End Times and Current Events
December 12, 2017, 05:41:27 pm
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Welcome To End Times and Current Events.
 
  Home Help Search Gallery Staff List Login Register  

Police Encounters - The Mind Of Law Enforcment

Shoutbox
November 24, 2017, 07:52:34 pm tennis shoe says: What happened to BA? He seems to have vanished.
November 14, 2017, 01:43:05 am Mark says:
October 17, 2017, 01:25:20 am Christian40 says: It is good to type Mark is here again!  Smiley
October 16, 2017, 03:28:18 am Christian40 says: anyone else thinking that time is accelerating now? it seems im doing days in shorter time now is time being affected in some way?
September 24, 2017, 10:45:16 pm Psalm 51:17 says: The specific rule pertaining to the national anthem is found on pages A62-63 of the league rulebook. It states: “The National Anthem must be played prior to every NFL game, and all players must be on the sideline for the National Anthem. “During the National Anthem, players on the field and bench area should stand at attention, face the flag, hold helmets in their left hand, and refrain from talking. The home team should ensure that the American flag is in good condition. It should be pointed out to players and coaches that we continue to be judged by the public in this area of respect for the flag and our country. Failure to be on the field by the start of the National Anthem may result in discipline, such as fines, suspensions, and/or the forfeiture of draft choice(s) for violations of the above, including first offenses.”
September 20, 2017, 04:32:32 am Christian40 says: "The most popular Hepatitis B vaccine is nothing short of a witch’s brew including aluminum, formaldehyde, yeast, amino acids, and soy. Aluminum is a known neurotoxin that destroys cellular metabolism and function. Hundreds of studies link to the ravaging effects of aluminum. The other proteins and formaldehyde serve to activate the immune system and open up the blood-brain barrier. This is NOT a good thing."
http://www.naturalnews.com/2017-08-11-new-fda-approved-hepatitis-b-vaccine-found-to-increase-heart-attack-risk-by-700.html
September 19, 2017, 03:59:21 am Christian40 says: bbc international did a video about there street preaching they are good witnesses
September 14, 2017, 08:06:04 am Psalm 51:17 says: bro Mark Hunter on YT has some good, edifying stuff too.
September 14, 2017, 04:31:26 am Christian40 says: i have thought that i'm reaping from past sins then my life has been impacted in ways from having non believers in my ancestry.
September 11, 2017, 06:59:33 am Psalm 51:17 says: The law of reaping and sowing. It's amazing how God's mercy and longsuffering has hovered over America so long. (ie, the infrastructure is very bad here b/c for many years, they were grossly underspent on. 1st Tim 6:10, the god of materialism has its roots firmly in the West) And remember once upon a time ago when shacking up b/w straight couples drew shock awe?

Exodus 20:5  Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me;
View Shout History
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Police Encounters - The Mind Of Law Enforcment  (Read 1700 times)
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 20966



View Profile
« Reply #30 on: September 05, 2014, 06:34:53 am »

What 3 forms of ID should they produce, and how do you know what a true legal warrant (certificate? document?) should look like?

Valid Search Warrant? 3 Things to Look For

Knock-knock. Police officers are at your door, armed with a search warrant. But is that search warrant legally valid?

The Fourth Amendment protects your privacy by generally requiring police to get a valid search warrant before they can conduct a search of your home (or other places where you have a reasonable expectation of privacy). The warrant must be filed in good faith by an officer and be based on reliable information showing probable cause to search your premises.

There are, however, a few additional warrant requirements that you'll want to look for if presented with a search warrant. A warrant must include:

    A magistrate's signature. After an officer applies for a warrant, a neutral and detached magistrate must issue the warrant and sign it. That means the magistrate must be impartial and outside of the "competitive enterprise" of law enforcement. For that reason, police officers and prosecutors generally can't serve as magistrates. State laws on magistrate qualifications vary widely; some states require that magistrates have an attorney's license, while others require only that magistrates be literate. If a proper magistrate never issued or signed the warrant, then the warrant (and the search) may not be valid.

    A description of the place to be searched. The warrant must specifically state the place to be searched. For most residences, a street address usually satisfies this requirement -- unless the warrant designates an apartment complex, hotel, or other multiple-unit building, in which case the warrant must describe the specific sub-unit to be searched. This may seem like a given, but little mistakes can lead to innocent persons being ambushed by police in their own homes, as allegedly happened in one notable case reported by SF Weekly.

    A description of the items to be seized. Finally, the warrant must specify "with particularity" which items are to be seized during the search. However, police may also seize contraband that isn't specified in the warrant (such as illicit drugs) if the contraband is in plain view of the officers performing the search.

So what if you challenge police over a questionable search warrant? While it may seem unfair, you can potentially be arrested for resisting a search -- though you can always file a claim afterwards alleging a violation of your rights. But keep in mind that police don't always need a warrant to conduct a search, so be sure to familiarize yourself with exceptions to the warrant requirement.

If you're still confused, or if you think you've been subjected to an unlawful search, you'll want to contact an experienced criminal defense lawyer right away.

http://blogs.findlaw.com/blotter/2013/07/valid-search-warrant-3-things-to-look-for.html

Quote
What 3 forms of ID should they produce,

Im thinking normal ID, Police ID, and a badge. If you are still in question you should actually call the police to see if they sent an officer out to your place. Also never stop for flashing lights on a lonely deserted road, always go to a lighted place with people.

