Virginia recently became the first state to pass legislation officially apologizing for slavery. Several other southern states are now considering similar legislation. Several black members of congress are seeking to have the United States apologize for slavery. No one can deny that slavery represented a very shameful and inhumane period it our nation's history.
This begs the question - should Americans apologize for slavery? I say no. Why not? Well, for one thing, slavery in this country was abolished in 1865, following the end of our Civil War. That was almost a century and a half ago. For another, we need to recognize how blacks became slaves in the first place.
Dominant African tribes raided the villages of other tribes, capturing their men, women and children, then selling them to Arab slave traders. Those Arabs then sold the captives to European slave traders who shipped them off to America where southern plantation owners bought them at open slave auctions. Thus, it would seem plausible that Africans, Arabs and Europeans should apologize for their part in slavery before we consider apologizing for America's participation in that sordid enterprise.
Many black activists are not only demanding an apology, but they also want the states and the federal government to pay reparations to the descendants of slaves. They point out that Jews who survived the holocaust, and the heirs of those who didn't, were paid reparations by post-Nazi Germany. That's pure unadulterated hogwash. Most of those reparations were made for property, businesses, bank deposits and personal belongings stolen from Jews by the Nazis and for life insurance policy claims. No reparationns were made for the thousands of Jews in concentration camps who were forced to work as slave labor in Nazi war plants.
If apologies are due for past wrongs, then what about apologies to the American Indians? Driven off their lands by white settlers, forced to live on reservations and robbed of their native culture by the government, American Indians were left to live in squalor and afflicted with a high rate of alcoholism.
While we're at it, do we owe Jews an apology? On November 9, 1938, "Kristallnacht" was the beginning of a Nazi progrom against Jews in Germany and parts of Austria which led to the relocation of Jews to concentration camps and the confiscation of their businesses and property. Many thousands sought asylum in the United States, but our government refused to allow in Jewish refugees, even though the Roosevelt administration knew that the Nazis intended to exterminate them. Just a relatively few Jews were able to immigrate, and then only if they had American sponsors who would guarantee to provide for all their needs. Thus, our government condemned thousands of Jews to extermination in the gas chambers of Nazi concentration camps.
This brings us to the Japanese-Americans during World War II. Right after the attack on Pearl Harbor, West Coast residents of Japanese ancestry were uprooted from their homes, farms and businesses, and interned in relocation centers. The government claimed the relocation, which appeared to be racially motivated, was justified on the grounds that they might aid Japan to invade our country. With few exceptions, those interned in the crowded camps were loyal to the United States. When they were released, these hapless citizens found that many of their homes, farms and businesses had been appropriated (stolen) by white Americans. Eventually, the government paid reparations to most former internees for their losses. If we owe blacks an apology, don't we owe an apology to loyal Japanese-Americans for uprooting them into internment camps?
While I do not believe we owe anything to anyone for something that ended a century and a half ago, I do believe that we should apologize to blacks for the Jim Crowism which treated blacks in the South as sub-human, and for the nationwide discrimination against blacks in education, employment, housing and civil rights, which followed the abolition of slavery and continued well into the last century. That chapter in our recent history is just as shameful as slavery itself.
Wednesday, March 28, 2007
Wednesday, March 21, 2007
AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL - BUTT OUT !!!
Roy Lee Pippin, who is scheduled to be executed next week, complains that life on Texas' death row is "a living hell." He has been lingering on death row for 12 years under what he considers horrendous conditions. His complaints have been taken up by Amnesty Internatioal, the London based human rights group.
In a letter to the Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Amnesty International accuses Texas of violating international human rights agreements by the way the State operates its death row unit. The group listed the following violations: The condemned are isolated in small cells 23 hours a day; they are not allowed to watch television; they have no work program; and they are not allowed to participate in group recreation and religious services. Amnesty International claimed that such "inherently inhumane" treatment can cause severe physical and mental harm.
Pardon me, while I get out my hanky and wipe away my tears. Heaven forbid that we should be so cruel to cold blooded killers. Have these bleeding hearts considered that the victims of death row inmates are isolated six feet underground in cramped coffins 24 hours a day and kept from working, watching television, or recreating? Is Amnesty International suggesting we turn death row into Club Med? That group disregards the fact that those on death row are not there for singing off-key in a church choir. Pippin, for instance, is there for killing two men who were believed to have stolen $1.6 million from his Columbian drug cartel bosses.
Amnesty International should concentrate on ensuring that prisoners of war are treated humanely. If they are concerned about the treatment of incarcerated criminals, they should spend their efforts at improving the conditions under which inmates serve time in many Latin American, Asian and African prisons. The living conditions in those prisons are far worse than those on Texas' death row. Of course, all this has really more to do with Amnesty International's vehement opposition to the death penalty than with its complaints about death row. So, Amnesty International, butt out of Texas!
In a letter to the Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Amnesty International accuses Texas of violating international human rights agreements by the way the State operates its death row unit. The group listed the following violations: The condemned are isolated in small cells 23 hours a day; they are not allowed to watch television; they have no work program; and they are not allowed to participate in group recreation and religious services. Amnesty International claimed that such "inherently inhumane" treatment can cause severe physical and mental harm.
Pardon me, while I get out my hanky and wipe away my tears. Heaven forbid that we should be so cruel to cold blooded killers. Have these bleeding hearts considered that the victims of death row inmates are isolated six feet underground in cramped coffins 24 hours a day and kept from working, watching television, or recreating? Is Amnesty International suggesting we turn death row into Club Med? That group disregards the fact that those on death row are not there for singing off-key in a church choir. Pippin, for instance, is there for killing two men who were believed to have stolen $1.6 million from his Columbian drug cartel bosses.
Amnesty International should concentrate on ensuring that prisoners of war are treated humanely. If they are concerned about the treatment of incarcerated criminals, they should spend their efforts at improving the conditions under which inmates serve time in many Latin American, Asian and African prisons. The living conditions in those prisons are far worse than those on Texas' death row. Of course, all this has really more to do with Amnesty International's vehement opposition to the death penalty than with its complaints about death row. So, Amnesty International, butt out of Texas!
Tuesday, March 20, 2007
GOOD POLICING AND QUESTIONABLE POLICING
GOOD POLICING: Santa Ana (California) police officer Rufus Tanksley has been giving money, gifts and advice to a homeless couple. Tanksley has encountered many homeless people during his 18 years as a police officer, most of them being drug addicts, alcoholics or mentally ill. John F. Martin, 54, and Marlena Gammelgard, 52, were different. Martin lost his electronics repair business and Gammelgard, a college graduate was laid off as a court cashier. They were down on their luck and left homeless.
In 2003, Tanksley "sold" the couple a 1990 Chevrolet Geo for $500, but he never asked them for the money. Occasionally, when he spots them sleeping in the car, he sticks an evelope containing $20 on the windshield. From time to time he takes them to a movie. At Christmas, he takes them to his home and fixes them a hearty breakfast. He got them a motel room when it was too cold to sleep in the car. Tanksley is helping the couple he believes to be "good people" down on their luck because years ago he himself had been down on his luck. Officer Tanksley desrves to be recognized nationally as an "Outstanding Officer of the Year."
This is not the first time than officers of the Santa Ana Police Department have played a significant charitable role. Many years ago, I came across a case where officers from that agency had arrested an office machine repairman for forgery. He was sentenced to prison, leaving his wife and children in difficult financial straits. Every week during this man's imprisonment, Santa Ana police officers took up a collection with which they purchased a week's worth of groceries for his family. Now, that's good policing.
Also years ago, I came across a case where Corona (California) police officers arrested a woman for the burglary of a bakery in which she stole a dozen or so loaves of bread. When the officers found that this single mother was only trying to provide some food for her hungry children, they persuaded the owner of the bakery to drop the charges which had been filed against her. At the suggestion of the officers, the baker also began to provide day-old bread and other bakery items to the woman and her kids. That's another example of good policing.
QUESTIONABLE POLICING: Recently, the Baltimore police arrested a 7-year old boy for riding a dirt bike on the sidewalk. His mother alleges that at the time of the arrest her son was merely sitting on the bike when an officer jerked him off by grabbing his neck. The bike was confiscated and the boy was arrested. He was taken to the staion house where, according to the boy, he was fingerprinted and had his mug shot taken, then handcuffed to a bench and interrogated, before being released to his parents.
Ouch - what a public relations nightmare. While he may have gone "by the book," the arresting officer should have used his discretionary powers and, with the backing of his supervisor, done his duty by impounding the bike, writing the boy a citation, and delivering him and the citation to his parents without taking him to a police station. Questionable policing? No, this is worse - it's piss poor policing.
And then, there is the "cops are armed and dangerous" case in which three New York officers have been indicted in the shooting death of an unarmed groom on his wedding day. Five undercover cops fired nearly 50 rounds which also wounded the groom's two companions. I will not defend bad policing. However, I always try to look at questionable cases from the officer's perspective. As such, I defended the actions of the Los Angeles officers in the Rodney King case, a position for which I was roundly criticized. ("Presumption of Officer Guilt: The Administration of Justice is Race Driven," TEXAS POLICE JOURNAL, July, 1996)
I have also defended the actions of several officers in cases where they shot someone to death with multiple rounds, even when some of those rounds struck that person in the back. Officers in fear of their lives instinctively fire multiple rounds because subconsciously they lack confidence in the accuracy of their shooting ability. No amount of training can immunize an officer from going into a panic mode the moment he thinks he is facing death. An instinctive shooting frenzy will usually be set off once one officer opens fire when several officers are present during a perilous situation.
The five New York undercover cops were conducting an investigation in a strip club when, according to the officers, they overheard the groom and his two buddies talking about going to his car to get a gun. Outside the club, the groom's car ran into one of the undercover police cars. When the five cops approached his car, one of the officers warned the others that someone was reaching for a gun. They all opened fire, killing the groom and wounding his buddies. No gun was found. Of the three indicted officers, one fired four shots, another fired 11, and the third fired 31.
Because the three strip clubbers were black, there was an immediate outcry in the black community about racist cops being quick to kill young blacks. This shooting reminded blacks of the 1999 shooting of an unarmed African immigrant who was shot 41 times. The current outrage was fueled by none other than the Reverend Al Sharpton, that charleton who was one of the three sleazy race-baiting provocateurs in the Tawana Brawley hoax. Never mind that two of the five officers were black. And now, Sharpton is complaining about the other two officers not being indicted.
I do find it impossible to defend the officer who fired 31 rounds. Unless he was firing two guns simultaneously, he would have had to eject one clip and insert another during the fusilage. By the time he reloaded, all the shooting would have been over because none of the other four officers fired more than 11 shots. It will take a psychiatrist to figure out what possessed him to fire all those rounds.
Just as with the Los Angeles officers in the Rodney King case, the indictments of the three New York cops appear designed to placate the black community. Would there have been any indictments had the groom and his two companions been white? I doubt it - absent malicious intent, the shootings probably would have been put to rest as an unfortunate tragedy, which is exactly what this shooting was.
By the way, where is the community outrage whenever cops are shot? Recently, within a short time span, two unarmed New York auxiliary cops were shot to death and two regular officers were wounded. Where was charleton Sharpton when these officers were shot?
In 2003, Tanksley "sold" the couple a 1990 Chevrolet Geo for $500, but he never asked them for the money. Occasionally, when he spots them sleeping in the car, he sticks an evelope containing $20 on the windshield. From time to time he takes them to a movie. At Christmas, he takes them to his home and fixes them a hearty breakfast. He got them a motel room when it was too cold to sleep in the car. Tanksley is helping the couple he believes to be "good people" down on their luck because years ago he himself had been down on his luck. Officer Tanksley desrves to be recognized nationally as an "Outstanding Officer of the Year."
This is not the first time than officers of the Santa Ana Police Department have played a significant charitable role. Many years ago, I came across a case where officers from that agency had arrested an office machine repairman for forgery. He was sentenced to prison, leaving his wife and children in difficult financial straits. Every week during this man's imprisonment, Santa Ana police officers took up a collection with which they purchased a week's worth of groceries for his family. Now, that's good policing.
Also years ago, I came across a case where Corona (California) police officers arrested a woman for the burglary of a bakery in which she stole a dozen or so loaves of bread. When the officers found that this single mother was only trying to provide some food for her hungry children, they persuaded the owner of the bakery to drop the charges which had been filed against her. At the suggestion of the officers, the baker also began to provide day-old bread and other bakery items to the woman and her kids. That's another example of good policing.
QUESTIONABLE POLICING: Recently, the Baltimore police arrested a 7-year old boy for riding a dirt bike on the sidewalk. His mother alleges that at the time of the arrest her son was merely sitting on the bike when an officer jerked him off by grabbing his neck. The bike was confiscated and the boy was arrested. He was taken to the staion house where, according to the boy, he was fingerprinted and had his mug shot taken, then handcuffed to a bench and interrogated, before being released to his parents.
Ouch - what a public relations nightmare. While he may have gone "by the book," the arresting officer should have used his discretionary powers and, with the backing of his supervisor, done his duty by impounding the bike, writing the boy a citation, and delivering him and the citation to his parents without taking him to a police station. Questionable policing? No, this is worse - it's piss poor policing.
