course, an 18 year old who can legally purchase a shotgun in North Carolina without a permit cannot purchase beer at all, much less a keg.

In an effort to diminish and also track the sales of kegs and identify individuals who are buying beer, the new law will require the purchaser of a keg of beer to first obtain a permit from the vendor. The permit requirement will not only apply to kegs containing over seven gallons of beer, but will also require anyone buying over a certain amount of beer or wine to also get a permit. Anyone buying over 80 liters of beer, 50 liters of wine, or 8 liters of fortified wine or so-called "hard liquor" will need to get a permit as well.
Previously, DUI charges could be filed if someone under the influence drove on a public road or other area that was considered to be used by the "members of the public." The definition included private areas that were "open" to the public. An example would be a shopping center parking lot. However, the new law extends the reach of the law to include almost any private property that has parking spaces that is used for vehicular traffic at any time, whether or not the business is open. The area does not have be a public road or private property that is open to the public, but it can be almost anywhere that is used by vehicles at any time under the new law. The new extension of the law includes almost every type of property other than a private home, although even then, DUI charges can be filed against someone driving on a private road if the road leads anywhere into a subdivision.

Previously under North Carolina law, anyone under 21 could be charged with a crime if they were found to be in possession of alcohol or had attempted to purchase it. With the new law going into effect, the state has also made it a crime to actually consume alcohol if a citizen is under 21 years of age. As such, students who seek medical attention for alcohol poisoning could now find themselves charged with the crime of alcohol consumption after they seek treatment at any hospital or other healthcare provider.

Police officers also now have the authority to take a person under 21 into custody and require them to take a breathalyzer test even if they are not driving, if they are suspected of drinking alcohol. "A law enforcement officer may require any person the officer has probable cause to believe is under age 21 and has consumed alcohol to submit to an alcohol screening test," says the new law.

The new law would allow officers at college and university campuses to charge students who had been drinking, but did not have alcohol in their possession. Under the old law, those students would normally would not face any charges since consumption was not a crime but possession was a misdemeanor. However, under the new law, students with any alcohol on their breath at all or who show a blood alcohol level after being detained and given a breathalyzer test can be also be charged with a crime.

Under the new law, police officers will now be able to get private medical information from hospitals about anyone involved in a vehicle crash even where alcohol has not yet been established to be involved. As such, anyone who is a victim in a car wreck or other automobile accident may have their medical information handed over to a law enforcement officer under the new law, even if they were not the driver behind the wheel. "If a person is involved in a vehicle crash, any health care provider who is providing medical treatment to the person shall, upon request, disclose to any law enforcement officer investigating the crash the following information about the person: name, current location, and whether the person appears to be impaired by alcohol, drugs, or another substance," says the law. "A health care provider shall disclose a certified copy of all identifiable health information related to that person as specified in a search warrant or an order issued by a judicial official," states the new law.

Remarkably, the new law reduces the ability of defendants in DUI cases in the courtrooms and the ability to throw out or challenge evidence that was obtained by the state except in certain circumstances. "The defendant may move to suppress evidence or dismiss charges only prior to trial," says the new law. Although as an exception, the defendant may still make a motion to dismiss the case at the close of state's evidence, this new rule is a vast departure from established courtroom procedure and places a much greater burden on the defendant.

Local defense attorneys we talked with are already concerned about some of the provisions of the law including the challenging of evidence as well as the elimination of the provision in the law that requires a test from a more accurate automated breathalyzer that prints out the report, as opposed to the field breathalyzers operate by officers.

"This is what happens when you have a former prosecutor who is governor choose everyone on the commission [to come up with the law] -- everyone on there was either involved in law enforcement or worked for the state as a prosecutor," said the local defense attorney, who tries DUI cases and wished not to have his name printed. "There was no one there to serve as an advocate for the legal rights of citizens, just to serve law enforcement."

Governor Easley said that the new laws, although tougher, would be applied fairly. "This comprehensive legislation will better protect the public from the dangers of drunk drivers by strengthening existing DWI laws. The legislation increases penalties for driving while impaired and assures that laws are applied fairly and consistently throughout North Carolina," said Easley in a released statement.

Other than the keg permit, the media across the state have focused on other less onerous provisions in the new law, including stricter penalties for getting involved in an accident or causing injuries while driving drunk. The new law makes most of those types of laws felonies and also makes it easier to classify DUI drivers as habitual offenders. Under the new law, drivers need only to get three DUI's in ten years as opposed to the old span of seven years.

