How not to fix a wrongful prosecution

On Friday the news broke that the "infamous" Memphis 3 -- Damien Echols, Jason Baldwin and Jessie Misskelley were freed. 

Freed, but not cleared. 

The trio, convicted nearly 20 years ago for the brutal rape and murder of three cub scouts in Arkansas, have spent half their lives imprisoned despite overwhelming evidence of their innocence. So why were they freed but not cleared? If you don't know the answer to that question, you haven't been paying attention to the horror that is the modern American "justice" system.

[A] 1996 HBO documentary titled "Paradise Lost: The Child Murders at Robin Hood Hills" drew the attention of celebrities including Vedder and Maines. Joined by other stars, they helped fund a legal team that sought a new trial.

Last fall, the Arkansas Supreme Court ordered a new hearing for the three, asking a judge to consider allegations of juror misconduct and whether new DNA science could aid the men or uphold the convictions. Then, suddenly, there was the plea deal.

It involved an unusual legal maneuver that allowed the men to maintain their claims of innocence. But with murder convictions still on their records, supporters say they've got to find whoever's responsible for the boys' deaths to clear the men's names.

Just to clarify that last paragraph (the AP must have an affirmative action program that requires them to hire the mentally challenged as reporters). The three were forced to make an Alford plea, "admitting" guilt as "overwhelming evidence", before the execrable Arkansas "legal" system would free them. Actually, as bad as that sounds, it's worse than that. One defendant was told to take the Alford plea or his friend wouldn't be freed from Death Row!

These are not the actions of a justice system. These are the actions of predatory prosecutors who are only interested in keeping their won-lost record intact, the innocence of those prosecuted be damned. This was about prosecutors covering their ass rather than administrating justice.

This is, to put it bluntly, a complete miscarriage of justice.

Either give the three fair trails in which to prove their innocence, or pardon them, or exonerate them. But don't pull this obscene abortion aimed at deflecting attention away from criminal prosecutors (take that naming either way you choose) who are utterly disinterested in justice and only interested in winning.

Law and Order UK

The other evening I was relaxing in Vulture Manor with Deadeye watching an episode of Law and Order UK. The BBC version of this venerable franchise is, IMO, every bit as good as if not better than the original was back in the 90's.

Okay, I watched TV. What does that have to do with anything?

The episode in question unfolded with what police at first thought was a copycat murderer mimicking a convicted white supremacist serial killer (hereinafter referred to as "Whitey"). When they found the killer, they received quite a surprise: the murderer was a black Jamaican, the murders weren't racially motivated at all (the killer was channeling "commands from God"), and, the biggest bombshell of all, he wasn't a copycat. He was the killer behind all of the murders for which Whitey was convicted!

This is where the course of justice, UK version, diverged sharply from the course of justice, USA version.

Whitey was freed right away. That makes perfect sense, right? Except that in the US, once it's been established that you're innocent, you're lucky if you don't wait months for someone to get around to issuing orders for you to be freed. If at all.

Then the solicitor (attorney) for Whitey dropped an accusation that the Crown Prosecutor (DA) had spiked exculpatory evidence in Whitey's original trial that would have cast doubt about his guilt in the murders. The CP was actually brought up on criminal charges of perverting the course of justice as a result of this single accusation. Stop for a moment and ponder that. A prosecutor was charged with the crime of perversion of justice as a result of an accusation of withholding exculpatory evidence. Whoa!

It got me thinking. Why in the name of all that is holy is there no such statute on the books in any jurisdiction in the US for the crime of perversion of justice? Why is it that DA's in the US can run roughshod over the rights of the accused, prosecute individuals they know to be innocent, and hide or manufacture evidence without fear of any sort of consequences? Lest you think I'm exaggerating or simply spewing hyperbole, I suggest you take a nice long look at actual evidence of prosecutorial mischief. Spend a half hour at Will Grigg's place. Or at William Anderson's place.You'll swear that I've understated the problem by half.

Until US prosecutors are held to the same high standard as Crown Prosecutors, we can expect innocents to continue to be sacrificed on the altar of some scumbag prosecutor's career aspirations. One day it might be you.

Once again, NWA was right

'cause a cop think a badge give him the authority to kill a minority.
NWA, F*** tha police

Some time back, I referenced a tragic shooting in the Seattle area of a Native American man by a police officer donut-eating self-important bully. John T. Williams is still dead. And the tax-fed waste of oxygen who killed him is still a free man, as per standard procedure in this type of case.

“If you’re going to prosecute a cop for excessive force amounting to manslaughter or homicide, you have to prove that the officer acted with malice,” says Strait. “(The standard requires proof) that (the officer) acted with intent to harm (the victim). You have to prove he really wanted to get the guy.” Birk has presented the shooting as an act of self-defense.

The inquest brought out the cloudy nature of some of the aspects of the case. Witnesses and Birk presented several different versions of the afternoon’s events — Birk believed that Williams presented a threat to passers-by, while civilian witnesses perceived Williams as a normal pedestrian.

The jury leaned somewhat toward the witnesses’ version of events. Four jurors out of eight believed that Williams “pose(d no) imminent threat of serious physical harm to Officer Birk.” Three jury members were undecided and one agreed that Williams was a serious threat.

Several other key points of the incident are in dispute: Jurors were split on whether or not Williams was facing Birk when he was shot, if Williams was able to put down his knife before he was shot, and whether or not Williams’s knife blade was open or closed.

With a demanding burden of proof, Washington prosecutors are often loath to pursue prosecutions of police officers who have fired on citizens.

Often loath? OFTEN?!?!?! How about 'virtually never'. Cops literally get away with murder in over 90% of these cases. Why? Because cops and prosecutors are on the same "team", and it's bad form to throw a member of your "team" under the bus.

The reactions of citizens and local officials to the decision not to prosecute are telling. The few private citizens quoted are foursquare in the Williams camp. The tax feeders and union hacks are foursquare behind Birk. And the prosecutor does his best Pilate.

