By Bob Walsh
Gavin Newsome is the Lt. Governor of the formerly great state of California. He is also an anti-gun psychopath. He has managed to get an initiative onto the California ballot that would, if it passes and gets past court challenges, make it difficult to impossible to obtain small-arms ammunition in the state (among other things).
The ballot initiative would do the following:
Ban all “high capacity” ammunition magazines (in actuality they are standard capacity magazines) even those which you purchased legally and have owned legally for many, many years. Those in your possession would have to be destroyed, removed from the state or turned in to the local Gestapo.
Require that all ammunition purchases in the state be made face-to-face in a licensed retail store. (This would outlaw both internet sales and would make it illegal to self-purchase ammo out of state and bring it back into the state with you.)
It would impose stringent new operating restriction that would drive most retail ammunition dealers out of business.
Require that ammunition purchasers have a “license” from the DOJ to buy ammo. The license would have a substantial fee attached.
Mandate a new government data base to track all ammunition sales in the state.
Welcome to the Brave New World.
EDITOR’S NOTE: Kookfornia!
If the ammo ban is approved, wgat will come next? One round-only magazines?
Saturday, June 25, 2016
WEIRD MURDER MISTRIAL: DEFENSE SAYS DEATH ON PURPOSE, PROSECUTOR SAYS ACCIDENT
Jose Espidion threatened Jose Alfredo Favela, “pushed him into the store at machete point” and forced the gun into his hands, the defense lawyer told jurors
By Hoa Quach
MyNewsLA.com
June 23, 2016
Prosecutors may try it again starting next week after another jury deadlocked in a bizarre murder trial in which the defense argued the killer shot his victim with an assault rifle on purpose, while the prosecution said the killing was an accident.
In a reversal of roles usually expected in a murder case, the defense said the killer shot his accomplice in a convenience store holdup, and the shooting was justified because the defendant was forced into the robbery by the dead man.
Prosecutors argued the defendant knew full well what he was doing in the robbery and shot the victim, his accomplice, by accident when unsuccessfully targeting the convenience store owner.
It was the second jury to be deadlocked in the trial of the killer charged with murdering his alleged accomplice during a botched convenience store heist nearly two years ago in the El Sereno area.
Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Craig Richman declared a mistrial Thursday after jurors said they could not reach a unanimous verdict on the murder count against Jose Alfredo Favela, 24, one day after the panel found him guilty of attempted robbery.
It marked the second time a jury had deadlocked on the murder count against Favela in connection with the July 18, 2014, death of his alleged accomplice, Jose Espidion, who was armed with a machete. The first jury to hear the case against him in March could not reach a verdict, either.
Favela was arrested the day of the shooting and has remained jailed without bail since then.
He is due back in a downtown Los Angeles courtroom next Tuesday for a pretrial hearing.
Deputy District Attorney Fernanda Barreto told jurors in Favela’s retrial that Favela — armed with a knockoff AK-47 assault rifle — was the one in charge when he and Espidion entered the store.
The prosecutor noted that the owner of the Meadow Maid Market testified that be bent down to block Espidion’s access to the cash register and that Favela then aimed at him, but the bullet struck Espidion instead.
“Even if the killing was unintentional, accidental or negligent” and even if Espidion was not the intended victim of the robbery, “the defendant is guilty of felony murder,” the prosecutor said.
Defense attorney Lori Harris countered that Favela thought he was going with Espidion to pick up a load and be paid $70 and that Favela had objected while on the road when Espidion told him, “We’re going to do a robbery. We’re going to do a hold-up.”
Espidion threatened Favela, “pushed him into the store at machete point” and forced the gun into his hands, the defense lawyer told jurors.
Favela’s attorney said her client saw the storeowner struggling with Espidion and realized he had put his life in the hands of “a high, crazy, crazed, agitated stranger.” Frightened that Espidion was about to lose control, Facela “raised the gun up over Mr. Chun and fired directly at Mr. Espidion,” she said, maintaining that the shooting was “justified.”
By Hoa Quach
MyNewsLA.com
June 23, 2016
Prosecutors may try it again starting next week after another jury deadlocked in a bizarre murder trial in which the defense argued the killer shot his victim with an assault rifle on purpose, while the prosecution said the killing was an accident.
In a reversal of roles usually expected in a murder case, the defense said the killer shot his accomplice in a convenience store holdup, and the shooting was justified because the defendant was forced into the robbery by the dead man.
Prosecutors argued the defendant knew full well what he was doing in the robbery and shot the victim, his accomplice, by accident when unsuccessfully targeting the convenience store owner.
It was the second jury to be deadlocked in the trial of the killer charged with murdering his alleged accomplice during a botched convenience store heist nearly two years ago in the El Sereno area.
Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Craig Richman declared a mistrial Thursday after jurors said they could not reach a unanimous verdict on the murder count against Jose Alfredo Favela, 24, one day after the panel found him guilty of attempted robbery.
It marked the second time a jury had deadlocked on the murder count against Favela in connection with the July 18, 2014, death of his alleged accomplice, Jose Espidion, who was armed with a machete. The first jury to hear the case against him in March could not reach a verdict, either.
Favela was arrested the day of the shooting and has remained jailed without bail since then.
He is due back in a downtown Los Angeles courtroom next Tuesday for a pretrial hearing.
Deputy District Attorney Fernanda Barreto told jurors in Favela’s retrial that Favela — armed with a knockoff AK-47 assault rifle — was the one in charge when he and Espidion entered the store.
The prosecutor noted that the owner of the Meadow Maid Market testified that be bent down to block Espidion’s access to the cash register and that Favela then aimed at him, but the bullet struck Espidion instead.
“Even if the killing was unintentional, accidental or negligent” and even if Espidion was not the intended victim of the robbery, “the defendant is guilty of felony murder,” the prosecutor said.
Defense attorney Lori Harris countered that Favela thought he was going with Espidion to pick up a load and be paid $70 and that Favela had objected while on the road when Espidion told him, “We’re going to do a robbery. We’re going to do a hold-up.”
Espidion threatened Favela, “pushed him into the store at machete point” and forced the gun into his hands, the defense lawyer told jurors.
Favela’s attorney said her client saw the storeowner struggling with Espidion and realized he had put his life in the hands of “a high, crazy, crazed, agitated stranger.” Frightened that Espidion was about to lose control, Facela “raised the gun up over Mr. Chun and fired directly at Mr. Espidion,” she said, maintaining that the shooting was “justified.”
RICHARD ROSARIO, WRONGFULLY CONVICTED OF 1996 SHOOTING DEATH, REJECTS DISMISSAL OF MURDER CHARGE IN QUEST TO PROVE INNOCENCE
NYPD investigators ignored 13 alibi witnesses who would have testified that Rosario was in Florida at the time of the shooting in the Bronx
By Shirley Chan
WPIX
June 24, 2016
THE BRONX -- After spending 20 years in jail for a crime he says he didn't commit, a Bronx man took an unusual move in court today.
It was a stunning day in court as Richard Rosario asked the judge for a stay of dismissal, keeping the murder indictment against him.
An open homicide case still hangs over Rosario's head. He says it's worth it because he wants to keep the case alive and continue the investigation, to prove his innocence.
"We want the court to stay the dismissal," said defense attorney Glenn Garber, of the Exoneration Initiative. Garber spoke before a packed courtroom.
The 40-year-old Rosario was freed from prison in March. His sentence was vacated after spending 20 years in jail for a crime he says he didn't commit -- the 1996 shooting death of 17-year-old George Collazo on a Bronx street.
Today was supposed to be the formal dismissal of his conviction. Outside court, he explained his stunning request.
Being free is not enough -- he wants his name cleared.
"I took this unusual step of stopping them from dismissing their indictment until the complete truth is out there, everyone knows I'm innocent," said Rosario.
But the Collazo family says they aren't buying it.
"He goes around saying he's innocent he's lying to you and to the public," said the victim's father, also named George Collazo, as he spoke before a throng of reporters.
From the very beginning, Rosario has maintained his innocence.
He claims he was in Florida when the murder was committed. Thirteen alibi witnesses backed him up. His court-appointed attorney only reached out to two of the 13 alibis. Police reportedly did not check out any of the alibis.
Rosario was convicted when two eyewitnesses picked him out of a lineup. He was sentenced to 25 years-to life.
Over the years, he has tried to get the sentence vacated. Several years ago, attorneys from the Exoneration Initiative, looked into his case and began to represent him.
The case was renewed when new Bronx DA Darcel Clark came into office in January.
The prosecution conceded Rosario was denied his right to effective counsel.
Now, Rosario wants access to a file that allegedly went missing until recently. He claims the DA's office has reneged on agreeing to give him access.
"All I'm asking for is transparency," said Rosario.
Inspired by Rosario's case, Congressman Sean Patrick Maloney is proposing legislation to fix a system he calls broken.
In a news release from his office: "According to reports, people in poverty account for more than 80 percent of individuals prosecuted. These criminal defendants plead guilty approximately 90 percent of the time. In many cases, overworked lawyers entered pleas for defendants without spending substantial time on these cases, interviewing witnesses, or filing pre-trial motions."
Judge Robert E. Torres asked both sides for written arguments on the stay by Aug. 30. The prosecution is objecting to the stay, arguing they are already committed to fully investigating the case.
By Shirley Chan
WPIX
June 24, 2016
THE BRONX -- After spending 20 years in jail for a crime he says he didn't commit, a Bronx man took an unusual move in court today.
It was a stunning day in court as Richard Rosario asked the judge for a stay of dismissal, keeping the murder indictment against him.
An open homicide case still hangs over Rosario's head. He says it's worth it because he wants to keep the case alive and continue the investigation, to prove his innocence.
"We want the court to stay the dismissal," said defense attorney Glenn Garber, of the Exoneration Initiative. Garber spoke before a packed courtroom.
The 40-year-old Rosario was freed from prison in March. His sentence was vacated after spending 20 years in jail for a crime he says he didn't commit -- the 1996 shooting death of 17-year-old George Collazo on a Bronx street.
Today was supposed to be the formal dismissal of his conviction. Outside court, he explained his stunning request.
Being free is not enough -- he wants his name cleared.
"I took this unusual step of stopping them from dismissing their indictment until the complete truth is out there, everyone knows I'm innocent," said Rosario.
