Blue Collar Law Blog

What follows is a unique insight into the methods used to get information out of suspected terrorists in Iraq. I would explain it, but you have to read it to believe it. It involves a story of a tortured 15 year old kid and "The Monster" who seems to be seeking redemption. The Monster

The following link will lead you to the 84 page confession of a man by the name of Kevin Underwood. It is prefaced with a warning that you should heed. It is definitely not for the faint of heart. Read the Confession of a Cannibal

This gadget known as the "Professional Mini-tracker" will magnetically attach to any metal surface. i.e. Cars. It is also so small that it can go unnoticed in a cluttered environment.

It just seemed cool to me that now you can prove exactly where you were at a specific time. For that matter you track whoever is driving your car. Says it will tell you speed and such things that could be an asset in a auto accident. I am assuming that you aren't the offending party. LOL

Follow the above link and check it out. It is accurate to 2.5 meters.

Anyone who tells you that our prison system doesn't actually serve as a storehouse for those among us that are actually crazy is one of two things. He is either a liar or misinformed.

Now we have a way of looking into the brain that pinpoints specific maladies. I wonder if they will create more bed space for those who need it and fewer prison cells? Read this CNN aticle. If you know about the Criminal system, think of the implications. If you don't know about it, then learn.

. . . the more they stay the same. Contemplate what our history is and how it is told. This is an impressive re-examination of our history.

Sorry, to you few who read this blog for not posting more. I come across things to write about all the time such as the case where California Authorities made the police return 60 pounds of marijuana because it was legal to transport under their Medical Marijuana laws. I thought that was funny. But like many of you I work to feed my family in a hostile environment and luxuries, such as this, have to take a back seat. Moving on.

Now, when you watch the following clip you will be exposed to a story that goes a little like this. Someone who was not in trouble. Someone who was not in custody. Someone who had a job in Switzerland's banking economy. Someone who saved us honest Taxpayer's untold amounts of tax dollars, is being jailed for 40 months for failing to turn over information on one client that the U.S. already had some leads on.

He did turn over the key piece of information that forced the largest Swiss Bank in existence to turn over information on over 19,000 tax cheats. Let that number sink in a moment. That is almost twice the size of the population of my home town. As a result he stands to receive up to 30% of all the monies recovered. That amount is undetermined but is expected to be huge. Please note that his value was determined to be to have provided the information that forced a major Swiss bank to turn over account information, not the actual account information that he did turn over.

So, as a result of not transferring information on one client he receives 40 months in prison. Considering his contribution I would have given him probation if anything at all were I the prosecutor. But it poignantly points out why our Government simply can not be trusted. I mean, you may be a beneficiary of it's acts, but make no mistake, it is this fundamental distrust that resulted in the first eleven amendments.

Technology and social advancement may change a lot of things, but it appears human nature remains the same. Those who govern always view themselves superior to those they govern. They should recall that they do work for us. That is why it is so important to vote. That is why we need lawyers who will litigate for every right accorded us. That is why you need to watch this:


Watch CBS News Videos Online

Humor, at least I thought it was funny.

I have spoken on use of fMRI's to detect brain damage and their possibility of being used as a lie detector. Well, this Wired Magazine Article claims to report its first used in Court by the Defense in the sentencing phase of a murder trial. The guy still got the death penalty, but I couldn't resist saying "I told you so."

This reference is to an interesting news article that describes an interesting methodology being tested to detect liars. Now, I think it adds some interesting perspectives to case analysis and is probably a tool that can be utilized by anyone. Have a good read ABC News Article.

Well, at least we know that George Bush Jr. came by it honestly. Apparently in 2001 we allowed 2000 P.O.W.'s to be suffocated in cargo containers. That is against the law by the way. Read the material that you will find at this website created by the physicians that broke the story.

This is a very nice breakdown of the insanity defense. Check out this legal digest.

Have you ever wondered who watches the watchers. Take a look at TracDEA. They claim to be a non-partisan group of folks just keeping up with the drug war. Decide for yourself.

Look across the bottom of the page, or go to the home page, and you will see they track everything else as well!

I can not believe this shit. Does my language offend you? Well, good, because it is time to be offended. It is offensive that we, the people who owe the debts to the mortgage companies are going to be the one to bail them out.

It is offensive to me that we use words like Trillion and don't understand what the unit of measurement means. For example a trillion seconds is in excess of thirty THOUSAND years. Look it up on google for yourself.

But most offensive of all is the information that I just now read. THEY PAY OUT MORE IN BONUSES WITH OUR MONEY THAN THEY MAKE IN PROFITS.

Here is the CBS article. You know, it just gets under my skin like nothing else when the government steamrolls an individual. But, it makes me just as angry when the government serves a select few over the rest of us.

I will be interested to see how this story develops. I will definitely cast my future votes in light of how this is handled.

I thought I would add some entertainment to an otherwise depressing post:

Why You So Mean, Credit Crunch? In honor of the US budget deficit hitting $1 Trill for the first time in history recently. Turns out, it`s our fault.

Attorneys must be very careful what they say to the press about a case. Ethically it is impermissible to intentionally try to sway public opinion with the exception of very limited circumstances. However, I have seen prosecutors that released the criminal information to the press for publication. If necessary, your attorney can go to the press to correct inaccuracies in the oppositions statements. But only to a limited extent even then.

Just the same, it is always a good idea to make a fine impression. The man who gunned down the two young soldiers in Little Rock Arkansas has a fine attorney indeed. Hell, for a moment I forgot what a horrible horrible thing he had done in the name of God, or, more appropriately Allah.

Ferguson explains, "The family is obviously concerned for their son and are very saddened on what happened. He came to me and we discussed some of the situations, and at that point we felt like it was in the client's best interest to come over at that point."

KTHV has an awesome story that you can read or watch.

As you no doubt already know, DNA evidence is considered irrefutable if procedure/protocol is followed. And as a result many inmates have been exonerated. Primarily due to the work of the Innocence Project.

If you follow the link you will see the primary reasons that innocent people go to jail. It is revealing. I do find some comfort that bad attorneys are last on the list . . . I would also include those that violate the rule of Samuel Clemens, and represent themselves. Those who represent themselves Pro Se, make all kinds of mistakes.

I have to say that the story of the Liberian immigrant who was lured into the woodshed and raped by fellow Liberian immigrants is a very sad story. She was 8 and the attackers were aged 9 to 14 yrs in age. The country they come from is located on the Western coast of Africa. There, over 90% of the women have suffered from violent sexual encounters.

Liberian women have suffered under a government that has only recently outlawed rape . . . before that only gang-rape was outlawed. The act of sex was used in the warfare occurring in the country. e.g. wives raped in front of a husband.

Apparently that country has a different set of values. The 8 year old was disowned by her parents for her indiscretions. When I found this out my heart turned to stone. There was no empathy in my heart. If that father and mother were burning in the street, I wouldn't even look for a bucket of water.

That poor child. She truly knows what it means to have injury upon injury placed upon her tiny shoulders. The insult won't even be recognized by her for at least a couple years, you know, until the pain clears up.

Apparently this is business as usual in Liberia. We can do without that here. Either aspect of it. Especially when you consider the attendant trauma to rape, much less gang rape, much less gang rape followed by the loss of your family because they turn their back on you and walk the away.



Source Article: CNN report

If adults suffer from having their memories altered by the police and their actions; how much more easily could a child's mind be twisted. Oh well, This is a 60 minutes video that should be interesting if our into the law:


Watch CBS Videos Online

Also visit the NIJ website. There you will find government publications that address all angles of criminal investigation.

Enjoy!

This should add some insight into the run in w/ the Gates fellow:

http://weblog.lawadvocateonline.com/templates/default/admin/img/mime_unknown.pnghenry-gates-arrest-report-2009.pdf

Make no mistake, it doesn't just appear that the prosecution was in the wrong, where was the Defense attorney?:

These are just estimates, Don't Drink and Drive.

Aside from .08 blood alcohol level, impairment can be used to convict in Arkansas on DWI. For information on Field Sobriety Tests search this blog for information, enjoy:

Please complete the following items, then press calculate to obtain the BAC estimate

Male
or Female

Number of ...

12 oz beers
5 oz glasses of wine
1.5 oz measures of spririts

Over how many hours
Your weight in pounds

Estimated BAC

I had to share this with you. The criminally accused/comvicted loses touch with the "world" when behind bars. Extremely painful steps are taken by some just to stay in touch. Can you here me now?

I can vouch for the the veracity of the methodology employed in this story, but I can not vouch for the veracity of the particular story. Ouch!

DNA evidence has been used for quite some time, more than a couple of decades, to imprison and then to exonerate (check out the innocence project). I wonder if this article is a portent of things to come. Maybe you should be tested for the Gangsta Gene

Watch as these Iranian civilians rush to aid a student that has been gunned down, and then ask yourself, had you been on that street, where would you have stood after the shots had been fired:

How our food has been changed forever.

You know maybe Spitzer had it right, even if his hourly rates were a bit high. Never forget, you pay a price for every relationship you ever have.

Why people are dishonest is the subject of this video. It is also relevant to all aspects of litigation.

Here is a source of information to tap. There is even a widget to track the swine flu. Hey, it might be something that is actually useful from the government. There is also an FBI widget . . . I wonder what that is for? Well, this compilation of raw and compiled data is the result of Obama's Transparency in Government initiative.

Dig into the data at Data.gov

Remember, anything that is an official government document can come in to evidence if it is relevant.

Enjoy!

Sign up at the World News Connection where you can get a perspective on foreign news stories.

Follow the link to the Arkansas Sentencing Commission Website. It will help if your a young attorney, criminal defendant, or a relative. Enjoy.

Under our Democracy we have a Federal Government that is supreme to the individual States with the exceptions found within the Federal Constitution. The Constitution of the United States has evolved over time, in part at least, under the pressure of these competing positions.

A must read in regard to this issue is contained in this MSNBC article about Montana. I am floored.

The last time we had a confrontation over states rights the issue was succession. It was the civil war that took hundreds of thousands of lives, you should look at the potential for conflict as the potential for a very BIG conflict.

You have to check this facebook entry on Texas Seceding from our Federal Union. By the way, they are proposing the Seccession take place NOW . . .

I live in Arkansas. I guess the front lines will begin in Texarkana.

The Arkansas Crime Information Center contains a lot of good information for parents and victims. Attorneys too.

I know, it is overly dramatic. But the fact is that I am still bitter about the fact that the U.S. Government gave money to the folks who created a problem and didn't give it to the individual taxpayers and allow them to reshape the market.

Well, it pisses me off even more when they allow insider trading with our money. Never mind the fact that the S.O.B.s are taking our money and then kicking us out on the street. I don't mean to imply that I have any problems financially. I don't. But I do see it every day. The poverty is overwhelming. And we have to tolerate THIS?

OMG! The Supremes in a 5-4 split have ruled that if you are in custody for a traffic violation, then the police have to get a warrant to search the vehicle. This is a win for individual rights and a major blow to those who seek to intrude our personal spaces. Read and understand the syllabus of Arizona v. Gant. For a more technical analysis read the whole opinion.

In Arkansas it seems that this prohibition is made more complete with the detention analysis contained in Bedsole v. Arkansas. In Arkansas the police can detain you for 15 minutes without arresting you or in the absence of good cause. Bedsole goes further than that. Read it, it is very simple to understand.

This is a mighty combination. If your in Arkansas and the subject of a vehicle search, these two cases can change your life.

Watch this video and think about it. If this is acceptable, then the Constitution is dead.



Here is more of the same only it is happening:

Read this Wired entry that is slightly reminiscent of George Orwell's 1984 -- Wired.com's Article. It is clear that the best hackers work for the government. Well, if not the best, the most powerful.

What I find particularly disturbing is that this information is from a time that is early in Bush Jr.'s administration. Imagine what happened once the "patriot" Act was in full glory. . .