The policy of this state is to give police officers this special protection. The underlying policy, passed 25 years ago, is a sound one. My first and foremost responsibility is to follow the laws in the state of Washington. I had to look and see, 'Is there malice, is there a lack of good faith?'

Translation from lawyer-speak: Cops get special treatment. Go pound sand if you don't like it.

I, for one, don't like it.

Apparently, a badge DOES give a cop the authority to kill a minority...or anyone else...and will continue to do so until right-minded people demand that policies like the Seattle area "the cop is innocent unless we say so...and we won't say so" policy are abolished and cops are treated the same as ordinary citizens who commit acts of violence.

Conservatives and law enforcement

One of the things about so-called Conservatives that really chafes my bottom is their adoration for law enforcement.  Cops are all heroes who accepted a calling from God to be protectors of the citizenry.  Prosecutors are all heroes who eschewed the Siren call of lucrative jobs with prestigious law firms to fight crime and see to it that the guilty are punished.

As has been witnessed by anyone who has read more than a handful of Will Grigg's posts, the reality doesn't match the fantasy.

Prosecutors tend to be bastions of corruption, more concerned with their won-lost record than whether they've sent an innocent man to prison (because it was easy) or let a guilty man walk free (because the case was too hard to win).  On multiple occasions it has been discovered that exculpatory evidence has been hidden by prosecutors to assure the "win"! (See here for one example).  Why do they do this?  What's in it for them?  Why, they have political aspirations, of course!  A prosecutor with a tremendous won-lost record makes an excellent candidate for state or federal office.  Bastards.

Think I'm wrong?  See here, here, and here.  Again, William Grigg has MANY more examples than that.

Cops tend to be fatass bullies, quick to anger, quick to shoot those who don't react immediately to their commands.  Examples of this are legion - particularly on Will Grigg's site, but I've documented a few myself, here, here, here, and especially here.

A prime example of "quick to anger, quick to shoot" is the case of John T. Williams (H/T to Debra Farver).

The police shooting of a talented, aging Native totem carver has sparked anger and outrage in Seattle’s Native community, and beyond.

John T. Williams, long time Seattle resident and a Ditidaht member of the Nuu-chah-nulth First Nations of Canada’s Vancouver Island, was shot four times and killed Aug. 30 by police officer Ian D. Birk, a two-year veteran of the Seattle Police Department.

Police said Williams advanced towards Birk when the officer spotted him sitting on a ledge with a knife and shouted three commands at him to drop it.

As eyewitnesses came forward with a different version of events police then said Williams was crossing an intersection with a knife and piece of wood in his hands, refused to drop the knife and advanced towards the officer.

“His body stance did not look threatening at all,” an eyewitness told The Seattle Times. “I could only see the gentleman’s back, and he didn’t look aggressive at all. He didn’t even look up at the officer.”

Williams died between 1811 Eastlake, a private nonprofit home for chronic drinkers where he’d lived off and on, and the Pike Street Market in downtown Seattle, where he sold his carvings.

Williams was crippled with arthritis and hobbled more than he walked, Randy Lewis, a leader of the United Indians of All Tribes Foundation said. He was capable at most of turning towards the officer when he heard him shouting, to show him what he had in his hands.

That’s if he heard him shouting. Williams’ friends say he was deaf in his left ear from an infection eight years ago.

To summarize:

• A cop orders a man walking down the street minding his own business to drop the knife he's carrying.  Never mind that the block of wood he's carrying is what's known as "a clue" as to what said person's intention is for said knife.


• The cop doesn't get the response he desires; that is, the person in question doesn't immediately comply like a cowering sheep to John Law's demand.  He most likely didn't comply because he couldn't hear him.  This matters not one whit to the man in blue.


• The cop shoots him 4 times.  In broad daylight.  Like a dog.

What do you think of your "hero" cop, Conservatives?  You think he's in law enforcement because he's been called by God to protect the masses?  Or is it because he's hung like a thimble and needs a license to throw his weight around, that license being the sanction of the State in the form of a badge?

What anonymity really means

There once was a blog called Coram Non Judice (known to regular readers of this fine blog as Caput Penitus Culus).  The blog was purported to present valid legal opinions on issues related to the FLDS raid in Texas.  The blog was run pseudonymously by a fellow identifying himself as TxBluesMan.  No one knew his real name.  No one knew what his credentials were to opine on legal matters.  No one.

When asked how he justified writing anonymously what essentially amounted to hate-filled propaganda in the guise of legal opinion -- citing precedent often, of course -- TxBluesMan compared himself to the Founders, who at times wrote anonymous tracts against the colonial government and the King.

This, of course, was complete horse hockey.  There was nothing remotely similar to what the Founders did in anything TxBluesMan wrote.  The Founders hid behind anonymity to avoid arrest for sedition.  TxBluesMan wrote anonymously for a far different reason.

Anonymity, Martha Nussbaum, a professor of law and philosophy at the University of Chicago observes, allows Internet bloggers “to create for themselves a shame-free zone in which they can inflict shame on others.” The power of the bloggers, she continues, “depends on their ability to insulate their Internet selves from responsibility in the real world, while ensuring real-world consequences” for those they injure.

As the tipster who passed this story on to me wrote, "That, boys and girls, is the story of TxBluesman."

100% true and accurate. Think I'm kidding? I was accused by TxBluesMan of being pro-polygamy and pro-pedophilia for simply opining that 4th Amendment protections were violated during the Texas Stoßtruppen's raid! 

TxBluesMan is an intolerant bully.  He desperately needed to be outed.  And he was.

TxBluesMan turned out to be Sgt. Gregory Prickett, AKA the Caput a Palos, AKA The Prickette.

Once he was outed, The Prickette immediately shut down his odious blog to try to bury the evidence.  You see, now his real self was linked to his Internet self -- and real consequences awaited.