But the Collazo family says they aren't buying it.
"He goes around saying he's innocent he's lying to you and to the public," said the victim's father, also named George Collazo, as he spoke before a throng of reporters.
From the very beginning, Rosario has maintained his innocence.
He claims he was in Florida when the murder was committed. Thirteen alibi witnesses backed him up. His court-appointed attorney only reached out to two of the 13 alibis. Police reportedly did not check out any of the alibis.
Rosario was convicted when two eyewitnesses picked him out of a lineup. He was sentenced to 25 years-to life.
Over the years, he has tried to get the sentence vacated. Several years ago, attorneys from the Exoneration Initiative, looked into his case and began to represent him.
The case was renewed when new Bronx DA Darcel Clark came into office in January.
The prosecution conceded Rosario was denied his right to effective counsel.
Now, Rosario wants access to a file that allegedly went missing until recently. He claims the DA's office has reneged on agreeing to give him access.
"All I'm asking for is transparency," said Rosario.
Inspired by Rosario's case, Congressman Sean Patrick Maloney is proposing legislation to fix a system he calls broken.
In a news release from his office: "According to reports, people in poverty account for more than 80 percent of individuals prosecuted. These criminal defendants plead guilty approximately 90 percent of the time. In many cases, overworked lawyers entered pleas for defendants without spending substantial time on these cases, interviewing witnesses, or filing pre-trial motions."
Judge Robert E. Torres asked both sides for written arguments on the stay by Aug. 30. The prosecution is objecting to the stay, arguing they are already committed to fully investigating the case.
EX-FIANCEE CLAIMS SHE HAS RIGHT TO $5 MILLION ARSENAL MAN’S FAMILY WANTS TO DESTROY
Catherine Nebron, the ex-fiancee of Jeffrey Lash, claims she should have the right to sell the weapons he purchased, but his estranged cousins claim they are the rightful heirs to his estate and they aim to send a gun control message to lawmakers by having the 891 guns and 8 tons of ammunition dumped into the ocean or melted down
By Miriam Hernandez
KABC-TV Los Angeles
June 22, 2016
PACIFIC PALISADES, LOS ANGELES (KABC) -- The saga of the late Jeffrey Lash unfolded like a psychological thriller spurring a debate over gun control.
According to his ex-fiancee, Lash was a hoarder of weapons and a conman.
Over the course of 17 years, he bought so many firearms, they were stacked to the ceiling of Catherine Nebron's Pacific Palisades townhouse.
Nebron said Lash forced her to live in a downstairs bathroom and convinced her he was an ultra-secret agent.
"He had worked for an intelligence agency, now he was on his own, he was independent," Nebron said.
Nebron alleged Lash manipulated her with stories about his power.
In court documents, she said Lash stated he thwarted two-thirds of the bomb and terrorist threats in the U.S. after the Sept. 11 attacks, stating they were incidents the public didn't know about.
Nebron said he dropped names like Ronald and Nancy Reagan, the Bushes, and Condoleezza Rice.
She said Lash would hit her, reduced her to a robot, and convinced her and other women to bankroll his cash purchases for firearms and more than a dozen vehicles.
Nebron said it was all in the name of national security.
"We didn't want people to die or cities to explode. It was very real for us. We thought we were doing a good thing," Nebron said.
Yet, estranged cousins of Lash claim they are the rightful heirs to his estate and they aimed to take action to send a message to lawmakers.
They want the 891 guns and 8 tons of ammunition dumped into the ocean or melted down.
"We want them destroyed rather than have them returned back into commerce, gun dealers, auctions gun shows," their lawyer Daniel Brookman said.
According to Brookman, Lash's stockpile was worth an estimated $5 million.
A year after an autopsy said Lash died at 60 years old from natural causes, Los Angeles police said he legally purchased the firearms.
Nebron's lawyer claims now they were hers to sell.
"They can be sold through the Department of Justice and may be sold to police departments, but there is no point in destroying them," Nebron's lawyer Harland Braun said.
Lash's stockpile never raised a red flag, according to Nebron.
"People saw them but not really. Again, it was the way this man spoke. He was so good at what he did," says Nebron.
The case is headed to probate court in July.
By Miriam Hernandez
KABC-TV Los Angeles
June 22, 2016
PACIFIC PALISADES, LOS ANGELES (KABC) -- The saga of the late Jeffrey Lash unfolded like a psychological thriller spurring a debate over gun control.
According to his ex-fiancee, Lash was a hoarder of weapons and a conman.
Over the course of 17 years, he bought so many firearms, they were stacked to the ceiling of Catherine Nebron's Pacific Palisades townhouse.
Nebron said Lash forced her to live in a downstairs bathroom and convinced her he was an ultra-secret agent.
"He had worked for an intelligence agency, now he was on his own, he was independent," Nebron said.
Nebron alleged Lash manipulated her with stories about his power.
In court documents, she said Lash stated he thwarted two-thirds of the bomb and terrorist threats in the U.S. after the Sept. 11 attacks, stating they were incidents the public didn't know about.
Nebron said he dropped names like Ronald and Nancy Reagan, the Bushes, and Condoleezza Rice.
She said Lash would hit her, reduced her to a robot, and convinced her and other women to bankroll his cash purchases for firearms and more than a dozen vehicles.
Nebron said it was all in the name of national security.
"We didn't want people to die or cities to explode. It was very real for us. We thought we were doing a good thing," Nebron said.
Yet, estranged cousins of Lash claim they are the rightful heirs to his estate and they aimed to take action to send a message to lawmakers.
They want the 891 guns and 8 tons of ammunition dumped into the ocean or melted down.
"We want them destroyed rather than have them returned back into commerce, gun dealers, auctions gun shows," their lawyer Daniel Brookman said.
According to Brookman, Lash's stockpile was worth an estimated $5 million.
A year after an autopsy said Lash died at 60 years old from natural causes, Los Angeles police said he legally purchased the firearms.
Nebron's lawyer claims now they were hers to sell.
"They can be sold through the Department of Justice and may be sold to police departments, but there is no point in destroying them," Nebron's lawyer Harland Braun said.
Lash's stockpile never raised a red flag, according to Nebron.
"People saw them but not really. Again, it was the way this man spoke. He was so good at what he did," says Nebron.
The case is headed to probate court in July.
Friday, June 24, 2016
I WATCHED AN HONEST-TO-GOD BLOODBATH ON LIVE TV LAST NIGHT
By Bob Walsh
It was like watching an unfolding train wreck. All of the “experts” and talking heads and most of the politicians assured the voters in the U.K. that they were morons if they even considered leaving the massive benefits of membership in the E.U. Well, the peasants and unwashed masses told them to go fuck themselves.
The vote tally started with a mild advantage to the LEAVE side. Then it got bigger. And bigger. And bigger. It ended up with a 4% majority.
The Japanese stock index started dropping like a rock, and they suspended trading. There has been speculation that the stock market will NOT open in London and N.Y. today (06-24). The Down Jones futures (an educated guess as to how the stock market will go) is indicating down over 500 for this morning. At one time it was over 700. The New York stock market will be very volatile for about a week or so I expect. Both the British Pound and the Euro dropped like poleaxed steers in comparison to the U.S. Dollar.
The British P.M. announced he is leaving and that there will be a new P.M. in October to see the country thru the British exit from the E.U., which will take about two years to accomplish fully.
There is wide speculation that this will trigger a huge shift in how the E.U. operates and that other members will change their status so that they are part of the economic union but not subject to the governmental controls and edicts from unelected bureaucrats in Belgium. It is even possible that the E.U. will totally crash and burn.
There are already comparisons of this “up yours” attitude with the campaign of Donald Trump. Hell, the talking heads may even be right on that one.
EDITOR’S NOTE: Now there are calls in France and Italy for a vote on exiting the E.U. And the Scots, who voted overwhelmingly to remain in the E.U., are calling for a vote on seceding from the U.K.
The 52-48 percent vote margin was not only a mortal blow to Prime Minister David Cameron, but it was also a blow to his buddy Barack Obama who traveled to Britain to campaign for the U.K. to remain a part of the E.U.
It was like watching an unfolding train wreck. All of the “experts” and talking heads and most of the politicians assured the voters in the U.K. that they were morons if they even considered leaving the massive benefits of membership in the E.U. Well, the peasants and unwashed masses told them to go fuck themselves.
The vote tally started with a mild advantage to the LEAVE side. Then it got bigger. And bigger. And bigger. It ended up with a 4% majority.
The Japanese stock index started dropping like a rock, and they suspended trading. There has been speculation that the stock market will NOT open in London and N.Y. today (06-24). The Down Jones futures (an educated guess as to how the stock market will go) is indicating down over 500 for this morning. At one time it was over 700. The New York stock market will be very volatile for about a week or so I expect. Both the British Pound and the Euro dropped like poleaxed steers in comparison to the U.S. Dollar.
The British P.M. announced he is leaving and that there will be a new P.M. in October to see the country thru the British exit from the E.U., which will take about two years to accomplish fully.
There is wide speculation that this will trigger a huge shift in how the E.U. operates and that other members will change their status so that they are part of the economic union but not subject to the governmental controls and edicts from unelected bureaucrats in Belgium. It is even possible that the E.U. will totally crash and burn.
There are already comparisons of this “up yours” attitude with the campaign of Donald Trump. Hell, the talking heads may even be right on that one.
EDITOR’S NOTE: Now there are calls in France and Italy for a vote on exiting the E.U. And the Scots, who voted overwhelmingly to remain in the E.U., are calling for a vote on seceding from the U.K.
The 52-48 percent vote margin was not only a mortal blow to Prime Minister David Cameron, but it was also a blow to his buddy Barack Obama who traveled to Britain to campaign for the U.K. to remain a part of the E.U.
SOMETIMES TIERE IS A WIN
SCOTUS kicks Barry in the ass
By Bob Walsh
Today (06-23) Barry’s illegal administrative immigration amnesty plan was shot down in flames by a tie vote of SCOTUS.
The justices issued a one-sentenced opinion this morning that had the practical effect of killing the plan for the balance of the term of the God-King, Barack I, (unless of course he suspends the election and declares himself President for Life).
