The passing of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg will change the U.S. Supreme Court in too many ways to count. The first signs of that shift may be felt at the Courts opening conference for the term the long conference which, as of this writing, is still on the justices calendar for Tuesday. At that meeting, the Court will sort through a pile of thousands of pending petitions for certiorari. Almost all will be rejected; still, at least a handful will likely be granted to bulk up the docket for the term. Here are just a few of the petitions the Reporters Committee will be watching closely.

Border Searches Each year, agents with U.S. Customs and Border Protection search a staggering number of travelers phones and laptops without obtaining a warrant. InWilliams v. United States, petitioner Derrick Williams is asking the justices to resolve whether the Fourth Amendment at least requires the government to demonstrate reasonable suspicion that the device contains contraband. Butas the Reporters Committee has argued, border searches also intrude on important First Amendment interests, including the ability of journalists to maintain their sources confidentiality, that only scrupulous adherence to a warrant requirement can protect.

The Computer Fraud and Abuse Act The Supreme Court is already slated to hear one case on the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act,Van Buren v. United States, toward the end of November. In that argument, which deals with a police sergeant who used his access to a license plate database for improper purposes, the justices will weigh what it means to exceed authorized access for purposes of the federal anti-hacking law. But LinkedIn is still asking the Court to hearits petitionon the meaning of another major CFAA provision the bar on accessing a computer without authorization as part of a long-running dispute over the scraping of personal data from the sites profiles.

As the Reporters Committee explained in itsfriend-of-the-courtbriefinVan Buren, web scraping is an important data-journalism tool and the CFAA should be construed to permit it, to avoid serious First Amendment and vagueness concerns.

Compelled Decryption The government wants to unlock your phone but doesnt know the password. Can you be compelled to tell them? InPennsylvania v. Davis, Pennsylvania is urging the justices to say yes, arguing that the Fifth Amendment doesnt protect against this kind of forced disclosure. The answer could have knock-on effects for reporter-source confidentiality.

Content Moderation Few laws inspire as much controversy asSection 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which provides internet intermediaries with broad-based immunity from liability for the user content they host. InMalwarebytes v. Enigma Software Group, a cybersecurity firm is seeking to overturn a decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit that carved out an exception for decisions motivated by anticompetitive animus. Malwarebytes warns that the opinion could open the door to liability wherever a party alleges that a platform made moderation choices in some sort of bad faith.

Like what youve read?Sign up to get the full This Week in Technology + Press Freedom newsletter delivered straight to your inbox!

The Technology and Press Freedom Project at the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press uses integrated advocacy combining the law, policy analysis, and public education to defend and promote press rights on issues at the intersection of technology and press freedom, such as reporter-source confidentiality protections, electronic surveillance law and policy, and content regulation online and in other media. TPFP is directed by Reporters Committee attorney Gabe Rottman. He works with Stanton Foundation National Security/Free Press Legal Fellow Grayson Clary and Technology and Press Freedom Project Legal Fellow Mailyn Fidler.

Read the rest here:

Four petitions we're watching as the US Supreme Court fills out its docket - Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press

DALLAS, Sept. 18, 2020 /PRNewswire/ -- Daniel Charest, founding partner of Burns Charest LLP, has been named "Attorney of the Year" in the Lone Star State for 2020 by Texas Lawyer. The honor underscores the breadth of success Charest has achieved for his clients during the past 18 months and the importance of those cases in the Texas legal landscape.

Earlier this month Mr. Charest was recognized among 26 "Winning Litigators" for 2020 by the National Law Journal.

As part of the Texas Lawyer virtual ceremony on Sept. 17, Charest was particularly recognized for his work as lead trial counsel in securing a landmark win for Houston-area property owners before the U.S. Court of Federal Claims. The court held that the United States is liable for flooding and property damage caused by the Army Corps of Engineers' management of Houston-area reservoirs during Hurricane Harvey in 2017. The ruling allows more than 10,000 property owners to recover significant flood-damage compensation for their Fifth Amendment taking claims.

"No one achieves a successful outcome for clients without the support of a great team of other attorneys and staff, so I share this award with everyone at Burns Charest and the co-counsel we have worked with during the past 18 months," said Charest in accepting the award.

Among other significant victories, in July 2019 Charest worked on a litigation team that obtained an international arbitration ruling in favor of the firm's client, Dallas-based Kosmos Energy. The January 2019 arbitration in London secured deep-water drilling rights off the coast of Africa and resulted in a multimillion-dollar award. In addition to the London arbitration, Charest led related litigation involving subsidiaries in Houston.

Charest also served as co-lead counsel in reaching a $52 million settlement on behalf of a multistate class alleging that Facebook failed to properly support and care for content moderators, who frequently suffer psychological damage from monitoring violent and unlawful activity posted on Facebook. In addition to significant injunctive relief, the May 2020 settlement provides class members funding for diagnosis and treatment.

Burns Charest represents clients in large, complex class actions; antitrust cases; oil and gas royalty disputes; environmental pollution cases; mass torts; and asbestos exposure claims. The firm has offices in Dallas and New Orleans. To learn more, visit http://www.burnscharest.com.

Media Contact:Barry Pound 800-559-4534[emailprotected]

SOURCE Burns Charest

Home

Go here to read the rest:

Daniel Charest Named 'Attorney of the Year' by Texas Lawyer - PRNewswire

In 1970, a young Air Force lieutenant, Sharron Frontiero, walked into my fledgling law firm in Montgomery, Alabama, which would one year later become the Southern Poverty Law Center. She was being denied the same housing benefits for married couples that were automatically provided to her male counterparts in the armed forces.

We filed a discrimination complaint in federal district court on her behalf, and within a couple of years, I found myself arguing before the U.S. Supreme Court that female members of the armed forces should be granted, under the due process clause of the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution, the same rights as men.

During that formative experience, I fortuitously came into the orbit of and quickly came to know and admire the director of the Womens Rights Project of the ACLU, Ruth Bader Ginsburg. To make a long story short, the ACLU filed anamicus(friend of the court) brief with the Supreme Court, and I authorized Justice Ginsburg to use part of my oral argument before the Court. We secured an 8-1 landmark decision.

What I remember most was not the argument, but the quick-witted humor and sheer brilliance of Justice Ginsburg. The evening before the argument, I had dinner with her and her late husband, Martin. We hardly discussed the case, but rather had wonderful conversations about issues completely unrelated to the law. I will never forget just how enjoyable that evening was. As a 29-year-old kid who was scared to death about what was in store the following day, it actually helped calm my nerves.

Justice Ginsburg argued and won another four cases on gender equality before the Court.And from her first term as a justice, she made it her mission to guarantee equal protection and open doors for women and other marginalized communities across the nation. She was a deeply principled person who demonstrated great courage and convictionthroughouther entire legal career a championof womens rights, reproductive justice,civil rights and workers rights.

Her grace and steely determination never wavered, even in defeat. "Real change, enduring change, happens one step at a time," she famously said.

Indeed, some of her most memorable and impactful work came in the form ofdissenting opinions. InShelby County v. Holder, the 2013 Supreme Court ruling that effectively gutted the Voting Rights Act of 1965, Justice Ginsburg wrote that the majority had been shortsighted. Getting rid of the requirement for federal preclearance of voting law changes in certain jurisdictions with a history of racial discrimination, she argued, was like throwing away your umbrella in a rainstorm because you are not getting wet.

And her dissent in a workplace pay discrimination case ultimately led to the passage of theLilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act.

Given the transformative figure she always was, and the inspirational icon she eventually became, Justice Ginsburg will be sorely missed by all who knew her and knew of her.

Now, its our turn to show up with that same courage and conviction. In honor of her extraordinary contributions to our democracy, we must redouble our commitment to continuing RGBs mission of achieving justice and equity for all.

Joseph J. Levin, Jr., a native of Montgomery, Alabama, is co-founder and board member emeritus of the Southern Poverty Law Center.

Read this article:

Courage and Conviction: We must redouble our commitment to continuing Justice Ginsburg's mission of achieving justice and equity for all - Southern...

Sharron Cohen in 1973 was known as Sharron Frontiero, a young U.S. Air Force lieutenant in Montgomery, whose sex discrimination lawsuit became the first case Ruth Bader Ginsburg ever argued before the Supreme Court.

That case, Frontiero v. Richardson, became a landmark decision, Reckon reports. Its considered the first successful sex discrimination case filed against the federal government and altered the legal landscape for future gender equity cases.

Her superiors at nearby Maxwell Air Force Base, where she worked as a physical therapist, repeatedly refused to grant her the housing allowance and medical benefits automatically given to married male service members.

That meant she made less in wages than men of equal rank. Instead, the Air Force insisted she had to prove that her husband depended on her for half his living expenses, a stipulation not required of men.

Cohen grew up in a workingclass family and put herself through school, becoming one of the first in her family to graduate from college. Her husband, Joseph, whom she married in 1969, was still a student. The full housing allowance would be a significant financial help.

A lawsuit filed of her behalf by the founders of the Southern Poverty Law Center was unsuccessful. The ACLU and its new Womens Rights Project division heard about the case and asked to be involved. The case was argued before the Supreme Court on Jan. 17, 1973.

