By Bob Walsh
Now, the DA didn’t agree to pass because it didn’t happen. In point of fact it did happen. Three First-Grade girls plotted to murder another First-Grade girl by poison. They were going to use silica gel packets, which they believed to be poisonous. (They really aren’t.)
This situation became general knowledge when the authorities at the Winterberry Charter School in Anchorage, Alaska sent out an email to parents.
I guess thumbtacks on the seats or spit-balls to the back of the head are déclassé now. Nowadays seven-year olds want to actually murder one another.
The world is truly going crazy.
Thursday, March 31, 2016
JOCK NAILED FOR RAPING PASSED-OUT DRUNK WOMAN
By Bob Walsh
A former Stanford University athlete has just been found guilty of three counts of sexual assault for the rape of a passed-out drunk woman at an on-campus frat party.
Brock Turner, 20, is looking at possibly ten years in the slammer and having to register as a sex offender for the rest of his life as a result. It took the jury slightly less than two days to make their decision.
Turner, who had hoped to swim in the Olympics this year, remains free on bond. He will be sentenced on June 2.
Turner was arrested on January 18 of last year when he was seen by two bicyclists having sex with the apparently unconscious woman outside of the Kappa Alpha frat party at one in the morning.
Both Turner and the woman were stinking drunk at the time of the assault.
A former Stanford University athlete has just been found guilty of three counts of sexual assault for the rape of a passed-out drunk woman at an on-campus frat party.
Brock Turner, 20, is looking at possibly ten years in the slammer and having to register as a sex offender for the rest of his life as a result. It took the jury slightly less than two days to make their decision.
Turner, who had hoped to swim in the Olympics this year, remains free on bond. He will be sentenced on June 2.
Turner was arrested on January 18 of last year when he was seen by two bicyclists having sex with the apparently unconscious woman outside of the Kappa Alpha frat party at one in the morning.
Both Turner and the woman were stinking drunk at the time of the assault.
TWO CALIFORNIA CCORRECTIONAL OFFICERS FACE CHARGES FOR OFF-DUTY BAR BRAWL DEATH
By Bob Walsh
Now this one doesn’t exactly peg out the stink-o-meter, but there is definitely a faint smell of rotten fish around the case.
Travis Woolf, 37, and Sergio Aranda, 36, used to be Correctional Officers at Salinas Valley State Prison in the formerly great state of California. They are facing manslaughter charges in the death of Alvaro Medrano, 54, a vineyard manger, in a bar fight on Sept. 7, 2014. They were both sacked in April of 2015.
It seems that there was some sort of confrontation between the three principles inside the Elkhorn Bar. When Woolf and Aranda got around to leaving the bar Medrano and five of his home-boys were waiting, and they attacked Woolf and Aranda. Medrano got knocked down by Woolf and hit his head. At some point, while Medrano was down and maybe unconscious, he got stomped by Aranda. Medrano died. There is some video surveillance of this fight.
It further seems that Woolf and Aranda had priors for involvement in bar fights. Several priors. It would also seem that Medrano was known for mixing it up in bar brawls.
Where this starts to smell bad is David Duckworth. Duckworth allegedly witnessed this brawl from some distance away. Duckworth was a friend of Medrano and gave a statement to the local constabulary that was very beneficial to Woolf and Aranda. However, that video was “misfiled” and the prosecution didn’t “find” it until December 2015. Duckworth has since died. The defense is presenting the Duckworth material as “vital” to their case.
So, was this an honest whoops as the prosecution claims, or evidence of bad faith prosecution as the defense claims? I don’t know, but I do know that it at least smells somewhat fishy. There have been large numbers of supporters for both sides of this issue in court as motions have been made. So far, the judge has refused to dismiss the charges and it looks like the case against Woolf and Aranda will proceed.
EDITOR’S NOTE: Forget the rotten fish smell. All these brawlers deserved each other. With Medrano packed in dirt and Wolf and Aranda probably staying out of bars, there will now be fewer MMA bouts at the Elkhorn Bar.
Now this one doesn’t exactly peg out the stink-o-meter, but there is definitely a faint smell of rotten fish around the case.
Travis Woolf, 37, and Sergio Aranda, 36, used to be Correctional Officers at Salinas Valley State Prison in the formerly great state of California. They are facing manslaughter charges in the death of Alvaro Medrano, 54, a vineyard manger, in a bar fight on Sept. 7, 2014. They were both sacked in April of 2015.
It seems that there was some sort of confrontation between the three principles inside the Elkhorn Bar. When Woolf and Aranda got around to leaving the bar Medrano and five of his home-boys were waiting, and they attacked Woolf and Aranda. Medrano got knocked down by Woolf and hit his head. At some point, while Medrano was down and maybe unconscious, he got stomped by Aranda. Medrano died. There is some video surveillance of this fight.
It further seems that Woolf and Aranda had priors for involvement in bar fights. Several priors. It would also seem that Medrano was known for mixing it up in bar brawls.
Where this starts to smell bad is David Duckworth. Duckworth allegedly witnessed this brawl from some distance away. Duckworth was a friend of Medrano and gave a statement to the local constabulary that was very beneficial to Woolf and Aranda. However, that video was “misfiled” and the prosecution didn’t “find” it until December 2015. Duckworth has since died. The defense is presenting the Duckworth material as “vital” to their case.
So, was this an honest whoops as the prosecution claims, or evidence of bad faith prosecution as the defense claims? I don’t know, but I do know that it at least smells somewhat fishy. There have been large numbers of supporters for both sides of this issue in court as motions have been made. So far, the judge has refused to dismiss the charges and it looks like the case against Woolf and Aranda will proceed.
EDITOR’S NOTE: Forget the rotten fish smell. All these brawlers deserved each other. With Medrano packed in dirt and Wolf and Aranda probably staying out of bars, there will now be fewer MMA bouts at the Elkhorn Bar.
TRUMP PROVES HE IS A POLITICALLY SUICIDAL WHACKO
Attempts to commit political harakiri may have finally come to fruition by his interview with MSNBC’s Chris Matthews
How many times can Donald Trump shoot himself in the foot without blowing it completely away? How many times can he fall on his own sword without succeeding at political harakiri? This week The Donald finally proved that he is a politically suicidal whacko … twice!
On Wednesday, during an interview with MSNBC’s Chris Matthews, Trump said he was pro-life and that if Congress passes a law outlawing the procedure, women should be punished if they get an abortion.
During a town hall meeting on Tuesday night, Trump told CNN’s Anderson Cooper that Japan and South Korea should be allowed to have nuclear weapons to defend themselves against North Korea and China. Then he went further than that by saying that Saudi Arabia should also be allowed to have nuclear weapons
What a whacko!
Trump had already alienated most women by a number of sexist comments, but his abortion remark will probably leave him with only a handful of women supporters, mainly those within his family. He succeeded, for the moment, in uniting both the far left and the far right. Both pro-choice and pro-life groups condemned Trump’s idea of punishing women for getting abortions. Both Ted Cruz and John Kasich condemned him for advocating that women be punished for getting an abortion.
Seeing that Trump’s abortion gaffe had infuriated conservatives as well as liberals, his campaign quickly released a statement saying that he meant doctors should be punished when they perform an abortion. Nice try, but it’s too late to repair the damage.
So Trump is pro-life. Yeah right. In 1999 Trump appeared on NBC’s Meet the Press and told Tim Russert that he was “very pro-choice” and even approved of partial-birth abortions. Now he tries to explain his turnaround by saying he has evolved. What a phony!
As for those nukes, Japan will let hell freeze over before even thinking about acquiring nuclear weapons. Remember Hiroshima and Nagasaki!
Letting Saudi Arabia acquire nukes? How whacko can you get?
I believe Trump’s attempts at political harakiri have finally succeeded and he will not be the Republican nominee for president. But if the Republicans are so whacko as to revive The Whacko Donald, Hillary will win by a landslide and the Senate will once again have a Democratic majority.
In the past I have said that if the election is between Trump and Hillary, I would vote for The Donald, but I would be holding my nose and a barf bag while doing so. If Trump somehow manages to survive this week’s whacko remarks and it’s between him and the Clinton bitch, I’ll do something I’ve never done since I became old enough to vote … stay home.
How many times can Donald Trump shoot himself in the foot without blowing it completely away? How many times can he fall on his own sword without succeeding at political harakiri? This week The Donald finally proved that he is a politically suicidal whacko … twice!
On Wednesday, during an interview with MSNBC’s Chris Matthews, Trump said he was pro-life and that if Congress passes a law outlawing the procedure, women should be punished if they get an abortion.
During a town hall meeting on Tuesday night, Trump told CNN’s Anderson Cooper that Japan and South Korea should be allowed to have nuclear weapons to defend themselves against North Korea and China. Then he went further than that by saying that Saudi Arabia should also be allowed to have nuclear weapons
What a whacko!
Trump had already alienated most women by a number of sexist comments, but his abortion remark will probably leave him with only a handful of women supporters, mainly those within his family. He succeeded, for the moment, in uniting both the far left and the far right. Both pro-choice and pro-life groups condemned Trump’s idea of punishing women for getting abortions. Both Ted Cruz and John Kasich condemned him for advocating that women be punished for getting an abortion.
Seeing that Trump’s abortion gaffe had infuriated conservatives as well as liberals, his campaign quickly released a statement saying that he meant doctors should be punished when they perform an abortion. Nice try, but it’s too late to repair the damage.
So Trump is pro-life. Yeah right. In 1999 Trump appeared on NBC’s Meet the Press and told Tim Russert that he was “very pro-choice” and even approved of partial-birth abortions. Now he tries to explain his turnaround by saying he has evolved. What a phony!
As for those nukes, Japan will let hell freeze over before even thinking about acquiring nuclear weapons. Remember Hiroshima and Nagasaki!
Letting Saudi Arabia acquire nukes? How whacko can you get?
I believe Trump’s attempts at political harakiri have finally succeeded and he will not be the Republican nominee for president. But if the Republicans are so whacko as to revive The Whacko Donald, Hillary will win by a landslide and the Senate will once again have a Democratic majority.
In the past I have said that if the election is between Trump and Hillary, I would vote for The Donald, but I would be holding my nose and a barf bag while doing so. If Trump somehow manages to survive this week’s whacko remarks and it’s between him and the Clinton bitch, I’ll do something I’ve never done since I became old enough to vote … stay home.
ROOM FOR ONE JUST FREED UP ON CALIFORNIA DEATH ROW
By Bob Walsh
Bernard L. Hamilton, 64, shuffled off this mortal coil on Death Row in California this week, of natural causes.
Bernie had been on death row since March of 1981. He murdered and dismembered a woman who discovered him burglarizing her van.
Since 1978, when the death penalty was, at least in theory, reactivated in the People’s Republic of California, 79 condemned inmates have died of natural causes. Another 25 self-rehabilitated. A total of 13 have actually been executed in that time but none for many, many years. There are now 747 guests of the state on death row in the formerly great state of California.
It seems that California wants to HAVE a death penalty as long as they don’t actually have to USE it.
Bernard L. Hamilton, 64, shuffled off this mortal coil on Death Row in California this week, of natural causes.
Bernie had been on death row since March of 1981. He murdered and dismembered a woman who discovered him burglarizing her van.
Since 1978, when the death penalty was, at least in theory, reactivated in the People’s Republic of California, 79 condemned inmates have died of natural causes. Another 25 self-rehabilitated. A total of 13 have actually been executed in that time but none for many, many years. There are now 747 guests of the state on death row in the formerly great state of California.
It seems that California wants to HAVE a death penalty as long as they don’t actually have to USE it.
BAY AREA COAST GUARD CREW INTERCEPTS COCAINE SMUGGLING SUB
Four suspected transnational criminal drug runners were aboard the blow-laden submersible about 300 miles southwest of Panama when the boat was spotted cruising just below the ocean surface
By Evan Sernoffsky
San Francisco Chronicle
March 28, 2016
A Bay Area Coast Guard crew busted a group of smugglers piloting a covert submarine loaded with 6 tons of cocaine through the open waters off the coast of Central America, officials said Monday.
Four suspected transnational criminal drug runners were aboard the blow-laden submersible on March 3 about 300 miles southwest of Panama when the boat was spotted cruising just below the ocean surface.
A U.S. Customs and Border Protection airplane spotted the vessel and scrambled two interceptor boats with the crew from Alameda, Lt. Donnie Brzuska said.
Once on board, the Coast Guard team found 12,800 pounds of coke with an estimated street value of over $200 million along with a loaded gun in the cockpit, Brzuska said.
The suspected smugglers were apprehended without incident. The Coast Guard released video of the dramatic open-ocean raid, showing armed officers storming the simplistic craft.
The boat, a self-propelled semi-submersible, is one of scores of makeshift vessels that glide just below the ocean surface to smuggle drugs into the United States.
The vessels have a mostly submerged hull with a cockpit and exhaust pipe that stick out just above water, making them hard to detect because of their low profile.
The Coast Guard busted a similar boat southwest of the Mexican-Guatemalan boarder in January.
Last year the Coast Guard seized more than 319,000 pounds of cocaine from semi-submersible boats and so far this fiscal year, which began Oct. 1, the agency has taken more than 200,000 pounds of drugs from such boats, officials said.
By Evan Sernoffsky
San Francisco Chronicle
March 28, 2016
A Bay Area Coast Guard crew busted a group of smugglers piloting a covert submarine loaded with 6 tons of cocaine through the open waters off the coast of Central America, officials said Monday.
Four suspected transnational criminal drug runners were aboard the blow-laden submersible on March 3 about 300 miles southwest of Panama when the boat was spotted cruising just below the ocean surface.
A U.S. Customs and Border Protection airplane spotted the vessel and scrambled two interceptor boats with the crew from Alameda, Lt. Donnie Brzuska said.
Once on board, the Coast Guard team found 12,800 pounds of coke with an estimated street value of over $200 million along with a loaded gun in the cockpit, Brzuska said.
The suspected smugglers were apprehended without incident. The Coast Guard released video of the dramatic open-ocean raid, showing armed officers storming the simplistic craft.
The boat, a self-propelled semi-submersible, is one of scores of makeshift vessels that glide just below the ocean surface to smuggle drugs into the United States.
The vessels have a mostly submerged hull with a cockpit and exhaust pipe that stick out just above water, making them hard to detect because of their low profile.
The Coast Guard busted a similar boat southwest of the Mexican-Guatemalan boarder in January.
Last year the Coast Guard seized more than 319,000 pounds of cocaine from semi-submersible boats and so far this fiscal year, which began Oct. 1, the agency has taken more than 200,000 pounds of drugs from such boats, officials said.
COAL MINE ROOSTERS WILL NO LONGER WAKE UP PENNSYLVANIA WOMAN
21-year-old Jenna Caso up and shot the Pioneer Tunnel Coal Mine’s two roosters for waking her up at six in the morning
By Alicia Nieves
WNEP
March 28, 2016
ASHLAND, Pennsylvania -- A woman is facing animal cruelty charges after she killed two roosters in Schuylkill County.
At the Pioneer Tunnel Coal Mine in Ashland, it's quieter than usual. Normally, two roosters could be heard belting out a sunrise crow or seen roaming the roads at the tourist attraction.
However, the 'Brother Roosters,' who were always seen together, were recently shot and killed.
"These two roosters would follow you around they would go down to open up," said Tony Loftus.
Loftus works at the Pioneer Tunnel and says about a year ago the roosters were donated to the tunnel. They replaced a former beloved rooster and hen known as 'Big Red' and 'Anne-thracite', who died of natural causes.
"Normally when I come in the morning to fire up the steam locomotive. The roosters would be crowing when the sun comes up. I know I will probably miss that," said Loftus.
That crowing is what caused their death a few weeks ago. According to police, Jenna Caso, 21, was sleeping in a home on Walnut Street when she heard the roosters crowing just after 6 in the morning. She then shot them three times.
Court documents show that after Caso shot the two roosters, a witness ran up to her and yelled, 'Why did you do that?' Caso replied simply, 'They woke me up.' Then, she went back into her home.
"That seems pretty extreme," said Samantha Kinkaid.
Kinkaid lives on the other side of Walnut Street and saw the roosters often, she's among those who thought the animals were part of the community.
"They seemed to be like farm animals they never bothered anybody. I never heard of them attacking anybody. They seemed pretty friendly," said Kinkaid.
Ashland Police charged Jenna Caso with misdemeanor animal cruelty and reckless endangerment. Her case now has to go through the courts.
Police added that they had never received a complaint about the roosters by anyone in Ashland including Caso.
By Alicia Nieves
WNEP
March 28, 2016
ASHLAND, Pennsylvania -- A woman is facing animal cruelty charges after she killed two roosters in Schuylkill County.
At the Pioneer Tunnel Coal Mine in Ashland, it's quieter than usual. Normally, two roosters could be heard belting out a sunrise crow or seen roaming the roads at the tourist attraction.
However, the 'Brother Roosters,' who were always seen together, were recently shot and killed.
"These two roosters would follow you around they would go down to open up," said Tony Loftus.
Loftus works at the Pioneer Tunnel and says about a year ago the roosters were donated to the tunnel. They replaced a former beloved rooster and hen known as 'Big Red' and 'Anne-thracite', who died of natural causes.
"Normally when I come in the morning to fire up the steam locomotive. The roosters would be crowing when the sun comes up. I know I will probably miss that," said Loftus.
That crowing is what caused their death a few weeks ago. According to police, Jenna Caso, 21, was sleeping in a home on Walnut Street when she heard the roosters crowing just after 6 in the morning. She then shot them three times.
Court documents show that after Caso shot the two roosters, a witness ran up to her and yelled, 'Why did you do that?' Caso replied simply, 'They woke me up.' Then, she went back into her home.
"That seems pretty extreme," said Samantha Kinkaid.
Kinkaid lives on the other side of Walnut Street and saw the roosters often, she's among those who thought the animals were part of the community.
"They seemed to be like farm animals they never bothered anybody. I never heard of them attacking anybody. They seemed pretty friendly," said Kinkaid.
Ashland Police charged Jenna Caso with misdemeanor animal cruelty and reckless endangerment. Her case now has to go through the courts.
Police added that they had never received a complaint about the roosters by anyone in Ashland including Caso.
Wednesday, March 30, 2016
55 YEARS AFTER THE CRIME, ILLINOIS MAN IS CONVICTED FOR THE MURDER OF A 7-YEAR-OLD GIRL, BUT 3 YEARS LATER, PHONE RECORDS SHOW HE WAS 35 MILES AWAY AT THE TIME OF THE CRIME
In 2012, Jack McCullough was convicted and sentenced to life in prison for the 1957 murder and rape of seven-year-old Maria Ridulph, but telephone records now corroborate his alibi that he was not anywhere nearby when the girl was abducted
This is a strange case from DeKalb County, Illinois.
Seven-year-old Maria Ridulph was abducted, raped and stabbed to death in Sycamore in 1957. The case lingered as a cold case until 2012 when Jack McCullough, a security guard, was arrested, tried convicted of the crimes and sentenced to life in prison. McCullough had been a neighbor of the slain girl.
During the trial McCullough claimed he was in Rockford at the time of the killing. Rockford is about 35 miles from Sycamore.
Now, after researching the evidence for the past six months, prosecutor Richard Schnack has concluded McCullough is innocent. A search of phone records showed that he did make a call from Rockford at about the time of Maria’s abduction, thus confirming his alibi. Furthermore, Schmack discovered that in interviewing a witness to the abduction, investigators used a discredited photo-lineup technique that has since been outlawed.