The ruling leaves intact the ruling by the federal appeals court in New Orleans. This court said that Barry does not have the authority to unilaterally and arbitrarily shield 4 million illegal aliens from being deported just because they have an anchor baby. He also cannot issue them work permits without congressional approval, which he is not going to get.
EDITOR’S NOTE: SCOTUS didn’t exactly kick Barry in the ass. The vote was split 4-4, with the Conservative justices voting to overturn Obama’s immigration initiative and the liberal justices voting to uphold it. The tie vote is not definitive, thus not really a kick in the President’s ass. Obama is now howling because he hasn’t been able to fill the void with another liberal justice, complaining that this decision “takes us further from the country that we aspire to be.”
By Bob Walsh
Today (06-23) Barry’s illegal administrative immigration amnesty plan was shot down in flames by a tie vote of SCOTUS.
The justices issued a one-sentenced opinion this morning that had the practical effect of killing the plan for the balance of the term of the God-King, Barack I, (unless of course he suspends the election and declares himself President for Life).
The ruling leaves intact the ruling by the federal appeals court in New Orleans. This court said that Barry does not have the authority to unilaterally and arbitrarily shield 4 million illegal aliens from being deported just because they have an anchor baby. He also cannot issue them work permits without congressional approval, which he is not going to get.
EDITOR’S NOTE: SCOTUS didn’t exactly kick Barry in the ass. The vote was split 4-4, with the Conservative justices voting to overturn Obama’s immigration initiative and the liberal justices voting to uphold it. The tie vote is not definitive, thus not really a kick in the President’s ass. Obama is now howling because he hasn’t been able to fill the void with another liberal justice, complaining that this decision “takes us further from the country that we aspire to be.”
FBI WARNED CHICAGO COPS OF AMBUSH THREAT OVER LAQUAN MCDONALD VIDEO
Informant said gang members intended to wait for cops to exit and walk toward their cars — a time when they would be vulnerable because they likely wouldn’t be wearing protective gear
By Stacy St. Clair, Todd Lighty and David Heinzmann
Chicago Tribune
June 21, 2016
CHICAGO -- The FBI warned the Chicago Police Department that officers’ lives could be in danger with the release of the Laquan McDonald video, according to documents released by the city.
In a Nov. 24 email sent just hours before the city made public the video of a white police officer shooting and killing the black 17-year-old, an FBI agent said that a confidential informant — who had provided reliable information in the past — reported plans to ambush officers in retaliation for the teen’s death.
“Violent rhetoric is high,” the FBI wrote. “Due to the recent media spotlight on officer-involved deaths of minorities, there is a lot of anger in the neighborhood served by the Chicago Police Department.”
According to the informant, gang members planned to set up outside the 14th District Headquarters on the West Side and the Homan Square Building, a police facility that has served as the setting for numerous police misconduct allegations in recent years. The informant said gang members intend to wait for police employees to exit and walk toward their cars — a time when the officers would be considered vulnerable because they likely wouldn’t be wearing protective gear or bullet-proof vests.
“In addition to being unarmed and unprotected, these employees will likely be in either small groups or by themselves, which would make them targets of opportunity,” the FBI said. “(Confidential human source) states that shooters may lay in wait, and then conduct an ambush.”
FBI spokesman Garrett Croon on Tuesday said the bureau notified city police about the source’s information. He declined further comment and referred questions to the Police Department, which did not have an immediate response.
There were no known attacks on police officers following the video’s release.
The FBI warning was included in more than 20,000 pages of emails released by Mayor Rahm Emanuel’s administration at 11:57 p.m. Monday. Faced with a court order to turn over all emails sent or received by former police Superintendent Garry McCarthy in December, the city also released McCarthy’s emails from November.
Emanuel fired McCarthy on Dec. 1 as the city was roiled by the release of a dashcam video showing Officer Jason Van Dyke shooting McDonald. Despite his ouster, McCarthy had access to his department email for the rest of the month.
Some emails that flooded McCarthy’s inbox were not unlike those any office worker might receive: spam, an invitation to a party and a joke. Others emails collected daily news clippings, crime statistics and department news releases.
There also were several messages of support following McCarthy’s abrupt firing, including one from the commander who initially cleared the officer in the McDonald shooting.
The emails also include McCarthy’s termination letter sent Dec. 17. McCarthy forwarded it to his wife, Kristin, noting that Emanuel’s chief of staff Eileen Mitchell — and not the mayor — had signed the letter.
“He didn’t even have the balls to sign it himself,” McCarthy wrote.
Emanuel’s spokesman Adam Collins said Tuesday that it’s common for the chief of staff to sign termination letters. And he called the focus on the issue “nonsense.”
“First, the mayor met with Garry to inform him of the decision personally on Dec. 1. Then he stood before press to explain his decision and the city’s need to move forward,” Collins said.
The city had failed to include that email in the roughly 1,500 it released last week under a court order. The Chicago Tribune — which had successfully sued the city for the records — was able to identify at least 17 emails that were not included in those documents.
City officials said the department re-ran a search for McCarthy’s emails after the Tribune pointed out the missing records. The department did not purposely withhold them, police spokesman Frank Giancamilli said.
The emails, in part, showed broad community and department support for McCarthy after Emanuel fired him.
The November emails demonstrate the build-up to the video’s release, though with little direct commentary from McCarthy. The records show, among other things, that he canceled travel plans a week before the video became public and he monitored the department’s plans to police the protests.
In an email to the entire department, McCarthy directed his officers to treat protesters respectfully and allow them the opportunity to voice their opinions.
“Professionalism is paramount during situations that may test your fortitude,” he wrote on Nov. 20. “If incidents do arise, I am confident you will maintain the composure and character necessary to safeguard the welfare of our communities. Take great care not to let the circumstances surrounding such an event dictate and undermine your response, but instead rely on your experience, skill and tactical patience to achieve an effective resolution.”
As protesters took to the streets in largely peaceful demonstrations, a local pastor emailed McCarthy on Thanksgiving Day to ask if they should cancel an upcoming community police event at the church.
McCarthy wanted to keep the commitment, which was scheduled for Dec. 2.
“I believe in moving forward,” McCarthy wrote. “We have too many projects in motion.”
Three days later, the pastor canceled the event.
“Definitely have to wait,” Pastor Christopher Harris of Bright Star Church in Bronzeville wrote. “The purpose of our meeting will be lost in the shuffle of very high emotions and participation will likely be extremely low from my community.”
By Stacy St. Clair, Todd Lighty and David Heinzmann
Chicago Tribune
June 21, 2016
CHICAGO -- The FBI warned the Chicago Police Department that officers’ lives could be in danger with the release of the Laquan McDonald video, according to documents released by the city.
In a Nov. 24 email sent just hours before the city made public the video of a white police officer shooting and killing the black 17-year-old, an FBI agent said that a confidential informant — who had provided reliable information in the past — reported plans to ambush officers in retaliation for the teen’s death.
“Violent rhetoric is high,” the FBI wrote. “Due to the recent media spotlight on officer-involved deaths of minorities, there is a lot of anger in the neighborhood served by the Chicago Police Department.”
According to the informant, gang members planned to set up outside the 14th District Headquarters on the West Side and the Homan Square Building, a police facility that has served as the setting for numerous police misconduct allegations in recent years. The informant said gang members intend to wait for police employees to exit and walk toward their cars — a time when the officers would be considered vulnerable because they likely wouldn’t be wearing protective gear or bullet-proof vests.
“In addition to being unarmed and unprotected, these employees will likely be in either small groups or by themselves, which would make them targets of opportunity,” the FBI said. “(Confidential human source) states that shooters may lay in wait, and then conduct an ambush.”
FBI spokesman Garrett Croon on Tuesday said the bureau notified city police about the source’s information. He declined further comment and referred questions to the Police Department, which did not have an immediate response.
There were no known attacks on police officers following the video’s release.
The FBI warning was included in more than 20,000 pages of emails released by Mayor Rahm Emanuel’s administration at 11:57 p.m. Monday. Faced with a court order to turn over all emails sent or received by former police Superintendent Garry McCarthy in December, the city also released McCarthy’s emails from November.
Emanuel fired McCarthy on Dec. 1 as the city was roiled by the release of a dashcam video showing Officer Jason Van Dyke shooting McDonald. Despite his ouster, McCarthy had access to his department email for the rest of the month.
Some emails that flooded McCarthy’s inbox were not unlike those any office worker might receive: spam, an invitation to a party and a joke. Others emails collected daily news clippings, crime statistics and department news releases.
There also were several messages of support following McCarthy’s abrupt firing, including one from the commander who initially cleared the officer in the McDonald shooting.
The emails also include McCarthy’s termination letter sent Dec. 17. McCarthy forwarded it to his wife, Kristin, noting that Emanuel’s chief of staff Eileen Mitchell — and not the mayor — had signed the letter.
“He didn’t even have the balls to sign it himself,” McCarthy wrote.
Emanuel’s spokesman Adam Collins said Tuesday that it’s common for the chief of staff to sign termination letters. And he called the focus on the issue “nonsense.”
“First, the mayor met with Garry to inform him of the decision personally on Dec. 1. Then he stood before press to explain his decision and the city’s need to move forward,” Collins said.
The city had failed to include that email in the roughly 1,500 it released last week under a court order. The Chicago Tribune — which had successfully sued the city for the records — was able to identify at least 17 emails that were not included in those documents.
City officials said the department re-ran a search for McCarthy’s emails after the Tribune pointed out the missing records. The department did not purposely withhold them, police spokesman Frank Giancamilli said.
The emails, in part, showed broad community and department support for McCarthy after Emanuel fired him.
The November emails demonstrate the build-up to the video’s release, though with little direct commentary from McCarthy. The records show, among other things, that he canceled travel plans a week before the video became public and he monitored the department’s plans to police the protests.
In an email to the entire department, McCarthy directed his officers to treat protesters respectfully and allow them the opportunity to voice their opinions.
“Professionalism is paramount during situations that may test your fortitude,” he wrote on Nov. 20. “If incidents do arise, I am confident you will maintain the composure and character necessary to safeguard the welfare of our communities. Take great care not to let the circumstances surrounding such an event dictate and undermine your response, but instead rely on your experience, skill and tactical patience to achieve an effective resolution.”
As protesters took to the streets in largely peaceful demonstrations, a local pastor emailed McCarthy on Thanksgiving Day to ask if they should cancel an upcoming community police event at the church.
