West Australia: Corruption and Crime Commission reveals assault by cops against woman at East Perth Watch House

No action planned against the cops concerned.  Determined and forceful refusal to co-operate with lawful police requests does risk the cops losing it

A WOMAN was repeatedly struck by police — with one officer using “hammer blows” – and had her finger broken in a shocking strip search incident condemned by the state’s corruption and crime watchdog.

The Corruption and Crime Commission’s damning report into the incident at the East Perth Watch House on April 7, 2013 found there were “serious misconduct, misconduct or reviewable police action in relation to five officers”.

The report was tabled in Parliament on Thursday morning, and CCTV vision showing part of the incident was also released.

In the early hours of that day, Joanne Martin, then 33, was arrested for disorderly conduct in Northbridge and taken to the East Perth Watch House.

The CCC found there was “nothing to indicate Ms Martin was a threat to any person” and that no person should be subjected to the kind of treatment meted out to her.

The watchdog noted in its report that soon after her arrival, Ms Martin found herself naked, lying face down on a floor, with a number of female watch house officers seeking to forcibly restrain her.

“One (was) applying hammer blows with a fist to the shoulder blade area, a second also striking here, and another using such force to try and remove a ring that it caused a serious fracture of a finger,” the report states.

“A little later, Ms Martin was escorted handcuffed and with leg restraints, naked apart from a blanket, past male officers.

“It is of considerable concern that a person could in Perth in 2013 undergo what befell Joanne Martin at the watch house on the morning of 7 April 2013.”

The CCC condemned the “unacceptable” treatment.  “It is clear from the … analysis of the events of 7 April 2013 that poor training and supervision, failures to adhere to the statutory and regulatory framework, and inconsistencies between the legislative protections for those in police custody and internal police rules were prime causes of those events,” it reports.

The report states this incident was occurring in the context of apparently similar conduct — tacitly or otherwise — approved by WA Police.

“That this is the case is the result of institutionalised failure by WA Police and the failure of its chains of command to ensure that the law, various regulations, policies and procedures are correctly applied, and its officers and their supervisors are accordingly held to account,” the report states.
The East Perth Watch House where a woman was subjected to a shocking strip search and had her finger broken.

While noting that some steps had been taken to improve procedures since the move to the Perth Watch House in Northbridge, the CCC is calling for urgent action on training and supervision of officers in the wake of its investigation into this matter.

The CCC supported police’s plans to install a body scanner at the Perth Watch House to replace strip searches, but it remains “dissatisfied” with other measures taken to address the misconduct.

Improved training, supervision, record keeping and a mandatory regime to protect detainees who are strip-searched are among six recommendations in the report.

In a response to the CCC in January, WA Police Superintendent of the Ethical Standards Division, John Leembruggen, said no criminal or managerial would be taken against the officers involved. However, a sergeant did receive “verbal guidance” for failing to accommodate Ms Martin’s request to lodge a complaint.

“Martin’s extraordinary physical strength posed a risk to the individual officers who were merely trying to lawfully remove her clothing and personal property and it is regrettable that during this process she received an injury to her ring finger,” he said.

“Ms Martin’s strength and grim determination not to allow the officers to carry out their lawful duty is illustrated by the necessity for seven other women to restrain her.

“WA Police hold the view it was Ms Martin’s unswerving and sustained opposition that set the standard, not something precipitated by uncontrolled aggression by any officer.”

In a subsequent letter to the CCC in July, Acting Assistant Commissioner of Judicial Services Lawrence Panaia said police supported the watchdog’s recommendations.

“Our staff work in a volatile environment with many intoxicated and violent detainees and experience has shown detainees frequently try to do harm to themselves or others,” he said.

“In particular, officers need to tread the fine line between not searching thoroughly (leading to self-harm and assaults) and searching too thoroughly, leading to unnecessary conflict with detainees ... where procedures are lacking or mistakes have been made, we will make improvements.”

Mr O’Callaghan said situations escalated in occasion in watch houses but the officers didn’t deviate from their training. “They have to make a decision about how they restrain the prisoner in those circumstances,” he told 6PR.

He also said the concern was for the safety of the detainee, who wasn’t a small woman. “We don’t agree that there was no reason to strip search that woman,” he said.

WA Police Union President George Tilbury said he fully supports the Commissioner in his reaction to the CCC report.  “Police watch houses are dynamic and volatile environments, and the WAPU will always support our members taking the necessary precautions, to ensure their safety as well as that of persons in custody,” he said.

“We will continue to work with WA Police and our Perth Watch House branch to ensure the safety of our members is paramount. “WAPU is disappointed it took so long for the CCC to form its opinions relating to our Members’ actions. Under its old administration, the CCC identified this incident and directed WA Police not to investigate.

“We believe the Professional Standards Portfolio is best placed to investigate allegations of police misconduct. If they were allowed to investigate, any perceived issues would have been resolved much sooner.”

Original report here


(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress.  If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where  posts  appear as well as on  the primary site.  I have reposted  the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts  HERE or HERE or here

Drivers, Beware: The Costly, Deadly Dangers of Traffic Stops in the American Police State

J.W. Whitehead

“The Fourth Amendment was designed to stand between us and arbitrary governmental authority. For all practical purposes, that shield has been shattered, leaving our liberty and personal integrity subject to the whim of every cop on the beat, trooper on the highway and jail official. The framers would be appalled.”—Herman Schwartz, The Nation

Trying to predict the outcome of any encounter with the police is a bit like playing Russian roulette: most of the time you will emerge relatively unscathed, although decidedly poorer and less secure about your rights, but there’s always the chance that an encounter will turn deadly.

The odds weren’t in Walter L. Scott’s favor. Reportedly pulled over for a broken taillight, Scott—unarmed—ran away from the police officer, who pursued and shot him from behind, first with a Taser, then with a gun. Scott was struck five times, “three times in the back, once in the upper buttocks and once in the ear — with at least one bullet entering his heart.”

Samuel Dubose, also unarmed, was pulled over for a missing front license plate. He was reportedly shot in the head after a brief struggle in which his car began rolling forward.

Levar Jones was stopped for a seatbelt offense, just as he was getting out of his car to enter a convenience store. Directed to show his license, Jones leaned into his car to get his wallet, only to be shot four times by the “fearful” officer. Jones was also unarmed.

Bobby Canipe was pulled over for having an expired registration. When the 70-year-old reached into the back of his truck for his walking cane, the officer fired several shots at him, hitting him once in the abdomen.

Dontrell Stevens was stopped “for not bicycling properly.” The officer pursuing him “thought the way Stephens rode his bike was suspicious. He thought the way Stephens got off his bike was suspicious.” Four seconds later, sheriff’s deputy Adams Lin shot Stephens four times as he pulled out a black object from his waistband. The object was his cell phone. Stephens was unarmed.

If there is any lesson to be learned from these “routine” traffic stops, it is that drivers should beware.

At a time when police can do no wrong—at least in the eyes of the courts, police unions and politicians dependent on their votes—and a “fear” for officer safety is used to justify all manner of police misconduct, “we the people” are at a severe disadvantage.

According to the Justice Department, the most common reason for a citizen to come into contact with the police is being a driver in a traffic stop. On average, one in 10 Americans gets pulled over by police. Black drivers are 31 percent more likely to be pulled over than white drivers, or about 23 percent more likely than Hispanic drivers. As the Washington Post concludes, “‘Driving while black’ is, indeed, a measurable phenomenon.”

As Sandra Bland learned the hard way, the reason for a traffic stop no longer matters. Bland, who was pulled over for allegedly failing to use her turn signal, was arrested after refusing to comply with the police officer’s order to extinguish her cigarette and exit her vehicle. The encounter escalated, with the officer threatening to “light” Bland up with his taser. Three days later, Bland was found dead in her jail cell.

“You’re doing all of this for a failure to signal?” Bland asked as she got out of her car, after having been yelled at and threatened repeatedly. Had she only known, drivers have been pulled over for far less. Indeed, police officers have been given free range to pull anyone over for a variety of reasons.

This approach to traffic stops (what I would call “blank check policing,” in which the police get to call all of the shots) has resulted in drivers being stopped for windows that are too heavily tinted, for driving too fast, driving too slow, failing to maintain speed, following too closely, improper lane changes, distracted driving, screeching a car’s tires, and leaving a parked car door open for too long.

Motorists can also be stopped by police for driving near a bar or on a road that has large amounts of drunk driving, driving a certain make of car (Mercedes, Grand Prix and Hummers are among the most ticketed vehicles), having anything dangling from the rearview mirror (air fresheners, handicap parking permits, troll transponders or rosaries), and displaying pro-police bumper stickers.

Incredibly, a federal appeals court actually ruled unanimously in 2014 that acne scars and driving with a stiff upright posture are reasonable grounds for being pulled over. More recently, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that driving a vehicle that has a couple air fresheners, rosaries and pro-police bumper stickers at 2 MPH over the speed limit is suspicious, meriting a traffic stop.