Four months later, the court ruled 8-1 that the Air Force policy violated Cohens rights. Specifically, the courts majority found it violated the due process clause in the Fifth Amendment, which says the federal government can deprive no one of life, liberty or property without due process of the law.

Cohen wasnt in court when the decision was handed down; she didnt realize she could attend. By then, she had moved on with her life. She and Joseph divorced. She retired from the Air Force after four years, remarried and had a son, Nathan. She and David Cohen, her husband of more than 40 years, now live in Massachusetts and enjoy spending time outdoors and with their grandchildren and family.

Cohen still identifies as deeply, deeply feminist and worries about the coming political battle over the filling of Ginsburgs seat, and what it might mean for the issues she cares about.

It scares me as much as it scares a lot of people, she said. And it isnt worthy of her legacy. She didnt owe us anything. She gave everything.

Originally posted here:

Ruth Bader Ginsburg and an Alabama Air Force officer opened doors for women everywhere in 1973 - AL.com

When the government uses civil asset forfeiture laws to steal the property of innocent people, it often backs down upon encountering unexpected resistance, as bullies tend to do. But as Gerardo Serrano's experience with legalized larceny illustrates, those victories do not necessarily help other people who find themselves in the same Kafkaesque situation.

Five years ago, Serrano was on his way to visit his cousin in Mexico when Customs and Border Protection (CBP) agents in Eagle Pass, Texas, found a magazine containing five .380-caliber rounds in the center console of his pickup truck. Serrano, a U.S. citizen with a Kentucky concealed-carry permit, said he did not realize the magazine was in the vehicle and offered to leave it behind as he continued on his journey. But as far as the CBP agents were concerned, those five cartridges made Serrano an international arms smuggler. Although he was never charged with a crime, the agents seized the truck, a 2014 Ford F-250.

After Serrano paid a $3,800 cash bond for the privilege of trying to get his truck back, two years went by without a hearing. Then in October 2017, a month after the Institute for Justice helped him file a lawsuit arguing that the government's forfeiture practices violated his Fifth Amendment right to due process, CBP suddenly decided to return his vehicle, which the government had never officially tried to keep. Serrano continued to pursue his lawsuit, which aimed to qualify as a class action, because he wanted to stop this sort of thing from happening again. A federal judge shot him down two years ago, and yesterday the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit agreed that Serrano had failed to state a due process claim.

That conclusion is astonishing when you consider the options that Serrano confronted after CBP took his truck. The notice that the agency sent him 10 days after the seizure explained that he could do one of six things:

1. He could file a "remission petition" begging the same agency that took his truck to give it back instead of selling it and keeping the money.

2. He could submit an "offer in compromise," agreeing to pay the government part of his truck's value in exchange for its return.

3. He could "abandon any interest in the property," letting the government keep it.

4. He could "request court action and have his case referred to the U.S. Attorney for institution of judicial forfeiture proceedings."

5. He could "do nothing," leading to the same result as Option 3.

6. He could "offer to substitute release of the seized property on payment," meaning he would get the truck back after paying the government its full market value.

Serrano's only realistic hope of getting his truck back without succumbing to government extortion was Option 4, which was the one he picked. Yet he waited two years as the government dragged its feet, neither returning the truck nor filing a forfeiture complaint that Serrano could then challenge. In fact, Serrano never got that opportunity, since CBP evidently decided that proceeding with the forfeiture was not worth the effort, expense, legal risk, and bad publicity. Call that Option 7.

After surveying this confusing, intimidating, infuriating, expensive, and time-consuming process, the Fifth Circuit concluded that nothing was amiss.

The three-judge panel conceded that "the seizure of a vehicle implicates an important private interest," which weighed in Serrano's favor. But it deemed "the risk of erroneous deprivation of such interest" to be "minimal," because of all "the remedial procedures"every one of them rigged in the government's favorthat theoretically "permit a claimant to contest the deprivation of his vehicle."

The third factor that the appeals court considered, guided by the 1976 Supreme Court case Mathews v. Eldridge, was "the Government's interest, including the function involved and the fiscal and administrative burdens that the additional or substitute procedural requirement would entail." That factor, the panel concluded, favored the government.

"We cannot ignore the context of the underlying seizure," the court said. "The Government's interest in preventing the unlawful exportation of munitions, drugs, and other contraband is significant."

You might think that the relevant "context" in this case was that Serrano lost his truck simply because he forgot about the five handgun rounds he had left in the center console. Although CBP claimed "the truck was used in an attempt to illegally export munitions from the United States, in violation of federal law," it is obvious that Serrano, who never even crossed the border with his "munitions" and offered to leave them behind when he realized his mistake, was not involved in any such activity. Serrano was never charged with violating federal law, and neither was his truck, since the government did not actually file a forfeiture complaint. Given the situation, the 5th Circuit's invocation of the government's interest in preventing international arms smuggling is comical.

The judges also noted that "a significant administrative burden would be placed on the Government if it was required to provide prompt post-seizure hearings in every vehicle seizure." Due process undeniably imposes a burden on the government; that is the whole point. If the government is worried about that burden, maybe it should stop stealing people's stuff on the slightest pretext.

The Institute for Justice says it will appeal the 5th Circuit's decision to the Supreme Court. "When the government takes someone's property, the owners should have an opportunity to challenge the seizure in court immediately, not wait days, months, or, as in Gerardo's case, even years," said Institute for Justice attorney Anya Bidwell. "The Supreme Court has already said that there must be a prompt hearing when you're arrested. It also requires pre-seizure hearings for real estate. It makes no sense for the Fifth Circuit to hold that a car is somehow different and you are not entitled to quickly see a judge and contest its seizure."

Read more:

Surveying the Federal Government's Kafkaesque System of Legalized Larceny, the 5th Circuit Sees No Due Process Problem - Reason

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg 54 died Friday of complications from cancer. Serving on the Supreme Court since 1993, Ginsburg was one of Cornells most notable alumnae, recently transformed into a liberal cultural icon, commonly known as Notorious RBG to her following. She was 87 and passed away in her home in Washington, surrounded by family.

The second woman appointed to the countrys highest court, Ginsburg attributed many of her lifes influences to her experiences at Cornell when she returned to Ithaca in 2014, according to a 2014 University press release: Her writing was influenced by English professor Vladimir Nabokov, her respect for the first and fifth amendment was cultivated by her college research and even her husband, Marty Ginsburg 53, was a Cornellian, too.

After graduating from Cornell, Ginsburg attended Harvard Law School as one of nine female attendees before transferring to Columbia Law School, according to her Oyez profile. In 1959, she graduated first in her class.

Aside from her demonstrated academic excellence, Ginsburg also worked as a law clerk, professor and worked for the Womens Rights Project of the American Civil Liberties Union before beginning her tenure after her appointment by President Clinton.

The notorious RBG, as she is known to her contemporary fans, was respected across the aisle and was famously friends with late Justice Antonin Scalia, a conservative judge.

Recently, the Justice has re-emerged into the spotlight. In 2018, two large films the documentary RBG by CNN Films and the movie On the Basis of Sex were released, highlighting her life. Merchandise ranging from stickers to earrings are sold with her likeness.

On campus, many groups still expressed ties to the esteemed Cornellian over the years. When the alumna fell and fractured her ribs in November 2018, students on campus created a cheeky Point to the sky and yell GET WELL SOON RBG. event in support, The Sun reported. Judicial collars worn by Ginsburg were on display in the Women Empowered: Fashions From the Frontline exhibit in December 2018, The Sun reported.

Much of her support stems from the progressive views that the Justice held, and the steady liberal stances she held. Some of her most notable court writings involved womens rights for abortion and equal pay.

With her death at age 87, Ginsburg leaves the court with five conservative and three liberal justices remaining, and another seat open for another nomination by President Donald Trump. This nominee, if confirmed, will be Trumps third pick for the bench.

The last nomination process which confirmed Justice Brett Kavanaugh was criticized by Ginsburg as a highly partisan show, according to the Washington Times.

According to the Chicago Sun Times, when asked when there would be enough female justices on the Supreme Court, Ginsburg the second female supreme court justice and a feminist known for her calculated legal arguments and stepwise progressiveness replied: when there are nine.

Here is the original post:

Cornellian Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg '54 Dies at 87 - Cornell University The Cornell Daily Sun

SAN JOSE A court Thursday rejected a defense bid to disqualify Santa Clara County District Attorney Jeff Rosens office from prosecuting a corruption case involving concealed-gun permits issued by the sheriffs office.

Superior Court Judge Eric Geffon handed down the ruling after a hearing in a San Jose courtroom, and soon after denied a defense motion to seal now-public transcripts of the grand jury proceedings in the case.

Joe Wall, attorney for South Bay litigator and political fundraiser Christopher Schumb, argued in a motion filed last month that his clients friendship past financial support for Rosen and plans to call on Rosen as a defense witness posed an insurmountable conflict of interest.

Rosen had repeatedly said the state Attorney Generals office deemed there was no conflict. Ultimately, Geffon sided with deputy attorney general Sharon Loughner in court to oppose recusal in deciding that emails illustrating the friendship between Rosen and Schumb were not sufficient grounds to disqualify Rosens office.

I dont believe the evidence before the court supports a finding of a conflict of interest, Geffon said.