McCarthy wanted to keep the commitment, which was scheduled for Dec. 2.
“I believe in moving forward,” McCarthy wrote. “We have too many projects in motion.”
Three days later, the pastor canceled the event.
“Definitely have to wait,” Pastor Christopher Harris of Bright Star Church in Bronzeville wrote. “The purpose of our meeting will be lost in the shuffle of very high emotions and participation will likely be extremely low from my community.”
HIGH COURT DECLINES TO HEAR ‘ANGOLA 5’ APPEAL
David Brown's death sentence for the killing of a prison guard during a 1999 escape attempt was overturned by a judge before it was reinstated in February by the Louisiana Supreme Court
By John Simerman
The Baton Rouge Advocate
June 21, 2016
ANGOLA, Louisiana -- The U.S. Supreme Court declined Monday to hear the case of David Brown, the “Angola 5” member whose death sentence for the killing of a prison guard during a 1999 escape attempt was overturned by a state judge, then reinstated in February by the Louisiana Supreme Court.
The denial marked a victory for Jefferson Parish District Attorney Paul Connick’s office.
Defense advocates had hoped the case would prompt the high court to scold Louisiana over what they describe as a persistent failure to adhere to Brady v. Maryland. That landmark 1963 Supreme Court ruling requires prosecutors to turn over to the defense all evidence favorable to a defendant, and Brown’s attorneys argued that his case was strikingly similar to Brady’s.
Brown had joined a group of prisoners in the Louisiana State Penitentiary at Angola in the escape attempt, but he claimed he wasn’t there when Capt. David Knapps was killed inside a bathroom.
Brown had helped drag Knapps there and got the victim’s blood on his prison uniform, but he said he had left before other inmates killed Knapps. He said murder wasn’t part of the plan.
The state never accused Brown, who at the time was serving a life sentence for a different murder, of striking Knapps. But it argued that he was guilty of first-degree murder for joining in a plot with the specific intent to kill, and a jury agreed.
At issue in his legal challenge was a statement from another state inmate, David Domingue, claiming that another man accused in the murder, Barry Edge, confessed that he and fellow inmate Jeffery Clark alone had decided to kill the guard. That statement never found its way to Brown’s attorneys before his conviction and death sentence for the guard’s slaying.
Retired Criminal District Court Judge Jerome Winsberg overturned Brown’s death sentence, but not his conviction, in 2014, finding that “there is a reasonable probability that the jury’s verdict would have been different had the evidence not been suppressed.”
An appeals court reversed Winsberg’s ruling, and in February the Louisiana Supreme Court agreed to keep Brown’s death sentence in place. The justices ruled that Domingue’s statement “provides no additional evidence as to who actually killed Capt. Knapps” and “simply does not exculpate Brown.”
Connick’s office argued that Brown jumped the gun in going to the U.S. Supreme Court when he can still ask the Louisiana Supreme Court to rehear the case.
Connick’s office, which handled the prosecution after a series of recusals by other agencies, also argued that Domingue’s statement wouldn’t have been admissible at Brown’s trial, and that even if it were, it was “neither favorable nor material” to his cause.
Prosecutors described Domingue’s statement as “wholly extraneous” to their argument for a death sentence for Brown, which they said “focused on the fact that a life sentence would be the equivalent of no punishment at all because David Brown was already serving a life sentence at the time of the murder.”
Brown’s case was up for a decision Thursday by the U.S. Supreme Court justices on whether to hear it. The court does not explain why it declines to hear cases.
Brown’s attorneys say the fight to spare him a death sentence isn’t over. They plan to ask the Louisiana Supreme Court to rehear the case and, failing that, to try again with the U.S. Supreme Court.
Connick’s office declined to comment on the decision, citing a policy of not commenting on open cases.
By John Simerman
The Baton Rouge Advocate
June 21, 2016
ANGOLA, Louisiana -- The U.S. Supreme Court declined Monday to hear the case of David Brown, the “Angola 5” member whose death sentence for the killing of a prison guard during a 1999 escape attempt was overturned by a state judge, then reinstated in February by the Louisiana Supreme Court.
The denial marked a victory for Jefferson Parish District Attorney Paul Connick’s office.
Defense advocates had hoped the case would prompt the high court to scold Louisiana over what they describe as a persistent failure to adhere to Brady v. Maryland. That landmark 1963 Supreme Court ruling requires prosecutors to turn over to the defense all evidence favorable to a defendant, and Brown’s attorneys argued that his case was strikingly similar to Brady’s.
Brown had joined a group of prisoners in the Louisiana State Penitentiary at Angola in the escape attempt, but he claimed he wasn’t there when Capt. David Knapps was killed inside a bathroom.
Brown had helped drag Knapps there and got the victim’s blood on his prison uniform, but he said he had left before other inmates killed Knapps. He said murder wasn’t part of the plan.
The state never accused Brown, who at the time was serving a life sentence for a different murder, of striking Knapps. But it argued that he was guilty of first-degree murder for joining in a plot with the specific intent to kill, and a jury agreed.
At issue in his legal challenge was a statement from another state inmate, David Domingue, claiming that another man accused in the murder, Barry Edge, confessed that he and fellow inmate Jeffery Clark alone had decided to kill the guard. That statement never found its way to Brown’s attorneys before his conviction and death sentence for the guard’s slaying.
Retired Criminal District Court Judge Jerome Winsberg overturned Brown’s death sentence, but not his conviction, in 2014, finding that “there is a reasonable probability that the jury’s verdict would have been different had the evidence not been suppressed.”
An appeals court reversed Winsberg’s ruling, and in February the Louisiana Supreme Court agreed to keep Brown’s death sentence in place. The justices ruled that Domingue’s statement “provides no additional evidence as to who actually killed Capt. Knapps” and “simply does not exculpate Brown.”
Connick’s office argued that Brown jumped the gun in going to the U.S. Supreme Court when he can still ask the Louisiana Supreme Court to rehear the case.
Connick’s office, which handled the prosecution after a series of recusals by other agencies, also argued that Domingue’s statement wouldn’t have been admissible at Brown’s trial, and that even if it were, it was “neither favorable nor material” to his cause.
Prosecutors described Domingue’s statement as “wholly extraneous” to their argument for a death sentence for Brown, which they said “focused on the fact that a life sentence would be the equivalent of no punishment at all because David Brown was already serving a life sentence at the time of the murder.”
Brown’s case was up for a decision Thursday by the U.S. Supreme Court justices on whether to hear it. The court does not explain why it declines to hear cases.
Brown’s attorneys say the fight to spare him a death sentence isn’t over. They plan to ask the Louisiana Supreme Court to rehear the case and, failing that, to try again with the U.S. Supreme Court.
Connick’s office declined to comment on the decision, citing a policy of not commenting on open cases.
HOUSTON ATTORNEY SUES STARBUCKS OVER ALLEGED COFFEE BURNS
By Craig Malisow
Houston Press
June 21, 2016
A Houston woman is suing Starbucks over an alleged scalding-hot coffee mishap that seared her skin and left her in excruciating pain.
Katherine Mize is also suing the barista who allegedly spilled the 20-ouncer on Mize as she was buying coffee for herself and some colleagues at the java giant's 445 North Loop West location in July 2014. The barista, identified only as "Brie," allegedly squeezed a cup of coffee as she handed it to Mize, "causing it to collapse and for the top to come off. Extremely hot coffee covered [Mize], severely burning multiple parts of her body."
Mize filed the suit last week in Harris County District Court and is seeking $200,000-$1 million, claiming she suffered "physical disfigurement." The suit doesn't get into details, but her attorney, Brian Humphrey, told Texas Lawyer, "She didn't have to have skin grafts, but she had to have treatment....It resulted in scarring."
The suit alleges that Mize, who is also an attorney, was "unable to eat, sit, walk, work, or function normally for an extended period of time after the accident." To add insult to injury, the suit also alleges that neither the mysterious Brie nor any of her co-workers "event attempted to assist" Mize.
As Texas Lawyer noted, the suit is similar to a widely publicized McDonald's hot-coffee case from 1994, in which a New Mexico woman was awarded $2.9 million for damages after she suffered third-degree burns and spent eight days in the hospital.
Similarly to the McDonald's case, the Houston suit alleges that Starbucks negligently served coffee that was "at an unreasonably dangerous temperature."
A Starbucks spokesperson told us in an email, "The health and safety of our customers and partners (employees) is always our top priority. We are evaluating the customer's claims and are determining the appropriate next steps."
EDITOR’S NOTE: Looks like a Houston shyster is trying to fleece Starbuck’s deep pockets. And poor old Brie … how much could she possibly be making as a barista?
If Mize was as seriously injured as she claims, why did she wait two years to file the lawsuit?
Houston Press
June 21, 2016
A Houston woman is suing Starbucks over an alleged scalding-hot coffee mishap that seared her skin and left her in excruciating pain.
Katherine Mize is also suing the barista who allegedly spilled the 20-ouncer on Mize as she was buying coffee for herself and some colleagues at the java giant's 445 North Loop West location in July 2014. The barista, identified only as "Brie," allegedly squeezed a cup of coffee as she handed it to Mize, "causing it to collapse and for the top to come off. Extremely hot coffee covered [Mize], severely burning multiple parts of her body."
Mize filed the suit last week in Harris County District Court and is seeking $200,000-$1 million, claiming she suffered "physical disfigurement." The suit doesn't get into details, but her attorney, Brian Humphrey, told Texas Lawyer, "She didn't have to have skin grafts, but she had to have treatment....It resulted in scarring."
The suit alleges that Mize, who is also an attorney, was "unable to eat, sit, walk, work, or function normally for an extended period of time after the accident." To add insult to injury, the suit also alleges that neither the mysterious Brie nor any of her co-workers "event attempted to assist" Mize.
As Texas Lawyer noted, the suit is similar to a widely publicized McDonald's hot-coffee case from 1994, in which a New Mexico woman was awarded $2.9 million for damages after she suffered third-degree burns and spent eight days in the hospital.
Similarly to the McDonald's case, the Houston suit alleges that Starbucks negligently served coffee that was "at an unreasonably dangerous temperature."
