Officer Kevin Yang is a fridge felon who picked the wrong workplace to snarf his colleague’s snacks. The suburban Houston police officer was charged with theft and suspended without pay for 30 days after a hidden camera nailed him as the long-sought culprit who was stealing food and drinks from the employee refrigerator.
Category: Criminal law
We have had a great deal of discussion about the controversy over the remarks of Judge Mark Martin of Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania in the dismissal of a charge against Talaag Elbayomy, a Muslim who attacked an atheist Ernie Perce for insulting the Prophet. Perce was parading as a zombie Mohammad in the Mechanicsburg Halloween parade when Elbayomy allegedly grabbed him. Elbayomy was at the parade with his family. Yet, it was Perce who ultimately came into a tongue lashing from Martin. Martin has now reportedly responded with the message below. I am not sure how much it helps on the merits, but he does clarify a couple of points if this response (which has appeared on several sites) is genuine.
Continue reading “Judge In “Zombie Mohammed” Case (Reportedly) Responds”
By Mark Esposito, Guest Blogger
For the first time, law enforcement officials are taking aim at not just child abusing priests but those who enabled the crimes by covering up. And what a cesspool they’ve uncovered. Monsignor William Lynn, on trial in Philadelphia on charges of conspiracy and child endangerment has filed a novel motion seeking to dismiss all charges. Lynn alleges that Cardinal Anthony Bevilacqua, a long-time pillar in the American Catholic Church, destroyed a memorandum written by Lynn’s superior detailing the abuse and the priests who perpetrated it.
Submitted by: Mike Spindell, Guest Blogger
Do you wonder how American politics has gotten so crazy in the last five decades? As someone who has lived through them as an adult I have often been amazed by our evolving political scene. This week the PBS documentary series “The American Experience” focused on the life and the two terms of Bill Clinton. It was a typical PBS historical documentary in that it made sure to present all sides of the issues and of course it dealt with “Whitewater”, Monica Lewinsky and the Impeachment proceedings. While we all lived through this bizarre political period in the 90’s, time and personal matters no doubt has dimmed its memory for most of us who were not directly involved. What fascinated me about this four hour documentary was that even in its non-partisan fairness, it delved into the massive effort made to discredit Bill Clinton begun from even before the inception of his first term. Though he won his election fairly, Republican’s and Conservatives never accepted his legitimacy as a duly elected President. It was this perceived “illegitimacy” that undermined his efforts as President and was the focus of constant attacks from his enemies. I’m not writing this as someone who felt that Bill Clinton was a great President and there were many concessions he made like “Welfare Reform” and “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” that I still hold against him. My question is that given his legitimate electoral mandate, did he ever get a chance to actually put his programs into effect and be President?
Bill Clinton entered his Presidency at the end of the first Iraq War. His inaugural speech talked of healing and bi-partisanship, as he would work together with Republicans to create a bridge to the Twenty First Century. The country was in a recession, partly caused by the excesses of military overspending by Reagan and G.H.W. Bush and by their tax cuts for the wealthy. There was a shrinking middle class due to the outsourcing of our manufacturing base and also because the Reagan Social Security “Reform” was actually a massive, regressive tax raise on those of middle income. The Reagan and G.H.W. Bush years burdened the Country with massive budget deficits and in Clinton’s first years the clamoring of the Republicans, Wall Street and the “Chattering Classes” for “Deficit Reduction” was at a fever pitch. We had also seen an illegal involvement in trying to topple the government of Nicaragua, despite a strong Congressional ban and its’ direct perpetrators falling on their swords to protect President Reagan and Vice President Bush. The din of budget deficits was so loud, with predictions so dire, that this newly elected President, with no Washington experience, was forced to accept the specious merits of this argument. Forgotten of course was that it was these selfsame groups, had blithely ignored rising deficits during the twelve years past of Republican governance. Perhaps, in my re-visiting what you already probably knew, a sense of Deja’ Vu might be occurring when thinking of American politics and political issues today? Continue reading “Hypocrisy Democracy: What’s Going On?”
There is a surprising story out of Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania that seems the perfect storm of religious tensions. You begin with Ernie Perce, an atheist who marched as a zombie Mohammad in the Mechanicsburg Halloween parade. Then you add Talaag Elbayomy, a Muslim who stepped off a curb and reportedly attacked Perce for insulting the Prophet. Then you have a judge (Judge Mark Martin) who threw out the criminal charges against Elbayomy and ridiculed the victim, Perce. The Judge identifies himself as a Muslim and says that Perce conduct is not what the First Amendment is supposed to protect. [UPDATE: The judge says he is not a Muslim despite what is heard by most listeners on the tape. That being the case, the criticism of the comments remains.] [UPDATE2: Perce has responded to our blog and denied many of the factual representations made by Judge Martin].
Meredith Lowell, 27,has been arrested in a rather bizarre alleged murder plot: to randomly kill a fur wearer. Lowell was charged with soliciting a hit man to shoot a stranger — justifying the hit was akin to liberating people from Nazi concentration camps.