Unfortunately for drivers, not only have traffic stops become potentially deadly encounters, they have also turned into a profitable form of highway robbery for the police departments involved.

As The Washington Post reports, “traffic stops for minor infractions such as speeding or equipment violations are increasingly used as a pretext for officers to seize cash from drivers.” Relying on federal and state asset forfeiture laws, police set up “stings” on public roads that enable them to stop drivers for a variety of so-called “suspicious” behavior, search their vehicles and seize anything of value that could be suspected of being connected to criminal activity. Since 2001, police have seized $2.5 billion from people who were not charged with a crime and without a warrant being issued.

“In case after case,” notes The Washington Post, “highway interdictors appeared to follow a similar script. Police set up what amounted to rolling checkpoints on busy highways and pulled over motorists for minor violations, such as following too closely or improper signaling. They quickly issued warnings or tickets. They studied drivers for signs of nervousness, including pulsing carotid arteries, clenched jaws and perspiration. They also looked for supposed ‘indicators’ of criminal activity, which can include such things as trash on the floor of a vehicle, abundant energy drinks or air fresheners hanging from rearview mirrors.”

If you’re starting to feel somewhat overwhelmed, intimidated and fearful for your life and your property, you should be. Never before have “we the people” been so seemingly defenseless in the face of police misconduct, lacking advocates in the courts and in the legislatures.

So how do you survive a police encounter with your life and wallet intact?

The courts have already given police the green light to pull anyone over for a variety of reasons. In an 8-1 ruling in Heien v. North Carolina, the US Supreme Court affirmed that police officers can pull someone over based on a “reasonable” but mistaken belief about the law.

Of course, what’s reasonable to agents of the police state may be completely unreasonable to the populace. Nevertheless, the moment those lights start flashing and that siren goes off, we’re all in the same boat: we must pull over.

However, it’s what happens after you’ve been pulled over that’s critical. Survival is the key.

Technically, you have the right to remain silent (beyond the basic requirement to identify yourself and show your registration). You have the right to refuse to have your vehicle searched. You have the right to film your interaction with police. You have the right to ask to leave. You also have the right to resist an unlawful order such as a police officer directing you to extinguish your cigarette, put away your phone or stop recording them.

However, as Bland learned the hard way, there is a price for asserting one’s rights. “Faced with an authority figure unwilling to de-escalate the situation, Bland refused to be bullied or intimidated,” writes Boston Globe contributor Renee Graham. “She understood her rights, but for African-Americans in encounters with police, the appalling price for asserting even the most basic rights can be their lives.”

So if you don’t want to get probed, poked, pinched, tasered, tackled, searched, seized, stripped, manhandled, arrested, shot, or killed, don’t say, do or even suggest anything that even hints of noncompliance when it comes to interactions with police.

One police officer advised that if you feel as if you’re being treated unfairly, comply anyhow and contest it in court later. Similarly, black parents, advising their kids on how to deal with police, tell them to just obey the officer’s orders. “The goal,” as one parent pointed out, “is to stay alive.”

It seems that “comply or die” has become the new maxim for the American police state.

Then again, not even compliance is a guarantee of safety anymore. “Police are specialists in violence,” warns Kristian Williams, who has written extensively on the phenomenon of police militarization and brutality. “They are armed, trained, and authorized to use force. With varying degrees of subtlety, this colors their every action. Like the possibility of arrest, the threat of violence is implicit in every police encounter. Violence, as well as the law, is what they represent.”

In other words, in the American police state, “we the people” are at the mercy of law enforcement officers who have almost absolute discretion to decide who is a threat, what constitutes resistance, and how harshly they can deal with the citizens they were appointed to “serve and protect.”

As I point out in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People, this mindset that any challenge to police authority is a threat that needs to be “neutralized” is a dangerous one that is part of a greater nationwide trend that sets the police beyond the reach of the Fourth Amendment. Moreover, when police officers are allowed to operate under the assumption that their word is law and that there is no room for any form of disagreement or even question, that serves to chill the First Amendment’s assurances of free speech, free assembly and the right to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

Frankly, it doesn’t matter whether it’s a casual “show your ID” request on a boardwalk, a stop-and-frisk search on a city street, or a traffic stop for speeding or just to check your insurance. If you feel like you can’t walk away from a police encounter of your own volition—and more often than not you can’t, especially when you’re being confronted by someone armed to the hilt with all manner of militarized weaponry and gear—then for all intents and purposes, you’re under arrest from the moment a cop stops you.

Sad, isn’t it, how quickly we have gone from a nation of laws—where the least among us had just as much right to be treated with dignity and respect as the next person (in principle, at least)—to a nation of law enforcers (revenue collectors with weapons) who treat us all like suspects and criminals?

Clearly, the language of freedom is no longer the common tongue spoken by the citizenry and their government. With the government having shifted into a language of force, “we the people” have been reduced to suspects in a surveillance state, criminals in a police state, and enemy combatants in a military empire.

Original report here


(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress.  If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where  posts  appear as well as on  the primary site.  I have reposted  the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts  HERE or HERE or here

Woman spent 15 YEARS on death row after being wrongly convicted of killing her abusive husband

A woman who was sentenced to death after she was wrongly convicted of killing her abusive husband has finally been set free after 15 years of incarceration, after the court re-examined her case and determined that there were some serious errors made during her trial.

Now 57, Michelle Byrom has spent more than a quarter of her life behind bars in Mississippi, awaiting her death for a crime she didn't commit. Even after her son confessed to murdering the man who abused him and his mother mercilessly, she continued to sit on death row.

Finally free again, Michelle recently spoke to Vanessa Golembewski at Refinery29 about what it was like to be imprisoned while innocent, condemning the judge who sentenced her and marveling at how much the world has changed since she was first locked up.

Michelle's marriage was a hard one. She met her former husband, Edward Byrom Sr. when she was 17 and he was 32, two years after leaving her Yonkers, New York, home and starting to work as a stripper.

Within five years they were married and had a son – but Edward had also started to become abusive. He beat her up regularly, once even making her ingest rat poison. She wasn't allowed to have money or be close to her family. He'd hit on any friends whom she invited over. He even forced her to have sex with other men and videotaped it.

'I don’t really know what else I could have done,' she said, explaining that whenever she tried to get away, he would find her and beat her more. 'Anywhere I would have went he would have found me, and he would have hurt anybody that tried to help me.'

In June of 1999, Edward Byrom Sr., then 58, was found murdered in his own bed.

At the time, Michelle, then 42, was in the hospital being treated for pneumonia. The local sheriff came to visit her there, telling her that they had plenty of evidence and she shouldn't leave her son, Edward Byron Jr., 'hanging out there to bite the bullet'.

On prescription drugs, she told the sheriff that she would 'take all the responsibility', hoping to protect her son. She confessed, making up a story on the spot about hiring one of her son's friends to do the deed. She was arrested at the hospital and brought directly to jail.

Michelle then got what could hardly be called a fair trial. She claims that she knew some of the members of the jury - including one who was in her Sunday school class - which should have disqualified them from serving.

No witnesses were called to testify in her defense. Important evidence was not even presented. And while her husband had abused her, prosecutors said that she could have just left him, rather than kill him - even though she maintained that she didn't actually do it.

In fact, by this time, her son had even confessed to the murder to a court-appointed psychiatrist. He pointed police to the murder weapon and tested positive for gunpowder residue on his hands. But none of that information was brought up in court.

In 2000, Michelle was convicted of capital murder by Judge Thomas Gardner, who sentenced her to death by lethal injection.

Michelle said that there were other abused women like her on death row at Central Mississippi Correctional Facility - including Rachel Moore, who shot her husband while he beat her. Rachel was sentenced by the same judge as Michelle.

'Judge Gardner has a big problem with domestic violence,' Michelle said. 'I think he has a problem with females, period. I don’t know if he’s married or not. If he is, I feel sorry for his wife.'

She went on to spend 15 years in prison awaiting her execution. During that time, many people on the outside were campaigning for her life to be spared - including former Supreme Court Justice Oliver Diaz.

'Whoever represented her at trial did a horrible job,' he said. 'There’s no doubt that, had she had adequate representation [earlier], she would never have received the death penalty in this case.'

Then one day in March 2014, just hours before she was scheduled to die, a fellow death row inmate told Michelle that she was on the news because she was going to get a new trial. Everyone celebrated.

As it turned out, the Mississippi Supreme Court had acknowledged that Michelle's defense had been incompetent. They also looked at new evidence that hadn't been admitted the first time around.

Instead of going through another trial, though, Michelle agreed to plead 'no contest' and leave prison sooner, with a felony on her record. So, on June 26, she walked out of prison a free woman.

From there, she moved in with her brother, Kenny, and his wife, Paula, in Murfreesboro, Tennessee, where she has her own room that she decorated with pictures and inspirational quotes.

