10-8

10-8 is 10-98 for the time being...

2005-05-31T08:46:00.000-07:00

Well ladies and gentlemen, it's been a fun experiment in blogging, but we all knew the good times couldn't last. With the last days of the Academy ahead of me, my search for a job continual, and my energy waning, keeping up this blog just isn't feasible right now.

10-8 will be going on hiatus for awhile until my life gets back into a more manageable territory.

Thanks for reading and hopefully I gave you something interesting to think about every once in awhile. In the meantime, why don't you go check out all the blogs I've linked to, since they are NOT going on hiatus. If they weren't cool, I wouldn't have linked to 'em.

Working at Cross Purposes

2005-05-27T08:31:00.000-07:00

This is a story out of Ohio. The site needs registration, so I'll post the text of the story for you, as always:

COLUMBUS, Ohio - State officials acknowledged Thursday that Ohio paid for Viagra and another drug to treat impotence for 13 convicted sex offenders in the last 14 months. The state discovered the issue after running a cross check of Ohio's 13,000-person sex offender registry with a database of Medicaid beneficiaries.
Ohio Medicaid will no longer supply erectile dysfunction drugs to sex offenders, said Jon Allen, spokesman for the state Department of Job and Family Services. The federal Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services clarified this week that states can cut sex offenders off from these drugs. The federal government even issued a warning that states could face sanctions if they don't. "We just don't feel that's appropriate," said Gary Karr, a spokesman for the federal agency.
Ohio spent $3,968 on impotence drugs for those 13 sex offenders. Their prescriptions will no longer be honored, and any future Medicaid claims for Viagra, Levitra and Cialis will be checked against the state's sex offender registry, Allen said. About 1.7 million Ohioans are enrolled in Medicaid, a state-federal program that provides health coverage for the poor and disabled. The federal Medicaid agency issued its directive on sex offenders after New York Comptroller Alan Hevesi announced Sunday that from 2000 through March, 198 rapists and other high-risk sex offenders in New York received Medicaid-reimbursed Viagra.
Elsewhere, Florida said its Medicaid program had paid $93,000 to provide Viagra to 218 sex offenders in that state over the last four years. Heather Herron Murphy, manager of the Columbus-based Sexual Assault Response Network of Central Ohio, agreed with Ohio's decision to stop prescribing impotence drugs to sex offenders. But she warned against blowing the issue out of proportion. "Erectile dysfunction drugs aren't aphrodisiacs," she said. "It's important to recognize that if we're only talking about what Viagra does for a man, then we're not thinking about how sexual assault really works. It's not about sex, it's about one person utilizing his power and control over another person," Herron Murphy said.
Overall, Ohio Medicaid spent $455,447 last year on impotence drugs, covering 7,600 prescriptions for 1,441 men. Earlier this year, a group of Ohio lawmakers began a fight to end reimbursements for impotence drugs to all Medicaid recipients, saying taxpayer money would be better spent on dental care and other essential health services. House Republicans pulled state funding for the drugs from its proposed budget and the Senate version also calls for eliminating the funding.

What in the world is wrong with these people? I mean, how on Earth does any right minded person approve this sort of thing? It boggles the mind at how inept bureaucracy can really be. If I was an Ohioan, I would be livid that my state was arming sex offenders with their weapon of choice. Isn't that really what they are doing? Why not give an arsonist a bunch of matches? Why not give a gang member a gun? There is absolutely not one good reason to give a sex offender a sex drug and shame on everyone that allowed it to happen.

Furthermore, government purchasing sex drugs is wholly inappropriate, if you ask me. The government shouldn't be in the business of giving people erections. Do you think the founding fathers had that in mind when they created this great union? Do you think Thomas Jefferson was all "I say, General Washington, I'm feeling a bit sluggish with Mrs. Jefferson, if ye know what I mean... If only there was a great and sprawling government which could assist me with my bedroom problems and various other bad humours...". How vulgar.

Oh well, it's your tax dollars at work and your representatives at work, Ohio. If you are outraged, only you can do something. Punish your elected representatives if they keep this up. Teach them a lesson at the ballot box.

(HT to Crim Prof)

Boston Botch

2005-05-26T08:20:00.000-07:00

Interesting story out of Boston, from ABC News:

BOSTON May 25, 2005 — A panel investigating the death of a woman hit by a pepper spray pellet at a Red Sox celebration said Wednesday that police made mistakes at every turn, from the department's decision to buy the pellet guns for crowd control to an officer's decision to fire the errant shot.
Five officers face internal disciplinary action and those still on duty could be fired for their involvement in the shooting, police Commissioner Kathleen O'Toole said as the independent commission's report was announced. Victoria Snelgrove, 21, an Emerson College student, was shot in the eye Oct. 21 outside Fenway Park after Boston defeated the New York Yankees for the American League pennant. The city paid her family a $5.1 million settlement earlier this month.
"We find that inadequate planning and training, combined with a breakdown of command discipline, set up a situation ripe to produce an unintended result," read the report by the commission, headed by former U.S. Attorney Donald K. Stern. Patrolman Rochefort Milien, who was certified to use the weapon, fired the pellet that killed Snelgrove. His lawyer has said the officer was aiming at someone near Snelgrove who was throwing bottles. "Officer Milien failed to take sufficiently into account that he was shooting at a moving target in the midst of a crowd and that a missed shot could easily strike a bystander," the report said.
The commission also faulted the Police Department's decision to buy the air-powered pellet guns in early 2004. Police officials did little research before making the purchase, then failed to properly train officers in their use, the panel said. Stern's commission also called for a national study on the effectiveness and safety of the FN303 pepper-pellet guns, manufactured by FN Herstal USA.
The report said the officers "did not appear to appreciate that a person could be seriously injured or killed." Milien and four others face internal charges alleging excessive use of force and poor judgment, the commissioner said at a news conference with Stern. O'Toole said each officer was "deeply distressed" by what happened.

Now, I don't know what happened, I wasn't there. I don't even like baseball. However, from just what this article is telling me, I can't say I side with the family of the victim here. Yes, the officer fired at a bottle-throwing jackass and missed and a seriously unfortunate incident happened. However, it seems to me to be an accident with no improper actions by the officer.

Yes, if the officer misses, he could hit someone behind. However, the bottle-thrower was a more dangerous element in my estimation. A guy throwing glass around could seriously injure someone. The officers were completely justified in trying to employ a less-lethal device against him. What followed was a freak accident, but it was in no way indicative of "excessive use of force". If you want to get right down to the nitty gritty, at least in the state of California, a man throwing bottles at a police officer could be considered a deadly force situation. Employing a less-lethal device is a favor to this rioting idiot. If anything, the family should have sued him for creating the conditions that necessitated the use of force in the first place. But no, let's blame the cops...

Granted there may be more to the story, but from what I read here, there is simply no indication that the officer acted improperly. Now, if it's a training issue, then it's still not the officer's fault if he was acting within his training. I wish ABC news would have taken an extra 20 minutes and found out a little more of the story. Oh well... If nothing else, I just hope that the officers are treated reasonably and with respect and not used as scapegoats or offered up as human sacrifices to the public.

Great Use of Resources

2005-05-25T09:36:00.000-07:00

This is a fantastic story out of Austria:

VIENNA - An Austrian politician has a novel idea for cracking down on people who don’t clean up after their dogs. A council member in Vienna proposes a DNA registry for dogs, so their droppings can be tested. People who fail to clean up their dogs’ droppings would be fined and charged for the DNA analysis. Vienna’s sidewalks are littered with dog droppings, and campaigns to get dog owners to clean up have made little headway. Dog owners already can be fined if they don’t pick up after their dogs, but tickets are rarely issued because the pet has to be caught in the act. The proposal isn’t likely to get very far. The governing Social Democrats have dismissed the idea, saying it would create a “police state.”

Whiskey. Tango. Foxtrot.

Is there really such an abundance of resources and time in Austria that they want to DNA test dog poop in order to ticket dog owners? What planet is this?

I've posted other stories about putting up cameras around town or just generally being in favor of Big Brother keeping an eye on all you hooligans out there, but even someone like myself can only marvel at the sheer inanity of poop testing. Not only is the idea inane but the dog owner would be charged for the cost of the DNA testing. I'm sure that's not cheap! How fair is that! And anyway, how are they going to keep a registry of every doggie DNA in Austria? The logistics are staggering.

In the good ol' US of A, you probably couldn't do this because unless it's a felony, you have to personally witness the crime in progress in order to make an arrest or give a ticket. There's no way you could claim that the crime occurred in your presence if you have to DNA test it.

In any case, for you Austrians out there, if you want to avoid prosecution, just carry a bottle of bleach or battery acid and bathe the feces in it in order to destroy the DNA. Problem solved!

(HT to Crim Prof Blog)

Feel-good Story of the Year

2005-05-24T12:07:00.000-07:00

Sorry for the late post, I was busy doing my oral interview at Downey. I think I did really good, so we'll see how it goes.

Anyways, I dont have much today, so I'll post this terrific story out of Omaha.

An Omaha woman is in custody, accused of Felony Child Abuse, after allegedly trying to sell her one-year-old child into prostitution.

Thirty-four-year-old Elizabeth Harlan was arrested shortly before 11:30 Sunday night.

Police were responding to a call near 32nd and "V" Street to check the well being of a child. Neighbors made the prostitution allegation.

Officers were directed to 3913 ½ South 24th Street.

Police entered the apartment and say they found Ms. Harlan passed out on the sofa while the one-year-old sat on the floor eating cigarettes.

The child was transported to Creighton University Medical Center for treatment and Harlan was taken to Central Police Headquarters where she was interviewed and then booked into detention for Felony Child Abuse.

No comment necessary. Kill her and be done with it.

More On Meth

2005-05-23T08:25:00.000-07:00

An article from the WOWT.com, an Omaha NBC affiliate:

A new law restricting the sale of cold medicines that contain an ingredient used to make methamphetamine took effect in Iowa Sunday.The law, passed by the legislature this session, is designed to clamp down on homegrown meth in Iowa.
The law targets pseudoephedrine, a decongestant found in many over-the-counter cold medicines. Those containing the drug can only be sold by pharmacists and customers are now required to show a photo ID and sign a logbook. Consumers will be limited to purchasing no more than 7,500 milligrams of pseudoephedrine in a 30-day period.
Authorities found nearly 1,500 meth labs in Iowa last year. While they expect the law to result in fewer labs, they don't expect it to solve the state's meth problem since it's estimated that 80% of meth used in Iowa is smuggled in from Mexico and the southwestern U.S.

In the academy, we're working through our narcotics class right now, and I learned that Columbia is to Cocaine as California is to Meth. Aces!

For law enforcement, these drug labs are dangerous. Besides drug degenerates always carrying weapons and being willing to kill cops, the chemicals mixed in these labs can kill you, either instantly or 20 years later. Depending on how they mix and which particular cloud enters into your lungs, you could be sick for the rest of your life or even pass on deformities to your kids. I know cops who have permanent resperatory damage from clearing meth labs. It's seriously a dangerous business. Anything that makes it harder to create these ticking poison bombs is okay by me.

Unfortunately, the drug trade has something on it's side that even the forces of good have a hard time dealing with: lots of money. I'm going to tell you guys something that you aren't going to want to hear, but it's the truth: There are some people out there who are willing to do bad things for money.

I know, I was shocked when I found out, too.

But seriously, the drug trade is so lucrative that buy-offs are widespread. Personally, I can't think of many things more pathetic than selling out your fellow man for a few bucks. To help destroy human life for a profit is one of the most ignoble and uncivilized things someone can do (Isn't that right, Planned Parenthood...). But it happens and there's not alot we can do about it. As long as misguided souls are willing to pay for a body-destroying drug, some degenerate scumbag will make it in his basement and sell it to them.

Just a thought...

2005-05-20T08:31:00.000-07:00

From the Newport News Times:

One man died and another faces criminal charges as a result of a traffic crash Saturday night on Pioneer Mountain Loop.Dead is Aaron Allan Handy, 25, of Springfield, who was a passenger in a 1972 Chevrolet Blazer being driven by Steven James Berliner, 25, of Toledo. Aaron Patrick Strom, 25, also of Toledo, was a passenger in the vehicle as well.At about 10:25 p.m., Lincoln County Sheriff's Deputies, the Oregon State Police, Toledo Fire Rescue, and Pacific West Ambulance were dispatched to a report of a crash on Pioneer Mountain Loop near milepost 1.7.

According to OSP, Berliner was driving west when he failed to negotiate a curve and drove off the road. The vehicle hit a tree and rolled down an embankment, ejecting the occupants. All three were transported to Samaritan Pacific Communities Hospital in Newport. Handy was pronounced dead at the hospital. Berliner and Strom were treated for their injuries and released.

The Lincoln County Multi-Agency Crash Team was called out to investigate the accident, and it was determined that alcohol was a factor in the crash. None of the occupants of the vehicle were wearing safety belts at the time of the accident.Berliner was arrested after being treated at the hospital, and he was lodged at the Lincoln County Jail on charges of criminally negligent homicide, Assault II, reckless driving, Driving Under the Influence of Intoxicants, and driving while suspended. His bail was set at $97,500.

Now, I have a question here...

We've all done stupid stuff under the influence of alcohol (well, all the cool people anyway). We've all taken stupid chances when we were young, you know how it goes. However, if you were going to let someone who's been drinking drive you home, why wouldn't you wear a seatbelt?

It's pretty dumb not to buckle up in the first place, but if your driver has alcohol in him, you'd be suicidal not to put your belt on! I just don't understand it... Of course, they picked the guy who was not only drinking but had a suspended license to drive them home. These weren't exactly rocket surgeons.

And just so this post isn't solely about making fun of injured and dead people, here's some interesting stats from MADD Online:

For fatal crashes occurring from midnight to 3:00 AM, 77 percent involved alcohol in 2003. The next most dangerous time period for alcohol-related crash deaths were 9 PM to midnight (64 percent of fatal crashes involved alcohol), followed by 3 AM to 6 AM (60 percent of fatal crashes involved alcohol). (NHTSA, 2004)

The rate of alcohol involvement in fatal crashes is more than 3 times as high at night as during the day (61 percent vs. 18 percent). For all crashes, the alcohol involvement rate is 5 times as high at night (16 percent vs. 3 percent). (NHTSA, 2004)

In 2003, 30 percent of all fatal crashes during the week were alcohol-related, compared to 53 percent on weekends. For all crashes, the alcohol involvement rate was 5 percent during the week and 12 percent during the weekend. (NHTSA, 2004)

The lesson here? At 2am Saturday morning, get the hell off the road! You're gonna die!

We could use a little more support...

2005-05-19T08:20:00.000-07:00

I have an article here from the San Francisco Gate:

Cooperation on homeland security often is a one-way street, with federal authorities ignoring advice from state and local counterparts, the International Association of Chiefs of Police Chiefs said Tuesday. Homeland security efforts have focused on a few communities, leaving most others vulnerable despite billions of dollars voted by Congress since the Sept. 11 attacks, the chiefs said.
The nation's homeland security strategy "is handicapped by a fundamental flaw: It was developed without sufficiently seeking or incorporating the advice, expertise or consent of public safety organizations at the state, tribal, or local level," the chiefs said. Most police forces have "not significantly improved their ability to prevent, respond to or recover from a terrorist attack in their community," the report said. The chiefs said prevention also had taken a back seat to response to an attack. Federal money has gone increasingly to major metropolitan areas at the expense of public safety agencies in the rest of the country, the chiefs said.
In addition, the Bush administration has cut grants to local police forces and is seeking further reductions this year. The cuts have hampered state, local and tribal police in their day-to-day work, from meeting with community groups to investigating reports of strange and suspicious behavior, the report said. It noted that police came face-to-face with three of the Sept. 11 terrorists through traffic stops in the months before the attacks. "These activities are the cornerstone of any successful crime or terrorism prevention effort," it said.
Brian Roehrkasse, spokesman for the Department of Homeland Security, said the police chiefs organization was heavily involved in drafting the national emergency response standards the administration issued in January. More than $13 billion has been distributed to first responders, including many police forces, in the past two years, Roehrkasse said. He acknowledged that the administration has given priority to some urban areas that have been targeted in the past and could be again.
"We have made it a priority to maximize homeland security funds by allocating resources based on risk to ensure those with the greatest needs get what they deserve," he said. Steve McCraw, the Texas homeland security director, said he has been pleased with the cooperation between federal and state authorities. "There's a tsunami of information that comes in," said McCraw, a former senior FBI official.

First of all, can you use the word "tsunami" positively again? I would wait until 2006 before calling things tsunamis.

Seriously though, I can't say I'm thrilled at the administration for apparently cutting us off at the knees after asking for our help combatting terrorism. What the heck is the point of a Department of Homeland Security if not to bolster and support local law enforcement?

Now, having said that, I can understand why more Homeland Defense money is going to New York and LA and not to Appleton, NJ or Waxahachie, TX. I mean, Waxahachie is a bustling American icon, buuuut I have a sneaking suspicion that we might not see too many suicide bombings down there.

In any event, I believe that you won't find too many administrations more pro-cop, pro-soldier, and anti-terror than the Bush Administration. I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt that we are still in the feeling out stages for what the DHS is going to be all about. I hope in the future we see even more partnership and support from them.

I don't suppose any of you out there have any experiences working with the DHS that you'd like to share with the class?

I hope you're happy LA!

2005-05-18T09:46:00.000-07:00

Well, you guys did it.

Actually, I take that back. By sitting on your butts and not doing anything, you did nothing to stop it, which is as good as doing it here. Only 30 percent of you voted. Well, congrats, you now have yourself a fine fine man as mayor.

Antonio Villaraigosa is your mayor! Are you nuts?!

A former MeCHA member is your mayor?

The guy that wants to give licenses to illegal aliens?

The guy with a list of shady friends a mile long?

The guy that would rather kiss up to Mexico than bring justice to rapists and murderers?

So you guys really elected an extreme Mexican nationalist?

How disturbing.

Now, I'm sure this will be met with cries of racism or anti-latinoism or something like that. I'm sure there are those out there who think I must just be some white supremist idiot. On the contrary, I have a huge love of mexican culture. I used to train in mexican wrestling down in Santa Ana, if you want to know the truth. I spent many hours with lower income Mexican people and they are some of the nicest, hardest working people you will ever meet. It is because I respect Mexican-Americans that I don't want these MeCHA thugs gaining more power. It is because I respect the hard work of the Mexican-Americans that I don't want people who support illegal immigration in office.

The long and the short of it is that if you are pro-illegal, you are anti-Mexican-American. It's that simple. Don't even get me started on being anti-cop or anti-law-enforcement. If you think James Hahn was a crappy mayor for cops, just wait until Antonio Villaraigosa gets going. You ain't seen nothing yet.

Congratulations L.A.!

Jesse Jackson Is An Idiot

2005-05-17T08:40:00.000-07:00

I finally found this news item on SignOnSanDiego.com. I'd heard it on the radio but couldn't find the story. As promised, here's the King Racebaiter himself:

TORRANCE – The Rev. Jesse Jackson called the shooting of an unarmed driver by sheriff's deputies "a hate crime" after meeting with the man and his family. Jackson said he visited Winston Hayes, who is still in the hospital recovering from four gunshot wounds, to offer spiritual, emotional and legal counseling and called on the FBI to investigate the incident."This is in fact a hate crime," Jackson said Sunday. "It is a violation of Mr. Hayes' civil rights."

That's right!

If a guy tries to run over a cop and the cop shoots him, it's a hate crime!

You have to wonder why Jesse Jackson keeps getting day passes from the mental institution he must live in. How on Earth does a man become so twisted inside that he allows himself the indignity of exploiting historical black oppression? Yes, Blacks (and Latinos, Women, Jews, and the Irish) were oppressed and mistreated years after slavery ended. But when Jesse Jackson throws around claims of racism just to make a buck, all he is doing is using their pain for his gain. When you think about it, slavery was about powerful men using weak men for their own personal profit. That's what Jesse Jackson does! He mistreats the slaves just like the plantation owners did. He uses them just like they did. Jackson is just another slave owner profitting from the misery of others.

The Black Community has a duty to denounce and get rid of Jesse Jackson. They owe it to themselves and to the ancestors that worked hard for the equality of Blacks. The world will be a better place when people like Jesse Jackson are cold, alone, and penniless in a gutter somewhere.

Monday Morning Bits n' Pieces

2005-05-16T08:34:00.000-07:00

I don't really feel like talking at length about any one thing, so I'll just throw up some stories I found interesting.

First, from the indomitable CrimProfBlog, we have this update to a story I posted awhile back:

We previously blogged here about the growing trend of cities putting suveillance cameras in public places to detect crime. This week, Baltimore rolled out its new public surveillance system, and while the Mayor was performing a public demonstration of the system during the unveiling ceremony, a man was witnessed stuffing his cigar with pot and was promptly arrested. I suppose the Mayor couldn't have dreamed of a better PR event to support his $2 million expenditure. Story . . . [Mark Godsey]

Professor Godsey may be speaking tounge-in-cheek with that last line, but my philosophy is "Hey! It works!". We may consider rolling a blunt to be a minor crime, but I'm happy that minor crimes and major crimes alike will be caught on tape. I would seriously consider moving to/working in Baltimore just to be a part of this cool new paradigm for cities.

Another tidbit from CrimProfBlog:

Gail Heriot at The Right Coast blogs about a death row inmate who wants to hurry up the process and be executed. His lawyer is trying to stop the execution by arguing that it would constitute assisted suicide in violation of state law. [Mark Godsey]

Very clever.