My version of the Criminal Attorney's rant:

1. If I tell you that your not smart enough to be in the Criminals Union, it is a joke. The truth is your just too stupid to be a criminal.

2. No "good" criminals get caught before being elected to office or holding a position of trust for a corporation/church.

3. Don't wear incriminating clothing to Court. i.e. shirt with flames all over it if your accused of arson.

4. It is not you that I am laughing at, it is your situation. Actually, it probably is you, but having me in a good humor is probably worth ignoring the insult. An insult, I might point out, that pales in comparison to the insult that led you to me in the first place.

5. If I tell you to do something, I mean for you to really do it. I also mean for you to do it BEFORE trial.

6. NO ONE believes that you are so stupid that you can not understand to be in Court when told to be there face to face by the Judge in Court. You can't blame me or your mother.

7. Saying "I just don't understand what is going on, I have never been charged with a crime before, your the lawyer." Leads me to believe that your either full of bullshit, a sociopath, a liar, mentally impaired, or, worst of all -- a bullshit lying retarded sociopath. But hey, maybe you never thought of the consequences of your actions, ever, . . .

8. Speaking to the Judge from the trial table can only mean horrible things are about to happen to you. Keep your mouth shut. If you interrupt your attorney, your, more than likely, going to AT LEAST spend the night in jail.

9. Emotions do not belong in Court, repress them. Passion is only sometimes helpful and then most often by an attorney employing it in Voir Dire/opening/closing.

10. Don't talk to your attorney while someone is testifying. He/she needs to hear what the witness is saying. Write things on a notepad to bring to your attorney's attention.

11. No, you won't get probation for a crime of violence that results in injury. At least, that won't be the first offer.

12. You never talk to witnesses, if you break this rule record the conversation to defend against claims by the State of witness tampering.

13. If you take the stand in the sentencing phase (as opposed to the guilt phase) and you apologize to the victim. Don't say "I'm sorry" and make it sound like "F'ck You!". The jury will not like that.

14. Don't wink, flirt, threaten, cajole, or otherwise interact with the alleged victim. It is important to remember that a prosecutor will not make an offer that he hasn't cleared with the victim.

That is it for now. I may be editing this one for a while.

You may ask yourself, what does this movie hold for the law aficionado? Well, if your asking yourself that question you either saw it or you didn't. And if you saw it, you got it or you didn't. There is nothing I can add. Watch this Cut, I promise, it is the deepest . . .

It only takes one deletion from your computer, assuming the file is deleted from the trash bin, to destroy information past recovery. Read this Legal Technology Article from Lawyer.com.

The Arkansas State Police are supposed to protect us. Indeed they do a very good job in this State. Well, one area they have recently had a problem with is internal security. They lost information on the background checks for ordinary citizens, not criminals, but all of us. To see if your information was released check this .pdf published by the Arkansas State Police. It has the low down skippy on whether your information was "lost".

Watch CBS Videos Online

You can probably find commentary by me and some resources on eyewitness testimony by using the search function on this blog. But, I was really surprised by this CBS news article. If you will notice, it is so easy for police to influence the eyewitness identification process. I have had cases where the police actually took the suspect back to the scene of the crime in the back of a patrol car and then conducted the "lineup".

In any event, it is important to know two things about eyewitness identification testimony

1. It is highly persuasive.
2. It is highly unreliable under certain circumstances.

I have started integrating maps and other graphics in my presentations. I just found this resource page for maps that detail Camden Arkansas. Well, you know I am not sharing this with you because I think you want to know more about Camden . . . look at all the available online resources. I would go on about how this can be utilized to convince a jury one way or another, but I am checking out all of those resources!!

The Pew report released information on the state of the prison systems in America. I have provided the fact sheet for Arkansas here. The rest of the report has some fascinating information. It begs the question of whether we have more criminals, more crimes, or just more imprisonment. Perhaps it is a combination of all three. It is something to think about.

Well, almost everything. Check out these websites for detailed information.

The international association for identification and the SWGFAST organization.

The Government can come to where you are, take you away, and hold you if they think your fingerprint was at a crime. Now, I want you to think about this. Fingerprinting has been a mainstay of the legal system for over a hundred years. It has been testified to in court by the FBI as being virtually infallible. It is routinely accepted into Court as evidence of "individualization". Individualization is the linking of a crime to a person. Basically, your it, bagged and tagged.

I could support my previous statements with citation, but I am pretty sure no one reads this anyway. ha ha

The story of Brandon Mayfield is scary. That is the only way to put it.

The .pdf REDACTED FBI admission of failure of fingerprinting. Read this and think about it.

Here is a manual on Crime Scene Investigation. It may be important to know how it is done right so you can know when it is done wrong. It was produced by a task force from the National Institute of Justice.

Here is a link to national standardized DWI training manuals and other materials. This should be helpful in ways that I am not even going to mention.

Read this New York Times article. Basically it identifies DNA evidence as the only reliable source of forensic information. So much for CSI.

Check out this story where a couple of "judges" took millions to run juveniles through a jail system for youths in return for millions in kickbacks. The story was broken on MSNBC I believe. Anyway, it is important to note that corruption on a large scale exists in the judicial systems around this nation, sometimes on a massive scale. Luckily, with the resources we have today, it is possible to fight this type of tyranny. What is incredible is how long this was allowed to go on. You can not just blame the judges either, there has to be some responsibility borne by the attorneys who allowed it to exist.

The story of STUFF.

I found an interesting web site. Well, it is interesting to me. Check out the information on Experts. Then check out the rest of the website. Lots of informative articles for the laypersons and young attorneys as well.

As a General Practitioner with a focus on Criminal Law I see the results of gun violence on a regular basis. I also see weapons serving those who use them appropriately.

You may rest assured that I believe weapons should be kept out of the hands of those who use them to commit crime. I feel just as strongly that weapons must be available to those who know how to use them so that they may protect their family and property from loss by the first group. The reason why this is necessary is human nature. Human nature dictates that a certain portion of our population will not only be breaking the laws we have made, but doing so without regard to the value of human life. Turning the other cheek will often times result in the death of a loved one. To me that is unacceptable. Any serious threat of harm to my family would be met with tools that I have been trained to maintain and use. My father taught me how to use weapons at the age of eight, it was a way of life.

What mystifies me are those individuals that keep large caches of weapons. I mean, I know you need particular weapons for different types of work. Close in, long range, need to penetrate, need to avoid penetration, and many other factors can dictate what weapon is used. But some guys have mini-guns. C'mon. Who, besides a well regulated militia, needs to fire over three thousand rounds a minute. I mean, it is fun, but I can not imagine it being necessary. And that begs the question. What are they thinking?

Watch this video for a fair and balanced perspective from a quality, down to earth, news organization. I was particularly impressed with the reporting from Current News

No matter where you stand, you should always fully understand an issue.

Read the story of Thomas M. Tamm. We should all have the courage that he has shown.

I read an article today in the Scientific American. It was on memory, which, if you read this blog, you know is crucial in every aspect of a trial. Nothing is more important than the recall of an eye witness. Nothing more damning than an in Court identification. The juror who can not recall the evidence is not worth having. The investigator who can not recall and relate facts is useless as tits on a boar hog.

Read this article and you will find that scientists have gained insight in how to erase only certain memories.

Columbia received 5 Billion in aid from the U.S.. I am glad to hear that it improved the lives of Colombians and increased their personal security. When your surrounded by an army and your spraying pesticide all over the country, life has to be good right? I mean the kidnappings and murders are down in Colombia as a result. the army was increased from 200k members to 400k something. Five billion improved the lives of the family members of the soldiers. I think that is a safe assumption. All of this money was spent from 2000-2006. It was in a limited geographical area, it was focused. It was the best that Five Billion could buy . . . I mean there is no reason to assume that we did it half-assed. Right? Well, production of cocaine rose by 15%. Sure there is a silver lining. It was nice to help the internal security of that nation. But that is not what we went there to do. We went there to eradicate the production of cocaine. We failed. Horribly. Read the article at CBS News.

. . . is still a thief. I can't recall where that came from. But, I believe it to be true. In this instance our government is giving money to banking institutions that are paying dividends, employee bonsues, and proceeding with other bank acquisitions. Now tell me. Should the banks be rewarded considering the lending practices that got us in this mess? Should their employees receive bonuses that could go to help feed the poor in our own country? And, who should be allowed to purchase more banks when they have to borrow government money to run their own? Hell if I know, but I feel like someone just lifted my wallet . . .

Body odor is as distinctive as a fingerprint. Scientific American's article seems to indicate that your smell can be used to catch criminals. So, if this does become possible, you'd probably be wise to be extra careful where you fart.

It has been discovered that teen pregnancies are linked to Sexy T.V. Shows. Later on, they discovered that an erect penis is somehow involved in the process. C'mon, the adults of tomorrow, the children of today, are shaped by their stimulus -- what they watching. You should control whatever your child experiences. Not just T.V. Shows, but be aware of teachers in trusted position. Those with whom you leave them in the care of. And be most aware of your own behavior.

For your enjoyment, I give to you the candidate for Rat Bastard of the Year Award:



Of course, she has mental problems . . . the Ratbastard is whoever talked her into it.

Why, oh why, didn't this happen to me:

I moved my office down to the Old Post Office at 901 Main Street here in Arkadelphia. Edit: I hate moving.

Well, I knew it was coming, the Brain Scans have arrived:

I have to comment on the following case. If for no other reason than to bring it to the attention of others so that they can protect their children. You never leave your child somewhere and fail to conduct a debriefing following their stay with anyone. When I say "anyone" I mean, even if it is your mother or your father. Just because you have good sense (by the way, I seem to recall reading somewhere is that there is a very good statistical probability that you as a parent are bound to have your head stuck up your ass on a regular basis) doesn't mean that your 75 year old mother and father have perfect judgment in their associations with other people.

This case involves two men. They lived together. Together they gathered "42 80-gigabyte computers filled with child pornography -- enough they said to fill nearly 103,000 paperback books with illegal material." If only it had stopped there. It seems that this duo had a proclivity for children. Not just any children, no, no, no. They liked boys around the age of 5. If you follow the link to the full story, be sure and look at the related articles at the bottom of the page. You can only know your enemy by studying them. Make no mistake about it, people like this are the enemies of parents.

* Story on duo of pedophiles and another story which give more information and their faces.

Two disturbing things occur to me:

1. Someone had to provide access for them to get at the very young children.
2. Whoever gave them access to these kids did so at a time when they had a prior history of child abuse.

You can find awesome information about locating sex offenders in your area at the National Sex Offender Registry. To get the latest information just Google "How to find sex offenders in your area". Go ahead and do that, add the name of your location to that search, you might be surprised what you find.

Here is the information for Arkadelphia Arkansas

Today I give to you Wishorne Turner v. State of Arkansas. In this case the Arkansas Court of appeals determined that a fingerprint alone on a mobile object and not corroborating evidence is not strong enough to convict even though the Defendant lived nowhere near where the car was stolen or found. I would not be surprised if this case is overturned, but it is an excellent analysis of the law in respect to convictions based upon circumstantial evidence.

Edit:

New techniques may make a single fingerprint enough to convict standing alone, watch this clip, amazing, simply amazing:

Caylee's mom, Casey Anthony, has been indicted for her murder. If you don't know who Caylee is, then you have my admiration. It is a sensationalized story that will ensure that only the appearance of justice will be maintained at any trial, regardless of any potential venue in which it is tried.