His public defender intends to file a motion before a DeKalb County court on Tuesday seeking dismissal of the charges against McCullough.
However, Maria’s brother thinks Schmack is a schmuck. Charles Ridulph filed a motion in court Monday. In his motion he requested that a special prosecutor be appointed to uphold McCullough’s conviction.
This is a strange case from DeKalb County, Illinois.
Seven-year-old Maria Ridulph was abducted, raped and stabbed to death in Sycamore in 1957. The case lingered as a cold case until 2012 when Jack McCullough, a security guard, was arrested, tried convicted of the crimes and sentenced to life in prison. McCullough had been a neighbor of the slain girl.
During the trial McCullough claimed he was in Rockford at the time of the killing. Rockford is about 35 miles from Sycamore.
Now, after researching the evidence for the past six months, prosecutor Richard Schnack has concluded McCullough is innocent. A search of phone records showed that he did make a call from Rockford at about the time of Maria’s abduction, thus confirming his alibi. Furthermore, Schmack discovered that in interviewing a witness to the abduction, investigators used a discredited photo-lineup technique that has since been outlawed.
His public defender intends to file a motion before a DeKalb County court on Tuesday seeking dismissal of the charges against McCullough.
However, Maria’s brother thinks Schmack is a schmuck. Charles Ridulph filed a motion in court Monday. In his motion he requested that a special prosecutor be appointed to uphold McCullough’s conviction.
HOUSTON MAN EXONERATED SEVEN YEARS AFTER DRUG LAB TEST PROVED HIS INNOCENCE
Johnny Adams served a 90-day jail sentence despite the District Attorney’s knowledge that he had no drugs at all
By Meagan Flynn
Houston Press
March 29, 2016
Less than a month after Johnny Adams pled guilty to possession of less than a gram of cocaine in 2009, the Harris County District Attorney's Office received results from the Houston Police Department crime lab showing that, actually, Adams had no drugs at all.
And then: nothing. Adams continued to sit in jail for the remainder of his 90-day sentence, despite the fact that the DA had clear-cut evidence that would have vacated his conviction and returned him to his family. In fact, it wasn't until five and a half years later, in July 2014, that prosecutors finally acknowledged the crime lab results and sent a letter to Adams that he was “convicted in error.” Finally, this month, he was formally exonerated — a good seven years late.
Adams's exoneration is one of dozens of drug conviction reversals in Harris County in recent years. From 2014 to the end of 2015, 73 people were cleared of drug crimes in Harris County, leading the country two years in a row in drug exonerations (and, as a result, all exonerations), according to an annual report from the National Registry of Exonerations released last month. That's largely because, in 2014, Harris County district attorney's conviction review team started aggressively hunting for false drug convictions after prosecutors realized test results from the lab were somehow never seeing the light of day. They were often processed so slowly that they were just forgotten about and never communicated—meanwhile, innocent people sat in jail. And according to Harris County Public Defender Nick Hughes, who has filed dozens of writs for innocent drug offenders, that's likely what happened in Adams's case.
“Sometimes [the results] just sat there on somebody's desk,” Hughes said. “It was worse than just falling through the cracks. There was no system in place. There was nothing that dealt with this issue whatsoever.”
While this problem may have been brought to light, prompting dozens of post-conviction writs, Hughes says there are several other problems that still persist.
One of them is that most innocent people are pleading guilty to low-level drug offenses because they just want to get their jail time over with. Many, he said, often can't afford bail, and so they're sitting in jail waiting for their court date, which may be reset multiple times. After prosecutors realized the problem that this presents in drug cases — causing people to plead to a lesser sentence before the drug test results even come back — District Attorney Devon Anderson created a policy in early 2015 stating that prosecutors can't offer plea deals until they've got those test results back from the lab.
“But that's a really shitty solution if you're the guy sitting there behind bars,” Hughes said. “You might have lost your job, maybe your kids, your family might have some tension they're left to deal with. It's just a bad situation.”
Another problem, Hughes said, is the field tests cops use to determine whether someone has drugs, tests that are notorious for false positives. In fact, the Washington Post once compiled a short list of the amount of strange items these field tests had mistaken for drugs: Deodorant, billiards chalk, breath mints and Jolly Ranchers are just a few examples. Perhaps that's why the results for some of those "drugs," when taken to the lab for more formal testing, turn up negative. Hughes says that in many cases, it's impossible to know exactly where the system failed because there's no documentation about how those field tests were even administered. As Hughes told the the Press, “My bottom line is, when you can't check their work and the courts aren't really holding them accountable for anything, it really kind of limits your ability to push these issues or have any change.”
Hughes said that change, at this point, really rests in judges' hands: Until they start granting drug offenders more personal bonds so they don't need to sit in jail awaiting either test results or a court date, the problems aren't going away any time soon.
Over at the National Registry of Exonerations, where researchers track exonerations on a daily basis, Director Sam Gross called Johnny Adams's case "disturbing." But his colleague, the Pulitzer Prize-winning investigative journalist Maurice Possley, offered perhaps a more disturbing idea: Johnny Adams's case is among those that we know about. How many other cases of innocent offenders sat atop prosecutors' desks untouched?
EDITOR’S MOTE: It’s a bitch to be poor when you’re charged with a crime and can’t afford to hire an attorney. I suspect Adams was given a court-appointed lawyer who, instead of defending him, advised him to cop a plea. To the court appointed attorney, this is just another coin-collecting quickie. Case closed and on to the next sucker!
By Meagan Flynn
Houston Press
March 29, 2016
Less than a month after Johnny Adams pled guilty to possession of less than a gram of cocaine in 2009, the Harris County District Attorney's Office received results from the Houston Police Department crime lab showing that, actually, Adams had no drugs at all.
And then: nothing. Adams continued to sit in jail for the remainder of his 90-day sentence, despite the fact that the DA had clear-cut evidence that would have vacated his conviction and returned him to his family. In fact, it wasn't until five and a half years later, in July 2014, that prosecutors finally acknowledged the crime lab results and sent a letter to Adams that he was “convicted in error.” Finally, this month, he was formally exonerated — a good seven years late.
Adams's exoneration is one of dozens of drug conviction reversals in Harris County in recent years. From 2014 to the end of 2015, 73 people were cleared of drug crimes in Harris County, leading the country two years in a row in drug exonerations (and, as a result, all exonerations), according to an annual report from the National Registry of Exonerations released last month. That's largely because, in 2014, Harris County district attorney's conviction review team started aggressively hunting for false drug convictions after prosecutors realized test results from the lab were somehow never seeing the light of day. They were often processed so slowly that they were just forgotten about and never communicated—meanwhile, innocent people sat in jail. And according to Harris County Public Defender Nick Hughes, who has filed dozens of writs for innocent drug offenders, that's likely what happened in Adams's case.
“Sometimes [the results] just sat there on somebody's desk,” Hughes said. “It was worse than just falling through the cracks. There was no system in place. There was nothing that dealt with this issue whatsoever.”
While this problem may have been brought to light, prompting dozens of post-conviction writs, Hughes says there are several other problems that still persist.
One of them is that most innocent people are pleading guilty to low-level drug offenses because they just want to get their jail time over with. Many, he said, often can't afford bail, and so they're sitting in jail waiting for their court date, which may be reset multiple times. After prosecutors realized the problem that this presents in drug cases — causing people to plead to a lesser sentence before the drug test results even come back — District Attorney Devon Anderson created a policy in early 2015 stating that prosecutors can't offer plea deals until they've got those test results back from the lab.
“But that's a really shitty solution if you're the guy sitting there behind bars,” Hughes said. “You might have lost your job, maybe your kids, your family might have some tension they're left to deal with. It's just a bad situation.”
Another problem, Hughes said, is the field tests cops use to determine whether someone has drugs, tests that are notorious for false positives. In fact, the Washington Post once compiled a short list of the amount of strange items these field tests had mistaken for drugs: Deodorant, billiards chalk, breath mints and Jolly Ranchers are just a few examples. Perhaps that's why the results for some of those "drugs," when taken to the lab for more formal testing, turn up negative. Hughes says that in many cases, it's impossible to know exactly where the system failed because there's no documentation about how those field tests were even administered. As Hughes told the the Press, “My bottom line is, when you can't check their work and the courts aren't really holding them accountable for anything, it really kind of limits your ability to push these issues or have any change.”
Hughes said that change, at this point, really rests in judges' hands: Until they start granting drug offenders more personal bonds so they don't need to sit in jail awaiting either test results or a court date, the problems aren't going away any time soon.
Over at the National Registry of Exonerations, where researchers track exonerations on a daily basis, Director Sam Gross called Johnny Adams's case "disturbing." But his colleague, the Pulitzer Prize-winning investigative journalist Maurice Possley, offered perhaps a more disturbing idea: Johnny Adams's case is among those that we know about. How many other cases of innocent offenders sat atop prosecutors' desks untouched?
EDITOR’S MOTE: It’s a bitch to be poor when you’re charged with a crime and can’t afford to hire an attorney. I suspect Adams was given a court-appointed lawyer who, instead of defending him, advised him to cop a plea. To the court appointed attorney, this is just another coin-collecting quickie. Case closed and on to the next sucker!
NOTABLE DEATH: PATTY DUKE
By Bob Walsh
Patty Duke cashed out her chips at age 69.
She won an Oscar for Best Supporting Actress for her portrayal of Helen Keller in THE MIRACLE WORKER. She also starred as two “identical cousins” in The Patty Duke Show on television. That show ran from 1963-1966. She was, at the time, the youngest star to appear in a show named for her.
She also won three Emmy awards.
Possibly her most memorable movie role was in the 1967 VALLEY OF THE DOLLS. She played very much against type as an alcoholic pill-head.
Patty Duke cashed out her chips at age 69.
She won an Oscar for Best Supporting Actress for her portrayal of Helen Keller in THE MIRACLE WORKER. She also starred as two “identical cousins” in The Patty Duke Show on television. That show ran from 1963-1966. She was, at the time, the youngest star to appear in a show named for her.
She also won three Emmy awards.
Possibly her most memorable movie role was in the 1967 VALLEY OF THE DOLLS. She played very much against type as an alcoholic pill-head.
SCOTUS ENDORSES FAIR SHARE
By Bob Walsh
The Supreme Court of the United States today sort-of (by default) endorsed the Fair Share concept.
Fair Share is a fee extracted from non-union members by a union, typically a public employee union, for collective bargaining costs and representational costs for those non-union members, at least theoretically.
It was expected that SCOTUS would ashcan Fair Share, but the death of Justice Scalia resulted in a 4-4 tie vote. This means the lower court decision stands. That lower court decision was that Fair Share was acceptable constitutionally.
The action was brought by non-union members of a California teachers union who did not feel they should have to pay this Fair Share fee.
The Supreme Court of the United States today sort-of (by default) endorsed the Fair Share concept.
Fair Share is a fee extracted from non-union members by a union, typically a public employee union, for collective bargaining costs and representational costs for those non-union members, at least theoretically.
It was expected that SCOTUS would ashcan Fair Share, but the death of Justice Scalia resulted in a 4-4 tie vote. This means the lower court decision stands. That lower court decision was that Fair Share was acceptable constitutionally.
The action was brought by non-union members of a California teachers union who did not feel they should have to pay this Fair Share fee.
UNDOCUMENTED IMMIGRANTS ARE MORE LIKELY TO HAVE A JOB THAN AMERICAN-BORN MEN, STUDY SAYS
Migrants drive down wages for unskilled labor, but they will do work that other people simply won't do
VICE News
March 23, 2016
Undocumented immigrants, the conventional wisdom goes, usually come to America for work and are willing to take pretty much any job they can find—and a new study from Harvard pretty much backs that up.
The study, authored by professor and economist George Borjas, found that men working in the US without papers are more likely to have a job than those who were born here.
After crunching some Census data, Borjas found that 86.6 percent of undocumented immigrant men in the United States were working or looking for work between 2012 and 2013, compared to 73.9 percent of native-born men and 81.5 legal immigrant men. (Undocumented women were less likely to work.)
According to Quartz, another takeaway from the study is that the labor supply of undocumented men doesn't respond to wage changes as dramatically as the other groups—meaning they tend to be willing to work for less, and for jobs that others don't want, which seems to back up the much-disputed pro-immigration argument that migrants will do work that other people simply won't do. But Quartz also noted that Borjas's past work has found that those migrants drive down wages for unskilled labor, which could hurt some American workers.
EDITOR’S NOTE: Personally, I don’t give a shit whether the people that mow my lawn, repair my roof, put down some new flooring, etc. are documented or not as long as they do a good job.
VICE News
March 23, 2016
Undocumented immigrants, the conventional wisdom goes, usually come to America for work and are willing to take pretty much any job they can find—and a new study from Harvard pretty much backs that up.
The study, authored by professor and economist George Borjas, found that men working in the US without papers are more likely to have a job than those who were born here.
After crunching some Census data, Borjas found that 86.6 percent of undocumented immigrant men in the United States were working or looking for work between 2012 and 2013, compared to 73.9 percent of native-born men and 81.5 legal immigrant men. (Undocumented women were less likely to work.)
According to Quartz, another takeaway from the study is that the labor supply of undocumented men doesn't respond to wage changes as dramatically as the other groups—meaning they tend to be willing to work for less, and for jobs that others don't want, which seems to back up the much-disputed pro-immigration argument that migrants will do work that other people simply won't do. But Quartz also noted that Borjas's past work has found that those migrants drive down wages for unskilled labor, which could hurt some American workers.
EDITOR’S NOTE: Personally, I don’t give a shit whether the people that mow my lawn, repair my roof, put down some new flooring, etc. are documented or not as long as they do a good job.
SMUGGLER OF ILLEGALS CAUGHT BY BORDER PATROL 23 TIMES IN LESS THAN 17 YEARS SENTENCED TO 5 YEARS IN PRISON
Efrain Delgado Rosales’ latest encounter came in November, when agents spotted the 35-year-old guiding a foursome of illegal immigrants through San Diego’s rugged East County terrain
By Teri Figueroa
The San Diego Union-Tribune
March 26, 2016
SAN DIEGO -- An apparent career smuggler nabbed while guiding four undocumented immigrants through the Otay Mountains last year was sentenced Friday to five years in prison.
U.S. Border Patrol agents had caught Efrain Delgado Rosales with undocumented immigrants 23 times in less than 17 years, according to the U.S. Attorney’s Office.
His latest encounter came in November, when agents spotted the 35-year-old guiding the foursome through rugged East County terrain.
The four men told authorities that Delgado had picked them up at a stash house in Mexico, led them to the border then left them for several hours. As they waited, thieves turned up and robbed them of all of their cash — thousands of dollars.
Delgado returned and — indifferent to the robbery — guided them over the border and through the mountains. While hiking, he left behind three men who could not keep his pace.
At the begging of the fourth man, he eventually returned to collect the distressed trio, each of whom had paid $5,000 to be smuggled into the country.
The details they gave investigators about their experience with Delgado were strikingly similar to an instance in 2014, when a man smuggled into the country died while hiking in a rugged stretch of the Otay Mountains. One of his companions later identified Delgado as their guide.
Federal prosecutors said agents have apprehended Delgado 24 times since 1999, and in all but one instance, he was found with at least two and up to 46 undocumented immigrants.
By Teri Figueroa
The San Diego Union-Tribune
March 26, 2016
SAN DIEGO -- An apparent career smuggler nabbed while guiding four undocumented immigrants through the Otay Mountains last year was sentenced Friday to five years in prison.
U.S. Border Patrol agents had caught Efrain Delgado Rosales with undocumented immigrants 23 times in less than 17 years, according to the U.S. Attorney’s Office.
His latest encounter came in November, when agents spotted the 35-year-old guiding the foursome through rugged East County terrain.
The four men told authorities that Delgado had picked them up at a stash house in Mexico, led them to the border then left them for several hours. As they waited, thieves turned up and robbed them of all of their cash — thousands of dollars.
Delgado returned and — indifferent to the robbery — guided them over the border and through the mountains. While hiking, he left behind three men who could not keep his pace.
At the begging of the fourth man, he eventually returned to collect the distressed trio, each of whom had paid $5,000 to be smuggled into the country.
The details they gave investigators about their experience with Delgado were strikingly similar to an instance in 2014, when a man smuggled into the country died while hiking in a rugged stretch of the Otay Mountains. One of his companions later identified Delgado as their guide.
Federal prosecutors said agents have apprehended Delgado 24 times since 1999, and in all but one instance, he was found with at least two and up to 46 undocumented immigrants.
DISNEY FILM CANCELLED
Al Sharpton reported today that Walt Disney's new film called "Jet Black," the African-American version of "Snow White," has been cancelled.
All of the 7 dwarfs: Dealer, Stealer, Mugger, Forger, Drive By, Homeboy and Shank have refused to sing "Hi Ho" because they say it offends black prostitutes.
They also say they damn sure have no intention of singing "It's off to work we go.”
All of the 7 dwarfs: Dealer, Stealer, Mugger, Forger, Drive By, Homeboy and Shank have refused to sing "Hi Ho" because they say it offends black prostitutes.
They also say they damn sure have no intention of singing "It's off to work we go.”
THE DEADY ARSENAL AND AWESOME FIREPOWER PUTIN IS USING TO POUND SYRIA
Putin is using Syria as a testing ground for a terrifying new generation of weapons as his warplanes, missiles and tanks, smart bombs and satellite technology have already changed the landscape in Syria
By David Williams and Jay Akbar
Mail Online
March 28, 2016
They have been dubbed 'Moscow's war games', a deadly flexing of Russia's military might in the battlegrounds of Syria that has seen Vladimir Putin's forces tip the balance of power towards the once beleaguered leadership of Bashar al-Assad.
For ranged now in the name of Putin's war on terror is an awesome array of firepower, with Russia's iron man president deploying an arsenal of his latest weapons to Syria - operating from land, sea and air.
In the latest major campaign to support Assad, the Russians have helped to drive Islamic State out of the ancient city of Palmyra, inflicting what the army called a 'mortal blow' to militants who seized the city last year and dynamited its ancient temples.
The loss of Palmyra represents one of the biggest setbacks for the ultra-hardline Islamist group since it declared a caliphate in 2014 across large parts of Syria and Iraq.
As Putin's intervention turns the tide of Syria's five-year conflict in Assad's favour, MailOnline spotlights the terrifying arsenal of weapons, armour and warplanes that have become so pivotal to the fate of all sides inside Syria.
BY AIR: Fleet of fighter jets with precision-guided missiles so advanced some are even controlled by the pilot's helmet
While the Russian Command Group and Co-ordination teams are based at their embassy in Damascus, it is their base in the port city of Latakia, north western Syria, which is providing the hub for the air power. Dozens of daily sorties were flown from these headquarters when the campaign was at its height.
Based there is the astonishingly powerful Air Group of Su-34, Su-35S, Su-30SM, Su-24 and Su-25 combat aircraft, the Helicopter Group of Mi-24 and Mi-35 gunships, Mi-8 utility helicopters and the Airlift Contingent of An-124, II-76 and Tu-154 aircraft.
The supersonic Su-24 tactical bomber, Su-25, Su-30 and Su-34 are all equipped with air-to-air and air-to-surface missiles to assist Syrian ground troops and destroy enemy bases.