In court filings, Rosen downplayed his relationship with Schumb. He also stated that he returned $1,500 in campaign contributions from him in August 2019 after his office served a search warrant on Schumb and made him a formal subject of a conspiracy and bribery investigation, that culminated in him being indicted along with three other defendants: sheriffs Capt. James Jensen, attorney Harpaul Nahal and gun-maker Michael Nichols.

Walls disqualification motion was accompanied by a trove of emails between Schumb and Rosen, and sometimes Chief Assistant District Attorney Jay Boyarsky, showing a chummy relationship and references to Schumbs fundraising for Rosens re-election. Rosen did acknowledge 125 personal emails involving Schumb between 2015 and 2019, but noted in his filing that they had one email in 2019, seemingly to indicate their contact had tapered off by the time Schumb came under investigation.

Thank you and Jill again for opening up your home and hosting a lovely event for my re-election, Rosen writes to Schumb in a June 29, 2013 email with the subject line Just Getting Started. I appreciate it very much. Youre a good and generous person. In a May 22, 2016 email, Rosen wrote to Schumb: Thank you very much for all your advice, counsel support and encouragement. Im very glad that youre in my corner.

As recently as February 2018 two months before Schumb is alleged to have taken part in the alleged crimes Rosen was writing to Schumb seeking advice for repairing an heirloom Swiss watch.

For Mr. Rosen to deny there was a friendship defies logic. Its absurd, Wall said in court Thursday. His role in this case taints our criminal-justice system All were asking for is a fair playing field.

Loughners central argument was that even substantiating a friendship between the two did not meet the standard for a conflict warranting disqualification from a case, asserting that the application of recusal law has mostly involved scenarios where a DA previously represented a criminal defendant or had a connection or affiliation with a crime victim.

Were still waiting to hear what the conflict is in this case, Loughner said in court. There has to be an actual likelihood of unfair treatment All were hearing is theres a conflict because theres a conflict. They simply say they have a relationship.

Wall sparred briefly with Loughner and Deputy District Attorney John Chase, head of the offices public integrity unit that led the corruption probe, over an internal DA memo Rosen shared with Schumb involving his 2013 conflict with the county over time-off benefits critics said shielded his top prosecutors from county-wide pay cuts. Wall held that up as proof of Schumbs status as a personal adviser to Rosen and of attorney-client privilege that further proved a conflict. Rosen refuted in a filing that he ever sought Schumb as legal counsel.

Harry Stern, Jensens attorney, bolstered the disqualification effort with a motion alleging in part that Rosens office leaked grand jury transcripts and other confidential information about the indictment to the Metro Silicon Valley newspaper, which the DA has credited with the initial tip that spurred the gun-permit probe. In his motion, Stern alleged that the DA did so to shape public opinion and taint a potential jury pool.

Sterns backing for this claim was circumstantial, premised on the idea that only a small number of people would be privy to minute details of the grand jury proceedings such as Sheriff Laurie Smiths demeanor when she invoked her Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination and a motive to leak them. He asked that the transcripts, which became public Aug. 31, be re-sealed. Rosen, Boyarsky and the two prosecutors who presented before the grand jury all submitted near-identical filings attesting that they did not share any grand jury information outside the public announcement of the indictment.

In denying the re-sealing motion, Geffon said he took the issue of a possible leak seriously, but stopped short of granting Sterns request that he make a judicial order asking the AGs office to start an investigation.

The state of evidence here is neutral, and speculative, Geffon said, adding that he rejected the idea that only the DA had a motive to leak the information. The leak was more about embarrassing the sheriff than prejudicing the defendants.

After Geffons denial, Stern signaled his intent to take the matter to the Sixth District Court of Appeal.

I think this is such a weighty matter that it necessitates that kind of an objective review, Stern said. I have to follow that to the end.

In his motion, Wall further argued thatpast acrimony between Rosen and Smiths over access to recordings of jail inmate calls added to the necessity of changing prosecutors. In a filing responding to that contention, Chase wrote that the jail-call issue had been resolved by the time a search warrant was sought for Schumb.

Schumb, Nahal, Nichols and Jensen are scheduled to return to court next week to continue their arraignment. All four were indicted on felony conspiracy and bribery charges that allege they plotted with Christian West, former CEO of the executive security firm AS Solution, and AS manager Martin Nielsen to get the firm up to a dozen concealed-carry permits for their agents in exchange for $90,000 in donations to committees supporting Sheriff Laurie Smith and her 2018 re-election campaign.

When the four indicted defendants first appeared in court together Aug. 31, West pleaded guilty to two conspiracy counts, on the agreement they are downgraded to misdemeanors for his cooperation with prosecutors. Nielsen and another AS manager testified before a criminal grand jury that they both were in line for similar consideration.

After Geffons decision Thursday, Rosens office released a statement that it will continue to fairly and fully prosecute this case.

Here is the original post:

Judge rejects bid to oust Santa Clara County DA from concealed-gun permit corruption case - East Bay Times

Margaret Elliott, a mathematics instructor at Washington University explains the solution to a problem during an evening broadcast aimed at college students on KETC-TV in March 1957. Most of the station's daytime programming was aimed at students in elementary and high schools, and evening broadcasts were aimed at adults. The station didn't begin broadcasting 24 hours each day until 1991. (Jack Gould/Post-Dispatch)

Sonny Fox, the "Finder," plays a guitar during a rehearsal at the studio shortly before the first broadcast. At right is Martin Quigley, station manager (KETC-TV archives)

Trustees of the St. Louis Educational Television Commission gather for the station's first broadcast at 9 p.m. Sept. 20, 1954. In the front row are (from left) Raymond Witcoff, Mrs. J. Wesley McAfee and Arthur Compton, commission chairman. In back (from left) are James Singer; St. Louis schools superintendent Philip Hickey; the Rev. Paul Reinert, president of St. Louis University; Malcolm Martin; William Akin and James Douglas. Compton spoke moments later during the broadcast. (Post-Dispatch)

Students at Dewey School, 6746 Clayton Avenue, watch an educational show on KETC-TV in December 1960 under the eye of their teacher, Anne Johns. KETC broadcast programs during school hours on science, spelling, reading and other subjects. (Louis Phillips/Post-Dispatch)

Steven Bloomer, the second "Finder" on KETC-TV, leads children along a platform at Union Station for their train excursion to Hannibal, Mo., on May 4, 1956. Bloomer replaced Sonny Fox, the station's original Finder. Bloomer's program took students, often literally, to places of interest. (William Dyviniak/Post-Dispatch).

Students from Dessalines School, 1745 Hadley Street, parade through their neighborhood just north of downtown on Sept. 23, 1953, in support of fundraising for KETC-TV. Organizers had hoped to be on the air by then, but the original cost estimates were optimistic. (Edward J. Burkhardt/Post-Dispatch)

Mrs. Clarence Meeker (right), a volunteer for KETC-TV, receives a donation from Mrs. Thomas Weaks, 5224 Delmar Boulevard, during a door-knocking drive on Sept. 24, 1953, to raise money for the station. The drive raised about $105,000. (Post-Dispatch)

Residents gather in the KETC-TV studio on April 5, 1957, for a live group discussion of the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Ran Lincoln, seated at the desk in the middle, served as moderator. The discussion was part of the station's Free Assembly series. The Fifth Amendment protects against self-incrimination, among other rights. (Post-Dispatch)

Students took part in a fundraising drive to keep KETC-TV on the air in June 1955. The station broadcast during part of school days and for two or three hours in the evening. It regularly ran short of money until it began the membership drives that continue today. The student representatives were gathered outside the station office, Millbrook and Big Bend boulevards at Washington University, to draw attention to the station's needs. They are, from left, Ann Hoeller, James Newcombe, Andrew Schwartz and Dennis Birke, all of Flynn Park School in University City; Stancil Cooper Jr., John Reichman and Stephen Schwartz, all of Hanley Junior High in University City; Robert Desloge of Our Lady of Lourdes Grade School in Clayton; and Victor Weisskopf of Flynn Park School. (Lloyd Spainhower/Post-Dispatch)

KETC's first office and studio were in a gymnasium in McMillan Hall at Washington University until a permanent home could be built at Big Bend and Millbrook boulevards. Arthur Baer, early and major booster of the station, financed constuction of the new building, which was named in honor of his parents, Julius and Freda Baer. Arthur Baer was president of Stix, Baer & Fuller, a department store in St. Louis. (Post-Dispatch)

St. Louis Mayor Joseph Darst (upper left, standing) addresses educators from 18 states who gathered in January 1952 at St. Louis City Hall to discuss creating local educational television stations. The mayor's own committee led to forming the St. Louis Educational Television Commission, creator and namesake of KETC-TV, Channel 9. KETC's first broadcast was on the evening of Sept. 20, 1954. (Lester Linck/Post-Dispatch)

Sonny Fox, known as the Finder in the early days of KETC-TV, shows one of the station's cameras in July 1954 to children in the summer day camp at Hamilton School, 5851 Westminster Place. The station had broadcast some closed-circuit programs the previous school year and was preparing to go on the air in September. The station's first studio was in a gymnasium in McMillan Hall at Washington University. Fox was the "Finder" because he traveled the area in a Corvette searching for stories of interest to young people. (Buel White/Post-Dispatch)

UNIVERSITY CITY Eight men and a woman, all prominent residents, gathered on the temporary set at Washington University. As hot lights glared for the live camera, a voice told viewers, "You are watching KETC."

