Trump Cries About Wiretaps

In case there is someone out there in Internetland who has not heard, Donald Trump has dominated Twitter, yet again, with yet another petty complaint. This time, it is an accusation against Barack Obama; specifically, that he had the phones at Trump Tower wiretapped during the election. Here's what he said, among other things:

While it is tempting to simply write this off as another stupid sounding complaint by an unqualified and ill-elected president, it is important to note the reaction of Kevin Lewis, Obama's spokesman, prior to passing judgement.  "A cardinal rule of the Obama administration was that no White House official ever interfered with any independent investigation led by the Department of Justice. As part of that practice, neither President Obama nor any White House official ever ordered surveillance on any U.S. citizen. Any suggestion otherwise is simply false, " Lewis stated.

This is interesting. A president cannot order the wiretapping of any American citizen's phone, or any unconstitutional invasion of privacy. If Donald Trump does not know this, and must reach out to his Twitter audience for an answer, he is too stupid for the oval office. Another very telling aspect of Lewis's remark is what he said about DOJ investigations. As it happens, there actually WAS a warrant, which was not obtained by the White House, but by the FBI, to investigate communications at Trump Tower. It centered on a server which was found to be communicating with Russia's Alfa Bank, which has strong ties to Vladimir Putin. It seems that Mr. Trump just found out about the FBI investigation yesterday.

As long as an investigation is ongoing, the FBI is usually not inclined to comment or speak publicly about it. Had Donald Trump just resisted the urge to tweet, many, many Americans would not be aware, today, that the FBI has been investigating his computer and email activities, in connection to his relationship with entities in Russia. It seems plausible that we will hear more about this in the future.

Abbie Hoffman Moment

No, Mr. Schwartz, I Am Not Glad It Happened In The Country

The remains in question here turned out to be a Kansas man who disappeared in July of last year. His name is Jason Southern. We still do not know the circumstances of his death. The reason he wasn't found until March 2015? This location is in the country, that famous location that a Kansas congresswoman Sharon Schwartz's husband gave to a constituent in defense of Frankfort School, in Frankfort, Kansas, for the continued employment of a guidance counselor who dropped a fourteen year old girl off four miles away from the school, despite her parents instructions against managing class this way, and just went home and had dinner when she did not return to school.

The "country" often has no cell phone signal and no surveillance cameras. It is one hundred percent certain that Tom Schroeder, the guidance counselor at Frankfort High School, knew this prior to leaving a female student in the isolated area in the "country". In fact, he probably knows exactly where signals pick up and fade away, and he probably knows exactly where surveillance cameras are, and are not installed.  There is also no doubt that he realized the girl was missing before he went home, as he discussed her situation with a second grader from the school. There is also no doubt that he DID NOT call the police. To lay some misinformation to rest, law enforcement keeps records of that data, and there is no such call to them from Tom Schroeder on that day. Schroeder just didn't care. If Schroeder had any other motive for endangering a child, such as production and promotion of child pornography,  the "country" would be the perfect place to get away with it. The "country" is also the location of choice for the hiding of evidence after a murder. Suppose a child who is allergic to bee stings gets stung after being abandoned alone, "in the country"? What happens if such a child falls, and suffers a broken bone? Then what? No, Mr. Schwartz, I am not glad it happened in the country.

Pat Welch Lyin' About The Lyon Sisters

Lets see here; Patricia Jean Welch, of Hyattsville, Maryland, brightened her holiday last year by getting arrested in December, for lying to the grand jury in Virginia about some evidence related to the forty year old cold case of the missing Lyon sisters, from Montgomery County, Maryland. Pat Welch thought it would be more circumspect to lie, when asked pointed questions, rather than realizing that the questions never would have been asked, in the first place, unless the truth, or at least part of the truth, was already known. 