The KH-29L air-to-surface missile - weighing up to 690kg - is designed to level hardened ground targets including railways, bridges, factories, runways and aircraft in reinforced concrete shelters, according to the Tactical Missiles Corporation.
Fitted with high explosive, penetrating warheads weighing up to 136kg, the rocket can reach speeds of up around 900mph. It has a range of up to six miles and can hit a target within an accuracy of just two metres.
It uses a 'semi active laser guidance system' whereby the pilot marks a target using a laser sight which the missile follows.
Russian warplanes are also using the smaller KH-25 missiles, weighing around 300kg, to destroy ships, armoured vehicles, ammunition caches and oil reserves.
Meanwhile the 80ft long, 60ft wide Su-24 can reach speeds of around 1,400mph and can climb at a rate of 29,000ft a second, according to experts at Military Factory.
It is also equipped with a six barreled GSh-6-23 cannon and 500 rounds of 23mm ammo.
Russia claimed a Su-24 bomber destroyed the ISIS command centre in the Idlib on February 11. ISIS's presence in the province is disputed.
In November, a Russian Su-24 was shot down by two Turkish jets after the country claimed their airspace was violated. Both of the flight crew ejected before the plane crashed in Syria.
Russia responded by arming its Su-34 jets with AA-10 and AA-11 air-to-air missiles.
Costing £26 million and dubbed the 'Fullback', the two-seat Su-34 possesses a state-of-the-art fire control system, a phased array radar, and a powerful electronic countermeasures (ECM) suite.
The AA-10 and AA-12 air-to-air missiles can hit targets from 60miles away and, when fully loaded, have a maximum speed of Mach 1.8. They fly to a range of 2,500 miles before needing to refuel.
The A-11 Archer is the best short range air-to-air missile in Russia's possession, according to military experts at Federation of American Scientists.
The smart rocket is connected to the pilots' helmets, which they use to target enemy aircraft.
The technology also means the missiles can be fired at jets flying either side of the aircraft, which a traditional system of targeting and guidance cannot manage.
Just like the AA-10, the AA-11 is designed to destroy helicopters, drones and cruise missiles - but can also engage modern and 'next generation' fighter jets.
The heat seeking AA-10, which carries a 39kg warhead, can intercept flying targets travelling at a speed of up to 2,000mph.
CRUISE MISSILES: White swan that carries KH-101 and KH-55 cruise missiles
Russia responded to the downing of a passenger jet over Egypt's Sinai province in November by deploying its colossal 24 foot long, two tonne KH-101 cruise missile for the first time.
Carried by a Tu-160 bomber dubbed the 'White Swan', the cruise missile can be fired 6,000 miles from its target, flies as low 30m off the ground to avoid enemy radar, and is said to have an accuracy of between 25m to 30m.
Its astonishing range means the KH-101 could be launched from Moscow to hit an enemy base in Syria.
The satellite-guided smart rocket hugs the terrain using a digital map, which is downloaded onto its on board computer before it is fired.
Both the KH-101 and its predecessor, the KH-55, are fired from Russia's largest long range strategic bombers, the Tu-95 and the Tu-160.
The Tu-160 Strategic Bomber is the heaviest combat aircraft ever built. It can accelerate to a maximum speed of 1,380 mph, climb to a maximum altitude of 49,235 feet and has a range of 7,643 miles.
It is capable of carrying up to 12 Kh-55 cruise missiles and Kh-15 short range missiles. It is also capable of carrying with nuclear and 'regular' bombs.
A nuclear version of the missile, the KH-102, can carry a 250 kiloton warhead, which the United States has expressed concerns about.
GUNSHIPS: Helicopters fitted with tank-destroying rockets and cannons
Russia has three helicopter gunships operating in Syria - the Mi-35s, Mi-24Ps and the new generation Mi-28, which is designed to carry out search and destroy missions on tanks and armoured vehicles.
Syrian TV crews filmed what is believed to be an Mi-28 near Humaymin air base in Syria, Russia based Sputnik news reported.
Called the 'Night Hunter' by pilots, the Mi-28 is equipped with 16 tank-destroying missiles, the Shturm and the Ataka, one unguided S-13 rocket and a turreted 2A42 cannon that fires up to 550 30mm shells a minute.
The helicopter is said to be one of the new pieces of equipment being tested in Syria and is being used to destroy tanks and other armoured vehicles.
The Mi-28's 30mm cannon, the 2A42, weighs around 115kg and can hit armoured ground targets from around 1,500m away
It has a range of up to 5,000m, hits the target travelling at 400m per second and its warhead can penetrate around 560mm of armour.
Up to 16 missiles can be fitted on the Mi-28, which can operate at any time of the day and in severe weather.
Dramatic footage from October showed two Mi-24 helicopters firing rockets on a Syrian town which was thought to be occupied by US trained rebel fighters.
SMART BOMBS: Satellite-guided 'smart missiles' that move at the speed of sound
Syria has been a testing ground for Russia's precision guided bombs.
Its warplanes have deployed the satellite guided KAB-500S to devastating effect on both ISIS and rebel strongholds - and plans to test the smaller KAB-250 in the conflict too.
The state of the art KAB-500, which made its combat debut in Syria in September 2015, is guided by Russia's space based GLONASS global positioning system (GPS).
The missile can be fired from heights of between 500m and 5,000m, and can be moving at the speed of sound when they strike their intended target with an accuracy of between 7m and 12m.
It is designed to destroy munitions depots, factories and ships in dock.
Footage from October showed a Russian Su-34 bomber dropping a KAB-500 on a Syrian rebel group's headquarters.
Another video released by Russia's MoD showed a KAB-500 being used to destroy an ISIS artillery stronghold in Latakia.
Konstantin Sivkov of the Russian Academy of Rocket, Missile and Artillery Sciences claimed the rocket was used against ISIS.
He wrote in the Military Industrial: 'Our aircraft have employed the latest product of Russia's defense industry, the KAB-250, to eliminate targets in the immediate vicinity of civilian infrastructure.
The KAB-250 was made to destroy lighter, thin skinned vehicles and other small enemy installations.
BY SEA: Black Sea fleet provides air defence 'umbrella' and boasts quietest submarine in the world
Russia has a Black Sea Fleet of at least ten ships headed by a Slava class guided missile cruiser in eastern Mediterranean waters, which provide logistics and an air defence 'umbrella' over Latakia and Tartus regions.
It includes a diesel electric submarine known as the Rostov-on-Don, which launched Kalibr cruise missiles against targets near the Syrian city of Raqqa, ISIS's de facto capital on November 17.
Commissioned in late December 2014, the submarine is a Project 636 Varshavyanka sub deemed to be one of the quietest in the world.
The stealth submarine is so advanced it is dubbed the 'black hole' because it is so hard to detect. It is the second submarine out of six planned for the Black Sea Fleet by the end of 2016.
It is backed up by Buyan-M class warships - four of which launched a barrage of 26 cruise missiles which blitzed ISIS targets located more than 930 miles away.
Each Buyan-class ship carries eight 3M-54K cruise missiles - known as 'Sizzlers' - which are 27ft long and carry a 450kg warhead.
The missile system is designed to destroy submarines, other 'surface vessels' and 'slow moving targets whose coordinates are known in advance'. The rockets have a range of up to 410miles.
Despite their 'relatively small launch weight of 1,570kg, the rockets can 'blow up very large surface craft,' according to experts at Global Security.
They added: 'The missile's moderate weight allows even warships with a small displacement to take aboard quite a few of such deadly weapons.'
BY LAND: Russian tanks can stop 'any missile in the world' and the 'Grizzly' that can defend attacks from 24 angles
Russia has sent at least 24 T-90 tanks to Syria and this month, they were used to push back the forces opposing Assad around Aleppo.
A local rebel commander told the Turkey-based Yeni Safak website his troops were attacked by more than 80 T-72 and T-90 tanks, although that number has not been verified.
The T-90s are the most advanced tanks in Russia's arsenal and are fitted with an anti-tank missile system that can stop any missile in the world.
When they were first transported to Syria, they were seen as the latest heavy armour by Russia to prop up Assad's forces in the ongoing civil war.
The armoured tank, which costs around £3million each to produce, is made from Kontakt-5 armour, which deflects the true force of the blast over a larger surface area to reduce damage.
It is also armed with a 2A46M cannon which fires 125mm shells, as well as AT-11 missiles that can destroy tanks and low flying helicopters up to three miles away, according to Military Today.
Russia has also deployed SA-17 surface-to-air missiles in an area along the Turkish border known as the Azaz Corridor, a major infiltration route for jihadist and other anti-government forces.
The SA-17, also known as the Grizzly, can engage up to 24 targets flying from any direction at any one time, experts at Army Recognition have said.
It can shoot down strategic and tactical jets, cruise missiles, air launched rockets, guided bombs and helicopters.
The missiles can reach an altitude of 24,000m and have a range of up to 31 miles, depending on conditions.
Russia is also said to be equipped with 25 D30 Howitzers that fire 122mm rounds and 12 Smerch Multiple Launch Rocket System (MLRS).
The Smerch has a 12 launchers which fires 300mm 3M-55K missiles at targets between 12 and 43miles away.
The rockets, which are used to destroy vehicles and other missile systems, are around 24ft long and weigh 800kg.
Satellite images from October showed 12 towed artillery pieces - 'probably 122 mm D-30 howitzers' - deployed at Russia's Latakia air base, according to defence and security intelligence organisation, IHS Jane's.
BY INTERNET: The Krasukha-4 Land Jammer can disrupt radars and even low-flying satellites
The Krasukha-4 jammer is the newest electronic warfare system in the Russian arsenal.
As a broadband multi-functional jamming platform, it could disrupt ground-based radars, airborne radars (especially AWACS systems) and low earth orbit satellites.
The jammer is said to cause permanent damage to targeted radio-electronic devices.
The Russian contingent in Syria is believed to possess a Krasukha-4 platform, which has a reported range of 200-miles.
It is claimed the Krasukha-4 could blind some AWACS planes and make it difficult for NATO to generate the air picture of the eastern Mediterranean and Syria
EDITOR’S NOTE: And I keep hearing our government and the media referring to Russia as a second-rate military power. If we don't increase our defense spending substantially, we may end up being the second-rate military power.
By David Williams and Jay Akbar
Mail Online
March 28, 2016
They have been dubbed 'Moscow's war games', a deadly flexing of Russia's military might in the battlegrounds of Syria that has seen Vladimir Putin's forces tip the balance of power towards the once beleaguered leadership of Bashar al-Assad.
For ranged now in the name of Putin's war on terror is an awesome array of firepower, with Russia's iron man president deploying an arsenal of his latest weapons to Syria - operating from land, sea and air.
In the latest major campaign to support Assad, the Russians have helped to drive Islamic State out of the ancient city of Palmyra, inflicting what the army called a 'mortal blow' to militants who seized the city last year and dynamited its ancient temples.
The loss of Palmyra represents one of the biggest setbacks for the ultra-hardline Islamist group since it declared a caliphate in 2014 across large parts of Syria and Iraq.
As Putin's intervention turns the tide of Syria's five-year conflict in Assad's favour, MailOnline spotlights the terrifying arsenal of weapons, armour and warplanes that have become so pivotal to the fate of all sides inside Syria.
BY AIR: Fleet of fighter jets with precision-guided missiles so advanced some are even controlled by the pilot's helmet
While the Russian Command Group and Co-ordination teams are based at their embassy in Damascus, it is their base in the port city of Latakia, north western Syria, which is providing the hub for the air power. Dozens of daily sorties were flown from these headquarters when the campaign was at its height.
Based there is the astonishingly powerful Air Group of Su-34, Su-35S, Su-30SM, Su-24 and Su-25 combat aircraft, the Helicopter Group of Mi-24 and Mi-35 gunships, Mi-8 utility helicopters and the Airlift Contingent of An-124, II-76 and Tu-154 aircraft.
The supersonic Su-24 tactical bomber, Su-25, Su-30 and Su-34 are all equipped with air-to-air and air-to-surface missiles to assist Syrian ground troops and destroy enemy bases.
The KH-29L air-to-surface missile - weighing up to 690kg - is designed to level hardened ground targets including railways, bridges, factories, runways and aircraft in reinforced concrete shelters, according to the Tactical Missiles Corporation.
Fitted with high explosive, penetrating warheads weighing up to 136kg, the rocket can reach speeds of up around 900mph. It has a range of up to six miles and can hit a target within an accuracy of just two metres.
It uses a 'semi active laser guidance system' whereby the pilot marks a target using a laser sight which the missile follows.
Russian warplanes are also using the smaller KH-25 missiles, weighing around 300kg, to destroy ships, armoured vehicles, ammunition caches and oil reserves.
Meanwhile the 80ft long, 60ft wide Su-24 can reach speeds of around 1,400mph and can climb at a rate of 29,000ft a second, according to experts at Military Factory.
It is also equipped with a six barreled GSh-6-23 cannon and 500 rounds of 23mm ammo.
Russia claimed a Su-24 bomber destroyed the ISIS command centre in the Idlib on February 11. ISIS's presence in the province is disputed.
In November, a Russian Su-24 was shot down by two Turkish jets after the country claimed their airspace was violated. Both of the flight crew ejected before the plane crashed in Syria.
Russia responded by arming its Su-34 jets with AA-10 and AA-11 air-to-air missiles.
Costing £26 million and dubbed the 'Fullback', the two-seat Su-34 possesses a state-of-the-art fire control system, a phased array radar, and a powerful electronic countermeasures (ECM) suite.
The AA-10 and AA-12 air-to-air missiles can hit targets from 60miles away and, when fully loaded, have a maximum speed of Mach 1.8. They fly to a range of 2,500 miles before needing to refuel.
The A-11 Archer is the best short range air-to-air missile in Russia's possession, according to military experts at Federation of American Scientists.
The smart rocket is connected to the pilots' helmets, which they use to target enemy aircraft.
The technology also means the missiles can be fired at jets flying either side of the aircraft, which a traditional system of targeting and guidance cannot manage.
Just like the AA-10, the AA-11 is designed to destroy helicopters, drones and cruise missiles - but can also engage modern and 'next generation' fighter jets.
The heat seeking AA-10, which carries a 39kg warhead, can intercept flying targets travelling at a speed of up to 2,000mph.
CRUISE MISSILES: White swan that carries KH-101 and KH-55 cruise missiles
Russia responded to the downing of a passenger jet over Egypt's Sinai province in November by deploying its colossal 24 foot long, two tonne KH-101 cruise missile for the first time.
Carried by a Tu-160 bomber dubbed the 'White Swan', the cruise missile can be fired 6,000 miles from its target, flies as low 30m off the ground to avoid enemy radar, and is said to have an accuracy of between 25m to 30m.
Its astonishing range means the KH-101 could be launched from Moscow to hit an enemy base in Syria.
The satellite-guided smart rocket hugs the terrain using a digital map, which is downloaded onto its on board computer before it is fired.
Both the KH-101 and its predecessor, the KH-55, are fired from Russia's largest long range strategic bombers, the Tu-95 and the Tu-160.
The Tu-160 Strategic Bomber is the heaviest combat aircraft ever built. It can accelerate to a maximum speed of 1,380 mph, climb to a maximum altitude of 49,235 feet and has a range of 7,643 miles.
It is capable of carrying up to 12 Kh-55 cruise missiles and Kh-15 short range missiles. It is also capable of carrying with nuclear and 'regular' bombs.
A nuclear version of the missile, the KH-102, can carry a 250 kiloton warhead, which the United States has expressed concerns about.
GUNSHIPS: Helicopters fitted with tank-destroying rockets and cannons
Russia has three helicopter gunships operating in Syria - the Mi-35s, Mi-24Ps and the new generation Mi-28, which is designed to carry out search and destroy missions on tanks and armoured vehicles.
Syrian TV crews filmed what is believed to be an Mi-28 near Humaymin air base in Syria, Russia based Sputnik news reported.
Called the 'Night Hunter' by pilots, the Mi-28 is equipped with 16 tank-destroying missiles, the Shturm and the Ataka, one unguided S-13 rocket and a turreted 2A42 cannon that fires up to 550 30mm shells a minute.
The helicopter is said to be one of the new pieces of equipment being tested in Syria and is being used to destroy tanks and other armoured vehicles.
The Mi-28's 30mm cannon, the 2A42, weighs around 115kg and can hit armoured ground targets from around 1,500m away
It has a range of up to 5,000m, hits the target travelling at 400m per second and its warhead can penetrate around 560mm of armour.
Up to 16 missiles can be fitted on the Mi-28, which can operate at any time of the day and in severe weather.
Dramatic footage from October showed two Mi-24 helicopters firing rockets on a Syrian town which was thought to be occupied by US trained rebel fighters.
SMART BOMBS: Satellite-guided 'smart missiles' that move at the speed of sound
Syria has been a testing ground for Russia's precision guided bombs.
Its warplanes have deployed the satellite guided KAB-500S to devastating effect on both ISIS and rebel strongholds - and plans to test the smaller KAB-250 in the conflict too.
The state of the art KAB-500, which made its combat debut in Syria in September 2015, is guided by Russia's space based GLONASS global positioning system (GPS).
The missile can be fired from heights of between 500m and 5,000m, and can be moving at the speed of sound when they strike their intended target with an accuracy of between 7m and 12m.
It is designed to destroy munitions depots, factories and ships in dock.
Footage from October showed a Russian Su-34 bomber dropping a KAB-500 on a Syrian rebel group's headquarters.
Another video released by Russia's MoD showed a KAB-500 being used to destroy an ISIS artillery stronghold in Latakia.
Konstantin Sivkov of the Russian Academy of Rocket, Missile and Artillery Sciences claimed the rocket was used against ISIS.
He wrote in the Military Industrial: 'Our aircraft have employed the latest product of Russia's defense industry, the KAB-250, to eliminate targets in the immediate vicinity of civilian infrastructure.
The KAB-250 was made to destroy lighter, thin skinned vehicles and other small enemy installations.
BY SEA: Black Sea fleet provides air defence 'umbrella' and boasts quietest submarine in the world
Russia has a Black Sea Fleet of at least ten ships headed by a Slava class guided missile cruiser in eastern Mediterranean waters, which provide logistics and an air defence 'umbrella' over Latakia and Tartus regions.
It includes a diesel electric submarine known as the Rostov-on-Don, which launched Kalibr cruise missiles against targets near the Syrian city of Raqqa, ISIS's de facto capital on November 17.
Commissioned in late December 2014, the submarine is a Project 636 Varshavyanka sub deemed to be one of the quietest in the world.
The stealth submarine is so advanced it is dubbed the 'black hole' because it is so hard to detect. It is the second submarine out of six planned for the Black Sea Fleet by the end of 2016.
It is backed up by Buyan-M class warships - four of which launched a barrage of 26 cruise missiles which blitzed ISIS targets located more than 930 miles away.
Each Buyan-class ship carries eight 3M-54K cruise missiles - known as 'Sizzlers' - which are 27ft long and carry a 450kg warhead.
The missile system is designed to destroy submarines, other 'surface vessels' and 'slow moving targets whose coordinates are known in advance'. The rockets have a range of up to 410miles.
Despite their 'relatively small launch weight of 1,570kg, the rockets can 'blow up very large surface craft,' according to experts at Global Security.
They added: 'The missile's moderate weight allows even warships with a small displacement to take aboard quite a few of such deadly weapons.'
