Search Results for: node/It takes a good prosecutor to convict a guilty man

SSCC #266:#269–New York

A Bronx prosecutor turned an innocent man’s life into a living hell for three years by plowing ahead with a case built on cops’ lies, a new lawsuit charges.

I have said my mantra about prosecutors many a time and I’ll say it again.  It takes a good prosecutor to convict a guilty man, it takes a GREAT prosecutor to convict an innocent one.  There is no correlation between the law and justice, don’t believe me?  What justice is there needed for a victimless crime?  Seriously, is it justice to punish someone because they are doing something that someone else disagrees with?

There is no winning a law suit, and this man has had his life ruined by a prosecutor who is protected by the state, and three cops who share the same protections.  I am not sure that his suit will be successful, however I have no doubt about the validity of his claim.  Further, they don’t have to find you guilty to ruin your and strip you of your rights.

State Sponsored Criminal Count: #266: Officer Vladimir Krull

#267: Detective Arnaldo Rivera

#268: Lt. Patrick Brown

#269: Bronx District Attorney’s Office (If you know the prosecutors name let me know)

Because when I can convict an innocent man I am in total control of the world and nothing can stop me.

SSCC #202 – New York

Here we have a case of contempt of cop which is being backed by an over zealous prosecutor.

After speaking to the woman, an officer told Mr. Dittrich there would be no charges, he said, but requested identification. He told her he did not want to give it. She told him, he said, that he would be charged with obstruction. He gave his name and address. Then she asked what country he was from. He said he did not have to say. When she insisted and he insisted, he was taken to the police station in handcuffs and given a summons.

Now New York is a stop and identify state, however that still requires the reasonable suspicion of a crime.  In this case we have a thin skinned woman who got upset at a blind man staring at her trying to figure out why this woman was blue.  There is no law against staring and there is no reason to believe that this individual had committed a crime.  Further there is no reason this man needed to provide his country of origin, doubly so as an American citizen.

That’s when we arrive at this little gem.

At one hearing, the prosecutor advised the judge that he would like to see Mr. Dittrich spend a little time behind bars. Disorderly conduct carries a maximum penalty of six months in jail and a $1,000 fine, though it is unusual for a first offender to serve time.

Remember, it takes a good prosecutor to convict a guilty man, it takes a great prosecutor to convict an innocent one.  Couple that with the diverse number of laws that are open to interpretation and anyone that a prosecutor wants they can have.

State Sponsored Criminal Count 202: Jane Doe (As usual if you find the names let me know)

Honorable Mention: Prosecutor John Doe 

Because putting an old blind man in jail is how you protect society.  You need to make them all sheep.

via Ry

This is my shocked face…

Dave Hardy over at Of Arms and the Law just posted something that has me completely non-shocked.

Of what a prosecutor friend once told me — that he was appalled to think of how all the power given a prosecutor these days could be used to entire ruin an honest man, or one who had made some minor error. Here’s a case from the 11th Circuit, applying what appears to be established law, holding that the prosecutor and his agents are mostly protected by absolute or lesser forms of immunity from a civil rights lawsuit.

My dad always told me a couple things regarding the law.

  1. There is no correlation between the law and justice.
  2. Prosecutors live by the mantra, “It takes a good prosecutor to convict a guilty man, it takes a great prosecutor to convict an innocent one.”

Recently Uncle posted about a DA offering bonuses to prosecutors who hit conviction targets.  I’m seriously beginning to wonder if they are using convictions to just strip honest people of their rights and make them subservient to the state.

Prosecutors, where would the world be without thee?

A 13-year-old Jefferson County boy says he knows what he did was wrong, but says it was an accident and he never intended to hurt anyone when he shot his toy airsoft gun at a friend, who was hit in the eye.

The kid made an absolutely dumb mistake.  However this is not something that the government, most especially a prosecutor needs to be involved in.  I had a run in with a dick prosecutor, it’s not fun.  He and the other boy are still friends, from the description is was rough housing that went a little too far.