Report here


(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today)

AUSTRALIA'S CONTEMPTIBLE POLICE

Post reproduced from "Australian Politics" -- including three separate reports




Police immunity again

Police get kid-glove treatment for their misdeeds

Two policemen have not been prosecuted for shooting a dog after tying it to a tree. An inquiry recommended the men be summonsed under the Animal Welfare Act. But police last night said the officers had been subjected only to "internal disciplinary action".

The first officer fired at the family pet from close range but missed. A shot from the second officer passed through the dog's neck - depriving it of the ability to bark - and cut the rope. The animal ran home to its master with blood pumping out of the entry and exit bullet wounds.

Ombudsman Carolyn Richards, who investigates complaints against Territory Government departments, said she was "appalled". Dog-owning Police Minister Chris Burns said he was also appalled.

The incident happened after police in an unnamed "remote locality" went to a house to arrest a man's son on an outstanding warrant. A struggle started and the family dog bit one of the officers. The police decided the dog was a "vicious animal" and should be put down. The owners said the officers did not fully explain that they were going to kill the animal and they were "coerced" into letting them take it away. The dog was taken into the bush, tied to a tree and shot. After the first shot, the pet was "jumping all over the place". The police found out that the dog had returned home, but decided against seizing it again.

The Joint Review Committee - made up of police and staff from the Ombudsman's office - investigated the case and found the officers had made "misleading" statements and been inhumane. It recommended internal disciplinary action and prosecution.

Source





Police try to gag Brimble witness

South Australian Police Commissioner Mal Hyde has tried to block a key witness from making claims of corruption within his police force when he testifies at the inquest into the death of Dianne Brimble. The witness, codenamed Mr White, is expected to raise allegations that one of the eight "persons of interest" in the 42-year-old Brisbane woman's death was a drug dealer who was protected by police officers and an outlaw motorcycle gang. Mr White, who is scheduled to give evidence in Sydney today under tight security, is also expected to claim that seven of the men of interest were involved in drug dealing in Adelaide nightclubs, some of which were "often" frequented by police.

Lawyers from the South Australian Crown Solicitor's Office wrote to their NSW counterparts after the corruption allegations became public on Monday and said the claims were "irrelevant" to the inquiry being conducted by Deputy NSW Coroner Jacqueline Milledge. They sought an undertaking the allegations wouldn't be raised in court. "We have no reason to believe that the allegations have any foundation in fact," the letter said. "The Commissioner of Police in South Australia is most concerned that the court proceedings may be used as a forum to spread baseless allegations or allegations based on speculation. "Could you please confirm that any witness statement that makes allegations of police corruption will not be placed on the court record and that (counsel assisting the coroner Ron Hoenig) will not lead such an allegation."

Mr Hoenig objected strongly to Mr Hyde's request to suppress Mr White's evidence, describing it as "impertinent" to the court. "I take exception to the suggestion that your honour has no jurisdiction in dealing with a particular matter when there are methods in place to do so," Mr Hoenig told the court.

Brimble died on the P&O cruise ship Pacific Sky in September 2002 from a toxic dose of the drug gamma hydroxybutyrate, also know as fantasy. The mother of three was photographed having sex with one of the men shortly before she died. It has been alleged her drink may have been spiked with fantasy.

Mr Hoenig foreshadowed parts of Mr White's evidence in court on Monday and said the witness would give evidence "that Matthew Slade had the protection of the Jokers motorcycle club and police officers". Mr Hoenig said Mr White would allege that Mr Slade, Peter Pantic, Mark Wilhelm, Dragan Losic, Luigi Vitale, Letterio Silvestri and Charlie Kambouris were involved in drug dealing in Adelaide nightclubs. Mr White had allegedly seen the eighth man, Ryan Kuchel, "self indulging" on ecstasy in an Adelaide nightclub.

Lawyers for Mr Pantic also tried to delay Mr White's evidence and asked for a suppression order to be put on parts of it. Barrister Peter Hayes said Mr Pantic faced being "pilloried before the press", based on untested evidence that might be "double or triple hearsay".

Mr Hyde said yesterday he wanted to hear the details of any claims of police corruption and determine if they needed to be investigated. South Australian Attorney-General Michael Atkinson told The Australian the Crown Solicitor's Office and Mr Hyde were not trying to prevent Mr White from giving evidence. He said that if the allegations were relevant, there was a "proper forum in which to make those allegations".