The prosecution is bragging about new technology that will be used to convict her in the absence of a body. In fact, the authorities are going to use "cutting edge" technology such as air sniffers that detect substances that are ordinarily released by decaying bodies. Cutting edge means that new forensic science is going to enter mainstream criminal litigation. For an instance of the effects of this when everything goes horribly wrong search for "bite marks" on this site. DNA is an example of where it goes right. At least in my opinion in its current form. (See my article about possible future changes in DNA evidence, just do a search on this site for DNA)

In any event, circumstantial evidence has been used to convict people for murder for a long time. In Arkansas, in order to convict on circumstantial evidence alone it must be of such strength as to rule out any other reasonable explanation. That is a hell of a lot of wiggle room for the Defense. I assume that is why the prosecution needs to inject untested, untried, and potentially untrue testimony based upon the cutting edge of science. Read the article linked above. It gives an excellent analysis of the problem.

Have you ever wondered how the NSA spies on American Citizens at home and abroad. Perhaps this Wired Magazine article. Now, more than ever our individual rights must be guarded, just as vigorously as our safety and security.

In my world, your word is your bond. Business is business and it is never personal. If you hire me to do a job I could give a shit about being warm and cuddly. Of course, finesse and professional courtesy is always the starting point.

Litigation, it should never be forgotten, is societies substitute for the shedding of blood. Never mind the death penalty . . . it is thoughtful institutionalized murder. Which, of course makes it o.k.

There is never compromise of a clients right to achieve their goals. Reality may cause you to change those goals. But even the vilest among us deserves a tenacious, intelligent, hard fought defense/prosecution. Those of us who enter the ring with one wit less than the utter destruction of their opponents case would not make a scab on a trial lawyers ass.

Now, that is not to say you should fabricate information in a defense, or hide information in a prosecution. You may rest assured there are attorneys who do these things. I count myself fortunate not to be among their kind. But one level of effort less than your very best can only be classified as an unfortunate attempt at playing a game with the lives of human beings. No, only your best will ever do. And, really, when entering a trial with all the professional courtesy I can muster, when I look into my opponents eyes I try to communicate both the respect I think he/she deserves and the unmitigated fact that I am the Son of a Bitch that came to trial to do the best I can to kick their ass.

And, really, that is why you should hire me to defend you case.

Bill Oreilly is a prick. There are no if, and, or buts to it. Well, his alligator mouth has gotten his tweety-bird ass in trouble. Apparently he has incurred the wrath of some hackers, and seems to be trying to pick a fight with wikileaks as well. Which is generally not a good idea. Oh well, please enjoy the hacking of bill.

This is a good bit of information on Blood Spatter Analysis.

Former prosecutor blasts the government's trials at Gitmo -- Read the Article for your edification.

Man goes in to the doctor for a circumcision at the age of 61. When he woke up he was short a PENIS.

There is a line I don't like any salesman to cross and that is my personal space. I don't appreciate it when anyone tries to substitute there reasoning for mine. Well, two former employees of the credit card company MBMA have revealed that they coaxed debtors into using up their credit. They even admit to talking them into maxxing out their credit cards for cash advances to make a home purchase . . . which is illegal. Oh well, read this CNN Money Article on their practices. If you have been treated like what they describe in the article, you need to let your attorney know.

The only time that I can recall that a regular army unit was deployed on American Soil was the Little Rock Nine incident in 1957 when Eisenhower sent the 101st Airborne to Little Rock Arkansas to enforce the ruling in Brown v. Board of Education handed down by the United States Supreme Court in 1954.

It will be military policy to maintain a federal force on United States Soil to put down popular insurrection . . . and, I assume, protesters and the like. Article at Democracy Now is where I got my information.

Is this a hoax? I would appreciate being told that this is bullshit ASAP please, or I am gonna have to vote for Obama . . . Damn.

Really, given Bush's disregard for human rights I feel very uneasy about this.

Here is confirmation! Read all about it in the Army Times. I understand the need to have a rapid response force to national emergencies, but when did it get so twisted up that it was the U.S. military. I thought that was supposed to be our State and National Police agencies and the Red Cross! I do have to say, even with the humanitarian spin on it, I don't like it much at all.

I had posted earlier stories on this, but you can read the criminal indictment at thesmokinggun.com -- U.S. v. Lori Drew

In the world of complex criminal litigation, every word counts. For your consideration I present the following Decision from the Arkansas State Supreme Court. In this Short opinion you see the Court recognize the existence of inflammatory material and then, through an artifice of logic, ignore it . . . Derek Sales v. Arkansas. The argument was not preserved because the Judge didn't make a ruling. As a trial attorney you must be sure to force a ruling if necessary on each and every objection that you make.

Now, I am not saying that 'ole Derek doesn't deserve to die. But I do believe that the issue of the inflammatory material should be addressed in each and every case where a life is forfeit. My two cents.

The Arkansas Supreme Court has recently been recognized as second in the Nation for it's consistency and quality.

Here is a worthwhile use of fourteen minutes of your time. The following is a interview of the former CIA operative. Although it has a bit of a promotional feel about it, it adds quite a bit of insight into the story:


Watch CBS Videos Online

For the majority of my life, and until quite recently, I always had a positive relationship with biscuits. Indeed, I really enjoy my breakfast.

Today, the word Biscuit takes on a whole new meaning in respect to interrogations as they relate to the war on terror:

At the center of the debate are the military’s behavioral science consultation teams, informally known as biscuits, made up of psychologists and others who assist in interrogations. Little is known about these units, including the number of psychologists who take part. Neither the military nor the team members have disclosed many details.

August 15, 2008 N.Y. Times Article. The debate referred to in the quote is between segments of the American Psychological Association on whether or not they should participate in the biscuit teams. Here is an interesting article on Biscuits written in 2005 in The Nation.

Psychological techniques have been used for purposes of interrogation for years. And waging psychological warfare has been utilized throughout history. But I have never considered the evolution of interrogation teams. Apparently there are specialized groups of professionals from the healing art of psychology that assist in determining the "tempo" of the interrogation. Nor does this happen in a vacuum, this is occurring under the Bush administration with all of it's problems relating to interrogation.

I wonder if these professionals go back to private practice and listen to common everyday problems. Will they start the new age fad of waterboarding as a treatment for depression? I am certain that I would no longer be concerned with the smaller problems after surviving the sense of impending drowning.

Well, I really think that I am going to skip the biscuits this morning . . .

I know that I have often left the impression that I have been less than pleased with many of the decisions/actions of our Supreme Court. But, I have to take my hat off to them with the issuance of Administrative Order No. 19.

The ability to remove sensitive information from the Court file, and public view, was achieved with the modification of Arkansas Rule of Civil Procedure 5 so that most discovery which is primarily what contains sensitive information no longer had to be placed in the Court file. Requests for Admission are still filed with the Court and will have to be redacted under the Admin. Ord. No. 10 and Revised ARCP No. 5. There is also a requirement that an original/copy be filed under seal without any redaction.

These changes should be a reasonable obstacle to people who scour Court files for private information so that they can then sell it for a profit.

I love my mom. I am certain that there are things that have happened in her life that I will never know. I would like to keep it that way.

Today I give to you a story of one son that discovered that his parents were making video's such as names as Buddy and Lucky.

My question is, Do they have to really register as sex offenders? I mean we victimize nature on a daily basis . . .

Speaking of victimization, Is it a crime to victimize a a hammer and a Couch?

You have to love The Smoking Gun website.

The church of scientology has, as our origins coming from aliens. In the transcript from 1988 the scientology attorney is trying to keep this information out of Court as a Trade Secret. They failed. Now, this document has been reportedly suppressed when posted on the internet. I have linked you to Scientology vs. Keith Henson. Those guys from that "church" use english, but they don't speak it. You will see what I mean when the transcript talks about the contents of certain document. Enjoy!

Edit: I found this wiki on Kieth Henson. It helps put things in perspective.

When I saw this, I immediately knew that I had to post on it. I just gained a whole new level of respect for that Judge on People's Court:


http://view.break.com/546551 - Watch more free videos

When I was stumped or surprised as a child I recall hearing and using the phrase "I'll be a monkey's uncle." I don't hear it at all today, and hadn't thought of the phrase until I recently read about the invocation of Executive Privilege by the Bush administration. Presidents use this privilege from time to time to protect sensitive information.

I have provided a link to a very nice summation of U.S. v. Nixon. To quote the article "he Court held that neither the doctrine of separation of powers, nor the generalized need for confidentiality of high-level communications, without more, can sustain an absolute, unqualified, presidential privilege."

Even this should be simple enough to grasp for our President. But in this MSNBC report Bush is claiming a privilege concerning the leak of information on Valerie Plame. Now, I could understand not releasing information on any operations she was involved in. The information sought doesn't involve any spy operation. The information that is being sought is about who told what and when. I mean, is there anyone that can read that doesn't know that Plame was a CIA operative? It would be important for the source of that information to be known. Especially if it came from our President's men. What we need is accountability for an act that, to this point, most people associated with terrorists and other enemies of our Government.

Take a closer look at these issues and see what you think -- I think he is seeking to make a monkey's uncle of us all.

I have found a 2006 pdf file that details the implementation of the Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments of 1988. This is the method that the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) is using to shut down the Arkansas Department of Corrections from drug testing. Read it here.

I hope this inspires you as much as it did me. Actually this guy sounds like some clients I have heard tell of.

Well, someone is going to get fired over this:

A federal agency has ordered Arkansas to stop testing its 49, 000 probationers and parolees for drugs, saying the state’s Department of Community Correction lacks the proper certification.

The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services says the tests require certification under the Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments of 1988, a law that sets out standards for tests that diagnose illnesses or assess a patient’s health.

Arkansas Democrat article

Now, drug testing is an integral part of not only parole and probation, but it is crucial for the drug courts. What this means is that no one can get violated on probation, parole, or drug court for a drug test done by anyone associated with the Department of Community Correction. In fact, if an individual for DCC does conduct a test after this Friday, it will be a criminal violation. Hopefully Arkansas can comply with the waiver and certification requirements before the system enters total chaos.

Understanding people is essential to selecting juries. Two people can look at the same thing and not agree on what it is. This is due to the filter we each place over the facts that we are able to perceive. And, no matter what, each filter applied is egocentric. The most interesting and important thing to each of us is ourselves. If you don't believe me just ask Dale Carnegie.

When we communicate with others we MUST consider their point of view towards the facts that we present. Recognizing in others the common values such as a sense of fairness, the ability to reason, and independence is important when communicating. You must consider their opinions that are rooted in the society that they are a part of. By way of example, you would address a jury that is from New York with its cosmopolitan population much differently than you would a jury in Mena Arkansas, which is a tad less cosmopolitan . . .

I once faced a man that I knew could kill me as easily as I could open a door, except for the fact that I was locked in with him. Unfortunately his personality was less than pleasant. I have no problem admitting that at the moment when we were left alone together I felt my stomach hit the floor. It did nothing to help the situation that I was being paid by a government entity. Most hardened criminals hate public defenders second only to prosecutors. It doesn't matter if you are working for the Federal Government or the State. And my client was of that ilk.

Well, the conversation was rather tense until I understood his point of view. I was able to identify what was important to him and why. I was able to empathize with him. And, when the time came that we disagreed on the course of action, he respected my opinion. At that moment, without really knowing it, I gained insight into the importance of other peoples perceptions.

There are times when one is justified in the commission of a criminal act. Yes it is true and I have an example of it. Seems that Kimberly Ann Cole found the father of her child smoking crack in the bathroom of their home. Apparently she ripped off the commode seat and started beating the moron with it. I get the picture of Samson beating the Philistines with the jawbone of an ass. And, indeed I find myself rooting for Kim.

You see, there is a thing in the law called constructive possession. In other words, if the police came in to the apartment they could charge her with a crime for possession of her boyfriend's crack. Where do you suppose her child is going to go once she is in jail? Chances are that some form of Child protective services would take the child into their immediate care.

It might be hard to imagine a prosecutor that would do this to a mother. Try harder. They send pregnant women to jail all the time. They have the babies. They rip them out of the mother's arms shortly thereafter. I'm sorry, did I say rip. That is too harsh. They take the child and deposit it w/ the father if he is married to the mom or to child protective services and farm them out to foster homes. Homes that make money off of keeping the children.