Adjusting to life outside of prison after a decade and a half has had its surprises. Smart phones, text messaging, and Facebook are all new. There are far fewer video rental stores. There's also plenty of new music, including one of her personal new favorites, Meghan Trainor's All About that Bass.

But Michelle can't completely shake off her prison habits. She doesn't sleep much, and eats just once a day. She also keeps in touch with some of her old fellow inmates.

And she'll never get to live as she did before prison. She now has Lupus and is dependent on a wheelchair. As a felon, she'd have a hard time getting a job, even if she could physically work. She is, however, considering taking up motivational speaking for those dealing with domestic violance.

Michelle also can't expect any reparations, since she pled no contest. Even the judge - whom she implied unfairly sentenced abuse victims - is unlikely to see any repercussions, since Michelle has been told that filing a complaint would be a waste of her time.

'No judge is going to go against another judge,' she said. 'Who down South would go against a judge from the South?'

Original report here



(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress.  If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where  posts  appear as well as on  the primary site.  I have reposted  the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts  HERE or HERE or here

The staggering number of wrongful convictions in America

By Samuel R. Gross

I edit the National Registry of Exonerations, which compiles stories and data about people who were convicted of crimes in the United States and later exonerated. The cases are fascinating and important, but they wear on me: So many of them are stories of destruction and defeat.

Consider, for example, Rafael Suarez . In 1997 in Tucson, Suarez was convicted of a vicious felony assault for which another man had already pleaded guilty. Suarez’s lawyer interviewed the woman who called 911 to report the incident as well as a second eyewitness. Both said that Suarez did not attack the victim and, in fact, had attempted to stop the assault. A third witness told the lawyer that he heard the victim say that he would lie in court to get Suarez convicted. None of these witnesses were called to testify at trial. Suarez was convicted and sentenced to five years.

After these facts came to light in 2000, Suarez was released. He had lost his house and his job, and his plan to become a paralegal had been derailed. His wife had divorced him, and he had lost parental rights to their three children, including one born while he was locked up. Suarez sued his former lawyer, who by then had been disbarred. He got a $1 million judgment, but the lawyer had no assets and filed for bankruptcy. Barring a miracle, Suarez will never see a penny of that judgment.

The most depressing thing about Suarez’s case is how comparatively lucky he was. He was exonerated, against all odds, because his otherwise irresponsible lawyer had actually talked to the critical witnesses and recorded those interviews despite failing later to call them at trial.

Suarez served three years in prison for a crime he didn’t commit. The average time served for the 1,625 exonerated individuals in the registry is more than nine years. Last year, three innocent murder defendants in Cleveland were exonerated 39 years after they were convicted — they spent their entire adult lives in prison — and even they were lucky: We know without doubt that the vast majority of innocent defendants who are convicted of crimes are never identified and cleared.

The registry receives four or five letters a week from prisoners who claim to be innocent. They’re heartbreaking. Most of the writers are probably guilty, but some undoubtedly are not. We tell them that we can’t help; we are a research project only, we don’t represent clients or investigate claims of innocence. Fair enough, I guess, but some innocent prisoners who have been exonerated wrote hundreds of these letters before anybody took notice. How many innocent defendants have I ignored?

Innocence projects do handle these cases, or at least some of them. They receive many times more letters than we do. I’ve spoken with lawyers who do this work, and who have successfully exonerated dozens of defendants. Most of them have clients who remain in prison despite powerful evidence of their innocence that no court will consider. And they all know that there are countless innocent defendants hidden in the piles of pleas for help that they will never have time to investigate.

How many people are convicted of crimes they did not commit? Last year, a study I co-authored on the issue was published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. It shows that 4.1 percent of defendants who are sentenced to death in the United States are later shown to be innocent: 1 in 25.

Death sentences are uniquely well-documented. We don’t know nearly enough about other kinds of criminal cases to estimate the rate of wrongful convictions for those. The rate could be lower than for capital murders, or it could be higher. Of course, in a country with millions of criminal convictions a year and more than 2 million people behind bars, even 1 percent amounts to tens of thousands of tragic errors.

The problem may be worst at the low end of the spectrum, in misdemeanor courts where almost everybody pleads guilty. For example, in July 2014 Wassillie Gregory was charged with “harassment” of a police officer in Bethel, Alaska. The officer wrote in his report that Gregory was “clearly intoxicated” and that “I kindly tried to assist Gregory into my cruiser for protective custody when he pulled away and clawed at me with his hand.”

The next step in the case would normally be the last: Gregory pleaded guilty, without the benefit of a defense lawyer. But Gregory was exonerated a year later after a surveillance video surfaced showing the officer handcuffing him and then repeatedly slamming him onto the pavement.

In the past year, 45 defendants were exonerated after pleading guilty to low-level drug crimes in Harris County, Tex. They were cleared months or years after conviction by lab tests that found no illegal drugs in the materials seized from them.

Why then did they plead guilty? As best we can tell, most were held in jail because they couldn’t make bail. When they were brought to court for the first time, they were given a take-it-or-leave-it, for-today-only offer: Plead guilty and get probation or weeks to months in jail. If they refused, they’d wait in jail for months, if not a year or more, before they got to trial, and risk additional years in prison if they were convicted. That’s a high price to pay for a chance to prove one’s innocence.

Police officers are supposed to be suspicious and proactive, to stop, question and arrest people who might have committed crimes, or who might be about to do so. Most officers are honest, and, I am sure, they are usually right. But “most” and “usually right” are not good enough for criminal convictions. Courts — judges, prosecutors, defense attorneys, sometime juries — are supposed to decide criminal cases. Instead, most misdemeanor courts outsource deciding guilt or innocence to the police. It’s cheaper, but you get what you pay for.

We can do better, of course — for misdemeanors, for death penalty cases and for everything in between — if we’re willing to foot the bill. It’ll cost money to achieve the quality of justice we claim to provide: to do more careful investigations, to take fewer quick guilty pleas and conduct more trials, and to make sure those trials are well done. But first we have to recognize that what we do now is not good enough.

Original report here


(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress.  If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where  posts  appear as well as on  the primary site.  I have reposted  the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts  HERE or HERE or here

I called the police to calm my son - but he died after they tasered him: Grieving mother's plea to Theresa May over 'Robocop' stun guns

Taser used for no known reason

It began as no more than a neighbourhood dispute. Yet within two hours of a call to the police, a 23-year-old man lay dead, struck in the chest by 50,000 volts.

According to an inquest, the death of Jordon Begley is the first recorded killing with a police Taser in Britain.

And now his grieving mother – speaking for the first time since the incident – is demanding to know why what should have been a routine police visit escalated into what she describes as ‘a scene from a Robocop movie’.

The inquest heard how the tragic events unfolded on a summer’s evening in July 2013 after Jordon returned home from work to the terraced house where he lived with his mother, Dot.

Jordon began rowing with neighbours, who accused him of stealing money and said they had called police. One said he was sending five men over to beat him up.

Mrs Begley, 48, dialled 999, believing her son was in danger and that the police would be able to help him. She recalled: ‘Jordon walked into the kitchen and picked up a vegetable knife. I told the police he had a knife and men were coming to the house.

‘I was still on the phone when we heard police sirens. Jordon threw the knife down and we walked out to the garden.’

After a conversation with two officers, the factory worker agreed to go back into his house in Gorton, Manchester, with one of them to explain the argument.

Mrs Begley told another officer that six weeks beforehand her son had had tests on his heart. Her warning was not passed on.

For reasons that are still unexplained, one of the PCs fired a nine-second Taser shot at Jordon’s chest. Jordon, who weighed 10st [140lb] , was then restrained by other officers, handcuffed and put face-down on the floor.

When it became apparent that he was not responding, he was rushed to hospital. When Mrs Begley got there she was told he had died.

It took nearly two years for the full horror of the day to emerge at Jordon’s inquest, which was finally held in June.

The inquest jury concluded that while an initial Taser shock did not cause his heart to stop, its use and the restraint used ‘more than materially contributed’ to a package of stressful factors leading to his fatal cardiac arrest.

Jordon’s alcoholism and cannabis use contributed to his state of health at the time of his death, the inquest heard.

The jury added that police officers were ‘more concerned about their own welfare’ than Jordon’s.

The Independent Police Complaints Commission has investigated 11 cases in which a person died after being hit by a Taser since their introduction in 2003 but this was the first inquest to rule that a Taser was responsible for a death. It is expected to have a wide-ranging impact on the future use of Tasers.

Home Office figures show Taser use has increased by more than 200 per cent since their introduction, and a tenth of officers are now armed with one. Home Secretary Theresa May has ordered a review of Taser data and use of force.

Greater Manchester Police restricted the operational duties of the officers involved in the case following the inquest.

Mrs Begley said: ‘This is not about closure. It’s about making sure that no one else ever has to go through this. The only way that can happen is a fundamental review of Taser training guidelines.’

A spokesman for the Independent Police Complaints Commission said in a statement: ‘We believed the officers acted correctly and generally in line with their training.’