P.S. cops are not your friends, they are a private military force employed by a city to collect monies anyway possible. Thugs with guns.
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 20966



View Profile
« Reply #31 on: November 10, 2014, 08:41:25 am »

Police Use Department Wish List When Deciding Which Assets to Seize

The seminars offered police officers some useful tips on seizing property from suspected criminals. Don’t bother with jewelry (too hard to dispose of) and computers (“everybody’s got one already”), the experts counseled. Do go after flat screen TVs, cash and cars. Especially nice cars.

In one seminar, captured on video in September, Harry S. Connelly Jr., the city attorney of Las Cruces, N.M., called them “little goodies.” And then Mr. Connelly described how officers in his jurisdiction could not wait to seize one man’s “exotic vehicle” outside a local bar.

“A guy drives up in a 2008 Mercedes, brand new,” he explained. “Just so beautiful, I mean, the cops were undercover and they were just like ‘Ahhhh.’ And he gets out and he’s just reeking of alcohol. And it’s like, ‘Oh, my goodness, we can hardly wait.’ ”

Mr. Connelly was talking about a practice known as civil asset forfeiture, which allows the government, without ever securing a conviction or even filing a criminal charge, to seize property suspected of having ties to crime. The practice, expanded during the war on drugs in the 1980s, has become a staple of law enforcement agencies because it helps finance their work. It is difficult to tell how much has been seized by state and local law enforcement, but under a Justice Department program, the value of assets seized has ballooned to $4.3 billion in the 2012 fiscal year from $407 million in 2001. Much of that money is shared with local police forces.


rest: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/10/us/police-use-department-wish-list-when-deciding-which-assets-to-seize.html?_r=3
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 20966



View Profile
« Reply #32 on: November 23, 2014, 02:57:58 pm »

Homeschooling family tasered, arrested after being accused of having a ‘messy’ house

A homeschooling family has filed a federal civil rights lawsuit after they say their home was illegally searched by the sheriff’s department.

hsldaThe Home School Legal Defense Association is aiding Laura and Jason Hagan. Their house was raided by Nodaway County Sheriff Darren White and Chief Sheriff’s Deputy David Glidden.

According to the HSLDA, “child protective services (CPS) caseworker had been inside the home several days earlier to investigate a report of a messy house and had returned for a follow-up visit.”

When they declined to let her in, the CPS worker summoned the sheriff.

They, too, sought to get in the house but they didn’t have a court order and Hagan declined their request.

Then, according to HSLDA:

As Jason turned to go back inside, Glidden sprayed him with pepper spray—first at the back of his head and then directly in his face. Glidden also sprayed Laura, who fell to the floor. Glidden then turned to Jason, who was still standing, and shot him in the back with his Taser. As Jason fell, Laura closed the front door. Glidden triggered the Taser three more times through the closed door.

Sheriff White joined Glidden on the front porch. Together they forced open the door and found Laura and Jason lying on the floor. Glidden sprayed Laura in the face a second time while White sprayed Jason and tried to turn him over onto his stomach.

Laura shouted to the officers that Jason had been taken to the emergency room earlier in the week for chest pains. White nevertheless continued attempting to turn Jason over and sprayed him a third time when he was unsuccessful. The officers also sprayed the Hagans’ dog with chemical agent and threatened to shoot it if it didn’t stop barking.

Finally, the officers handcuffed and arrested Laura and Jason and charged them with resisting arrest and child endangerment.

All of this took place in front of the Hagans’ three young children, who were then taken to the emergency room to be evaluated for exposure to pepper spray.

 This all took place on September 30, 2011.

Because of the warrantless search, the judge dismissed the case against the Hagans.

“The State has not offered sufficient, if indeed any, evidence of an exception that would justify a warrantless entry,” the judge wrote in his ruling, according to the home school group.

The HSLDA filed suit in federal court on November 14, 2014, alleging White and Glidden violated the Hagans’ Fourth Amendment rights.

“All too often, law enforcement officers and child-welfare workers act as if the Fourth Amendment does not apply to CPS investigations. They are wrong. The Fourth Amendment is a legal shield that protects people from exactly the kind of mistreatment the Hagans endured,” the organization writes.

http://eagnews.org/shock-homeschooling-family-tasered-arrested-after-being-accused-of-having-a-messy-house/
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 20966



View Profile
« Reply #33 on: December 08, 2014, 06:46:54 pm »

Wisconsin Police Ask Residents To Volunteer For House Gun Search
"Gun violence is as serious as the Ebola virus .."


In an effort to reduce gun violence, police in Beloit, Wisconsin, have kicked off a new initiative asking residents to volunteer to allow police to search their homes for guns.

"Gun violence is as serious as the Ebola virus is being represented in the media, and we should fight it using the tools that we've learned from our health providers,” said Police Chief Norm Jacobs.

Skeptical that people will actually call, Jacobs' hope is that the ones who do will allow the cops to find guns that residents did not even know were there.

“That's really what we're looking for,” he said. “Maybe we'll find a toy gun that's been altered by a youngster in the house — and we know the tragedies that can occur there on occasion.”

Seven people have been the victims of seven gun homicides in Beloit in 2014.

Jacobs said:

The problem with weapons in Beloit, as well as with many communities, is a very serious issue. People were looking for some leadership to do something and so we said, “Well, let's see if we can help people make themselves safer.” They can actually take responsibility for the violence that they are so scared of out in the neighborhood. Eight police, 16 police, 60 police driving around in your community are not going to do as much as a community that will do everything they can to try to prevent violence ... We try to find weapons in cars where these things occur, but these weapons are also in these persons' households, and there's some people in Beloit that don’t know that they are in their house and being used for crimes.

http://www.truthrevolt.org/news/wisconsin-police-ask-residents-volunteer-house-gun-search
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 20966



View Profile
« Reply #34 on: January 20, 2015, 08:22:56 am »

Georgia Cop Tickets Motorist For Eating McDonald's Double Quarter Pounder While Driving

A motorist was cited for “eating while driving” after a cop spotted him noshing on a McDonald’s Double Quarter Pounder with Cheese as he drove along a Georgia roadway.