And then, there is the "cops are armed and dangerous" case in which three New York officers have been indicted in the shooting death of an unarmed groom on his wedding day. Five undercover cops fired nearly 50 rounds which also wounded the groom's two companions. I will not defend bad policing. However, I always try to look at questionable cases from the officer's perspective. As such, I defended the actions of the Los Angeles officers in the Rodney King case, a position for which I was roundly criticized. ("Presumption of Officer Guilt: The Administration of Justice is Race Driven," TEXAS POLICE JOURNAL, July, 1996)
I have also defended the actions of several officers in cases where they shot someone to death with multiple rounds, even when some of those rounds struck that person in the back. Officers in fear of their lives instinctively fire multiple rounds because subconsciously they lack confidence in the accuracy of their shooting ability. No amount of training can immunize an officer from going into a panic mode the moment he thinks he is facing death. An instinctive shooting frenzy will usually be set off once one officer opens fire when several officers are present during a perilous situation.
The five New York undercover cops were conducting an investigation in a strip club when, according to the officers, they overheard the groom and his two buddies talking about going to his car to get a gun. Outside the club, the groom's car ran into one of the undercover police cars. When the five cops approached his car, one of the officers warned the others that someone was reaching for a gun. They all opened fire, killing the groom and wounding his buddies. No gun was found. Of the three indicted officers, one fired four shots, another fired 11, and the third fired 31.
Because the three strip clubbers were black, there was an immediate outcry in the black community about racist cops being quick to kill young blacks. This shooting reminded blacks of the 1999 shooting of an unarmed African immigrant who was shot 41 times. The current outrage was fueled by none other than the Reverend Al Sharpton, that charleton who was one of the three sleazy race-baiting provocateurs in the Tawana Brawley hoax. Never mind that two of the five officers were black. And now, Sharpton is complaining about the other two officers not being indicted.
I do find it impossible to defend the officer who fired 31 rounds. Unless he was firing two guns simultaneously, he would have had to eject one clip and insert another during the fusilage. By the time he reloaded, all the shooting would have been over because none of the other four officers fired more than 11 shots. It will take a psychiatrist to figure out what possessed him to fire all those rounds.
Just as with the Los Angeles officers in the Rodney King case, the indictments of the three New York cops appear designed to placate the black community. Would there have been any indictments had the groom and his two companions been white? I doubt it - absent malicious intent, the shootings probably would have been put to rest as an unfortunate tragedy, which is exactly what this shooting was.
By the way, where is the community outrage whenever cops are shot? Recently, within a short time span, two unarmed New York auxiliary cops were shot to death and two regular officers were wounded. Where was charleton Sharpton when these officers were shot?
Friday, March 16, 2007
ROOM AND BOARD FOR FALSE IMPRISONMENT
Now, I've heard it all. On the evening of March 14, I was watching the COUNTDOWN WITH KEITH OLBERMAN television program on MSNBC. Near the end of that program, Olberman designated the Law Lords of Birmingham, England as "the worst persons in the world." He described the Law Lords as being "a kind of super-appeals court." Why did he believe they were the worst persons in the world?
Olberman reported that "brothers Michael and Vincent Hickey spent 18 years in jail for a murder they did not commit. When their convictions were overturned, each was awarded huge settlements, more than a million dollars each. But now the Law Lords have sent the Hickey brothers a bill. Vincent owes $244,000. Michael owes $478,000. Why? Room and board during their 18 years of false imprisonment."
I have to agree with Olberman's worst persons designation. I can't believe that the Law Lords had the chutzpah to charge those poor bastards room and board for the 18 years they spent in prison for a crime they did not commit. To those of you who think that a million bucks each is too much to pay for all those years in prison, I would ask - as a productive member of society, how much is 18 years of your own life worth?
I have always been, and continue to be a strong law and order advocate. But, I also have a strong sense of justice. Whenever society, whether English or American, falsely imprisons a person over a prolonged period of time, it should be expected to pay for this miscarriage of justice by adequately compensating that individual for the loss of his freedom and the loss of wages he might have earned had he not been incarcerated. And, he should certainly not be charged room and board for his time in prison!
Olberman reported that "brothers Michael and Vincent Hickey spent 18 years in jail for a murder they did not commit. When their convictions were overturned, each was awarded huge settlements, more than a million dollars each. But now the Law Lords have sent the Hickey brothers a bill. Vincent owes $244,000. Michael owes $478,000. Why? Room and board during their 18 years of false imprisonment."
I have to agree with Olberman's worst persons designation. I can't believe that the Law Lords had the chutzpah to charge those poor bastards room and board for the 18 years they spent in prison for a crime they did not commit. To those of you who think that a million bucks each is too much to pay for all those years in prison, I would ask - as a productive member of society, how much is 18 years of your own life worth?
I have always been, and continue to be a strong law and order advocate. But, I also have a strong sense of justice. Whenever society, whether English or American, falsely imprisons a person over a prolonged period of time, it should be expected to pay for this miscarriage of justice by adequately compensating that individual for the loss of his freedom and the loss of wages he might have earned had he not been incarcerated. And, he should certainly not be charged room and board for his time in prison!
Wednesday, March 14, 2007
AEROSPACERS GONE WILD 2
PREVIOUSLY ON AEROSPACERS GONE WILD: Lisa Nowak's rendezvous with Colleen Shipman in the parking lot of the Orlando airport did not go well for Lisa. She was arrested and charged at first with attempted kidnapping, and then with attempted murder. Released on bail, she was suspended by NASA for 30 days upon her return to Houston. William "Billy-O" Oefelein flew to Florida to comfort a shook-up Shipman between them sheets on her bed.
CURRENT EPISODE: Lisa stays in seclusion. Billy-O returns to NASA following his tryst with Colleen. The Florida prosecutor refuses to accept the police charge of attempted murder, chosing instead to have Lisa indicted for attempted kidnapping, among other charges. She faces the possibility of a 25 year term in prison. NASA requests that Lisa be reassigned by the Navy, thus effectively firing her as an astronaut. At the end of the 30 day suspension, the Navy transfers Lisa to the Corpus Christi Naval Air Station and assigns her to a position in the flight training program.
A Florida court released documents from the investigation into this case. Billy-O, when questioned by the police, first balked at admitting that Lisa had been his girlfriend. "Well I --- yeah, I don't, it's hard to consider her a girlfriend, she was an ex, um, I --- I wouldn't --- she was an ex-interest, I guess." After trying to hem and haw his way around the question, Billy-O finally admitted that he started shacking up with Lisa in 2004, a year before his divorce.
At the time of her arrest, Lisa was carrying some e-mails which she had retrieved from Billy O's computer. One related to a charm Colleen had given Billy-O. During his 13 day mission as the pilot of the space shuttle Discovery, he e-mailed her a picture of the charm floating in the shuttle. Unable to see it, Colleen responded, "I don't see the charm though! pant, pant, it's like those erotic hidden picture games that they have at the bar . . . only you're fully clothed in the picture."
Before he returned from the flight, another of Colleen's e-mails provided Billy-O with some LUST IN SPACE. "Will have to control myself when I see you. First urge will be to rip your clothes off, throw you on the ground and love (screw) the hell out of you."
COMING EPISODES: Will her attorney try to keep Lisa out of prison by claiming that she was merely trying to stop Colleen from throwing Billy-O on the ground, thereby preventing a possible injury to the poor fellow? Will Billy-O remain with NASA? Will the Navy courtmartial Lisa and Billy-O for adultery?
What if Colleen becomes pregnant? Will fellow Floridian O. J. Simpson, the legally innocent but morally guilty murderer of Nicole Simpson and Ron Goldman, come forth and claim that he may be the father of Colleen's unborn child? Far fetched? Not really. After all, O.J. now claims he may be the father of Anna Nicole Smith's infant daughter. Soap lovers, stay tuned to AEROSPACERS GONE WILD.
CURRENT EPISODE: Lisa stays in seclusion. Billy-O returns to NASA following his tryst with Colleen. The Florida prosecutor refuses to accept the police charge of attempted murder, chosing instead to have Lisa indicted for attempted kidnapping, among other charges. She faces the possibility of a 25 year term in prison. NASA requests that Lisa be reassigned by the Navy, thus effectively firing her as an astronaut. At the end of the 30 day suspension, the Navy transfers Lisa to the Corpus Christi Naval Air Station and assigns her to a position in the flight training program.
A Florida court released documents from the investigation into this case. Billy-O, when questioned by the police, first balked at admitting that Lisa had been his girlfriend. "Well I --- yeah, I don't, it's hard to consider her a girlfriend, she was an ex, um, I --- I wouldn't --- she was an ex-interest, I guess." After trying to hem and haw his way around the question, Billy-O finally admitted that he started shacking up with Lisa in 2004, a year before his divorce.
At the time of her arrest, Lisa was carrying some e-mails which she had retrieved from Billy O's computer. One related to a charm Colleen had given Billy-O. During his 13 day mission as the pilot of the space shuttle Discovery, he e-mailed her a picture of the charm floating in the shuttle. Unable to see it, Colleen responded, "I don't see the charm though! pant, pant, it's like those erotic hidden picture games that they have at the bar . . . only you're fully clothed in the picture."
Before he returned from the flight, another of Colleen's e-mails provided Billy-O with some LUST IN SPACE. "Will have to control myself when I see you. First urge will be to rip your clothes off, throw you on the ground and love (screw) the hell out of you."
COMING EPISODES: Will her attorney try to keep Lisa out of prison by claiming that she was merely trying to stop Colleen from throwing Billy-O on the ground, thereby preventing a possible injury to the poor fellow? Will Billy-O remain with NASA? Will the Navy courtmartial Lisa and Billy-O for adultery?
What if Colleen becomes pregnant? Will fellow Floridian O. J. Simpson, the legally innocent but morally guilty murderer of Nicole Simpson and Ron Goldman, come forth and claim that he may be the father of Colleen's unborn child? Far fetched? Not really. After all, O.J. now claims he may be the father of Anna Nicole Smith's infant daughter. Soap lovers, stay tuned to AEROSPACERS GONE WILD.
Monday, March 12, 2007
MUG THE MUGGER
As many of you know by now, a New York mugger punched out a 101 year old lady in the foyer of her appartment building, breaking her cheek bone in the process. He followed that up by punching out an 85 year old lady outside her apartment building. Each robbery netted him less than 40 dollars. MSNBC's Tucker Carlson labeled this thug "the leading candidate for a public flogging."
During the latter half of my 25 years as a criminal justice professor, I concentrated on teaching HUMAN RELATIONS IN THE ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE. I always advocated the principles of good police work which requires officers, among other things, to refrain from using excessive force druing an arrest, regardless of any provocation on the part of the arrestee.
Years ago, I attended a law enforcement conference in San Francisco. The keynote speaker was a federal official with the Law Enforcement Assistance Administration in Washington, D.C. who was formerly a California peace officer. The speaker happened to be black. He started his presentation with the obligatory joke. "In the good old days, 10, 15 years ago, the police were not prejudiced. We just kicked the shit out of everyone."
When I was a cop, did I participate in some ass-kicking arrests? I'm not going to lie about it - sure I did. Did the arrestees deserve to get the shit kicked out of them? You bet they did. Which brings me to the asshole who mugged the two (probably many more) elderly ladies. When he gets caught, his lawyer will plead that this punk was the product of a teenage school dropout's unwanted pregnancy, deprived of a loving family relationship, beaten by several of his alcoholic mother's live-in boyfriends, addicted to drugs, and on top of everything else, a victim of racism.
Well, I'm sorry, but the principles of good police work be damned. In this case the mugger should be mugged. I hope some good old New Yorkers catch this asshole before the police do. Civilians will kick the supreme shit out of him and that is what he most certainly deserves. But, if cops catch this punk first, I hope he is stupid enough to resist arrest.
During the latter half of my 25 years as a criminal justice professor, I concentrated on teaching HUMAN RELATIONS IN THE ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE. I always advocated the principles of good police work which requires officers, among other things, to refrain from using excessive force druing an arrest, regardless of any provocation on the part of the arrestee.
Years ago, I attended a law enforcement conference in San Francisco. The keynote speaker was a federal official with the Law Enforcement Assistance Administration in Washington, D.C. who was formerly a California peace officer. The speaker happened to be black. He started his presentation with the obligatory joke. "In the good old days, 10, 15 years ago, the police were not prejudiced. We just kicked the shit out of everyone."
When I was a cop, did I participate in some ass-kicking arrests? I'm not going to lie about it - sure I did. Did the arrestees deserve to get the shit kicked out of them? You bet they did. Which brings me to the asshole who mugged the two (probably many more) elderly ladies. When he gets caught, his lawyer will plead that this punk was the product of a teenage school dropout's unwanted pregnancy, deprived of a loving family relationship, beaten by several of his alcoholic mother's live-in boyfriends, addicted to drugs, and on top of everything else, a victim of racism.
