Attorney
General Eric Holder, in a speech addressed to the National Association of
Criminal Defense Lawyers, stated that “Criminal
sentences must be based on the facts, the law, the actual crimes committed, the
circumstances surrounding each individual case and the defendant’s history of
criminal conduct”. “They should not be based on unchangeable factors that a
person cannot control, or on the possibility of a future crime that has not
taken place.” The New York Times
article on the speech can be read here: http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/us-attorney-general-eric-holder-urges-against-data-analysis-in-criminal-sentencing/2014/08/01/92d0f7ba-1990-11e4-85b6-c1451e622637_story.html?tid=collaborative_1.0_strip_3
Saturday, August 2, 2014
Friday, August 1, 2014
Attorney General calls for transparency over execution drugs
Following
another botched execution, Attorney General Eric Holder, who has been committed
to criminal justice reform issues during the second term of the Obama
presidency, has called for transparency with the drugs used to effectuate
execution. The full article can be read
here -- http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/sns-rt-us-usa-execution-holder-20140801-story.html
- ixzz399GmBm7U.
Per the Chicago Tribune, Holder stated:
"There
may not be a legal requirement for transparency and talking about, describing
the drugs that are used," ... "But you sometimes have to go beyond that which is
legally required to do something that is right."…"For the state to
exercise that greatest of all powers, to end a human life, it seems to me, just
on a personal level, that transparency would be a good thing, and to share the
information about what chemicals are being used, what drugs are being used.”
Hudson County Prosecutor's Office detective free of murder charge
A New
Jersey detective was acquitted in a racially-charged case in Annapolis,
Maryland. The detective was accused of
fatally shooting a man after a road-rage incident. Joseph Walker was acquitted on Wednesday
after 6 hours of deliberation. Claims of
prosecutorial misconduct, and the withholding of “Brady Evidence” permeated the
case (but is no longer an issue due to the “not guilty” verdict). Mr. Walker was represented by Charles
Curlett. Coverage of the trial can be
read here: http://www.nj.com/jjournal-news/index.ssf/2014/07/hudson_county_prosecutors_offi_1.html
(Note-- Mr. Curlett was a recently a guest on "Wallach On Law" -- http://www.blogtalkradio.com/wallachlaw/2014/06/09/wallach-on-law-featuring--charles-n-curlett-jr-peter-mills)
(Note-- Mr. Curlett was a recently a guest on "Wallach On Law" -- http://www.blogtalkradio.com/wallachlaw/2014/06/09/wallach-on-law-featuring--charles-n-curlett-jr-peter-mills)
Sunday, July 13, 2014
Warrant To Force 17-Year Old To Hospital For Injection Of Privates, For Use In Prosecution Of “Sexting” Case – Was Real, But Police Have Dropped Plans To Use It
The LA
Times has followed the story of the warrant in a Manassas, Virginia “sexting”
case that spurred an internet fury. The
full story can be read here: http://www.latimes.com/nation/nationnow/la-na-nn-manassas-sexting-photos-police-20140710-story.html
Thankfully,
this story brought enough attention to bring this offensive abuse of law
enforcement power to a halt.
The
accused was a 17-year old boy. He had
allegedly received a “sexting” SMS message from his 15-year old girlfriend, and
sent one himself. The police received a
complaint from the parent of the a girl.
The boy was charged with manufacturing child pornography and possessing
child pornography.
The boy
was allegedly told to plea to the charged offense, or face a warrant compelling
him to be taken to a hospital, have his genitalia injected to stimulate
arousal, to be photographed for use in the trial. The police had previously photographed the
boy’s genitalia.
This is
fundamentally wrong for so many reasons, including the following. First, child-pornography statutes were
enacted to remedy a completely-different societal harm than that at issue
here. They are designed to protect
children, not harm them. Second, the
Milwaukee Police Department originally issued a statement implying that the
warrant did not exist (see http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/local/wp/2014/07/09/manassas-city-police-release-statement-on-teen-sexting-case/). This was a lie disseminated to the public
(however, they did not deny getting the warrant, they just stated it would
violate their policy to do so). Third, it
makes no sense to create child porn in the name of prosecuting it. Fourth, an accused should not be subjected to
a greater injury than they are alleged of inflicting during an investigation of
the offense.
In sum –
this happened. There was a gross abuse
of prosecutorial power. There was an inquiry
into that abuse by the press. The
Manassas City Police then lied to the press and public in a misleading
statement denying the existence of the warrant.
Then they were caught. And this
all stemmed from a threat to subject a boy to an insanely traumatic procedure,
in an effort to get him to plea to a horrific crime (aimed to guard against
conduct that he did not engage in -- a child who exchanges photos of privates
with their girlfriend is not a possessor or creator of child pornography). The plea would have destroyed his life. And for what purpose?
There
will be no ramifications for the officer who sought the warrant, the agency
that falsely denied its existence, the prosecutor who used it to threaten the
boy to coerce a plea, or the magistrate who signed it.
Note --
on Thursday, July 17, 2014, we discussed this warrant on Wallach-on-Law with Jason Feldman, and a
link to that show is here – http://www.blogtalkradio.com/wallachlaw/2014/07/10/george-zimmerman-verdict-one-year-later-with-don-west
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)