Madison Turner, 36, was ticketed by a Cobb County policeman shortly after he left a McDonald’s drive-thru in Marietta on January 10. The ticket issued to Turner, a web developer from Alabama, alleges that the driver failed to exercise due care while behind the wheel.

In the ticket’s “remarks” section, Officer Delaney wrote, “Eating While Driving.”

Turner, who was pulled over around 3:40 PM, told TSG that the cop specifically told him that his 2009 BMW was not swerving in the roadway, nor was he driving above the speed limit.

Turner, seen above, contends that he was not distracted while enjoying his McDonald’s grub.

Turner, who intends to fight the ticket, is scheduled for a February 3 court appearance.

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/buster/driving-while-eating/eating-while-driving-charge-890761
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 20966



View Profile
« Reply #35 on: February 21, 2015, 04:43:05 pm »

No Charges for Cops Who Broke Into Innocent Man’s Home While He Slept and Shot Him 16 Times

Dustin Theoharis was asleep in his bed when a Department of Corrections officer, and King County Sherriff’s deputy rushed into his house on February 11, 2012. The two cops busted into his bedroom and began to unload their pistols on this unarmed man.

It is estimated that the two officers fired over 20 rounds of which 16 landed in Mr. Theoharis. According to Theoharis’s attorney, Erik Heipt, “Theoharis suffered “a broken shoulder, 2 broken arms, broken legs, he had a compression fracture to his spine, damage to his liver and spleen.”

To add insult to attempted murder, Theoharis was not the guy the police were after. According to King 5 News Seattle, the King County Sheriff’s deputy and Washington Department of Corrections officer who shot him were at the house to arrest a man who’d violated his parole.

Cole Harrison, who was at the house, described it this way:  “They (the officers) rushed into that room like they were going to get somebody.  I mean they rushed down there and then all of a sudden. Boom, boom, boom, boom.”

King County reached a settlement with Theoharis in 2013, agreeing to pay him $3 million. But Theoharis brought a federal lawsuit against the officers.

Officers claimed that Theoharis was reaching for a gun. Although Theoharis would have been entirely justified reaching for a gun, as his life was clearly in danger, he denies this claim.

According to the Seattle Times, in his federal suit, Theoharis alleges Rongen and Thompson fired at him after asking for identification.  Theoharis contends he reached to the floor for his wallet and was turning back with it when he was struck with about 16 shots in the face, arm, legs and abdomen.

After hearing the details of this case on Feb. 6, 2015 US District Judge Richard Jones ruled Theoharis’ excessive-force claim in his suit should be heard by a jury in a trial scheduled for June 1.

But this week all that would change.

In a travesty of justice, reacting to Jones’ ruling that raised questions about the deputy’s and officer’s version of events, prosecutors said in statement that insufficient evidence remains that the two acted with malice or bad faith in violation of state law.

After reviewing the conflicting reports of that fateful evening, it is clear that prosecutors are either covering for their boys in blue or haven’t looked at any of the evidence.

A review was requested by Charles Gaither, a civilian watchdog of the Sheriff’s Office in July of 2013. The review was conducted by a police accountability expert, Merrick Bobb.

The review showed that the officers refused to be interviewed on the scene, and no internal investigation was ordered. In fact, Deputy Aaron Thompson didn’t even issue a statement until a month later. Presumably after he was able to fabricate the events of that evening.

The report also suggests that the Sheriff’s Office did more to cover for the two officers than it did to investigate the shooting; citing an apparent conflict of interest right from the start.

    “Under KCSO policy, the first supervisor to arrive at the scene is obliged to assume control of the crime scene, direct involved personnel, and take on preliminary investigation responsibilities. (G.O. 6.02.015, subd. Clearly, given the sensitive issues that often accompany deadly force incidents, the neutrality of the supervisor needs to remain unquestioned. In this case, however, the first responding supervisor, KCSO Sergeant D, did not maintain the position of neutrality. Shortly after arriving on the scene, he switched roles from supervisor and neutral party to officer advocate.”

Also noted in the report is the severe incompetence or deliberate deficiency of the Sherriff’s Office when conducting the investigation.

    “Nonetheless, we were deeply troubled by serious deficiencies in the underlying investigation and the apparent unwillingness of KCSO to question its own officers about the use of deadly force once it appeared that they have not committed a crime. For example, the involved officers were not immediately interviewed about their actions, but instead were given over a month to provide a written account of the shooting. In addition, physical evidence was overlooked or moved, witness interviews were not thorough, and inconsistencies were not adequately addressed.”

Meanwhile, Dustin Theoharis has undergone 12 surgeries and will never be the same again. This is a travesty of justice. And sadly it’s just another example of how police can shield themselves from crimes they commit by being the enforcement cog in the rusty bureaucratic machine that is the state.

Read more at http://thefreethoughtproject.com/charges-cops-broke-innocent-mans-home-slept-shot-16-times/#p2SfJZLqmPSh8B9E.99
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 20966



View Profile
« Reply #36 on: March 14, 2015, 06:52:03 am »

Texas Bill Would Make Recording Police Illegal

 bill introduced in the Texas House of Representatives would make it illegal for private citizens to record police within 25 feet.

