Morning Links

Digg it |  reddit |  del.icio.us |  Fark

Not a War on Patients

In the name of preventing the diversion of prescription painkillers, the DEA is causing unneeded suffering in America’s nursing homes.

Meanwhile, here’s an email I received today from a pain patient in Tennessee.

Hi Mr. Balko. First, thank you so very, very,  much for being the “voice” for all of us chronic pain disease people. I have a rare disease called RSD/CRPS. It is rated the highest of all pain diseases on the Mcgill Pain Scale. It is rated higher in pain than child birth or the loss of a digit. I am on a fentanyl patch and other meds as well. I have recently been informed that the pharmacies near me will no longer fill opiate pain meds! My husband has to drive all over the state to find a place that will fill my medicine. I would be willing to talk to you if it will help me and others with the nightmare we are living. Again, thank you for what you are trying to do. We need you.

After my Huffington Post series on chronic pain, I created a file for emails from pain patients who can’t find treatment. It’s up to 300 messages.

But they must all be lying. Because the drug czar assures me such people don’t exist.

Digg it |  reddit |  del.icio.us |  Fark

Did Texas Execute Another Innocent Man?

An exhaustive investigation from Columbia Law School argues yes.

It is now clear that a person was executed for a crime he did not commit, and his name – Carlos DeLuna – is being shouted from the rooftops of the Columbia Human Rights Law Review. The august journal has cleared its entire spring edition, doubling its normal size to 436 pages, to carry an extraordinary investigation by a Columbia law school professor and his students.

The book sets out in precise and shocking detail how an innocent man was sent to his death on 8 December 1989, courtesy of the state of Texas. Los Tocayos Carlos: An Anatomy of a Wrongful Execution, is based on six years of intensive detective work by Professor James Liebman and 12 students.

Starting in 2004, they meticulously chased down every possible lead in the case, interviewing more than 100 witnesses, perusing about 900 pieces of source material and poring over crime scene photographs and legal documents that, when stacked, stand over 10ft high.

What they discovered stunned even Liebman, who, as an expert in America’s use of capital punishment, was well versed in its flaws. “It was a house of cards. We found that everything that could go wrong did go wrong,” he says.

Carlos DeLuna was arrested, aged 20, on 4 February 1983 for the brutal murder of a young woman, Wanda Lopez. She had been stabbed once through the left breast with an 8in lock-blade buck knife which had cut an artery causing her to bleed to death.

From the moment of his arrest until the day of his death by lethal injection six years later, DeLuna consistently protested he was innocent. He went further – he said that though he hadn’t committed the murder, he knew who had. He even named the culprit: a notoriously violent criminal called Carlos Hernandez.

The two Carloses were not just namesakes – or tocayos in Spanish, as referenced in the title of the Columbia book. They were the same height and weight, and looked so alike that they were sometimes mistaken for twins. When Carlos Hernandez’s lawyer saw pictures of the two men, he confused one for the other, as did DeLuna’s sister Rose . . .

All the evidence the Columbia team has gathered on the DeLuna case has been placed on the internet with open public access . . .

Carlos DeLuna commented on his own ending in a television interview a couple of years before his execution. “Maybe one day the truth will come out,” he said from behind reinforced glass. “I’m hoping it will. If I end up getting executed for this, I don’t think it’s right.”

You can read the book and review the evidence here.

Digg it |  reddit |  del.icio.us |  Fark
ADVERTISEMENT

Another Highway Robbery

The conversation between the reporter and the Tennessee cop in this article is just surreal.

For more than a year, NewsChannel 5 Investigates has been shining a light on a practice that some call “policing for profit.”

In this latest case, a Monterey police officer took $22,000 off the driver — even though he had committed no crime.

“You live in the United States, you think you have rights — and apparently you don’t,” said George Reby . . .

Reby was driving down Interstate 40, heading west through Putnam County, when he was stopped for speeding.

A Monterey police officer wanted to know if he was carrying any large amounts of cash.

“I said, ‘Around $20,000,’” he recalled. “Then, at the point, he said, ‘Do you mind if I search your vehicle?’ I said, ‘No, I don’t mind.’ I certainly didn’t feel I was doing anything wrong. It was my money.”

That’s when Officer Larry Bates confiscated the cash based on his suspicion that it was drug money.

“Why didn’t you arrest him?” we asked Bates.

“Because he hadn’t committed a criminal law,” the officer answered.

Bates said the amount of money and the way it was packed gave him reason to be suspicious.

“The safest place to put your money if it’s legitimate is in a bank account,” he explained. “He stated he had two. I would put it in a bank account. It draws interest and it’s safer.”

“But it’s not illegal to carry cash,” we noted.

“No, it’s not illegal to carry cash,” Bates said. “Again, it’s what the cash is being used for to facilitate or what it is being utilized for.”