Mr. Prosecutor sees a way to make a name for himself and this is the result!  Someone once said, “It takes a good prosecutor to convict a guilty man, it takes a GREAT prosecutor to convict an innocent one.”  Even with records sealed, it will seriously screw with this kids life. 

Rule #1 Know of who you are talking to

I actually have numerous rule #1’s however the one I’m invoking today is know of who you are talking to, even more so of that of which you speak, especially if someone is offering advice to try to keep you out of jail.  Doubly so if they’re also trying to make sure that you realize it is quite possible you could be the cause of a wildfire.

So here’s the conversation for those of you who don’t know what I’m talking about.  Yes feel free to laugh at the guy who thinks he’s educating Janelle about how explosives work.

image

Aaron, let me enlighten you as to the background of my wife an I.  We are both staff for FlashTek.  Since you probably don’t know what that is, it’s run by Joe Huffman and is the company that is responsible for putting on Boomershoot every year.  Here’s the quick rundown from this year.

In one weekend we manufacture approximately 2000 lbs of explosives and are quite familiar with what they are, how they work, and the possible consequences of both their use and misuse.

We both spend a lot of time outside of preparation for the main event with experiments and development of the mixture, targets, and other things both pertaining to the technical aspects for the explosives as well as the event itself.

On the fire and environmental factors:

You do not actually need excess fuel in the form of gasoline to start a fire.  Actually the chemicals involved in the explosive can cause a fire on their own.  Boomerite actually can spontaneously combust when subjected to UV sunlight but your extensive knowledge of explosives has you obviously knowledgeable on that fact.  Do you know all the failure conditions for the materials involved in Tannerite to make your statement about fire not being an issue.  Further no reaction is 100%, actually far from it.  Some of the material from the explosion will not actually combust and be consumed in the reaction.  These materials can be problematic as it can react with organic material as it breaks down.  From a cursory inspection none of the materials immediately seem to be a fire danger but we thought the same thing about Boomerite.

The bottom line is that explosions are caused by combustion and to cause them we use materials that are prone to combust, quite quickly.  Yes reactive targets have been blamed for fires, including some recently here in the state of Washington.  While I’m not sure that the targets were the cause, it is certainly a possibility and not outside the realm of reality.  As a FYI when that happened, it was still relatively wet out here, still is actually.

However that doesn’t change that you are actually within the fire season for the State of Washington, as well as Idaho.  You can’t control the weather and just because things seem moist and safe doesn’t actually make it so.  Further there are already numerous wild fires including one in Colorado and another in Montana.  While further away, it should still serve as a reminder that caution and vigilance is important.

Be careful, be aware, have a plan to put it out, and make sure to turn the soil where you detonated the targets after you’re done to separate and disperse components.  But you, who knows so much about explosives were going to do that already.  Right?

Now on to my biggest point of contention.

This is Technically a Crime in Washington State

Washington is not exactly the friendliest of states with regards to explosives. As Janelle pointed out RCW 70.74 actually outlines many things that are prohibited regarding explosives. Including the fact that RCW 70.74.022 technically requires that any person mixing explosives have a license. While I fully and whole heartily sympathize and think it’s B.S. the law is still the law. It’s kind of funny that many of us whine about how congress critters ignore the law and then we turn around and do it ourselves. But that’s a level of irony for a whole different post.

But you’re not going to be in an urban area so how would you be caught I hear you cry.  I would hope to shout since discharging a firearm is illegal in most cities and townships.  But you should know you are not safe just because you’re in the middle of nowhere.  All it takes is for one person to see you and dislike what you’re doing and you’ll be in a world of trouble.  Joe had problems because someone who was near a quarry he had permission to be at called the sheriff and the ATF.  Joe learned of the situation after and an ATF Agent, not inspector (also known as the branch of Jack Booted Thugs), tracked him down and contacted him weeks after the incident.  Note Joe has a license to manufacture and handle explosives and permissions to be on the property.  Joe also knew inspectors on a first name basis with people in the same office as the agent.  Joe had every i dotted and t crossed and was legal and clear in what he was doing.

