SSCC #29–Radcliff, KY PD

Of the 26 arrests, which were made public Friday, half were made sporadically following forensics testing on their computers or online chats in which they expressed "nasty" and "abnormal" sexual desires to an agent posing as a child. A lieutenant in the Radcliff (Kentucky) Police Department typed to an undercover deputy about his wish to impregnate a child, according to the sheriff’s office.

The individual in question was charged as follows:

David Williams, 37, West Point, KY Lewd Exhibition and Solicitation

Initially I was figuring this to be an honorable mention since there is no direct evidence of him having committed the crime while on duty.  That said, his position of authority and trust allowed him the opportunity to exploit it at his wish.  It was mostly by luck that he was caught prior to him exploiting that power.  See my original post and note the following from the rules:

The person committed the crime while on duty, or his job provided access to commit the crime under color of law (see the pedophile above).

This is a bit more difficult since the pedophile could use his job to touch children without legal recourse by the definition of his job as defined by the state.  The officer however does have a position of trust and authority that he can use to manipulate children.  While his department certainly wouldn’t protect his actions like the TSA would, we have seen elsewhere that departments will protect their officers until there is public backlash.  So with that I’ll let it stand as a member of the count.  It is borderline and if you feel differently, feel free to explain your reasoning in the comments.

State Sponsored Criminal Count: 29

Because what else would an official from the state do to someone who has been told to unquestionably follow their orders.

Via Joe

SSCC #24-26 –Oklahoma State Patrol

In a news release Tuesday, Logan County District Attorney Tommy Lee says while on duty as a trooper, Venable pulled over a woman on the Broadway Extension in Oklahoma City. Lee says Venable took the woman into custody for driving under the influence of intoxicating liquor. He’s accused of then transporting her to a residence in Guthrie where he had sex with her.

While on duty he made an arrest.  Then he proceeded to use his position over the woman to satisfy his own urges.  Ignore the statement that he is a “former” officer because he resigned as opposed to actually being dismissed by the OSP as punishment.  This is by no means the first issue with OSP either, not even the first of a sexual nature.

Arganbright has been under investigation for professional misconduct by the Internal Affairs Division of the state Department of Public Safety. Among the allegations against him, are that he used his patrol car for romantic rendezvous with a 16-year-old girl and sent text messages to her, asking her run away with him, authorities said.

A cop having relations with a minor, at least in this case the OSP actually fired him.  Not to mention he was also tagged with violating a protection order and embezzlement.  The most famous incident of late though happens to be the following:

This incident though from 2009 shows the depth of the problem considering the officer at question was reinstated shortly there after.  There is a history of the OSP looking the other way when it’s officers step out of line.

State Sponsored Criminal Count: 26 (All three officers committed these crimes while on duty)

Because since the girl was drunk it’s all her fault since the officer was on duty, right? 

Because pedophiles could never possibly work for the government, and most definitely wouldn’t use their authority to abuse their victims, right?

Because the cop and his authoritah is considerably more important than the woman having a heart attack in the back of the ambulance.

SSCC #13–TSA Takes Teens $100 Gift

Now it seems that TSA agents have found a more subtle score: stealing $100 that was a gift to a 16-year-old honor student from his grandmother. The boy’s mother tells the Post that the theft was "disgusting and a violation of my son’s trust."

The TSA has not terminated this individual involved as it is still under investigation.  Despite the claims of zero tolerance, I doubt anything is going to come from this as how can they prove he swiped 100 bucks.  It’s not as if he swiped 20 grand worth of jewelry and pawned it.

A Security Theater has proven worthless and nothing more than a den for thieves and perverts.

State Sponsored Criminal Count: 13

Because nothing says free like representatives of the state stealing a kids lunch money gift from his grandmother.  I mean where else have we ever seen this kind bullying before?

Patriot Act Up for Renewal

The Patriot Act should have never been created to begin with.

It was made while we were all still very emotional, many of us, including myself though have hated it from the start.  It appears that the congress is going to be adding another year onto the Patriot Act.

This would extend it until February of 2012, and passage is likely to happen with little debate or contention.

Remember who the DHS considers terrorists.  Time to write your congress critters.  This renewal needs to be at least debated, preferably fully derailed.

Two Assurances in Life

There are two assurances in life. Death, and taxes. It seems King County has now combined to two, to make sure the government get a cut for kicking the bucket.

“The reason we do that is to make sure no one goes to the crematorium or to their grave without society and the family knowing exactly how their loved one died,” says Gareth Johnson, King County Prevention Division Manager.

A death that occurs under mysterious circumstances probably needs an investigation. However when someone is dying of a terminal disease, or a baby is born without developed lungs. Odds are in those later cases, cause of death is already known. Why does the state need to further investigate it and send the bill? Also in many cases, such as this one, why is it “societies” business?

What makes them so special?

James Clyburn would like special treatment for members of congress at airports.

“We’ve had some incidents where TSA authorities think that congress people should be treated like everybody else,” he said. “Well, the fact of the matter is, we are held to a higher standard in so many other areas, and I think we need to take a hard look at exactly how the TSA interact with members of Congress.”