Some prosecutors have compassion, a large portion of them are Bush wannabee's. And, there is no getting away from it, some mothers don't deserve to be able to keep their children. But, you may rest assured that some of them were just standing too close to a bad situation.

If you find yourself with the father of your child smoking crack in your home and you beat his sorry ass with anything you have my undying admiration. I would love to be your attorney, call me.

Read the full story here.

In an edited and degraded videotape we see a Sixteen year old getting an "interview" where he claims he has been tortured. Is he saying "kill me" or "help me" repeatedly? This man is a Canadian Citizen in the custody of the U.S. and was accused of throwing a grenade at U.S. troops.

In Arkansas the criminal trial is a bifurcated process. That is to say that it occurs in two phases.

Phase one is the guilt phase. At this stage the client is presumed innocent until the jury comes back with a guilty verdict. There are some cases where a guilty verdict is virtually assured such as when there are multiple confessions to different people, video of the defendant committing the crime with which he is charged, etc. In some instances denying the proof submitted to the jury can cause them to feel insulted and to lose all faith in the defense attorney. If you successfully anger a jury panel through a poor defense and testimony, you can almost guarantee a bad outcome in the second phase of the trial.

In the second phase of the trial sentencing is considered by the jury. At this stage guilt is a foregone conclusion, the only question left is one of degree of punishment. In order to argue successfully for the lightest possible sentence you must rely on mitigating factors. I like to think of mitigating factors as those that help "explain" the criminal conduct. At this stage, in my opinion, if you continue to deny guilt you are asking for trouble. What you have to do is find someway to connect with the jury and make them understand why you client deserves less of a sentence and not more of one.

Never is this so important as when the decision of the jury is one of life or death. I have been directed to a brief compendium of writings on mitigation in death penalty cases. I hope you enjoy this reading. I have just started and it is very interesting!

If you have been breathing and barely paying attention over the last few years you are aware of the patriot act. It is something that I would call ambush legislation. I say this because it allowed the Government to sneak in with little oversight and spy on a U.S. Citizen. Essentially it allows the U.S. Government to spy on your communications on little more than a whim. At least today there is judicial review of the Government's domestic spying.

You are also probably aware that many of the communications giants participated without the need for a warrant. They turned over our private information in violation of the Privacy Act. I can't recall if the Government has given them immunity yet . . . my guess is that the immunity has been extended to them and I just missed it.

Cox Communications has a subpoena form that is somewhat enlightening as to how this information gathered and what they look for. Take a look at it here.

You may want to take a look at this guy. I have secured a link to a very interesting complaint against a Florida attorney: Report on JOHN BRUCE THOMPSON

A long long time ago a prominent figure in USAjudo by the name of Fletcher Thornton abused children under his care. To this day nothing has been done. Sworn Affidavits of abuse and look here for authentication information and link to summary.

A very interesting Video on the right to remain silent.

Overzealous persecution of an Artist by the FBI -- Check this website out. The Order dismissing the charges should probably be read first -- Read that here.

In many crimes the police have just a suspicion of who the accused will be and not any concrete proof. Drew Peterson is just such a case. They have been investigating him since 2007 in an attempt to bring together a criminal case against him for two murders and there are still no charges. Most individuals are not that lucky. If you are being investigated it is crucial that you retain the services of an attorney.

For the Attorney to be able to work for you he has to know the truth. Faulty information will lead to faulty representation every single time. That maxim holds true irrespective of the type of case you have.

The role of the attorney at the investigatory (is that even a word?) stage is to preserve the innocence of the defendant if the allegations don't apply to them. Or, where the individual is actually guilty of the crime, then damage control is the best way to go if the case is developing into a strong case. The bottom line is that on many occasions charges are not brought against a suspect whose constitutional rights are being protected by an attorney irrespective of whether they are actually guilty or innocent.

Here are some tips for potential clients: An attorney can not represent falsehoods to the police or prosecution. We are not allowed to advise you on how to dispose of evidence. But, most importantly, we can never repeat a word you say to us so long as the privilege is preserved. To preserve this privilege it is necessary to meet with the attorney without third parties present, with the exception of the Attorney's employees. It is also necessary to not go around repeating the conversations that you had with your attorney with anyone.

The choice as to whether to involve the attorney is personal, but I believe that the earlier the attorney is involved the better off you will be.

In America we value our freedom. Every day I fight to preserve the Constitution and ensure the facts used to deprive the liberty of U.S. Citizens are accurate and persuasive. It is my job to ensure that no one is "railroaded" into confinement. No loss of liberty is taken lightly. It is that simple. Young men and women are in fact dying to preserve these fundamental principles that underpin what our Nation is supposed to be. I find it impossible to take the cost of our Freedom lightly.

To be sure Freedom is an abstract concept that is never fully achieved. I mean, look at the role of corporate America in the running of our governments, both Federal and State. From lobbyists to porkbarrel legislation . . . well, you get my point. I hope. But, even with the involvement of big monied corporate interests -- I can still defend and win against government attempts to take away your liberties, rights, and priviledges. America is the greatest nation on the face of the earth in terms of individual freedom.

Well, that is inside our borders. Outside our borders is a different thing altogether. I stumbled upon something of interest. I wanted to share it with you because I believe that it actually detracts from the value of the debt paid in blood to preserve our freedom. Before reading my linked material, consider the following quote:

The manual directly advocates training paramilitaries, pervasive surveillance, censorship, press control and restrictions on labor unions & political parties. It directly advocates warrantless searches, detainment without charge and (under varying circumstances) the suspension of habeas corpus. It directly advocates employing terrorists or prosecuting individuals for terrorism who are not terrorists, running false flag operations and concealing human rights abuses from journalists. And it repeatedly advocates the use of subterfuge and "psychological operations" (propaganda) to make these and other "population & resource control" measures more palatable.

Full article on U.S. Manual is here.

To be sure extreme methods are indeed necessary. But, as you read the manual and it's excerpts you will see that these tactics are applied generically. For instance, they were used to suppress Democracy in El Salvador. For more reading consider Noam Chomsky's "What we say goes."

It is always a good idea to get several different sources of information on the same thing when you are researching foriegn policy. Information is slanted for a purpose from several outlets -- governmental, corporate, and private. However, facts remain at the heart of any spin. Use your common sense and insist on the fundamental respect for human rights in every foriegn matter engaged in by our Government. If we don't, who will?

In Arkansas I can raise the defense of insanity even if my expert's opinion finds the defendant to be sane. I can do this if other facts would indicate that he was in fact suffering from a mental disease or defect.

To prevail on an insanity defense, a defendant has to prove, by a preponderance of the evidence, that at the time of the events in question, "as a result of mental disease or defect," he lacked the capacity to "conform his conduct to the requirements of law or to appreciate the criminality of his conduct" under § 5-2-312(a) and subsection (d) of this section. Hill v. Lockhart, 28 F.3d 832 (8th Cir. 1994), cert. denied, 513 U.S. 1102, 115 S. Ct. 778 (1995).

LEXIS 2008 annotations to A.C.A. § 5-1-111

Of course it helps to have an expert willing to back that up . . . but it is not necessary. A jury can recognize the loss of control that goes along with a mental disease or defect using common sense. And with proper foundation (basis) a non-expert can offer his testimony as to the defendant's sanity at the time of the events in question. See Phillips v. State, 266 Ark. 883, See also Avery v. State, 271 Ark. 584.

The reality is that the mentally defective are "treated" inside prison walls in the State of Arkansas. There are simply not enough resources at the State Hospital. I have read material on this, but I can speak from my experience in the criminal justice system.

Another little twist in this process is that someone who is too mentally ill to stand trial can be rehabilitated to stand trial. See Campbell v. State, 265 Ark. 77. A sort of get him well so we can hang him approach.

Now, it seems that the Supreme Court has drawn a finer line. One can be sane enough to hang, but too crazy to represent himself. Read about it in this article. It is also the case that you can not execute the mentally retarded. This is especially interesting since the Defendant must be able to assist in his own defense in order to stand trial. You can take my word that it is hard enough to get the ones that aren't crazy to "assist" in their own defense.

Now, let me summarize: You can not be convicted of a crime that you committed where you were not able to conform to the law or appreciate the criminality of your conduct. Experts and lay witnesses alike can opine on ones ability, or lack thereof to meet this legal requirement. You must also be sane enough to assist in your own defense. However, you can be convicted if your mentally handicapped, you just can't be killed. You can be sane enough to stand trial, but not sane enough to represent yourself.

Still sound a bit confusing? I know it is confusing for me and I study this stuff for fun . . . I really think that the Courts are doing the best they can in a difficult situation. But, in reality, with standards like these we end up killing or imprisoning the mentally ill more often than we heal them.

Having seen all sorts of child abuse in my life, I was suprised how this story moved me. So much so that I would pay good money to be left alone with this animal for a week. The following is an excerpt from the CNN story of one mother's "love":

He was covered in cigarette burns, including to his genitals. He couldn't fully open his hand because it had been burned on a stove. His tooth was broken with a nerve exposed. And he had been made to sit in his own urine and feces, authorities say.

As the 5-year-old remains hospitalized by kidney failure brought on from malnutrition . . .

Read the rest of the story here.

. . . to catch a thief. That is my theme for this post anyway. Seems that the FCC Office of Inspector General website posted a document on their website for all to see. The document reports theft by a corporate entity from the Government and the Federal Government caught them in the act . . . Then the article disappeared from their website. The cached version at yahoo disappeared. Then it wound up in the hands of wikileaks.org.

You will find the article and authentication at Censored Government Fraud Report

This has to be the most bizzare case I have heard about to date. Tomorrow I am sure will bring something stranger I am sure.

In the Amy Yates case we have a dead 8 year old girl. A close friend is suspected and interrogated. He gives three different confessions, all of them vague and devoid of identifying facts. He is a juvinile and after being convicted as a juvinile he does two years. Short time for murder huh? Well, after this case they changed the law.

Now, that wasn't the bizarre part. The bizarre part is that this teenager who is mentally handicapped tells, two years after the murder, that he is the one who did it. The guilt ate him up. And his story is detailed and accurately reflects facts found at the crime scene.

Here is an old story, but very detailed --- .MSNBC article

Well, you know, as a general rule I love children. I mean, before I reproduced I had viewed them as disease carrying vermin. Now, they have names and I am sure to get them all of their shots. Even the best children can have their memory tampered with by adults and, I know this may be hard to believe, but they will sometimes even lie.

Allegations of sexual abuse should be treated with care. On one hand there is the need to protect our most precious resource, our children. On the other, and equally important, is the life of an adult that stands accused of a criminal act. An investigator should have the time to spend to get all the facts. A finding that abuse occurred should never be based upon what the alleged victim says alone. Unfortunately that is all too often the case.

It is not unusual for the accused to just have two or three days to submit to an interview. Failure to submit is counted as a factor in favor of finding that there has been abuse. Since a Arkansas Department of Human Services (DHS) Crimes Against Children Division (CACD) is instituting an investigation that is civil in nature the protections of the fifth amendment don't apply to the administrative process. One not here, the CACD is staffed by the State Police. When they interview the alleged perpetrator they read him his Miranda rights so that any product of the "civil" investigation can be used to bolster the prosecutor's case should he or his investigators decide to file charges based on the report written to them. No shit. You need an attorney at the earliest stages of an accusation of sexual abuse, otherwise you will be shredded by the system.

To be fair to DHS CACD they are overworked. The budget is tightening during this recession. Some of the finest people I know work for this organization, but build weak cases due to being understaffed and overworked. And, of course, there are those investigators and official involved in the process that are not so swell. I have seen some of them hide evidence and lie with impunity. They don't stand up to my investigation and cross examination so well and have actually worked in my client's favor in the past. I believe that you can capitalize off of the bad apples in any CACD investigation and the lack of time that they have to adequately complete their job.