BY LAND: Russian tanks can stop 'any missile in the world' and the 'Grizzly' that can defend attacks from 24 angles
Russia has sent at least 24 T-90 tanks to Syria and this month, they were used to push back the forces opposing Assad around Aleppo.
A local rebel commander told the Turkey-based Yeni Safak website his troops were attacked by more than 80 T-72 and T-90 tanks, although that number has not been verified.
The T-90s are the most advanced tanks in Russia's arsenal and are fitted with an anti-tank missile system that can stop any missile in the world.
When they were first transported to Syria, they were seen as the latest heavy armour by Russia to prop up Assad's forces in the ongoing civil war.
The armoured tank, which costs around £3million each to produce, is made from Kontakt-5 armour, which deflects the true force of the blast over a larger surface area to reduce damage.
It is also armed with a 2A46M cannon which fires 125mm shells, as well as AT-11 missiles that can destroy tanks and low flying helicopters up to three miles away, according to Military Today.
Russia has also deployed SA-17 surface-to-air missiles in an area along the Turkish border known as the Azaz Corridor, a major infiltration route for jihadist and other anti-government forces.
The SA-17, also known as the Grizzly, can engage up to 24 targets flying from any direction at any one time, experts at Army Recognition have said.
It can shoot down strategic and tactical jets, cruise missiles, air launched rockets, guided bombs and helicopters.
The missiles can reach an altitude of 24,000m and have a range of up to 31 miles, depending on conditions.
Russia is also said to be equipped with 25 D30 Howitzers that fire 122mm rounds and 12 Smerch Multiple Launch Rocket System (MLRS).
The Smerch has a 12 launchers which fires 300mm 3M-55K missiles at targets between 12 and 43miles away.
The rockets, which are used to destroy vehicles and other missile systems, are around 24ft long and weigh 800kg.
Satellite images from October showed 12 towed artillery pieces - 'probably 122 mm D-30 howitzers' - deployed at Russia's Latakia air base, according to defence and security intelligence organisation, IHS Jane's.
BY INTERNET: The Krasukha-4 Land Jammer can disrupt radars and even low-flying satellites
The Krasukha-4 jammer is the newest electronic warfare system in the Russian arsenal.
As a broadband multi-functional jamming platform, it could disrupt ground-based radars, airborne radars (especially AWACS systems) and low earth orbit satellites.
The jammer is said to cause permanent damage to targeted radio-electronic devices.
The Russian contingent in Syria is believed to possess a Krasukha-4 platform, which has a reported range of 200-miles.
It is claimed the Krasukha-4 could blind some AWACS planes and make it difficult for NATO to generate the air picture of the eastern Mediterranean and Syria
EDITOR’S NOTE: And I keep hearing our government and the media referring to Russia as a second-rate military power. If we don't increase our defense spending substantially, we may end up being the second-rate military power.
Tuesday, March 29, 2016
DIRE PREDICTIONS FOR AMERICA
By Harry Dunne
Unless something dramatic happens to change the downward spiral of life in America, I predict the following:
I predict law enforcement will continue to be less pro-active. This will give rise to entrepreneur criminals. This type of criminal will target large cash robberies and burglaries. Home invasions of business owners for cash will go through the roof.
I predict the police will respond after the fact and take a report. Cases will be assigned to detectives which will already have a crippling case load.
I predict home alarms and security camera businesses will flourish. Open and concealed carry will become the norm in society because the police are in no hurry to respond to your home alarm, business burglary or take your stolen vehicle report.
In fact, I predict people will be denied a responding police officer and be instructed to file a report via an automated system.
I predict citizens organizing armed neighborhood militias or hiring ex-military mercenary types for protection.
I predict the criminal culture will believe they are entitled to commit crimes. They will be raised in an atmosphere of criminal behavior that is accepted as being normal. If you need new clothes, rob somebody. If you go to jail then you earn street credibility.
I predict law suits against citizens from criminals will flourish.
I predict the citizens will retaliate, because a "I'd rather be tried by twelve than carried by six" attitude will replace political correctness.
I predict the lack of pro-active policing ie: sting operations, saturation patrol and tactical response units will cease to exist until the police feel appreciated and not prosecuted for doing their jobs.
Do these Predictions sound over the top?
Count the predictions that you believe have already occurred.
Harry Dunne is the pen name of a veteran Texas law enforcement official.
Unless something dramatic happens to change the downward spiral of life in America, I predict the following:
I predict law enforcement will continue to be less pro-active. This will give rise to entrepreneur criminals. This type of criminal will target large cash robberies and burglaries. Home invasions of business owners for cash will go through the roof.
I predict the police will respond after the fact and take a report. Cases will be assigned to detectives which will already have a crippling case load.
I predict home alarms and security camera businesses will flourish. Open and concealed carry will become the norm in society because the police are in no hurry to respond to your home alarm, business burglary or take your stolen vehicle report.
In fact, I predict people will be denied a responding police officer and be instructed to file a report via an automated system.
I predict citizens organizing armed neighborhood militias or hiring ex-military mercenary types for protection.
I predict the criminal culture will believe they are entitled to commit crimes. They will be raised in an atmosphere of criminal behavior that is accepted as being normal. If you need new clothes, rob somebody. If you go to jail then you earn street credibility.
I predict law suits against citizens from criminals will flourish.
I predict the citizens will retaliate, because a "I'd rather be tried by twelve than carried by six" attitude will replace political correctness.
I predict the lack of pro-active policing ie: sting operations, saturation patrol and tactical response units will cease to exist until the police feel appreciated and not prosecuted for doing their jobs.
Do these Predictions sound over the top?
Count the predictions that you believe have already occurred.
Harry Dunne is the pen name of a veteran Texas law enforcement official.
GANDHI LOVED DER FUHRER
The revered Indian saint declared that the Germans of the future “will honor Herr Hitler as a genius, a brave man, a matchless organizer and much more.”
Here are some interesting facts about the revered Gandhi’s apparent love for Hitler that most people, including me, are unaware of. My former fellow officer and longtime friend Jerry Doyle sent me the following excerpt from “Indian Summer: The Secret History of the End of an Empire” by Alex Von Tunzelmann (Pages 110-111):
"Gandhi's position on nonviolence was absolute. Aggression could never be returned. He did not believe that women should resist rape, but preferred that they should 'defeat' their assailants by remaining passive and silent. Correspondingly, he did not believe that the vic¬tims of war should resist attackers by physical force, but rather ought to offer satyagraha -- that is, noncompliance with the invaders. 'If there ever could be a justifiable war in the name of and for humanity, war against Germany to prevent the wanton persecution of a whole race would be completely justified,' he wrote. 'But I do not believe in any war.'
"He advised the British to give up the fight against Hitler and Mussolini: 'Let them take possession of your beautiful island ... allow yourself, man, woman and child, to be slaughtered, but you will refuse to owe allegiance to them.' Furthermore, in one of his most controversial arguments, Gandhi advised the Jews in Germany to offer passive resistance to the Nazi regime -- and to give up their own lives as sacrifices. He told the Jews to pray for Adolf Hitler. 'If even one Jew acted thus,' he wrote, 'he would salve his self respect and leave an example which, if it became infectious, would save the whole of Jewry and leave a rich heritage to mankind besides.'
"Gandhi compounded this error of judgment by offering praise to Hitler. 'I do not consider Herr Hitler to be as bad as he is depicted,' he wrote in May 1940. 'He is showing an ability that is amazing and he seems to be gaining his victories without much bloodshed. ' Ap¬parently, he saw some parallel between his own efforts to return In¬dia to the Indians and Hitler's invasion of French territory to reclaim that lost to Germany under the terms of the Treaty of Versailles at the end of the First World War. He regretted that Hitler had employed war rather than nonviolence to achieve his aims, but nonetheless averred that the Germans of the future 'will honour Herr Hitler as a genius, a brave man, a matchless organizer and much more.'
"The American journalist Louis Fischer brought up this subject with Gandhi in 1946. By that time, the concentration camps had been discovered, and the true, awful extent of the Holocaust re¬vealed. It might have been expected that the benefit of hindsight would have tempered the old man's views. It had not. 'Hitler killed five million Jews,' Gandhi told Fischer, 'It is the greatest crime of our time. But the Jews should have offered themselves to the butcher's knife. They should have thrown themselves into the sea from cliffs. . . . . As it is they succumbed anyway in their millions.' "
EDITOR’S NOTE: Thank God that my parents did not follow Gandhi’s advice by sacrificing us for his beloved Der Fuhrer because then I would not be here to piss off people with my blogs.
After learning about Gandhi’s love affair with Hitler, I would have to conclude that, rather than a saint worshipped to this day by pacifists all over the world, the man who ran around wearing a bedsheet was a certified nutcase.
Here are some interesting facts about the revered Gandhi’s apparent love for Hitler that most people, including me, are unaware of. My former fellow officer and longtime friend Jerry Doyle sent me the following excerpt from “Indian Summer: The Secret History of the End of an Empire” by Alex Von Tunzelmann (Pages 110-111):
"Gandhi's position on nonviolence was absolute. Aggression could never be returned. He did not believe that women should resist rape, but preferred that they should 'defeat' their assailants by remaining passive and silent. Correspondingly, he did not believe that the vic¬tims of war should resist attackers by physical force, but rather ought to offer satyagraha -- that is, noncompliance with the invaders. 'If there ever could be a justifiable war in the name of and for humanity, war against Germany to prevent the wanton persecution of a whole race would be completely justified,' he wrote. 'But I do not believe in any war.'
"He advised the British to give up the fight against Hitler and Mussolini: 'Let them take possession of your beautiful island ... allow yourself, man, woman and child, to be slaughtered, but you will refuse to owe allegiance to them.' Furthermore, in one of his most controversial arguments, Gandhi advised the Jews in Germany to offer passive resistance to the Nazi regime -- and to give up their own lives as sacrifices. He told the Jews to pray for Adolf Hitler. 'If even one Jew acted thus,' he wrote, 'he would salve his self respect and leave an example which, if it became infectious, would save the whole of Jewry and leave a rich heritage to mankind besides.'
"Gandhi compounded this error of judgment by offering praise to Hitler. 'I do not consider Herr Hitler to be as bad as he is depicted,' he wrote in May 1940. 'He is showing an ability that is amazing and he seems to be gaining his victories without much bloodshed. ' Ap¬parently, he saw some parallel between his own efforts to return In¬dia to the Indians and Hitler's invasion of French territory to reclaim that lost to Germany under the terms of the Treaty of Versailles at the end of the First World War. He regretted that Hitler had employed war rather than nonviolence to achieve his aims, but nonetheless averred that the Germans of the future 'will honour Herr Hitler as a genius, a brave man, a matchless organizer and much more.'
"The American journalist Louis Fischer brought up this subject with Gandhi in 1946. By that time, the concentration camps had been discovered, and the true, awful extent of the Holocaust re¬vealed. It might have been expected that the benefit of hindsight would have tempered the old man's views. It had not. 'Hitler killed five million Jews,' Gandhi told Fischer, 'It is the greatest crime of our time. But the Jews should have offered themselves to the butcher's knife. They should have thrown themselves into the sea from cliffs. . . . . As it is they succumbed anyway in their millions.' "
EDITOR’S NOTE: Thank God that my parents did not follow Gandhi’s advice by sacrificing us for his beloved Der Fuhrer because then I would not be here to piss off people with my blogs.
After learning about Gandhi’s love affair with Hitler, I would have to conclude that, rather than a saint worshipped to this day by pacifists all over the world, the man who ran around wearing a bedsheet was a certified nutcase.
WHY ANTI-ISRAEL BECOMES ANTI-JEW
By Jonathon S. Tobin
Commentary Magazine
March 27, 2016
This past week, on both ends of the country, the BDS (boycott, divest, sanction) movement against Israel received a stern rebuke. Several states around the country are passing laws that would bar their governments from doing business with companies that comply with boycotts of Israel. But in New York and California, the current debate is not about implementation of this economic war against the Jewish state but rather the way college campuses — including state-run universities like the University of California or the City University of New York or CUNY — have allowed the debate about Israel to turn into acquiescence for open expressions of anti-Semitism. In New York, the legislature has cut funding for CUNY, though BDS was not the sole motivation. But in California, the regents of the state university system voted last Thursday to take a stand against what they termed “anti-Semitism, anti-Semitic forms of anti-Zionism, and other forms of discrimination.”
The measure was long overdue but pro-Palestinian and other leftist groups are blasting it as an attempt to stifle freedom of expression. They claim this simple sentence will make it impossible to criticize Israel and its policies. They are wrong about that. Israel is a democracy and, just like Israelis, those on campus can opine all they want about its government and all it does. But what is at stake here is whether those whose purpose is to destroy the one Jewish state on the planet can pose as advocates for human rights while in engaging in hate speech against Jews.
In an era where the preservation of “safe space” for students against anything they might find objectionable, including subtle slights labeled “micro-aggressions,” political advocacy, or actual hate speech, there is one group that hasn’t gotten much protection: Jews. The reason for this isn’t much of a mystery. In the context of academia, Jews are treated as the 21st century moral equivalent of WASPS and are therefore too secure and/or powerful to merit any concern for their rights, let alone their sensibilities. To some extent, such complacency is justified. Unlike in Europe or most other parts of the world, the rising global tide of anti-Semitism hasn’t made much of an impact in the United States. American exceptionalism and the lack of a history of state-sanctioned anti-Semitism in this country has left Jews free to rise on their own merits finding acceptance in virtually every sphere of American society. Jew hatred has largely been confined to the fever swamps of the far right and left. But there is one glaring exception to this rule: college campuses.
Anti-Semitism in academia has become an issue because the BDS movement against Israel has made it one. The efforts of pro-Palestinian students to delegitimize Israel have effortlessly slipped into a campaign to stigmatize and intimidate Jewish students and organizations. As the numbers of incidents of hate speech and intimidation grow, some Jewish groups and other fair-minded people are pushing back.
Groups like the AMCHA initiative and the Zionist Organization of America have documented many of the anti-Semitic incidents and cases of incitement against Jews associated with anti-Israel agitation. Jews have subjected to every kind of insult and threat by those whose goal it is to wipe out Israel, often by promoting egregious lies about atrocity stories.
But we don’t really have to dig too deep into the files of incidents because we already know why it is so easy for BDS and pro-Palestinian advocates to slip into overt anti-Semitism. That is because, contrary to the University of California statement that was hoping to mollify some of the Israel-haters, there is no such thing as an anti-Semitic form of anti-Zionism. All forms of anti-Zionism are anti-Semitic, no matter the identity of the speaker because to single out the one Jewish state and to deny its people the right to self-determination and self-defense in their ancient homeland is, in principle, anti-Semitic. Put simply, denying Jews these rights that no one would think of challenging for any other people, is an act of bias. Acts of bias against Jews are called anti-Semitic.
That’s why the line that supposedly separates traditional Jew-hatred from the cause of destroying Israel is so frequently breached by its advocates. They can’t help speaking this way because their goal is to deny Jews their human rights. In order to justify this indefensible cause, they don’t merely resort to lies about Israel or ignore the fact that the Palestinians have been waging a century-long war to destroy the Jewish presence in the country and not merely to force it back to the 1967 lines. Like the Palestinian Authority and Hamas, which broadcast hate about Jews and praise for anyone that tries to murder a Jew, BDS supporters need to demonize the object of their criticism. And to do that, they inevitably use hate speech designed to marginalize and silence Jews.
Some BDS advocates assert that they just want Israel to end the “occupation” of the West Bank. But while one can support that cause, it is disingenuous to claim that supporting a cause whose purpose is to wipe out Israel even within the 1967 lines — as the Palestinians clearly wish to do — is merely a limited protest. BDS is not advocacy for a two-state solution. It is part of an effort to create a one-state solution in which Israel is eliminated. Anyone, including far-left Jews such as those in the anti-Zionist Jewish Voices for Peace group that claims otherwise, are either dupes or liars.
One may criticize Israel just as one may criticize the policies of the U.S. government. But those whose purpose is not merely to change Israel’s policies but to eliminate Zionism are targeting Jews. Just as one may study and discuss other forms of racism on college campuses, one may do the same about both Zionism and anti-Zionism. But just as universities would take a dim view of groups that advocate racism like the Ku Klux Klan using their campuses as a platform for hate, so, too, should they think the same way about anti-Semitic groups. The same lesson applies to BDS groups whose cause is inextricably linked to Jew hatred.
Thankfully, the administration of some schools and the politicians that fund them are starting to recognize how serious this issue has become. As we’ve seen on campuses like Columbia, even liberal faculties are starting to wake up to the dangers of being silent as an anti-Semitic BDS movement gains ground. Those who excuse or even support acquiescence about this threat or that think it is wrong to urge Jewish students to stand up and confront the haters are making a mistake. When confronted with hate, there is no option but to fight back.
EDITOR’S NOTE: Due to campaigns by Palestinian students and Marxist professors, America’s leading universities have become hotbeds of anti-Semitism. I seriously doubt that the stand against anti-Semitism by the regents of California’s state university system will stem the tide of Jew-hatred at those institutions.
Commentary Magazine
March 27, 2016
This past week, on both ends of the country, the BDS (boycott, divest, sanction) movement against Israel received a stern rebuke. Several states around the country are passing laws that would bar their governments from doing business with companies that comply with boycotts of Israel. But in New York and California, the current debate is not about implementation of this economic war against the Jewish state but rather the way college campuses — including state-run universities like the University of California or the City University of New York or CUNY — have allowed the debate about Israel to turn into acquiescence for open expressions of anti-Semitism. In New York, the legislature has cut funding for CUNY, though BDS was not the sole motivation. But in California, the regents of the state university system voted last Thursday to take a stand against what they termed “anti-Semitism, anti-Semitic forms of anti-Zionism, and other forms of discrimination.”
The measure was long overdue but pro-Palestinian and other leftist groups are blasting it as an attempt to stifle freedom of expression. They claim this simple sentence will make it impossible to criticize Israel and its policies. They are wrong about that. Israel is a democracy and, just like Israelis, those on campus can opine all they want about its government and all it does. But what is at stake here is whether those whose purpose is to destroy the one Jewish state on the planet can pose as advocates for human rights while in engaging in hate speech against Jews.
In an era where the preservation of “safe space” for students against anything they might find objectionable, including subtle slights labeled “micro-aggressions,” political advocacy, or actual hate speech, there is one group that hasn’t gotten much protection: Jews. The reason for this isn’t much of a mystery. In the context of academia, Jews are treated as the 21st century moral equivalent of WASPS and are therefore too secure and/or powerful to merit any concern for their rights, let alone their sensibilities. To some extent, such complacency is justified. Unlike in Europe or most other parts of the world, the rising global tide of anti-Semitism hasn’t made much of an impact in the United States. American exceptionalism and the lack of a history of state-sanctioned anti-Semitism in this country has left Jews free to rise on their own merits finding acceptance in virtually every sphere of American society. Jew hatred has largely been confined to the fever swamps of the far right and left. But there is one glaring exception to this rule: college campuses.
Anti-Semitism in academia has become an issue because the BDS movement against Israel has made it one. The efforts of pro-Palestinian students to delegitimize Israel have effortlessly slipped into a campaign to stigmatize and intimidate Jewish students and organizations. As the numbers of incidents of hate speech and intimidation grow, some Jewish groups and other fair-minded people are pushing back.
