Law and Disorder – Page 162

Happy Belated Mothers’ Day

And for all you mothers out there here is a heart warming story from the UK via Says Uncle:

Schoolboy James Killen, 18, was held by police after next-door neighbour Jonathan London, 46, died of stab wounds.

It is believed Mr London attacked the teenager’s mother, former air stewardess Sandra Crawford, at her home in St Alban’s, Herts on Friday.

Mr Killen was arrested on suspicion of stabbing to death Mr London but later released on bail.

It is believed the teenager, a student at nearby Sandringham School, attacked Mr London after he discovered him slashing his mother.

The kid should have called the police and stood by watching his mother get slashed to death until the cops finally arrived. That way he wouldn’t be sitting in jail. See making self defense illegal is perfectly logical.

Why I Hate the Police State

Why do I hate the idea of a police state? Because they will kill your fucking dogs. <a href="“>Every Day, No Days Off links to a video for a SWAT team raid where they bust down the door, storm in, and shoot the man’s dogs one of which was in it’s still in it’s fucking cage! Oh and what offense required such a forceful and zealous response? Possession of weed. Here’s the video:

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RbwSwvUaRqc]

If that doesn’t infuriate you I don’t know what will. Oh and in the end the police charged the parents with endangering their children. It seems to me the SWAT team did a better job of that than the parents.

More Fun and Games from The TSA

Via Dvorak Uncensored we have this gem:

MAY 6–A Transportation Security Administration screener is facing an assault rap after he allegedly beat a co-worker who joked about the size of the man’s genitalia after he walked through a security scanner. The May 4 confrontation involved Rolando Negrin, 44, and other TSA employees who had previously taken part in a training session at Miami International Airport, according to the below Miami-Dade Police Department reports. Negrin, pictured in the mug shot at right, and his co-workers had been training with new “whole body image” machines–the controversial kind that provide very revealing images of a traveler–when Negrin walked through the scanner.

But remember those TSA agents aren’t going to make such remarks about you just each other. Your privacy is perfectly safe.

Not This Crap Again

Jay over at MArooned stumbled upon some major stupidity. Somebody is suing Starbucks because they dared to serve him hot tea:

According to the complaint, the plaintiff Zeynep Inanli was served tea that was “unreasonably hot, in containers which were not safe,” at a Starbucks store at 685 Third Avenue in Manhattan.

As a result of Starbucks’ negligence, the plaintiff suffered “great physical pain and mental anguish,” including the burns, the complaint said.

Of course they threw in the mental anguish. It’s easy to make millions when unspecified damages are thrown in. This would be a fine country if it wasn’t for all the fucking frivolous lawsuits.

Arizona’s Support Our Law Enforcement and Safe Neighborhoods Act

There has been a lot of hullabaloo over Arizona’s new law that has claimed to give police the right to ask for your papers so to speak. With all the hysteria surrounding the bill I decided to go read the bill for myself. I’m not a lawyer but I can generally derive laws from text to an extent. It didn’t take long for me to find the clause that’s causing all the uproar:

B. FOR ANY LAWFUL CONTACT MADE BY A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL OR AGENCY OF THIS STATE OR A COUNTY, CITY, TOWN OR OTHER POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THIS STATE WHERE REASONABLE SUSPICION EXISTS THAT THE PERSON IS AN ALIEN WHO IS UNLAWFULLY PRESENT IN THE UNITED STATES, A REASONABLE ATTEMPT SHALL BE MADE, WHEN PRACTICABLE, TO DETERMINE THE IMMIGRATION STATUS OF THE PERSON. THE PERSON’S IMMIGRATION STATUS SHALL BE VERIFIED WITH THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT PURSUANT TO 8 UNITED STATES CODE SECTION 1373(c).

Talk about vague. I found nothing else in this bill that specifies what lawful contact means, what reasonable suspicion means (usually it’s a cheap cop out that gives officers the authority to make up any old reason for searching your person or vehicle), or what they mean by when practicable.

I believe there are always grounds for concern when vague laws are passed. With the wording present seems to make it perfectly legal for an officer to walk up to you and ask for your papers. As no guidelines are in the bill restricting what “reasonable suspicion” is the officer can pretty much make up any old excuse (the suspect was talking in Spanish, etc.). After carousing through the entire bill I can say that yes this is a horrible piece of legislation based on the above mentioned clause.

