Homeless in Arizona

DUI is all about raising revenue, not safety???

Source

First drunk-driving conviction can cost nearly $16,000 in California

By Jerry Hirsch

March 14, 2013, 8:32 a.m.

Beware of the $16,000 cocktail.

Just in time for St. Patrick's Day partying, the Automobile Club of Southern California has calculated that a first-offense misdemeanor DUI conviction can now cost up to $15,649 in California.

That’s up 29% from 2011.

The penalties are even higher for teenagers. The expense of an under-age-21 first-offense misdemeanor DUI is up to $22,492.

“It only takes one or two drinks to slow physical and mental skills that affect vision, steering, braking judgment and reaction time,” said the Auto Club’s Senior Researcher Steven A. Bloch. “Drivers should be aware that the California Highway Patrol and law enforcement agencies regularly use sobriety checkpoints to look for drinking drivers during heavy drinking periods, such as St. Patrick’s Day.”

A recent AAA report found that 10% of motorists admitted to driving when they thought their blood alcohol content was above the legal limit in the past year.

The Auto Club developed its cost estimate by totaling up mandated state and local fines, penalties, restitution, legal fees and increased insurance costs. The calculations do not include thousands of dollars of other potential expenses drivers might face if they lose work time for a criminal trial or to go to jail, need to pay bail or incur injury or vehicle damage from a crash they caused.

It also doesn’t include other potential drunk-driving-conviction consequences such as the risk of a civil trial or the requirement to install an ignition interlock in a vehicle.

"This is entirely preventable," Bloch said.

Government rulers are habitual liars????

Source

ICE prisoner release should make you angry

It doesn’t matter how you feel about immigration reform.

Thursday’s news that Immigration and Customs Enforcement released far more prisoners than initially reported should make you angry.

We were initially told it was only a few hundred people convicted of low-level offenses. But, according to ICE director John Morton, that’s not totally true. Of the 2,228 illegal immigrants let out of detention centers nationwide, 629 were convicted criminals. None were violent felons (hurray?), but at least four high-level offenders were mistakenly released because of a computer glitch.

Even worse, it took congressional testimony to pry these key pieces of information from the agency. Arizona still doesn’t know how many or what kind of criminals were released within our communities.

If you believe Morton, his agency acted without telling the President and Homeland Security director. But frankly, that doesn’t make Barack Obama or Janet Napolitano look any better than if they were calling the shots.

Who’s running what around there? And why should we believe a word they say after a stunt like this?

If the administration is really serious about immigration reform, we need to know who was released and what’s being done to make it right. At this point, even those who favor the reforms Obama is selling have reason to doubt whether his underlings have the ability to carry them out.

You think you will get a fair trial??? Don't make me laugh!!!!!

Source

Experts: Right to attorney is at risk as cuts hit

By JJ Hensley The Republic | azcentral.com Sat Mar 16, 2013 10:01 PM

As landmark civil-rights cases go, the Gideon case doesn’t have the renown of Brown vs. Board of Education or the notoriety of Miranda, a local case that went national and led to the “right to remain silent” warning familiar to any suspect or fan of TV crime dramas.

But the impact of Gideon vs. Wainwright, published 50 years ago Monday, has fundamentally altered the American legal system in a variety of ways, according to experts. And they suggest budget crises at the state and federal level are a threat to those protections.

The U.S. Supreme Court decision of March 18, 1963, guaranteed the right to representation by an attorney in state courts for any suspect who could not afford one. It came 25 years after a ruling made the same guarantee for defendants in federal courts. It stemmed from a case involving a man accused of burglary in Florida who showed up for court without an attorney.

Supreme Court Justice Hugo Black, who wrote the opinion, believed the decision was the most important he rendered in the court, said Larry Hammond, a Phoenix attorney who served as a law clerk for Black.

Hammond said the system has since fallen short of the promise the decision offered.

“I have mixed feelings about it,” Hammond said, noting the unrealistic workloads and lack of resources that tie the hands of public defenders at all levels. “It breaks my heart a little bit that we’re not better off, but I love the public defenders. What they’re doing is God’s work.”

It took awhile for Maricopa County to get on board with the notion of a public defender’s office. Two years after the decision was reached, the county Board of Supervisors paid for a division with an appointed administrator, five attorneys and a handful of investigators and staff members.

Craig Mehrens, a Phoenix attorney, went to work in the office shortly after it opened and said the variety of cases — ranging from first-degree murder to contributing to the delinquency of a minor — and staff shortages offered ample opportunity for young lawyers to hone their skills. For Mehrens, whose introduction to the legal community came through books he read, it solidified the value of a vigorous defense.

“Until you’re involved in the criminal-justice system, you have no concept how frightening it is. The public defender is the only human being that stands between that person and his going to prison or put to death. And, of course, in almost every case, the person accused has no concept of how the law works, has no idea what their rights are,” Mehrens said.

“Unfortunately, the public sees defense lawyers as thinking, ‘How do I get this guy off?’ Almost all the defense lawyers I know, they see their job as simply to make sure that person’s rights are not violated. We all know we are going to lose most of our cases.”

The office encountered problems almost from the outset. The first appointed public defender was dismissed after several years because he was alleged to have run his private practice from the public defender’s office, Mehrens said.

His successor held the position for 18 years, but he was fired by the Board of Supervisors in 1987 after he allowed attorneys in the office to testify in a court case about staffing shortages and caseloads.

Bob Storrs, a criminal-defense lawyer who began practicing in Arizona 45 years ago, said the Gideon decision also led to a host of other changes in the system.

Court-appointed lawyers conducted investigations and challenged prosecutors where a suspect might have been unwilling or unable, Storrs said. As investigations and prosecutions became more technical, those court-appointed lawyers became even more vital, he said.

“All of these kinds of things really have evolved out of Gideon. You have to look at it, and you try to make a determination and say, ‘Is this a good case? Do they have the right guy?’ It’s interviewing witnesses, getting a second opinion on the state’s experts,” Storrs said.

“Before Gideon, if they didn’t have the money to hire a lawyer, they went without a lawyer. The number of defendants that hire lawyers is still low in comparison with those that have court-appointed lawyers.”

Court-appointed attorneys accounted for about 80 percent of the lawyers in non-capital felony cases filed in Maricopa County in the last fiscal year.

Today, the system in Maricopa County relies on an administrative office that doles out cases to public defenders as well as to private attorneys who are assigned to cases as contract counsel. But time has not changed many of the issues that made Gideon such an important decision, said Paul Bender, an Arizona State University law professor and constitutional-law expert.

“In a principled way, everybody would agree, I think, that people — regardless of whether they have money or not — are entitled to an adequate defense. If public defenders are swamped the way they are, that means that it’s going to be impossible for some people to get an adequate defense. That can lead to innocent people being convicted. It also leads to plea bargains of cases that shouldn’t be plea- bargained,” he said.

“People should be concerned about that ... just as a matter of fairness and constitutional principle. It’s in everybody’s interest to have that system work well.”

On the 50th anniversary of the landmark decision, it is the notion that budget cuts are once again jeopardizing the chance for indigent suspects to receive a fair trial that concerns legal observers, particularly at the federal level, where the right to counsel was solidified by a 1938 court decision.

Last month, the Federal Public Defender’s Office in Arizona laid off 10 staff members, including six attorneys, because the budget gridlock in Washington, D.C., has led to stagnant funding while prosecution costs have increased, said Jon Sands, federal public defender for Arizona. The sequester just made that worse, he said.

And the federal budget crisis comes at a time when the focus on certain crimes, including drug smuggling, immigration-related offenses, mortgage fraud and crime on tribal lands, has led to a deluge of cases in Arizona’s federal courts. Much of that falls on the shoulders of the Public Defender’s Office.

The federal public defender opened slightly more than 12,000 cases in Arizona in the most recent fiscal year, compared with 5,500 cases in fiscal 2001.

“What this (layoff) means is that indigent defendants will not be given counsel as quickly as they have in the past; cases will not be processed as quickly,” Sands said.

Employees who remain in his office also face furloughs, as do federal prosecutors, U.S. marshals and FBI agents.

“The whole system slows down, which seems to be counterproductive to everyone’s interest in having justice delivered fairly and swiftly,” Sands said.

The federal budget cuts also will affect private attorneys appointed as counsel for indigent defendants, said David Eisenberg, Arizona’s representative for a panel of attorneys appointed through the Criminal Justice Act.

The private attorneys pay experts and other expenses associated with their clients’ defenses and submit reimbursement vouchers. Eisenberg expects delays in attorneys’ voucher reimbursements but said it should not fundamentally alter the work the defense attorneys do on behalf of their clients.

“I think the delay in paying is going to make it more difficult for lawyers to run their practices,” he said.

Right to Lawyer Can Be Empty Promise for Poor

Source

Right to Lawyer Can Be Empty Promise for Poor

By ETHAN BRONNER

Published: March 15, 2013 186 Comments

ADEL, Ga. — Billy Jerome Presley spent 17 months in a Georgia jail because he did not have $2,700 for a child support payment. He had no prior jail record but also no lawyer. In Baltimore last fall, Carl Hymes, 21, was arrested on charges of shining a laser into the eyes of a police officer. Bail was set at $75,000. He had no arrest record but also no lawyer. In West Orange, N.J., last summer, Walter Bloss, 89, was served with an eviction notice from the rent-controlled apartment he had lived in for 43 years after a dispute with his landlord. He had gone to court without a lawyer.

Russell Davis, 37, was jailed three times over child support payments during court proceedings that he faced without a lawyer.

Fifty years ago, on March 18, 1963, the Supreme Court unanimously ruled in Gideon v. Wainwright that those accused of a crime have a constitutional right to a lawyer whether or not they can afford one. But as legal officials observe the anniversary of what is widely considered one of the most significant judicial declarations of equality under law, many say that the promise inherent in the Gideon ruling remains unfulfilled because so many legal needs still go unmet.

Civil matters — including legal issues like home foreclosure, job loss, spousal abuse and parental custody — were not covered by the decision. Today, many states and counties do not offer lawyers to the poor in major civil disputes, and in some criminal ones as well. Those states that do are finding that more people than ever are qualifying for such help, making it impossible to keep up with the need. The result is that even at a time when many law school graduates are without work, many Americans are without lawyers.

The Legal Services Corporation, the Congressionally financed organization that provides lawyers to the poor in civil matters, says there are more than 60 million Americans — 35 percent more than in 2005 — who qualify for its services. But it calculates that 80 percent of the legal needs of the poor go unmet. In state after state, according to a survey of trial judges, more people are now representing themselves in court and they are failing to present necessary evidence, committing procedural errors and poorly examining witnesses, all while new lawyers remain unemployed.

“Some of our most essential rights — those involving our families, our homes, our livelihoods — are the least protected,” Chief Justice Wallace B. Jefferson of the Texas Supreme Court, said in a recent speech at New York University. He noted that a family of four earning $30,000 annually does not qualify for legal aid in many states.

James J. Sandman, president of the Legal Services Corporation, said, “Most Americans don’t realize that you can have your home taken away, your children taken away and you can be a victim of domestic violence but you have no constitutional right to a lawyer to protect you.”

According to the World Justice Project, a nonprofit group promoting the rule of law that got its start through the American Bar Association, the United States ranks 66th out of 98 countries in access to and affordability of civil legal services.

“In most countries, equality before the law means equality between those of high and low income,” remarked Earl Johnson Jr., a retired justice of the California Court of Appeal. “In this country for some reason we are concerned more with individuals versus government.”

With law school graduates hurting for work, it may appear that there is a glut of lawyers. But many experts say that is a misunderstanding.

“We don’t have an excess of lawyers,” said Martin Guggenheim, a law professor at New York University. “What we have is a miserable fit. In many areas like family and housing law, there is simply no private bar to go to. You couldn’t find a lawyer to help you even if you had the money because there isn’t a dime to be made in those cases.”

Even in situations where an individual is up against a state prosecutor and jail may result, not every jurisdiction provides lawyers to the defendants. In Georgia, those charged with failing to pay child support face a prosecutor and jail but are not supplied with a lawyer.

Mr. Presley lost his job in the recession and fell way behind on support payments for his four children. In 2011, he was jailed after a court proceeding without a lawyer in which he said he could not pay what he owed. He was brought back to court, shackled, every month or two. Each time, he said he still could not pay. Each time, he was sent back.

A year later, he contacted a public defender who handles only criminal cases but who sent his case to the Southern Center for Human Rights. Atteeyah Hollie, a lawyer there, got him released that same day, helped him find work and set up a payment plan.

An important service lawyers can provide defendants like Mr. Presley is knowledge of what courts want — receipts of medical treatment, evidence of a job search, bank account statements. On their own, many people misstep when facing a judge.

In Adel, Ga., a town of 5,000, child support court meets monthly. On a recent morning, a dozen men in shackles and jail uniforms faced Chuck Reddick, a state prosecutor, on their second or third round in court.

“In most cases, they simply can’t pay,” said John P. Daughtrey, who was sheriff here until losing an election in November. “An attorney could explain to the judge why jail is not the solution and how to fix it. As a sheriff, I want criminals in my jail, not a debtor’s prison.”

Mr. Reddick and Judge Carson Dane Perkins of Cook County Superior Court in Adel both said they would welcome lawyers for defendants because it would make the process clearer and smoother.

“If we could extend the right to a lawyer to civil procedures where you face a loss of liberty, that would be good,” Judge Perkins said. “Lawyers can get affidavits from employers and help make cases for those who can’t pay.”

The Southern Center for Human Rights has filed a class-action suit seeking a guarantee of a lawyer for such cases in Georgia. Sarah Geraghty, a lawyer there, said the center had received thousands of calls from Georgians facing child support hearings. Among them was Russell Davis, a Navy veteran with post-traumatic stress disorder who was jailed three times and lost his apartment and car while in jail.

Georgia also offers a case study on the mismatch between lawyers and clients at a time when each needs the other. According to the Legal Services Corporation, 70 percent of the state’s lawyers are in the Atlanta area, while 70 percent of the poor live outside it. There are six counties without a lawyer and dozens with only two or three.

Mr. Bloss, who faced eviction in New Jersey, went to legal services, which won for him the right to stay in his apartment while his case is under appeal.

In Baltimore, where Mr. Hymes was accused of shining a laser at a police officer and assigned bail of $75,000, first bail hearings do not include a lawyer. Tens of thousands are brought through Central Booking every year, facing a commissioner through a glass partition, who determines whether to release the detainee on his own recognizance or assign bail and at what level.

“For the poor, bail is a jail sentence,” said Douglas L. Colbert, a law professor at the University of Maryland. A study he conducted on 4,000 bail cases of nonviolent offenders found that two and a half times as many detainees were released on their own recognizance and bail was set at a far more affordable level if a lawyer was at the hearing.

Mr. Hymes was relatively lucky. When he eventually faced a judge with the help of a public defender, bail was slashed to $200 cash. It took his family a few weeks to pay. A student of Mr. Colbert’s, Iten Naguib, acted as an intermediary.

“If there had been an attorney involved at the initial stages,” Ms. Naguib said, “Mr. Hymes would likely have been released much earlier.”

Strikers bills - how our elected officials prevent us from knowing what they are doing.

OK, I guess if you spend 20 hours a day monitoring these striker bills you could figure out what the crooks in the Arizona legislator are doing, but for most of us that takes too much time.

Source

It’s 'striker' season at the Capitol

By Alia Beard Rau The Republic | azcentral.com Sat Mar 16, 2013 10:18 PM

Watch out, it’s striker season.

No, that’s not some obscure reference to spring training or a new term for haboobs, but a favorite subversive tactic of Arizona lawmakers at the Capitol this time of year.

About halfway through the legislative session, as proposed bills get bogged down in the politics or lawmakers come up with a bold new idea they neglected to introduce in January, they begin to file what are called strike-everything, or “striker,” amendments.

Lawmakers take a bill that offers only a technical change or that they don’t mind sacrificing and propose an amendment that strikes out all the existing language and replaces it with an entirely different proposal.

The motivation varies. Strikers can revive an idea that was voted down in its original bill form, introduce an entirely new idea or allow a controversial idea to skip parts of the public-hearing process.

House Minority Leader Chad Campbell, D-Phoenix, is critical of the tactic.

“One strike-everything is one too many,” he said. “I don’t think it’s an appropriate way to do business. It’s not a transparent process.” [Well then why haven't you introduced a bill to out law this practice??? Probably because you like this tactic because it keeps the people you pretend to represent from knowing what you are doing!!!!]

But Rep. Debbie Lesko, R-Glendale, said the tool has value, such as in a situation where a particular committee chairman refuses to hear a bill that’s vital to a lawmaker’s constituents. [Well if that is the case then the system is NOT working and needs to be change!!!]

Striking that bill for another that’s been past the chairman can keep the bill alive.

“It’s kind of like attorneys. You don’t always like them until you need one,” she said. “In some cases, it’s not fair that one person can block an important bill. A striker allows you to get around that person and get a fair hearing.” [Again, if that is the case then the system is NOT working and needs to be change!!!]

Lawmakers introduce dozens of strikers each year.

This year, 75 have already been approved, covering topics that include boosting campaign contributions, establishing a Cowboy Day, creating tax incentives for employers and tax exclusions for religious institutions, and banning goldfish prizes at school fairs.

The Cowboy Day striker appears to be a case of timing as opposed to trying to avoid a public hearing or certain committee. [What rubbish!!! That is the whole purpose of these "striker bills", to keep the public from hearing about the bills] Senate Bill 1139 started out proposing technical changes to existing state law regulating the sending of unsolicited goods.

At some point after the session deadline for introducing new bills, Republican lawmakers decided they wanted legislation honoring cowboys as a symbol of Arizona’s culture.

Sen. Gail Griffin, R-Hereford, allowed a striker to SB 1139 declaring the fourth Saturday of July as Cowboy Day during a Senate Government and Environment Committee hearing.

The revised bill passed that committee, the full Senate and then the House Energy, Environment and Natural Resources Committee. It still needs a final vote of the full House before going to the governor.

If the trend follows prior sessions, hundreds more strikers will be introduced over the next month. All but two striker bills already approved belong to Republicans.

So far, nothing enormously controversial has emerged. But that’s not always the case.

Last year, Sen. Kimberly Yee, R-Phoenix, then a state representative, and Sen. Steve Yarbrough, R-Chandler, replaced a House bill addressing attorney fees with a striker making numerous changes to state abortion laws.

They added the striker after the more mundane bill had already passed the House Government Committee and the full House, meaning the more controversial abortion bill only had a public hearing in the Senate instead of both chambers.

Strike-everything amendments

Arizona lawmakers each session propose dozens of strike-everything, or "striker," amendments. The amendments propose to replace all of the wording in an unrelated bill with an entirely different proposal. This year, lawmakers have already approved 75 strikers. Here are some of them:

Tax credits: Converted House Bill 2037 from making technical corrections to malpractice law to a proposal to allow school tax-credit money be spent on certain sports programs.

Animal prizes: Converted HB 2121 from funding security barriers at the Capitol to banning live-animal prizes.

Tax incentives: Converted HB 2264 from making technical corrections to mobile-home-park law to creating tax benefits for businesses that create new jobs and for the self-employed.

Drones: Converted HB 2269 from a technical correction on liquor-supplier law to a proposal creating a study committee on the use of drones.

HOAs: Converted HB 2371 from a technical correction on construction materials to proposing numerous changes to homeowners-association regulations, including limiting local government ability to require planned communities, allowing HOAs to vote by e-mail and prohibiting HOAs from charging extra fees to renters.

Special education: Converted HB 2395 from a technical correction on medical-malpractice laws to proposing limits on civil lawsuits based on negligence by private schools that provide special-education services.

Religious exemption: Converted HB 2446 from a technical correction on limited partnership laws to proposing property-tax exemptions for religious institutions.

Contribution limits: Converted HB 2593 from technical correction on veterans issues to proposing an increase on campaign-contribution limits.

Early ballots: Converted Senate Bill 1003 from a technical correction on agricultural regulations to proposing restrictions on who can return an early ballot for another person.

Cowboy Day: Converted SB 1139 from a technical correction on unsolicited merchandise to a proposal to make the fourth Saturday of July Cowboy Day.

Adoption subsidies: Converted SB 1062 from a technical correction on boating laws to proposing expanded behavioral-health services for adoptees.

Independent expenditures: Converted SB 1336 from regulating the election commission to a proposal to make it a felony to violate independent-expenditure regulations.

More on Redflex bribes of Chicago rulers

Source

Federal Redflex probe casts speed camera initiative in an unfavorable light

By David Kidwell, Chicago Tribune reporter

12:48 a.m. CDT, March 16, 2013

The first evidence of a federal criminal probe into Chicago's red-light camera program is focusing attention on bribery allegations at City Hall just as Mayor Rahm Emanuel is trying to launch his controversial speed camera initiative.

Both the company and a former city official at the center of the red-light scandal were also involved in efforts to legalize speed cameras, which the mayor plans to use to catch speeders near schools and parks around the city.

When Emanuel was first pushing his plan in 2011, the now-beleaguered Redflex Traffic Systems Inc. was positioned as a leading contender after 10 successful years as the city's red-light vendor. But Emanuel scuttled those hopes after Tribune reports last year questioned ties between the company and the former city official who oversaw its contract.

Now federal authorities are probing the personal finances of John Bills, the former managing deputy commissioner of transportation, following an internal Redflex investigation that found evidence that its largest North American program was likely built on a $2 million bribery scheme involving Bills and a longtime friend hired as the company's Chicago consultant.

Both Bills and his friend, Marty O'Malley, have denied any wrongdoing.

A subpoena signed by an assistant U.S. attorney was delivered recently to Bills' ex-wife, his attorney Nishay Sanan said Friday. Sanan said he sent a letter to federal prosecutors asking that all further requests for records come to him.

The U.S. attorney's office declined to comment.

Emanuel moved quickly to separate his administration from the scandal after the first Tribune report in October, banning Redflex from competing for the speed camera contract and calling for an inquiry by city Inspector General Joseph Ferguson. He later barred the company from renewing its red-light contract when it expires in June. But before the scandal broke, the Tribune disclosed that the interests of Redflex, Bills and a key Emanuel political ally had converged around the mayor's speed camera push.

Emanuel political consultant Greg Goldner, working for the Redflex-funded Traffic Safety Coalition, hired Bills just after he left his job overseeing the red-light program in September 2011. Goldner said Bills was hired to bolster the group's efforts to legalize speed cameras statewide.

At that time, Emanuel's proposal for speed camera legislation was already quietly under review in Springfield. Assisting that effort was Redflex's Springfield lobbyist Michael Kasper, a Chicago lawyer who had also represented Emanuel in a residency dispute during his campaign for mayor.

Goldner told the newspaper last year that he did not know about the mayor's own push for speed cameras until it became public and only then joined forces with the administration. He said he probably would not have hired Bills had he known there would be new city business for his client to pursue.

Goldner, who managed Emanuel's 2002 election to Congress, directed a political fund that helped elect pro-Emanuel aldermen to the City Council in 2011. Kasper helped set up the fund.

The Emanuel administration has repeatedly denied Tribune requests for public records related to the speed camera push, which the mayor has pitched as a way to cut down on accidents involving schoolchildren. Critics say it is a money grab for a cash-starved city and note that Emanuel is counting on $30 million in revenue from speed cameras this year.

Now the mayor faces the challenge of finding a new operator for the red-light system while trying to launch his speed camera program.

The allegations are centered on Bills' role overseeing the red-light program from its inception in 2003 under Mayor Richard Daley until Bills' retirement in 2011. The program generated about $100 million for Redflex and more than $300 million for the city.

In October the newspaper disclosed a Redflex whistle-blower letter alleging an inappropriate relationship with Bills. The 2010 letter detailed lavish vacations for Bills and illegal transfer of commissions from Redflex consultant O'Malley, saying "the level of this insider fraud would take down the contract and most likely the company."

Company executives told the Tribune and City Hall last year they discounted the allegations after an internal investigation, but a second company-initiated probe conducted by former federal prosecutor and city Inspector General David Hoffman reached starkly different conclusions.

Hoffman found that the company paid $2.03 million to its Chicago consultant with some of the money intended for Bills, who allegedly proposed the arrangement. The company also plied Bills with 17 company-paid trips from 2003 through 2010, including airfare, hotels, golf outings, rental cars and meals, according to a summary of Hoffman's findings released March 4 on the Australian Securities Exchange.

"The arrangement between the city program manager, the consultant, and Redflex will likely be considered bribery by the authorities," the filing said. It also said company officials misled the Emanuel administration and the newspaper about the extent of the problem.

The evolving scandal has left Redflex reeling. The chairman of the Australian company and the top executives of its Phoenix-based subsidiary have all left, and company stock is trading at less than a dollar a share.

dkidwell@tribune.com

A facade shields Obama

A facade shields Obama

Thu Mar 14, 2013 7:34 PM

During my working career, I sometimes conferred with consultants in an effort to solve building-construction problems. On occasion, I interviewed people who pronounced that they could solve all the problems that I faced.

These consultants could talk very well, but in reality, they provided very few good solutions.

The one constant that some of these consultants had was a way with words, a golden tongue, so to speak. I am constantly reminded of this type of person whenever I hear President Barack Obama speak. He talks a good game but doesn’t produce anything worthwhile.

His everyday solution to our country’s problems is to spend more money. Hell, anybody can do that. That’s a crutch, not a solution.

President Obama has a facade. He speaks extremely well, but his intelligence leaves a lot to be desired.

Unfortunately, he has pulled the wool over many Americans’ eyes much as many consultants have attempted to do to me in my business career.

— R. “Dick” Gira
Sun City West

Federal court rejects CIA's denial of drone strikes as 'fiction'

Federal court rejects CIA's denial of drone strikes as 'fiction'

Source

Federal court rejects CIA's denial of drone strikes as 'fiction'

By David G. Savage

March 15, 2013, 10:22 a.m.

WASHINGTON—A federal appeals court said Friday that it will no longer accept the “fiction” from the Obama administration’s lawyers that the CIA has no interest or documents that describe drone strikes.

“It is neither logical nor plausible for the CIA to maintain that it would reveal anything not already in the public domain to say the Agency at least has an intelligence interest in such strikes,” said Chief Judge Merrick Garland. “The defendant is, after all, the Central Intelligence Agency.”

The decision gave a partial victory to the American Civil Liberties Union in a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit that seeks documents on the government’s still-secret policy on drone strikes. The three judges did not say any particular documents must be released, but they rejected the administration’s position that it could simply refuse to “confirm or deny” that it had any such documents.

A federal judge had rejected the ACLU’s suit entirely, but the three-judge appeals court revived the suit. The agency’s non-response does not pass the “straight face” test, Garland concluded.

He cited public statements from President Obama, new CIA Director John Brennan and former Defense Secretary Leon Panetta that discussed the use of drone strikes abroad. In the past, the courts have sometimes allowed government agencies in sensitive cases to refuse to say whether they have certain documents in their files.

“In this case, the CIA has asked the courts to stretch that doctrine too far — to give their imprimatur to a fiction of deniability that no reasonable person would regard as plausible,” Garland wrote in ACLU vs. CIA.

ACLU attorney Jameel Jaffer called the decision a victory. “It requires the government to retire the absurd claim that the CIA’s interest in targeted killing is a secret,” he said. “It also means that the CIA will have to explain what records it is withholding and on what grounds it is withholding them.

“We hope that this ruling will encourage the Obama administration to fundamentally reconsider the secrecy surrounding the drones program,” said Jaffer, a deputy legal director for the ACLU.

david.savage@latimes.com

5 NYPD employees arrested in separate incidents

5 NYPD employees arrested in separate incidents

Associated Press Sun Mar 17, 2013 2:15 PM

NEW YORK -- Five New York Police Department employees, including three police officers, have been arrested in separate incidents on charges including driving while intoxicated and unlawful surveillance.

Off-duty police officers Joseph King and Dennis Munge were each charged with driving while intoxicated on Sunday in Queens. King was also charged with leaving the scene of an accident and refusing to take a breathalyzer test.

Off-duty NYPD administrative aide Curline Brown was arrested on Saturday in the Bronx and charged with criminal possession of a controlled substance.

Two employees were arrested in the Bronx on Friday. Officer Miguel Gomez was charged with unlawful surveillance.

NYPD traffic agent Denise Johnson was charged with obstructing government administration, criminal possession of a weapon and criminal possession of stolen property.

Trial over NYPD stop-and-frisk tactic set to begin

Source

Trial over NYPD stop-and-frisk tactic set to begin

Associated Press Sun Mar 17, 2013 2:16 PM

NEW YORK -- The New York Police Department’s practice of stopping, questioning and frisking people on the street is facing a sweeping legal challenge this week.

A federal trial is scheduled to begin Monday in Manhattan. A judge could order major changes to the nation’s largest police force.

Lawyers say the trial will include stories from a dozen black and Hispanic men who say they were targeted because of their race. The suit seeks a court-appointed monitor to oversee changes to how the police make stops.

The lawsuit is the second — and broader — legal challenge to the policy to be heard in federal court this year by U.S. District Court Judge Shira Scheindlin. She has said in earlier rulings that she is deeply concerned about the tactic.

Suburban Chicago officer charged in fatal crash

Source

Suburban Chicago officer charged in fatal crash

Associated Press Sun Mar 17, 2013 2:16 PM

CHICAGO -- A suburban Chicago police officer accused of killing two people in a wrong-way collision on Chicago’s Lake Shore Drive appeared briefly in court Sunday and a judge set bail at $500,000.

During the hearing, prosecutors said Terrell Garrett’s blood alcohol content after Friday’s wreck was measured at 0.184, which is more than twice the legal limit of 0.08. The North Chicago police officer is charged with two counts each of reckless homicide and aggravated driving under the influence of alcohol.

Garrett, 35, was in serious condition at Advocate Illinois Masonic Medical Center and didn’t attend the hearing.

Witnesses said Garrett’s car was driving at least 60 mph as it sped in the wrong direction on the scenic highway, where the speed limit is 45 mph, according to prosecutors. The collision totaled both vehicles and killed 25-year-old Joaquin Garcia and his friend Fabian Torres, 27.

Relatives of the men said they couldn’t believe the judge granted bond for Garrett, who wasn’t on duty at the time of the crash.

“I believe he should be in jail,” Julian Garcia, Joaquin Garcia’s uncle, told the Chicago-Sun Times.

Garcia’s mother, Cecilia Garcia, told the newspaper that learning that the man suspected of causing a crash that killed her son makes things “10 times worse” for her.

“He’s supposed to be protecting us,” she told the paper.

Joaquin Garcia was studying to be a surgical technician at Malcolm X College in Chicago and was set to graduate in May, according to family members. Torres was a first-year student at DePaul University.

“We were supposed to be going to my brother’s graduation in a month,” said his sister, who is also named Cecilia. “Now, we’re planning his funeral.”

Garrett, who has been relieved of his police powers, has been placed on administrative leave from his job in North Chicago.

Bail set at $500K for cop charged in Lake Shore Drive double fatal

Bail set at $500K for cop charged in Lake Shore Drive double fatal

By Mitch Smith and Dawn Rhodes Tribune reporters

10:45 p.m. CDT, March 17, 2013

A judge set bail at $500,000 Sunday for a North Chicago police officer accused of causing the deaths of two men, driving drunk and going the wrong way on Lake Shore Drive last week.

Relatives of both victims said that bail was too low and that they believed the officer received preferential treatment.

Officer Terrell Garrett remained hospitalized Sunday and did not appear in court. If Garrett posts bond, Cook County Judge James Brown ordered that he not consume alcohol or possess a firearm. He must also wear an electronic monitor.

"He will wear that monitor so that I can prevent him from driving while this case is pending," Brown said.

Garrett, 35, told authorities he had been drinking to celebrate his birthday, said Assistant State's Attorney Michael Rusch. Garrett refused a DUI kit at the hospital, Rusch said, but a blood draw revealed a blood-alcohol content of 0.184, more than twice the legal limit of 0.08.

The families of both victims, Fabian Torres and Joaquin Garcia, said at the courthouse they believed that bail should have been denied and that Garrett was getting special treatment because he is a police officer.

Garcia expected to graduate from Malcolm X College in May. "I was going to have a big party and now I'm planning his funeral,'' said his mother, Cecilia Garcia.

Torres' mother, Asuncion Torres, also expressed grief and anger.

"He's getting a slap on the wrist because he's a police officer," Torres said.

Garrett, who lives in Zion, has been a police officer since 2008. The officer's attorney, Richard F. Blass, said Garrett is the custodial parent of his 2-year-old daughter.

The crash occurred about 4 a.m. Friday after Garrett drove his silver Chevy Trailblazer north for a mile in Lake Shore Drive's southbound lanes, police and prosecutors said. Torres, 27, of the 2800 block of South Avers Avenue, and Garcia, 25, of the 2200 block of West 18th Place, were pronounced dead at the crash scene between Diversey Parkway and Belmont Avenue.

Garrett faces two felony counts of reckless homicide and two felony counts of aggravated driving under the influence. He also faces misdemeanor DUI charges and a traffic charge for driving the wrong way. His next court date is Monday.

He has been put on administrative leave by the North Chicago Police Department, according to a news release.

Tribune reporter Carlos Sadovi contributed.

mitsmith@tribune.com

cdrhodes@tribune.com

Justice Department wins the Rosemary Award - Again

Source

Posted at 08:00 AM ET, 03/15/2013

Justice Department ‘wins’ award for secrecy

By Emily Heil

In the category of dubious achievements, the Justice Department is now a back-to-back winner of the Rosemary Award, a distinction given by the National Security Archive annually to a public agency whose performance on transparency and openness is downright dismal.

Congrats, or something to the Justice Department (as our colleagues at The Fix say to the winners of their Worst Week in Washington)!

To merit the eighth-annual award, Justice obstructed and cloaked its doings in secrecy, the Archive says, much like the award’s namesake, Rose Mary Woods, secretary to President Richard Nixon. Woods famously erased a crucial 18 minutes of White House tapes (an innocent mistake, she claimed, that accidentally happened when she stretched to answer a phone call).

Justice “clinched the intensely competitive award “ just this week with its performance at a Senate hearing in which an official refused to answer questions about litigation that could undermine an open-government law Congress adopted in 2007 to speed up requests from the public filed under the Freedom of Information Act.

And Judiciary Committee Chairman Pat Leahy might have tipped the scales in the Rosemary sweepstakes when got in this zing chiding Justice for slow-walking its rewrite of its own FOIA policies to comply with the 2007 law:

“It’s been five years since we changed the law,” Leahy said. “It took me less time to get through law school.”

Two Canadian prisoners break out in brazen helicopter escape

Source

Two Canadian prisoners break out in brazen helicopter escape

By Paul Thomasch Reuters

5:53 a.m. CDT, March 18, 2013

NEW YORK (Reuters) - Two Canadian inmates broke out of prison in broad daylight on Sunday by climbing into a helicopter hovering over a detention center northwest of Montreal, according to media reports.

The helicopter was hijacked earlier in the day from tour company Heli-Tremblant by two men armed posing as tourists, according to The Globe and Mail. The helicopter's pilot was ordered to fly to the prison, about 37 miles outside of Montreal, the newspaper reported.

Once the helicopter arrived at the prison, the two inmates climbed up to it using ropes or cables, the newspaper said. Both fugitives, identified as Benjamin Hudon-Barbeau, 36, and Danny Provencal, 33, were believed to have been injured in the escape.

By late Sunday, police had arrested three men, including one of the escaped prisoners, Hudon-Barbeau. Police had the second escapee, Provencal, surrounded, The Globe and Mail said.

Earlier, while police were still pursuing the inmates, a man identifying himself as Hudon-Barbeau called a local radio station. "It will end badly," he said, according to the report. "I'll kill myself, I'm 36 years old, I was told that I would die in prison." Hudon-Barbeau had beaten a double murder conviction on an appeal, but was in prison in connection with an attempted murder investigation, according to CNN.

When police eventually found the helicopter about 50 miles from the prison, only the pilot was still at the scene. He was taken to the hospital and police officials said he would be questioned, according to the newspaper.

Volunteer to help recall Sheriff Joe!!!!!

Source

Joe Arpaio recall in trouble

Just 12 days after anti-Joe Arpaio forces announced that they had collected an impressive 120,000 signatures in the campaign to recall Sheriff Joe Arpaio, the campaign has taken a nosedive.

Lilia Alvarez, campaign manager of the Arpaio recall, confirmed the campaign is out of money and can no longer pay petition circulators. Instead, Respect Arizona will rely on volunteers to get to the promised land of 335,317 valid signatures by May 30.

Alvarez remains optimistic that it can be done.

“Money isn’t really the answer,” she said. “It’s whether people are hungry for change or not.”

Others, however, say the lack of cash is a major setback. One Democratic strategist says “recall fatique” has set in among donors and young Arizonans who campaigned against him last year and now have moved on to Phoenix City Council races.

“Joe Arpaio is passé and so is any effort to get him out of office,” said Democratic strategist Mario Diaz.

Randy Parraz, an Arpaio recall backer who launched the successful recall of ex-Senate President Russell Pearce, predicted the group can get there with volunteers. He said the Pearce recall got 5,700 signatures from paid circulators but 12,000 from volunteers.

The Arpaio recall campaign needs at least 450,000 signatures in order to ensure success. Assuming the campaign had 120,000 valid signatures 12 days ago, it needs about 26,000 more where they came from every week until the end of May.

Arpaio’s campaign manager, Chad Willems, wouldn’t speculate on what Monday’s announcement means for the recall effort, saying it could be “another one of Randy Parraz’s fundraising stunts.”

“If they are forced to go to an all-volunteer effort I’ll have to reserve judgment on that as well,” he said in an e-mail. “The recall crowd does have plenty of volunteers and plenty of funding sources outside the legal channels of ‘Respect Arizona’.”

My take: no money = no recall.

I’ve never heard of a petition campaign of this magnitude that didn’t rely heavily on paid circulators.

The interesting question, of course, is this: why haven’t the big-name Democrats, the unions and other Arpaio opponents backed this effort to oust the sheriff?

‘Show me your papers’ — before you p**

What rubbish. If I have to use the restroom really, really bad and all the men's restrooms are occupied I won't hesitate to use a woman's restroom.

This silly law would make it a crime to do that.

I guess Cathi Herrod wants me to poop in my pants if all the men's rooms are occupied rather then do the sensible logical thing and use an empty women's restroom.

Source

‘Show me your papers’ — before you p**

I was talking to City of Phoenix staffers a few weeks ago about expanding the anti-discrimination ordinance to cover LGBT residents — you know, the “bathroom bill.”

This was a few days before the six-hour City Council hearing — an endless stream of public comments — where the ordinance was approved.

One of the staffers told me he believed that Arizona law was silent on whether a man could enter a women’s public bathroom or a woman could enter a men’s room (I checked; he was right).

“Don’t let Cathi Herrod know,” he said. “She might try to change it.”

I think she does. I think she is.

Now there is a “bathroom bill” before the state Legislature — “show me your papers” before you pee. Read it:

A PERSON COMMITS DISORDERLY CONDUCT IF THE PERSON INTENTIONALLY ENTERS A PUBLIC RESTROOM, BATHROOM, SHOWER, BATH, DRESSING ROOM OR LOCKER ROOM AND A SIGN INDICATES THAT THE ROOM IS FOR THE EXCLUSIVE USE OF PERSONS OF ONE SEX AND THE PERSON IS NOT LEGALLY CLASSIFIED ON THE PERSON’S BIRTH CERTIFICATE AS A MEMBER OF THAT SEX.

Legislators had told me that Herrod, leader of the Center for Arizona Policy faith group and lobbying powerhouse, was shopping for a sponsor for a bill to strike back at the City of Phoenix ordinance.

SB 1432 is a “strike-everything” bill inserted in the shell of another bill that had the same number.

I haven’t confirmed Herrod wrote it. It’s just hard to imagine anyone else dreaming it up. Phoenix’s approval of the LGBT ordinance was a personal defeat for Herrod.

The hearing on this latest “show me your papers” bill is at 2 p.m. Wednesday before GOP State Rep. John Kavanagh’s House Appropriations Committee. Same time as his first hearing on the governor’s proposed Medicaid expansion.