Well, I'm sorry, but the principles of good police work be damned. In this case the mugger should be mugged. I hope some good old New Yorkers catch this asshole before the police do. Civilians will kick the supreme shit out of him and that is what he most certainly deserves. But, if cops catch this punk first, I hope he is stupid enough to resist arrest.
Saturday, March 10, 2007
SHORT TAKES UPDATES
ANNA NICOLE SMITH. The decomposing corpse of Anna Nicole was finally laid to rest next to her son's grave in the Bahamas. The funeral was held up at the last minute when her mother petitioned a Bahamian court to stop the proceedings so she could take possession of the body and have it moved to Texas for burial. The court turned down her request and the funeral went on after an hour's delay.
When Anna Nicole's mother arrived at the chapel, she was roundly booed by spectators lining the street. Howard Stern, her lover, blasted the mother during his eulogy. At the burial site, Anna Nicole's mother could be seen feverishly dumping shovel load after shovel load of dirt on the grave. Finally, instead of walking around it, she stomped across the grave on her way out of the cemetary.
Anna Nicole's mother vowed to continue her fight to have both the body of her daughter and that of her grandson moved to Texas. She is represented by John O'Quinn, a prominent Houston tort lawyer. Meanwhile. none other than O. J. Simpson joined the list of those claiming to be the likely father of Anna Nicole's infant daughter. Yes, that's O.J., the legally innocent but morally guilty murderer of Nicole Simpson and Ron Goldman.
PRES. FELIPE CALDERON. After mobilizing 20,000 army troops in the war against that country's drug lords, the president of Mexico took additional steps to strengthen that effort. He is seeking approval by Mexico's congress to merge the four federal police agencies - the Federal Preventive Police, the Federal Investigative Agency, the Immigration Police, and the Customs Police - into a unified federal law enforcement orgaqnization.
Calderon wants to provide that agency with the latest technology in the fight against crime. And, he is trying to root out endemic government drug corruption by calling on all Mexcian citizens to report any knowledge they may have of such corruption among the police, prosecutors, the courts, and other government agencies.
JOSEPH NICHOLS. Nichols' prolonged fight to avoid excution has finally come to an end. Nichols, who complained that Texas was trying to kill him when he had already served a life sentence (over 25 years of numerous appeals) for the same crime, was put to death this past Wednesday.
Nichols did not go quietly. When asked if he had any last words, Nichols said he did and then spewed forth a tirade of expletives against his executioners and against the State of Texas for putting him to death. There is an upside for Nichols though - he is no longer serving that life senteence.
When Anna Nicole's mother arrived at the chapel, she was roundly booed by spectators lining the street. Howard Stern, her lover, blasted the mother during his eulogy. At the burial site, Anna Nicole's mother could be seen feverishly dumping shovel load after shovel load of dirt on the grave. Finally, instead of walking around it, she stomped across the grave on her way out of the cemetary.
Anna Nicole's mother vowed to continue her fight to have both the body of her daughter and that of her grandson moved to Texas. She is represented by John O'Quinn, a prominent Houston tort lawyer. Meanwhile. none other than O. J. Simpson joined the list of those claiming to be the likely father of Anna Nicole's infant daughter. Yes, that's O.J., the legally innocent but morally guilty murderer of Nicole Simpson and Ron Goldman.
PRES. FELIPE CALDERON. After mobilizing 20,000 army troops in the war against that country's drug lords, the president of Mexico took additional steps to strengthen that effort. He is seeking approval by Mexico's congress to merge the four federal police agencies - the Federal Preventive Police, the Federal Investigative Agency, the Immigration Police, and the Customs Police - into a unified federal law enforcement orgaqnization.
Calderon wants to provide that agency with the latest technology in the fight against crime. And, he is trying to root out endemic government drug corruption by calling on all Mexcian citizens to report any knowledge they may have of such corruption among the police, prosecutors, the courts, and other government agencies.
JOSEPH NICHOLS. Nichols' prolonged fight to avoid excution has finally come to an end. Nichols, who complained that Texas was trying to kill him when he had already served a life sentence (over 25 years of numerous appeals) for the same crime, was put to death this past Wednesday.
Nichols did not go quietly. When asked if he had any last words, Nichols said he did and then spewed forth a tirade of expletives against his executioners and against the State of Texas for putting him to death. There is an upside for Nichols though - he is no longer serving that life senteence.
Friday, March 09, 2007
RUSH LIMBAUGH IS A TEXAS BLIVOT
Ego gone wild. I could hardly believe my ears this mornoing as I was listening to that Texas blivot, Roach Limburger - oops, I mean Rush Limbaugh - on my car radio. Good old Roach was offended by one of his good old dittoheads who called in to complain that Limburger had not done enough for conservatives. Roach responded by tooting his own horn for damn near 10 minutes.
Roach claimed over and over again that he had been personally responsible for the election of a Republican Congress and the election of Presidents Bush I and Bush II.. He said, "I spawned the Republican revolution, I spawned the Republican House of Representatives, I spawned the Republican Senate, I spawned the election of two Repbublican Presidents," and he repeated his "I spawned" statements multiple times during his response to a seemingly dissapointed dittohead.
It takes a hell of a lot of nerve and an inflated super ego on Roach's part to make such far fetched outlandish claims. Now, I'm sure you've been asking yourself, what in the world is a Texas blivot? A TEXAS BLIVOT IS 10 POUNDS OF SHIT IN A TWO POUND BAG.
Roach claimed over and over again that he had been personally responsible for the election of a Republican Congress and the election of Presidents Bush I and Bush II.. He said, "I spawned the Republican revolution, I spawned the Republican House of Representatives, I spawned the Republican Senate, I spawned the election of two Repbublican Presidents," and he repeated his "I spawned" statements multiple times during his response to a seemingly dissapointed dittohead.
It takes a hell of a lot of nerve and an inflated super ego on Roach's part to make such far fetched outlandish claims. Now, I'm sure you've been asking yourself, what in the world is a Texas blivot? A TEXAS BLIVOT IS 10 POUNDS OF SHIT IN A TWO POUND BAG.
Monday, March 05, 2007
JOURNALISTIC CROWN JEWELS
Every once in a while you will learn that some journalists are the crown jewels of their profession. Three such jewels are Dana Priest and Anne Hull of the Washington Post and Bob Woodruff of ABC News. These journalists uncovered the deplorable conditions under which our wounded soldiers from Iraq and Afghanistan are treated in the Walter Reed Army Medical Center's outpatient facilities and the deplorable treatment given Iraq and Afghanistan war veterans by the Veterans Administration.
Dana Priest and Anne Hull conducted an intensive investigation of the outpatient facilities at Walter Reed after getting a complaint from a soldier wounded in Iraq. What they found is appalling. The building used to house outpatients was found to be infested with rats and roaches. The walls were covered with black mold. There were holes in the ceiling and walls. The place was found to be in a terrible state of disrepair. For inpatients, once the outstanding initial treaatment phase has been completed, the quality of care given the wounded at Walter Reed and other military hospitals starts going down the tubes. There is a reluctance to recommend discharge from the service and there is a lot of foot dragging in determining disability rates.
To their credit, the two Washington Post staff writers did not immediately go to the Defense Department with their findings. Had they done so, the army likely would have covered up the deplorable conditions or, at best, would only have disciplined some low level hospital staff persons. Instead, Priest and Hull published their findings in the Post before contacting any officials, much to the chagrin of the Bush administration and of the Defense Department.
After their story was published, repairs to the outpatient facilities were started and the Secretary of the Army fired Walter Reed's commanding general. Then Robert Gates, the Secretary of Defense, forced the Secretary of the Army to resign. Now, President Bush is calling for a commission to look into the treatment of our wounded veterans and Congress will hold hearings on the same matter.
Bob Woodruff, who was critically wounded by a roadside bomb in Iraq, has uncovered a mountain of ineptness with the Veterans Adminsistration medical programs which is robbing military veterans of the proper medical care they should be receiving. Woodruff, who is quick to point out that he owes his life and remarkable recovery from a traumatic brain injury and other wounds to the excellent care he received at our military hospitals in Iraq, Germany, and in this country, found such care lacking for wounded veterans once they had been discharged from the service.
Woodruff found that the Veterans Administration was totally unprepared for, and overwhelmed by the number of troops wounded in Iraq and Afghanistan. Wounded veterans were subjected to bureaucratic red tape, making it hard for them to receive proper medical treatment. Those seeking treatment are required to fill out a pile of paperwork and to provide proof they were wounded - one brought his Purple Heart. There were instances of totally blind patients being placed in front of eye charts during their medical examinations. Veterans were sent to military base clinics for specific medical problems only to find that these clinics did not have the capability to treat those problems.
Is the Bush tax cut, which really benefits only the top one percent among taxpayers, responsible for the shoddy practices of the Veterans Administration? If so, should that tax cut be rescinded and some of the added tax revenue used to beef up the Veterans Administration? Hopefully, the investigations resulting from Woodruff's work will ensure that the wounded troops, who have been discharged from the service, will receive the medical treatment they deserve.
Priest, Hull and Woodruff are truly the crown jewels of their profession. Our veterans have been well served by these three journalists. The Washington Post can be very proud of Priest and Hull. Likewise, ABC can be very proud of Woodruff's work, following a long recovery from the wounds he suffered. Our nation should also be very proud to have these three journalists in our midst. We are all the beneficiaries of their diligent work.
Dana Priest and Anne Hull conducted an intensive investigation of the outpatient facilities at Walter Reed after getting a complaint from a soldier wounded in Iraq. What they found is appalling. The building used to house outpatients was found to be infested with rats and roaches. The walls were covered with black mold. There were holes in the ceiling and walls. The place was found to be in a terrible state of disrepair. For inpatients, once the outstanding initial treaatment phase has been completed, the quality of care given the wounded at Walter Reed and other military hospitals starts going down the tubes. There is a reluctance to recommend discharge from the service and there is a lot of foot dragging in determining disability rates.
To their credit, the two Washington Post staff writers did not immediately go to the Defense Department with their findings. Had they done so, the army likely would have covered up the deplorable conditions or, at best, would only have disciplined some low level hospital staff persons. Instead, Priest and Hull published their findings in the Post before contacting any officials, much to the chagrin of the Bush administration and of the Defense Department.
After their story was published, repairs to the outpatient facilities were started and the Secretary of the Army fired Walter Reed's commanding general. Then Robert Gates, the Secretary of Defense, forced the Secretary of the Army to resign. Now, President Bush is calling for a commission to look into the treatment of our wounded veterans and Congress will hold hearings on the same matter.
Bob Woodruff, who was critically wounded by a roadside bomb in Iraq, has uncovered a mountain of ineptness with the Veterans Adminsistration medical programs which is robbing military veterans of the proper medical care they should be receiving. Woodruff, who is quick to point out that he owes his life and remarkable recovery from a traumatic brain injury and other wounds to the excellent care he received at our military hospitals in Iraq, Germany, and in this country, found such care lacking for wounded veterans once they had been discharged from the service.
Woodruff found that the Veterans Administration was totally unprepared for, and overwhelmed by the number of troops wounded in Iraq and Afghanistan. Wounded veterans were subjected to bureaucratic red tape, making it hard for them to receive proper medical treatment. Those seeking treatment are required to fill out a pile of paperwork and to provide proof they were wounded - one brought his Purple Heart. There were instances of totally blind patients being placed in front of eye charts during their medical examinations. Veterans were sent to military base clinics for specific medical problems only to find that these clinics did not have the capability to treat those problems.
Is the Bush tax cut, which really benefits only the top one percent among taxpayers, responsible for the shoddy practices of the Veterans Administration? If so, should that tax cut be rescinded and some of the added tax revenue used to beef up the Veterans Administration? Hopefully, the investigations resulting from Woodruff's work will ensure that the wounded troops, who have been discharged from the service, will receive the medical treatment they deserve.
Priest, Hull and Woodruff are truly the crown jewels of their profession. Our veterans have been well served by these three journalists. The Washington Post can be very proud of Priest and Hull. Likewise, ABC can be very proud of Woodruff's work, following a long recovery from the wounds he suffered. Our nation should also be very proud to have these three journalists in our midst. We are all the beneficiaries of their diligent work.
Monday, February 26, 2007
SHORT TAKES ON PERSONALITIES IN THE NEWS
ANNA NICOLE SMITH. Anna Nicole, who died Feb. 8, will not be buried before tomorrow, if then. Her mother is appealing Judge Larry's decision awarding the body to the court appointed guardian of Smith's five month old daughter. Meanwhile, Anna Nicole's corpse continues to decompose.
Why is Anna Nicole's corpse decomposing while the body of soul singer James Brown, who died two months ago, is not decomposing? Brown's body, like Anna Nicole's, has been fought over in legal proceedings, thus preventing his burial. Post mortem experts believe that Brown's body is still in good shape because it was embalmed within a few hours of his death, while Anna Nicole's corpse remained refrigerated for more than a week before it was embalmed.
PRES. FELIPE CALDERON. The new president of Mexico got it right when he recently ordered 20,000 soldiers from the Mexican army to take over the fight against the narco trade in that country. Mexico's local, state and federal police have been corrupt through and through, and some drug corruption has reached into the highest levels of the federal government. Calderon raised the pay of the soldiers engaged in this fight from $319 a month to $474, retroactive to Jan. 1.