What cards do you have to play like that if someone doesn’t like what you’re doing?  You will be in violation 70.74.022 and if they attempt to classify the explosive as a firework you will be violating 70.77.495.  All it takes is some people trying to enjoy the wilderness that are disrupted by your activities and with a description of your vehicle you life can start rolling down hill.

FYI, I’m more familiar with how the legal system works that most people would ever like to be.  There is a phrase I often say that I am going to repeat here, it’s how prosecutors think:

It takes a good prosecutor to convict a guilty man, it takes a great prosecutor to convict an innocent one.

Given the overall destruction of Mens Rea three isn’t much the nanny state wont outlaw.  Even given the fact that it’s nanny stateish I would be very careful about willfully or knowingly committing crimes, much less posting to Facebook about your intent and will to do so.  That’s just not smart or bright at all.  Especially since it can be brought out as evidence later showing you knew full well about the legalities involved.

Will you probably get away without a problem? Probably.  Does it have the potential to go south on you?  Most definitely.  Do you need to be prepared about the potential to cause a fire? Yes, even though it isn’t extremely likely it can happen.  It may not even happen while you’re there but a day or two later.

What the wife was saying and I’m repeating:

Be careful, know what you’re doing is dangerous and can have consequences that you’re not immediately aware of, and be prepared to deal with them because you are responsible.  You would think that common sense would work, but common sense isn’t always so common.  Instead of walking over people thinking you know more than them and just dismissing their comments for whatever reason, maybe you should just shut up and listen.  They might have a reason for what they’re saying.

No Correlation Between The Law and Justice

Still don’t believe me?  Well here it is from U.S. District court Judge Keith Ellison.

Federal law does not recognize actual innocence as a mechanism to overturn an otherwise valid conviction.

What was the purpose of that statement?  It was his reasoning behind him denying a motion for a new trial.  Think about that long and hard.  Innocence is not a reason to overturn a conviction.  Being innocent does not prevent you from being found guilty and evidence that proves your innocence does not provide a route to overturn a bad verdict.

Translation: “There is no correlation between the law and justice.”

Remember, It takes a good prosecutor to convict a guilty man, it takes a great prosecutor to convict an innocent one.  Couple that with three felonies a day and you’re only allowed to remain free by their good graces.

via Uncle.

Quote of the Day – A Girl (12/18/2012)

When I was mugged I blamed only 2 people. My attacker and myself. I can’t control him, so I looked at myself to figure out what I could do to put myself in a better position for survival should the element I couldn’t control decided to come after me again. I took responsibility. I didn’t blame the cops or the grocery store parking lot or even my parents. They had some influence as did society, but it was me who stood there and did nothing. It was me. I did not come after you or anyone else. I didn’t go to congress and ask for new laws to protect my lack of action. I took action. Law abiding, legal action and I took responsibility for my part in that day. I can tell you none of it felt good. I didn’t feel good after I picked myself up off the ground, I didn’t feel good as I hid in the bathroom and took care of my scraped up arms and back. I didn’t feel good when my so called friends turned their backs on me. I didn’t feel good when my daughter looked me in the eye and told me she didn’t feel safe because I didn’t stop the and guy. It didn’t feel good when I showed up in the park to learn how to defend myself. I felt anything but good. I felt sad and lonely. I felt lost and broken. I felt ashamed and confused. I felt scared and and hopeless. And I fought all of that everyday for over a year in order to take responsibility. In order to feel good again.

A GirlFeeling Good
December 18, 2012


[First, go read the whole thing, it’s worth it and there were a few other quotes I almost put up first till I hit that one.

Now when I read that my immediate thought was, “No one ever said doing the right thing was the easiest route.”  I did a previous rant in the immediate wake and honestly her post and mine are intertwined together.

Feelings are driving the conversation for a lot of people right now, they want to do something, anything.  As I said before:

They want to be able to look at a physical object and blame it for what as happened.  They want to destroy the physical object and blame it for their grief.