House Bill 2918, introduced by state Rep. Jason Villalba (R-Dallas) on Tuesday, would make the offense a misdemeanor. Citizens who are armed would not be permitted to record police activity within 100 feet of an officer, according to the Houston Chronicle.

Only representatives of radio or TV organizations that hold an FCC license, newspapers and magazines would have the right to record police.

The legislator disagreed with people on Twitter who said he's seeking to make all filming of cops illegal.

"My bill ... just asks filmers to stand back a little so as not to interfere with law enforcement," Villalba tweeted.

The bill would go against precedent set in 2011 by an appeals court, which found that citizens are allowed to record police, according to the ACLU.
Quick Poll
Should recording police within 25 feet be illegal?

Yes, recording interferes with law enforcement.

No, we need to have the right to record officers of the law.

Villalba's bill comes at a time of increased public scrutiny over the police killings of Michael Brown, Eric Garner and others. In Garner's case, a grand jury didn't indict the police officer who put Garner in a chokehold before his death, but another grand jury did indict the man who filmed the incident on weapons charges.

Last year, HuffPost reporter Ryan J. Reilly and another reporter were detained and assaulted while attempting to film a swarm of police officers filling up a McDonald's in Ferguson, Missouri, the town where Brown was killed. That filming, as well as other recordings of police interactions by the public, are currently legal.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/03/13/bill-recording-police-illegal_n_6861444.html
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Christian40
Moderators
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3835


View Profile
« Reply #37 on: April 02, 2015, 05:02:38 am »

Report Spam   Logged
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 20966



View Profile
« Reply #38 on: April 10, 2015, 09:12:19 am »

Sheriff Orders Immediate Internal Investigation Into Arrest Seen on "Disturbing" Video

The San Bernardino County Sheriff ordered an internal investigation Thursday into an arrest caught on NBC Los Angeles' NewsChopper4 video that showed deputies beating a suspect when they caught up to him following a wild desert chase on horseback.

Aerial footage showed the man falling off the horse he was suspected of stealing during the pursuit in San Bernardino County Thursday afternoon.

He then appeared to be stunned with a Taser by a sheriff's deputy and fall to the ground with his arms outstretched. Two deputies immediately descended on him and began punching him in the head and kneeing him in the groin, according to the footage.

The group surrounding the man grew to 11 sheriff's deputies.

video+rest: http://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/local/Man-on-Stolen-Horse-Stunned-by-Sheriffs-Deputies-in-IE-299250951.html
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 20966



View Profile
« Reply #39 on: April 18, 2015, 05:07:46 am »

Confiscating 'Criminals’' Property Is a Cop Racket

Until last week, police in all 50 states had the power to take your property—cash, cars, houses, or anything else—based purely on their assertion that the property was “guilty” of a crime.

This means that police and prosecutors can confiscate your stuff, sell it and pocket the money without even charging you with a crime, as long as they say that the property was connected in some way to illicit activity. The burden is then on the owner to hire lawyers to prove, not that they are innocent, which would be horrific enough, but that their property is.

This shakedown scheme is called civil forfeiture, and it’s how you get cases with titles like United States v. $124,700 and 1958 Plymouth Sedan v. Pennsylvania. It’s also how police departments line their pockets: In many cities and states, cash and property seized under civil forfeiture go directly back to the departments themselves, incentivizing more and more seizures.

But on Friday, New Mexico became the first state to abolish this reprehensible, unconstitutional practice. The legislature voted unanimously to replace civil forfeiture with criminal forfeiture, requiring the government to first prove beyond a reasonable doubt, to a jury of their peers, that people are actually guilty of a crime before taking their property.

Forfeiture laws started from a reasonable-sounding premise, that criminals should not be able to keep proceeds of their illegal activity, and that by “taking the profit out of crime,” cops could both discourage criminals as well as help to better equip law enforcement to catch them. The good guys get stronger as the bad guys get weaker, or so the theory went.

The problem was that by trying to take the profit out of crime, civil forfeiture laws put it in policing. Because of forfeiture, cops are more likely to pull over drug suspects on their way out of cities than on their way in: mules bring drugs in, but they carry cash out. Cops seize the cash, buy more cruisers, pull over more drivers, and seize more cash—even if they can’t prove cash had anything to do with drugs.

Citizens who want to fight it face big costs and enormous obstacles in a confusing and byzantine legal process where the slightest misstep means they lose their homes, money, or vehicles for good. Police and prosecutors often seize property on the thinnest pretext and then bully owners into settling with them for a fraction of its value—money that then goes to pay the salaries of the prosecutors who took it.

This vicious logic is how we got from the reasonable-sounding premise to the city attorney for Las Cruces, New Mexico, gleefully telling a room full of cops, “Think about it, this is a gold mine. A gold mine. You could seize a house, not a vehicle.… Just think what you could do as the legal department. We could be czars. We could own the city.”

Not anymore. At least not in one state.

New Mexico is small, but this move is significant because it shows the breakdown of a decades-old national political consensus between law enforcement bureaucracies and “law and order” politicians, a Bootlegger-and-Baptist coalition that helped create and sustain the civil forfeiture regime.

Combined with former Attorney General Eric Holder’s modest reform of a federal program that allowed police to do an end-run around state laws limiting forfeiture, there is hope that the moral cover for this deeply corrosive practice is being stripped away, and the public will finally see it for what it is: a racket.

http://www.newsweek.com/confiscating-criminals-property-cop-racket-323041
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 20966



View Profile
« Reply #40 on: April 21, 2015, 08:49:51 am »

District Attorney Says Encrypted Phones May Make You a Terrorist Because They “Cannot Be Accessed by Law Enforcement”

The attack on personal privacy continues.