Source





Police union boss to face court

Queensland Police Union president Gary Wilkinson will face contempt charges arising from comments he made in March about the Palm Island inquiry's findings. Mr Wilkinson labelled Queensland's Deputy Coroner Christine Clement's findings into a death in custody as a "witch-hunt".

Ms Clements handed down her report into the death of Palm Island man Mulrunji on September 27, finding police officer Sen-Sgt Chris Hurley was responsible for his fatal injuries.

At a press conference, Mr Wilkinson launched a scathing attack on the findings. Two weeks later Mr Wilkinson apologised, emphasising he had not meant to question the impartiality or personal integrity of Ms Clements or to reflect upon the Magistrate's Court. However, earlier this month the Queensland Attorney-General Kerry Shine initiated contempt charges charges against Mr Wilkinson. In a brief Supreme Court application yesterday, Solicitor General Walter Sofronoff QC, appearing for the Attorney-General, and solicitor Michael Quinn, for Mr Wilkinson, agreed on a consent order for an exchange of documents and outlines of their cases. Justice George Fryberg set the hearing down for two days on March 19 and 20 next year.

Source



(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today)

Chicago man wrongfully convicted for rape to be released

Marlon Pendleton serving 20-Year prison sentence due to incompetent forensic "science"

A Cook County judge agreed Thursday to release a man serving a 20-year-prison sentence for a 1992 rape that DNA tests showed he didn't commit. "That's not justice," Circuit Judge Stanley Sacks said of Marlon Pendleton's imprisonment. "It's an injustice." Sacks vacated Pendleton's sentence and ordered him released on a personal recognizance bond for a separate sexual assault for which he's already served his full prison term, setting in motion a release from prison that might come as early as Thursday.

Pendleton appeared stunned by the judge's ruling, dropping his head and covering his face with his hands -- the moment, his attorney said, when it hit him he was going to get out of prison.

"He's been in prison for over a dozen years," said attorney Karen Daniel. "He's lost a huge chunk of his life, he's lost his family. He doesn't have any money, he doesn't have a job. It's not a happy day for Marlon Pendleton."

Sacks set another hearing for Dec. 8, at which time the Cook County State's Attorney's Office will likely drop the case, spokesman John Gorman said. Pendleton, 49, still must return to Dixon Correctional Center to process paperwork, but, Sacks promised, "It's your last trip back and forth."

The judge's ruling follows an announcement last week that DNA tests ruled out Pendleton as the source of genetic evidence left by the person who attacked and robbed a woman on Chicago's South Side in 1992. Pendleton had claimed from the outset that he was innocent of the attack. But he was convicted after a Chicago police crime lab analyst, whose work has been linked to several wrongful convictions, said there was not enough evidence for DNA testing.

But a forensic serologist chosen to analyze evidence by prosecutors and Pendleton's attorneys found that, even after the crime analyst used some of the evidence in her testing, he still had enough material to develop a profile.

Report here



(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today)

POLICE GOONS AGAIN?

The police chief placed all eight members of a narcotics investigation team on leave Monday after a confidential informant said they had asked him to lie during the investigation of the death of an 88-year-old woman, shot and killed by police officers during a drug raid last Tuesday. Chief Richard J. Pennington said the Federal Bureau of Investigation would investigate the death of the woman, Kathryn Johnston, who was killed after she fired at three officers who breached the door of her small house, with its green shutters and a wheelchair ramp. The Georgia Bureau of Investigation is also examining the case.

The informant’s claim fueled more outrage over Ms. Johnston’s death, which had already prompted Chief Pennington to announce a review of the Atlanta Police Department’s policies on the use of no-knock warrants and confidential informants. Since the shooting, civil rights activists and community groups have demanded a federal investigation, saying excessive force was used.

In a news conference Monday afternoon, Chief Pennington said the officers involved and the informant had given contradictory accounts. “There are many unanswered questions,” he said. “But we must all exercise patience as we examine and re-examine every aspect of these tragic events.”

The events leading to the death of Ms. Johnston, whose photograph in news reports showed her with a cane and a birthday crown, began with a warrant stating that an unnamed informant had bought two bags of crack cocaine from a man at the house, near Vine City, the neighborhood where the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and his family once lived. The warrant was known as a no-knock, giving the police the authority to burst through the door without warning in order to prevent the destruction of drugs.

