Abbie Hoffman Moment

Private Message

Abbie Hoffman Moment

How To Stop The Violence Against Police Officers

Want to know how to stop angry people from taking the law into their own hands against the violent, heavy handed police officers who have been recklessly shooting minorities, lately? Abolish qualified immunity for all police, and force them to obey the law. If pigs faced the same consequences for crime as the rest of the population, it is likely that they would not be as trigger-happy around minorities as they so often are; and if victims and other aggrieved parties had access to justice, there would be fewer people taking the law into their own hands.

Kansas Public Schools And The Supreme Court

Here we go again. The Supreme Court of Kansas has ruled, once again, that the Republican dominated Kansas legislature has failed the public schools in Kansas by refusing to properly fund them.

The Supreme Court ruled in February of this year that the state is not adequately funding the schools, and the legislature pretended to fix the problem. The court has now ruled that an acceptable budget for schools must be passed and in place by June 30, or schools must remain closed. The schools must remain closed? That seems like a tall order in a country where all children under the age of sixteen years are legally obligated to attend school, except in rare cases wherein children have graduated early. It seems much more likely that Kansas public schools could go into receivership.

The crux of the issue here is the distribution of funds between richer and poorer school districts. Kansas, in an ongoing effort to resist Brown vs. the Board of Education, continues to craft its geographic school districts in a deliberately unequal manner. The Kansas legislature could easily remedy this by consolidating schools, county by county, eliminating the need for multiple school boards and multiple administrations within a county. All of the counties and their school boards would answer to a central authority, the state. This would save money, and make equitable distribution much more possible. If the Kansas legislature would just accept this, and stop resisting the Constitution, the Supreme Court would not have any reasons to stop public schools in Kansas from opening in August for the school year of 2016-2017.

Abbie Hoffman Moment

Abbie Hoffman Moment

Tamir Rice Was Shot Because He Was Black

"I was right there and he went for the gun. I had no choice," is the lie told by Tim Loehmann after shooting twelve year old Tamir Rice in November, 2014.

Why do police officers in America lie? Since most investigations of police officers are done by individuals and organizations that are pro police and racist, why was  Tim Loehmann even motivated to make false statements? For instance, reporting that Rice had the gun in his hands, when the video clearly shows he did not. Also, Loehmann stated that Rice was sitting at the table at the recreation center in a group of people, while the video very clearly shows that Rice was alone. Let us also not forget that Loehmann wrote that he told Rice three times to put his hands in the air, when the video shows that he did not say a word to Rice, but shot him instantly.

This is why policemen are often referred to as pigs. I hope Tamir Rice's community can find a way to get justice.

A Kansas School And Guns

 

Above is a picture of a toy similar to the toy over which Dean Dalinghaus, principal of Frankfort High School in Frankfort, Kansas, once attempted to expel an autistic fourth grader. We suspect that Dalinghaus simply has it in for children with disabilities. 

Below is a gun, similar to the one an adult senior at the same school took to school one day. That student is not autistic. He did not get expelled, and was allowed back inside the building. He was even allowed to graduate, seven weeks later, with his class. 

 

Abbie Hoffman Moment

Who's Responsible For The Journal Entry?

Hey, Judge Angela Hecke, of Marshall County, Kansas...when the attorney representing one of the parties before you, in your courtroom, wants to know who is going to be responsible for typing up the journal entry, outlining your decision, why do you not direct anyone to do so? Why do you deny a copy of the court order to those who seek justice? And when court is over, why do you then tell the sheriff your decision was something other than what you stated in court? Don't you think that the person you stomped on will look at this post? I'll betcha she will. The next time an attorney offers to type up an order, you should thank him and let him do it.

It might also be a good idea to stop mocking our justice system. And if you really believe what the bible says, you should be aware that perverting justice is wrong.

Facebook Strikes Again

A Flint, Michigan police officer by the name of Rob Garceau was recently fired because of something he posted on Facebook. The statement he made relates to the investigation of two homicides, and what he wrote is, "Keep purging society of the maggots. 2 less welfare, food stamp people. Keep it up."