The most dangerous thing is that it appears to me that there is a presumption of validity that attaches to the complaints made by the children. The efforts to corroborate the testimony are superficial at best. No weight is given to the absence of physical indications of abuse. This is because reporting often occurs long after the event of alleged abuse is supposed to have occurred. No weight is given to the fact that the abuse wasn't reported. And this is because the victims are often threatened and do not tell.

The validations for adhering to these presumptions on the investigators part fail when it leads to ignoring evidence. It should be important when you find in the course of your "investigation" that not only was there no reporting of abuse, the victim verifies that there was no intimidation.

Multiple versions of a story should be investigated. No presumption that the alleged victim is telling the truth should prevent a full investigation. But because of a lower burden of proof which is more likely than not, the investigator in the DHS case doesn't have to work as hard to prove their case as the criminal investigator that they supplement.

Your best defense in the administrative case is a good offense. You should consult with an experienced attorney (that would be me) and fight as hard as possible and quickly as possible in the administrative case. Once criminal proceedings have begun, the opportunities to defend yourself are actually diminished.

Well, I am all too pleased to present the following possibly true leak, but absolutely titillating in its implications . . . as with most anonymous leaks you should take it with a grain of salt, but it could possibly be one hell of a developing story. Read it , the McCain Campaign Internal Memo.

If you are a victim of crime here are some helpful websites in Arkansas and abroad:

Federal Office for Victims of Crime
Another National Crime Victims site
A Hate Crime Web site
Arkansas Crime Information Center
Information for Victim Assistance on a State by State basis

This is really old news, but did you hear about the girl that hung herself over comments posted on her Myspace page? Yup, 13 year old Megan did the deed after her 47 year old female neighbor created the fake persona of a 16 year old boy. This shit is so weird no one could make it up. We may never know why Lori Drew did this. Read the Security Focus Article. The events occurred in 2006, but have recently been the subject of an Indictment.

Remember, if you convince your 13 year old neighbor to hang herself, be sure and give me a call before speaking with the police or otherwise taking credit.

I could go on about how if this case goes off successfully and Lori is convicted it will make a whole bunch of liars over at Myspace criminals! I wonder if misrepresenting your weight is enough to get you in trouble?

Here is a little Company Policy on when it is o.k. to use force. I want to work for these guys . . . or not.

Well, I have long been wary of lie detector tests. I know for a fact that voice stress analysis is inaccurate. I have more confidence in the polygraph, but that is probably unwarranted. My experience is that these tests are used by the police to interrogate witnesses. I have posted on this before, but the following described technique purports to be able to identify the presence or absence of information involving an event. They claim to have achieved 100% reliability and should be scrutinized closely, consider the following excerpt:

Brain Fingerprinting testing will determine if specific information is in the brain, but will not tell us how it got there. It is like having fingerprints at the crime scene. Someone's fingerprints could be there because he was there witnessing the crime and not because he committed it. In a case where there are two people at a crime scene and only one committed the crime, Brain Fingerprinting testing can narrow the search down to the two suspects. It cannot be used to distinguish why a person was at the crime scene. Like DNA and fingerprinting, Brain Fingerprinting testing matches evidence at a crime scene with evidence on the person of the perpetrator or suspect. It can place a person at the crime scene or exonerate someone who was not there. If specific information is available about the planning or execution of a crime that a witness would not know, then Brain Fingerprinting testing may be able to distinguish between a witness and a perpetrator.

From the Brain Fingerprinting Website .

It would seem that you can tell who the innocent parties are since they would have no information pertaining to the crime. Still, I get a very creepy feeling knowing that the government, or anyone for that matter, has the ability to strip away our facade so casually. On the other hand, if the system and science are tried and true, it could quickly weed out suspects from investigations and prevent innocents being incarcerated for crimes that they have no knowledge of.

Regardless of it's validity it is a science that must be closely examined. It is not unusual for quackery disguised as forensic science to creep into the Courtroom. See this New York Times Article on Bite Mark Evidence.

There are some people that claim it is too burdensome to pay child support. In fact they often have to go to Court over failure to pay child support. These people are not real parents. They are more like sperm/egg donors. They make me physically ill due to the fact that the law prevents me from choking the shit out of them. Child support is in fact a damn site less than it costs to raise them yourself.

There are prices that are gladly paid by real parents. Self sacrifice is a daily event. I would like to introduce you to my hero. Please read the story of Joseph Richardson.

In Arkansas, and most likely in many other jurisdictions as well, if you plead to a crime, A battery for instance, and that guilty plea is entered -- You can still be prosecuted for murder if the victim later dies. I have included an excerpt from Thompson v. State, 343 Ark. 135, 34 S.W.3d 33 (2000):

On July 22, 1999, appellee Betty Thompson entered a plea of nolo contendere to violating Ark. Code Ann. § 5-28-103(c)(1) (Repl. 1997), which states that "any person or caregiver who neglects an endangered or impaired adult . . . causing serious physical injury or substantial risk of death, shall be guilty of a Class D felony . " "Neglect," as defined in Ark. Code Ann. § 5-28-101(3) (Repl. 1997) requires that a person act negligently. Thompson's plea arose from her failure to properly care for her husband.

Subsequent to her plea, Thompson's husband died, allegedly as a result of her abuse. The State charged her with second-degree murder. Arkansas Code Annotated § 5-10-103(a)(1) (Repl. 1997) states that " a person commits murder in the second degree if he knowingly causes the death of another person under circumstances manifesting an extreme indifference to the value of human life."

Prior to trial, Thompson moved for dismissal in the circuit court, claiming that her former admission of guilt to negligence in the abuse of her husband precluded the State from seeking a second-degree-murder conviction for "knowingly" causing his death. Specifically, Thompson contended that under the doctrine of collateral estoppel, the finding that she acted negligently in committing adult abuse decided an issue of ultimate fact; and, therefore, the State could not then seek to attribute a greater culpable mental state to her for allegedly causing her husband's death. The State responded below by arguing that, pursuant to Ark. Code Ann. § 5-2-203(c) (Repl. 1997), one who acts "knowingly" also acts "negligently," and that the finding that Thompson acted negligently in committing adult abuse did not decide the issue of whether she acted knowingly in causing her husband's death. Based on the foregoing arguments, the circuit court granted Thompson's motion to dismiss, finding that collateral estoppel prevented the State from charging her with second-degree murder and the lesser-included offense of manslaughter. The State now appeals the circuit court's decision to grant Thompson's motion, contending that the trial court was in error and that collateral estoppel does not apply. We agree with the State and reverse and remand the case, as a result.

That is one hell of a note. I am not saying that the death shouldn't be addressed and consequences faced. But this is an example of the 1001 pitfalls that face the criminal defendant. It also seems dishonest in a way. I mean, why wouldn't the prosecutor charge the defendant with attempted murder in the first place? If the victims condition is that serious it would make sense to do that instead of Abuse of an Adult. Hell, the dishonesty lies in the prosecutor laying out a plea agreement on the same nucleus of facts that forms the basis for both charges.

The guilty plea to the first charge essentially places the defendant in a position where he can not testify in his defense. The Defendant has taken a deal that appears to have addressed the crime, when in fact he has sealed his fate in the later case that addresses the death of the victim. I would propose that any such plea bargain in the first instance would necessarily entail immunity from later prosecution, or, in the alternative you should go ahead and force the prosecutor to trial on the initial charge just to see all of his evidence in a trial where your exposure is much less. The physical condition of the victim should be your prime indication as to what you should do.

In a worst case scenario -- Defendant, who is innocent, takes a plea on a smaller charge initially and pleads guilty. Let's say that the reason that the guilty plea is entered is because the dumb sonofabitch doesn't want to take a chance of catching the charge of attempted murder. I mean, we have all run into situations that at first appear to indicate person "A" was responsible and then upon closer inspection it becomes obvious person "B" is actually responsible. Person "A" may opt not to take a chance and, as I have explained, seals his fate later on down the line when the victim dies.

There are few things worse than facing criminal charges when you are in fact innocent. And, in the Law, nothing is as simple as it appears.


Edit: Here is a twist for you:

In Mason v. State, the Arkansas Supreme Court held that the doctrine of res judicata, in conjunction with Arkansas Code Annotated section 5-1-113(2), applies to criminal cases to preclude the State from presenting evidence in a subsequent trial of an issue that was litigated and determined by final and valid judgment in favor of the defendant in a previous trial.

28 U. Ark. Little Rock L. Rev. 651. So, there is further incentive to try the first series of charges where the victim has suffered serious injury.

So, I am getting ready for Church this morning. Methodist born and raised thank you very much. Anyway, I stumble upon this "religious" contract. I have to ask myself what kind of idiot would believe in a cult religion, especially after being given this Contract. Additionally, this confirms to me what a total idiot Tom Cruise really is. Oh well. Have a good Sunday and I hope you didn't have to sign a contract in order to go to Church.

I recall how I treated my professors in Law School. For the most part I held them in high regard. Then there were those that I held in contempt, not only because it was obvious that they would not make a scab on a trial attorney's ass, but also because they treated their students with little or no respect. I mean, even if you don't respect my station in life, they should respect that our loans are paying their wages.

Well, I became aware this last week about a most unusual situation here in Arkansas. "Richard J. Peltz is suing two students who are involved in the university’s chapter of the Black Law Student Association, the association itself, and another individual who is affiliated with a black lawyers’ group." as quoted from Inside Higher Ed

So, he is suing the black students who say he is racist. Stranger still, it seems that this has all grown out of the classroom instruction provided by the professor. This concerns me for a couple of reasons. First and foremost, students and professors should let what happens in the classroom stay there short of physical assault. To do otherwise would have a chilling effect on honesty, creativity, and free thinking in the classroom. I am certain that the professor would not be filing the law suit unless he was pushed into the corner. On the same note, if he has tenure why does he even care what they are saying? How aggressive are the parties towards each other in the academic setting? I will post the complaint as soon as I get it.

You can all thank me later. Here is a story that moved me and I am hoping it will move you. Sexy Thing.

An article I read recently struck me as incredibly insightful and informative. It concerns the interplay of the politics and the laws that govern the enactment of any major governmental policies. Newsweek Article by David G. Victor -- enjoy.

I apologize, words escape me at the moment. I believe that the story of Kelsey Briggs is one that must be told.

There is more to the story.

When you are called upon to testify in Court you can rest assured that it will be uncomfortable at some point in time. If you are the witness in your own case the pressure is really on.

1. Don't ask the opposing attorney questions. You will look like an idiot.

2. Don't act belligerent, angry, or uncooperative when you are already in trouble. It is unattractive and will get your ass canned.

3. If you have an attorney, you had best tell him everything about your case. It would also help if you reveal all of the juicy tidbits about your witnesses.

4. Keep all of your relationships professional. If your going to screw your attorney write him a hot check.

5. If you think your smarter than the opposing party you most probably are NOT. Approach your testimony with the intent to be accurate, truthful, humble, strong, confident, and emotionally consistent with your testimony (see #2 above).

6. You must have realistic expectations. If you testify about giving your employer a blow job and go on to explain why that isn't "sex", YOU WILL NOT GET CUSTODY!

That is all for now.

Antipolygraph.org has posted information on why the new hand-held device being fielded by the military does not work. It recommends that the soldier not rely on it. I almost didn't post it because it tells how to beat the machine. As I understand it this machine works off of same principles as the voice stress analyzer used by police. Enjoy.

I am truly sorry. I can't leave John Yoo alone. You see it is rare that an American attorney would author a memo that condones torture. Period.

Well snap! The low down on John Yoo. It even shows his picture and a location to his home. Quite a detailed information packet on him. I really do hope I never piss off people like he has. I would move. Change my name. Become a Trekkie. etc etc.