The Iranian Sharia courts have given the world a steady stream of horrific judgments — using the pretense of a legal system to mete out religious-based and perfectly medieval punishments. They have now added a fresh outrage. Despite worldwide condemnation, a trial court in Iran has issued its final verdict that Youcef Nadarkhani, 34, be put to death. His crime? Converting to Christianity. During the country’s Sharia law, such apostasy is punished by death.
Continue reading “Iranian Court Orders The Death Penalty For Christian Pastor Convicted of Apostasy”
James Privett, 26, believes in love . . . and its power to heal all wounds . . . including cleaver scars. Privett took a cleaver to his wife but has told police that he hopes “loves conquers all” and hopes to reconcile with his wife Erica.
Michigan legislators are moving to make possession of toy guns a crime. The legislation by members is based on the growing practice of criminals cutting off the orange tips and using the toy guns in crime. This way, presumably, they will go and get real guns for their crimes?
Holly Grigsby is obviously cuckoo for Cocoa Puffs. The murder suspect has challenged jail conditions that deny her access to the cereal and other items in the commissary of the Snohomish County Jail.
Continue reading “Cereal KIller? Murder Suspect Challenges Jail’s Denial Of Favorite Cereal”
California prosecutors have brought a rare manslaughter charged against an architect for the substandard construction and design of a $11 million mansion. Albert Becker, 48, was arrested after a firefighter died in a blaze at the home, which was going to be the backdrop for a reality show called “Germany’s Next Model.”
Continue reading “Architect Charged With Manslaughter Over Poorly Built $11 Million Mansion”
Submitted by Gene Howington, Guest Blogger
Reasonable people tend to agree there is both a right to privacy and that it is necessary. But what exactly is the right to privacy? Justice Brandeis famously said in Olmstead v. U.S., 277 U.S. 438, 479 (1928), “The makers of our Constitution undertook to secure conditions favorable to the pursuit of happiness. They recognized the significance of man’s spiritual nature, of his feelings and of his intellect. They knew that only a part of the pain, pleasure and satisfactions of life are to be found in material things. They sought to protect Americans in their beliefs, their thoughts, their emotions and their sensations. They conferred, as against the government, the right to be let alone-the most comprehensive of rights and the right most valued by civilized men. To protect, that right, every unjustifiable intrusion by the government upon the privacy of the individual, whatever the means employed, must be deemed a violation of the Fourth Amendment. And the use, as evidence in a criminal proceeding, of facts ascertained by such intrusion must be deemed a violation of the Fifth.” Plainly put, at its heart a right to privacy is simply a right to be let alone.
However, do we need to specifically protect it or generally protect it? Is that right absolute? Laws, by definition and the nature of entering a social compact, are restrictions on absolute liberty found in the state of nature. One of the larger disagreements at the Constitutional Convention was about whether enumerated rights would serve to unjustly limit those rights versus a failure to enumerate rights would result in rights not being properly protected. This is a valid question surrounding this issue, especially since some would advocate enumerating the right to privacy by Constitutional amendment. There are advantages and disadvantages to both approaches. While specifically defining/enumerating a right creates a foundation for arguments surrounding said right, leaving a right’s definition nebulous allows jurisprudence greater leeway to evolve around fact specific instance and questions that in the long run can result in a more nuanced understanding and application of the right without the constraints a foundational definition might impose. In this light, consider the right to privacy.
Continue reading “Privacy Rights – To Enumerate or Not to Enumerate, That is the Question”
By Mark Esposito, Guest Blogger
Martin County Florida law enforcement officers made a surprising discovery while processing 28 year-old arrestee Ramon Blair. Blair had been fingered by the ubiquitous reliable, confidential informant as riding around town with $100 worth of crack cocaine on his person.
Continue reading “Florida Police Make Surprising Discovery That Man Has Crack In His Butt”
Below is my column today in the Washington Post (Sunday) Outlook Section. The column concerns the Alvarez case to be heard on Wednesday before the Supreme Court. I have been a long critic of the Stolen Valor Act — not because I am not highly sympathetic to its purpose but because I am concerned about the means of achieving that purpose. I share the anger over people who falsely claim to be war heroes. However, the government often selects popular causes for expanding its power over speech or conduct of its citizens. The question before the Court is really not about this specific form of lying, but the legal basis for criminalizing lies generally. The Act is different in that it seeks to criminalize lies simply because they are lies as opposed to lies that are used to commit a specific crime like larceny or fraud or perjury. I also spoke to NPR on Talk To The Nation on this subject.
Continue reading “The Better Part of Valor: Should Lying About Medals Be A Crime?”
We previously discussed the abusive arrest of Mark Fiorino by Philadelphia police. Now the American Civil Liberties Union of Pennsylvania and the law firm of McCausland Keen & Buckman have filed a federal complaint today against the city of Philadelphia in his defense. It is an important case and we will be following it closely.
Continue reading “ACLU Files On Behalf Of Gun Owner Abusively Arrested By Philadelphia Police”