From every angle big government politicians and officials are doing everything they can to take away your ability to be secure in your person or possessions. Under terrorism laws like the Patriot Act the government has given itself the right to wire tap your home or enter your personal premises without so much as a warrant so long as police or federal law enforcement officials can show that your activities may be related to terrorism. And as we know, being associated with a terrorist nowadays requires absolutely no concrete facts according to President Obama’s latest initiative. Simply being suspected of being suspected of terrorism (whatever that means) can now qualify you for a terror watchlist or further investigation.

As we reported last week, even the Third Amendment can now be violated so that law enforcement officials can forcibly occupy your home to gain a tactical advantage against criminal or terror suspects.

This is America in 2015 so it’s no surprise that Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance, Jr. wants total access to your personal effects. If it were up to Vance, you as an individual would have no right to secure your personal phone or computer data. As far as the DA is concerned, if you are encrypting your passwords, private messages, and personal notes you are denying nosy big government operatives the intrusive access they so desperately need to control you.

statist-vance

    We’ve heard some pretty outrageous ramblings from the government regarding Apple’s use of encryption in its mobile devices in the past—including a claim from the Department of Justice that some day it will result in the death of a child—but Manhattan district attorney Cyrus Vance, Jr. might have just dethroned the DOJ as king of hyperbole.

    Yesterday morning during a radio interview, Vance claimed that Apple’s encrypted software will make the iPhone the communication tool of choice for terrorists:

    “Apple has created a phone that is dark, that cannot be accessed by law enforcement even when a court has authorized us to look at its contents,” Vance warned on “The Cats Roundtable” show on WNYM/970 AM.

    “That’s going to be the terrorists’ communication device of choice.”

    Source: 9 to 5 Mac

What we know as a matter of fact is that smelting your own gold, making your finger into the shape of a gun, storing seven days worth of food, and homeschooling all qualify you for investigation under domestic terrorism guidelines.

Now, you can also be suspected of being suspected of terrorism for simply having your mobile phone locked and inaccessible to the prying eyes of government.

Slowly, but surely, all Constitutionally protected rights are being eroded by the likes of Cyrus Vance, Jr.

http://www.shtfplan.com/headline-news/district-attorney-says-encrypted-phones-may-make-you-a-terrorist-because-it-cannot-be-accessed-by-law-enforcement_04202015
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 20966



View Profile
« Reply #41 on: April 21, 2015, 06:58:11 pm »

Video Appears to Show U.S. Marshal Destroying an Onlooker's Cell Phone




The U.S. Marshals Service says it’s investigating a video taken this weekend in California that appears to show an agent rip a phone away from a woman who had been filming him before destroying it.

The agents were reportedly investigating alleged biker gang activity near the South Gate home where the video was recorded, when Beatriz Paez walked by. Via the LA Times:

    U.S. Marshals and local law enforcement officers had blocked off a stretch of San Juan Avenue and had eight to 10 people lying on their stomachs with their hands on their heads when Paez took out her Samsung cellphone and began recording, she said.

Standing a few feet away from them and filming, she can be heard repeating something about feeling unsafe and having a “right to be here.”

South Gate police confirmed the Marshals service was involved in the incident, and a Marshals spokesperson tells the Daily Dot that the man in the video appears to be an agent and that the incident is under investigation.

http://gawker.com/video-appears-to-show-u-s-marshal-destroying-an-onlook-1699298257
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 20966



View Profile
« Reply #42 on: May 09, 2015, 05:15:26 am »

DEA Steals $16,000 In Cash From Young Black Man, Because He Must Be A Drug Dealer

After scraping together enough money to produce a music video in Hollywood, 22-year-old Joseph Rivers set out last month on a train trip from Michigan to Los Angeles, hoping it was the start of something big.

Before he made it to California, however, Rivers fell victim to a legal form of government highway robbery.

Rivers changed trains at the Amtrak station in Albuquerque, New Mexico, on April 15, with bags containing his clothes, other possessions and an envelope filled with the $16,000 in cash he had raised with the help of his family, the Albuquerque Journal reports. Agents with the Drug Enforcement Administration got on after him and began looking for people who might be trafficking drugs.

Rivers said the agents questioned passengers at random, asking for their destination and reason for travel. When one of the agents got to Rivers, who was the only black person in his car, according to witnesses, the agent took the interrogation further, asking to search his bags. Rivers complied. The agent found the cash -- still in a bank envelope -- and decided to seize it on suspicion that it may be tied to narcotics. River pleaded with the agents, explaining his situation and even putting his mother on the phone to verify the story.

No luck.

“These officers took everything that I had worked so hard to save and even money that was given to me by family that believed in me,” Rivers told the Journal. “I told (the DEA agents) I had no money and no means to survive in Los Angeles if they took my money. They informed me that it was my responsibility to figure out how I was going to do that.”

Rivers, who has since returned to Michigan, fell victim to civil asset forfeiture, a legal tool that has been criticized as a violation of due process and a contradiction of the idea that criminal defendants are presumed innocent until proven guilty. Asset forfeiture allows police to seize property they suspect is related to criminal activity, without even charging its owner with a crime. The charges are filed against the property itself -- including cash, jewelry, cars and houses -- which can then be sold, with part of the proceeds flowing back to the department that made the seizure.

“We don’t have to prove that the person is guilty,” Sean Waite, the agent in charge at the DEA's Albuquerque's office, told the Journal. “It’s that the money is presumed to be guilty.”

The burden of proof lies with those whose property is taken, who often are forced to wage costly court battles to prove they came by their possessions legally.

That's where Michael Pancer, a San Diego attorney who now represents Rivers, comes in.

