Tag Archives: Rule of Law

SSCC #435ƴ: NYPD

  By Barron | October 18, 2012 - 07:00 | , ,
6 Comments

The Brooklyn DA and NYPD Internal Affairs are investigating cops caught on tape beating a man wrongly suspected of trespassing in a Crown Heights synagogue, authorities said yesterday.

So the security guard screwed up and called police when he really didn’t need to.  However this is how the cops behaved upon showing up:

To put the icing on the cake.  Here is how the department has responded to the behavior of the officers.

NYPD spokesman Paul Browne said one of the cops involved, a 49-year-old man, “has been placed on modified assignment.”

Yup, business as usual for our anointed overlords.  When they say “To Protect and Serve” they really just are leaving off the hidden word at the end, “Themselves.”

State Sponsored Criminal #435: John Doe

#436: John Doe

Because by all means beat the hell out of someone without actually talking to them first.

SSCC #433 – Utah Highway Patrol

  By Barron | October 17, 2012 - 07:00 | , ,
2 Comments

A supervisor warned in 2010 that Utah Highway Patrol Cpl. Lisa Steed, who is under investigation by her own agency, was frequently arresting people for driving under the influence of drugs who had no drugs in their systems.

The response of the Utah Highway Patrol, bury it so defense attorneys don’t find out.  This wasn’t just a minor screw up either, blood tests confirm the officer was lying.

In seven of those [20 reviewed] cases, toxicology tests showed the driver had only metabolite, Nixon wrote. Metabolite is the remnants of drugs or pharmaceuticals in the bloodstream, though not necessarily the illegal kind.

Four other drivers had no drugs in their system, according to Nixon’s memo, a copy of which was obtained by The Salt Lake Tribune.

The UHP continued to allow the officer to retain the same position and took no corrective action.  The memo and findings were also with held from defense attorneys   How heavily was it buried?

The memo is “extraordinary,” said Joseph Jardine, a Salt Lake City defense attorney who earlier this year successfully petitioned a judge to gain access to Steed’s discipline record. Jardine said the memo was not included in the records he viewed. The Salt Lake Tribune showed Jardine and Skordas the memo Tuesday.

When the light was finally shined on the mold, the UHP finally removed her from road duty and began an investigation which is obviously at this point almost 3 years over due.

It gets even better though because in 2007:

Utah Highway Patrol Officer Lisa Steed is the Utah Highway Patrol’s new Trooper of the Year. The Utah Department of Public Safety made the announcement after Steed made more than 200 DUI arrests this year.

Looks like we all know how she made that accomplishment now don’t we.

State Sponsored Criminal #433: Cpl. Lisa Steed

Because when you want to come in first, arrest anyone and every one you can as long as you can trump up an excuse.  Their lives don’t matter, only your career matters!

via Tango

A Compare and Contrast Exercise…

  By Barron | October 15, 2012 - 11:00 | , , , , , ,
Comments Off

Let’s compare and contrast the following two people, what they did, and the reactions by the American Media.

GonzalesVSHolder

For those who don’t recognize the pictures, on the left we have former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, on the right we have Attorney General Eric Holder.

The significant similarities necessary for this discussion:

  • Both are tied to the highest position within the Department of Justice.
  • Both committed questionable acts while in that position.
  • Both were disliked by large parts of the American people for their actions.
  • Both acted in a manner with the express intent of undermining and destroying enumerated rights.

Differences:

  • Eric Holder’s decisions resulted in the deaths of both American and Mexican civilians.
  • Eric Holder refused to process cases where the American public was intimidated from exercising their rights.
  • Alberto Gonzales was forced to resign while Holder continues to retain his position.
  • Eric Holder was found in contempt of congress.  Eric Holder has not been arrested despite the ability for congress to do so.
  • The Congressional “no-confidence” vote against Gonzales did not succeed.
  • Alberto Gonzales was appointed by President George Bush.
  • Eric Holder was appointed by President Barack Obama.

For those who may not remember the details.  Here is the quick rundown of the two big scandals under Holder.

The details you more likely need a reminder of is the incidents involving Alberto Gonzales

So while the comments and behavior of Gonzales was despicable and worthy of question, why has AG Holder been allowed to remain?  There is a man responsible for creating programs with the express purpose of illegally undermining a constitutional right.  Programs that resulted in the deaths of members of the public.  A man who has been found in contempt of congress, yet no one seems to have the balls to actually fire him.