This one could go longer than six hours.

Cathi Herrod's potty police????

Bathroom bill? Really, Rep. Kavanagh?

Forget about showing your birth certificate to vote. You soon may need to tote the thing around in order to use the bathroom in Arizona.

No really, I mean it.

House Appropriations Committee Chairman John Kavanagh plans to introduce a proposal Wednesday aimed at heading off an army of transgendered people who apparently stand ready to invade public bathrooms and wreak all manner of hygenic havoc.

Or not.

But that, really, is beside the point.

The right wing has been in a dither for several weeks now, ever since the Phoenix City Council had the colossal gall to approve a city ordinance declaring that you can’t discriminate against gay and transgendered people in the areas of employment, housing and restaurants and such.

Naturally, the hysterics among us went right to the toilet – and, coincidentally, to the Arizona Legislature.

And so comes Wednesday’s strike-everything amendment, wiping out an already-approved House bill dealing with state massage therapy bureaucrats and replacing it with this:

“A person commits disorderly conduct if the person intentionally enters a public restroom, bathroom, shower, bath, dressing room or locker room and a sign indicates that the room is for the exclusive use of persons of one sex and the person is not legally classified on the person’s birth certificate as a member of that sex.”

And how would the potty patrol really know that a person with the wrong equipment was about to use the facilities?

I suppose someone could be deputized to peek under the stalls to see which way the high heels are pointed or to peek under the dresses of all who look suspect.

Otherwise, how do you know it’s not a girl who just looks like a dude in a dress?

I guess we’ll find out the answers to these and other vital questions soon enough. The threat is dire enough that this bill contains an emergency clause, meaning it would take effect immediately upon becoming law rather than the usual 90-day wait.

Kavanagh, R-Fountain Hills, didn’t return a call to explain why there is such a pressing need for this bill or who pressed it upon him. Odds-on favorite would have to be Cathi Herrod, president of the Center for Arizona Policy and a woman on every right-wing legislators’ speed dial.

Having already pressured the Legislature into deciding that for purposes of abortion, life begins on the first date, I imagine she’s got plenty of time on her hands these days.

Pity she won’t use it to encourage our leaders to close the gaping loophole that allows deep-pocketed special interests to finance entire political campaigns without having to disclose their identities.

Or to require background checks before someone can buy a gun.

Or to improve mental-health care in this state or public education in this state or countless other things that are actually important in this state.

Instead, we have the emergency bathroom bill, being heard at 2 p.m. Wednesday, to head off the renegade city of Phoenix.

The legislator who is pushing privacy for lottery winners wants you to show your birth certificate – or perhaps your pertinent private parts — to gain entry to a public bathroom.

Which brings us to perhaps the most pressing question of all.

Has there been a problem?

I confess to not spending a lot of time thinking about where transgendered people go when they’ve got to go. But doesn’t it make sense that they probably already are and long have been quietly using the bathroom of their choice?

And if they do and there’s been no trouble, why is it the state’s business where they do their business?

(Column published March 20, 2013, The Arizona Republic.)

Use the wrong restroom, go to jail???

A number of times when I have to go really bad and all the men's restrooms are occupied I have used the women's restroom.

SB 1432 would criminalize that act and require that I poop in my pants or go jail.

Source

Law governing transgender use of restrooms proposed

By Dustin Gardiner The Republic | azcentral.com Tue Mar 19, 2013 10:51 PM

The furor surrounding Phoenix’s new anti-discrimination law has found its way to the state Capitol, with opponents pushing a bill that would block many transgender people from using the public bathroom of their choosing.

Rep. John Kavanagh, R-Fountain Hills, wants to create Arizona’s first law governing restroom privileges. Under Senate Bill 1432, someone would be guilty of disorderly conduct if he or she uses a bathroom, locker room or dressing room that’s not designated for the sex listed on his or her birth certificate.

The House Appropriations Committee will hear the issue at 2 p.m. Wednesday, and dozens are expected to turn out for the testimony.

Some Phoenix City Council members see the proposal as a rebuke to their vote last month to broadly outlaw discrimination against the city’s gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender residents. A council majority approved the changes after more than five hours of emotionally charged testimony.

Councilman Tom Simplot, who is openly gay and pushed the reforms, said if SB 1432 becomes law, it would criminalize the “very nature” of being transgender, a term used to describe people who identify as a sex different than that they were born as.

“They’re creating a solution to a problem that doesn’t exist,” Simplot said of the proposal. “This kind of extremist legislation is exactly what brings criticism to Arizona and compromises our work to make Phoenix an accepting and competitive city.”

At the center of the controversy is a debate over whether Phoenix’s new ordinance allows a person born a man but identifying as a woman to use the women’s restroom and vice versa. There’s no legal consensus, but city attorneys have said that a transgender person might, in some cases, have a discrimination claim under the law if blocked from using the restroom.

Critics of Phoenix’s move have repeatedly raised fears that the city opened the door for sexual predators to share bathrooms with women and girls. They labeled it the “bathroom bill,” a nickname gay-rights advocates said was an inflammatory distraction.

“This is about the person who will use gender identity or expression as their ruse to gain access to opposite-sex facilities,” Cathi Herrod, president of the conservative Center for Arizona Policy, said after the council approved the ordinance.

Kavanagh, who could not be reached for comment, submitted the proposal as a “strike everything” amendment to an existing bill, meaning it strikes out all the original language and uses its shell to advance an entirely different proposal. Because it has an emergency clause, the law would go into effect immediately if the governor signs it.

SB 1432 would make it illegal to enter a bathroom if signage indicates it is exclusively for the opposite sex. Authorities could charge violators with a Class 1 misdemeanor, punishable by a $2,500 fine and up to six months in jail.

It includes exemptions for children who need assistance, the physically disabled, people giving aid to others and those who must enter a bathroom as part of their job responsibilities, such as a janitor or maintenance worker.

News of the latest so-called bathroom bill quickly spread online Tuesday and attracted the attention of national gay-rights groups. It follows several high-profile U.S. cases involving bathroom use for transgender people, including several school districts that have struggled with such policies.

Much of the recent attention has focused on the case of a 6-year-old born a boy but identifying as a girl who was prohibited from using the girls bathroom at a public school. Her parents are now fighting the school district, citing Colorado’s 2008 anti-discrimination law.

Michael Silverman, director of the Transgender Legal Defense and Education Fund, said the bill puts Arizona in the minority of states that are curtailing rights. He said 16 states and more than 160 cities and counties, including Phoenix, have passed laws protecting against discrimination on the basis of gender identity or expression.

“Many transgender people do not look like the sex that’s designated on their birth certificate,” Silverman said. “This bill will put transgender people in serious danger.”

Phoenix, Tucson and Flagstaff are the only Arizona municipalities that have adopted similar laws.

NYC plan would keep tobacco products out of sight

Source

NYC plan would keep tobacco products out of sight

Associated Press Mon Mar 18, 2013 1:21 PM

NEW YORK — A new proposal would require New York City retailers to keep tobacco products out of sight under a proposal aimed at reducing the youth smoking rate, Mayor Michael Bloomberg said Monday.

The legislation would require stores to keep tobacco products in cabinets, drawers, under the counter, behind a curtain or in other concealed spots. They could only be visible when an adult is making a purchase or during restocking.

Bloomberg has backed a number of public health measures, including a crackdown on extra-large sizes of sugary drinks and adding calorie counts to menus. A judge blocked the drinks ban but the city is appealing.

Bloomberg said similar prohibitions on displays have been enacted in other countries, including Iceland, Canada, England and Ireland.

“Such displays suggest that smoking is a normal activity,” Bloomberg said. “And they invite young people to experiment with tobacco.”

Stores devoted primarily to the sale of tobacco products would be exempt from the display ban.

The mayor’s office said retail stores could still advertise tobacco products under the legislation.

“We have made tremendous strides in combatting smoking in New York City but this leading killer still threatens the health of our children,” said Dr. Thomas A. Farley, the health commissioner.

Farley said the city’s comprehensive anti-smoking program cut adult smoking rates by nearly a third — from 21.5 percent in 2002 to 14.8 percent in 2011 — but the youth rate has remained flat, at 8.5 percent, since 2007.

Smoking remains the leading preventable cause of death among New Yorkers, Farley said.

The legislation, to be introduced in the City Council on Wednesday, is comprised of two separate bills that Farley called “logical, important next steps to further protect our teens from tobacco.”

The second bill, called the “Sensible Tobacco Enforcement” bill, strengthens enforcement of discounted and smuggled cigarettes. It would prohibit the sale of discounted tobacco products, impose packaging requirements on cheap cigars and create a price floor for cigarette packs and small cigars. The city would have the authority to seal premises where there are repeat violations.

The bill would also increase penalties for retailers who evade tobacco taxes or sell tobacco without a license.

The bill would also prohibit retailers from redeeming coupons for tobacco products.

Country Club Hills police chief arrested on witness tampering charges

Ex-Country Club Hills police chief arrested on witness tampering charges

By Joseph Ryan, Chicago Tribune reporter

6:41 a.m. CDT, March 19, 2013

A former south suburban police chief is in custody after being charged with witness tampering in a federal fraud case involving a $1.25 million state grant.

Ex-Country Club Hills Chief Regina Evans is accused of coaching a witness to lie to the grand jury about allegedly cashing fake paychecks and returning the money to Evans.

Evans, a former Chicago police lieutenant, and her husband were charged last year with siphoning hundreds of thousands of dollars from the job-training grant to pay friends and relatives and cover the mortgage on the couple's landmark New Regal Theater on Chicago's South Side. The money was supposed to help train dozens of minorities and women for construction jobs.

In the latest charges, authorities say Evans directed a close associate to lie to investigators while downplaying the associate's concerns about getting caught.

Evans' attorney, Lawrence Beaumont, said his client is innocent. "We dispute the allegations, and we plan on litigating the matter vigorously," Beaumont said.

Authorities say they have it on tape. The recordings started last month, soon after the associate told a grand jury about teaching courses for the nonprofit and being paid thousands of dollars, authorities say. The associate was not named in court records.

After the testimony, authorities say, they accused the associate of lying to the grand jury. Days later, authorities say, the story changed: The associate didn't do any training and gave the money from her paychecks to Evans.

Over the following weeks, authorities say, the associate participated in secretly recorded conversations with Evans. Court records say the veteran cop pushed the associate to lie, saying at one point, "Don't let them mess with your mind," and at another, "They can't prove you're lying about anything unless you go in there and tell them."

Evans' We Are Our Brothers Keeper was awarded the grant in 2009.

Evans, who resigned her post as top cop in 2011, was arrested Friday and ordered held in Sangamon County until a hearing Monday.

jbryan@tribune.com

TSA goons force Marine to remove artificial legs at Sky Harbor checkpoint

Marine ordered to remove artificial legs at Sky Harbor checkpoint

By Sean Holstege The Republic | azcentral.com Tue Mar 19, 2013 2:26 PM

A wounded Marine on active duty was ordered to remove his artificial legs at Sky Harbor International Airport security checkpoint last week, according to a letter by a California congressman demanding an explanation from the Transportation Security Administration.

"The Marine, whose prosthetics were exposed, was humiliated, according to accounts," Rep. Duncan Hunter wrote TSA Administrator John Pistole.

The soldier was in a wheelchair carrying his military identification.

He was directed to two different screening stations, ordered to remove his prosthetics and at one point stand up for secondary inspection. Other TSA agents sat and watched as he tried to stand painfully and as his wheelchair was checked for explosives, Duncan wrote Monday.

Those accounts came from a man accompanying five San Diego area Marines to a Spring Training games as part of a volunteer effort to help wounded veterans with their recovery, Duncan’s spokesman Joe Kasper said. None of the Marines, who were not in uniform at the time, have spoken about the incident, he added.

Neither TSA nor Sky Harbor officials had any information about the incident, which reportedly occurred mid-day last Wednesday.

"There’s not much to say. Right now it’s a letter from a congressman," TSA spokesman Nico Melendez said, unable to confirm what happened. "We’ve not seen the letter."

In it Duncan demanded TSA’s procedures for such circumstances.

Melendez said those protocols are posted on the TSA’s website. _ ( www.tsa.gov/traveler-information/wounded-warrior-accommodations ) – which advises wounded veterans to contact the agency before travelling.

“Passengers with prostheses can be screened without removing them,” the TSA says on another passenger advisory on its website.

“Passengers in wheelchairs who can neither stand nor walk will be screened by a thorough pat-down while they remain seated,” the TSA tells passengers.

Since word of the Sky Harbor incident broke, Duncan’s office has received dozens of calls of support and more complaints of similar treatment by TSA.

“He’s not the first and he won’t be the last,” Kasper said.

One soldier had to remove his pants. Another double amputee faced repeated harassment, Kasper said.

“Those comments are built on a reputation TSA has built for itself. It’s not just about Marines, it’s anybody with a disability,” he added

Was the war worth it?

I thought the Iraq war ended on May 1, 2003 when George W. Bush landed a fighter plane on the aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln and declared the end of major combat operations in Iraq.

OK, just joking, and NO the war wasn't worth it!!!

Source

Posted on March 19, 2013 10:54 am by EJ Montini

Was the war worth it?

It’s strangely quiet.

Should it be? Shouldn’t there at least be a discussion, an argument, something that answers the question: Was it worth it?

There are no official commemorations planned in Washington, D.C. None in Baghdad, either. On Tuesday, President Barack Obama issued a two-paragraph press release on the 10th anniversary of the start of the U.S. war in Iraq.

Here it is in its entirety:

“As we mark the 10th anniversary of the beginning of the Iraq war, Michelle and I join our fellow Americans in paying tribute to all who served and sacrificed in one of our nation’s longest wars. We salute the courage and resolve of more than 1.5 million service members and civilians who during multiple tours wrote one of the most extraordinary chapters in military service. We honor the memory of the nearly 4,500 Americans who made the ultimate sacrifice to give the Iraqi people an opportunity to forge their own future after many years of hardship. And we express our gratitude to our extraordinary military families who sacrificed on the home front, especially our Gold Star families who remain in our prayers.

“The last of our troops left Iraq with their heads held high in 2011, and the United States continues to work with our Iraqi partners to advance our shared interest in security and peace. Here at home, our obligations to those who served endure. We must ensure that the more than 30,000 Americans wounded in Iraq receive the care and benefits they deserve and that we continue to improve treatment for traumatic brain injury and post-traumatic stress disorder. With a strong Post 9/11 GI Bill, we must help our newest veterans pursue their education and find jobs worthy of their incredible talents. And all Americans can continue to support and honor our military families who are pillars of so many of our communities. On this solemn anniversary, we draw strength and inspiration from these American patriots who exemplify the values of courage, selflessness and teamwork that define our Armed Forces and keep our nation great.”

It’s good to honor the dead and to take care of the wounded. It’s important to acknowledge the sacrifice of those who risked so much, lost so much.

Nearly 4,500 Americans were killed and more than 30,000 wounded.

And so many more thousands of Iraqis.

News reports said that bombings on Tuesday’s anniversary killed nearly 60 people in Baghdad and injured 221 others.

Which leaves us with a question we don’t really seem willing, or able, to answer.

Was it all worth it?

In Sunday’s New York Times former Times reporter Abdulrazzaq Al-Saiedi, an Iraqi, wrote in part, “We thought the trauma of war would be over when Hussein was deposed in 2003, but it extends past the execution of a thug. Ten years ago, I called the Iraq war the right war, but now, I cannot say that such a thing exists.”

That’s not an unusual sentiment.

Following World War II the great journalist and author John Hersey wrote a New Yorker magazine article that became a book called “Hiroshima.” It describes what happened to six people who were in the Japanese city when the atomic bomb was dropped.

At the end of Hersey’s book, one of the survivors, a German priest named Wilhelm Kleinsorge says, “The crux of the matter is whether total war in its present form is justifiable, even when it serves a just purpose. Does it not have material and spiritual evil as its consequences which far exceed whatever good might result? When will our moralists give us a clear answer to this question?”

Based on what has occurred in the world since 1945 I’d say … never.

MCSO overbilled Scottsdale $160,000 for jail housing

Report: MCSO overbilled Scottsdale for jail housing

By Julian Osorio The Republic | azcentral.com Tue Mar 19, 2013 7:32 PM

A report conducted by Scottsdale’s City Auditor revealed the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office overbilled the city by about $160,000 for detention costs over the past 18 months.

Scottsdale pays MCSO for the use of its facilities for any inmate held past the city’s maximum holding period of 48 hours.

According to the audit, MCSO billed the city of Scottsdale the incorrect jail housing rate for 284 detainees accused of a second offense DUI or other felony convictions, totaling more than $143,000.

The sheriff’s office incorrectly charged Scottsdale $15,000 for inmates with felony charges that are not billable to the city, the audit said. In 10 cases, Scottsdale was billed for detainees not in the city’s court records, costing them about $1,800.

Scottsdale is only likely to recover $29,200 of the overbilled amount due to MCSO procedures that allow only refunds for errors made within the last 90 days, according to the audit.

The report concluded the MCSO 90-day review process deadline is not efficient due to the lengthy process to review MCSO Jail invoices.

The audit said that in January 2013, invoices from October 2012 still were being reviewed but the city usually pays MCSO invoices within 10 days, even if the review process is not completed.

The audit recommended the city identify responsible parties at MCSO and at minimum negotiate extending the time limit departments have to request refunds when billing errors are identified.

“Our department will work with the court and city auditor’s office to help implement the best systems and controls that are deemed necessary to curb any inconsistencies in the accounting of jail housing costs,” said Sgt. Mark Clark, spokesman for the city of Scottsdale.

A meeting with Scottsdale Police officials and court technology personnel to discuss further solutions was scheduled this month.

“As the work continues we will continue to work within the system we have in place to assure the bills are audited and inconsistencies are corrected, “ Clark said.

Officials for Maricopa County did not immediately respond to a request for an interview.

Josh has a gun!!! Quick call Child Protective Services!!!!

Source

Boy’s gun photo draws unwanted visit

Associated Press Tue Mar 19, 2013 4:31 PM

The ruddy-cheeked, camouflage-clad boy in the photo smiles out from behind a pair of glasses, proudly holding a gun his father gave him as a present for his upcoming 11th birthday.

The weapon in the photo, posted by his dad on Facebook, resembles a military-style assault rifle but, his father says, is actually just a .22-caliber copy. And that, the family believes, is why child welfare case workers and police officers visited the home in Carneys Point last Friday and asked to see his guns.

New Jersey’s Department of Children and Families declined to comment specifically on the case but says it often follows up on tips. The family and an attorney say father Shawn Moore’s Second Amendment rights to bear arms were threatened in a state that already has some of the nation’s strictest gun laws and is considering strengthening them after December’s schoolhouse massacre in Connecticut.

In this case, the family believes someone called New Jersey’s anonymous child abuse hot line.

Shawn Moore said he gave his son Josh the gun as a present to use on hunting trips. The elder Moore was at a friend’s house when his wife called, saying state child welfare investigators, along with four local police officers, were at the house, asking to inspect the family’s guns.

Moore said he called Nappen, who specializes in Second Amendment cases, and had him on speaker phone as he arrived at his house in Carneys Point, just across the Delaware River from Wilmington, Del.

“They said they wanted to see into my safe and see if my guns were registered,” Moore said. “I said no; in New Jersey, your guns don’t have to be registered with the state; it’s voluntary. I knew once I opened that safe, there was no going back.”

[When the police want to search your home you shouldn't waste your time calling a lawyer. The automatic answer should be "NO!!! Get lost and don't come back unless you have a search warrant." And of course you should also always take the Fifth Amendment and refuse to answer any and all police questions. Last the police will almost always lie to you and tell you that you don't have any stinking 4th or 5th Amendment rights, and you should be firm and say "You don't have my permission to search me, my car, my property or my home, and I want my lawyer before I answer any questions. ] With the lawyer listening in on the phone, Moore said he asked the investigators and police officers whether they had a warrant to search his home. When they said no, he asked them to leave. One of the child welfare officials would not identify herself when Moore asked for her name, he said.

The agents and the police officers left, and nothing has happened since, he said.

“I don’t like what happened,” he said. “You’re not even safe in your own house. If they can just show up at any time and make you open safes and go through your house, that’s not freedom; it’s like tyranny.”

State child welfare spokeswoman Kristine Brown said that when it receives a report of suspected abuse of neglect, it assigns a caseworker to follow up. She said law enforcement officers are asked to accompany caseworkers only if the caseworkers feel their safety could be compromised.

“It’s the caseworker’s call,” she said. “It is important to note the way an investigation begins is through the child abuse hotline. Someone has to call to let us know there is a concern.”

Carneys Point Police Chief Robert DiGregorio did not answer a call late Tuesday to his office, which said only he would be able to comment.

The Iraq war was a dismal failure!!!

Posted on March 19, 2013 5:02 pm by Robert Robb

The real Iraq war lesson

Except in a few neoconservative hideouts, the Iraq war is generally regarded as a mistake.

The war has cost over $800 billion so far, with more than 4,400 U.S. soldiers killed and around 32,000 wounded. Hard to argue that the United States has acquired security gains commensurate with that sacrifice.

So, why was the Iraq war a mistake and what lessons should be learned from it? The 10th anniversary of the initial invasion has occasioned considerable discussion of those questions. But most of the discussion is wide of the most important lesson to be learned.

The Iraq war was a mistake not because the Bush administration lied about the intelligence or because the press wasn’t skeptical enough about the claims being made about Saddam Hussein and weapons of mass destruction. The Iraq war wasn’t a mistake because there was inadequate planning for postwar reconstruction or insufficient military commitment and engagement by the U.S. after Saddam fell.

Certainly, it is fair to say that every important assumption the Bush administration made about the Iraq war turned out to be inaccurate.

Saddam did not have weapons of mass destruction or an active program to produce them. The Bush administration assumed that it could just lop off the Baath leadership in Iraq and the civil government and society would continue to operate reasonably well. Instead chaos ensued and order and sound governance are still highly tenuous. Oil revenues haven’t paid for but a fraction of the cost of reconstruction, which remains patchy at best.

But here is the most important thing the Bush administration got wrong. The Bush administration claimed that, postwar, Iraq would become a shining example of democratic capitalism, serving to transform the region and be a U.S. ally helping to check the influence of Iran.

According to Transparency International, Iraq is the eighth most corrupt country in the world in which to do business. Its government remains largely paralyzed from sectarian and ethnic conflict. And it has no interest in being America’s front line against Iran. In fact, it wants friendly relations with Iran.

After Saddam’s minority Sunni dominance was wiped away, political power naturally flowed to the majority Shia. And the Shia naturally want cordial relations and an alliance with their co-religionists in Iran, given the hostile Sunni neighborhood in which they reside.

What’s important is that, while this in retrospect seems foreseeable, it was not foreseen. The Bush administration didn’t anticipate it. It wasn’t a major point made by critics of the decision to go to war.

The major lesson of the Iraq war is this: The United States cannot foresee the consequences of our actions with sufficient accuracy to be attempting to micromanage the geopolitics of the Middle East.

This is not a deficiency peculiar to the Bush administration or Republicans. President Barack Obama’s Muslim charm offensive was a dud. The Arab Spring caught his administration off guard and flat-footed.

Nor is it recent. President Clinton pushed prematurely for an Israeli-Palestinian comprehensive peace agreement and helped trigger the Second Intifada. George W. Bush told Palestinians they had to elect new leadership, so they choose Hamas.

Sometimes the time fuse on our unintended consequences is long. In 1953, the U.S. helped depose a democratically elected government in Iran and install an autocrat, the Shah, to run the country. That meant that, when the Shah was deposed in 1979, the revolution was reflexively anti-American. And now the anti-American ruling elite that took over wants a nuke.

The United States favored Saddam Hussein in his war against Iran, then went to war against him twice.

It’s often said that the United States has no option but to be deeply engaged in the region’s geopolitics. Certainly that’s where the international terrorism that threatens us emanates. But effective counterterrorism can be selective and targeted. And Middle East oil, the other rationale usually cited, is far more important to Europe than the United States, particularly if we more aggressively developed domestic sources.

The larger U.S. role in attempting to micromanage the region’s geopolitics only even arguably makes sense if we can confidently intervene in ways that are productive rather than destructive. There’s a 60-year history that says we can’t, Iraq being just the most costly example.

Request for quick medical-marijuana ruling is denied

Request for quick medical-marijuana ruling is denied

Associated Press Wed Mar 20, 2013 12:56 AM

The Arizona Supreme Court has refused to accelerate consideration of an appeal of a judge’s ruling that the state’s medical-marijuana law is constitutional.

The justices without comment Tuesday denied Maricopa County Attorney Bill Montgomery’s request to transfer the appeal to the state Supreme Court so that it bypasses the midlevel Court of Appeals.

Transferring the case would have hastened an ultimate ruling by months.

Montgomery’s office had said the law’s interpretation is important across Arizona and needs to be decided quickly.

A judge ruled in December that the county must provide zoning clearance for a Sun City medical-marijuana dispensary because federal drug laws don’t stand in the way of Arizona’s medical-marijuana law.

Montgomery contends county employees could be federally prosecuted if they help to grow, distribute or market medical marijuana.

Former officer charged with theft, misconduct pleads not guilty

Former officer charged with theft, misconduct pleads not guilty

4:57 p.m. CDT, March 19, 2013

A former Northbrook police officer has pleaded not guilty to felony theft and official misconduct charges in which he was allegedly videotaped by his fellow officers and the FBI stealing jewelry from a home he had been dispatched to check on, officials said.

Enrique Guzman, 34, resigned from his position as a Northbrook officer shortly after he was charged in late January, according to officials.

At the Skokie courthouse on Monday, Guzman pleaded not guilty to all charges and is scheduled for an April 30 preliminary hearing.

According to court records, when Northbrook police suspected that Guzman was responsible for several thefts and burglaries in the community, they worked with the FBI to set a trap in January that authorities say the 12-year veteran of the Northbrook department allegedly walked right into.

The sting operation included recording Guzman on hidden video cameras on Jan. 30 stealing a fake diamond ring from a Northbrook residence where he had been told that a door had been left open, court records show.

Guzman has resigned from his $89,918 post with the Northbrook police department, officials said. Free on $30,000 bond, he is living with his brother, a Chicago police officer, his attorney has said.

triblocaltips@tribune.com

David Ranta spent 23 years in prison, framed by the NYPD for murder????

Source

Jailed Unjustly in the Death of a Rabbi, Man Nears Freedom

By MICHAEL POWELL and SHARON OTTERMAN

Published: March 20, 2013 239 Comments

In the wintry darkness 23 years ago on a back street in Williamsburg, Brooklyn, a jewelry thief fleeing a botched robbery panicked and shot a Hasidic rabbi in the head.

Four days later, the rabbi, Chaskel Werzberger, an Auschwitz survivor, died of his wounds. Even in the New York City of 1990, as homicides crested at 2,245, the murder stirred grief and outrage. The “Slain Rabbi” was front-page tabloid news. Mayor David N. Dinkins traveled to Williamsburg’s Satmar enclave to sit in mourning and to offer a $10,000 reward.

The new Brooklyn district attorney, Charles J. Hynes, stood shoulder to shoulder with fur-hat-wearing Satmars, watching as they rocked back and forth and wailed as the pinewood coffin was carried out. He vowed to bring the killer to justice.

Forty detectives worked the case, soon led by the swaggering, cigar-chewing Detective Louis Scarcella. Working closely with an influential Satmar rabbi, Detective Scarcella arrested a drug-addicted, unemployed printer named David Ranta. Hasidic Jews surrounded the car that carried the accused man to jail, slapping the roof and chanting, “Death penalty!”

Mr. Ranta was convicted in May 1991 and sentenced to 37.5 years in maximum-security prison, where he remains to this day.

He is almost certainly not guilty.

This week Mr. Hynes, after a long investigation by a unit that he created to look into questionable convictions, plans to ask a state judge to release the prisoner. Mr. Ranta’s lawyer, Pierre Sussman, who conducted his own inquiry, said his client has been instructed to pack up his cell.

Mr. Ranta could walk free as early as Thursday. In the decades since a jury convicted him of murder, nearly every piece of evidence in this case has fallen away. A key witness told The New York Times that a detective instructed him to select Mr. Ranta in the lineup. A convicted rapist told the district attorney that he falsely implicated Mr. Ranta in hopes of cutting a deal for himself. A woman has signed an affidavit saying she too lied about Mr. Ranta’s involvement.

Detective Scarcella and his partner, Stephen Chmil, according to investigators and legal documents, broke rule after rule. They kept few written records, coached a witness and took Mr. Ranta’s confession under what a judge described as highly dubious circumstances. They allowed two dangerous criminals, an investigator said, to leave jail, smoke crack cocaine and visit with prostitutes in exchange for incriminating Mr. Ranta.

At trial, prosecutors acknowledged the detectives had misbehaved but depicted them as likable scamps. Reached in retirement on Tuesday, Mr. Scarcella defended his work. “I never framed anyone in my life,” he said.

No physical evidence ever connected Mr. Ranta to the murder.

He now sits in a cell at a maximum-security prison outside Buffalo. He is a touch shy; his gray hair is fast thinning. His voice still carries the slantwise intonations of working-class south Brooklyn. Asked how he survived, he said he was not sure he had.

“I’d lie there in the cell at night and I think: I’m the only one in the world who knows I’m innocent,” he said. “I came in here as a 30-something with kids, a mother who was alive. This case killed my whole life.”

A Guilty Verdict

It began with a fumbled robbery on Feb. 8, 1990.

Chaim Weinberger, a courier for Pan American Diamond Corporation, left his apartment in a public housing tower in Williamsburg, pulling a 50-pound suitcase filled with diamonds and precious gems. He had to catch a 7 a.m. flight to the Dominican Republic, where his cargo would be cut into jewelry.

His trips were predictable and easily timed; he worried about robbery. In the lobby, he saw a tall, blond, strikingly handsome guy, “like a lifeguard on the beach,” Mr. Weinberger said. They stared at each other.

The blond man walked downstairs.

As Mr. Weinberger hurried beneath towering sycamores to the street, he saw the man trailing him. He tossed the suitcase into the trunk and started his engine. The blond man strode quickly now, covering his face with a handkerchief and pulling out a silver gun.

David Ranta, being led out of the 90th Precinct in August 1990 by Detectives Stephen Chmil, left, and Louis Scarcella. He was convicted in May 1991 despite no physical evidence connecting him to the murder.

Mr. Weinberger put the car into reverse and knocked the gunman into a trash heap. He sped away, his door flapping open. He did not stop until he got to the airport, he recalled in an interview.

Tragedy unfolded behind him. The robber, unnerved, spotted Rabbi Werzberger warming up his blue 1985 Oldsmobile Cutlass Supreme before driving to a synagogue. He ran over, fired a shot, pulled out the mortally wounded rabbi and drove off in his car.

This murder tore at the heart of the then-25,000-strong Satmar community. Rabbi Werzberger was their shamas and adviser to the grand rebbe. The Satmar, the intensely devout, politically powerful ultra-Orthodox sect, demanded that the police find his killer. Rabbi Leib Glantz became their point man.

Rabbi Glantz rounded up witnesses, brought them to the precinct and translated from Yiddish as detectives conducted interviews.

Detectives worked furiously, calling in paroled felons and miscreants of many varieties for questioning. An anonymous caller suggested that the police talk to Joseph Astin, an experienced holdup man who was tall and blond, with rugged good looks. But on April 2, Mr. Astin crashed his car in a police chase and died.

In late April, Detective Scarcella went to jail and visited Dmitry Drikman, a mustachioed bull of a man with a perpetual glower. Mr. Drikman was being held for several robberies, and had in the past been convicted of a horrific rape.

Mr. Drikman, in hopes of obtaining a shorter sentence, proved talkative. He gave Detective Scarcella the name of his friend, Alan Bloom.

Mr. Bloom, a crack-cocaine addict, had been convicted of dozens of robberies and faced a potential century in prison. He decided to start talking.

The detectives placed Mr. Bloom and Mr. Drikman in the same section of the jail, so they could continue their conversation. Soon they had their story: Mr. Bloom had had a hand in the robbery, but an acquaintance, David Ranta, a small-time thief and drug user, was the gunman. And Mr. Drikman’s girlfriend told detectives she had seen Mr. Ranta and Mr. Bloom planning to cover up the crime.

District Attorney Hynes shook hands with Mr. Bloom shortly before prosecutors gave him immunity from prosecution in the murder case and greatly reduced his sentence for other crimes.

On Aug. 13, Detectives Scarcella and Chmil found Mr. Ranta on 73rd Street in Bensonhurst. They handcuffed him and drove to the 90th Precinct in Williamsburg.

Detective Scarcella testified at Mr. Ranta’s trial that, 26 hours later, he sat on a bench in a crowded office and listened as Mr. Ranta, with little or no sleep, gave a long, rambling confession.

The detective said he did not have to ask Mr. Ranta a single question. “He flowed, and I took it all down, verbatim,” the detective testified.

Asked why he did not question the suspect, Detective Scarcella was nonchalant.

“That’s not my style,” he replied.

The case was laden with inconsistencies. Mr. Weinberger had stared the gunman in the face and testified during the trial that Mr. Ranta was “100 percent not” that person. In fact, four of the five witnesses in the first lineup did not identify Mr. Ranta.

In the end, however, the jury pronounced Mr. Ranta guilty.

Before his sentencing, Mr. Ranta addressed the court. He spoke of corrupt police officers and those who testified against him.

“Now you people do what you got to do because I feel this is all a total frame setup,” he told the court. “When I come down on my appeal, I hope to God he brings out the truth because a lot of people are going to be ashamed of themselves.”

Behind the Scenes

During the trial, Detective Scarcella proved to be an entertaining witness. A son of Bensonhurst, a professed old-school detective, he talked about how to make a suspect talk and where to buy the best pizza (New Haven, he advised). But his description of his investigation angered the judge, Francis X. Egitto.

Joseph Astin, who died in 1990, was later accused of being the real killer.

Asked why he took prisoners out of jail to eat at restaurants and visit felonious friends, Detective Scarcella replied, “I do what I want to do with my prisoners.”

“They’re not your prisoners,” Justice Egitto responded.

The detective testified that while interviewing Mr. Bloom and Mr. Drikman, he never wrote a single note, as required by police procedure. Nor did he show witnesses photographs of Mr. Drikman or Mr. Bloom, although they were murder suspects.

The judge in particular questioned how Detective Scarcella obtained Mr. Ranta’s confession, asking why a veteran detective did not take Mr. Ranta to an interview room, where he could have tape-recorded it. Detective Scarcella said he transcribed the 658-word confession by hand.

Mr. Ranta has insisted he confessed to nothing. He passed a polygraph test in which he was asked if he shot the rabbi.

Midway through the trial, the judge spoke to the lawyers of his mistrust of these detectives. They are playing games, he said. They have “taken it upon themselves to be judge, jury and partial executioner.”

Yet, when he instructed the jury on what to consider during deliberation, he mentioned none of his concerns.

Four years later, new doubts arose. In 1996, Theresa Astin testified that her husband, Mr. Astin, who had died in that car wreck in April 1990, had murdered the rabbi. She knew details of the killing that only someone close to it would. Mr. Ranta’s defense lawyer, Michael Baum, filed a court motion.

Ms. Astin turned out to be a complicated witness.

In the early 1980s, she was the girlfriend of Joe Sullivan, a freelance hit-man known as Mad Dog who killed at least 11 men.

Afterward, she married and settled down in the Gravesend neighborhood with Mr. Astin, a mechanic with a cocaine problem and a tendency to pull armed robberies.

Snarled though her personal life was, Ms. Astin told a compelling tale: Her husband had planned a robbery, and he came home shaking and nearly in tears on the day the rabbi was shot. Later she found him in the bathroom, dismantling a pistol.

“He said, ‘I hurt someone, something happened,’ ” Ms. Astin testified. “He was crying, he was scared.”

“ ‘You’re in trouble, Joe. It’s like you killed a priest in our religion,’ ” she warned him. Justice Egitto handled the court hearing. Again he wrote of troubling facts — and refused to toss the verdict.

Mr. Ranta feared he had exhausted every option for appeal. “I figured I was going to die in prison,” he recalled.

Case Falls Apart

Every Christmas, Mr. Baum received a Christmas card from Mr. Ranta. “I never had any doubt in my mind he was innocent,” Mr. Baum said in an interview. “I sleep with it every night.”

Sixteen months ago, the district attorney, promoting his newly established Conviction Integrity Unit, gave a talk to the public defenders. Does anyone, he asked, know of cases that should be re-examined?

Mr. Baum raised his hand.

In the Bronx, Pierre Sussman, a defense lawyer hunting for evidence of police misconduct, noticed that Detective Scarcella’s name showed up in several troubled cases. He did a computer search, discovered Mr. Ranta’s name and visited him in prison, where he agreed to take on his case.

Soon the last vestiges of evidence fell away. A man who was 13 at the time of the murder, Menachem Lieberman, testified back then that he had seen Mr. Ranta sitting in a car near the murder site.

Now, reached at his home in Montreal, Mr. Lieberman said the case had nagged at him for years. “Before I entered the” lineup room, he told investigators, “a police detective told me to ‘pick the guy with big nose.’ ”

He picked Mr. Ranta, he said, “because he had the biggest nose.”

And Mr. Drikman’s girlfriend, Elizabeth Cruz, also abandoned her story and apologized. “I made up everything,” she said in an affidavit, in hopes of gaining a deal for her boyfriend.

Mr. Drikman also stated that he fabricated his account, and that detectives and Mr. Bloom “framed” Mr. Ranta.

The case against Mr. Ranta had come undone.

“What’s important to me is that this fellow should not be in prison one day longer,” Mr. Hynes said in a telephone interview on Tuesday.

All that remains is for Mr. Ranta, now 58, to feel the shackles taken off his hands and legs and stand before a State Supreme Court judge.

“I’ve lived years in a cage, stripped down, humiliated,” he said. “I’ll be able to touch people again, to make decisions.”

He took a great gulp of air. “To be honest, what’s ahead scares me.”

Site too toxic for housing but OK for San Mateo County jail?

Source

San Mateo County jail: Site too toxic for housing but OK for jail?

By Manuel La Fontaine and Isaac Lev Szmonko

Special to the Mercury News

Posted: 03/18/2013 10:00:00 AM PDT

Last week the aptly named Chemical Way was cleaned of decades of toxic chemical residue, according to the San Mateo County Sheriff's Department.

The site of the proposed new jail was so permeated by volatile organic compounds that the Department of Toxic Substances Control declared the land too hazardous for residential use. Unfortunately, it is still too hazardous to meet residential toxicity standards. The county cleaned it to commercial-level standards, which are lower, presuming that people don't regularly sleep or eat or spend as much time in commercial settings. But the jail will have people eating and sleeping on site -- 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.

If the jail site isn't safe for residential use, where most people aren't home 24 hours a day, it certainly isn't safe for the people who will be locked inside for months or years at a time.

Perhaps for that reason, the county failed to include a Human Health Risk Assessment, which is used to measure people's likely exposure to toxic chemicals and whether that level of exposure is safe. Should we infer that the county doesn't believe jails are residential, or just that the potential health risks to prisoners are not important enough to fully assess?

Black people make up 24 percent of San Mateo's jail population even though they represent only 3 percent of the county's population. Similarly, Latinos constitute 35 percent of the jail population but only 26 percent of the county's. The disregard for the health and well-being of these prisoners is environmental racism.

Communities of color suffer the highest rates of unemployment, poverty, health problems, inadequate housing, disenfranchisement and lack of access to education. They are also disproportionately exposed to pollution in places they live.

The county's attempt to greenwash the jail project with talk of solar panels, water conserving toilets and recycling can't hide the fact that building new jails and locking up more people is not good for anyone's environment.

In addition to the harm associated with housing people on contaminated land, mountains of research have proved that imprisonment is bad for mental, physical, family and community health. As one study says, "The incarceration experience often contributes to a downward cycle of economic dependence, social isolation, substance abuse, and other physical and mental health problems." In contrast, alternatives that reduce the jail population such as drug treatment, mental health support, affordable housing, education and job placement interrupt these pernicious cycles and build healthier communities.