“What this is, is having your money stolen by a federal agent acting under the color of law,” Pancer told the Journal. “It’s a national epidemic. If my office got four to five cases just recently, and I’m just one attorney, you know this is happening thousands of times.”

Pancer is challenging the DEA asset forfeiture on Rivers' behalf, and wrote in a letter to Rep. John Conyers (D-Mich.), obtained by The Huffington Post, that Rivers' race "played a role in the incident." Conyers' office wouldn't comment on active litigation.

A February report by the Institute for Justice, a libertarian group that focuses on civil liberties, showed how widespread civil asset forfeiture has become. The federal program led to nearly $6.8 billion in seized cash and property from 2008 to 2013, the report says. A series in The Washington Post published last year showed that since 2001, $2.5 billion had been seized in cash alone -- all from people who were never charged with a crime and without a warrant being issued.

While law enforcement officials argue that civil asset forfeiture is an important weapon for fighting the drug trade, stories like Rivers' emerge regularly, suggesting that plenty of innocent people have become collateral damage.

Take the case of Matt Lee, 31, who in 2011 was pulled over by police in Nevada while on the last leg of a cross-country move from Michigan to California. In an ensuing K-9 search, police discovered $2,400 in cash, loaned to Lee by his father. Though officers had no proof of any connection to a crime -- Lee had never even been arrested before -- they seized the cash and left Lee with $151. Lee later hired a lawyer, and the county eventually agreed to return his money. By then, his legal fees had reached $1,269, leaving Lee with less than half of the money that had been taken from him.

Civil asset forfeiture isn't just being used to take down big-time drug dealers. A recent study by the Drug Policy Alliance on the practice in California found that the average value of a state forfeiture in 2013 was $5,145, adjusted to 1992 dollars. This number has changed little since 1992, when 94 percent of state forfeitures involved seizures of $5,000 or less.

A DEA list of recently seized property, released on Thursday, reflects this trend, listing seizures of a few hundred dollars alongside high-value items and cash.

Growing criticism of civil asset forfeiture has led to calls for change in some states. In New Mexico, where Rivers' money was seized, Gov. Susana Martinez (R) signed a set of reforms last month that will effectively end the most controversial use of the practice by police at state level. In Montana, a new law will scale back civil asset forfeiture by state and local police.

But these reforms don't affect the ability of federal agents to seize property under federal rules, meaning we will likely continue to see stories like Rivers'.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/05/07/dea-asset-forfeiture-joseph-rivers_n_7231744.html
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 20966



View Profile
« Reply #43 on: August 12, 2015, 11:44:27 am »

FBI admits flaws in hair analysis over decades

The Justice Department and FBI have formally acknowledged that nearly every examiner in an elite FBI forensic unit gave flawed testimony in almost all trials in which they offered evidence against criminal defendants over more than a two-decade period before 2000.

Of 28 examiners with the FBI Laboratory’s microscopic hair comparison unit, 26 overstated forensic matches in ways that favored prosecutors in more than 95 percent of the 268 trials reviewed so far, according to the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers (NACDL) and the Innocence Project, which are assisting the government with the country’s largest post-conviction review of questioned forensic evidence.

The cases include those of 32 defendants sentenced to death. Of those, 14 have been executed or died in prison, the groups said under an agreement with the government to release results after the review of the first 200 convictions.

The FBI errors alone do not mean there was not other evidence of a convict’s guilt. Defendants and federal and state prosecutors in 46 states and the District are being notified to determine whether there are grounds for appeals. Four defendants were previously exonerated.

The admissions mark a watershed in one of the country’s largest forensic scandals, highlighting the failure of the nation’s courts for decades to keep bogus scientific information from juries, legal analysts said. The question now, they said, is how state authorities and the courts will respond to findings that confirm long-suspected problems with subjective, pattern-based forensic techniques — like hair and bite-mark comparisons — that have contributed to wrongful convictions in more than one-quarter of 329 DNA-exoneration cases since 1989.



In a statement, the FBI and Justice Department vowed to continue to devote resources to address all cases and said they “are committed to ensuring that affected defendants are notified of past errors and that justice is done in every instance. The Department and the FBI are also committed to ensuring the accuracy of future hair analysis testimony, as well as the application of all disciplines of forensic science.”

Peter Neufeld, co-founder of the Innocence Project, commended the FBI and department for the collaboration but said, “The FBI’s three-decade use of microscopic hair analysis to incriminate defendants was a complete disaster.”

“We need an exhaustive investigation that looks at how the FBI, state governments that relied on examiners trained by the FBI and the courts allowed this to happen and why it wasn’t stopped much sooner,” Neufeld said.

Norman L. Reimer, the NACDL’s executive director, said, “Hopefully, this project establishes a precedent so that in future situations it will not take years to remediate the injustice.”

While unnamed federal officials previously acknowledged widespread problems, the FBI until now has withheld comment because findings might not be representative.

Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), a former prosecutor, called on the FBI and Justice Department to notify defendants in all 2,500 targeted cases involving an FBI hair match about the problem even if their case has not been completed, and to redouble efforts in the three-year-old review to retrieve information on each case.

“These findings are appalling and chilling in their indictment of our criminal justice system, not only for potentially innocent defendants who have been wrongly imprisoned and even executed, but for prosecutors who have relied on fabricated and false evidence despite their intentions to faithfully enforce the law,” Blumenthal said.



Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Charles E. Grassley (R-Iowa) and the panel’s ranking Democrat, Patrick J. Leahy (Vt.), urged the bureau to conduct “a root-cause analysis” to prevent future breakdowns.