Garceau's attorney is running a media campaign against the police department in Flint because he is convinced that Garceau has the right, via the First Amendment, to post such statements as long as he is not on duty. There are several problems with that, beginning with the fact that Garceau is a cop, and cops are trusted to enforce the law. Murder is against the law, yet the police department in Flint had an officer whose public statements technically encourage murder. He may not have meant it literally, but the words still set a terrible example: Garceau essentially told anyone who happens to read his post that murder is behaviorally acceptable. Next, it appears, from Garceau's Facebook post that he believes that anyone who receives public assistance or charity should not have the same protections from law enforcement as the rest of the population. Is a child who qualifies for reduced lunches at school in more danger when Garceau is on duty? Most food stamp recipients are, after all, children. If policemen really think that it is sufficient to allow anyone who might be receiving government assistance to become victims of crime, how can they possibly discourage and fight crime? There is also the reality that a police officer, unless clairvoyant, is not likely to have the ability to determine who is on welfare and who isn't, while on duty. Are we to assume that anyone who the cops think is needy enough for charity will not merit protection from law enforcement? So much for public trust! I do not blame the police department one bit for giving Garceau his walking papers.

Something else Garceau's attorney should think about is the murder case, itself. If the case is still under investigation, chances are quite strong that the prosecutor does not need public comments made about it by a police officer. Not only is there an outside chance of influencing or intimidating witnesses, thereby perverting justice; it shows an officer who does not work well with the court system. I think getting Garceau off the force was a good idea.

Courtly Conduct Before Juries

We've been hearing a lot abut jury trials in the news, lately. We also, on a semi-regular basis, hear a lot about the press, social media, and the first amendment. But does anyone truly understand the sanctity of a jury decision, and the purpose of the protections of the same, both before and after the decision is rendered? Apparently, there is some misunderstanding, as a rather high profile case, that of the murder trial of Aaron Hernandez, ran a risk of dismissal shortly before the trial concluded because a reporter chased a vehicle transporting members of a seated jury in order to obtain pictures, names, and interviews!

What part of "do not sway, taint, or influence a jury" do these reporters not understand? Can they not see that when a defendant invokes his right to a jury trial, all involved parties count on an impartial jury? Before the jury has rendered a decision, this kind of crap can easily bias the jury and rob the defendant of his right to a fair trial. This is why judges are often obliged to invoke orders against discussion about cases by any involved party during trials. How can the court be sure that the jury was not responding to threats or bribes when deliberating the case if others have taken the liberties of influencing jury panels via outside conversation? This can lead to mistrials, miscarriages of justice, and convictions of innocent people.

One more thing this reporter attempted to do that was completely unwise was an attempt to photograph the jury while they were commuting to and from the courthouse. This was the reporter's excuse, as a matter of fact. He thought that merely snapping a picture of jury members was appropriate. He had not considered what might have happened if someone, somewhere had been dissatisfied with the verdict, and decided to use the information and pictures provided by the media in an attempt to gain some sort of vengeance on any member of the jury who could be identified. It seems that, thanks to social media and peer pressure in general, there is already enough temptation to "go with the flow" and do what everyone else is doing, and never do one's own thinking. In court, a jury is depended upon to depart from peer pressure and make it's decision as individuals, looking critically at the facts, not public opinion. Why should the media interfere with this process?

Police In Motion Pictures

Something law enforcement should remember is that police officers cannot assault and batter anyone they choose without abandon anymore, thanks to the advent of the digital camera and the cell phone. Even if one eyewitness with such a device is pounded to the ground, law enforcement cannot possibly interfere with every filming witness or surveillance camera. Google even snaps random pictures. Finding each and every possible camera isn't even possible, anymore. No matter how loudly police officers threaten those with recording devices, it remains perfectly legal, under the Constitution, to photograph and record them, as long as said police officers are in public. The ACLU has graciously provided us with a guide for gathering such photographic records here. For further enjoyment, there is a picture below of former police officer James Kinsella, at his bond hearing in Omaha, Nebraska, after being charged with felony tampering with evidence because he snatched cameras and SD cards from men who attempted to record evidence of their local police at work. It isn't legal at all for a cop to snatch a cell phone, camera, or an SD card from a citizen.