Something else to which Pat Welch did not give much attention is that when people, such as Lloyd Lee Welch, her nephew and a "person of interest" in this case, go to jail on the spur of a moment, they sometimes leave many of their personal possessions behind. Since Lloyd is in jail, and has been for years, he isn't as available to visit his previous addresses and hide evidence. That makes it a little bit easier for the police to find his stuff, what's left of it, and look for anything connected to any crimes he might have committed. 

Pat's husband, Richard Welch, is also a "person of interest" in the missing persons cases of Katherine and Sheila Lyon, and has recently retained legal counsel. This happened right around the time that the house he shares with Pat was searched again by Montgomery County Police, earlier this month. Pat says the police didn't take anything, but the media has pictures and footage of police taking things. Also, Richard's lawyer says that if the police come back, Pat and Richard will cooperate and be honest, because they have nothing to hide, but if that's really true, why is Pat due in court in Bedford County, Virginia, on June 29, for perjury? If she has nothing to hide, wouldn't she have just cooperated, and answered the grand jury's questions truthfully in December?

Sheila and Katherine Lyon, who disappeared while walking home from Wheaton Plaza, in Maryland, on March 25, 1975. 

ACLU Guide For Snapping Pictures In Public

There seems to be a lot of misunderstanding about snapping pictures in public, especially of police officers while they are eating doughnuts and beating people up....er...working. Police officers will often tell people that it is not lawful to take pictures of police officers when they do their jobs, and will even confiscate cameras of bystanders and arrest journalists and reporters when cameras have clearly caught police officers with their pants down. But the truth is, taking pictures in public is perfectly legal. On private property, one must have permission of the property owner in order to take pictures, but in public, one may snap pictures of anything one can see. Police may not confiscate anyone's camera or SD card without a warrant, and police officers have even been brought up on charges of tampering with evidence for doing just that. The American Civil Liberties Union has published a guide for photographers for reference.

Pictures of police in action, taken by citizens, provide an independent record of the photographed or recorded incident. Such evidence reduces the prevalence of faulty memories and lies, and is important for transparency of those who represent authority. No one should have to worry about police confiscating photographs or cameras, and no police officer should do anything in the line of duty that he or she would not want photographed.

What Kept The Etan Patz Jury From Guilty Verdict?

Etan Patz disappeared on his way to school in the Soho neighborhood in New York, in 1979. He was only six years old. He has never been found, and there have not been many viable leads or suspects over the years. In 2010, a basement was dug up in search of remains, but none were found. There have been age progressed pictures, and another suspect, Jose Ramos, the significant other of a babysitter sometimes used by Etan's family, was successfully sued in civil court by the Patz's in a wrongful death suit. There was never enough evidence to charge him in criminal court.

In 2012, an emotionally unstable man named Pedro Hernandez told law enforcement that he had killed a child. Members of his church supported that story, stating that he had repeated his account of having killed a child since the early 1980's. As for the remains, Hernandez claimed he had put the body in the trash. He was finally arrested, and his case went to trial. Aside from a haphazard confession, seven hours of which were not recorded, there was no evidence. Hernandez did not even get the name of the child he allegedly killed, and because there were no remains, against which to compare dental records or DNA for a positive identification, jurors would have had to make not only the leap that Hernandez actually did the deed, but that the victim was truly Etan Patz. Suppose Hernandez actually killed someone, but it wasn't Etan? Would Etan get justice? Or would a killer still be free to commit another murder?

The trial ended in a hung jury, and the judge finally declared a mistrial. There was one juror who did not agree that guilt should be determined in an American court with no evidence. It is a bit disturbing that only one juror would hold out, resisting the social pressure to convict without evidence, but thankfully, at least one person was willing to demand that the judicial system work the way it was designed to work. Coercion of a mentally ill suspect for hours on end by police is not likely to result in reliable information. And why would seven hours of such a conversation not have been recorded, so as to be available to a jury, later on? Could the seven hours possibly have been erased in order to preserve the ability of involved police officers to lie their asses off and get the wrong man convicted, thereby closing the case? With so many open and loose ends here, that seems like a distinct possibility. The only other supporting "evidence" the prosecution had were a few disorganized statements from Hernandez's former churchmates, claiming that he had "said he killed someone." Great. If he had really made such statements; and he actually may have; why in bloody hell didn't these church people go to the police back in the eighties, when Hernandez told them these things? Not that the statements are evidence, mind you. In the real world, third hand information is called "hearsay".