“It is critical that the Bureau identify and address the systemic factors that allowed this far-reaching problem to occur and continue for more than a decade,” the lawmakers wrote FBI Director James B. Comey on March 27, as findings were being finalized.

The FBI is waiting to complete all reviews to assess causes but has acknowledged that hair examiners until 2012 lacked written standards defining scientifically appropriate and erroneous ways to explain results in court. The bureau expects this year to complete similar standards for testimony and lab reports for 19 forensic disciplines.

Federal authorities launched the investigation in 2012 after The Washington Post reported that flawed forensic hair matches might have led to the convictions of hundreds of potentially innocent people since at least the 1970s, typically for murder, **** and other violent crimes nationwide.

The review confirmed that FBI experts systematically testified to the near-certainty of “matches” of crime-scene hairs to defendants, backing their claims by citing incomplete or misleading statistics drawn from their case work.

In reality, there is no accepted research on how often hair from different people may appear the same. Since 2000, the lab has used visual hair comparison to rule out someone as a possible source of hair or in combination with more accurate DNA testing.

Warnings about the problem have been mounting. In 2002, the FBI reported that its own DNA testing found that examiners reported false hair matches more than 11 percent of the time. In the District, the only jurisdiction where defenders and prosecutors have re-investigated all FBI hair convictions, three of seven defendants whose trials included flawed FBI testimony have been exonerated through DNA testing since 2009, and courts have exonerated two more men. All five served 20 to 30 years in prison for **** or murder.

University of Virginia law professor Brandon L. Garrett said the results reveal a “mass disaster” inside the criminal justice system, one that it has been unable to self-correct because courts rely on outdated precedents admitting scientifically invalid testimony at trial and, under the legal doctrine of finality, make it difficult for convicts to challenge old evidence.

“The tools don’t exist to handle systematic errors in our criminal justice system,” Garrett said. “The FBI deserves every recognition for doing something really remarkable here. The problem is there may be few judges, prosecutors or defense lawyers who are able or willing to do anything about it.”

Federal authorities are offering new DNA testing in cases with errors, if sought by a judge or prosecutor, and agreeing to drop procedural objections to appeals in federal cases.

However, biological evidence in the cases often is lost or unavailable. Among states, only California and Texas specifically allow appeals when experts recant or scientific advances undermine forensic evidence at trial.

Defense attorneys say scientifically invalid forensic testimony should be considered as violations of due process, as courts have held with false or misleading testimony.

The FBI searched more than 21,000 federal and state requests to its hair comparison unit from 1972 through 1999, identifying for review roughly 2,500 cases where examiners declared hair matches.

Reviews of 342 defendants’ convictions were completed as of early March, the NACDL and Innocence Project reported. In addition to the 268 trials in which FBI hair evidence was used against defendants, the review found cases in which defendants pleaded guilty, FBI examiners did not testify, did not assert a match or gave exculpatory testimony.

When such cases are included, by the FBI’s count examiners made statements exceeding the limits of science in about 90 percent of testimonies, including 34 death-penalty cases.

The findings likely scratch the surface. The FBI said as of mid-April that reviews of about 350 trial testimonies and 900 lab reports are nearly complete, with about 1,200 cases remaining.

The bureau said it is difficult to check cases before 1985, when files were computerized. It has been unable to review 700 cases because police or prosecutors did not respond to requests for information.

Also, the same FBI examiners whose work is under review taught 500 to 1,000 state and local crime lab analysts to testify in the same ways.

Texas, New York and North Carolina authorities are reviewing their hair examiner cases, with ad hoc efforts underway in about 15 other states.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/crime/fbi-overstated-forensic-hair-matches-in-nearly-all-criminal-trials-for-decades/2015/04/18/39c8d8c6-e515-11e4-b510-962fcfabc310_story.html
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 20966



View Profile
« Reply #44 on: June 09, 2016, 01:33:11 pm »

Oklahoma Cops Unveil New Device Enabling Direct Seizure Of Bank Accounts, Credit Cards

We have covered the disgusting topic of civil asset forfeiture numerous times (most recently here), but the latest move by Oklahoma police is quite simply shocking.

As News9 reports,

    You may have heard of civil asset forfeiture.

    That's where police can seize your property and cash without first proving you committed a crime; without a warrant and without arresting you, as long as they suspect that your property is somehow tied to a crime.

     Now, the Oklahoma Highway Patrol has a device that also allows them to seize money in your bank account or on prepaid cards.

    It's called an ERAD, or Electronic Recovery and Access to Data machine, and state police began using 16 of them last month.

     Here's how it works. If a trooper suspects you may have money tied to some type of crime, the highway patrol can scan any cards you have and seize the money.

The local police chief explains... "it's not about taking money..."

    The one state that has gone complete anti-democratic is Oklahoma. It is wise not to travel in that state at all. Oklahoma should be on a no fly zone. Now Oklahoma police can outright just seize everything you have from debit cards to bank accounts on a traffic stop without any criminal charges being filed – just some policeman “thinks” and your life is over. With no money, you cannot hire a lawyer so they can now just rob everything you have on a whim.

     

    The Oklahoma Highway Patrol has introduced a device that also allows them to seize money in your bank account or on prepaid cards, which they call ERAD, or Electronic Recovery and Access to Data machine. State police began using 16 of theses last month and this is a state now where the police have become literally the highway robbers. This makes the traffic cops in Russia pulling you over for speeding and you just pay them and they go away as a far more civilized arrangement. Here, they can rob you of everything.Let’s say a state trooper “suspects” or just “thinks” you may have money tied to some type of crime – any crime. He can now scan any cards you have and seize the money in your wallet. He does not have to charge you with any crime. He just “thinks” you might be connected to anything he can imagine. There is no right to remain silent, for he is not charging you. He is after all your money because they are broke.