Healthful alternatives are available. A report from the San Mateo County manager outlines alternatives recommended by the county's health system, including expanding existing programs such as residential treatment for mental illness or drug detox, alternative sentencing, mental health programs and re-entry services. The health system's detailed recommendations would take three to six months to get up and running, serve 2,100 residents and cost the county $8.38 million a year. The new jail would not open until 2015 and will cost $160 million to build and at least $30 million a year to operate.

Thousands of people have voiced deep concern about construction of a jail. We join them in urging the Board of Supervisors to enact sustainable solutions to the real problems our communities face. It is not too late to stop the toxic jail.

Manuel La Fontaine of Daly City is an organizer with All of Us or None -- a Project of Legal Services for Prisoners with Children. Isaac Lev Szmonko is a member of Critical Resistance. Both organizations are affiliates of Californians United for a Responsible Budget, a statewide coalition to reduce the number of people imprisoned in California. They wrote this for this newspaper.

San Jose police officer who fatally shot man was involved in November shootout

San Jose police officer who fatally shot man was involved in November shootout

By Eric Kurhi

ekurhi@mercurynews.com

Posted: 03/19/2013 05:38:01 PM PDT

SAN JOSE -- The policeman who shot and killed a suspect accelerating at him in a stolen car on Monday has been identified as Officer Bruce Barthelemy, who was involved in a shootout last November that capped off a robbery and homicide rampage.

Officials on Tuesday declined to name the deceased driver or his passenger, who faces criminal charges.

According to the Santa Clara County Sheriff's Office, which is handling the investigation because the shooting happened in an unincorporated area of East San Jose, Barthelemy got out of his cruiser and ordered the suspects out of the stolen Honda Civic at gunpoint, after the driver rammed two police vehicles and crashed into a parked car.

When the driver instead accelerated toward Barthelemy, the officer fired a single round that struck the suspect in an undisclosed location. Emergency personnel were summoned, and he was transported to a hospital, where he was later pronounced dead.

He has been identified only as an adult in his 20s. His passenger, also a man around the same age, was booked into jail on a probation violation and suspicion of being in possession of stolen property and burglary tools.

The shooting happened in a residential area off South White Road northeast of Story Road. It was the second officer-involved shooting by San Jose police this month, also the second this year. Ronald Aduddell, a 28-year-old with a history of drug and burglary offenses who was facing a third strike, was shot and killed March 2 after leading police on a high-speed chase in South San Jose.

The department had four officer-involved shootings in 2012, with one resulting in a fatality. In 2011, there were eight, half of which resulted in a death.

Barthelemy has been with the San Jose Police Department for five years. On Nov. 16, Barthelemy arrived as a backup at the Tully Road scene where two suspects had an officer pinned down by gunfire in what was described as an ambush attack.

Barthelemy fired at Jonathan Dawson Wilbanks, striking him twice. Wilbanks fled and was eventually arrested holed up at a home near Reid-Hillview Airport, and a 15-year-old boy believed to be his accomplice was taken into custody a week later.

Prosecutors believe the two suspects are linked to a San Jose crime spree that included four armed robberies, the slaying of Campbell native Rory Park-Pettiford, 22, and the police ambush.

Monday's incident remains under investigation, sheriff's officials said.

Contact Eric Kurhi at 408-920-5852. Follow him at Twitter.com/erickurhi.

Lindh lawyer to push for 5 daily group prayers

Lindh lawyer to push for 5 daily group prayers

Associated Press Wed Mar 20, 2013 11:59 AM

INDIANAPOLIS — A lawyer who helped American Taliban fighter John Walker Lindh and other Muslim inmates win the right to hold daily group prayers in a high-security unit said he’ll ask a judge to order that they be allowed to pray together five times a day, as Islam requires.

Chris Burke, a Bureau of Federal Prisons spokesman, said that since March 12, inmates of all religions housed in the Terre Haute federal prison’s Communications Management Unit have been allowed to pray together three times per day.

American Civil Liberties Union of Indiana legal director Ken Falk, who represented Lindh in his lawsuit against the prison bureau, said U.S. District Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson’s Jan. 11 ruling requires that the prison allow five daily group prayers.

“Basically, it’s our contention that they’re not complying with the court order,” Falk said Tuesday. “The judge’s order is pretty clear.”

A prison bulletin dated March 12 says only 10 inmates at a time can use the unit’s multi-purpose room for group prayer during the hours the room is open. It wasn’t clear how prison officials arrived at the limit of three prayers a day.

Those housed in Lindh’s unit are considered extreme security risks and their interactions are closely monitored. Until this month, inmates housed in the unit were only allowed to pray together once per week or during Ramadan or on other significant religious holidays. At other times, inmates had to pray alone in their cells and hope to hear each other through the walls.

Magnus-Stinson found the policy violated a 1993 law banning the government from curtailing religious speech without showing a compelling interest, and the government chose not to appeal her ruling.

Magnus-Stinson said in court documents that it was clear that 32-year-old Lindh sincerely believed that Islam mandates that Muslims pray together five times a day and federal law requires the prison to accommodate his beliefs — which praying simultaneously inside their cells did not do. She also noted that Muslim inmates in other federal prisons were allowed to hold daily group prayers.

“A central tenet of the Islamic faith is the obligation for adult Muslims to engage in five daily prayers, or Salat,” she wrote. “By prohibiting Mr. Lindh and the other Muslim prisoners who hold similar beliefs in the CMU from praying in each other’s presence, the Warden has denied Mr. Lindh and these other prisoners the religious exercise of daily group prayer,” she said elsewhere.

Prison officials said during the trial on Lindh’s lawsuit that allowing group prayers every day would pose a security risk and that inmates had used religion as cover for gang-like activity, but the judge dismissed those arguments as insubstantial.

The lawsuit was originally filed in 2009 by two Muslim inmates in the unit. Lindh joined the lawsuit in 2010, and the case has drawn far more attention because of his involvement. The other plaintiffs have dropped out as they were released from prison or transferred to other units.

In 2001, Lindh was captured in Afghanistan by U.S. troops and accused of fighting for the Taliban. Raised Catholic, the California native was 12 when he saw the movie “Malcolm X” and became interested in Islam. He converted to Islam at age 16. Walker told Newsweek after his capture that he had entered Afghanistan to help the Taliban build a “pure Islamic state.”

In 2002, Lindh pleaded guilty to supplying services to the now-defunct Taliban government and carrying explosives for them. He had been charged with conspiring to kill Americans and support terrorists, but those charges were dropped in a plea agreement. He was transferred to the Terre Haute prison in 2007. He is eligible for release in 2019.

5 Bell city councilmen convicted

Ex-officials convicted in Calif. corruption case

Associated Press Wed Mar 20, 2013 7:33 PM

LOS ANGELES — Five former city councilors in a small, blue-collar Los Angeles suburb that became a symbol of political greed were convicted Wednesday of stealing taxpayer money by creating a panel that helped boost their part-time pay to nearly $100,000 a year.

One former councilman was acquitted and the other five were found not guilty of several counts each, as jurors returned verdicts on only about half of the more than 80 charges prosecutors had filed. Jurors said they were deadlocked on the other charges, but the judge ordered them to continue deliberations after some members said they thought a verdict could still be reached.

The trial was the first such proceeding following revelations that Bell’s leadership had bilked the hardscrabble city of $5.5 million, using the money to pay huge salaries to the city manager, police chief, City Council members and others. The former city manager and his assistant are expected to face trial on similar charges later this year.

Former Bell Mayor Oscar Hernandez and onetime City Council members Teresa Jacobo, George Mirabal, George Cole and Victor Bello were convicted Wednesday of misappropriating public funds.

Former Councilman Luis Artiga was acquitted of all charges. The pastor of Bell Community Church broke down in tears and pointed heavenward as the not guilty verdicts were read.

“I said, ‘Thank you, Lord,’” a beaming Artiga, surrounded by his wife and four children, said outside court. “I never lost faith. I knew it, I just knew it.”

After the four-week trial, the other defendants were convicted of illegally taking money for sitting on Bell’s Solid Waste and Recycling Authority, an entity they could not prove had been legally established or did any work. Artiga was not on the City Council when it was created.

Records showed it met only one time between 2006 and 2010.

After the verdicts were read, the jury foreman told Judge Kathleen Kennedy the panel was deadlocked 9-3 on the other charges, which involved their paid service on other, similar boards that prosecutors said were created for no purpose other than to inflate their salaries.

When four jurors told her they still believed a verdict on those charges was possible, she ordered them to continue deliberations. They were to meet again Thursday.

At the heart of the case is whether the six officials broke the law by paying themselves annual salaries of up to $100,000 to govern only part-time in the city of 36,000 people where one in four residents live below the poverty line.

An audit by the state controller’s office found the city had illegally raised property taxes, business license fees and other sources of revenue to pay the salaries. The office ordered the money repaid, which for a time put Bell in danger of filing for bankruptcy.

The defendants, many of whom took the witness stand during the trial, insisted they earned their salaries by working around the clock to help residents. Their lawyers blamed Bell’s disgraced former city manager, Robert Rizzo, for creating the fiscal mess.

City records have revealed that Rizzo had an annual salary and compensation package worth $1.5 million, making him one of the highest paid administrators in the country.

His salary alone was about $800,000 a year — double that of the president of the United States.

To fund salaries of officials, Rizzo masterminded a scheme to loot Bell’s treasury of $5.5 million, prosecutors said.

Witnesses at the trial of the former council members depicted Rizzo as a micro-manager who convinced the city’s elected officials that they too deserved huge salaries.

He was said to have manipulated council members into signing major financial documents, particularly Hernandez who does not read English and, according to his lawyer, was often unaware of what he was signing.

After the scandal was disclosed, thousands of Bell residents protested at City Council meetings and staged a successful recall election to throw out the entire council and elect new leaders.

Current Mayor Ali Saleh, a leader of the recall, hailed the guilty verdicts on Wednesday but said residents won’t be truly satisfied until Rizzo and Spaccia are tried.

“Our community will rest when the legal process has come full circle and justice has been served,” he said.

Denisse Rodarte, 31, a longtime Bell resident who was also involved in launching the recall, stood outside Bell City Hall later Wednesday holding a sign that read “Rizzo is next.”

“To finally have a court say they are guilty, it’s like ‘Yeah, we were right, we’ve been saying this all along,’” Rodarte said.

Hernandez, whose family members wept after the verdicts, was convicted of five counts of misappropriating public funds, as were Jacobo and Mirabal. Bello was convicted of four of the same charges and Cole of two.

Prosecutors declined to comment on possible sentences for the defendants until all the charges have been resolved.

Prosecutors brought an extensive, complicated case against all six defendants.

The jury had deliberated since Feb. 28 after one member of a previous panel was replaced and the judge told the reconstituted group of 12 to start over.

The defendants’ lawyers told jurors their clients had no idea what Rizzo was doing or that what they were doing was illegal.

Jacobo testified that when Rizzo told her that he was increasing her salary enough that she could quit her job selling real estate, she asked the former city attorney if that was legal and he assured her it was.

Hernandez’s lawyer said the once popular mayor, who ran a small grocery store in Bell, was unschooled and not one who understood the city’s finances.

“We elect people who have a good heart. Someone who can listen to your problems and look you in the eye,” attorney Stanley Friedman had told jurors.

———

Associated Press writers Greg Risling, Robert Jablon, Chris Weber, Gillian Flaccus and Linda Deutsch contributed to this story.

Police left prison door ajar in Debra Milke case

Source

Police left prison door ajar

The Republic | azcentral.com Wed Mar 20, 2013 7:11 PM

Debra Milke can see daylight. After two decades on death row, she’s likely to get a new trial. For this, thank the police.

Milke was convicted of arranging the 1989 execution-style murder of her 3-year-old son. A jury convicted her, in part, on the strength of a verbal confession that now-retired Phoenix police Detective Armando Saldate said he had obtained from her.

The confession wasn’t taped. No one else witnessed it. That alone raises questions.

But the jury in 1989 wasn’t allowed to hear even more troubling facts: Saldate had a history of lying and obtaining the most unlikely confessions, including from a man drifting in and out of consciousness in a hospital room.

In four court cases, confessions or indictments were tossed because Saldate misled juries and judges. In another four cases, confessions were suppressed or convictions tossed because Saldate violated suspects’ constitutional rights.

And now, there is Milke, granted a new trial by a 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals panel because the jury didn’t hear about Saldate’s record.

Saldate’s superiors knew his history. They recorded it in his personnel file. But it appears they did little to correct his behavior, to guard against further abuses, to protect justice. If they had, he would not have been in an interrogation room alone with Milke or any other suspect.

Police must police themselves as vigorously as they do all other citizens. When they fail in that duty, justice suffers.

They are royal rulers, not "public servants"

Source

Auditor: 2 on Oakland council broke law

Matthai Kuruvila

Updated 8:52 am, Thursday, March 21, 2013

(03-21) 08:50 PDT Oakland -- Two Oakland City Council members interfered with the bidding process on a major construction contract, breaking a city law that prohibits elected officials from telling city workers what to do, according to an investigation by City Auditor Courtney Ruby, who provided The Chronicle with an advance copy of the report to be issued Thursday.

Ruby said Wednesday that her probe, prompted by questions over whether City Council members were engaging in political interference, found a total of 14 instances of City Charter violations - 12 by Councilwoman Desley Brooks and one each by Councilman Larry Reid and his aide, whom Reid identified as Iris Merriouns.

In addition to the contract interference, Ruby found that Brooks repeatedly interfered with city workers in her efforts to get two teen centers built. Reid was cited only for the contract interference, and Merriouns was found to have pressured parking officials to waive her parking tickets.

Ruby said all the findings were so serious that she plans to turn over her report to the Alameda County District Attorney's Office, the FBI and the state Fair Political Practices Commission. The City Charter states that a council member who is convicted of violating the non-interference law must forfeit his or her seat.

It is unclear, however, whether any charges will be filed in connection with Ruby's audit. Wrongdoing denied

Reid, Brooks and Merriouns, in separate interviews Wednesday, vehemently denied doing anything wrong.

Ruby's audit found that Brooks and Reid each interfered in a city contract involving the redevelopment of the former Oakland Army Base, which is being transformed into a regional shipping hub. Ruby said Brooks and Reid appeared to favor one company, Turner Construction Group, for a roughly $2 million contract in July and August 2011. The audit found that city staffers were incorrectly treating the bidding process as a sole-source contract with a company called Top Grade Construction when Reid and Brooks interfered.

Redevelopment staff told auditors that Brooks and Reid directed them to establish a bid proposal with Turner Construction, according to Ruby's report.

Reid called the allegations against him "a flat-out lie," and in a written response to Ruby said: "Under no circumstances did I, at any time, direct staff to issue a RFP (request for proposal) on behalf of the Turner Group as it relates to the Oakland Army Base."

Brooks fires back

Brooks said Ruby had done a poor investigation and had a biased agenda that was about self-promotion. She denied interfering in the bid process, saying her only concerns were that the contract was worth more than $1 million and that city staffers had not sought competitive bidding.

"What I said at an open meeting was that they needed to justify why they weren't competitively bidding an over $1 million contract," she said. "That is not interference. I did it out in the open at a public meeting. I am at a loss as to why that would be interference."

The lack of a competitive bidding process was cited as a problem in Ruby's report.

Ruby said she looked into political contributions and found no donations from Turner Construction to either Reid or Brooks.

Ruby's audit found the most violations related to the opening of the Digital Arts and Culinary Academy in East Oakland. It is also known as the Rainbow Teen Center, and Brooks planned and oversaw it. Ruby's audit found evidence that Brooks interfered with city workers by:

-- Negotiating terms and agreements with two contractors.

-- Directing city departments to process contracts.

-- Pressuring city staffers to pay a vendor quickly.

-- Hiring staffers for the Rainbow Teen Center.

-- Ordering sound equipment and pressuring staffers to pay the vendor retroactively.

Brooks took issue with the characterizations of her involvement in both teen centers. She said she consistently consulted with city staff before taking action on the Rainbow center.

At Arroyo, near 77th and Bancroft avenues, Brooks said she used more than $100,000 of her discretionary council funds to create the center.

"It wasn't done right," she said. "We got it done right."

After her involvement, Brooks said the city was supposed to finish various elements, but never did.

"I wanted a place for kids to go so they weren't hanging out," she said. "The area around Arroyo was 'hot,' and we needed safe places for kids to go. It still isn't totally done."

Problematic culture

Though the allegations involve two council members, Ruby said Oakland has a widespread culture of City Council members directing city staff - or failing to censure those who do.

The report states that city workers fear for their jobs if they don't comply with council member edicts, while other city staff "consider council members to be their 'bosses' or 'protectors.' "

A city staffer who had spoken to Ruby told The Chronicle that the audit was a rare opportunity to confront inappropriate behavior by council members or their staffs.

"I finally stood up to a bully," the staffer said on condition of anonymity because of fear of retaliation. "I didn't think anything would come of it because nothing has come of it before."

'Fertile environment'

In an interview, Ruby said: "Because there's a culture of interference, it makes it a fertile environment for the 14 instances of interference that have been confirmed and found by the audit."

Since 1931, Oakland's City Charter has stated that council members cannot give orders, either privately or publicly, to city staffers who work under the jurisdiction of the city administrator or mayor. "The City Council is allowed to make policy and appropriate funding decisions," Ruby said. "That is it. The administration is responsible for carrying out city policy and running the day-to-day operations."

The separation of powers is intended, Ruby wrote, to shield city staff from political favoritism, political influence and patronage.

Matthai Kuruvila is a San Francisco Chronicle staff writer. E-mail: mkuruvila@sfchronicle.com Twitter: @matthai

Arizona Legislature is short on ethics rules

Source

Arizona Legislature is short on ethics rules

By Alia Beard Rau The Republic | azcentral.com Thu Mar 21, 2013 11:27 PM

There’s almost no such thing as a conflict of interest at the Arizona Legislature, at least according to state law.

Even when lawmakers introduce or vote on legislation that benefits them, it’s all legal if at least nine other Arizonans also benefit.

So, there is no problem with a lawyer proposing to make it easier for all attorneys to recover legal fees, or the executive director of a school tax-credit organization voting for a bill to increase tax-credit opportunities, or a foster parent supporting efforts to give foster parents more money — all of which have happened in recent years.

And if allegations of a conflict were to arise, it’s the lawmakers themselves who determine wrongdoing and hand out punishment.

Arizona’s conflict-of-interest regulations are looser than laws in many states, national ethics experts say. And Arizona is among only nine states without an independent organization to oversee ethics complaints.

Ben Bycel, an attorney and former executive director of the Los Angeles City Ethics Commission, called Arizona’s law laughable.

“If you have 11 people who are going to make millions of dollars, why isn’t that a conflict of interest?” he said. “And I would consider it an embarrassment for Arizona that they don’t have an ethics commission.”

Following the Fiesta Bowl ticket scandal, in which the organization paid for 31 elected officials to take trips to football games across the country, there was talk of forming an independent ethics commission. But Republican leadership refused to advance a Democratic proposal this session to create a governor-appointed commission. And a Democratic bill to expand what constitutes a conflict of interest has also gone nowhere.

Leaders of the Republican-controlled Legislature say there are no recent examples of lawmakers proposing legislation to financially benefit themselves. They say unfounded concerns of conflicts are the unfortunate byproduct of a part-time citizen Legislature in which many members supplement their $24,000-a-year salary with outside work. But, they say, that also allows them to bring varied expertise to lawmaking.

“A citizen Legislature brings a wealth of knowledge and experience to the legislative process,” said Senate President Andy Biggs, R-Gilbert. “It’s tough to forbid voting on anything that may affect you. I have kids in school. Should I not be voting on education?”

Sen. Steve Gallardo, D-Phoenix, introduced a bill this year to expand the conflict-of-interest exceptions to an action that impacts fewer than 100 individuals or that could benefit the lawmaker by more than $500. He described the current law as “a joke.”

“The idea that as long as more than 10 people are going to benefit financially then it’s OK for us to pass legislation that will line our pockets is outrageous,” he said. “I would imagine the vast majority of people in Arizona would have serious concerns about that.”

Arizona rules

Arizona law requires legislators to file annual financial-disclosure forms detailing the legislator’s employer, his or her spouse’s employer, personal debts, gifts over $500 received and investments, among other things. The forms, which are on file with the Secretary of State’s Office, are publicly accessible online.

But no state agency audits the documents to ensure compliance with state reporting laws. In the Fiesta Bowl scandal, several lawmakers failed to properly report gifts. There was an investigation, but no criminal charges were filed. Maricopa County Attorney Bill Montgomery said at the time that he couldn’t prove criminal liability because of inconsistent state laws regarding gifts to public officials and vague reporting requirements for elected officials and lobbyists.

As potential conflicts arise, lawmakers can seek the advice of legislative attorneys, but the advice is not subject to public scrutiny.

Lawmakers can also file a document notifying legislative leadership of a possible conflict of interest, declaring that they have sought legal advice or stating that they will not vote on an issue and why. Those documents are public, but no official entity ensures all possible conflicts are documented.

State conflict-of-interest laws vary widely. Florida requires lawmakers to disclose any time they or their employer would benefit. In Connecticut, there is no conflict if a bill benefits an entire profession.

Unlike many other states, Arizona has no outside ethics group to examine allegations of conflicts. Instead, the House and Senate have ethics committees, which consist of a bipartisan group of lawmakers.

Residents, outside organizations or lawmakers can formally request an ethics investigation, and the committees determine whether and how to investigate.

Such requests are rare. There was no formal request for a committee investigation into the Fiesta Bowl trip incidents.

None of the handful of investigations conducted in the past 13 years was related to conflict of interest. They included allegations of inappropriately interrupting a filibuster, fighting among members and domestic violence.

“We’ve had people who have been removed from our body for various activities,” Biggs said. “But we haven’t had a conflict-of-interest problem.”

Possible conflicts

An analysis of 2013 financial-disclosure forms shows this Legislature includes teachers, lawyers, a doctor, real-estate agents and landlords. A number of lawmakers also run or work for consulting firms whose focuses are sometimes unclear. The disclosure forms do not require these lawmakers to reveal their clients, making it difficult to evaluate whether there may be conflicts of interest with bills they propose.

For example, House Minority Leader Chad Campbell, D-Phoenix, on his financial-disclosure form lists “public affairs consulting” for Inspired Connections in Phoenix. Gallardo on his form states he is self-employed as an “independent consultant.” Sen. Al Melvin, R-Tucson, lists ownership of a business called American Quality International Consulting. None provided details about clients.

There are situations where lawmakers may benefit in ways not related to their employment, which can also be difficult for the public to determine.

For example, Sen. Rick Murphy, R-Peoria, is a foster parent who has proposed bills that would increase services for foster children and families.

“When you have a citizen Legislature, the whole point is for people to deal with the things they are familiar with,” Murphy said.

In other cases, lawmakers’ involvement in areas their legislation would impact are more obvious, although none would violate the state’s rule of 10. Lawmakers say they proposed these bills not because they will benefit but because they understand the issues.

Rep. Kelly Townsend, R-Mesa, has worked as a doula, supporting pregnant women during deliveries. She proposed legislation to create a study committee that could recommend the state’s Medicaid program pay for patients to use doulas.

Townsend said she is no longer a practicing doula and so would not benefit financially from such a program. During a hearing, she said that her past experience has shown her that such a program could decrease costly Caesarean sections paid for by the state’s Medicaid program, saving Arizona money.

Sen. Steve Yarbrough, R-Chandler, is executive director of Arizona Christian School Tuition Organization, which in 2012 accepted $13 million in donations and provided private-school scholarships for 5,683 students. He has proposed and supported legislation that would bring more money to school-tuition organizations. Yarbrough said he has consulted with legislative attorneys to confirm that he has no conflict of interest.

“They’ve ruled conclusively that it’s not a conflict,” he said. “There are over 50 STOs in the state, and I happen to work for one of them.”

Yarbrough said he proposes STO legislation not because he may benefit financially but because he understands the issue.

That is the nature of a citizen Legislature “unless they want to pay us six figures,” he said. “We have to decide what we want: a citizen Legislature or people who are completely removed from even the remotest conflict.”

In the past five years, eight state lawmakers have filed paperwork related to conflicts of interest. Most were simply creating a public record stating that they had consulted with legislative attorneys and were told they were not in violation of the law.

“We all have conflicts of interest, and that’s not inherently bad,” said Peggy Kerns, director of the Center for Ethics in Government with the National Conference of State Legislatures and a former Colorado legislator. “Your expertise in your professional life has value at the Legislature.”

But, she said, elected officials do need to understand that they are held to a higher standard and should try to avoid any perceived conflicts of interest.

Proposed changes

Democrats over the past several years have proposed legislation to increase disclosure requirements. None was ever given a hearing.

This year, Sen. Ed Ableser, D-Tempe, introduced a bill to require legislators to file a notice every time they vote on a bill in which they or an immediate family member would financially benefit as part of a business, profession or class of people.

Rep. Martin Quezada, D-Phoenix, introduced a bill to create a six-member independent election and ethics commission to investigate and enforce issues related to political committees, candidates, ballot measures and members of the Legislature. The bill was never given a hearing.

Gallardo has also unsuccessfully pushed to make financial-disclosure forms more detailed and to require that lawmakers file them more often.

“The only purpose of financial disclosures is so the people of Arizona can identify any conflict of interest,” he said. “But if you have a reporting system that’s not clear, that’s not proper disclosure.”

California attorney Bob Stern, who helped write California’s ethics law, said Arizona’s lack of an independent ethics commission — and reliance on the Legislature’s ethics committees — is even more concerning than the state’s weak conflict law.

“It doesn’t matter whether it’s Arizona or Congress, it’s very difficult to enforce the law against a colleague,” Stern said. “It’s just the way we are as human beings.”

He said the Legislature isn’t likely to support a law to create additional oversight.

“It almost takes a voter initiative to do something like this to make it really meaningful,” he said.

Northern Arizona University politics professor Zachary Smith said he believes the law needs to change.

“Given the things that have happened in the last couple of years regarding the Fiesta Bowl, that makes it clear Arizona has a problem that needs to be addressed,” he said.

Murphy said he believes state regulations are appropriate. Beyond that, “voters can decide where the line is on a case-by-case basis,” he said.

Biggs said California, which has a full-time Legislature and an independent ethics commission, should not be looked to as an example.

“They have a professional legislature,” he said. “And what you see out of there is what you see in Washington, D.C: professional politicians who lose touch with the real people.”

RELATED INFO

Disclosing conflicts

Legislators on occasion notify the clerk’s office of possible conflicts of interest related to legislation. Here are details of the notices filed since 2010:

Rep. Justin Olson, R-Mesa, in 2012 reported that he would abstain from voting on a bill to give multistate service providers, including Apollo Group, tax benefits because “it will impact my employer.” Olson is a tax analyst with Apollo Group.

Former Rep. Amanda Reeve, R-Phoenix, in 2011 reported that she worked for a law firm that dealt with environmental and energy companies. She was chairwoman of the House Environment Committee and served on the House Energy and Natural Resources Committee. She reported that House attorneys told her it was not a conflict.

Rep. Brenda Barton, R-Payson, in 2011 reported that her husband runs a consulting company that worked with a Scottsdale-based ethanol-production company. She served on the House Higher Education, Innovation and Reform Committee, the Agriculture and Water Committee and the Energy and Natural Resources Committee. She wrote that she consulted with House attorneys.

Sen. Steve Yarbrough, R-Chandler, in 2010 as a state representative reported that he was executive director of Arizona Christian School Tuition Organization. He wrote that he consulted with House attorneys who said his employment would not conflict with voting on STO bills.

Rep. Andy Tobin, R-Paulden, in 2009 reported that his consulting company worked with a health care organization that served patients of the state’s Medicaid program. He wrote that he consulted with House attorneys and there was no conflict.

Rep. Chris Deschene, D-St. Michaels, in 2009 reported that he is an attorney for a power company. He served on the House Natural Resources and Rural Affairs Committee and the House Water and Energy Committee. He wrote that he consulted with House attorneys who said there was no conflict.

Former Sen. Jack Harper, R-Surprise, in 2008 reported that his wife was a teacher and could benefit from the passage of a bill covering teacher performance pay. He abstained from the vote.

Harper in 2010 reported that he was a licensed loan originator and could be impacted by a bill covering reverse mortgages. He abstained from the vote.

Activist files lawsuit to halt Arpaio recall

Source

Activist files lawsuit to halt Arpaio recall

By Ronald J. Hansen The Republic | azcentral.com Thu Mar 21, 2013 10:09 PM

A nationally known conservative legal activist filed suit Thursday to end the recall petition against Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio, saying it violates the state’s constitution.

Larry Klayman, a lawyer who helped bedevil the Clinton administration in the 1990s through his group Judicial Watch, called the current recall effort against Arpaio an ongoing criminal activity. Klayman’s suit seeks court orders to shut the recall down and return the money donors raised to support it.

Chiefly, the suit takes aim at how quickly the recall started: only days after Arpaio began his sixth term. Klayman said the Arizona Constitution requires recalls to wait at least six months into a new term, and a state law that suggests otherwise is legally invalid.

“It’s not only unconstitutional,” Klayman said. “It’s an abuse of process.”

The recall is led by a group called Respect Arizona, which maintains that few voters knew how much Arpaio spent on his re-election or that he refused to debate his opponent.

Respect Arizona has ties to a group led by political organizer Randy Parraz, who helped lead the successful 2011 recall of former state Sen. Russell Pearce, then president of the Arizona Senate. Parraz also helped lead the failed effort to defeat Arpaio in the 2012 election.

Klayman’s lawsuit, filed on behalf of a group called Citizens to Protect Fair Election Results, does not involve Respect Arizona and instead seeks steps by state and county election officials to end a recall that he said could cost as much as $5 million.

Lilia Alvarez, campaign manager for Respect Arizona, said the suit is an unsuccessful and premature attempt to intimidate her organization.

“We won’t back down,” she said.

Alvarez declined to say how many signatures Respect Arizona has obtained, but she did say it has taken in more than $300,000 in support of the effort.

Klayman said he had not discussed his case with Arpaio. A spokesman for Secretary of State Ken Bennett said they had not yet received a copy of the suit and could not comment.

Phoenix Mayor Greg Stanton reneges on food-tax repeal

Source

Posted on March 21, 2013 4:07 pm by Laurie Roberts

Phoenix Mayor Greg Stanton reneges on food-tax repeal

As expected, Phoenix Mayor Greg Stanton announced this afternoon that he’s weaseling out of his campaign pledge to repeal the city’s 2 percent tax on food.

Right on cue, Phoenix City Manager David Cavazos said early repeal of the tax would result in the layoffs of 100 police officers and 288 other city employees.

“That’s not a choice I’m willing to make,” Stanton said.

Yet two years ago, the then-mayoral candidate said it wasn’t a choice he would have had to make. During his campaign for mayor, Stanton repeatedly vowed to repeal the food tax by April 2013 without harming public safety.

In fact, he went even further than that in his zeal to get elected. Who can forget this now-infamous quote, just two days before the election and a week after the City Council had rejected a bid to repeal the tax:

“The food tax needs to be repealed as soon as possible. If I was able to vote last week, I would have supported a repeal of the food tax two years early, and in a way that does not require termination or layoffs of sworn police officers and firefighters.”

Me, to the mayor today: So why could you get rid of the food tax two years ago, when the economy was worse, and not affect public safety but now, when the economy is better, it would affect public safety?

Stanton: “If I said that I was mistaken.”

Reasons given today for the rollback in a rather important promise: revenue increases are lower than the 6 percent hike the city expected, employee pension costs are 42 percent higher than projected and voters are 100 percent guaranteed to forget this by the time he’s up for re-election in 2015.

(OK, that last reason was something I added.)

Stanton backs off repeal of food tax

Stanton backs off repeal of food tax

By Dustin Gardiner The Republic | azcentral.com Thu Mar 21, 2013 11:37 PM

Ending Phoenix’s controversial food tax two years early would require sweeping budget cuts, including the layoffs of 99 police officers and about 300 other employees, city leaders announced Thursday.

That’s just a portion of the spending cuts City Manager David Cavazos said the city would need to cover a nearly $55 million shortfall if officials repealed the tax this spring, as some council members have urged.

The projected loss of police officers and other cuts to city services were enough to prompt Mayor Greg Stanton to back away from his campaign pledge to end the tax.

Stanton said he will not support its repeal this year, leaving little chance such a proposal could pass the City Council.

“That’s not a choice I’m willing to make,” he said of public-safety layoffs. “When you’re in a leadership capacity, you don’t do what’s politically expedient.”

Opponents of the food tax are skeptical of the grim budget scenario, suggesting that city leaders are using public-safety cuts as a scare tactic to justify a tax on the backs of Phoenix’s poorest. They were quick to criticize Stanton.

“I don’t buy that argument anymore, and neither does the public,” Councilman Sal DiCiccio said of concerns that it would require cuts to public safety. “It gives absolutely no thought to a campaign promise.”

Political pressure to repeal the tax early has been mounting in recent weeks, with a few council members calling on Stanton to follow through on his pledge to end it by April 1. An effort to repeal the tax in 2011 narrowly failed a council vote.

The council created the tax to help cover a record $277 million budget shortfall during the economic slump in 2010. If nothing changes, it’s scheduled to sunset in March 2015.

Residents pay the 2 percent tax on their grocery bills. For a typical family that spends about $100 per week on basic groceries, it adds up to $104 per year.

Steep cuts

Although city staffers signaled their reluctance to repeal the tax in recent months, the full impact of the potential cuts came to light Thursday when Cavazos released his proposed budget for the next fiscal year, which starts July 1.

His budget plan indicates that an early repeal would require drastic cuts to everyday services, such as police, libraries and mass transit.

Here are some of the significant impacts. It would:

Eliminate the fire-prevention section within the Fire Department, which would result in fewer code-compliance inspections of buildings and end a pool-fence safety permitting program. Savings: $1.97 million.

Reduce spending for a graffiti-cleanup program, potentially increasing the time it takes to address graffiti complaints. Savings: $413,000.

Eliminate Friday and Saturday light-rail service from 11 p.m. to 2 a.m. Savings: $288,000.

Close five of the city’s 13 large recreation centers: Deer Valley, Desert West, Devonshire, Mountain View and the Washington Activity Center. Savings: $1.73 million.

Cut nearly half of the city’s after-school programs for school-age children. Savings: $604,000.

Reduce hours at libraries across the city and close Burton Barr Central Library one day per week. Savings: $1.2million.

Several council members already have voiced concerns that the tax’s repeal could hurt the public more than a 2-cent-per-dollar food tax. Much of the focus has been on the impact to public safety.

“It would have been wrong to cut police and fire two years ago, and the same is true today,” said Ann Malone, a Phoenix neighborhood leader who supports Stanton’s decision. “The people of Phoenix value safe neighborhoods and demand safe schools.”

Cavazos said that he focused on making cuts in other areas before looking to police and fire services but that some cuts would beneeded because public safety makes up 70 percent of the city’s budget. In addition to laying off police, the city would cut $3.8million from the Fire Department, including seven sworn positions.

“We believe that in order to have a quality of life that Phoenicians have come to expect, we need to have (services) that are not only public safety,” Cavazos said. “There had been a long-standing practice of always cutting everything but public safety. I took a different path.”

Cavazos’ budget projections are a starting point as the council begins its spring budget negotiations in earnest. Council members must approve a budget to take effect with the new fiscal year.

The city’s ability to repeal the food tax has been complicated in recent months by rising pension costs and lower-than-expected sales-tax returns. General-fund revenue is about $18 million less than projected in the current year’s budget. City officials said consumer spending, especially during the holiday season, was hurt by talk about the “fiscal cliff” and federal budget cuts.

Without removal of the tax, Cavazos projects a balanced budget next year, with the additions of some minor services.

Council divided

But the food-tax debate isn’t likely to end without a sizzle. DiCiccio and other critics have vowed to continue pressing the issue, taking the fight to 19 public hearings being held throughout the city next month. Residents can weigh in on essentially two budget plans: one with cuts to cover a loss of the food tax and another with current revenue.

Councilman Bill Gates, who is still evaluating his stance, said he’s disappointed by the way the conversation already has been framed. He said public-safety cuts are being dangled before residents from the get-go instead of city leaders taking time to evaluate all the options first.

“Here we go again,” Gates said, adding that the tax was originally created with just one day’s notice to the public. “That happened in 2010, and it seems to be happening again.”

Although several council members did not receive the proposed cuts until late Thursday, critics acknowledge it’s unlikely they have the votes to overturn the tax.

DiCiccio has raised concerns about the impacts of the tax on the working poor. He said that the city used a “regressive” tax to pay for tens of millions in raises and bonuses for city employees in recent years and that the vast majority have received pay bumps every year throughout the downturn.

“Mayor Stanton fulfilled his commitment to the union bosses and failed the middle class,” DiCiccio said.

Meanwhile, Stanton and other community leaders stressed Thursday that the impact of massive service cuts could also harm many of the city’s most vulnerable, who depend on services such as senior centers or support to domestic-violence shelters.

“These are incredibly difficult choices,” Stanton said. “But as a leader, you lead with the facts as they actually are.”

More on the photo bandit radar scandal in Chicago

Source

Redflex Execs in Phoenix Resign Over Corruption Investigation

By Monica Alonzo Thursday, Mar 21 2013

Redflex Holdings, the Australian parent company of the Phoenix-based photo-enforcement company, says an internal corruption investigation also has found "potential issues" involving contracts in two other U.S. cities, but it didn't provide further details.

Redflex supplies and manages controversial red-light and speed-photo-enforcement systems used by communities around the world, including Phoenix, Chandler, and El Mirage.

Phoenix city officials tell New Times they are aware of bribery scandal in Chicago and are taking a closer look at the city's contract with Redflex.

Redflex will lose what the Chicago Tribune calls its "lucrative" red-light-camera contract with Chicago when it expires in June, and it is banned from vying for that city's upcoming photo-radar contract designed to nab speeding motorists.

"The Chicago program, with more than 380 cameras, has been the company's largest in North America and is worth about 13 percent of worldwide revenue for Redflex Holdings," the Tribune reported. "Since 2003, it has generated about $100 million for Redflex and more than $300 million in ticket revenue for the city."

On February 20, the company fired Aaron Rosenberg, its California-based executive vice president of business development.

President and CEO Karen Finley and chief financial officer Sean Nolen resigned on February 25. A few days later, Andreis Bunkse resigned as the firm's top attorney.

All three worked in the company's Phoenix headquarters.

In a report to the Australian Securities Exchange, Redflex described the scheme involved in the scandal as an "arrangement" between John Bills, a Chicago employee managing the city's red-light-camera program, and a Redflex consultant who "likely intended" to funnel payments from the consultant to the manager.

The Tribune identified the Redflex consultant as Marty O'Malley, a friend of the Chicago manager overseeing the traffic program.

Redflex officials said they paid O'Malley $2.03 million between 2003 and 2011 — $1.57 million of the payments were made between 2007 and 2011. The company stated that, lacking subpoena power to access financial documents, it couldn't determine whether the consultant made payments to Bills.

However, company records show that Rosenberg and the Redflex consultant showered Bills with gifts and covered hotel, flight, rental car, golf, and meal expenses for at least 17 trips from 2003 to 2010.

Rosenberg and O'Malley paid for the Chicago official's junkets, submitted expense reports with incomplete documentation, and then were reimbursed by Redflex.

According to the Redflex report, Finley "knew about and approved some of these trips and expenses," and she also approved their reimbursement requests, in violation of city policies.

The March 4 report also states that Finley and Rosenberg "had knowledge that would have made any reasonable person highly suspicious that this was a bribery scheme" but allowed the "arrangement to occur."

Redflex reports also show that executives failed to adequately investigate allegations of corruption first made in September 2010 by a whistle-blower. That investigation, according to the Tribune, was overseen by Bunkse, the company's general counsel. The Redflex reports show that Nolen, the chief financial officer, assisted in the 2010 investigation but limited his review of documents to one year, looked only at money that Rosenberg paid Bills, and did not attempt to interview the company's consultant.

