Monday, March 3rd, 2008
- Witnesses preparing to testify about the mysterious 1970s disappearances of critics of the Argentine government are now themselves . . . disappearing.
- I don’t know what to say about this Charlotte Allen op-ed in the Washington Post. Except to say that I think she may have written this piece, too.
- It’s a few years old, but here’s an interesting law review article about reconsidering absolute prosecutorial immunity. At the very least, any time a prosecutor takes on an investigative role in a case, his immunity from a civil rights suit ought to be rolled back to the same qualified immunity afforded police officers.
- Government agencies and “watchdog” groups are always telling us that manufacturers of adult products and services shouldn’t be allowed to use cartoon characters and fuzzy animals, which they say appeal only to children. In that vein, I give you “Gus, the Groundhog,” ambassador of the Pennsylvania State Lottery! “Keep on Scratchin’!”
- Rolling Stone investigates the case of Chris Wilson, proprietor of the “Now That’s Fucked Up” website. He’s being prosecuted for obscenity. But his real crime seems to have been offering a forum for U.S. troops to upload photos of dead Iraqis. Which isn’t necessarily against the law. Like Joe Francis, the guy who started Girls Gone Wild, Wilson isn’t the most savory of characters. But also like Francis, it looks like he’s getting railroaded.
This entry was posted
on Monday, March 3rd, 2008 at 2:20 pm by Radley Balko
and is filed under Uncategorized.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
TheAgitator.com
Every geek girl I’ve dated, and my wife, happen to have similar opinions of most women. Then again, they were libertarians and concluded that since most women tend to vote for collectivists, that their personal freedoms would be better guarded by disenfranchising women.
Another thing worth keeping in mind is that there is little correlation between liberty and having the right to vote. We may have made progress on racism in the last 200 years worth being proud about, but no one can deny that the government of 2008 is probably at least two or three orders of magnitude more invasive and domineering toward the public than 1808.
Mike, let me get this straight. You’re saying that the government is 100 to 1000 times more domineering now than during slavery? Seriously, I’m trying to wrap my head around this libertarian thing as the conservative movement seems all but dead now. I regularly get in trouble with people like you for expressing what I believe to be a frank, highly informed assessment of where the black community is today. And now you’re telling me that some people doing a little jail time for smoking pot and the economy being overregulated is 100 to 1000 (at least) times worse than 1/5th of the population being slaves. Get f#$@ing real.
There’s nothing “mysterious” about the “disappearances” in Argentina, et al, during the Cold War when the Soviets/Cubans were instigating insurrections around the globe. Argentina is one of the countries in which they were unsuccessful. Where they were successful, death-tolls were orders of magnitude worse.
Argentina’s courts are basically re-opening a civil-war with intent to prosecute the winners.
– Tell me it’s not a recipe for all things ending badly.
Absolute immunity for any government official is a mistake. Since most of these county prosecutors use their elected positions to run for higher offices within the state they care more about putting someone behind bars than they do about justice or even “truth”. I think the bigger problem is the voting populace just doesn’t care. As long as someone looks like they’re “tough on crime” then people of both parties will show up to re-elect a dirty prosecutor.
When it can be proven that a prosecutor withholds evidence or intentionally fabricates evidence they should be subjected to the same punishment they were trying to apply to the defendant. I agree with a previous post (concerning the phoenix, AZ drunk driving case) that there is a 2 tier justice system in this country, although I think it has more to do with money than race. If you can’t afford a good attorney, and in some cases an entire investigative team, then you’re screwed regardless of if you’re actually guilty or not.
alex,
he probably meant two or three times, not 100 or 1000 times (yes i know what order of magnitude mean, doesn’t mean he does)
even if he did, and it was an exaggeration, i agree that the government is quite a bit more invasive and domineering than it was a 100 or 200 years ago.
We’ve simply trended toward government involvement in every little aspect of life.
what in the world does slavery have to do with that. Slavery was a human rights issue, and had nothing to do with how invasive or domineering the government was. The government didn’t force anyone to have slaves, they just hadn’t outlawed it. Completely different issue.
I’m having trouble understanding what you’re point is. I’ll try to address it as best I can.
I contend that government enforcing a complete denial of any basic human rights for 1/5 of the population is more domineering than a few people facing obscenity charges. Basically, my point is that although the goverment may be improper or unideal, on balance we’re much better off than 200 years ago, and to say otherwise is adolescent in my opinion.
I don’t know about 100 years ago, but 96 years ago began the most oppressive (civil rights aside) era of government bar none. I’ll take SWAT raids and Guantanamo over the American Protective League seven days a week.
Gus is a varmint, I suggest that we find a varmint hunter, Mitt Romney comes to mind, to reduce the varmint population in PA.
By my understanding, lawyers are forbidden from outright lying to the court. While they have considerable latitude in forming their beliefs (a defense attorney is allowed to advocate his client’s version of events if a milligram of evidence (e.g. his client’s statement of it) supports it, even if a mountain of evidence would say otherwise) they are not supposed to make statements that aren’t supported by any evidence whatsoever. Lawyers are also forbidden from knowingly suborning perjury.
