Superior Court judge Carlia Brady, 41, is to stand trial for “knowingly harbor[ing]” a fugitive charged with armed robbery in her Woodbridge home and never calling the police. She was arrested on Tuesday and charged two counts of hindering the apprehension of Jason Prontnicki, 41.
Category: Courts
The Michigan Supreme Court voted yesterday 5-2 to remove Wayne Family Circuit Judge Deborah Ross Adams from office for lying under oath and other violations of judicial ethics. In removing Adams, the court found that a 180-day suspension recommended by the Judicial Tenure Commission was manifestly too low for a judge lying under oath. Continue reading “Michigan Judge Removed From Office For Lying Under Oath”
Circuit Judge Royce Taylor in Murfreesboro, Tennessee is embroiled in an interesting controversy after he urged female attorneys to dress appropriately in courthouses. It is common for judges to instruct male attorneys on the need to wear jackets, ties, and appropriate shoes. However, for a male judge to write a memo on female dress is a different matter for some. It raises a long-standing issue for attorneys. Male attorneys privately grumble that there appears to be no serious limits on female dress codes while men are called to account before judges.
Continue reading “Tennessee Judge Under Fire For Warning Female Lawyers About Professional Dress”
Submitted by: Mike Spindell, Guest Blogger
One of the greatest novels I’ve ever read was Joseph Heller’s “Catch 22”. It is in turns humorous, tragic and distressing. It is finally one of the best commentaries on the insanity of the human condition, especially in wartime. Catch 22’s protagonist is Yossarian, an Air Force Bombardier in World War II, who no longer wants to keep flying the increasingly deadly missions over Germany. So desperate is Yossarian that he is willing to act out in any way possible that will get him grounded and he is hoping that he will be declared unfit for duty due to insanity. The problem is a military regulation that is described as “Catch 22”.
“The “Catch-22” is that “anyone who wants to get out of combat duty isn’t really crazy” Hence, pilots who request a mental fitness evaluation are sane, and therefore must fly in combat. At the same time, if an evaluation is not requested by the pilot, he will never receive one and thus can never be found insane, meaning he must also fly in combat. Therefore, Catch-22 ensures that no pilot can ever be grounded for being insane even if he is.” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catch-22_%28logic%29
The revelations of NSA spying have become a great topic of discussion these days, though it is merely a continuance of what we know our government has been doing since the origins of the Cold War, fueled by an ever more sophisticated technology in this digital age. A few people have been privy to the use of secrecy to hide the many violations of constitutional rights, human rights and war crimes. They have acted out of conscience to expose these violations only to face imprisonment and vilification by not only the Intelligence establishment, but by the bi-partisan Washington Establishment and their pundit minions. The most prominent of these “whistle blowers” have been Bradley Manning, Julian Assange and now Edward Snowden. The Establishment I refer to represents the Intelligence/Military/Corporate Complex (IMCC) that is and has been, in control of our country. They are the “Permanent Government” of the United States and have been for most of our history. The IMCC owns or controls most of our supposed “free press” which includes the media outlets from which Americans get their news and form their opinions. Despite the outrage of many here and many in the public, I believe that almost nothing will stop this perversion of this country under the guise of protecting it because of the logic inherent in Catch 22. Yet I have also read an article this week that discusses the NSA issue and actually ends with a modicum of hope. Since it was written by a fearless investigative reporter, whose outlook is usually pessimistic, I took heart from it and perhaps you will also if you oppose this invasion of our lives, supposedly done to protect us. Continue reading “Catch 22 and the Secrecy Debate”
Politicians love popularly named bills like the PATRIOT Act and DREAM ACT, an art in itself to name the most compelling acronyms and names. Texas Gov. Rick Perry and state Senator Robert Nichols (R-Jacksonville) therefore can be credited with coming up with the “Merry Christmas Bill” — just try voting against that in Texas. However, the purpose of the bill is far from benign if you are a secularist, atheist, or agnostic. Perry explained the purpose of the bill in a way that put anyone on the other side of a Merry Christmas: “I’m proud we are standing up for religious freedom in our state.” He then added this legal interpretation of the First Amendment: “Freedom of religion doesn’t mean freedom from religion.”
Continue reading “Perry: First Amendment Does Not Protect You From Religion”
I previously wrote a column opposing the claim of Myriad Genetics over patenting human genes in the case of Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, No. 12-398. The Supreme Court appears to have the same concerns. The Court unanimously ruled this afternoon against the Utah company and by extension of the Federal Circuit in claiming such property rights.
Continue reading “Supreme Court Rules Against Patenting Of Human Genes”
There is an extraordinary story coming out of Georgia this week where two Murray County sheriff’s deputies pleaded guilty in federal court for their part in a scheme to frame a woman, Angela Garmley (left), after she accused Chief Magistrate Judge Bryant Cochran of soliciting sex from her in return to favorable treatment in her pending divorce case. Three other women have accused Cochran of such abuse.
Below is today’s column in USA Today (the print version is a bit shorter). The column looks at the effort of President Barack Obama and his congressional allies to get citizens to give up privacy as they did protections of the free press, due process, and international legal principles on earlier scandals. It is truly the final measure of devotion demanded in what has become a virtual cult of personality.