It's not pleasant when the curtain is parted and the Great and Powerful Oz is revealed to be a two-bit loser with a penchant for throwing his weight around and playing the big shot.  At least, not for Oz.

UPDATE: The same tipster who passed on the NY Times article adds the following:

Just FYI: while online at any sites controlled by Google, your "anonymity" is subject to their selective authority that may or may not conceal it.

Wiener of the Year

Prior to 2010 I awarded the Wiener of the Week award and the Wiener of the Month award every week/month.  I discontinued that practice this year because it constrained my flexibility with regard to subject-matter selection.  It was a decision I'm glad I made, given that the past year I've had significantly less opportunity to post than in past years.

But at the time I announced the discontinuation of the Wieners of the Week and Month, I stated that the Wiener of the Year award would still be given out to the person or persons most deserving of that dishonor.

In past years I solicited nominations for the WotY.  Not this year.  There was no need for that.  The winner (wiener?) was decided months ago.  There aren't even any candidates for the runner-up spots.  Nope, for 2010 there's just one, and he may be the most deserving recipient yet.

Ladies and gentlemen, your Wiener of the Year for 2010 is: Sgt. Gregory Prickett (hereinafter referred to as The Prickette).

It's ironic, but The Prickette is a two-time Wiener.  Last year I picked co-Wieners when I awarded the WotY to two blogs noted for their anti-FLDS bigotry.  At that time the identity of the person behind the execrable Coram Non Judice (known by regulars here as Caput Penitus Culus - Head Inside Ass) was unknown.  Thanks to the efforts of The Pharisee and others, the identity of the Caput a Palos was revealed.  Rather than bore you with the history of what transpired in the wake of that revelation, you can read up on it here.  Suffice it to say that The Prickette has paid dearly for playing lawyer and accusing innocent persons of pedophilia.

What makes The Prickette Wiener-worthy?  Let me count the ways.

1. He shut down his blog once he was outed.   It's gone for good, deleted by its owner.  Note that The Prickette has never at any time denied that he is TxBluesMan, the sorry excuse for a human being who proudly used his purported legal "expertise" to espouse bigotry and hatred.
2. He presented himself to his blog readers as a legal expert.  He not only isn't a lawyer, he wasn't even a real law enforcement professional (campus cop does NOT count as law enforcement).
3. He lost his job as a campus cop.  It would be purely speculative on my part to posit a theory as to why he is no longer employed by UNT, but it is likely related to alleged misuse of university resources in furtherance of his malignant campaign of pure bigotry against the FLDS.
4. Now that he's been "outed", his relationship with Natalie Malonis has become fodder for speculation.  I wonder how Mrs. Prickette feels about the coziness between her pompous-ass husband and Ms. Malonis.
5. He has attempted to sue those responsible for outing him for "damages", yet, as noted earlier, he has NEVER denied being the cowardly subhuman behind Caput Penitus Culus.  Never.  Kinda hard to prove damages when the "damage" is the result of the revelation of the truth.

Face it, Prickette.  Your life is a colossal fail.  Epic.  You sat in judgment of others, flinging baseless accusations from behind the cloak of anonymity like an ape throwing feces at the zoo (a fitting mental picture of who you really are).  And you've proved to be a fraud, a loser, a nothing.

Congratulations, Prickette.  You're the Wiener of the Year.

 Pictured: the Caput a Palos himself

Law (?) and Order (?!?!?!?) - Caput Penitus Culus Edition

I have to admit that when it comes to the legal system I'm a fish out of water.  The terminology.  The prosaic phraseology.  The BS preambles with their legal buzzwords ("hereinafter referred to as The Plaintiff", "party of the first part", etc.).  The BS Latin and Latinate words and phrases ("pro se", "ad litem", "dominum dictum", "ex nihilo", etc.).  Truth is, it's a foreign world to me.

But there are certain legal concepts I understand completely.  'Hot check' is one of them.  And 'hot check' is the latest development in the sorry case of Mall Cop a Palos v. Bloggers.

When all the legal challenges to bloggers over one being classified as a “Rent-A-Cop” came out, the first place checked was the court records.

Still there today, as you can see in the image below, were the records indicating that an employee of the University of North Texas, a Gregory J. PRICKett, had evidently obtained the services of Natalie Malonis to file and PAY the fees necessary to get the process started.

Go on.

Now that you’ve seen the financial records which started the ball rolling, along with a couple more payments made by Gregory J. PRICKett to keep it headed just where he hopes it will help him the most, let’s move on to the latest under the “Events & Orders of the Court” in those records from the District Civil Court in Texass.

Ooh! Tell me more!

10/27/2010 HOT CHECK

Natalie Malonis, Attorney At Law – Refer to Acct Dept x7260

Oh how the mighty have fallen!  Attorney Natalie Malonis, once a featured "expert" on the Nancy Grace Show, has now been reduced to passing bad checks on behalf of her partner in calumny, Sgt. Gregory Prickett, pictured at top, hereinafter referred to as The Prickette, a known hostis humani generis (you like that, pretend lawyer asshole?).

I don't need to remind you of the enmity I (and frankly, all people possessed of human decency) have toward the foul pretend lawyer behind Coram Non Judice, ah, excuse me, Caput Penitus Culus.  That he and his particeps criminis, Ms. Malonis, have been exposed and put in a position where they are on the defensive is extraordinarily gratifying.  That Ms. Malonis is reduced to passing bad checks in the shadow of accusations that she "misappropriated" child support payments intended for a client is absolutely....priceless.

By their fruits ye shall know them.  I smell rotten apples.  And Noxzema.  And mall cop.

White-hot Prickette

War.  Really, it's the only word that can begin to describe the escalation of the saga of The People vs. The Mall Cop a Palos.  To summarize the events to this point.

• The individual behind Coram Non Judice (or, as I prefer, Caput Penitus Culus -- Head Inside Ass) has presented himself/herself/itself as the legal expert for all things related to the illegal seizure of the FLDS children in Texas.
  
