Kareem Abdul-Jabbar: Kim Davis Is Not a Patriot — She's Like the Folks Who Defended Racial Segregation

When politicians support Davis in defying the U.S. Supreme Court, they are making it clear why they should never be elected to any office, let alone the Presidency of the United States where they would take the oath to “support and defend the Constitution” since they are emphatically telling America that they wouldn’t support and defend it.

Kim Davis (Illustration by Mike Licht)

By Kareem Abdul-Jabbar
The martyr business in America is booming. It’s a growth industry, like yoga pants, prisons and celebrity nip-slip sites. Caterers, cake-makers, pizza shops, hobby stores and others are publicly throwing themselves on the righteous sword of spiritual indignation—but only when there are media cameras nearby to record their stirring sacrifice.

On Sunday, around 300 supporters gathered outside the jail where Kim Davis, the Kentucky clerk who refused to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples, is being held. They waved signs like “Kim Davis for President” and “We Ought to Obey God Rather Than Men.” The crowd in itself is not newsworthy—you can get 300 people to support pretty much anything (in England’s 2001 census, almost 400,000 people stated their religious preference as Jedi). What makes this situation especially significant is that also offering their support to Davis were presidential candidates Mike Huckabee, Gov. Bobby Jindal, Gov. Scott Walker, Sen. Rand Paul and Sen. Ted Cruz. Cruz said, “Today, for the first time ever, the government arrested a Christian woman for living according to her faith… I stand with Kim Davis. Unequivocally.” Perhaps Sen. Cruz forgot all the black and white Christian women who were arrested during the Civil Rights era. And the Christian women suffragists arrested in support of voting rights. And the Christian lesbian women arrested in support of gay rights. All for their belief that God wanted all people to be treated equally.

[...]

The Orthodox Jewish clerk at the DMV cannot deny you a driver’s license because you eat ham. The Muslim clerk at the Social Security office can’t deny you benefits because you drink liquor. The Christian Scientist clerk at the IRS cannot audit your taxes because you chose medical help. Practice your religion in freedom; just don’t make everyone else practice your religion.

[...]

When politicians support Davis in defying the U.S. Supreme Court, they are making it clear why they should never be elected to any office, let alone the Presidency of the United States where they would take the oath to “support and defend the Constitution” since they are emphatically telling America that they wouldn’t support and defend it. They have announced that if you sincerely disagree with the Constitution, feel free to ignore it. And not just ignore it, make sure to use your position so that others are barred from following it.

Read More

America's 'Justice' System is Failing Everyone But the Rich — They're the Only Ones Who Can Afford Legal Representation

We don’t need fewer lawyers. We need cheaper ones — Unable to afford representation, more Americans are going to court alone, and they're losing.

Photo by Pop Culture Geek.

By Martha Bergmark
In 2014, a Louisiana woman, J., landed in court after a dispute with her landlord over a $25 parking fee. J., 52, was suffering from cancer and did not have an attorney. The court ruled against her, and ordered her to vacate her home within 24 hours.

J.’s case, which was later taken on by Southeast Louisiana Legal Services, sounds extreme, but for someone who can’t afford legal counsel, the outcome isn’t surprising. The sad reality is that many Americans facing the loss of a home, family or livelihood are going it alone in civil court, and they’re losing.

In well over two thirds of critical cases in America’s civil courts, people appear without a lawyer, even though the stakes are often just as high as in criminal proceedings. Many people suffer crushing losses in court not because they’ve done something wrong, but simply because they don’t have legal help.

The future of the legal profession is unclear. Student loan debt for law graduates now averages $84,000 for public law schools and $122,000 for private law schools, reflecting the dramatic rise in the cost of attending law school in the past three decades. Despite the growing costs for students, long-term job prospects have become less certain. One study found that among 2010 law school graduates, 20 percent hold jobs that don’t require a law degree. Only 40 percent are employed by law firms, where the financial returns are highest.

Some say that the recent decline in law school enrollment simply marks a natural correction in the legal industry, because law schools are producing more lawyers than the country needs. But the latest studies, and J.’s story, show the opposite: Americans need legal help more than ever.