And lastly, a tibit from the Boston Herald:

Even if the state continues to pump money and scientists into its overburdened crime laboratory, it will take ``five to seven years'' before DNA testing can be turned around in 30 days rather than the current rate of up to 15 months, officials told a legislative committee yesterday.
Although the state will double the 12 DNA chemists within a year and plans to build a new crime lab capable of meeting all the commonwealth's forensic testing needs, it would take 80 scientists alone to handle the massive requests for DNA testing. ``The (Romney) administration and the Legislature has stepped up to the plate over the past several years but it's a long road,'' said Cape and Islands District Attorney Michael O'Keefe. ``We have to stay on it and make sure we don't get off it. We're five to seven years out on that but none of these things happen overnight.''
The state's beleaguered crime lab made headlines again in April when a suspect was arrested in the murder of Truro fashion writer Christa Worthington. Because the crime lab is backlogged with thousands of cases, it took almost a year to match a suspect's DNA profile to evidence recovered from Worthington's body.

I had no idea it took that long to get DNA tests squared away like that. Hopefully we can get this process streamlined in the future.

Well that's all the bits n' pieces for today. Tune in tomorrow when I try to find a ridiculous Jesse Jackson quote that he just made today so that we can make fun of him.

Tough Gang Bill Passes House

2005-05-13T08:40:00.000-07:00

HR 1279 passed the house today. It's a tough new gang bill. From the Law Librarian Blog:

GovTrack.us reports that HR 1279 passed the House yesterday with 91% of Republicans supporting and 63% of Democrats opposing. The measure passed 279 to 144.

If you click on the link, it will take you to a PDF with the text of the bill on it. The GOP website has this summary of the bill:

Summary: H.R. 1279 is a comprehensive bill to increase gang prosecutions and prevent gang-related crimes. The bill authorizes increased federal funding to support Federal, State and local law enforcement efforts against violent gangs, and to coordinate law enforcement agencies’ efforts to share intelligence and jointly prosecute violent gangs. The Act also creates new criminal gang prosecution offenses, enhances existing gang and violent crime penalties to deter and punish illegal street gangs, proposes violent crime reforms needed to prosecute effectively gang members, and proposes to reform the federal juvenile justice system to authorize prosecution of 16 and 17 year old gang members who commit violent crimes.

Sounds like an awesome bill. I can't imagine why 63% of Democrats opposed this bill. I'm sure it was for purely non-partisan reasons of principle...

Hahahaha sorry, even this cat thinks that's a hilarious joke.

Court Victories For Law Enforcement

2005-05-12T08:27:00.000-07:00

From CrimProfBlog:

State v. Sykes, Wis., No. 2003 AP1234-CR, 4/22/05
The existence of probable case will justify treating a warrantless search as a search "incident" to a later arrest for a different crime even when the officer, at the time of the search, did not intend to arrest the defendant and the later arrest is based on evidence found during the search, the Wisconsin Supreme Court decides. It is not the officer's subjective intent that is important, the court says; it is the fact that the officer actually had probable cause to arrest the defendant at the time he performed the search. Decision here.
Garvey v. State, Del., No. 5-2004, 4/28/05
A defendant who responded to a request to waive his "Miranda" rights by saying, "Depends on what you ask me," unambiguously waived his rights, the Delaware Supreme Court holds. Decision here. [Mark Godsey]

I'm not exactly sure what the first one means, so if there are any legal eagles flying around, feel free to break it down better than I can. What I believe it's saying is that an officer has legitimate reason to search a person if he has probable cause that the crime was committed, regardless of whether he actually arrests that person for that crime or a different one or doesn't arrest him at all. If I'm correct, then I'm definitely in favor of this ruling. I'm in favor of virtually any court decision, executive order, or state law that lets me ignore your Fourth Amendment right to commit crimes in private.

I like the second decision because some smart-ass crook just lost his case. Here's a tip to criminals out there: when you're in custody, don't try to be cute.

Understatement of the week

2005-05-11T09:36:00.000-07:00

"Deputies lacked a plan", says an article from the L.A. Times. No kidding...

The Los Angeles County sheriff's deputies who fired 120 rounds at an unarmed car chase suspect early Monday appeared not to have a coordinated plan and at times worked at cross-purposes, department officials said Tuesday after a preliminary investigation. As a result, some deputies opened fire because they erroneously believed that the suspect had shot two colleagues, while others were firing because they thought the suspect was trying to ram officers, Capt. Ray Peavy said.
The findings prompted Sheriff Lee Baca, who said Monday that he was reserving judgment on the deputies' action, to question some of their tactics, saying Tuesday that the amount of gunfire seemed excessive. The shooting, which was broadcast repeatedly on TV newscasts across the country, also came under criticism from Merrick J. Bobb, who serves as the Board of Supervisor's special counsel on Sheriff's Department matters. He described the deputies' response as disorganized and undisciplined."The fact that 120 rounds were expended indicates panic, lack of planning and an absence of control," said Bobb, who plans to examine the policy issues surrounding the case and report to the Board of Supervisors.
An unedited videotape of the incident obtained by The Times offered a clearer picture of what happened when deputies blocked in a white SUV they had been chasing through a residential area of Compton early Monday.The tape shows that deputies fired several shots initially when the suspect, 44-year-old Winston Hayes, backed toward them.
That was followed a second later by a much larger burst of gunfire coming from deputies who had surrounded Hayes' Chevrolet Tahoe. The vehicle lurched forward a short distance down Butler Avenue, moving between two groups of deputies, who delivered a third barrage, with bullets flying wildly toward officers and into homes. Hayes and Deputy Edward Clark were wounded. Clark was treated and released; Hayes, who was shot four times, remains hospitalized.

I've seen the video. Oh God, the video...

You know, I come on from week to week and defend officers on the grounds that in stressful situations, people react in certain ways that they have a split second to decide and you have a lifetime to dissect. I try to show you the other side of the coin. I try to make you give them the benefit of the doubt.

But, oh God... the video...

I am not claiming to be a tactics expert. But right now in the Academy, I'm being taught by several tactics experts and they would kick me out of the Academy if I ever did what those deputies did on that shooting.

Besides firing 120 rounds into a car at an unarmed man AND NOT KILLING HIM, they let him get between them and started firing at each other! One guy pull his police car in front of the suspect car and exited his vehicle ON THE SIDE THAT WAS DIRECTLY IN FRONT OF THE SUSPECT CAR! I try to avoid profanity on this blog, as it is a family blog, but that was a clusterf**k of epic proportions.

And it's all on video.

Oh God... the video...

UPDATE: In case you can't get the video (oh god... the video...) I have a little diagram for you of what happened. It just shows the position of the suspect vehicle and how the officers were endangering them selves. The red dots are their approximate lines of fire. You can see how dangerous it was.

UPDATE TWO:

Mr. Hampton found an even better place to get graphical info for the shooting. Try this page!

Everyone's favorite Schedule 1 Drug

2005-05-10T08:34:00.000-07:00

First, I bring to you an interesting story from Jointogether.com which made me laugh at first because I saw the word "joint" in it:

A growing number of teenagers and preteens are being treated at emergency rooms or are entering drug treatment as a result of using a highly potent type of marijuana, government officials say.
The Los Angeles Times reported April 26 that although marijuana use by youths has declined overall since the mid-1990s, the latest statistics show an increase in more serious problems related to the drug. According to federal health officials, the number of marijuana-related emergency room visits for children ages 12 to 17 more than tripled since 1994, to 7,535 in 2001, the most recent year for which figures were available.
Most of the hospital visits were for an "unexpected reaction" to the drug, while "overdose" was listed in 10 percent of the cases, "chronic effects" in 6 percent, and "accident or injury" in 4 percent."The stereotypes of marijuana smoking are way out of date," said Michael Dennis, a research psychologist in Bloomington, Ill. "The kids we see are not only smoking stronger stuff at a younger age but their pattern of use might be three to six blunts -- the equivalent of three or four joints each -- just for themselves, in a day. That's got nothing to do with what Mom or Dad did in high school. It might as well be a different drug."
According to federal officials, the marijuana being taken by youngsters today is nearly twice as potent as it was in the 1980s. "There is no question marijuana can be addictive; that argument is over," said Dr. Nora Volkow, director of the National Institute on Drug Abuse. "The most important thing right now is to understand the vulnerability of young, developing brains to these increased concentrations of cannabis."

We hear so much propaganda from the pothead lobby about how safe and non-threatening marijuana is, so I think it's good to hear some other stats for a change. Did you know that the number 1 illegal drug that people go to rehab for is marijuana?

Also, in case you think lighting nature on fire and breathing in whatever results is a safe and healthy activity for the whole family, think about this, which I got from DrugStory.org:

Smoking marijuana causes many of the same respiratory complications as smoking tobacco, including daily cough and phlegm (symptoms of chronic bronchitis), frequent chest colds, and increased risk for lung infection, tissue damage and cancer. Regardless of THC content, the amount of tar and carbon monoxide delivered to the lungs is approximately three to five times greater for marijuana smoke than tobacco smoke. This is largely due to differences in the method of smoking tobacco and marijuana, such as larger puff volumes and longer durations of inhalation with marijuana. Some experts have linked marijuana use to a weakened immune system, which could impact the body’s ability to resist viruses, bacteria, fungi and other microbes, thereby increasing risk for infections among youth.

Mmm, sounds like a tasty treat.

Can someone remind me why we are listening to the POTHEAD lobby about anything? What's next, pulling tweekers off their bikes and asking them about tax policy?

Who wants to apply for Belgium PD?

2005-05-09T08:31:00.000-07:00

I am a member of a message board for my police academy. Well, other people interested in police and police academy are members too. One of these members is currently living in Belgium and is pursuing a career in law enforcement out there. He posted a message about use of force policy in America versus policy in Belgium. I wanted to post part of what he wrote because I find it fascinating:

Let me explain to you how it works here in Belgium. If someone shoots at a COP, unless the COP is hit, he has no right to shoot back. If someone attacks a cop with anything else......a knife for example...unless the cop get stabbed, he can't stab the guy back. Now if he gets stabbed, he can ONLY stab the guy back (if he finds a way to get hold of the knife) but he can't shoot him or hurt him in any other ways. COPS can only defend themselves with equal force and same weapons. These laws apply as well to citizens. belgian citizens are not allowed to hurt back someone who is hurting them. If someone breaks into my house, I have to let him hurt me, give him what he wants and let him go....then call the cops.

Now, I'm not going to give out this guy's name just on the off chance it could harm his career. But, what he has to say here is important. This is your so-called "enlightened" European view of police work. This is how the "cultured" Europe treats their cops. They give license to their criminals to run amok and prevent the cops from doing their job.

That policy puts police in grave danger. It's almost as if someone who hates cops is in charge over their because they have basically said a cop cannot defend himself unless he is wounded. I don't need to tell you how dangerous that is.

But I want you to think about something: Next time the media starts foaming at the mouth about police using excessive force, ask yourself if the media won't be happy until we are more like Belgium. Think about who typically criticizes police and ask yourself what the real agenda is. If we revise our policies everytime race-baiting extortionists like Sharpton and Jackson decide that they don't like our decisions, ask yourself how long it will be until a cop can be stabbed and still not be allowed to use his gun.

Ayn Rand prophesied in her book Atlas Shrugged that the world would end not in a fiery explosion, but by a great softening that eventually turned it into a pulpy mush. You all need to help stand guard against the softening of America. Otherwise, we're screwed.

Let's shoot our mouths off...

2005-05-06T08:37:00.000-07:00

Friends, well-wishers, and fellow contemporaries, I come to you today with some friday gun stats for your perusal. They come from the US Department of Justice.

Normally I put things in block quotes, but today I'll just number the ones I find interesting.

1. In 1997 among State inmates possessing a gun, fewer than 2% bought their gun at a flea market or gun show. Over 80% got them from friends, family, a street buy, or an illegal source.

SHOCKING!

2. Of those armed during the commission of their crime, over 80% of State and Federal prisoners DID NOT CARRY a firearm!

MON DIEU!

3. About 84% of State inmates who possessed a gun also had some characteristic that would have prevented them from buying the gun.

WHO KNEW?!

4. Between 1993-2001, about 703,800 violent crimes against 12-17 year olds occurred on school campuses. Only 1% were committed with a firearm, compared to 3% with a sharp object, 4% with a blunt object, and 4% with miscellaneous objects like ropes, chains, and poisons.

CAN IT BE?!

5. From 1993 to 2001, firearm violence fell 63%.

CALL THE PRESS!

6. The same percentage of violent offenders carried a firearm as a blunt or sharp object (10%). Over 2/3 carried no weapon.

GOD HELP US!

Now, obviously I'm having a bit of fun with this, but the point is this: When someone tells you that handgun violence is a huge and growing problem, they are either ignorant, stupid, or liars. Not only is handgun violence falling, but guns aren't even used much of the time. Not only that, but most people who own guns didn't buy them from WalMart because laws prevent most of them from owning one.

YET AMAZINGLY THESE FINE UPSTANDING CROOKS ARE SOMEHOW GETTING GUNS!

This ought to clearly show how increasingly restrictive laws against gun owners do nothing to solve anything. When over 4/5s of the criminals who committed a crime with a gun were already legally prevented from owning it, you know that the laws aren't reducing anything.

Strict enforcement is the only answer. What if carrying an illegal gun carried a minimum sentence of 25 years in the State Pen? Do you think people would think twice about carrying them around?

It's something to think about. Enjoy your weekend. ;)

Fashion Police

2005-05-05T08:21:00.000-07:00

Charming tale from IOL News

London - The fashion-conscious owner of a burgled clothes shop said on Wednesday he helped to catch the man who robbed him after spotting the thief dressed in a criminally uncouth mix of stolen trousers and tops. "I couldn't believe that this guy was wearing all the pinched stuff, with little thought of matching items with any real taste," said Neil Primett, who owns the Planet Clothing store in Bedford, a town in south-east England.
Primett, 36, was left dumbfounded when he spotted the man in a blue sleeveless T-shirt - ironically emblazoned with the logo "Criminal" - green trousers and a tracksuit top, just 36 hours after the shop was raided. "I couldn't believe it, he was
wearing such a mismatch," he said.
"Picture Rupert the Bear, green check trousers with elasticated bottoms, an electric blue sleeveless T-shirt carrying the word 'Criminal' and a tracksuit top," said the store owner, referring to the British comic book character. "I always recognise clothes from my store because there are not many other places that sell them." After spying the thief, Primett rang the police and then trailed him until officers arrived 20 minutes later.
A Bedford police spokesperson said a man had been released on bail until May 13 in connection with the burglary.

Can't you just picture this guy, hand on his hip, gesticulating wildly about the unfashionable criminal? I love that this guy was more offended by the ensemble than by the crime itself.

However, this story brings to a light a very serious issue which I cannot remain silent on.

Primett, 36, was left dumbfounded when he spotted the man in a blue sleeveless T-shirt - ironically emblazoned with the logo "Criminal"

Yet again, a JOURNALIST misuses the word Ironic. Irony is NOT a coincidence, it's not a funny event, it's nothing like that!

Irony is a very precise term that refers to a very specific scenario, one in which the actual outcome of a situation is the opposite of, and in mockery of, the intended outcome of a situation. It is NOT a funny coincidence. A coincidence could almost not be farther from Irony. Unfortunately, the world at large has decided to utterly gut the meaning of Irony. I almost do not blame them, because true Irony can be hard to spot.

There are two important components: The actual outcome being the opposite of the intended outcome, and the element of mockery. It is the latter of the two that makes Irony difficult to ascertain. I give you this scenario: A diabetic is crossing the street to go to the pharmacy to buy insulin. As he crosses, he is hit and killed by the insulin delivery truck. This is ironic because he needed the insulin to live, yet it ended up being the death of him. Do you see the element of mockery there? Try this one: An African refugee survived intense civil war only to be killed by a box of humanitarian aid when it landed on him after being ejected from a plane.

The only instance of irony in Alanis Morissette's insipid song "Isn't it Ironic?" is that fact that nothing in the song is ironic at all. I certainly don't think Ms. Morissette had enough wit to give the song meta-irony, I think she's just stupid.

On Hoaxes

2005-05-04T09:43:00.000-07:00

From the indefatiguable CrimProf Blog:

The 32-year old who faked a kidnapping will not face criminal charges--the thousands of hours, millions of dollars and, presumably, multiple gunpoint stops of people fitting the fabricated description of the suspects must be disregarded in light of the fact that the woman faced a stressful wedding--only a cad would insist on the
letter of the law. "She needed some time alone," empathized Albuquerque's Chief of Police.
The Albuquerque Tribune reports that "authorities from several law enforcement agencies went beyond the call of duty - giving her a teddy bear, an FBI cap and polo shirt, a tote bag, meals and even a shoulder to cry on - to make her daylong stay in the city comfortable." Last year, Minnesota college student Audrey Seiler faked her kidnapping and got misdemeanor probation. On the other hand, the
19-year old college student who faked a racial incident is facing the hammer--the highest degree of all possible charges. After all, she selfishly disrupted the campus for her own personal reasons. [Jack Chin]
UPDATE: Although apparently in the clear in New Mexico, where the false statements were made, the runaway bride may in fact face criminal charges in Georgia, according to prosecutors--even though Duluth, GA Police Chief Randy Belcher has been quoted as saying no charges would be filed. AND PS: I don't deal with the Wendy's hoaxer here because it is uncontroversial that scammers for profit are subject to prosecution. The more difficult problem is people who do this sort of thing for emotional reasons.

Aw... I sure am glad that criminal acts that cost millions of dollars and emotional stress to hundred of people are going to go unpunished. I mean, she just needed some time alone, right? Who among us hasn't claimed to be kidnapped by mexicans when we get really stressed?

This is the sort of thing I was talking about in my earlier post about judging INTENT versus MOTIVE. We should punish or not punish someone based on their intent. Their motive is only mildly interesting. She clearly intended to fake her kidnapping and file a false report. She was nervous about her wedding? So what?!?! EVERYONE IS NERVOUS BEFORE THEIR WEDDING, BUT NO ONE ELSE FAKES THEIR OWN ABDUCTION!

Of course, it looks like the police chief is going to coddle this 32-year old baby instead of discipline her. That's a shame because it just teaches everyone else that if you ever get sad or upset, do whatever you want because we care more about your feelings than about law and order.

Disgusting.

When molesters lose, everyone wins

2005-05-03T08:29:00.000-07:00

From CrimProf Blog:

From MSNBC.com: "Spurred by the killing of a 9-year-old girl, Gov. Jeb Bush on Monday signed a law imposing tougher penalties on child molesters and requiring many of those released from prison to wear satellite tracking devices for the rest of their lives. The measure gives Florida one of the toughest child-sex laws in the nation. The Jessica Lunsford Act was quickly drafted after Jessica’s death was discovered in March and was pushed through by lawmakers outraged that the man accused of killing her was a registered sex offender. It passed both the Senate and House unanimously.
It establishes a mandatory sentence of 25 years to life behind bars for people convicted of certain sex crimes against children 11 and younger, with lifetime tracking by global positioning satellite technology after they are freed. Until the new law goes into effect Sept. 1, molesting a child under 12 is punishable in most cases by up to 30 years in prison." Story . . . [Mark Godsey]

I like the huge mandatory sentence. You always hear stories about these creepy animals going to jail for short amounts of time. Hopefully there is no "time off for good behavior" with this mandatory sentence. The whole reason you're in jail is because you didn't have good behavior!

What also drives me crazy is that of all the crimes one can commit, child molestation is the most indicative of an irreversible mental defect, yet many times they are just back out among the populace as if they shoplifted a CD. These people cannot be rehabilitated, only prevented from committing the crime. It's not like they see the errors of their ways. So, I'm all for huge sentences, satellite tracking, and whatever else we can do to confound them.

If I had my way, they'd all have to move to their own little island, away from decent folk. Ah well...

The State Babysitters

2005-05-02T08:38:00.000-07:00

So, I went on a ride-along on Saturday with my dad. If you don't know, a ride-along is when you get to ride in the front seat of a cop car and follow the officer around while he patrols. You get to see the real cops instead of reel cops (get it?). Anyway, we had a good time cruising the fair city, making life better for all creatures great and small. But I noticed something that hadn't occurred to me before for some reason.

A very large amount of people are childish idiots.

I mean, I've always known that many people are jerks, but try going on a ride along for a few hours. Your faith in the basic goodness of all people will be decapitated and buried in a shallow grave by the railroad tracks. Custody disputes are the worst. Seemingly normal grown men and women act like bickering schoolchildren. They call the police at the drop of a hat trying to screw over their ex in any way possible. Then they put on their little brave face and talk about just trying to make it out there and not wanting any trouble and the like.

Then you get the guy that hits his wife and then he calls us and has us come out to "make sure nothing happens" because he thinks that if he calls, we won't be able to go after him. I'm not even a cop and I've been out on like three calls like that! Who does he think he's fooling?

I don't even need to get into the racism nonsense. A guy could be standing in middle of Hollywood Blvd covered in blood holding a severed head and he will still accuse you of racial profiling.

But moreso than people being jerks to cops or using cops to be jerks, a lot of calls are just because people are jerks on their own. People are brutal to each other, and for no reason. Many of them spend all day thinking of ways to screw over their fellow man. I'm not even talking about robberies or car thefts. I'm talking about shady car dealerships who sell people cars and then reposses them in the middle of the night with no warning or notice. I'm talking about guys locking their wives out of the house. I'm talking guys in their mid-twenties seducing high school girls. Guys who steal stuff from drunk vagrants. Teenagers playing "pranks" like smashing windows, throwing stuff into traffic, or anything else that could seriously hurt someone.

It's like, if you are going to be a jerk, at least have the deceny to be enough of a jerk to go to state prison for awhile. Don't just be a small time jerk that ruins people's days every once in awhile. Be enough of a jerk that we can teach you a powerful lesson.