Why shouldn’t the congress critters by abused by the DHS and TSA they created?  Oh that’s right, they think they’re a ruler over us peasants.  They believe that because this happened once, that magically all of them are going to be dead.  Now with all the threats they think, “They want us all dead.”  No, we want you out of office because you’re acting like elitists.  I would like to point out though the shooter would have been considerably more effective just driving a truck into the crowd.

As for a security measure mentioned today,

and they are demanding improved protection ranging from office security cameras to the installation of a Plexiglas barrier over the House floor.

I believe Executive Orders from Tom Clancy already solved that barrier.  All of this behavior is to remind us who the rulers are, and who the peasants are.

Update on EPIC TSA Lawsuit

EPIC has submitted numerous Freedom of Information Act requests regarding the body scanners.  They have posted the information online for all to see.

These documents include:

Initially it was claimed that the TSA body scanners could not store or transmit images.  Then the US Marshal Service in August 2010 reported they had saved more than 35000 imagesThe TSA responded by claiming that it has not done so and the machines do not have the ability.  Some still believe the TSA, the smart one’s have distrusted them from the start.

One WBI system,  identified by  the Government, shall (26) have the capability, which can be configurable at the superuser level. to record  images for training purposes. The superuser password shall(27) be managed by  the TSA. The capability to retain  images at the superuser level will be disabled on operational systems

Later in the same document(emphasis mine):

Incorporate a three  level user and password scheme allowing supervision and “superusers” access and override capabilities

While they claim for it to be possibly disabled the fact that the feature is there means that someone can re-enabled it.  Some would claim that no one would possibly want it.  However there have been rumors about a “new fetish”.  The thing is though, it’s already happened.  That could be your one of your loved ones.  We know the types of people the TSA employs.

While reading through the Operational Requirements, you can find the following:

image

Normally one would avoid conjecture, however what could be considered critical to national security regarding the privacy capability of the device?  NMAB-482-1 can be found here, the section we really care about is here.

It appears that the tactic being used for airport security is to rule this search as being administrative.

Airport security searches fit quite naturally into the administrative search exception to the Fourth Amendment. Administrative searches are justified on the basis that they serve a societal purpose other than standard criminal law enforcement (Vernonia School District 47J, 1995, citing Griffin, 1987). After all, the Fourth Amendment cannot be construed to prevent the government from fulfilling a variety of other necessary functions, such as maintaining school discipline, preventing drunk driving, detecting illegal aliens, or even ensuring air traffic safety (Vernonia, 1995; Michigan Dept. State Police, 1990; United States v. Martinez-Fuerte, 1976).

Each of those examples though require some sort reasonable suspicion.  Randomly stopping cars for drunk drivers and testing everyone, until recently has never happened.  In the instance Florida’s new checkpoints, there will probably be a strong legal challenge.  When attempting to maintain school discipline they must be disruptive to begin with.  As for illegal aliens, detecting them is extremely difficult. If it is as they claim above, why isn’t Arizona’s law legal unquestionably?  Especially since it requires contact of a lawful nature, they can’t just walk around carding people.

With regard to the TSA though, they claim the right to do this to any person for any reason.  No reasonable suspicion is required of a crime having been committed.

Against the special need of the government, the court must consider the passenger’s expectation of privacy. This consideration involves the same analysis used in the threshold issue of whether a search has occurred, with one important difference. Deciding whether a person has a reasonable expectation of privacy for purposes of determining whether or not a search has taken place is a yes-or-no-question. Either one does or does not have a legitimate expectation of privacy in this context. On the other hand, expectation of privacy as a factor in the balancing test becomes a matter of degree. Thus, the court in Vernonia (1995) held that schoolchildren, because of the supervisory role schools have over them, have a decreased expectation of privacy at school. As discussed in the first section, airline passengers most probably have a legitimate expectation of privacy against being searched in an intrusive manner. Nevertheless, this expectation could decrease if passengers perceive the threat level to be high.

Emphasis mine.  Their method to get around this problem is to convince the public that a statistically rare event (you’re actually more likely to be struck by lightning) is actually more common than it is.  The comparison to school children also shows the view they have of the public in general of being children and the government has the supervisory role.  We’re the children in school and they’re the principal.

Further the NMAB states:

Thus, measures should be taken to minimize the appearance of nakedness, the number of people having access to and identifying the image with the traveler, the time the image endures or is preserved, the uses to be made of the data, etc., to the extent consistent with safety objectives. The next section deals with the concept of less versus more intrusive means.

