Crime & Federalism

Islam Remains the Religion of Peace

Mike

For proof, go here.

William Buckley Vs. Gore Vidal

Mike

This is awesome.

Illinois Criminal Defense Lawyer

Mike

If you're looking for an Illinois or Central Illinois criminal defense lawyer, check out Jeremy Richey.

Lock Your Doors

Mike

Why is it so hard for people to lock their doors?  I get into an argument with my wife at least once a week over this. 

I am a large male with extensive training in all sorts of dangerous things.  I lock the door.  So why would a woman who weighs almost half of what I weigh refuse to lock the door?  It's completely moronic.  Idiotic.  Indefensibly stupid.

In Santa Monica, a wealthy beach town, two different people on different days were murdered in their apartments.  There are two killers on the loose.  Both times, the murderer walked in through an unlocked door.

In an affluent area of San Diego, three savages walked into an apartment.  Then then repeatedly raped two college girls.  Again, the apartment's front door was unlocked.

What the Hell is wrong with people?

You walk inside, you turn the dead bolt, you move on.  It's simple.  It takes less than three seconds.  And it's a lot more comfortable than wearing a seat belt.  (You do wear one of those, yes?)

I am all for people buying guns and training their dogs to attack unwelcome intruders.  Heck, keep a machete next to your couch.  But often in life the most effective way to avoid harm is the cheapest and easiest thing you can do. 

Unless you want to be raped or murdered, lock your damned doors.

Nifong Awards Go To: Greg Damm and Kimberly Frayn

Mike

In United States v. Chapman, (opinion here; via Volokh) a unanimous three-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, in an opinion joined by ultra-conservative judge Diarmuid F. O'Scannlain, concluded that gross prosecutorial misconduct occurred in a federal trial:

The government egregiously failed to meet its constitutional obligations under Brady and Giglio. It failed to even make inquiry as to conviction records, plea bargains, and other discoverable materials concerning key witnesses until after trial began. It repeatedly misrepresented to the district court that all such documents had been disclosed prior to trial. The government did not admit to the court that it failed to disclose Brady/Giglio material until after many of the key witnesses had testified and been released. Even then, it failed to turn over some 650 documents until the day the district court declared a mistrial and submitted those documents to the court only after the indictment had been dismissed.

The Court of Appeal concluded:

This is prosecutorial misconduct in its highest form; conduct in flagrant disregard of the United States Constitution; and conduct which should be deterred by the strongest sanction available.

However, if you read the opinion, you will never learn who these people who deserve "the strongest sanction" are. 

Fortunately, I will say what judges will not say.  According to official court records (here and here), Greg Damm and Kimberly Frayn were the prosecutors who committed "prosecutorial misconduct in its highest form."

Will the Nevada State Bar take notice of this prosecutorial misconduct?  Will Greg Damm and Kimberly Frayn be punished?

I am personally going to mail a copy of this opinion to the Nevada State Bar association.  I will also be following-up with them.

I will let you know whether the Nevada State Bar takes lawyer misconduct seriously.

Interesting Insight Into Fieger Trial

Mike

Norm Pattis has a very interesting post here.

L.A. Times Teaches How to Write in Bad Taste

Mike

I think John McCain is bad for America.  Putting that aside: Isn't the article in totally bad taste? 

Felons in the Military

Mike

I don't see a problem with that.

The Illusion of Safety

Mike

This is reason number one why I watch my own back.

Pope to United States: Priests' Molesting Children is All Your Fault

Mike

"Holy Father," indeed:

In a speech delivered after evening prayer, the pontiff berated the bishops for their poor handling of a scandal surrounding sexual abuse of children in the church.

But he urged efforts "to address the sin of abuse within the wider context of sexual mores" as well as a reassessment of "the values underpinning society."

"What does it mean to speak of child protection when pornography and violence can be viewed in so many homes through media widely available today?" the pontiff said on the first full day of his US visit.

What? 