Rather than a shortage of people who need lawyers, what we are seeing is a disgraceful failure of our legal system to meet the serious legal needs of most Americans, who are increasingly priced out of the market for legal services. In 70 to 98 percent of cases in America’s civil courts today, one or both parties are not represented by a lawyer. One report found that civil legal aid programs must turn away almost two-thirds of the people who seek their assistance in critical civil cases, despite research showing that in many such cases, access to legal help makes all the difference. In evictions, for example, two-thirds of tenants who go to court without a lawyer lose their homes, while two-thirds of those represented by an attorney are able to keep them. In complex areas of the law, legal help is essential to enable people to understand and defend their rights. But legal help has become so expensive — about $200 to $300 an hour on average and drastically higher at the largest law firms – that it’s unaffordable, not just for those struggling to make ends meet, but even for most middle-class Americans.

Read More

TV Producers Are Exploiting Real Crime and Suffering for a Buck — Sometimes With Deadly Consequences

Second Trial for 'Show Off' TV Cop: 7-Year-Old Girl Shot Dead During SWAT Commando Raid on  Apartment Which Was Part of 'Reality Show'

Aiyana Stanley-Jones.

By ED WHITE
A member of an elite Detroit police unit is set to stand trial again for killing a 7-year-old girl during a 2010 raid on her house that was captured on video by a reality TV crew.

Nobody alleges that Officer Joseph Weekley intended to kill Aiyana Stanley-Jones, who had been sleeping on a couch near the front door when officers burst through around midnight in search of a murder suspect. But prosecutors charged him with involuntary manslaughter because they believe he handled his submachine gun recklessly, causing the girl's death.

Jury selection starts Monday in Wayne County court, 15 months after Weekley's first trial ended with jurors unable to agree on a verdict.

Weekley was a member of Detroit's Special Response Team, which was sent to an east side neighborhood to capture a suspect in the killing of a teenager outside a convenience store.

Police threw a stun grenade through a window, emitting smoke, bright light and vibrations to confuse anyone inside. Weekley was first through the door, with a shield in one hand and a gun in the other. He claims he accidentally pulled the trigger when Aiyana's grandmother, Mertilla Jones, grabbed his gun. She denies that she interfered in any way.

Read More

___________________

Omaha Police Officer Accidentally Kills "Cops" Film Crew Member During Shootout

By Associated Press
When the call came from an officer who needed help facing an armed robber at a fast-food restaurant, two members of a reality television show riding along with Omaha police hustled to record the confrontation.

Bryce Dion. (Screen capture from YouTube video)

In the chaotic scene that unfolded, one crew member was struck by "friendly fire" from one of the officers, a bullet slipping past his bulletproof vest and killing him, Omaha Police Chief Todd Schmaderer said Wednesday. The robbery suspect was also killed. The weapon he was carrying turned out to be a pellet gun, though it looked and sounded so real that both witnesses and officers were fooled, Schmaderer said.

Bryce Dion, 38, of Boston, the audio supervisor for Cops, is the first crew member of the long-running TV show to be killed while filming police in action, executives with the show's production company said. Police identified the robbery suspect as 32-year-old Cortez Washington, who was on parole from Missouri for a robbery conviction.

Schmaderer told reporters that police and prosecutors have reviewed the Cops video of Tuesday's shooting and found that the officers "had no choice" but to open fire, though a grand jury will still be tasked with investigating.

Read More

___________________

Man Whose Arrest Was Filmed By "Cops" Sues Officers For Brutality

The lawsuit seeks damages as well as an injunction prohibiting the police agencies from associating with "Cops" or similar TV programs again.

Hansen, who did not commit a crime, was passed out drunk in a sleeping bag outside a relative's home

The TV show "Cops": Screen captured from Google search results.

By KomoNews
A man apparently woken from a drunken stupor by Pierce County sheriff's deputies, repeatedly zapped with a stun gun and finally chewed by a police dog - all in front of a production crew from the TV show "Cops" - has sued the county and the officers, alleging brutality.

The deputies, accompanied by a K-9 officer from the Tacoma Police Department, were looking for an armed suspect in a car break-in when they came upon Aaron Otto Hansen, 34, of Roy, early on July 10, 2004.

Hansen, who did not commit the crime, was passed out drunk in a sleeping bag outside a relative's home in the Tacoma suburb of Lakewood, one of his lawyers said. The "Cops" video footage of his arrest, obtained by The Associated Press, seems to support that claim:

"Wake up! Show me your hands!" one officer, identified in the lawsuit as Deputy Joseph Kolp, screams at Hansen on the video.

No response.

"You're gonna get tased, dude," Kolp says.