At one point, I was starting to think "Damn, am I devoting my life to babysitting childish adults?". But then I realized, with a smile, "No, I am devoting my life to making life miserable for childish adults! And teenagers too!"

I heard that!

2005-04-29T08:23:00.000-07:00

From my first stop in the morning, CrimProf Blog:

State and federal prosecutors applied for 1,710 wire taps last year, a dramatic increase over prior years. Wiretap applications are similar to search warrants, and require a demonstration of probable cause that incriminating conversations will be recorded. Every single wiretap application submitted to a judge last year in this country was approved. Every single one? When I was a federal prosecutor, some judges would approve a wiretap application after a quick skim-read, as they can be lengthy and time-consuming. One federal judge, who shall remain nameless, looked at the size of the application and asked me, "Is there probable cause here?" When I said yes, he started to sign it without reading a word. I had to respectfully ask him to read it. But most judges really busted my chops on the probable cause issue. All 1,710 applications approved? Have our judges become rubber stamps after 9/11? Story . . . [Mark Godsey]

Am I the only one who read this and said "Woo hoo!"? Every app was accepted! That's outstanding!

First of all, ignore the fact that there were 1,710 wiretaps and concentrate on the fact that on 1,710 occasions, we conducted a "search" with total due process from the court. This isn't even a story about law enforcement playing fast and loose with search and seizure considerations. This is 1,710 cases of the system doing what the system is supposed to do.

Some people may worry that innocent people will be tapped. I'm okay with that. If nothing else, it will help prove your innocence that much quicker. Also, I highly doubt that Gladys Abernathy, octogenarian from Macon, Georgia will have her phone tapped by the big mean FBI. I suspect it will be males ages 18-34 with names like Mohammed, Ackbar, and Bin Laden, who make frequent calls and trips to the Middle East and who just signed up for flight school.

And you know something? If I moved to Japan and then one day 20 young white Christian males who watched professional wrestling with unhealthy fervor suddenly blew up Tokyo, I would expect to have my phone tapped too. Hell, I'd probably request to have my phone tapped just so that I'm totally above board.

Besides, they are going to be very bored listening in on my calls. I hate the phone.

And the problem is...?

2005-04-28T08:26:00.000-07:00

CrimProf blog quotes TalkLeft.com when they say:

"A new government report shows our prison population is soaring.

1 of every 138 U.S. residents are in jail.

The prison population grew by 900 inmates per week between 2003 and 2004.

8,000 more prisoners were admitted to federal prisons than were released.

2.1 million people are housed in our prisons and jails."

And the problem is...? Last time I checked, you have to get this thing called due process before you are deprived of your liberty. It's not like people are just being thrown into jail for no reason. They are committing crimes. They are violating their agreement with society. That fact that more and more of them are being removed from society is a good thing.

Also, according to Department of Justice statistics:

The violent crime rate decreased 3.9% from 2002 to 2003. From 1994 to 2003 the rate fell 33.4%.
The property crime rate decreased 1.2% from 2002 to 2003. From 1994 to 2003, the rate fell 23%.

Here, have some more stats that match these.

I think the real story is that despite the fact that we put a lot of people behind bars, there is still an iPod stealing epidemic in New York.

You know what that means? We're going to be increasing that prison population again!

Hooray!

This town ain't big enough for the both of us...

2005-04-27T09:43:00.000-07:00

From your fav and mine, CrimProf Blog:

From NPR.com: "With sex offenders accused of two recent high-profile murders in the state, the city of Miami Beach, Fla., is considering a law that would effectively run registered offenders out of town. The city's mayor -- and the opposition -- talk about balancing public safety and civil liberties." [Mark Godsey]

Civil liberties... remind me about that civil liberty that forces good and innocent people to live next to sex offenders. I'm sure it's somewhere in the constitution, but the article escapes me. What about people's right not to be raped and murdered? Do we have that right at least?

Sex crimes really represent a break with humanity in some sense. Molesting a child, raping a woman and the like really show an inhumanity in the offender. They show a brokenness inside the person. This isn't simple theft, it's not even something really bad like a fatal DUI. This is a person who has shocked our most primal sensibilities. It indicates a sickness that, to my knowledge, is never really cured.

And we want to let them move next door.

We apparently tell honest, law-abiding citizens that if they don't like it, they can leave because we want to make sure that the child molestor can live where he wants. Real nice.

My philosophy is this: local government sets the local rules. If the city of Brea doesn't want to be a home to sex offenders, they shouldn't have to be. With any luck, we can force all sex offenders to move out to some desert camp somewhere where they can molest cactuses and leave the rest of us alone.

A man can dream, can't he?

2005-04-25T10:57:00.000-07:00

A story from the Sun Sentinel out of Florida

DELRAY BEACH -- The father of a teenager shot and killed by a rookie police officer plans to file a wrongful death lawsuit against the city, his attorney said.A Palm Beach County judge recommended Thursday that Delray Beach Police Officer Darren Cogoni be charged with manslaughter for the death of 16-year-old Jerrod Miller. Cogoni, 23, finished police training three weeks before the shooting. Willie Gary, the attorney for the teen's father, Kenneth Miller, did not say Friday how much money he would seek in damages. But in a letter to city officials, Gary said he is also suing for more supervision of rookie police officers, better training in the use of deadly force, more minority recruiting and a community police liaison.City Manager David Harden declined to comment on the pending lawsuit. Jerrod Miller was shot in the back of the head Feb. 26 as he drove across the Delray Full Service Center high school campus. Cogoni asked to see Miller's driver license, and the teenager, who did not have one, drove off erratically, scattering students gathered outside the school gym, according to witnesses. Cogoni said he fired to protect bystanders mingling in the path of Miller's car. State Attorney Barry Krischer is expected to decide in the next two to three weeks if Cogoni will be charged, a spokesman said.

Usually I post a story about a cop on trial and I explain why we should cut the cop some slack. Usually, I stick up for cops in deadly force situations, giving them the benefit of the doubt. This time, I just can't see how this is defensible. It doesn't even make any sense!

Officer Cogoni fired a gun towards a car speeding away from him in order to protect people in the path of the car? That means that the bystanders were in the path of his bullets! Not to mention the use of force issues involved in shooting a car that's not coming at you, not to mention the fact that killing a driver will not immediately stop the car anyway. If we have a driver trying to run down a cop, then you have assault with a deadly weapon and it makes sense to use deadly force to combat the deadly force being used against you. When you have some brain-dead idiot teenager trying to escape, it's not anywhere near the same thing.

I know Florida has different peace officer standards and training, but I seriously doubt this is how officers are trained. As much as I hate the idea of suing cops and departments, in this case, I don't blame the dad. I'm willing to bet that Cogoni acted outside his training and his department policy, and you just can't do that.

x

I'm sure there's a joke about shooting craps in here...

2005-04-25T10:50:00.000-07:00

Sorry for the delayed post. I had to get a rental car taken care of because some lovely person backed out of a parking space and right into me!

Anyways, Alex from Law and Ordnance sent me this nifty news item:

SAN ANTONIO -- This is one story they'll be telling around the San Antonio Police Department for a long time. An off-duty officer was at a San Antonio auto auction house yesterday when nature called, a police spokesman said. Officer Craig Clancy strolled to the appropriate facility and was lowering his trousers when his pistol fell from his waistband. When Clancy fumbled for the falling firearm, it went off, twice. One of the bullets nicked a bit of floor tile into the leg of a man who was washing his hands nearby. That man was taken to a nearby hospital for treatment. Police internal affairs is investigating.

What can you say?

If you drop a gun, don't fumble for it. Chances are it will NOT go off if you let it fall. Chances are it WILL go off if you fumble around with it.

Lesson learned.

No Child Left Unsearched

2005-04-22T08:52:00.000-07:00

From CBC news:

MONTREAL - Police in Montreal are raising concerns about the involvement of young children in gang activity. They say children as young as nine or 10 years old are being recruited into street gangs. A 14-year-old was sentenced on Tuesday for the brutal stabbing of 65-year-old Martha Taylor Gregory last January. The teen was only 13 when the incident occurred. Police say he's been known to them since he was 10.
"We do have examples of very young children as young as 10 that have been associated with street gangs," said Yves Riopel, the commander of the anti-gang section of the organized crime division for the Montreal police. Riopel says the recruitment of young children has not reached alarming proportions, yet. Harry Delva, the youth projects co-ordinator at La Maison D'Haiti, says street gangs find younger recruits particularly attractive "because they know that the police and other people won't search the younger ones.
"Mostly what they do is take the kids and put them on the bus and then they become carriers. So they are going to carry drugs and sometimes they are going to carry weapons." Delva believes gang violence is on the upswing in Montreal and that this summer could be a difficult one.

Lesson Number 1 for all you law enforcement out there: search them all. Especially the women and the youngsters. Those gangbangers think you're stupid. They think you're just going to slouch through your whole career and that they can bamboozle you. Don't prove them right. Know their tricks and show 'em who's smarter and more cunning.

There are a number of things we need to consider in thinking about why this happens at all: first of all, too many kids don't have a good dad at home. Over here in the States, over 70% of black kids are born out of wedlock. That's an incredible figure. And when we talk about crime being more prevalent in the minority community, it's more like crime is prevalent in the fatherless community. What is frustrating is that no one can really do anything about this. Until we issue a license to breed, people are going to do what they do without thought of social consequences.

It also doesn't help that hip-hop/gangster/thug culture is the new chic style today. Even suburban white kids are listening to hardcore gangsta rap. It's everywhere and the culture permeates all races and groups. Unfortunately, it is one of the most despicable cultures we've seen in awhile. It glorifies crime, mayhem, and violence and it venerates pimps and thugs. Hip-hop culture idolizes victimizers if you want to get right down to it. So we see that the dominant cultural climate is that is pro-crime, anti-woman, and (last but not least) anti-cop. And we wonder how 10 year olds end up as gang mules.

Those are two problems that really can't be solved by the ingenuity of men. As to what actions we CAN take, I have no idea. I think about it a lot. I brainstorm ideas, but at 22 I don't think I have the experience to even scratch the surface. Maybe someday we'll figure it out. If you have any ideas, let's hear em.

Slightly Embarrassing

2005-04-21T08:50:00.000-07:00

From The Herald Sun:

THE reputation of Papua New Guinea's capital as one of the world's most crime-ridden cities has been given an unwanted boost with news that Port Moresby's police chief was assaulted and robbed within sight of a major police station.
Assistant Commissioner Tony Wagambie was held up and assaulted on Wednesday by six armed men who stole his vehicle, a mobile phone and a small amount of cash, a police spokesman said today. Mr Wagambie was in uniform just 400m from Port Moresby's Gordons Police Station, where Australian police assigned to help battle lawlessness in the former Australian colony are based. The incident also came just days after Mr Wagambie denied newspaper reports that there had been an upsurge in armed robberies in Port Moresby since the detachment of 145 Australian police arrived in January as part of a $US600 million ($782m) five-year aid program to fight crime and corruption in PNG.

Oops! That can't be spun in any redeeming way for that police department.

It goes to show you, though, how if police do not possess a good command presence both individually and as a department, crooks don't care. Not everyone is afraid of our pretty uniforms, shiny badges, and bad-ass guns. Many of them have cooler guns than we do anyway!

I don't know how to solve crime in Papua New Guinea, but this does serve as a lesson to departments here in the US: Don't lose your edge. Don't give up your command presence. Don't let criminals think you are pushovers. Otherwise, your chief might get robbed less than a mile from your station.

(HT: CrimProf Blog)

Two interesting court cases

2005-04-20T09:25:00.000-07:00

From the fine gentlemen at CrimProf Blog:

U.S. Law Week notes that the Supreme Court granted review in two criminal cases yesterday:
1. Maryland v. Blake, No. 04-373 -- When a police officer improperly communicates with an in-custody suspect after the suspect has invoked his right to counsel, does the rule of Edwards v. Arizona, 451 U.S. 477 (1981), against reinitiation of custodial interrogation permit consideration of curative measures taken by the police to conclude that a suspect's later initiation of communications with the police was voluntary?
2. Georgia v. Randolph, No. 04-1067 -- When two persons have equal use and control of a residence, may one occupant give the police permission to conduct a warrantless search of the common areas of the premises over the objection of the other occupant? [Mark Godsey]

I don't know what number 1 really means, so perhaps one of you law talking guys can explain it to the rest of the class. What it sounds like it's trying to decide is whether or not police can give evidence that in-custody suspects voluntarily reinitiated interrogation after they invoked their rights. If that's the case, I obviously have no problem with that.

Number two is of more interest to me. According to my academy training, at least in California, occupants of a home can consent to searches of common areas. I don't see why this should be problem. It makes sense that if Jim and Tim share a house, Jim can't give consent to search Tim's room. It doesn't make sense that Jim couldn't give consent to search the kitchen.

My one beef with consent searching is that parents cannot give consent to search their child's room. I don't think children should have that kind of right to privacy that supercedes their parents. I was raised under the banner of "My House, My Rules", so if dad wants to let the police look through Junior's stuff while Junior is living in dad's house, he should be allowed to. If Junior doesn't like it, he can pay rent on the room and make it "his". But apparently precedent is not on my side.... yet... ;)

He makes criminals go bananas! (stupid joke sorry)

2005-04-19T08:21:00.000-07:00

From My Way News:

MESA, Ariz. (AP) - The Mesa Police Department is looking to add some primal instinct to its SWAT team. And to do that, it's looking to a monkey.
"Everybody laughs about it until they really start thinking about it," said Mesa Officer Sean Truelove, who builds and operates tactical robots for the suburban Phoenix SWAT team. "It would change the way we do business."
Truelove is spearheading the department's request to purchase and train a capuchin monkey, considered the second smartest primate to the chimpanzee. The department is seeking about $100,000 in federal grant money to put the idea to use in Mesa SWAT operations. The monkey, which costs $15,000, is what Truelove envisions as the ultimate SWAT reconnaissance tool.
Since 1979, capuchin monkeys have been trained to be companions for people who are quadriplegics by performing daily tasks, such as serving food, opening and closing doors, turning lights on and off, retrieving objects and brushing hair. Truelove hopes the same training could prepare a monkey for special-ops intelligence.
Weighing only 3 to 8 pounds with tiny humanlike hands and puzzle-solving skills, Truelove said it could unlock doors, search buildings and find suicide victims on command. Dressed in a Kevlar vest, video camera and two-way radio, the small monkey would be able to get into places no officer or robot could go.

Remember how I said yesterday that the new guard is more attuned to rapid progress? Well, there you have it. (Unless using animals to do human work is not considered progress. Except, I can't think of a single people-group prior to 1969 that used animals to do work more efficiently. Nope, not even one. Progress it is!)

In any event, I think we should have a whole menagerie of animals in law enforcement. We can use rhinos to batter down doors, we can send in police panthers which are faster than dogs, we can have police falcons snatch weapons from the hands of crooks, and we use police killer whales for the harbor division.

Can any of you think of any uses for animals in law enforcement?

It's no good to have it and not use it...

2005-04-18T08:46:00.000-07:00

From the Toledo Blade:

At least six traffic stops. Five driver's license renewals. One night in jail.
At any of those times, Toledo's most elusive murder suspect could have been nabbed in a four-decade-old electronic, nationwide web for fugitives - had Toledo police entered the arrest warrant into an FBI database. Now, the arrest of David Delacruz raises a key question: Are there other fugitives whose warrants have not been entered into the proper electronic databases?
Toledo police have 8,476 active warrants, dating to 1954, court records show. A third of those are felonies - the more serious category of crime. Toledo police say they don't have a system in place to ensure fugitives' names have been entered into the correct databases.
While such information has been automatically sent to databases since the late 1980s, old warrants had to be typed in. And police have no central repository for those old paper warrants, particularly from the 1970s. Court records show Toledo police have 512 active felony warrants issued before 1980.

Police technology is a great thing, but you have to actually use it for it to be effective.

To be fair, I think many old American institutions are still playing catch-up to modernity. Businesses have to be a technologically advanced as possible because they make their money from efficiency and customer service. If a business is behind the times, it's going to lose money and go out of business.

Cops, on the other hand, don't make profit from their business savvy. Whether they have lots of technology or very little, it doesn't make a huge difference to their bottom line. Some departments still make their officers hand write all their reports! Clearly efficiency isn't on some department's radar screen.

Eventually it will get all worked out. Not to rag on police veterens or anything like that, but I think that now that the old guard is passing on and younger generation are becoming the Captains, Commanders, Chiefs, Commissioners, and Mayors, we are seeing the birth of a real techno-boom in policing. This is not to say that the old guard is holding us all back or being obstinate (though perhaps some are), but rather that I think Generation X is just more culturally attuned to rapid progress. It's a socio-cultural thing rather than an ego thing. I'm certainly not eager to lose many of our vets because they have so much wisdom to impart. I mean, some of our instructors were out patrolling before cops carried radio packs. Can you imagine policing downtown LA without access to a radio? That takes some real courage and some real skills.

Anyways, it's an exciting time to be entering law enforcement. For all the stupid lawsuits and ridiculous vitriol against cops, all the new toys we get to play with that help us put bad guys in jail totally make up for it.

A little thing called tact...

2005-04-15T08:18:00.000-07:00

I found this story on this site.

Lori came home to find her daughters fighting that Monday evening. Her 12-year-old had kicked a hole in the door, and the girls were hitting and throwing things at each other. She feared one or both would be seriously hurt.
She called 911 and asked for help. Her 12-year-old daughter was out of control, she told the call-taker."OK. Do you want us to come over to shoot her?" the dispatcher asked, according to a recording released this week.
For five seconds, the line went dead."Are you there?" the call-taker asked."Excuse me?" Lori said.Mike Forbess, a dispatcher of five years for the Watauga Department of Public Safety, then told her he was joking and apologized. But Lori cannot get his comment out of her head.

Hmmm... Something tells me that might have been inappropriate. But in Forbess' defense, he did apologize immediately and owned up to his supervisor immediately. That's not good enough for Lori though. She wants blood.

"This is a slap in the face that my child was not important enough, my call for help, my 911 call was not important enough that he had to make a joke about it," Lori said Monday. She asked that her last name not be used to avoid identifying her daughters, one of whom has emotional problems.
Forbess immediately told his supervisor about the call. He received a letter of reprimand two days later. Forbess received a second letter of reprimand from Chief David Van Laar on Monday, the same day the Star-Telegram obtained a copy of the 911 call recording, and of Forbess' disciplinary records. The mother, however, said her faith in the 911 system remains shaken. She said she plans to file a formal complaint. "I do not have words to tell you how shocked I am that someone is allowed to do this," she said. "You don't do people like this, and then get a slap on the wrist."
In his letter to Forbess, Van Laar wrote: "This type of response cannot be tolerated, and this letter shall serve as notice that any future unprofessional responses while answering the 911 line will be cause for termination."But the reprimand is not enough, the mother said.The next time she has an emergency, she said, she won't feel safe calling 911.
"This man does need to be disciplined," Lori said. "How can a person in this line of work be so unfeeling that he asked a person who needed help, 'Would you like us to come over and shoot your child?'"That's an interoffice disciplinary action," she said of the reprimands. "That doesn't do anything."

Wow, way to be reasonable lady. Yeah, Forbess was a moron for cracking a joke on a 911 line. He probably thought he was helping calm her down or diffuse some rage and instead he put his foot in his mouth. We all do it, it's part of life. He received reprimands and his job is on thin ice. That's plenty. But this lady acts like she is going to boycott 911.

Also, she talks about him being unfeeling in her time of crisis, but she has to realize that it looks like she is calling 911 to step in and parent for her. Her child is acting up and she gets afraid and calls the cops. Some people are bound to take it a little less seriously than, like, a fire, a murder, a rape, or a robbery. Have a little perspective Lori.

So if you guys were the Chief, what would you have done about this?

Anticop Legislation in Texas

2005-04-14T08:12:00.000-07:00

Very disturbing story on GritsForBreakfast today:

"Talk about a strange coalition," said state Sen. John Whitmire, D-Houston, when he realized the ACLU and the National Rifle Association both supported banning so-called "consent searches" at trafic stops. Sen. Juan Hinojosa sponsored HB 1195, which was heard and left pending in yesterday's Senate Criminal Justice Committee. (See MSM coverage here and here.)That bill would disallow officers from requesting consent to search people's vehicles at traffic stops without cause.

First of all, what the hell is the NRA doing with the ACLU? That's troubling right off the bat.

Several other states, including Rhode Island, New Jersey, Minnesota, Hawaii and the California Highway Patrol already disallow such searches. About 35% of all searches at traffic stops in Texas are consent searches, according to figures reported as part of departments' racial profiling statistics.Both advocates and law enforcement agreed that consent searches are only rarely "productive," meaning officers don't often find contraband when they conduct them.
"You are right that in the vast majority of the time, we found nothing,"a police union representative told the committee. That seemed to bolster Hinojosa's claim that consent searches are a "waste of law enforcement's time." Nobody thought there would be a significant law enforcement impact. A representative from San Antonio PD defended consent searches by saying it was officers' job "to ask questions," but admitted that "I don't believe we'll be hindered in the majority of our job. ... The sky isn't going to fall" if the bill passes, she said.

Maybe I'm nuts but I don't think the idea behind searches is that they yield fruit 95% of the time. It's to find the 5% of people with illegal stuff. Most people are good people. Hell, I could have even told you that you won't find things on most searches. Why remove a useful tool from our bag of tricks just because it doesn't catch a bad time many times.

Also, I reject the notion that it is unproductive. It's actually quite productive: it removes any question about whether they have illegal stuff! Once the search is over, everyone is on the same page and we all know whether or not the driver is a criminal. Everyone wins (except crooks)! How is that not productive? It's produces a good analysis about what is going on.