Original report here

(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress.  If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where  posts  appear as well as on  the primary site.  I have reposted  the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts  HERE or HERE or here

Bipartisan Group of Lawmakers Asks Treasury Department to Return $29,500 Taken From Innocent Dairy Farmers

A bipartisan group of lawmakers on the House Ways and Means Oversight Subcommittee is coming together to ask the Treasury Department to return nearly $30,000 it seized from Maryland dairy farmers in 2012.

The letter, sent August 11 to Treasury Secretary Jack Lew, calls on the agency to return $29,500 the Internal Revenue Service seized from Frederick-based dairy farmers Randy and Karen Sowers through civil asset forfeiture.

The lawmakers also asked Lew to review similar cases and return money seized by the tax agency under the practice.

“Treasury still holds funds seized from innocent business owners who settled their cases only because they could not afford to do otherwise,” the letter said. “As the Treasury secretary, you have the opportunity to right the wrong done to these small business owners.”

Reps. Peter Roskam, R-Ill., the subcommittee’s chairman, John Lewis, D-Ga., Mike Kelly, R-Pa., Joseph Crowley, D-N.Y., Patrick Meehan, R-Pa., Charlie Rangel, D-N.Y., Jason Smith, R-Mo., Kristi Noem, R-S.D., and Jim Renacci, R-Ohio, signed onto the letter.

Three years ago, the IRS seized $63,000 from the Sowers’ bank account under civil asset forfeiture. The tax agency alleged that the couple committed structuring violations, which involves making consistent cash deposits or withdrawals of under $10,000 to avoid bank reporting requirements.

The money deposited into the farm’s account, though, came from customers who paid in cash at the local farmer’s market.

The Sowers were never charged or convicted of a crime.

While the couple was in the midst of settlement negotiations with the government, hoping to have most of their money returned, Randy Sowers spoke with a reporter from The City Paper in Baltimore, Md., about his experience with structuring and civil asset forfeiture.

On the day the article was published, Stefan Cassella, the assistant U.S. attorney overseeing Sowers’ structuring case, told the family’s lawyer he had a “problem” and was no longer willing to negotiate a settlement amount, according to court filings.

The Sowers did eventually settle, forfeiting $29,500 to the federal government.

Though the Sowers had some of their money returned, the couple filed a petition with the government last month asking for the remainder of it back.

The family’s case is just one of many that has emerged in recent years involving civil asset forfeiture. Under the tool, law enforcement agencies have the authority to seize money and property if it’s suspected of being connected to a crime.

Forfeitures that stem from structuring violations fall under a subset of civil asset forfeiture laws that oversee cash transactions.

The procedure began as a way for law enforcement to target those involved in drug trafficking and money laundering. However, a number of innocent property owners like the Sowers have come forward after having money seized without ever being charged or convicted of a crime.

In response to reports identifying innocent Americans who had money seized due to structuring violations, the IRS changed its policy regarding such seizures in October 2014.

Under the new policy, the tax agency could only pursue structuring cases in which the money stemmed from illegal activity.

The Justice Department changed its own guidelines surrounding structuring violations several months later.

In their letter to Lew, the bipartisan group of lawmakers pointed to the IRS and Justice Department’s policy changes as the reason why the Sowers’ money should be returned.

“The IRS’s October 2014 policy change is tantamount to an admission that it never should have seized funds that were not associated with an illegal source,” the lawmakers said in their letter to Lew. “The Sowers and others like them should be treated with the same fairness applied to cases going forward.”

Original report here


(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress.  If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where  posts  appear as well as on  the primary site.  I have reposted  the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts  HERE or HERE or here

Man imprisoned for 34 years released thanks to new DNA evidence

PITTSBURGH — A man who spent 34 years in prison for the rape and shooting death of a teenage girl will be released from prison Thursday after a judge vacated his murder conviction, citing new DNA evidence.

Lewis Fogle, 63, will be released on bond because he remains charged and could be retried by District Attorney Patrick Dougherty, who filed the joint motion to vacate the conviction with the New York-based Innocence Project.

“We are incredibly grateful to District Attorney Patrick Dougherty for working with us to conduct the DNA testing and for acknowledging that Mr. Fogle’s conviction should be set aside,” said David Loftis, managing attorney for the Innocence Project.

But Dougherty said his actions — and the judge’s decision — don’t mean Fogle has been exonerated in the death and rape of 15-year-old Deann Katherine Long in 1976.

“I am not agreeing that he is actually innocent,” Dougherty said. “I also don’t want to let somebody out that deserves to be” in prison.

Dougherty is reviewing and attempting to gather more evidence before announcing Sept. 14 whether Fogle will be retried for second-degree murder. In Pennsylvania, that’s defined as any killing that occurs during another felony — in this case, rape.

Fogle has denied any involvement. He was the only one of four people arrested in March 1981 to be tried. Paul Cates, a spokesman for the Innocence Project, said attorneys don’t want Fogle answering specific questions about the case “because there’s too much at stake.”

Deann’s body was found July 31, 1976, by a stranger picking blackberries in the woods. The previous day, Deann’s younger sister saw a man telling Deann their brother had been in a car crash, and the sister later saw Deann in the man’s car.

That man checked himself into a psychiatric facility and was questioned about the murder five times but never charged. But after he was hypnotized to aid in the investigation, the man said he was present when Fogle, his brother and two other men raped the girl before she was shot.

Fogle was tried and convicted after three jailhouse informants testified he confessed to them. Charges against his brother, who is imprisoned for a child sex conviction last year, were dismissed under speedy trial rules. Prosecutors eventually cited a lack of evidence in dropping charges against the other two, one of whom has since died.

Dougherty said the new DNA evidence came from a semen sample gathered from Deann’s body using new technology. The tests showed the semen wasn’t Fogle’s.

“I believe that would have been enough to give him a new trial and that’s all I agreed to do,” Dougherty said. He’s having the sample tested to see whether it matches any of the others originally charged.

But even if it does, Dougherty said, there may not be enough evidence to retry Fogle.

Witnesses may have died, or may not remember as much, after all these years, he said.

“The question is, 40 years later, do we have the pieces of the puzzle?” Dougherty said.

Original report here


(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress.  If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where  posts  appear as well as on  the primary site.  I have reposted  the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts  HERE or HERE or here

Pansy British cop sues nightclub where he attended break-in - because he claims the burglar alarm gave him tinnitus!

A police officer has threatened to sue a nightclub after he claimed their burglar alarm damaged his hearing.

PC Darren Belford claims he suffered hearing loss and tinnitus after attending a suspected break-in at gay club Gossip in Stoke-on-Trent, Staffordshire.

His legal team complain that the disco's burglar alarm was 'set to an unsafe noise level' which was 'likely to cause injury', when he attended first thing in the morning.

It's not known exactly how long PC Belford spent within the premises, but his lawyers are set to pursue a claim for damages alleging that his hearing was significantly impaired by the volume of the alarm.

Trinity Law Partnership, who are representing him, said: 'Our client suffered damage to his hearing, in particular hearing loss and tinnitus.

'This was caused by the unsafe noise level he was exposed to from the alarm, which was set at a level foreseeably likely to cause injury.  'We are instructed to pursue a claim for damages on his behalf.'

Baffled nightclub owner Pete Terry says he 'thought it was a wind-up' when the legal letter dropped through his door.  'Burglar alarms are supposed to be loud, that's the whole point of them,' he said.

'This is part of his job. It's not what I would expect from a police officer.  'It sets a dangerous precedent for the future, as it is saying that if you get burgled, the police may end up suing you.'

Staffordshire Police have distanced themselves from the claim, which was submitted privately.

According to Terry, Gossip's alarm system conforms to the British standards and is of standard design. It was installed last September by Newcastle-based SV Security Systems.

Staffordshire Police chairman Andy Adams said that the federation was not involved in PC Belford's claim.  He also admitted to finding the claim 'surprising'.

Andy said: 'If he is of the belief that this alarm caused him a serious injury then he is entitled to pursue a claim like every other member of the public.

'But I imagine the public will see this as another member of the emergency services trying to get some extra money and it does not reflect well on the rest of us.'

PC Belford attended the club, in the Hanley area of the city, on January 27 this year.  The alarm was sounding and the doors lay open when he arrived, with a break-in suspected to have taken place.

It is not known exactly how long PC Belford was inside the club while the alarm was sounding.

Owner Pete Terry says the case could have a profound knock-on effect to the future safety of the popular disco.  'It brings into question the nightclub being able to have the police onto the premises,' he said.

'Usually with a dispute like this, our insurers wouldn't allow us to have that person back onto the premises, but in his capacity as a police officer he would be able to come back on.'

Staffordshire Police Assistant Chief Constable Bernie O'Reilly said: 'Policing is a risky business risk is an inherent part of what we do and often why we do it.