I can understand that allowing a discovery motion in response to each and every allegation of prosecutorial misconduct would bog the system down unworkably. On the other hand, if it’s possible to establish a strong prima facie case of deliberate misconduct even without the benefit of discovery, I see no reason such a case shouldn’t be allowed to proceed.
I’ll take SWAT raids and Guantanamo over the American Protective League seven days a week.
I think the general idea is to wonder why we can’t have none of them.
Alex,
If you think that all you have to deal with today is a few little issues like smoking pot, think again. In the last two hundred years the governments, mostly the federal government has asserted the right to:
1) Draft any number of men it needs for war.
Regulate the ownership of firearms to the point that it is nearly impossible in many areas of the country to carry them in public.
2) Take up to 50% of one’s entire income.
3) Seize property without following constitutional procedures (asset forfeiture laws).
4) Search you at the borders without the slightest probable cause.
5) Spy on electronic communications with minimal judicial oversight.
6) Suspend habeus corpus without an invasion or insurrection.
7) Mark whatever information it deems necessary to be of such importance that it cannot be divulged to the public.
9) Turned the first amendment into a weapon against religion by arguing that even individual expressions of religion on state property may violate the first amendment.
10) Seize anyone’s property and sell it to someone who can generate more tax revenues with it.
11) Impose fines and incarceration that are too severe for the 8th amendment in the name of things ranging from the War on Drugs, to fighting sex offenders.
12) Detain anyone for up to 48 hours, without having to charge them. We used to call this kidnapping.
13) Redistribute wealth.
14) Establish healthcare and retirement systems for the general public that compete with the private sector.
15) Centralize the banking system into the hands of the Federal Reserve System, and abolish sound money policies.
16) Seize any unreported quantity of cash over $10,000 that leaves the country.
Get where I am going with this?
The problems that many black communities have go directly back to this trend. The welfare state destroyed the black family, inner city public schools destroyed their education opportunities, and the War on Drugs (and other vices) gave them a black market with all of the dangers and profit potential that come with a black market.
Pinette, I was using hyperbole in an (apparently failed) attempt to make a point. The level of government intrusiveness is probably 10x higher today than it was back then.
Well, except 1, 2,14, and 15, , I can honestly say that not one thing you mentioned has affected me or at least my 20 closest friends and family.
“I think the general idea is to wonder why we can’t have none of them.”
I think we can encourage reform without being shrill and hyperbolic about the current state. In fact, I’m sure that’s the most effective route.
Agitator,
The 42 USC 1983, et seq., case law does make prosecutorial immunity qualified when they are doing other than prosecutorial functions. A friend sued the County department of Social Services on this. I don’t remember the case names, but it’s pretty well developed, Sup Ct., case law about qualified immunity for prosecutors when they’re not prosecuting.
Prof.
Mike T,
I don’t see how your questionable review of certain jurisprudence relates to ‘the welfare state’ destroying black communities. You could get at ‘liberals’ by talking about how liberals redlining effected the quality of life in black communities.
Mostly your assumptions/conclusions are incorrect and could easily be laid on a ‘libertoonian’/conservative/corporatist mentality that puts forth judicial officers who are strict constructionists or constitution in exile Federalists.
All in all, I don’t see how you make the leap to destroying black communities though.
Prof.
“Slavery was a human rights issue, and had nothing to do with how invasive or domineering the government was. The government didn’t force anyone to have slaves, they just hadn’t outlawed it.”
The Fugitive Slave Act of 1793, as one example, indicates the government was doing much more than you suggest.
Another example would be laws in Southern states making it a crime to publish abolitionist literature.
And here’s another example, “the Louisiana statute of 1835 declaring that ‘all persons who shall teach, or permit or cause to be taught, any slave in this State to read or write, shall, on conviction thereof, before any court of competent jurisdiction be imprisoned not less than one month nor more than twelve months.’” Lash, 88 Northwestern University Law Review 1106, 1135 n. 137 (1994).
Your suggestion that government activity had little or nothing to do with maintaining a system of slavery, that the state and federal governments just sat by on the sidelines while private actors did bad things, is pretty clearly wrong.
Radley:
That Chris Wilson article is from December of 2005. The website mentioned on it — freechris.org — has been replaced with a spam site.
However, thanks to the glory of the internet archive, I discovered what ended up happening:
January 14th, 2006
From Chris:
It is with some sadness, but much relief, that I can finally announce a resolution of the criminal charges arising out of the NTFU website. The serious felony charge has been dropped, and all but 5 of the misdemeanor charges were dismissed. I’ve entered a no-contest plea to these remaining misdemeanor charges, and agreed to pay certain costs and accept a term of probation in connection with the settlement. One of those terms will require me to close down this site after about 3 months, once existing subscriptions expire. Until then, we will continue to offer the best in amateur erotic content and uncensored news. I will then be moving on to other things in life, after the close out period.