     

    Oklahoma Highway Patrol Lt. John Vincent said. “We’re gonna look for if there’s a difference in your story. If there’s someway that we can prove that you’re falsifying information to us about your business.” So all he has to do is “believe” you lied about anything and he has the right to take everything you have. They justify this claiming it is not about seizing money. Of course not. It is criminal prosecution but there is no crime. Forget innocent until proven guilty. That will not apply. They pretend the money committed the crime – not you.

     

    This is simply nullifying the Constitution. You have absolutely ZERO rights. He can rob you of everything and leave you with no money even for gas. The police have become the criminals. This is precisely how Rome fell. When they could not could not pay the army, they began sacking their own cities. This is exactly what the police are doing now and there is nobody to defend us against this new criminal organization.

     

    Just stay out of Oklahoma at all costs. If other states follow, you better migrate to another country and fast. One not based on common law (English countries). This will destroy the freedom to even travel as broke police are nothing more than highway criminals with guns.

As we detailed yesterday,

    As long as the current system of civil asset forfeiture remains intact, new federal guidelines or policy are unlikely to be effective, said Steven L. Kessler, a New York attorney who has defended a number of clients in high-profile forfeiture cases. He believes clear legislative action is needed to keep the government from compromising people’s property rights in the hunt for money.

     

    “When the government says they’re going to do that on their own, they’re going to make the change, everyone is very happy and we move on to the next story,” said Kessler. “Rarely does anything change, because we’re dealing with a guideline — we’re dealing with something that is within the full discretion of the government.”

     

    There are some rumblings in Congress for a legal overhaul.

     

    Last week, Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner (R-Wis.) and a bipartisan group of co-sponsors introduced a bill to rein in civil asset forfeiture. Among the most significant measures, the Deterring Undue Enforcement by Protecting Rights of Citizens from Excessive Searches and Seizures Act of 2016, or the DUE PROCESS Act, would shift the burden of proof from the property owner to the government, and raise the standard needed to validate a forfeiture. If passed, the new law would require the government to provide “clear and convincing” evidence that property was substantially connected to criminal activity — still below the “beyond a reasonable doubt” standard for criminal convictions.

This must pass!

And finally, as Liberty Blitzkrieg's Mike Krieger previously concluded:“

    "The way you would expect the criminal justice system to work if you were reading your high school civics textbook is that you’d expect the government first to investigate people, then to obtain an indictment if they think something wrong has happened, and then to obtain a conviction and then finally to punish them... But in many cases that has happened exactly backwards.”

This is not what freedom looks like.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-06-09/oklahoma-cops-unveil-new-device-enabling-direct-seizure-bank-accounts-credit-cards
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Psalm 51:17
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28357


View Profile
« Reply #45 on: July 22, 2016, 09:06:20 am »

Report Spam   Logged
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 20966



View Profile
« Reply #46 on: September 29, 2016, 06:44:11 pm »

Kansas Police: You Can't Pray in Your Own Home

According to attorneys representing a Louisburg, Kan., woman, police forced their way into her home, telling her the Constitution was "just a piece of paper" that "doesn't work here," before telling her she could not pray in her home.

All over a simple noise complaint about her radio being turned up too loudly.

According to attorneys for the First Liberty Institute, which are representing Mary Anne Sause, a Catholic former nurse, she was home late at night when the police came to her home. When they knocked at the door, they did not identify themselves as police, and with her front door's "peephole" inoperative, she did not open the door.

They returned later and identified themselves as police, then demanded to be let in to her apartment. As they berated her for not letting them in the first time, they refused to give a specific reason why they were there, as is required. When she showed them a copy of the Constitution and Bill of Rights given to her by her congressman, one of the officers mockingly said, "that's nothing, it's just a piece of paper—[it] doesn't work here."

The officers continued to act in a belligerent manner toward Sause, telling the terrified woman she should prepare to go to jail. She asked if she could pray beforehand, and while one of the officers granted her request, the other told her she could not pray in her own home.

"No American should ever be told that they cannot pray in their own home," First Liberty Institute Associate Counsel Stephanie Taub said. "The right to pray in the privacy of one's own home is clearly protected by the First Amendment."

According to the officers' version, they said her prayer was interfering with their ability to ask her questions—in other words, to continuing berating and harassing her—over the simple noise complaint. She was ultimately given a citation to appear over the violation, and not arrested as the officers had threatened.

"The police are supposed to make you feel safe, but I was terrified that night," she said. "It was one of the worst nights of my life."

When First Liberty attorneys took her case to federal court, the district court threw out the complaint entirely, denying Sause her day in court. Her attorneys have now filed a brief with the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals, seeking to have the case remanded back to the lower court with instructions to hear the case.

"As Ms. Sause explained in her complaint, two Louisburg police officers abused their power and violated her First Amendment rights by ordering her—under threat of arrest and without any legitimate law-enforcement justification—to stop praying in her own home," said attorney Bradley G. Hubbard, a litigation associate with Gibson Dunn, the local law firm assisting with the case. "We urge the Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit to reverse the district court's decision and allow Ms. Sause a meaningful day in court as she attempts to vindicate her constitutionally-protected religious liberty.

http://www.charismanews.com/politics/issues/60254-kansas-police-you-can-t-pray-in-your-own-home
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by EzPortal
Bookmark this site! | Upgrade This Forum
Free SMF Hosting - Create your own Forum

Powered by SMF | SMF © 2016, Simple Machines