How effective will this move be and how long will the army continue to be used in the war against drugs? That remains to be seen. So far, no high level traffickers have been arrested. In Columbia, the combined use of the military and the federal police has resulted in breaking up that country's leading drug cartels. Unfortunately however, others were quick to move into the lucrative narco trade and Columbia continues to be the leading source of the cocaine found in the United States.
GOV. ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER. Yesterday, the Republican governor of California was interviewed by Bob Schieffer on CBS' Face the Nation. That interview is more proof of why Article II, Section 1 of the United States Constitution should be ammended so that foreign born citizens will be able to serve as president of our country. Schieffer's interview convinced me that Schwarzenegger is the most outstanding elected official in America.
The governor advocated that candidates elected to public office adopt a centrism position. He stated that public office holders were elected to represent all the people, not just those of their own political party or any wing of a party. He believes that it is the duty of the president, the governors, congressional leaders and other office holders to bring the opposing political parties together so that both can work for the good of all the people, rather than only for their own interests.
Schwarzenegger admitted that he was wrong when, early in his term, he battled the majority Democrats in the California legislature. Failing to get his proposed measures passed, he tried to bypass the legislature by placing the measures before the public in an initiative referendum. With the strong opposition of the nurses and teachers unions, the measures were soundly defeated and his approval rating dropped to 30 percent.
The governor told Schieffer that he learned from his mistakes and started to work together with both the Democrats and the Republicans. Because he strived to bring both parties together, the legislature passed some notable measures for health care, environmental protection, and other laws of benefit to all Californians. Last November, he soundly defeated his Democratic opponent while Republicans in other states were run out of office.
THE DIXIE CHICKS. During the recent Grammy Awards, the Dixie Chicks won five Grammies. Celebrity award groups tend to be of the liberal persuasion and the politically correct crowd gleefully claimed that the awards vindicated the trio for their public criticism of President Bush and the war in Iraq. The Chicks' defenders and supporters just don't get it.
Some people would have been pissed off had the Dixie Chicks made their Bush-bashing and anti-war statements on any street corner in the United States. That is their right. But the shit storm over their remarks arose from the fact that they were made in England and not in this country. The politically correct crowd be damned, but Americans have absolutely no business criticizing our country or its officials while they are overseas!
JOSEPH NICHOLS. Who in the hell is Joseph Nichols? He is a Texas death row inmate who was convicted for the 1980 murder of a clerk during a convenience store robbery. He has lingered on death row due to the many appeals filed on his behalf. He is scheduled to be executed next month if a last minute appeal does not succeed. An angry 45 year old Nichols complained about his fate during a recent interview with a newspaper reporter.
Nichols told the reporter that he was angry at being "punished twice" for the same crime. "I've already served a life sentence. Now they want to kill me. They want to punish me two times. If they were going to kill me, they should have done it a long time ago."
Say what? That's some chutzpah for Nichols to cry foul. So, why has he been serving the equivalent of a life sentence on death row? The only reason Nichols has been sitting on death row over 25 years is because he agreed to let his attorneys file numerous appeals on his behalf. Claiming that he should not be executed because he has already served a life sentence is akin to a youth throwing himself on the mercy of the court because, by murdering his parents, the poor lad had been orphaned by the tragic sudden deaths of his mother and father.
Why is Anna Nicole's corpse decomposing while the body of soul singer James Brown, who died two months ago, is not decomposing? Brown's body, like Anna Nicole's, has been fought over in legal proceedings, thus preventing his burial. Post mortem experts believe that Brown's body is still in good shape because it was embalmed within a few hours of his death, while Anna Nicole's corpse remained refrigerated for more than a week before it was embalmed.
PRES. FELIPE CALDERON. The new president of Mexico got it right when he recently ordered 20,000 soldiers from the Mexican army to take over the fight against the narco trade in that country. Mexico's local, state and federal police have been corrupt through and through, and some drug corruption has reached into the highest levels of the federal government. Calderon raised the pay of the soldiers engaged in this fight from $319 a month to $474, retroactive to Jan. 1.
How effective will this move be and how long will the army continue to be used in the war against drugs? That remains to be seen. So far, no high level traffickers have been arrested. In Columbia, the combined use of the military and the federal police has resulted in breaking up that country's leading drug cartels. Unfortunately however, others were quick to move into the lucrative narco trade and Columbia continues to be the leading source of the cocaine found in the United States.
GOV. ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER. Yesterday, the Republican governor of California was interviewed by Bob Schieffer on CBS' Face the Nation. That interview is more proof of why Article II, Section 1 of the United States Constitution should be ammended so that foreign born citizens will be able to serve as president of our country. Schieffer's interview convinced me that Schwarzenegger is the most outstanding elected official in America.
The governor advocated that candidates elected to public office adopt a centrism position. He stated that public office holders were elected to represent all the people, not just those of their own political party or any wing of a party. He believes that it is the duty of the president, the governors, congressional leaders and other office holders to bring the opposing political parties together so that both can work for the good of all the people, rather than only for their own interests.
Schwarzenegger admitted that he was wrong when, early in his term, he battled the majority Democrats in the California legislature. Failing to get his proposed measures passed, he tried to bypass the legislature by placing the measures before the public in an initiative referendum. With the strong opposition of the nurses and teachers unions, the measures were soundly defeated and his approval rating dropped to 30 percent.
The governor told Schieffer that he learned from his mistakes and started to work together with both the Democrats and the Republicans. Because he strived to bring both parties together, the legislature passed some notable measures for health care, environmental protection, and other laws of benefit to all Californians. Last November, he soundly defeated his Democratic opponent while Republicans in other states were run out of office.
THE DIXIE CHICKS. During the recent Grammy Awards, the Dixie Chicks won five Grammies. Celebrity award groups tend to be of the liberal persuasion and the politically correct crowd gleefully claimed that the awards vindicated the trio for their public criticism of President Bush and the war in Iraq. The Chicks' defenders and supporters just don't get it.
Some people would have been pissed off had the Dixie Chicks made their Bush-bashing and anti-war statements on any street corner in the United States. That is their right. But the shit storm over their remarks arose from the fact that they were made in England and not in this country. The politically correct crowd be damned, but Americans have absolutely no business criticizing our country or its officials while they are overseas!
JOSEPH NICHOLS. Who in the hell is Joseph Nichols? He is a Texas death row inmate who was convicted for the 1980 murder of a clerk during a convenience store robbery. He has lingered on death row due to the many appeals filed on his behalf. He is scheduled to be executed next month if a last minute appeal does not succeed. An angry 45 year old Nichols complained about his fate during a recent interview with a newspaper reporter.
Nichols told the reporter that he was angry at being "punished twice" for the same crime. "I've already served a life sentence. Now they want to kill me. They want to punish me two times. If they were going to kill me, they should have done it a long time ago."
Say what? That's some chutzpah for Nichols to cry foul. So, why has he been serving the equivalent of a life sentence on death row? The only reason Nichols has been sitting on death row over 25 years is because he agreed to let his attorneys file numerous appeals on his behalf. Claiming that he should not be executed because he has already served a life sentence is akin to a youth throwing himself on the mercy of the court because, by murdering his parents, the poor lad had been orphaned by the tragic sudden deaths of his mother and father.
Saturday, February 24, 2007
JUDGE LARRY "SON OF ITO" SEIDLIN
Last week, television viewers were treated to a courtroom spectacle that has been derided as a three ring circus presided over by, as MSNBC's Tucker Carlson described him, "the most infamous judge in America." The judge, Larry Seidlin, held a hearing with the sole purpose of determining who would get custody of the decomposing corpse of Anna Nicole Smith who died on Feb. 8. The proceedings, which should have been concluded within half a day, dragged on for six days until its surprise ending on Feb. 22.
Seidlin is a probate judge in Broward County, Florida. He is a former Bronx cab driver who obtained his law degree by attending night school. He has been on the bench for almost 30 yeqrs and is nearing retirement, Those critical of the Anna Nicole hearing accuse him of using the televised proceedings to audition for the next Judge Judy show. Carlson called him a "self promoter" and described his conduct of the hearing as an "outrageous performance." A member of the Florida bar has initiated proceedings to bring Judge Larry up before the State's Judicial Qualifications Committee.
Some have suggested Seidlin may be mentally unstable. Indeed, Judge Larry displayed some bipolar tendencies in that he alternated joking and laughing with spells of sadness and crying. As the proceedings dragged on, his pontifications became more frequent. He asked more questions of the witnesses than did all the attorneys representing the three parties involved in the fight for the remains of Anna Nicole. On occasion, when a witness hesitated answering a question, Judge Larry would even answer it for him.
Judge Larry, playing up to the television cameras, clearly lost control of the hearing, and at times lacked self control. Shades of Judge Lance Ito. You may recall that, in 1995, Ito presided over the Los Angeles Superior Court murder trial of O. J. Simpson. The trial lasted over eight months, but it only took the mostly black jury less than four hours to acquit the former football star. Over the months, it became clear that, like Judge Seidlin, Ito was playing up to the television cameras. Ito helped turn the Simpson trial into a media circus.
In my opinion, Judge Ito, more than anyone else, was responsible for Simpson's acquittal. Inadvertently aided by Marcia Clark and Christopher Darden, the inept prosecutors, Ito allowed the defense to play the race card. A since disbarred F. Lee Bailey was allowed to ask Mark Fuhrman, a very experienced L.A. homicide detective, if he had ever used the word "nigger" in the past ten years. That question, and Darden's mistake in getting Simpson to try on the infamous glove, nullified the overwhelming evidence against Simpson in the minds of the black jurors.
Seidlin out-buffooned Ito. The hearing came to an abrupt end when instead of deciding in favor of one of the two claimants, Anna Nicole's mother or her bottom feeding lawyer-lover, a tearful Judge Larry released the decomposing corpse to the court appointed guardian of Anna Nicole's five month old daughter. His decision that the infant daughter was the next of kin with the right to take possession of her mother's body could have been rendered within a couple of hours after the start of the hearing. He took the hearing into Anna Nicole's drug use and into who the birth father of her new daughter might be, neither issue having any relevance whatsoever to the issue of who should get the body. As a result, the proceedings dragged on and on for six days at great expense to Florida taxpayers.
By his bipolar-like grandstanding, Seidlin allowed the hearing to become a theater of the absurd. Very few Americans have ever attended a court trial. Their impressions of court proceedings are formed by television dramas or by televised court proceedings involving celebrities like Simpson and Anna Nicole. The Anna Nicole hearing has garnered world-wide attention. Seidlin's buffoonery has done serious harm to the image and reputation of the American judicial system.
Seidlin is a probate judge in Broward County, Florida. He is a former Bronx cab driver who obtained his law degree by attending night school. He has been on the bench for almost 30 yeqrs and is nearing retirement, Those critical of the Anna Nicole hearing accuse him of using the televised proceedings to audition for the next Judge Judy show. Carlson called him a "self promoter" and described his conduct of the hearing as an "outrageous performance." A member of the Florida bar has initiated proceedings to bring Judge Larry up before the State's Judicial Qualifications Committee.
Some have suggested Seidlin may be mentally unstable. Indeed, Judge Larry displayed some bipolar tendencies in that he alternated joking and laughing with spells of sadness and crying. As the proceedings dragged on, his pontifications became more frequent. He asked more questions of the witnesses than did all the attorneys representing the three parties involved in the fight for the remains of Anna Nicole. On occasion, when a witness hesitated answering a question, Judge Larry would even answer it for him.
Judge Larry, playing up to the television cameras, clearly lost control of the hearing, and at times lacked self control. Shades of Judge Lance Ito. You may recall that, in 1995, Ito presided over the Los Angeles Superior Court murder trial of O. J. Simpson. The trial lasted over eight months, but it only took the mostly black jury less than four hours to acquit the former football star. Over the months, it became clear that, like Judge Seidlin, Ito was playing up to the television cameras. Ito helped turn the Simpson trial into a media circus.
In my opinion, Judge Ito, more than anyone else, was responsible for Simpson's acquittal. Inadvertently aided by Marcia Clark and Christopher Darden, the inept prosecutors, Ito allowed the defense to play the race card. A since disbarred F. Lee Bailey was allowed to ask Mark Fuhrman, a very experienced L.A. homicide detective, if he had ever used the word "nigger" in the past ten years. That question, and Darden's mistake in getting Simpson to try on the infamous glove, nullified the overwhelming evidence against Simpson in the minds of the black jurors.
Seidlin out-buffooned Ito. The hearing came to an abrupt end when instead of deciding in favor of one of the two claimants, Anna Nicole's mother or her bottom feeding lawyer-lover, a tearful Judge Larry released the decomposing corpse to the court appointed guardian of Anna Nicole's five month old daughter. His decision that the infant daughter was the next of kin with the right to take possession of her mother's body could have been rendered within a couple of hours after the start of the hearing. He took the hearing into Anna Nicole's drug use and into who the birth father of her new daughter might be, neither issue having any relevance whatsoever to the issue of who should get the body. As a result, the proceedings dragged on and on for six days at great expense to Florida taxpayers.