When the Tribune obtained the whistle-blower's letter and started asking questions in 2012, company officials misled the public by claiming they conducted an "exhaustive" and "thorough" investigation and found the allegations of corruption were without merit, according to the Redflex report.

A law firm hired by Redflex Holdings in Australia finally exposed the corruption.

In Chicago, law enforcement officials are investigating the bribery allegations.

Robert T. DeVincenzi, Redflex Holdings' and (following the scandal) also Redflex Traffic Solutions' newly appointed president and CEO, says the company is making changes to "support the highest ethical standards."

In a statement, he tells New Times that Redflex is working to "recapture the trust of our clients, the public, and our own employees."

The scandal is a major blow to Redflex, whose cameras have been unpopular with motorists in Arizona and across the country. Stock in the company was trading at about 80 cents on March 18, down from more than $2 in October.

Critics say the cameras are more about making money for Redflex and government entities than safety, and the case in Chicago has raised suspicion about Redflex programs across the globe.

Former Arizona Governor Janet Napolitano wasn't shy about touting that revenue from the cameras could offset state budget deficits when she approved a contract in 2008 for Redflex to pepper Valley freeways with cameras. At the time, she estimated that Arizona would make about $90 million a year from its photo-enforcement program.

Public disdain for the cameras prompted Governor Jan Brewer, Napolitano's successor, to let the state's contract expire two years later, but Redflex cameras still snap photos of errant drivers in 11 municipalities across the state.

Still, Arizona lawmakers aren't willing to ban the cameras altogether (a bill to do that went nowhere in February). But attempts to curtail their use by municipalities are ongoing.

Cameras have been vandalized, attacked with an ax, and in 2009, a Redflex worker was shot and killed while working in a fully marked Department of Public Safety photo-radar van near Loop 101 and Seventh Street.

Phoenix, Chandler, El Mirage, Eloy, Paradise Valley, Prescott Valley, Show Low, Sierra Vista, Star Valley, Superior, and Surprise all have Redflex contracts.

And some of the jurisdictions have been granted permission by the Arizona Department of Transportation to install cameras on state highways.

Proponents say the cameras improve public safety by deterring speeders and red-light runners. But municipal officials don't have to prove there is a need for a camera program.

Republican state Representative Debbie Lesko, whose district includes El Mirage, floated House Bill 2477, which "forbids a city or town from placing a photo-enforcement system on a state highway" unless it can prove the system is necessary for public safety.

State representatives approved the measure 47-12, and it is now making its way through the Arizona Senate.

Lesko tells New Times that she first examined the issue after receiving complaints from El Mirage residents about Redflex cameras installed along U.S. 60 (Grand Avenue) at Primrose Avenue, a three-way intersection that dead ends into a state highway stretching northwest toward Wickenburg and Las Vegas.

El Mirage was supposed to justify the need for the cameras, according to an agreement with the state. ADOT granted the permit even though it didn't obtain reports or traffic studies from El Mirage.

City officials' e-mails obtained by New Times reveal that between July 1, 2008 and June 30, 2011, 39 traffic collisions occurred at the Grand/Primrose intersection before Redflex installed the cameras. Of those, 30 were non-injury accidents. Five other accidents caused "non-incapacitating" injuries. And three others caused "possible injury." One was listed as "blank."

Considering that city officials estimate between 35,000 and 44,000 vehicles travel daily through the intersection, that's at least 12.7 million cars a year driving through El Mirage.

This means the chances of getting into a car accident at that intersection are infinitesimal.

Ironically, despite the public disdain for the photo-enforcement cameras, the state is home to both major players in the industry — Redflex and Tempe-based American Traffic Solutions, which services Scottsdale, Mesa, Tucson, and Pima County.

NY cops ordered to stop and frisk "the right people"???

Source

Recording Points to Race Factor in Stops by New York Police

By JOSEPH GOLDSTEIN

Published: March 21, 2013 49 Comments

For years, the debate over the New York Police Department’s use of stop-and-frisk tactics has centered on whether officers engage in racial profiling. Now, a recording suggests that, in at least one precinct, a person’s skin color can be a deciding factor in who is stopped.

The recording, played on Thursday in Federal District Court in Manhattan, was of a conversation between a patrol officer and his commanding officer in the 40th Precinct in the South Bronx, a violent command that recorded the highest number of police stops in the Bronx in 2011.

The commanding officer, Deputy Inspector Christopher McCormack, urged the officer to be more active, emphasizing the need to conduct more street stops. “We go out there and we summons people,” Inspector McCormack said. The way to suppress violent crime, he said, was for officers to stop, question and, if necessary, frisk “the right people at the right time, the right location.”

The officer who surreptitiously recorded the conversation last month, Pedro Serrano, began pressing Inspector McCormack about who he meant by the “right people.” The conversation grew heated.

After an exchange about Mott Haven, a particularly crime-prone neighborhood, the inspector suggested that the police needed to conduct street stops of the people creating “the most problems” there.

“The problem was, what, male blacks,” Inspector McCormack said. “And I told you at roll call, and I have no problem telling you this, male blacks 14 to 20, 21.”

The conversation was played on the fourth day of a class-action lawsuit covering several million stop-and-frisk encounters in the city, a police tactic that the Bloomberg administration has embraced, citing its effectiveness in driving down gun violence. But the tactic has proved divisive in many parts of the city and has become a major issue in the mayoral race.

The authority of the police to use stop-and-frisk tactics is not at issue, but how the Police Department conducts these street interactions — and whether it stops blacks and Hispanics in violation of the Constitution — is the matter at hand before the judge in the case, Shira A. Scheindlin.

The question of what commanders mean by “the right people” is central to the trial.

Civil rights lawyers have long maintained that the term “right people” is police code for young black and Hispanic men, who make up an overwhelming share of those stopped. But the police, on the other hand, say that they use this phrase to describe habitual lawbreakers, and that by focusing on the “right people,” they are trying to avoid giving tickets to the construction worker drinking a beer on his way home or the couple strolling through a park that is closed for the night.

Officer Serrano, 43, testified on Thursday that he believed his supervisors used the expression to pressure officers to stop blacks and Hispanics without reasonable suspicion.

He testified that he once told a teenager he had been ordered to issue a ticket that “they should take my name down and if they sue, they could use me as a witness.”

Officer Serrano is the second Bronx police officer to take the witness stand in the trial and assert that police supervisors institute quotas that encourage officers to stop people unlawfully. He said he began taping interactions with supervisors in the station house because “they’re asking me to do something that’s illegal, I believe, and I was worried.”

Officer Serrano, who continues to work in the 40th Precinct, said that as a Hispanic man in the Bronx, he himself had been stopped many times. “It’s not a good feeling,” he testified.

When he went to Inspector McCormack’s office last month to complain about his work evaluation, he immediately came under criticism for having reported only a couple of street stops for all of 2012.

“It seems like you are purposely not doing anything to help prevent the shootings, the robberies and the grand larcenies,” Inspector McCormack said. To conduct so few stops in a year, amid so much crime, he said, was “not fair to the public.”

“I could see in Central Park maybe that would be fine, but this ain’t Central Park,” Inspector McCormack said.

Officer Serrano explained that his interactions with the public did not always rise to stops, as a matter of law, and so he rarely filled out the UF-250 form, which officers are supposed to fill out each time they conduct a stop.

At first, Inspector McCormack can be heard lecturing Officer Serrano about how “99 percent of these people in this community are great, hardworking people” who deserve to go about their days in peace. But the citizens, he said, were troubled by crime, and he went on to describe how a woman in her 60s was shot coming out of an elevator at 10 a.m.

The ambiguity in how the phrase “stopping the right people” is used by police commanders, and how it may be interpreted by patrol officers, was evident in the recordings played in court.

Pressed by the officer on what he meant, Inspector McCormack offered examples of people who should not be stopped, like an elderly person violating a parks rule by playing chess. He also cited the stop of a 48-year-old woman who was intercepted on her way to work as she took a shortcut through a park that was closed for the night.

“You think that’s the right people?” Inspector McCormack asked the officer skeptically.

But with Officer Serrano challenging him, the inspector never offered a clear answer.

“So what am I supposed to do?” Officer Serrano asked, after Inspector McCormack used that expression again. “Is it stop every black and Hispanic?”

The exchange continues until the inspector brings the conversation to a close, telling the officer, “You’re very close to having a problem here.”

The inspector continued, “The problem is that you don’t know who to stop and how to stop.”

In a later passage of the recording, which was not played in court, Inspector McCormack seemed to suggest to others there that Officer Serrano was trying to put words in his mouth. “He’s adding on that I wanted him to stop every black and Hispanic.”

Inspector McCormack is expected to be called as a witness in the coming weeks.

Hitler joins gun debate, but history is in dispute

Source

Hitler joins gun debate, but history is in dispute

By Adam Geller Associated Press Sat Mar 23, 2013 8:26 AM

When the president of Ohio’s state school board posted her opposition to gun control, she used a powerful symbol to make her point: a picture of Adolf Hitler. When a well-known conservative commentator decried efforts to restrict guns, he argued that if only Jews in Poland had been better armed, many more would have survived the Holocaust.

In the months since the Newtown, Conn., school massacre, some gun rights supporters have repeatedly compared U.S. gun control efforts to Nazi restrictions on firearms, arguing that limiting weapons ownership could leave Americans defenseless against homegrown tyrants.

But some experts say that argument distorts a complex and contrary history. In reality, scholars say, Hitler loosened the tight gun laws that governed Germany after World War I, even as he barred Jews from owning weapons and moved to confiscate them.

Advocates who cite Hitler in the current U.S. debate overlook that Jews in 1930s Germany were a very small population, owned few guns before the Nazis took control, and lived under a dictatorship commanding overwhelming public support and military might, historians say. While it doesn’t fit neatly into the modern-day gun debate, they say, the truth is that for all Hitler’s unquestionably evil acts, his firearms laws likely made no difference in Jews’ very tenuous odds of survival.

“Objectively, it might have made things worse” if the Jews who fought the Nazis in Poland’s 1943 Warsaw ghetto uprising had more and better guns, said historian Steve Paulsson, an expert on the period whose Jewish family survived the city’s destruction.

But comparisons between a push by gun control advocates in the U.S. and Hitler have become so common — in online comments and letters to newspaper editors, at gun rights protests and in public forums — they’re often asserted as fact, rather than argument.

“Absolute certainties are a rare thing in this life, but one I think can be collectively agreed upon is the undeniable fact that the Holocaust would have never taken place had the Jewish citizenry of Hitler’s Germany had the right to bear arms and defended themselves with those arms,” former Major League Baseball pitcher John Rocker wrote in an online column in January.

After some gun advocates rallied at New York’s capitol in February carrying signs depicting Gov. Andrew Cuomo as Hitler, National Rifle Association President David Keene said the analogy was appropriate.

“Folks that are cognizant of the history, not just in Germany but elsewhere, look back to that history and say we can’t let that sort of thing happen here,” Keene, who was the lead speaker at the rally, told a radio interviewer March 1.

Those comparisons between gun control now and under Hitler joined numerous other statements, including the one by the Ohio school board president, Debe Terhar, on her personal Facebook page in January and by conservative commentator Andrew Napolitano, writing in The Washington Times.

The comparisons recently prompted the Anti-Defamation League, a Jewish civil rights group, to call on critics of gun control to keep Hitler and the Nazis out of the debate.

The rhetoric “is such an absurdity and so offensive and just undermines any real understanding of what the Holocaust was about,” said Ken Jacobson, the ADL’s deputy national director. “If they do believe it, they’re making no serious examination of what the Nazi regime was about.”

But some gun rights advocates firmly disagree.

“People who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it,” said Charles Heller, executive director of Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership, which has long compared U.S. gun control to Nazi tactics. “I guess if you’re pro-Nazi, they are right. But if you’re pro-freedom, we call those people liars.”

Comparing gun control activism to Hitler is not new. In a 1994 book, “Guns, Crime and Freedom,” NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre wrote that “In Germany, firearm registration helped lead to the Holocaust.”

But the history of civilian gun ownership under the Nazis, scholars say, is far more complicated than the rhetoric indicates.

After World War I, Germany signed a peace treaty requiring dismantling of much of its army and limiting weapons import and export. But many of the 1 million soldiers returning home joined armed militias, including a Nazi Party force that saw Communists as the leading threat.

“Technically, they (the militias) were illegal and the guns were illegal, but a lot of government officials didn’t care about right-wingers with guns taking on Communists,” said David Redles, co-author of “Hitler and Nazi Germany: A History,” a popular college text. By 1928, however, officials decided they had to get a handle on the militias and their weapons and passed a law requiring registration of all guns, said Redles, who teaches at Cuyahoga Community College in Cleveland.

Soon after Hitler was named chancellor in 1933, he used the arson of the Reichstag as an excuse to push through a decree allowing for the arrest of many Communists and the suspension of civil rights including protections from search and seizure. But as the Nazis increasingly targeted Jews and others they considered enemies, they moved in 1938 to loosen gun statutes for the loyal majority, said Bernard Harcourt, a University of Chicago professor of law and political science who has studied gun regulations under Hitler.

The 1938 law is best known for barring Jews from owning weapons, after which the Nazis confiscated guns from Jewish homes. But Harcourt points out that Hitler’s gun law otherwise completely deregulated acquisition of rifles, long guns and ammunition. It exempted many groups from requiring permits. The law lowered the age for legal gun ownership from 20 to 18. And it extended the validity of gun permits from one year to three years.

“To suggest that the targeting of Jews in any of the gun regulations or any of the other regulations is somehow tied to Nazis’ view of guns is entirely misleading,” Harcourt said, “because the Nazis believed in a greater deregulation of firearms. Firearms were viewed, for the good German, were something to which they had rights.”

With the 1938 law, Nazis seized guns from Jewish homes. But few Jews owned guns and they composed just 2 percent of the population in a country that strongly backed Hitler. By the time the law passed, Jews were so marginalized and spread among so many cities, there was no possibility of them putting up meaningful resistance, even with guns, said Robert Gellately, a professor of history at Florida State University and author of “Backing Hitler: Consent and Coercion in Nazi Germany.” [Of course the Jews fighting a normal war against the Nazi's would have been impossible. But when minorities are oppressed, the never fight a normal war, but instead fight a guerrilla war and only choose to fight in battles they can win. That's what happened in the American Revolution when the Americans fought the British]

U.S. gun rights advocates disagree, pointing to the 1943 Warsaw ghetto uprising by about 700 armed Jews who were able to fend off a much larger force of German troops for days until retreating to tunnels or fleeing. The Nazis won out by systematically burning the ghetto to the ground, house by house.

“Once the Germans began adopting that strategy there really wasn’t very much that people armed with pistols, or even rifles and machine guns, could do,” said Paulsson, the historian and author of “Secret City: The Hidden Jews of Warsaw.” [Again I disagree, in these situations the Jews would have chosen to fight a guerilla war and only picked to fight battles which they could win.]

Paulsson said it is possible that if Polish Jews had limited their resistance, Nazi troops might not have destroyed the ghetto, allowing more to survive in hiding or escape. When armed Jews shot at mobs or troops at other times in 1930s and 1940s Poland, it incited more vicious counter-attacks, he said.

But to Heller, the gun rights activist, the Warsaw uprising is proof of power in firearms. Giving Jews more guns might not have averted the Holocaust, but it would have given them a fighting chance, enough that perhaps a third of them could have shot their way out of being marched to the concentration camps, he said.

“Could they have fought back? They did (in Warsaw). You know why they (the Nazis) destroyed the ghetto? Because they were afraid of getting shot,” he said. “Now, will it get to that in the U.S.? God, I hope not. Not if (U.S. Attorney General Eric) Holder doesn’t start sending people to kick doors down.”

But Paulsson, whose mother was freed from the Auschwitz concentration camp at the end of the war, dismisses that argument as twisting the facts.

“Ideologues always try to shoehorn history into their own categories and read into the past things that serve their own particular purposes,” he said.

Honduras police operating death squads???

Police in Honduras accused of operating death squads

By Alberto Arce Associated Press Fri Mar 22, 2013 8:38 PM

TEGUCIGALPA, Honduras The operation was quick and under the cover of night. Armed, masked men arrived in late-model SUVs, getting through the gate into the small neighborhood of humble homes. Without firing a shot, witnesses said, they took Kevin Samraid Carranza Padilla, 28, known in the gang world as “Teiker,” and his girlfriend, Cindy Yadira Garcia, 19.

The next morning, Jan. 10, Honduras’ major newspaper, El Heraldo, reported that police had captured Carranza, a leader of the 18th Street gang suspected in the shooting death of a police commander months earlier. It also published a photo of a shirtless, tattooed young man lying on the ground, his hands behind his back, his face partially wrapped in blue duct tape, the roll still attached. Carranza’s mother, Blanca Alvarado, recognized him from his tattoos.

The photo was distributed to media by a police prosecutor, according to three sources who didn’t want to be named for security reasons. Soon after, agents at the national criminal investigations office acknowledged that there was a detention order for Carranza, and he had been brought in.

More than two months later, Carranza and Yadira have disappeared, The Associated Press has found. They are not in police custody, there are no criminal proceedings against them, and police now say they know nothing about the case.

“At this point,” said Carranza’s mother, “one can only imagine that they are dead.”

At all levels

Police have long been accused of operating more like assassins than law enforcement officers in Honduras, but few cases ever have been investigated. In the past year, police were alleged to have been involved in the deaths of a prominent Honduran radio journalist and the son of a former police chief — but neither killing has been solved.

Despite millions of dollars in U.S. aid to Honduras aimed at professionalizing the country’s police, accusations persist.

In the past three years, the AP has learned, Honduran prosecutors have received as many as 150 formal complaints about death squad-style killings in the capital of Tegucigalpa, and at least 50 more in the economic hub of San Pedro Sula. The country’s National Autonomous University, citing police reports, has counted 149 civilians killed by police in the past two years, including 25 members of the 18th Street gang.

Even the country’s top police chief has been charged with being complicit.

In 2002, a police internal affairs report accused then-police prison inspector Juan Carlos Bonilla of three extrajudicial killings — and linked him to 11 more deaths and disappearances that it said were part of a police policy of “social cleansing.” He was tried and acquitted on one of the three charges. The head of internal affairs unit who produced the report, Maria Luisa Borjas, was expelled from the department, and the rest of the cases, like most crimes in Honduras, were not investigated.

Last year, Bonilla was chosen to lead the national police force despite unanswered questions about his past.

Surveillance video

AP interviews with family, witnesses and law enforcement officials paint a picture of a case in which two people associated with gangs were taken into police custody and then never heard from again.

After witnesses told Alvarado, 50, that her son had been taken by police, she went to a series of police stations in search of him.

At the National Criminal Investigations Office, she was met by 20 officers, some masked, who openly played with their guns as she asked after her son and his girlfriend.

“You can look for those dogs in the Tablon,” Alvarado said they told her, referring to a lot outside of the city where bodies of the executed are regularly dumped, their faces taped and hands and feet tied.

Honduras has the highest murder rate in the world.

The modus operandi in death squad-style killings does not vary much: masked men in bulletproof vests, traveling in large vehicles with tinted windows and no plates, roam the city in groups of 10, said an official in the Carranza investigation, who also could not be named because of the sensitivity of the case.

A month after Carranza’s disappearance, Honduran media released a surveillance video of a similar case: five young men walking a street at night were stopped and surrounded by masked gunmen with AK-47s who pulled up in a large SUV. The gunmen fired at three men who fled. The remaining two, their hands up in surrender, were made to lie face down on the pavement — and then shot several times in cold blood.

One died instantly. The other is seen still moving after three shots from an assault weapon. He later died at a hospital.

Phoenix Mayor Greg Stanton pulls a fast one on voters

In most city elections less then 5 percent of the registered voters actually vote. And in that case the 3,000 or so registered voters who are also Phoenix police officers can certainly swing an election.

Sadly when so few people vote, it is easy for special interest groups, like the Phoenix Police to swing an election to the candidate that gives them the most government pork.

Source

Posted on March 22, 2013 5:00 pm by Laurie Roberts

Masterful Mayor Stanton pulls a fast one on voters

A round of applause going out today to Phoenix’s own Greg Stanton, mayor to masses – or at least, those among the masses who can afford groceries.

To channel another politician, one also didn’t hold much stock in silly campaign promises: “Read my lips,” Mr. Mayor.

Masterful work, simply masterful.

Here’s a guy who runs for mayor on a platform of repealing the city’s food tax – the most regressive tax around, one that forces people to pay a tribute to city hall in order to eat. This, as 30 percent of the residents in some parts of the city go without food because they simply can’t afford enough to eat, according to the Washington D.C.-based Food Research and Action Center.

Not only does Candidate Stanton promise to repeal the tax by April 2013 but in his zeal to get elected, he announces just before Election Day 2011 that he would have already voted to ax the tax, had he been on the Phoenix City Council.

Now, 16 months after his election when the economy is actually better, Mayor Stanton says he couldn’t possibly consider forgoing the 2 percent tax on the groceries of single moms and senior citizens and others who are barely scraping by.

He’d like to, you see, but though revenues are up, they haven’t increased as much as the city expected. Meanwhile, employees are due raises, and taxpayers’ share of pension costs will jump a startling $35 million next year – ironically, just about what the food tax brings into the general fund in a year.

End the tax on milk and eggs? Why, it would mean chaos on the streets, city workers thrown to the curb, old people and young alike cut off from library books and recreational activities but fortunately not subsidized golf.

“As a leader, Stanton says. “You lead with the facts as they actually are.”

Indeed, you do. So let’s review a few of them.

Stanton took office last year and rather than immediately instructing City Manager David Cavazos to begin planning for the promised day when the tax would end, he supported employee pay raises.

Stanton talks often of the 3.2 percent in pay and benefits that employees gave up in 2010, half of which was restored this year. What he doesn’t often mention is that nearly half of Phoenix’s employees have gotten raises averaging 4.8 percent every year throughout the downturn in the economy. The rest, those at the high end of the pay scale, have continued to receive “longevity” bonuses of up to $4,000 a year.

In all, the city has spent $106 million on raises and bonuses since the food tax was enacted in 2010, just about the amount the city would lose had Stanton stood by his promise and ended the food tax two years ahead of its scheduled March 31, 2015 sunset.

The truth is, the city had no intention of ending the food tax early. If it had, Stanton and company would not have approved a 5 percent increase in city spending this year.

If it had, they would have frozen employee pay, explaining that we’re sorry but it’s simply wrong to offer raises on the backs of “emergency” taxes on people who are struggling to buy food.

If it had, they wouldn’t have handed Cavazos a 33 percent pay raise last fall, one that equates to nearly twice the median household income ($43,960) of a Phoenix family.

If it had, they would have begun planning last year for a budget that wouldn’t have required taking a hacksaw this year to public safety and libraries and programs people care about.

That is, if they really wanted to end the food tax.

Instead, they constructed the perfect PR setup, giving Stanton the cover he needs to renege on his promise and emerge unscathed. While the rest of world sees the economy improving, in Phoenix it’s the old sky-is-falling-and-police-officers-will-be-cut routine that cities perform every time they sense a revenue stream slipping through their fingers.

“This is a tough, tough choice,” Stanton told me.

Not nearly as tough, mayor, as the choice of which of your kids will go to bed hungry tonight.

A jobs program for MCCCD cops - Sounds like it!!!

Source

MCCCD weighs tuition hike to bolster campus security

By Mary Beth Faller The Republic | azcentral.com Fri Mar 22, 2013 10:43 PM

A tuition increase for students of Maricopa Community Colleges would pay for a fundamental change to the district’s security culture, from an uneven patchwork of guards and aides at the many campuses to a full staff of certified, armed officers.

The community-college district’s chief of police is seeking $2 million to hire 23 additional officers, a 50 percent increase in staffing for the district’s Department of Public Safety.

The governing board of the Maricopa County Community College District will vote on a $5-per-credit tuition increase on Tuesday. Students’ costs would increase from $76 per credit hour to $81 per credit hour for 2013-14. If approved, the tuition hike would generate an additional $12.5 million for the district.

Mikel Longman, the district’s chief of police, was hired last year to consolidate the 10 colleges’ public-safety units, which were independent, into one district department.

Staffing varies at the colleges, ranging from three to six officers on the main campuses. Some smaller satellite campuses have an officer, and some don’t. Longman’s plan would add one or two officers to each campus, and GateWay Community College in Phoenix would get four.

Currently, the ratio of certified police officers to students is 1 to 5,108, Longman said. The additional officers would reduce it to 1 to 3,405.

“It’s a basic assumption that when we’re open for business, we’ll have armed police officers,” he said.

Crime on the campuses is fairly low. According to the annual report for 2011, the most recent available, there were no murders, robberies or arsons at any of the colleges. Other districtwide statistics for 2011: four forcible sex assaults, five non-forcible sex assaults, 10 aggravated assaults, 19 burglaries, 21 motor-vehicle thefts, 17 drug arrests, six liquor arrests and two weapons violations.

There were 396 larcenies, which would be incidents such as phone and bike thefts, in 2011, an increase of about a third from two years before. No other crimes showed a notable increase from previous years.

Longman said his officers respond to about 90 percent of campus incidents, with the remainder handled by municipal police. The campuses and branches are in 12 police jurisdictions, and because there is no reporting system, the number, response time and type of incidents the municipal police respond to is unknown.

Earlier this month, the district awarded a $158,000 contract to establish a security records-management system that should be working by this summer.

Longman also wants to reduce reliance on the part-time security aides, who write parking tickets, monitor surveillance cameras and escort people after dark. He said the aides, who make about $9 or $10 an hour, are not reliable in showing up for shifts. There are also about 50 full-time security guards around the district.

“We give our keys to our kingdom to minimum-wage, minimally trained employees, and if something bad happens to our property, it hurts our ability to deliver education,” he told the governing board last month.

Besides requesting their second tuition increase in three years, the community colleges are seeking an increase in the property-tax levy, which would generate an additional $8.1 million. The vote on that will be in May.

The colleges want to add, in addition to police, 32 full-time professors. They also want to update technology and spend $5 million on two ongoing programs to improve efficiency in registration and financial aid and students’ graduation and transfer rates.

Andrew Kuhn, president of the Associated Students of Mesa Community College, said last week that his group is studying the tuition proposal and will likely draft a position before the vote Tuesday.

“The general consensus I’ve taken from most students is that they’re not in favor of it, partly because the last time, when the association was in favor of it, it was under the assumption that it wouldn’t happen for another five years,” he said.

Kuhn, 25, a business major, said the group acknowledges that funding from the state has decreased — from $45 million in 2010 to a projected $8 million for 2013-14.

Barry Vaughn, spokesman for the Maricopa Community Colleges Faculty Association, said his group also has not had time to take a position, but will meet Tuesday afternoon before the vote. He said that, beyond this tuition proposal, the faculty is worried about the spiraling costs of higher education in general.

“It’s going to undermine our ability to prepare the next generation of citizens in this country if we cannot get these rapid increases under control,” said Vaughn, who is a professor of philosophy and religious studies at Mesa Community College.

“Having said that, we are still going to be by far one of the least expensive options for higher education in Arizona, so we are still a bargain, relatively speaking.”

The governing board will meet at 6:30 p.m. Tuesday at the district office, 2411 W. 14th St., Tempe.

Arias Trial: Jurors question expert witness in Mesa murder case

Source

Arias Trial: Jurors question expert witness in Mesa murder case

Posted: Friday, March 22, 2013 6:12 pm

Associated Press

Jurors in Jodi Arias' murder trial paid close attention to an expert witness who diagnosed her with post-traumatic stress disorder and amnesia as many of the panel's questions Thursday focused on specific details of his evaluation and how he could come to any conclusions relying on Arias' repeated lies.

Psychologist Richard Samuels, a defense witness, testified for a fifth day Thursday after telling jurors his diagnosis explains why Arias can't remember much from the day she killed her lover.

Arizona is one of a few states where jurors have a legal right to query witnesses through written questions read aloud by the judge. In most other states, it's up to the judge to determine whether to allow it.

Samuels answered more than 100 questions Thursday, and then was questioned by attorneys on both sides about his answers. He resumes testimony on Monday.

Many of the juror questions Thursday focused on Arias' lies, how Samuels could be sure she is telling the truth now, whether her memory loss could be fabricated and his opinions on premeditation.

"How can we be certain that your assessment of Ms. Arias is not based on her lies?" one juror question read.

"The diagnosis of PTSD is a function of an evaluation based upon my 35 years of experience in working with individuals with PTSD," Samuels replied, noting he can say with "all reasonable psychological probability" that she meets the criteria.

Arias faces a possible death sentence if convicted of first-degree murder in the June 2008 killing of Travis Alexander in his suburban Phoenix home. Authorities say she planned the attack on her lover in a jealous rage. Arias initially told authorities she had nothing to do with it then blamed it on masked intruders. Two years after her arrest, she said it was self-defense.

When Samuels initially began his evaluation, Arias was sticking to the intruder story.

Jurors asked if Samuels could be certain that Arias wasn't still lying about the day of the killing.

"Not with 100 percent certainty," he said. "Psychology is the science of behavior so we're seldom 100 percent sure."

Samuels testified previously that Arias was likely suffering from acute stress at the time of the killing, sending her body into a "fight or flight" mode to defend herself, which caused her brain to stop retaining memory.

The jury asked Thursday whether this scenario could occur even if this was a premeditated murder, as the prosecution contends.

"Is it possible? Yes. Is it probable? No," Samuels said.

"Can acute stress occur if someone plans to kill versus defending themselves from danger?" the panel asked.

"Um, homicide is of a different nature," Samuels said before being cut off by an objection from the prosecutor.

"Possible but not probable," he continued.

The jury later asked if it is possible for a defendant to trick a psychologist into thinking they have PTSD.

Samuels said it was possible but unlikely, noting when a person is telling the truth their stories tend to change slightly as they are questioned repeatedly. He said Arias' intruder story remained exactly the same until she eventually said it was self-defense.

"It is my feeling that once the story changed (from intruders) she was essentially telling actually what happened," he said.

Defense attorney Jennifer Willmott later questioned Samuels.

"Is it rational for a person who was at a crime scene to leave evidence behind that they were at the crime scene?" Willmott asked.

"No," Samuels said.

"Well thought out?" she prodded.

"No," Samuels replied.

Prosecutor Juan Martinez seized on Samuel's credibility, accusing him of forming a relationship with Arias and being biased.

Samuels previously testified he had compassion for Arias.

In his typical dramatic fashion, Martinez displayed a page from the dictionary defining the word "compassion."

"A desire to alleviate someone's distress is an indication of sympathy isn't it?" Martinez yelled.

"According to Webster's," Samuels replied calmly.

"So you felt sorry for her," Martinez snapped back.

"No, I didn't, a sense of compassion," Samuels said.

Alexander suffered nearly 30 knife wounds, was shot in the head and had his throat slit. Arias' palm print was found in blood at the scene, along with her hair and nude photos of her and the victim from the day of the killing.

Arias said she recalls Alexander attacking her in a fury. She said she ran into his closet to retrieve a gun he kept on a shelf and fired in self-defense but has no memory of stabbing him.

She acknowledged trying to clean the scene, dumping the gun in the desert and working on an alibi to avoid suspicion.

None of Arias' allegations of Alexander's previous abuse, that he owned a gun and had sexual desires for boys has been corroborated.

More on those dope dealing Schaumburg cops

Source

Questions arise over supervision as probe widens into 3 Schaumburg cops

By Christy Gutowski and Robert McCoppin, Chicago Tribune reporters

11:10 p.m. CDT, March 22, 2013

They are accused of betraying their badges by stealing cash, cocaine and marijuana from suspected dealers, fueling a scheme that funneled more drugs into the streets the men were sworn to protect.

The alleged illicit activity of the three former Schaumburg police officers often occurred while they were on duty and, at least once, while their unsuspecting supervisor was standing nearby, authorities said.

Though village officials insist that even strict supervision isn't foolproof, law enforcement experts say the men's unit operated like a force unto itself, and lack of oversight might have allowed the alleged rogue cops' behavior to go unchecked.

The Tribune has learned from law enforcement sources that the men worked independently of regional, state and federal task forces. Their supervisor was out for months with a medical condition during their alleged crimes, leaving oversight to two sergeants and a commander for the entire investigations division.

"No one was paying attention," said Mark Piccoli, director of the DuPage Metropolitan Enforcement Group, a multijurisdictional drug task force. "That's the problem. If you are lax on supervision, the potential for abuse is high."

John Cichy, Matthew Hudak and Terrance O'Brien have pleaded not guilty since their January arrests and are free on bond. The scandal has since resulted in four federal lawsuits and two dozen failed criminal prosecutions in three counties.

Then, this week, the embattled Schaumburg police chief resigned.

But that might be just the start. Authorities confirmed that a DuPage County grand jury has continued to hear evidence as more witnesses come forward with allegations of corruption dating back to 2010, rather than just months as originally alleged.

Authorities said they have no evidence that other officers took part in the alleged conspiracy. But the extent of the allegations suggests a lack of checks and balances, experts agreed. The charges and fallout follow a classic pattern, they said, seen in big-city police scandals where undercover narcotics officers have been charged with committing the very crimes they're sworn to prevent.

Jack Riley, special agent in charge of the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration's Chicago field division, said the arrests are an aberration in an otherwise upstanding police department. Still, he could not recall another time three officers on one suburban police force stood accused of such brazen acts.

"Many times ... this goes right back to a lack of supervision and controls," he said. "It leads me to believe someone should have been watching a little closer."

After nearly a year of investigations into harassment allegations by an ex-girlfriend, Chief Brian Howerton said this week that he will retire April 5. He denied any wrongdoing, and prosecutors declined to pursue charges, but the chief said he no longer wishes to fight the allegations. The village's review of his conduct is due out by late next week.

Howerton insists his personal controversy did nothing to affect departmental supervision. But Village Manager Ken Fritz previously called the matter "a distraction and a disruption" for the police.

The village has hired a security consulting firm, Hillard Heintze, to review police operations and policies. Its report is due in May.

"There's no way you can put a blanket of supervision over your special investigators that could possibly prevent this from happening ever," Howerton said. "We give our officers an incredible amount of autonomy to do their jobs. … Supervisors can't make it to every call. Officers have to search cars. They can take drugs or money if they want — until they get caught."

Playing the part?

Just as state police were wrapping up the Howerton investigation, authorities in DuPage County said they were hearing wild allegations from a man in custody after a Jan. 2 raid of his Carol Stream home turned up cocaine.

Seeking leniency, the 25-year-old man alleged he had been selling and buying drugs for the three Schaumburg officers for several months, prosecutors said. During the next few weeks, as the informant wore a wire, prosecutors said they recorded illicit transactions and compiled evidence from texts and video surveillance.

A second law enforcement informant, who spoke to the Tribune on the condition of anonymity, said he had helped the accused officers sell drugs.

The 23-year-old northwest suburban man described himself as a close friend to Cichy and said his cooperation with authorities began after they confronted him with the secret recordings, which implicated him as well.

"I'm not proud," he said of turning in Cichy. "I feel like he was just caught in a Catch-22. He didn't want to rat out his buddies and just got caught up in it, too."

In one final sting set Jan. 12, authorities said they planted $20,000 in a Roselle storage unit rigged with video cameras. They said the first informant told the suspected officers that a drug dealer was using the unit to stash his wares, including 33 pounds of marijuana.

O'Brien is accused of surveilling the perimeter of the unit as Cichy and Hudak, wearing masks, broke in and made off with the cash. The money later was recovered in the officers' homes and cars, authorities said. The men were arrested four days later. [They are trying to convince us that these cops who broke into a building stole $20,000 from a safe would not have done it if they were properly supervised??? What rubbish!!!!]

Prosecutors said O'Brien, 46, admitted he did it "for the thrill of it," while Hudak, 29, said "everything you have on tape, I did. You got me on that." Cichy, 30, in the special operations unit the shortest time, confessed to stealing the money, prosecutors said.

Only Hudak provided a written statement, prosecutors said.

The former officers are charged with unlawful delivery of a controlled substance, armed violence, criminal drug conspiracy, official misconduct, theft and burglary.

McHenry County court records show Hudak was sued in 2011 and accused of defaulting on a mortgage. His paychecks were garnished after a February 2012 judgment for $24,300, according to the records. Months later, Hudak was released from the judgment after he paid in full.

Attorneys for the officers, all of whom resigned, say their clients were set up by unreliable snitches.

"They're dealing with informants, drugs and people on the street," said Hudak's attorney, Thomas Glasgow. "You have to act, look and be the part or else you're not going to get very far with making arrests in the narcotics trade."

But in an account spelled out in a federal lawsuit and, authorities say, under oath before a grand jury, another man alleges he has proof that O'Brien and Hudak victimized him as a confidential informant.

Jordan Miller, 29, said Hudak and O'Brien raided his Hanover Park home in May 2010 after he tried to cut ties with them. Miller claims O'Brien and Hudak seized two of his rifles — weapons that authorities said have been found in the officers' possessions.

The discovery prompted prosecutors to seek out Miller as a witness after the officers were indicted, court records showed. Unlike the others who filed lawsuits, Miller did not have a pending criminal case and said he came forward reluctantly after authorities sought him out to ask about the stolen guns.

His lawsuit alleges "a pattern of racketeering activity" in which he says the officers ran a robbery ring that included illegally searching homes, false arrests, stealing narcotics and cash, physical abuse, intimidation and threats. Miller, a felon who went to prison for impersonating a police officer, said he was set up by O'Brien in 2010 while acting as their informant.

"These guys did whatever they wanted, wherever they wanted," Miller told the Tribune. "I think as long as they got results, no one asked questions."

Training and audits

The DEA's Riley said there's a certain amount of acting in undercover narcotic enforcement, but officers doing legitimate work do not take the character — or the money — home with them.

Though many local police agencies run independent narcotics units, Riley and other experts said multijurisdictional and state police task forces offer increased training, financial background checks of officers and annual audits to better safeguard against corruption.

"The bottom line is if there's proper supervision, this shouldn't happen," said Terry Lemming, president of the Illinois Drug Enforcement Officers Association.

DuPage and Lake counties have large Metropolitan Enforcement Group units, Lemming said, but a "huge void" resulted when the Cook County counterpart shut down in 1999.

Schaumburg officials, however, insist they set safeguards. In fact, as prosecutors confirmed, the men are accused of skimming marijuana during a Jan. 11 raid in Wheeling while a supervisor was outside. Fritz, the village manager, said it shows close supervision won't catch everything.

"It comes down to the ethics and morals of these officers," Fritz said. "At some point, they're going to be out of your sight and you have to trust them."

Since the officers' arrests, prosecutors tossed out drug charges against nearly two dozen defendants. Besides Miller, three other men are suing the village.

One lawsuit, filed by Diangelo Beasley, 25, of Chicago, claimed Hudak pistol-whipped him to get the name of a drug supplier, then planted drugs on Beasley to justify felony charges last year. The charges were dropped after Beasley spent seven months in jail. He had prior criminal convictions but said he had straightened out his life after having a daughter.

As he watched news reports about the officers' arrests from jail, Beasley later told the Tribune, he thought, "Maybe I can finally get some justice."

"It should have been discovered earlier," said his attorney, David Lipschultz. "Nobody was making sure the officers were following policies and procedures, not to mention the Constitution."

In another case, John Abel, 23, was released from jail in February after prosecutors dropped felony drug charges against him. Abel has a prior conviction of aggravated robbery. He and his mother, Christine Abel, told the Tribune that police trashed their house in Schaumburg while searching for drugs last spring. The Abels allege that police falsified reports, stole $4,000 and broke his hand.

"I don't understand why they don't have anything to oversee these guys," Christine Abel said. "They were running rampant."

Such fallout doesn't surprise Riley.

"I don't think in Schaumburg's case it was systemic at all," he said. "I think it was one of those things where three guys get together, something breaks down and it snowballs."

Freelance reporter George Houde contributed.

cmgutowski@tribune.com

rmccoppin@tribune.com

IRS spends $60,000 to film 'Star Trek' parody

You can view the video here:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=dHe-zXm17Pc

If you ask me I would rather have the IRS p*ssing away our hard tax dollars on silly stuff like this then using our tax dollars to murder brown skinned folks in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Of course if you ask me I would rather keep the money my self then let the government p*ss it away on anything.