'I do understand the concern this type of claim may cause and I want to reassure the public its business as usual as we do everything we can to keep them safe and reassured.

'I do not generally support the principle of officers claiming compensation against victims of crime, people to whom we have responded to help them. Of course there may be isolated incidents for example if an officer is seriously injured whilst on duty and maybe loses earnings as a result; they may need to seek legal recourse the same as everyone else.'

Original report here



(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress.  If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where  posts  appear as well as on  the primary site.  I have reposted  the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts  HERE or HERE or here

Teenager, 19, stopped and questioned by police probing drug dealing after 'talking on his phone' while walking to get a haircut

Guilty of walking while black?

A teenager walking to get a haircut was stopped, questioned and sworn at by plain-clothed police investigating drug dealing - who said they had seen him 'talking on his phone'.

Adebola - who only wishes to be known by his first name - was told by one of the two officers in Islington, north London, to get his iPod ‘out of my f***ing face’ after realising he was being filmed.

The 19-year-old security apprentice was told to ‘account for his presence in the area’ by the officer last week, who said he was ‘standing around aimlessly’ - and asked if he was phoning his mother.

The Metropolitan Police said last night that it was aware of the video circulating online, had identified the officer featured and would be speaking to him ‘in order to give him words of advice’.

Adebola - who said he had never been arrested but has been stopped by police in the past - told MailOnline: ‘I left my house to go and get a haircut and I was walking down the road.

‘I already saw them down the road - they were driving up past me. Then he shouted something to get my attention. I ignored him and he turned his car around - and I said “What do you want”?

‘They know my name. It’s just so annoying. I think they generalise you as one of the bad public of the area. They don’t expect you to have a voice. I know how to talk to people.

A force spokesman said: ‘We are aware of a video in circulation on social media showing an exchange between a member of the public and a plain clothes police officer in Islington on Monday.

‘We have identified the officer in question and will be speaking to him in due course in order to give him words of advice. No complaint has been received in relation to this incident.’

Original report here


(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress.  If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where  posts  appear as well as on  the primary site.  I have reposted  the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts  HERE or HERE or here

Australia: Man charged with drink-driving wins $125,000 payout because he made it home before cops could breath test him

A MAN who beat a drink-driving charge was awarded $125,000 ­because police tried to force him to take a breath test at his home.

Real estate agent Bernard Nash was tailed by an officer as he left the Shelly Beach Golf Club, on the Central Coast, and drove 150m to his house at Bellevue St.

Highway patrol Senior Constable ­Michael Hicks, who was driving in the opposite direction, did a U-turn and gave chase, suspecting the 53-year-old was over the drink-driving limit.

When he caught up, Mr Nash had already parked in his driveway.

Constable Hicks pulled into the driveway and said “Just here sir” and “You’re under arrest”.

Mr Nash was heading down the side of his property when the officer ran towards him, put him in a “bear hug” and told him he was under arrest.

The officer then wrestled Mr Nash to the ground and pinned him with his knees before threatening to use capsicum spray.

Mr Nash did not give a breath test but was charged with driving under the ­influence and resisting arrest.

However, the law says police cannot force suspected drink-drivers to take a breath test at their home.

Mr Nash beat the charges in Wyong Local Court and then sued the state over the incident, which occurred on October 13, 2011.

In a judgment published last week, Judge Judith Gibson ruled in NSW District Court that the incident amounted to wrongful arrest and malicious prosecution and ­ordered the state to pay Mr Nash $124,958 in damages.

Judge Gibson said the fact Mr Nash was on his own property meant he didn’t have to take a breath test.

The other issue was that Constable Hicks had no evidence that Mr Nash was drunk or had committed an offence, Judge Gibson said. This left the officer with no legal reason to arrest Mr Nash.

The court heard that Mr Nash said he was not drunk and had three light beers while he was at the club.

The precise time the officer turned on his siren and lights was also “hotly contested”.

This was because Mr Nash could not legally ignore the officer’s order to pull over.

Mr Nash told the court he did not see the police lights nor hear the ­sirens. Constable Hicks was “never sufficiently close to Mr Nash’s car to ­activate the sirens and lights”.

The judge awarded Mr Nash $70,000 for malicious prosecution, $25,000 for wrongful arrest, $25,000 for assault and battery and $4958 for special damages.

A police spokesman said they were not looking to appeal. Constable Hicks is still working as an officer.

Original report here


(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress.  If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where  posts  appear as well as on  the primary site.  I have reposted  the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts  HERE or HERE or here

Prosecutors accused of hiding evidence in Freddie Gray case

Attorneys for the six police officers charged in Freddie Gray's death say prosecutors steered investigators away from allegations about Gray's behavior in past interactions with law enforcement.

The attorneys claim detectives were told Gray had a history of participating in "crash-for-cash" schemes in which people hurt themselves to collect settlements - a piece of information attorneys say would be useful for their case.

Gray died on April 19, a week after suffering a critical spinal injury in the back of a police van. Gray's death spurred days of largely peaceful protests followed by rioting and looting last April 27.

Six officers were charged with crimes ranging from misdemeanor assault to "depraved-heart" murder.

In a motion filed Thursday in Baltimore Circuit Court, defense attorneys allege that investigators for the Baltimore Police Department had information that Gray had a history of intentionally injuring himself in order to collect insurance money.

The attorneys allege in the filing that police investigators knew that Gray once injured himself so severely while in a Baltimore jail that he required medical attention. The attorneys say in documents that when police investigators tried to follow up on the evidence, prosecutors in the state's attorney's office told them "not to do the defense attorneys' jobs for them."

Defense attorneys also say in the motion that high-ranking members of the state's attorney's office met with Dr. Carole Allen of the Office of the Chief Medical Examiner a week before Gray's autopsy was complete and his death ruled a homicide. In addition, attorneys say the prosecutors didn't provide the medical examiner's office with a copy of the statement of Donta Allen, a man who had been inside the police van where Gray suffered his injury.

Investigators initially said Allen told them that Gray had been making banging noises in the back of the van. But Allen later told the media that police had exaggerated his account.

Rochelle Ritchie, spokeswoman for State's Attorney Marilyn Mosby, declined comment on the recent filing.

The officers are scheduled to face trial in October, with a hearing on motions set for one month prior. Defense attorneys have asked a judge to move the trial out of Baltimore, arguing that pre-trial publicity will taint the integrity of the jury pool.

Additionally, defense attorneys have asked for State's Attorney Marilyn Mosby and her office to be removed from the case, citing alleged conflicts of interest. The most recent filing is in support of that request.

"The statement to investigators 'not do the defense attorneys' jobs for them' would seem to indicate some level of knowledge that exculpatory evidence exists which could benefit the officers charged in Mr. Gray's death and that the prosecutor did not want this information uncovered by investigators," the attorneys wrote in the motion.

An attorney for the Gray family did not immediately return a call for comment Friday.

Meanwhile, a psychological firm paid to evaluate troubled Baltimore police, including a lieutenant charged in Gray's killing, is under investigation by the city and has been put on probation by the state police for cutting corners in its mental health screenings of officers.

Original report here


(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress.  If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where  posts  appear as well as on  the primary site.  I have reposted  the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts  HERE or HERE or here

Another crooked British cop

A veteran police detective who swindled £85,000 to fuel his massive gambling addiction has been jailed for two years. Det Con Christopher Hawkins, 47, served with Norfolk Police for 25 years before he was booted out when he turned to crime.

Hawkins was in the force at the time he started fraudulently signing documents in his then wife's name to get loans which he blew gambling.

His former wife, a serving police officer, who was totally unaware what he was doing, has had her credit rating hit and could lose her home, a court heard yesterday.

Hawkins, of Bury St Edmunds, Suffolk, was jailed for two years at Ipswich Crown Court after he admitted four counts of fraud. The offences spanned six years, from 2007 until 2013.

But the full extent of the fraud was only discovered after Hawkins admitted fraud by false representation between March and April 2012.

It was after he was sentenced for that offence, which related to an £8,000 loan he had fraudulently made in his wife's name, that she 'began to make more detailed investigation into their financial affairs'.

Hawkins falsely claimed his former wife had signed and agreed to be bound by the terms of credit agreements, including extending mortgages and surrendering endowment policies in order to obtain cash loans.

The crooked cop made these applications on both their behalves, forging signatures to acquire the money to pay serious gambling debts.

Andrew Shaw, prosecuting, said Hawkins' ex-wife had access to a Lloyds account which had been used by him during their marriage.

She discovered that cash had been paid into that account, including £25,000 from a mortgage extension application made to Alliance and Leicester, now Santander, in her name which she had been unaware of.

Mr Shaw said the money, which had been paid into the account in February 2007, 'fairly quickly dissipated' as a result of desperate Hawkins' 'gambling addiction'.

He said Hawkins' former wife faced a worrying future because of the defendant's offending and could be forced to sell her home.