They don’t want to admit that ultimately there was a person behind the gun.  They don’t want to admit no matter how hard they tried, they wouldn’t be able to control him.  They don’t want to admit all the efforts they took in advance to feel good in the wake of things like Columbine and other mass shootings in the end did nothing.  Not only did they do nothing, but the may have made it worse.

To them though that last thought is an impossibility   It is impossible that the actions they took to satisfy their feelings could have been counter productive.  How could they?  Their responses felt right to them in a previous time of emotional tragedy.

People currently forget that 11 years ago a group of men brought this country to its knees with a set of box cutters.  The tool is a tool and nothing more.  It’s use for good and evil rests entirely with the person holding the tool.

The principal, Dawn Hochsprung, gave her life ultimately trying to protect her students.  She was forced, by law, to be unarmed in that encounter.  The aggressor however broke numerous laws and had to actually steal the firearms to carry out his crime.  Think about that for a second, objectively.  We, as a community, trusted that woman, as well as the staff with the care and protection of our children.  We trusted that they would do what is necessary to keep them safe and educate them for the future.  We trust them enough to send our children there for a decent part of their young lives.  Yet we refuse to allow them the choice of carrying a firearm to defend our children should evil come before them.

We refused to allow the people immediately on the scene to respond to the threat posed against the children.  Instead the shooter was given 20 minutes to perpetrate his crimes.  He was given 20 minutes with defenseless victims.  Victims who were in the charge of responsible adults.  Those responsible adults, responsible for the children in their charge, were forcibly disarmed under the law.

The law in this case guaranteed the outcome.  We will never know what the outcome would have been had just one teacher been able to choose to be armed.  We can hypothesize given previous events, such as the Pearl High School incident in 1997.  But we can never actually know, all we can do is wonder.

It’s time to stop passing laws based on irrational emotion and examine a very simple and harsh fact.  When evil finally shows up, how can we react.  We focus too much on stopping evil out right and preventing it from ever happening.  While definitely a worthy goal, it is almost impossible to achieve since you cannot actually control the aggressor.  All you can do is react as quickly as possible and try to minimize damage.   What you can control to achieve that goal is yourself and your response, except in many cases the law has neutered that ability from the victims. -B]

I’m sure someone’s fuming

So I’m sure our opponents will go into PSH over the following:

The four hour course, which will be held this Saturday, January 12th, is recommended for children who received a new BB gun, shotgun or hunting rifle for Christmas or for those who may already have a gun.

Sheriff Steve Prator told Shreveport Times, “Children who will receive a gun for Christmas can try it for the first time in front of certified law enforcement academy firearms instructors.

That’s right folks, a Sheriff’s department is offering free firearms training to kids.  But it gets better, to cover the costs of the training some different sources have stepped up to the plate.

The course is free and is sponsored by donations from local citizens, Walmart, and local wholesalers.  Children without a gun can use a gun that will be supplied by the academy, according to Shreveport Times.

I’m sure our opponents are screaming how Walmart and other businesses should be buying back the guns from the kids.  How that if we keep them hidden and out of sight children will never find them or be curious about them.  At the same time though these individuals are more than happy to have them go through sex education, because you “know kids are curious and not talking about it won’t do anything to solve the problem.”

I’m sure someone else will scream how it’s insensitive given the recent school shootings, blah de blah blah blah.  At which point their hood and veil come off.  We see right through their lies into the bell of the beast.  This isn’t about making kids safer, this isn’t about stopping criminals, it is about banning firearms and control. Period.  They use the tragedy merely as an emotional crutch to support their agenda because they cannot support it with facts and logic.

Don’t believe me?  Let’s look at a conversation that happened over at Sebastian’s place.  I’m going to post it here because honestly, I don’t want it lost down in some thread in the comments, I want it front and center.  Especially with how it ended.  This is pretty long so I’m shoving it below the fold.  Here is a link to skip to the conclusion below the fold.

Continue reading