Hernandez is still in jail, waiting for the mumbo jumbo experts who engineered this mockery of a resolution to a missing persons case to decide when and if they want to retry the case. He is scheduled for a status hearing on June 10, 2015. Hopefully, if the case is tried again, there will at least be evidence and compelling testimony which will lead to the location of Etan Patz, and allow his family closure. 

Bye-bye, Reverend Finn

The pope has accepted the resignation of Bishop Robert Finn, of Kansas City, Missouri, who pretty much got away with protecting one of his priests, Shawn Ratigan, when police came knocking on the door, search warrant in hand, requesting more information. After removing the computer requested by law enforcement and concealing it at another address, the court found him guilty of "failing to report" the crime and gave him "suspended probation". What a farce, and a mockery of justice! Shawn Ratigan had actually produced and trafficked kiddie porn while preaching the gospel, and Finn was more interested in protecting the kiddie porn, the kiddie porn producer, and the computer involved than in protecting his religion or the children involved. Sometimes, one simply has to take a minute to see christianity for what it so often is, and sleep in one Sunday morning.

Where's The Real Killer, Alabama?

This past week, an innocent man was freed from death row in Alabama, after being held hostage by the judicial system for nearly thirty years. After a murder in 1985, a trial, involving actual evidence, apparently was not important. Ballistics from the alleged murder weapon, as in whether or not the bullets actually came from the gun police randomly decided COULD have been the murder weapon, were never even requested by the prosecution. The defense had only a limited amount to spend on expert testimony, and no one cared. Anthony Ray Hinton spent thirty years on death row for a crime he did not commit.

Prosecutors are not held to very high standards. There is a prosecutor in Northeast Kansas whose son damaged her vehicle by driving it through a neighbor's crops, and when the neighbor complained and the vehicle wouldn't run properly, she attempted to accuse a random constituent (who happens to be an older woman who has never worked on cars) of sabotage! No demand for responsibility on the part of her own son! She even fixed the vehicle her son damaged and gave it back to him, allowing him, once again, to prey upon the neighbors' fields, gardens, and mailboxes! But that's small potatoes compared to Hinton's case, and others like it, that have been bungled, not only because of prosecutorial misconduct and indifference, but enabled by the level of comfort felt by the general public when the wrong person, in an inordinate number of cases, a black person, is convicted of a crime he or she did not commit. In this case, no one even looked for the actual perpetrator, who apparently got away with murder. How many more murders could this person have committed in thirty years?

Half a life behind bars cannot actually be repaid to Mr. Hinton. Neither can a damaged reputation or thirty years worth of lost opportunities. How will the prosecution go about attempting to make right any murders committed by the real killer in this case, who was never prosecuted? Was the racist indifference worth it, Alabama?

An Arrest Concerning The Missing Lyon Sisters

There is now an arrest in connection to the missing Lyon sisters, who disappeared in Maryland in 1975, after walking to Wheaton Plaza, but it is not the arrest for which so many of us had hoped. Instead of a perpetrator and direct answers, after almost forty years, the wife of a "person of interest" decided to lie to the grand jury in Virginia about a matter that is of material importance to the case. Richard Welch, of Hyattsville, Maryland, has been named a person of interest in this case, along with his jailbird nephew, Lloyd Lee Welch. Some land owned by their family, in Bedford, Virginia, has come onto the radar of authorities in the recent past, and witnesses who know the involvements of these two men have been asked to testify. Now Patricia Welch, Richard Welch's wife, has been arrested for testifying falsely in the case. Some have argued that spousal privilege should apply in Welch's case when answering questions about a matter involving her husband, but there is also at least one other person of interest, and no one has yet been charged. The only person Ms. Welch has a legal right to protect at this point in the investigation is herself, yet if she does that, there is a chance that she will incur closer scrutiny. She really should have consulted an attorney about any conflicting or untrue testimony. If she has guilty knowledge, or had decided, on her own, when, or if, the Lyons could have long overdue information concerning their missing daughters, and was still using her own timetable for sharing it, authorities will hopefully throw the book at her.