By his bipolar-like grandstanding, Seidlin allowed the hearing to become a theater of the absurd. Very few Americans have ever attended a court trial. Their impressions of court proceedings are formed by television dramas or by televised court proceedings involving celebrities like Simpson and Anna Nicole. The Anna Nicole hearing has garnered world-wide attention. Seidlin's buffoonery has done serious harm to the image and reputation of the American judicial system.
Friday, February 16, 2007
IDIOT COPS AND/OR LOONY LAW UNFORCEMENT
By now, I am sure many of you have seen the video clip where an angry father rushed in and threw his son's eleven year old wrestling opponent out of the ring. To me, what is remarkable about this incident is the police response to it.
On the evening of February 13, a Greco-Roman wrestling match was taking place in an Aurora (Illinois) gym. There were several matches going on at the same time. In one of those, Nick Nasenberry, 11, pinned his opponent to the floor. Suddenly the father of the other boy rushed in and threw Nick some six feet through the air. Then he rushed at Dan Nasenberry, Nick's father, who was video taping the incident. The assailant was restrained by security personnel before he could reach Nick's father.
Ray Hoffman, the eleven year old's assailant, later told a television reporter that he regrets his behavior and feels embarrassed. Hoffman happens to be a part-time wrestling coach. At the same time he rushed into the ring, the referee was already blowing his whistle, indicating that the match was over. Wrestling coaches noted that Nick pinned Hoffman's son with a legal move. Hoffman's punishment? He will no longer be allowed to coach wrestling.
When the Nasenberry family appeared on this morning's NBC Today show, Mrs. Nasenberry was asked whether or not any criminal charges were pending against Hoffman. She said that the police had informed them that Hoffman had no malicious intent when he assaulted Nick. The police added that without such intent, no charges couold be filed against Hoffman, as no crime had been committed.
Whoa! If Aurora, a Chicago suburb, is in the United States of America, that city has some idiot cops and/or some loony law UNforcement. The law does not require specific proof of intent in every case. Intent is proven by the action of the perpetrator. For example, you don't have to prove that a burglar intended to steal when he broke into a home. The breaking and entering proves intent.
Furthermore, intent is not always an issue. If I accidentally kill someone when my gun discharges as I am cleaning it, I can be charged with manslaughter or negligent homicide. even though I had no intention of killing anyone. Why? Because it is incumbent of me to exercise the care necessary to avoid doing harm to others.
Hoffman should be charged with assault, as well as with child endangerment. Nick received an injury to his shoulder, but he could have been hurt much more seriously. The fact that Hoffman may not have intended to hurt the boy is immaterial. It is a gross miscarriage of justice if Hoffman's only punishment is his being banned from coaching wrestling. Aurora should be emabarrassed by its idiot cops and/or its seemingly loony law UNforcement.
On the evening of February 13, a Greco-Roman wrestling match was taking place in an Aurora (Illinois) gym. There were several matches going on at the same time. In one of those, Nick Nasenberry, 11, pinned his opponent to the floor. Suddenly the father of the other boy rushed in and threw Nick some six feet through the air. Then he rushed at Dan Nasenberry, Nick's father, who was video taping the incident. The assailant was restrained by security personnel before he could reach Nick's father.
Ray Hoffman, the eleven year old's assailant, later told a television reporter that he regrets his behavior and feels embarrassed. Hoffman happens to be a part-time wrestling coach. At the same time he rushed into the ring, the referee was already blowing his whistle, indicating that the match was over. Wrestling coaches noted that Nick pinned Hoffman's son with a legal move. Hoffman's punishment? He will no longer be allowed to coach wrestling.
When the Nasenberry family appeared on this morning's NBC Today show, Mrs. Nasenberry was asked whether or not any criminal charges were pending against Hoffman. She said that the police had informed them that Hoffman had no malicious intent when he assaulted Nick. The police added that without such intent, no charges couold be filed against Hoffman, as no crime had been committed.
Whoa! If Aurora, a Chicago suburb, is in the United States of America, that city has some idiot cops and/or some loony law UNforcement. The law does not require specific proof of intent in every case. Intent is proven by the action of the perpetrator. For example, you don't have to prove that a burglar intended to steal when he broke into a home. The breaking and entering proves intent.
Furthermore, intent is not always an issue. If I accidentally kill someone when my gun discharges as I am cleaning it, I can be charged with manslaughter or negligent homicide. even though I had no intention of killing anyone. Why? Because it is incumbent of me to exercise the care necessary to avoid doing harm to others.
Hoffman should be charged with assault, as well as with child endangerment. Nick received an injury to his shoulder, but he could have been hurt much more seriously. The fact that Hoffman may not have intended to hurt the boy is immaterial. It is a gross miscarriage of justice if Hoffman's only punishment is his being banned from coaching wrestling. Aurora should be emabarrassed by its idiot cops and/or its seemingly loony law UNforcement.
Wednesday, February 14, 2007
ONE SMART COP, ONE TRUE HERO
Last Monday evening, five shoppers were killed and four were seriously wounded by gunfire at the Trolley Square shopping mall in Salt Lake City. The shooter was a young man armed with a shotgun and handgun, wearing a backpack and bandoleer full of ammunition. The toll of dead and wounded would have been much higher were it not for the smartness and heroic action of an off-duty police officer.
Ken Hammond and his pregnant wife, Sarita, were sitting on a mall bench outside the restaurant where they had just finished dining. Hammond is an officer with the City of Ogden, which is north of Salt Lake City. Being off-duty, he was in civilian clothes, without body armor, and carrying a pistol with no extra ammo clips in his possession. When he heard gunfire and spotted the shooter, he sprang into action.
He instructed his wife to go back into the restaurant and tell the manager to lock the doors. He also told his wife to call "911" and give the operator a detailed description of what he looked like and what he was wearing while in pursuit of the shooter, so that he would not be mistaken for the perpetrator by any responding Salt Lake City officers.
He followed the shooter, identified himself, and ordered the man to drop his weapon. They exchanged several shots at a distance of 20 - 30 yards, He cornered the shooter and continued to keep him in sight so he could point him out to any responding officers. By his action, he placed himself in an extremely dangerous situation. He had only a few rounds of ammunition and he was not wearing any body armor. He could have been shot by the perpetrator, or worse, he could have been shot by Salt Lake City officers seeing a man with a gun in civilian clothes and believing him to be the killer.
Fortunately for Hammond, the first officer to arrive at the scene did not shoot him. To his credit, that officer kept his wits about him when he spotted Hammond with a gun and heard him shout that he was an off-duty officer. In the heat of the moment, a hyped-up officer could easily have shot Hammond. Shortly thereafter, the shooter was killed by officers, thus ending the carnage.
The Salt Lake City police chief announced that there was no doubt Hammond's action resulted in preventing any additional deaths and injuries. Hammond was very smart in telling his wife to give the "911" operator his detailed description. That probably helped to prevent him from being mistaken for the shooter. Many officers would not have thought to get their own description called in.
Hammond is a very brave officer. Instead of hiding in the restaurant with his pregnant wife, he went after the heavily armed perpetrator, thereby riskimg his life to save the lives of others. He could have readily been killed by the shooter or by "friendly fire." Officer Hammond had to know that, by going after the killer, he might not live to see his family again. That is what being a true hero is all about.
Ken Hammond and his pregnant wife, Sarita, were sitting on a mall bench outside the restaurant where they had just finished dining. Hammond is an officer with the City of Ogden, which is north of Salt Lake City. Being off-duty, he was in civilian clothes, without body armor, and carrying a pistol with no extra ammo clips in his possession. When he heard gunfire and spotted the shooter, he sprang into action.
He instructed his wife to go back into the restaurant and tell the manager to lock the doors. He also told his wife to call "911" and give the operator a detailed description of what he looked like and what he was wearing while in pursuit of the shooter, so that he would not be mistaken for the perpetrator by any responding Salt Lake City officers.
He followed the shooter, identified himself, and ordered the man to drop his weapon. They exchanged several shots at a distance of 20 - 30 yards, He cornered the shooter and continued to keep him in sight so he could point him out to any responding officers. By his action, he placed himself in an extremely dangerous situation. He had only a few rounds of ammunition and he was not wearing any body armor. He could have been shot by the perpetrator, or worse, he could have been shot by Salt Lake City officers seeing a man with a gun in civilian clothes and believing him to be the killer.
Fortunately for Hammond, the first officer to arrive at the scene did not shoot him. To his credit, that officer kept his wits about him when he spotted Hammond with a gun and heard him shout that he was an off-duty officer. In the heat of the moment, a hyped-up officer could easily have shot Hammond. Shortly thereafter, the shooter was killed by officers, thus ending the carnage.
The Salt Lake City police chief announced that there was no doubt Hammond's action resulted in preventing any additional deaths and injuries. Hammond was very smart in telling his wife to give the "911" operator his detailed description. That probably helped to prevent him from being mistaken for the shooter. Many officers would not have thought to get their own description called in.
Hammond is a very brave officer. Instead of hiding in the restaurant with his pregnant wife, he went after the heavily armed perpetrator, thereby riskimg his life to save the lives of others. He could have readily been killed by the shooter or by "friendly fire." Officer Hammond had to know that, by going after the killer, he might not live to see his family again. That is what being a true hero is all about.
Monday, February 12, 2007
AEROSPACERS GONE WILD
Television viewers are now being treated to a new soap opera of the JOHN'S OTHER WIFE genre. The new soap, AEROSPACERS GONE WILD, has gotten off to a very strong start. For all you soap opera lovers, here is a review of the new show.
THE CHARACTERS: Lisa Nowak, 43, a NASA astronaut who flew on the Discovey last July. Lisa is a U.S. Navy captain, a rank equivalent to a "full chicken" colonel in the U.S. Army. Lisa, a 1985 graduate of the U.S. Naval Academy, is the recipient of bachelor and master's degrees in aerospace engineering. She joined NASA in 1996. Lisa, who is separated from her husband, is the mother of three children.
William Oefelein. 41, a NASA astronaut who flew on the Discovery last December. A stud, known to his friends as Billy-O, he is a commander in the U.S. Navy. He has a bachelor's degree in electrical engineering and a master's degree in aviation systems. He joined NASA in 1998. Billy-O is the divorced father of two children.
Colleen Shipman, 30, a U.S. Air Force captain who is an engineer with a launch support unit for the air force's national security launches at Kennedy Space Center, the same site where NASA's space shuttles are launched. Colleen was in the ROTC at Penn State and holds degrees in chemical engineering and in German. In 2002, she was commissioned a lieutenant in the air force. Colleen does not work with the space agency's programs. Colleen is single.
Donald Lykkebak, a Florida lawyer, who specializes in keeping a poker face while telling bald-faced lies. Orlando police detective William Becton. Additional characters include other astronauts and NASA administrators, friends and family of Lisa, Billy-O and Colleen, and other Florida law enforcement officials.
THE PLOT: AEROSPACERS GONE WILD is the story of a passionate love triangle between two middle aged astronauts and a younger woman. Astronaut Billy-O is divorced by his wife of 17 years. He devlops a close relationship with fellow astronaut Lisa as they train together for flight in space. Lisa falls deeply in love with Billy-O and theirs becomes an intimate relationship. Lisa separates from her husband of 19 years.
While at the Kennedy Space Center, Billy-O meets the younger Colleen. Billy-O and Colleen become lovers. Lisa is devastated when she learns of their relationship. Lisa finds out that Colleen is staying with Billy-O in Houston over the weekend. A dumped Lisa is determined to end the affair of her former lover with Colleen. Lisa plots an elaborate scheme designed to doom the romance between her rival and Billy-O.
LAST WEEK'S EPISODE: Using her contacts at NASA, Lisa finds out the airline flight schedule for Colleen's return to Florida. Lisa withdraws a large amount of cash with which she purchases a black wig, a hooded trenchcoat, a pellet handgun, a four inch folding knife, pepper spray, a steel mallet, four feet of plastic tubing, six black latex gloves, and some garbage bags, making sure not to pay for anything with her credit card.
Her cheating heart broken, Lisa hops in her car and drives 969 miles from Houston to Orlando. To get to the airport ahead of Colleen, she wears an adult diaper so she would not have to stop to pee. She stops only for gas and pays for the fuel in cash. She checks into a hotel near the Orlando airport, wearing the wig, registering under a false name with a false address, and paying for the room in cash. Lisa, still wearing the diaper and wig, puts on the trench coat and drives to and parks at the airport to await the arrival of Colleen.
Colleen arrives in Orlando, but discovers that her baggage was not on her flight. She waited in the airport for two hours until her baggage arrived. As she heads to her car, an alarmed Colleen notices a dark haired woman following her. She hurries to her car, gets in, and immediately locks all the doors. The dark haired woman starts pounding on the driver's side window screaming that she needed help. Colleen cracks the window slightly and Lisa spritzes her with the pepper spray.