But in an interview broadcast Monday by the local Fox affiliate, the informant, whose identity was concealed, said he had never been to the house in question and had not bought drugs there. Ms. Johnston’s family has said that she lived alone. “They were going to pay me just to cover it up,” he said in the interview, arranged after he placed a call to one of the station’s reporters on Thursday. “They called me immediately after the shooting to ask me, I mean to tell me, ‘This is what you need to do.’ ” He added that the officers told him explicitly that he was needed to protect their story. The reporter, Nicole Allshouse, said in her report that the informant had told her Ms. Johnston’s death had prodded him to come forward.

Mr. Pennington said it was not clear if the drug dealer, referred to in the warrant only as Sam, existed. He said the officers claimed they had found a small amount of marijuana, but no cocaine, in the house.

In asking a judge for the no-knock warrant before the raid, the narcotics investigator named in the warrant, Jason R. Smith, had said it was needed because a drug dealer inside had several surveillance cameras and monitored them closely. But Chief Pennington said it was not clear if that was true, either. He confirmed that the informant’s account in the television interview was the same as what he had told the internal affairs division of the Police Department. Department procedures call for investigators to observe drug buys conducted by informants, and to watch them enter and exit if a deal takes place indoors. But again, Chief Pennington said it was not clear if that had occurred. He said the informant was considered reliable and had been involved in previous cases.

Once the search warrant was signed, three officers appeared at Ms. Johnston’s door with bulletproof vests and raid shields emblazoned with the word “police.” Department officials have insisted that the officers went to the correct address. They announced themselves as the police after cutting through the burglar bars and forcing down the door.

But Ms. Johnston was already at the door with her revolver, which neighbors said she kept for self-defense in an area where drugs are rampant and an elderly woman was recently raped. She shot Officers Gary Smith, 38, Gregg Junnier, 40, and Cary Bond, 38, in the face, chest, arm and leg, prompting them to release a volley of bullets. Ms. Johnston died of a bullet wound in the chest; the officers are expected to recover.

Ms. Johnston was initially said by family members to have been 92, but the medical examiner and public records indicate that she was 88. At the news conference, David E. Nahmias, the United States attorney for the Northern District of Georgia, issued a warning. Now that the case is under federal investigation, he said, “anyone who lies or obstructs justice is committing a serious crime.”

Report here



(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today)

CHEAP TO KILL A CHILD IN AUSTRALIA

More than a dozen people charged with murdering children in the past decade in Victoria have struck deals to dramatically reduce their time behind bars. Families, police and victims' groups are appalled by the "institutionalised injustice" that lets child killers beat murder charges in favour of manslaughter. A wave of community outrage over the death of five-month-old Rachael Joy Arney has prompted calls for a review of the law.

The Herald Sun has identified 12 cases where attackers inflicted horrific injuries on young children. In each, the offenders were charged with murder but prosecutors accepted a plea of guilty to manslaughter. All but one received sentences of less than half the 20-year maximum penalty for manslaughter. Their minimum non-parole jail terms totalled just 64 years. In developments yesterday:

VICTORIAN Premier Steve Bracks took the rare step of urging the Director of Public Prosecutions to appeal against the minimum five-year sentence imposed this week on the killer of baby Rachael.

FRUSTRATED police called for juries to be left to decide child murder charges.

THE father of one victim spoke of his devastation at seeing his son's killer jailed for just four years.

A PROMINENT barrister called for the DPP to make public the reasons for accepting lesser pleas.

The list of case studies reveals the horrific injuries and torment suffered by the child victims. They include skull fractures, broken ribs, bleeding on the brain, and torn internal organs. The highest sentence - 10 years' jail with a minimum of seven - was given in 2000 to Gary Stanley Kesic, who violently shook Jed Britton, 2, over the child's inability to learn toilet training.

David Scott Arney, 25, was sentenced on Monday to a minimum five years for repeatedly punching daughter Rachael in the stomach. Mr Bracks, clearly moved by baby Rachael's death, said he hoped the DPP would consider an appeal. "This is a horrific case, a dreadful case. I'm appalled by all of it," he said. "It would be up to the DPP to decide if it wishes to appeal on that matter . . . and you would hope if there is an opportunity . . . they would take that up."

One homicide squad detective said police were resigned to such sentences being imposed. "It's sad but it's at the top end," he said. "When a bloke gets nine (years in prison) with a six (year non-parole period), it's above average. "The little baby's got no choice. They're gone forever." The detective said it was a sad reality that if judges handed down stiffer sentences, they would be reduced on appeal. He said sustained public outrage might be the only thing that changed the situation.