Sen. Seliger, R-Amarillo, in particular thought the threat of arrest invalidated the ability to deny consent. He seemed to be searching for a compromise, and at one point suggested that requiring written consent might be the way to go. That would make a big difference. The City of Austin began requiring written consent last year, and the number of people allowing their vehicles to be searched declined by 63%

Well gee, that's something to be proud of! "I made sure that cops got to do their jobs less effectively almost 2/3 of the time!". And he's a Republican! That's what I get for praising Republicans in my previous post. Ha ha, very funny.

Anyway, at this rate, pretty soon, we'll have to get written consent from the suspect and the UN before we can arrest anyone, and we won't be able to use cuffs, batons, guns, or stern language. I'm starting to forget why I want to get in this line of work...

News Bits

2005-04-13T08:18:00.000-07:00

From NewsDay.com:

DALLAS -- A set of numerals written on the back of a dead man's hand turned out to be a license plate number that led police to his suspected killers. Police noticed the numbers as they looked over the body of 18-year-old Francisco Lopez, who was shot near his home on Sunday.
On Saturday night, Lopez had noticed a blue Monte Carlo cruising around his home. Lopez thought the men riding in it might try to steal his Cadillac, so he wrote their car's license plate number on his hand, police said.
The next day, Lopez and his girlfriend were returning home when Lopez saw the car again, confronted the men and was shot to death, police said. Brothers Javier Izaguirre, 21, and Reymundo Izaguirre, 20, were arrested and charged with murder.

This somewhat goes back to my monday post about fighting back, being aware of what's going on, and doing something about crime. This victim paid attention and used his head and even though he was killed, the two cockroaches who did it are behind bars now.

And from the SF Gate:

Parole violators will be sent back to prison rather than to drug treatment programs or home detention beginning Monday under a sweeping change to California's troubled parole system.
State corrections officials said they decided to do away with diversion programs that served as an alternative to prison because there was no evidence the lesser sanctions work. The policy had been pushed by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's administration as a way to rehabilitate ex-convicts and to save money by reducing the prison population. In his weekly radio address, Schwarzenegger stressed the state's concern and aid for crime victims after his administration abandoned the program, which was
under fire from crime victims' advocates and parole agents.
The Los Angeles Times reported Saturday that the Schwarzenegger administration had dropped a program that allowed jail-based drug treatment, halfway house programs or home detention with electronic monitoring as an alternative to prison for some low-level parole violators.
The state adopted the alternative programs under former Gov. Gray Davis and expanded them about a year ago after a nonpartisan watchdog agency called the state's parole system "a billion-dollar failure" because 67 percent of ex- convicts returned to prison.

Gee, another feel-good-do-nothing program bites the dust. And what a shock it was a Republican who had to clean up an expensive and useless mess made by a Democrat. What do you want to bet that Governor Arnold will be called "insensitive" and "anti-rehab" and "typical Republican jerk"? Never mind that it was an ineffective program that wasted valuable resources. "Oh it's always about money with you Republicans... what about humanity? What about giving people a second chance?"

Not interested, because in this case, the criminal has squandered his second chance. No need to waste the money. Let's spend it on researching alternative energy. That'll be a little more useful.

South African Police Need Help

2005-04-12T08:40:00.000-07:00

Funny story out of everybody's favorite Dutch-African country:

Cape Town's dumbest crook award must surely go to the man who stole an activated security camera from a building in Woodstock, leaving video footage of himself taking his loot.
But in spite of having the damning footage, Cape Town central detectives have been unable to solve the crime in more than four months.The owner of the building in Newmarket Street, fearing for her safety, has only given her first name, Carol. She said she was turning to the Cape Argus to publish images from the video in the hope that someone may recognise the culprit.
She said the incident happened late at night on November 4 last year, when three men pulled up in a car outside her club in Newmarket Street. "They first lurked around a bit and then one of the guys lifted his friend up so that he could reach the camera."It was reality TV all the way. He looked straight into the lens, probably thinking that it had not been connected, or else he was just plain stupid,"

What can you say about this? You just laugh and move on.

Thank God none of us have ever totally made fools of ourselves out on the job...

Stand Your Ground In Florida

2005-04-11T08:30:00.000-07:00

CrimProf, as usual, has something interesting up on their site:

The legislature has enacted a statute permitting a person assailed outside their home to stand their ground rather than retreat before using deady or non-deadly force.

This is great step in the right direction for what I would call an attitude of nonvictimization. I don't think the State should force people to cower, to hide, to run, to back down, to surrender, to retreat, to not fight back when they are attacked. I think too often we cultivate an attitude of "Oh, I'll just let big people terrorize me and as long as I don't stand up for myself, I'll be okay". Sometimes, this works. But as we all know, many crooks are violent little jerks who will wound or kill even submissive victims. You have to remember that people who have decided to spend their time victimizing people aren't right in the head. They aren't predictable. They don't do what normal people do.

I wouldn't want to counsel people with a blanket statement of "always fight back", but by the same token, I will never tell you to lay down and be a good victim. I don't believe in it. It's one thing if it's you versus 5 ex-cons with shotguns. In that case, it would be suicide to try and fight the guys directly. But always have a plan. Always be thinking of how you can escape quickly or, if all else fails, how you can kill as many of them as possible before they get you. And when it's one on one, seriously put some thought behind standing up for yourself. You don't know what this animal is capable of and I think you need to prepare yourself to do violence if at all possible.

For me personally, when I'm driving around or when I have time to think as I'm walking around alone, I always go through mental exercises about what I would do if I was attacked. For example, this last Thanksgiving I was in downtown Vancouver on a vacation by myself. I walked everywhere, so I had a lot of time to think. I spent most of that time thinking of how I would respond to various attacks. I thought about where I would strike, how many times, and with what (it was raining nonstop, so luckily I had a heavy umbrella the whole time). I thought about how I would deal with two or three attackers. I kept an eye on where public places were and where police stations and other safe havens were. I always had a plan, and that plan rarely included submission. But again, that's just me.

It reminds me of a story one of my instructors told us. He was working in the a major US city that, at the time, was the bank robbery capital of the world. A reporter asked him for an exclusive interview and he agreed. The report asked him, in his professional opinion, what would stop all these bank robberies. My instructor said, in that gruff and salty way of his, "You wanna know what'll stop these bank robberies? I'll tell you, then... All we need to do is kill a few more of them and word'll spread that if you rob a bank here, you're gonna die". He went on to tell us how after that, they bought some information about a bank robbery team planning one in the area. They set up an ambush and that entire clan was wiped out. And sure enough, robberies in the area dropped for awhile.

For me this says something: If it becomes dangerous to be a crook, they'll go somewhere else. What if half of all muggings in downtown Vancouver ended with a dead or paralyzed mugger? Do you suppose muggers would move on to less dangerous areas?

Just a thought...

Two tidbits from CrimProf Blog

2005-04-08T08:32:00.000-07:00

First we have an interesting statistic:

From the DPIC: "According to a new report issued by Amnesty International, the United States is among four countries that carried out the vast majority of the 3,797 executions around the world in 2004. Amnesty's report states that the nations carrying out the most executioners last year were China (3,400), Iran (159), Vietnam (64), United States (59), Saudi Arabia (33), Pakistan (15), Kuwait (9), Bangladesh (7), Egypt (6), Singapore (6), and Yemen (6). The report notes that the increase in executions in China is partly due to a new way of estimating such executions since the government does not publicly release this data. The use of the death penalty declined in the U.S. in 2004 compared to 2003." To obtain the report, click here. [Mark Godsey]

I like how the headline of the Amnesty Int'l report says "the United States is among four countries that carried out the vast majority of the 3,797 executions around the world in 2004" when we were responsible for exactly .01% of them.

I also find it misleading to give data for Islamofascist countries like Iran because most of the countries don't execute their criminals with due process, they murder innocent people who have no due process. For the U.S. it tooks years of hard work to kill the 59 criminals that we did. I would love to see a report of how long it takes on average to get someone executed in the U.S. compared to other countries. I'd be willing to bet we take waaay longer than other countries.

And we also have a fascinating little story here...

A defendant was charged with felony murder after his accomplice in a burglary was killed by a victim fleeing in a car. [Jack Chin]

And if you click on that link, you get this explanation:

A West Palm Beach man was arrested on burglary and second-degree murder charges on Wednesday, more than two months after his alleged accomplice was run over and killed by the victim along Interstate 95.Christopher Dean, 25, drove the getaway car during the Jan. 12th break-in, allegedly committed with Eric Flint,
officials said.
Dean was trying to pick up Flint when Gregory Marlow, driving a Chevy Suburban, hit and killed Flint, officials said. Dean is being held responsible for Flint's death.

You have to admit, that's a creative reading of the law. I wonder if it will stick...

Euphemisms solve nothing

2005-04-07T08:28:00.000-07:00

From The Volokh Conspiracy:

New Euphemism:
Heard on local NPR station WAMU: "Most murders in DC are caused by 'loosely-knit neighborhood groups.'"
You mean, ummh, gangs?

As an avid and passionate linguophile, I cannot tolerate euphemistic language when it attempts to lessen the stigma of crime or bad behavior.

"Loosely knit neighborhood groups"? Why on Earth would NPR wish to make GANGMEMBERS look any better? What purpose does it serve? Euphemisms are useful when you want to put difficult information in a tactful way to someone you respect. I have to question why NPR wishes to garner the respect of gang members.

What other criminal euphemisms can we come up with?

Hypervelocitators = Speeders

Aggressively Unrequested Intercourse = Rape

Nonmedical Nonconsentual Devitalization = Murder

Politically-oriented decisive action groups = Terrorists

Unbalanced Landscaping Tool Enthusiast = Axe Murderer

Feel free to post your own. The winner of the best one will be awarded a career on a left-of-center radio show.

Say Hi to your big brother for me...

2005-04-06T08:21:00.000-07:00

An article from the fine gentlemen at CrimProf Blog:

Public officials in Bellwood, IL, a village of 21,000 residents covering 3.5 square miles in Greater Chicago, have decided to join the growing list of cities using surveillance cameras to deter crime. Only Bellwood is taking their initiatives one step further. As reported in the Chicago Tribune, within two years, officials plan for Bellwood to be the first town in Illinois (and quite possibly the first in the entire country) "to have every public thoroughfare, sidewalk and alley under the watchful digitized eye of the Bellwood Police Department...[In response to criticism from the ACLU,] Bellwood's mayor said he welcomed the suggestion that his town might be considered something akin to a Big Brother-land. 'I wish we could create that image. I would love that,' Mayor Frank Pasquale said with a chuckle. Although village officials say their town is
not unsafe, and in fact crime has dropped in the last two years, they are aiming for a crime-free future. 'Let this be a warning to our criminals,' Pasquale said. 'Be aware. We have you covered. So go elsewhere.'
The cameras, which police will monitor at the department's call center and can access through laptops in their cars, are the latest technology. They're wireless and sound-activated. Any excessive noise prompts the cameras to tilt and point toward the sound, enabling the department to hone in on a crime even as it is happening. The images are beamed to the department and the laptops through highly encrypted Internet servers and can be downloaded to compact discs to be used as evidence. High-ranking department officials eventually will be able to access the cameras via hand-held PDAs.
In a demonstration Wednesday, a camera set on a lamppost in the Bellwood Police Department parking lot was able to zoom in on the license plate of a car parked about five blocks away. When a gun was fired into the air, the camera took less than one second to shift toward the sound and zoom in on the demonstrator. 'We can look for chain-link fences rattling, gunshots obviously, car alarms, burglar alarms,' said Steve Daugherty, president of Current Technologies, the Naperville-based company that built and will install the cameras for Bellwood. 'Any sound that's discernible, we can
find it, sense it and point a camera at it.'

I, for one, welcome our new camera overlords. Here's the deal with security versus privacy: the public streets belong to the public corporately. They aren't my streets or your streets, they are our streets. Because we have a collective claim, it is more important to focus on the safety of the public than on it's privacy. We all have individual privacy in our homes. If we want to do something private, we can do it within our home. Out in public, however, the need for safety and security is more important.

Personally, living in a Big Brother community would be right up my alley. I don't do weird or criminal things out in public, thus, I'm not ashamed to be watched by the local police. There's nothing I do that I need privacy for on a public street.

I wonder about how people who have never been victimized differ from those who have been victimized when it comes to privacy vs. security. Personally, I've never been the victim of anything other than ridicule, but I don't want to ever have to be one. Out in public, privacy is a luxury that we unfortunately cannot easily afford anymore. There are a lot of sick people out there looking to victimize the weak. The strong among us could perhaps afford a little more privacy in public, but we ought to be looking out for the week. Honestly, who needs privacy out on a public street? What good is it? What would you do with it? What's your compelling interest?

That having been said, if they wanted to install a camera in my bedroom, I would be rather upset about that.

Criminal Chemistry

2005-04-05T08:51:00.000-07:00

A story out of Israel:

The Jerusalem Police yesterday uncovered a sophisticated system of smuggling drugs that served to bring cocaine into the country in recent months, investigators suspect. Using a chemical process and other materials, the members of the smuggling ring managed to turn the cocaine into elastic sheets that were then slotted into the sides of suitcases used by the drug couriers.
According to Chief Superintendent Hanoch Cohen of the Jerusalem Police, the members of the ring in Israel were to have detached the elastic sheets from the sides of the suitcases and put them through a second chemical process to turn them back into cocaine.The chemical process employed by the ring made it impossible for police to locate the drugs by means of existing technological tools, and the bust was facilitated by a sting operation involving two undercover police agents.

Well, well, well... if you build a better mousetrap, they'll build a better mouse.

If we can use the magic of science to turn cocaine into all manner of useful substances, why don't we invent a mist that ruins cocaine and just pump it into airplanes, bus terminals, subways, tunnels, and any other place that criminals tool around with drugs?

How 'bout it, science?

Sorry about the delay

2005-04-04T08:38:00.000-07:00

BlogSpot decided to refuse to post my posts for the last four days or so. Great way to kill my momentum guys!

Anyways, here's the two days of back posts below. I think they are swell.

Sad tale of a fallen hero...

2005-04-01T08:31:00.000-08:00

I watched a pretty horrific video in class yesterday. It was the video footage of the death of Lance Corporal Coates, a South Carolina Highway Patrolman. Coates was on a "routine" traffic stop for a driver who was later shown to be armed and dangerous. AT the time though, the driver seemed friendly and docile. It was only after Coates decided to pat down the driver that he pull out the small gun and fired at Coates. They wrestled for the gun as Coates drew his own .357 revolver. The driver was shot five times in center mass. Coates stood up and reached for his shoulder radio to call for help. The driver fired, the .22 caliber bullet going through Coates' arm and into his chest, severing an aorta. Coates died on the scene. The killer survived.

There were many officer safety lessons to be learned from the video. However, the video showed an interesting thing that happened after Coates was shot. Another patrolman received the call of an officer down and sped to the scene. Before he got there, two truckers who had seen the gunfight stopped to help the fallen officer, one of them brining their gun in case the driver still wanted to fight.

The other officer drives up and sees two men standing over Coates' body, one of them holding a gun. The officer flew out of the car and put down the truckers at gunpoint. It was a few minutes later before the true story came out about who had done the shooting. Luckily, the truckers weren't hurt. In the interview later, the arriving officer had said he was so consumed with rage that if they had moved wrong even an inch, he would have killed them. That's some scary stuff!

Beyond lessons of officer safety, it teaches us another lesson: Know what is going on. Things aren't always as they seem. Scenes can appear one way and be another. In the video, the arriving officer put himself in an unsafe position because while he was proning out the two truckers, the real killer was lying off to the side. If he had more ammo and wasn't bleeding from massive chest wounds, this could have been a double tragedy.

So stay safe out there and remember that there are no routine stops and things aren't always obvious.

Criminals Upset Over Being In Prison (Tearjerker)

2005-03-31T08:30:00.000-08:00

From the "Call The Waahhhmbulance" file (and the Post-Gazette) comes this Supreme Court story.

WASHINGTON -- Ohio's Attorney General Jim Petro yesterday asked the U.S. Supreme Court to reverse two lower federal courts and uphold his state's procedures for transferring prisoners to a "super-maximum-security" prison, where they endure long periods of solitary confinement and little opportunity for exercise.

Calling the decision to move prisoners to the 500-bed Ohio State Penitentiary in Youngstown a decision that reflects both their past misconduct and future dangerousness, Petro said: "The government needs to have the capacity and ability to make the best possible decision in light of all possible factors."

But University of Pittsburgh law professor Jules Lobel, representing a group of Ohio inmates, told the justices that the state's revised procedures for approving transfers to the "supermax" facility give prisoners only vague notice of why they are being subjected to as many as three years in solitary confinement -- such as a suspicion that the inmate is a gang leader.

Lobel summarized the explanation given to prisoners in the past as: "I'm putting you in there, and I'm not giving you a reason." Under the Constitution's guarantee of due process, he said, a prisoner is entitled to a summary of the reasons for his transfer that is "detailed enough for him to reply."

Lobel asked the court to affirm a ruling by 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Cincinnati requiring the Ohio prison system to provide a prisoner with written notice of the reason for a transfer to "supermax"; to allow the prisoner to call witnesses at a transfer hearing; and to advise the prisoner of what he must do to be returned to the general population.

In a hearing in which both justices and lawyers struggled to distinguish between different versions of Ohio's rules -- both of which have been shelved by lower federal courts -- a majority of the court seemed inclined to give the state the benefit of the doubt.

When Lobel suggested that prisoners were given only a vague explanation of why they were reclassified as maximum-security inmates, Justice Sandra Day O'Connor protested: "I mean, this is a prison classification, for goodness' sake!"

Justice Anthony Kennedy noted that the court had to choose between two views of a 6th Circuit decision finding fault with Ohio's transfer policy, which was revised during litigation. Either the lower-court decision was a "remedy" for abuses under the Ohio prison system's earlier transfer policy, or it was a forward-looking judgment regarding the language of the revised policy. Justice Stephen Breyer seemed inclined to take the latter view.

Noting that the revised policy did provide inmates with some explanation for their transfer, Breyer asked Lobel why the court shouldn't uphold the revised policy against the inmates' challenge and consider future claims of unfairness on a case-by-case basis.

Gee, so I guess being in prison kind of sucks now... Isn't that a shame? Doesn't your heart just totally go out to these crooks for having to endure a hard stint in a Supermax facility? How are they supposed to illegally traffic drugs, rape other inmates, and conduct gang business?! It's not fair. I wish somebody would stand up for the right of these criminals to have a positive and fulfilling prison experience and not be separated from their gangs and drugs. If only Johnny Cochran were alive, he'd do the right thing and help out these poor, defenseless, and personable criminals...

I need a tissue....

Funny Story

2005-03-31T08:24:00.000-08:00

From the fellows over at CrimProf Blog:

A man in Australia who was trying out his new high speed internet connection randomly came across a webcam posted outdoors in England, and just happened to catch a robbery in progress at that moment. He called the police in England and tipped them off, and the police made the bust. Story . . . [Mark Godsey]

Road Trip!!!!

2005-03-30T10:05:00.000-08:00

From the folks at CrimProf Blog:

Brian Kalt of Michigan State has posted The Perfect Crime, forthcoming in the Georgetown Law Journal, on SSRN. Here's the abstract:
This article argues that there is a 50-square-mile swath of Idaho in which one can commit felonies with impunity. This is because of the intersection of a poorly drafted statute with a clear but neglected constitutional provision: the Sixth Amendment's Vicinage Clause. Although lesser criminal charges and civil liability still loom, the remaining possibility of criminals going free over a needless technical failure by Congress is difficult to stomach. No criminal defendant has ever broached the subject, let alone faced the numerous (though unconvincing) counterarguments. This shows that vicinage is not taken seriously by lawyers or judges. Still, Congress should close the Idaho loophole, not pretend it does not exist. To obtain the paper, click here. [Mark Godsey]

Ruh roh. Unless you want to commit felonies, I suggest you not hang out in that swath for too long. I picture a dusty "Old West" town where anything goes. Can you imagine what people would do if they knew you could commit all the felonies you wanted? I would probably walk around with a "shobi-zue" because that is a cool felony that doesn't hurt anyone.

A Story about Attitude

2005-03-30T09:31:00.000-08:00

I want to tell you story. Last night I was at the Academy and one of our instructors told us this. He said that one day he was visiting a California Youth Authority facility (like State Prison for people under 25). He was talking to some of the kids there and got to talking with one in particular. He was 15 years old and he was on his 8th stint at the CYA. The kid then started talking about all the times he had the opportunity to kill a cop. Many times he was armed and ready in the back seat while the officer was talking to the driver. He had the ability to take that officer's life at any time. Other kids began to pipe in with similar stories.

Our instructor asked them why they never took the shot. The kid said that it was because that cop treated them with respect. He didn't hassle them, talk down to them, or insult them. He was professional and courteous and he'll never know it, but that allowed him to go home to his family that night. Stories like this really make you think about how you handle yourself out there (or if you're like me, how you plan to handle yourself).

Sometimes a situation will call for an intense and aggressive response right away. But many times, I think we can diffuse potentially deadly scenarios with an easy-going and respectful manner. Believe me, I doubt anyone hates teenagers more than I do, but you can bet that if I ever stop a car full of them, I'm going to be quite willing to be the nice cop now (at least until I get the driver out of the car and on to the curb away from his loser thug friends. Then if he wants to rumble, it's on like Donkey Kong).

So, this is just a little food for thought. Sometimes the way you behave will have consequences that you may never even know about until it's too late.

Be careful if you use Vonage...

2005-03-29T08:46:00.000-08:00

From CrimProf Blog:

The State of Texas has sued the internet phone company Vonage after a customer was unable to reach 911 during an home invasion robbery. Vonage requires separate sign-up for 911 services; Texas alleges that this was not made clear when the services are sold. [Jack Chin]

So, if you use Vonage Internet phones, make sure you get signed up for emergency services.