Groups like the AMCHA initiative and the Zionist Organization of America have documented many of the anti-Semitic incidents and cases of incitement against Jews associated with anti-Israel agitation. Jews have subjected to every kind of insult and threat by those whose goal it is to wipe out Israel, often by promoting egregious lies about atrocity stories.
But we don’t really have to dig too deep into the files of incidents because we already know why it is so easy for BDS and pro-Palestinian advocates to slip into overt anti-Semitism. That is because, contrary to the University of California statement that was hoping to mollify some of the Israel-haters, there is no such thing as an anti-Semitic form of anti-Zionism. All forms of anti-Zionism are anti-Semitic, no matter the identity of the speaker because to single out the one Jewish state and to deny its people the right to self-determination and self-defense in their ancient homeland is, in principle, anti-Semitic. Put simply, denying Jews these rights that no one would think of challenging for any other people, is an act of bias. Acts of bias against Jews are called anti-Semitic.
That’s why the line that supposedly separates traditional Jew-hatred from the cause of destroying Israel is so frequently breached by its advocates. They can’t help speaking this way because their goal is to deny Jews their human rights. In order to justify this indefensible cause, they don’t merely resort to lies about Israel or ignore the fact that the Palestinians have been waging a century-long war to destroy the Jewish presence in the country and not merely to force it back to the 1967 lines. Like the Palestinian Authority and Hamas, which broadcast hate about Jews and praise for anyone that tries to murder a Jew, BDS supporters need to demonize the object of their criticism. And to do that, they inevitably use hate speech designed to marginalize and silence Jews.
Some BDS advocates assert that they just want Israel to end the “occupation” of the West Bank. But while one can support that cause, it is disingenuous to claim that supporting a cause whose purpose is to wipe out Israel even within the 1967 lines — as the Palestinians clearly wish to do — is merely a limited protest. BDS is not advocacy for a two-state solution. It is part of an effort to create a one-state solution in which Israel is eliminated. Anyone, including far-left Jews such as those in the anti-Zionist Jewish Voices for Peace group that claims otherwise, are either dupes or liars.
One may criticize Israel just as one may criticize the policies of the U.S. government. But those whose purpose is not merely to change Israel’s policies but to eliminate Zionism are targeting Jews. Just as one may study and discuss other forms of racism on college campuses, one may do the same about both Zionism and anti-Zionism. But just as universities would take a dim view of groups that advocate racism like the Ku Klux Klan using their campuses as a platform for hate, so, too, should they think the same way about anti-Semitic groups. The same lesson applies to BDS groups whose cause is inextricably linked to Jew hatred.
Thankfully, the administration of some schools and the politicians that fund them are starting to recognize how serious this issue has become. As we’ve seen on campuses like Columbia, even liberal faculties are starting to wake up to the dangers of being silent as an anti-Semitic BDS movement gains ground. Those who excuse or even support acquiescence about this threat or that think it is wrong to urge Jewish students to stand up and confront the haters are making a mistake. When confronted with hate, there is no option but to fight back.
EDITOR’S NOTE: Due to campaigns by Palestinian students and Marxist professors, America’s leading universities have become hotbeds of anti-Semitism. I seriously doubt that the stand against anti-Semitism by the regents of California’s state university system will stem the tide of Jew-hatred at those institutions.
INDIANA TROOPER FINDS WOMAN MISSING SINCE 1970S
Evansville Courier & Press
March 25, 2016
Lula Ann Gillespie-Miller thought she was too young to be a mother. So the 28-year-old gave custody of her children to her parents and disappeared.
After a decades-long search that included an exhumed body and an intense search through missing persons record, Gillespie-Miller has been found -- and she could be reunited with her family via telephone this holiday weekend.
Gillespie-Miller, originally from Laurel, Indiana, was found in living in south Texas under an alias.
She left Indiana in 1974, shortly after giving birth to her third child, according to a news release from Indiana State Police. With the exception of a letter postmarked from Richmond, Indiana, in 1975, the family hadn't heard from her since.
ISP Detective Sgt. Scott Jarvis took the case in January 2014, after the Doe Network, a website that assists families with missing person's investigations, contacted state police at the Pendleton Post.
Jarvis combed through Richmond Police Department records, and discovered the case of an unidentified dead woman found in 1975. The woman was buried in an unmarked grave in Richmond, and after Jarvis obtained a search warrant, authorities exhumed the body to collect DNA.
Jarvis garnered DNA from Gillespie-Miller's daughter, Tammy Miller, for comparison, but no match was found.
He then latched onto the trail of a woman who had lived in Tennessee in the '80s before moving to Texas. That trail eventually led him to small town in the southern part portion of the state.
Texas Rangers spoke to the woman. She wished to remain anonymous in her new identity, but admitted to authorities that she was Gillespie-Miller, now 69 years old.
Despite her wish for continued anonymity, she allowed authorities to pass along contact information to her daughter. The two hope to speak this Easter weekend.
March 25, 2016
Lula Ann Gillespie-Miller thought she was too young to be a mother. So the 28-year-old gave custody of her children to her parents and disappeared.
After a decades-long search that included an exhumed body and an intense search through missing persons record, Gillespie-Miller has been found -- and she could be reunited with her family via telephone this holiday weekend.
Gillespie-Miller, originally from Laurel, Indiana, was found in living in south Texas under an alias.
She left Indiana in 1974, shortly after giving birth to her third child, according to a news release from Indiana State Police. With the exception of a letter postmarked from Richmond, Indiana, in 1975, the family hadn't heard from her since.
ISP Detective Sgt. Scott Jarvis took the case in January 2014, after the Doe Network, a website that assists families with missing person's investigations, contacted state police at the Pendleton Post.
Jarvis combed through Richmond Police Department records, and discovered the case of an unidentified dead woman found in 1975. The woman was buried in an unmarked grave in Richmond, and after Jarvis obtained a search warrant, authorities exhumed the body to collect DNA.
Jarvis garnered DNA from Gillespie-Miller's daughter, Tammy Miller, for comparison, but no match was found.
He then latched onto the trail of a woman who had lived in Tennessee in the '80s before moving to Texas. That trail eventually led him to small town in the southern part portion of the state.
Texas Rangers spoke to the woman. She wished to remain anonymous in her new identity, but admitted to authorities that she was Gillespie-Miller, now 69 years old.
Despite her wish for continued anonymity, she allowed authorities to pass along contact information to her daughter. The two hope to speak this Easter weekend.
HILLARY’S VICTORIES MEAN PAINFUL LEGAL CHOICES FOR DOJ, WH
Knowing that FBI Director Comey will resign if the administration whitewashes the Clinton investigation, Lynch and her political bosses, Barack Obama and his closest adviser, Valerie Jarrett, will have to decide which is worse, indicting their party's presumptive nominee or risking their own Watergate?
By Charles Lipson
RealClearPolitics.com
February 29, 2016
Few jobs are as demanding as the U.S. attorney general’s. The AG’s popularity peaks at the swearing-in ceremony and goes downhill from there. It’s not just the hard cases on the docket. It’s that attorneys general have two mandates that sometimes conflict. Do they follow their responsibilities as the nation’s chief law enforcement officer, wherever those responsibilities lead? Or do they act as the president’s top appointee in law enforcement and do his bidding?
AGs do not keep their jobs unless they know which mandate takes priority. They serve at the president’s pleasure.
This bedrock choice between blind justice and political calculation is almost certain to confront Loretta Lynch once the FBI concludes its investigation into Hillary Clinton, her top aides, and the Clinton Foundation.
Her choice just got tougher now that the former secretary of state is sure to win the Democratic nomination. She effectively clinched that prize with an unheard-of 50-point victory over Bernie Sanders in Saturday’s South Carolina primary, on the heels of a solid victory in Nevada last Tuesday. Clinton's victory in the Palmetto State portends big wins all across the South, leaving Sanders with no realistic path to the nomination. After months of enthusiastic “Feel the Bern” rallies, the Democrats are now back where they started. As one prankster, who managed to photo-bomb a Clinton campaign rally, put it on his tee-shirt: “Settle for Hillary.”
Before Democrats officially settle, though, Clinton, Lynch, and Barack Obama have a treacherous bridge to cross.
Standing athwart it is FBI Director James Comey, an experienced prosecutor and consummate professional with some 100-150 agents investigating the Democratic front-runner, the Clinton Foundation, and (presumably) several of Hillary’s closest aides: Huma Abedin, Cheryl Mills, and Jake Sullivan.
Clinton voters are oblivious to the dangers. Polls show they no longer consider her “honest and trustworthy,” but they still don’t think she has committed any crimes. Countless Clinton supporters have told me, “These investigations won’t find anything. The Benghazi hearings proved it. This is simply a partisan witch hunt.”
They are half right. The Benghazi hearings proved, once again, that Congress has the investigative prowess of Homer Simpson. They are right that Republicans hate her. Divided as the GOP is, it is united in thinking Bill and Hillary are corrupt, self-serving liars.
But the GOP is not leading the criminal investigation. The FBI is. The bureau is not partisan, and it is not on a witch hunt. Despite the obvious risks of investigating the presumptive Democratic nominee during a Democratic administration, its agents are sorting through mountains of evidence pointing to serious, deliberate crimes.
What are the key legal dangers facing Clinton and her aides? Here are just a few.
* Hillary Clinton deliberately set up a private email server for herself and her top State Department aides. She used it to store over 1,800 documents now deemed classified, some highly classified. The sheer bulk of the security violations is extraordinary. Intelligence professionals agree the server was almost certainly hacked by foreign agencies—probably by several.
* Secretary Clinton specifically instructed aides to send her classified materials on that insecure network. We know of at least one such instruction. We don’t know how many others were redacted by the State Department.
* Because her server was private, the State Department’s records did not include its contents when responding to Freedom of Information Act requests. The department wrongly told FOIA applicants that no such materials existed. Not only did the materials exist (on Clinton’s server), senior officials knew it and allowed false denials to be made.
* Some documents on the Clinton server contained the intelligence-gathering methods, the names of undercover agents, and real-time disclosures of top officials’ movements. Aside from the nuclear launch codes, these are the most closely guarded secrets in the U.S. government. That material is “classified at birth,” as Clinton, Mills, Abedin, and Sullivan certainly knew. To avoid any misunderstanding, they had all taken mandatory training in the proper treatment of sensitive and classified materials.
* Some of the classified materials on Clinton’s server originated in intelligence agencies outside the State Department and came into the department on a secure, classified network. They were marked as such. They could only be transferred to Clinton’s unsecured network by hand. Each occurrence was a felony. Since the server has now been recovered, the FBI and intelligence agencies know who sent those messages and who received them at the State Department.
* The Clinton Foundation and some private businesses were deeply involved in the State Department’s business. The lines were blurred between Hillary Clinton’s official role as secretary of state and her unofficial role at a major foundation, headed by her husband, that was showered with money from people and companies working with the State Department. At best, the arrangements were sleazy. At worst, they were criminal “pay to play.”
* Hillary’s closest aide, Huma Abedin, had blurred roles, too. While working at State, she was also employed by a private company whose clients did business with her department and the government.
One major feature of FBI investigations has been completely ignored. The bureau normally interviews all the key participants, and it knows the answers before it asks the questions. That should mean closed-door sessions with Abedin, Mills, Sullivan, and, ultimately, Hillary Clinton and perhaps Bill Clinton (if the foundation’s activities are at issue). Failing to interview them would replicate the botched Benghazi investigation by Adm. Mike Mullin and Ambassador Thomas Pickering. The FBI won’t repeat that mistake or subject itself to the withering criticism.
These interviews are deadly serious. Former Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert learned that the hard way. When the FBI asked why he had withdrawn cash from his bank account, he lied. He was caught and, last October, plead guilty to a felony.
So, will Abedin, Mills, or Sullivan answer fully and truthfully or invoke their Fifth Amendment rights? If they did, would it become known and hurt Hillary politically? If she refuses to testify herself, her political career is over. She won’t do that unless she fears indictment is certain, and she would have to drop out of the presidential race anyway.
If FBI Director Comey does recommend criminal charges, he will put DOJ and the White House in a very tight box. First, as a seasoned prosecutor, he will present only strong, winnable cases. Second, he won’t present one or two charges. He will present evidence of dozens and dozens of felonies. AG Lynch and her career attorneys won’t be able to say, “On the whole, there’s just not enough here to convict.” They will have to say that over and over, on each charge. Indictment on even a few felonies is a torpedo beneath the waterline for Clinton. Third, it is clear that CIA and FBI investigators already fear an administration whitewash and have leaked damaging information to the press.
If insiders think the administration is engaged in a full-fledged cover-up, they will resign, led by Comey. They won’t go quietly. They will spill the beans. And two hours later, it won’t smell good.
Knowing that, Lynch and her political bosses, Barack Obama and his closest adviser, Valerie Jarrett, will have to decide which is worse, indicting their party’s presumptive nominee or risking their own Watergate?
Whichever they choose, the White House will not want its fingerprints on the decision. They will want White House spokesman Josh Ernest to say, with a straight face, “This decision was made entirely by respected, career professionals at the Department of Justice.”
If the FBI recommends felony charges, as is likely, the DOJ’s choices are damned-if-you-do, damned-if-you-don’t. For Loretta Lynch, it will make for a painful final year. For her party, the stakes are the presidency. For her country, they are the impartial rule of law.
EDITOR’S NOTE: FBI agents have been spreading the word that Director James Comey is getting stonewalled, despite uncovering compelling evidence that Clinton broke the law.
By Charles Lipson
RealClearPolitics.com
February 29, 2016
Few jobs are as demanding as the U.S. attorney general’s. The AG’s popularity peaks at the swearing-in ceremony and goes downhill from there. It’s not just the hard cases on the docket. It’s that attorneys general have two mandates that sometimes conflict. Do they follow their responsibilities as the nation’s chief law enforcement officer, wherever those responsibilities lead? Or do they act as the president’s top appointee in law enforcement and do his bidding?
AGs do not keep their jobs unless they know which mandate takes priority. They serve at the president’s pleasure.
This bedrock choice between blind justice and political calculation is almost certain to confront Loretta Lynch once the FBI concludes its investigation into Hillary Clinton, her top aides, and the Clinton Foundation.
Her choice just got tougher now that the former secretary of state is sure to win the Democratic nomination. She effectively clinched that prize with an unheard-of 50-point victory over Bernie Sanders in Saturday’s South Carolina primary, on the heels of a solid victory in Nevada last Tuesday. Clinton's victory in the Palmetto State portends big wins all across the South, leaving Sanders with no realistic path to the nomination. After months of enthusiastic “Feel the Bern” rallies, the Democrats are now back where they started. As one prankster, who managed to photo-bomb a Clinton campaign rally, put it on his tee-shirt: “Settle for Hillary.”
Before Democrats officially settle, though, Clinton, Lynch, and Barack Obama have a treacherous bridge to cross.
Standing athwart it is FBI Director James Comey, an experienced prosecutor and consummate professional with some 100-150 agents investigating the Democratic front-runner, the Clinton Foundation, and (presumably) several of Hillary’s closest aides: Huma Abedin, Cheryl Mills, and Jake Sullivan.
Clinton voters are oblivious to the dangers. Polls show they no longer consider her “honest and trustworthy,” but they still don’t think she has committed any crimes. Countless Clinton supporters have told me, “These investigations won’t find anything. The Benghazi hearings proved it. This is simply a partisan witch hunt.”
They are half right. The Benghazi hearings proved, once again, that Congress has the investigative prowess of Homer Simpson. They are right that Republicans hate her. Divided as the GOP is, it is united in thinking Bill and Hillary are corrupt, self-serving liars.
But the GOP is not leading the criminal investigation. The FBI is. The bureau is not partisan, and it is not on a witch hunt. Despite the obvious risks of investigating the presumptive Democratic nominee during a Democratic administration, its agents are sorting through mountains of evidence pointing to serious, deliberate crimes.
What are the key legal dangers facing Clinton and her aides? Here are just a few.
* Hillary Clinton deliberately set up a private email server for herself and her top State Department aides. She used it to store over 1,800 documents now deemed classified, some highly classified. The sheer bulk of the security violations is extraordinary. Intelligence professionals agree the server was almost certainly hacked by foreign agencies—probably by several.
* Secretary Clinton specifically instructed aides to send her classified materials on that insecure network. We know of at least one such instruction. We don’t know how many others were redacted by the State Department.
* Because her server was private, the State Department’s records did not include its contents when responding to Freedom of Information Act requests. The department wrongly told FOIA applicants that no such materials existed. Not only did the materials exist (on Clinton’s server), senior officials knew it and allowed false denials to be made.
* Some documents on the Clinton server contained the intelligence-gathering methods, the names of undercover agents, and real-time disclosures of top officials’ movements. Aside from the nuclear launch codes, these are the most closely guarded secrets in the U.S. government. That material is “classified at birth,” as Clinton, Mills, Abedin, and Sullivan certainly knew. To avoid any misunderstanding, they had all taken mandatory training in the proper treatment of sensitive and classified materials.
* Some of the classified materials on Clinton’s server originated in intelligence agencies outside the State Department and came into the department on a secure, classified network. They were marked as such. They could only be transferred to Clinton’s unsecured network by hand. Each occurrence was a felony. Since the server has now been recovered, the FBI and intelligence agencies know who sent those messages and who received them at the State Department.
* The Clinton Foundation and some private businesses were deeply involved in the State Department’s business. The lines were blurred between Hillary Clinton’s official role as secretary of state and her unofficial role at a major foundation, headed by her husband, that was showered with money from people and companies working with the State Department. At best, the arrangements were sleazy. At worst, they were criminal “pay to play.”
* Hillary’s closest aide, Huma Abedin, had blurred roles, too. While working at State, she was also employed by a private company whose clients did business with her department and the government.
One major feature of FBI investigations has been completely ignored. The bureau normally interviews all the key participants, and it knows the answers before it asks the questions. That should mean closed-door sessions with Abedin, Mills, Sullivan, and, ultimately, Hillary Clinton and perhaps Bill Clinton (if the foundation’s activities are at issue). Failing to interview them would replicate the botched Benghazi investigation by Adm. Mike Mullin and Ambassador Thomas Pickering. The FBI won’t repeat that mistake or subject itself to the withering criticism.
These interviews are deadly serious. Former Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert learned that the hard way. When the FBI asked why he had withdrawn cash from his bank account, he lied. He was caught and, last October, plead guilty to a felony.
So, will Abedin, Mills, or Sullivan answer fully and truthfully or invoke their Fifth Amendment rights? If they did, would it become known and hurt Hillary politically? If she refuses to testify herself, her political career is over. She won’t do that unless she fears indictment is certain, and she would have to drop out of the presidential race anyway.
If FBI Director Comey does recommend criminal charges, he will put DOJ and the White House in a very tight box. First, as a seasoned prosecutor, he will present only strong, winnable cases. Second, he won’t present one or two charges. He will present evidence of dozens and dozens of felonies. AG Lynch and her career attorneys won’t be able to say, “On the whole, there’s just not enough here to convict.” They will have to say that over and over, on each charge. Indictment on even a few felonies is a torpedo beneath the waterline for Clinton. Third, it is clear that CIA and FBI investigators already fear an administration whitewash and have leaked damaging information to the press.
If insiders think the administration is engaged in a full-fledged cover-up, they will resign, led by Comey. They won’t go quietly. They will spill the beans. And two hours later, it won’t smell good.
Knowing that, Lynch and her political bosses, Barack Obama and his closest adviser, Valerie Jarrett, will have to decide which is worse, indicting their party’s presumptive nominee or risking their own Watergate?