Australian Childhood Foundation CEO Joe Tucci said the law was letting children down by reducing the seriousness of a horrific crime. "The price of a child's life is 5-10 years at the most and that, to me, is a tragic indictment on the way we see the sanctity of childhood," Mr Tucci said. He said the Office of Public Prosecutions should be transparent and accountable when it accepted a reduction in the charge. Mr Tucci wants plea bargaining abolished and a new child homicide offence with a minimum term introduced.

The father of Jonathan Guiver, 3, who was beaten to death by Mark Mietto in 2001, said the penalty for his son's death did not fit the crime. Mietto received a minimum four-year jail term and was released this year. "A fair penalty? There probably isn't one," Mr Guiver said. "Ten years is what I thought he would have got but nothing could be right for what he's done. "A child is defenceless. A child needs the protection of the courts."

Barrister Peter Faris, QC, said a jury should decide between murder and manslaughter in child homicide cases. "You hear that a jury is the hallmark of democracy and it reflects the views of the man in the street . . . why wouldn't you leave the case to them?" Mr Faris said. He said a culture had developed where child-killing cases were put in their own category with their own rules. "It's the theory that these are usually horrific circumstances for everybody," Mr Faris said. "It's an overly sympathetic attitude for factors that can be reflected in the sentence for murder."

Office of Public Prosecutions spokesman Bruce Gardner said plea offers were always considered, but whether they were acted on depended on differing legal factors. The Arney case, like all others, was being considered for appeal.

Report here



(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today)

SOAK THE CROOKED POLICE!

If you make injustice very expensive, there might be less of it. See my earlier post of August 25 for background

Lawyers for Earl Washington Junior are seeking one-point-six (m) million dollars in fees and expenses for their successful federal suit against a late state police investigator. The legal fees are in addition to the two-point-25 (m) million dollars that jurors awarded to Washington in May.

Washington spent nine-and-a-half years on death row for the 1982 rape and murder of Rebecca Lynn Williams, a 19-year-old Culpeper woman. DNA testing led to Washington's pardon in 2000.

In May, a federal jury in Charlottesville found that Curtis Wilmore, a state police officer who died in 1994, fabricated parts of Washington's confession. Wilmore got a confession from Washington in 1983 in which Washington was said to have known details of the crime only the killer could have known. Washington is mildly retarded.

Robert Hall, one of Washington's lawyers, said U-S District Judge Norman Moon will decide whether the state should pay the fees.

Report here



(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today)

Well done ... now free the Scot on death row

The 6th circuit Court of Appeals has already overturned Kenny Richey's conviction, but in Ohio, as in Pakistan, that does not seem to matter. He is still in jail. See my post of July 12, 2005

I am delighted to see that Briton Mirza Tahir Hussain has at last been released after 18 years on death row in Pakistan. Here I can only applaud the decision of Pakistan's president Pervez Musharraf to use his discretionary powers to commute Hussain's death sentence on humanitarian grounds. Hussain's life for the past 18 years has surely been torture. He went to Pakistan all those years ago to visit family and ended up in some sort of hell. It was also wonderful to see so many members of parliament, prime minister Tony Blair and Prince Charles stepping in to fight for Mirza Tahir's life. All of this is incredibly poignant for me.

For the past decade and a half I've campaigned for justice for another British man on a foreign death row - the Scot Kenny Richey, still languishing in Mansfield Correctional Facility in Ohio after almost 20 years. Kenny, who has a Scottish mother and grew up in Edinburgh, has fought a long campaign to clear his name. As a young man, Kenny was convicted of arson and murder in Ohio in 1986 and sentenced to death in January 1987.

He has been on death row since then, but has always protested his innocence. Evidence has since emerged casting serious doubt over his guilt, and human rights organisations such as Amnesty International have always said his original trial was shoddy and that he should be allowed to present the fresh evidence that could clear his name. In fact, Kenny's lawyers are going to get the chance to present information to the 6th Circuit Federal Court of Appeal in Cincinnati in the new year, but when this ordeal for Kenny is ever going to end is still anyone's guess.

Kenny Richey, like Mirza Tahir Hussain, has been a victim of a gross miscarriage of justice. After what appears to have been a timely and vital intervention in Mirza Tahir's case from Tony Blair and Prince Charles, is it now not time for something similar with Kenny Richey? After this month's mid-term elections in the US, Ohio has a new governor-elect in Ted Strickland and this could be just the time for high-level representations to him.