I cannot begin to thank my supporters enough. They have helped me get through a difficult time, and put up an aggressive defense against this prosecution. As a result, we were able to reach a favorable resolution of this matter, which avoids any jail time or any felony conviction. It is often said that a sign of a good settlement is where neither party is particularly happy with the result. That is a good description of what happened with my case. While I’m not exactly ‘happy’ about all the elements of the settlement, I am extremely relieved that the case is over.Thanks again for your help and support during the prosecution, and enjoy the next 3 months.
From Jeremy
Regarding FreeChris.org - Now that the fight is over, the site is over as well. As a close friend of Chris, I started this site to do my part to help out his situation. I will be passing ownership of this site over to Chris, to do with it what he wants. Stay tuned to this site as a connecting point to see what Chris is up to, keep in contact etc. He may even make it into his own personal blog (my suggestion), who knows.
But whatever the outcome, I personally would like to thank everyone who helped out with this case, and thank you all for the support. The supporters have renewed my faith in people, kudos to all. I would like to thank Lawrence and the gang from firstamendment.com, for giving their best and being the best. I would like to thank the ACLU and the FSC for their help as well. Without their work, this case would have been a much uglier story for sure.
-Jeremy Morgan
– http://web.archive.org/web/20060516044703/http://www.freechris.org/
“The government didn’t force anyone to have slaves, they just hadn’t outlawed it.”
Here’s an example of the government doing precisely what you said it didn’t do: forcing people to have slaves:
“The freeing of enslaved persons–manumission–was not regulated by statute in South Carolina until 1712, when the colonial legislature decreed that slaveholders or the colonial governor or provincial council could manumit enslaved persons for good cause. . . . By 1800, manumission laws had become more stringent. In response to some slaveholders who freed troublesome, old, or sickly blacks who then became burdens on the community, the legislature required the approval of a commission for any future manumissions. By 1820, enslaved African Americans could only be freed by an act of the legislature.”
Source: http://www.slaveryinamerica.org/geography/slave_laws_SC.htm
(The 1820 Act is likely the one entitled, “An Act to Restrain the Emancipation of Slaves,” which was passed in December 1820.)
Alex,
“Well, except 1, 2,14, and 15, , I can honestly say that not one thing you mentioned has affected me or at least my 20 closest friends and family.”
I could say the same thing for me and my closest family and friends, some of whom are black, about slavery and Jim Crow. Yet for some reason you want me to see those as unqualified problems, and yet you are dismissive about nearly everything else.
Prof Challenger,
“I don’t see how your questionable review of certain jurisprudence relates to ‘the welfare state’ destroying black communities. You could get at ‘liberals’ by talking about how liberals redlining effected the quality of life in black communities.”
That’s because I didn’t intend to establish a cause-and-effect relationship between most of that itemized list, and the problems with the black community. Alex made a comment about having a highly informed opinion about the state of the black community, and downplayed the problems with government intrusiveness to a comment about cracking down on pot, and overregulation of the economy. That’s where most of that list came from, to prove that there are many areas where the government has assumed power it neither needs, nor has the legitimacy to obtain.
hey Mike Schneider,
i’m curious, if there is nothing mysterious about the cold blooded killing of witnesses to U.S. sponsored torture and murder in 70s argentina, perhaps you could enlighten me as to what precisely is going on?
Re: item #12 on MikeT’s list in comment #11. You’re off by 24 hours, at least in Washington state. They can hold you for 72 hours without filing charges while they “investigate.”
Further, the weekends don’t count.
I know this for a fact as I was arrested late one Thursday night and then released, uncharged, late the following Tuesday night.
5 days of my life stolen from me by the state because I defended myself against someone who attacked, and was attempting to kill, me.
My attacker admitted to the police on the night of my arrest that he had attacked me. It didn’t matter. I still spent about 120 hours in the county jail.
Oh, and better yet, they released him first. He was a housemate so he was back at the house before me. As a consequence, I lost most of my possessions as well since I was unable to find a place to move them to before he sold them off and/or destroyed them.
So social security is a worse evil than slavery?
Good grief.
> #20 | wade | March 4th, 2008 at 9:01 am
>
> hey Mike Schneider,
>
> i’m curious, if there is nothing mysterious about the cold blooded
> killing of witnesses to U.S. sponsored torture and murder in 70s
> argentina, perhaps you could enlighten me as to what precisely is
> going on?
The completely non-mysterious behavior of the Argentine government in the 1970s is that, what with Chile’s recent disastrous experiment of Allende Stalinism wrecking that country for several years until its own legislature implored the military to overthrow him*, Argentina’s then rulers decided they’d cut out the several years of getting wrecked and just cut to the chase of stuffing the Marxists in holes, or putting holes in the Marxists, or what have you.
– Depending upon your sympathies, you may not like the way the Cold War resolved in Argentina; but there’s nothing “mysterious” about it.
(* http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Declaration_of_the_Breakdown_of_Chile%E2%80%99s_Democracy )