NewsChannel 5 Investigates noted, “But you had no proof that money was being used for drug trafficking, correct? No proof?”

“And he couldn’t prove it was legitimate,” Bates insisted.

I didn’t realize Tennessee’s forfeiture law was quite this absurd:

He said that, while police are required to get a judge to sign off on a seizure within five days, state law says that hearing “shall be ex parte” — meaning only the officer’s side can be heard.

That’s why George Reby was never told that there was a hearing on his case.

“It wouldn’t have mattered because the judge would have said, ‘This says it shall be ex parte. Sit down and shut up. I’m not to hear from you — by statute,” Miles added.

George Reby said that he told Monterey officers that “I had active bids on EBay, that I was trying to buy a vehicle. They just didn’t want to hear it.”

In fact, Reby had proof on his computer.

But the Monterey officer drew up a damning affidavit, citing his own training that “common people do not carry this much U.S. currency.”

“On the street, a thousand-dollar bundle could approximately buy two ounces of cocaine,” Bates told NewsChannel 5 Investigates.

“Or the money could have been used to buy a car,” we observed.

“It’s possible,” he admitted.

NewsChannel 5 Investigates asked Bates if Reby had told him that he was trying to buy a car?

“He did,” the officer acknowledged.

“But you did not include that in your report,” we noted.

“If it’s not in there, I didn’t put it in there.”

So why did he leave that out?

“I don’t know,” the officer said.

The guy eventually got his money back, but only after four months, and even then only after News Channel 5 started asking questions. He was still required to come back to Tennessee from New Jersey—on his own dime—to claim it. And get this:

He had two clients where police agreed to drop the cases in exchange for a cut of the money — $1,000 in one case, $2,000 in another. In both cases, that was less than what they might have paid in attorney fees.

Miles called that “extortion.”

I’d say he’s right.

Nashville’s New Channel 5 continues to do great work on this topic (and in general, actually). One of their previous reports on forfeiture in Tennessee noted that the vast majority of drug stops on Tennessee interstates were of motorists leaving Nashville, when a drug runner would presumably be flush with cash, than heading into the city, when the car would contain the drugs. Meaning they were willing to let the drugs be sold so they could make a bust that would bring some money back to their respective police agencies.

Digg it |  reddit |  del.icio.us |  Fark

Bonus Afternoon Links

Digg it |  reddit |  del.icio.us |  Fark

Morning Links

Digg it |  reddit |  del.icio.us |  Fark

Lettuce Create the Ultimate Sandwich Thread

According to the BBC, now is approximately the 250th anniversary of the invention of that magnificent and versatile foodstuff, the sandwich.

I would like to celebrate with the ultimate sandwich thread. Please share your favorite sandwich stories, your favorite sandwich recipes, the name and location of the restaurants where you have eaten memorable sandwiches, and—if applicable—a story about the time a sandwich saved your life, or helped deliver one of your children in the back of a taxicab.

I’ll start.

The best variation on a club sandwich I’ve ever eaten is the swordfish club at Rustico in Alexandria, Virginia. The best Cuban sandwich I’ve ever had, oddly enough, was in Louisville, Kentucky, at a place called Havana Rumba. Best Philly cheese steak was at Primanti Bros. in Pittsburgh. My favorite place for a deli sandwich is still the wonderfully-named Dagwood’s in Bloomington, Indiana. My favorite (and much underrated) sandwich cheese is cream Havarti. My favorite specialty sandwich accoutrement is the jalapeno bacon from Nashville’s Loveless Cafe.  The best burger I’ve ever eaten was at The Fatted Calf in Clayton, Missouri. Best meatball sandwich (and best authentic Italian cold cut sandwich) was at The Italian Store in Arlington, Virginia. Favorite somewhat exotic sandwich: the Banh Mi. My favorite national sandwich chain is Cosi. Or possibly Panera. Finally, just to mix things up, last week I was at Noshville Delicatessen in midtown Nashville. They’ve recently added a bold new creation to their menu called “Reuben Soup.” As you might guess, it’s a Reuben sandwich, only in soup form. I can report that it is a smashing success.

Other sandwich tips:

  • Think beyond mayo or mustard. Dress your sandwich with salad dressings, dips (spinach dip is a personal favorite), relishes, and tapenades.
  • How to make any sandwich at least 60 percent more delicious: Brush each side with olive oil, add some rosemary or Italian seasoning mix, then press in your Foreman Grill for about 10 minutes on medium heat.
  •   Caramelized onions. Always caramelized onions. But to the point where they’re a wee bit charred, so they have some crunch.

Lastly, here is my favorite sandwich-related comedy sketch.