Respectfully Submitted by Lawrence E. Rafferty (rafflaw)-Guest Blogger
You may recall an article that I wrote back in January discussing the Steubenville, Ohio rape case. It was a case where members of the town’s high school football team were charged with repeatedly raping and sexually assaulting an unconscious young girl and it also exposed the community support these alleged rapists had. In that case a local unit of the Hacktivist group, Anonymous, published tweets and pictures of the alleged rapists. One of the citations or links that I provided in the article has since been taken down and now the local Anonymous activist had his home raided by a FBI SWAT team and may be charged with hacking into the high school website and could face a potential 10 year sentence for the alleged crimes! You may ask what are the sentences that the now convicted rapists are facing? Since they were minors at the time of the alleged serial rape, they are facing 2 year sentences. Continue reading “What Is a Worse Crime, Rape or Publishing Evidence of the Rape?”
Submitted by Mike Spindell, Guest Blogger
There is a new bill passed by the New York State Senate that relates to many of the blogs and discussions we have had here through the years. This bill would make it a felony to “annoy” a police officer acting in the course of his duties. While I can understand that directly interfering with a police officer in the middle of his duties should not be done, we have seen through the years that the police broadly interpret what is “interference” to include what is obviously a person exercising their First Amendment rights, such as responding negatively to a police officers actions or videotaping them. I find this law another distressing example of how far we are going in the direction of a police state, since as we have seen in our many blogs and discussions here it will be abused time and again. I will have several links at the bottom to illustrate some of the issues dealing with purported “police interference on the Jonathan Turley Blog alone. Continue reading “Don’t “Annoy” Your Local Police Or Else”
Submitted by: Mike Spindell, Guest Blogger
It’s been so long that I can’t really remember when I first started thinking about and supporting freedom of speech. Perhaps it was when I was eight and went to the local library to borrow Sir Walter Scott’s “Ivanhoe”. I was told I could only borrow books from the children’s section. At the time I didn’t see that as a First Amendment Issue, because I still hadn’t learned about the Constitution. However, as the “Fifties” progressed and the issue of banning books and movies heated up, my social studies education caught up with my natural predilections and I became a full supporter of the idea of the rights of free speech, free press and everyone’s right to access information. During the “Fifties” movies were regularly cut down so as not to offend groups such as The Catholic League. The novels of some of the great authors of the Twentieth Century, such as James Joyce, D.H. Lawrence, William Burroughs and Henry Miller were banned in the U.S. as pornography and their shipments confiscated at our borders. Those of us, like myself, who are old enough to have lived through those times understand that the meaning we give to the First Amendment now, was not the same as it was for the first 160 years (or so) of our country. The lesson of this is that in the courts and with the ever changing political scene , we must ever be vigilant to protect our right as a people to say, read and write what we please, providing it doesn’t cause real danger to others. The catch of course in my last sentence, is what exactly “real danger” is and then what too should be the limits of using freedom of speech as a defense? Continue reading “The First Amendment and Catch 22”
I have repeatedly written against the use of shaming and novel sentencing by judges around the country (here and here and here). Judges often thrill the public by imposing their own forms of justices — departing from conventional criminal sentences to force people to clean courtrooms with toothbrushes, wear demeaning placards, or carry out publicly humiliating tasks. These judges often develop a taste for such power and the public acclaim that unfortunately comes from humiliating people. Cleveland Municipal Judge Pinkey Carr is a case in point. Carr garnered clearly welcomed public attention by requiring a woman to wear a sign to punish her for reckless driving near a school bus. Now, Carr has taken to making such placards herself and, when citizens do not comply as marionettes, throwing them in jail. Such is the case with Richard Dameron who refused to carry an “idiot” sign hand crafted by Carr. In the hearing, Carr appropriately compared herself to the Burger King of the justice system.
As expected, in facing yet another attack on civil liberties by the Obama Administration, Democratic members are choosing personality over principle. Senator Dianne Feinstein (D., CA) has come out to assure the public that it is a good thing that the Administration is spying on them and encourage them to accept such surveillance as the new normal. In the meantime, Sen. Saxby Chambliss (R, Ga), insists that the surveillance must be fine because “to my knowledge we have not had any citizen who has registered a complaint relative to the gathering of this information.” Of course, it has been secret and just last February the Administration succeeded in blocking an effort of dozens of citizens and groups challenging such surveillance programs before the Supreme Court.
Continue reading “Learning To Love The Matrix: Feinstein Defends Warrantless Surveillance of All Citizens”
While the media in the United States (with some notable exceptions) have been criticized for relatively soft coverage of attacks on civil liberties by the Obama Administration, the British press appears to be filling the gap. The Guardian is reporting on a massive surveillance program by the Obama Administration where the government has ordered Verizon (and presumably other carriers) to turn over all calls made within the United States and calls between the United States and other countries. The surveillance was conducted under an order from our controversial secret court, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, and demanded by the Justice Department and the FBI. The Administration has confirmed the existence of the program — another blow to civil liberties under Attorney General Eric Holder and this president. It also adds another area where Obama officials appear less than candid with Congress. [Update: USA Today first revealed aspects of this program in 2006]
Continue reading “Obama Administration Confirms Massive Surveillance Program Of U.S. Citizens”
There have long been complaints about the temperament and civility of Judge Edith Jones of the New Orleans-based 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. Indeed, when I clerked on that court, Jones was rather infamous for her run-ins with colleagues and others. Jones has been criticized for her extremely conservative views and, more importantly, her perceived intolerance (and hostility) for opposing views and colleagues. This includes telling another judge to “shut up” in oral argument. Now, she is facing a formal complaint over a Federalist Society speech given at the University of Pennsylvania where she allegedly said that certain racial groups are predisposed to crime and that defenses like mental competence and actual innocence are “red herrings” among other bizarre claims.