Colleen manages to drive as far as the parking lot toll booth where she reports the assault. The police arrive in time to see Lisa trying to discard a garbage bag containing the purchased goodies, which they retrieve from a trash container. Colleen identifies Lisa who is then arrested and charged with attempted kidnapping, among other charges. After spending the night in jail she appeared in court and was granted release on $15,000 bail. While she was in a bail bond office, Lisa was rearrested on a newly filed charge of attempted first degree murder.
Detective Becton prepared the affidavit for the murder charge. "The facts that Mrs. Nowak drove approximately 900 miles, urinated in diapers so that she did not need to stop, stayed at a hotel where she paid in cash and used a false name and address to register, stealthily followed the victim, while in disguise, and possessed multiple deadly weapons at the time she confronted the victim, as well as spraying the victim with a substance meant to disable a person, create a well-founded fear and give this investigator probable cause to believe that Mrs. Nowak intended to murder Ms. Shipman."
At the following court hearing Donald Lykkebak, Lisa's lawyer, told the judge that this case was not what it appeared to be. Maintaining a poker face, he told the court, "What we have here is a desperate woman wanting to talk to the other woman." This time Lisa was released on $25,000 bail, fitted with a GPS ankle bracelet, and escorted back to Houston on a commercial flight by another astronaut, one of two who had flown to Orlando to be at her side. Uon her return, NASA placed Lisa on 30 days leave. Meanwhile, Billy-O flies to Florida to be at Colleen's side.
COMING EPISODES: Will a spaced out Lisa be thrown out of the space program? Will Colleen testify against Lisa or will she decide not to cooperate with the prosecution? Will that murder charge hold up? Will Lykkebak's argument of Lisa only wanting to talk to Colleen fly? Will she get probation, go to prison, or will a jury find that this astronaut merely flew over the cuckoo's nest? Will the Navy courtmartial Lisa for the unbecoming conduct of adultery? Will Billy-O marry Colleen, or will he dump her for a still younger babe? Soap lovers, stay tuned to AEROSPACERS GONE WILD with new adult diaper commercials claiming that "You can depend on Depend to keep you dry for at least 900 miles."
THE CHARACTERS: Lisa Nowak, 43, a NASA astronaut who flew on the Discovey last July. Lisa is a U.S. Navy captain, a rank equivalent to a "full chicken" colonel in the U.S. Army. Lisa, a 1985 graduate of the U.S. Naval Academy, is the recipient of bachelor and master's degrees in aerospace engineering. She joined NASA in 1996. Lisa, who is separated from her husband, is the mother of three children.
William Oefelein. 41, a NASA astronaut who flew on the Discovery last December. A stud, known to his friends as Billy-O, he is a commander in the U.S. Navy. He has a bachelor's degree in electrical engineering and a master's degree in aviation systems. He joined NASA in 1998. Billy-O is the divorced father of two children.
Colleen Shipman, 30, a U.S. Air Force captain who is an engineer with a launch support unit for the air force's national security launches at Kennedy Space Center, the same site where NASA's space shuttles are launched. Colleen was in the ROTC at Penn State and holds degrees in chemical engineering and in German. In 2002, she was commissioned a lieutenant in the air force. Colleen does not work with the space agency's programs. Colleen is single.
Donald Lykkebak, a Florida lawyer, who specializes in keeping a poker face while telling bald-faced lies. Orlando police detective William Becton. Additional characters include other astronauts and NASA administrators, friends and family of Lisa, Billy-O and Colleen, and other Florida law enforcement officials.
THE PLOT: AEROSPACERS GONE WILD is the story of a passionate love triangle between two middle aged astronauts and a younger woman. Astronaut Billy-O is divorced by his wife of 17 years. He devlops a close relationship with fellow astronaut Lisa as they train together for flight in space. Lisa falls deeply in love with Billy-O and theirs becomes an intimate relationship. Lisa separates from her husband of 19 years.
While at the Kennedy Space Center, Billy-O meets the younger Colleen. Billy-O and Colleen become lovers. Lisa is devastated when she learns of their relationship. Lisa finds out that Colleen is staying with Billy-O in Houston over the weekend. A dumped Lisa is determined to end the affair of her former lover with Colleen. Lisa plots an elaborate scheme designed to doom the romance between her rival and Billy-O.
LAST WEEK'S EPISODE: Using her contacts at NASA, Lisa finds out the airline flight schedule for Colleen's return to Florida. Lisa withdraws a large amount of cash with which she purchases a black wig, a hooded trenchcoat, a pellet handgun, a four inch folding knife, pepper spray, a steel mallet, four feet of plastic tubing, six black latex gloves, and some garbage bags, making sure not to pay for anything with her credit card.
Her cheating heart broken, Lisa hops in her car and drives 969 miles from Houston to Orlando. To get to the airport ahead of Colleen, she wears an adult diaper so she would not have to stop to pee. She stops only for gas and pays for the fuel in cash. She checks into a hotel near the Orlando airport, wearing the wig, registering under a false name with a false address, and paying for the room in cash. Lisa, still wearing the diaper and wig, puts on the trench coat and drives to and parks at the airport to await the arrival of Colleen.
Colleen arrives in Orlando, but discovers that her baggage was not on her flight. She waited in the airport for two hours until her baggage arrived. As she heads to her car, an alarmed Colleen notices a dark haired woman following her. She hurries to her car, gets in, and immediately locks all the doors. The dark haired woman starts pounding on the driver's side window screaming that she needed help. Colleen cracks the window slightly and Lisa spritzes her with the pepper spray.
Colleen manages to drive as far as the parking lot toll booth where she reports the assault. The police arrive in time to see Lisa trying to discard a garbage bag containing the purchased goodies, which they retrieve from a trash container. Colleen identifies Lisa who is then arrested and charged with attempted kidnapping, among other charges. After spending the night in jail she appeared in court and was granted release on $15,000 bail. While she was in a bail bond office, Lisa was rearrested on a newly filed charge of attempted first degree murder.
Detective Becton prepared the affidavit for the murder charge. "The facts that Mrs. Nowak drove approximately 900 miles, urinated in diapers so that she did not need to stop, stayed at a hotel where she paid in cash and used a false name and address to register, stealthily followed the victim, while in disguise, and possessed multiple deadly weapons at the time she confronted the victim, as well as spraying the victim with a substance meant to disable a person, create a well-founded fear and give this investigator probable cause to believe that Mrs. Nowak intended to murder Ms. Shipman."
At the following court hearing Donald Lykkebak, Lisa's lawyer, told the judge that this case was not what it appeared to be. Maintaining a poker face, he told the court, "What we have here is a desperate woman wanting to talk to the other woman." This time Lisa was released on $25,000 bail, fitted with a GPS ankle bracelet, and escorted back to Houston on a commercial flight by another astronaut, one of two who had flown to Orlando to be at her side. Uon her return, NASA placed Lisa on 30 days leave. Meanwhile, Billy-O flies to Florida to be at Colleen's side.
COMING EPISODES: Will a spaced out Lisa be thrown out of the space program? Will Colleen testify against Lisa or will she decide not to cooperate with the prosecution? Will that murder charge hold up? Will Lykkebak's argument of Lisa only wanting to talk to Colleen fly? Will she get probation, go to prison, or will a jury find that this astronaut merely flew over the cuckoo's nest? Will the Navy courtmartial Lisa for the unbecoming conduct of adultery? Will Billy-O marry Colleen, or will he dump her for a still younger babe? Soap lovers, stay tuned to AEROSPACERS GONE WILD with new adult diaper commercials claiming that "You can depend on Depend to keep you dry for at least 900 miles."
Sunday, February 04, 2007
CYNICISM: THE WORST THING ABOUT BEING A COP
We have all heard different takes on what is the best thing about being a cop. There's the noble calling in which you risk life and limb to protect and serve society. There's the occasional excitement. There's the joy of not being tied down to a desk all day long. When you report for your shift, you never know what is in store for you. There's the thrill of driving your patrol car at 100 mph with the emergency lights and siren on. There's the satisfaction of catching a crook. And then, there are the short skirted cleavage showing groupies who are crazy about a man in uniform. Whoopee!!!
But, what is the worst thing about being a cop? The answer to that question depends on who you talk to. Criminal justice researchers say that police work consists of 95 percent utter boredom and five percent sheer terror. That is correct. And, that creates problems for some officers. To overcome the boredom, they will create their own excitement. How do they do that? Sometimes, by riling up a violator during an otherwise uneventful confrontation. The excitement comes from the inevitable knock down and drag out. Others create some escitement by driving like there's no tomorrow. Boredom also leads to carelessness, thereby placing an officers's life in greater jeopardy.
I recently heard a police officer say, "The worst thing about this job is having to listen to people lie all day long." He had a good point. Whether you are talking to a traffic violator or to someone suspected of committing a crime, you usually get nothing but a load of crap. Officers finding a stolen stereo set during the execution of a search warrant, will ask the crook, "What about that stereo?" He'll usually reply, "What stereo?" When they jerk him over to the stereo and say, "This stereo," he'll usually respond, "Oh, that stereo." The same with dope. "Where did you get this shit (heroin)?" "What shit?" "This shit, asshole!" "Oh, that shit." Even crime victims, and not just crooks, often lie to investigating officers.
Dr. Mike Roberts, a highly respected police psychologist, once asked all of the recruits, on their frirst day in the San Francisco police academy, what they thought of people in general. Their response for the most part was, "There are good people and there are assholes." He returned a year after they graduated from the academy and asked the same question. This time the answer was, "There are cops and there are assholes." When he returned three years later with that quesstion, those still on the force replied that even "some of the cops are assholes."
The cynicism - cops and assholes - which pervades the police service is one of the worst things about being a cop. It creates problems in the officer's relationship with familly members. It creates problems in his relationship with the community. This cynicism is nurtured by hostility between the police and members of the community. That hostility is a consequence of the police's duty to regulate human behavior when no one likes to have their behavior regulated.
How does a good cop deal with the assholes in the police service? Unfortunately, not very well. Will an officer turn in his partner if he used excessive force during an arrest? Not likely. Will an honest cop turn in a crooked cop? Maybe, maybe not. The problem is the unwritten law in the police service that you do not rat out a fellow officer. That is partly due to the cynicism of "everyone out there is against us, so we have to stick together." Of course, in our society a rat is a rat, whether one is a police officer or not.
Cynicism is also a great destructor of idealism. I've known a number of white police officers who joined the force to do their part in fighting racism against blacks. After a while, they get sick and tired of the hostility they meet when dealing with members of the black community, a hostility based on years of mistreatment by the police. It isn't long before many of them join their fellow officers in using the "n" word and in making disparaging remarks about minorities. The same with the idealists who want to help make ours a better society. They soon give up on that - it becomes us against the assholes.
There is little doubt that cynicism has a debilitating effect. Many officers undergo regressive personality changes during their progression through the police service. Some acquire an authoritarian Napoleonic complex.
Many develop a "people are no fucking good" attitude. Some develop a borderline paranoid ideation. Cynicism probably plays a significant role in the high rate of alcoholism and divorce among cops. Notwithstanding the cynicism, most of those who become cops will find police work to be an important, challenging, and satisfying occupation.
But, what is the worst thing about being a cop? The answer to that question depends on who you talk to. Criminal justice researchers say that police work consists of 95 percent utter boredom and five percent sheer terror. That is correct. And, that creates problems for some officers. To overcome the boredom, they will create their own excitement. How do they do that? Sometimes, by riling up a violator during an otherwise uneventful confrontation. The excitement comes from the inevitable knock down and drag out. Others create some escitement by driving like there's no tomorrow. Boredom also leads to carelessness, thereby placing an officers's life in greater jeopardy.
I recently heard a police officer say, "The worst thing about this job is having to listen to people lie all day long." He had a good point. Whether you are talking to a traffic violator or to someone suspected of committing a crime, you usually get nothing but a load of crap. Officers finding a stolen stereo set during the execution of a search warrant, will ask the crook, "What about that stereo?" He'll usually reply, "What stereo?" When they jerk him over to the stereo and say, "This stereo," he'll usually respond, "Oh, that stereo." The same with dope. "Where did you get this shit (heroin)?" "What shit?" "This shit, asshole!" "Oh, that shit." Even crime victims, and not just crooks, often lie to investigating officers.
Dr. Mike Roberts, a highly respected police psychologist, once asked all of the recruits, on their frirst day in the San Francisco police academy, what they thought of people in general. Their response for the most part was, "There are good people and there are assholes." He returned a year after they graduated from the academy and asked the same question. This time the answer was, "There are cops and there are assholes." When he returned three years later with that quesstion, those still on the force replied that even "some of the cops are assholes."
The cynicism - cops and assholes - which pervades the police service is one of the worst things about being a cop. It creates problems in the officer's relationship with familly members. It creates problems in his relationship with the community. This cynicism is nurtured by hostility between the police and members of the community. That hostility is a consequence of the police's duty to regulate human behavior when no one likes to have their behavior regulated.