As the Sunday Herald has reported, Kenny has already written to Mr Strickland pleading with him to look afresh at his case. Kenny's supporters are doing the same. It would be fantastic if Prince Charles and Tony Blair personally intervened in Kenny's case, and I will be writing to them to praise their work for Mirza. But I will ask that they extend the same support to an innocent Scot who has spent half of his life rotting on death row for a crime that never happened.


Report here



(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today)

English case paves way for Scotswoman to appeal salt conviction

For more than six years, Susan Hamilton has lived with the stigma of child abuse. She is ostracised by neighbours, who vividly recall the day in 2000 when she was first accused of attempting to murder a girl aged eight. Despite daily taunts and recriminations, she maintains her innocence and refuses to move from her home in Sighthill, Edinburgh. But now she has been given real hope that she can prove her innocence. An expert involved in clearing a woman in England of murdering her child by salt poisoning sees remarkable similarities with Mrs Hamilton's case - and has called for an inquiry.

The key could be a drug called Domperidone, which Mrs Hamilton, 42, claims was prescribed to the child - and could have caused the high salt levels. The drug is the subject of a medical review because of possible links with high sodium levels.

For many in the community, Mrs Hamilton's name is synonymous with evil, and she will always be known as the woman jailed for poisoning a sick and defenceless little girl with huge doses of salt. But being spat on or jeered at by passers-by is nothing new to the mother of two, who she says she has nothing to hide. "I'll keep fighting because I'm innocent and the people that are closest to me, my family and friends, have all stood by me, because they know I didn't do it," she said. "My lawyers kept telling me to plead guilty and they'd spare me a jail sentence, but how on earth could you plead guilty to a crime you didn't commit? It's been three years of absolute hell, but I know we'll be proved right in the end."

At the time of her arrest, Lothian and Borders Police believed she was suffering from Munchausen's syndrome by proxy - a largely discredited condition which causes people to harm children in order to draw attention to themselves. In March 2000, the child was admitted to Edinburgh's Royal Hospital for Sick Children suffering from a level of sodium described by Thomas Marshall, a consultant paediatrician, as among the highest he had even seen. He concluded the girl had been "deliberately poisoned" with salt and police were called in. Mrs Hamilton was arrested and charged in September 2000, but it was an agonising three and a half years before the case came to court.

After a trial, she was cleared of attempted murder but convicted of assault and leaving the child brain-damaged. She was jailed for four years. The prosecution claimed she had been able to administer a potentially deadly dose because the youngster, who was fed through a tube directly into her stomach, could not taste what she was being given. It was claimed the girl, who cannot be named for legal reasons, suffered a stroke after receiving a particularly strong dose and would never fully recover from the salt doses, which were administered over a period of four and a half years.

But campaigners believe Mrs Hamilton is one of a growing number of women in Britain wrongly accused of child abuse and say a review of medical evidence will prove she has been the victim of a miscarriage of justice. Within the past month, she has been given new hope after the acquittal of Marianne Williams, 24, from Wiltshire, who was cleared of murdering her 15-month-old son, Joshua, with an overdose of salt. Joshua, born 12 weeks prematurely in November 2002, had chronic renal problems and found it difficult to retain enough sodium as it flowed through his bloodstream. His tiny kidneys led doctors to prescribe medications high in salt to provide him with appropriate nutrients.

The Hamilton and Williams cases have remarkable similarities and centre around the drug Domperidone. During Mrs Hamilton's trial, the High Court in Edinburgh heard the girl was repeatedly admitted to hospital suffering from high levels of sodium in her blood. The jury was told she had a history of ill- health, including weakness in her throat muscles which made it hard for her to swallow and hold down food. Mrs Hamilton's supporters insist Domperidone was prescribed by doctors to prevent nausea and vomiting, and that it could have exacerbated the child's illness. They say none of these factors was mentioned in court.

Now a government watchdog is to investigate the drug, amid concerns about its use in the salt-poisoning cases. Painstaking research by Penny Mellor, who runs Dare to Care, a pressure group for parents accused of harming children, has resulted in the drug being reviewed. "This is a major boost for all the people caught up in these allegations of child abuse," she said. "We have major concerns about Domperidone and how it can cause sodium levels to rise. There are so many similarities between these salt cases."

