Posts From: March, 2010

Federal Judge: Mural Protesting Government Policy Isn’t Protected Political Speech

Wednesday, March 31st, 2010

A federal judge has upheld St. Louis officials’ demands that eminent domain opponent Jim Roos remove the mural pictured here, even though it was put up on on a building Roos owns.

In 2007, the city ordered Roos to take the mural down, saying it violated city sign regulations. City code prohibits any sign larger than 30 square feet in that zoning district; Roos’ mural is more than 360 square feet.

Roos sued to preserve his mural, arguing that it was not a sign, but a piece of art offering a protected political statement.

On Monday, U.S. District Court Henry Edward Autrey rejected that argument, saying the mural — which features the addresses of two affiliated websites –is a “classic example” of the definition of a sign.

“The painting is outside and is used to advertise, identify, direct and attract attention to what petitioners believe is eminent domain abuse. It advertises online addresses for more information,” Autrey wrote. “It attracts attention to the perceived eminent domain abuse.”

Autrey also ruled that the city’s sign ordinance is constitutional because it is  “content neutral” — restrictions on signs are based on size and place,  not subject.

The prohibition of Roos’ mural, the judge wrote, “relates not to the content of petitioners’ message but, rather, to the method by which they wish to convey it.”

Autrey found that the city’s desire to maintain aesthetic appeal and not disrupt traffic was sufficient enough to allow for restrictions on the placement of signs.

Rare Shots From North Korea

Wednesday, March 31st, 2010

More here.

north-korea-16

Morning Links

Wednesday, March 31st, 2010
  • My colleague Jacob Sullum has a good column on the new prosecutorial misconduct case the Supreme Court has agreed to hear.
  • If there were federal appellate judge trading cards, I would have the entire Alex Kozinski set.
  • I knew weeks ago that someone was going to post this.
  • Women outnumber men on college campuses by increasingly large margins. Waiting for cries of gender disparity.
  • Be curious to hear what Agitator readers think of the Massachusetts bullying story. My take? The statutory rape and civil rights charges are asinine overkill, and the prosecutor is grandstanding. The assault charges are appropriate if the bullying schoolmates actually assaulted the girl. The commenters to the Slate piece calling for criminal charges against school officials and parents are the Internet equivalent of a pitchfork-toting mob. This is a sad story. Tragedies needn’t always result in criminal charges.

And After Just Two Hours Volunteering in a Chicago Soup Kitchen in 2003, He Developed the Weathered, Empathetic Eyes of a Mother Theresa

Tuesday, March 30th, 2010

Ana Marie Cox points to an embarrassingly worshipful passage from the introduction to a new self-help book by Time Managing Editor Richard Stengel:

It is impossible to write about Nelson Mandela these days and not compare him to another potentially transformational black leader, Barack Obama. The parallels are many. … And while it took twenty-seven years in prison to mold the Nelson Mandela we know, the forty-eight-year-old American president seems to have achieved a Mandela-like temperament without the long years of sacrifice.

Somewhat related: Last year, Jeff Winkler and I poked fun at Time’s penchant for moral panic.

Reason Saves Cleveland

Tuesday, March 30th, 2010

John Stossel, Drew Carey, Nick Gillespie, and Dennis Kucinich talk about Cleveland.

Sounds like an odd dream. But fun to watch!

Lunch Links

Tuesday, March 30th, 2010

IJ Takes on Asset Forfeiture

Tuesday, March 30th, 2010

The Institute for Justice launched a national campaign against civil asset forfeiture today, including the video below, a comprehensive report on forfeiture policy in all 50 states, and—I hear—some litigation.

You can read my February Reason feature on forfeiture here.

Jonathan Ayers and Eric Cantor

Tuesday, March 30th, 2010

Let me be clear, here. I don’t in any way condone threats or violence against politicians.

That said, it would be nice if the media and our elected officials would get half as outraged when agents of the government kill innocent Americans as they’ve gotten about this recent spate of bricks tossed through office windows and empty threats posted on YouTube.

Progress and Challenges in Mississippi

Monday, March 29th, 2010

My crime column this week looks at the latest developments in the Mississippi death investigations saga, including last week’s good news that Gov. Haley Barbour signed the bill that will effectively (most likely) end the career of Steven Hayne.

Holy Crap….

Monday, March 29th, 2010

…..ACTA looks scary as hell.

On Flexing Your Rights. Or at Least Meagerly Trying to Hold on to Them.

Monday, March 29th, 2010

The invaluable organization Flex Your Rights has released its latest video, 10 Rules for Dealing With the Police (good Washington Post writeup here). Narrated by Baltimore criminal defense attorney Billy Murphy, Jr., the new video is targeted at minority groups subject to profiling stops.

But while giving the Flex organization proper credit for educating the public about stops and searches, Ken at the Popehat blog raises an important point about the first rule, “Always be calm and cool.”