Ultimately the biggest difference between these two is the men who were responsible for appointing them.  Because honestly that’s the only reason Eric Holder has been able to continue in his position.  Remember that the next time some tells you about how the media isn’t biased.

Quote of the Day – Scott Greenfield(10/10/2012)

  By Barron | October 10, 2012 - 11:30 | , , ,
Comments Off

Because of this, all the other safeguards of the criminal justice system kicked in, from due process to double jeopardy.  People at HuffPo and Boing Boing usually like these aspects of the law, except when they don’t. Then they become technicalities and produce injustice, because the outcome doesn’t comport with their sensibilities. Rape is one of the sacred cow crimes, and no law should get in the way of conviction.

It’s all about outcome?  As Ken at Popehat points out, people across the political spectrum pick their positions based on outcomes, just different ones.  It’s not about thinking, but feeling.  The law, however,isn’t about feeling.

(Emphasis mine.) Scott Greenfield – The Future Of Law and The Fool’s Utopia, Rape Edition
October 10, 2012

[I've said it before and I'll say it again.  There is no correlation between the law and justice!  Seriously folks, realize this right here and now.  The point of the law is not just to convict the guilty but to protect the innocent from the power and wrath of the state.

In the end we hope that the law will give some form of justice.  However it is also up to the players within the system to aid in that outcome.  The prosecution in this case clearly screwed up and charged this person with the wrong crime.

Am I sad that this monster is getting away with the actual crime he did?  You bet your ass. Am I angry at the legal system and think it failed?  Yes and no.  I am angry at the prosecutor for doing a piss poor job, I am not however upset that the rest of the system worked as it should to protect the defendant.

The thing to understand is you cannot have your cake and eat it.  While one wants to both protect the innocent and convict the guilty, concessions must be made to protect the innocent.  In doing so the possibility for error can allow the guilty to go free.

This isn't a bug folks, it's a feature.  A feature that as Scott points out are more than happy to be cheered about by the same people who now condemn it when they feel it was wrong.

Popehat also put this quite well:

If we're going to defend rights — if we're not going to let them be chipped away, bit by bit, in cases involving rape or terrorism or anything else that engenders strong feelings — then we're going to have to be ready to be called terrorist-sympathizers and un-American and even rape apologists by the likes of Antinous. But I can't think of any earthly reason why we can't inform these people that they're full of shit.

Because folks, that's how they do it.  They invoke emotion and claim necessity.  Some of us are patient, calm, and rational enough to think the whole problem through.  Most however would prefer we just "do something" because doing something is better than nothing.  Except sometimes doing nothing is actually the best thing to do because someone just screwed the pooch.

More power and depredation of rights is never a solution. -B]

 

SSCC #427 – DEA, BATFEieio

  By Barron | October 10, 2012 - 07:00 | , , , , ,
Comments Off

The nation’s top drug and gun enforcement agencies do not track how often they give their informants permission to break the law on the government’s behalf.

U.S. Justice Department rules put strict limits on when and how agents at the FBI, Drug Enforcement Administration and Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives can authorize their informants — often drawn from the ranks of the criminals they are investigating — to commit a crime. But both the ATFand DEA acknowledged, in response to open-records requests and in written statements, that they do not track how often such permission is given.

(Emphasis mine.) When you see it written like that, it reads as the definition of a State Sponsored Criminal now doesn’t it?

State Sponsored Criminal #427: The Feds

Because if you want to get a crime, just ask the government for permission first.  If you have to sweeten the deal by squealing on your compatriots.  No honor among thieves you know.

 

SSCC #425–NYPD

  By Barron | October 8, 2012 - 07:00 | , ,
Comments Off

There’s a reason this happened in NYC.

An unarmed Army National Guardsman was pulled over on a Queens highway and shot to death by an NYPD officer from an elite unit today — and the DA now is probing the incident that the victim’s friend is calling a case of police “road rage.”

Noel Polanco, 22, had his hands on the steering wheel of his 2012 Honda Fit moments before Detective Hassan Hamdy shot him once in the torso, a woman sitting in the front passenger seat told police, NYPD spokesman Paul Browne said.

Reading the article it appears the officer had no reason to treat the stop as a felony stop.  He then broke two rules obviously and put a round into the driver.  Yup, still think the cops are out to protect and serve.  They’re out to merely protect their own ass if they’re protecting anyone.

Odds are the officer won’t be fired and if anything will receive “training”.  I have a feeling the training is really, “How to frame the situation better in your favor.”

The reason I say it happened in NYC, is here in free America they would be afraid of people in the car being armed and shooting back after the first shot.