How does a good cop deal with the assholes in the police service? Unfortunately, not very well. Will an officer turn in his partner if he used excessive force during an arrest? Not likely. Will an honest cop turn in a crooked cop? Maybe, maybe not. The problem is the unwritten law in the police service that you do not rat out a fellow officer. That is partly due to the cynicism of "everyone out there is against us, so we have to stick together." Of course, in our society a rat is a rat, whether one is a police officer or not.
Cynicism is also a great destructor of idealism. I've known a number of white police officers who joined the force to do their part in fighting racism against blacks. After a while, they get sick and tired of the hostility they meet when dealing with members of the black community, a hostility based on years of mistreatment by the police. It isn't long before many of them join their fellow officers in using the "n" word and in making disparaging remarks about minorities. The same with the idealists who want to help make ours a better society. They soon give up on that - it becomes us against the assholes.
There is little doubt that cynicism has a debilitating effect. Many officers undergo regressive personality changes during their progression through the police service. Some acquire an authoritarian Napoleonic complex.
Many develop a "people are no fucking good" attitude. Some develop a borderline paranoid ideation. Cynicism probably plays a significant role in the high rate of alcoholism and divorce among cops. Notwithstanding the cynicism, most of those who become cops will find police work to be an important, challenging, and satisfying occupation.
Friday, February 02, 2007
COPS HARPOONED AND ZAPPED
The use of Tasers by the police as non-lethal weapons was initially aclaimed the greatest development since sliced bread. The second guessers, usually civil libertarians, come out of the woodwork every time a cop pops someone with his gun, Tasers were thought to be a harmless way of subduing those who charge at cops with knives, clubs, hammers, axes, machetes, chainsaws, a sack full of shit or whatever, without having to resort to deadly force. God forbid that the police should ever shoot some hatchet swinging juvie punk. Heaven help the cop who shoots an unarmed hyped-up 250 pound hulk bent on beating him into a lifeless bloody pulp.
All good things must come to an end. Some scientists and many civil libertarians no longer look at tasers as the weapon of choice for a kinder, gentler, and friendlier neighborhood cop. There have been a number of people throughout the country who have died after having been tasered by the police. Many cops have been criticized for using tasers instead of sweet-talking some aggressive drug-crazed asshole into a police car. Others have been accused of resorting to tasers out of anger or to satisfy some sadistic trait.
Police taser guns fire two barbs which imbed themselves in the clothing or skin while delivering a five second long 50,000 volt electric charge, resulting in the loss of muscular control, thereby incapacitating the targeted individual. Some police agencies require that before an officer is issued a taser, he himself must be tasered. The thinking here is that an officer needs to experience the hurt he may put on others to keep him from using the taser unless it is absolutely necessary. Other police agencies do not require their officers to be tasered.
I have always felt very strongly that it is ridiculous to require that an officer be harpooned and zapped with 50,000 volts before he is allowed to carry a taser. If that is necessary to prevent the unnecssary use of that weapon, why not shoot an officer before he is allowed to carry a gun? Or, why not really whack him a few times with a baton before he is allowed to carry that weapon? You say that shooting and clubbing an officer are absurd analogies. Sure they are, but they are no more absurd than harpooning and zapping an officer.
The judicious use of tasers can best be achieved through an emphatic training program without resorting to the tasering of the trainee. As with guns and batons, their judicious use can be enforced by written taser use policies, the violation of which would result in serious disciplinary consequences. Whether or not police agencies will continue to use tasers is besides the point. There will always be an occasion when a cop will have to shoot someone in order to save himself or the life of another citizen.
All good things must come to an end. Some scientists and many civil libertarians no longer look at tasers as the weapon of choice for a kinder, gentler, and friendlier neighborhood cop. There have been a number of people throughout the country who have died after having been tasered by the police. Many cops have been criticized for using tasers instead of sweet-talking some aggressive drug-crazed asshole into a police car. Others have been accused of resorting to tasers out of anger or to satisfy some sadistic trait.
Police taser guns fire two barbs which imbed themselves in the clothing or skin while delivering a five second long 50,000 volt electric charge, resulting in the loss of muscular control, thereby incapacitating the targeted individual. Some police agencies require that before an officer is issued a taser, he himself must be tasered. The thinking here is that an officer needs to experience the hurt he may put on others to keep him from using the taser unless it is absolutely necessary. Other police agencies do not require their officers to be tasered.
I have always felt very strongly that it is ridiculous to require that an officer be harpooned and zapped with 50,000 volts before he is allowed to carry a taser. If that is necessary to prevent the unnecssary use of that weapon, why not shoot an officer before he is allowed to carry a gun? Or, why not really whack him a few times with a baton before he is allowed to carry that weapon? You say that shooting and clubbing an officer are absurd analogies. Sure they are, but they are no more absurd than harpooning and zapping an officer.
The judicious use of tasers can best be achieved through an emphatic training program without resorting to the tasering of the trainee. As with guns and batons, their judicious use can be enforced by written taser use policies, the violation of which would result in serious disciplinary consequences. Whether or not police agencies will continue to use tasers is besides the point. There will always be an occasion when a cop will have to shoot someone in order to save himself or the life of another citizen.
Wednesday, January 31, 2007
ARMED AND INFAMOUS - REST IN PEACE
Great news!!! CBS has axed its reality show ARMED AND FAMOUS after airing only four episodes. The show, which featured some half-ass celebrities playing "real" cops in Muncie. Indiana, had so few viewers that CBS was forced to pull the plug on this farce. Thank God!!!
Now Erik Estrada can go back to watching himself on videos of his 70's cop show ChiPs. LaToya Jackson can go back to exposing her breast or whatever else she does best. Of course, she could play cop to brother Michael and keep him from molesting any more young boys now that he is back in this country. Jason "Wee Man" Acuna can stop making a jackass of himself as a dwarf cop and go back full-time to his day job on the MTV show Jackass.
Muncie Police Chief Joe Winkle can now stop worrying about Estrada's temper and obscene language. He can be thankful that he is no longer involved in a denigration of law enforcement. Now that he doesn't have to waste anymore time with this show, Winkle should sit down and figure out how he can best apologize to the law enforcement community for helping to belittle police officers.
I hope that CBS lost a ton of money for its insulting embarrassment of the police service. It looks like America's television viewing audience is not quite as stupid as I thought. By omission, they've killed and buried this show. May it rest in peace. Hallelujah!!!
Now Erik Estrada can go back to watching himself on videos of his 70's cop show ChiPs. LaToya Jackson can go back to exposing her breast or whatever else she does best. Of course, she could play cop to brother Michael and keep him from molesting any more young boys now that he is back in this country. Jason "Wee Man" Acuna can stop making a jackass of himself as a dwarf cop and go back full-time to his day job on the MTV show Jackass.
Muncie Police Chief Joe Winkle can now stop worrying about Estrada's temper and obscene language. He can be thankful that he is no longer involved in a denigration of law enforcement. Now that he doesn't have to waste anymore time with this show, Winkle should sit down and figure out how he can best apologize to the law enforcement community for helping to belittle police officers.
I hope that CBS lost a ton of money for its insulting embarrassment of the police service. It looks like America's television viewing audience is not quite as stupid as I thought. By omission, they've killed and buried this show. May it rest in peace. Hallelujah!!!
Sunday, January 28, 2007
DEMOCRATS AND MEDIA PERSONALITIES SUCK UP TO A CHARLATAN
Hillary Clinton and other Democrat presidential hopefuls have been sucking up to the Reverend Al Sharpton. So have a number of media personalities. And, of course, so has Hollywood. The suck-ups brush aside Sharpton's role in the Tawana Brawley hoax, in the Crown Heights riot, and in the Freddie's Fashion Mart massacre, three dark chapters in American race relations.
On a Thanksgiving weekend in 1987, Tawana Brawley, a 15 year old black girl, was found curled up inside a garbage bag in a small Hudson Valley town. She was smeared with feces and the words "nigger," "KKK" and "bitch" were scrawled on her body. She claimed to have been abducted, beaten, and sexuallly assaulted for four days by six white law enforcement racists.
Needless to say, this case drew immediate world-wide media attention. Understandably, the black community throughout the United States was outraged. Sharpton and two black attorneys, Alton Maddox and Vernon Mason, assumed the mantle as Bawley's advisors. Sharpton orchrestated the whole sordid affair, thereby fanning the flames of black anger. Sharpton's role in this case made him an instant leader among black activists.
One cop and a prosecutor were identified as having participated in the abduction and sexual assault. So much abuse was heaped on the accused that it ruined the prosecutor's career and led the police officer to commit suicide. However, a lengthy grand jury investigation found all of the allegations to be a hoax. Subsequently, an in-depth investigation by six New York Times reporters also determined that the allegations were a hoax committed by Brawley to hide the fact from her mother that she had run off with a boyfriend.
The falsely accused prosecutor sued Sharpton, Maddox and Mason, winning a monetary judgement against all three. Maddox and Mason were eventually disbarred for unethical conduct. Sharpton has never apologized for his responsibility in the officer's suicide and in the porsecutor's ruined career. In fact, to this day Sharpton continues to insist that the Brawley scandal was not a hoax.
In 1991, Sharpton also helped fan the flames of black anger against Jews in the Crown Heights section of Brooklyn. A Jewish driver in a police escorted procession, which was returning from a cemetary, collided with another vehicle at an intersection. His car veered onto the sidewalk where it struck two seven year old black children, one of whom died. Some bystanders charged that the driver was speeding and ran a red light. A private Jewish ambulance, which had arrived at the scene, was ordered by the police to take the Jewish driver away. The ambulance attendants were also ordered not to attend to the two injured black children because a city ambulance had already been summoned.
Blacks were outraged, feeling that a Jew had been afforded favorable treatment at the expense of the injured children. There had long been tensions between Jews and blacks in the Crown Heights neighborhood. Sharpton's rantings and ravings over the incident were instrumental in causing a riot which lasted for four days. The rallying cry of blacks was "Get the Jews" and a Jewish seminary student was stabbed to death. Because the rioting was mishandled by the police, Lee Brown, New York's black police commissioner, lost his job and David Dinkins, the city's first black mayor, was defeated by Rudy Giuliani in his bid for another term in office.
In 1995, a landlord in Harlem tried to evict one of his tenants, a black music store owner, in order to expand his adjoining business. Sharpton organized a demonstration against the landlord, denouncing him as a "white interloper." Sharpton's inflammatory race-baiting rhetoric provoked one of his followers to take a gun into Freddie's Fashion Mart and slaughter seven customers before committing suicide.
Sharpton and Jesse Jackson both feed off the culture of victimology which pervades the black community. It is sad that blacks look to these two charlatans for leadership when there are so many other prominent blacks without a checkered past. Democrats used to court Jackson, but his star has been fading. Now they slobber all over Sharpton. Media personalities, like Chris Matthews and Tucker Carlson, suck up to Sharpton almost daily. Hollywood, not to be outdone, invites him to attend the Academy Awards. Sharpton is a frequent guest on the Leno and Letterman shows and has hosted Saturday Night Live.
I've always liked Tucker Carlson and it sickens me that he seems to worship Sharpton. Hillary Clinton already has a lock on the black vote, yet she, nevertheless, sucks up to Sharpton. We are a nation of forgiving people, but should we brush aside Sharpton's sordid history and forgive him for his part in the Tawana Brawley hoax, in the Crown Hights riot, and in the Freddie's Fashion Mart massacre? Shame on Clinton and her fellow presidential hopefuls. Shame on Matthews, Carlson, and the other media personalities who suck up to Sharpton. Shame on Hollywood for giving Sharpton star power. Above all, shame on us for letting those candidates, those media personalities, and Hollywood get away with it.
On a Thanksgiving weekend in 1987, Tawana Brawley, a 15 year old black girl, was found curled up inside a garbage bag in a small Hudson Valley town. She was smeared with feces and the words "nigger," "KKK" and "bitch" were scrawled on her body. She claimed to have been abducted, beaten, and sexuallly assaulted for four days by six white law enforcement racists.
Needless to say, this case drew immediate world-wide media attention. Understandably, the black community throughout the United States was outraged. Sharpton and two black attorneys, Alton Maddox and Vernon Mason, assumed the mantle as Bawley's advisors. Sharpton orchrestated the whole sordid affair, thereby fanning the flames of black anger. Sharpton's role in this case made him an instant leader among black activists.
One cop and a prosecutor were identified as having participated in the abduction and sexual assault. So much abuse was heaped on the accused that it ruined the prosecutor's career and led the police officer to commit suicide. However, a lengthy grand jury investigation found all of the allegations to be a hoax. Subsequently, an in-depth investigation by six New York Times reporters also determined that the allegations were a hoax committed by Brawley to hide the fact from her mother that she had run off with a boyfriend.
The falsely accused prosecutor sued Sharpton, Maddox and Mason, winning a monetary judgement against all three. Maddox and Mason were eventually disbarred for unethical conduct. Sharpton has never apologized for his responsibility in the officer's suicide and in the porsecutor's ruined career. In fact, to this day Sharpton continues to insist that the Brawley scandal was not a hoax.