This law enacts a guilty until proven innocent clause. According the the Supreme Court case Coffin v. United States (and common sense):

The principle that there is a presumption of innocence in favor of the accused is the undoubted law, axiomatic and elementary, and its enforcement lies at the foundation of the administration of our criminal law.

The entire text of the decision can be read here. It’s a good read as it does go over the history of presumption of innocence. And that is my major quarrel with Arizona’s new law. It violates the basic idea that a person is presumed innocent. Remember no proof of a crime needs to exist for an officer to ask for your papers, just reasonable suspicion (which could be anything really).

Whether you want stronger immigration laws and/or stricter laws against illegal aliens in this country I think you can agree that assuming guilt is no sane way to approach this topic in a free country (and if you think the idea of guilty until proven innocent is a good idea may I suggest moving to China). A person should never have to be assumed guilty without hard evidence collected tying them to the said crime. Having “reasonable suspicion” isn’t hard evidence nor does it constitute an investigation. It just means the officer had a hunch or gut feeling and was able to articulate it well enough to be considered “reasonable” (reasonable of course being different depending on the person you talk to).

Personally I think this is a horrible law that goes against the very ideas this country’s justice system is founded on.

Body Banks

I’m guessing most people reading this site don’t remember the ’80’s cyberpunk T.V. show Max Headroom. It was a great, although very short lived, show dealing with all sorts of technological issues. One thing that was prominent in the future were body banks. Body banks were where dead people were shipped to and their organs sold off for sale.

Well Uncle informs us that New York may be going that route. If Assemblyman Brodsky has his way you will become state property upon death and your organs will be dispersed.

Now I’m all for donating your organs upon death but this is outrageous. The state would be laying claim to your body making you property of the government. I’m sorry but if somebody doesn’t want to donate their organs when they die that’s their own damned business.

Can You Say Owned

Dvorak Uncensored let us know that if you buy property that you reasonably expect is stolen law enforcement is going to investigate. For the last couple of weeks there has been a saga going on at Gizmodo. They obtained what is believed to be the next version of the iPhone and they trickled out data for the better part of two weeks.

The saga involved how they obtained the iPhone prototype. After inquiry the story given by the Gizmodo people was they purchased it from a man who found it in a bar. Obviously the story sounds a little fishy and is dripping with potential criminal activity. Well that’s what the Feds thought so they raided the home of the Gizmodo editor who had the phone.

This story has intrigued me from the start. Not because I wanted to see the new iPhone, I really could care less about that. What I found intriguing was the potential legal ramifications involved here. It was very reasonable to believe the property Gizmodo purchased was stolen. To top that off this happened in California where buying merchandise you reasonably believe to be lost or stolen is a crime. Of course this case isn’t so black and white since journalists are able to get away with a lot more than you and me. Oh but we have yet another detail in that Gizmodo pretty much stated they knew the property was lost or stolen because the dragged poor Gary Powell through the mud. Mr. Powell is the Apple employee who lost the new iPhone prototype.

Still this case wouldn’t be a huge deal in my opinion if Gizmodo contacted Apple in an effort to return the device and in the mean time took some pictures and/or video of the new iPhone. But they also dissected the phone so they could show of the internals of the new device.

This should be an interesting case since it will further outline the rights of journalists in regards to buying reasonably believed to be stolen merchandise in order to do a story.

“WEAPONS: A. Discharge of Weapons: It shall be unlawful to discharge any firearm, air gun, BB gun, pistol, cannon, toy gun, bow, mechanically drawn bow, or any type of mechanical device projecting pellets, arrows, missiles or projectiles, leaden or otherwise or any other type of missile excepting in a regularly established shooting gallery or unless fired or discharged for ceremonial purposes with a weapon that may cause a report but does not deliver a projectile capable of causing serious injury and with the approval of the Chief of Police; provided, that this subsection shall not be construed to prohibit any officer of the law from discharging a firearm in the performance of his/her duty or for training purposes at an authorized police training facility; nor to any citizen for the discharge of a firearm when lawfully defending his person or property.”

If something could possibly be used in any manner to have fun we need to ban it immediately!

Tag: Law and Disorder