Source

IRS calls 'Star Trek' parody video a mistake

By STEPHEN OHLEMACHER, Associated Press

Updated 7:58 pm, Friday, March 22, 2013

WASHINGTON (AP) — Nobody's going to win an Emmy for a parody of the TV show "Star Trek" filmed by Internal Revenue Service employees at an agency studio in Maryland.

Instead, the IRS got a rebuke from Congress for wasting taxpayer dollars.

The agency says the video, along with a training video that parodied the TV show "Gilligan's Island," cost about $60,000. The "Star Trek" video accounted for most of the money, the agency said.

The IRS said Friday it was a mistake for employees to make the six-minute video. It was shown at the opening of a 2010 training and leadership conference but does not appear to have any training value.

The video features an elaborate set depicting the control room, or bridge, of the spaceship featured in the hit TV show. IRS workers portray the characters, including one who plays Mr. Spock, complete with fake hair and pointed ears.

The production value is high even though the acting is what one might expect from a bunch of tax collectors. In the video, the spaceship is approaching the planet "Notax," where alien identity theft appears to be a problem.

"The IRS recognizes and takes seriously our obligation to be good stewards of government resources and taxpayer dollars," the agency said in a statement. "There is no mistaking that this video did not reflect the best stewardship of resources."

The agency said it has tightened controls over the use of its production equipment to "ensure that all IRS videos are handled in a judicious manner that makes wise use of taxpayer funds while ensuring a tone and theme appropriate for the nation's tax system."

The agency also said, "A video of this type would not be made today."

The video was released late in the day Friday after investigators from the House Ways and Means Committee requested it.

"There is nothing more infuriating to a taxpayer than to find out the government is using their hard-earned dollars in a way that is frivolous," said Rep. Charles Boustany, R-La., chairman of the Ways and Means oversight subcommittee. "The IRS admitted as much when it disclosed that it no longer produces such videos."

The film was made at an IRS studio in New Carrollton, Md., a suburb of Washington. The agency said it uses the studio to make training films and informational videos for taxpayers.

"The use of video training and video outreach through the in-house studio has become increasingly important to the IRS to reach both taxpayers and employees," the agency said. "In the current budget environment, using video for training purposes helps us save millions of dollars and is an important part of successful IRS cost-efficiency efforts."

IRS YouTube videos have been viewed more than 5 million times, the agency said. A video on the IRS website called "When Will I Get My Refund?" has been seen 950,000 times this filing season.

The disclosure of the "Star Trek" video comes as agencies throughout the federal government face automatic spending cuts, including employee furloughs at many of them.

Acting IRS Commissioner Steven Miller has told employees they could be furloughed five to seven days this summer. The furloughs, however, will be delayed until after tax filing season so refunds should not be affected.

The agency said the "Star Trek" video "was a well-intentioned, light-hearted introduction to an important conference during a difficult period for the IRS."

Congressional investigators initially sought both the "Star Trek" video and the "Gilligan's Island" video but after viewing them determined that the "Gilligan's Island" video was a legitimate training video. The IRS did not release the "Gilligan's Island" video.

"The video series with an island theme provided filing season training for 1,900 employees in our Taxpayer Assistance Centers in 400 locations," the IRS said. "This example of video training alone saved the IRS about $1.5 million each year compared to the costs of training the employees in person."

___

Online:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=dHe-zXm17Pc

___

Follow Stephen Ohlemacher on Twitter: http://twitter.com/stephenatap

El lucrativo negocio de las cárceles para indocumentados

El lucrativo negocio de las cárceles para indocumentados

La custodia de inmigrantes sin papeles en centros de detención de ICE, genera grandes ganancias a empresas que las administra y le ha costado al gobierno $4,000 millones de dólares.

La Casa Blanca afirma que detener inmigrantes cuesta mucho dinero y justifica la reciente liberación de un número no determinado de ellos culpando a los recortes automáticos de presupuesto federal.

Pero, hasta ahora, ni demócratas ni republicanos se habían quejado jamás de un sistema carcelario paralelo que desde hace más de una década –particularmente desde los ataques terroristas del 11 de septiembre de 2001- ha crecido sin parar, consumiendo cada vez más dinero del presupuesto del país.

Si ambos partidos han sido cómplices de este continuo aumento, otros se han beneficiado directamente de este estado de cosas, entre ellos las compañías de cárceles privadas en donde está detenida más de la mitad de la población carcelaria inmigrante del país, las cuales, por años, han cabildeado y contribuido con fondos a políticos en busca de solidificar su negocio.

Danza de millones

En las cifras está claro: la cantidad de camas ocupadas diariamente por detenidos de las autoridades migratorias se quintuplicó en un período de 15 años, con un costo para el gobierno y para los contribuyentes que pagan la factura.

Sólo para el año fiscal presente (2013), el presupuesto de la sección de "Actividades de Custodia" del Departamento de Seguridad Nacional fue de $1,900 millones.

Esto no incluye los demás costos de seguridad nacional y control fronterizo, varios miles de millones más. Sólo en el año fiscal 2012 el gobierno está gastando $4,000 millones en tecnología para Seguridad Nacional.

Este flujo de dólares ha beneficiado enormemente a las compañías que se dedican al ramo de las cárceles privadas y la seguridad nacional.

Boom de cárceles

"Creo firmemente que las oportunidades con el gobierno federal sólo crecerán como resultado de lo que ocurre. Esas personas que cruzan la frontera y son arrestadas tendrán que ser detenidas y según mi forma de pensar, eso sólo puede mejorar las oportunidades para lo que nosotros hacemos", dijo Wayne Calabrese, presidente de GEO Group, una corporación que construye, compra y maneja prisiones privadas y que administra siete centros de detención privados para inmigrantes con capacidad para casi 8,000 camas.

Por ejemplo, dos megaempresas, Geo Group y CCA, que controlan conjuntamente un 75% del mercado de las prisiones privadas, han vivido un "boom" de crecimiento en los últimos años, balanceando lo perdido en contratos estatales con el continuo crecimiento en el gasto federal para detener inmigrantes y sus ingresos combinados en el año 2010 fueron de casi $3,000 millones.

Contratos millonarios

Desde 2001, CCA ha tenido un aumento de ingresos del 88% y GEO, de un 121%. La mayoría de sus negocios están en contratos para prisiones estatales, pero no es allí donde está el futuro para ellas: los gobiernos estatales no tienen dinero para nuevas prisiones.

Por años, el negocio de la detención de inmigrantes ha sido boyante, y por ahora, a pesar de los problemas presupuestales, no ha dado señal de que vaya a disminuir, aunque una reforma migratoria amplia podría poner en peligro las ganancias de estas empresas.

El área de seguridad fronteriza es donde el negocio sigue boyante para muchas empresas del ramo. Como lo explicó el año pasado Michael Rosenberg, vicepresidente de la compañía que esta semana organiza la conferencia de 2012 sobre seguridad en la frontera, que se realiza en Phoenix, Arizona: "Las reducciones en el presupuesto militar hace que empresas de seguridad y defensa busquen otras áreas para hacer negocios".

Chandler messy yard cops destroy buildings????

Chandler program clears city of dilapidated buildings

By Weldon B. Johnson The Republic | azcentral.com

Tue Mar 5, 2013 7:30 AM

A vacant, dilapidated building is more than an eyesore to residents of the surrounding neighborhood.

That empty building can pose hazards, including fire, safety, crime and illegal dumping. With that in mind, Chandler’s Code Enforcement Unit and other city departments have been attempting to rid the city’s neighborhoods of such structures.

Among the city’s most-effective tools is the Voluntary Demolition Program.

Since the first house was torn down on East Saragosa Street in January 2012, nearly a dozen other blighted structures have been razed, although some were demolished by their owners outside of the program.

“Nothing good comes from open, blighted properties,” Chandler Neighborhood Resources Director Jennifer Morrison said. “The Voluntary Demolition Program was the seed for a lot of different outcomes resulting in the elimination of, or securing, or planning for the rehabilitation, of blighted properties in our neighborhoods.”

The Voluntary Demolition Program began in 2011 and grew from emphasis by Mayor Jay Tibshraeny and the City Council on improving the city’s older neighborhoods. The program is funded by $140,000 in federal Community Development Block Grant money.

If the property owner meets certain guidelines, the program will pay 75 percent of the cost of demolishing a residential structure. The property owner can pay the remainder up front or have a lien placed on the property, in which case the city is reimbursed when the property is sold.

Neighborhood Preservation Manager Malcolm Hankins, who heads the Code Enforcement Unit, estimates the cost of demolishing the structures to be $13,000 to $20,000. A significant portion of that is the requirement to test for the presence of asbestos. If any is found, there are additional costs for the removal, and monitoring during removal, of the hazardous material.

After the structure is demolished and debris removed, a layer of gravel is placed on the property and the owner is encouraged to have the vacant lot fenced. Fencing can discourage illegal dumping or having the lot used as a pass-through for pedestrian or vehicular traffic.

The city initiated the program by consulting with staff members from a variety of departments, including code enforcement, police and fire, to identify open, abandoned and dilapidated structures. Those were then secured by boarding up, and the owners were contacted.

If the property owner chooses to take part in the program, the city evaluates the structure and determines if it qualifies for the demolition program.

“The key is it’s voluntary,” Hankins said. “We’ve had some homeowners who have elected to do the demolition on their own, independent of the program. Some of them have had the equipment and resources to get it done themselves. Some don’t want to spend the time it takes to use the program. When you use federal funding, you have to go through a fairly significant bid process for every phase.”

Other owners choose to rehabilitate their property to bring it back to community standards. There are some who do not respond to the city at all.

“On some occasions when folks don’t comply with the ordinance, we’ve had to go through court to get that done,” Hankins said.

Five structures were torn down as part of the Voluntary Demolition Program in 2012, and six more have been demolished by their owners without using program funds. There are two other houses that have been approved for the program, and the city is in the process of securing contractors to do the demolition.

Accordingly, Morrison said the program works.

“It has created a much more secured environment in the neighborhoods,” Morrison said. “I believe it also says to residents that the city of Chandler has your neighborhood on its radar and we understand the condition this unit is in, it’s not positive and we’re going to remedy that.”

Crece polémica de "baños transgénero"

Crece polémica de "baños transgénero"

Phoenix, Arizona

por Eduardo Bernal - Mar. 22, 2013 10:43 AM

La Voz

El pasado miércoles 2 de marzo un panel legislativo comenzó a deliberar una iniciativa que penalizaría como un crimen menor a individuos transgénero y transexuales que utilicen "inapropiadamente" un baño, duchas públicas y vestuarios en lugares públicos.

La iniciativa SB1432, propuesta por el representante John Kavanagh de Fountain Hills, llega a menos de un mes de que la ciudad de Phoenix aprobara una ordenanza municipal anti discriminatoria que permite a cualquier persona utilizar un sanitario de acuerdo al género o sexo con el que se identifique, y no necesariamente el que esté indicado en su acta de nacimiento.

Introducida por Kavanagh como una enmienda "strike everything" (la cual permite eliminar el propósito original de un proyecto de ley y reemplazarlo por otro completamente distinto), ha generado preocupación entre grupos que abogan por los derechos civiles de la población, en especial de comunidades LGBT (lesbianas, gays, bisexuales y transgénero) ya que lesionarían sus derechos constitucionales relacionados con la segunda enmienda de la Constitución Política del Estado.

De acuerdo con una provisión dentro de la actual ley de estatutos de Arizona, una persona practica "conducta desordenada" cuando intencionalmente ingresa a un vestidor, baño, o ducha pública, del género opuesto al que indica su certificado de nacimiento o identificación.

Básicamente la propuesta de ley de Kavanagh criminaliza a quienes utilizan el baño del sexo con el que se identifican o expresan. Quienes se oponen a la medida, la desestiman primero por los métodos para proponerla, y segundo por la manera cómo se aplicaría: ¿se pedirán identificaciones o certificados de nacimiento para saber el sexo de la gente?

"Están creando una solución a un problema que no existe", declaró el concejal Tom Simplot quien es abiertamente gay. "Este tipo de legislaciones son precisamente las que atraen críticas a Arizona y arriesgan nuestro trabajo para hacer de este estado tolerante y competitivo", acotó Simplot.

De encontrarse culpable, el individuo que infrinja esta esta ley podría recibir una pena de hasta seis meses en prisión y/o 2 mil 500 dólares de multa, sin mencionar el hecho de que podrían agregarle cargos de ofensas sexuales, los cuales obligarían al individuo a registrarse como agresor sexual.

Quienes están a favor de la medida, incluyendo a la senadora Nancy Barto, Kavanagh y representantes del Center for Arizona Policy, alegan que depredadores sexuales utilizarán esa excusa para ingresar al baño del sexo opuesto y cometer delitos sexuales.

Kavanagh declaró que es inaceptable que cualquier hombre que se identifique como mujer, pueda ingresar al baño o vestuario de mujeres y desvestirse.

De acuerdo a grupos que representan a comunidades LGBT esta medida sería una de las más rigurosa en la nación en materia de violación a los derechos civiles.

Is that Dorner reward a $1-million mirage?

By Louis Sahagun and Joel Rubin, Los Angeles Times

March 24, 2013, 4:40 p.m.

As the manhunt for Christopher Dorner gripped Southern California last month, Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa announced a $1-million reward for the capture of the fired LAPD officer.

Two claims have been made on the money since Dorner's death Feb. 12 — by a couple near Big Bear who were tied up and whose car was stolen and by a man whose pickup truck Dorner later hijacked.

Now, however, some groups that pledged money are reconsidering. They said they offered the reward for information that would have led to the capture and conviction of Dorner, neither of which occurred. Dorner committed suicide when cornered in a burning cabin near Big Bear.

Underlying their objections is a moral argument that donors will not make publicly. Some find the claims for the money unseemly. They believe reward seekers had called police to report they were victims of crimes by Dorner and now seek to profit from their brief encounters, which left them unharmed, during a rampage that devastated the families of police officers and of others he killed.

Police believe Dorner went on a 10-day killing rampage of revenge against law enforcement officials whom he blamed for his 2009 firing from the force. Dorner is thought to have killed Riverside Police Officer Michael Crain; San Bernardino County Sheriff's Deputy Jeremiah MacKay; Monica Quan, the daughter of a retired LAPD captain; and Quan's fiance, Keith Lawrence.

More than 25 donors pledged reward money, including state and local police unions, civic organizations and individuals. But now, many are hesitating to follow through.

"I've spoken with some groups — including a few that are substantial — that have already decided to withdraw their pledges," said Ron Cottingham, president of the 64,000-member union Peace Officers Research Assn. of California, which has placed its own pledge on hold pending additional information. "They said the reward doesn't fit their criteria."

The LAPD, responding to the arguments donors make publicly, says the money should be paid. LAPD Deputy Chief Kirk Albanese said that to deny someone the reward because Dorner died before he could be put on trial "would be disingenuous" and would undermine future attempts by police to get information about unsolved crimes by offering rewards.

Much of the confusion surrounding the conditions of the reward began with the language Villaraigosa used in his announcement. Donors specified that the money they pledged was for Dorner's arrest and conviction. But Villaragoisa broadened it to "capture" in his public remarks — and that word could be interpreted to include being surrounded in a cabin before committing suicide.

Later in the news conference announcing the reward, Los Angeles Police Chief Charlie Beck said pointedly: "For those of you with questions about how the reward works: The reward is for the capture and the conviction."

Further clouding the issue is the language of a written statement the LAPD issued saying the reward was "for information leading to the apprehension and conviction" of Dorner. The department recently proposed replacing that phrase with "identification and capture." State and local law enforcement unions that pledged money rejected the change.

LAPD officials said a group of detectives investigating the Dorner case will make a recommendation to the donors regarding whether certain people were instrumental in catching Dorner and how much money they deserve.

Tyler Izen, president of the Los Angeles Police Protective League, which also had pledged money for information leading to the arrest and conviction of Dorner, said his organization "is waiting for additional information from the LAPD about the incident before determining whether to pay the reward."

Vicki Curry, a spokeswoman for the mayor, said money for a reward was solicited before any decisions were made about terms or conditions. "It came together fairly quickly over that weekend in the midst of the chaos, and now we've got to figure it out," Curry said.

Curry, who said she was unaware of any turmoil among the donor group, said that even if some donors do back away from their commitments to contribute to the reward, the $1-million total will not be lowered. She reiterated a contention that Beck made when the reward was announced — that additional donors had pushed the amount collected to more than $1 million — and said the extra money would be used to cover funds promised by donors that back out. "There will be a $1-million reward," Curry said.

Rewards have been a fixture of the American system of justice since the 1800s. When detectives hit dead ends, a cash incentive may be the only way to solve crimes.

In the Dorner case, information was delivered Feb. 12 in a 911 call made by Karen Reynolds, who, along with her husband, Jim, had been taken captive briefly at their Mountain View Resort before Dorner stole their car.

Before leaving, Dorner warned the couple not to call police. Reynolds did it anyway.

Shortly afterward, Dorner crashed their car, and Rick Heltebrake, a Boy Scout camp ranger, called a San Bernardino County sheriff's deputy to report that his pickup had been hijacked.

The Reynoldses' claim, filed by their attorney, Kirk M. Hallam, says their information was immediately radioed to law enforcement officers in the Big Bear Lake area. State Fish and Wildlife wardens soon identified the Reynoldses' purple Nissan being driven by Dorner on California Highway 38, about 20 miles away, according to the claim.

The Reynoldses support their argument with a San Bernardino County Sheriff's Department press release, which says, in part, that after Reynolds' call, "deputies immediately began a search on ground and from the air for the vehicle [the purple Nissan]. The vehicle was located at Highway 38 and Glass Road."

In an interview, Hallam added, "When the mayor announced the reward offer, he just said, 'captured.' So, in terms of the $1-million reward, the offer did not include conviction." In addition, state law allows a reward to be paid if an arrest or conviction is rendered impossible by the death of a suspect during a pursuit by law enforcement.

Heltebrake's claim, filed on his behalf by attorney Allen L. Thomas, says that shortly after his client called, Dorner was cornered by authorities at the cabin where he died.

Heltebrake said in his claim that he was driving along a mountain road when Dorner jumped out of a snow bank and pointed a firearm at him. He says Dorner ordered him out of the white pickup and used it to continue fleeing.

Heltebrake's call "notified law enforcement of Mr. Dorner's location, provided a description of the vehicle he was fleeing in and was the substantial factor in the capture of Mr. Dorner at the cabin location," according to his claim.

louis.sahagun@latimes.com

Public servant or royal government ruler???

Alameda County rewards boss: $400k…for life

Alameda County supervisors have really taken to heart the adage that government should run like a business — rewarding County Administrator Susan Muranishi with the Wall Street-like wage of $423,664 a year.

For the rest of her life.

According to county pay records, in addition to her $301,000 base salary, Muranishi receives:

– $24,000, plus change, in “equity pay’’ to guarantee that she makes at least 10 percent more than anyone else in the county.

– About $54,000 a year in “longevity” pay for having stayed with the county for more than 30 years.

– An annual performance bonus of $24,000.

– And another $9,000 a year for serving on the county’s three-member Surplus Property Authority, an ad hoc committee of the Board of Supervisors that oversees the sale of excess land.

Like other county executives, Muranishi also gets an $8,292-a-year car allowance.

Muranishi has been with the county for 38 years, and she’s 63. When retirement day comes, she’ll be getting a lot more than a gold watch.

That’s because, according to the county auditor’s office, Muranishi’s annual pension will be equal to the dollar total of her entire yearly package — $413,000. She also has a separate executive private pension plan, for which the county chips in $46,500 a year.

To find out more about how Muranishi wound up being the highest-paid county administrator in California, read here.

LAPD homicide detective pleads guilty to murder

Ex-LAPD homicide detective pleads guilty in fatal beating of wife

By Andrew Blankstein

March 25, 2013, 2:25 p.m.

A retired LAPD homicide detective pleaded guilty to manslaughter in connection with the fatal beating of his wife in Hawaii seven years ago, authorities said Monday.

Dan DeJarnette, 59, who was arrested at his Big Island home last May, pleaded guilty March 15 to manslaughter while under extreme emotional distress. He faces up to 20 years in prison in connection with the slaying of his wife, 56-year-old Yu DeJarnette, whose body was found in November 2006 on a lava embankment about 20 feet from the couple's home in Ka'u on the southern end of the island.

Police said he bludgeoned her with a car jack stand.

According to police, DeJarnette said he had awakened to find his wife outside the home suffering from injuries in a fall over an embankment while hanging laundry out to dry. An autopsy determined that she died from head trauma and DeJarnette was booked on suspicion of murder. The former LAPD detective, who moved to Hawaii after his retirement in 2003, was eventually released because of a lack of evidence.

After languishing for half a decade, Hawaiian authorities took another look at the case in January 2012. After additional investigation that included testing of DNA evidence, prosecutors secured an indictment against DeJarnette from a Hawaii grand jury, leading to his arrest in May 2012.

The evidence suggested that DeJarnette used a bleaching-type agent to try to clean up blood in the bathroom, but could not eliminate it completely. Follow-up testing eventually showed his wife's blood on items recovered from the home.

The indictment came days after former LAPD Det. Stephanie Lazarus was sentenced to 27 years to life in prison, with the possibility of parole, for killing her former boyfriend's wife nearly three decades ago in a fit of rage and jealousy.

DeJarnette worked as a homicide detective in the Van Nuys Division and investigated rape cases while assigned to the department's Robbery Homicide Division-Rape Special Section.

During his time as a detective, DeJarnette handled several high-profile investigations, including the probes into a fatal Christmas night shooting at an Echo Park pizza parlor in 1990, the 1993 stabbing death of a pregnant woman at an automated teller machine in Sherman Oaks and the 1981 cold-case murder of a newlywed in her Sherman Oaks home by a serial rapist.

DeJarnette, who joined the Los Angeles Police Department in 1982, moved to Hawaii after his retirement in 2003. But by 2006, the marriage was showing signs of strain. Yu DeJarnette had told co-workers at the Kona grocery store where she worked that she wanted to leave her husband, according to a source familiar with the investigation.

Authorities said that in his plea, DeJarnette said that after Yu DeJarnette slapped him, he hit her twice in the head in a bathroom at the couple's home with a jack stand, which is used to elevate an automobile. His wife's body was then dragged outside and thrown over the embankment.

DeJarnette also had taken out a $300,000 life insurance policy on his wife, but was unable to collect because he was long considered a suspect in the case.

The former LAPD detective is eligible for parole. Without the plea he faced the possibility of life in prison if convicted of murder.

Rep. John Kavanagh tweaks his homophobic "potty police" law

Transgender restroom bill will be revamped, lawmaker says

By Dustin Gardiner The Republic | azcentral.com Mon Mar 25, 2013 2:25 PM

A bill that would have made it illegal for many transgender Arizonans to use the public bathroom of their choice has been gutted.

Rep. John Kavanagh, R-Fountain Hills, said he plans to introduce a new version of Senate Bill 1432 this week, removing any potential criminal penalties for transgender residents who enter the restroom of the opposite sex.

His original proposal would have made it a misdemeanor for a person to use a bathroom, locker room or dressing room that’s not designated for the sex listed on his or her birth certificate. Violators would have been guilty of disorderly conduct.

But Kavanagh said the new version seeks to take government entirely out of the business of regulating bathroom privileges.

He said it will prohibit local governments from passing ordinances that could subject businesses to lawsuits or criminal penalties if they forbid a transgender person from using a restroom.

Kavanagh said he decided to scrap the original proposal after it drew criticism from transgender advocates across the country and some of his fellow lawmakers, who felt it unnecessarily extended the reach of state government into bathrooms stalls.

Both versions of his so-called bathroom bill are a rebuke to Phoenix leaders, who voted last month to broadly outlaw discrimination against the city’s gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender residents. The protections apply in the areas of housing, employment and public accommodations, such as restaurants and hotels.

“I’m just saying, you know what, that’s not government’s concern,” Kavanagh told The Republic. “We’re simply going to go right back to where it was the day before Phoenix passed its overreaching ordinance with respect to showers, dressing rooms and bathrooms.”

Rebecca Wininger, president of the gay-rights watchdog Equality Arizona, said Kavanagh’s new proposal does nothing to alleviate her concerns. She said it still singles out a group of people for discrimination.

“It’s no better to deny anyone the basic right of being able to use the restroom,” Wininger said. “I really don’t hink there’s anything behind it except for fear and possibly hate.”

Supporters of the city’s move said Kavanagh’s bill is a solution in search of a problem. They point to the 16 states and more than 166 cities and counties that have passed similar laws prohibiting discrimination based on gender identity, which includes those who identify as a different sex than they were born.

Phoenix city attorneys have said the ordinance could extend to bathroom use in some cases. For instance, a person with male genitalia who identifies as a woman might have a discrimination claim if they are barred from using the restroom of their choosing and vice versa.

Recall effort launched against Rep. John Kavanagh

"Show me your genitals state"

Sadly Arizona is already the

"Show me you papers state"

Source

Recall effort launched against Rep. John Kavanagh

By Mary Jo Pitzl The Republic | azcentral.com Mon Mar 25, 2013 10:01 PM

Rep. John Kavanagh, the chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, is the latest target of a recall effort launched against high-profile state politicians.

A committee called Raise the Bar Arizona filed paperwork on Monday for a recall election, citing what it called Kavanagh’s hypocrisy on pledging to reduce the size of government while introducing legislation that would extend government’s reach. Kavanagh, R-Fountain Hills, dismissed it as misguided political harassment.

“He’s not limiting government; he’s extending it into bathrooms,” said Ray Ceo Jr., co-chairman of the newly formed committee.

Ceo was referring to Kavanagh’s introduction last week at the Legislature of a bill that would impose a disorderly-conduct charge on anyone who uses a public bathroom, dressing room or locker room if the gender designation on the facility doesn’t match the gender on the individual’s birth certificate.

Kavanagh, a four-term lawmaker, said recall organizers apparently aren’t aware of the changes he’s proposed to the bill, which will get a committee hearing Wednesday. The changes would remove the criminal penalties for bathroom use, but would bar local governments from enacting ordinances that would punish business owners if they deny bathroom use to a transgendered person.

Ceo said the committee’s problems with Kavanagh’s conduct go beyond the bathroom issue. The committee is critical of Kavanagh’s support of a bill that would defund the Arizona Students Association by taking away a fee that has benefited the group. Ceo’s co-chairman, Brianna Pantilione, is treasurer of the student group, which sued the Arizona Board of Regents for free-speech violations when the board suspended the group’s access to the student fee.

“Representative John Kavanagh has spent his time in office unconstitutionally attacking specific groups such as students rather than fulfilling his campaign promises to limit government and use taxpayer’s money effectively,” Raise the Bar said in a press release.

Ceo, a librarian and Valley native who’s also active within the gay community, said he’s tired of seeing Arizona being a “laughing stock” nationally.

The committee will need the valid signatures of 16,920 voters in Kavanagh’s northeast Valley district for a recall election.

Kavanagh said the recall would be a waste of time and money. “If they succeed, they’ll recall me five months before my primary,” he said.

The earliest a recall election could be staged is March 2014; the GOP primary for the Legislature is in August. Although term limited in the House, Kavanagh is eying a state Senate seat.

“It’s not politically wise,” he said, adding that it appears people are increasingly using the recall process as a way to harass elected officials, rather than to make a sincere effort to oust them.

“It gives new meaning to March madness,” he quipped.

The Raise the Bar committee is the latest recall effort; earlier this month, a group of central-Phoenix Republicans filed a committee to recall House Minority Leader Chad Campbell, D-Phoenix.

A committee seeking to recall Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio conceded it has fallen far short of the money needed to mount an effective countywide effort. Organizers vowed to press on.

Colorado pot growers gear up for ‘green rush’

Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. said that he would soon announce a response to the initiatives in Colorado and Washington last year legalizing pot for recreational use.

Source

Colorado pot growers gear up for ‘green rush’

By T.W. Farnam, Published: March 25

Denver — The pot industry in Colorado is undergoing a massive makeover as it prepares to begin selling marijuana for recreational use legally under state law. Businesses are ramping up production, and trade associations are cleaning up their image, anticipating what could be a billion-dollar industry.

But the entrepreneurs who are hoping to cash in on the “green rush” starting next year are struggling with the unique challenges of conducting a business that the federal government considers a crime.

The state’s pot producers and retailers are having trouble securing business financing because banks won’t give them loans — and most of the time, not even an account.

State lawmakers are about to shake up the marketplace in unpredictable ways with regulations covering everything from the shape of containers to the labeling required for pot-laced brownies and other “infused products.”

And business owners say they’re anxious about the intentions of the federal government, which could seize millions of dollars they have invested or even send them to prison.

At a hearing in the Senate Judiciary Committee earlier this month, Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. said that he would soon announce a response to the initiatives in Colorado and Washington last year legalizing pot for recreational use. The federal government, which deems marijuana a controlled substance, could upend the plans of Colorado entrepreneurs at any moment.

Last year, the state’s voters approved a constitutional amendment to “regulate marijuana like alcohol” for adults to buy in small amounts, building on the state’s 13-year-old law allowing the sale of marijuana to medical patients. Under the new measure, marijuana stores, or dispensaries, must register with the state, but many of the other regulations governing pot sales are still being finalized.

Kristi Kelly, 35, began selling medical marijuana three years ago and plans to grow the business when recreational sales become legal in 2014. Her Good Meds company includes three stores and two industrial indoor gardens.

Wearing a blue blazer and knee-high leather boots on a recent tour of her operation, Kelly was more dressed up than most of her customers and employees. Some sat on couches in hooded sweatshirts and dreadlocks trimming dried marijuana plants. Jimi Hendrix played in the background.

She led the way through one of her “grow facilities,” a 65,000-square-foot garden where plants at different stages were segregated into different rooms by maturity.

“We have about 10 rooms that look exactly like this,” Kelly said over the hum of a humidifier. A chain of 1,000-watt fixtures showered bright light on dozens of plants so heavily laden with large flowers that they were supported by a net. A valve on the wall periodically spurted carbon dioxide.

A Washington, D.C. native, Kelly has a high-energy demeanor that seems more at home on the East Coast than in laid-back Denver. A former ad agency executive who once managed accounts for government agencies such as the U.S. Mint, she said she deals with the uncertainty of operating in a legal gray area by keeping a close watch on risks she can control, such as security and compliance with state rules.

“I tend to stay as conservative as possible on as much as possible,” Kelly said.

More than 500 businesses are already selling medical marijuana, and many are now preparing to burst into the new marketplace for recreational pot. These dispensaries sold $186 million worth of cannabis for medical purposes in the last fiscal year, according to tax receipts. The Colorado Legislative Council predicts that figure could rise to $920 million next year once the new constitutional amendment legalizing recreational sales takes effect. This estimate does not account for the anticipated influx of pot tourists who are expected to arrive in search of a Rocky Mountain high. With steep excise and sales taxes proposed, the industry could be a big revenue booster for the state.

Many of the entrepreneurs, like Kelly, have had little previous experience with marijuana. “We’re not those Woodstock hippies who have had secret grows in the mountains for decades,” Kelly said. “We’re business people.”

This isn’t business as usual, however. The federal government has cautioned many banks against handling marijuana finances. Many smaller pot businesses have been unable to find a bank to take their money and must operate on a cash-only basis, creating vexing problems with security and accounting. Kelly said she lost four bank accounts last year as one institution after another said they could not risk doing business with her company.

“The people who are lucky enough to have bank accounts guard them with their lives,” she said.

In her Lakewood, Colo., store, a two-ton safe bolted to the floor behind the counter holds a dozen gallon jars full of cannabis. With a doctor’s prescription, you can buy marijuana in just about any form in this store: rolled into joints, filling an e-cigarette cartridge, baked into chocolates and cheesecake cupcakes, or concentrated in Cannacap pills, lemon drops, Cheeba Chews, hard candies and liquid tinctures with flavors such as orange and agave.

Kelly says she has to pay premium rent for her storefront because landlords are wary of marijuana businesses, considering them risky ventures that can attract an undesirable clientele. She has also spent thousands of dollars upgrading her operation’s security to guard against thieves who could be attracted to the copious amounts of cannabis and cash.

Making her financial situation even worse, distributing marijuana isn’t a legitimate business expense under the tax code, so her company can’t deduct most of its expenses. Kelly’s business lost money last year, she said, after paying income tax.

Nor can these retailers use many of the traditional means for promoting consumer goods, such as advertising. Denver bans outdoor ads for marijuana, and most mainstream media outlets won’t run them. Kelly recently tried to sponsor a radio public service announcement about safe driving, but had her money returned by the station management.

Complying with a thick and evolving book of state regulations is another challenge. The rules, for instance, require each marijuana plant to be placed under video surveillance and tracked from seed to sale, at times by carrying a bar code.

Many more regulations are coming. Under Amendment 64, the legislature must tax and oversee cannabis stores for the general public as well. A task force appointed by the governor this month issued recommendations for those laws, which must be finalized before the legislative session ends this spring.

Many medical marijuana business owners, including Kelly, opposed Amendment 64 over concern that it would upturn their growing businesses or prompt action from the federal government. But now she and many other owners see the legalization of pot as a great business opportunity.

And medical marijuana businesses are seeking to have the tight regulations they follow expanded to recreational use, deploying a bevy of lobbyists to work the task force and the legislature. That has led advocates for liberalization to complain that the industry is trying to limit competition. For the first year, only retailers that sell medical marijuana will be allowed to sell pot for recreational purposes.

Business owners counter that by tightly regulating their industry, Colorado has avoided the kind of federal scrutiny given to other states, such as California, which largely leave regulation of medical marijuana to local jurisdictions.

The U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency is watching Colorado, but has yet to intervene in a dramatic way. The agency sent letters to some Colorado dispensaries within 1,000 feet of schools, warning them to shut their doors. Some business owners took that as a tacit endorsement of the state’s approach.

Federal policy on marijuana businesses will likely be fluid for some time, and disruptions in the marketplace may yet come. For Kelly, it won’t be the first time.

“We’ve changed our business plan like five times,” she said.

Discuss this topic and other political issues in the politics discussion forums.

Court: Drug dog sniff is unconstitutional search

Source

Court: Drug dog sniff is unconstitutional search

By JESSE J. HOLLAND, Associated Press

Updated 8:51 am, Tuesday, March 26, 2013

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court ruled Tuesday that police cannot bring drug-sniffing police dogs onto a suspect's property to look for evidence without first getting a warrant for a search, a decision which may limit how investigators use dogs' sensitive noses to search out drugs, explosives and other items hidden from human sight, sound and smell.

The high court split 5-4 on the decision to uphold the Florida Supreme Court's ruling throwing out evidence seized in the search of Joelis Jardines' Miami-area house. That search was based on an alert by Franky the drug dog from outside the closed front door.

Justice Antonin Scalia said a person has the Fourth Amendment right to be free from the government's gaze inside their home and in the area surrounding it, which is called the curtilage.

"The police cannot, without a warrant based on probable cause, hang around on the lawn or in the side garden, trawling for evidence and perhaps peering into the windows of the home," Justice Antonin Scalia said for the majority. "And the officers here had all four of their feet and all four of their companion's, planted firmly on that curtilage — the front porch is the classic example of an area intimately associated with the life of the home."

He was joined in his opinion by Justices Clarence Thomas, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan.

On the morning of Dec. 5, 2006, Miami-Dade police detectives and U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration agents set up surveillance outside a house south of the city after getting an anonymous tip that it might contain a marijuana growing operation. Detective Douglas Bartelt arrived with Franky and the two went up to the house, where Franky quickly detected the odor of pot at the base of the front door and sat down as he was trained to do.

That sniff was used to get a search warrant from a judge. The house was searched and its lone occupant, Jardines, was arrested trying to escape out the back door. Officers pulled 179 live marijuana plants from the house, with an estimated street value of more than $700,000.

Jardines was charged with marijuana trafficking and grand theft for stealing electricity needed to run the highly sophisticated operation. He pleaded not guilty and his attorney challenged the search, claiming Franky's sniff outside the front door was an unconstitutional law enforcement intrusion into the home.

The trial judge agreed and threw out the evidence seized in the search, but that was reversed by an intermediate appeals court. In April a divided Florida Supreme Court sided with the original judge.

The Supreme Court's decision upholds that ruling.

"A drug detection dog is a specialized device for discovering objects not in plain view (or plain smell)," Kagan wrote in a concurring opinion. "That device here was aimed at a home — the most private and inviolate (or so we expect) of all the places and things the Fourth Amendment protects. Was this activity a trespass? Yes, as the court holds today. Was it also an invasion of privacy? Yes, that as well."

The four justices who dissented were Chief Justice John Roberts, Justice Stephen Breyer, Justice Anthony Kennedy and Justice Samuel Alito.

It's not trespassing when a mail carrier comes on a porch for a brief period, Alito said. And that includes "police officers who wish to gather evidence against an occupant," Alito said. "According to the court, however, the police officer in this case, Detective Bartelt, committed a trespass because he was accompanied during his otherwise lawful visit to the front door of the respondent's house by his dog, Franky. Where is the authority evidencing such a rule?"

Alito also said that the court's ruling stretches expectations of privacy too far.

"A reasonable person understands that odors emanating from a house may be detected from locations that are open to the public, and a reasonable person will not count on the strength of those odors remaining within the range that, while detectable by a dog, cannot be smelled by a human."

___

The case was Florida v. Jardines, 11-564.

Follow Jesse J. Holland on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/jessejholland

Wash., Colo. bars test limits of legal pot laws

Wash., Colo. bars test limits of legal pot laws

By Gene Johnson Associated Press Tue Mar 26, 2013 9:26 AM

TACOMA, Wash. — John Connelly leaned forward on his barstool, set his lips against a clear glass pipe and inhaled a white cloud of marijuana vapor.

A handful of people milled around him. Three young women stood behind the bar, ready to assist with the preparation of the bongs, as the strains of a blues band playing downstairs sounded faintly off the exposed brick walls.

“It feels so comfortable in here,” said Connelly, 33. “It’s just a great social aspect.”

Welcome to the Stonegate — puns welcome. It’s one of a tiny number of bars, cafes and private clubs catering to the stoner class in Washington and Colorado since voters last fall made them the first states to legalize marijuana for adults over 21.

Both states bar the public use of marijuana — which typically would include bars and restaurants — and most bars are steering clear of allowing pot use at least until officials come up with rules for the new weed industry.

But a few have been testing the boundaries of what’s allowed in hopes of drumming up business and making a political statement.

“I’ve been running a bar a few years now, and people would always go outside around the corner, into the shadows, to smoke up,” said Jeff Call, the Stonegate’s owner. “People shouldn’t have to hide. There’s no rules yet, but I’m trying to do this thoughtfully and responsibly.”

Washington’s law bans pot distribution by anyone but a licensed seller — and no such licenses will be issued until the end of the year at the earliest. There’s also a statewide smoking ban that prohibits smoking where people work.

So the establishments are trying various strategies to allow on-site consumption.

Frankie’s Sports Bar and Grill in Olympia is less than a mile from the headquarters of the Washington State Liquor Control Board, where officials are writing rules for the pot industry. It allows members of its private smoking room to use tobacco or marijuana.

The owner, Frankie Schnarr, said his revenue has jumped by nearly half since he started allowing pot smoking in December.

In Denver, Club 64 — named after Colorado’s law, Amendment 64 — charges a $30 yearly membership for the privilege of getting high in a private social setting. Members receive emails alerting them to the locations of club “meetings,” like a recent St. Patrick’s Day party hosted by a local bar, featuring marijuana-infused green beer.

Club 64 owner Robert Corry, an attorney, wants to open a bar where he can welcome members on a daily basis.

“A marijuana club is exactly what the voters wanted,” Corry said. “Colorado voters knew exactly what we were doing.”

The Front Tea & Art Shop in Lafayette, about 20 miles north of Denver, offered “cannabis-friendly” evenings six nights a week at which customers over 21 were allowed to bring their own pot.