In 1991, Sharpton also helped fan the flames of black anger against Jews in the Crown Heights section of Brooklyn. A Jewish driver in a police escorted procession, which was returning from a cemetary, collided with another vehicle at an intersection. His car veered onto the sidewalk where it struck two seven year old black children, one of whom died. Some bystanders charged that the driver was speeding and ran a red light. A private Jewish ambulance, which had arrived at the scene, was ordered by the police to take the Jewish driver away. The ambulance attendants were also ordered not to attend to the two injured black children because a city ambulance had already been summoned.
Blacks were outraged, feeling that a Jew had been afforded favorable treatment at the expense of the injured children. There had long been tensions between Jews and blacks in the Crown Heights neighborhood. Sharpton's rantings and ravings over the incident were instrumental in causing a riot which lasted for four days. The rallying cry of blacks was "Get the Jews" and a Jewish seminary student was stabbed to death. Because the rioting was mishandled by the police, Lee Brown, New York's black police commissioner, lost his job and David Dinkins, the city's first black mayor, was defeated by Rudy Giuliani in his bid for another term in office.
In 1995, a landlord in Harlem tried to evict one of his tenants, a black music store owner, in order to expand his adjoining business. Sharpton organized a demonstration against the landlord, denouncing him as a "white interloper." Sharpton's inflammatory race-baiting rhetoric provoked one of his followers to take a gun into Freddie's Fashion Mart and slaughter seven customers before committing suicide.
Sharpton and Jesse Jackson both feed off the culture of victimology which pervades the black community. It is sad that blacks look to these two charlatans for leadership when there are so many other prominent blacks without a checkered past. Democrats used to court Jackson, but his star has been fading. Now they slobber all over Sharpton. Media personalities, like Chris Matthews and Tucker Carlson, suck up to Sharpton almost daily. Hollywood, not to be outdone, invites him to attend the Academy Awards. Sharpton is a frequent guest on the Leno and Letterman shows and has hosted Saturday Night Live.
I've always liked Tucker Carlson and it sickens me that he seems to worship Sharpton. Hillary Clinton already has a lock on the black vote, yet she, nevertheless, sucks up to Sharpton. We are a nation of forgiving people, but should we brush aside Sharpton's sordid history and forgive him for his part in the Tawana Brawley hoax, in the Crown Hights riot, and in the Freddie's Fashion Mart massacre? Shame on Clinton and her fellow presidential hopefuls. Shame on Matthews, Carlson, and the other media personalities who suck up to Sharpton. Shame on Hollywood for giving Sharpton star power. Above all, shame on us for letting those candidates, those media personalities, and Hollywood get away with it.
Friday, January 26, 2007
LATEST DEVELOPMENTS CONCERNING THE BLACK PANTHERS AND THE DUKE RAPE CASE
Recently I published blogs entitled THE BLACK PANTHER LEGACY (December 1, 2006) and OFFICIAL OPRESSION: THE DUKE UNIVERSITY RAPE CASE (January 15, 2007). This week, there have been some new developments concerning the Panthers and the Duke rape case.
In the Black Panther blog I stated that "Panthers also committed a number of deadly attacks against unsuspecting police officers." I am sure that those who consider the Panthers to be folk heroes do not believe that statement nor do they believe what I said about the free breakfast program coloring book. Hey - Wake up and smell the roses!
This week, eight black men were arrested for the 1971 slaying of a San Francisco police sergeant. A ninth former Panther is also charged in this case and is still being sought. Seven of those arressted were former members of the Black Liberation Army, a branch of the Black Panther Party for Self Defense. According to the authorities, the slaying of Sgt. John V. Young was part of the BLA's "five-year campaign to kill law enforcemnt officers in San Francisco and New York."
The Panther BLA attacks against the police were carried out between 1968 and 1973, and included the slaying of two New York City police officers and the bombing of a San Francisco police funeral. Why did it take 35 years for these thugs to be arrested? According to the San Francisco Police Department, the investigation of these attacks was reopened in 1999 after "advances in forensic science led to the discovery of new evidence."
All of those charged are in their 50s and 60s. Stuart Hanlon, a lawyer for one of the arrestees, claims "There's a law enforcement attitude that they hate these people, the Panthers. Now they're going after old men." Damn right, we hate the Panthers and for good reason. And good for SFPD in bringing about the arrest of these cold blooded cop killers.
In the Duke rape blog I wrote that "The State Bar is also investigating his withholding of exculpatory DNA evidence." This week the North Carolina State Bar filed charges against District Attorney Mike Nifong for withholding favorable DNA evidence from defendants in the Duke lacrosse case and for repeatedly lying about it to judges and the State Bar. These charges are far more serious than the previous charges of making inflammatory public statements to reporters and misrepresenting the facts in the case.
Nifong's case against three Duke lacrosse players started to fall apart from its very beginning. The North Carolina State Bureau of Investigation could not find semen, blood or saliva on the accuser's underwear or on swabs taken from her vagina. Nifong then received the court's permission to go to a private DNA lab for more sophisticated testing. DNA Security of Burlington found DNA from AT LEAST four unidentified men. Not a single cell was found from any of the lacrosse players, all of whom had submitted DNA samples.
Despite repeated requests by the defense, Nifong hid the DNA test results and lied to the court about their availability on five occasiions from May to September. Nifong told the State Bar that he withheld the test results because he was concerned about violating the privacy rights of the lacrosse players. The State Bar recognized this crock of shit for what it was - "knowingly false."
Here is what Joseph Kennedy, a law professor at the University of North Carolina, had to say about the charges against Nifong. "Lying is really at the top of the list in terms of things lawyers just can't do. And then lying about something as important as evidence suggesting innocence in a serious case, it just doesn't get any worse than that."
For personal gain, Nifong pursued this case with reckless abandonment on the word of a slut, despite evidence to the contrary. His phony claim of withholding DNA evidence to protect the privacy rights of the lacrosse players just doesn't hold any water. All of the players would have been tickled pink had there been a public disclosure that the DNA testing did not find a single cell from any of the team members. If Nifong is not disbarred, then there is no justice in this world.
In the Black Panther blog I stated that "Panthers also committed a number of deadly attacks against unsuspecting police officers." I am sure that those who consider the Panthers to be folk heroes do not believe that statement nor do they believe what I said about the free breakfast program coloring book. Hey - Wake up and smell the roses!
This week, eight black men were arrested for the 1971 slaying of a San Francisco police sergeant. A ninth former Panther is also charged in this case and is still being sought. Seven of those arressted were former members of the Black Liberation Army, a branch of the Black Panther Party for Self Defense. According to the authorities, the slaying of Sgt. John V. Young was part of the BLA's "five-year campaign to kill law enforcemnt officers in San Francisco and New York."
The Panther BLA attacks against the police were carried out between 1968 and 1973, and included the slaying of two New York City police officers and the bombing of a San Francisco police funeral. Why did it take 35 years for these thugs to be arrested? According to the San Francisco Police Department, the investigation of these attacks was reopened in 1999 after "advances in forensic science led to the discovery of new evidence."
All of those charged are in their 50s and 60s. Stuart Hanlon, a lawyer for one of the arrestees, claims "There's a law enforcement attitude that they hate these people, the Panthers. Now they're going after old men." Damn right, we hate the Panthers and for good reason. And good for SFPD in bringing about the arrest of these cold blooded cop killers.
In the Duke rape blog I wrote that "The State Bar is also investigating his withholding of exculpatory DNA evidence." This week the North Carolina State Bar filed charges against District Attorney Mike Nifong for withholding favorable DNA evidence from defendants in the Duke lacrosse case and for repeatedly lying about it to judges and the State Bar. These charges are far more serious than the previous charges of making inflammatory public statements to reporters and misrepresenting the facts in the case.
Nifong's case against three Duke lacrosse players started to fall apart from its very beginning. The North Carolina State Bureau of Investigation could not find semen, blood or saliva on the accuser's underwear or on swabs taken from her vagina. Nifong then received the court's permission to go to a private DNA lab for more sophisticated testing. DNA Security of Burlington found DNA from AT LEAST four unidentified men. Not a single cell was found from any of the lacrosse players, all of whom had submitted DNA samples.
Despite repeated requests by the defense, Nifong hid the DNA test results and lied to the court about their availability on five occasiions from May to September. Nifong told the State Bar that he withheld the test results because he was concerned about violating the privacy rights of the lacrosse players. The State Bar recognized this crock of shit for what it was - "knowingly false."
Here is what Joseph Kennedy, a law professor at the University of North Carolina, had to say about the charges against Nifong. "Lying is really at the top of the list in terms of things lawyers just can't do. And then lying about something as important as evidence suggesting innocence in a serious case, it just doesn't get any worse than that."
For personal gain, Nifong pursued this case with reckless abandonment on the word of a slut, despite evidence to the contrary. His phony claim of withholding DNA evidence to protect the privacy rights of the lacrosse players just doesn't hold any water. All of the players would have been tickled pink had there been a public disclosure that the DNA testing did not find a single cell from any of the team members. If Nifong is not disbarred, then there is no justice in this world.
Wednesday, January 24, 2007
SPANK YOUR CHILD AND GO TO JAIL
Sally Lieber, a member of the California State Assembly, is introducing a bill which would outlaw the spanking of any child under the age of three. Such spanking would be a misdemeanor which, under California law, would subject an offender to a jail term of up to one year and/or a fine of up to $1,000. Needless to say, her proposed bill has already generated considerable controversy.
One one side you have the anti-corporal punishment crowd which claims that spanking teaches children that violence is an acceptable method of settling matters. The "violence begets violence" bunch is salivating over the possible passage of this law. At the same time, they are complaining that the bill does not go far enough because it does not outlaw corporal punishment altogether.
On the other side you have those who believe that corporal punishment, both at home and in the schools, is an effective means of disciplining unruly children. They are worried that this is just the first step in outlawing corporal punishment for children of all ages. Some civil libertarians object to this bill on the grounds that a law making it a crime to spank a child is an intrusion into the privacy rights of parents.
Lieber's bill will probably be passed by the California state legislature, especially since it will apply only to children under the age of three. I don't have a problem with such a bill, although I too am worried that this is just the first salvo in an attempt to outlaw corporal punishment altogether. Several states have already outlawed corporal punishment for all children.
If you read my blog, IT'S TOUGH TO BE A COP'S KID (December 23, 2006), you know that I favor the use of corporal punishment, as long as it's not administered in the heat of anger. I just can't buy into the anti-corporal punishment psycho babble put forth by childless child psychologists. When I was a cop, I came across a good number of really messed up kids who had a psychologist or a psychiatrist for a parent. The "never spank your child" bunch quite simply represents the pacifist segment of our society.
Why don't I object to Sally Lieber's bill? As a sensible psychiatrist put it, children under three are incapable of differentiating between right and wrong. They will not know why they are being spanked because they have not yet developed the language skills needed to understand why they are being punished. All that they will know is that spanking hurts. This psychiatrist advises parents to remove the child away from the object of his misbehavior or to take the object away from him. That's not psycho babble.
Anyhow, if Lieber's bill becomes law, it will be just about toothless. How can that law be enforced? Is a one or two year old child going to make a complaint with the authorities? If the spanking is not severe, will one spouse rat out the other? Hardly anyone will be jailed. What it boils down to is that this bill is a bit of feel-good legislation for those who are opposed to corporal punishment.
One one side you have the anti-corporal punishment crowd which claims that spanking teaches children that violence is an acceptable method of settling matters. The "violence begets violence" bunch is salivating over the possible passage of this law. At the same time, they are complaining that the bill does not go far enough because it does not outlaw corporal punishment altogether.
On the other side you have those who believe that corporal punishment, both at home and in the schools, is an effective means of disciplining unruly children. They are worried that this is just the first step in outlawing corporal punishment for children of all ages. Some civil libertarians object to this bill on the grounds that a law making it a crime to spank a child is an intrusion into the privacy rights of parents.
Lieber's bill will probably be passed by the California state legislature, especially since it will apply only to children under the age of three. I don't have a problem with such a bill, although I too am worried that this is just the first salvo in an attempt to outlaw corporal punishment altogether. Several states have already outlawed corporal punishment for all children.
If you read my blog, IT'S TOUGH TO BE A COP'S KID (December 23, 2006), you know that I favor the use of corporal punishment, as long as it's not administered in the heat of anger. I just can't buy into the anti-corporal punishment psycho babble put forth by childless child psychologists. When I was a cop, I came across a good number of really messed up kids who had a psychologist or a psychiatrist for a parent. The "never spank your child" bunch quite simply represents the pacifist segment of our society.
Why don't I object to Sally Lieber's bill? As a sensible psychiatrist put it, children under three are incapable of differentiating between right and wrong. They will not know why they are being spanked because they have not yet developed the language skills needed to understand why they are being punished. All that they will know is that spanking hurts. This psychiatrist advises parents to remove the child away from the object of his misbehavior or to take the object away from him. That's not psycho babble.
Anyhow, if Lieber's bill becomes law, it will be just about toothless. How can that law be enforced? Is a one or two year old child going to make a complaint with the authorities? If the spanking is not severe, will one spouse rat out the other? Hardly anyone will be jailed. What it boils down to is that this bill is a bit of feel-good legislation for those who are opposed to corporal punishment.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)