Public television made its debut in St. Louis at 9 p.m. Sept. 20, 1954, with a one-hour show. Seated among the introductory VIPs was Arthur Compton, chairman of the St. Louis Educational Television Commission, who called the station "a powerful means of education. It doesn't use books, it uses pictures and sound."

It had taken more than two years of planning and fund-raising to put KETC on the air.

Work began in earnest in April 1952, when the Federal Communications Commission announced it would take applications for 2,051 new TV stations across the country. Six were to be for St. Louis, including Channel 9, designated "non-commercial."

Back then, St. Louis had one station KSD-TV (Channel 5), owned by the Post-Dispatch and on the air since 1947. A TV set cost a whopping $200, the equivalent of more than $1,600 today. For more perspective, women's cotton dresses were $4, chicken was 53 cents per pound and typists started at $160 per month.

St. Louis Mayor Joseph Darst pushed to form the local commission, led by Compton, the chancellor of Washington University. Other members included the Rev. Paul Reinert, president of St. Louis University, and city schools Superintendent Philip Hickey. The Ford Foundation and Arthur Baer, a local department store owner, made hefty donations, and 21 area school districts kicked in money. Call letters "KETC" stood for Educational Television Commission, although the group's first choice had been KNOW. The goal was to begin broadcasting in 1953.

Read the rest here:

Sept. 20, 1954: Channel 9 hits the airwaves in St. Louis - STLtoday.com

Jeffrey Deskovic speaking in Davis last year at the Annual Vanguard Event

Looking back will feature reprints of articles that Jeff previously wrote while a columnist at The Westchester Guardian, which encompass topics that are applicable here in CA as well as across the country and not simply applicable to NY.

By Jeffrey Deskovic

The phrase never again, although identified with the cause of European Jews, millions of whom were exterminated under the Nazi German regime, is, in a broader sense, identified with the notion that never again would the world watch while an aggressor nation invaded weaker nations, conquering them, and slaughtering a people while the rest of the world watched and did nothing, not wanting to get involved, because of the sacrifice that intervention and involvement would entail. In my usage of the phrase, however, I mean that never again, insofar as it lies within my power and ability, should anyone else ever be wrongfully convicted and go through what I did. Certainly, in any case, it should never happen through the flaws that are known at this time to exist. We need to have a better review mechanism in place so that if a wrongful conviction does occur, it will not take 16 years to correct.

I do not believe that wrongful convictions will ever be totally eliminated. But, I do believe that the frequency with which they occur can be, and should be, significantly reduced, and that the flaws in our criminal justice system that we know exist can be corrected.

Collectively, we must insist that the injustices that presently exist be eliminated. No one engaged in the struggle may withdraw until they have done all that they can do, and then some, no matter that it will entail sacrifice and the diverting of some energies, resources, and focus from ones pursuit of individual happiness. How can anybody be at peace while others suffer? Additionally, a lesson of war, reiterated by Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., is that injustice anywhere threatens justice everywhere. Perhaps today you are not personally affected, but how long will it be before you are? Can anyone be certain that they will never be? Evil never stops on its own, it must be confronted and defeated.

We know, based on the evidence of the slaughter in Rwanda, Bosnia, and now in Darfur, that the world, once again, failed in its promise. Can we do better in this matter? I am committed to combating wrongful convictions, but I know that I cannot be successful by myself. Everyone must do their part, do the little bit that they can. Below are listed changes that must be made in the system, to ensure that others do not suffer in the same way that I did, along with a rationale supporting each proposed change.

Will you, yes you, join me by contacting Governor Spitzer, Attorney General Cuomo, Speaker Silver, and Senate Majority Leader Bruno, in asking that these legislative changes be advocated and enacted? Or, will you wait, doing nothing, until eventually, like Pearl Harbor, the problem comes home directly to you and you find yourself, or a loved one, wrongfully arrested and convicted?

Changes

The ultimate goal is to bring about legislative changes. Below are the changes I am advocating. Having been through the system, I know all too well where the cracks in it lie, both from what I experienced first-hand, and from my studies on wrongful convictions, which I was forced to become well-versed in back when I was incarcerated and took to studying in a desperate effort to find something that I could emulate so that I too could be exonerated.

You know, it is common that when we adopt new laws, we frequently name them after the person whose suffering inspired them, thus both honoring them and ensuring that neither they nor what they went through will ever be forgotten. Hence the appellations, for example, of Jennas law which pertains to sentencing repeated violent offenders and The Kirk Bloodsworth Innocence Protection Act, whose aim was to protect innocent defendants but which wound up getting watered down before being passed.

Naturally, I would be honored if a bill containing my proposed changes were named after me. However, instead of it containing my first name, and thus being named Jeffreys Law, I would much prefer it be known as Deskovics Law, thus making it easier for those who certainly will come after me to discover who I was and what I went through. Not for vanitys sake, mind you, but because I would never want people to forget what happened to me; that the awareness is brought home that a wrongful arrest and conviction can happen to anyone, at any time, through a wide variety of possible ways, even above and beyond a coerced, false confession.It is through this awareness that I would hope that a sense of alarm will be triggered in the minds of the People, followed by actions, efforts, and a never rest-type of determination until concrete changes are achieved, lowering the possibility of a wrongful conviction, and making it safer for everybody. Nobody should ever go through an unjust prison sentence as I did, much less have to endure that injustice for 16 years before exoneration.

NEVER AGAIN.

All interrogations must be videotaped

Videotaping interrogations would enable there to be a complete record of what was said, when, and in what context. It would also prevent police officers from omitting those unpleasant little details that they would rather the world not know about. Similarly, some officers would refrain from some abusive tactics because they would know that the tape is playing. Videotaping would enable interrogations to be more easily reviewed by courts, juries, false confession experts. Additionally, the police practice, sometimes unintentionally engaged in, that involves providing suspects with intimate details of a crime in the course of interrogating them, then ascribing those details to the suspect, claiming that only the killer would have know them, would be seriously curtailed. Conversely, police interrogators would be more protected from false allegations of coercion.

To be sure, videotaping interrogations is not a panacea, for the tape does not show what was said or done prior to the tape being turned on, nor what happened once it was turned off. Yet it is always better to have some measure of protection, even if it is not total, rather than none at all. Of course, all videotaped interrogations must begin with the clear and unmistakable issuance of complete Miranda warnings to the suspect, thus insuring that whatever statement is made was voluntary and knowing and that the individual interrogated was aware that he had the right to remain silent, that any statement he made might be used against him, that he had the right to the presence of an attorney, and that if he could not afford an attorney, one would be appointed.

Other tactics which are known to produce false confessions and therefore wrongful convictions must be outlawed.

According to The Innocence Project, with respect to DNA exonerations, false confessions have been the cause of 25% of wrongful convictions. There needs to be many changes made in order to reduce the risk of false confessions. Below are specific tactics which are currently in use which produce false confessions, and which should be absolutely banned:

Lengthy Interrogations

The treatise False Interrogations In The Post DNA World by Drizin and Leo, discussing cases of false confessions obtained following lengthy interrogations, declares, More than 80% of the false confessors were interrogated for more than six hours, and 50% of the false confessors were interrogated for more than twelve hours. Interrogation-induced false confessions tend to be correlated with lengthy interrogations in which the innocent suspects resistance is worn down, coercive techniques are used, and the suspect is made to feel hopeless, regardless of his innocence.

Threats

Threats result in false confessions. When physical harm is threatened, either explicitly, via literal verbiage, or implicitly, then physical self-preservation at any cost becomes the goal. Threats of being overcharged or a longer prison sentence are posed, along with the similar game of we already know it is you, so you are going away whether you admit it or not. How is it going to look for you if you dont admit it?

Claiming to have evidence that doesnt exist

This tactic results in false confessions because like threats, it conveys the futility of maintaining innocence. It is important to understand that this doesnt happen in a vacuum, meaning all at once. Rather, we are speaking about a period of time, during which innocent suspects are worn down by psychological tactics, food deprivation, and lack of supportive people present to boost morale. Once a futile mindset has been established, the goal of the accused becomes since I am going to be arrested anyway, I dont want to make it worse than what it already is.

Use of the polygraph

Polygraph machine use has been linked to the obtaining of false confessions. There is a consensus in the scientific community that the polygraph, also called a lie detector, is not reliable. The premise of the test is that a person who is lying will become nervous and therefore their pulse rate, their respiration and other physiological indicators will change significantly. The pulse

rate is the primary measurement. It has been established that the test is inaccurate because frightened but innocent people often fail the tests because their fear causes their pulse rate to go up (See Psychology Today, an article by Lykken, March 1975, pp56-60).

The purpose of falsely telling a suspect that they failed the test is to employ it as a psychological weapon to convey the idea that the maintenance of ones innocence is futile, we already know that it is you, dont make it worse on yourself than it already is by lying to us. Use of the polygraph should be disallowed because in any case, the polygraph is not accurate, and it has been repeatedly shown that police are perfectly willing to misuse it, leading to wrongful convictions.

It is unfortunate but, nevertheless true, that most often once juries either learn or get the impression, rightly or wrongly, directly or indirectly, that a defendant has failed a polygraph, they often rely upon this to the exclusion of all else, placing a disproportionate amount of weight where no weight should be placed at all.