  
• Said individual -- while, mind you, remaining completely anonymous -- engaged in the worst sort of character assassination against those whose opinions differed from his own.  Said individuals would include The Pharisee, Bill Medvecky, ScottyL of Ye Olde Journalist, Toes, and The Vulture.  Among other slurs, these individuals have been accused of being pedophiles or pro-pedophilia.  All save Toes blog "in the clear", with their real name and other information there for all to see.  I think that all fair-minded people would agree that slurs against real people -- particularly heinous slurs like calling someone a pedophile -- done from cover of anonymity is the act of a total coward.
  
  
• A Wikipedia administrator, investigating allegations of sock puppetry/meat puppetry and of using multiple identities in those activities (clearly against Wikipedia regulations), discovered two individuals, Sgt. Greg Prickett (hereafter referred to as The Prickette*) and Natalie Malonis (a prominent anti-FLDS lawyer) were engaged in meat puppetry.
  
  
• In the course of that administrator's investigation, the admin found a link from one of The Prickette's aliases (TxBluesMan) to the execrable POS Caput Penitus Culus.  He also discovered The Pharisee, looking for TxBluesMan.
  
  
• Long story short, The Pharisee became aware of The Prickette's real name, and he was formally "outed".
  
  
• All of the aforementioned individuals previously slandered by The Prickette (save Toes, who remains ever polite) had a field day with this information.  The Prickette was called everything but a Child of God by said individuals.  Not coincidentally, every word of what was said about the Prickette by these individuals was....wait for it....TRUE.
  
  
• Bill Medvecky wrote an open letter to The Prickette's boss detailing the kinds of activities he had been involved in.
  
  
• The Prickette issued a Cease and Desist order to The Pharisee, Bill Medvecky, and ScottyL to "stop calling him names and telling on him".  Big pussy!  At the time, I was just a wee bit bent that he hadn't included me in that order.  I didn't realize how lucky I was.
  
  
• The Prickette escalated.   He published pictures of The Pharisee's daughter on that cesspool of a blog, FLDS Texas, in a clear effort to intimidate and extort The Pharisee to back off.
  
  
• The Pharisee countered by contacting just about everyone associated with the university where The Prickette works to alert them to the kind of stalker sociopath they have working for them.
  
  
• The university, clearly seeing the potential liability they faced if they did nothing about this whack-job placed The Prickette on Administrative Leave.
  
  
• Now the other shoe has dropped, so to speak.  The Prickette has sued The Pharisee, Bill Medvecky, ScottyL, and the Wikipedia administrator for $1 million big ones and filed an ex parte which enjoins these gentlemen to desist in their accurate but hurtful name calling against The Prickette (Greggie!  Whatever happened to "sticks and stones..."?).   The full document can be read here.
  

Does anyone still doubt that we're dealing with a borderline personality here?  The Prickette sees absolutely nothing wrong with slandering innocent people, threatening their employment, threatening their relatives(!).  But reveal who he is and the kind of things he's done over the past two years...and he's first in line at the courthouse, ready to sue your ass.

Prickette, you're every bit the sniveling coward I thought you were the first time we had the opportunity to exchange views.  Wait, we didn't exchange views so much as I shared an opinion regarding the 4th Amendment violations I perceived regarding the flimsy warrant the Texas Stoßtruppen used as an excuse to search EVERY HOME IN THE FREAKING COMMUNITY and you called me a pedophile.

If I were the gentlemen named in your lawsuit -- particularly if I were The Pharisee -- I'd counter-sue your sorry ass.  I would guess that the aforementioned folks kept records of their "interactions" with you, just as I have.  I believe the things you've done to all of us from cover of anonymity completely dwarf the things these guys have allegedly done to you "in the clear".

Loser.

* Prickette was chosen as Mr. Prickett's non de guerre for the following reasons.  First, the name "Prickett" is pronounced "prick-ETT".  Second, the suffix "-ette" is used as a feminine diminutive.  This results in Prickette - a prick, only smaller and less masculine.

What am I, chopped liver?

For those of you keeping score in the ongoing blogwar between the forces of good (The Pharisee, Ye Olde Journalist, and Free the FLDS Children) vs. the forces of evil (the Mall Cop a Palos, et al), yet another shot has been fired across the bow in the form of a cease-and-desist order from the wannabe lawyer to the aforementioned forces of good (see full text here).

I have just one question.  How come I wasn't included in the cease-and-desist?  What am I, chopped liver?  I've also been quite vocal in my disgust and disdain for the Mall Cop a Palos.  Is it because ole Greggie views me as small potatoes, since I get a fraction of the site hits that the bloggers ordered to cease and desist get?

C'mon, Greggie!  Where's the love for the Vulture?

Another out-of-control Prosecutor

Normally, this would be a story for Toes at Sore Toes and a Bleeding Heart.  She is a tireless advocate for the reform of CPS (Child Protective Services).  But Toes passed it to me because (a) she knows my opinion of Prosecutors, that they are over-ambitious weasels intent on parlaying their position into a future political career without regard to the human wreckage left in their wake, and (b) it happened in my neck of the woods.  In Harford Country, to be exact - just a couple of hours northeast of humble Frederick.

Toes knows me entirely too well. The story got the predictable reaction out of me - I'm PISSED.

I can't do the story justice with a few random quotes. You can find it here in its entirety (major hat tip to Bill Medvecky who, like Toes, is a champion in the fight against out-of-control CPS). This is the money quote.

We want to see how she reacts when we tell her her kid is dead.

Classy. I hope there's a special place in hell where assholes like this can be subjected to horrors beyond imagination.

Vulture inbox

Most of the emails I get regarding my blog are nastygrams from Deadeye regarding my attitude and profanity (what? so I swear a little - BFD) or from my father taunting me (which I regard as the highest accolade one can earn as a blogger).  But every so often I receive a nice email that makes me glad that I've stuck with this blogging thing in spite of my stagnant site hit numbers.