Whichever they choose, the White House will not want its fingerprints on the decision. They will want White House spokesman Josh Ernest to say, with a straight face, “This decision was made entirely by respected, career professionals at the Department of Justice.”
If the FBI recommends felony charges, as is likely, the DOJ’s choices are damned-if-you-do, damned-if-you-don’t. For Loretta Lynch, it will make for a painful final year. For her party, the stakes are the presidency. For her country, they are the impartial rule of law.
EDITOR’S NOTE: FBI agents have been spreading the word that Director James Comey is getting stonewalled, despite uncovering compelling evidence that Clinton broke the law.
WASHINGTON REDSKINS FINALLY DROP THE OFFENSIVE NAME
Neil Snyder, owner of the National Football League team, the Washington Redskins, has announced that following in-depth research into the acceptance of the team name, it is conclusive that the name has been found offensive.
Beginning with the 2017 season, Snyder is dropping "Washington" from the team name, and it will henceforth be simply known as "The Redskins."
Results of the research discovered that the word 'Washington' imparts a negative image of poor leadership, mismanagement, corruption, cheating, lying, and graft, and that image is not a fitting role-model for young fans of football!
Beginning with the 2017 season, Snyder is dropping "Washington" from the team name, and it will henceforth be simply known as "The Redskins."
Results of the research discovered that the word 'Washington' imparts a negative image of poor leadership, mismanagement, corruption, cheating, lying, and graft, and that image is not a fitting role-model for young fans of football!
Monday, March 28, 2016
CRUZ’S KOOKY RESPONSE TO ISLAMIST ATTACKS ON BRUSSELS
Cruz appears to be clueless on the differences between the Muslim neighborhoods in Europe and those in the United States
“We need to empower law enforcement to patrol and secure Muslim neighborhoods before they become radicalized.”
“For years, the West has tried to deny this enemy exists out of a combination of political correctness and fear. We can no longer afford either. Our European allies are now seeing what comes of a toxic mix of migrants who have been infiltrated by terrorists and isolated, radical Muslim neighborhoods.”
Thus spoke Cruz on March 22. Police need to “Patrol and secure Muslim neighborhoods.” What a kooky response to the Islamist attacks on Brussels.
Cruz appears to be clueless on the differences between the Muslim neighborhoods in Europe and those in the United States.
The Muslim migrants of Europe have failed to become integrated with people in their host nation. As a result they live in self-imposed isolation. They are mostly poor and live in slummy neighborhoods. Most of them take the word of the Quran literally, and believe they themselves must implement the teaching of the Islamic holy book. That makes them prime candidates for jihadism. The young especially, many of them jobless, are drawn to the siren songs of fundamentalist imams.
In contrast, America’s Muslims are mostly middle class. They have integrated into American society, the hijab veil worn by Muslim women notwithstanding. Many American Muslims own their own businesses, including convenience stores and gas stations.
Many American Muslims are professionals. Almost all of my doctors are Muslims, and they are considered among the best physicians in the area.
America’s Muslims are less likely to become radicalized because they have achieved the American Dream. The overwhelming majority are not fundamentalists who take the writings of the Quran literally. They are hard-working loyal Americans.
Thus, having the police patrol and secure Muslim neighborhoods would be counterproductive. It would produce an ‘us against them’ mentality that would enhance and exacerbate the radicalization of young Muslims.
However, there have been a number of Wahhabi mosques and madrassas established in this country by the Saudis. The imams of these mosques and madrasas preach hatred of the west and are responsible for most of our homegrown Islamic terrorists. Therefore it seems appropriate for the police to conduct surveillance of the Wahhabi schools and places of worship. That is what NYPD did both in New York and New Jersey before the newly elected Sandinista-loving Mayor Bill de Blasio put an end to this practice.
Cruz defended his proposal by pointing to NYPD’s “successful program” under then Mayor Michael Bloomberg. Wrong again. NYPD did not patrol and secure Muslim neighborhoods, it merely conducted surveillance of Mosques known to be run by radical imams.
But guess what? Cruz did get Trump to finally agree with something ‘Lying Ted’ said. The Donald said he agreed with Cruz’s proposal to patrol and secure Muslim neighborhoods. A kooky idea supported by a kooky presidential candidate.
The tragedy of the Republican presidential campaign is that the longer it goes on, with Cruz and Trump wallowing in the sewer about their wives and coming forth with kooky pronouncements, the more certain it becomes that Hillary will be the next President of the United States.
“We need to empower law enforcement to patrol and secure Muslim neighborhoods before they become radicalized.”
“For years, the West has tried to deny this enemy exists out of a combination of political correctness and fear. We can no longer afford either. Our European allies are now seeing what comes of a toxic mix of migrants who have been infiltrated by terrorists and isolated, radical Muslim neighborhoods.”
Thus spoke Cruz on March 22. Police need to “Patrol and secure Muslim neighborhoods.” What a kooky response to the Islamist attacks on Brussels.
Cruz appears to be clueless on the differences between the Muslim neighborhoods in Europe and those in the United States.
The Muslim migrants of Europe have failed to become integrated with people in their host nation. As a result they live in self-imposed isolation. They are mostly poor and live in slummy neighborhoods. Most of them take the word of the Quran literally, and believe they themselves must implement the teaching of the Islamic holy book. That makes them prime candidates for jihadism. The young especially, many of them jobless, are drawn to the siren songs of fundamentalist imams.
In contrast, America’s Muslims are mostly middle class. They have integrated into American society, the hijab veil worn by Muslim women notwithstanding. Many American Muslims own their own businesses, including convenience stores and gas stations.
Many American Muslims are professionals. Almost all of my doctors are Muslims, and they are considered among the best physicians in the area.
America’s Muslims are less likely to become radicalized because they have achieved the American Dream. The overwhelming majority are not fundamentalists who take the writings of the Quran literally. They are hard-working loyal Americans.
Thus, having the police patrol and secure Muslim neighborhoods would be counterproductive. It would produce an ‘us against them’ mentality that would enhance and exacerbate the radicalization of young Muslims.
However, there have been a number of Wahhabi mosques and madrassas established in this country by the Saudis. The imams of these mosques and madrasas preach hatred of the west and are responsible for most of our homegrown Islamic terrorists. Therefore it seems appropriate for the police to conduct surveillance of the Wahhabi schools and places of worship. That is what NYPD did both in New York and New Jersey before the newly elected Sandinista-loving Mayor Bill de Blasio put an end to this practice.
Cruz defended his proposal by pointing to NYPD’s “successful program” under then Mayor Michael Bloomberg. Wrong again. NYPD did not patrol and secure Muslim neighborhoods, it merely conducted surveillance of Mosques known to be run by radical imams.
But guess what? Cruz did get Trump to finally agree with something ‘Lying Ted’ said. The Donald said he agreed with Cruz’s proposal to patrol and secure Muslim neighborhoods. A kooky idea supported by a kooky presidential candidate.
The tragedy of the Republican presidential campaign is that the longer it goes on, with Cruz and Trump wallowing in the sewer about their wives and coming forth with kooky pronouncements, the more certain it becomes that Hillary will be the next President of the United States.
OBAMA DANCED THE TANGO IN ARGENTINA, BUT IN CUBA, CASTRO TURNED DOWN A DANCE WITH THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES
At the end of their joint press conference in Havana, Castro rejected Obama’s attempt to embrace him
Raul Castro has good taste. While Obama danced the tango in Argentina following his visit to Cuba, the Cuban leader did not want to dance with the American president. Castro rejected Obama’s attempt to embrace him at the end of their joint press conference in Havana.
A video of the press conference shows Castro deflecting Obama’s left arm as the American president attempted to hug him. As his arm was deflected upwards and held there by Castro, Obama’s left hand was left dangling limply.
What an embarrassing picture … President Obama’s left hand dangling limply.
Ah, but after he arrived in Argentina, Obama looked pretty good dancing the tango with a professional dancer.
However, the international community will not judge Obama by how well he tangoed, but by how the President of the United States was publically rejected and embarrassed by the leader of a tiny Caribbean island nation..
Raul Castro has good taste. While Obama danced the tango in Argentina following his visit to Cuba, the Cuban leader did not want to dance with the American president. Castro rejected Obama’s attempt to embrace him at the end of their joint press conference in Havana.
A video of the press conference shows Castro deflecting Obama’s left arm as the American president attempted to hug him. As his arm was deflected upwards and held there by Castro, Obama’s left hand was left dangling limply.
What an embarrassing picture … President Obama’s left hand dangling limply.
Ah, but after he arrived in Argentina, Obama looked pretty good dancing the tango with a professional dancer.
However, the international community will not judge Obama by how well he tangoed, but by how the President of the United States was publically rejected and embarrassed by the leader of a tiny Caribbean island nation..
LIE IS HARD. IT’S HARDER WHEN YOU’RE STUPID. OFTEN IT’S SHORTER TOO
By Bob Walsh
15-year-old Stephen BrenoR of Lakeland, Florida, is never going to make it to 16. He died from terminal stupidity, with maybe a touch of bad luck.
Shawn Plain is a licensed security guard. He was charging his cell phone in an apartment building laundry room when a young male appeared in the doorway, produced a handgun, and shot Plain in the face. It turned out the handgun was in fact a pellet gun, which is still a weapon. People die with some regularity from being shot with pellet guns.
Plain pursued the young male who fled the scene with a number of other young men. Plain fired on Brenor, hitting him in the leg. Plain then returned to the laundry room, retrieved his cell phone and returned to the scene where he shot Brenor. Brenor allegedly apologized to Plain and asked him to summon an ambulance.
The ambulance showed up, but Brenor died. I presume he bled out because very few otherwise healthy young men die from a leg shot except for that.
Brenor was a known, documented gang member.
Plain went to the hospital for treatment for pellet wounds to his face. The shooting is under investigation.
I will now offer a piece of free advice for people similarly situated. Shooting at someone with a pellet gun who is likely to have a more conventional, more powerful firearm at his immediate disposal is a really, really stupid idea. The other person may kill you.
15-year-old Stephen BrenoR of Lakeland, Florida, is never going to make it to 16. He died from terminal stupidity, with maybe a touch of bad luck.
Shawn Plain is a licensed security guard. He was charging his cell phone in an apartment building laundry room when a young male appeared in the doorway, produced a handgun, and shot Plain in the face. It turned out the handgun was in fact a pellet gun, which is still a weapon. People die with some regularity from being shot with pellet guns.
Plain pursued the young male who fled the scene with a number of other young men. Plain fired on Brenor, hitting him in the leg. Plain then returned to the laundry room, retrieved his cell phone and returned to the scene where he shot Brenor. Brenor allegedly apologized to Plain and asked him to summon an ambulance.
The ambulance showed up, but Brenor died. I presume he bled out because very few otherwise healthy young men die from a leg shot except for that.
Brenor was a known, documented gang member.
Plain went to the hospital for treatment for pellet wounds to his face. The shooting is under investigation.
I will now offer a piece of free advice for people similarly situated. Shooting at someone with a pellet gun who is likely to have a more conventional, more powerful firearm at his immediate disposal is a really, really stupid idea. The other person may kill you.
WHO CAN RUN FASTER?
Usually the one who is having a gun pointed at him
When two Atlanta cops got into an argument over which one can run the fasted, one of them pulled his gun on the other one. If the one having the gun pointed at him would just have taken off and beat feet (as Bob Walsh would say), he would have shown he was the fastest because, I’ll bet, he would have left the gun-wielding cop in the dust.
Seriously though, hoe did these two jerks ever become cops?
ATLANTA POLICE OFFICER PULLS GUN ON COLLEAGUE
The officers argued about who would be faster in a foot race
By Kimberly James
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
March 26, 2016
Two Atlanta police officers were relieved of duty after getting into a fist fight where a gun was allegedly pulled.
They fought over who could run faster.
The scuffle happened early Friday morning at R. Thomas Restaurant in Buckhead, after officers Stephen Green, Joseph Tyer and a handful of other officers met there for dinner, Officer Lukasz Sajdak, a spokesman for Atlanta police, said in an email.
The officers bantered about who would be faster in a foot race, Green or Tyer, Sajdak said.
The conversation began to escalate and Green said he noticed Tyer getting upset.
"I'm going to punch you in the face," Tyer told Green, according to the statement. Green, who was taken by surprise, said, "What?"
"I'll punch you in the face," Tyer said.
The argument escalated to blows and the other officers broke up the fight, Sajdak said. Tyer allegedly pulled his service weapon, but no shots were fired.
The Office of Professional Standards opened an investigation that is still ongoing, Sajdak said.
"The Atlanta Police Department takes these allegations very seriously," the department said in a statement. "Chief [George] Turner has always prioritized officer accountability and professional behavior at all times. He will continue to take decisive action when necessary to hold his employees to the highest standard."
Green, who had been with the force since 2011, is on administrative leave.
Tyer resigned on Tuesday. He had been with Atlanta police since 2012.
When two Atlanta cops got into an argument over which one can run the fasted, one of them pulled his gun on the other one. If the one having the gun pointed at him would just have taken off and beat feet (as Bob Walsh would say), he would have shown he was the fastest because, I’ll bet, he would have left the gun-wielding cop in the dust.
Seriously though, hoe did these two jerks ever become cops?
ATLANTA POLICE OFFICER PULLS GUN ON COLLEAGUE
The officers argued about who would be faster in a foot race
By Kimberly James
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
March 26, 2016
Two Atlanta police officers were relieved of duty after getting into a fist fight where a gun was allegedly pulled.
They fought over who could run faster.
The scuffle happened early Friday morning at R. Thomas Restaurant in Buckhead, after officers Stephen Green, Joseph Tyer and a handful of other officers met there for dinner, Officer Lukasz Sajdak, a spokesman for Atlanta police, said in an email.
The officers bantered about who would be faster in a foot race, Green or Tyer, Sajdak said.
The conversation began to escalate and Green said he noticed Tyer getting upset.
"I'm going to punch you in the face," Tyer told Green, according to the statement. Green, who was taken by surprise, said, "What?"
"I'll punch you in the face," Tyer said.
The argument escalated to blows and the other officers broke up the fight, Sajdak said. Tyer allegedly pulled his service weapon, but no shots were fired.
The Office of Professional Standards opened an investigation that is still ongoing, Sajdak said.
"The Atlanta Police Department takes these allegations very seriously," the department said in a statement. "Chief [George] Turner has always prioritized officer accountability and professional behavior at all times. He will continue to take decisive action when necessary to hold his employees to the highest standard."
Green, who had been with the force since 2011, is on administrative leave.
Tyer resigned on Tuesday. He had been with Atlanta police since 2012.
Sunday, March 27, 2016
EVERY TEXAN AND HIS MOTHER APPLIED FOR A LICENSE TO CARRY A GUN IN THE LAST TWO MONTHS
In the months immediately preceding and following the January 1, 2016 start-date for Texas' new open carry law, a pretty astounding amount of Texans applied for a license to carry a gun
By Leif Reigstad
Houston Press
March 25, 2016
According to a Texas Department of Public Safety press release, "during the three-month period from December 2015 through February 2016, DPS has received approximately 136,000 LTC application submissions compared to approximately 57,000 over the same time period the year prior – representing a 139 percent increase [italics from original version, but we probably would've added it anyway]."
It is unclear what, exactly, caused the mad dash to be lawfully strapped, but there are a number of possible explanations, including the state's new open carry law, the terrorist attacks in Paris and the ISIS-affiliated shooting in San Bernardino, California, and President Barack Obama's executive action in January aimed at curbing gun violence. No matter what caused the uptick, DPS has more applicants than it can handle.
The jump in applications has apparently sent DPS scrambling to meet the state's 60-day deadline to issue a license from whenever the application was submitted. According to the press release, DPS has "increased staffing strength (hiring additional personnel and initiating an overtime project involving multiple shifts, seven days a week) and resources" to deal with the surge, and the agency is desperately urging applicants to make sure they "closely follow LTC application guidelines and to ensure they submit a fully-completed application."
In early January, we took (and passed) the LTC shooting test after applying for a license. It has been more than 60 days, and we have still not received a license.
EDITOR’S NOTE: I think I can explain the ‘mad dash’ for licenses to carry a gun. The police are refraining from being proactive because their leaders and politicians have wilted under the threat of lawsuits and Black Lives Matter demonstrations, and because cops are getting fired, prosecuted and sued. With the police no longer wanting to be proactive, law abiding citizens want to carry guns to protect themselves.
By Leif Reigstad
Houston Press
March 25, 2016
According to a Texas Department of Public Safety press release, "during the three-month period from December 2015 through February 2016, DPS has received approximately 136,000 LTC application submissions compared to approximately 57,000 over the same time period the year prior – representing a 139 percent increase [italics from original version, but we probably would've added it anyway]."
It is unclear what, exactly, caused the mad dash to be lawfully strapped, but there are a number of possible explanations, including the state's new open carry law, the terrorist attacks in Paris and the ISIS-affiliated shooting in San Bernardino, California, and President Barack Obama's executive action in January aimed at curbing gun violence. No matter what caused the uptick, DPS has more applicants than it can handle.
The jump in applications has apparently sent DPS scrambling to meet the state's 60-day deadline to issue a license from whenever the application was submitted. According to the press release, DPS has "increased staffing strength (hiring additional personnel and initiating an overtime project involving multiple shifts, seven days a week) and resources" to deal with the surge, and the agency is desperately urging applicants to make sure they "closely follow LTC application guidelines and to ensure they submit a fully-completed application."
In early January, we took (and passed) the LTC shooting test after applying for a license. It has been more than 60 days, and we have still not received a license.
EDITOR’S NOTE: I think I can explain the ‘mad dash’ for licenses to carry a gun. The police are refraining from being proactive because their leaders and politicians have wilted under the threat of lawsuits and Black Lives Matter demonstrations, and because cops are getting fired, prosecuted and sued. With the police no longer wanting to be proactive, law abiding citizens want to carry guns to protect themselves.
MAYBE A SMART POLICE RECRUITING IDEA
By Bob Walsh
The San Jose (CA) P.D. is almost critically understaffed. They are down over 400 sworn officers over the last eight years. In an effort to boost recruiting the P. D. is going to start giving credit for military service in lieu of college for new recruits.
Part of the issue is a pension reform measure that has been passed by the voters and is being fought tooth and nail by the public employee unions. The police union has reached a T A with the city, which will go to the voters this November.
The department has recently implemented mandatory overtime in order to maintain a minimal patrol presence in the city. They also operate their own academy, though the department is seriously considering sending its recruits to a regional academy.
The San Jose (CA) P.D. is almost critically understaffed. They are down over 400 sworn officers over the last eight years. In an effort to boost recruiting the P. D. is going to start giving credit for military service in lieu of college for new recruits.
Part of the issue is a pension reform measure that has been passed by the voters and is being fought tooth and nail by the public employee unions. The police union has reached a T A with the city, which will go to the voters this November.
The department has recently implemented mandatory overtime in order to maintain a minimal patrol presence in the city. They also operate their own academy, though the department is seriously considering sending its recruits to a regional academy.
DETROIT CHIEF SLAMS $3K BOND FOR TEEN WHO SHOT AT COP
By George Hunter
The Detroit News
March 21, 2016
Police are livid after a 17-year-old who allegedly shot at a Detroit cop last week was given a lower bond than people arrested for painting graffiti on buildings.