State Sponsored Criminal #425:  Hassan Hamdy

Because if you’re a cop and someone cuts you off, pull him over and shoot him.  If anyone asks what happened say he shot himself!*

*Yes, read the article, the officer told his friends that the driver shot himself…

SSCC #420 – New Orleans

  By Barron | October 4, 2012 - 10:30 | , , ,
1 Comment

Seriously I didn’t not plan for this in advance, the number and crime are purely coincidental.

Assistant city attorney Jason Cantrell was issued a summons after he dropped a joint while talking to a police officer in Orleans Parish Criminal District Court.

Cantrell, 43, was cited for simple drug possession and released under a city policy for low-level marijuana cases, according to police.  

Now while apparently the law was followed in this case, there is a reason I’m placing this under the criminal count.

Cantrell has practiced civil and criminal law in New Orleans for 17 years, including six as a public defender in Juvenile Court. In an ironic twist, the 43-year-old also worked as a drug court attorney.

(Emphasis mine.)  While it does seem that most of the work may have been on the defense side instead of the prosecution, he still was a city employee.  Charged with enforcing and upholding the law.

Now he has promptly resigned and the punishment matches what the rest of the public should see in that municipality if the article is to be believed.  Still, this fits perfectly with the, “Laws for thee, not for me” tag.

State Sponsored Criminal #420: Jason Cantrell

Because laws only apply to the lowly peons.  Those who work for the king are allowed to have any noun they want.

h/t Dave Hardy.

Quote of the Day–Adam Kline (10/3/2012)

  By Barron | October 3, 2012 - 13:42 | , ,
Comments Off

The NRA thrives on weak challenges; it sees them as fundraising opportunities. Its supporters are ready to believe that any gun bill — no matter how rational its purpose or how minor its scope — is a threat to God-given and constitutionally protected rights, and will contribute generously, giving the organization not only the psychological momentum of a win, but likely a surplus as well. It is up to us to choose our battles wisely.

(Emphasis mine)

Adam Kline – Sen. Kline: Democrats haven’t wimped out on guns

October 2, 2012

[h/t to Joe for the article. First, side rant. Adam Kline also said the following:

The way it works in this democracy is that we legislators represent our constituents. We can get a majority of our colleagues on an issue when enough of us sense that the people are there, or almost there, or at least going there, and that we may have to push them there, but at the end of the day our risk will not have been wasted. The work of moving public opinion on an issue cannot be done by legislators alone, whose work makes us generalists, but must be done by the activists who care particularly about that issue.

We don’t live in a democracy Mr. Kline.  We live in a constitutional republic.  I realize though that a majority of those who now work in the legislative bodies are ignorant of how the system was actually designed to work and prefer to twist and manipulate it to destroy the rights of the minority.  For you see a democracy is nothing more than mob-rule.  If the mob wants to take your property, they can.  If the mob wants to kill you, they can.  If the mob decides they would rather bleed you dry like a slave, they can.  The point of a constitutional republic is that both the majority and minority are protected equally.

Now back to the quote at hand, more specifically the part emphasized.  There is a reason we view it as a threat to a natural and enumerated right.  Because it IS! I grew up in the age of the 1994 assault weapons ban.  I remember it quite well and it’s goal was down right obvious.  Don’t believe me?  The most popular rifle in America would still be banned if it wasn’t for the expiration of the AWB.

That was claimed by supporters as being rational and the only way to curb gun violence.  The thing is, statistically gun control has been proven to be ineffective over and over again.  Further when you compare nations with strong gun controls it becomes obvious it creates a world that is less safe for the law abiding. 

That is the crux Mr. Kline.  The American public no longer likes being criminalized by the government for merely having and effective tool of self defense.  The American public sees what you’re doing and claiming for exactly what it is.  You’re issue is that you can no longer control the narrative.  Not only can you not control the narrative but you’re upset because the people on your side of the debate are crazy and violent.  Because of this your side of the debate is left standing still every time you attempt to infringe on that natural and enumerated right.

It is however unsurprising that you find your home the Peoples Republic of Puget Sound and you feel your “majority” other wise known merely as Seattle is a right for you to dictate life throughout the rest of the state.  I doubt this will make any difference given the 37th Legislative district is the equivalent of Communist China, but if you live there, please send that tyrant home.

So in closing Mr. Kline, in the words of Melvin Udall, “Where did they teach you to talk like this, some Panama City sailor wanna hump hump bar, or is this get-a-way day and your last shot at his whiskey, sell crazy some place else, we’re all stocked up here.”  -B]