A young FLDS man whom I'll refer to as 'HR' wrote me a lengthy and much appreciated email.  He is 26 years old, single, and a computer programmer. Hey, what's not to like about him?

Here are some excerpts.

I found your blog from Hugh McBryde a month or two ago, but I haven't really read through much until today. I must say, that I'm very impressed by the way you explain things, and I want to personally thank you for your unwavering support of our Constitution. We need more people like you in this country. It's so sad to see so many people totally blind to their basic rights and freedoms being eroded away day by day.

Dude, you are SO right about that. The average American is WAAAAAY more concerned with Joren Van Der Sloot than with the encroachment of our government on our personal liberties.

I was reading through your older posts on your blog about our people. Even though you had been swayed quite a bit by the trash spewed forth by the Big Media about us, yet you still were willing to defend our basic Constitutional rights. It was nice to see how you changed your view of us once more of the truth started to be known. I just wanted to personally thank you for what you have done. Any act of kindness or friendship does not go unnoticed. Just imagine living all your life knowing that you, your parents, your loved ones, are hated. How people can allow themselves to be consumed by such hatred, I will never know. Maybe you already saw this piece that Bill Medvecky posted (a comment from the Gosanangelo rag):

“PLEASE hire contractors with no flds affiliation !!!! My husband & many of his friends have lost so much work in the last couple of years ! The flds can work for cheaper rates because they bring all their teen & preteen boys to do all the work. Please pay the little bit extra to NOT use flds. Tell Lowe’s & Home Depot that you do not want flds working on your things !!!"

Of course, "Grandpa Bill", as I lovingly call him, asks us what if that were posted referring to another group?

“PLEASE hire contractors with no NIGGER affiliation !!!! My husband & many of his friends have lost so much work in the last couple of years ! The NIGGERS can work for cheaper rates because they bring all their teen & preteen boys to do all the work. Please pay the little bit extra to NOT use NIGGERS. Tell Lowe’s & Home Depot that you do not want NIGGERS working on your things !!!”

Well said, my friend! I had to plead mea maxima culpa some time back when I was made aware of my initial bigotry in dealing with the YFZ fiasco. But what limited contact I have had with the FLDS has left me impressed. Much like FLDS Mom, you write well - much better than a young man your age is usually capable of in this age of the Internet and PS2. And you're much more aware of the situation regarding our personal freedoms than many of your maleducated peers.

I'm loath to categorize an entire people based on contact with just a few supplemented with the occasional gander at an FLDS-centric blog (BTW, 'HR' recommends truthwillprevail.org, a site I will be adding to my blog role). But I have to say that the FLDS with whom I've had contact have impressed me a whole lot more than the bigots and ignoramuses at Caput Penitus Culus, with their slavering fetish for "the law", could ever hope to achieve.

'HR', I'm glad to have you as a reader. You're an interesting and articulate young man. Come back often.

Stop me if you've heard this before

A woman is killed.  A likely suspect is found.  Cops zero in like a laser beam on this one lone suspect, seeing only that suspect and no one else.

Eventually a case is assembled and presented to prosecutors.  Prosecutors, those pathologically ambitious bastards, have no problem proceeding with the case.  To prosecutors, winning is everything, so key exculpatory evidence is withheld.  The suspect is convicted and condemned to a lengthy prison sentence that will consume most of the remainder of his life.

Later, the exculpatory evidence is unearthed, and, as it turns out, that evidence, along with new advances in DNA analysis, prove categorically that the convicted man is innocent.  Absolutely innocent.

Say hello to Tim Masters. What I just described was his reality.

The state confirmed the Dutch DNA results, and with that, the prosecutor takes bold action, instructing his deputy to move for Tim's immediate release. With that, the hearing abruptly ends. The states' witnesses never even testify. And, after more than nine years, Tim is suddenly a free man.
[...]
Three days after his release, the state drops all charges against Tim, but prosecutors still won't officially clear him of Peggy's murder. "They still have him on a leash, I mean even though - just because your case is dismissed nobody’s ever come out and said, 'Tim Masters did not commit this crime,'" Liu says.
[...]
The Colorado attorney general now has the Hettrick case, but won't comment on it.
[...]
If the original prosecutors are upset, they're not talking. Both were publicly reprimanded and fined for failing to disclose information to the defense.
[...]
By then, they had been promoted to judges. But Tim doesn't blame them for what happened. "It's pretty obvious who did this to me. It was one detective, Jim Broderick."

Aside from the obvious, there are some troubling things that jump out at me and should jump out at everyone.

• The prosecutors, notwithstanding the weight of the evidence, will not drop the bone.  The guy is free, his conviction vacated, but those foul bastards still won't say the words, "He's innocent".


• The original prosecutors were reprimanded.  Reprimanded.  Are you effing kidding me?  An innocent man languishes in prison for nearly a decade and they get an MF'ing slap on the wrist?!?!?!  THEY should be in prison, minimum sentence the 9 years served by Mr. Masters.  Short of that, each of them should be summarily kneecapped.


• Prosecutors, continued.  They were promoted to judges.  Again, are you effing kidding me?  These rapacious, soulless devourers now administer the justice they denied Tim Masters.  God help us all!


• Mr. Masters blames one detective for his plight.  But is Detective Jim Broderick really different from other detectives?  What he did happens every single day.  Every single MF'ing day.  He locked in on a single suspect and couldn't be bothered to exercise his "Body by Dunkin' Donuts" physique or his torpid mind to look anywhere else.

Detective Broderick, in his own defense.

Broderick, the man who pursued Tim over the decades, is under investigation. Looking back, he makes no apology for his actions. "I believe that I followed the evidence, OK? And the evidence pointed to Tim Masters."

"They find the ex-boyfriend's DNA inside her underpants, on the cuffs of her blouse," Spencer points out. "Does that not give you any pause?"