Charlie Myatt, defending, said Hawkins had offended when there was a 'significant strain' on his marriage and his behaviour was 'out of his normal character'.  Mr Myatt said it 'was not borne out of sheer greed and selfishness' but out of 'an addiction to gambling which grew out of control'.  He said the gambling was to 'escape' rather than out of greed'.

Hawkins, an officer from December 1989 to October 2014, was sacked following his 2014 conviction after an internal disciplinary process with the Professional Standards Department.

Speaking after the case, Det Sgt Gary Lillie, of Norfolk and Suffolk Police's Anti-Corruption Unit, said: 'We expect the highest level of personal and professional behaviour from those serving with us.

'This result highlights how important it is for the forces to continue to robustly investigate any allegations of criminal conduct made against its employees or former employees.

'The fact that Hawkins had deceived those who should have been able to trust him the most and who have particularly suffered via his actions is equally unacceptable.'

Original report here



(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress.  If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where  posts  appear as well as on  the primary site.  I have reposted  the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts  HERE or HERE or here

MI: Prosecutor charges 11-year-old with manslaughter in three-year-old’s shooting

If there's a negligent manslaughter charge to be filed, it's against those who failed to secure the weapon and/or supervise the children

New York: An 11-year-old  boy has been charged with manslaughter for allegedly shooting dead a three- year-old neighbour in the US state of Michigan, media reported today.

The incident took place on Monday inside a vehicle parked behind a residence in Detroit.

The boy was visiting his father when he took out a handgun from the bedroom closet and threw it out of a window and into a backyard. After going outside and retrieving the firearm, he entered a vehicle in which victim Elijah Walker was sitting and allegedly shot him in the face for unknown reasons, according to police.

Wayne County Prosecutor Kym Worthy, who said the shooting was intentional, but without malice, charged the boy yesterday with manslaughter and felony use of a firearm.

He is being charged as a juvenile.

"I cannot remember a time where we have charged someone so young with taking a life. Very unfortunately and very tragically, the alleged facts in this case demanded it," Worthy was quoted as saying by The Huffington Post.

"The charged respondent here will remain in the juvenile system, but the case remains under investigation," the prosecutor said.

Meanwhile, family members of the victim are seeking donations on a fundraising site to help cover his funeral costs, who was the youngest of his mother's three children.

The juvenile, who has not yet appeared in court to enter a plea, is being held at a Detroit-area juvenile detention center.

Original report here



(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress.  If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where  posts  appear as well as on  the primary site.  I have reposted  the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts  HERE or HERE or here

Do women look guiltier than men?

Although it is undoubtedly congenial to feminists to believe that a woman was badly treated because she was a woman, I don't think it is established  that such bias was the problem in this case.  What IS clearly established as a cause of the miscarriage of justice that occurred in this case is the disgraceful withholding of evidence by the prosecution.  I note that the accusations of bias against women come from "Mother Jones", a far-Left publication sympathetic to feminism

WHEN Kristine Bunch woke up on the sofa in the early hours of June 30, 1995, a fire was raging through her house, and her three-year-old son, Anthony, was screaming for her from the bedroom.

She couldn’t reach him through the flames, so she ran outside and tried to break the window with a tricycle. The next minute, the room was engulfed in fire, and Anthony was dead.

It’s a mother’s worst nightmare, but things were about to get far worse for Kristine.

Investigators concluded that the fire had been arson, and the 21-year-old mother had killed her only child.

Kristine, by then 22 and pregnant again, was sentenced by an Indiana court to concurrent prison terms of 60 years for murder and 50 years for arson. And that might have been the end of her story, had her case not come to the attention of the Center on Wrongful Convictions (CWC).

They found that, contrary to the trial testimony of an analyst from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, no petroleum had been found in the bedroom. Kerosene had only been found in the living room, where the family had used a refillable heater. The documents proving that fact had been withheld from her defence lawyers.

On August 8, 2012, Kristine was released from jail, 17 years after her conviction, and eight days before Christmas, the prosecution dropped all charges against her.

Her exoneration was partly due to the discovery of the new evidence, and partly down to advancements in fire science, but the lawyers who worked on her case say her greatest crime was being a woman.

Of the 1635 names on the National Registry of Exonerations, only 148 are female. That’s not just because women commit fewer serious crimes.

Eleven per cent of people convicted of violent crimes are women, yet they make up just 6 per cent of those exonerated, non-profit news outlet Mother Jones reported.

Lawyers at the CWC had represented just four women, and they were struck by the similarities between their cases. They decided to set up Northwestern Law’s Women’s Project, focused exclusively on freeing innocent women, discovering a number of reasons why proving a woman’s innocence can be far harder than proving that of a man.

All of the women CWC had represented were single mothers charged with murdering their children and none had any apparent motive to kill her child. Yet one had falsely confessed under duress, and the others had made statements that police and prosecutors misconstrued as incriminating.

In Kristine’s case, she made contradictory statements about her nightgown being on fire, whether she saw smoke and the precise height and location of the flames, Indianapolis Monthly reported.

“I was in shock,” she said after her release. “So it’s really hard to articulate what I felt, where I was. I think everybody feels kind of like you’re in a dream and you just can’t believe it’s happening, until you wake up and realise, it’s happened.”

Like Kristine, more than half of exonerated women have been convicted of harming or killing a loved one. They are often dealing with deep personal losses, which makes them very vulnerable to high-pressure interrogation tactics that can lead to damning statements or false confessions.

Their apparent crimes against family members also make them “particularly reviled by society” (and therefore the police, jury and prosecutors), says the Women’s Project, because women are “traditionally viewed as nurturers and protectors”.

At Kristine’s sentencing, Mother Jones reported, the judge said: “I understand that you have arranged to have yourself impregnated. You thought it would work to your advantage somehow in this process. It will not. You will not raise that child.”

Sexist stereotypes also emerged in other Women’s Project’s cases. During Julie Harper’s trial for the murder of her 10-year-old son, prosecutors presented several pieces of “gender-biased emotional, prejudicial, and irrelevant evidence”, including testimony by her ex-husband that she had considered aborting her pregnancy with Joel, which was not only prejudicial, but false.

She was exonerated in 2006, after six years in jail.

Domestic cases can be the hardest to solve, because there are often no witnesses and only circumstantial evidence. Many modern-day innocence projects rely on DNA evidence to discover the truth, but in a domestic case, the accused’s DNA footprint is likely to be all over the scene even if they didn’t commit the crime.

Exoneration projects also rely on other traditional crime-solving techniques, Mother Jones observed — finding alibis, witnesses and alternative suspects. But in 64 per cent of exonerated women’s cases, no crime had occurred at all, while that was only true for 21 per cent of the men.

With science constantly evolving, explaining technical evidence to juries’ satisfaction can be difficult. For many women, proving their innocence involves controversial and contested science relating to fire, shaken-baby syndrome, toxicology or rare medical conditions.

Kristine is now trying to rebuild her relationship with her second son, who is 19, but her absence for most of his life is making that difficult. She’s volunteering with the Women’s Project and hopes to attend law school one day, to save others from the heartache she endured.

Original report here


(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress.  If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where  posts  appear as well as on  the primary site.  I have reposted  the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts  HERE or HERE or here

14th Wrongful Conviction Vacated in Brooklyn

A man found guilty of murder in 2009 has become the 14th person exonerated since Kenneth Thompson became Brooklyn District Attorney in January 2014.

Joel Fowler, 35, was freed Tuesday after the office's Conviction Review Unit conducted a year-long review of his case.

Fowler, who spent about 7 1/2 years in prison, had been convicted of second-degree murder and sentenced to 25 years to life.

During proceedings Tuesday, Mark Hale, chief of the review unit, told Acting Brooklyn Supreme Court Justice Matthew D'Emic that a "multifaceted confluence of issues" had led to Fowler's wrongful conviction.

The factors included faulty legal representation, an unreliable witness and Fowler's false confession. He was 17 at the time of the incident.

Hale said in court that Fowler was nowhere near the scene of the murder.

"We are determined to correct miscarriages of justice when we find them. This is the right thing to do," Thompson said in a statement.

Fowler was represented by Lynn Fahey, attorney-in-charge of Appellate Advocates, as well as David P. Greenberg, supervising attorney, and De Nice Powell, director of innocence investigations.

In an interview, Fahey said the district attorney's office "really should be complimented. ... They really became convinced and did the right thing. It was joy to see."

Fahey also credited Greenberg and Powell for their work on the case.

Appellate Advocates handled Fowler's direct appeal when the conviction was affirmed in 2012, but Fahey said Fowler's conviction was "one of those nagging cases."

"Instead of closing the file, we followed up with the D.A.'s office, and eventually this is where we got," she said.

Original report here


(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress.  If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where  posts  appear as well as on  the primary site.  I have reposted  the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts  HERE or HERE or here

'My husband was arrested for child porn. My 10-year nightmare began'

British police bastardry

Jeremy Clifford was arrested for possessing child porn in 2003, but cleared his name after an epic legal battle. His wife Faith tells Radhika Sanghani how they coped

Jeremy and Faith Clifford were still asleep in bed on a Thursday morning in 2003 when the doorbell rang.  It was the police.