A Starbucks spokesperson told us in an email, "The health and safety of our customers and partners (employees) is always our top priority. We are evaluating the customer's claims and are determining the appropriate next steps."
EDITOR’S NOTE: Looks like a Houston shyster is trying to fleece Starbuck’s deep pockets. And poor old Brie … how much could she possibly be making as a barista?
If Mize was as seriously injured as she claims, why did she wait two years to file the lawsuit?
THE CASE FOR AND AGAINST THE U.K. LEAVING THE E.U.
The Onion
June 23, 2015
British voters will decide Thursday whether the U.K. should remain a member of the European Union. Here are the leading arguments for and against the U.K. leaving the E.U.:
FOR
First step in returning Britain to its pre-1970s glory as an economically languishing failed colonial empire
In the face of a resurgent Russia and increased threats from ISIS, leaving E.U. would be the best strategy for letting someone else deal with that shit
Britons could once again refocus their hatred on internal class divisions
One less goddamn flag everyone has to hang up
Won’t have to take part in awkward process of denying Bosnia and Herzegovina’s E.U. membership request
Throughout its history, Britain has always been a valiant defender of the right of smaller territories to separate from larger, oppressive governments
Pretty airtight way for citizens to mask racism as concern for national autonomy
AGAINST
Could lead to a chain reaction in which other member states consider leaving and then realize their economy would collapse if they did so
Abandonment of E.U. would significantly delay transition to single totalitarian world government
Could possibly make things awkward when bumping into Denmark or Malta at United Nations summits
The windswept Swiss Alps! The stunning Sagrada Familia! The radiant vineyards of Tuscany!
Never a good idea to find yourself on Luxembourg’s bad side
Free trade agreements keep price of imported wiener würstchen low
Fewer people for David Cameron to order around
EDITOR’S NOTE: At press time the results of the BREXIT votes had not come in.
June 23, 2015
British voters will decide Thursday whether the U.K. should remain a member of the European Union. Here are the leading arguments for and against the U.K. leaving the E.U.:
FOR
First step in returning Britain to its pre-1970s glory as an economically languishing failed colonial empire
In the face of a resurgent Russia and increased threats from ISIS, leaving E.U. would be the best strategy for letting someone else deal with that shit
Britons could once again refocus their hatred on internal class divisions
One less goddamn flag everyone has to hang up
Won’t have to take part in awkward process of denying Bosnia and Herzegovina’s E.U. membership request
Throughout its history, Britain has always been a valiant defender of the right of smaller territories to separate from larger, oppressive governments
Pretty airtight way for citizens to mask racism as concern for national autonomy
AGAINST
Could lead to a chain reaction in which other member states consider leaving and then realize their economy would collapse if they did so
Abandonment of E.U. would significantly delay transition to single totalitarian world government
Could possibly make things awkward when bumping into Denmark or Malta at United Nations summits
The windswept Swiss Alps! The stunning Sagrada Familia! The radiant vineyards of Tuscany!
Never a good idea to find yourself on Luxembourg’s bad side
Free trade agreements keep price of imported wiener würstchen low
Fewer people for David Cameron to order around
EDITOR’S NOTE: At press time the results of the BREXIT votes had not come in.
Thursday, June 23, 2016
CHICAGO’S NEW NORMAL: FIVE PEOPLE KILLED AND 12 WOUNDED BY GUNFIRE OVERNIGHT FRIDAY
40 people have been shot and killed since the beginning of this month – and 192 people shot and wounded
By Tess Owen
VICE News
June 18, 2016
Chicago's violent streak of shootings continued, as five people were killed and at least 12 others wounded by shootings between Friday afternoon and Saturday morning, police said, bringing the week's total number of fatal shootings to 18 so far, with another 81 wounded.
Shortly after 9:00pm on Friday, a 16-year old was killed while sitting in the front passenger seat of a car. Not even two hours after, around 10:30pm, a 22-year-old man died after being shot in the neck. At 1:30am, one man was killed when he and another man were shot as they sat in a minivan on Chicago's west side. Around 3:40am on Saturday, police reported that another three men had been shot – one fatally – in the University Village neighborhood on the near west side of Chicago. About 6:30am on Saturday, a 23-year-old man was shot and killed on Chicago's westside.
The youngest victim of the day was a six-year-old girl who was injured after a bullet struck and shattered a restaurant window.
The Chicago Tribune listed the deaths on Saturday morning in a crime-blotter like article that topped its homepage, in addition to a litany of other shootings that took place overnight but did not injure or kill anyone.
Unfortunately, the last 24-hours were nothing unusual for Chicago, a city whose name is often synonymous with gun violence. "Shooting in Chicago is like cancer," Charles Parker, 46, told the New York Times recently. Parker said that gun violence has been spreading from known hotbeds of unrest to blocks that had long been considered safe.
Shootings have spiked by 50 percent this year in the Windy City, placing it at the heart of the nation's raging debate over gun control. But using Chicago to make the case for gun control has its own set of problems. The city has some of the toughest firearm laws in the country, yet continues to be plagued by shootings and gun crime. Lawmakers who oppose gun control often tout the city as an example for why gun control doesn't work.
But gun control advocates say that its too easy to traffic guns between states that have tough gun regulation, and those which have very little regulation.
Philip Cook, a Duke public policy professor and economist who works with the University of Chicago Crime Lab, told Bloomberg that about 60 percent of guns which were recovered in Illinois in connection with an arrest were from out of state — over a third of which came from neighboring Indiana, which "isn't regulated at all." Gang activity was mostly to blame for the availability of guns in Chicago, Cook said.
According to a site which compiles shooting and homicide data in Chicago from analyzing local news stories, gun violence watchdogs and official data, gunshots have accounted for more than 89 percent of homicides since the start of 2016 – claiming 254 victims in total. It also found that 40 people have been shot and killed since the beginning of this month – and 192 people shot and wounded.
EDITOR’S NOTE: Most of the shootings are gang related. Most of the gang membership is black. So, most of those shot are black. Black Lives Matter, where are you? Oh, I forgot that BLM is only concerned about white cops killing blacks.
By Tess Owen
VICE News
June 18, 2016
Chicago's violent streak of shootings continued, as five people were killed and at least 12 others wounded by shootings between Friday afternoon and Saturday morning, police said, bringing the week's total number of fatal shootings to 18 so far, with another 81 wounded.
Shortly after 9:00pm on Friday, a 16-year old was killed while sitting in the front passenger seat of a car. Not even two hours after, around 10:30pm, a 22-year-old man died after being shot in the neck. At 1:30am, one man was killed when he and another man were shot as they sat in a minivan on Chicago's west side. Around 3:40am on Saturday, police reported that another three men had been shot – one fatally – in the University Village neighborhood on the near west side of Chicago. About 6:30am on Saturday, a 23-year-old man was shot and killed on Chicago's westside.
The youngest victim of the day was a six-year-old girl who was injured after a bullet struck and shattered a restaurant window.
The Chicago Tribune listed the deaths on Saturday morning in a crime-blotter like article that topped its homepage, in addition to a litany of other shootings that took place overnight but did not injure or kill anyone.
Unfortunately, the last 24-hours were nothing unusual for Chicago, a city whose name is often synonymous with gun violence. "Shooting in Chicago is like cancer," Charles Parker, 46, told the New York Times recently. Parker said that gun violence has been spreading from known hotbeds of unrest to blocks that had long been considered safe.
Shootings have spiked by 50 percent this year in the Windy City, placing it at the heart of the nation's raging debate over gun control. But using Chicago to make the case for gun control has its own set of problems. The city has some of the toughest firearm laws in the country, yet continues to be plagued by shootings and gun crime. Lawmakers who oppose gun control often tout the city as an example for why gun control doesn't work.
But gun control advocates say that its too easy to traffic guns between states that have tough gun regulation, and those which have very little regulation.
Philip Cook, a Duke public policy professor and economist who works with the University of Chicago Crime Lab, told Bloomberg that about 60 percent of guns which were recovered in Illinois in connection with an arrest were from out of state — over a third of which came from neighboring Indiana, which "isn't regulated at all." Gang activity was mostly to blame for the availability of guns in Chicago, Cook said.
According to a site which compiles shooting and homicide data in Chicago from analyzing local news stories, gun violence watchdogs and official data, gunshots have accounted for more than 89 percent of homicides since the start of 2016 – claiming 254 victims in total. It also found that 40 people have been shot and killed since the beginning of this month – and 192 people shot and wounded.
EDITOR’S NOTE: Most of the shootings are gang related. Most of the gang membership is black. So, most of those shot are black. Black Lives Matter, where are you? Oh, I forgot that BLM is only concerned about white cops killing blacks.
ANOTHER CROOKED DEMOCRAT SHOT DOWN IN FLAMES
By Bob Walsh
United State Congressman Chaka Fattah, (D. Pa.) was convicted yesterday of widespread corruption and racketeering charges. He was stealing money every time he turned around. Some of it came from charities he sponsored, some of it came from campaign contributions, some of it was stolen from federal grant money under his control.
He has not yet decided whether or not to resign from congress. He could continue to draw his salary and benefits while in prison unless he is expelled from Congress, though his term runs out at the end of this year. He is scheduled to be actually sentenced October 4. Several of his associates are facing similar criminal problems.
United State Congressman Chaka Fattah, (D. Pa.) was convicted yesterday of widespread corruption and racketeering charges. He was stealing money every time he turned around. Some of it came from charities he sponsored, some of it came from campaign contributions, some of it was stolen from federal grant money under his control.
He has not yet decided whether or not to resign from congress. He could continue to draw his salary and benefits while in prison unless he is expelled from Congress, though his term runs out at the end of this year. He is scheduled to be actually sentenced October 4. Several of his associates are facing similar criminal problems.
FEDS BACK OFF SOMEWHAT ON NOLA JAIL
By Bob Walsh
The feds have backed off, at least somewhat, on an almost takeover of the operations of the New Orleans county jail.
The Sheriff will retain control, sort of. He must appoint a “compliance director” from a list of people submitted to him from the outside. That director will have broad power over things such as budget allocation and operational and management policy.
It isn’t wonderful, but it is certainly better than having a federal judge and a “special master” in your hip pocket constantly.
The feds have backed off, at least somewhat, on an almost takeover of the operations of the New Orleans county jail.