Digg it |  reddit |  del.icio.us |  Fark

Watch Them Explode

Great reporting by the Miami New Times on the city’s hyper-aggressive Tactical Narcotics Team, which goes by the charmingly subtle moniker “TNT.”

Suddenly, flashing lights bathe the front lawn in red and blue. More than a dozen cops in light-gray polos, dark-gray cargo pants, and black vests flood out of the Chrysler and other unmarked cars, storming through the front gate with guns drawn. Dante drops his beer. Before he can react, a beefy cop tackles him, knocking down his 1-year-old, who screams in terror.

The police, all members of an elite Miami-Dade unit called the Tactical Narcotics Team — TNT for short — arrest Dante and his friends, and haul Khalid and Alexis off to jail as well.

The Levels were just three of the 112 people in Liberty City booked that weekend as part of a TNT operation cheekily dubbed “Santa’s Helper,” which the Miami Herald and local TV stations ate up as a feel-good story about cops keeping the inner city safe — an especially juicy tale when coupled with video of the widow of a slain officer handing out 500 toys to poor children. The Levels’ arrest led the 6 p.m. telecasts, with CBS 4 reporter Peter D’Oench hailing the MDPD for “getting kids in the neighborhood to see… the human side of the officers who love to interact with the children.” A Herald story, meanwhile, offered that the “streets of northwest Miami-Dade [will be] safe for when Santa comes to town.”

However, a two-month investigation by New Times has found that Santa’s Helper was a colossal waste of police resources. Of the 112 suspects arrested, 73 people were charged only with misdemeanor pot possession. The vast majority of the busted pot smokers were either released within 24 hours or avoided jail by promising to show up in court. Of the 73 alleged tokers, 68 of them — including Dante Level and his siblings — had no violent criminal record. If they were guilty of anything, it was smoking a joint on their own front porch.

Police say TNT, a 31-officer team that focuses on aggressive, low-level drug busts such as Santa’s Helper, is vital because their work prevents more serious drug and gang violence. Even as other units specializing in cargo and auto theft were disbanded last month to save money for the cash-strapped department, the brass left TNT and its $3 million budget untouched.

“This is a great way to capture a cross section of robbers, burglars, thieves, and dopers who shoot kids and cops and will openly spray a corner with bullets,” says Maj. Charles Nanney, head of the Miami-Dade Narcotics Bureau. “Cocaine, marijuana, and heroin availability at the street level poses the greatest threat.”

But neighborhood activists and some criminologists say letting an aggressive unit loose on small-time users does more to alienate black neighborhoods than it does to end violent crime. Santa’s Helper, they say, is a perfect illustration of how a unit with a history of corruption — and a mound of complaints about excessive force — has lost the War on Drugs. In recent years, three officers who worked with TNT, but not assigned to the unit full-time, were busted in public corruption probes. Meanwhile, 14 current squad members have combined for 40-plus internal affairs probes.

We’ve seen this over and over again. These tactics are typically justified on the argument that they’re only used on the nastiest, most dangerous drug distributors. Time and again, when local media looks into what these raids typically turn up, they find vanishingly few weapons, significant drug busts, or felony charges. In the case above, three people were charged for possessing the same joint.

The one difference with the TNT unit is that, as the story indicates, while it was initially set up to target criminals with violent histories, busting low-level offenders with the shock-and-awe bullshit is now stated policy.  So they’ve dispensed with the pretense. If a few toddlers and grandmas get in the way of scaring the vocabulary out of the city’s pot smokers, well, that’s a price these cops are willing to pay.

But I suppose there’s no questioning the results. As I understand it, Miami is now basically drug-free.

Digg it |  reddit |  del.icio.us |  Fark

Disposable People

The Nation‘s Liliana Segura digs up a devastating, 35-year-old case that calls up the horrors of a number of tough-on-crime policies, most notably juvenile life without parole.

On August 29, 1976, around 1:40 am, a fire erupted at 1138 Spruce Street in Chester, Pennsylvania. The building, in a row of two-family homes just south of the Delaware Expressway, burned for two hours, killing two boys: 13-year-old Brian Harvey and his 6-year-old brother, Derrick.

Neighbors spotted two local girls at the scene: 16-year-old Frances Newsome and 14-year-old Trina Garnett. But according to early reports in the Delaware County Daily Times, “the immediate focus” was Trina, a “mysterious girl” with a “grudge” against Sylvia Harvey, the boys’ mother. Investigators theorized that she had broken a kitchen window and climbed through, lighting matches throughout the first floor of the house and then escaping before it went up in flames. On September 3, Trina was arrested and charged with homicide, arson, conspiracy and burglary. She was held without bail; police told reporters she would be tried as an adult.