Who came up with this idea?

2005-03-29T08:25:00.000-08:00

You just have to laugh a little at this one:

NORWICH, N.Y. -- A man and a teenager have been charged with forcibly tattooing an obscenity on the forehead of a 17-year-old boy, police said Monday.
Norwich Police Officer Craig Berry declined to describe the tattoo, except to say it was a phrase.
"It's just ludicrous that someone would do something like this to another person," Berry said.
Kenneth D. Peer, 23, of South New Berlin and a 17-year-old boy from Earlville were charged with felony assault and unlawful imprisonment. Police were withholding the name of the 17-year-old, who was charged as a youthful offender, Berry said.

The pair were being held in the Chenango County jail on $25,000 bail. They were to
return to court Wednesday. The victim _ whose name also was withheld by police _ walked into the Norwich police station Friday to file a complaint against his attackers. The victim told officers he had been held down by a man and another teen at a Norwich residence while they forcibly tattooed the vulgarity.

Police have not established a motive for the attack, Berry said. Police, however, said the three were acquaintances and that the incident was not a hate crime.

Berry said the attackers used a homemade tattooing instrument. Berry said it was likely the victim would require plastic surgery or a laser process to remove the ink.

Here's my only question: Have the elements for mayhem been met since the kid was forcibly disfigured?

Who kept the pizza?

2005-03-28T08:22:00.000-08:00

Great story out of Boston:

BOSTON (AP) -- A Boston police officer turned pizza deliveryman and nabbed two would-be robbers last night.
It all started when the owner of a Roxbury pizza shop told police he had just received an order from an apartment where his deliveryman had been robbed the week before. So, according to police, an undercover officer decided to pose as a deliveryman and see what happened when he arrived with the pizza. A number of other officers were sent to wait outside.
Police said the "deliveryman" rang the doorbell and announced "pizza" several times. When the door opened and he stepped into the foyer of the apartment, he saw two people dressed in black, wearing masks and holding knives. The officer revealed his true identity and arrested the suspects with the help of other officers who rushed in. The suspects, both juveniles, were expected to be arraigned today.

I have to say, the idea was creative and brave. Knowingly posing as someone likely to get robbed is a dangerous thing. But, they were thinking outside the box and it worked. Three cheers for creativity!

From the "What a moron!" Department

2005-03-25T08:26:00.000-08:00

What is wrong with 23 year olds these days?

NEWARK, N.J. -- A Texas woman who admitted she started the six-hour standoff between police and purported hostage-takers in New Brunswick earlier this week by phoning in a fake emergency call was arrested Thursday and charged with conspiracy and other offenses.
Fatin A. Ward, 23, of Arlington, Texas, told The Associated Press Thursday morning she was playing a telephone game called "bombing" in which people make bogus emergency calls and then see how many law enforcement officers respond. Her mother said Ward has a history of mental illness and has been refusing to take medication.
"I didn't mean to cause any trouble," Ward said in a telephone interview Thursday morning. "It got out of control." The Middlesex County prosecutor's office signed criminal complaints Thursday afternoon against Ward and an alleged accomplice, Wadu Jackson, 20, of Irvington, charging them with conspiracy, initiating a false public alarm, and making a fictitious report to police. Ward was arrested at her home at about noon, said Christy Gilfour, spokeswoman for Arlington, Texas, police. A registered sex offender in Texas, she had been charged in Arlington on Feb. 18 with failing to notify police of her new address.
A month later, after the Union, N.J. police department said Ward was making prank calls to them, Texas authorities moved to revoke her bail because she was continuing to commit crimes, Gilfour said. It was that bond revocation order on which she was arrested Thursday. The Middlesex prosecutor's office asked police in Arlington, Texas, to extradite Ward to New Jersey. Jackson was still being sought in New Jersey on Thursday afternoon.
Ward declined to say exactly what she told police to spark Tuesday's standoff. She told The Star-Ledger of Newark for Thursday's newspapers that she told police she had been handcuffed to a bed, raped and was being held hostage in an apartment. That prompted police to cordon off a neighborhood more than 1,500 miles away.
The standoff ended when three teenagers who were in a third-floor apartment walked out of the house. The teens were taken into custody and then released. Middlesex County First Assistant Prosecutor William Lamb said Thursday that the three teens have been cleared of any criminal activity.

Can you believe that? That's an outrageous "game"! Someone could have gotten killed. It's not smart to amp up cops with tales of rape, cause them to draw their guns, and have them wait and get antsy. I hope this knucklehead gets seriously punished for this.

HAZMAT Drivers To Be Scrutinized

2005-03-24T08:22:00.000-08:00

I have found an interesting item from Newsday.com:

CRANBURY, N.J. -- The truck drivers who haul cargo labeled as flammable, combustible, radioactive or poisonous are now going to be scrutinized as closely as the hazardous materials that fill their tankers and trailers.
In the coming months, roughly 3 million drivers across the nation will begin to be fingerprinted and put through FBI criminal background checks. Their names also are cross-referenced with federal databases related to terrorist activity, a practice the U.S. Transportation Security Administration began over the summer.

Now, perhaps you shared my reaction to this story, which went a little something like this:

WE WEREN'T ALREADY DOING THAT?! IT'S 2005 FOR CRYIN' OUT LOUD!

Ah, that feels better. Anyway, I'm glad that we are fingerprinting them now, but I cannot believe that it took 4 years after 9/11 to get on this.

A Duty To Enforce?

2005-03-23T11:34:00.000-08:00

Sorry for the delay, I posted this and Blogger ate it and erased it. Then I got bogged down at work. Anyways, on to the post.

This is a very interesting story out of Colorado:

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court gave a skeptical hearing today to a woman's claim that police can be sued if they fail to enforce a protective order designed to shield her and her children from her estranged husband.Six years ago, Jessica Gonzales of Castle Rock, Colo. lost her three daughters when her estranged husband abducted them from her frontyard and later shot and killed them in his truck. He was killed when he shot at police.

Three times during the evening of the abduction, the mother had reported to the Castle Rock police that her girls were missing. She also had obtained a protective order during her divorce proceeding that required her husband to stay away from her house. The order also said police "shall" use all reasonable means to protect her and her children.The officer who took her calls did nothing, except tell her to call back in two hours if the girls did not reappear.The Supreme Court took up her case to decide whether victims of such non-action by the police can sue and win money damages.For most of the justices, the answer appeared to be no.
Justice Stephen G. Breyer said he feared that a ruling for Gonzales would open the door to multiple lawsuits against the police and other government agencies for failing to do their duty."The reason is they're too busy," he said. Plenty of laws impose a duty on the government, he noted, "but that doesn't mean the victim has a right to enforce it" by suing, he added.Justice Sandra Day O'Connor said she too was worried about allowing persons to sue the police for not acting. Usually, the police are sued for taking actions, such as using excessive force."This is such a new requirement you are seeking. It would be a major step," O'Connor said.
Others pointed out that the police usually have wide discretion to decide which cases to pursue."This is very much at odds with the normal discretion" given the police, Justice David Souter commented.The case of Castle Rock vs. Gonzales has attracted broad attention. Women's rights groups and activists in the fight against domestic violence say protective orders are meaningless if police have no duty to act. And without the penalty of a lawsuit, they may choose to ignore these court orders, they said.Gonzales' lawyer said the Castle Rock Police Department often did nothing to enforce protective orders."They had a pattern of ignoring these complaints," attorney Brian Reichel of Broomfield, Colo. told the court. "She assumed she would be protected by the state. It means something only if the police were willing to enforce it."
Police and municipal groups joined the case on the side of Castle Rock, as did Bush administration lawyers. They said federal courts should not allow lawsuits based on complaints that a government agency did not respond."What happened here is undeniably tragic," said law professor John Eastman, representing the town of Castle Rock. But, he said, a protective order does not create a constitutional "entitlement" to a speedy response from the police.Eastman, who teaches at the Chapman University Law School in Orange, Calif., said the state of Colorado did not intend to create any such entitlement, and therefore, officials did not violate the Constitution when they failed to respond to Gonzales' calls.
Justice Antonin Scalia said he agreed, calling the claim "utterly zany." Only Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and John Paul Stevens sounded as though they leaned in favor of Gonzales.

I find this a very fascinating ruling, and a little confusing. It seems to me that the Supreme Court has found that police do not have a compelling legal duty to enforce a court order or respond to one being violated. That's an interesting concept.

While I sympathize with Ms. Gonzales, I can also sympathize with the police. It's a very busy job and many custody disputes are seen as relatively unimportant compared to other crimes. You haven't seen petty immature bickering until you've seen two divorced parents with joint custody. I'm sure the cops thought this was just another silly bicker-fest and opted to handle more pressing issues. Unfortunately, the man was a murderer.

My heart goes out to Ms. Gonzales. She lost her kids to a horrible little man. But I can't abide the opening of a door to sue cops when they don't respond to certain calls in a timely manner. It would make police work almost impossible to open them up to that kind of litigation. Thankfully the Supremes saw it the same way.

Tribute to a Fallen Officer

2005-03-22T08:21:00.000-08:00

I'm sure you've all heard the news about the school shooting in Minnesota. Yet another neo-nazi snot-nosed brat decided to seek revenge on his classmates, teachers, and anyone else who happened to be around. You can read the story here. Anyways, here is the relevant clip:

When the rampage was over, 10 people were dead, including the gunman's grandfather; a woman who may have been his grandfather's wife or girlfriend; a school security guard; a teacher; and five other students. At least 14 others were wounded, officials said.
...
All of the dead students were found in one room, including the teen believed to be the shooter. Red Lake Fire Director Roman Stately said the gunman had two handguns and a shotgun. The shooter may have obtained his weapons from his grandfather, who was a long-time police officer in the area.

I don't know anything about the grandfather except that he took care of the kid after the death of his father and the incapacitation of his mother. I don't even know if he was retired or still working. All I know is that no officer, past or present, deserves to be gunned down by some little fascist. My thoughts and prayers go out to his family and friends and I hope they find comfort during this time.

The stupidest plan that ever worked

2005-03-21T08:44:00.000-08:00

I realize this is "like, so last week", but I wanted to comment on the Brian Nichols/Ashley Smith saga. Here's the story from CNN.com. Now, everyone and their mother knows basically what happened, how the girl talked her way into safety by reading the Bible and The Purpose Driven Life to the rapist. But I wanted to focus on a particular aspect of this story:

Smith said Nichols eventually unbound her hands and feet and that he began to relax as they spoke for hours about religion and family -- including Smith's 5-year-old daughter and her late husband, who was stabbed four years earlier and died in her arms.
"I basically just talked to him and tried to gain his trust," she said.
Smith said she showed Nichols family photographs and read him passages from Rick Warren's best-selling book, "The Purpose Driven Life: What on Earth Am I Here For?" (Interview with book's author)
After 6 a.m., Smith said she followed Nichols so he could hide Wilhelm's truck and then took him back to the apartment in her car. She said that Nichols did not bring any weapons on the trip, and that she had her cellular phone but did not call police.

Now, of course Ms. Smith was quite brave and level-headed with this murderer-rapist. If you read the crimes that Nichols committed, you can see he's a pretty sick puppy. She kept her cool and eventually escaped.

Here's the problem: She helped this guy dispose of his evidence. He got in one car without weapons, she got in another car with her cell phone, she followed him while he dumped the truck, picked him up, drove him back to the house! Then she made him pancakes!

Up until the truck dump, she was playing the game, winning trust, gaining an opening. After that though, she crossed the line into stupidity. This guy is a vicious rapist and a cold-blooded murderer! He killed 4 people!

She had a great opportunity to 1) escape and call the cops or 2) drive back to the house, pick up a gun wait for that cockroach to come back so she can rid the earth of him. Instead she chose option 3: Help him dump evidence and then chauffeur him back to her house for a charming pancake breakfast. That's sick! That's an insult to the families who won't have a loved one this Christmas. They are wailing in agony at a morgue somewhere while the murderer is watching TV and enjoying a home-cooked meal!

Here's the part that - suprisingly - chaps my ass: It worked. This plan should have failed. There is no reason why this lady should be alive. But she is. She did several stupid things and came out on top.

Now, you might be asking yourself why the capture of a killer and the survival of a hostage is irritating me. Well, I'm not mad that she lived and that Nichols is in custody. I'm ecstatic that there's not another body and a killer on the loose. What irritates me is that I'm afraid other people are going to think she's the rule, not the exception.

How many people are going to try to "go Ashley" on their captors instead of doing the smart thing? How many people are going to cart their unarmed captors around, helping them dispose of evidence, reading "Chicken Soup for the Murderer's Soul" to them, and packing their lunches? How many people are going to get themselves killed trying to convert their attacker instead of fighting back or escaping? As a Christian, I know how naive and impressionable some Christians can be, and I fear for the next purpose-driven christian who gets kidnapped or taken hostage. It's gonna be ugly.

Prison Population

2005-03-18T08:52:00.000-08:00

A few days ago, I had a discussion with a reader about prisons and prison population. He was under the impression that prisons were full of low-level drug offenders and thus it wasn't fair for me to advocate a harsh penal system since most low-level drug offenders need counseling rather than punishment. I told him I would do some research into prison population, so I did.

The first interesting bit of data I found was a chart on the DOJ website. In 2001, 49% of the prison population was in prison for violent crimes, 19% for property crimes, and 20% for drug crimes. Right off the bat, we can see that drug offenders do not make up most or even half or even one third of prisoners.

Furthermore, according to a handy chart available here, between 1995 and 2001, violent crime accounted for 63% of the growth in prison population, while drugs accounted for only 15%.

Also, this chart has some interest recidivism stats, though they are from 1994:

• Within 3 years from their release in 1994 C 67.5% of the prisoners were rearrested for a new offense (almost exclusively a felony or a serious misdemeanor) 46.9% were reconvicted for a new crime 25.4% were resentenced to prison for a new crime 51.8% were back in prison, serving time for a new prison sentence or for a technical violation of their release, like failing a drug test, missing an appointment with their parole officer, or being arrested for a new crime.
• Released prisoners with the highest rearrest rates were robbers (70.2%), burglars (74.0%), larcenists (74.6%), motor vehicle thieves (78.8%), those in prison for possessing or selling stolen property (77.4%), and those in prison for possessing, using, or selling illegal weapons (70.2%).
• The 272,111 offenders discharged in 1994 had accumulated 4.1 million arrest charges before their most recent imprisonment and another 744,000 charges within 3 years of release.

Do you see what I see? It ain't the drug offenders coming back in droves (though they do come back), it's the property offenders. Obviously prison doesn't suck enough to make them stop the madness.

That last bullet point illustrates something we've been saying for years: A small number of people commit the majority of crimes here in the US. 272,111 people generated 4,100,000 arrest charges before theye were captured and 744,000 within three years after they were released!

What this means is that the average prisoner commits 15 crimes before he's caught, and almost 3 crimes within three years of his release! We are not reaching these people. We are not... adequately conveying our disgust at their lifestyle. We are not making ourselves clear.

Maybe someday we'll actually convince them that we don't suffer criminals very well. Until then, keep an eye on your stuff.

Justified Shooting: Yay or Nay?

2005-03-17T08:23:00.000-08:00

From www.policeone.com:

Until the Force Science Research Center entered the case, no one knew precisely how Randall Carr ended up killed by a police bullet that tore into his body near his rectum and blew a hole in his heart. His angry relatives, with Johnnie Cochran’s legal team behind them, insisted it had to be a deliberate police execution.
The officers involved vehemently denied that, of course. But they couldn’t reconstruct the fatal details of Carr’s final moments or explain the seemingly incriminating pattern of wounds documented at autopsy.
...
During an investigation of an assault on the landlord during a rent dispute, 2 officers were questioning the accused tenant, Randall Carr, 38. Carr was acting “very excited and aggressive,” and was later found to have evidence of cocaine use in his bloodstream. He declared, “I own this building, I own Oklahoma City and I don’t have to pay rent!” Then he punched one officer in the head, inflicting a cut over his right eye, and kneed the other in the groin, and fled on foot. Multiple units responded. During a pursuit by foot and car, Carr at one point was whacked at the knee with an expandable baton and sprayed directly in the eyes and nose with OC, but he did not submit. Finally the cop who’d been kneed during the initial call, Ofcr. Jerry Bowen, and a responding sergeant, Randy Castle, cornered Carr in a small, dark churchyard a couple of blocks from his apartment.
With a jagged piece of concrete about twice the size of a softball clutched in his left hand, Carr (who was left handed) tried to scale a spiked fence at one edge of the yard, but he couldn’t make it. The officers were yelling at him to get down and to drop the concrete. He dropped off the fence, turned and with his left arm raised started to run directly at Castle, who was about 20 feet away.
Bowen was forward from Castle and to his right. In Bowen’s perception, Carr was charging Castle intent on bashing in the sergeant’s skull with the concrete chunk. Both officers opened fire with their Glocks. Eleven rounds were discharged. Seven struck Carr. When the shooting stopped he was slumped against a wooden bench several feet to Castle’s left.
Castle had no clear recollection of the 5 shots he fired. He recalled Carr “throwing” the concrete at him at a point. A left-hander like the suspect, Castle instinctively turned away while raising his right hand to protect his head, and fired his rounds blindly back at his assailant with his left hand. Bowen said he started shooting when Carr crossed his line of fire in the dead run toward Castle. There was about 5 feet between Bowen and the attacker at that moment. He fired a total of 6 rounds. Between the moment he started shooting and an awareness that Carr was “suddenly” no longer upright as a target, he had no relevant memories.

Pretty hairy situation. You can see why the victim's family might be upset.

At the heart of the plaintiffs’ case was an inflammatory premise: Such a fatal bullet pathway could have occurred only if Carr was already down on his hands and knees, butt in the air and no longer a threat, when the killing shot was fired. Bowen must have advanced on the suspect and pulled the trigger from behind him to create the resulting wound channel. In effect, the fatal round was an unjustified execution.

Ruh roh.

As one of the nation’s foremost authorities on reaction times and shooting dynamics, Lewinski felt that documenting the missing elements would be critical to understanding how the shooting actually unfolded and determining whether the plaintiffs’ allegations of wrongdoing might, in fact, be true.
He started by taking Ofcr. Bowen and Sgt. Castle to Oklahoma City PD’s firearms range. They’d told him that in an effort to stop the onrushing Carr they had fired as fast as they could pull the trigger that fateful night. He asked them to do that again--repeatedly--while they were videotaped by Lewinski and one of FSRC’s National Advisory Board members, Parris Ward. Ward, who heads the firm Biodynamics Engineering, is a prominent computer animator whose vivid reconstructions of police shootings and other controversial events are frequently introduced as pivotal evidence in high-profile court cases.
The videotapes offered gross time stamps of the officers shooting. But back in his lab in Pacific Palisades, CA, Ward’s ultra-sophisticated equipment was able to break down the sample firings into hundredths of a second. That revealed that the officers had been able to shoot in a range of .233 to .268 of a second per round.
Now Lewinski, working with Ward and his precision equipment, set about the laborious task of calculating the sequence and timing of every round that had struck Carr.

So, what was the outcome? Well, I should just make you read the rest of the story, but I suppose I'll save you the time:

On Nov. 22, after days of testimony and arguments, the jury returned its verdict. Four long years after the shooting occurred, the officers were finally exonerated. The plaintiffs were granted nothing, and there was no reimbursement for the substantial funds the plaintiffs’ attorneys had put forth to prepare for trial.
This case, incidentally, is the third in which Lewinski has helped to successfully defend officers against Johnnie Cochran’s legal armada.

Ha! We won! Make sure you check out the animations. They are pretty sweet. Especially compare the slow-mo version with the sped up version to get a feel for how lightning-fast everything happened. It's incredible.

I think this goes to show that as long as we are doing the right thing and acting within policy and training, not even Johnnie Cochran can get to us.

This Force Science Research Center sounds like a really cool outfit. I'll do a little research and find out more about them for y'all.

Police Prayers

2005-03-16T09:41:00.000-08:00

Instead of some news or politics, today I'd like to post some neat Police prayers I found online.

This first one is the Nation Policeman's Prayer:

Almighty God, Father of all Mercies, we ask Thy blessing and guidance on all law enforcement officers engaged in the protection of our citizens. Be with them in their lonely tours of duty while patrolling the busy streets of our cities and the remote areas of our country. Give them the blessing of your wisdom, to know and do what is right. Temper their actions with mercy and justice. When their tours are completed and the day is over, guide them safely home to their loved ones.
We ask Thy blessing and eternal rest to all our brothers who have sacrificed their very lives in the performance of their duties. Give to their loved ones the peace and strength to bear the anguish of their loss. Remove all resentment from their hearts, knowing that eternal peace and rest will abide their departed loved ones forever. This we beg Thy name forever and ever, Amen.

This next one I found is the Policeman's Prayer of Courage:

Lord I ask for courage
Courage to face and Conquer my own fears... Courage to take me where others will not go...
I ask for strength
Strength of body to protect others and strength of spirit to lead others...
I ask for dedication
Dedication to my job, to do it well, to my community to keep it safe...
Give me Lord, concern for others who trust me and compassion for those who need me... And please Lord through it all Be at my side...

This next one is a prayer to St. Michael, patron saint of policemen, military folks, and anyone who protects people from evil.