Having already proven itself to be an unreliable method from which many wrongful convictions have been obtained, we should outlaw the use of polygraphs to improve the reliability of results obtained in the courtroom. In my own Appellate Brief, page 12, testimony is referenced by the polygraphist that When unable to say Deskovic failed the first test, he administered two more, and told him you told me within yourself that you did it. I just want you to tell me from your mouth that you did it.. The polygraph was utilized to obtain the coerced, false confession. My case is by no means an isolated example.

Interrogation Of Those Who Are Mentally Retarded Or Have Other Psychological Problems Without A lawyer Should Be Banned

The reason for this is that often a hallmark of the behavior of the mentally ill is their desire to please others. It becomes obvious that police want a confession, and, in an effort to please them, the mentally ill provide false confessions. Consider the case of Earl Washington. Earl had an IQ of 68, and, as his case profile on the Innocence Projects website states, psychological analyses stated that to compensate for his disability Washington would politely defer to any authority figure he came into contact with. He gave police concessions to five different crimes. Four of them were discounted as unreliable. Somehow one of them was seen as reliable and he was prosecuted based upon it. Earl was convicted in Virginia of capital murder and rape and sentenced to death. He came within 9 days of being executed. Ultimately he was cleared by DNA, after serving 17 years, 10 of them on death row.

In New York Doug Warney served 10 years for a murder and rape which DNA later proved that he did not commit. He was interrogated for 12 hours. He, too, had mental health issues, and an eighth grade education. There was no law in place to prevent police from questioning him without a lawyer present, and he therefore gave a false confession which caused him to needlessly spend 10 years in prison. Prosecutors originally attempted to convict him for a capital murder charge for which he would then be eligible for the death penalty.

There Should Be A Pre-Trial Hearing In Which False Confession Experts Review all Alleged Confessions for Truthfulness Prior to a Confession Being Allowed as Evidence

Presently there is no pre-trial hearing whose purpose it is to determine truthfulness. The only pre-trial hearing that exists right now with respect to alleged confessions is a Huntley Hearing, in which the focus is on whether or not a confession was made knowingly, willingly, and voluntarily, whether the Miranda Warnings were issued, and whether Fifth Amendment rights were violated. This is not sufficient protection to innocents, because normally no matter how horrendous the circumstances were under which the confession was procured, judges routinely allow them in as evidence and juries regularly convict.

A hearing is needed to determine truthfulness, and this review should be

made by those trained in this field, namely, false confession experts. By analogy, when it comes to identification testimony, before eyewitness testimony is allowed in as evidence at a trial, its reliability must first be passed upon in a pre-trial hearing, to ensure accuracy, because when that type of evidence is allowed in it presents a serious obstacle to be overcome.

Thus, the hearing is a type of protective screening method to try to prevent wrongful convictions. Such protection is also needed in the area of confessions. On page 950 of the Drizin and Leo study, it is pointed out, In cases of wrongful conviction in our sample, 80% (35/44) of the false confessors received prison sentences of longer than ten years.

While the length of sentence may not be surprising in light of the severity of the crimes for which they were convicted, this finding underscores the potential risk of putting a false confession before a trier of fact even though the defendant is factually innocent. On page 953 of the study they further point out, The safeguards built into the criminal justice system failed to prevent wrongful prosecution and conviction, lengthy incarceration, and, in some instances, years on death row.

To further underscore the risk and need for such a hearing, I quote another section of the treatise, which declares, 81% of the false confessors who chose to take their case to trial were wrongfully convicted. In other words, approximately four out of every five innocent individuals who chose to take their case which was typically based on nothing more than a confession that was subsequently proven false, were wrongfully convicted! Clearly, additional protections are needed. This measure will add another layer, another barrier of protection between the innocent and wrongful conviction.

Jeffrey Deskovic, JD, MA, is an internationally recognized wrongful conviction expert and founder of The Jeffrey Deskovic Foundation for Justice, which has freed 7 wrongfully convicted people and helped pass 3 laws aimed at preventing wrongful conviction. Jeff is an advisoryboard member of It Could Happen To You, which has chapters in CA, NY, and PA. He serves on the Global Advisory Council for Restorative Justice International, and is a sometimes co-host and co-producer of the show, 360 Degrees of Success. Jeff was exonerated after 16 years in prison-from age 17-32- before DNA exonerated him and identified the actual perpetrator. A short documentary about his life is entitled Conviction, and there episode 1 of his story in Virtual Reality is called, Once Upon A Time In Peekskill. Jeff has a Masters Degree from the John Jay College of Criminal Justice, with his thesis written on wrongful conviction causes and reforms needed to address them, and a law degree from the Elisabeth Haub School of Law at Pace University.

To sign up for our new newsletter Everyday Injustice https://tinyurl.com/yyultcf9

Read the rest here:

Looking Back: Never Again Part 1 - The Peoples Vanguard of Davis

Oracle won the bid for TikTok in the United States sector, beating out big competitors like Microsoft.

Because Microsoft shared a similar audience to TikTok and was planning to partner with Walmart, Microsoft was widely seen as the likeliest American company to acquire [TikTok].Because Oracle has a history of collaborating with the US government, this partnership is a strategic move given the Chinese opposition undercurrents in the White House, wrote Scott Nover of Adweek.

Oracles partnership with TikTok is ambiguous. The agreement states that ByteDance and Oracle will become technology partners, with Oracle will assuming management of user data in the US. Negotiations are underway for Oracle to take stake in TikToks US operations.

This arrangement would not be wholesale sell of the company, however. In fact, today Chinas state broadcaster CGTN has said that ByteDance does not plan on selling to Microsoft or Oracle or any U.S. buyers for that matter, said TechCrunch.

ByteDance recently sued the US government over Trumps executive order from Aug 6, claiming that the order violated their first and fifth amendment rights. The case is still ongoing. If TikTok doesnt find another buyer by September 20th, the US government has threatened to shut down the service.

Broadband provider Century Link is legally changing its name to Lumen Technologies, or Lumen.

Lumen CEO Jeff Storey and other company officials said that Lumen plans to lead enterprises through the fourth industrial revolution by providing global technology infrastructure, as well as business solutions and services.

The broadband providers is rebranding itself as worldwide fiber network providing adaptive networking, edge cloud and information technology, connected security, and communications and collaboration.

Lumen also plans to launch a product it is dubbing quantum fiber, which it says is a fully digital platformfor delivering fiber-based products and services to residents and small businesses. The company will continue to supply fiber to residential areas and small businesses through traditional networks.

While there is no set date for the satisfaction of all legal and regulatory requirements of the name change, Century Links stock sticker will officially change from CTL to LUMN on Friday.

In the Unwired Planet v. Huawei, the United Kingdoms supreme court held that in certain circumstances, the nations courts may decide the worldwide licensing terms of standard-essential patents and may impose an injunction on use of those patents if those terms are not honored, according to a blog post of Michael Rosen of the American Enterprise Institute.

In the UK, industry groups establish a technical standard and decide what patents are covered by that standard. The owners are then required to licence those patents out as guided by the so called-FRAND principles (free, reasonable and non-discriminatory).

In this case, Unwired acquired essential 2G, 3G, and 4G patents from Ericsson and sued Huawei for infringement. The European Telecommunications Standards Institute imposed the FRAND obligation on the owners of the essential patents.

Huawei had infringed on Unwireds patents, according to a lower court ruling. Huawei appealed the decision, arguing that FRAND-terms only covered UK patents. But the supreme court instead held that the ETSI agreement was intended to have international effect.

Courts in other nations including China and Germany may determine that they too have the ability to set the terms of a global FRAND license between SEP-holders and implementers, said attorneys at Norton Rose Fulbright. That could encourage others to race to their preferred jurisdiction to resolve future FRAND disputes.

The rest is here:

Oracle as the New TikTok Boss, Century Link Rebrands Itself Lumen, Litigating 5G Patents in the UK - BroadbandBreakfast.com

Earlier this year, a survivor of sex-trafficker Jeffrey Epstein filed a lawsuit claiming the financier and his alleged accomplice, Ghislaine Maxwell, groomed her for sex in the '90s starting when she was 14. The woman, referred to as Jane Doe, also claimed Epstein introduced her to Donald Trump at Mar-A-Lago and asked the future president, This is a good one, right? (Doe did not accuse Trump of any misconduct.)

On Monday, a federal judge put Does lawsuit on hold pending the resolution of Maxwells criminal trial, scheduled for July 12, 2021. Maxwell, who is a defendant in Does suit, is facing a slew of charges related to Epsteins underage sex ring.

U.S. District Judge Debra Freeman ruled Does litigation would result in undue prejudice for the British socialite. Should discovery in the civil action proceed, Maxwell would be forced to decide whether to defend herself by making pretrial disclosures and giving deposition testimony (which could be used against her in the criminal case) or to invoke her Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination (which would protect her in the criminal case, but which could well result in an adverse inference being drawn against her in the civil case), Freeman noted in her order.

Days before the ruling, federal prosecutors submitted a letter arguing a complete stay of this civil action will serve the public interest of preserving the integrity of the criminal prosecution against Maxwell. They said Maxwells indictment contains allegations that overlap with those mentioned in Does complaint.