Kolp pulls on the sleeping bag. Hansen - clearly disoriented - tries to pull it back over his head, apparently to shield his eyes from Deputy Russell Martin's flashlight. Kolp grabs Hansen's arm and Martin moves in to help with an arrest.

Hansen, still on the ground, starts to revive. He pushes Kolp, and the officers repeatedly use their Tasers as they kneel on him, pressing the instruments into his chest and his buttocks.

Read More

____________________

"To Catch a Predator" TV Show Called "Cause" of Former District Attorney's Suicide: Show's Producer's Accused of Manipulating Police

Chris Hansen: The "To Catch a Predator" star was caught in his own extramarital
scandal and lost his position as host.

By CLAUDIA FELDMAN
TV Show "To Catch a Predator" Said To "Cause" Former District Attorney's [Louis Conradt] Suicide

A TV news organization often criticized for ethical lapses takes another hit in the September issue of Esquire magazine.

Former Kaufman County District Attorney,
Louis "Bill" Conradt Jr.

Luke Dittrich's story says the staff of Dateline NBC's To Catch a Predator manipulated and controlled law enforcement officers during a sting in Murphy in north Texas, blurring the lines between reporters and police and resulting in the suicide of a former district attorney.

Editor David Granger is calling on NBC to cancel To Catch a Predator before someone else dies.

"The show puts aside the need for due process," Granger said in a recent interview. (Esquire, like the Houston Chronicle, is a Hearst publication.) "Whether these men are convicted in a court of law or not, they're convicted in the court of public opinion. Our country has not succeeded and prospered for two centuries by exploiting people who have no recourse. It's just wrong."

[...]

The Esquire investigation shows [...] that after two weeks of vidchat, Conradt stopped communicating with the actor who was pretending to be 13. He didn't answer the decoy's computer messages, and soon stopped taking his phone calls.

RELATED STORY: 10 Incredibly Controversial Sting Operations

For whatever reason, however, the Dateline staffers decided not to wait for Conradt to come to them. Instead, they urged police to arrest the prosecutor at home. The magazine article describes the police camping out on his front lawn, then breaking into the house with a search warrant riddled with mistakes.

Read More

____________________

Judge Refuses to Block TV Show on Unsolved Killing

By PHILIP A. JANQUART
An Idaho judge on Friday denied an emergency motion to block an episode of a TNT show about a 10-year-old, unsolved murder case, to be broadcast Friday night.

Brad Scott Compher (top, middle) was charged
with the murder of Nori Jones.

Bannock County public defenders Randy Schulthies and Dave Martinez were still working this afternoon to block TNT from airing the episode of "Cold Justice," which they say could bias a jury against their client.

The episode will describe the killing of Pocatello resident Nori Jones and her suspected killer, Brad Scott Compher.

Compher, 39, was arrested in September 2014 on first-degree murder charges after he was matched with a single fingerprint recovered from the crime scene.

Jones, 25, was found dead in her home on Sept. 28, 2004. She had been stabbed repeatedly.
Compher's attorney made a motion for prior restraint in an attempt to block TNT from airing the show, but Idaho's 6th District Magistrate Judge Rick Carnaroli denied the motion.

Schulthies and Martinez were granted permission to appeal to Idaho's 6th District Judge Stephen Dunn, who denied the motion in an emergency hearing held online at 2 p.m. Friday.

Read More

____________________

Dying in the E.R., and on TV Without His Family’s Consent


By By CHARLES ORNSTEIN
Anita Chanko could not sleep. At 4 a.m., on an August night in 2012, she settled onto the couch in her Yorkville living room with her dog, Daisy, and her parrot, Elliott, and flipped on the DVR. On came the prior night’s episode of “NY Med,” the popular real-life medical series set at NewYork-Presbyterian Hospital, starring Dr. Mehmet Oz. Mrs. Chanko, 75, was a fan of the show and others like it.

[...]

Anita Chanko, TV Star Dr. Mehmet Oz (inset) and husband, Mark Chanko (far right).
(Screen capture from YouTube video)

On the TV screen, she saw a chief surgery resident, Sebastian Schubl, responding to an emergency in which a man is hit by a vehicle. “And then I see, even with the blurred picture, you could tell it was him,” she said. “You could hear his speech pattern. I hear my husband say, ‘Does my wife know I’m here?’ ”

There was no doubt in her mind: The blurred-out man moaning in pain was her husband of almost 46 years, the Korean War veteran she met in a support group for parents without partners.