Andre Shontez Lee was charged with felonious assault for allegedly firing a round at an officer during a foot chase Tuesday. At Lee’s arraignmentThursday, 36th District Magistrate Bari Blake Wood set bond at $30,000, allowing him to be freed if he paid 10 percent, or $3,000.
That’s less than half the bond given last year to renowned street artist and alleged graffiti violator Shepard Fairey. Fairey’s bond was set at $75,000/10 percent. A personal bond of $5,000 was set for three Grosse Pointe teens who spray-painted buildings downtown in 2014.
“That’s beyond ridiculous,” Detroit Police Chief James Craig said Sunday. “Across the country, police officers are being killed; what kind of message does this send to allow (Lee) to get out for only $3,000?
“I just can’t let this go without saying something. You just can’t shoot at a cop and get a slap on the wrist.”
Lee had not posted bond as of Sunday evening, and was locked up in the Detroit Detention Center, said Detroit Police Sgt. Michael Woody.
Attempts to reach the magistrate for comment Sunday were not successful.
Lee and a companion were walking in the middle of the street on Detroit’s east side at about 3:15 p.m. Tuesday, when officers from the 5th Precinct ordered them to the sidewalk, Woody said.
“They didn’t comply, so the officer stepped out of his squad car,” Woody said. “Before he could get his feet on the ground (Lee) takes off running.”
During a foot chase, Lee allegedly turned and fired off a single round at the officer from a 9 mm handgun, Woody said.
“The officer returned fire; neither person was hit,” he said. “But (Lee) got away.”
The gun was recovered, and police cordoned off the area. “There was a school nearby, and it was on lockdown for a few hours,” Woody said.
A helicopter and tracking dogs were employed. About two hours after the shooting, police found Lee hiding in an abandoned building.
Craig said the low bond given to Lee is especially rankling because of the recent spate of officers being killed in the line of duty — 26 this year, with 14 in March alone.
“Judges have to be mindful that what they do can be a deterrent,” Craig said. “That works the other way, too. You shoot at a police officer, and you can be back on the street after posting just $3,000? Something is very wrong here.”
Mark Diaz, president of the Detroit Police Officers Association union, also slammed the low bond, which he said “expresses (the magistrate’s) value of the lives of the protectors of Detroiters.”
“By setting a $3,000 bond for someone who tried killing a police officer, she is clearly a detriment to the safety of our community,” Diaz said.
Woody said Lee has a previous criminal conviction, although because he was sentenced under the Holmes Youthful Trainee Act, his record has been expunged.
Lee pleaded guilty in 2014 after stealing a car and fleeing a police officer.
“He did six months’ probation, and because he was charged under HYTA, after he did his probation, the charges were dismissed,” Woody said.
Under HYTA, state law allows defendants between ages 17 and 20 who plead guilty to be sentenced or .complete the youth program. Once successfully completed, there is no criminal record.
Magistrates and judges have discretion when it comes to setting bond, said University of Detroit-Mercy law professor Lawrence Dubin.
“There are no guidelines, but there are factors that exist for a judge or magistrate to review in setting a bond,” Dubin said. “Those include potential danger to the community, flight risk, and nature of the charges. It’s subject to the reasonable discretion of the judge.”
State Sen. Virgil Smith, who also was charged with felonious assault before entering a plea deal for the lesser charge of malicious destruction of property, was granted $25,000 bond. Smith fired several rounds at his ex-wife’s car.
Police often are angered over bond amounts set by judges and magistrates. In 2014, Craig called for a summit with Wayne County judges and Prosecutor Kym Worthy after a Detroit man was accused of trying to kill a rival, granted $10,000 bond, and then shot the victim again.
Another bond that ticked off police: Angel Birch, charged with slashing Officer Joel Dobris in the face with a razor blade, was given a $25,000 bond.
Dubin said bonds are subject to review by a district court judge.
“So it could be changed; it’s not permanent,” he said.
EDITOR’S NOTE: The Chief Judge of 36th District Court, Nancy M. Blount, responded to the criticism and defended the magistrate's ruling.
"In this instance, Felonious Assault is a 4 year felony, and this bond is consistent with the charge. Mr. Lee is not on probation or parole... It was unfortunate that the Chief jumped to conclusions that the magistrate didn't look at factors which include the safety of the public," said the Chief Judge.
Mr. Lee my ass! Bond should have been set at $300,000 for the motherfucker.
The Detroit News
March 21, 2016
Police are livid after a 17-year-old who allegedly shot at a Detroit cop last week was given a lower bond than people arrested for painting graffiti on buildings.
Andre Shontez Lee was charged with felonious assault for allegedly firing a round at an officer during a foot chase Tuesday. At Lee’s arraignmentThursday, 36th District Magistrate Bari Blake Wood set bond at $30,000, allowing him to be freed if he paid 10 percent, or $3,000.
That’s less than half the bond given last year to renowned street artist and alleged graffiti violator Shepard Fairey. Fairey’s bond was set at $75,000/10 percent. A personal bond of $5,000 was set for three Grosse Pointe teens who spray-painted buildings downtown in 2014.
“That’s beyond ridiculous,” Detroit Police Chief James Craig said Sunday. “Across the country, police officers are being killed; what kind of message does this send to allow (Lee) to get out for only $3,000?
“I just can’t let this go without saying something. You just can’t shoot at a cop and get a slap on the wrist.”
Lee had not posted bond as of Sunday evening, and was locked up in the Detroit Detention Center, said Detroit Police Sgt. Michael Woody.
Attempts to reach the magistrate for comment Sunday were not successful.
Lee and a companion were walking in the middle of the street on Detroit’s east side at about 3:15 p.m. Tuesday, when officers from the 5th Precinct ordered them to the sidewalk, Woody said.
“They didn’t comply, so the officer stepped out of his squad car,” Woody said. “Before he could get his feet on the ground (Lee) takes off running.”
During a foot chase, Lee allegedly turned and fired off a single round at the officer from a 9 mm handgun, Woody said.
“The officer returned fire; neither person was hit,” he said. “But (Lee) got away.”
The gun was recovered, and police cordoned off the area. “There was a school nearby, and it was on lockdown for a few hours,” Woody said.
A helicopter and tracking dogs were employed. About two hours after the shooting, police found Lee hiding in an abandoned building.
Craig said the low bond given to Lee is especially rankling because of the recent spate of officers being killed in the line of duty — 26 this year, with 14 in March alone.
“Judges have to be mindful that what they do can be a deterrent,” Craig said. “That works the other way, too. You shoot at a police officer, and you can be back on the street after posting just $3,000? Something is very wrong here.”
Mark Diaz, president of the Detroit Police Officers Association union, also slammed the low bond, which he said “expresses (the magistrate’s) value of the lives of the protectors of Detroiters.”
“By setting a $3,000 bond for someone who tried killing a police officer, she is clearly a detriment to the safety of our community,” Diaz said.
Woody said Lee has a previous criminal conviction, although because he was sentenced under the Holmes Youthful Trainee Act, his record has been expunged.
Lee pleaded guilty in 2014 after stealing a car and fleeing a police officer.
“He did six months’ probation, and because he was charged under HYTA, after he did his probation, the charges were dismissed,” Woody said.
Under HYTA, state law allows defendants between ages 17 and 20 who plead guilty to be sentenced or .complete the youth program. Once successfully completed, there is no criminal record.
Magistrates and judges have discretion when it comes to setting bond, said University of Detroit-Mercy law professor Lawrence Dubin.
“There are no guidelines, but there are factors that exist for a judge or magistrate to review in setting a bond,” Dubin said. “Those include potential danger to the community, flight risk, and nature of the charges. It’s subject to the reasonable discretion of the judge.”
State Sen. Virgil Smith, who also was charged with felonious assault before entering a plea deal for the lesser charge of malicious destruction of property, was granted $25,000 bond. Smith fired several rounds at his ex-wife’s car.
Police often are angered over bond amounts set by judges and magistrates. In 2014, Craig called for a summit with Wayne County judges and Prosecutor Kym Worthy after a Detroit man was accused of trying to kill a rival, granted $10,000 bond, and then shot the victim again.
Another bond that ticked off police: Angel Birch, charged with slashing Officer Joel Dobris in the face with a razor blade, was given a $25,000 bond.
Dubin said bonds are subject to review by a district court judge.
“So it could be changed; it’s not permanent,” he said.
EDITOR’S NOTE: The Chief Judge of 36th District Court, Nancy M. Blount, responded to the criticism and defended the magistrate's ruling.
"In this instance, Felonious Assault is a 4 year felony, and this bond is consistent with the charge. Mr. Lee is not on probation or parole... It was unfortunate that the Chief jumped to conclusions that the magistrate didn't look at factors which include the safety of the public," said the Chief Judge.
Mr. Lee my ass! Bond should have been set at $300,000 for the motherfucker.
CALLING THE COPS AFTER YOUR FRIEND OVERDOSES CAN STILL GET YOU ARRESTED
Arrests of the persons who report an overdose basically means that Good Samaritan laws are null and void
By Maia Szalavitz
VICE News
March 23, 2016
It was exactly the kind of tragedy you'd expect a "Good Samaritan" overdose law to address.
Last July, Shane Ward overdosed on heroin and other drugs after getting high in a van with three friends. When he passed out, his friends acted quickly: One of them, 21-year-old Devan Miller, got behind the wheel and took off, calling 911. She was told to pull over, which she did, instructing another friend to perform CPR on Ward while they awaited an ambulance. When help arrived, Ward was taken to a nearby hospital, and probably owes Miller his life.
But her altruism got Miller arrested, not praised.
Rather than being offered amnesty from low-level drug charges for doing the right thing—as Illinois's Good Samaritan law suggests—Miller was handcuffed and taken in for questioning. She was charged with "aggravated battery" under the apparent contention (which she and her lawyer dispute) that she helped Ward inject himself.
Miller was also charged with driving with a revoked license, drug possession, and drug delivery—even though she had no drugs on her when she was arrested. And she remains in jail some eight months later because her family cannot afford to post the $7,500 required to secure bond.
She isn't alone, ether.
Kathleen Kane Willis, director of the Illinois Consortium on Drug Policy at Roosevelt University, has documented at least three such prosecutions in rural counties in the state in recent years. These cases have supporters of Good Samaritan laws, which are supposed to protect people like Miller in the name of public health, thinking it's the 1980s all over again.
"It obviously acts at complete cross purposes to Good Samaritan legislation, in both spirit and letter," argues Leo Beletsky, associate professor of law and health science at Northeastern University. He sees a pattern across the country of enforcement that undermines Good Samaritan laws.
"It means basically that Good Samaritan laws are null and void," Willis adds.
The desire on the part of cops and prosecutors across America to show that they're cracking down on heroin is increasingly coming into direct conflict with initiatives to prevent overdose deaths. Call it Good Samaritans v. Drug Warriors. Spurred by the activism of grieving parents whose children were abandoned after overdose, dozens of states now have Good Samaritan laws, which are well-grounded in research showing that the most common reason people don't seek medical attention in these situations is fear of arrest. Since we know that most overdoses are witnessed, immunizing witnesses from prosecution should reduce this fear and save lives.
Unfortunately, these laws aren't all that well publicized—and now they're being threatened in a sort of twisted coda to the fading war on drugs.
In fact, most states have "drug delivery" laws that allow prosecution of dealers for murder if it can be proven that someone overdosed on a product they sold. Federal law also allows lengthier sentences for dealers linked with such deaths. And in some states, like Illinois, people who try to help other drug users can get prosecuted for crimes like battery instead of murder if the victim survives the overdose.
The majority of these laws were passed in the 1980s, following widespread outrage over the coke-related death of college basketball star Len Bias. But Illinois, Kansas, and Pennsylvania passed their laws between 2011 and 2012—during the current opioid crisis—and politicians around America continue to propose new versions.
Such laws are a terrible mistake. It would be one thing if they were only applied to high-level dealers. But overwhelmingly, the people being picked up for "drug-induced homicide" or "aggravated battery" associated with overdose are those like Miller, who are struggling with addictions.
Nearly all of these prosecutions involve people who were in the room when the victim died; almost never does such a situation involve a kingpin, because they don't tend to sit around shooting up in vans. And I can tell you from personal experience that it's almost impossible to have a heroin problem without having "sold" or "delivered" the stuff at some point. That distinction, any given time, tends to be between the person who knows where to score that day and the one who doesn't.
Of course, many anguished parents of overdose victims want to punish someone for the loss of their children's lives—and prosecutors seem to take up these cases with an eye to getting justice for these families and making dealers think twice because they could face the long sentences associated with homicide.
"Although many prosecutors support Good Samaritan laws, there is a real conflict when someone actually recklessly caused death of another person and then panics and calls 911," says Josh Marquis, who has been the district attorney for Clatsop County, Oregon, since 1994, and is a spokesperson for the National District Attorney's Association. He adds, "There is a weighing test you have to go through, and you can't simply grant blanket amnesty for anyone who knowingly provides a highly toxic substance, which then, in turn, kills people."
Tamara Olt, an Illinois obstetrician and gynecologist who lost her son Josh to overdose at 16, once supported prosecuting such cases. In her rage and grief over losing a child so young, she wanted anyone with any responsibility for what happened to pay. "Initially, I wanted everybody prosecuted," she tells me, adding that prosecutors began pursuing drug-induced homicide charges in her son's case.
However, the police first went after the wrong dealer—and as she mourned, Olt began to see the situation very differently. She got involved with a support group for parents who had also lost children to overdose, known as GRASP, for Grief Recovery After a Substance Passing. Talking with other moms, she realized that it was only chance that her Josh was the one who had died, rather than being the one who faced homicide charges. "I've forgiven everyone associated with his death, including him and myself," she says.
In order to help others, she started the JOLT foundation in memory of her son—and she works to promote harm-reduction practices, like distributing the overdose antidote Naloxone, and Good Samaritan laws. She's even put up billboards to tell users that they will be safe from arrest if they help their friends. That's why, when she heard about Miller's case, she was outraged and went so far as to donate $1,500 to her legal defense.
Miller's lawyer, Terry Slaw, adds, "Based on the fact that my client made the call and that brought the police on the scene, she should immune from prosecution—yet she's charged with three very serious crimes."
The prosecutor in Miller's case is Jonathan Wright, the state's attorney for Logan County. He told the local paper, the Courier, that he could not comment the case. But Marquis, who's been prosecuting drug cases for years in an Oregon community with plenty of experience in heroin overdoses, says choosing to charge a low-level user in a situation like Miller's "seems like an odd prosecutorial decision."
"You don't want to discourage people from calling for help," he says.
As I see it, we've already tried a bunch of ways to discourage drug dealing through the criminal justice system with little success. How is it different if a dealer faces 15 years to life simply for selling drugs, versus facing the same kind of time because someone overdoses? Why would fear of a long sentence for drug-induced homicide prove more potent than that of a long sentence for simple drug dealing? And is the terror of doing extra time in prison for helping your friends get drugs really a deterrent if you aren't too worried about dying of overdose yourself?
This is one of many examples of how unchecked the power of prosecutors is—and another reason why we need to thoroughly revise our drug laws. Decriminalizing low-level possession would be a good start, and would help prevent users from being prosecuted as dealers. But we also need to recognize that the way we handle dealers isn't working, either.
Saving lives has to come first—it's absurd to turn a tragedy for one family into a tragedy for two by prosecuting the addicted survivor and tearing them away from their loved ones. It's time to reward people who save lives rather than try, in vain, to scare them out of addiction.
EDITOR’S NOTE: When there is clear evidence that the ‘Good Samaritan’ supplied the drugs or helped the overdose victim inject the drugs, that person should be arrested, and if the victim dies, charged with murder.
By Maia Szalavitz
VICE News
March 23, 2016
It was exactly the kind of tragedy you'd expect a "Good Samaritan" overdose law to address.
Last July, Shane Ward overdosed on heroin and other drugs after getting high in a van with three friends. When he passed out, his friends acted quickly: One of them, 21-year-old Devan Miller, got behind the wheel and took off, calling 911. She was told to pull over, which she did, instructing another friend to perform CPR on Ward while they awaited an ambulance. When help arrived, Ward was taken to a nearby hospital, and probably owes Miller his life.
But her altruism got Miller arrested, not praised.
Rather than being offered amnesty from low-level drug charges for doing the right thing—as Illinois's Good Samaritan law suggests—Miller was handcuffed and taken in for questioning. She was charged with "aggravated battery" under the apparent contention (which she and her lawyer dispute) that she helped Ward inject himself.
Miller was also charged with driving with a revoked license, drug possession, and drug delivery—even though she had no drugs on her when she was arrested. And she remains in jail some eight months later because her family cannot afford to post the $7,500 required to secure bond.
She isn't alone, ether.
Kathleen Kane Willis, director of the Illinois Consortium on Drug Policy at Roosevelt University, has documented at least three such prosecutions in rural counties in the state in recent years. These cases have supporters of Good Samaritan laws, which are supposed to protect people like Miller in the name of public health, thinking it's the 1980s all over again.
"It obviously acts at complete cross purposes to Good Samaritan legislation, in both spirit and letter," argues Leo Beletsky, associate professor of law and health science at Northeastern University. He sees a pattern across the country of enforcement that undermines Good Samaritan laws.
"It means basically that Good Samaritan laws are null and void," Willis adds.
The desire on the part of cops and prosecutors across America to show that they're cracking down on heroin is increasingly coming into direct conflict with initiatives to prevent overdose deaths. Call it Good Samaritans v. Drug Warriors. Spurred by the activism of grieving parents whose children were abandoned after overdose, dozens of states now have Good Samaritan laws, which are well-grounded in research showing that the most common reason people don't seek medical attention in these situations is fear of arrest. Since we know that most overdoses are witnessed, immunizing witnesses from prosecution should reduce this fear and save lives.
Unfortunately, these laws aren't all that well publicized—and now they're being threatened in a sort of twisted coda to the fading war on drugs.
In fact, most states have "drug delivery" laws that allow prosecution of dealers for murder if it can be proven that someone overdosed on a product they sold. Federal law also allows lengthier sentences for dealers linked with such deaths. And in some states, like Illinois, people who try to help other drug users can get prosecuted for crimes like battery instead of murder if the victim survives the overdose.
The majority of these laws were passed in the 1980s, following widespread outrage over the coke-related death of college basketball star Len Bias. But Illinois, Kansas, and Pennsylvania passed their laws between 2011 and 2012—during the current opioid crisis—and politicians around America continue to propose new versions.
Such laws are a terrible mistake. It would be one thing if they were only applied to high-level dealers. But overwhelmingly, the people being picked up for "drug-induced homicide" or "aggravated battery" associated with overdose are those like Miller, who are struggling with addictions.
Nearly all of these prosecutions involve people who were in the room when the victim died; almost never does such a situation involve a kingpin, because they don't tend to sit around shooting up in vans. And I can tell you from personal experience that it's almost impossible to have a heroin problem without having "sold" or "delivered" the stuff at some point. That distinction, any given time, tends to be between the person who knows where to score that day and the one who doesn't.
Of course, many anguished parents of overdose victims want to punish someone for the loss of their children's lives—and prosecutors seem to take up these cases with an eye to getting justice for these families and making dealers think twice because they could face the long sentences associated with homicide.