As we reported, Doe was the last holdout against Epsteins estate. She had chosen to continue her litigation despite what her lawyers described as pressure from the estates co-executors, Darren Indyke and Richard Kahn, to stay her case and pursue a claim with the victims compensation fund instead. (Survivors are not required to pause their litigation until they accept an offer from the fund.)

Before Does case was interrupted, her lawyers tried to schedule depositions for Maxwell, Indyke, and Kahn. Does attorney Robert Glassman has previously stated Indyke, Epsteins longtime personal lawyer, has firsthand knowledge of Epsteins relationship with Doe and even acted on [Epsteins] behalf to communicate with [Doe] on several occasions.

In late August, Glassman fought to keep Does case active, arguing in a letter that continuing the litigation was in the publics interest.

The continuation of this last remaining civil avenue can furnish the public with critical information as to defendant Maxwell's well known criminal enterprise, how it was operated and all those involved, Glassman wrote to Freeman. A stay of the civil proceedings would provide what defendant Maxwell has sought for yearsconcealing her heinous acts from public view.

Delaying Does case, Glassman added, would simply delay long overdue justice for his client.

For too long Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell skirted the consequences of their vile acts. Sadly, defendant Maxwells seeking a stay is consistent with her decades-long routine of resisting accountability for sexually abusing minors.

See the original post:

Lawsuit of Epstein Victim Who Says He Introduced Her to Trump Put on Hold - The Daily Beast

US government says "at present" it doesn't plan to prosecute WeChat users for downloading or using the app.

The Trump administration's looming ban on WeChat won't target people who use or download the Chinese-owned app, the administration said in a filing Wednesday. The government's filing came in response to a lawsuit filed in August by a group of WeChat users who aren't affiliated with the company behind the app and argued that President Donald Trump's ban is unconstitutional.

Trump signed an executive order on Aug. 6 banning US transactions on WeChat, calling the messaging app owned by Chinese giant TenCent a "significant" threat to national security. The user group's lawsuit sought a restraining order against the executive order, calling it "vaguely worded" and saying it fails to provide evidence that WeChat poses a threat to US national security.

Subscribe to the Mobile newsletter, receive notifications and see related stories on CNET.

The Justice Department said in the filing it had notified the WeChat users that their use of the app wasn't prohibited by the order, without addressing the concerns central to their legal challenge.

"While the Department of Commerce continues to review a range of transactions, including those that could directly or indirectly impact use of the WeChat app, we can provide assurances that the secretary does not intend to take actions that would target persons or groups whose only connection with WeChat is their use or downloading of the app to convey personal or business information between users, or otherwise define the relevant transactions in such a way that would impose criminal or civil liability on such users," the administration said in a filing with the Northern California District Court (see below).

"In other words, while use of the app for such communications could be directly or indirectly impaired through measures targeted at other transactions, use and downloading of the app for this limited purpose will not be a defined transaction, and such users will not be targeted or subject to penalties."

The WeChat users' Aug. 23 lawsuit said Trump's order "targets and silences WeChat users, the overwhelming majority of whom are members of the Chinese and Chinese-speaking communities," the complaint says. "It regulates constitutionally protected speech, expression, and association and is not narrowly tailored to restrict only that speech which presents national security risks to the United States."

The WeChat users group responded by saying the administration's filing failed to address the concerns laid out in their challenge.

"Defendants' 'representations and assurances' in their Notice Regarding Implementation fall far short of what is needed to address the serious and substantial First and Fifth Amendment issues raised by the [executive order]," the WeChat users group said in a subsequent filing Wednesday (see below). "Instead, Defendants' filing demonstrates that a preliminary injunction is necessary and appropriate to preserve the status quo and prevent the irreparable loss of rights pending full adjudication on the merits."

Trump issued sweeping bans on Aug. 6 against WeChat and fellow Chinese tech app TikTok, citing concerns that data that TikTok and WeChat collect "vast swaths of information" from their US users. There is also concern that Chinese companies may be unable to reject requests from China's ruling Communist Party to access that data. Often cited by critics of China is a 2017 law that requires Chinese companies and citizens to comply with all matters of national security.

A Trump administration filing in the same court Tuesday assured TikTok employees that a ban against that app wouldn't affect their paychecks or benefits or expose them to prosecution for doing their job.

The Justice Department's filing:

WeChat users v. Donald Trump by jonathan_skillings

The WeChat user group's response:

WeChat users response to Trump administration filing by jonathan_skillings on Scribd

More:

Trump's ban on WeChat won't affect the app's users, Justice Department says - CNET

Posted Thu, August 27th, 2020 4:16 pm by Andrew Hamm

This week we highlight cert petitions that ask the Supreme Court to decide the constitutionality of a Kansas law on voter registration and a California law on union organizing. Schwab v. Fish involves a Kansas law that requires documentary proof of U.S. citizenship in order to register to vote. Two lawsuits, later consolidated, maintained that the requirement violates the 14th Amendment by burdening the right to vote and is preempted by the National Voter Registration Act. Section 5 of the NVRA, the motor voter provision, requires states to include an application for voter registration within the application for a drivers license that asks for only the minimum amount of information necessary. Kansas is seeking Supreme Court review after the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit struck down the proof-of-citizenship requirement.

In Cedar Point Nursery v. Hassid, a strawberry nursery is challenging a California regulation that allows union organizers to enter the private property of agricultural growers for up to three hours a day, 120 days a year. Under this regulation, organizers entered the nursery and conducted protests. The nurserys owners argue that the regulation creates an unconstitutional taking under the 5th Amendment because it forces them to allow access to their property without providing compensation. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit rejected that claim because the time restrictions did not grant organizers a complete right of access. Arguing that the courts of appeals are split on whether easements that are limited in time can be taken without just compensation, the nursery is asking the Supreme Court to weigh in.

These and otherpetitions of the weekare below the jump:

Cedar Point Nursery v. Hassid20-107Issue: Whether the uncompensated appropriation of an easement that is limited in time effects a per se physical taking under the Fifth Amendment.

Schwab v. Fish20-109Issues: (1) Whether the Constitution prohibits Kansas from requiring applicants to provide proof of U.S. citizenship when registering to vote; and (2) whether Section 5 of theNational Voter Registration Act of 1993prohibits Kansas from requiring motor-voter applicants to provide proof of citizenship when registering to vote.

Andalusian Global Designated Activity Company v. Financial Oversight and Management Board for Puerto Rico20-126Issue: Whether the Employees Retirement System of the Government of the Commonwealth of Puerto Ricos entitlement to future payments from statutorily mandated employer contributions to ERS pension system, though not fixed and calculable at the time of bankruptcy, is property, and the subsequent payments proceeds, within the meaning ofSection 552(b)(1)of the Bankruptcy Code.

Big Port Service DMCC v. China Shipping Container Lines Co.20-128Issue: Whether the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit erred in recognizing a cause of action for a party seeking to avoid arbitration and in concluding that courts have remedial power untethered to any federal statute and unconstrained by the Supreme Courts precedents governing the grant of injunctive relief to issue injunctions against arbitration.

Posted in Cedar Point Nursery v. Hassid, Schwab v. Fish, Andalusian Global Designated Activity Company v. Financial Oversight and Management Board for Puerto Rico, Big Port Service DMCC v. China Shipping Container Lines Co., Featured, Cases in the Pipeline

Recommended Citation: Andrew Hamm, Petitions of the week: Voter citizenship, union organizing and more, SCOTUSblog (Aug. 27, 2020, 4:16 PM), https://www.scotusblog.com/2020/08/petitions-of-the-week-voter-citizenship-union-organizing-and-more/

Excerpt from:

Petitions of the week: Voter citizenship, union organizing and more - SCOTUSblog

Sept. 2, 2020 By Allie Griffin

Mayor Bill de Blasio said he will give restaurants an answer this month as to if and when indoor dining can reopen.

The mayor said restaurant owners and workers deserve a clear answer soonas more and more industry leaders and politicians have been calling on the city to reopen indoor dining for struggling businesses.

Folks just want a final answer as soon as possible so they can make their plans up or down, de Blasio said at a press briefing this morning. I think its our responsibility to give them as clear an answer in the month of September as possible of where were going.

Indoor dining has been postponed in New York City indefinitely, while it has opened in all other regions at reduced capacity within the state. Nearby, New Jersey will also resume indoor dining on Friday (at 25 percent capacity) which Governor Andrew Cuomo acknowledged would send some New Yorkers across a bridge or tunnel to eat out on Monday.

New York City residents have already been crossing the border to Long Island, where indoor dining is allowed at 50 percent capacity, according to a recently filed lawsuit.

In one Queens neighborhood that borders Long Island, a restaurant owner has sued the Cuomo and de Blasio over the lack of indoor dining in the five boroughs.

The owner of Il Bacco Restaurant in Little Neck filed a $2 billion lawsuit against the leaders this week, stating that the shutdown of indoor dining violates the Fifth Amendment in which the government cannot take private property without just compensation.

The Italian restaurant is just one block away from Nassau County, where indoor dining is permitted. The suit argues that the eatery is losing all its customers who cross the border for an indoor meal at Nassau County restaurants.

There is absolutely NO SCIENCE that will prove that indoor dining is safer one city block east from Plaintiffs restaurant, the lawsuit alleges.

De Blasio has repeatedly said indoor dining has been linked to COVID-19 upticks in other states and countries, which is why he has been hesitant to reopen it in the city.