The assumption though that is enough for some people regarding their privacy is false.  If it wasn’t why would these have popped up overnight?  Also the ability to store the images as I talked about earlier has been proven to be false.  While they may claim it is not “normally” enabled.  The machines do have the capability and there is no way for the public to verify that it does not store the image.  We must take the governments word, which at this point should be worthless to everyone. If you opt out of the scanner the TSA humiliates anyone who refuses to go through the body scanner.  They are doing a procedure that is highly intimate and detrimental to victims of sexual abuseThis scanner can also reveal however private medical information that may not want to be shared because it’s no one’s business but yours and your doctors.  This also ignores the health concerns regarding the radiation exposure.  What is disturbing is this is the only time I’ve ever heard of people working around equipment that uses radiation that do NOT wear dosimeters

These documents display a crafted, thought out, and planned destruction of our 4th Amendment rights.  Their justification to violate the 4th Amendment centers around creating the illusion of necessity.  A Security Theaters has yet to stop any terrorists.  Yet they claim that their infringements are necessary and merely administrative to stop this “common” threat.  They need to be rendered impotent to stop the spread of their idiocy and evil.

(Sorry about going all Kevin Baker(it’s a complement Kevin) on this post.)

Red Light Cameras

So reading through the blogosphere yesterday Uncle posted about someone getting 5 red light tickets, but they weren’t his.  I had meant at the time to do a blog post on the subject but never got around to it.  Uncle’s post gave me renewed vigor.

Red light cameras strike a special nerve with me.  The arguments for their use are much like the arguments for gun control, it makes everyone safer.  The actual numbers from the field though show the complete opposite however, again, just like gun control.

My mom got a red light ticket back home.  It was actually her vehicle in this instance.  A couple weeks later some friends of hers who live out of town called and asked about the same intersection.  The interesting thing though about these tickets is they were for turning right on red, which is legal at that intersection.

As it is a sequence of still photographs as opposed to video, you can not defend yourself by showing you came to a complete stop.  You’re stuck paying the ticket.  Ahh, a ticket, maybe it is done for revenue.  Camera tickets are not reported to insurance companies or otherwise scored in your driving record.  It’s the equivalent of getting a parking ticket(California and Oregon excluded).  You are requested to pay this please for doing X, it’s a penance, except they’re charging people now a penance for something that is legal.  I voiced my displeasure by preaching to the choir and then it happened.  An article was posted in the town paper from where I grew up.  I read the article and damn near had an embolism from my blood pressure going through the roof.

Those who question the program’s validity will admit that there does seem to be a relationship between the cameras and the safety of people. Unfortunately, some politicians and pundits are inserting a “but …” and making claims that just are not true.

After my initial rage subsided I decided that I needed to bitch beyond the choir, to the no talent ass clowns politicians pushing this garbage.  After forwarding the article to “The Short Lady with the Grey Hair” she decided to send a letter as well.  Here is a copy of my letter for the internet to retain for all eternity.

Mr. Lewis,
There are some other issues you do not cover in your statement regarding photo enforcement at intersections.

As the rates of people committing infractions drop, revenue decreases.  Revenue is needed to maintain and operate the cameras.  As that revenue drops either the cameras are no longer maintained, or things are done which produce false positives to create revenue.  In either case people are or can be falsely cited for infractions.  Examples of this are ticketing everyone who turns right on red even though it’s legal.  As it is only pictures, NOT video it is impossible to prove guilt using them, however in a court room the images are looked at as divine judgment of guilt.

I will not argue that they can help decrease accidents, however accidents are caused by people blowing lights as through traffic.  Making a right hand turn on red is perfectly legal unless specific sings are in place to indicate otherwise.  However when I hear of different individuals getting a ticket for something perfectly legal at the same intersection is shows corruption and greed within the system.  It displays the real need for these cameras is to increase revenue.

Mr. Lewis, the facts of how these cameras are used and operated, coupled with the difficulty in defending yourself from a ticket for a legal procedure indicates a gross abuse by the local government against it’s citizens as well as visitors.  I grew up in Auburn and remember it prior to it’s explosion to it’s current state.  There is a reason I now live in a town with not a single stop light.  However when I talk to friends and relatives who still remain in the area about getting a ticket for turning right on red, where there is no indication it is illegal to do so, it makes me disappointed to say I grew up in Auburn.  It makes it obvious that Auburn’s intention with the system is not to increase safety, but rather to increase revenue by false citations to the citizenry.  Eventually the locals will know not to turn right on red, but what about people from out of town visiting.  Couple that with the distance and you have a guaranteed payout.

This is completely independent of the fact that the idea of red light and speeding cameras are grossly Orwellian in nature and indicate a subservience of the public to the state.  In our “free” republic, people are elected to represent the will of the public, not do as they wish.  When issues are brought up it is your duty as a public servant to address them.  That includes saying you made a mistake instead of continuing to push public policy to preserve your public image.  I would suggest finding a local scout organization and sitting through the “citizenship” merit badges.  The questions of efficacy in this instance I do not feel center around preventing accidents, but whether those who are ticketed have actually committed a crime.

Sincerely,

TMM

I haven’t seen or heard a reply and I’m sure it was probably just tossed the garbage.  So instead it will be placed on the internet, for all to see and enjoy.  This will also provide another case for others who find themselves in the same predicament to use in support of their case when fighting a ticket ill gotten penance required by the force of government.