See, if your goal is not to be abused, wrongfully arrested, falsely accused, searched without probable cause, or proned out on the pavement because you irritated someone with a gun and a badge, then “don’t be mouthy to a cop” is excellent practical advice. But dammit, we shouldn’t have to give that advice. The concept that you should expect to be abused if you aren’t meek (or, to be more realistic, subservient) in dealing with public servants ought to be abhorrent to a society of free people. Courtesy is admirable, and unnecessary rudeness is not, but rudeness ought not be seen as inviting government employees to break the law. But the reality is that our society largely issues apologias for, not denunciations of, police abuse. The prevailing belief is that claims of abuse are about lawyers or crooks trying to game the system, that people accused of crimes generally committed them, and that cops are heroes of the sort who deserve the benefit of the doubt when their account of a roadside encounter differs from that of a citizen. Our society, for the most part, indulges cops in their expectation that citizens will be subservient. As a result, “don’t talk back to a cop” remains tragically apt practical advice.

Moreover, the truth of it is that many cops will interpret an assertion of your constitutional rights, however politely delivered, as a rude challenge. They are supported in that view by four decades of “law and order” talk that classifies constitutional rights as mere instrumentalities of crime, not as the rules by which we have chosen to live.

Shame on us if we put up with that.

Here’s a good example to illustrate Ken’s point: Last week, a panel from the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that three Seattle police officers were justified in using a taser three times on a pregnant woman for resisting arrest. The woman had been pulled over for going 32 mph in a school zone. She insisted it was the car ahead of her that was speeding, and refused to sign the ticket. That’s when they tased her.

The problem is that under Washington law, (a) you aren’t required to sign a traffic ticket, (b) speeding isn’t an arrestable offense, and (c) you can’t be arrested for resisting an unlawful arrest.

So the woman was completely within her rights. Yet asserting those rights got her the business end of a stun gun. Three times. And two of the three federal appellate judges to hear the case see nothing wrong with that.

So yes, submission to police officers even when you’re well within your rights is good advice. But it shouldn’t be.

I’m Moving to Nashville

Monday, March 29th, 2010

At the end of May or early June, I’ll be moving to Nashville, Tennessee.

I’ve lived in D.C. for 10 years, now. I never intended to be a lifer, so I figure it’s time to get out. My job is portable, so I’m kind of intrigued by the idea of picking up and starting over in a new town. I visited Nashville in December. Seems like a good place for a music buff. I’ll also get a nice little cost of living bump, and from what I can tell, the city seems pretty young; has some art, culture, and restaurants; and looks to be a lot of fun.  Also gives me closer proximity to Mississippi so I can drive down to cover (let’s hope) Cory Maye’s new trial.

I figure I’ll sign a 12-month lease and if I’m not crazy about the town this time next year, I’ll pick another spot. I know quite a few Nashvillians (is that what I’ll be called?) read this blog. So lay it on me. Sing your town’s praises.

Oh, and if you have any leads on housing, let’s hear those, too! My ideal place: A loft. Downtown or in a promising neighborhood. Would love a two-bedroom so I can set up a home office, though after browsing some listings, that might  be a hair more than what I’m looking to pay.

I’m excited about the move. The people I know who have lived in Nashville have only great things to say about the town.

Morning Links

Monday, March 29th, 2010
  • Woman claims massive police raid on her home caused her miscarriage. She was accused of violating city animal control ordinances. Her attorney says she was later cleared. In addition to the usual overkill, there’s also a certain irony in bringing a SWAT team to confront someone charged with neglecting dogs.
  • Close-up photos of dew-covered insects.
  • Great post by Will Wilkinson on “Earth Hour.” I thought the counter-protests in which people burned as much energy as possible were silly and not particularly helpful to the discussion. But Will makes a very good point about energy consumption and poverty.
  • Old pictures of drunk Brits.
  • Area police officers were involved in hundreds of vehicular collisions last year that could have been avoided had the drivers adhered to traffic laws and basic roadway etiquette, according to official reports.”
  • Woman paints people to look like paintings, then photographs them. Result: Rather nifty.

Sunday Links

Sunday, March 28th, 2010

I’m Not Sure What To Make of This

Saturday, March 27th, 2010

CM Capture 2

It Would Be Dangerous to Legalize Pot Because….

Friday, March 26th, 2010

….kids might shoot each other with joints?

Fighting Budget Deficits With Traffic Fines

Friday, March 26th, 2010

Angrifying* story from the A.P.:

Shomari Jennings was willing to pay the $70 ticket he received for driving without a seatbelt, but not the slew of tacked-on fees and penalties that ballooned the cost more than tenfold. Every $10 of his base fine triggered a $26 “penalty assessment” for courthouse construction, a DNA identification program, emergency medical services and other programs…

In Los Angeles, city officials are thinking about doubling red-light cameras to 64 intersections. Last year, 44,000 red-light camera tickets were issued in the city, netting more than $6 million…

The fine for running a red light is nearly $500 when city and county fees combined with various penalty assessments, which are set by the Legislature, and traffic school are factored in. The majority of the red-light camera citations, however, were for making right turns without a full stop, a $381 violation.

It’s hard to keep track of all the bullshit public policy going on in this article. A $70 seatbelt violation—which shouldn’t be a fine in the first place—grows to over $200 because of “penalty assessments” imposed in part to pay for the pensions and benefits of the public employees who both administer these policies, and who spent the state into oblivion in the first place. Then L.A. wants to make city roads less safe so it can collect more revenue from outrageously expensive red light camera fines.