Ian and Angela Gay, from the West Midlands, were jailed for five years for poisoning their foster son with salt but had a manslaughter conviction overturned this year after the defence team argued the boy had a rare condition and could not regulate salt in his system.

Mrs Hamilton has drawn strength from the Williams case. "I was so pleased when I heard Marianne had been acquitted because I knew exactly what she was going through and I finally began to think I could clear my name," she said. "It brought back a lot of memories from the day I stood in the dock. Up to the very last minute, I never believed I was going to be convicted. This whole thing has been a living nightmare and I want to be able to clear my name and move on. I only hope that finally people are going to believe I was sent to jail for a crime I didn't commit. To be accused of harming a child is the worst thing that can happen to anyone."

Dr Michael Moritz, a professor of paediatrics in the US, was called as an expert witness in the case of Marianne Williams, who last month was cleared of killing her 15-month-old son, Joshua. The prosecution suggested she had force-fed the baby with the equivalent of three and a half teaspoonfuls of table salt. Dr Moritz said there are disturbing parallels between the case of Miss Williams and Susan Hamilton, jailed in 2003 for poisoning an eight-year-old girl with salt. His intervention comes as The Scotsman reveals a government watchdog is to conduct a review of the drug Domperidone - prescribed to the children in both cases.

"I'm keen to talk to the Scottish lawyers to investigate this case," said Dr Moritz. "If a child has been salt poisoned, you must have a witness. Just because a doctor can't work out how it happened, it doesn't mean the child was deliberately poisoned."

Report here



(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today)

JAILHOUSE SNITCHES: LONG OVERDUE CAUTION IN CALIFORNIA

A state panel Monday urged tighter standards on the use of jailhouse informants in criminal cases, noting the danger of manufactured ``confessions'' from cellmates. Saying the use of such informants is a leading cause of wrongful convictions, the California Commission on the Fair Administration of Justice unanimously recommended statewide safeguards that would require, among other measures, independent corroboration before informants are used.

The recommendations fall far short of strict rules enacted in Los Angeles County, where the criminal justice system was stung by a scandal involving jailhouse informants in the 1980s. In Santa Clara County, a ranking prosecutor says the guidelines largely represent policies already in place, but one defense lawyer Monday called the county procedures a ``disgrace.'' The recommendation by the panel, which includes Santa Clara County District Attorney George Kennedy, comes amid a brewing controversy over the use of jailhouse informants in the South Bay.

The use of jailhouse informants locally was examined as part of ``Tainted Trials, Stolen Justice,'' a series of Mercury News articles that have highlighted a variety of issues raising the small but significant risk of wrongful conviction. One case that the newspaper looked at, the murder trial of Roy Garcia, ended in an acquittal last month after the prosecution relied in part on the testimony of an informant who had been found not credible in another case.

And earlier this month, the Texas inmate sharing a cell with Tyrone Hamel, who was charged in the 1988 killing of a Palo Alto lawyer, was called to testify at a preliminary hearing that he heard Hamel confess.

Because such confessions are easily manufactured, and because inmates have so much incentive to curry favor with authorities, the state commission is urging statewide rules. The commission wants the Legislature to require that juries be told that corroborating evidence must accompany a jailhouse informant's testimony about either the crime or the existence of special circumstances that could lead to the death penalty. The commission also called on district attorneys to adopt policies requiring a supervisor to approve the decision to call a jailhouse informant, to maintain a database of informants within the office, and to record all interviews with inmates. ``I believe these recommendations are a step forward in terms of the most egregious situations'' involving informants, said the commission's executive director, Gerald F. Uelmen.

He said many district attorney's offices throughout the state have no written policy at all. The commission report credited Santa Clara County for having a written policy, though that document is far less elaborate than that of Los Angeles County, where jailhouse informants may not be used without the approval of a committee of top officials within the office. David Tomkins, an assistant district attorney in Santa Clara County, said he and other supervisors dislike and discourage the use of informants. He said prosecutors in his office must be satisfied an informant is credible and that the informant's testimony is vital to the case. The office has developed a computer system to track and identify witnesses in cases, but that database is not yet complete and some attorneys use it more diligently than others. Tomkins said the office ``is reviewing'' the decision to use the Texas inmate at the preliminary hearing in the Hamel case. He was arrested after DNA tied him to the slaying of Gretchen Burford, a case that went unsolved for years. Tomkins said no decision has been made on whether to call the inmate as a witness if the case goes to trial.