I have located a complete and concise statement on the restoration of your rights after a criminal conviction has occurred. This deals exclusively with the law in Arkansas, but there are sections on every state from the homepage.

I have to admit, I am so involved in the guilt and innocence side of my cases, my motion practice, and sentencing (thank God for the sentencing guidelines handbook), that I learned some things that I didn't know. Of course, that happens every day . . . My Grandfather once told me that the day you stop learning is the day you start dying. I believe him.

Well, I must say that I am all for catching criminals. But I am unsure that I can appreciate entrapment type techniques that require no probable cause to exist in order to raid your home. One errant click and the DoJ descend upon you like the plague. Read this and govern yourselves accordingly!!!!!

A Detroit Murder and Mutilation Case contained the linked testimony. I haven't been able to find all of the testimony online, but it appears that the entire trial was taped. Watch this testimony it is both repulsive and riveting at the same time. By the way, the defense attorney let the prosecutor lead way to much.

Here is an interesting tidbit on the Mormons in Texas. Were they set up? I don't know, but it will be interesting to find out!

Here are the clues:

1. This government holds a court where the members of the Court are prohibited from deciding key questions in respect to the Defendant.
2. The Court can only make reccomendations to the government in respect to how the Defendant is to be disposed of.
3. The government alters documents in order to make itself appear credible.


Make your guess and then read a detailed analyses of this issue: ANSWER IS LINKED HERE

Apparently Defense Attorneys around the nation must collectively shudder. Now, and bear with me, this story assumes that the DOJ is NOT a criminal agency.

Well, here is what has happened --- Miles Ehrlick (damn what a last name, can you imagine -- they must have called him Miles Asslick as a child), who was formerly the AUSA (Assistant U.S. Attorney) collecting information on what was essentially a criminal organization, quit the government and began representing the criminal organization. That means he is now a Criminal Defense Attorney --- Damn, damn, damn.

Make no mistake about it, I understand that this is a disgrace to the ranks of the dutiful and faithful prosecutors who serve their communities well. However, I haven't a clue as to what it is like to prosecute. I would think I would have to have rabies vaccinations to protect me though and they are painful. That was a joke. Anyway check out the following quote---

The criminal activities I reported to Miles Ehrlich (the federal prosecutor) directly affect multiple victims including the government of a foreign country (India), an ally of the United States. By definition, criminal activity affects society as a whole, in this case the People of the United States and the State of California. Moreover, a federal prosecutor, who’s sworn to up hold the Constitution and the public trust must not be allowed to engage in representing persons identified to him as committing criminal acts in contravention to laws of the United States, after leaving government service; otherwise, crime victims, witnesses and informants will be reticent to report criminal activity out of fear (1) they will be retaliated against; and (2) their interests have been sold to the higher bidder.

This quote from the ethics complaint filed by Scott J. Drexel and Ms. Lisa Stowe.

And it is much more interesting than that. Indeed the implications of the behavior detailed in this memo is truly frighting. Another thing that impressed me is that the Attorney who wrote this document is very well researched, extremely bright, and superbly articulate. Son of a Bitch! I hate running into people smarter than me. It happens every day seems like! Probably was written by a lay person anyway.

Without further sulking on my part ---- I give you . . . . . . . . Wikileaks.org leaked document on the Ethical Complaint filed against former AUSA Miles Erhlick

This is more of an FYI. Really, if I hadn't posted on the torture memo I probably wouldn't list it. MSNBC Story on investigation of the torture memo by Yoo.

I found a very interesting article on MSNBC which detailed the use of Second Generation DNA testing in the Courtroom. I was suprised to find out that there are specific genes linked to violence. I was also interested in the forced gene testing in domestic cases. Whether your a criminal or soon to be divorced, or if your just curious, read the article. I'm tired.

I meet liars everyday. Some are very dangerous and they knowingly lie to sow discord. Some are unconsciously misrepresenting facts because of their desire to make a good impression. Some lie with no emotional reaction attached to the deception.

In this sea of deception I must make decisions that impact upon the lives of my clients. I get to experience such a high degree of exposure thanks, in large degree, to my position as part time Public Defender. Police, and to a lesser extent, Prosecutors are awash in the same confusing mess. Some folks think they can determine the truth of the matter simply by recording your body's vital signs and sweat. Here is a link to current lie detection methods. And, of course, the future of lie detection.

I have little or no faith in lie detection methods. They are used as a form of interrogation. In my opinion, in a such an environment, objective facts are the touchstone to any defensive or prosecutorial case. Like having a murder case without a motive. It can be shown to not exist if the Prosecutors side of the case runs contrary to the facts. And, if you can show that the opposing theory of the case runs contrary to facts beyond change you beat the other side. More than likely. Probably. Maybe, really depends on the facts . . . and the opposing theory of the case. And whether or not you know which end is up in a Court Room.

I saw this quote in someone's signature:

"You sleep safe in your beds because rough men stand ready in the night to visit violence on those who would do you harm. " George Orwell ; followed by -- Be brave and upright that God may love thee. Speak the truth always, even if it leads to your death. Safeguard the helpless and do no wrong.

I am unsure of the origin of the last part of the quote, but the be brave and upright part most certainly finds it's roots in our Judeo-Christian heritage. Altogether I would think it would be a standard. It is a standard that, when met, defines the finest of humanity. And when that standard is not met, and a position of power is turned into a position of abuse and subjugation you have the vilest sort of human. You have a renegade clothed in the power and authority of Government.

The problem is that all of us are human. Many of us can not be true to a standard all of the time. Hell, those folks followed Moses around in the desert drinking water from a stone and eating manna from heaven and they still turned their backs on God while he was on the mountain. I could give a rat's ass if you are religious or not. You should get this. It is Humanity's ability to be moved to this standard that makes the difference. It makes a difference with the jury.

A good defense attorney knows how to turn that to his advantage when this standard is not met. Everyone on the Jury feels it is attainable. I mean, who wants "rough men . . . visiting violence . . ." that are above the law or morally deficient. It is also the impression of the officer as infallible and morally just that must be weeded out in voir dire. That is to say if police officers are going to testify against you, it is important to remove the people that believe that they ALWAYS tell the truth.


My motto for the day:
"So long as the people do not care to exercise their freedom, those who wish to tyrannize will do so; for tyrants are active and ardent, and will devote themselves in the name of any number of gods, religious and otherwise, to put shackles upon sleeping men." Voltaire

When I find confidential information that is released on the web concerning our troops in Iraq, I never put it up on my blog. Period. This, however, is a document that is both released on the web and to law enforcement officials. I, as an American, feel entitled to this information. Well, if Barney Fife can have it, You can too!! Criminal Intelligence Summary from 2002. This thing reads better than most novels. What is more important is that it is an HONEST summary of the true state of our union as a nation when it was released. Not the pure bullshit put out by the Bush Administration. I only call it bullshit because to characterize it otherwise would to be to deny proven facts.

Seems like the court system down in Texas is having one hell of a time with all those children of the polygamist sect. Seems they stand accused of marrying their young nubile daughters to old fellows. Apparently these guys have several wives ergo the polygamist angle. Well, this judge has lost her mind, read all about the circus the custody battle has become. Usually the State's child welfare system has a difficult time handling their "normal" loads. I would expect to see many of these displaced children continue to be abused in hastily thrown together plans to "protect" them. Sorry, I have very little faith in beaurocrats seeing that children are raised properly and I have even less faith in human nature.

John Yoo, that is who. He is the author of the infamous Torture Memo. In this document he goes on to explain that torture is o.k. and can be justifiable. Of course, this violates the premise of a government of laws and not of man. When President George Bush was given this memo an entire course of action involving torture was legitimized. Ligitimization is crucial for those in power because it gives them license to do this or that.

The Torture Memo authored by Dr. Yoo, in my opinion, acted as a license for the Bush Administration to ignore the Geneva Convention and other applicable International prohibitions against torture. It placed the man above the Laws.

I have represented murderers, rapists, pedophiles, theives, and whores. None among that list is as dangerous for society as a the author of the torture memo, John Woo. That is simply because, if you allow man to be placed above the laws, all sorts of men seek power. That power is the ability to act with impunity. Without fear of retribution. And when this happens, that is when continuity in government through time is lost and the cult of personality comes to dominate.

It is our laws that allow for and preserve our civilization. You, Mr. Yoo, are a traitor to those principles and a human of the lowest sort. You are no friend to the U.S.A. and, sir, I would not piss on you if you were on fire in the middle of the desert.

Well, now that you know how I feel, I have included a copy of Mr. Yoo's current employer defending his memo:

The Torture Memos and Academic Freedom
Christopher Edley, Jr.
The Honorable William H. Orrick, Jr. Distinguished Chair and Dean
UC Berkeley Law School

While serving in the Department of Justice, Professor John Yoo wrote memoranda that officials used as the legal basis for policies concerning detention and interrogation techniques in our efforts to combat terrorism. Both the subject and his reasoning are controversial, leading the New York Times (editorial, April 4), the National Lawyers' Guild, and hundreds of individuals from around the world to criticize or at least question Professor Yoo's continuing employment at U.C. Berkeley Law School. As dean, but speaking only for myself, I offer the following explanation, although with no expectation that it will be completely satisfying to anyone.

Professor Yoo began teaching at Berkeley Law in 1993, received tenure in 1999, and then took a leave of absence to work in the Bush Administration. He returned in 2004, and remains a very successful teacher and prolific (though often controversial) scholar. Because this is a public university, he enjoys not only security of employment and academic freedom, but also First Amendment and Due Process rights.

It seems we do need regular reminders: These protections, while not absolute, are nearly so because they are essential to the excellence of American universities and the progress of ideas. Indeed, in Berkeley's classrooms and courtyards our community argues about the legal and moral issues with the intensity and discipline these crucial issues deserve. Those who prefer to avoid these arguments - be they left or right or lazy - will not find Berkeley or any other truly great law school a wholly congenial place to study. For that we make no apology.
Did what Professor Yoo wrote while not at the University somehow place him beyond the pale of academic freedom today? Had this been merely some professor vigorously expounding controversial and even extreme views, we would be in a familiar drama with the usual stakes. Had that professor been on leave marching with Nazis in Skokie or advising communists during the McCarthy era, reasonable people would probably find that an easier case still. Here, additional things are obviously in play. Gravely so.

My sense is that the vast majority of legal academics with a view of the matter disagree with substantial portions of Professor Yoo's analyses, including a great many of his colleagues at Berkeley. If, however, this strong consensus were enough to fire or sanction someone, then academic freedom would be meaningless.

There are important questions about the content of the Yoo memoranda, about tortured definitions of "torture", about how he and his colleagues conceived their role as lawyers, and about whether and when the Commander in Chief is subject to domestic statutes and international law. We press our students to grapple with these matters, and in the legal literature Professor Yoo and his critics do battle. One can oppose and even condemn an idea, but I don't believe that in a university we can fearfully refuse to look at it. That would not be the best way to educate, nor a promising way to seek deeper understanding in a world of continual, strange revolutions.

There is more, however. Having worked in the White House under two presidents, I am exceptionally sensitive to the complex, ineffable boundary between policymaking and law-declaring. I know that Professor Yoo continues to believe his legal reasoning was sound, but I do not know whether he believes that the Department of Defense and CIA made political or moral mistakes in the way they exercised the discretion his memoranda purported to find available to them within the law. As critical as I am of his analyses, no argument about what he did or didn't facilitate, or about his special obligations as an attorney, makes his conduct morally equivalent to that of his nominal clients, Secretary Rumsfeld, et al., or comparable to the conduct of interrogators distant in time, rank and place. Yes, it does matter that Yoo was an adviser, but President Bush and his national security appointees were the deciders.