Owner Veronica Carpio said the cafe attracted 25 people a day — until last month, when Lafayette declared a moratorium on pot use at businesses. She’s suing, arguing the city overstepped its authority.

Anyone who wanders up the stairs to the Stonegate’s second-floor smoking lounge is charged a nominal fee — $1 a day to $20 a year — to become a member of the private club. To evade the smoking ban, there’s no smoking allowed — only “vaporizing,” a method that involves heating the marijuana without burning it.

Call provides space in the lounge — an L-shaped bar of blond wood, painted with portraits of Keith Richards, Stevie Ray Vaughn and other rock heroes — to the proprietor of a local medical marijuana dispensary.

People who don’t have a medical authorization have to bring their own pot, then rent a vaporizer — $10 by the half-hour — or pay to have one prepared for them. For $5, those who do have an authorization are offered various preparations of “shatter” — a hardened oil of powerful marijuana extract.

Call opened his rum-and-pizza joint a few years ago in a brick building along a formerly seedy stretch of shops, bars and restaurants. The second floor had recently been operated as a brothel, he said.

On a recent Friday night, a gentle scent of fresh marijuana filled the room. At one table, a handful of 20-somethings inhaled deeply from a rubber hose attached to a rented vaporizer, a black box that toasted the cannabis to 375 degrees.

Those who wanted a more powerful dose grabbed a seat at the bar, where Jenae DeCampo, a 21-year-old in a black tube-top, pulled out a small blowtorch.

DeCampo held the hissing flame to the metal stem of a clear glass bong until the metal glowed orange. With a wand, she picked up a small piece of what looked like amber — a chunk of potent, hardened marijuana oil — and rubbed it on the scorching metal.

A white cloud filled the pipe, bubbled through the water at the bottom and rushed into Connelly’s lungs.

“A lot of people are shocked by what we’re doing because it’s so uncommon,” DeCampo said. “I like being part of something that could possibly be big.”

Tacoma’s code enforcement staff is reviewing the Stonegate’s operation, a city spokeswoman said.

Justin Nordhorn, the state liquor board’s chief of enforcement, has some concerns about bars that allow pot use. Most importantly, he said, is that marijuana can compound alcohol’s intoxicating effects, meaning people might be even more dangerous when driving.

He also doubted whether the “private club” aspect of the establishments would keep them out of trouble. A truly private club that serves alcohol — say, an Elks Lodge — would have to have a liquor license specific to private clubs, and members of the public couldn’t be allowed in.

For now, Nordhorn noted, there is a loophole in the state board’s ability to block bars from allowing pot use. Its rules require bars to address on-site criminal violations, but public use of marijuana is only a civil infraction — meaning officials can’t necessarily punish bars that let people partake, even if police could come in and write tickets to toking customers.

That’s something the board could address as it makes rules for the new pot industry.

For now, Call’s goal is to get more people into the bar — people who will get hungry and order pizzas.

“People are just smiling and friendly and happy,” Call said. “I just really like the feeling you get when you’re up here.”

Arizona National Guard reins in whistle-blowers

Source

Arizona National Guard reins in whistle-blowers

By Dennis Wagner The Republic | azcentral.com Tue Mar 26, 2013 11:27 PM

Amid an investigation of corrupt conduct in the Arizona National Guard, soldiers and airmen have been issued strict ethics guidelines that include restrictions on whistle-blower disclosure of agency information.

The “Code of Ethical Conduct” was published earlier this year by Maj. Gen. Hugo Salazar during the early stages of an independent review of Guard discipline. That review was prompted by an Arizona Republic investigation raising ethical and leadership questions.

Matthew Benson, Gov. Jan Brewer’s spokesman, said the findings from that review are expected within two weeks.

The new ethics code, in a section subtitled “Protection of Agency Records and Information,” tells Guard members that “only designated individuals” may speak out.

Accompanying guidelines warn that “any release of agency information to the public or media must go through either the Public Affairs Office or the Staff Judge Advocate’s Office.”

The new code was issued Jan. 15 to all members of the Arizona Department of Emergency and Military Affairs, which includes the Guard and the state Division of Emergency Management. It was accompanied by a letter from Salazar urging personnel to conduct themselves with honor and integrity — “sustaining a place where we are all proud to serve.”

The code advises Guard personnel that they must report alleged misconduct to commanders and stresses a “zero-tolerance policy toward reprisal” against whistle-blowers.

However, guidelines protect whistle-blowers only for communications to members of Congress or within armed-forces channels. Revelations to watchdog organizations or media are not covered.

The Republic’s ongoing reporting on corruption has been based largely on information from dozens of Arizona Guard members who say that the chain of command fails to combat wrongdoing and that complainants frequently are subject to retaliation.

They also say reports filed with the federal inspector general, the Arizona Governor’s Office, the National Guard Bureau and members of Congress are typically referred back to Arizona Guard command. Many of the soldiers and airmen provided documentation for those assertions.

Experts on law and ethics said the new policy is confusing because it does not define “agency information” and therefore may be perceived as a free-speech violation.

“To the degree that there’s a mandate and you can’t talk to the press, that could be problematic,” said Kathleen Clark, a law professor at Washington University in St. Louis who teaches and writes about whistle-blowing.

Tom Devine, legal director for the non-profit Government Accountability Project, which operates whistleblower.org, said Guardsmen are a hybrid of state and federal military, with the legal rights of neither.

“National Guards have been in a unique loophole to all whistle-blower protections,” Devine said. “They end up with the worst of all possible worlds.”

Richard Moberly, associate dean and a law professor at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln, said military organizations understandably require extra security, but that makes transparency and oversight problematic.

“There’s more reason for secrecy,” he said. “Of course, that allows for the ability to cover up.”

Moberly said military systems falter when personnel feel compelled to go outside the agency because a leadership culture is perceived as corrupt.

“Here’s where whistle-blower protections fail,” he added. “If the highest people in an organization allow misconduct to continue, or if you have a culture of closing ranks and the whistle-blower becomes an outlier because they question authority.”

Salazar, the state’s top military officer, has declined to comment to The Republic since October, when a series of articles exposed widespread criminal conduct, retaliation and lax discipline in a state Guard with about 8,000 personnel.

The series described repeated incidents of sexual abuse of high-school cadets, recruiting fraud, drunken driving, fraternization, assaults, embezzlement, cronyism and reprisal against those who reported misconduct.

Salazar previously acknowledged that the recruiting command had become corrupt but said misconduct, lax discipline standards and other leadership failures were addressed. He stressed the integrity of most Guard members and denied the existence of a rogue environment.

In November, Brewer assigned Maj. Gen. Ricky Adams to conduct a “full, fair and independent review.” An Arizona Guard spokesman said in mid-January that Adams had completed his interviews and was expected to submit an investigative report by month’s end. Since then, however, numerous officers and enlisted soldiers have reported additional interviews conducted by Adams’ staff. Adams declined to comment.

The Arizona review coincides with a national scandal involving sexual abuse and harassment in the military. Reaction to that scandal has included Senate hearings two weeks ago and an ongoing investigation of rapes at Lackland Air Force Base in Texas.

The Defense Department has estimated that there are 19,000 sexual-abuse incidents annually in the military, with one perpetrator in 100 held accountable.

Commanders from all military branches testified about reforms instituted to combat sexual misconduct. But some U.S. senators, troubled by a permissive atmosphere, have advocated changes in the way rapes are investigated, including possible civilian prosecutors and oversight.

Brewer has previously stressed that the review of Arizona’s Guard would be independent.

Maj. Gen. Adams is a member of the Oklahoma National Guard who works in his civilian life as an administrator with Oklahoma’s Department of Public Safety. He also serves as deputy commanding general with the Army Training and Doctrine Command in Virginia, which provides leadership instruction for soldiers.

Adams is working in Arizona through the National Guard Bureau, an administrative agency also based in Virginia.

Like Salazar, Adams ascended through artillery commands. E-mails obtained by The Republic show that when Adams first contacted Salazar about conducting the inquiry, his salutation read, “Hello, Hugo!”

Those e-mails also indicate that the Arizona Guard attempted to conduct an online survey during the past few months, asking soldiers and airmen to evaluate morale, leadership, integrity and stress.

Results have not been released. Records indicate the poll could be flawed if personnel chose to submit multiple entries.

Since the newspaper series was published in October, numerous soldiers and airmen have come forward with additional examples of misconduct and cover-ups.

The Republic sought documentation for many of those incidents under Arizona’s Public Records Law. In response, the Guard terminated a policy of releasing investigative files.

Legal advisers for the state agency announced that investigative records must be obtained under federal law, via the Freedom of Information Act. To date, the U.S. Army, National Guard Bureau, Air Force and Arizona Guard have not provided investigative materials.

Military documents obtained independently by The Republic show that Arizona Guard problems include numerous cases of recruiting fraud, part of a problem found to be epidemic in the military.

The Washington Post reported last year that about 1,700 recruiters were under investigation nationwide. Guard officials declined to comment or provide records on Arizona cases.

The Republic also sought an interview with Brewer and, in a letter, asked that she direct the Guard to provide investigative files as required by state law. Benson said the governor would not respond.

Phoenix organizing 3 gun buyback events in May

Phoenix organizing 3 gun buyback events in May

By Amy B Wang and Nicole Barrett The Republic | azcentral.com Tue Mar 26, 2013 11:06 PM

Amid criticism of the effectiveness of gun-buyback programs, Phoenix officials on Tuesday pushed forward with a plan for the largest gun buyback in Arizona history in May.

A $100,000 anonymous donation will fund the program, a partnership between Phoenix police and the non-profit Arizonans for Gun Safety.

Those who turn in guns will receive gift cards, likely to supermarkets or electronics stores — $100 cards for handguns, shotguns and rifles; $200 cards for assault weapons. Participants will receive $10 to $25 cards for high-capacity magazines that accompany a weapon.

The program will distribute free gun locks, along with lessons on how to store guns safely.

Organizers hope the buyback will not only give residents a safe way to get rid of unwanted firearms but also improve home gun safety, said Hildy Saizow, president of Arizonans for Gun Safety.

“Both of these goals are important, if not critical, to public safety,” Saizow said. “This is how we can actually save lives.”

Gun buybacks aren’t new. Cities, including Phoenix, have run similar programs for years. Law-enforcement agencies across the nation hosted gun-buyback events following December’s mass shooting in Connecticut.

Mayor Greg Stanton announced the program in his State of the City speech in February, drawing reaction from both gun-rights groups and those who supported the plan.

“(Buybacks) make people feel good, but they do nothing to reduce violence on the street,” said Joe Clure, president of the Phoenix Law Enforcement Association. “The reality of the matter is gun buybacks are doing zero percent for public safety.”

Researchers who have evaluated gun-control strategies say buybacks, despite their popularity, are among the least-effective ways to reduce gun violence. They say targeted police patrols, intervention efforts with known criminals and, to a lesser extent, tougher gun laws all work better than buybacks.

“They make for good photo images,” said Michael Scott, director of the Center for Problem-Oriented Policing, based at the University of Wisconsin’s law school. “But gun-buyback programs recover such a small percentage of guns that it’s not likely to make much impact.”

The biggest weakness of buybacks, he said, is the firearms they usually collect are insignificant when measured against the arsenal in the hands of American citizens. The government estimates there are more than 310 million guns in America today, nearly enough to arm every man, woman and child in the country.

Scott said buyback programs tend to attract the people least likely to commit crimes and to retrieve guns least likely to be used in crimes. Violent criminals steer clear of buyback programs unless they’re trying to make some quick cash by selling a weapon they don’t want anymore, he said.

Phoenix police held a gun buyback in December 2011 and collected 207 guns. A buyback in Tucson in January collected about 200 firearms, many of them old or inoperable, in exchange for about $10,000 worth of gift cards. A few hundred feet away, gun dealers offered cash for guns in good enough condition to resell.

Phoenix officials acknowledged that a buyback was unlikely to dramatically decrease gun deaths, but said such a program was an important service for residents to safely dispose of unwanted firearms “with no questions asked.”

“We’re not naive about what a gun buyback is going to do to the crime rate, but we do believe that this a very positive thing for the future of our city,” Stanton said.

Phoenix Police Chief Daniel V. Garcia said gun buybacks “may not reduce crime as a whole, but it’s one of the tools in the toolbox that we can use.”

When someone turns in an unwanted gun, Garcia said, “that citizen is making a decision of what the future of that weapon will be.”

Police will run the guns’ information through a database. Those lost or stolen will be returned to their owners. Police will keep others tied to a crime or that have historical value.

All other guns will be destroyed, an approach criticized by gun-rights groups. A state law that took effect in August was designed to prohibit police agencies from destroying confiscated weapons, but Garcia said the law does not apply to voluntary buybacks.

According to Arizonans for Gun Safety, there are about 900 gun deaths in Arizona each year, and 60 to 70 percent are accidents or suicides, Saizow said.

The program, along with the distribution of free gun locks, seeks to reduce the risk of those incidents, she said.

Amy B Wang is a Republic reporter; Nicole Barrett is a contributor. Cincinnati Enquirer reporter Dan Horn also contributed to this article.

A friendly reminder that your taxes are due next month

Wall Street sees opportunity in marijuana

Wall Street sees opportunity in marijuana

By Andrew Tangel, Los Angeles Times

March 23, 2013, 8:00 a.m.

BELVIDERE, N.J. — Amid the whir of fans and the glow of soft white light, workers tended to bright green seedlings sprouting in a giant greenhouse.

Located about an hour's drive from Manhattan in the hills of northwestern New Jersey, the facility produces basil, chives, oregano and other herbs that are sold in grocery stores around New York City.

But if Ken VandeVrede has his way the facility will one day be growing a much more valuable plant: marijuana.

VandeVrede is chief operating officer at Terra Tech, a hydroponic equipment maker based in Irvine. The small company wants to double the five-acre New Jersey greenhouse operation. The aim is one day to supply the exploding U.S. medical marijuana trade and to prepare in the event that recreational marijuana ever becomes legal nationwide.

"We can scale this thing very, very quickly," said VandeVrede, clad in blue jeans and a pumpkin-colored sweater as he surveyed his indoor fields of produce and flowers. "When hemp and cannabis become legal, we're ready to rock and roll."

To do it, Terra Tech needs to raise $2 million. And like a number of small businesses in the burgeoning U.S. cannabis industry, it's trying to enlist Wall Street's help. Business owners have been pitching their ideas to potential investors, coming to New York in some cases to meet with would-be financiers.

Wall Street has good reason to smell potential profits.

Washington, D.C., and 18 states, including California, have already legalized medical marijuana; there are formal measures pending in 10 additional states, according to the National Cannabis Industry Assn.

Colorado and Washington legalized recreational marijuana use in November. In addition, a measure allowing "adult use" of pot has been proposed in Maryland, according to the association's tally. Various bills to legalize marijuana and hemp have been proposed in Congress too.

Although pot remains contraband under federal law, some entrepreneurs see marijuana heading down the same path as Prohibition, which banned the manufacture, transportation and sale of alcohol from 1920 until it was repealed in 1933.

"More and more people see the inevitability," said Brendan Kennedy, chief executive of the Seattle private equity firm Privateer Holdings, which targets cannabis-focused start-ups. "They see that the Berlin Wall of cannabis prohibition is going to come down."

Privateer is raising $7 million to acquire small companies that have a hand in the trade but don't grow or distribute marijuana. Its first acquisition: Leafly, a Yelp-style online rating site in Seattle for dispensaries and varying strains of marijuana.

With pot still federally outlawed, others are making similar bets — funding firms that supply equipment or ancillary services while steering clear of marijuana farming and sales.

Take Lazarus Investment Partners, a $60-million hedge fund in Denver, for example. One of Lazarus' investments is in AeroGrow International Inc., a maker of hydroponic kitchen appliances geared toward growing herbs, lettuce and tomatoes.

Lazarus, which owns 15% of AeroGrow's shares, has suggested that the company tweak its products to accommodate taller plants, including marijuana, said Justin Borus, the fund's managing partner.

"We want to be selling the bluejeans to the gold miners," Borus said. "We don't want to take a bet on which state is going to get legalized and which dispensary is going to succeed, or [which] cannabis growers are going to be successful. We want to just make a bet on overall legalization."

In California, MedBox, a West Hollywood maker of automated dispensing machines for doctors' offices, pharmacies and pot dispensaries, is on the hunt for funding.

Vincent Mehdizadeh, MedBox's founder, said the company is actively exploring raising $20 million in equity to boost staffing and fund research and development, acquisitions and marketing.

Mehdizadeh said he's seen a "major spike" in interest from potential financiers looking to invest in the small company since Colorado and Washington legalized recreational pot use last year.

"Everybody's loosening up a lot because they realize the momentum has shifted and the financial world is going to have to make room for this industry," he said. "Wall Street and investment banks are going to have to come along for the ride, eventually."

Derek Peterson, president and chief executive of Terra Tech, is working to get his company's shares listed on a stock exchange by the end of the year. The company may try for NYSE MKT, which was formerly known as the American Stock Exchange and is geared toward smaller companies, or perhaps the Nasdaq Stock Market, he said.

"The stodgier Wall Street types are starting to realize there's money to be made here," said Peterson, who worked in wealth management at Wachovia Securities and Morgan Stanley Smith Barney.

The company has taken steps to get the word out to investors. It tapped Midtown Partners, a small New York boutique investment bank, to help it explore financing options as it planned the New Jersey greenhouse expansion. Terra Tech is merging with the farm's owner, NB Plants, and retail gardening center and nursery. Both are owned by VandeVrede's family.

Initially, the vast majority of Terra Tech's revenue will come from cultivating fresh herbs and flowers from the New Jersey farm, with the rest coming from equipment sales. The idea is to first feed urban consumers' growing appetite for pesticide-free produce, then add pot or hemp when the legal climate is right.

"There is this huge demand for organic food," said Prakash Mandgi, Midtown Partners' director of investment banking. "Marijuana cultivation, in my opinion, is a potential driver in the future, but it's so tied to government rule and regulations.... Federally it's illegal."

Estimates for the marijuana industry's size range widely, since much of the trade remains on the black market. Bloomberg Industries recently pegged it at $35billion to $45 billion.

Still, Wall Street is by no means opening the floodgates of capital.

Companies in this space are still quite tiny, not to mention risky, compared with large corporations trading on the New York Stock Exchange or the Nasdaq.

Moreover, Wall Street firms face a significant disincentive to investing in the industry: federal law. Growing and distributing marijuana can still lead to raids by federal agents — not to mention prison time and huge fines.

Major banks have come under intense scrutiny by the federal government in recent years for violating laws aimed at preventing money-laundering. The British banking giant HSBC paid $1.9 billion to end a U.S. investigation into its role processing cash for drug cartels and customers in rogue nations.

Marijuana dispensary owners have complained of difficulty opening bank accounts, forcing them to operate in cash only.

"This is messy," said Dan Richman, a former federal prosecutor who handled narcotics cases and now teaches at Columbia Law School in New York. "This might be complex politically. It's not complex as a matter of federal criminal law."

Investors in businesses involved in growing or distributing cannabis could face civil forfeiture actions to seize their investments or other assets, Richman said.

"I would think the prospectus would have to say: 'The government might come and take all of your money and possibly go after you,'" Richman said.

Federal law may not deter all investors. After all, the government can choose what laws to strictly enforce, and it's unclear how the federal government will ultimately treat legalized recreational pot in Colorado and Washington.

Alan Valdes, a floor trader on the New York Stock Exchange, expects some of Wall Street's more adventurous investors to put up money for a project he's involved with called Diego Pellicer Inc.

The business idea is to open a dozen Starbucks-like high-end shops for pot in Colorado and Washington. Valdes said he and his partners might begin tapping investors — wealthy individuals, family-run funds — later this year.

"These are more mavericks — these are gunslingers," he said of potential investors. "The big houses are off the table right now."

andrew.tangel@latimes.com

Law-enforcement veterans join Arpaio recall

Law-enforcement veterans join Arpaio recall

By Michelle Ye Hee Lee The Republic | azcentral.com Thu Mar 28, 2013 12:14 AM

Several retired Valley law-enforcement officials have joined the recall effort against Sheriff Joe Arpaio, criticizing him for using what they consider scare tactics to raise money to fight the recall.

Respect Arizona is in the process of gathering signature petitions seeking to hold a recall election to oust Arpaio.

The group obtained a letter — signed by Arpaio and paid for by the Elect Sheriff Joe Arpaio campaign — that was e-mailed to conservative supporters urging financial donations to help fight the recall.

In the letter, Arpaio said the Valley’s public safety was at stake in the recall.

Without Arpaio, the letter said, those who would be in danger include single mothers whose children face “a rampant drug culture,” the hypothetical mother of a child killed by a drug dealer whom Arpaio is not able to keep in jail, and small-business owners whose livelihoods are threatened by illegal immigrants who have control over neighborhoods.

Respect Arizona released statements purported to have been provided by retired Phoenix Police Chief Jack Harris and retired Phoenix Assistant Police Chief Bill Louis, accusing Arpaio of misleading supporters by taking sole credit for community safety. Former U.S. Attorney for Arizona Paul Charlton and former Arizona Attorney General Terry Goddard were also quoted in the group’s statements.

“Arizona law enforcement will continue to fight crime and ensure public safety long after Mr. Arpaio leaves office,” Harris said in his statement.

Two other retired law-enforcement officials and former Phoenix Mayor Phil Gordon echoed those sentiments in person. During a Wednesday news conference, they called Arpaio’s fundraising letter disingenuous.

“Elected officials come and go, and the state moves on,” Gordon said.

Arpaio’s camp defended the statements in his letter.

Chad Willems, manager for the Elect Sheriff Joe Arpaio campaign, said there “would most certainly be consequences negatively impacting law enforcement” if Arpaio were recalled: Fewer illegal immigrants would be apprehended or turned over for deportation, and citizens would be less safe because crimes associated with illegal immigration could increase.

“If it doesn’t matter who the elected official is, then why do they want to remove Arpaio from office? They want him out of office precisely because of the way he runs his office, specifically as it relates to enforcing illegal immigration laws,” Willems said in an e-mail to The Arizona Republic.

Willems took a swipe at Respect Arizona and its dwindling finances, which the group’s leaders recently confirmed. He blamed the group for misleading the public, the same accusation the group lodged against Arpaio.

“It is ironic that the Respect Arizona petitioners are criticizing the sheriff for seeking financial donations when he has been made to do so to defend himself against the very recall effort they started, an effort that is waning, if not entirely dead,” Willems said in a statement.

Phoenix transgender restroom bill clears House committee

Source

Phoenix transgender restroom bill clears House committee

By Dustin Gardiner The Republic | azcentral.com Thu Mar 28, 2013 1:09 AM

A panel of Arizona state lawmakers voted late Wednesday to advance a bill aimed at rolling back a portion of the non-discrimination ordinance Phoenix leaders adopted last month.

Senate Bill 1045 would prohibit local governments from passing ordinances that could subject businesses to lawsuits or criminal penalties if they forbid a transgender person from using a restroom.

Bill sponsor Rep. John Kavanagh, R-Fountain Hills, said the measure is a response to Phoenix’s new city ordinance, which bans discrimination against gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender residents. The law applies to public accommodations such as stores, restaurants and hotels.

City attorneys have said the ordinance could extend to bathroom use in some cases. For instance, a person with male genitalia who identifies as a woman might have a discrimination claim if the facility bars that person from using the restroom, and vice versa.

“We’re simply saying that government has no business in this area,” Kavanagh said. “The store owners can work it out as they have always done.”

After more than two hours of emotional and contentious testimony from residents, the House Appropriations Committee voted 7-4 along party lines to advance the measure. SB 1045 now moves to the House Rules Committee before heading to the House floor.

Gay-rights advocates and transgender residents said the bill essentially gives business owners the right to discriminate against those who appear too masculine or feminine. They said it could create unintended consequences by broadly defining “gender identity or expression.”

Democrats on the committee called the bill an embarrassment to the state. They questioned which bathroom Republican lawmakers expect transgender residents to use in place of the one they identify with.

“You’ve all shown why this is a horrible idea,” Rep. Chad Campbell, D-Phoenix, told the audience. “I believe we have spent a lot of time and money discussing an issue that doesn’t have any merits.”

Dozens of residents filled the hearing room, with the vast majority of speakers arguing against the so-called bathroom bill. Several talked about the discrimination they’ve experienced trying to use public bathrooms.

Kavanagh said the bill is a matter of “civility,” not civil rights. He said Phoenix’s law, which is similar to ordinances in Tucson and Flagstaff, allows a person with male genitalia but who identifies as a woman to change clothes in the female locker room, potentially exposing himself.

After it was clear the bill had passed, the audience burst into outcries. Many opponents shouted “shame” as committee members began to clear the room.

The version of the proposal that passed the committee was a far cry from what Kavanagh originally proposed. He submitted it as a “strike everything” amendment to an existing bill, meaning it strikes out original language and uses its shell to advance a different proposal.

Kavanagh’s original proposal, which drew national media attention, would have made it a misdemeanor for a person to use a bathroom, locker room or dressing room that’s not designated for the sex listed on his or her birth certificate. Violators would have been guilty of disorderly conduct.

He said he changed his mind about the original bill after it drew criticism from transgender advocates across the country and some fellow lawmakers, who felt it unnecessarily extended the reach of state government into bathroom stalls.

Phoenix city leaders who sup ported the anti-discrimination ordinance did not attend the hearing. Councilman Tom Simplot has called Kavanagh’s efforts an extremest solution to “a problem that doesn’t exist.”

One local cop for every 270 people in Arizona???

Source

Phoenix police temporarily halt shooting practice, cite rising supply costs

By Cecilia Chan The Arizona Republic-12 News Breaking News Team Wed Mar 27, 2013 10:26 PM

Phoenix police are temporarily halting discretionary shooting practice because of rising cost and limited supply of ammunition.

Officers will no longer get 100 rounds of .40-caliber and .45-caliber ammunition each month and shoot on their own at the academy’s range, said police spokesman Trent Crump. All other firearms training and certifications will remain.

The Phoenix Law Enforcement Association, which represents 2,500 rank-and-file officers, said some officers struggle with shooting and need the extra practice and many go down to the range and take advantage of the monthly shooting.

“Any time you have a resource, a critical resource that is limited, reduced or taken away it does cause concern,” union Vice President Ken Crane said.

Crane said roughly 308 officers each month last year participated in the optional practice. Some officers participate because they enjoy shooting and others do it to keep up their required shooting skills, he said.

Every year officers must pass a firearms qualification, which includes earning a score of 84 percent with a duty handgun on an approved course.

Crane said some officers might have a hard time passing the certification and thus more might have to take department’s Skill Builder Program, which is mandated for officers who fail their firearms qualification.

“We want officers to maintain their level of efficiency when they are out on the street,” he said.

The department memo sent Monday cited budgetary issues, the increasing cost of ammunition, and the difficulty in getting ammunition in a timely basis for suspending the monthly practice. Crump said the ammunition cost was 20 percent higher.

Crump doesn’t know exactly when the department can resume the target shooting. He attributed the shortage on a back-order.

Crump said the department ordered a bulk shipment of practice rounds in May, which didn’t arrive in January as expected.

“It sounds like fall before we can expect it,” Crump said. “The firearms unit is trying to manage the ammunition we have to make sure we get through all the training, all the mandatory shooting required by AZ Post.”

The Arizona Peace Officer Standards and Training Board sets standards for training, recruitment and retention for more than 15,000 sworn peace officers and 9,000 correctional-service officers in the state.

Crump was unable to say how much money the department spends on practice rounds but that last year it spent $850,000 for all ammunition.

Crump said 1 million to 2 million practice rounds are fired each year.

Practice ammunition is cheaper and of less quality than that used while on duty, Crump said.

“We are being more frugal with the rounds we have because of the shortage,” he said.

Gilbert messy yard cops want to run drunks and dopers out of town???

Regulations weighed for ‘sober houses’ in Gilbert

By Parker Leavitt The Republic | azcentral.com Wed Mar 27, 2013 12:28 PM

Gilbert officials are weighing new regulations on “sober houses” that would require them to seek a special permit through a public process before opening their doors to people recovering from substance abuse.

The proposed code amendment stems from an apparent proliferation of the facilities, also referred to as halfway houses, and a series of neighborhood complaints related to disturbances, noise and an unfavorable perception of the group homes’ residents, Gilbert zoning administrator Mike Milillo said.

Sober houses provide a transitional facility for 10 to 15 residents adjusting from life in an institution to a “real-world” setting without supervision or caregivers. By living with a group, the residents can support one another in their efforts to abstain from drugs or alcohol before moving on to greater independence.

The concept is nothing new, but Gilbert’s Land Development Code does not address that type of use in residential neighborhoods. The town’s definition of a “family” allows for as many as five unrelated individuals living in a single household, but sober houses always include more, Milillo said.

Gilbert’s code does allow group homes for people with disabilities, but the sober houses differ in that they are not licensed by the state and do not provide care for residents, Milillo said.

Last year, town officials became aware of at least two sober houses operating in Gilbert, though one has since shut down, Milillo said. Rather than take action against the other facility, town officials are working with the Small Business Alliance through the town’s Independent Regulatory Advocate program to provide a legal way for the house to operate.

Town officials must consider federal law while crafting the new regulations, because the Fair Housing Amendments Act of 1988 includes substance addiction as a disability and requires municipalities to make a “reasonable accommodation” for those needing to live in a community residence.

“This provision does mean that a city is required to bend its zoning rules,” said a report from the American Planning Association.

Gilbert officials this year began meeting internally to examine how other communities regulate sober houses, Milillo said. None of the Valley communities they looked at had a good model, so town administrators turned to Newport Beach, Calif.

Eventually, the town decided on a conditional-use permit process to allow prospective sober houses to apply for permission to operate. That will allow for neighborhood involvement and a Planning Commission decision that can be appealed to the Town Council.

“There are neighborhood impacts, potentially,” Milillo said. “You want to make sure whatever you put in your neighborhoods is compatible with the primary uses, which are other residences.”

The sober houses could create issues with traffic, parking and substance abuse because there are no caregivers, Milillo said.

Officials hope to mitigate those impacts by creating separation requirements for the facilities. Town staff would track the location of each approved sober house to ensure a new one could not open within a certain radius of another, Milillo said.

While the language of the code amendment has not been finalized, the town likely will limit the number of occupants in a sober house using a formula based on bedroom square footage, Milillo said. A Planning Commission hearing is tentatively April 3.

“We don’t really think that anyone wants to have a house where people are sleeping all over the living room, where there aren’t enough bathrooms and it basically turns into a slum dwelling,” Milillo said. “That’s contrary to everything we try to do in our neighborhoods with our zoning regulations.”

The housing bust and ensuing flood of foreclosures appear to have contributed to a rise in the number of sober houses as investors look to find a way to make their properties more productive, Milillo said.

“Obviously there’s some demand out there, some sort of population of recovering substance abusers, so they saw an opportunity here,” Milillo said.

Are the DEA and FBI listening to your cell phone calls????

Source

Little-known surveillance tool raises concerns by judges, privacy activists

By Ellen Nakashima, Published: March 27

Federal investigators in Northern California routinely used a sophisticated surveillance system to scoop up data from cellphones and other wireless devices in an effort to track criminal suspects — but failed to detail the practice to judges authorizing the probes.

The practice was disclosed Wednesday in documents obtained under the Freedom of Information Act by the American Civil Liberties Union of Northern California — in a glimpse into a technology that federal agents rarely discuss publicly.

The investigations used a device known as a StingRay, which simulates a cellphone tower and enables agents to collect the serial numbers of individual cellphones and then locate them. Although law enforcement officials can employ StingRays and similar devices to locate suspects, privacy groups and some judges have raised concerns that the technology is so invasive — in some cases effectively penetrating the walls of homes — that its use should require a warrant.

The issues, judges and activists say, are twofold: whether federal agents are informing courts when seeking permission to monitor suspects, and whether they are providing enough evidence to justify the use of a tool that sweeps up data not only from a suspect’s wireless device but also from those of bystanders in the vicinity.

In Northern California, according to the newly disclosed documents, judges expressed concerns about the invasive nature of the technology.

“It has recently come to my attention that many agents are still using [StingRay] technology in the field although the [surveillance] application does not make that explicit,” Miranda Kane, then chief of the criminal division of the Northern California U.S. attorney’s office, said in a May 2011 e-mail obtained by the ACLU.

As a result of that, she wrote, “effective immediately, all . . . applications and proposed orders must be reviewed by your line supervisor before they are submitted to a magistrate judge.” [I suspect a "line supervisor" will rubber stamp the request with no questions asked, just like judges usually rubber stamp them with no questions asked]

The Justice Department has generally maintained that a warrant based on probable cause is not needed to use a “cell-site simulator” because the government is not employing them to intercept conversations, former officials said. But some judges around the country have disagreed and have insisted investigators first obtain a warrant.

“It’s unsettled territory,” said one U.S. law enforcement official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak for the record. [Unsettled territory my *ss, the Fourth Amendment has been around since the 1700's]

In a statement, Christopher Allen, a spokesman for the FBI, said the bureau advises field offices to “work closely with the relevant U.S. Attorney’s Office to adhere to the legal requirements” of their respective districts.

One of the problems is there is “scant law” addressing the issue of cell-site simulators, said Brian L. Owsley, a federal magistrate judge in the Southern District of Texas, who in June wrote a rare public ruling on the issue. He denied an application to use a StingRay, in large part because he felt the investigating agent failed to explain the technology or how it would be used to gather the target’s cellphone number.

Moreover, the government did not explain what it would do with the numbers and other data “concerning seemingly innocent cell phone users” that were also picked up.

“Neither the special agent nor the assistant United States attorney appeared to understand the technology very well,” Owsley wrote. “At a minimum, they seemed to have some discomfort in trying to explain it.” [I suspect they didn't WANT to explain it and risk the judge not issuing their search warrant]

At a recent conference on cellphone tracking issues at Yale University, Owsley said he thought that “there are magistrate judges around the country that are getting these requests and not realizing what these requests are,” in some cases perhaps because the agents are not clear about their intent to use the technology. [Again, I suspect the agents intentionally don't explain the technology, because they don't want to risk a just refusing to rubber stamp the search warrant]

“By withholding information about this technology from courts in applications for electronic surveillance orders, the federal government is essentially seeking to write its own search warrants,” said Linda Lye, a staff attorney for the ACLU of Northern California.

Judges “need the opportunity to require privacy safeguards, such as rules on how to handle the data of innocent people that may be captured by the devices as well,” she said.Lye will be arguing the issue on Thursday in a federal case in Arizona, in support of a defendant charged with tax fraud and identity theft. Daniel Rigmaiden, known as “the Hacker” to acquaintances and federal agents, was tracked in part with the use of a StingRay. He has alleged that investigators did not seek a court’s approval to use the technology.

“The main concern we have in Rigmaiden is the government was not being forthright with the magistrate when it was seeking to use this device,” said Lye, whose organization is one of several that have filed an amicus brief in the case.

The newly disclosed documents suggest that “Rigmaiden was not an isolated case,” she said.

The government said it obtained a warrant to track Rigmaiden, but the ACLU is arguing that the government did not present key information about the surveillance device to the magistrate, rendering the warrant invalid.

Chris Soghoian, the ACLU’s principal technologist, said cell-site simulators are being used by local, state and federal authorities.

“No matter how the StingRay is used — to identify, locate or intercept — they always send signals through the walls of homes,” which should trigger a warrant requirement, Soghoian said. “The signals always penetrate a space protected by the Fourth Amendment.”

Another person framed for murder with junk science??? Probably!!!

Texas inmate gets new trial amid state arson review

By Molly Hennessy-Fiske

March 28, 2013, 6:30 a.m.

HOUSTON -- A Texas man convicted of setting a fire that killed his two stepsons has been granted a new trial by the state's highest criminal court amid a statewide review of questionable arson convictions.

Ed Graf's case is one of several arson cases under review by the Lubbock-based Innocence Project of Texas and a new state fire panel reexamining arson investigations that may have been compromised by faulty scientific conclusions. The unprecedented investigation of closed cases was recommended by the state’s Forensic Science Commission.

Graf, 60, is serving a life sentence for setting the fire that killed his stepsons Joby, 9, and Jason, 8, in a backyard shed at their home outside Waco, Texas, in 1986.

The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals ordered Graf's conviction set aside Wednesday, noting in its order: "False expert testimony at [Graf's] trial violated his due process rights.”

The court declined to issue a finding of actual innocence, sending his case back to district court in Waco, where Graf can request release on bond pending a new trial.

Innocence Project officials have said they hope the statewide arson review will help overturn wrongful convictions that relied on so-called “junk science” -- discredited approaches of determining whether fires were intentionally set.

The state fire panel was convened after a report last year by the Forensic Science Commission found that unreliable science had helped lead to Cameron Todd Willingham's conviction for murder by arson in 1992. Willingham, 24, had been convicted in the deaths of his three children in a 1991 fire at their home in Corsicana, about 55 miles south of Dallas. He was executed in 2004.

Innocence Project staff found about 30 problematic arson cases they wanted to investigate and brought them to the six-member state fire panel when it met for the first time in January.

Fire panel members plan to contact local officials and gather more information about the cases before their meeting next month, the state fire marshal has told The Times. They plan to draft reports of their findings in time for their meeting in June.

molly.hennessy-fiske@latimes.com

Phoenix’s mayor has shed his scruples in record time

Source

Phoenix’s mayor has shed his scruples in record time

Wed Mar 27, 2013 7:50 PM

The most remarkable thing about Mayor Greg Stanton is the arrogant and skillful ease he has displayed in becoming the consummate politician.

For most politicos who feed at the public trough, it takes years to morph into a weather-vane leader whose words and scruples become meaningless and totally self-serving. Stanton has accomplished the transformation in record time. He has cast off his reptilian skin in less than a year regarding his position on the city food tax.

He once filled our hopes, as a man of the people, by the people and for the people, with lofty promises, but sadly, he’s nothing but handshakes, smiles and empty words.

Remember how bold he was in the closing days of his campaign, grabbing headlines and votes, with his “I will repeal the tax!”?

Not so today.

If the tax is repealed, he said, you Phoenix citizens will be punished with less police and fire protection, closed parks and libraries and disgruntled city employees.

In poker, a four-flusher is one who bets with an empty hand.

In politics, it’s one who bets with empty words! How disappointing! How predictable!

Dale Douglas
Phoenix

Maricopa County Community Colleges vote to create a jobs program for cops

I put a copy of that article following this article.

Source

Maricopa County Community Colleges' tuition increase OK’d

By Mary Beth Faller The Republic | azcentral.com Wed Mar 27, 2013 10:39 PM

With drastic declines in state funding, the Maricopa County Community College District’s tuition increase seemed nearly inevitable.

There was almost no opposition when the district governing board voted to raise tuition $5 per credit Tuesday night, a 6.5 percent increase.

Students at the 10 colleges will pay $81 per credit starting in the fall.

But it’s likely that the district’s vote to raise property taxes in May will draw more attention. It would be the third tax increase in five years.

Both increases together would raise about $20 million in revenue for the district. That amount would partially offset the decrease in funding provided by the state, which dropped from $45 million in 2010 to a projected $8 million for 2013-14.

Only one student group, Associated Students of Mesa Community College, spoke on the tuition increase Tuesday, and the president, Andrew Kuhn, said student opinion seemed to be divided.

“We do agree that tuition increases as a continuous source of income is not an option,” he said. “We call for the state Legislature to align itself with Arizona’s constitutional values of keeping education as free as possible.”

Chancellor Rufus Glasper said state funding now accounts for only 1 percent of all revenue for the community colleges. “We probably will not get any material increase in state aid for the next three or four years,” he said. “The state does not have the wherewithal.”

He said the district’s new “corporate college,” which will launch this summer for workforce training, could be a revenue source for the district but not for a while.

The tuition and potential tax increase would pay for initiatives to improve the colleges’ graduation rates and transfers to universities, as well as technology updates, additional full-time professors and more police officers.

Glasper said the colleges committed themselves to doubling the number of degrees awarded by 2020, and a report last fall established for the first time definitive metrics for measuring student success.

The district’s statistics showed that the percentage of students who completed degrees within six years has been steady at about 20 percent for several years.