I like adult women - a lot.  My female friends and gay male friends like adult men - a lot.  What in the Hell does that have to do with molesting children?  I guess, to the Pope, all sex is vile?  Go to the strip club today, molest 5-year-olds tomorrow?

More importantly, priests were able to continually molest children because, instead of the Church holding the exposed pedophiles accountable, the Church transferred them to other parishes where no one knew of their misdeeds.

What does sex and violence on TV, or Internet porn, have to do with covering up child molestation?

Nothing, that's what.

Rather than accepting responsibility for causing molestation, the Pope blamed you and me.  That's strike two for the Catholic Church.

Libertarians Supporting More Governmental Regulation?

Mike

This post at Kipesquire provides a remarkable example of bribery that can never be proven in a court of law.  Here's the summary: The government entered into a contract with a contractor that would cause the government to lose money.  The contractor gave huge campaign contributions to the three government officials who gave them the contract.

Absent corruption, why in the world would a government official enter into a losing contract?  People are incompetent, but not that incompetent.  It's clear what went down.

Yet there is no way that a federal bribery case could be made.  When you give a federal official an envelope full of money, bribery is easy to establish.  When you give a federal official a campaign contribution, it's almost impossible to prove bribery.

It is precisely because of this that many of us support sweeping reforms of campaign contribution laws. 

Yet supporting restrictions on campaign contributions puts us into the libertarian paradox.  Because of some bad government laws, many of us are required to support more bad government laws.  How is that consistent with liberty?  Where is the stopping point? 

I don't have a great limiting principle.  In general, I think the best approach is to not support more laws unless a practice is so entrenched that there is no way to end the underlying practice.

So, for example, the reality is that the government will continue awarding no-bid contracts to members of the private sector.  This will never change.  Thus, preventing people who do business with the government from giving campaign contributions is a reasonable way to mitigate corruption and waste.

On the other hand, there currently is not a universal system of socialized medicine in this country.  We should fight like Hell to prevent it from existing. 

If there were universal socialized medicine, it might be reasonable to deny some care to smokers, obese people, and others who make lifestyle choices that affect health care costs.   Absent socialized medicine, I have no business caring about what you eat: It's your right to give yourself diabetes, heart disease, or lung cancer.  But when I am being forced to pay for your decisions, it becomes my business - even though I don't want it to be.

It ain't easy being a libertarian. 

The Interesting Criminal Law Divide

Mike

Here is something about criminal law that has always given me a chuckle.

Find a true believer criminal defense lawyer.  He'll excuse anyone's misdeeds and presume everyone innocent.  But when a cop is charged with a crime, excuses and presumptions of innocence goes out the window.  Burn the witch.

Then find a true believer prosecutor or just red-meat conservative.  Everyone is guilty - until a cop is charged with a crime.  Then we must "withhold judgment" and "wait for the facts to fully develop" before drawing any conclusions.  Even then, there is only one proper conclusion: Not guilty.

I had a professor who was the lead prosecutor for the anti-corruption division of his office.  When he took his job prosecuting crooked cops, all of his longtime friends in law enforcement disowned him.  Mind you, he only went after the really bad apples.  Yet good cops hated him for that.

I suppose the need to choose a side and the inability to find faults with people on "our side" just shows us how much like apes we remain.  The best proof that we evolved from apes is our current behavior!

Putting the (Ahem) "Richard" in Cheney?

Mike

This is one of the funniest pictures (safe for work, but not in the best taste) I have ever seen.  Really.

I authenticated the picture via the Vice President's website.  It's legit.

UPDATE: While the picture is legit, one expert has concluded that the reflection is of Cheney's hand - casting a rod. 

Biggest Threat to Financial Stability?

Mike

Who would have known that, according to Michael Chertoff, it's not the rampant manipulation of markets done by hedge fund money masters.  Nor it is the subprime mortgage debacle.  Instead, it's hackers!  (Via)

The Type of People Losing Their Homes

Mike

These are not good people who deserve to be bailed out.  For the most part, people losing their homes are irresponsible and selfish.  Here is a sad story about typical behavior from that demographic.