The Sheriff will retain control, sort of. He must appoint a “compliance director” from a list of people submitted to him from the outside. That director will have broad power over things such as budget allocation and operational and management policy.
It isn’t wonderful, but it is certainly better than having a federal judge and a “special master” in your hip pocket constantly.
THIS MIGHT BE A GOOD SNIVEL
By Bob Walsh
Lee Baca, 74, was formerly the Sheriff of Los Angeles County. He was recently convicted of federal charges of lying to the feds during a probe of operations at the L.A. County Slammer.
According to documents filed in federal court on Monday Baca has early-onset Alzheimer’s. The diagnosis was made less than one month before he was scheduled to be sentenced. His plea deal gives him a maximum of six months in federal custody.
There have now been 21 members of the S. O. that have been convicted of various charges attached to jail operations and alleged misconduct.
Baca’s lawyer is asking for probation, alleging (probably correctly) that going to prison would further deteriorate Baca’s condition, which at the moment is classified as mild.
EDITOR’S NOTE: My pet name for Baca was Pepe LePew.
Lee Baca, 74, was formerly the Sheriff of Los Angeles County. He was recently convicted of federal charges of lying to the feds during a probe of operations at the L.A. County Slammer.
According to documents filed in federal court on Monday Baca has early-onset Alzheimer’s. The diagnosis was made less than one month before he was scheduled to be sentenced. His plea deal gives him a maximum of six months in federal custody.
There have now been 21 members of the S. O. that have been convicted of various charges attached to jail operations and alleged misconduct.
Baca’s lawyer is asking for probation, alleging (probably correctly) that going to prison would further deteriorate Baca’s condition, which at the moment is classified as mild.
EDITOR’S NOTE: My pet name for Baca was Pepe LePew.
WOMAN CHARGED WITH STEALING MISSOURI PATROL CAR
Since the deputy sheriff’s car contained a gun, Stevi Renee Zinn was also charged with being a felon in possession of the firearm
By Katy Bergen
The Kansas City Star
June 21, 2016
Prosecutors accused a 28-year-old woman Monday of stealing a patrol car after a Johnson County's Sheriff's Office deputy gave her a ride to a hospital.
They also charged Stevi Renee Zinn, of Kansas City, Kan., with being a felon in possession of the firearm, which was inside the patrol car she allegedly took.
According to the sheriff's office, the incident began early Monday morning in De Soto when someone reported a "distraught" woman standing on a street corner.
When the deputy spoke with the woman, she asked to be taken to Shawnee Mission Medical Center.
He allowed her to sit in the front seat during the ride. But after they arrived, as the deputy walked around the vehicle to let the woman out, she slid into the driver's seat and made off with the Ford Crown Victoria, according to the sheriff's office.
The vehicle was recovered five minutes later at 9100 W. 70th St.,, and Zinn was arrested shortly after that at 71st Terrace and Frontage Road.
Zinn has a prior felony conviction for attempted aggravated escape, according to court records.
A judge set her bond at $100,000. She was scheduled to make her first appearance in Johnson County District Court Monday afternoon.
By Katy Bergen
The Kansas City Star
June 21, 2016
Prosecutors accused a 28-year-old woman Monday of stealing a patrol car after a Johnson County's Sheriff's Office deputy gave her a ride to a hospital.
They also charged Stevi Renee Zinn, of Kansas City, Kan., with being a felon in possession of the firearm, which was inside the patrol car she allegedly took.
According to the sheriff's office, the incident began early Monday morning in De Soto when someone reported a "distraught" woman standing on a street corner.
When the deputy spoke with the woman, she asked to be taken to Shawnee Mission Medical Center.
He allowed her to sit in the front seat during the ride. But after they arrived, as the deputy walked around the vehicle to let the woman out, she slid into the driver's seat and made off with the Ford Crown Victoria, according to the sheriff's office.
The vehicle was recovered five minutes later at 9100 W. 70th St.,, and Zinn was arrested shortly after that at 71st Terrace and Frontage Road.
Zinn has a prior felony conviction for attempted aggravated escape, according to court records.
A judge set her bond at $100,000. She was scheduled to make her first appearance in Johnson County District Court Monday afternoon.
THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE AND GOD (ARABIC) BE PRAISED
By Debra J. Saunders
Townhall
June 21, 2016
"I pledge allegiance to (omitted) may God protect him (Arabic), on behalf of (omitted)," said the man who killed 49 innocent people in an Orlando gay bar on June 12. Or so reported a redacted transcript of phone conversations between the shooter and police. The transcript airbrushed all reference to Islam and the Islamic State. U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch told ABC's "This Week" that her department was releasing a partial transcript "because we're not going to be, for example, broadcasting his pledges of allegiance. We are trying not to revictimize those who went through that horror."
After House Speaker Paul Ryan chided the administration for its "preposterous" selective editing, the Department of Justice realized its error and released a transcript that included the words "Islamic State." It was no surprise. The shooter had paid homage to the Islamic State and Allah when he posted on Facebook during his killing spree. Did "Allah" make an appearance in the less edited transcript? Not quite. I got no answer when I asked the Justice Department if the killer said "Allah" in what the 2.0 version transcript recorded as "God [Arabic]."
I can see why the feds chose not to release audio of the calls -- why feed other would-be Islamic terrorists' dreams of jihad fame and glory?
But I don't believe the attorney general's rationale for editing the partial transcripts for a New York minute. President Obama frequently chides political opponents for seeing any correlation between Islam and radical Islamist extremism. The president is not content to note that the overwhelming majority of Muslims are not jihadis; he takes the extra step of pronouncing any link between Islam and terrorism as specious.
The administration's editing bespeaks a pattern of willful deception. This isn't the first time the administration has tried to steer public outrage away from radical Islamic terrorism. Weeks before the 2012 presidential election, as the administration wanted to shift blame from its Libya policy. National Security Adviser Susan Rice disingenuously credited an American-made video for sparking the Benghazi attack that left four Americans dead.
In May, Fox News correspondent James Rosen noticed the State Department had removed from its official website a video of a 2013 exchange between Rosen and spokeswoman Jen Psaki. At a news conference, Rosen asked Psaki if it was State Department policy to lie to achieve its goals. Psaki answered, "I think there are times when diplomacy needs privacy in order to progress." (The administration's animus toward Fox News is hardly secret. Lynch's predecessor, Eric Holder, approved a search warrant on Rosen, whom he called a possible criminal co-conspirator in a leak investigation.)
The Obama administration seeks to blame lax gun laws for an Islamic State-inspired attack. That is, this administration would rather target supporters of gun rights than the allure of the Islamic State. Lynch actually went on the Sunday shows to tout the release of partial transcripts -- as proof of transparency. The administration planned this. Methinks the administration expected the media to play along.
EDITOR’S NOTE: In Islam there are 99 names of God. The Quran refers to the names of God as God's "most beautiful Names" (al-ʾasmāʾ al-ḥusná). They are traditionally enumerated as 99 in number to which is added as the highest Name (al-ism al-ʾaʿẓam), the Supreme Name of God is Allāh.
When the Justice Department referred to the name of God in Arabic, what it refused to name in English was probably Allah.
Townhall
June 21, 2016
"I pledge allegiance to (omitted) may God protect him (Arabic), on behalf of (omitted)," said the man who killed 49 innocent people in an Orlando gay bar on June 12. Or so reported a redacted transcript of phone conversations between the shooter and police. The transcript airbrushed all reference to Islam and the Islamic State. U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch told ABC's "This Week" that her department was releasing a partial transcript "because we're not going to be, for example, broadcasting his pledges of allegiance. We are trying not to revictimize those who went through that horror."
After House Speaker Paul Ryan chided the administration for its "preposterous" selective editing, the Department of Justice realized its error and released a transcript that included the words "Islamic State." It was no surprise. The shooter had paid homage to the Islamic State and Allah when he posted on Facebook during his killing spree. Did "Allah" make an appearance in the less edited transcript? Not quite. I got no answer when I asked the Justice Department if the killer said "Allah" in what the 2.0 version transcript recorded as "God [Arabic]."
I can see why the feds chose not to release audio of the calls -- why feed other would-be Islamic terrorists' dreams of jihad fame and glory?
But I don't believe the attorney general's rationale for editing the partial transcripts for a New York minute. President Obama frequently chides political opponents for seeing any correlation between Islam and radical Islamist extremism. The president is not content to note that the overwhelming majority of Muslims are not jihadis; he takes the extra step of pronouncing any link between Islam and terrorism as specious.
The administration's editing bespeaks a pattern of willful deception. This isn't the first time the administration has tried to steer public outrage away from radical Islamic terrorism. Weeks before the 2012 presidential election, as the administration wanted to shift blame from its Libya policy. National Security Adviser Susan Rice disingenuously credited an American-made video for sparking the Benghazi attack that left four Americans dead.
In May, Fox News correspondent James Rosen noticed the State Department had removed from its official website a video of a 2013 exchange between Rosen and spokeswoman Jen Psaki. At a news conference, Rosen asked Psaki if it was State Department policy to lie to achieve its goals. Psaki answered, "I think there are times when diplomacy needs privacy in order to progress." (The administration's animus toward Fox News is hardly secret. Lynch's predecessor, Eric Holder, approved a search warrant on Rosen, whom he called a possible criminal co-conspirator in a leak investigation.)
The Obama administration seeks to blame lax gun laws for an Islamic State-inspired attack. That is, this administration would rather target supporters of gun rights than the allure of the Islamic State. Lynch actually went on the Sunday shows to tout the release of partial transcripts -- as proof of transparency. The administration planned this. Methinks the administration expected the media to play along.
EDITOR’S NOTE: In Islam there are 99 names of God. The Quran refers to the names of God as God's "most beautiful Names" (al-ʾasmāʾ al-ḥusná). They are traditionally enumerated as 99 in number to which is added as the highest Name (al-ism al-ʾaʿẓam), the Supreme Name of God is Allāh.
When the Justice Department referred to the name of God in Arabic, what it refused to name in English was probably Allah.
GUNS, DEMOCRATS AND TERROR
When the NYPD successfully took on guns and terror, liberals howled
By William McGurn
The Wall Street Jurnsl
June 20, 2016
That didn’t take long. Right after Orlando, President Obama promised he would “spare no effort to determine what—if any—inspiration or association” had sent Omar Mateen on his murderous spree.