“We need sustainable funding to make the changes that are necessary,” he said. “Our education institutions have been left to fend for themselves.”

Board member Dana Saar cited the report in voting against the increase. “My concern is that we’re not identifying what return the students are going to get on that greater investment in their education,” he said. “We haven’t moved the bar far enough along to justify that increase in tuition.”

Saar was the only vote against the tuition hike. Board President Doyle Burke joined members Randolph Lumm and Ben Miranda in approving the tuition increase. Board member Debra Brimhall Pearson was absent. The board members said the colleges’ tuition was lower than the national average for two-year institutions.

After the increase, a full-year resident tuition at an MCCCD college will be $2,430, compared with a national average of $3,313. The rate also is much lower than tuition at Arizona State University, which has requested increasing the in-state annual tuition for incoming freshman to nearly $10,000 for the next school year, a 3 percent hike.

Here is a prior article on this tuition increase which clearly says it is a jobs program for the police at the Maricopa County Community Colleges.

A jobs program for MC Community College cops - Sounds like it!!!

A jobs program for MCCCD cops - Sounds like it!!!

Yes, this article sure sounds like they want to create a jobs program for Maricopa Community Colleges Police Officers.

The $5-per-credit hour tuition hike will cost students taking a full time load of 18 hours $90 a semester.

Who needs to pay $90 more a semester to hire police thugs to micromanage your lives???

Source

MCCCD weighs tuition hike to bolster campus security

By Mary Beth Faller The Republic | azcentral.com Fri Mar 22, 2013 10:43 PM

A tuition increase for students of Maricopa Community Colleges would pay for a fundamental change to the district’s security culture, from an uneven patchwork of guards and aides at the many campuses to a full staff of certified, armed officers.

The community-college district’s chief of police is seeking $2 million to hire 23 additional officers, a 50 percent increase in staffing for the district’s Department of Public Safety.

The governing board of the Maricopa County Community College District will vote on a $5-per-credit tuition increase on Tuesday. Students’ costs would increase from $76 per credit hour to $81 per credit hour for 2013-14. If approved, the tuition hike would generate an additional $12.5 million for the district.

Mikel Longman, the district’s chief of police, was hired last year to consolidate the 10 colleges’ public-safety units, which were independent, into one district department.

Staffing varies at the colleges, ranging from three to six officers on the main campuses. Some smaller satellite campuses have an officer, and some don’t. Longman’s plan would add one or two officers to each campus, and GateWay Community College in Phoenix would get four.

Currently, the ratio of certified police officers to students is 1 to 5,108, Longman said. The additional officers would reduce it to 1 to 3,405.

“It’s a basic assumption that when we’re open for business, we’ll have armed police officers,” he said.

Crime on the campuses is fairly low. According to the annual report for 2011, the most recent available, there were no murders, robberies or arsons at any of the colleges. Other districtwide statistics for 2011: four forcible sex assaults, five non-forcible sex assaults, 10 aggravated assaults, 19 burglaries, 21 motor-vehicle thefts, 17 drug arrests, six liquor arrests and two weapons violations.

There were 396 larcenies, which would be incidents such as phone and bike thefts, in 2011, an increase of about a third from two years before. No other crimes showed a notable increase from previous years.

Longman said his officers respond to about 90 percent of campus incidents, with the remainder handled by municipal police. The campuses and branches are in 12 police jurisdictions, and because there is no reporting system, the number, response time and type of incidents the municipal police respond to is unknown.

Earlier this month, the district awarded a $158,000 contract to establish a security records-management system that should be working by this summer.

Longman also wants to reduce reliance on the part-time security aides, who write parking tickets, monitor surveillance cameras and escort people after dark. He said the aides, who make about $9 or $10 an hour, are not reliable in showing up for shifts. There are also about 50 full-time security guards around the district.

“We give our keys to our kingdom to minimum-wage, minimally trained employees, and if something bad happens to our property, it hurts our ability to deliver education,” he told the governing board last month.

Besides requesting their second tuition increase in three years, the community colleges are seeking an increase in the property-tax levy, which would generate an additional $8.1 million. The vote on that will be in May.

The colleges want to add, in addition to police, 32 full-time professors. They also want to update technology and spend $5 million on two ongoing programs to improve efficiency in registration and financial aid and students’ graduation and transfer rates.

Andrew Kuhn, president of the Associated Students of Mesa Community College, said last week that his group is studying the tuition proposal and will likely draft a position before the vote Tuesday.

“The general consensus I’ve taken from most students is that they’re not in favor of it, partly because the last time, when the association was in favor of it, it was under the assumption that it wouldn’t happen for another five years,” he said.

Kuhn, 25, a business major, said the group acknowledges that funding from the state has decreased — from $45 million in 2010 to a projected $8 million for 2013-14.

Barry Vaughn, spokesman for the Maricopa Community Colleges Faculty Association, said his group also has not had time to take a position, but will meet Tuesday afternoon before the vote. He said that, beyond this tuition proposal, the faculty is worried about the spiraling costs of higher education in general.

“It’s going to undermine our ability to prepare the next generation of citizens in this country if we cannot get these rapid increases under control,” said Vaughn, who is a professor of philosophy and religious studies at Mesa Community College.

“Having said that, we are still going to be by far one of the least expensive options for higher education in Arizona, so we are still a bargain, relatively speaking.”

The governing board will meet at 6:30 p.m. Tuesday at the district office, 2411 W. 14th St., Tempe.

Phoenix Mayor Greg Stanton is a lying hypocrite?????

But Robert Robb is being polite about it and doesn't use those exact words.

Source

Reach Robert Robb at robert.robb@arizonarepublic.com or 602-444-8472.

Posted on March 28, 2013 4:45 pm by Robert Robb

Sanctimonious Phoenix food tax fight

The City of Phoenix hasn’t been especially profligate when it comes to spending. It wouldn’t give me heartburn if the temporary sales tax on food ran its course until its scheduled expiration in 2015.

Nevertheless, the city council fracas over its early expiration is highly revealing – about the political character of Phoenix’s new mayor, Greg Stanton; and about how city government in Phoenix remains very much an insiders’ game.

Stanton and city management are donning hair shirts and flaying themselves over how virtuous they have been in managing city finances through the recent recession. And, truth be told, Phoenix and other big governments around the Valley have managed through an extraordinarily rough fiscal storm rather well.

But that only tells part of the story. Before the recession, Phoenix did ramp up spending incontinently.

From 2003 to 2007, the city’s general fund budget grew, on average, nearly 9 percent a year. Then the recession hit, and the city basically has flat-lined spending. The general fund budget proposed by the city manager for Fiscal Year 2014 is only modestly higher than it was in 2007.

That’s the part the city stresses in trying to make the case to retain the temporary food tax. But, from a longer perspective, the story is different. If the city manager’s budget is adopted, city spending will have increased at a rate of more than 3 percent a year since 2003. That’s not giving drunken sailors any run for their money. But it’s hardly a starvation diet either.

The fiscal path taken by county government and other major Valley cities isn’t materially different than that taken by Phoenix. All rode the housing bubble and ramped up spending. After the recession hit, all admirably managed restraint with a minimum of disruption. Tempe and Glendale also adopted temporary sales tax increases to help cope.

The difference is that no other major Valley government is so sanctimonious about it.

Stanton wrote a column for the Arizona Republic making the case for not ending the temporary sales tax on food early. It begins with an unctuous recitation of commitments Stanton made “when I took office last year.” Unmentioned was the commitment that he made while running for the office: to eliminate the temporary sales tax on food early, no later than next month. [Translation he promised to cut the sales tax BEFORE he was mayor in an attempt to get people to vote for him. And it probably was a bold faced lie considering his current position on the tax.]

This was not a trifling aside; it was a major campaign plank for Stanton. While city revenues are running a bit behind estimates, in reality there has been no material change in the city’s financial situation since Stanton ran in part on shutting down the tax early.

Stanton’s a bright and informed guy. So, there’s only one possible conclusion: He was insincere when he made a big deal to voters about eliminating the tax early. He was just saying what he thought he had to say to get elected. [Again he seems to be saying Mayor Greg Stanton LIED and promised to cut the tax solely to get people to vote for him]

One of the issues in that campaign was whether city government had become too much of an insiders’ game, run too much for the benefit of city management, staff and favored constituencies.

The temporary sales tax on food was supposedly an emergency measure enacted because there were no other options to keep houses from burning down and crooks from running free. [That's lie is a universal lie crooked politicians tell us to get temporary taxes passed, and of course those temporary taxes almost always turn into permanent taxes as this 2 percent tax will.]

Phoenix city government, while practicing reasonable overall spending constraint, has acted in some respects inconsistent with the existence of a fiscal emergency requiring the imposition of a temporary food tax. Most city workers have continued to get decent raises. City Manager David Cavazos got a whopper.

In most cities, the politicians and senior managers would find it unseemly to give out, or accept, raises while asking voters to suck it up and pay more in taxes to get through a fiscal crunch. But not in Phoenix.

There are clearly ways to manage an early termination of the food tax without allowing homes to burn down or crooks to run free, if the will existed to do so. And the will would exist if Stanton had meant what he said during the campaign.

On the other hand, city spending remains relatively constrained even with the tax. But if the tax is kept, please at least spare us the sanctimony.

(column for 3.29.13)

Man accused of using fake penis for drug test

If our government masters had not made drugs illegal people would not be committing the silly victimless crime in this article.

Source

Man accused of using fake penis for drug test

Associated Press Thu Mar 28, 2013 5:07 PM

ST. CHARLES, Mo. — A man accused of using a prosthetic penis to try to pass a drug test is now facing charges in eastern Missouri.

Authorities allege that 34-year-old Sydney Levin was submitting a urine sample last week as part of his probation when an officer allegedly spotted him using a prosthetic known as a Whizzinator. The prosthetic is advertised as a discreet device that includes synthetic “medical grade urine.”

Levin, of Lake St. Louis, was charged last week with possessing a forging instrument, KMOV-TV reported. He was arrested and released after posting $25,000 bond, and pleaded not guilty on Monday.

Levin was on probation for possession of a controlled substance and felony stealing in 2009. Authorities said Levin’s probation required that he submit a urine sample as part of drug test.

Levin did not have a listed phone number. Court records show that he does not yet have an attorney.

In 2010, Gerald Willis of Los Angeles was sentenced to six months in federal prison for running a company that sold the Whizzinator to cheat on drug tests. Willis’ company disbanded, but the Whizzinator is still sold online as a sex toy. A message seeking comment Thursday from the company selling the device was not returned.

FBI Pursuing Real-Time Gmail Spying Powers

Source

FBI Pursuing Real-Time Gmail Spying Powers as “Top Priority” for 2013

By Ryan Gallagher

Posted Tuesday, March 26, 2013, at 4:58 PM

For now, law enforcement has trouble monitoring Gmail communications in real time

Despite the pervasiveness of law enforcement surveillance of digital communication, the FBI still has a difficult time monitoring Gmail, Google Voice, and Dropbox in real time. But that may change soon, because the bureau says it has made gaining more powers to wiretap all forms of Internet conversation and cloud storage a “top priority” this year.

Last week, during a talk for the American Bar Association in Washington, D.C., FBI general counsel Andrew Weissmann discussed some of the pressing surveillance and national security issues facing the bureau. He gave a few updates on the FBI’s efforts to address what it calls the “going dark” problem—how the rise in popularity of email and social networks has stifled its ability to monitor communications as they are being transmitted. It’s no secret that under the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, the feds can easily obtain archive copies of emails. When it comes to spying on emails or Gchat in real time, however, it’s a different story.

That’s because a 1994 surveillance law called the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act only allows the government to force Internet providers and phone companies to install surveillance equipment within their networks. But it doesn’t cover email, cloud services, or online chat providers like Skype. Weissmann said that the FBI wants the power to mandate real-time surveillance of everything from Dropbox and online games (“the chat feature in Scrabble”) to Gmail and Google Voice. “Those communications are being used for criminal conversations,” he said.

While it is true that CALEA can only be used to compel Internet and phone providers to build in surveillance capabilities into their networks, the feds do have some existing powers to request surveillance of other services. Authorities can use a “Title III” order under the “Wiretap Act” to ask email and online chat providers furnish the government with “technical assistance necessary to accomplish the interception.” However, the FBI claims this is not sufficient because mandating that providers help with “technical assistance” is not the same thing as forcing them to “effectuate” a wiretap. In 2011, then-FBI general counsel Valerie Caproni—Weissmann’s predecessor—stated that Title III orders did not provide the bureau with an "effective lever" to "encourage providers" to set up live surveillance quickly and efficiently. In other words, the FBI believes it doesn’t have enough power under current legislation to strong-arm companies into providing real-time wiretaps of communications.

Because Gmail is sent between a user’s computer and Google’s servers using SSL encryption, for instance, the FBI can’t intercept it as it is flowing across networks and relies on the company to provide it with access. Google spokesman Chris Gaither hinted that it is already possible for the company to set up live surveillance under some circumstances. “CALEA doesn't apply to Gmail but an order under the Wiretap Act may,” Gaither told me in an email. “At some point we may expand our transparency report to cover this topic in more depth, but until then I'm not able to provide additional information.”

Either way, the FBI is not happy with the current arrangement and is on a crusade for more surveillance authority. According to Weissmann, the bureau is working with “members of intelligence community” to craft a proposal for new Internet spy powers as “a top priority this year.” Citing security concerns, he declined to reveal any specifics. “It's a very hard thing to talk about publicly,” he said, though acknowledged that “it's something that there should be a public debate about.”

Arizona ruling on DUI test for pot appealed

Of course this pretty much proves the DUI laws are not about keeping us safe, but rather for raising revenue for the government.

Source

Arizona ruling on DUI test for pot appealed

Associated Press Sat Mar 30, 2013 8:00 AM

The Arizona Supreme Court is being asked to review a lower court’s ruling that marijuana smokers can be prosecuted for driving under the influence even when there is no evidence that they are actually high.

The Court of Appeals on Feb. 12 overturned a trial judge who said it doesn’t make sense to prosecute people with no evidence they’re under the influence.

At issue are the chemical compounds in marijuana that show up in blood and urine tests after people smoke pot.

The case stems from a motorist’s blood test. It revealed only a chemical compound that is found in the blood after another compound produced from ingesting marijuana breaks down.

The Supreme Court will receive additional legal briefs before deciding whether or not to hear the case.

Case against Horne not over; judge sets hearing

Source

Case against Horne not over; judge sets hearing

By Lindsey Collom The Republic | azcentral.com Fri Mar 29, 2013 10:49 PM

An administrative-law judge who recommended that the campaign-finance case against Arizona Attorney General Tom Horne and one of his top aides be dismissed on technical grounds has agreed to hold a hearing on the merits of the case.

In an order issued Friday, state Office of Administrative Hearings Judge Tammy Eigenheer said she will hear arguments May 7, a date originally set for an evidentiary hearing. The motion was quickly followed by responses from attorneys for Horne and Kathleen Winn, a campaign supporter who became a Horne staffer, imploring the judge to let her original decision stand.

Eigenheer’s order and the responses came hours after Maricopa County Attorney Bill Montgomery filed his response to Eigenheer’s March 19 recommendation to dismiss the matter because she believed the method used to prosecute Horne and Winn was inappropriate.

Eigenheer contends the secretary of state did not follow statutory protocol by referring the case to Montgomery for prosecution, rather than to the Attorney General’s Office.

Horne and Winn are accused of unlawfully coordinating an independent-expenditure committee during the 2010 election, when he was the Republican candidate for attorney general and she was chairwoman of Business Leaders for Arizona. Both have denied any wrongdoing.

Horne and Winn are fighting a civil compliance order Montgomery issued in October for the pair to revise their campaign-finance reports and refund about $400,000 in donations, or face three times that amount in penalties. Horne and Winn appealed to the Arizona Office of Administrative Hearings, an independent arbiter over decisions made by certain state agencies, boards and commissions.

According to Montgomery, a 14-month inquiry by the FBI and his office revealed that Horne collaborated with Winn’s committee to quickly raise more than $500,000 to run negative ads against his Democratic foe, Felecia Rotellini.

The Arizona Secretary of State’s Office found that there was reasonable cause to believe a campaign-finance violation had occurred, and it referred the case to Montgomery.

In his motion Friday, Montgomery stood by his argument that the attorney general was disqualified from reviewing or enforcing a case against himself, or referring it to an outside agency, the latter of which Eigenheer says Horne should have been given a chance to do.

Montgomery said he rejected Eigenheer’s dismissal recommendation and directed her to proceed with the May 7 hearing.

Winn’s attorney, Tim LaSota, said he was perplexed by Montgomery’s motion. “It’s like a runner being called out by the umpire and ordering the umpire to call him safe,” he said.

In his motion, La Sota suggested that if Montgomery wants Eigenheer to hear the case, he should first ask a Maricopa County Superior Court judge to determine whether he has jurisdiction to prosecute.

Horne’s attorney, Michael Kimerer, wrote in his motion that Montgomery “is illegally claiming to be both advocate and judge in this matter.”

Another attempt to flush Prop 203 down the toilet???

I know Prop 203 says driving while your stoned is still, DUI or DWI. But Prop 203 also says that medical marijuana users can not automatically be convicted simply because a drug test says they have marijuana in their body. Which is true for people who are not medical marijuana users.

This article seems to say that the government wants to flush Prop 203 down the toilet and say that medical marijuana patients are automatically guilty of DUI if they have Carboxy-THC in their body.

Source

Petition asks Arizona court whether someone who uses marijuana should be allowed to drive

Posted: Sunday, March 31, 2013 1:12 pm

By Howard Fischer, Capitol Media Services

In what would be a precedent-setting case, the state's high court was asked Friday to decide, in essence, whether someone who smokes marijuana -- even legally -- can ever drive in this state.

In a petition to the Arizona Supreme Court, the attorney for Hrach Shilgevorkyan does not deny that his client had at some point inhaled prior to his December 2010 arrest by a Maricopa County sheriff's deputy who had pulled him over for speeding. That was confirmed by a blood test which showed the evidence of Carboxy-THC, a metabolite of the drug.

But Michael Alarid III said this particular metabolite can remain in someone's system for up to a month after marijuana has been used. More to the point, he claims it is "inactive.''

And Alarid pointed out that the blood test found no evidence of tetrahyrocannabinol, or THC, the principal psychoactive ingredient in marijuana, as well as Hydroxy-THC, which is what THC breaks down into. State law clearly makes the presence of either chemical presumptive evidence of impairment.

Hanging in the balance is whether marijuana users in Arizona can be convicted of driving under the influence for some activity that has occurred weeks before.

The issue takes on even more importance because Arizona allows those with a doctor's recommendation to legally use the drug. While that does not grant anyone permission to drive while impaired, a Supreme Court ruling against Alarid could effectively preclude any of the state's nearly 38,000 registered medical marijuana users from driving at any point given the long-term presence of Carboxy-THC in their blood.

Alarid called that result "absurd,'' given the lack of evidence of impairment.

Central to the debate is the law the makes it illegal to drive where there is any drug defined in the criminal code or its metabolite in the person's body.

THC is on that list. And Hydroxy-THC is a metabolite.

Prosecutors argued the law includes all possible metabolites of THC. But a justice of the peace tossed the charges, a decision upheld by Maricopa County Superior Court Commissioner Myra Harris.

"This court has not been persuaded that the Legislature necessarily intended to include all possible derivatives of drugs -- particularly inactive end products that no longer affect an individual -- within the statutory scheme of controlling impaired drivers,'' Harris wrote. "Where, as here, there is no showing of a drug or metabolite that causes impairment, the driver should not be subjected to criminal penalties that can include up to 10 consecutive days in jail and assessments of over $1,000.''

Last month, however, the state Court of Appeals decided otherwise.

Judge Michael Brown, writing for the panel, said the laws on impaired driving "must be interpreted broadly to appropriately effectuate the legislative purpose and intent underpinning the statutory language.''

That leaves the question in the hands of the high court.

Alarid said the state's own expert conceded that Carboxy-THC does not cause impairment. He said it would be "absurd'' to allow someone testing positive for this chemical to be convicted of driving under the influence.

But Maricopa County Attorney Bill Montgomery, whose office is prosecuting the case, said there is no good way to determine whether someone is "impaired'' because of marijuana use.

"We don't know at what rate most of the population would be able to break down marijuana to when it's in its non-psychoactive elements,'' he said. And that, Montgomery said, makes it legally acceptable for the Legislature to decide that the proper standard should be zero.

Alarid told the justices that the appellate court ruling is wrong because it relied in part on a 1994 ruling which concluded the Legislature was reasonable in determining there is no level of "illicit drug use'' which can be acceptable when someone in driving.

But since that time, Alarid pointed out, Arizona and 17 other states have adopted medical marijuana laws. "Thus, marijuana is no longer a completely proscribed illicit drug,'' he wrote.

In her ruling, Harris noted the changing legal scene. And she pointed out that the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled there is a "constitutional right to travel.''

Harris said if Arizona can determine that anyone with Carboxy-THC in the blood can be arrested for driving, that could effectively impair that constitutional right.

"There's a right to travel,'' Montgomery acknowledged. "But no court has ever found that there is a right to a driver's license.''

Anyway, he said, there is an argument to be made that anyone who has a medical need for marijuana probably should not be driving in the first place.

He said someone with chronic pain -- the most frequent reason cited by those seeking permission to use the drug -- probably would need to be using some other prescribed drug. And he said most of those have warnings against using them while driving or operating machinery.

Alarid has one other legal argument in his bid to allow those with Carboxy-THC to drive without nfear of arrest.

He said the law makes it illegal to drive with THC and "its metabolite'' in the blood. That, he said, means a singular metabolite, in this case, Hydroxy-THC.

"Therefore, based on the plain meaning of the statute, (it) does not prohibit driving with Carboxy-THC in the body,'' he said in his legal petition to the Supreme Court.

The justices have not decided whether to accept the case.

Can Jodi Arias get a fair trial????

Arias trial: Prosecutor’s celebrity becomes issue By Michael Kiefer The Republic | azcentral.com Fri Mar 29, 2013 7:22 AM Prosecutor Juan Martinez dances on the edge of outrage in the courtroom, and his TV following loves it. But on Thursday it came back to haunt him when defense attorneys for accused killer Jodi Arias were able to introduce a string of e-mails — over his repeated objections — showing that victim Travis Alexander’s close friends had tried to warn Arias that Alexander was an abusive womanizer. And Arias’ lead attorney, Kirk Nurmi, suggested that Martinez’s love for the TV camera was lapsing into prosecutorial misconduct. At the close of the day Thursday, the jurors were called in one by one to be questioned on whether they saw Martinez signing autographs and posing for cameras outside the courthouse last week. Arias, 32, admits killing Alexander, 30, in June 2008, and if convicted, she could be sent to death row. Nurmi and his co-counsel, Jennifer Willmott, are trying to build a case that Alexander was physically and sexually abusive to Arias and that she killed him in self-defense. Arias claims she recalls shooting Alexander, but cannot remember stabbing him nearly 30 times and then slitting his throat. The case has played out internationally, and to date, Maricopa County taxpayers have paid more than $1.4 million in defense costs alone. It is the defense’s case right now. On Thursday, domestic-violence expert Alyce LaViolette and Willmott got down to specifics about the relationship between Alexander and Arias. Arias has alleged on the witness stand that Alexander struck or “body slammed” her on a few occasions. She claimed his sexual preferences tended toward sodomy that she took part in because she loved him and did not want to anger him. The prosecution has disputed the claims. Willmott guided LaViolette toward an e-mail string among Alexander and his California friends Chris and Sky Hughes. The e-mails were not actually shown to the jury. Upon instruction from Judge Sherry Stephens, LaViolette was not allowed to read them, but only to characterize their content, and she did so with great difficulty given Martinez’s repeated rapid-fire objections. The memo line, LaViolette said, was, “You crossed the Line.” Written Jan. 29, 2007, the e-mails expressed Alexander’s anger that the Hugheses had talked to Arias to discourage her from pursuing Alexander because he was abusive to women. He called her a “skank,” only saw her secretly and tended to treat her coldly in public, according to LaViolette. What was not mentioned in court Thursday was the history of the e-mails. A defense filing from January 2011 details the efforts of Arias’ attorneys to obtain them. Initially the prosecution told the defense attorneys that there were no available text messages sent or received by Alexander and then was ordered to turn over several hundred. Furthermore, according to the filing, the case agent, Mesa Police Detective Esteban Flores, told the defense attorneys that there was nothing “out of the ordinary” among Alexander’s e-mails; about 8,000 were turned over to the defense in June 2010, including the Hughes e-mails. The 2011 filing details the e-mail contents, including “A response from Mr. Hughes ... wherein he asserts that he believes Jodi would be his (Travis’) next victim and that Jodi was just another girl that he (Travis) was playing.” Alexander allegedly replied by saying “I am a bit of a sociopath.” Other e-mails from Sky Hughes, the filing says, say that Alexander considered Arias to be a “booty call.” How much of the e-mails makes it into testimony remains to be seen. Chris and Sky Hughes have already testified for the prosecution regarding an earlier allegation of misconduct by Martinez, but the topic of the e-mails was not discussed. They could be called back. LaViolette will be back on the stand Tuesday, when the trial resumes. But there was another drama that framed the day in court. In the morning, before the jury entered the courtroom, Nurmi called to the judge’s attention that Martinez had been filmed and photographed on the court steps posing with his fans and signing autographs. Nurmi showed a photograph that was on the front page of The Arizona Republic and talked about video shot by 12 News to document Martinez’s newfound celebrity. Nurmi called to the witness stand court analyst Jean Casarez for Turner Broadcasting, who had commented on air about Martinez’s behavior and how troublesome it would be if jurors were to see it. The 12 News video accompanied her comments. In response to the witness, Martinez, talking about himself in the third person, implied that it was the only time “the prosecutor” had gone out the front door. At the end of the day, the media and spectators were expelled from the courtroom so that the judge and attorneys could question the jurors about what they saw. They have been admonished since the beginning of the trial to avoid media reports about the proceedings. There was no indication Thursday if any of the jurors were at risk of being dismissed.

Obama's DEA thugs continue their war against medical marijuana!!!!

But Obama continues to send his DEA thugs to hunt down, arrest and send to prison people involved in the medical marijuana industry.

Sadly President Obama is just a clone of tyrant and former President George W. Bush, and his war mongering rival John McCain in the 2008 election.

Source

Man secretly owned chain of pot stores

By Joe Mozingo, Los Angeles Times

March 29, 2013, 10:00 p.m.

The marijuana shops evoked health and homeopathic care, with names like Dana Point Safe Harbor Collective, Belmont Shore Natural Care, Alternative Herbal Care and Costa Mesa Patients Assn.

Nine dispensaries in all, they appeared to be run by different owners around Orange and Los Angeles counties, little different than any of the hundreds of dispensaries that have popped up in the last five years.

But they were secretly owned and operated by a 56-year-old convicted drug dealer from San Clemente, who used the stores to make millions.

Federal drug agents say John Melvin Walker, who was arrested in October, was one of the biggest players they have prosecuted in Southern California's medical marijuana trade. They could recall only one similar case, a man who used the proceeds of his seven dispensaries to buy land in Costa Rica.

On Monday, Walker is expected to appear at the U.S. Courthouse in Santa Ana to plead guilty to two felony counts: conspiracy to distribute more than 1,000 kilograms of marijuana and tax evasion. He must forfeit more than $25 million in assets, cash and business interests — including his Tuscan manor high above the Pacific in San Clemente, two homes in Long Beach and four mobile homes in Mammoth — and possibly pay $4.3 million in tax restitution.

He faces 10 years to life in prison, but prosecutors say sentencing guidelines call for 21 years to 27 years.

The Orange County Sheriff's Department started the investigation with the help of federal agents.

They took the case to the U.S. attorney because federal penalties are more severe and federal law is clear — all marijuana possession is illegal — avoiding the ambiguity of California's medical cannabis laws, which do not directly address whether commercial sales of pot are legal.

Assistant U.S. Atty. Christine Bautista said it was common for "drug-traffickers like [Walker] to hide behind the facade of medical marijuana laws and compassionate care, to make millions of dollars and conceal their identities as the true owners/operators of a string of marijuana stores."

She didn't know of any other cases involving so many stores.

"It appeared from evidence that he ran a tight ship," she said. "He instituted regular procedures at all nine shops. He regularly visited to observe. He required managers to report midday and end-of-day figures to him to show cash on hand."

At the Dana Point shop, detectives found spreadsheets showing sales over 10 months totaled $3.17 million, with $2.47 million cash on hand, according to an affidavit.

When Orange County sheriff's detectives first conducted searches of properties owned by Walker and his cohorts, they were staggered by the cash. At a Walker rental in Long Beach, they found $390,160.00 in four grocery bags in his garage, along with a shotgun, a Beretta handgun and a Chinese AK-47 with a bayonet. At a stash house in San Clemente, they found stacks of bills stuffed in furniture, in an Igloo cooler and on an ironing board, totaling about $700,000.

In February 2012, 14 people, including Walker — also known as "Pops" — were indicted on 14 counts and arrested.

The indictment alleged that Walker failed to report any income from the shops to the IRS and that he told his bookkeeper "to destroy all records pertaining to income generated at the marijuana dispensaries shortly after they were generated and not to create records that fully identified Walker's connection to the marijuana dispensaries."

According to his plea agreement, he might have to forfeit his properties, $535,291 in currency and give up any benefits he got from a $700,000 loan he made to a Charles Westlund and Silent Strippers LLC, and whatever interests he had in six businesses.

Walker's attorney, Kate T. Corrigan, said Walker is a "devoted family man, a very active parent" to young children. She declined to say how many.

"He is completely devastated that he is going to be separated from his children, and they'll be separated from him," Corrigan said. "They're going to be growing up fatherless."

joe.mozingo@latimes.com

More on the crooks that work for Sheriff Joe???

Source

Deputy chief dropped from MCSO legal battle

By JJ Hensley The Republic | azcentral.com Sun Mar 31, 2013 10:03 PM

The long legal battle between some of Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s former top aides and the Sheriff’s Office appears closer to resolution after a Maricopa County Superior Court judge dismissed several defendants in a broad civil suit brought by the former aides.

Judge Arthur Anderson’s ruling last week granting sheriff’s Deputy Chief Frank Munnell’s motion for summary judgment also removes a central figure from the legal proceedings tied to the downfall of former sheriff’s Chief Deputy David Hendershott, Capt. Joel Fox and Deputy Chief Larry Black.

In 2010, Munnell delivered a 63-page memo to Arpaio that included detailed allegations of misconduct, intimidation and retaliation by Hendershott, Arpaio’s longtime second-in-command. The memo also accused Black and Fox of conspiring with Hendershott, particularly on a political-action committee that ran ads attacking Arpaio’s opponent in the 2008 election.

Munnell’s memo prompted Arpaio to ask Pinal County Sheriff Paul Babeu to conduct an internal investigation into the allegations, for which Babeu hired Phoenix private investigator Keith Sobraske.

The investigation found more than 50 alleged instances of misconduct, with many relating to Hendershott’s handing of the sheriff’s anti-corruption squad that launched investigations into county politicians. Those probes were later discredited. The inquiry also found that Black threatened Munnell and improperly tried to intervene in internal investigations, and that Fox lied to investigators about those involved in the 2008 PAC.

Arpaio fired all three. Fox continues to challenge his dismissal in Superior Court.

The deposed commanders filed a suit last spring accusing Arpaio, Babeu, Sobraske, Munnell and the Pinal and Maricopa county governments of negligence, defamation and infliction of emotional distress, among other allegations.

Jack MacIntyre, a deputy chief in Arpaio’s office, said that last week’s dismissal was welcome news but that the legal action was hardly a concern to anyone who tried to read it.

“It’s really very, very much a stillborn ... lawsuit in that it was written so poorly — and consisted of histrionic narrative that no one should be held to account — to have to puzzle out what the plaintiffs meant and who they were targeting,” MacIntyre said. “(The dismissal) makes a lot of the people that were named in those harebrained lawsuits and claims, even if they weren’t named as a party, relieved.”

The memo and subsequent investigation led to the stunning fall of Hendershott, who had overseen the day-to-day operations of the Sheriff’s Office for more than a decade. The commander also played an instrumental role both in Arpaio’s campaign activities and the politically fueled investigations that brought scrutiny from the U.S. Justice Department.

Those investigations accused county politicians and judges of corruption, and some led to indictments that were all later dismissed. Many of those targeted in the investigations have since filed civil-rights claims against the Sheriff’s Office. Eight of those lawsuits have been settled at a cost of more than $3 million.

The political-corruption inquiry also led to the disbarment of former Maricopa County Attorney Andrew Thomas, who lost a race for the Arizona Attorney General’s Office amid the unraveling of many of the political-corruption cases spearheaded by Hendershott.

But the critical memo that Munnell delivered in 2010 hardly touched on those politically-fueled topics, and instead focused on a litany of alleged misdeeds Hendershott committed while he led Arpaio’s office. Those included his involvement with the PAC in 2008.

The committee, known as the Sheriff’s Command Association, collected more than $100,000 from donors and sheriff’s officials and gave the money to the Arizona Republican Party. The party used the money for ads targeting Arpaio’s opponent. Fox initially said he alone was involved with the organization but later relented when faced with a $315,000 fine.

Munnell claimed in his memo that Hendershott helped launch the committee and that Hendershott asked Munnell and other employees to donate to the organization through automatic withdrawals from their paychecks.

Munnell said his impression was that the money would go toward “usual campaign expenses,” including signs and mailers. It wasn’t until Fox came under investigation for his role in SCA that Munnell learned of the committee’s true intentions to run attack ads against Arpaio’s opponent. It was then that he also learned Fox was refusing to cooperate with investigators. No one was charged with any violations related to the committee’s work.

Munnell filed a motion for summary judgment to get out of the deposed trio’s suit, based on the fact that he was never properly served. Ed Moriarity, an attorney who represented Thomas, Hendershott and others, never responded to the motion, and Anderson granted the request Wednesday, ending upheaval that plagued the Sheriff’s Office for five years.

Moriarity, Fox and Hendershott did not respond to requests for comment.

Black could not be located for comment, but in a 2011 letter to Arpaio following his dismissal, the longtime sheriff’s employee denied the allegations in Munnell’s memo and said the process was tainted by the way he was portrayed in the media.

“There is no question in my mind that the ‘Munnell Memo’ was inflammatory and full of statements not based on evidence or personal observation and published in a variety of media outlets prior to even one interview conducted,” Black wrote. “It will always be a question in my mind as to how much this advance information tainted the outcome of this investigation.”

Munnell, after learning that the suit was dismissed, said the claim by Hendershott, Black and Fox was baseless from the beginning.

Rivals prepare for legal battle over abortion bans

Source

Rivals prepare for legal battle over abortion bans

Associated Press Sun Mar 31, 2013 11:10 AM

Rival legal teams, well-financed and highly motivated, are girding for court battles over the coming months on laws enacted in Arkansas and North Dakota that would impose the nation’s toughest bans on abortion.

For all their differences, attorneys for the two states and the abortion-rights supporters opposing them agree on this: The laws represent an unprecedented frontal assault on the Supreme Court’s 1973 Roe v. Wade decision that established a nationwide right to abortion.

The Arkansas law, approved March 6 when legislators overrode a veto by Democratic Gov. Mike Beebe, would ban most abortions from the 12th week of pregnancy onward. On March 26, North Dakota went further, with Republican Gov. Jack Dalrymple signing a measure that would ban abortions as early as six weeks into a pregnancy, when a fetal heartbeat can first be detected and before some women even know they’re pregnant.

Abortion-rights advocates plan to challenge both measures, contending they are unconstitutional violations of the Roe ruling that legalized abortion until a fetus could viably survive outside the womb. A fetus is generally considered viable at 22 to 24 weeks.

“I think they’re going to be blocked immediately by the courts — they are so far outside the clear bounds of what the Supreme Court has said for 40 years,” said Nancy Northup, president of the Center for Reproductive Rights.

The center will be leading the North Dakota legal challenge and working in Arkansas alongside the American Civil Liberties Union’s state and national offices. Both Northup and ACLU lawyers say they have ample resources to wage the battles, and they expect victories that would require their attorneys’ fees to be paid by two states.

Dalrymple, in signing the ban, acknowledged that its chances of surviving a court challenge were questionable, but said it was worth the eventual price tag — at this point unknown — in order to test the boundaries of Roe.

North Dakota’s attorney general, Wayne Stenehjem, initially said lawyers from his office would defend any lawsuits but is now considering hiring outside help. His office is working on a cost estimate for the litigation that could be presented to lawmakers soon.

“We’re looking at a sufficient amount to adequately defend these enactments,” Stenehjem said.

A lead sponsor of the Arkansas ban, Republican state Sen. Jason Rapert, said threats of lawsuits “should not prevent someone from doing what is right.”

He contended that the ban had a chance of reaching the U.S. Supreme Court through the appeals process and suggested that the victory predictions made by abortion-rights lawyers amounted to “posturing” aimed at deterring other states from enacting similar bans.

In both Arkansas and North Dakota, the states’ lawyers will be getting pro bono assistance from lawyers with Liberty Counsel, a conservative Christian legal group.

Mathew Staver, the group’s chairman, said supporters of the bans were resolved to fight the legal battles to the end, and issued a caution to the rival side.

“They ought to hold off on their celebrations,” he said. “The cases have a long way to go through the court system.”

The North Dakota ban is scheduled to take effect Aug. 1, along with two other measures that have angered abortion-rights backers. One would require abortion providers to have admitting privileges at a local hospital, the other would make North Dakota the first state to ban abortions based on genetic defects such as Down syndrome.

The Center for Reproductive Rights is reviewing its options regarding the latter two bills, but definitely plans to challenge the 6-week ban before Aug. 1. Northup said her team is pondering whether to file suit in state court or U.S. district court.

In Arkansas, where the 12-week ban would take effect 90 days after the end of the legislative session, abortion-rights lawyers plan to file their challenge in federal court within the next few weeks.

Bettina Brownstein, who will be representing the ACLU of Arkansas in the case, said the U.S. district court with jurisdiction over Little Rock had issued rulings in past abortion-related cases that gave her confidence of victory this time.

“Eventually it could go to U.S. Supreme Court on appeal, but that would take a while, and they may not want to hear it,” she said. “It’s a question of how much money the state wants to spend.”

Northup chided officials in both Arkansas and North Dakota for their willingness to spend taxpayers’ money on difficult and divisive legal cases.

“It’s important that the citizens of those states realize that every dollar spent to defend blatantly unconstitutional laws is taxpayers’ dollars wasted,” she said.

Attorneys’ fees for the upcoming cases are impossible to estimate at this stage, but Northup said her organization received $1.3 million in fees from Alaska after that state lost a recent case regarding an abortion-related law.

The last few years have been intensely busy for the Center for Reproductive Rights, the ACLU and other abortion-rights legal groups as Republican-controlled legislatures have enacted scores of laws seeking to restrict access to abortion. At least two dozen such measures are currently the target of lawsuits, said Northup, who vowed that her organization “will not let unconstitutional laws go unchallenged.”

Some of the recent laws place new requirements on abortion clinics, others require abortion providers to perform certain procedures or offer state-mandated counseling before an abortion can take place.

At least 10 states have passed bills banning abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy on the disputed premise that a fetus can feel pain at that stage. One of those laws, in Idaho, was struck down by a U.S. district judge on March 6, while the laws in Georgia and Arizona have been temporarily blocked by judges pending further court proceedings.

Abortion-rights advocates, while eager to defeat the new bans in North Dakota and Arkansas, worry about the impact of the broader surge of restrictions.

“I don’t believe these bans are going to take effect, but the danger is that they make the other laws look reasonable,” said Talcott Camp, deputy director of the ACLU’s Reproductive Freedom Project. “The ultimate goal is to take this decision away from a woman and her doctor and give it to the politicians.”

One of the most frequent targets of the anti-abortion laws is the Planned Parenthood Federation of America, which — in addition to providing a range of other health services — is the nation’s leading provider of abortions.