Here are some images of St. Michael:

This prayer was written by a policeman, specifically for policemen:

ST. Michael, Heaven's glorious Commissioner of Police, who once so neatly and successfully cleared GOD's premises of all it's undesireables, look with kindly and professional eye on your earthly force.
Give us cool heads, stout hearts, hard punches, an uncanny flair for investigation and wise judgement. Make us the terror of burglars, the friend of children and law-abiding citizens, kind to strangers, polite to bores, strict with law breakers and impervious to temptations.
You know, ST. Michael, from your own experiences with the devil that the policeman's lot on earth is not always a happy one; but your sense of duty that so pleased God, your hard knocks that so surprised the Devil, and your Angelic self-control give us inspiration. And when we lay down our nightsticks, enroll us in your Heavenly Force, where we will be as proud to guard the throne of GOD as we have been to guard the city of men. AMEN....

And lastly, the official prayer to St. Michael for any and all defenders of innocents:

St. Michael the Archangel, defend us in our day of battle; protect us against the deceit and wickedness of the devil. May God rebuke him, we humbly pray.
And you, O prince of the heavenly host, by the power of God banish into hell Satan and all of the evil spirits who roam through the world seeking the ruin of souls.
Amen.

If you aren't religious, these might not mean anything to you. Even so, I think they are powerful and touching. Heck, I'm not even Catholic but I love St. Michael's prayer and I wear a St. Michael pendant around my neck. (St. Michael actually cast Satan out of Heaven. You don't have to be a Catholic to respect that particular act of law enforcement!)

Anyways, I hope you enjoy these prayers and if you know of any other good ones, please post them in the comments section.

Another look at video games

2005-03-15T08:24:00.000-08:00

I found this very interesting article on PoliceOne.com:

My initial thoughts were that realistic video games could instill useful tactical concepts in dedicated players. Most first-person shooter games encourage ammunition conservation. The spray and pray technique quickly depletes your ammo supply. Players are shown that it is best to reload when you can, not when you have to. Use of tactical cover is encouraged. Players soon discover that moving from cover to cover is a better option than standing in the open and spraying bullets.
Many on-screen enemies will not go down with only one hit; often multiple rounds are required to take an attacker out. Head and chest shots do more damage to attackers than peripheral arm or leg hits. All of these are useful tactical concepts.
It also seemed obvious to me that good hand/eye coordination was needed to excel at a video game. Those with moderate to poor hand/eye coordination should logically benefit from time spent playing such games.

The article goes on to talk about how video games can provide a valuable training aspect. They teach you to recognize multiple targets and increase your visual perception abilities. He talks about a friend of his who is a video game-playing cop who, during a Simunition exercise, was able to identify a bad guy with a gun in a split second, where others might not have done so well.

Whether this article's premise is correct or not, it is a refreshing way to look at a topic that is often the target of hysteria and stupidity.

The whole rest of the site is pretty cool too.

That's one spicy meatball

2005-03-14T08:42:00.000-08:00

For some reason, I found this story on Scotsman.com

Two retired New York police detectives have been charged with leading double lives, moonlighting as hit men and carrying out gangland executions.
Louis Eppolito, 56, and Stephen Caracappa, 63, were arrested and charged in connection with eight murders, kidnapping, conspiracy and money laundering.

Police said they used New York Police Department files as their own “personal Yellow Pages”, working with the Mafia and feeding them confidential information for over a decade. The suspects were arrested at an Italian restaurant in Las Vegas and are due in court today. Eppolito once wrote a book entitled Mafia Cop: The Story of an Honest Cop Whose Family Was the Mob which described false charges of Mafia involvement.
Prosecution lawyer Roslynn Mauskopf described the case as “stunning”. “These corrupt former detectives betrayed their shields, their colleagues, and the citizens they were sworn to protect,” he said. Caracappa’s lawyer David Chesnoff accused the
government of using “organised crime figures who are trying to save their lives” to build their case. “The government is relying on the words of rats,” he claimed.
The pair allegedly targeted several mobsters in retaliation for the attempted assassination of a crime family underboss Anthony ’Gaspipe’ Casso. They are charged with kidnapping a mob figure, stuffing him in a car and delivering him to Casso, who then tortured and killed him in 1987. Police claim they also stole £33,000 (65,000 dollars) from Casso in 1992 to kill a Gambino family captain suspected of involvement in the attempt on Casso’s life.
Brooklyn lawyer Charles Hynes, described it as “one of the most shocking examples of criminal activity” he had ever witnessed. Eppolito is related to known Mafia members and in his 1992 autobiography described his family background but denied the mob allegations. Caracappa helped found the NYPD’s Organised Crime Homicide Unit.

You know it goes on, but it's still rather shocking when you find a truly and thoroughly corrupt police officer at a department. And these aren't just cops on the take, these are full on mafioso within the department. They used their police resources to help out the Mafia! FOR OVER A DECADE! That's incredible!

It really makes you wonder who else is out there. I mean, for ten years, these two clowns kept up the image of good cops while at the same time living the life of a Goodfella. For all you know, your partner, your Sergeant, anyone could be doing the same thing. How do check for stuff like this? How do you audit your force for criminals?

I wonder if these guys thought that since they were killing criminals and helping screw over criminals that they were doing a good thing. You wonder how people get wound up in these type of capers. Maybe it started out as a kind of infiltration and snowballed from there.

However, the real question here is this: How did the underboss get the nickname "Gaspipe"? I bet there's a good story there...

Why does this happen?

2005-03-11T08:13:00.000-08:00

From a CNN.com story -

ATLANTA, Georgia (CNN) -- A Fulton County Superior Court judge and a court reporter were killed and two deputies were wounded Friday when a defendant grabbed a gun from a deputy sheriff and opened fire, officials said.

Now they think that one of the deputies is going to die as well. It's a terrible, terrible situation.

But I have to ask, why did this happen? How did one man in a courthouse grab a gun from a highly-trained individual and shoot 4 people, make it down 8 flights of stairs, and out into the wind?

My first question is this: where was the deputy's gun leg? If your gun leg is away from bad guys, they have a real hard time getting it. Was she standing with her gun towards the rapist? How did that guy get his hands on that gun? And when he did, what did the deputy do about it? Apparently not enough, but I know we're all trained to respond to an attempted gun take away, so I want to know what she did.

Here's my main problem (keeping in mind that I don't know the details of the situation): The deputy had to have acted outside her training in order for this to occur, unless Georgia Peace Officer Standards and Training doesn't include officer safety. It makes me mad and sad because this didn't have to happen. This could have been avoid with minimally smart tactics.

Well, if she survives, I'm sure the deputy is going to be beating herself up for the rest of her life over this. I hope she's okay and I hope she's able to cope. And I also hope that this is a lesson to everyone else to pay attention to where you put your gun leg. We can't get complacent out there (easy for me to say, right?). It's never a "routine day". I'm sure this deputy thought it was just another routine court case. Now it might be her last.

EDIT: So I'm stupid and didn't realize the deputy was a woman. I've changed all the pronouns to make it accurate. Thanks to Robbie for showing me the light.

Maybe somebody in West VA is a 10-8 Fan!

2005-03-10T09:35:00.000-08:00

How else do you explain this story:

Law makers in West Virginia are considering a bill that will remove the hate crime statute. The statute currently allows judges to give stricter punishment to people who commit crimes out of hate.
In West Virginia the hate crime law says people who target their victims based on race, religion, nationality, political affiliation or gender, can get added punishments above and beyond a crime without hate as a motive.
West Virginians have mixed feelings about this legislation. Some think it is a good idea. "Just because I hate a person and I did something and another person just does it they should be treated the same, said Loretta Brier. Others believe the statute is needed to stamp out prejudice. "It can no longer be. I am surprised they are trying to pass that. The legislature? I can't believe that," said Dan Kolopajlo.
Five republicans in West Virginia are sponsoring the bill, including Ohio County delegate Chris Wakim. Those supporting the bill say this will focus on the actual crime and not the motive behind the act. House majority leader Rick Staton is against this legislation. He says the added punishment for hate crimes is still needed.

I await the results with baited breath.

Creative Sentence

2005-03-10T09:10:00.000-08:00

From my favorite daily stop, CrimProf Blog:

Texas Tech CrimProf Larry Cunningham and student attorneys from the Texas Tech Criminal Justice Clinic filed an appeal last week on behalf of Tracy Ward and Rhonda Smith, two women accused and convicted of delivering a controlled substance to a child. The twist to this case is this: The children were fetuses at the time of the alleged delivery. Potter County prosecutors utilized a new Penal Code definition of "person" (which now includes a fetus). They said that the women delivered drugs to persons---their fetuses--- because the women ingested drugs while pregnant. Cunningham argued in the clinic's March 3rd brief that the state legislature never intended for this new definition to apply to pregnant women. In fact,the bill made specific exceptions in other areas of the law. The bill in question -- S.B. 319 -- was intended to punish third-parties for criminal actions against pregnant women. The brief also argues that the prosecution violates due process, Roe v. Wade, and constitutes cruel and unusual punishment. The State's brief is expected April 3. Argument is expected sometime this Summer or in the Fall. More . . . [Mark Godsey]

You have to laugh. C'mon, it's clever. I like clever judges.

Of course I support this decision! Although, were it me in the judge's seat, I would've charged her with attempted murder for ingesting drugs with a child inside her.

The Goal of Punishment

2005-03-09T10:32:00.000-08:00

Sentencing Law And Policy Blog has an article that includes this quote from a decision in a case:

Rehabilitation is also a goal of punishment. 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)(2)(D). That goal cannot be served if a defendant can look forward to nothing beyond imprisonment. Hope is the necessary condition of mankind, for we are all created in the image of God. A judge should be hesitant before sentencing so severely that he destroys all hope and takes away all possibility of useful life. Punishment should not be more severe than that necessary to satisfy the goals of punishment.

I totally disagreed with that first sentence. I posted this comment in the comments section:

I disagree that rehabilitation is the goal of punishment. The goal of punishment is to make people stop doing bad things. The majority of crimes are committed by the same minority of people, so obviously we are not rehabbing anyone. Prison should do two things: Keep bad guys safely behind bars, and serve as an unpleasant consequence to bad behavior. That way people in prison can't commit crimes and people outside of prison won't want to commit crime for fear of imprisonment.
It's prison, not bed-wetting camp! I don't care if criminals grow and mature or not. I don't see a kinder gentler approach to incarceration as an answer to recidivism. By being kinder and gentler to career criminals, we are totally missing the boat.
I don't want criminals to have hope. I want a life of crime to be a hopeless soul-crushing experience. I want every moment to be filled with fear and trepidation. These people have broken their contract with society and it should really suck for them!
But what do I know...

So that was my opinion on the matter. Maybe I'm out to lunch of this one, but I seriously don't think the goal of punishment is rehab. Punishment is meant as a deterrant! A bad thing! Something that sucks so bad, it makes you not want to go through it!

When I was a kid, if I did something wrong, my dad spanked me. Was I rehabilitated by the spanking? Did I grow and mature and see the error of my ways and thus stop doing bad things? No way, I stopped doing bad things because I didn't want to get spanked. It hurt! What does a 6 year old know of the philosophy of Right and Wrong? All I knew was this:

Lying or Swearing = Mouth Washed out with Soap
Not Obeying Parents = Spanking
Aggravated Not Obeying = Spanking With Belt

That was the Aldridge Penal Code, and it worked just fine. I knew there would be an immediate and unpleasant consequence and that spoke way more to me than discussions of integrity or honor, because I was immature.

Criminals are immature. You can't send a bank robber to his room without dessert and expect him to feel remorse. These people have decided that they will not honor society's laws and that they should victimize the weak and powerless in order to improve their own life. Why try to rehabilitate that attitude? Why not instead say, "If you choose this life, the State will make your existence a living Hell until the day you die." I'm not saying torture people or be cruel, but there's plenty of Hell that the State can mete out that is still humane.

Fire Trucks to Fight Crime

2005-03-09T09:28:00.000-08:00

CrimProf Blog has a curious story:

San Francisco Mayor Proposes Firetrucks on Corners to Deter Crime On Monday, at a City Hall meeting with police and fire chiefs, San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom suggested that parking fire trucks, manned with firefighters who aren't responding to emergency calls, on street corners of crime-prone areas could be a viable crime deterrent for the city to explore.
Mayor Newsom's idea comes in response to an increased crime rate in San Francisco. The city has 19 reported homicides so far in 2005, whereas at this time last year, there were only 13, and Mayor Newsom wants to take more action to reduce these violent crimes. SFGate.com reports: "(Mayor Newsom said), 'I think the homicide rate is outrageous. This is my biggest burden.' He said the city needs to look beyond traditional policing and consider creative tactics, such as putting fire trucks on the streets. There already are plans in the works to park city ambulances in outlying neighborhoods later this year so they can respond to calls faster."
Firefighters union chief John Hanley agreed that the visible presence of fire trucks on corners may prevent some crime, but raised safety concerns. "We're firefighters. We're not armed. My guys don't have bulletproof vests,'' Hanley said. More from the San Francisco Chronicle... [Mark Godsey]

Mayor Newsome and myself have not always seen eye to eye when it comes to enforcing law (*ahem* gay weddings), but I have to at least give him credit here: He's trying something. It sounds a little crazy, a little bizarre, but he is thinking outside the box, and I like it.

That having been said, I have to wonder why fire trucks are going to deter crime. I could see if it was something like extra police cars would be put in high crime areas, but fire trucks? What are they going to do, spray muggers with the hose? Attack them with the axe? Send the dalmation after the bad guys? I mean, I just don't understand why the firemen are the ones having to maintain a security presence. I sympathize with the union chief. Not only are they unarmed and unprotected, I don't think they are even trained in fighting and tactics. I am very curious to see how this goes.

I suppose the main thing they have is contact with emergency services. They can immediately radio dispatch if they see a crime or something. Also, I guess criminals will be wary around anyone in uniform. Not to mention, firefighters are always very buff and dashing, so they have that going for them too.

Mayor Newsome, I hope your plan works!

Blog shout-out

2005-03-08T09:19:00.000-08:00

By the way, check out California Mafia for a cool law/political/sports/etc blog.

In pursuit of the best policy...

2005-03-08T08:35:00.000-08:00

Gritsforbreakfast had a comment on the pursuit story below:

I guess those 18 innocents in CA were acceptable collateral damage, under your theory?

When it comes to topics where innocent people die, it's always hard to call real people with real families "acceptable collateral damage". No one wants to dehumanize a person like that, especially when they have families grieving for them. But life is hard and it doesn't have easy answers. We have to accept a world where bad things happen to good people. The death of an innocent person is not good enough to justify sweeping changes, especially because the changes are heavy of emotion and light on substance.

PursuitWatch.org, an anti-pursuit site, has some statistics on it. Two stats that I found interesting were that only 1% of pursuits end in fatality and that their figure for bystander deaths in pursuits was 236 a year.

236 is not that many people, I'm sorry to say. It just isn't. When you figure that there are 300,000,000 people in the U.S. currently, that comes out to .00000007% of the population. I don't want to minimize loss of life, but statistically speaking, it's really very minor. For comparison, I found some other death stats. These ones I got from http://danger.mongabay.com/injury_death.htm:

Drowning and submersion while in or falling into swimming-pool 567
Water transport accidents 630
Inhalation and ingestion of food causing obstruction of respiratory tract 744
Inhalation and ingestion of other objects causing obstruction of respiratory tract 3,187

And from www.defendu.com:

As many as 98,000 Americans die unnecessarily every year from medical mistakes
made by physicians, pharmacists and other health care professionals

Those are just a few obviously, but you get the point. Relatively speaking, pursuits are not butchering innocents at any substantial rate.

Also, the 1% stat for fatalities is a tad misleading because the majority of the time, it's the suspect being killed in the pursuit. If you go with PursuitWatch's numbers, then .33% of pursuits kill an innocent bystander. So we want to obstruct police business and give a thumbs-up to criminals because of .33% of pursuits. That's ludicrous.

Here's what I'm in favor of: increased mandatory training for cops. Maybe cops need to go to EVOC every three years instead of just in the Academy. I'm okay with that. I'm also in favor of doing what Jeb Bush did in Florida, which is make fleeing from the police an automatic felony punishable by 5 years in prison, 15 if it's aggravated, and even worse if there is injury. Tell me this: if fleeing from the police resulted in an automatic minimum 25 year sentence, do you think people would try it just to get out of a speeding ticket? But no, we'd rather remove police immunity and tell the criminals, "Go ahead and run, we won't chase you anymore because .00000007% of Americans die each year. Please, run for any reason."

Do I wish innocent people didn't have to die? Of course. Am I willing to tie the police's hands unnecessarily to assauge the emotions of families? Of course not. Call me a cold, cruel man, but I am just not willing to go there. Somebody has to make the tough calls. Somebody has to be the asshole for the good of society.

W00t! Another legal victory!

2005-03-07T11:13:00.000-08:00

From your favorite and mine, CrimProf Blog:

Here's a case from the South Carolina Court of Appeals holding that while a search warrant was unconstitutionally overbroad for lack of a particualr description, the invalid portions could be severed from the valid portions, and the critical elements of the search upheld. The court cited the LaFave treatise as well as state and lower federal court cases. Thanks to Flynn Carey for the tip. [Jack Chin]

Yay, silly legal technicalities won't set another jerk free!

I know we'll never get rid of the exclusionary rule, but a man can dream can't he?

Pursuits...

2005-03-07T08:16:00.000-08:00

From The Mercury News (you need to sign up for free to view, I think):

On any given day in California, a television station helicopter hovers over a speeding car that pinballs through traffic on the freeway below with police cars in hot pursuit. More and more often, however, this staple of television news and police procedure has brought death and serious injuries. According to the California Highway Patrol, the number of chases has grown by the hundreds each of the last three years for which statistics are available: 5,895 in 2001; 6,337 in 2002; 7,171 in 2003.
Fifty-one people died in 2003 as a result, or nearly one each week. Of the dead, 18 were not involved in the pursuit, according to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. Last month, University of California, Berkeley, graduate student Jie Wang joined the list of the seriously injured after a motorist fleeing an Albany, Calif., police officer ran a red light and crashed into Wang's car. The 24-year-old Wang remains in a coma.
California's numbers consistently far exceed any other state. Compared to the 51 California deaths in 2003, Texas had 33 including nine innocents; North Carolina had 23 deaths, eight of them uninvolved motorists; Florida had 21 deaths, just one of an innocent motorist.
While some cities including Los Angeles have limited chases, Florida and Mississippi last year enacted laws boosting penalties for fleeing drivers, similar to what California law enforcement is now proposing this year as the California Legislature is set to start again attempts to change the way law enforcement pursue potential criminals. Law enforcement groups want to increase penalties for fleeing drivers, while a bipartisan group of legislators is pushing a proposal that would include penalties for police who recklessly pursue drivers.

You have almost admire the sheer idiocy of people that, in order to stop destruction from police chasing criminals, want to hamstring the police. "Officer, we'd like you to stop doing your job because sometimes accidents happen". Now, don't you suppose that maybe bad guys read the news? And don't you suppose they will hear about new laws meant to stop officers from chasing? And don't you suppose that they might then decide that running from the cops is the way to go? Don't you suppose that everyone from people with felony warrants to people who speed are going to see running from the cops as no big deal?

I found this line particularly telling as to the intelligence of the anti-police legislators out there:

"Probably the worst way to catch someone is by chasing them," [state Sen. Sam] Aanestad said.

I see. I would tend to think that not chasing someone is the worst way to catch them, but then I'm no California State Senator. (By the way, I implicitly don't trust anyone with a double letter at the beginning of their last name. Call me old-fashioned, it's just how I was raised)

Aanestad is naming his bill after Kristie Priano, a 15-year-old Chico honor student who was killed in January 2002 when her family's minivan was struck by an unlicensed 15-year-old who took her mother's car without permission. Candy Priano argues police knew where the fleeing driver lived, so there was no need for the pursuit that killed her daughter. "I blame the people who flee. (But) people who flee do not care about anyone's safety, so the burden of protecting innocent bystanders by necessity falls on the police," Priano said in remarks prepared for a news conference Monday before a Public Safety Committee information hearing Wednesday.

I kind of like that little "but" she had. "I blame the bad guys, but since they don't care, it's the police's fault now." When someone loses a loved one, you don't want to tell them to shut up, but really...

I feel like this is so simple, I shouldn't have to say it again, but here goes: If you make it hard for police to chase bad guys, bad guys will flee more often. And when bad guys get away, they do other bad things! This woman complains that the police should protect innocent bystanders. Well what happenes when they call off the chase of someone and that person gets away and later carjacks someone or murders them? Weren't they an innocent person in need of protection? What happens when we stop chasing a guy with warrants and then when officers go to serve it at his home, he gets in a shoot-out with them as he barracades himself inside? Who knows what these jerks are capable of? Isn't it better to get them off the street as quickly as possible?

Now, if the State Legistature really wanted to do something useful for once, instead of trying to punish cops, why don't they support this?

More shooting

2005-03-05T20:20:00.000-08:00

I was at the range today, sorry for the lack of an update. Weekends are tough for me to get on a computer. I suppose I need WiFi. If it makes you feel any better, I shot very well today.

Not only that, one of our instructors brought a .50 caliber Browning machine gun. It was breath-taking.

Here's a fun story from the NY Times to tide you over:

The Bush administration's secret program to transfer suspected terrorists to foreign countries for interrogation has been carried out by the Central Intelligence Agency under broad authority that has allowed it to act without case-by-case approval from the White House or the State or Justice Departments, according to current and former government officials.

Not every country is as nice to scumbags as the USA. It's nice that people who hate this country get to see other countries. I'm happy for them.

High Schoolers: You have no privacy. HA!