Now, just one week later, his attorney general, Loretta Lynch, tried to have the Islamist “inspirations” and “associations” Mateen invoked scrubbed from the transcripts of the 911 calls released to the public—before being forced to back down on Monday. No one should be surprised. The impulse to edit out anything that confirms acts of terror are acts of war is fully consistent with standard operating procedure these past eight years.
And if Hillary Clinton is elected in November, it will be the same for the next four.
Like the president, Mrs. Clinton has used Orlando to relaunch the liberal offensive on the “gun lobby.” She promises “to do everything” to take “weapons of war off our streets.” She further calls for an “intelligence surge.”
Tough stuff, right? Unfortunately, the moment any of these efforts run up against political correctness, they will almost certainly collapse under liberal pressure. How do we know? There is no better example than the post-9/11 experience of New York under Police Commissioner Ray
Kelly.
Mr. Kelly began his second stint as New York’s top cop on Jan. 1, 2002, when the city was still clearing debris from the Twin Towers. His charge looked impossible: Prevent another terror attack, and maintain the progress against gun violence begun under MayorRudolph Giuliani.
Over the next 12 years the finest police force in America did just that. In so doing, Mr. Kelly pulled off what President Obama and Hillary Clinton now claim are their post-Orlando priorities —a full-fledged assault on gun violence, and “smarter” policies to identify terrorists before they strike.
Here’s the rub. The secret to New York’s success wasn’t just Mr. Kelly. It was also Mayor Michael Bloomberg. Mr. Bloomberg was a liberal rarity, a pol who would not throw his cops under the bus when successful policies produced politically inconvenient results.
Start with guns. Under Mr. Kelly, police expanded a tactic known as stop-and-frisk. Here’s a better way to think about it: gun control for bad guys.
Cops would be proactive. When they spotted someone behaving suspiciously, he would be stopped, questioned and sometimes frisked. Often police found an illegal weapon.
The gun control was not limited to the thousands of guns taken off the streets this way. Because the bad guys knew they might be frisked, they started leaving their guns at home. New York became America’s safest big city.
How was this success greeted? The cops found themselves denounced as racists, because the stops of black men were disproportionate to their percentage of the general population (but not disproportionate to suspect descriptions). The activists sued; an anti-cop federal judge egged them on; and Bill de Blasio made “racial profiling” by police a key campaign point in his successful run for mayor in 2013.
Never mind that as a result of the NYPD’s approach, thousands of young black and Hispanic lives were saved.
Alas, it’s the same sad story for the cause of better intelligence. Under Mr. Kelly, police set up a demographics unit. The Associated Press would win a Pulitzer for a sensationalist series of stories falsely implying it was about blanket spying on Muslims. In fact, the unit was about getting smart—learning where, for example, terrorists such as the Tsarnaev brothers might look for shelter had they made it to New York (as they’d planned) after bombing the Boston marathon.
Or what about the 2007 NYPD report called “Radicalization in the West: The Homegrown Threat”? Here’s a sentence from the first paragraph of the executive summary: “Rather than being directed from al-Qaeda abroad, these plots have been conceptualized and planned by ‘unremarkable’ local residents/citizens who sought to attack their country of residence, utilizing al-Qaeda as their inspiration and ideological reference point.”
Substitute “ISIS” for “al-Qaeda” and these words today look prophetic.
So how did the liberal world react to this effort to smarten up? In January, the de Blasio administration agreed to pull the report from the NYPD website as part of a settlement with
Muslim groups who had sued. Two years earlier the NYPD had disbanded the demographics unit, also after much litigation and pressure.
Remember: All this came in a New York that, under Mr. Kelly, had suffered no terror attack after 9/11 and had seen its shootings and murders driven down to historic lows.
The larger point of New York’s record here is that it’s not enough to have smart and effective policies if the goal is to bring down gun violence and stop terrorists. The other critical factor is a leader like Mr. Bloomberg, willing to buck political correctness and back his law enforcement team.
By William McGurn
The Wall Street Jurnsl
June 20, 2016
That didn’t take long. Right after Orlando, President Obama promised he would “spare no effort to determine what—if any—inspiration or association” had sent Omar Mateen on his murderous spree.
Now, just one week later, his attorney general, Loretta Lynch, tried to have the Islamist “inspirations” and “associations” Mateen invoked scrubbed from the transcripts of the 911 calls released to the public—before being forced to back down on Monday. No one should be surprised. The impulse to edit out anything that confirms acts of terror are acts of war is fully consistent with standard operating procedure these past eight years.
And if Hillary Clinton is elected in November, it will be the same for the next four.
Like the president, Mrs. Clinton has used Orlando to relaunch the liberal offensive on the “gun lobby.” She promises “to do everything” to take “weapons of war off our streets.” She further calls for an “intelligence surge.”
Tough stuff, right? Unfortunately, the moment any of these efforts run up against political correctness, they will almost certainly collapse under liberal pressure. How do we know? There is no better example than the post-9/11 experience of New York under Police Commissioner Ray
Kelly.
Mr. Kelly began his second stint as New York’s top cop on Jan. 1, 2002, when the city was still clearing debris from the Twin Towers. His charge looked impossible: Prevent another terror attack, and maintain the progress against gun violence begun under MayorRudolph Giuliani.
Over the next 12 years the finest police force in America did just that. In so doing, Mr. Kelly pulled off what President Obama and Hillary Clinton now claim are their post-Orlando priorities —a full-fledged assault on gun violence, and “smarter” policies to identify terrorists before they strike.
Here’s the rub. The secret to New York’s success wasn’t just Mr. Kelly. It was also Mayor Michael Bloomberg. Mr. Bloomberg was a liberal rarity, a pol who would not throw his cops under the bus when successful policies produced politically inconvenient results.
Start with guns. Under Mr. Kelly, police expanded a tactic known as stop-and-frisk. Here’s a better way to think about it: gun control for bad guys.
Cops would be proactive. When they spotted someone behaving suspiciously, he would be stopped, questioned and sometimes frisked. Often police found an illegal weapon.
The gun control was not limited to the thousands of guns taken off the streets this way. Because the bad guys knew they might be frisked, they started leaving their guns at home. New York became America’s safest big city.
How was this success greeted? The cops found themselves denounced as racists, because the stops of black men were disproportionate to their percentage of the general population (but not disproportionate to suspect descriptions). The activists sued; an anti-cop federal judge egged them on; and Bill de Blasio made “racial profiling” by police a key campaign point in his successful run for mayor in 2013.
Never mind that as a result of the NYPD’s approach, thousands of young black and Hispanic lives were saved.
Alas, it’s the same sad story for the cause of better intelligence. Under Mr. Kelly, police set up a demographics unit. The Associated Press would win a Pulitzer for a sensationalist series of stories falsely implying it was about blanket spying on Muslims. In fact, the unit was about getting smart—learning where, for example, terrorists such as the Tsarnaev brothers might look for shelter had they made it to New York (as they’d planned) after bombing the Boston marathon.
Or what about the 2007 NYPD report called “Radicalization in the West: The Homegrown Threat”? Here’s a sentence from the first paragraph of the executive summary: “Rather than being directed from al-Qaeda abroad, these plots have been conceptualized and planned by ‘unremarkable’ local residents/citizens who sought to attack their country of residence, utilizing al-Qaeda as their inspiration and ideological reference point.”
Substitute “ISIS” for “al-Qaeda” and these words today look prophetic.
So how did the liberal world react to this effort to smarten up? In January, the de Blasio administration agreed to pull the report from the NYPD website as part of a settlement with
Muslim groups who had sued. Two years earlier the NYPD had disbanded the demographics unit, also after much litigation and pressure.
Remember: All this came in a New York that, under Mr. Kelly, had suffered no terror attack after 9/11 and had seen its shootings and murders driven down to historic lows.
The larger point of New York’s record here is that it’s not enough to have smart and effective policies if the goal is to bring down gun violence and stop terrorists. The other critical factor is a leader like Mr. Bloomberg, willing to buck political correctness and back his law enforcement team.
Wednesday, June 22, 2016
TRUMP MUST TAKE US ALL FOR FOOLS
The way Trump backtracked on his remarks about armed patrons in the Pulse nightclub is just one more reason Hillary will be our next president
In the wake of the Orlando shooting, Donald Trump made a number of speeches in which included remarks similar to the following one he made on CNN:
“If you had some guns in that club the night that this took place, if you had guns on the other side, you wouldn’t have had the tragedy that you had. If people in that room had guns with the bullets flying in the opposite direction right at him... right at his head, you wouldn’t have had the same tragedy that you ended up having.”
Or as he said at a Texas rally:
“If some of those wonderful people had gun strapped right here—right to their waist or right to their ankle—and one of the people in that room happened to have it and goes ‘boom, boom,’ you know that would have been a beautiful, beautiful sight, folks.”
However, on Sunday’s ABC This Week, Chris Cox, executive director of the NRA's Institute for Legislative Action, responded to Trump’s remarks by saying:
“No one thinks that people should go into a nightclub drinking and carrying firearms. That defies common sense. It also defies the law.”
And NRA head Wayne LaPierre agreed, telling CBS Face the Nation, “I don’t think you should have firearms where people are drinking.”
Trump then quickly backtracked by tweeting:
“When I said that if, within the Orlando club, you had some people with guns, I was obviously talking about additional guards or employees.”
Yeah right! Anyone with the brain of an earthworm knows exactly that when Trump mentioned “those wonderful people,” he was obviously referring to the nightclub patrons being armed, and not to guards or employees.
What a schmuck! Trump must take us all for fools. His backtracking whopper is just one more reason the Hildebeast will be our next president.
In the wake of the Orlando shooting, Donald Trump made a number of speeches in which included remarks similar to the following one he made on CNN:
“If you had some guns in that club the night that this took place, if you had guns on the other side, you wouldn’t have had the tragedy that you had. If people in that room had guns with the bullets flying in the opposite direction right at him... right at his head, you wouldn’t have had the same tragedy that you ended up having.”
Or as he said at a Texas rally:
“If some of those wonderful people had gun strapped right here—right to their waist or right to their ankle—and one of the people in that room happened to have it and goes ‘boom, boom,’ you know that would have been a beautiful, beautiful sight, folks.”