Planned Parenthood’s president, Cecile Richards, said she found it frustrating that women “continue to be a political punching bag.” But she saw an upside to the wave of anti-abortion legislation: more members and more donations for her organization.

“These attacks have served to energize our supporters,” she said. “We’ve gained 2 million members in the past two years.”

There’s new energy on the other side as well.

The tough North Dakota laws have been welcomed by the protesters who gather weekly in Fargo outside the state’s lone abortion clinic.

Among those on hand for the latest protest at the Red River Women’s Clinic was Scott Carew, 50, who had brought two anti-abortion posters nailed to pieces of wood.

“Certainly, we’re proud of the governor standing up for life,” Carew said. “We’re going to keep standing up for life until we can’t stand up anymore.”

———

Associated Press reporters James MacPherson in Bismarck, N.D., David Kolpack in Fargo, N.D., and Andrew DeMillo in Little Rock, Ark., contributed to this report.

———

Follow David Crary on Twitter: http://twitter.com/CraryAP

Arizona officials target synthetic drugs like 'spice,' 'bath salts'

Source

Arizona officials target synthetic drugs like 'spice,' 'bath salts'

By JJ Hensley The Republic | azcentral.com Mon Apr 1, 2013 10:46 PM

Politicians from the White House to the state Capitol — including Arizona’s county attorneys — have made an issue of the proliferation of legal synthetic drugs like “spice” and “bath salts,” which mimic the buzz users get off illegal street drugs.

Their efforts to address the problem, which began to take shape several years ago, have started to make their way into the courtroom. A federal indictment filed late last week in U.S. District Court in Phoenix reveals the international scope of the conspiracy to traffic those drugs and the amounts of money that may be involved.

Court documents highlight the cat-and-mouse game that investigators play with drug manufacturers, who try to stay one step ahead of expanding bans on chemicals used in making synthetic drugs. They also demonstrate the unique steps prosecutors have taken to make their cases stick against manufacturers and distributors.

By October 2011, when the federal Drug Enforcement Administration took emergency action to outlaw three chemicals commonly found in bath salts, the potential dangers of synthetic drugs were already well-known. Nearly a year earlier, federal officials had banned five chemicals commonly found in the synthetic marijuana-like substance commonly called spice amid reports of frantic teens showing up in emergency rooms around the nation strung out on the legal chemicals.

Some observers immediately questioned the strength of the bans, speculating that financially motivated manufacturers would start substituting new chemicals for those that were banned.

And that is exactly what federal prosecutors allege Nicholas Pascal Zizzo and Michael Rocky Lane set about doing: shopping around the world for someone who could supply them with a legal version of MDPV, a chemical that the federal government had recently prohibited and which was used in the manufacture of bath salts.

The men secured the chemicals legally from China and made a few other cosmetic changes to remain on the right side of the law, according to court documents.

“After October of 2011, defendant Zizzo and others ceased using the name ‘Eight Ballz Bath Salts’ and started utilizing the name ‘Eight Ballz Ultra Premium Glass Cleaner,’ ” according to the indictment.

The new chemicals were legal, but a 1986 law makes it illegal to manufacture, distribute or possess substances that have a similar effect on the nervous system as banned drugs.

And invoking that law in criminal prosecutions in Arizona is unique, said Bruce Feder, an attorney for Lane who has practiced for 35 years and is aware of one other case where the Analogue Act was cited.

“Something must have happened in the Justice Department to precipitate these indictments,” Feder said. The U.S. Attorney’s Office in Arizona did not respond to a request for comment about this case or the government’s efforts to target synthetic drugs in general.

The federal sting that originally took down Lane, Zizzo and three others was part of a nationwide undercover operation in late July known as “Operation Logjam.”

The operation had been going on for months and was made public about two weeks after Congress passed a law targeting synthetic drugs.

The local defendants were done in by federal agents posing as Hells Angels who purchased 2,500 powder packets of “Eight Ballz” from one of the defendants, Benjamin J. Lowenstein, in a late June meeting at a parking lot on Thunderbird Road, according to a federal affidavit.

Federal officials at the time speculated that the Arizona suspects generated “tens of millions of dollars” in profits.

The most recent indictment indicates the government is trying to seize more than $1.4 million in Zizzo’s accounts and more than $800,000 in Lane’s accounts, in addition to property including homes, an SUV and Lane’s custom motorcycle with vanity plates reading “SALTS.”

While the federal prosecution takes shape, Arizona legislators are taking another crack at outlawing synthetic drugs. The state has tried twice before, with manufacturers making enough changes to keep their products readily available.

A 2012 statewide survey of eighth-, 10th-, and 12th-graders by the Arizona Criminal Justice Commission found that 10 percent had used synthetic drugs sometime in their lifetime. The prevalence of its use was greater than that of smokeless tobacco and inhalants like glue or spray paint.

In recent years, Gov. Jan Brewer signed into law a bill that added to the banned-substances list seven primary chemicals commonly used to make bath salts, and the Legislature banned substances used in spice.

Rep. Eddie Farnsworth, R-Gilbert, the bill’s primary sponsor, said the bill is not intended to be a cure-all, but rather a “step in the right direction.”

But there are more wrinkles: The chemicals at question in the federal case predate the Analogue Act and do not duplicate the psychoactive qualities of drugs in the federal government’s top two tiers of banned substances, which raises questions about whether the act applies, Feder said.

Republic reporter Lindsey Collom contributed to this article.

Louis Taylor spends 42 years in prison for a crime he didn't commit.

Source

Posted on April 1, 2013 5:50 pm by Laurie Roberts

After 42 years, Louis Taylor will walk free

Louis Taylor is expected to walk out of prison on Tuesday, a free man for the first time in 42 years.

For a decade, the Arizona Justice Project has worked to free Taylor. For 10 years, lawyers, law students and investigators have volunteered their time and their expertise, convinced that Taylor had nothing to do with the downtown Tucson hotel fire that killed 29 people in December 1970.

Today, faced with new evidence that calls into question whether the fire was arson, Pima County prosecutors will offer Taylor a plea deal that allows his immediate release from prison.

“It’s obviously, for all of us, a wonderful culmination of many years of working on the case and knowing from the outset that Louis was innocent,” said Andy Silverman, a University of Arizona law school professor who directed students’ work on Taylor’s case.

The Justice Project was formed 15 years ago by Larry Hammond, a partner at Osborn Maledon and a guy who is seriously at risk of giving lawyers a good name. These volunteer attorneys and law students from UA and ASU are often the last resort for those who have no remaining hope that the truth will set them free.

“We believed there were lawyers in this state who would care, along with us, about people being convicted of crimes they didn’t commit or people who were victims of very manifest injustice,” Hammond told me.

Taylor will be the 15th inmate released from an Arizona prison as a result of the Justice Project’s efforts.

People like Drayton Witt, who served a decade for killing a 4-month-old baby in 2000. Witt was released last May after new evidence indicated that the child died of disease, not abuse.

Like William Macumber, who served nearly 38 years for a 1962 double murder he says he didn’t commit. Last fall, prosecutors offered a no-contest plea that allowed his immediate release after Justice Project lawyers called into question forensic evidence and pointed out that another man’s confession was withheld from jurors.

As with Macumber, prosecutors continue to believe that Taylor is guilty. They’re just not willing to risk having to retry the case.

The Pioneer Hotel fire was one of the deadliest tragedies in Tucson’s history. Taylor, a 16-year-old African American, was arrested that night, apparently because he was in the area and had matches in his pocket. He was questioned for eight hours, without an attorney or even a parent present.

Despite his pleas of innocence, he was convicted by an all-white jury of murder and arson and sentenced to 28 life terms in 1972. Even the trial judge questioned the verdict, saying he “judged some of the evidence differently” than jurors.

The Justice Project took up the case 10 years ago after a “60 Minutes” report suggested that Taylor had been railroaded. Ed Novak, an attorney with Polsinelli Shughart, volunteered to petition for a new trial, based on the UA law students’ legwork.

Their new evidence: five fire investigators who said the cause of the fire could not be determined using modern fire science techniques. At least one of the investigators conceded his work was hampered because some evidence had been destroyed.

“You certainly can’t have arson if you don’t have arson as the cause and you can’t have murder if you don’t have arson,” Novak said.

Novak says no accelerant was ever found, though jurors weren’t told that, just as they weren’t told that Taylor didn’t match the suspect’s description.

In November, Novak deposed the original fire investigator, Cy Holmes, who said that he concluded early on, during a walk-through of the hotel, that the fire had been set by a young African American.

“I felt that the culprit was probably Black and that he was probably 18,” Holmes testified.

Novak said Holmes went on to explain anyone younger than 18 would have been in bed by midnight and that African Americans were familiar with fire, having used it to clear land and for other “beneficial purposes”. “And if they get mad at somebody, the first thing they do is use something they’re comfortable with. Fire was one of them.”

Holmes was a key witness against Taylor.

Faced with the possibility of a new trial, Pima County prosecutors have offered Taylor a deal: plead no contest to 28 counts of murder and arson and go free.

Novak says Taylor, who is now 59, agreed to take the plea rather than sit behind bars for several more years while they fight it out in court. Time, at this point, is precious — too precious to wait any longer for exoneration.

And so Tuesday, he will walk out of prison, a free man for the first time in 42 years and living proof that justice is not always blind, certainly not always swift.

And but for a group of volunteer lawyers and law students, not always available.

(Column published April 2, 2013, The Arizona Republic.)

Drug cartels dispatch agents deep inside U.S.

"If left unchecked, authorities say, the cartels’ move into the American interior could render the syndicates harder than ever to dislodge and pave the way for them to expand into other criminal enterprises such as prostitution, kidnapping-and-extortion rackets and money laundering."

Others are skeptical about claims cartels are expanding their presence, saying law-enforcement agencies are prone to exaggerating threats to justify bigger budgets.

Source

Drug cartels dispatch agents deep inside U.S.

Associated Press Mon Apr 1, 2013 9:46 AM

CHICAGO — Mexican drug cartels whose operatives once rarely ventured beyond the U.S. border are dispatching some of their most trusted agents to live and work deep inside the United States — an emboldened presence that experts believe is meant to tighten their grip on the world’s most lucrative narcotics market and maximize profits.

If left unchecked, authorities say, the cartels’ move into the American interior could render the syndicates harder than ever to dislodge and pave the way for them to expand into other criminal enterprises such as prostitution, kidnapping-and-extortion rackets and money laundering.

Cartel activity in the U.S. is certainly not new. Starting in the 1990s, the ruthless syndicates became the nation’s No. 1 supplier of illegal drugs, using unaffiliated middlemen to smuggle cocaine, marijuana and heroin beyond the border or even to grow pot here.

But a wide-ranging Associated Press review of federal court cases and government drug-enforcement data, plus interviews with many top law enforcement officials, indicate the groups have begun deploying agents from their inner circles to the U.S. Cartel operatives are suspected of running drug-distribution networks in at least nine non-border states, often in middle-class suburbs in the Midwest, South and Northeast.

“It’s probably the most serious threat the United States has faced from organized crime,” said Jack Riley, head of the Drug Enforcement Administration’s Chicago office.

The cartel threat looms so large that one of Mexico’s most notorious drug kingpins — a man who has never set foot in Chicago — was recently named the city’s Public Enemy No. 1, the same notorious label once assigned to Al Capone.

The Chicago Crime Commission, a non-government agency that tracks crime trends in the region, said it considers Joaquin “El Chapo” Guzman even more menacing than Capone because Guzman leads the deadly Sinaloa cartel, which supplies most of the narcotics sold in Chicago and in many cities across the U.S.

Years ago, Mexico faced the same problem — of then-nascent cartels expanding their power — “and didn’t nip the problem in the bud,” said Jack Killorin, head of an anti-trafficking program in Atlanta for the Office of National Drug Control Policy. “And see where they are now.”

Riley sounds a similar alarm: “People think, ‘The border’s 1,700 miles away. This isn’t our problem.’ Well, it is. These days, we operate as if Chicago is on the border.”

Border states from Texas to California have long grappled with a cartel presence. But cases involving cartel members have now emerged in the suburbs of Chicago and Atlanta, as well as Columbus, Ohio, Louisville, Ky., and rural North Carolina. Suspects have also surfaced in Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota and Pennsylvania.

Mexican drug cartels “are taking over our neighborhoods,” Pennsylvania Attorney General Kathleen Kane warned a legislative committee in February. State Police Commissioner Frank Noonan disputed her claim, saying cartels are primarily drug suppliers, not the ones trafficking drugs on the ground.

For years, cartels were more inclined to make deals in Mexico with American traffickers, who would then handle transportation to and distribution within major cities, said Art Bilek, a former organized crime investigator who is now executive vice president of the crime commission.

As their organizations grew more sophisticated, the cartels began scheming to keep more profits for themselves. So leaders sought to cut out middlemen and assume more direct control, pushing aside American traffickers, he said.

Beginning two or three years ago, authorities noticed that cartels were putting “deputies on the ground here,” Bilek said. “Chicago became such a massive market … it was critical that they had firm control.”

To help fight the syndicates, Chicago recently opened a first-of-its-kind facility at a secret location where 70 federal agents work side-by-side with police and prosecutors. Their primary focus is the point of contact between suburban-based cartel operatives and city street gangs who act as retail salesmen. That is when both sides are most vulnerable to detection, when they are most likely to meet in the open or use cellphones that can be wiretapped.

Others are skeptical about claims cartels are expanding their presence, saying law-enforcement agencies are prone to exaggerating threats to justify bigger budgets.

David Shirk, of the University of San Diego’s Trans-Border Institute, said there is a dearth of reliable intelligence that cartels are dispatching operatives from Mexico on a large scale.

“We know astonishingly little about the structure and dynamics of cartels north of the border,” Shirk said. “We need to be very cautious about the assumptions we make.”

Statistics from the DEA suggest a heightened cartel presence in more U.S. cities. In 2008, around 230 American communities reported some level of cartel presence. That number climbed to more than 1,200 in 2011, the most recent year for which information is available, though the increase is partly due to better reporting.

Dozens of federal agents and local police interviewed by the AP said they have identified cartel members or operatives using wiretapped conversations, informants or confessions. Hundreds of court documents reviewed by the AP appear to support those statements.

“This is the first time we’ve been seeing it — cartels who have their operatives actually sent here,” said Richard Pearson, a lieutenant with the Louisville Metropolitan Police Department, which arrested four alleged operatives of the Zetas cartel in November in the suburb of Okolona.

People who live on the tree-lined street where authorities seized more than 2,400 pounds of marijuana and more than $1 million in cash were shocked to learn their low-key neighbors were accused of working for one of Mexico’s most violent drug syndicates, Pearson said.

One of the best documented cases is Jose Gonzalez-Zavala, who was dispatched to the U.S. by the La Familia cartel, according to court filings.

In 2008, the former taxi driver and father of five moved into a spacious home at 1416 Brookfield Drive in a middle-class neighborhood of Joliet, southwest of Chicago. From there, court papers indicate, he oversaw wholesale shipments of cocaine in Illinois, Wisconsin and Indiana.

Wiretap transcripts reveal he called an unidentified cartel boss in Mexico almost every day, displaying the deference any midlevel executive might show to someone higher up the corporate ladder. Once he stammered as he explained that one customer would not pay a debt until after a trip.

“No,” snaps the boss. “What we need is for him to pay.”

The same cartel assigned Jorge Guadalupe Ayala-German to guard a Chicago-area stash house for $300 a week, plus a promised $35,000 lump-sum payment once he returned to Mexico after a year or two, according to court documents.

Ayala-German brought his wife and child to help give the house the appearance of an ordinary family residence. But he was arrested before he could return home and pleaded guilty to multiple trafficking charges. He will be sentenced later this year.

Socorro Hernandez-Rodriguez was convicted in 2011 of heading a massive drug operation in suburban Atlanta’s Gwinnett County. The chief prosecutor said he and his associates were high-ranking figures in the La Familia cartel — an allegation defense lawyers denied.

And at the end of February outside Columbus, Ohio, authorities arrested 34-year-old Isaac Eli Perez Neri, who allegedly told investigators he was a debt collector for the Sinaloa cartel.

An Atlanta attorney who has represented reputed cartel members says authorities sometimes overstate the threat such men pose.

“Often, you have a kid whose first time leaving Mexico is sleeping on a mattress at a stash house playing Game Boy, eating Burger King, just checking drugs or money in and out,” said Bruce Harvey. “Then he’s arrested and gets a gargantuan sentence. It’s sad.”

Because cartels accumulate houses full of cash, they run the constant risk associates will skim off the top. That points to the main reason cartels prefer their own people: Trust is hard to come by in their cutthroat world. There’s also a fear factor. Cartels can exert more control on their operatives than on middlemen, often by threatening to torture or kill loved ones back home.

Danny Porter, chief prosecutor in Gwinnett County, Ga., said he has tried to entice dozens of suspected cartel members to cooperate with American authorities. Nearly all declined. Some laughed in his face.

“They say, ‘We are more scared of them (the cartels) than we are of you. We talk and they’ll boil our family in acid,’” Porter said. “Their families are essentially hostages.”

Citing the safety of his own family, Gonzalez-Zavala declined to cooperate with authorities in exchange for years being shaved off his 40-year sentence.

In other cases, cartel brass send their own family members to the U.S.

“They’re sometimes married or related to people in the cartels,” Porter said. “They don’t hire casual labor.” So meticulous have cartels become that some even have operatives fill out job applications before being dispatched to the U.S., Riley added.

In Mexico, the cartels are known for a staggering number of killings — more than 50,000, according to one tally. Beheadings are sometimes a signature.

So far, cartels don’t appear to be directly responsible for large numbers of slayings in the United States, though the Texas Department of Public Safety reported 22 killings and five kidnappings in Texas at the hands of Mexican cartels from 2010 through mid- 2011.

Still, police worry that increased cartel activity could fuel heightened violence.

In Chicago, the police commander who oversees narcotics investigations, James O’Grady, said street-gang disputes over turf account for most of the city’s uptick in murders last year, when slayings topped 500 for the first time since 2008. Although the cartels aren’t dictating the territorial wars, they are the source of drugs.

Riley’s assessment is stark: He argues that the cartels should be seen as an underlying cause of Chicago’s disturbingly high murder rate.

“They are the puppeteers,” he said. “Maybe the shooter didn’t know and maybe the victim didn’t know that. But if you follow it down the line, the cartels are ultimately responsible.”

———

Follow Michael Tarm at www.twitter.com/mtarm .

California lawmakers consider regulating, taxing ammunition

California lawmakers consider regulating, taxing ammunition

By Josh Richman

jrichman@bayareanewsgroup.com

Posted: 04/01/2013 02:30:00 PM PDT

Gun control advocates in Sacramento are putting a new twist on an old NRA slogan: "Guns don't kill people -- bullets kill people."

Democratic lawmakers are pushing like never before to regulate or tax ammunition sales. They say the logic is simple: A firearm is nothing but an expensive paperweight without ammunition.

"We regulated gun sales because of our concern about safety, (so) by logical extension we should do so with bullets," said state Assemblywoman Nancy Skinner, D-Berkeley, whose AB48 will be heard Tuesday by the Assembly Public Safety Committee.

Gun-rights advocates are preparing a counter-offensive, arguing that ammunition-control bills are a not-so-back-door assault on the Second Amendment.

"It's a way to red-tape the right to bear arms to death," said Chuck Michel, the California Rifle and Pistol Association's attorney, promising to sue if any such bills pass. "It's all part of a campaign of shame, the fight to make it as difficult as possible for law-abiding citizens to make the choice to have a firearm for self-defense."

As lawmakers mull how to curb gun violence in the wake of December's massacre of school children in Newtown, Conn., some note that California and federal laws also forbid those who aren't allowed to own firearms from owning ammunition -- but there's no way to tell who's buying it.

Skinner's bill would require all ammo dealers to be licensed and all ammo buyers to provide identification information that would go to a state registry. The registry could then be compared with a state database of people prohibited from owning guns and ammo because of crimes, mental health issues or other reasons. It also would tip police to massive purchases.

Another bill, SB53 by state Sen. Kevin de Leon, D-Los Angeles, would require a background check and an estimated $50 fee for a one-year permit to buy ammunition. Bills in Congress similarly would require dealer licensing or buyer background checks, but those are no doubt dead on arrival in the Republican-led House.

Only Illinois, Massachusetts, New Jersey and the District of Columbia now require some sort of license to buy ammunition. New York passed a law in January requiring background checks for ammo purchases, but it hasn't taken effect yet.

So even in California, where guns are heavily regulated, you can walk into a store, show ID to prove you're at least 18 (or for handgun ammunition, 21), plunk down your money and walk out with a box of cartridges. Easier yet, you can buy all you want online.

Gun shops report ammo is flying off the shelves as gun owners worry about proposed new laws.

Assemblyman Rob Bonta said his AB187 -- a 10 percent tax on ammunition to fund crime prevention -- might merge with another lawmaker's proposed nickel-per-round tax to fund mental-health screening for children. Bonta, D-Oakland, said his tax is mostly about generating money to "combat the gun violence in our communities," but could have the "secondary benefit" of stemming "rampant sales."

Yet he acknowledged it won't be easy to pass, even with Democratic legislative supermajorities and recent Field Poll findings that 61 percent of California voters favor ammunition taxes and 75 percent favor background checks and permits for ammo purchases.

Because a new tax faces the hurdle of a two-thirds vote, "it's a heavy lift," Bonta said.

Some Democratic state lawmakers aren't eager to discuss the bills. Of eight -- five assemblymen and three state senators -- who scored above zero on the National Rifle Association's 2012 scorecard, only state Sen. Jim Beall, D-San Jose, would be interviewed for this story.

Beall said he's not yet very familiar with the legislation but sees little reason for a state ammunition bureaucracy that would cost taxpayers money to create and maintain. "A lot of those bills probably won't get through the Appropriations Committee" while education is a funding priority, he said.

California's 2009 law requiring dealers to record all handgun ammunition sales remains in limbo after an appeals court ruled that it's too ambiguous because some rounds can be used both in handguns and rifles. The bills now pending would affect all ammunition.

Mike Smith, co-owner of The Gun Works in Pleasant Hill, said the proposed bills would drown sellers in paperwork but have "zero" effect on crime because "criminals don't buy ammunition; they steal it."

As for the proposed ammo tax, he said, gun owners shouldn't be compelled to pay extra for crime prevention.

"Bonta replied that firearms and ammunition taxes date back to 1919 and are "a perfectly responsible way to fund emergency services."

"AB187 is on the right side of history."

Proposed ammunition laws

In the California Legislature:

AB 48 by Assemblywoman Nancy Skinner, D-Berkeley — Would require ammunition sellers to be licensed; ammunition purchasers to show identification; ammunition sellers to report all sales to the state Justice Department, which would create a registry of ammunition purchases. First hearing: April 2.

AB 187 by Assemblyman Rob Bonta, D-Oakland — Would impose a 10 percent tax on all ammunition sold in the state, with the revenue directed to a fund for crime-prevention efforts in the state’s high-crime areas. No hearing date set. AB 760 by Assemblyman Roger Dickinson, D-Sacramento — Would impose a 5-cent tax on each bullet sold in California, dedicating the revenue to an existing program to screen young children for mild to moderate mental illness — and intervene with strategies to address their problems. First hearing: April 15.

SB 53 by state Sen. Kevin de Leon, D-Los Angeles — Would require anyone buying ammunition to first pass a background check and receive a one-year permit, for an estimated $50 fee, from the state Justice Department. First hearing: April 16.

In Congress:

S.35, the Stop Online Ammunition Sales Act of 2013, by Sen. Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J. — Would require face-to-face purchases of ammunition, require licensing of ammunition dealers and reporting of bulk purchases of ammunition. A companion bill in the House, HR142, is sponsored by Rep. Carolyn McCarthy, D-N.Y.

S.174, the Ammunition Background Check Act of 2013, by Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn. — Would require an instant background check for the purchase of ammunition and would restore pre-1986 requirements that sellers track their inventory and keep records of their customers. Purchases of 1,000 rounds or more, or thefts of large amounts of ammunition, would have to be reported to law enforcement.

El alcalde de Phoenix, Greg Stanton es "gun grabber"

Stanton anuncia plan para eliminar armas

Phoenix, Arizona

por Eduardo Bernal - Mar. 28, 2013 03:45 PM La Voz

El alcalde de Phoenix, Greg Stanton, presentó un plan para reducir el número de armas de fuego en la ciudad y para combatir la violencia en las calles.

El plan consiste en que los residentes de la ciudad entreguen voluntariamente -y sin ser cuestionados- las armas de fuego que no deseen, y a cambio recibirán tarjetas que pueden ser canjeadas en tiendas de electrodomésticos y de abarrotes.

Stanton mencionó que la entrega de armas podrá realizarse todos los sábados de mayo.

Los detalles de esta iniciativa fueron revelados durante una conferencia de prensa el pasado martes 26 de marzo en la que estuvieron presentes el jefe del Departamento de Policía de Phoenix, Daniel García, y Hildy Saizow, presidenta de la organización sin fines de lucro Arizonans for Gun Safety.

Las autoridades de la Ciudad informaron que las tarjetas serán de 100 dólares por cada arma corta que sea entregada, de 200 por rifles de asalto, escopetas y de entre 10 y 20 dólares por cada cargador. Este programa es financiado por una donación anónima de 100 mil dólares que fue hecho a Arizonans for Gun Safety.

Con este plan también se pretende duplicar el número de oficiales de policía que patrullen las escuelas de esta ciudad.

Los residentes de la ciudad podrán entregar las armas en estacionamientos de iglesias ubicadas en las comunidades de South Mountain, Maryvale y Sunnyslope.

"Estos programas son muy positivos para la comunidad, permiten que menos armas circulen en las calles de nuestra ciudad y eso hace el trabajo de la policía menos complicado", dijo Stanton.

Arizonans for Gun Safety está coordinando el programa a través del Departamento de Policía de Phoenix y el Cabildo de esta municipalidad.

Hildy Saizow dijo que el proyecto busca cumplir dos propósitos: dar la oportunidad a los residentes de la ciudad de deshacerse de las armas que ya no deseen y mejorar la seguridad en los hogares.

De acuerdo con Daniel García, el programa no tendrá un impacto considerable para reducir el índice de criminalidad; no obstante, será algo menos con lo que los oficiales en el campo tendrán que lidiar y es una herramienta más para combatir el crimen.

Aunque la entrega de armas es completamente confidencial y se mantendrá el anonimato de los participantes, la policía realizará investigaciones sobre la procedencia del armamento o si fue utilizado en algún crimen. Las armas que no tengan antecedentes serán eliminadas.

Los lugares de entrega de armas son Southminster Presbyterian Church, ubicada en 1923 E. Broadway Rd. y Betania Presbyterian Church, ubicada en 2811 N. 39th Ave. Para mayor información visite el portal de internet www.phoenix.gov/police/gunbuyback2013.html

xxx

Senator Shooter burst into grandson’s class

Source

Report: Arizona Sen. Shooter burst into grandson’s class

By Mary Jo Pitzl The Republic | azcentral.com Fri Mar 29, 2013 7:14 AM

State Sen. Don Shooter, R-Yuma, faces a possible assault charge after he barged into his grandson’s Yuma high-school classroom and confronted the boy’s teacher, according to a police report.

After being asked to leave three times, and realizing the teacher was video-recording the incident on her cellphone, Shooter left.

The Yuma Police Department report, as well as witness accounts, portrayed the senator as visibly angry when he entered the classroom at the Yuma Private Industry Council charter school last Friday morning.

The Republic obtained the police report through a public-records request. The report notes that police have been unable to contact Shooter, a committee chairman at the state Legislature; he did not return a phone call from The Republic.

No charges have been filed in the case, which remains under investigation. The initial police report lists three possible offenses: assault, criminal trespassing and interference or disruption of an educational institution.

According to the report, Shooter, 59, stopped at the school’s front desk and said he wanted to talk to the teacher, Danielle Muñoz.

When the front-desk attendant was distracted by a phone call, he proceeded down the hall and into the classroom, where he confronted Muñoz, pointing his finger in her face.

He was reportedly unhappy with the instruction his grandson was getting at the school, which prepares youths for jobs in Yuma area.

He told her he wanted to talk to her about his grandson, but was interrupted when another school official entered the classroom and told him he had to leave, the report said.

Muñoz then reached for her cellphone and started recording the encounter, while another school official entered the classroom and also asked him to leave, the report said.

Muñoz told police that Shooter’s abrupt entry into her classroom made her “afraid for her safety and the safety of her student.” She later told police she wanted to press assault charges against Shooter, and the investigating officer said he would forward the report to the city prosecutor.

Muñoz also told police she would pursue an “injunction against harassment” against Shooter in city court.

The school’s policy prohibits visitors from going past the front desk, according to the police report.

In an accompanying statement, Patricia Romant, the school’s operations director, told police that Shooter “informed them that he was a state senator and very influential man in Yuma and in the state.”

Shooter is a second-term lawmaker and chairs the Senate’s Appropriations Committee.

Other witness statements indicate that some of the male students in Muñoz’ classroom rose to her defense.

“Two student got up cuz they were scare but mad,” (sic) Oscar Villanueva, 18, wrote. Shooter then left, he wrote, and things calmed down.

The report also notes that Shooter later called the Arizona Charter Schools Association and informed them that he had stopped by the school and was angry during the visit.

The association’s executive director then called the school and suggested they find a way to resolve the dispute “quietly,” according to the police report.

Nevada lawmaker arrested after historic expulsion

Source

Nevada lawmaker arrested after historic expulsion

By Ken Ritter Associated Press Fri Mar 29, 2013 7:59 AM

LAS VEGAS — Former Nevada Assemblyman Steven Brooks has been arrested in California on charges including resisting arrest and throwing objects, just hours after state lawmakers took the unprecedented step of expelling him.

Jail records show Barstow police arrested Brooks, 41, at about 7 p.m. Thursday on Interstate 15 at Stoddard Wells.

“We had started to discuss possible next steps,” Mitchell Posin, Brooks’ attorney, said Friday. “Next thing I know, I heard about this.”

Posin said he had no details about the arrest, or about why Brooks was on the interstate in Barstow.

Records show Brooks was taken to a San Bernardino County jail in Rancho Cucamonga, Calif., on $100,000 bail.

The Nevada Assembly voted Thursday morning to oust Brooks, after Assembly Majority Leader William Horne called him “potentially dangerous” and said lawmakers didn’t feel safe with him in the building.

This is the third time the North Las Vegas Democrat has been arrested since January. He’s accused of making threats toward his colleagues, including Assembly Speaker Marilyn Kirkpatrick.

Brooks also was denied the purchase of a gun in Sparks last month after he was banished from the chambers. Posin said there’s been a misunderstanding and Brooks doesn’t pose any real threat to anyone.

Brooks won re-election in November by a 2-1 margin over an unknown challenger.

Horne said Thursday that Brooks’ unpredictable behavior — which included missing meetings, calling news conferences he never showed up for and posing shirtless for a Las Vegas newspaper — had made the session look “more like a circus and daytime drama than a serious legislative body.”

It was the first time the Legislature initiated the expulsion of a member since a lawmaker was accused of libeling other members in 1867, although that case never came to a formal vote.

Prosecutor, falsely arrested, ordered to pay bank $50K

Prosecutor, falsely arrested, ordered to pay bank $50K

San Mateo County prosecutor Sharon Henry went to a Bank of America branch in Noe Valley five years ago to deposit a check and got arrested for check fraud because of a manager’s mistake. San Francisco police took her to jail, chained her to a wall, did not let her take her diabetes medication and refused to let her make a phone call that might have cleared things up, then released her in two hours when the bank learned the truth.

Henry sued BofA and the police. That’s when the deputy district attorney learned a harsh lesson — not only could she not sue, but she was ordered to pay the bank’s $50,000 in attorneys’ fees for allegedly trying to chill its freedom of speech.

This week, a federal appeals court ruled on her case — and she fared no better. To read about what Henry’s attorney called “a travesty of justice,” click here.

Arizona gun proponents launch free gun program

Arizona gun proponents launch free gun program

By CRISTINA SILVA, Associated Press

Updated 2:20 am, Friday, March 29, 2013

TUCSON, Ariz. (AP) — A campaign promising free shotguns for people to protect themselves in Tucson's most troubled neighborhoods has divided some residents in a community still reeling from a shooting rampage in 2011that killed six people, left a congresswoman and several others wounded, and made the city a symbol of gun violence in America.

The Armed Citizen Project is part of a national campaign to give shotguns to single women and homeowners in the nation's crime-ridden neighborhoods, an effort that comes amid a national debate on gun control after mass shootings in Arizona, Colorado and Connecticut.

While towns in Idaho, Utah, Virginia and Pennsylvania have debated ordinances recommending gun ownership, the gun giveaway effort appears to be the first of its kind.

"If you are not willing to protect the citizens of Tucson, someone is going to do it, why not me? Why not have armed citizens protecting themselves," said Shaun McClusky, a real estate agent who plans to start handing out shotguns by May.

Arizona gun proponents have donated about $12,500 to fund the gun giveaway and McClusky, a former mayoral and city council candidate, hopes to collect enough to eventually arm entire neighborhoods.

Participants will receive training on how to properly use, handle and store their weapon, as well as trigger locks. It costs about $400 per participant for the weapon and training.

Tucson police officials declined to discuss the gun program or public safety concerns, but statistics published by the department show violent crime was at a 13-year low in 2010, with 3,332 incidents. That compares with 5,116 violent crimes — including homicides, sexual assaults, and robberies — in 1997. Tucson averages about 50 homicides a year.

"Just like any other city in Arizona and in the nation we have our issues, but it is not crime-ridden," said Vice Mayor Regina Romero. "I would never say you have to carry a gun or you have to be afraid for your life."

Research has produced inconclusive results on whether defensive gun use lowers crime. Some research suggests guns result in more suicides and accidental deaths, while other studies have shown criminals are wary of gun owners.

"People don't want to confront an armed person at home," said Garen J. Wintemute, director of the UC Davis Violence Prevention Research Program. "But, separately, there is solid evidence that in communities with higher rates of gun ownership, burglary rates are up, not down, and that's because guns are hot loot."

Wintemute said it's likely the risk of violence in the home participating in the gun giveaway will go up.

But those behind the program argue shotguns are affordable, easy to use and don't require precise aim when shooting, making them the perfect home protection weapon. The goal is to arm hundreds of people in Tucson, Houston, New York, Chicago, Detroit and at least 10 other cities by the end of the year.

"It is our hypothesis that criminals have no desire to die in your hallway. We want to use that fear," said Kyle Coplen, 29, the project's founder and a University of Houston graduate student.

Tucson became a symbol of American's gun violence in 2011 when a mentally ill man opened fire at a political meet-and-greet hosted by then-Rep. Gabrielle Giffords outside a Tucson-area supermarket. Giffords, who is still recovering from her critical wounds, has in recent months become a champion of universal background gun checks and other gun restrictions denounced by Second Amendment proponents.

Moved by Giffords advocacy, the Tucson City Council recently approved a measure requiring universal background checks at gun shows held on city property. City officials said the gun giveaway program appears to be legal, so they have no recourse to shut it down.

One of the neighborhoods targeted by the program is Pueblo Gardens, an ethnically diverse, blue-collar neighborhood in southern Tucson where residents say occasional shootings, drug busts and car thefts are not uncommon.

The no-frills landscape is dotted with pickup trucks, palm trees, window bars, cacti, chain fences and toy-littered lawns. Many residents own guns, if only because of the handful of sex offenders who call the area home. More than 90 percent of the humble, single-story homes are occupied by renters.

Pueblo Gardens could benefit from a public safety campaign, but some residents say they are appalled anyone would think the answer is more guns.

"We could take that $400 per shotgun and give it to these people so they could go buy groceries, pay rent, pay their utility bills, something useful," said neighborhood association president Cindy Fayala. "Vigilantism is not the answer."

McClusky argued that like signs posted in yards advertising alarm systems, signs that warn the homeowners have guns would get the message across, he said.

"I'd like to prevent them from becoming a victim," he said.

At least 13 single women in Houston have already benefited from the program.

Tiffany Braggs, 44, said she had never owned or fired a gun before she signed up for The Armed Citizen Project in Houston after her condominium management board warned residents of growing crime.

"I feel a little bit more secure knowing that I can defend my home and my children," said Braggs, who now plans to buy a handgun to keep in her purse.

Alan M. Gottlieb, founder of the Second Amendment Foundation in Bellevue, Wash., said he expects to see more gun giveaways as President Barack Obama and other leaders call for gun restrictions.

"All this is happening because it's a pushback," he said. "If others weren't screaming for more control you wouldn't see all the sales for guns and ammunition."

___

For more information about the national gun giveaway program, visit http://www.armedcitizenproject.org/

Louis Taylor framed by the Tucson police for murder - 42 years in prison

Source

Man imprisoned for fatal Tucson hotel fire to be freed after 42 years

By Richard Ruelas The Republic | azcentral.com Fri Mar 29, 2013 10:38 PM

A man convicted in 1972 of 28 counts of murder in the infamous Pioneer Hotel fire in Tucson will secure his freedom Tuesday after 42 years in prison.

Louis Taylor, 59, was 16 when he was arrested shortly after the Pioneer Hotel caught fire in 1970. Twenty-nine people died in the blaze, which started on the fourth floor of the 11-story hotel. Firefighters’ ladders could not reach the upper floors.

Taylor is scheduled to enter an unspecified plea in Pima County Superior Court Tuesday, after which he will be sentenced to the time he has already served.

Volunteer attorneys from the Arizona Justice Project have been looking at Taylor’s case for more than a decade. This year, they filed a motion for a new trial, citing sworn depositions from experts who said modern forensic techniques cast doubt as to whether the fire was arson.

One of those experts, a Tucson fire investigator, reviewed all available evidence and said he could not rule out the possibility that the fire was caused by accident. However, that same investigator said his work was hampered because some of the evidence from the 43-year-old blaze, which some say is the worst disaster in Tucson history, had been destroyed.

Pima County Attorney’s Office spokeswoman Isabel Burruel-Smutzer confirmed the plea arrangement late Friday.

“In return for the entry of (his) plea, Mr. Taylor will be found guilty by the court and sentenced to the 42 years he has served in prison,” Smutzer told the Arizona Republic in an e-mail.

“Efforts have been made to locate and discuss the plea with surviving victims of the fire, many of whom plan to be present at Tuesday's hearing,” she said.

The Pima County Attorney’s Office would not comment Friday, nor would attorneys for the Arizona Justice Project.

However a public relations firm for Polsinelli Shughart, a national law firm that has been working on the case, sent a news release on Thursday touting a story that was going to be aired on “60 Minutes” Sunday.

The news release said the CBS news program would profile a man who had been in prison for more than 40 years and would be set free. The news release also promised reporters a news conference next week at the law firm’s downtown Phoenix office with the freed man.

A “60 Minutes” clip on the CBS News website shows reporter Steve Kroft interviewing Phoenix attorney Ed Novak about the case. In 2002, “60 Minutes” also did a story raising questions about the Pioneer Hotel fire case.

The clip from Sunday’s story shows a portion of a sworn deposition taken in November of the original fire investigator in the case, Cy Holmes.

He is shown testifying that he determined the blaze was set by a young African American man because “blacks, at that point, their background was the use of fire for beneficial purposes.”

Taylor, an African-American, has maintained his innocence since his conviction.

Holmes, during a phone interview from his California office on Friday, said he stood by his original findings.

“The techniques and methods I used 42 years ago are the same, or about identical, to the ones being used today,” he said. “You can’t do it today because the evidence isn’t here, but I had the evidence in front of me.”

Taylor was convicted by an all-White jury after a seven-week trial. According to an Arizona Daily Star story from 1972, after the verdict was read, he held his head in his hands sobbing and said, “I’m not guilty. I’m not guilty.”

Prison records show Taylor is housed at the Lewis prison in Buckeye. He has worked as a prison barber and beautician since June 2011.

He also has had 68 disciplinary infractions during his 41 years behind bars, including sexual assault in 1995, narcotics possession in 1991 and arson in 1996.

For the last decade, his infractions have largely been for showing disrespect to staff or disobeying orders. His most recent infraction, for disorderly conduct, was in December.