People who think they do not have to comply with federal law, especially concerning testimony related to crimes against children, are disgusting. Anyone who can help in this case should call the police in Montgomery County, Maryland at 240-773-5070.

Insight

Advice To Hunters And Hikers

Hunters and hikers should always be aware of the possibility of finding evidence in a missing persons case. Kyron Horman has been missing in Oregon for over four years, and Sarah and Jacob Hoggle were last seen in a part of Maryland where there are a lot of hiking trails and park land.

Anonymous To Huntsville Alabama Police

This video was made because police in Huntsville, Alabama reportedly told paramedics, after arresting a seventeen year old child, and apparently after handcuffing him, pepper spraying him, and battering his one hundred and fifty pound frame, that he had swallowed evidence during the arrest. When paramedics attempted to induce vomiting, they found nothing, so police proceeded to ram a sharp object down the child's throat, killing him.

After the undersheriff of Marshall County, Kansas gave permission to assault and batter a targeted victim, it appears that law abiding citizens have a war of sorts on their hands with the very agents we formerly trusted to serve and protect. Missing children, hate crimes, and sexual violence against children do not appear to be important to Kansas and it's judicial system. They have an agenda that is not in the best interest of the general public.

Undersheriff Timothy Ackerman's official okey-dokey to violence against someone who was targeted for reasons of religious differences. 

Forensic Evidence In Kendrick Johnson Case

Kendrick Johnson's untimely death at his Georgia school last year is finally gaining some national attention. It would be nice to think it was also the subject of serious investigation, but over a year has passed, and local law enforcement initially had no intentions of any honesty with Kendrick's family; from the cause of death to the possible suspects. Judging from community reaction to this, it appears that school officials and others in the community are displeased with the determination of Kendrick's parents to find out exactly what happened to their son. Some members of the community actually think that Kendrick's family should just forget that they ever loved him, and "move forward with their lives", accepting the community's judgment that it is okay to victimize some people, and that the feelings, lives, and children of those people do not matter.

"Move forward and get on with your life." Communities who push that philosophy usually push it on minority populations, and it is most feverishly pushed on those targets when special non-minority segments of the population, such as the children of law enforcement or prosecutors, have committed crimes that the teachers, policemen, school administrators, and Christian ministers would rather see unprosecuted.

California Answers The Call Of A Michigan Pig

Remember a few weeks ago, when a sixty year old woman named Jamie Lewis was arrested in California for a prison escape in Michigan way back in 1977? Law enforcement in California immediately deferred to law enforcement in Michigan and popped right over to Ms. Lewis's home and arrested her forthwith for the jailbreak, and in an ongoing effort to embarrass the poor woman in front of her neighbors and children, told reporters that she had "changed her name"....something most women do at their weddings.......and had thus eluded capture for thirty-seven years. As it turns out, Ms. Lewis had turned herself in all the way back in 1982, and the case had been revisited, at which time she was sentenced to time already served, AHEM, and released. The offending "name change" did not occur until a year later. How's that for a state that routinely allows that statute of limitations to elapse when collecting and analyzing evidence for rape? On February 4, 2014, the day Jamie Lewis's false arrest made the news, California had an estimated backlog of 400,000 rape kits that had not been processed. Some of this evidence dates back to the early nineties. The victims in these cases are constantly told that someone will get back to them, and finally, they stop asking about this elusive and non-occurring justice. But......there is always time and resources for the California judicial system to  answer the call of a pig in another state and arrest someone for whom there is no arrest warrant. Yeppers.