"Well, you can find DNA evidence and it may have an innocent explanation," Broderick says.

Are you effing kidding me?  Are you effing kidding me? DNA evidence from an ex-boyfriend has an innocent explanation.  In the name of all that is holy please tell me how ANYONE with an IQ above room temperature could believe this?

Our legal system is broken.  Beyond broken.  Guilty people with connections walk.  Innocent people lacking connections languish in prison, victims of lazy cops and soulless prosecutors.

This is American Justice.  Pray you never fall into its gaping maw.

Just go to Wikipedia and search for 'bigoted egomaniac'

Just when I thought I'd put the Caput a Palos in my rear view mirror, blogging compatriot Hugh McBride called my attention to this monument to egomania run amok.  Yes, it seems that anonymity is no obstacle when it comes to bald-faced self-promotion.

Coram Non Judice, is a legal blog that primarily focuses on the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (FLDS) and the various legal actions involving them in Texas, Arizona, and Utah.

[...]

The blog, authored by an anonymous blogger known as "TxBluesMan" has consistently supported the law enforcement side of the issues involved.

"Supported the law enforcement side of the issues?" What a load of horse hockey! Try "supported the pro-bigotry side of the issues"!

Unless one of the Caput a Palos' sycophantic followers created the Wiki page, what we have here is one of the all-time great examples of egomania.  "Look at me!  Look at me!  Look at me!"

Yeah, this has to be a Wiener Award winner.  Can you think of anyone more deserving?  I might just have to name the award after the guy.

Law abuse

This is exactly the sort of story that makes it clear why people despise lawyers.

The 62-year-old Ogletree, you see, was headed to Las Vegas on December 30 when he stopped at a pizza place in the Houston airport. Upon departing the food court in Terminal C, Ogletree somehow forgot to take his "expensive black leather coat," an XL Polo model (with a fashionable plaid lining) worth $800. Not surprisingly, the coat subsequently disappeared. Now Ogletree is threatening to sue the City of Houston, Continental Airlines, and the food court's management company for failing to have "collected the coat, kept it in a secure place and held it for a reasonable time" until he was able to reunite with the garment. These prospective defendants, Ogletree reasoned, "breached their duty" in connection with how they "manage lost and found items for which they are responsible." In his January 18 litigation threat letter, a copy of which you'll find below, Ogletree, pictured at right, noted that "further legal action" could be avoided if he simply was paid $800 "for the cost of the coat."

To summarize:

• Lawyer enters airport


• All parties in the airport are immediately libel for any damage or loss involving his person and possessions

And to think! Once upon a time it was understood that personal responsibility requires one to be RESPONSIBLE for one's PERSON. By extension, one is also to be responsible for one's PERSONAL EFFECTS.

Mr. Ogletree, you're the recipient of the Wiener Award.

There is one lingering question, however. Could this possibly be the Caput a Palos, TxBluesMan himself?

False rape accusation punished

On Monday I wrote a post addressing the reality of a false rape allegation being no laughing matter. I wrote that, in spite of the inherent humor in the situation described in the original story, no false criminal accusation is the least bit funny so long as our legal system is as FUBAR as it currently is.

Oh how right I was!!!

A young mother who falsely cried rape, sending an innocent man to prison for nearly four years, will experience firsthand what he suffered -- she'll spend one to three years behind bars for perjury.

"I wish her the best of luck," said William McCaffrey last night of Biurny Peguero Gonzalez.

"Jail isn't easy."

McCaffrey, 33, of The Bronx, was locked up after Gonzalez accused him of raping her at knifepoint on a Bronx street back in 2005.

It was a lie she repeated to doctors, cops, prosecutors, a grand jury and the jury that convicted McCaffrey.

"What happened in this case is one of the worst things that can possibly happen in our criminal-justice system," Manhattan Supreme Court Justice Charles Solomon said as he pronounced sentence.

Gee, Charlie. You really think so? [/sarcasm]

In light of what has been done to him, I think William McCaffrey showed a lot of class in his comments about the heinous shrew whose lies caused him to lose four years of his life and forced him to endure an unmentionable hell in prison. Even so, there is justifiable bitterness.

A person who would "lie and paint somebody as a rapist is worse than a real rapist or a real murderer," McCaffrey said

He also blamed "the arresting officers, the prosecution." Everyone, he said, "wanted to believe the lie, the ADA [assistant district attorney] first and foremost."

My advice to Mr. McCaffrey is this: sue everybody! Sue the city. Sue the District Attorney's office. Sue the hosebag who made the false accusation against you.

The police, in their usual fashion, latched onto a suspect and made no effort to do no more than absolutely necessary in order to continue to dine at the public trough. The ADA was only concerned with getting the win once the case was referred to him. This is true of most 21st century DAs. They couldn't care less if the person they convict is guilty or not. They just want the win.

While at first glance it is something of a feel good story -- lying Jezzibel gets jail time, innocent man is to be freed -- there is still an inequality that screams for remedy. Why, in the name of all that is good, did the bitch only get sentenced to 1 to 3 years? She should have -- at a minimum -- served the same number of days in prison as Mr. McCaffrey endured. At. A. Minimum.

If the courts were concerned with eliminating false accusations of this kind (hint: they're not), they would have sentenced her to 10 years. That's what I would have done if I was the judge. We've got to make it clear to lowlifes like Ms. Gonzalez that robbing a man of his freedom is an offense every bit as heinous as violently assaulting his person.

Not amusing

Okay. I’ll admit it. I laughed when I heard the story.

Two Tennessee women who accused a man of rape have admitted to cops that they had consensually agreed to sex with him in exchange for a pack of cigarettes. One woman told investigators that the duo filed a phony police report because they "didn't enjoy the sex," according to cops.

You have to admit, the image of these two heinous water buffaloes prostituting themselves for cigarettes, then claiming rape before owning up to their fraud is chuckle-worthy. That is, until you think through the consequences that potentially faced the poor gentleman (and, boy, do I use THAT term loosely) who managed to achieve and maintain arousal with those two fugly hosebags.