“Jeremy told me the police wanted to search the house,” recounts Faith, now 54. “It’s funny but I just remember feeling devastated at having intruders in my house. I was embarrassed.”

The couple had never been involved with the police before and assumed it was all a big mix-up. That’s when they finally realised that Jeremy was being arrested. For child pornography.

“I was really afraid,” says Faith, “but I knew it was all rubbish. I just know Jeremy. I know he wouldn’t do this, and the fact that we don’t even have any computers at home just proved it to me. I was convinced it would all be over in a few hours when they realised they had the wrong man.”

But that didn’t happen. Instead Jeremy was charged with possessing child pornography and spent the next nine months wondering if he was going to be jailed for a crime he had nothing to do with.

“It was unbelievable,” says Faith. “You think it happens to other people. I’m just an ordinary person – never been in trouble before and suddenly all this happened on the most awful subject. It was this huge struggle.

“Jeremy’s more sensitive. He just started to crumple. It was awful because when I first met him he was very charismatic, entrepreneurial and full of fun. But after this I’d come home and he’d be sat in darkness, he was quick to temper, he was ratty. He just kept saying, no one will ever believe me. Honestly, some of those traits have never gone.”

Eventually, Jeremy was cleared in 2005 – “Even now I cry thinking about the day the charges were dropped,” he says. “We were just sobbing our hearts out” - but by this point he’d lost his film equipment business and their lives had been turned upside down.

It’s why he decided to sue the police for the distress and hurt they caused by falsely accusing him.  “You’ll never know what it’s like to be charged for that kind of offence,” he tells me, now aged 55. “I’m still not over it. It has affected me, I had really bad depression. I was medically unable to continue my job.  "Anyone who has accused of that sort of thing would have that reaction – especially being innocent. They prosecuted me for almost two years."

The couple’s nightmare didn’t end there. Their decision to sue Hertfordshire Constabulary ended up becoming a six-year legal battle that cost them thousands of pounds and thousands of hours of their lives.

They had to sell their home in Watford as well as a house in Spain to afford the legal costs. But they were convinced they would win their case, mainly because they knew that a computer expert found no evidence to prosecute Jeremy back in 2003, but Hertfordshire police charged him anyway.

All the police had as evidence were 10 images of indecent children found on a work computer that were ‘level one’ – the lowest level of seriousness used to categorise indecent images of children, and with evidence that his credit card had been used to access a child porn website six times in 1999.

Jeremy was charged with possessing these images even though there was no evidence he knew they were there. It later transpired that the “thumbnail” images on his computer may have been downloaded accidentally by pop-up ads, and that his card has been used fraudulently – the details had been hacked when he booked his honeymoon with Faith.

But when the Cliffords took the case to trial, their claim for damages was dismissed in 2008, when the judge ruled there was no wrongdoing by the police and the arrest was justifiable.

“You can only imagine what went through our minds,” says Jeremy. “We would have lost all our money and had to pay them as well. It was so frustrating because I’d spent months in a law library learning to litigate for myself, and we think that’s why we lost. So we decided to appeal.”

The couple hired the best lawyers they could, won their appeal, and were granted a retrial in 2011. It was then that justice was finally served and the couple won their case.

The police were forced to pay out £20,000 in damages along with around £750,000 for the legal bills the couple had accrued over the past eight years.

“It was a relief but we didn’t get the compensation we should have,” says Faith. “We’d hoped to retire in Spain but that’s not going to happen now. We had to sell our house which was hard. They have stamped all over our lives.

“Why didn’t they say ‘we made a mistake’? If they’d just given us an apology or compensation back in 2005 when we made the complaint, they could have avoided this. But instead it took six years and two trials. We’ll never get our life back – not to the standard it was at.”

It’s why she has now written a book called Fit Up: Fighting the Police to Clear My Husband’s Name about the couple’s ordeal. “I don’t think the [police have paid enough,” she says. “I want to name and shame them.”

One of the main focuses of her book is the stigma of her husband being charged for a crime like possession child pornography and what that did to her relationship.

“Any normal thinking person has this revulsion about it and to be accused of it is absolutely appalling,” she tells me. “People are very quick to judge. It was hard for me because I couldn’t tell anyone at work. So I ended up just feeling shut out.

“When my colleagues would talk about their weekends and things, I didn’t feel I could join in. My heart was stone cold. I had to carry on being this cheery person, meanwhile thinking what’s going to happen to Jeremy? What’s the next bad news going to be?”

She says it was particularly hard as a wife trying to support her husband: “Your role as a wife is to stand by your man and when you believe in them you can. But there are still moments where you don’t know what to do.

“He once said, I might not be here when you come back. So then you just have that fear in your head. I had to get a dog to refocus him. I thought if I didn’t, he’d do something stupid.

“Our sexual relationship went downhill. Anything to do with that seemed dirty. We used to watch police programmes, like The Bill and so on, but couldn’t even do that anymore. I could see the nice times disintegrate.”

It’s only now that Faith says things have really got better, meaning this one incident has affected more than a decade of their lives. For her, writing the book was a cathartic way to deal with everything she’d been through, and she says it’s made her realise she’s become a lot stronger over the past 10 years:

“I have had to deal with the worst things. So I think anything else will be a doddle. I’ve seen that I’m a strong brave person, and no one should mess with me because I’m quiet but I’ll get you back.

“I think, would we [sue the police] again, and we always would because I can’t let people like that beat me.”

Original report here



(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress.  If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where  posts  appear as well as on  the primary site.  I have reposted  the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts  HERE or HERE or here

Four years later:  Judge grants defense self-defense motion

He should never have been charged

A judge has dismissed a voluntary-manslaughter charge against a Savannah man in the 2011 shooting death of a Thunderbolt man based on a defense claim of self-defense.

Vernon Michael Rich Jr., then 30, was charged with causing the death of Troy Wells with a handgun “as the result of a sudden, violent and irresistible passion.”

Defense attorney Richard Darden argued his client was immune from prosecution “because his self-admitted shooting of Mr. Wells was required to defend his person from attack,” Chatham County Superior Court Judge Michael Karpf said in an order filed on Friday.

“Based on the testimony, the court finds that defendant had a reasonable belief that he needed to defend himself from a violent attack by the victim,” Karpf said.

He also ruled the defendant’s use of force was not excessive under the circumstances, the defendant “was lawfully carrying the weapon, and that he did not leave the scene, but instead immediately called 911.”

“Therefore, the court is satisfied that defendant’s use of force was justified and that he is immune from prosecution,” Karpf ruled, granting Darden’s motion for immunity from prosecution.

Wells, 35, was shot to death Sept. 16, 2011, in Bonaventure Place Townhouses off Bonaventure Road, Thunderbolt police said.

They initially charged Rich with murder.

According to Thunderbolt police, Rich and a female co-worker finished their shifts at Lab Corp. off Southern Boulevard near Chatham Parkway about 9 p.m.

Rich offered to give the woman a ride home and they stopped by a store on the way, according to statements given to officers.

When the woman got home, Wells was there, police said. Wells was her ex-boyfriend and was supposed to have moved out that day.

The woman told police Wells walked up behind her as Rich was turning his car around to leave. Wells started arguing with her, demanding to know who Rich was. Wells tried to hit the woman, police said, but she backed away and sprayed him with Mace.

That’s when Wells allegedly walked over to Rich’s car and started hitting him as he sat in the driver’s seat. The woman said she heard a gunshot. Police said Rich called 911, admitted to shooting Wells in his upper torso, and gave them the gun used to do it.

Rich was not injured in the altercation, police said.

Original report here


(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress.  If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where  posts  appear as well as on  the primary site.  I have reposted  the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts  HERE or HERE or here

Baltimore Cops’ Attorneys Just Made Two Explosive Claims In Freddie Gray Case

According to The Baltimore Sun, the officers’ attorneys are claiming that the office of Baltimore city state’s attorney Marilyn Mosby has evidence that the 25-year-old Gray had “attempted to injure himself” in police custody prior to his April 12 arrest. They also claim that Mosby had a “private meeting” with the medical examiner who conducted Gray’s autopsy days before the report was released.

Mosby’s office has failed to turn that evidence over to the defense, the attorneys asserted.

“Based upon information and belief, the State’s Attorney’s Office was informed of this fact, yet failed to disclose to the Defendants any statements, reports, or other communications relating to this information,” the attorneys said of evidence that Gray has tried to harm himself during a previous arrest.

Prosecutors have also withheld “multiple witness statements from individuals who stated that Mr. Gray was banging and shaking the van at various points,” the defense claims, adding that they have also concealed “police reports, court records, and witness statements indicating that on prior occasions, Mr. Gray had fled from police and attempted to discard drugs.”