In Case You Didn't Listen In Church This Sunday

An Arrest Might Help

In the gloomy retrospect of young Micheal Brown's funeral yesterday, a question seems to keep getting asked here and there, on various news websites and on local TV news: now that the funeral is over, what can we do to effect productive change and ensure justice for Michael Brown and his family? Here's a quick answer that could have saved quite a bit of trouble in the first place.....arrest Darren Wilson, the officer who murdered Michael Brown almost three weeks ago. Had an arrest been made immediately, and had the officer been held just as accountable as Michael Brown would have been, had the situation been reversed, no one would have ever felt the need to riot.

In other news, the ACLU got involved in the career of Officer Gofuckyourself, featured in the video above, and effective August 20, he is no longer on the force. Unfortunately, the citizens of Missouri are probably still paying his salary.

Rest in peace, Michael Brown.

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.

 

Folks In Topeka Upset By Due Process

Troy Allen Robinson is on trial in Shawnee County, Kansas for the stabbing of Oma Shannon Bennett in December of 2012. Recently, it was discovered that his defense attorney had a conflict of interest inasmuch as this case is concerned, and needed to bow out. Robinson now has a new defense attorney. Robinson's next court date is November 8, for a status hearing. All things considered, even the conflict of interest and the appointment of a new attorney, this is rather quick for a trial in which the defendant is charged with first degree murder.

Oma Shannon Bennett

It seems that there is a lot of angst among those who support instant gratification in terms of emotionally responsive justice for this murder victim. That is understandable, from a "feelings" related viewpoint, yet; actual justice cannot be administered in a quick manner simply to gratify the feelings of an angry mob. From the scant bit of information available about this case, there are two apparent problems; first, the evidence which led to the arrest, and second, the amount of preparation involved, connected to this case, prior to court dates in the past.

Local media in Kansas has not reported very much about the evidence that led to Robinson's arrest for murder. By all appearances, it seems that the police in Riley County arrested Robinson because of some statements he made to a third party, specifically, his mother, about having been involved in a crime. While this can probably be introduced during a motions hearing in a pinch, as circumstantial evidence, it is only hearsay. Without more solid evidence, an arrest warrant should not even have been granted. If that is truly all the prosecution has, and it should be hoped that it isn't, there is not much by which to actually connect the defendant to the crime. A guilty verdict under these circumstances could easily lead to a vacated decision or an appeal. It is important that justice be practiced according to the law, not mob mentality.

The second problem which does not appear completely understood by the courtroom crybabies is the need for all legal professionals involved in trying or hearing a case to be impartial. A conflict of interest in a criminal case, on the part of the judge, defense attorney, or the prosecuting attorney can lead to an improper verdict, either guilty or not guilty, and pervert justice. If either attorney, upon review of the facts pertinent to the case, discovers a conflict, the only professional thing to do is ask to be recused. After a new attorney is appointed, that attorney should be granted ample time to prepare the case or prepare the appropriate responses. Everyone is entitled to justice, not only those who can afford the most expensive private lawyers.

Has a motive been established for this murder?

 

 

Abbie Hoffman Moment

Expedience, not justice, is the rule of contemporary American law.  Abbie Hoffman

This week's Abbie Hoffman moment was brought to you by Marshall County, Kansas!

 

 

Mitt Romney Belongs To A Racist Church

Mitt Romney is a bishop in his church. His church, the Mormon Church, is historically and currently racist. Whenever he is questioned about this part of his church's doctrines, he evades the question about whether or not he feels he has a literal god-given right to deny constitutional rights and justice to people who happen to belong to races that are not defined as Caucasion. A vote for Mitt Romney is a vote for taking America backwards into a part of history that no one should wish to repeat.

 

Here's a bratty, spoiled rotton little Mormon boy telling the world why he thinks it's okay to be a racist. Would we really want to turn back the clock to that?