2005-03-04T11:59:00.000-08:00

From CrimProf Blog:

Just a few years ago, using breathalyzers at extracurricular activities like proms, pep rallies, and sporting events was hotly debated and resisted as an invasion of students' privacy. Eventually, these sobriety tests were accepted as necessary to ensure that students weren't smuggling drugs and alcohol into school-sponsored events or attending these events while intoxicated. Now, some school districts, ranging from Indiana to Connecticut and New York, are beginning to employ breathalyzers as part of the ordinary school day. School officials say that they have a duty to prevent drug and alcohol abuse and to ensure that students aren't showing up to class intoxicated.
The New York Times reports that manufacturers of breathalyzers have sold thousands of devices to schools, so it's impossible to calculate how many school districts are beginning to use breathalyzers as a typical school practice, but the East Hampton School District on the East End of Long Island is one of these districts. "Any student suspected of being drunk in class would be tested by a trained staff member, and not a police officer," board officials said. Results showing alcohol consumption would mean suspension. Refusing to take a test would be seen as an admission of guilt."
Civil rights lawyers are concerned that the tests will unfairly stigmatize students who just act goofy or don't abide by the norms. Following the same tune, East Hampton citizens have overflowed the local newspapers with op-eds calling the policy "heavy-handed." More from the New York Times... [Mark Godsey]

I support almost any measure that controls teenagers. Hell, we can't execute them anymore, the least we can do is breathalyze them. I know for a fact that many high schoolers drink alcohol in the morning or at lunch or sometimes in class. I know this because I've done it. I know all about hanging out with that crowd.

Why am I so anti-teen? Because I remember my teen years and I used very poor judgement. I did things then that affect me now. I made decisions that reverbrated throughout my life. At the time, you don't care. We're all passing around jack and coke in the parking lot, let's party! But one thing teens don't need is to be full of a liquid that makes you use worse judgement. They barely have any to begin with! Controlling teens and keeping them coralled until they grow up a little is a helpful thing. Do you realize that there is a very real push to raise the driving age to 18? Do you realize how many lives it will save? Do you realize why? Because most teenagers are dumb. I was, you probably were too, unless you were some geek. Of course if you were, now you're running a company and telling all the cool kids what to do. Feels good, no?

Also, if the ACLU thinks this will stigmatize kids, I have news for them: It will be a badge of honor to be breathalyzed. Kids will brag about it. There will be contests to see who can get the most. There will be races to see who can get breathalyzed first. Believe me, this is going to be a popular device.

A Great Man Has Died

2005-03-04T08:46:00.000-08:00

From the L.A. Slimes... oops, I mean LA Times.

Peter Malkin, the Israeli Mossad agent who captured Adolf Eichmann, the chief architect of the Holocaust, has died, media in Israel reported Wednesday. He was 77.
...
In the late 1950s, Israeli security agents received a tip that Eichmann was living in Argentina under an assumed name. Believing that the Argentine government would never arrest him, the Israeli government sent a team of Mossad agents to the South American country to capture him. Malkin was part of that seven-person team.
After a week of surveillance, on the night of May 11, 1960, Malkin stopped Eichmann on a street in the Buenos Aires suburb of San Fernando. He spoke a few words to him in Spanish before grabbing his arm and wrestling him to the ground. Other agents grabbed Eichmann's legs and stuffed him into a car.
Eichmann was interrogated for 10 days in a safe house. During that time, Malkin said, he had long late-night conversations with the Nazi, assuring him that the Israelis would not harm his family. Eichmann was eventually taken to Israel for trial on charges of crimes against humanity. He was executed in 1962.
...
In the Haganah [An Israeli Independence group] , Malkin learned a number of skills that would be useful in his later life as a Mossad agent. He became proficient in building and disassembling bombs. He also became an expert in disguises and martial arts.

What a stud! The way the story goes, Malkin walked right up to Eichmann and said something like "You killed my nephew. He was the same age as your son. You basically killed your son. How could you do it?" Eichmann looked confused at the question and finally said "Your nephew... he was a Jew".

Don't let anyone tell you that evil does not exist in a profound way. The only thing that keeps it at bay is the courage and honor of men like Peter Malkin. Police, Military, Intelligence, they all serve a large overarching purpose: to hold back the tide of evil in the world. Sure, cops write tickets and break up parties and hassle kids making out in parks, but every once in awhile, we will be called to stop an evil man from doing something evil.

One of our instructors at our academy is a very tough, very legendary cop. He's taught tactics and officer survival around the world and he told us last night that training to be a cop is like training to be in the Olympics. You keep yourself in shape physically and mentally in preparation for a single day where you need to take home first place. Only for us, we don't know when our day will be, and second place is death. Someday, we may face our Olympics when we try to fight against evil. My prayer is that I and my comrades will be ready to take home the gold.

Man, law enforcement is so much different than the banking industry!

Thanks SCOTUS!

2005-03-03T13:03:00.000-08:00

Great, I guess we can't execute this little scumbag either.

Stupid Stupid Stupid

2005-03-03T09:10:00.000-08:00

From CrimProf Blog:

A Chicago radio station has a feature where listeners are invited to call and confess something they did wrong; I assume usually the calls involve kissing an attractive stranger even though you are going steady or taking that can of Coke from the office refigerator knowing full well it belongs to someone else. However, this genius who had robbed a bank and gotten away clean decided to call the show, and describe the crime and how it was carried out (identifying of course the inside help). Now, he will have to wait in line to use the phone. [Jack Chin]

Remeber, if they were smart, they wouldn't have to rob banks.

Tactics Abroad

2005-03-03T08:19:00.000-08:00

I would love to train at the Jerusalem police academy. That would be a huge honor and I would imagine an eye-opening experience. Check out this story from the Jerusalem Post:

Jerusalem police called off a state of red alert that had been in place for six hours in the city Wednesday afternoon, police said. Police went on heightened alert shortly after noon on Wednesday after receiving intelligence warnings of a planned terror attack in the city.
Throughout the afternoon, police carried out spotchecks on vehicles and increased their presencethroughout the city in a last ditch attempt to ward off or catch any potential bomber. The police had also increased their presence andactivities at security checkpoints surrounding Jerusalem. The high state of alert in the city came just fivedays after a Palestinian suicide bomber blew himself up at a Tel Aviv nightclub killing five Israelis.

The story itself isn't that fascinating, but it really makes you think about an entirely different police culture. Over here, we are cognizant of officer safety issues such as how to approach a stopped car so as to minimize our likelihood of being shot. Over there, there is a radically different set of issues. The guy you approach might have a huge bomb strapped to his chest. He may blow it just because you turned on your lights. There's almost no way to know when another terrorist might explode on you. The tactics that they teach over there must be intense.

I went to the Israeli Police website to see what they had. It turns out that their full-time training program is about as long as a full time academy is over here, actually a little less. However, every citizen of Israel has to join the military for a period of time, so I suppose they are not working from scratch like over here. Even so, I'm curious what we do that is the same and what we do that is different.

Searching around on this topic led me to this little story. It was published shortly after 9/11 and it's about how the US could benefit from Israel's law enforcement practices. I enjoyed this excerpt:

For instance, evidence obtained without a search warrant is easier to introduce in courts in Israel than in America. It is simpler for Israeli law enforcement agencies to obtain wiretaps. Arab terrorism suspects are held in "administrative detention" for years without charges or trials. And Israel's "profile" method of interviewing airline passengers, screening pedestrians and detaining drivers, in which Arabs and others deemed to be high-risk are targeted for special attention, might go down poorly in a country as diverse as the United States.

Not too shabby, Israel. I guess when you are under constant attack from bloodthirsty terrorists, you're not to worried about profiling. They take security seriously over there. And I bet you they don't have a Cultural Diversity class during their training... lucky...

Robbie did some research!

2005-03-02T09:20:00.000-08:00

Robbie from UrbanGrounds has a great analysis of some of the people that would benefit from yesterday's SCOTUS decision to declare the execution of anyone younger than 18 unconstitutional. Here are some of the charming, delightful people that we as a society are going to let live:

The following men all committed horrendous and deliberate murders when they were 17 years old. They are currently sitting on Texas’ death row. Because of this new Court decision, they will probably be spared the fate they deserve:
Raul Villarreal — Convicted for kidnapping and killing Jennifer Ertman (14) and Elizabeth Pena (16). The girls had taken a shortcut home. Each girl was repeatedly raped by Villarreal and his fellow gang members, and then strangled to death. Villarreal later bragged that he stepped on the neck of Jennifer Ertman in an effort to strangle her because the “bitch wouldn’t die” after being strangled with a belt.
Robert Acuna — Convicted of killing two elderly neighbors, James and Joyce Carroll, shooting them “execution style” and then stealing their car.
Geno Wilson — On 12/02/98 on the streets of Houston, Texas, Wilson shot an adult male during a robbery attempt. The victim was reportedly selling bottles of cleaning solution on the street and was approached by Wilson and 3 black male companions. Wilson indicated he would buy a bottle of the cleaning solution then produced a handgun and pointed it at the head of the victim, demanding cash. When the victim denied having any cash, Wilson shot him once in the back of the head.
Bruce Williams — On 02/03/99, during the nighttime, Williams abducted two Asian females. The victims were forced by Williams at gunpoint to go to a wooded area where he then shot both of the victims. One victim survived the shooting and called police.
Tran Son — Tran and three others lured a man to a club in Houston and murdered him because of his relationship with a woman who worked at the club. Tran and the others involved learned that another woman who worked at the club was aware of their identities. Tran and two of the others drove that woman to a secluded beach and shot her in the head, resulting in her death. Tran and two others then became concerned that the fourth person involved in the first murder might not keep their secret. The fourth person was lured to a meeting under false pretenses. He brought a friend along. Tran and one of the others shot and killed the fourth person and his friend. Prosecution for the death of theses last two murders resulted in the capital murder conviction for Tran.
Whitney Reeves — On 8/20/1999, Reeves and one co-defendant shot and killed a 14 year old white female and her father, a 40 year old white male, with a 12 gauge shotgun. The double homicide occurred at the victims’ apartment in Beaumont. The apparent motive for the shooting was that the 14-year-old girl had testified at a grand jury hearing that resulted in charges of Aggravated Sexual Assault of a Child against the co-defendant.
Michael Lopez — On 09/29/98, during the early morning hours in Houston, shot and killed a 26 year old Deputy constable on a routine traffic stop.
Jorge Salinas — On 07/28/2001 in Mission, Texas, Salinas and 2 co-defendants fatally shot a 29 year old Hispanic male 1 time with a 12 gauge shotgun and caused the death of a 21 month old Hispanic female by abandoning her in an area where she was not likely to be found. Salinas and 2 co-defendants carjacked the victim for his 2001 Chevy Malibu vehicle. Salinas and 2 co-defendants then dumped the 29 year old Hispanic male victim in an orchard and took the 21 month old Hispanic female child, while strapped in her car seat, and placed her in a tall grassy area. Salinas and co-defendants fled in the victim’s vehicle.

Aww... doesn't that just warm your heart? These are just some crazy mixed-up kids who need a good stern talking to, right? I mean, really, we all got into some mischief when we were kids, right? Who among us hasn't stepped on the neck of someone we raped because they wouldn't die? We've all been there; it's a part of growing up!

In all seriousness, it's simply disgusting that these little beasts are allowed to live in my country and breath the same air as I do. Thank you, 5/9 of SCOTUS! Thank you for your service to this country! If you guys ever come down to Yorba Linda, look me up so that I can high five you for protecting neck-stomping rapists.

(Props to Robbie for all that research! Great blog!)

(Thanks to reader Alex who pointed out that I kept writing "SOCUS" and not "SCOTUS". Of course SCOTUS refers to the Supreme Court of the United States, as opposed to SOCUS which refers to the Southern Ohio Canes and Umbrellas Society. So far, SOCUS has not appointed itself sole arbiter of law in America while SCOTUS has. My apologies.)

Teens can still be evil

2005-03-01T09:04:00.000-08:00

Well, we can't win 'em all, I guess.

WASHINGTON (AP) - The Supreme Court ruled Tuesday that the Constitution forbids the execution of killers who were under 18 when they committed their crimes, ending a practice used in 19 states. The 5-4 decision throws out the death sentences of about 70 juvenile murderers and bars states from seeking to execute minors for future crimes. The executions, the court said, were unconstitutionally cruel.

I'm sorry, this really doesn't make any sense to me. I will have to do some research today, but I really can't fathom how executing a 16 year old is just de facto cruelty. One of the boneheads who is going to benefit from this ruling is Lee Boyd Malvo, who you may remember as one of the Washington Sniper Duo. Can anyone dispute that this kid is a little monster who targetted several innocent people, taking and ruining lives and putting an entire state in terror. What HE did was cruel. Executing him isn't just justice, it's a repudiation of what he did. It says "Society will not permit a monster like you to draw breath". It is repayment in part for what he took from people, it is penance for his crimes against society, and it is an act of cleansing, of removing someone from life who doesn't deserve to be there. Malvo is as deserving of death as any other murderer. But no, he's young so it's cruel. I think it's an act of cruelty against the noble and decent people of Washington to let him live.

Am I missing something? Is there some inherent immunity from being evil just because you haven't lived for exactly 18 years? If he was 17 years and 364 days old, it would be an act of cruelty to execute him, but it wouldn't be 24 hours later? Give me a break.

I like this post from Mark Levin on The Corner at National Review Online:

All those gang members under the age of 18, some of the most vicious murderers known to law enforcement, will be pleased with this ruling. After they murder, they will now have time to "attain a mature understanding of [their] own humanity."

Go Mark!

Joshua Claybourn at In The Agora has this take:

Aside from ignoring the voice of the people through representative democracy, and instead relying on their own beliefs as well as international opinion (something the Court won't do with abortion), the Court's opinion also fails to chastise the Supreme Court of Missouri for its failure to follow binding U.S. Supreme Court precedent. Only Justice Scalia addresses it in the final two pages of his dissent.

Cops finally get a win on the 4th Amendment

2005-02-28T09:48:00.000-08:00

From CrimProf Blog:

The Sixth Circuit held last week in U.S. v. Yoon, 03-5875, 2005 WL 427883, (and here) that once a civilian informant gains permission to enter a suspect's home and establishes probable cause that contraband is present, the informant may signal the police to enter the house as well and the police may then conduct a search. The court held that the permission given by the homeowner/suspect to the informant to enter the home constitutes "consent once removed" for the police to then search the home, even if the homeowner/suspect is not aware that the civilian is a police informant. The scope of the police search is limited to areas where the informant was granted access under the consent initially given to him, and of course, the police can seize any contraband in plain view in those areas. In so holding, the Sixth Circuit agreed with the Seventh Circuit's decision in United States v. Paul, 808 F.2d 645 (7th Cir.1986).

It's about time we got a few Search and Seizure cases in our favor! I had honestly never heard of this "consent once removed" before. I wasn't even aware that enough cops were using it that it ended up a court case. In any event, while I don't fully understand why we can have consent once removed but we can't use temperature detectors to see if people are growing marijuana, I'll take what I can get!

Jails sure have changed...

2005-02-28T08:46:00.000-08:00

Check out this story from MercuryNews. (you have to register to read it, but it's free) I'll post the relevant part:

California Youth Authority officials are pledging changes after a Fresno gang member walked away from a prison work detail and began what law enforcement officials believe was a multistate crime spree. Yatau Her escaped while doing charity work in Sacramento and was arrested this past week in Minnesota after the shooting of a sheriff's deputy.

Now, I always thought jail was this place where you were chained to something or locked inside of something. Why do we keep hearing stories of inmates walking out of prison? Not only did this knucklehead walk away, but he shot a police officer! Of course now the CYA is going to engage in some CYA, which should be interesting. Here's my plan for making sure this doesn't happen again: Bring back the ball and chain. Just hook a giant 450 pound weight to the guy's leg while he's anywhere besides his cell. Or make it really big and awkward so that if he does try to drag it around, it will get stuck on doors and coffee tables and stuff. If that doesn't work, just use the dog collar that shocks your dog if he leaves the yard. Just crank it up really high. Not enough to kill the guy, but enough to make him ruin his pants. Problem solved.

Seriously though, this has got to stop. We trust Corrections to keep these animals penned in safely away from society but they still manage to just wander away. No bueno. Having said that, I do feel for the California Dept. of Corrections because they have a really tough job: They have to watch thousands of people who have all day to think of ways to maim and kill officers. I understand that you just can't keep a strict eye on all men at all times. And hey, we've all had our bad days at work. But I hope this is yet another wake up call that something substantial needs to be done.

Any ideas out there? If not the ball and chain or the shock collar, what can we do to stop prison walk-offs? If anyone has a great idea, we should send the DoC a letter.

Also, this story is precious. (Same site, you may need to sign up):

At a recent county board of supervisors subcommittee meeting, [Santa Clara County District Attorney George] Kennedy was asked to comment on statistics showing a spike in the number of inmates at county jail. The female jail population grew significantly faster than the male population over the last few years.``This is a nationwide thing with females and I think it has to do with females being more liberated and independent in every way,'' he told the subcommittee, comprising two female supervisors, Blanca Alvarado and Liz Kniss.
Just in case he wasn't clear, the DA reiterated his point a few minutes later: ``If you look at the flowering of the women's movement, you're going to find criminality increases right in parallel with it on the part of females.'' Kennedy went on to assure the panel that ``I'm not passing judgment on anything.'' Word after the meeting was that participants were so dumbfounded by Kennedy's remarks that no one challenged him (``I'll have to research that'' was about all Alvarado mustered in response).

Can I just take this opportunity to admire DA Kennedy? Can you imagine how much guts this guy had to have to say that? Maybe he's right, maybe he's an idiot, but he actually creditted the women's movement with more crime among women! He said it out loud, in front of people! He's the bravest government official I've ever heard of! Imagine the PR bombshell that just exploded at his office! I love it!

(And who knows, he could be correct. But I guarantee you that instead of researching the truth, people will just label him a sexist. It's much easier.)

Drug Blog

2005-02-27T02:25:00.000-08:00

I've added a blog called Voice of the Victims to my blogroll, you might notice. It's a pretty cool blog about the victims of drugs, the effect drugs have on society, and other drug-related posts. A few days ago I posted about how dangerous meth use is. Well, VotV goes into greater depth on meth use as well as ecstasy, date rape drugs, and various other illegal substances. Go take a look!

(Thanks to Laer from CheatSeekingMissiles for the tip!)

Totally Off-topic!

2005-02-27T02:12:00.000-08:00

This has nothing to do with Law Enforcement, but you need to go see Downfall.

It's the story of Hitler's last days in power, holed up in his bunker. It is a deeply moving film with an incredible cast. It's German with English subtitles, so be prepared. In any event, this movie will captivate you. It also has a great message about the cowardice and patheticness of suicide, as opposed to movies like Million Dollar Baby, which glorify the act.

If you have any interest at all in Hitler, WW2, or how powerful men fall, go see it.

P.S. If you think this is a lame post, tough. I was at the range all day trying to figure out why my grouping sucks, then I got trapped in Norco. Then I almost missed the movie tonight. I've been busy! ;)

Take 'em to the limit

2005-02-25T11:03:00.000-08:00

The guys over at CrimProf Blog have posted on an interesting article. Apparently, there is a bill in Massachusetts that will eliminate the Statute of Limitations on most sex crimes.

Can I get a "Hell Yeah"?

First of all, sex crimes aren't like theft or car jacking. They keep on keepin' on long after the abuse has stopped. For some people, it ruins their entire lives. I think it's one of the worst kinds of victimization you can participate in. Second, many victims have a hard time coming forward in a timely manner. This is either because they suppress the memory or because they are too scared and ashamed to talk about what happened. Getting rid of the SoL would allow victims to receive therapy and gain some inner strength before they have to dredge up the memories of the abuse in court. I'm all for it. Anything to make sex abusers pay.

I'm in favor of a law that would force registered sex offenders to let you punch them in the stomach three times a year. Write your congressman!

We're living the dream...

2005-02-25T08:31:00.000-08:00

This is the kind of thing that reminds me why I started the police academy.

A Kansas City man is in jail this morning after Lenexa police said they arrested him driving nude and covered in corn oil.

I don't think I would have put him in the back of my car. Maybe we'd just walk back to the station. How big is Lenexa anyway?

On a more serious note...

BAGHDAD — A suicide car bomber disguised as a police officer drove into a police station parking area this morning, killing at least 15 people in the northern city of Tikrit.The victims were members of the new Iraqi police force, whose station is along the main road through Tikrit, Saddam Hussein's home city.

The bomber struck at a busy time, 8 a.m., when police were changing shifts, police Lt. Col. Saad Dahan Abid said. About a dozen cars caught fire. The police official said the attacker was able to slip into the station undetected because he was wearing a police lieutenant's uniform.

I wonder how different police work and police training would be if we had to contend with this sort of thing in America. Right now, in the Academy, we are learning how to disarm an attacker, how to approach a car or pedestrian, how to conduct an investigation. If LAPD was attacked with the same frequency as Tikrit PD, I wonder if we'd be learning how to approach the station or how to tell a fake police uniform from a real one. It's a scary situation over there and those Iraqi police are real heroes for putting themselves in extreme danger everyday. They literally have no safe haven from terrorist thugs. My heart goes out to them.

Probably stands for "Did Not Attack"...

2005-02-24T09:11:00.000-08:00

A little tribute to Dana Carvey's Johnny Cochran impression. Whatever happened to that guy?

Anyways, exciting new technology for Law Enforcement.

The kit is a natural progression of the Company's DNAWitness(TM) testing service, which previously was only performed at DNAPrint's Sarasota laboratory, and will enable forensics experts to conduct their own tests in their own facilities," stated Richard Gabriel, the Company's President and Chief Executive Officer.

Cool stuff! And howabout this nifty technology:

Microwaves — high-powered electromagnetic beams that can rapidly heat water molecules — and other directed-energy weapons could bring advantages to the battlefield in places like Iraq (news - web sites) and Afghanistan (news - websites), where U.S. troops have had to deal with hostile but unarmed crowds as well as dangerous insurgents. Aside from paralyzing potential attackers or noncombatants like a long-range stun gun, the weapons could disable the electronics of missiles and roadside bombs or even disable a vehicle in a high-speed chase, developers say. The weapons emit a pulse of energy and can destroy semiconductors with a surge of volts.