Gray was arrested after a foot chase with police. He reportedly began running after making eye contact with Lt. Brian Rice, one of the arresting officers. Gray had been arrested at least 18 times before, mostly for drug-related offenses. The official explanation for his arrest was that he was in possession of a spring-loaded knife.

The knife has been a source of controversy as well. During her very public announcement of charges against the officers on May 1, Mosby said that Gray’s arrest was illegal, in part, because the knife he had was legal in Maryland.

But the defense claims in its motion that even before Mosby made that public claim, she was told that the knife was, in fact, illegal in Baltimore.

Mosby also failed to disclose that she met privately with Carol Allan, the medical examiner who conducted Gray’s autopsy, the motion reads, according to The Sun.

When Mosby announced charges, she had received the results of the autopsy just hours before. Allan ruled Gray’s death a homicide. That allowed Mosby to slap serious charges on the officers involved in Gray’s arrest and van transport. Caesar Goodson, Jr., the driver of the police van, was charged with second-degree depraved-heart murder and manslaughter. Three other officers face manslaughter charges, too.

If the defense’s claims are true, Mosby’s case will have suffered a heavy blow.

Her case relies on the theory that the officers contributed to Gray’s death through “acts of omission.” They failed to properly restrain Gray in the back of the police van, and when Gray was calling for help, they failed to provide proper medical attention, the theory goes.

But if Gray has tried to hurt himself before — as the defense claims — the case will likely be made that he could have done the same thing on April 12. And if he did try to hurt himself in the back of the van, that would mean that the officers did not cause his death.

One witness has given a statement that he believed Gray was trying to harm himself in the back of the police van.

Donta Allen was arrested shortly after Gray and placed in a separate compartment in the police van. Allen reportedly gave a statement to investigators in which he said he heard Gray making loud banging noises. He also said the van ride was smooth, undermining claims made by some that Gray was the victim of a “rough ride.”

Allen retracted his claims, though, after they were made public.

Original report here



(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress.  If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where  posts  appear as well as on  the primary site.  I have reposted  the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts  HERE or HERE or here

Disquieting law enforcement behaviour in Australia

Customs officer confiscates passenger's phone and then uses it to secretly text

A customs officer at Sydney international airport confiscated a mobile phone from a passenger during a baggage search and then secretly used it to send and receive messages without the passenger's knowledge.

The November incident has been referred to the Australian Federal Police, but the new Department of Immigration and Border Protection has refused to release further details, prompting widespread concern and a call for a federal police investigation into the actions of the customs officer.

The passenger, a 22-year-old man who did not wish to be identified, discovered what had happened only when he received a letter from the Integrity and Professional Standards branch of the department, saying it was investigating the "inappropriate use" of his phone by the customs officer.

The letter dated nearly six months later, said "this behaviour does not uphold the standards expected of our officers at the border and on behalf of the department and the ACBPS [Australian Customs and Border Protection Service] I apologise that it occurred. The letter said the "appropriate steps" were being taken in relation to the incident.

The man told Fairfax Media last week he was "disgusted" when he found out what had happened.

"It is embarrassing for them. They obviously have something to hide."

The Department of Immigration and Border Protection refused requests for information by Fairfax Media under freedom of information laws in part to protect the privacy of the officer and would not reveal what the messages said, who they were sent to and why.

A spokesman said "Under section 186 of the Customs Act 1901, officers have the power to examine goods in certain circumstances. 'Goods' includes electronic devices, such as mobile telephones. Access to the passenger's phone was consistent with the act."

The revelations have alarmed civil libertarians and prompted Greens Senator Sarah Hanson-Young to refer the matter to Australian Federal Police to investigate the wrongdoing.

Senator Hanson-Young said the secrecy of the department and the behaviour of the customs officer involved raises questions about the culture of the Border Force.

"Tampering with an individual's phone like this is illegal," she said.

"Why is the department being so secretive about the case? I have written to the AFP and asked them to investigate."

Professor Michael Fraser, the director of the Communications Law Centre at UTS, said unless there was some lawful reason – which needs to be given – the department needed to justify why the phone was used.

"The person has a right to know what communications were made on his phone," Professor Fraser said.

Stephen Blanks, president of the NSW Council of Civil Liberties, said "this is frightening".

"The Australian people should be frightened that a public official in a position of apparent authority can illegally access people's phones and send messages and then the department thinks that is not a matter of public interest. That is the kind of secrecy a police state relies on to damage the reputation of people who are being targeted," Mr Blanks said.

The man told Fairfax Media he was stopped when leaving Australia for a holiday in Turkey and Cyprus visiting his parents. He was taken to a room where Customs and AFP officers were present. They took his phone and computer and demanded the access codes and then took his phone into another room where he could not see what was happening.

During the time he was detained and searched, the man said he was asked weird questions including how many times a day he prayed? Was his family religious? And did they have a lot of money?

By the time he was released he had missed his flight. No one has since offered to refund his fare. After organising another flight, he was again stopped by Customs and the second time he called his solicitor, he said.

After tense conversations and the customs officers refusing to speak to his lawyer, he was eventually allowed to travel and he returned in December. His solicitor Zali Burrows has been instructed to commence legal proceedings against the department.

The decision not to release any information did say the incident had been "self-reported" the day after by the officer and his supervisor.

It revealed two documents existed that  the department would not release – an Integrity Complaint Assessment Report and an internal minute dated December 16, 2014.

No documents showed that the matter had been referred to any other authority such as the Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity which is the federal watchdog, or even that the minister had been had been informed.

Original report here


(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress.  If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where  posts  appear as well as on  the primary site.  I have reposted  the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts  HERE or HERE or here

Cincinnati police officer Ray Tensing charged with murder over shooting of black driver

It's never wise to defy the police but antagonism towards the police has been preached to blacks.  Bad advice, this time fatal


Tensing

A DRAMATIC bodycam video has emerged showing the moment a Cincinnati police officer pulled a gun and fatally shot an unarmed driver.

The video was released by police on Wednesday during a news conference announcing officer Ray Tensing, 25, had been charged with the murder of Samuel DuBose, 43.

Officer Tensing discharged one round into DuBose’s head on July 19 after DuBose attempted to drive away from a routine traffic stop.

Tensing faces life in prison if convicted, Hamilton County Prosecutor Joe Deters said on Wednesday.

“He lost his temper because Mr Dubose wouldn’t get out of his car,” Deters said.  “When you see this you won’t believe how quickly he pulls his gun. Maybe a second — it’s incredible.”

The 3 minute 40 second video begins when Tensing approaches the drivers side window of DuBose’s car.

Tensing asks DuBose if he has a license on him and explains that he was pulled over for failing to display his front license plate.

DuBose searches for his license and pulls out an unopened bottle of gin. He explains that he does not have his license on him. “I have a license, you can run my name,” DuBose says.

Tensing responds by asking: “Be straight up with me, are you suspended? Why don’t you have your license on you.”

Things escalate quickly when Tensing attempts to open DuBose’s door. “Go ahead and take your seatbelt off,” Tensing says.

DuBose reaches for the ignition, saying: “I didn’t even do nothing,” before attempting to drive away.

In an instant, Tensing shouts “stop”, pulls out his weapon and fires a single shot at close range through the drivers side window as DuBose drives away.

The officer catches up with the car less than 100m down the road where DuBose’s body appears limp in the front seat.

The footage was reportedly shown to DuBose’s family before being released to the public.

On Wednesday, Deters labelled the shooting “asinine” and “senseless”.

“I’ve been doing this for over 30 years. This is the most asinine act I’ve ever seen a police officer make — totally unwarranted,” he said.

“It’s an absolute tragedy in the year 2015 that anyone would behave in this manner. It was senseless.

“People want to believe that Mr. DuBose had done something violent towards the officer — he did not. He did not at all. I feel so sorry for his family and what they lost, and I feel sorry for the community, too,” Deters said.

Tensing surrendered to authorities on Wednesday and has been fired from his job at the University of Cincinnati.

His lawyers are expected to argue that he feared for his life. “The guy jams the keys in the ignition,” Stew Mathews told CNN.

“Turns the car on, jams it in the drive and mashes the accelerator. He wasn’t slowly pulling away. (Tensing) feared for his life. He thought he was going to be sucked under the car that was pulling away from him. He thought he was going to get sucked under and killed.”

DuBose’s mother told reporters she was grateful the real story had come out.

“I want everybody to just lift up their heads in prayer, and thank God because this one did not go unsolved and hidden,” said Audrey DuBose. “We’re going to continue to fight together with God.”

The footage is expected to further inflame tensions between police and the public in the US following the shootings of Michael Brown, Walter Scott and Tamir Rice.

Earlier this month, Black Lives Matter activist Sandra Bland was pulled over for failing to indicate when changing lanes in Texas. She was found hanged in a police cell hours later.

Original report here


(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress.  If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where  posts  appear as well as on  the primary site.  I have reposted  the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts  HERE or HERE or here