The youngest of twelve kids, Trina was known as a slow child. She had a very low IQ and couldn’t read or write. Kids made fun of her for sucking her fingers. Her mother died when Trina was 9, and her father was a violent alcoholic capable of unthinkable cruelty. (Sworn affidavits describe, in addition to horrific abuse against his wife and kids, how he once beat the family dog to death with a hammer as Trina watched, then made his children clean up its remains.) From the time Trina was young, she was mostly cared for by her siblings: among them, Edith (or Edy), the eldest, who took over her mother’s responsibilities, and twin sisters Lynn and Linda, just a year older than Trina. In and out of homelessness, Trina and the twins slept in cars and abandoned buildings, washing their clothes in police stations and foraging for food wherever they could, including from trash cans.

When she was 11, Trina was sent by her grandmother to Allentown State Hospital for mental treatment; she was discharged at 13 against the advice of her doctor and stopped taking her medication.

Following the fire, prison officials requested she be given a psychiatric evaluation, after which she was deemed unfit for trial and hospitalized. A second evaluation yielded a diagnosis of schizophrenia. But a third assessment, just a few weeks later, deemed her competent to stand trial. Her lawyer did not challenge the decision. Nor did he challenge the prosecutor’s successful push to try Trina as an adult. (He would later be jailed and disbarred.) Trina was tried in March 1977. Trial transcripts have been lost, but it’s clear that she took the stand as the sole witness for the defense. Frances Newsome was the key witness for the prosecution, telling the jury Trina had set the fire as revenge on Sylvia Harvey for forbidding her sons to play with her.

Trina was found guilty of arson, two counts of second-degree murder and “causing a catastrophe.” The conviction sealed her fate. Had she been facing the death penalty, she would have had the right to introduce mitigating evidence, according to a Supreme Court ruling the previous year striking down mandatory death sentences as cruel and unusual punishment. But no such right extended to defendants facing mandatory life sentences. In Pennsylvania this meant that Trina’s age, severe mental problems, history of abuse and neglect, and, most crucially, rehabilitative potential were not up for discussion. Bound by the state’s mandatory sentencing statutes, on July 7, 1977, Delaware County Judge Howard Reed handed down two life terms plus up to forty years in prison. He called her case “one of the saddest I’ve ever seen” and expressed worry that there was “no facility whatsoever to take care of these few juveniles in desperate need of a secure, safe and meaningful facility.”

His words would prove prescient. Trina had barely begun her sentence at the State Correctional Institution (SCI) at Muncy when she was raped by a prison guard. She got pregnant and delivered the baby, which was taken into foster care. Trina’s sister Brenda (who died in 2003) eventually won custody of the child. His name is Rodney.

Today, Trina is one of approximately 470 prisoners in Pennsylvania serving life without parole for crimes they committed as teenagers.

She has since been diagnosed with MS, and is confined to a wheelchair. (Echoes of the Paul House case.) The story just gets more awful from there.

The U.S. Supreme Court will hand down its decision on juvenile life without parole in the fall.

Digg it |  reddit |  del.icio.us |  Fark

Five-Star Fridays

I’m in New York for the weekend. So here’s Steve Earle. He’s going to New York City, where he hears that the girls are pretty.

Digg it |  reddit |  del.icio.us |  Fark

Getting the Government’s Permission to Work

The Institute for Justice has published an important new study on the economic impact of licensing laws.

As a new report issued today by the Institute for Justice discusses, more and more Americans now need the government’s permission before they can pursue the occupation of their choice. The IJ report, “License to Work: A National Study of Burdens from Occupational Licensing,” shows that for lower-income Americans, these government-imposed “occupational licensing” hurdles are not only widespread, but often unreasonably high. License to Work details licensing requirements for 102 low- and moderate-income occupations in all 50 states and D.C. It is the first national study of licensing to focus on lower-income occupations and to measure the burdens licensing imposes on aspiring workers . . .

All of the 102 occupations studied in License to Work are licensed in at least one state. On average, these government-mandated licenses force aspiring workers to spend nine months in education or training, pass one exam and pay more than $200 in fees. One third of the licenses take more than one year to earn. At least one exam is required for 79 of the occupations.

“These licensing laws force people to spend a lot of time and effort earning a license instead of earning a living,” said Dr. Dick Carpenter, director of strategic research at the Institute for Justice and report co-author. “They make it harder for people to find jobs and to build new businesses that create jobs.”

Data show that those practicing the 102 occupations studied are not only more likely to be low-income, but also to be minority and to have less education, likely making licensing hurdles even harder to overcome. In addition, about half the 102 occupations offer the possibility of entrepreneurship, suggesting these laws affect both job attainment and creation.

Licensing requirements are usually justified under concerns for public safety. But that’s usually just a canard.

 . . . research to date provides little evidence that licensing protects public health and safety or improves products and services. Instead, it increases consumer costs and reduces opportunities for workers.