“I hear them saying his blood pressure is falling. I hear them getting out the paddles and then I hear them saying, ‘O.K., are you ready to pronounce him?’ ”

She clenched her fists so tightly that “the palms of my hands almost looked like stigmata” and her mouth got so dry that her tongue stuck to the roof “as if I had just eaten a whole jar of peanut butter.”

“I saw my husband die before my eyes.”

Read More

$10 Million To Be Paid To Victim of Wrongful Prosecution in New York: Was Jailed for 15 Years for Murder He Didn't Commit

Jabbar Collins at the law firm where he now works. (Photo by Andrew Burton)

By Joaquin Sapien, ProPublica
New York City has agreed to pay $10 million to settle a wrongful conviction lawsuit filed by Jabbar Collins, who spent 15 years in prison for a murder he did not commit.

The settlement announced today concludes a decades-long struggle for Collins, now 42.

He was just 22 when he was sent to Green Haven Correctional Facility in upstate New York for the 1994 murder of Brooklyn landlord Abraham Pollack. In the years that followed, Collins turned his cell into a full-fledged jailhouse lawyer's office. He filed Freedom of Information Requests, re-interviewed witnesses, and taught himself to write and submit legal motions. Eventually, he gained the attention of a Manhattan defense attorney named Joel Rudin, who helped Collins win his freedom by persuading Federal Judge Dora Irizarry to vacate his conviction in 2010.

RELATED STORY: Unpardonable Failure For a Respected Prosecutor -- Innocent Man Jailed Over 20 Years Because Prosecutor Hid Evidence

As ProPublica has reported, the effort by Rudin and Collins, in many ways, helped trigger the downfall of former Brooklyn District Attorney Charles "Joe" Hynes, whose top aide Michael Vecchione prosecuted Collins. In their lawsuit, Collins and Rudin accused Vecchione of violating several bedrock legal principles in order to win the conviction, saying he coerced witnesses, withheld exculpatory evidence, and suborned perjury. To bolster their claim, Collins and Rudin pointed to other instances of similar abuses by Brooklyn prosecutors, suggesting thatwhat Vecchione did was part of a larger, systemic pattern of misconduct that Hynes either overlooked or encouraged during his 23 years in office.

In an interview, Rudin said that the settlement marked a very gratifying moment for himself and Collins.

"I worked for four years to get him out of prison and another four years to get him some compensation and some sort of vindication," Rudin said.

RELATED STORY: Mass Incarceration — How it Works: Tens Of Thousands Of Innocent People Have Likely Pleaded Guilty Says Federal Judge — Defendants Terrorized
by Threats from Prosecutors

Rudin also represented Collins in his lawsuit against the state of New York, which settled last month for $3 million. The total of $13 million Collins will receive is among the largest settlements New York has agreed to pay anyone wrongfully convicted in the state.

"I had three goals when I brought this lawsuit," Collins said in a press statement issued today. "One was to expose the illegal practices of District Attorney Hynes and to help drive him from office. The second was to obtain personal vindication and to demonstrate my innocence. The third was to receive compensation that would recognize the enormity of the harm that was done to me and my family and would provide financial security for the rest of my life. I accepted the City's offer because it meant that I had achieved all of my goals."

Collins' victory comes on the heels of several other settlements for high-profile wrongful convictions in New York. Earlier this year, David Ranta was awarded $6.4 million after spending 23 years in prison for a murder he always swore he did not commit. In June, five men wrongly convicted in the infamous Central Park jogger case were awarded $1 million each for every year they spent in prison.

A spokesperson for the New York Law Department issued a brief statement about Collins' settlement, pointing out that when Collins' conviction was first overturned in 2010, the Brooklyn District Attorney's office conceded that exculpatory evidence was withheld.

"We believe this settlement is fair and is in New York City's best interests," the statement said.

Last year, Hynes lost his bid for a seventh term as Brooklyn District Attorney after coming under heavy criticism for his handling of wrongful convictions. He is now being investigated by the New York Department of Investigation over allegations that he received advice from a top Brooklyn judge on several sensitive matters, including media coverage of Collins' case.

A spokesperson for Kenneth Thompson, who has since taken over the District Attorney's office declined to comment for this story.

Reprinted with permission from ProPublica

Case of Fake Terrorism in the US?: 94% of "terrorism" cases in US did not involve terrorism at all—The Study & Audio Interview With Co-Author

Photo by Sweetsofa [Streetart].