Also, maybe I’m just not up to snuff on the latest traffic cam technology, but how is a red light camera that captures a stationary photo able to identify a motorist failed to come to a complete stop before making an otherwise legal right turn?

(*Yes, I made this word up.)

Well?

Friday, March 26th, 2010

I think it’s the hint of exasperation that makes this wonderful.

(Via James Joyner’s Twitter feed.)

Morning Links

Friday, March 26th, 2010
  • Tax writers confused by tax code. It’s absurd that most Americans have to hire a professional merely to help them comply with the law.
  • As economy crashed and deficits soared, more than half the states gave pay raises to public employees last year.
  • This is brilliant.
  • As homicides soar in Cincinnati, police arrest a man for “threatening” a police officer by saying he should kill a cop to see how long it takes for the cops to show up.
  • Good article on the sad state of the public defender system.
  • Dogs revolt in response to continued stonewalling in the Cheye Calvo lawsuit.

Afternoon Links

Thursday, March 25th, 2010

Skinner Gets a Stay

Thursday, March 25th, 2010

The Supreme Court gave Hank Skinner a brief stay last night, about an hour before he was to be executed. The stay is just until the Court votes on whether to take his case. The Court already ruled last year that there is no right to post-conviction DNA testing, so it seems unlikely they’ll overturn the conviction.

But maybe some lawyers who read this site can answer this question: Does the fact that Skinner asked his lawyer—in writing—to request the test, and his lawyer refused, possibly provide an opening, here? Also wondering if the Court may rule on the conflict problems of an accused murderer getting a court-appointed attorney who not only was a former DA, but who actually prosecuted the accused in another case.

Lunch Links

Wednesday, March 24th, 2010
  • Obama’s promise not to tax the middle class takes another tumble. Turns out, he won’t tax you so long as you don’t smoke or frequent tanning salons. Should have said, “I won’t raise your taxes so long as you engage in activities approved of by the federal government.”
  • Three little-used airports in Rep. Bart Stupak’s district received big federal grants two days before health care vote. Grants amounted to $27 for every passenger who actually used the airports in 2008. Pure coincidence, I’m sure.
  • Via the comments, check out the comments to an article on the Jonathan Ayers case posted to this police-oriented website. Troubling, to put it mildly.
  • Canada’s lack of respect for free expression is contemptible. But Ann Coulter is still a twit.
  • I’m not a video game person, but this game looks deliciously wicked.
  • India weaponizes hot chilli.

Hank Skinner Scheduled for Execution Tomorrow

Tuesday, March 23rd, 2010

As noted, tonight I’ll be moderating a panel that will discuss the case of Cameron Todd Willingham, the Texas man executed in 2006 who critics say was innocent.

Coincidentally, unless the U.S. Supreme Court or Texas Gov. Rick Perry intervene, Texas will execute Henry “Hank” Skinner tomorrow. The Medill Innocence Project has raised serious questions about Skinner’s guilt. In Skinner’s case, there is untested crime scene DNA evidence that could either confirm his guilt, strongly suggest his innocence, or call his guilt enough into doubt to merit halting his execution. For eight years, prosecutors have refused to allow the evidence to be tested, and have to this point been backed by both Texas and federal appeals courts.

I wrote about Skinner’s case last month.

Reminder: I’m Moderating a Forensics Panel Tonight

Tuesday, March 23rd, 2010

D.C.-area readers:  I’ll be moderating a panel of forensic experts discussing the case of Cameron Todd Willingham tonight at Georgetown Law Center.

Non D.C.-area readers: The event will be webcast live here.

Details:

WHAT:
“Bad Science: The Execution of Cameron Todd Willingham and the Case for Forensic Reform”

WHO:
Craig Beyler, Fire Scientist hired by Texas Forensic Science Commission to review Willingham case

John Lentini, Owner, Scientific Fire Analysis, LLC and Author, Scientific Protocols for Fire Investigation

Juan Hinojosa, Texas State Senator

Stephen Saloom, National Policy Director, The Innocence Project

MODERATOR:
Radley Balko, Senior Editor, Reason Magazine

WHEN:
Tuesday, March 23, 2010, 7:00 p.m.

WHERE:
Georgetown University Law Center
McDonough Hall – Hart Auditorium
600 New Jersey Avenue, NW
Washington, D.C. 20001

NOTE:
A panel of experts in forensic science and criminal justice discuss the case of Cameron Todd Willingham, who was executed by the state of Texas in 2004.  Willingham was convicted in 1992 of murdering his three young daughters in a house fire that the state determined was arson.

A report issued by Beyler in 2009 claimed that in convicting Willingham, the state used techniques and assumptions that were no longer recognized as scientifically valid and that the original finding of arson could not be sustained.

This event is sponsored by the Georgetown Law Innocence Project.

Update on the Jonathan Ayers Case

Tuesday, March 23rd, 2010

My crime column this week look at some incredible new developments in the death of Johnathan Ayers, the Georgia pastor killed last year by an anti-narcotics task force.