License to Work provides additional reasons to doubt that many licensing regimes are needed. First, most of the 102 occupations are practiced somewhere without government permission and apparently without widespread harm: Only 15 are licensed in 40 states or more, and on average, the 102 occupations are licensed in just 22 states—fewer than half. This includes a number of occupations with no self-evident rationale for licensure, such as shampooer, florist, home entertainment installer and funeral attendant.

Second, licensure burdens often vary considerably across states, calling into question the need for severe burdens. For instance, although 10 states require four months or more of training for manicurists, Alaska demands only about three days and Iowa about nine days. Such disparities are prevalent throughout the occupations studied.

Finally, the difficulty of entering an occupation often has little to do with the health or safety risk it poses. Of the 102 occupations studied, the most difficult to enter is interior designer, a harmless occupation licensed in only three states and D.C. By contrast, EMTs hold lives in their hands, yet 66 other occupations face greater average licensure burdens, including barbers and cosmetologists, manicurists and a host of contractor designations.

Idea for some econ grad student: Do a study to determine the number of jobs the Institute for Justice has created over the years by suing, usually successfully, to overturn this protectionist nonsense.

Digg it |  reddit |  del.icio.us |  Fark

Puppycides

In Topeka:

Several neighbors in the 1100 block of S.W. Plass Ave. were upset Monday night after a Topeka police officer drew his weapon and shot a dog to death.

“He drew his gun and fired five or six shots,” said neighbor Constantinos Miklas Acton. “He killed that dog dead for no reason.” . . .

A few minutes later, Acton took a break and saw the dog, a German shepherd and border collie mix, galloping playfully toward the officer.

A few seconds later, shots rang out.

“He knew I saw it,” Acton said. “He really got hot under the collar.”

Topeka police Sgt. Jennifer Cross didn’t release the officer’s name Monday night. She did confirm there had been several calls made about a barking dog and another dog possibly loose in the area.

She said the officer tried to make contact with the dog’s owner, and when the dog approached the officer, “he felt in danger.”

“His training is to protect himself,” Cross said.

And in Cheatham County, Tennessee:

A Cheatham County man said deputies gunned down his dog, and then disposed of the body in the most disrespectful way possible.  Now, he wants answers about how it happened.

Brandon Reed said his pit bull, Kojo, disappeared last Tuesday.

“I had a couple dogs show up in my yard, and they were just kinda hanging out, my dog was out, and he was playing with them, and they were laying around and stuff,” he said.  “Evidently, Kojo followed them back to their home.” . . .

“She said she called the police because my dog was there and he was causing some type of trouble, or she felt threatened,” Reed said.

Sheriff John Holder told NewsChannel 5 his deputies shot the dog after arriving on the scene, but said they did so because Kojo was being aggressive.

“My officers saw this dog come toward them, and my officers shot him,” Sheriff Holder said.  “And we’ll take responsibility for shooting the dog, but we would not have shot the dog if he had not shown some kind of aggression.” . . .

“She said, well, when the officers shot the dog, they dragged it into the woods and threw if off the bluff, which is right behind their house,” he said.  “There’s no way I could’ve found it without rappelling.  So I mean, I don’t even know where he is, I didn’t even get to bury him.”

Sheriff Holder insists that his deputies would not go that far.

“We left the dog there with the people who called us, and they said they would destroy the dog, bury the dog, I think is what they said,” said the sheriff.

That never happened, which is why Reed is so upset.

“It was all handled poorly, the whole situation,” he said.  “It’s so disrespectful to Kojo.  And he deserved more.”

NewsChannel 5 spoke to the woman who called 911 on that day.

She did not want to go on camera, but told us the deputies helped them carry Kojo into the woods, and to the top of that 150-foot bluff.

She said they simply placed the body near the edge, though, and somehow, it must have rolled off.

Image courtesy of the @firehat Twitter feed.

Digg it |  reddit |  del.icio.us |  Fark

Morning Links

Digg it |  reddit |  del.icio.us |  Fark

Obama and Gay Marriage

I’m sorry, but I’m not really seeing the bravery or heroism, here. It’s important, sure. And it’s historic. And it might prove to be an effective use of the bully pulpit.

It’s also about f*cking time. Basically, Obama announced to the country today that he, personally, is cool with gay marriage. It’s a position he has allegedly held all along, but didn’t have the political spine to state publicly prior to this afternoon. Even then, he only made his statement after carefully strategizing with his aides to make sure it wouldn’t damage him politically. Or I guess to put it more accurately, once his aides convinced him that his gutless silence was hurting him more than what he said today possibly could.

Obama’s statement doesn’t change a single policy. He has basically adopted a federalist approach to the issue. To my knowledge, gay marriage also happens to be the only issue in which Obama embraces federalism. Obama apparently believes the states should be able to discriminate when it comes to marriage benefits, but if they allow cancer and AIDS patients to smoke pot, he asserts the supremacy of federal law, and sends in the SWAT teams. What a twisted set of priorities.