A Case of Fake Terrorism in America?: 94 Percent of the 400 "terrorism" cases reviewed did not involve terrorism at all.

Attorney Kathey Manley. (Screen captured from YouTube video)

"We went through all the cases and we looked for the signs of "preemptive prosecution" (defendants are targeted for their beliefs, no real crime is committed, a sting operation). In a total of 74 percent of the 400 cases were what we would call pure preemptive prosecutions... Another 20 percent of those cases had elements of preemptive prosecutions where there was some  crime going on (fraud, Internet crime, drug crimes) but not terrorist related crimes. But because the people were Muslim, and whatever other reasons the government was suspicious of their beliefs, they enhanced their sentences, they tried to inject elements of terrorism into these cases. So we call those cases elements of preemptive prosecutions. And if you add those in to the pure preemptive prosecution cases it adds up a total of 94 percent. Of the cases they [the U.S. government] claim are terrorists aren't really terrorists at all... Only 13 out of the whole list of 400." —Kathy Manley


JAMES CORBETT of the Corbett Report interviews Kathy Manley of Project SALAM and the National Coalition to Protect Civil Freedoms about her recent study, “Inventing Terrorists: The Lawfare of Preemptive Prosecution.”

Original Link

Below: The study, Inventing Terrorists: The Lawfare of Preemptive Prosecution followed by a compilation of some of the "synthetic" terrorism cases of the FBI and other U.S. law enforcement agencies, The FBI's Synthetic Terrorism During Contemporary Times.

Inventing Terrorists:
The Lawfare of Preemptive Prosecution
 Click the arrow (<) on the left side to view the document without thumbnails.

________________

The FBI's Synthetic Terrorism During
Contemporary Times

Click the arrow (<) on the left side to view the document without thumbnails.

General Mills Corp Tried To Shield Itself From Lawsuits: With Sneaky Contracts You 'Sign' Just By Logging Onto Website — Changes Mind After Bad PR

Bowl of Cheerios: General Mills turned out to be not so "family friendly"
after all. (Photo by yaybiscuits123)

By Nolan Feeney
The food giant reversed itself regarding widely criticized new legal terms on its website that some said could prevent customers from suing the company over downloading coupons, joining its online communities, or interacting with the company

General Mills announced it was removing controversial legal terms from its website on Saturday following an uproar over the changes.

“Because our concerns and intentions were widely misunderstood, causing concerns among our consumers, we’ve decided to change them back to what they were,” company spokesman Mike Siemienas wrote in an email obtained by the New York Times. The New York Times reported last week that the General Mills had added new legal terms to its website which could force customers to surrender their right to sue the company if they downloaded coupons, joined its “online communities” or interacted with the company in a variety of other ways.

Read More 

When The Judge Is A Woman

Redressing the historical and structural male domination of judicial systems requires that we consider the impact of gender on judges, citizens, and the text of law itself. Reflections on the conversations at the ‘le juge est une femme’ conference at the Université libre de Bruxelles.

Tunisian judges, magistrates and lawyers demonstrate for their independence.
(Photo: Demotix)

By Heather Mcrobie
What does it mean when the judge is a woman?  The question raised at the Université libre de Bruxelles looks at the implications for the judicial system – and what we consider justice – when the gendered structures and assumptions built into it are taken apart.  In reply to the question, legal scholars and gender theory experts explored the impact of gender on judges themselves, as well as for citizens encountering the justice system.

For all their assertions of impartiality and fairness, the concepts that underpin law – and frame the ways we think about justice–  are laced with gendered notions, from the evolution of the symbol of ‘Lady Justice’ from the goddess Themis to the Enlightenment-era reworking of the relationship between citizen, state and the law through assertions of rights of ‘man’.  And judicial systems worldwide are male-dominated in at least two senses: firstly, judges who identify as male make up the majority of judges in national formal judicial systems, with women historically underrepresented in the judicial profession; secondly, as feminist legal scholars and socio-legal scholars have argued, modern justice systems emerged out of patriarchal conceptions of justice, and as such they privilege the male experience and qualities associated with masculinity.  Gendered ideas of who constitutes the ideal citizen pepper the historical emergence of our modern concepts of justice throughout the Enlightenment, whilst nineteenth-century elevations of the idea of property as a cornerstone of legal status work in tandem with historically patriarchal ideas of property.  Traces of these ideas live on in our current realities through their continued presence in the bloodstream of legal bodies.