Telephone Tag With A'Kiera Burrell Sledge

On December 25, missing fourteen year old A'kiera Burrell Sledge, from Kansas City, Missouri, finally called her mother from an untraceable number. This is great news for Iyonna Burrell, who, prior to this phone call, had no real idea what had happened to her daughter. A'kiera has a history of running away from home, and was taken into state custody and placed in Crittenden because of it. Iyonna has not lost parental rights, just custody, but when her daughter disappeared while in the state's custody, she was treated as if no one owed her any answers. This is simply not true. What's really going on is that a facility that accepts monies from state funded insurance failed to protect a child in it's custody, and when the parent demanded answers, pretending she had no right to answers was the most convenient way of blowing her off. Unfortunately, the court in Kansas City, Missouri is vested in covering for Crittenden, and refuses to establish a profile with NCMEC for A'kiera. No one has forced Crittenden to turn over it's security footage from the cameras that provide surveillance around the perimeter twenty-four hours a day. Crittenden, so far, has gotten away with falsely stating that there is no surveillance footage.

At least Iyonna Burrell knows her daughter was alive on Christmas. A'kiera has been missing since the last week of November. She does not wish to live at Crittenden anymore. Missouri will not allow her to live with her mother, and as of late, will not even allow her mother to advocate for her while she is a missing child. Missouri was not making any efforts in improving communication between mother and daughter, and it appears that Crittenden just wanted to make sure that A'kiera was not reported missing too close to the middle of the month, lest they lose the funding for A'kiera's enrollment in their program. Or something like that. Any time stamped video footage of A'kiera leaving the facility might mean Crittenden would owe the insurance company or the state a prorated refund. The only other reasons for discouraging communication between A'kiera and family members and for withholding the surveillance footage are much more sinister.

Right now, A'kiera needs her mother more than she needs anything. The state of Missouri needs to realize it's failure in this case, and either return A'kiera to her mother or find a family member or friend who can keep A'kiera until communication and balance can be established. Telling Iyonna not to parent is one and the same as telling A'kiera she can't have a mother, at this point; and that is morally repugnant. Why can't there be an advocate, or legal counsel, for A'kiera? If there was, how would she know who to contact, and who to trust? If someone can answer those questions for her, she might place another phone call to her mom.

 

No Shooting In The Police Station

 

Addison Mikkelson, who was arrested over the holiday for obstruction of justice because he took some videos and pictures of Kansas law enforcement in action, returned to the police station in Topeka the following day. He wanted a copy of the video captured by law enforcement of his arrest. While he is, in fact, entitled to the video, his arrest changes the auspices of his entitlement. Information pertaining to or resulting from an encounter with a government entity that is just an encounter, and nothing more, can usually be obtained by written request citing the most recent update of the Freedom of Information Act.  Unfortunately, Addison was charged with a crime here, and law enforcement's video record of the event has become evidence. Addison, or his lawyer, must now subpoena this evidence, and if the case against him goes forward, Addison will be allowed to examine it. The court, rather than either party, has a certain amount of control over the evidence and it's uses until the charges are disposed. The uninvolved officer with whom Addison spoke has no authority to release evidence in the case to anyone. Ah.....kids!

If the police station in Topeka Kansas seriously wishes to forbid or limit any filming, a sign should be posted on their wall, stating that permission must be granted prior to filming or recording. It seems that a lot of police officers lately, despite the public aspect of the job, have been extremely camera-shy. While the interest in footage of abusive cops is undoubtedly growing, most civilians do not take exception to police officers caught doing their jobs professionally and courteously. When an officer is caught on camera behaving like a thug, and proceeds to behave even more like a thug upon finding out that he has been caught on camera, there's a problem. Addison Mikkelson obviously has a pastime, and hopefully a passion, for catching police in action on video; hopefully, he has the heart, soul, and good fortune required for this type of activism.