Moreover, because the federal government is actively discriminating against homosexual couples based on whether or not the state where they reside recognizes their marriage, there’s actually a decent equal protection argument argument against letting the states decide this issue. Or, better yet, for the federal government to just stop conferring special benefits onto heterosexual couples. Or, still better yet, to stop conferring benefits onto married couples at all.* And I say that as someone who generally believes in federalism. (And, to be fair, who isn’t married.)

I’ve been happy to praise Obama on those unfortunately few occasions when there’s been reason to do so. But this? This is a president half-assing it while still keeping plenty of political cover, and on an issue in which he could have effected real change had he had the courage of his convictions years ago.

As leadership goes, it’s little more than acknowledging the direction the wind is blowing. It hardly merits a new chapter for Profiles in Courage.

(*Insert boilerplate libertarian disclaimer about how government shouldn’t be in the business of sanctioning relationships in the first place.)

Digg it |  reddit |  del.icio.us |  Fark

“I just start smashing his face to hell.”

This police beating of Kelly Thomas is one of the most heartbreaking videos I’ve ever seen. Not just for Thomas, although quite obviously for Thomas. But also for the sheer depravity—the staring-you-in-the-face confirmation that your fellow human beings are capable of this sort of thing.

Of course, the point is also that these aren’t just any human beings. You can find violent videos at sites like World Star Hip Hop that are every bit as soul-crushing. But these are the people we entrust with the exclusive power to use coercive force—which we do in the interest of protecting the public. Days after the beating, one of these animals called into a radio show to boast about it. The night of the beating, one of them demanded treatment for a scrape on his elbow as Thomas lay dying a few feet away, looking like this.

Public officials closed ranks. A “special assistant to the DA” was brought on to defend the officers. The police department shut down the flow of information, then released misinformation (though another public official later found no fault with that). The city then tried to pay Thomas’ father $900,000 to go away.

Were it not for a citizen with a cell phone camera, the agitation of a local blog, and the determination of Thomas’ father, himself a former cop, we may never have known about Kelly Thomas. And these animals could well still be on the police force in Fullerton.

It’s difficult as hell, but you should still sit down to watch this video. Once you’re done, you can restore some optimism with this video from Reason.tv, which explains how technology and social media eventually shamed Fullerton officials into taking action.

(Via Carlos Miller, who has much more.)

 

Digg it |  reddit |  del.icio.us |  Fark

You, Sir, Are an Extremist

That Tea Party extremist nut Rand Paul is at it again. First, he was the only U.S. Senator to openly speak out against renewal of the PATRIOT Act. Then he promised that it should it become necessary, he’d wage a filibuster to block SOPA. He raised holy hell about the NDAA.

Now the winger is trying to prevent a war with Iran or Syria.

Presidents of both parties, over the past several decades, have shown a willingness to interpret Senate resolutions in the broadest imaginable way when it comes to war, whether it’s to launch a 10-year land-war in Southeast Asia or Afghanistan, to torture detainees picked up in foreign countries or to eavesdrop without a warrant on American citizens.

This time around, Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) wants to make sure there are no misunderstandings.

The Senate is debating legislation that would impose strict sanctions on Iran, including penalizing U.S. companies whose subsidiaries have ties to the country.

The bill, S. Res. 380, would not explicitly allow war with Iran. But Paul, who has been a critic of U.S. involvement in both Iraq and Afghanistan, doesn’t want to take any chances. His amendment would make clear that nothing in the bill “shall be construed as a declaration of war or an authorization of use of force against Iran or Syria.”

A single senator can wield serious influence in the Senate simply by refusing to go along, and Paul is willing to use it. In late March, Paul blocked the bipartisan Iran sanctions bill from coming to a vote, demanding consideration of his amendment. The House has already approved a version of the legislation. Moving forward would require coming to an agreement with Paul so that he lifts his objection, or getting 60 votes to bypass him, which would chew up several days of limited Senate floor time.

So far, only one Democrat, Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), has expressed interest in signing on as a cosponsor . . .

Fortunately, seasoned Washington veterans are around to tamp down Paul’s nutty crusades.

The effort to rally votes simply to clarify that the bill does not authorize war has been a frustrating one for Paul. Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.), chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, warned that the amendment wasn’t “helpful” at the moment.

“I just don’t think it would be helpful right now, frankly, to have that kind of a debate when you’re in the middle of negotiations, when you’re trying to send a bunch of other different kinds of messages, and when you don’t want to confuse the ability to bring people to the table and act in good faith,” he said. “When you start talking about war debate and strength debate, it’s a whole different climate. I don’t think it’s necessary.”