He didnt indicate Wednesday which direction the city was swaying in favor of, but said people need an answer, whether its a yes or no.

If there can be a timeline, if there can be a set of standards for reopening, we need to decide that in the next few weeks and announce it, whether its good news or bad news, de Blasio said.

The state must also weigh in on the issue and Gov. Cuomo has been equally cautious of indoor dining. De Blasio said he is working closely with the state.

Well keep looking at it, I think we owe the industry as clear an answer as humanly possible soon, but its always going to be about health and safety first, de Blasio said. Thats why weve been so careful on this issue.

Queens elected officials are also pushing for the city to reopen indoor dining. Last week, Council Member Costa Constantinides said the city must come up with a plan and yesterday, State Sen. Joseph Addabbo called Cuomo to reopen indoor dining and bars in the city, as well as the states casinos.

Restaurants and bars in New York City have been able to operate with outdoor seating, but that is not nearly enough to allow them to continue surviving this pandemic, Addabbo said. By not allowing indoor dining especially when just over the border into Nassau County allows it and with the cold weather approaching it will cripple many businesses.

The mayor also said opening indoor bars and nightclubs is more risky than indoor restaurants and that the city will treat them as a separate issue to indoor dining.

No comments yet

Visit link:

De Blasio Says Restaurants Will Get an Answer on Indoor Dining This Month - Long Island City Post

Buy Photo

Alexandria Quinn poses for a portrait in Opelika, Ala., on Friday, July 24, 2020.(Photo: Jake Crandall/ Advertiser)

An Alabama woman prepared to challenge the city of Tuskegee and a former police officer in federal court this summer is once again awaiting her day in court, as chronic delays and COVID-19 trial cancellations have plagued the case for six years.

Alexandria Quinn, now 27, alleges a city police officer sexually assaulted her over a three-year period, beginning when she was 14. After Quinn ultimately threatened to reveal the abuse, the officer allegedly maced her during an arrest on a minor in possession of alcohol charge, which was later dropped.

Quinn alleges other police officers and police dispatchers in the small central Alabama town were warned then-cop Levy Kelly had illegal contact with minors.

Quinn's 2014 federal civil lawsuit was set to go to jury trial in July. Steeled to take the stand and recount the years of trauma that led her to speak to authorities, Quinn was told the night before trial was to begin that it would be rescheduled, due to a rise in COVID-19 cases across the state.

"I went into a depression state, feeling like I don'twant to be here," said Quinn, who was diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder in her early twenties. "Sad, crying, depressed, scared. It's scarier for me now, to know that it's being prolonged."

Last week, U.S. Circuit Judge Andrew Brasher offered the partiesthree potential trial dates in October, November and December. Both parties on Friday filed a motion agreeing to reschedule the trial for Dec. 14.

"When you've got a case like this, where the events that are the subject of litigation occurred as far back as this, so much time has lapsed that witnesses have difficultly remembering," Barbara Agricola, one of Quinn's attorneys, said after the federal trial delay."This additional delay is making it more difficult for us to be able to prove our case. Witness memory diminishes, people move out of town, people change their phone numbers, people die. It's very disappointing. We're also very disappointed that the criminal case has been continued so many times. My client is living in fear.

"We hope we can get some sort of justice soon so that he can't do this to other girls."

As federal court rescheduling continues, criminal charges against Kelly linger in state court.

Free on bond, according to court documents, Kelly has received eighttrial continuances in state court in the past six years on charges of first degree rape, first degree assault and enticing a child under 16 in Macon County. Kelly has pleaded the 5th Amendment in the federal trial and was found liable in May on four charges in federal court.

Messages left with Kelly, Kelly's attorney in the criminal case and the prosecutor of the Macon County chargeshave not been returned.

Quinn said no one investigated her claims against Kelly until the Alabama Bureau of Investigationtook over an off-duty shooting case involving the Tuskegee cop.Court records indicate the Alabama Bureau of Investigation found photos of Quinn and further evidence on Kelly's phone leading to his arrest in December 2012.

The Tuskegee Police Department, which hired Kelly on two separate occasions despite a prior criminal record, fired him after the ABImoved forward with criminal charges in Quinn's case and with charges related to a second, unidentified victim.

Alexandria Quinn poses for a portrait in Opelika, Ala., on Friday, July 24, 2020.(Photo: Jake Crandall/ Advertiser)

City attorneys, who did not return an Advertiser request for comment, have argued in pre-trial briefs that Kelly acted as a private and independent citizen when he detained, arrested and maced Quinn before driving her to the police station and questioning her for twohours.

"Everybody will reap what they sow. I know everyone has good and evil in them ..." Quinn said in June, trailing off before finishing the sentence. "But I think it's his time."

In late July, following the federal trial delay, Quinn appeared shaken in an interview with the Montgomery Advertiser.

"I'm ready to close this chapter of my life," Quinn said, her voice barely above a whisper. "Sometimes I don't want to get up in the morning. I'm tired. It's been too long."

Barbara Agricola, one of Quinn's attorneys at an Opelika law firm, said trial preparations over the summer were difficult, as they asked Quinn to "re-live all of this."

"For her to have to do this again, it's disheartening," Agricola said."It seems like we're on a hamster wheel."

"Over and over again," Quinn replied.

Quinn first met Kelly in November 2007, when the police officer was on patrol duty at a Tuskegee apartment complex she had just moved to. She first spoke to him when her mother was not home, and Kelly asked to look around the apartment, joking about finding boys in the apartment.

"He took his leg and laid his leg out, like across to the other wall. Hegrabbed me and pushed me over his leg and patted as if he was going to give me a whooping," Quinn said.

Court documents state Kelly continued to call and proposition Quinn over the following months until April 2008. Kelly then propositioned Quinn for sex, on "many" occasions in his patrol car while dressed in a police uniform. Quinn, then 15, was too young to legally consent to sexual contact with an adult.

"He had a badge. He had a gun. Hehad a nightstick. He had mace," Quinn said. "When a police officer tells you to do something, you're supposed to do it."

Quinn said Kelly began riding by her apartment, telling her he was watching her house to see who she was with. The police officer would allegedly threaten Quinn, twisting situations to make her feel like she was "the perpetrator."

"He'd threaten that he'd tell and get me put in jail. You know how kids smoke a cigarette, he'd see and threaten me over stuff like that," Quinn said.

In 2010, Quinn said Kelly "forcefully" anally raped her at a friend's house. Traumatized and fearful, then 17-year-old snapped, threatening to call the police immediately. Quinn said he stopped propositioning her after that, though she still saw him around town.

"I didn't really know the damage it had done until now," she said. Quinn has been diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder, she said, after years of trying to avoid the past trauma by trying to "ball it up in a corner."

"But being raped not only rapes your body, it rapes your mind," Quinn said."It's taken a toll on my life. It's like I'm just standing still, and there is something in my way. I've been scared, scared to go to sleep. Sometimes I get depressed and can't eat. It's been a long, sad situation. I cried for years, and I just wish that he would be put behind bars."

When Kelly allegedly first approached Quinn at Lakeshore Apartments in 2007, the police officer had already been sentenced for using a position of authority to threaten another person.

In June 2002, Kelly was a uniformed security officer at a Montgomery apartment complex whenhe forced a man "to the ground at gunpoint." Kelly told the man and bystanders that he was a police officer with the Montgomery Police Department.

Kelly ultimatelypleaded guilty to impersonating a police officer in Montgomery County, according to Alabama court records. He was given a suspended sentence and probation.

In her initial federal complaint, Quinn accused Tuskegee of "negligent and wanton hiring and supervision," arguing Tuskegee hired Kelly twice first in 2005 and later in 2012, after Kelly had worked as a Hayneville police officer for a short period of time despite his criminal record.

In February 2016, Kelly was pulled over in Montgomery for speeding. According to the responding cop's affidavit, Kelly pulled out his wallet and flashed a Tuskegee Police Department badge.

"I know I was speeding, I just finished working an off-duty job," Kelly said, according to the Montgomery police officer's account. Kelly was released with a warning, but the Montgomery cop later made contact with Tuskegee dispatch, who told him Kelly was no longer employed with the department.

Kelly was again charged with impersonating a peace officer, but a Montgomery grand jury didn't move to indict him.

"He impersonated a police officer," Quinn said."That goes to show you what type of guy he is.

Quinn alleges Kelly continues to stalk and harass her. She said he frequently drives past her house. Quinn and her attorneys sayshe's previously made reports to the police but hasn't lately, because she "doesn't know who to trust."

Despite Quinn's allegations of years of sexual abuse against Kelly, the federal trial is expected to centeron the issue of Tuskegee's liability and whether or not it should be held responsible for Kelly's on-duty actions during Quinn's 2012 arrest.

In May, the federal judge overseeing Quinn's lawsuit found Kelly liable of four charges and plans to consider damages at a later date.

In his judgment, Judge Andrew Brasher noted Kelly failed to present any evidence or answer to the allegations against him, apart from denying the initial claims and invoking his Fifth Amendment right not to testify.

Much of the federal trial is expected to revolve around the October 2012 incident, in which Kelly approached Quinn while she was standing outside of a car, which she said she had borrowed from her dad. Quinn believes Kelly was following her after she left a friend's house, still holding a "grudge" that she threatened to reveal the abuse.