What troubles me substantively with the analyses in the memoranda is that they reduce the Rule of Law to the Reign of Politics. I believe there is much more to the separation of powers than the promise of ultimate remedies like the ballot box and impeachment, even in the case of a Commander in Chief during war. And I believe that the revolution in sensibilities after 9/11 demands greater, not reduced, vigilance for constitutional rights and safeguards. What of the argument made by so many critics that Professor Yoo was so wrong on these sensitive issues that it amounted to an ethical breach. It is true, I believe, that government lawyers have a larger, higher client than their political supervisors; there are circumstances when a fair reading of the law must - perhaps as an ethical matter? - provide a bulwark to political and bureaucratic discretion. And it shouldn't require a private plaintiff and a Supreme Court ruling to make it so. Few professions require an oath at entry, but law does. Oaths must mean something.

Assuming one believes as I do that Professor Yoo offered bad ideas and even worse advice during his government service, that judgment alone would not warrant dismissal or even a potentially chilling inquiry. As a legal matter, the test here is the relevant excerpt from the "General University Policy Regarding Academic Appointees", adopted for the 10-campus University of California by both the system-wide Academic Senate and the Board of Regents:

Types of unacceptable conduct: … Commission of a criminal act which has led to conviction in a court of law and which clearly demonstrates unfitness to continue as a member of the faculty. [Academic Personnel Manual sec. 015]

This very restrictive standard is binding on me as dean, but I will put aside that shield and state my independent and personal view of the matter. I believe the crucial questions in view of our university mission are these: Was there clear professional misconduct - that is, some breach of the professional ethics applicable to a government attorney - material to Professor Yoo's academic position? Did the writing of the memoranda, and his related conduct, violate a criminal or comparable statute?

Absent very substantial evidence on these questions, no university worthy of distinction should even contemplate dismissing a faculty member. That standard has not been met.

April 10, 2008

Busted by the Feds is on my wish list. Not to be Busted by the Feds! No, no. But to have their concise and correct (we shall see) handbook should help in the process of conversing with clients who have already read it. The tacky advertising makes me think it is a crap product.

Anyway, I know how to use my current sentencing guidelines. I also know that they are infact only advisory now days. Hell, I practiced when they were definitive law. Now days they are more like strong suggestions, but they are most certainly not the last word. The definitive treatment of sentencing subsequent to Booker-FanFan can be found here.

If you are in so much trouble that you need a handbook, it is time to call an attorney. FYI.

but were afraid to ask. Here is the thing, that computer of yours can have files on it that you have never seen. I have known good folks that have had porn sites installed on their computer without their knowledge. I have had clients that were charged with a crime for pictures that I could prove that they had never viewed.

The list of malware in the form of virii and bots is long. The exploits change with the system and are approached by the hackers as a challenge to be overcome. A lot of the literature that I have read has pointed to an increased sophistication of the hacker community. I have seen articles detailing the growth and commercialization of identity theft on CBS News Article.

Recently I heard of an individual who went to have his computer serviced and, because of pictures sent to him NOT AT HIS REQUEST, was charged with a crime for photos uncovered by the computer service people and believed to have been deleted by the accused. Well, whatever your case is, if you own your own computer, and especially if it is connected to the internet, you should read First Responders Guide for processing electronic evidence

If as a society, community, and individually we were to look for someone to blame for the sadistic, soulless, and extremely dangerous monsters that prey on us we need look no farther than the closest mirror. It all goes back to how we care for and parent our children.

In my career as a criminal attorney, and to a lesser extent as a divorce attorney, every hardened criminal has had a rough child hood. Not to excuse them, but, and make no mistake about this, in the vast majority of criminal cases, before that person failed there was a parent that failed them first. A recent story caught my eye and really made me aware of what I had been seeing for so long but had not fully appreciated. Check this out . . .

Apparently the children at the special education class at Waycross Georgia were a bit miffed at their teacher. After some elaborate planning their Plot To KILL their teacher was foiled.

I was reminded of all of the juveniles that are processed through the Court here in Clark County Arkansas. As a parent you should know that if a child is sixteen years old he or she can be charged as an adult if the crime would be a felony for someone committing the same act as an adult. If the child is fourteen he can be charged as an adult if he commits certain enumerated crimes.

For those that like to read statutes, here is Arkansas Code Annotated section 9-27-318.

Filing and transfer to the criminal division of circuit court.

(a) The state may proceed with a case as a delinquency only when the case involves a juvenile:

(1) Fifteen (15) years of age or younger when the alleged delinquent act occurred, except as provided by subdivision (c)(2) of this section; or

(2) Less than eighteen (18) years of age when he or she engages in conduct that if committed by an adult would be any misdemeanor.

(b) The state may file a motion in the juvenile division of circuit court to transfer a case to the criminal division of circuit court or to designate a juvenile as an extended juvenile jurisdiction offender when a case involves a juvenile:

(1) Fourteen (14) or fifteen (15) years old when he or she engages in conduct that if committed by an adult would be:

(A) Murder in the second degree, § 5-10-103;

(B) Battery in the second degree in violation of § 5-13-202(a)(2), (3), or (4);

(C) Possession of a handgun on school property, § 5-73-119(a)(2)(A);

(D) Aggravated assault, § 5-13-204;

(E) Unlawful discharge of a firearm from a vehicle, § 5-74-107;

(F) Any felony committed while armed with a firearm;

(G) Soliciting a minor to join a criminal street gang, § 5-74-203;

(H) Criminal use of prohibited weapons, § 5-73-104;

(I) First degree escape, § 5-54-110;

(J) Second degree escape, § 5-54-111; or

(K) A felony attempt, solicitation, or conspiracy to commit any of the following offenses:

(i) Capital murder, § 5-10-101;

(ii) Murder in the first degree, § 5-10-102;

(iii) Murder in the second degree, § 5-10-103;

(iv) Kidnapping, § 5-11-102;

(v) Aggravated robbery, § 5-12-103;

(vi) Rape, § 5-14-103;

(vii) Battery in the first degree, § 5-13-201;

(viii) First degree escape, § 5-54-110; and

(ix) Second degree escape, § 5-54-111;

(2) At least fourteen (14) years old when he or she engages in conduct that constitutes a felony under § 5-73-119(a); or

(3) At least fourteen (14) years old when he or she engages in conduct that, if committed by an adult, constitutes a felony and who has, within the preceding two (2) years, three (3) times been adjudicated as a delinquent juvenile for acts that would have constituted felonies if they had been committed by an adult.

(c) A prosecuting attorney may charge a juvenile in either the juvenile or criminal division of circuit court when a case involves a juvenile:

(1) At least sixteen (16) years old when he or she engages in conduct that, if committed by an adult, would be any felony; or

(2) Fourteen (14) or fifteen (15) years old when he or she engages in conduct that, if committed by an adult, would be:

(A) Capital murder, § 5-10-101;

(B) Murder in the first degree, § 5-10-102;

(C) Kidnapping, § 5-11-102;

(D) Aggravated robbery, § 5-12-103;

(E) Rape, § 5-14-103;

(F) Battery in the first degree, § 5-13-201; or

(G) Terroristic act, § 5-13-310.

(d) If a prosecuting attorney can file charges in the criminal division of circuit court for an act allegedly committed by a juvenile, the state may file any other criminal charges that arise out of the same act or course of conduct in the same division of the circuit court case if, after a hearing before the juvenile division of circuit court, a transfer is so ordered.

(e) Upon the motion of the court or of any party, the judge of the division of circuit court in which a delinquency petition or criminal charges have been filed shall conduct a transfer hearing to determine whether to transfer the case to another division of circuit court.

(f) The court shall conduct a transfer hearing within thirty (30) days if the juvenile is detained and no longer than ninety (90) days from the date of the motion to transfer the case.

(g) In the transfer hearing, the court shall consider all of the following factors:

(1) The seriousness of the alleged offense and whether the protection of society requires prosecution in the criminal division of circuit court;

(2) Whether the alleged offense was committed in an aggressive, violent, premeditated, or willful manner;

(3) Whether the offense was against a person or property, with greater weight being given to offenses against persons, especially if personal injury resulted;

(4) The culpability of the juvenile, including the level of planning and participation in the alleged offense;

(5) The previous history of the juvenile, including whether the juvenile had been adjudicated a juvenile offender and, if so, whether the offenses were against persons or property, and any other previous history of antisocial behavior or patterns of physical violence;

(6) The sophistication or maturity of the juvenile as determined by consideration of the juvenile's home, environment, emotional attitude, pattern of living, or desire to be treated as an adult;

(7) Whether there are facilities or programs available to the judge of the juvenile division of circuit court that are likely to rehabilitate the juvenile before the expiration of the juvenile's twenty-first birthday;

(8) Whether the juvenile acted alone or was part of a group in the commission of the alleged offense;

(9) Written reports and other materials relating to the juvenile's mental, physical, educational, and social history; and

(10) Any other factors deemed relevant by the judge.

(h) (1) The court shall make written findings on all of the factors set forth in subsection (g) of this section.

(2) Upon a finding by clear and convincing evidence that a case should be transferred to another division of circuit court, the judge shall enter an order to that effect.

(i) Upon a finding by the criminal division of circuit court that a juvenile fourteen (14) through seventeen (17) years of age and charged with the crimes in subdivision (c)(2) of this section should be transferred to the juvenile division of circuit court, the criminal division of circuit court may enter an order to transfer as an extended juvenile jurisdiction case.

(j) If a juvenile fourteen (14) or fifteen (15) years of age is found guilty in the criminal division of circuit court for an offense other than an offense listed in subsection (b) or subdivision (c)(2) of this section, the judge shall enter a juvenile delinquency disposition under § 9-27-330.

(k) If the case is transferred to another division, any bail or appearance bond given for the appearance of the juvenile shall continue in effect in the division to which the case is transferred.

(l) Any party may appeal from a transfer order.

(m) The circuit court may conduct a transfer hearing and an extended juvenile jurisdiction hearing under § 9-27-503 at the same time.

Eyewitness identification is often considered the best evidence short of DNA that a prosecutor can have. Indeed sometimes it is the only evidence linking someone to the crime. This ABC News Story has a lot of good information on eyewitness identifications.

This is a Police Report on the events that broke the story of Masha Allens story. If you will recall I detailed her story in "A Child's Tale" below. It is so cool to be able to see the original Police Report on the web. Damn, I love the internet! It reads like a action packed novel.

What you know influences your actions and reactions to people, places, and things. I have recently posted controversial material on my website. I did so not to shock or anger anyone, but because it was information that was being censored. Along those lines Wikileaks.org has preserved news clips concerning those in Tibet that want to be free from Chinese oppression. Click on the link above to get an idea about what is going on that China doesn't want us to know. I am also sure that our Government would like us not to know as well since it could strain our relations with a country whose money is needed more than ever to shore up our failing economy.

I was shocked by the film Fitna. Here is the Youtube link, the other one has been censored. Fitna on Youtube I was amazed at the prejudice with which it was created and the effect it had on me. I was shocked by the content of the Koran that was cited in the film. I warn you the graphic images will turn your stomach. And when I say "the prejudice with which it was created" I am referring to the fact that it is designed to cause us to feel hatred towards a religion. I want to say now, before going further, that I do not endorse such approaches irrespective of my true feelings. I attempt to adhere to the teachings of Christ. But, I was moved by what I saw . . .

The more I thought about it, the more important I thought it was. You know we do not have to swallow everything we see hook, line, and sinker. But after watching this film I realized that I hate Islam as a religion. For me it was the wholesale generalizations cited in the film that promote violence against those who think/believe differently than a "true" believer of islam. Indeed the newstories are replete with dismemberments and stonings for such things as women not fighting their gangrape hard enough .. .

I would never believe that such a god has any connection with the Christian God that I believe in. I am not saying that we have not committed atrocities in the name of our God. I think that the crusades was one of those instances. However, I have not found the generalizations in support of violence im our old or new testaments. I have seen examples of where jews were supposed to wipe out groups such as the philistines, but I don't see any philistines hanging out at the local gathering spot. I do see Christians and others who don't believe in islam hanging out in large groups and fear that as a result are called to suffer for their disbelief by a religious document followed by millions.