Thank goodness the Senate was full of people like Kerry back when Bush was in office, and not people like Paul. I mean, there may have actually been some debate over the PATRIOT Act. Or some attempt to be specific about what that authorization of war on terrorism did and didn’t allow the president to do.

Digg it |  reddit |  del.icio.us |  Fark

Morning Links

Digg it |  reddit |  del.icio.us |  Fark

Just Collateral Damage

Digg it |  reddit |  del.icio.us |  Fark

Set Phasers to Litigate

Over at Huffington Post, I have an update on Terrance Huff, the filmmaker who was pulled over and searched in Collinsville, Illinois while returning from a Star Trek convention last year.

He filed a civil rights lawsuit this morning.

Digg it |  reddit |  del.icio.us |  Fark

Win.

The 7th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals has struck down the onerous Illinois wiretapping law.

The ruling from the 7th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals in Chicago is the strongest blow yet to the law, which is one of the strictest in the country and makes it illegal for people to audio record police officers in public without their consent.

The ruling follows last month’s announcement by Chicago officials that they would not enforce the law during the May 20-21 NATO summit when potentially thousands of people armed with smart phones and video cameras are expected to demonstrate in the city.

The ruling from the appeals court stems from a lawsuit filed in 2010 by the American Civil Liberties Union of Illinois. The suit sought a preliminary injunction barring Cook County prosecutors from enforcing the law.

A federal judge denied the request, prompting the ACLU to appeal to the 7th Circuit. In its ruling today, the appeals court agreed with the ACLU, saying, “The Illinois eavesdropping statute restricts far more speech than necessary to protect legitimate privacy interests.”

The ACLU of Illinois welcomed the ruling. Its legal director, Harvey Grossman, said that the “widespread accessibility of new technologies make the recording and dissemination of pictures and sound inexpensive, efficient and easy to accomplish.”

“In order to make the rights of free expression and petition effective, individuals and organizations must be able to freely gather and record information about the conduct of government and their agents – especially the police,” Grossman said in a statement.

There was one dissent. And with it, I think it’s officially time to stop pretending that Judge Richard Posner has any kinship with libertarians.

Judge Richard Posner dissented, saying the legislature in 1994 might have had good reason for requiring two-party consent — a higher standard of privacy than other states — even when it comes to recording police officers on public streets: “A person who is talking with a police officer on duty may be a suspect whom the officer wants to question; he may be a bystander whom the police are shooing away from the scene of a crime or an accident; he may be an injured person seeking help; he may be a crime victim seeking police intervention; he may be asking for directions; he may be arguing with a police officer over a parking ticket; he may be reporting a traffic accident,” Posner wrote. “Police may have no right to privacy in carrying out official duties in public. But the civilians they interact with do.”

Or it might be the alleged victim of sexual assault by a police officer, attempting to document the fact that the internal affairs cops to whom she’s trying to report the incident are bullying her into dropping her complaint. Posner  apparently thinks she should go to prison for that.

Keep in mind, this is the same Posner who is unconcerned with warrantless cell phone searches, and who in just about every other context seems to believe that privacy is dead.

Just not when you’re recording on-duty cops.

Digg it |  reddit |  del.icio.us |  Fark

Arrested, Jailed for a Legitimate Pain Script

Doctors prescribed a Texas woman a strong narcotic after she shattered her knee in Haiti.  And then . . .

“They gave me a pretty high, heavy duty narcotic, Norco, as a painkiller going forward and I had used that up. It had been a month and I had called for my refill,” Lenhart said.

The pharmacy called Lenhart to ask her exactly what time she would be in pick up her prescription. She thought it was odd, but told the pharmacy what time she would be there.

Still on crutches and unable to drive, a friend of Lenhart’s, drove her to a CVS Pharmacy in Oak Cliff.

She wasn’t able to pick up her prescription because a police officer arrived to pick her up.

“He was like ‘we need to go outside,’” she said. “I was on crutches and I had a permanent IV line in my arm. I had a big leg brace. I asked him if it was necessary and he said yes and he rather policingly escorted me out the front door and into the back of a waiting patrol car.”

Lenhart was so stunned, she didn’t think to ask the officer questions. The officer explained to her what was going on.

“He said, ‘Well we believe that you have forged your pain pill prescription and we are calling your doctor now. But I’ve worked with this pharmacist a number of times and he’s never made a mistake,” Lenhart said.

The officer then took her the Dallas County jail, where she remained overnight.  After she was released on bond, she was charged with obtaining a controlled substance by fraud, a felony.

“I couldn’t go back to work until HR had received the paperwork that this was a mistake from my attorney,” she said.

Dallas police later dropped the charges after speaking with Lenhart’s doctor.

These idiots couldn’t even bother to call the woman’s doctor before tossing her in a jail cell.