However, on Sunday’s ABC This Week, Chris Cox, executive director of the NRA's Institute for Legislative Action, responded to Trump’s remarks by saying:
“No one thinks that people should go into a nightclub drinking and carrying firearms. That defies common sense. It also defies the law.”
And NRA head Wayne LaPierre agreed, telling CBS Face the Nation, “I don’t think you should have firearms where people are drinking.”
Trump then quickly backtracked by tweeting:
“When I said that if, within the Orlando club, you had some people with guns, I was obviously talking about additional guards or employees.”
Yeah right! Anyone with the brain of an earthworm knows exactly that when Trump mentioned “those wonderful people,” he was obviously referring to the nightclub patrons being armed, and not to guards or employees.
What a schmuck! Trump must take us all for fools. His backtracking whopper is just one more reason the Hildebeast will be our next president.
MICHAEL JACKSON EXPOSED AS A SEX CRAZED PREDATOR
A 2013 sheriff’s raid on the King of Pop’s home uncovered an extensive collection of photos featuring naked teenage boys, as well as disgusting and downright shocking images of child torture, adult and child nudity, and sadomasochism
By Chris Spargo
Daily Mail
June 21, 2016
A new video has been released of the November 2003 raid of Michael Jackson's home by 70 members of the Santa Barbara County District Attorney's Office and Sheriff's Department which uncovered his collection of pornography and photos featuring young boys naked.
The video shows almost all of Jackson's home, from the arcade room to his bedroom and the many life-size mannequins he had throughout his Neverland Ranch.
Many of these mannequins were superheroes like Superman and Lara Croft.
This raid also revealed for the first time the King of Pop's secret closet, hidden in the back of his bedroom and kept closed with three deadlocks.
It was in here that he kept memorabilia like a signed photograph of Macaulay Culkin, stuffed animals and games, and naked photos.
Culkin signed his photo with the message: 'Don't leave me alone in the house.'
There were also racing cars, Disney merchandise and a shocking number of dolls.
Many of these books and videos found in the raid were also detailed in court papers from the time, submitted after a young boy came forward claiming that he had been sexually abused and assaulted by the singer on multiple occasions.
The police report claims that in Jackson's bedroom and bathroom alone there were at least seven collections of work found by investigators that show boys in their teenage years - and in some cases younger - fully nude or partially clothed.
One of the collections, Taormina Wilhelm Von Gloeden, is described in court papers as: 'Nude photos of teenage boys from late 1800s.'
An arrest warrant had been issued at that time as well, and Jackson later turned himself into police when he returned to California.
Radar Online first obtained the police report and court papers, and an investigator on the case told them: 'The documents exposed Jackson as a manipulative, drug-and-sex-crazed predator who used blood, gore, sexually explicit images of animal sacrifice and perverse adult sex acts to bend children to his will.'
The source added: 'He also had disgusting and downright shocking images of child torture, adult and child nudity, female bondage and sadomasochism.'
The report states that many of the materials featuring naked men and women in the home could be used for the purpose of trying to attract young men.
After the descriptions for many of the materials, the investigator notes: 'Based on my training, this type of material can be used as part of the "grooming" process, by which people (those seeking to molest children) lower the inhibitions of their intended victims and facilitate the molestation of said victims.'
These materials include 'a book depicting nude children' found in the singer's 'arcade room'; 'a book which contained nude photographs of men' in the 'master bathroom'; and multiple books found in the 'master bedroom' that included one with 'naked and semi-naked gay men' and another with 'pre-teen or early teenage individuals' who in some cases were 'nude or semi-nude.'
Radar spoke with Santa Barbara Senior Assistant District Attorney Ron Zonen about the case as he was part of the prosecution team that took on Jackson in court.
'A lot of this stuff was used to desensitize the children, and Michael admitted taking one child after another into bed with him for long periods of time,' said Zonen.
'We identified five different boys, who all made allegations of sexual abuse. There’s not much question in my mind that Michael was guilty of child molestation.'
Jackson was ultimately acquitted in 2005 after being charged with seven felony counts of child molestation and two felony counts of providing an intoxicant to a minor under the age of 14 when Gavin Arvizo came forward claiming that he had been sexually assaulted by the singer.
Gavin was a 13-year-old cancer survivor at the time of the alleged incidents.
The claims made by Gavin were similar to the ones made a decade earlier when another 13-year-old boy, Jordan Chandler, came forward to say he had been molested by Jackson.
No charges were ever filed against the singer however after police discovered the Chandler's father may have been attempting to extort Jackson and the young boy's mother claimed Jackson never touched her son.
Jordan however was able to perfectly describe Jackson's buttocks, pubic hair, and distinctive marks on both his testicles and penis.
The mark on the penis could only be seen if it was lifted and was otherwise not visible.
In the end, Jackson settled with the Chandler family for $22million and no charges were ever filed against him in court.
Once the trial was over Jackson - who had been facing up to 20 years in prison if convicted on all charges - left the country, moving to the island nation of Bahrain, located in the Persian Sea.
He eventually returned to the United States and had been preparing for his comeback tour in 2009 when he was found unresponsive inside his Holmby Hills home.
Paramedics arrived on the scene and were unable to revive the singer, who they declared dead at the age of 48 while still at his residence.
The cause of death was later ruled to be acute propofol and benzodiazepine intoxication caused by drugs that were being prescribed to him by Dr. Conrad Murray, who was convicted of involuntary manslaughter in 2011 and charged with the singer's death.
He was released in November 2013 after serving roughly half of his four year sentence.
EDITOR’S NOTE: Jackson’s acquittal is reminiscent of OJ’s acquittal. Morally guilty, legally innocent.
Jackson has to be one of history’s sorriest pieces of shit, yet millions of his fans continue to idolize him.
By Chris Spargo
Daily Mail
June 21, 2016
A new video has been released of the November 2003 raid of Michael Jackson's home by 70 members of the Santa Barbara County District Attorney's Office and Sheriff's Department which uncovered his collection of pornography and photos featuring young boys naked.
The video shows almost all of Jackson's home, from the arcade room to his bedroom and the many life-size mannequins he had throughout his Neverland Ranch.
Many of these mannequins were superheroes like Superman and Lara Croft.
This raid also revealed for the first time the King of Pop's secret closet, hidden in the back of his bedroom and kept closed with three deadlocks.
It was in here that he kept memorabilia like a signed photograph of Macaulay Culkin, stuffed animals and games, and naked photos.
Culkin signed his photo with the message: 'Don't leave me alone in the house.'
There were also racing cars, Disney merchandise and a shocking number of dolls.
Many of these books and videos found in the raid were also detailed in court papers from the time, submitted after a young boy came forward claiming that he had been sexually abused and assaulted by the singer on multiple occasions.
The police report claims that in Jackson's bedroom and bathroom alone there were at least seven collections of work found by investigators that show boys in their teenage years - and in some cases younger - fully nude or partially clothed.
One of the collections, Taormina Wilhelm Von Gloeden, is described in court papers as: 'Nude photos of teenage boys from late 1800s.'
An arrest warrant had been issued at that time as well, and Jackson later turned himself into police when he returned to California.
Radar Online first obtained the police report and court papers, and an investigator on the case told them: 'The documents exposed Jackson as a manipulative, drug-and-sex-crazed predator who used blood, gore, sexually explicit images of animal sacrifice and perverse adult sex acts to bend children to his will.'
The source added: 'He also had disgusting and downright shocking images of child torture, adult and child nudity, female bondage and sadomasochism.'
The report states that many of the materials featuring naked men and women in the home could be used for the purpose of trying to attract young men.
After the descriptions for many of the materials, the investigator notes: 'Based on my training, this type of material can be used as part of the "grooming" process, by which people (those seeking to molest children) lower the inhibitions of their intended victims and facilitate the molestation of said victims.'
These materials include 'a book depicting nude children' found in the singer's 'arcade room'; 'a book which contained nude photographs of men' in the 'master bathroom'; and multiple books found in the 'master bedroom' that included one with 'naked and semi-naked gay men' and another with 'pre-teen or early teenage individuals' who in some cases were 'nude or semi-nude.'
Radar spoke with Santa Barbara Senior Assistant District Attorney Ron Zonen about the case as he was part of the prosecution team that took on Jackson in court.
'A lot of this stuff was used to desensitize the children, and Michael admitted taking one child after another into bed with him for long periods of time,' said Zonen.
'We identified five different boys, who all made allegations of sexual abuse. There’s not much question in my mind that Michael was guilty of child molestation.'
Jackson was ultimately acquitted in 2005 after being charged with seven felony counts of child molestation and two felony counts of providing an intoxicant to a minor under the age of 14 when Gavin Arvizo came forward claiming that he had been sexually assaulted by the singer.
Gavin was a 13-year-old cancer survivor at the time of the alleged incidents.
The claims made by Gavin were similar to the ones made a decade earlier when another 13-year-old boy, Jordan Chandler, came forward to say he had been molested by Jackson.
No charges were ever filed against the singer however after police discovered the Chandler's father may have been attempting to extort Jackson and the young boy's mother claimed Jackson never touched her son.
Jordan however was able to perfectly describe Jackson's buttocks, pubic hair, and distinctive marks on both his testicles and penis.
The mark on the penis could only be seen if it was lifted and was otherwise not visible.
In the end, Jackson settled with the Chandler family for $22million and no charges were ever filed against him in court.
Once the trial was over Jackson - who had been facing up to 20 years in prison if convicted on all charges - left the country, moving to the island nation of Bahrain, located in the Persian Sea.
He eventually returned to the United States and had been preparing for his comeback tour in 2009 when he was found unresponsive inside his Holmby Hills home.
Paramedics arrived on the scene and were unable to revive the singer, who they declared dead at the age of 48 while still at his residence.
The cause of death was later ruled to be acute propofol and benzodiazepine intoxication caused by drugs that were being prescribed to him by Dr. Conrad Murray, who was convicted of involuntary manslaughter in 2011 and charged with the singer's death.
He was released in November 2013 after serving roughly half of his four year sentence.
EDITOR’S NOTE: Jackson’s acquittal is reminiscent of OJ’s acquittal. Morally guilty, legally innocent.
Jackson has to be one of history’s sorriest pieces of shit, yet millions of his fans continue to idolize him.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)