Two counts of rape. The average sentence for an individual convicted of rape is 11.8 years. A casual interwebs search found sentences between 11 and 20 years for two counts of rape.

"Oh c’mon, Vulture! There’s no way he would have been prosecuted!" Really? You’re telling me that some Mike Nifong wannabe wouldn’t press charges? You’re telling me that some unscrupulous prosecutor wouldn’t hide exculpatory evidence to ensure that their "won-loss record" wouldn’t take a hit? You’re telling me that a jury of "his peers" (read: people not smart enough to get out of jury duty) couldn’t be persuaded by an emotional pair of women tearfully recounting how this man had "deflowered" them?

In 21^st century America there is NO situation where being charged with a crime is the slightest bit funny. Because in 21^st century America our tangled legal system seems to be designed to make criminals of us all rather than to assure the safety of the citizenry. And in that sort of legal system, no one is safe from malicious, fraudulent, or mistaken prosecution. No one.

So laugh if you will at the hideous HURTings now charged with filing a false police report. But I’m not laughing. Not as long as our system of laws is as effed up as it is right now. Not as long as innocent people can have their lives ruined by false allegations in a system run amok. And certainly not as long as people like this can practice law.

A job opening for TxBluesMan?

Tip of the hat to Tizona Group's "token American", Angus Dei, for this beauty.

The Civil Rights Division encourages qualified applicants with targeted disabilities to apply. Targeted disabilities are deafness, blindness, missing extremities, partial or complete paralysis, convulsive disorder, mental retardation, mental illness, severe distortion of limbs and/or spine…

The Department of Justice welcomes and encourages applications from persons with physical and mental disabilities.

What's that? The DoJ is looking for retard lawyers? I have just the guy for the job. What's that? He's OVERQUALIFIED? Can't say I'm surprised...

BTW, Tizona -- if you're looking for another American to add to your stable, I'd be honored.

Zero tolerance = zero sense

It started in the 80's because the "Law and Order" crowd was dismayed at the way that "lenient liberal judges" were "coddling" criminals. They were also upset that small-time offenders were summarily given probation or even a walk. The result was a slew of laws to "rectify" the situation.

To deal with "lenient judges": mandatory sentencing guidelines.
To deal with small-time crime: zero tolerance.

While zero tolerance in law enforcement didn't really catch on, the concept had a certain appeal to other authoritarians of all stripes.

Everywhere you look now, zero tolerance rules are popping up like zits on a greasy teen. Zero tolerance rules in schools have resulted in honor students being expelled for giving Motrin to a classmate. They've resulted in students being suspended for pointing a stick at a classmate and saying "bang". That's not the worst -- one little boy was suspended for the "crime" of drawing a gun! No, he didn't remove a weapon from its holster. He drew a PICTURE of a gun. That's right, an effing picture.

I thought that the suspension for drawing a picture was the biggest example of ass-headed unthinking zero tolerance up until I saw this story on HLN.

A birthday celebration that culminated in a trip to catch the blockbuster movie "The Twilight Saga: New Moon" could land 22-year-old Samantha Tumpach in prison for three years.

The Chicago, Illinois-area woman captured three minutes of the film on her videocamera while taping part of her sister's surprise party at a Muvico theater in Rosemont.

Theater managers contacted police, who arrested Tumpach. She spent two days in jail. Now she faces a felony charge of illegally copying a movie.

"The motion picture industry has encouraged theater owners to adopt a 'zero-tolerance' policy prohibiting the video or audio recording of any portion of a movie," Muvico Entertainment, which oversees the theater, told HLN's "Prime News."

Excuse me. Am I to understand that a young woman could spend 3 years in prison because the motion picture industry "encouraged" theater owners (read: told them in no uncertain terms) to exercise zero tolerance with ANY video filmed in a theater?

In a common sense world, the young woman would be reprimanded and sent on her way. Hell, in a common sense world, the motion picture industry wouldn't be dictating to private business owners and the judicial system how they should handles situations of this type.

The bottom line is this: zero tolerance = zero sense. It permits authoritarian types to throw their weight around like dime store Barney Fifes. Because zero tolerance takes all thought and reason out of the punishment process, mindless, robotic morons, acting in much the same way as a computer running bug-riddled software, simply process the instructions without regard or thought to the fallout or consequences.

It ain't right. It just ain't right.

Wiener of the Week

What's in the water in Columbia, SC? First the Governor, and now this.

Newly-released video from a Columbia police cruiser's dashboard camera shows a former Republican legislator and state attorney being stopped by police after he was caught in a cemetery with a teenage strip club employee on his lunch break this week.

The video shows Roland Corning, 66, being stopped Monday afternoon by five officers under the overpass where I-126 becomes Elmwood Avenue. Corning was pulled over after an officer spotted him in an area police say is known for sex and drug use.

Corning had an 18-year-old employee of the Platinum Plus Gentleman's Club in his vehicle at the time. After speaking to officers for a few minutes, Corning steps out of the car and allows officers to search his SUV. Officers found sex toys and a bottle containing Viagra that Corning says were there "just in case."

"Hey, I've got an idea. I'll pick up a stripper, some 'toys', and some 'V'. Then I'll head over to the cemetery for some fun and games."

Boys and girls, this is what happens when the little head does the thinking.

Roland Corning, you're the Wiener of the Week.

Wiener of the Week

Jane Velez-Mitchell has issues. And, no, I'm not referring to the dopey name of her insipid show Issues with Jane Velez-Mitchell. And it's not just the fact that she SCREAMS throughout here entire show (xfloggingkylex says you can hear her even after you press the Mute button). Nor is it the fact that her show is a formulaic ripoff of Nancy Grace's show, which, itself, after a fine start, gradually because a formulaic stultifying nightmare.

No, the issues to which I refer have to do with a failure to think.