Lenhart’s story has been making its way around the web the past few days, and has been generating the appropriate outrage. But it shouldn’t be all that surprising. This is the perfectly predictable outcome of all this painkiller hysteria of late. It’s bad enough coming from the usual drug warriors. But because there’s a big evil pharmaceutical corporation to play the villain, we now get progressive outlets like ProPublica, and Alternet and Salon spitting out the government’s hype without the least bit of skepticism—or concern for pain patients.

You can’t really blame the pharmacist, here. She risks arrest and criminal prosecution if some overeager prosecutor looking to make a name for himself decides she hasn’t been sufficiently suspicious of her customers. Think about that. The government will now throw you in jail for failing to be suspicious enough of your fellow citizens. (And not just with painkillers — remember this monstrous injustice?)

Don’t blame her employer, either. The DEA recently shut down two CVS stores in Florida because federal drug cops thought the stores should have been turning away more people who came to fill pain medication prescriptions. Not only that, the agencies also attempted to shut down the wholesaler who supplies those stores for not being sufficiently suspicious of them, a move that would have left thousands of patients in several states without access to the medication they need.

The government has created a poisonous, paranoid atmosphere in which every player in the painkiller process from manufacturer to patient has been deputized to police every other player, to the point where anyone who doesn’t continually question the motives and actions of everyone else risks losing his livelihood, or even his freedom.

But Drug Czar Gil Kerlikowske personally assures me that none of this hysteria is affecting patients. People suffering from pain and conscientious doctors have nothing to worry about, Kerlikowski promises. Just trust him on this one.

Yeah, so tell that to Anne Lenhart. Or to the desperate pain patients who have been emailing me since the most recent doctor went down.

You are sorely missed, Siobhan Reynolds.

Digg it |  reddit |  del.icio.us |  Fark

Afternoon Break

Time-lapse Venice.

Digg it |  reddit |  del.icio.us |  Fark

Philly Police Union Looks To Oust Retired Cop

The Philadelphia Fraternal Order of Police is looking to strip a retired captain of his union membership, because he had sex with a 14-year-old girl illegally raided immigrant-owned bodegas across the city, then stole from and threatened their owners illegally arrested and nearly killed a man for legally carrying a firearm beat his girlfriend and threatened to “stamp” her “heart out” sexually assaulted three women during drug raids  . . . hmm. It appears to have been none of those.

So what could he possibly have done?

The retired Philadelphia police captain committed an act so heinous, so unforgivable in the eyes of the FOP, that union president John McNesby filed a rare grievance that could result in Lewis being permanently expelled from the FOP and stripped of union benefits such as life insurance and free legal assistance.

“It’s quite unusual. We had to dig into the books to see what we could do and couldn’t do,” said FOP pension director Henry Vannelli, who made the motion to refer Lewis’ case to the union’s grievance committee. “We don’t want that guy around.”

Lewis’ inexcusable offense?

He wore his police uniform to the Occupy Wall Street protest in Zuccotti Park last year. He wanted to show the world that the economic-equality movement is not just the pink-haired potheads and scatterbrained anarchists that some media outlets tend to focus on. He makes sure to tell people he’s retired.

“They thought everyone thought of them as dirty hippies. I made their concerns legitimate to the masses,” said Lewis, 60, explaining how he was greeted by the protesters last year. “Their gratitude was overwhelming.”

Lewis, who wore his police uniform to Southwest Philadelphia’s Elmwood Park on Tuesday for a May Day rally with Occupy Philly and labor leaders, became somewhat of an Occupy celebrity, appearing in Time magazine and on cable news.

All of which continues to infuriate McNesby and other FOP officials. The grievance committee could complete its Lewis investigation by the end of the month.

“He’s not respecting the uniform,” McNesby said. “People died for that uniform. It’s not Halloween.”

Not only should Lewis be punished by the union, McNesby said, he “absolutely” should be locked up every time he sets foot in Philly with his uniform on.

Only problem: Nothing Lewis did was illegal.

Also, here’s a bonus, fun glimpse at police union logic:

But if it’s all about the uniform, why doesn’t the FOP take issue with Philadelphia lawyer Jimmy Binns? The wannabe cop has been photographed with a Glock on his hip in a look-alike Philadelphia police uniform on a Harley-Davidson that says “police” on the side and is nearly identical to those ridden by city cops.

Simple, the FOP’s Vannelli says: “Binns is a very good friend of police.”

Digg it |  reddit |  del.icio.us |  Fark

Morning Links

Digg it |  reddit |  del.icio.us |  Fark

Sunday Evening Dog Blogging: Reader Dogs

 

This is Lucy, a neglected pup that reader and fellow writer David McElroy rescued  . . . from his neighbors. You can read the story here.

Digg it |  reddit |  del.icio.us |  Fark