I like it. But I loooove the Sticky Shocker:

The Sticky Shocker concept involves a blunt projectile that sticks to the clothing with glue and imparts a short burst of high voltage pulses.

Can I get a "Hell Yeah"?

Meth is an evil evil drug...

2005-02-23T09:53:00.000-08:00

Check out this article from Des Moines:

DES MOINES- It's something you don't want to brag about, but Iowa ranks second in the nation in the number of meth labs. Monday law enforcement officials teamed up to try to get one step closer to winning the war on meth.
They say the current senate bill doesn't do enough to fight the problem. According to law enforcement, the only way to win this war is to keep all products that contain pseudoephedrine behind the counter.

Now, the bill that the senate passed includes retail exceptions. That means cold medicines that contain small amounts of pseudoephedrine can be sold without going through a pharmacist.
However, law enforcement officials say that makes it too easy for meth makers to get their hands on the key ingredient. Chief Bill McCarthy, Des Moines Police, said, "I am telling you what law enforcement faces on the frontlines and what our children are exposed to and our citizens are exposed to and we think it's serious enough to digest a little bit of an inconvenience for a short period of time."

Michael O'Meara, Polk County Attorney, said, "So we're asking the members of the house and the senate to keep faith with the citizens of the state of iowa and to pass the strongest legislation they can."
Last year, Iowa law enforcement responded to about 1,400 meth labs. That's about four per day.

If you guys aren't aware of meth and it's issues, this drug is pure evil. There are many opinions, even in the Law Enforcement community, regarding legalization. But we are not talking about marijuana. Meth makes weed look like corn flakes. It utterly destroys a person from the inside out. This article talks about the growing problem of meth. It's exploding everywhere. What's worse is that not only does using meth put you at greater risk of STDs, but it can cause diseases like HIV to ravage you much more rapidly.

Meth users also can go a long time without sleep, committing crimes and running amok for days at a time. We saw a scary video in class where a methed-up Nazi Lowrider ran down a police officer while the officer was just pumping gas. With meth use increasing out there, it's going to be a dangerous time to be a cop (i suppose that's nothing new...). Stay safe out there, guys.

This post is about a different kind of race...

2005-02-22T10:25:00.000-08:00

Enough posts about genetic races. Let's talk about car races.

Check out this Wired magazine article.

If a Los Angeles-area scientist has his way, car chases may become as antiquated as horse-mounted cavalry. James Tatoian, chief executive of Eureka Aerospace in Pasadena, California, is developing a system that uses microwave energy to interfere with microchips inside cars. Once the chip is overloaded with excessive current, the car ceases to function, and will gradually decelerate on its own, he said.
"If you put approximately 10 or 15 kilovolts per meter on a target for a few seconds, you should be able to bring it to a halt," Tatoian said.
(click link for more)

Oh baby. Summer can't come soon enough for me: Academy graduation, car-stopping microwaves, the latest Harry Potter book...

I'll say it again: oh baby.

More Tension...

2005-02-22T08:29:00.000-08:00

Check out this story from Mercury News

LOS ANGELES - The killing of a 13-year-old boy by police in South Los Angeles has exposed unresolved tension between the black community and police in a city scarred twice in the last 40 years by riots. The shooting of Devin Brown at the end of a pre-dawn car chase on Feb. 6 triggered immediate outcry. Quickly, the word "riot" was in the air - in reaction on the street and from officials wondering if public anger would send the nation's second-largest city spiraling into a repeat of the violence of 1965 and 1992.

Amid candles, flowers and balloons placed at the scene was a homemade sign that called the Los Angeles Police Department a "cancer" to the community. Rep. Maxine Waters, D-Los Angeles, issued a statement saying her immediate reaction was, "Once again, the police in our community acts as judge, jury and executioner." Mayor James Hahn pushed Police Chief William Bratton to finish a revision of a moving-vehicle shooting policy begun a year ago, then got the city Police Commission to immediately approve it. Bratton also released preliminary investigative details to counter what he termed misinformation that was being deliberately spread.

...

"Some of us have come to the conclusion that it's not about whether the right procedure was used or following policy," Waters said. "It's about a mind-set inside the Police Department that causes officers to shoot first and ask questions later." The revised shooting policy bans firing at a vehicle unless something other than the vehicle is a threat. The mayor said it is important because it will give guidance to police and help to change their mind-set.

"An incident like the shooting of Devin Brown causes a lot of anguish. ... It's a tragedy," Hahn said. "But it doesn't negate all the other good things that have been happening. The department really has been working to try to improve community relations." The "over-the-top" criticism of the Police Department by some black leaders has mischaracterized the police force and current racial relations in the city, Hicks said. A similar view was offered by Fernando J. Guerra, director of the Center for the Study of Los Angeles at Loyola Marymount University. "Every single day in Los Angeles there are hundreds of thousands of inter-ethnic contacts and the vast majority is either positive, constructive or neutral," Guerra said. "Only a very small part of it, maybe 1 or 2 percent, is conflictual and gets out of hand. We allow that 1 or 2 percent to define us instead of the other."

This goes back to what I talked about yesterday. This "Blame Cops First" attitude is seriously unproductive and unnecessary. Yes, it's hard when a child dies, but let us not forget that this child stole a car and fled the cops only to later attempt to back over them. Also, you can hardly say a 13-year-old didn't know any better. The kid was a criminal and he was forced to accept the consequences of his behavior. Did you know that I have never stolen a car and tried to run over cops and not once have any cops ever shot at me! We can debate until next Christmas about whether or not police officers should be able to shoot at someone trying to run them over, but the fact remains that if you don't attempt to run them over, you have a 99.99% chance of not getting shot at! Learning is fun!

Anyways, the only cancer in the community is Ms. Waters. She condemns police for doing their jobs and plays up racial tensions in order to stay in power. She profits from community unrest. If you want to find black leader who will fight for the real interests of black people, look no further than Bill Cosby. He's been out there recently trying to improve the community by edifying it from the inside instead of blaming everyone else in the world. If people would elect more Cosbys and less Waters, I think you would see the black community florish and prosper. And despite what Ms. Waters would have you believe, this upper middle class Caucasian would love to see that.

Black-on-black Crime?

2005-02-21T12:21:00.000-08:00

Check out this story from Grand Rapids, Michigan.

An excerpt:

Some Saturday questioned whether it's helpful to use race in defining the problem.
"They don't call it white-on-white crime," said Gormas, who is white. "It seems to me that we're blaming black people for being the problem."
As pastor at Praying Hands Church of God in Christ, co-organizer Bishop Walter Durham said he rejects the concept of black-on-black crime as racist.
"We take the position that there's no such thing as black-on-black crime. There's just crime," Durham said.
"When those girls were assaulted here recently, you didn't hear people talking about white on white crime," he said, referring to the assaults of two Wyoming area schoolgirls earlier this month.

I think these rally attendees are missing the point. For so long, many in the black community have blamed every external source imaginable for violence against blacks. Every excuse in the book is given, but these stats of black-on-black crime paint a different picture. The problem is within the community itself. This is not to say that all (or even most) black people are criminals, but the much of the crime problem is emanating from the minority community. I think the point of discussing black-on-black crime is to light a fire under the good and noble people of the black community so that they will clean house. It's time the community addresses their own contributions to the problem and then fix them. This isn't about degrading people, it's about finding the cause of a problem and solving it.

I'd say most black people are just good hardworking folks who want to make a good life for themselves and their children. It's a small segment of the population that constantly victimizes and terrorizes others. But unfortunately people like Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, Maxine Waters, Kweisi Mfume, and others want to use it in a political way to stick it to other people. These guys make a lot of money by convincing black people that everyone is out to get them. All they really do is hold down the community and allow problems to fester. They also drive a wedge between the Law Enforcement community and the people we serve. How are we supposed to have a solid partnership with the community when you have race-baiters constantly telling them "The Man is out to screw you over! The police are your enemy!" It's frustrating to see it happen because the people I know in Law Enforcement and the people I am training with in the academy have a genuine heart for the community. They genuinely want to see people stop being victimized. They want to see bad guys go to jail so that kids can play in the street without fear. All of us - black, white, latino, asian, whatever - want to make the cities a safer places for people of any race or background. Hopefully someday the entire community will see that we share their same goals for a safer world.

Punishing motive...

2005-02-19T16:58:00.000-08:00

I used to live in Travis County, where this news story comes out of.

If you don't feel like clicking on the link, it's just a story about a guy from Austin, TX who beat up a man because he was gay. He's being charged with a hate crime. He could get up to 20 years for it.
Now, I think victimizing people because they are black, gay, women, or whatever minority group is wrong. But here's the deal: It is just as bad to beat up a gay guy because he's gay as it is to beat up a white straight guy because you want his wallet. Beating innocent people up is wrong period; the motive is irrelevant.

When you prosecute motive like this, you open up a door that I think should be left closed. When society decides to punish hate crimes, what the reason you do something is the crime, not the crime itself. What it ultimately says is that we as a society believe that beating up a man because you want to remove his rightful property from him is more honorable than beating up a man because you believe his race is inferior. How absurd! Assaulting innocent people is wrong for any reason. There's no excuse for it. There is no degree of acceptibility attached to some motives rather than others.

For example, let's see I cut off a man's right hand, maiming him for life. Now here is a list of potention motives:

1. He cut me off in traffic
2. I wanted his Camero
3. He was flirting with my girlfriend
4. He was black
5. No reason, I just wanted to.

You're going to tell me that we should somehow rate these five in an order of Best to Worst? That we could "sympathize" with 3 but not with 4? That 4 shocks us worse than 5? Cuz right now, if I did it for reason number 4, I'd get way more jail time than if I did it for number 5, even though 5 is arguably the most evil motive of them all.

This doesn't even get into the fact that hate crimes are almost never charged when a straight white Christian male is the victim... I went searching for some statistics on this, but a lot of the thorough analyses of Hate Crimes stats are on white supremacist websites, and I don't want to affiliate myself with them whether their stats are true or not. Suffice it to say, a lot goes on with this stuff that is suspicious and off-putting.

Now, take away race/religion/ethnicity-biased crimes. Can anyone find any more motives that should be punished more than others? What other mindsets should we severely punish?

Cops, Dogs, and Who Not to Punch

2005-02-18T08:43:00.000-08:00

From HometownAnnapolis.com:

...

Officer Allen joined state lawmakers at the General Assembly yesterday to support proposal to impose greater penalties for assaults on police officers. Supporters say the current law sets tougher penalties for attacking a police dog than his handler.

House Speaker Michael E. Busch, D-Annapolis, called HB 2 a "priority" measure this session. The bill, cosponsored by 50 delegates, would make attacks on a police officer a felony carrying up to 15 years in prison and a $5,000 fine and would make the crime equivalent to that of assaulting police dogs.

...

Well thank God human cops finally get the same respect as canine cops! This is a great moment in human rights history. And here I was, afraid that we'd always be second-class citizens compared to the K9 Unit. Oh hallelujah!

However, thinking about canine officers raises some interesting ethical questions. I've heard it said that any good officer would never send his canine into a situation that he wouldn't put a human in. However, another school of thought says that we have canines precisely to use them in situations that would be too risky for humans. After all, it is just a dog. He doesn't have a wife and kids at home. This attitude makes the dog more of a tool than a "partner".

Personally, I don't think I like the "tool" approach to police dogs. I think police dogs are capable of doing certain things that officers can't do (sniffing for drugs, chasing down some runner and catching him quickly, barking at stuff), but I don't think their purpose is to be cannon fodder either. I don't think that I would consider a canine partner to be on the same level as a human partner, but I certainly don't think he's just some tool that might as well go in the trunk when I'm not using it.

What do you guys think? Any canine officers out there want to comment on this?

Video Games Train Killer

2005-02-17T15:42:00.000-08:00

From FoxNews

TUSCALOOSA, Ala. — A lawsuit claims the video game "Grand Theft Auto" led a teenager to shoot two police officers and a dispatcher to death in 2003, mirroring violent acts depicted in the popular game.

The suit announced Tuesday seeks damages from the game's manufacturers and two stores that allegedly sold it to Devin Thompson (search), now 18.

An attorney for relatives of two of the victims said Thompson, who is charged with murder, had played the video game repeatedly.

Thompson is accused of killing the three men in June 2003 after being brought to the Fayette police station on suspicion of driving a stolen car. Thompson allegedly grabbed one of the officer's guns, shot him and the other two, then fled in a patrol car.

The suit alleges Thompson purchased "Grand Theft Auto III" at the Gamestop (search) in Jasper and "Grand Theft Auto: Vice City" at the Jasper Wal-Mart when he was under 17. The games, which depict police killings and other acts of violence, are rated M, meaning they are appropriate for those 17 or older.

"What has happened in Alabama is that four companies participated in the training of Devin ... to kill three men," attorney Jack Thompson told The Tuscaloosa News, which reported the suit's filing.

Named in the suit are Wal-Mart Stores (search) and Gamestop along with Take-Two Interactive Software, the manufacturer of the games, and Sony Computer Entertainment, the maker of the PlayStation 2.

Messages left for officials of three of the companies were not immediately returned. There was no answer at the listing for Gamestop in Grapevine, Texas.

At a December hearing, authorities said Devin Thompson, when he was apprehended, told officers, "Life is a video game. You've got to die sometime.

Please. Is anyone buying this?

I have been playing the most sick and twisted games since I was a wee lad and I've never felt the need to kill a cop. People who murder are sick in the head and it is not triggered by a video game. If he didn't have a PS2, he'd blame it on television or the movies or violent books. He's a sick little freak with a sick freak lawyer. Luckily, no judge or jury in the world is going to buy it. I hope that kid has a fun time in prison.

This points to a larger problem with society: people do not want to take responsibility for themselves. Whether it's welfare, Jesse Jackson, or violent video games, people have stopped having the personal honor to be responsible for themselves. Lost your job? It's not because you are an incompetent dunderhead, it's because your boss is a misogynst! Do you hit your kids? It's because your daddy never came to your little league games, not because you are an abusive monster! Don't feel guilty! Don't trouble yourself with personal betterment. Just be the same worthless human you always were but blame white people, Christians, the Bush Family, the Ozone Layer, and Marylin Manson for your troubles!

Makes me sick.

Right now what we need badly is a "loser pays" legal system. That kid and his family and his scummy lawyer should have to foot the bill when they lose. It's time to end the Lawsuit Lottery and start punishing friviolous lawsuits. You realize what this means for you out there... You have to vote responsibly. You have to take the initiative and get out there and make sure people who will stand up for common sense are elected so that they can appoint judges and pass laws that will end the madness. It is your responsibility to do the right thing at the ballot box.

P.S. My fellow Californians, this means you have to stop electing Barbara Boxer and Diane Feinstein!!!

A new felony...

2005-02-17T08:28:00.000-08:00

From www.aberdeennews.com

Abortion should be a crime in South Dakota if states are given the right to outlaw the medical procedure, a House panel recommended Friday. The State Affairs Committee unanimously approved HB1249, which would make it a felony to do abortions if Roe v. Wade, the 1973 U.S. Supreme Court decision legalizing abortion, is overturned. The bill would allow exceptions in cases where a pregnant woman's life is at risk.
Those who do abortions could face up to two years in prison and a $2,000 fine. The committee changed the bill to remove a provision that would have made it a crime to advise women to seek abortions. Rep. Joel Dykstra, R-Canton, the bill's prime sponsor, said it is designed to protect the rights of fetuses in case states are given the right to regulate abortion. Rachel Hansen of the South Dakota Right to Life Committee, which helped draft the bill, said abortion rights supporters are gearing up for a fight in case the Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade.
"In South Dakota, House Bill 1249 would throw a monkey wrench right in the middle of that strategy," Hansen said. Rob Regier of the South Dakota Family Policy Council
urged the committee to pass the bill. "Send a message that South Dakota is more than just prepared to protect the unborn, but eager to," Regier said. Kate Looby of Planned Parenthood said the bill is one of the most extreme measures she has seen. The measure would tie physicians' hands and ignore women's ability to make decisions for themselves, she said. "Making abortion illegal never has and never will stop women from having abortions," Looby said, urging the committee to reject the bill. Jennifer Ring of the American Civil Liberties Union said the bill makes no provisions for abortions in cases where a woman's health is at risk or a fetus develops a potentially fatal condition. In such cases, women would be forced to allow the pregnancy to develop until it threatens their lives, Ring said.
HB1249 goes now to the House floor.

This is a fascinating bit of legislation. Many Americans (even some cops) are in favor of abortion. If Roe v. Wade were overturned (keep your fingers crossed) and the states were allowed to govern themselves, that would mean that South Dakota police offices would conceivably have to arrest women who tried to get abortions. Even though cops tend to be on the conservative side, surely there are some left-of-center officers out there who vehemently disagree with what this bill is trying to do. Would they look the other way if they ran into abortive "mothers" or abortion doctors? Abortion is such a socially charged issue, it would be hard for people to be objective, I would imagine.

As a very right-wing guy, I would have a slight tension if I had to pursue, arrest, or perhaps even apply deadly force to someone who, for example, burned down an abortion clinic in the middle of the night. I truly and honestly and deeply believe abortion is the full-fledged murder of a living innocent human being. Yet, in this country, I will be expected to enforce the law, and part of that law allows this act. That's tough. This isn't like thinking drugs should be legal. This is about life and death!

So, on the one hand, I can sympatheize with left wing South Dakota cops if they have to enforce this new felony law in the future. On the other hand, it's about time it was hard for liberals to be cops instead of just conservatives!

What do you all think about this out there? Should a pro-choice cop be forced to arrest an abortive woman? If not, then should a pro-life cop be allowed to look the other way when "his team" does something illegal as well?

Public Pressure

2005-02-16T11:47:00.000-08:00

From the Daily Breeze:

LAPD chief seeks changes in rules for police firearm use
By Paul Chavez THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
Los Angeles Police Chief William Bratton on Friday proposed a new use of deadly force policy that would ban officers from firing at moving vehicles. The proposal was given to the civilian Police Commission for its review less than a week after the controversial killing of a 13-year-old boy police said was driving a stolen car. The revised policy prohibits officers from firing at a moving vehicle "unless the officer or another person is being threatened with deadly force by means other than the moving vehicle," Bratton said in a memo to police commissioners. He asked that the commission approve the policy Tuesday at its next meeting. Police departments in major cities, including Boston, Cincinnati and Detroit, have adopted similar restrictions in recent year.
Bratton said a year ago he was considering revising the department policy after officers killed a suspected burglar in a confrontation broadcast live on local TV.Nicholas Hans Killinger, 23, was shot 10 times as his vehicle slowly rolled backward into police patrol cars that had closed in on him following a 90-minute pursuit. The shooting policy again came under intense scrutiny following the Sunday shooting of Devin Brown after a pursuit in South Los Angeles. The shooting occurred about 4 a.m. after the 13-year-old crashed a 1990 Toyota Camry that was reported stolen onto a sidewalk. A 14-year-old boy who was a passenger in the car ran from the scene and the Camry then backed into and damaged a patrol car. Officer Steven Garcia, 31, a nine-year veteran, fired 10 rounds toward the vehicle. Brown was struck and died at the scene.
After the shooting, Bratton said a revised policy would be presented to the Police Commission in 30 to 45 days, but the matter was put on a fast track under pressure from Mayor James Hahn and community leaders. The proposed policy would require that officers in the path of a vehicle should move out of its path instead of firing at it. Among the reasons given for revising the policy was that bullets are "extremely unlikely" to stop a moving vehicle, gunfire could miss the intended target or ricochet into innocent people, and the vehicle could crash and hurt others if the driver is shot.
Bob Baker, president of the local police union, the Los Angeles Police Protective League, said he opposes changing the existing policy. Current policy generally prohibits firing at a moving vehicle, but allows using deadly force as a last resort. "You can't legislate what is going to happen in the streets. Our work is highly unpredictable and usually dictated by the actions of suspects," Baker said. "You can't take away all discretion from a police officer to try and save a community member's life or his own life or his partner's life." Geoffrey Alpert, a professor of criminology at the University of South Carolina, said the proposed policy would save lives.

I heard Chief Bratton being interviewed on the radio this morning and he says that the new policy will allow officers to fire at a moving vehicle if they can justify it. Well, isn't that always the case?

Unless I misunderstood my use of force training (and I'll have you know I got 100% on the test), you always have to be able to articulate why you used the force you did. The policy also states that you should move out of the way rather than shoot. Well, current rules of use of force dictate that we must exhaust other alternatives before shooting. That would mean that under current policy, if you could move out of the way safely, you should. So basically this policy does very little besides assauge the rage of the community. Just what we need. More ink and paper wasted on making an unreasonable community happy.

What happens when the community gets mad that a thirteen year old firing at cops gets dumped? Are we going to make a policy that redefines handguns as non-deadly weapons? That may sound silly, but you never know these days...

Hello and What's Crackin'?

2005-02-16T11:11:00.000-08:00

Greetings all!

My name is Phil Aldridge and I am a 22 year old police academy recruit and I have started this blog for the purpose of talking about law enforcement and advancing police interests. There will be plenty of news and politics discussion, maybe a teensy bit of religion where appropriate, and hopefully this will be an original blog that people would actually want to read. I noticed a severe dearth of cop blogs out there, so I want to get the ball rolling. There's about a million blogs for theologians, republicans, democrats, professors, lawyers, and the like, so we in the law enforcement community (or in my case, wanna-be's for the enforcement community) need to step up and get in.

So, check back often and please join in the discussion so that this isn't just a monologue.