Shooting a documentary of the "history" of the police station in Topeka, Addison? Seriously? That's the most amusing thing I've heard all weekend! You should have just said, "Smile! You're on Candid Camera!"

 

Happy Hate Crimes Holidays

Kristina Vindiola was working as a bell ringer for Salvation Army outside of Walmart in Phoenix, Arizona. Suddenly, a Christian woman stopped beside the kettle. Thinking she was going to donate money, Kristina wished her "Happy Holidays." Instead of donating money, the Christian woman asked her if she believed in God, and informed her that she is supposed to say "Merry Christmas!"  Then, the Christian woman slugged her!

The police were called to the Walmart store, where they took a report on the incident; but not only were they unable to locate the suspect by the time they arrived, they told Kristina that there wasn't enough evidence to charge the Christian woman with a crime!

Ahem! Don't Walmart department stores have surveillance cameras aimed at key areas, inside and outside stores? Don't they use cameras to monitor the perimeters? Aren't doorways, where Salvation Army kettles are stationed during the holiday season, important places for security cameras? After all, if evidence was needed in court to nail a shoplifter, Walmart would just send the security footage to the police. Why shouldn't they do the same when a Christian assaults and batters someone who says "Happy Holidays"? Phoenix law enforcement should have all the evidence they need in order to charge that Christian woman with a hate crime, in addition to assault and battery. It's good to know that some retailers only use their cameras to identify shoplifters and are not interested in the personal safety of those visiting their stores.
 

Kendrick Johnson Was Killed At School

Kendrick Johnson, a seventeen year old Lowndes County Georgia student,  didn't come home from school one day in January of this year. He didn't make it to a basketball game, either. On January 11, he was found deceased, rolled up in a gym mat. The death was ruled an accident, and some truly insane speculations were made concerning how he got into the gym mat. No evidence was analyzed, no witnesses were interviewed, the crime scene wasn't even taped off; Kendrick was found shortly after ten in the morning, and police did not investigate the surroundings or begin to look for evidence until after three in the afternoon, even though Georgia law requires that the coroner be called immediately when police discover a body. During the five hour interim, the gymnasium was in use. It would seem that police already somehow "knew" the death was an "accident".

That's exactly how Bill Watson, the Lowndes County coroner, ruled Kendrick's death: as an accident. A second autopsy was done at his parents' request and expense, and that autopsy yielded different findings. Kendrick Johnson actually died of "unexplained, apparent non-accidental blunt force trauma"....CNN, quoting the medical report. Kendrick's parents were also told by the sheriff and the prosecuting attorney that Kendrick was alone in the gym when he died. Yet the surveillance taken on that day shows other students in the gym at the same time. In an interview with CNN's Anderson Cooper, L. Warren Turner, Jr., the attorney for the school, told Anderson Cooper that there were other students present in the gym. The very same attorney had previously joined the Georgia Bureau of Investigations in an unsuccessful effort to convince the community that Kendrick was alone when he died. The information is obviously conflicting, yet the lawyer does not acknowledge the problem. Rather than admit wrongdoing on the part of the school, which owes it's students better and more competent supervision, he leaves Kendrick's parents with the task of paying their own lawyer to challenge him, even though he knows that in protecting the school, he is at cross purposes with student safety, perverting justice, allowing a killer to remain at large, and sending a clear message to any would-be bullies that the school is more concerned with protecting it's public image than protecting any underage crime victims.

Anderson Cooper has as much of the footage from the day Kendrick died as he was able to get from the school. The reader should also note that law enforcement did not even peruse this video before the death was initially ruled accidental. Had Kendrick been white, would this investigation have been handled differently?