"Although many prosecutors support Good Samaritan laws, there is a real conflict when someone actually recklessly caused death of another person and then panics and calls 911," says Josh Marquis, who has been the district attorney for Clatsop County, Oregon, since 1994, and is a spokesperson for the National District Attorney's Association. He adds, "There is a weighing test you have to go through, and you can't simply grant blanket amnesty for anyone who knowingly provides a highly toxic substance, which then, in turn, kills people."
Tamara Olt, an Illinois obstetrician and gynecologist who lost her son Josh to overdose at 16, once supported prosecuting such cases. In her rage and grief over losing a child so young, she wanted anyone with any responsibility for what happened to pay. "Initially, I wanted everybody prosecuted," she tells me, adding that prosecutors began pursuing drug-induced homicide charges in her son's case.
However, the police first went after the wrong dealer—and as she mourned, Olt began to see the situation very differently. She got involved with a support group for parents who had also lost children to overdose, known as GRASP, for Grief Recovery After a Substance Passing. Talking with other moms, she realized that it was only chance that her Josh was the one who had died, rather than being the one who faced homicide charges. "I've forgiven everyone associated with his death, including him and myself," she says.
In order to help others, she started the JOLT foundation in memory of her son—and she works to promote harm-reduction practices, like distributing the overdose antidote Naloxone, and Good Samaritan laws. She's even put up billboards to tell users that they will be safe from arrest if they help their friends. That's why, when she heard about Miller's case, she was outraged and went so far as to donate $1,500 to her legal defense.
Miller's lawyer, Terry Slaw, adds, "Based on the fact that my client made the call and that brought the police on the scene, she should immune from prosecution—yet she's charged with three very serious crimes."
The prosecutor in Miller's case is Jonathan Wright, the state's attorney for Logan County. He told the local paper, the Courier, that he could not comment the case. But Marquis, who's been prosecuting drug cases for years in an Oregon community with plenty of experience in heroin overdoses, says choosing to charge a low-level user in a situation like Miller's "seems like an odd prosecutorial decision."
"You don't want to discourage people from calling for help," he says.
As I see it, we've already tried a bunch of ways to discourage drug dealing through the criminal justice system with little success. How is it different if a dealer faces 15 years to life simply for selling drugs, versus facing the same kind of time because someone overdoses? Why would fear of a long sentence for drug-induced homicide prove more potent than that of a long sentence for simple drug dealing? And is the terror of doing extra time in prison for helping your friends get drugs really a deterrent if you aren't too worried about dying of overdose yourself?
This is one of many examples of how unchecked the power of prosecutors is—and another reason why we need to thoroughly revise our drug laws. Decriminalizing low-level possession would be a good start, and would help prevent users from being prosecuted as dealers. But we also need to recognize that the way we handle dealers isn't working, either.
Saving lives has to come first—it's absurd to turn a tragedy for one family into a tragedy for two by prosecuting the addicted survivor and tearing them away from their loved ones. It's time to reward people who save lives rather than try, in vain, to scare them out of addiction.
EDITOR’S NOTE: When there is clear evidence that the ‘Good Samaritan’ supplied the drugs or helped the overdose victim inject the drugs, that person should be arrested, and if the victim dies, charged with murder.
IOWA MAN CONTESTS SUPPORT FOR CHILD HE SAYS HE DIDN’T FATHER
By Charly Haley
The Des Moines Register
March 25, 2016
A Davenport man is protesting a state law that requires him to pay child support for a child that isn't his.
Joe Vandusen, 45, received a letter earlier this month from the Iowa Department of Human Services notifying him that he would be required to pay child support for his estranged wife's child, even though he is not the father, Vandusen told The Des Moines Register Friday evening.
Vandusen and his wife have hardly talked in 15 to 17 years, aside from an occasional phone call or Facebook message, he said. "I was married to my ex a couple of years, but we didn't see eye-to-eye, so we split up," without filing for an official divorce, Vandusen said. The child Vandusen is expected to help support is about 1 year old, he said.
Vandusen contacted the Department of Human Services' Child Support Recovery Unit to say he's not the biological father of his wife's child, and he offered to take a paternity test to prove it — but he was told it didn't matter, according to state law, he said.
"They said since I'm still legally married, I'm going to be responsible for the child support," Vandusen said.
A spokesperson from the Department of Human Services confirmed to WQAD-TV in Davenport that in a case like Vandusen's, the husband is considered the legal father of his wife's newborn child, even though he has not seen her in nearly two decades. The Register could not reach state officials for comment Friday evening.
Other states have similar laws, which are aimed at making sure all children are sufficiently financially supported.
Vandusen was recently laid off from his job, so he doesn't have the money to pay child support, he said. He also doesn't have the money to pay for an attorney to file for divorce and to fight in court against the child support requirement.
So he went to the media to draw attention to his case, he said. Since his story aired on WQAD on Wednesday, Vandusen has been contacted by many people from across the U.S. offering their support, including three other men from Iowa in a similar situation, he said.
Vandusen also has established a fundraiser to help with his legal expenses at www.crowdrise.com. The amount of child support that Vandusen will be expected to pay has not yet been established, he said, but the initial cost of an attorney will be about $2,000.
"I'd like to see my divorce get filed; I want the DNA test to prove I'm not the father, and then they'd drop the case against me," he said.
He also hopes Iowa lawmakers will notice his case and change the law, he said.
Vandusen already owes child support on his own child, who was born to another woman before his marriage, and "in that case, I didn't deny it," he said.
But being asked to support a child that is not his is not fair, Vandusen said.
"I'm just trying to get it stopped," he said.
EDITOR’S NOTE: Just because there are a number of other states in addition to Iowa that require men to provide child support for kids they did not father, that’s still getting fucked without enjoying it.
The Des Moines Register
March 25, 2016
A Davenport man is protesting a state law that requires him to pay child support for a child that isn't his.
Joe Vandusen, 45, received a letter earlier this month from the Iowa Department of Human Services notifying him that he would be required to pay child support for his estranged wife's child, even though he is not the father, Vandusen told The Des Moines Register Friday evening.
Vandusen and his wife have hardly talked in 15 to 17 years, aside from an occasional phone call or Facebook message, he said. "I was married to my ex a couple of years, but we didn't see eye-to-eye, so we split up," without filing for an official divorce, Vandusen said. The child Vandusen is expected to help support is about 1 year old, he said.
Vandusen contacted the Department of Human Services' Child Support Recovery Unit to say he's not the biological father of his wife's child, and he offered to take a paternity test to prove it — but he was told it didn't matter, according to state law, he said.
"They said since I'm still legally married, I'm going to be responsible for the child support," Vandusen said.
A spokesperson from the Department of Human Services confirmed to WQAD-TV in Davenport that in a case like Vandusen's, the husband is considered the legal father of his wife's newborn child, even though he has not seen her in nearly two decades. The Register could not reach state officials for comment Friday evening.
Other states have similar laws, which are aimed at making sure all children are sufficiently financially supported.
Vandusen was recently laid off from his job, so he doesn't have the money to pay child support, he said. He also doesn't have the money to pay for an attorney to file for divorce and to fight in court against the child support requirement.
So he went to the media to draw attention to his case, he said. Since his story aired on WQAD on Wednesday, Vandusen has been contacted by many people from across the U.S. offering their support, including three other men from Iowa in a similar situation, he said.
Vandusen also has established a fundraiser to help with his legal expenses at www.crowdrise.com. The amount of child support that Vandusen will be expected to pay has not yet been established, he said, but the initial cost of an attorney will be about $2,000.
"I'd like to see my divorce get filed; I want the DNA test to prove I'm not the father, and then they'd drop the case against me," he said.
He also hopes Iowa lawmakers will notice his case and change the law, he said.
Vandusen already owes child support on his own child, who was born to another woman before his marriage, and "in that case, I didn't deny it," he said.
But being asked to support a child that is not his is not fair, Vandusen said.
"I'm just trying to get it stopped," he said.
EDITOR’S NOTE: Just because there are a number of other states in addition to Iowa that require men to provide child support for kids they did not father, that’s still getting fucked without enjoying it.
KINDERGARTEN PLAY GETS BROKEN P BY POLICE AFTER PARENTS BRAWL OVER BEST SEATS
By Sarah Kaplan
The Washington Times
March 25, 2016
Guys.
We know that school productions can be stressful affairs. There are carpools to coordinate and kids to corral. Great Aunt June’s hearing aid needs adjusting; teenage cousin Ralph has to be bribed to attend. Sonia will demand a juice box five minutes before curtain, then inevitably spill it on her costume two minutes later.
But still. It’s probably not a good sign when the local police have to be called to the local school auditorium to break up an all-out brawl. Especially when the brawl involves not the collection of kindergartners standing on stage, but their parents.
“Yeah, it’s kind of shocking,” said Michael Vasquez, the bemused sheriff’s deputy tasked with handling media inquiries about what went down at Ridgemoor Elementary School’s kindergarten play on Wednesday.
According to Vasquez, the fight broke out over “seating privileges”: Someone walked to the front of the auditorium to film the production. Other audience members registered their discontent. Insults — and eventually fists — began to fly.
The local police arrived at the Manifee, Calif., school soon after to find several adults “pushing and shoving” one another, Vasquez said. No one was arrested, but a citation was issued for one person to appear in court at a later date. Then everyone was sent home.
Vasquez said that the Riverside County District Attorney’s Office is still investigating the incident.
He chuckled: “Sometimes adults act in funny ways.”
Uh huh.
Menifee Union School District spokeswoman Betti Cadmus told the Riverside, Calif. Press-Enterprise that Ridgemoor students were given letters about the incident to take home on Thursday. The district also made phone calls to families in both Spanish and English. The play does not appear to have been rescheduled.
Grown-ups, this is why we can’t have nice things.
EDITOR’S NOTE: Manifee is a city of around 78,000 people in southwestern Riverside County. Holy shit! When I was with the Riverside County Sheriff’s Department in the ’50s, I never even heard of the place.
According to Wikipedia, on June 3, 2008, the residents of the communities encompassing the Menifee area voted to incorporate together to form Riverside County's 26th city. The new City of Menifee was officially established on October 1, 2008.
The Washington Times
March 25, 2016
Guys.
We know that school productions can be stressful affairs. There are carpools to coordinate and kids to corral. Great Aunt June’s hearing aid needs adjusting; teenage cousin Ralph has to be bribed to attend. Sonia will demand a juice box five minutes before curtain, then inevitably spill it on her costume two minutes later.
But still. It’s probably not a good sign when the local police have to be called to the local school auditorium to break up an all-out brawl. Especially when the brawl involves not the collection of kindergartners standing on stage, but their parents.
“Yeah, it’s kind of shocking,” said Michael Vasquez, the bemused sheriff’s deputy tasked with handling media inquiries about what went down at Ridgemoor Elementary School’s kindergarten play on Wednesday.
According to Vasquez, the fight broke out over “seating privileges”: Someone walked to the front of the auditorium to film the production. Other audience members registered their discontent. Insults — and eventually fists — began to fly.
The local police arrived at the Manifee, Calif., school soon after to find several adults “pushing and shoving” one another, Vasquez said. No one was arrested, but a citation was issued for one person to appear in court at a later date. Then everyone was sent home.
Vasquez said that the Riverside County District Attorney’s Office is still investigating the incident.
He chuckled: “Sometimes adults act in funny ways.”
Uh huh.
Menifee Union School District spokeswoman Betti Cadmus told the Riverside, Calif. Press-Enterprise that Ridgemoor students were given letters about the incident to take home on Thursday. The district also made phone calls to families in both Spanish and English. The play does not appear to have been rescheduled.
Grown-ups, this is why we can’t have nice things.
EDITOR’S NOTE: Manifee is a city of around 78,000 people in southwestern Riverside County. Holy shit! When I was with the Riverside County Sheriff’s Department in the ’50s, I never even heard of the place.
According to Wikipedia, on June 3, 2008, the residents of the communities encompassing the Menifee area voted to incorporate together to form Riverside County's 26th city. The new City of Menifee was officially established on October 1, 2008.
Saturday, March 26, 2016
CHEERS! CALIFORNIANS PAY LOWER TAXES ON ALCOHOL THAN AVERAGE, STUDY FINDS
Californians can consider themselves lucky: their state charges less in taxes than the national average for import taxes on beer, wine and liquor
By Daniel Wheaton
The San Diego Union-Tribune
March 24, 2016
Californians can consider themselves lucky: their state charges less in taxes than the national average for import taxes on beer, wine and liquor.
A report from the Tax Foundation breaks down excise taxes by state. These are paid by the person or business that buys the alcohol from the manufacturer, and are often passed down to the consumer. California's rate is 20 cents per gallon of beer. That amounts to 2.5 cents for each pint. On top of that however, is a federal tax of 58 cents per gallon of beer, or 7 cents per pint.
As with nearly every other good, taxes vary based on where you’re purchasing them. Regionally, there is significant variation in how much states tax beer: The South has the highest beer taxes; in Wyoming, it’s barely anything at all.
Those geographic trends don’t translate to other types of liquor, though. For wine, Kentucky pays the most with $3.30 per gallon, while Louisiana only pays 11 cents. California booze importers pay a small share as well, only 20 cents per gallon, or about 4 cents per 750 ml bottle. Some state governments control the sale of alcohol, which then can alter the tax even further.
The harder the liquor, the more it costs to buy from a manufacturer, with a federal tax of $13.50 per proof per gallon. The highest state tax is in Washington, where you’ll pay $33.54 per gallon of spirits. So importers would pay $8.86 of state tax for each liter of whiskey. The amount of tax can vary by the alcohol content; for the map above, the Tax Foundation used an ABV of 40%.
In California, it’s about one-tenth that amount, with $3.30 per gallon. Or 80 cents tacked on to that whiskey.
Cheers!
EDITORS NOTE: When California’s Democratic state legislators read this, they are liable to go ape and correct this oversight quickly. How? By raising those taxes well above the national average.
By Daniel Wheaton
The San Diego Union-Tribune
March 24, 2016
Californians can consider themselves lucky: their state charges less in taxes than the national average for import taxes on beer, wine and liquor.
A report from the Tax Foundation breaks down excise taxes by state. These are paid by the person or business that buys the alcohol from the manufacturer, and are often passed down to the consumer. California's rate is 20 cents per gallon of beer. That amounts to 2.5 cents for each pint. On top of that however, is a federal tax of 58 cents per gallon of beer, or 7 cents per pint.
As with nearly every other good, taxes vary based on where you’re purchasing them. Regionally, there is significant variation in how much states tax beer: The South has the highest beer taxes; in Wyoming, it’s barely anything at all.
Those geographic trends don’t translate to other types of liquor, though. For wine, Kentucky pays the most with $3.30 per gallon, while Louisiana only pays 11 cents. California booze importers pay a small share as well, only 20 cents per gallon, or about 4 cents per 750 ml bottle. Some state governments control the sale of alcohol, which then can alter the tax even further.
The harder the liquor, the more it costs to buy from a manufacturer, with a federal tax of $13.50 per proof per gallon. The highest state tax is in Washington, where you’ll pay $33.54 per gallon of spirits. So importers would pay $8.86 of state tax for each liter of whiskey. The amount of tax can vary by the alcohol content; for the map above, the Tax Foundation used an ABV of 40%.
In California, it’s about one-tenth that amount, with $3.30 per gallon. Or 80 cents tacked on to that whiskey.
Cheers!
EDITORS NOTE: When California’s Democratic state legislators read this, they are liable to go ape and correct this oversight quickly. How? By raising those taxes well above the national average.
NORTH CAROLINA MAN ARRESTED FOR NOT RETURNING A VHS TAPE …14 YEARS LATER
James Meyers got fingered by “Freddy Got Fingered” and it landed him in the slammer
By Euan McKirdy
CNN
March 25, 2016
A man pulled over in a routine traffic stop found himself behind bars over a long-overdue copy of the Tom Green comedy “Freddy Got Fingered.”
The North Carolina man, James Meyers, was pulled over for a broken brake light. When the Concord, NC officers ran a check on his driver’s license it showed an outstanding warrant for a movie he had rented and failed to return — in 2002.
“The guy brings me to the back of the car and he goes: ‘Sir, I don’t know how to tell you this, but there’s a warrant out for your arrest from 2002. Apparently you rented a movie, ‘Freddy Got Fingered,’ and you never returned it,'” he recounted the officers telling him in a video posted to YouTube.
“That’s what my local law enforcement officers are up to,” he says in the video. “They’re not out here catching heroin dealers.”
He was handcuffed before being taken into the magistrate’s office, according to a local media report.
When stopped, he was on his way to drop off his daughter at school, he says. The officers, who Meyers described as courteous, allowed him to complete the school run before turning himself in.
Open warrant
The Rowan County warrant remains open, according to the report, and Meyers is liable for a fine. He’s due in court on April 27 to answer the charge of failure to return hired property, a misdemeanor.
The film in question, “Freddy Got Fingered,” starring comedian Tom Green and actor Rip Torn, was a relatively new release at the time. The video shop, J&J Video in Salisbury, North Carolina, has since closed.
Green himself has developed an interest in the case, tweeting on Thursday, “I just saw this and am struggling to believe it is real.”
He has since referenced the case — and the movie — in a number of tweets.
The Canadian comedian, interviewed on an Australian TV show, talked about the incident, adding that he’d contacted Meyers and they’d “had a good laugh about it.”
“It’s a completely bizarre story… it’s an example of how bureaucracy can get out of control.”
EDITOR’S NOTE: I don’t think I would have thrown this guy in the slammer, I would have told him to pay the fine and that I would check on it in a week because if he hadn’t paid it by then, I’d come and throw his ass in jail.
By Euan McKirdy
CNN
March 25, 2016
A man pulled over in a routine traffic stop found himself behind bars over a long-overdue copy of the Tom Green comedy “Freddy Got Fingered.”
The North Carolina man, James Meyers, was pulled over for a broken brake light. When the Concord, NC officers ran a check on his driver’s license it showed an outstanding warrant for a movie he had rented and failed to return — in 2002.
“The guy brings me to the back of the car and he goes: ‘Sir, I don’t know how to tell you this, but there’s a warrant out for your arrest from 2002. Apparently you rented a movie, ‘Freddy Got Fingered,’ and you never returned it,'” he recounted the officers telling him in a video posted to YouTube.
“That’s what my local law enforcement officers are up to,” he says in the video. “They’re not out here catching heroin dealers.”
He was handcuffed before being taken into the magistrate’s office, according to a local media report.
When stopped, he was on his way to drop off his daughter at school, he says. The officers, who Meyers described as courteous, allowed him to complete the school run before turning himself in.
Open warrant
The Rowan County warrant remains open, according to the report, and Meyers is liable for a fine. He’s due in court on April 27 to answer the charge of failure to return hired property, a misdemeanor.
The film in question, “Freddy Got Fingered,” starring comedian Tom Green and actor Rip Torn, was a relatively new release at the time. The video shop, J&J Video in Salisbury, North Carolina, has since closed.
Green himself has developed an interest in the case, tweeting on Thursday, “I just saw this and am struggling to believe it is real.”
He has since referenced the case — and the movie — in a number of tweets.
The Canadian comedian, interviewed on an Australian TV show, talked about the incident, adding that he’d contacted Meyers and they’d “had a good laugh about it.”
“It’s a completely bizarre story… it’s an example of how bureaucracy can get out of control.”
EDITOR’S NOTE: I don’t think I would have thrown this guy in the slammer, I would have told him to pay the fine and that I would check on it in a week because if he hadn’t paid it by then, I’d come and throw his ass in jail.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)