The Clintons Are Rich

Mike

Here's your daily gossip (for those of you who lack the good taste to read the Drudge Report).

Islam: The Religion of Peace

Mike

Right?   (Via AT)

Harry Reid is a Scumbag Liar

Mike

What does "voluntary" mean? (Via Kip)

Megan Meier Prosecution

Mike

There is an update to the story involving Megan Meier, and Lori and Curtis Drew.  It seems prosecutors are considering filing charges under a very interesting (and perhaps disturbing) legal theory.  Check it out.

The Wall Street Journal Finally Gets Enron Right?

Mike

Unfortunately the "Enron = evil" memo is so ingrained in the collective unconscious that it will never bee removed.  That said, at least some editors of the Wall Street Journal are realizing how ignorant and foolish their coverage of the Enron affair was.

Bill Clinton's "Stunning" Behavior?

Mike

Why does this stun or surprise anyone?  Are people really so moronic that they fall for Clinton's superficial charm? 

Prosecutorial Misconduct?

Mike

Under the case law, this most likely is.  Yet that is not the type of prosecutorial misconduct most people have a problem with. 

Craigslist Hoaxers Busted

Mike

TSG has the story here.

Depression Was Behind Roget's Thesaurus

Mike

Fascinating story. 

Los Angeles Times: A Comedy in Three Parts

Mike

Part I.  The Los Angeles Times publishes an article criticizing my research of the David Motari video: 

It was a despicable and even shameful act, but the reaction was no better. Before any of the facts were established -- the Marine's identity, for instance, or whether the video was some kind of hoax -- the cyber mob had its torches lighted, and the auto-da-fé had begun. Barely a day after the video surfaced, a Marine's reputation was in tatters, his life threatened and his family terrorized.

Part 2.  The Los Angeles Times publishes an article accusing Sean "Puff Daddy" Combs of being involved in Tupac Shakur's 1994 assault:

In 1994, Tupac Shakur was ambushed, beaten and shot at the Quad Recording Studios in New York. He insisted that friends of Sean 'Diddy' Combs were behind it. New information supports him.

Part 3.  The Los Angeles Times never seemed to establish any facts before publishing its Tupac story.

Epilogue.  David Motari was indeed the Marine depicted in the video.  His own sister confirmed it.  But Puff Daddy had nothing to do with Tupac's assault.   The world wonders: Who should be lecturing whom?

Open Tech Secrets

Mike

I have a business plan to do some tech consulting and web design.  The only thing keeping me from jumping is self-doubt.  Then I learn how ignorant most people are about stuff I consider hilariously basic.  People pay "consultants" to tell them this stuff? 

I need more self-confidence!

David Motari Update

Mike

David Motar, the Marine who seems to be killing a puppy in a YouTube video, is still under investigation. 

We must keep the heat on.  Everyone wants this story to go away.  Our letters, e-mails, and phone calls will keep this case going.

Incidentally, here is a recent story showing how most Marines treat animals - kindly.

Googles Maps and Drug Deals

Mike

Pretty interesting stuff.

Don't Believe Everything You Read on the Internet

Mike

       JACKSONVILLE, Ore. -- A pair of hoax ads on Craigslist cost an Oregon        man much of what he owned.

The ads popped up Saturday afternoon, saying the owner of a Jacksonville home was forced to leave the area suddenly and his belongings, including a horse, were free for the taking, said Jackson County sheriff's Detective Sgt. Colin Fagan.

The rest of the story is here.

Prison Loaf Lawsuit

Mike

Here's the frivolous lawsuit of the day, filed on behalf of prison inmates who don't like the taste of their food.  There are lots of things about prison conditions that should disturb every civilized human being.  That some food doesn't taste so good is not one of those conditions.

Here, incidentally, is the quote of the day:

"[Prison loaf] is commonplace in other states as a way of providing nutrition in a mechanism that dissuades inmates from throwing feces, urine, trays and silverware," said Vermont Corrections Commissioner Rob Hofmann.

Some people really should be kept separated from society.