 

The Lowndes County coroner, Bill Watson, made yet another interesting comment. In addition to getting away with covering for a school where homicides go uninvestigated and covering for a police department that has agendas that are more important to the local sheriff than impartial enforcement of the law, Watson wants Anderson Cooper to redact the whole interview between himself and Cooper! Fat chance! Watson may be able to manipulate the journalists and advertisers who produce the local news where he lives, but he does not own Anderson Cooper or CNN!

 

 

Stupid Prosecutor Loses License To Practice Law

Mingo County, West Virginia has a position open for a county prosecutor now that Michael Sparks the law license of Michael Sparks, former Mingo County prosecutor, has been revoked. It seems that Michael Sparks was either acutely aware, or vaguely aware, of the practice employed by a West Virginia judge, the former Judge Thornsbury, of planting evidence and falsely accusing innocent people of crimes, and attempting to initiate prosecution against his victims! It appears that in addition to taking a dim view of false litigation, the Supreme Court in West Virginia takes an equally dim view of looking the other way when elected officials in law enforcement and the court have engaged in corrupt, unlawful behaviors that erode the trust of the general public. What a concept! The Supreme Court also has a problem with prosecutors and judges who try to silence federal witnesses. An element of that also played a role here. In fact, Both Sparks and Thornsbury did something that is often done in Marshall County, Kansas, where a prosecutor named Laura McNish is constitutionally incapable (pun somewhat intended) of winning a jury trial by herself, and intimidates and threatens defendants who hire lawyers, invoke their rights, and insist upon jury trials: they attempted to deprive a defendant of adequate legal counsel in exchange for a lighter sentence. A quote from WOWKTV states this:

"Sparks is accused in a scheme to protect former Sheriff Eugene Crum from revelations he'd bought drugs from a campaign sign-maker.
Prosecutors allege Sparks, a former county commissioner and former Circuit Judge Michael Thornsbury offered a lighter sentence if the dealer fired his lawyer and hired one they preferred."

So interfering with a defendant's counsel is also criminally unethical? Who'd have thought?!

On a related note, the Kansas Department of Education is still looking for a way to ensure cooperation of prosecutors in the area of mandatory reporting of all teachers who commit crimes. When teachers who exhibit criminal behavior, such as criminal restraint and kidnapping are prosecuted and reported to the Department of Education AS THE LAW REQUIRES, it is much easier to identify them and deny the renewals of teachers' licenses. Perhaps if Marshall County Kansas had a prosecutor with competence, instead of Laura McNish, court in Marshall County would begin to administer justice and Frankfort High School would be safe enough to get insurance.

 

Another Stupid Prosecutor

What is going on with stupid prosecutors these days? In Colorado, there is a young and inexperienced prosecutor named Todd Risberg, who requested discovery of all the evidence in possession of all parties involved in a case he tried. Everyone complied, but Risberg still felt somehow cheated, so he filed a motion about it. During court, the judge ruled that the prosecution had all the evidence it needed, and that the defendant's attorney did not have to supply the prosecutor with any more so-called "evidence"; which, in this case, was a penned letter to one of the defendant's friends. Had the judge ruled otherwise, and had the defense still refused, someone would have been in contempt of court then and there; but no one was in contempt of court, because all of the judge's orders were followed. So what does Risberg do? He files criminal charges against the defense attorney for not handing over the letter the judge said he did not have to hand over! He feels that this step is necessary to "send a message" to defense attorneys in his area. Where's the eye-rolley when I need it?

I do not believe Risberg's dumbass case will go anywhere. No defendant, represented by an attorney or not, has a legal obligation to fork over evidence, including written or oral statements, to help the State prosecute a case. The fourth and fifth amendments to our Constitution are quite clear about this. Many of the defense attorneys in Risberg's area are in solidarity against this case, and against these tactics, and it will not surprise me a bit if the case is dismissed with prejudice. Sadly, it will also not surprise me a bit if Risberg finds a way to take his nonsense to civil court, when criminal court fails to give him his own way.

This is the kind of stuff about which ethics complaints are written to Bar Associations. And I would certainly write one if I were involved in this case.