The evening after that loser in Pittsburgh shot up a gym (Deadeye's comment to me was, "See. That's why I don't work out."), Jane hosted a panel of guest "experts" to discuss this heinous, cowardly act.

There were positive moments in the exchange, mostly provided by criminal profiler Pat Brown, who correctly categorized the shooter as a sociopath, NOT a psychopath. And Velez-Mitchell scored a correct answer when she categorized his attitude as "[A] victim mentality...Everybody's to blame but him. OK, he is not to blame."

But the rest? To quote my Jewish brethren, "Oy, vey!"

The following are excerpts from the transcript.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Apparently, he was using -- Jeanne, he was using 30-round ammo clips that were illegal before the assault weapons ban was lifted in 2004. And those ammo clips allow you to kill a lot of people very quickly, right?

Translation: 30-round clips - once illegal - make it "easier to kill people", so we should ban them again.

If this statement alone isn't worth of a WotW, I don't know what is! Bringing back the ill-conceived (and unconstitutional) Assault Weapons ban wouldn't have saved those people, you stupid cow!

[Dr. Judy] KURIANSKY: ... then guns are often that kind of a sexual acting out, because a gun is like a sex organ. And when men are extremely frustrating and frustrated, they can end up taking all that aggression out with a gun.

Translation: Guns are a substitute sex organ, and shooting them off relieves aggression just like an orgasm.

Again, a statement worthy of a WotW on it's own merits. This is quack pop psychology at it's worst.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Brad, you`re the defense attorney. Do these women who were injured and the families of the dead have a lawsuit, and if so, against whom?

[Attorney Bradford] COHEN: It`s definitely -- it`s something that they should consider. And it`s probably against L.A. Fitness for some sort of lack of security. He went there once before, and he was fully armed. I don`t know, in terms of what kind of security they have, if there is that kind of appropriate security that`s in place. But I`m sure, believe me, with civil attorneys around, there`s definitely going to be someone who`s going to be filing a civil lawsuit.

Translation: Can they sue? You're damn right! Let's start looking for deep pockets right now!

I thought my head was going to explode at this point. Are you kidding me? You're talking lawsuits? For WHAT?!?!? It's a gym, asshats! You don't have security at a gym! Nor should you! Memberships are expensive enough as it is! And the idea that the gym is responsible for a sociopath shooting up the place is absolute nonsense. This exchange alone is grounds for tort reform!

DAVID SCHWARTZ, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY: You know what the bottom line is, Jane? What are we going to do to prevent this in the future? You know, there needs -- we need to spend more money as a society on mental disease and defects. This is something very serious.

Translation: MORE GOVERNMENT SPENDING!!!

That's right. We're already blowing out unrepayable debt into the third and fourth generation of our grandchildren. Let's spend some more money on...what? What exactly are you going to do? Screen for sociopaths? Who will do it? The government? Oh, THAT'S not a recipe for persecuting political enemies of Der Staat or anything! Assclown!

SCHWARTZ: We need more -- the insurance companies also...

Translation: Make the insurance companies pay!

Not content with mere government spending, Mr. Schwartz wants to FORCE insurance companies to spend more money on...what? Again, the act of spending more money does not a solution make.

KURIANSKY: No question that in this -- in this whole time of health care...[crosstalk]...we need to pay more attention to mental health care here. And there`s another important issue that`s very psychological that has to do with bystanders. Because there have been real-life bystanders who stand by when people get murdered and don`t want to get involved. And now it`s turned to the Internet and the responsibility that people have to notice what people are blogging about. And who are they going to report to? That`s what we need to pay attention to now.

Translation: Anyone who suspected this act has to pay!

So...if someone read the rantings of this loser prior to him going on a rampage (which, it turns out, wouldn't have been possible, since he posted the entire "diary" just prior to the event), they are guilty, too? What is this, the USSR? We're supposed to rat out people based on rantings?

I've spent a lot of time around teenagers. They go off on rants where they say they're going to do this or going to do that. If you're not familiar with teenagers, you'd be alarmed. If you are familiar with teenagers, you'll shrug. Why? Because it's all bluster. There are exceptions to be sure, like the Columbine teenagers. And that begs the question: if you can't separate the bluster from real threats, and you're "required" to "report threats", how long will it be before every little childish threat becomes a crime?

DAVID SCHWARTZ, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY: Jane, it does take an intervention. I have had plenty of cases where there have been psychopaths who have had this intervention.

This guy went 49 years without killing anyone. There needs to be an intervention; it does take a village sometimes. And I guarantee you the writing was on the wall. If you sent Tom Ruskin out there to that gym to do an investigation, I guarantee you in five minutes he would find people that would come out and say that the writing was on the wall in this particular case.

Translation: It takes a village. Sing Kum Ba Ya everyone.

No further comment necessary.

Megapoints to criminal profiler Pat Brown for this scathing comeback to an insipid Velez-Mitchell comment.

PAT BROWN, CRIMINAL PROFILER: Well, I would agree with you Jane, if I believed that this was actually necessarily true.

But the part about getting help; again psychopaths do not seek help because they don`t think they need any because it`s everybody else`s fault. You cannot help them. They wont -- they will lie to their therapists and that won`t go anywhere.

What we need to do is work with children who are small. To teach them that they`re not entitled to everything that -- the selfishness that they`re being brought up with where they just get everything they want and think they can have everything.

No. You have to bring up children to realize that you have to earn things and that sometimes it takes time. You have to wait for things. And this guy apparently didn`t grow up with that, so he thinks that he should get what he wants and he`s is not willing to do the work.

In other words, he could probably get a lady in his life if he treated them nicely. If he stopped looking for a cheerleader type of 20-year-old instead of perhaps a nice 50-year-old librarian, a little overweight, who he was sweet to. He could have somebody in his life. But he has chosen not to do that.

Pat Brown, you've made a fan of me.

But Jane Velez-Mitchell? You're the Wiener of the Week.