That is no religion and I would give my life fighting against it. But, now this is the point. Even though I feel this way, I feel more strongly in the provision in the bill of rights that protects the right to believe, as distinguished from acting, the beliefs set forth in the koran. This right is guaranteed in the First Amendment. Ironically, it is this very freedom that allows them to believe as they wish in this Country. Their actions are a different matter.


Well, I had promised no more rambling, but I saw this film and it made me think and there ya have it . . .

In fairness here is a response for Islam

I have linked to a document that might be a bit boring for most. It is the complaint filed by the federal government in order to protect the exploitation of these poor misguided women. I can not understand why they might be interested in this line of work. Couldn't be for the 50k and 35k fees that they charged for a three day engagement . . .

Federal Complaint -- working hard for Bush to preserve our morals.


If any link on my Blog ever breaks let me know. I have most of the original material downloaded . . . somewhere . . .

So many of us forget that we have rights in America that protect us from State intrusion into our lives. We forgot it so bad that we allowed the Patriot Act to be passed. We forgot it so bad that water-boarding is not considered torture. We forgot our rights so bad that Son-of-a-bitch Bush has yet to be indicted.

Failure to assert your rights results in prison sentences that are longer. You also may pass up on filing a lawsuit under Section 1983 of the U.S. Code 42 U.S.C. s1983.


This is an easy to read Ebook that is short and to the point. Know Your Rights when encountering Law Enforcement is published by the ACLU.

I have discovered that it is possible to track NSA research funding by entering the code MDA904 in Google. Alternatively you can do so in Google Scholar. Apparently this search has been growing in popularity since it was pointed out by Wikileaks. Here are some of the odds and ends I found:

Large vocabulary recognition of Wall Street Journal sentences at Dragon Systems - all 9 versions »look here

I believe this is research into an algorithym for recognizing speech. I am probably wrong, any help would be appreciated.

More research on improving Speech Recognition Software.

More Language research.


Aren't these the guys that monitor world-wide communications? And since the Patriot Act, haven't they been monitoring our communications?

For me the hardest thing about being an attorney is that we, or at least I , profit from human misery. Oftentimes those who come to us are desperate. They are losing their property, loved one, and freedom. They are paying for a contract, child support, fines and restitution. There has been a betrayal of trust or an intrusion into their lives by the Government.

On the up side, we help these people that are suffering . . . usually. The hardest thing to do is to face someone who has placed their hopes in you and deliver bad news. Irrespective of why, it happens. I have seen Judges and Juries take diametrically opposed positions to what I, as the defense attorney in a criminal trial, believed to be the truth supported by the facts. The Answer as to why this happens is not so simple most of the time. It may be that the fact finder has a prejudice that blinds it. Perhaps the fact finder has cultural filters that cause them to rule a certain way. The bottom line is that quite often the misery that brought a client to my office in the first place becomes a self perpetuating courtroom drama for years to come. Sometimes I think that there is good reason to believe in purgatory.

When a client is satisfied with the work you have done, that is a reward that is equally important as the money. If a client is dissatisfied it is usually due to a breakdown in communication and easily rectified. Well, with the exception of those Attorneys who don't keep the client informed, fail to file pleadings on time, fail to respond to discovery on time, "borrow" client trust funds etc etc. Those are a bit harder to fix. The good news is that those attorneys are removed from the system quite effectively.

I worry most about clients that hire you from afar. There is something about being able to look someone in the eye when you speak to them about their case. To that end I have put in a video conferencing station in my office. If you are one of my long distance clients make use of it if you can.

The most important limitations are those imposed upon the case by the health of the advocate. Common sense tells you that the case is only as good as the presentation. I have never seen an attorney make an effective presentation from a casket.

Ah, the joys of the law. More stories of interest in the future and less rambling!

Oh, if anyone knows of a foriegn country that needs a legal systems adviser, give me a shout! I love to travel.

I have seen it in my private practice and I have seen it advertised as if it is a novel idea. What am I referring to? People representing themselves (Pro Se) using "legal" forms to get a divorce or sue for child custody. When this occurrs interesting results ensue.

I believe that every time that you are affected by the legal system, even indirectly as a victim, you should have an attorney. That attorney should have a proven trackrecord of handling such matters in his locale or, when hiring an out of town attorney, associated with a local attorney. In Arkansas you must divide property at the time of divorce. If done improperly marital property rights may be needlessly lost to the opposing party. Matters concerning custody should never, ever, be handled pro se due to the emotional stress placed on the party. An advocate should never be so emotionally involved in a matter that their courtroom situational awareness is degraded. What I mean by this is that if your freaking out about the possibility of losing your children, you miss key admissions, lies, or body language that you could otherwise pick up on and use to promote your theory of the case.

In Arkansas, the District Court Small Claims Division is the ONLY place you should represent yourself in my opinion. These are civil cases below a certain dollar amount. In respect to criminal cases, anything that will result in imprisonment calls for an attorney to be present. The beauty of District Court is that you have an appeal even if you enter a guilty plea! At the Circuit Court level a guilty plea forcloses the avenue of appeal unless there is a specific agreement between the prosecution and defense entered on the record of the Court.

The complexities of the legal practice can grow exponentially. You can find yourself relying on a form for direction and the law has changed drastically since it was drawn up. For instance it is possible that there is a law that states that if a single clause is void, the entire contract is void unless you thought to add a clause allowing for a modified interpretation of the contract.

I often find direction from jury instructions that address the issues pertinent to my case irrespective of whether it is civil or criminal. But all other "forms" must be by necessity checked against current law. Even attorneys, who are human, make mistakes and we are severly punished for those mistakes. Even if there was no malicious intent. It keeps us on our toes and from doing too much harm to society. Still, if you do decide to handle your legal affairs yourself you should run your "product" by a competent attorney.

Not all signs are for the protection of our children. I have something that I want all parents to read and remember. How can you recognize a pedophile? The FBI offers some tips. Make an effort to look, ok?

New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer has let us all down. Yes, it is true he has been caught! Now, it wasn't for treason. It wasn't for drug use. It wasn't for wife beating. It wasn't for discrimination. It wasn't for waterboarding. It was for something much more sinister. He overpaid for the company of this young lady:

This concerns me --
JP Morgan has exploited a loophole which allows it to engage in insider trading for its clients. An article on Wikileaks.org explains how they do this, begin quote:

Documents obtained earlier this month by Wikileaks from JP Morgan Private Bank, which subtitles itself as "World class solutions for wealthy individuals and families", show the firm has a dedicated '10b5-1 Selling program,' along with a 'dedicated 10b5-1 team' to help its clients take advantage of the loophole.

Here's how it works:

1. An insider client transfers all or a portion of their company stock into a JP Morgan Securities Inc. brokerage account.

2. The insider then develops, in conjunction with the 10b5-1 team, a 'phased, pre-planned sales program to be executed at either market or specified prices'.

3. Depending on the information available to the insider (but not the public), the insider can decide whether to execute the sale or not.

By gaming the system this way, JP Morgan teaches insiders how to use their knowledge to create a rigged market, one in which it is the "house" that always wins, and the small investor that always loses. -- end quote, follow link above for full article.

Bottom line is that there are reasons that insider trading is not allowed. One of the reasons is that it is a practice that allows a few to gain at the expense of many. It also, as I understand it, can destabilize the market. Indeed, insider trading is so bad folks go to jail for doing it. That is what the SEC is all about, making sure everyone follows the rules. However, it is no help at all when the rules are what allow you to do that which is generally forbidden.

Our economy is already in shambles, surely our government is promoting sound trading policies through well thought out laws and regulations. Or maybe not. Time will tell.

I am going to share a document that I came across while visiting WikiLeaks.org. This document was particularly disturbing because it relates, purportedly, to a class given interragators under the Bush Administration. Although this report should be taken with a grain of salt and, possibly, a work of fiction -- it is disturbingly real. I was alerted to one spelling error of the word Pentathal as Pentathol which is apparently incorrect at least when your referring to sodium pentathal. However, there are also some indications that it may be true. Since the verification process is ongoing I will link the article to the introductory page at Wikileaks. I think that it should be published just to get us to think about what is or could be occurring in respect to the torture of Prisoners of War. If it is true, may God forgive us, hell waterboarding alone should have us all on our knees . . . You may have difficulty getting the sight to come up during peak hours; now, without further ado, I give you PIGS BLOOD. This document contained metadata that links it to Dr. Larry Forness.

The following is an excerpt of the Wikileaks.org description of Dr. Forness' qualifications and the purpose of the document that I linked as Pigs Blood:

"The document explains the rationale behind torturing prisoners, torture methods, and a justification for ignoring international law. Forness advocates the injection of truth serums, threatening to inject Muslim prisoners with pigs' blood, and torturing detainees' friends and family.

"Dr. Larry Forness is a professor at American Military University. He has earned nine degrees, including three doctorates and two law degrees, with over half the degrees obtained via distance education. He completed his undergraduate training at Notre Dame and his advanced degree and training from prestigious universities such as Duke University and UCLA. He also earned two Law degrees (JD and LL.M.). A former Marine, Dr. Forness provides classified consulting to U.S. Military Special Operations units. Specialties include unconventional warfare and intelligence." (AMU biography)

Although the document was likely intended for Forness' students, it was subsequently circulated within the US military, where it came to the attention of the Wikileaks whistleblower Peryton, who also disclosed Guantanamo Bay's main manual Camp Delta Standard Operating Procedure (2004), which was authenticated publicly by Joint Task Force Guantanamo."


ALTERNATE SITE IF MAIN ONE IS DOWN: PIGS BLOOD

Masha Allen started life in Russia. At age five she was sold as a sex slave to a depraved bastard here in the U.S.. Of course, as having his own sex slave was not enough, the predator who had Masha was still on the internet trading in child pornography. That is how he got caught. Indeed, it is estimated that most pedophiles have copies of pictures of Masha. Thus far it sounds pretty bad huh? Well, it gets worse.

After being "rescued" masha was placed in foster care. Her foster mother was prohibited from caring for children. Masha was placed with her after this and she was allowed to adopt Masha. During Masha's time with her she was never given treatment for all of the years of sexual abuse.

Because it is a story that needs to be told here are all of the links I could find, even one to Oprah:

1. This is the Wiki article that was pulled about her
2. This is the link to Oprah Winfreys segment which appears to be quite good
3. Lawsuit filed by Masha's attorney which details quite a bit

The sad thing is that it is not uncommon for children to be neglected by the Child Services in each State.

I found a book about corruption in the town of Tyler Texas. This book was taken off of the shelves by the publisher and there are allegations that attorneys for the powers that be in Tyler have taken steps to suppress the online distribution of this book. I wish I still had my copy of "Steal this Book" by Abbie Hoffman. Oh well, here it is Smith County Justice. If you happen to have a copy of this book you should know that they are selling for top dollar on Amazon.com and are considered rare.


Here is an excerpt ". . . All these laws you're going to be enforcing, they're made for all these other assholes around you. There's not one law made for the narc. He has his own set of laws . . ." Page 14, Smith County Justice.

Here is a lawsuit that sheds more light -- read Matthews v. Wozencraft (author of Rush)

It is always important to gather information on a unfaithful spouse discreetely. In Arkansas, based upon my experience, Adultry is the hardest grounds to prove. I have come across this Compilation of sites that have all the gear you could imagine or need to find out if your spouse is faithful to you.

It would seem that such devices might me handy if you think your spouse is trying to kill you . . . not that they would, it just seems that it is a common means of ending marriages nowadays, what with the cost of gas on the rise and all.

Oh, one more thing that last paragraph reminds me of --- the almost accused and publicly convicted Drew Peterson has a publicist. I shit you not. Please view for your pleasure the Article about Drew's personality makeover.