But last month Deputy District Attorney Javier Alcala called inmate Timothy Villalba as a witness in the Garcia trial, despite doubts about Villalba's credibility. Villalba, hoping for parole while serving 25-years to life for murder, contended that Garcia had implicated himself in the 1998 killing of Deborah Gregg while he and Garcia were in custody together. Villalba was already ruled not credible in another case, after he testified in 2002 that he heard another inmate -- Glen ``Buddy'' Nickerson -- confess his part in a notorious 1984 drug-related double homicide. A federal judge ruled Villalba ``entirely without credibility,'' and overturned Nickerson's conviction. Wednesday, Garcia's attorney, Doron Weinberg, said he was ``outraged'' by any suggestion that Santa Clara County had model standards on the use of informants. ``Any policy that would permit the testimony of somebody like Villalba . . . is not a policy worth talking about.''

The commission earlier this year approved recommendations on protecting against mistaken identification and on wrongful confessions. Those recommendations led to bills that ultimately were vetoed by the governor. Nevertheless, Uelmen said Monday he was ``optimistic'' that the new report -- which carried unanimous support -- would be enacted and that he ``also remains optimistic that the governor will give a second look at the earlier measures as well.''

Report here




(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today)

Britain: No justice at all. Huge numbers of violent criminals are avoiding jail as police issue more "cautions"

More than half of people charged with offences of violence against the person receive a caution rather than going to court, according to government figures published yesterday. Hundreds of thousands of criminals, including violent offenders, are escaping punishment after a surge in the use of police cautioning. Figures published by the Home Office revealed a 17 per cent rise in police cautions in England and Wales to reach almost 300,000 last year.

For the first time people charged with violence against the person are now more likely to receive a caution than go to court and face the prospect of a fine, community punishment or jail term.

A caution is a formal warning given by a senior officer in a police station where a person admits to a criminal offence. The caution gives an individual a police criminal record.

The jump in use of cautions was condemned by opposition politicians who accused the Government of talking tough on crime while being in charge when the cautioning rate was increasing.

Nick Clegg, the Liberal Democrat home affairs spokesman, said: “The public will be confused that a government that spends so much time talking tough is in fact presiding over an increasing number of cautions for serious violent crimes. Cautions should not be used in a way that lets people off the hook who have committed serious offences.”

David Davis, the Shadow Home Secretary, said that the figures were an insult to victims of crime. “It is bad enough that so many people suffer from soaring violent crime. It is outrageous that so many people get away with it.

“This is a direct consequence of Labour’s failure to address the chronic lack of capacity in our prisons, meaning people who should be in jail are not. People want to see offenders properly prosecuted and convicted.”

A Home Office spokeswoman said: “We are quite clear that more serious cases of violent crime will lead to a custodial sentence. But in certain cases, involving much less serious injuries, a simple caution may be appropriate and it is right for the police to decide whether to issue a caution or whether to charge.”

The Home Office figures show that the number of suspects found guilty by the courts fell by 4 per cent last year. A total of 1.4 million people were convicted in the magistrates and Crown Courts, compared with 2.1 million in 1981 and 1.5 million in 1991. When cautions were included, 1.78 million offenders were dealt with by the criminal justice system, a fall of 1 per cent.

Within the overall increase in cautions, there was also a 17 per cent increase in cautions for the most serious offences, to reach 183,000.

A total of 55 per cent of the 91,900 people accused of violence against the person were cautioned in 2005, compared with 48 per cent the previous year. Almost half of 588 people accused of threat or conspiracy to murder received a caution from the police. But the figures show that the number of people cautioned for rape has fallen sharply from 40 in 2004 to 22 last year.

The cautioning rate for indictable, or more serious, offences rose four points to 38 per cent.

Three police forces — Dyfed-Powys in Wales, Surrey and Warwickshire — had caution rates for more serious offences of more than 50 per cent. The rate in Dyfed-Powys and Surrey was 57 per cent, compared with just 18 per cent in North Yorkshire.

Yesterday’s report also highlights the struggle that the Government has to speed up justice. The average time from an offence being committed to the case being completed in the magistrates’ court rose from 118 days in 2004 to 122 days last year.

The figures also show that the proportion convicted of sexual offences remained at 56 per cent despite wideranging government measures to boost guilty verdicts.

The number of murder convictions in the year reached 394, up from 361 in 2004.

Report here


(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today)