According to court record, Kelly approached Quinn from behind, sprayed her with mace and handcuffed her.

Kelly opened a can of beer he found, poured it out and called for back-up. Quinn maintains the beer wasn't hers.

"It doesn't take mace to restrain me. I'm 105, 110 pounds," and was not resisting, Quinn said. "I didn't know what he was going to do with me. He could have killed me, raped me, threw me on the side of the road. I couldn't breathe."

Kelly called for back-up, which arrived shortly. Afraid to be left alone with Kelly, Quinn said she told the officer that Kelly had sexually assaulted her since she was 14 and she feared being alone with him. But Kelly was allowed to leave the scene with Quinn in his car.

Kelly drove her to the police station, court records state, where she was interrogated alone by Kelly for two hours before she was allowed to leave. The minor in possession charge for which she was arrested was eventually dismissed.

Quinn in court will argue Tuskegee is liable for an alleged use of excessive force stemming from the arrest.

In a trial brief, Tuskegee's lawyers say the city had takena complaint of excessive force from Quinn "seriously" and was in the process of investigating it. But the investigation was interrupted, Tuskegee lawyers said in court filings, when Kelly was involved in an off-duty shooting and evidence collected by state investigators revealed Kelly's relationship with Quinn and "other underaged minors."

Tuskegee argues there was no evidence the city knew "Kelly would use his power as a police officer to hurt her, but did nothing to stop it," despite his previous conviction of holding a man at gunpoint while impersonating a police officer.Quinn's attorneys allege at least one other officer brought concerns about Kelly's behavior with underage girls to the police chief in 2007, which Tuskegee denies in court record.

Quinn said ABI investigators sought her out after discovering photos of her on Kelly's phone. Quinn spoke to investigators and turned over diaries she had kept since she was 14 about Kelly's alleged abuse. Three days later, he was arrested.

"They told me they felt he was a threat and a danger to my life," Quinn said.

According to state court records, Kelly spent several months in jail on the criminal charges but eventually bonded out. Since 2015, his Alabama criminal trial has been continued eighttimes. His defense attorney filed several continuance requests due to scheduling conflicts, according to court records, but in October 2019 filed a motion to dismiss the criminal indictment, stating the state had failed to turn over Kelly's phone and related evidence, calling it "egregious" and "gross misconduct" on the state's part.

Quinn continues to go to court every trial term and expected the case to go to trial this spring, before the coronavirus pandemic delayed it yet again. Though frustrated that her case has yet to go to trial in criminal court, Quinn plans to take the stand in federal court.

"Stuff that happened to me years ago, it seemed like it happened to me yesterday," Quinn said. The summary judgment against Kelly brings some closure, but "I'm still walking around in fear. This is something I'll have to deal with for the rest of my life. This might bring some closure so I can put one foot in front of the other, instead of just standing in this one spot."

Contact Montgomery Advertiser reporter Melissa Brownat 334-240-0132or mabrown@gannett.com.

Read or Share this story: https://www.montgomeryadvertiser.com/story/news/2020/08/31/tuskegee-woman-alexandria-quinn-sues-police-department-former-officer-levy-kelly/5494995002/

More:

Plagued by criminal court delays and COVID-19, lawsuit against former Tuskegee cop also lingers - Montgomery Advertiser

What happens when a movement becomes an industry? Thats precisely whats playing out every day in the commercial regulated cannabis market. Its important to consider how the cannabis industry has a more profound burden and responsibility to social equity than other industries.

The road to cannabis industry equality

Its no secret that the prohibition of cannabis disproportionately and adversely impacted people of color. To counter this, many states and cities have implemented social equity programs in connection with the legalization of medical or adult-use cannabis. Social equitydeals with justice and fairness within social policy. These programs attempt to ensure that people of color, and those with marijuana offenses prior to legalization, be afforded an opportunity to participate, meaningfully, in this burgeoning industry.

The first regulated cannabis states, including Colorado, have only recently taken action on this front. Their programs have had limited success, and as an industry, were looking for ways to craft better public policy by surveying the results in other jurisdictions, both nationally and globally. Many problems remain with the implementation of these programs.

Take the requirement in most early legal marijuana states that commercial cannabis growers get married to cannabis retailers. Its often said that plant people (growers) and people people (sellers) do not mix. This led to tremendous disagreements and lawsuits. Californias marijuana social equity program have shown similar traits, including the use of people of color to obtain a license, but then have no meaningful participation. This is fertile ground for corruption and unequal treatment of individuals. Can it work?Only time will tell.

The demand for social equity is currently very high in the industry and has been heightened by recent events: the mobilization of the Black Lives Matter movement, nationwide protests against police brutality, and the like. Numerous large cannabis companies Canopy Growth, Cresco Labs, Curaleaf are now talking about reinvesting in communities and social equity, but it remains to be seen whether they will put their money where their mouth is.

Despite living in one of the less diverse places in the United States, the Hoban Law Group implemented social equity programs in cannabis before they were popular byoffering minority-owned businesses opportunities, advancing minority employees, and sharing stage time with less-advantaged people of color as I spoke around the world.

We recognize that we must do more. We created an Diversity and Inclusion Committee dedicated to advocating for Black, People of Color and LGBTQ employment candidates, clients, and employees. The intention of this committee is to challenge us and help us address the injustices each of us witnesses every day. Our entire staff will receive unconscious bias training for our entire staff, managers, and executive team. The submitted candidate pool for posted openings at HLG has been far less than diverse.While we cant control that fact directly, we can (and will) take steps to ensure that we post job opportunities in a greater variety of forums to draw a wider pool of candidates.

In addition, HLG will contribute to the American Bar Association (ABA) Legal Opportunity Scholarship fund. The fund encourages racial and ethnic minority students to pursue a law degree and to provide financial assistance for them to attend and complete law school. The ABA Legal Opportunity Scholarship grants 10-20 incoming diverse law students with $15,000 of financial aid over their three years in law school. Perhaps this effort will afford promising young minority students an opportunity to become lawyers and build a more diverse applicant pool for law firm jobs.

As stated above, cannabis prohibition has been disproportionately deleterious to minority populations. This has led to many young people that have been deprived of educational opportunities and a future by virtue of being arrested for marijuana possession. Our firm is taking steps to advance the descheduling and/or legalization of marijuana. It is well documented that marijuana has been akey driverof mass criminalization in this country andhundreds of thousandsof people, the majority of whom are Black or Latina/o, have their lives impacted by these arrests each year.

Despite this, federal law remains unchanged. Yet there is a case with the potential to remove cannabis from the Schedule I Controlled Substances List: Marvin Washington v. William Barr,No. 18-859 (2d Cir. 2019). The lawsuit asks the federal courts to declare that the Controlled Substances Act (CSA), as it applies to cannabis, unconstitutional, and to prohibit federal enforcement of the unconstitutional classification.The plaintiffs include: Marvin Washington former NY Jets football player and Super Bowl Champion-turned-cannabis entrepreneur; two children Alexis Bortell and Jagger Cotte who need medical cannabis to live; the Cannabis Cultural Association a non-profit organization dedicated to supporting and educating communities of color harmed by the war on drugs; and Jose Belen a disabled Iraq War combat veteran who treats his PTSD with medical cannabis.

The plaintiffs argue that this classification of cannabis: (i) is irrational as shown by, among other things, the federal governments own acknowledgement of cannabis medical efficacy and safety a violation of the 14thAmendment; (ii) this violates medical patients fundamental rights to preserve their health and lives with medically safe and effective treatments, and their fundamental rights to travel and petition the government for grievances (under the First Amendment), while having medical cannabis on their person; and (iii) violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fifth Amendment due to its racist history and current enforcement.

They are now filing a petition with the U.S. Supreme Court, asking for permission to appeal the lower courts decisions (the US Supreme Court must give parties a right to appeal, since its not automatically given). However, because the U.S. Supreme Court only grants a small percentage of these requests, its important for the plaintiffs to demonstrate the national impact of their appeal. Thats where amicus briefs come in. Our firm will work pro bono to file an amicus brief in this matter before the Supreme Court, a small step that could impact the lives of so many.

We will continue to look for other pro bono opportunities that have the potential to exact social and racial justice as it relates to cannabis. Its the least we can do as attorneys andparticipants in this commercial industry.

Our own HLG Attorney, Sara Gersten, is the Executive Director and General Counsel for the Last Prisoner Project (LPP), which focuseson three key criminal justice reform initiatives: prisoner release, record clearing through clemency and expungement, and reentry programs.A core social justice focus is to release incarcerated cannabis prisoners. Data shows, however, that most released prisoners fail without the proper resources in place. Reentry programs work to greatly reduce recidivism. A criminal record can also be a significant barrier to employment, housing, financial assistance, and more, so wealso workto provide record relief. Collectively these programs help cannabis prisoners become "fully free."HLG provided financial and human capital resources to LPP in 2019 and will continue to do so in 2020 and beyond in an effort to further social justice.

In recent months, weve seen alarming images of local police forces acting violently. Police brutality disproportionately impacts minority populations, who have few resources to combat these wrongs on their own. The National Police Accountability Project (NPAP) is a 501(c)(3) organization and a project of the National Lawyers Guild, founded in 1937 as the first racially-integrated national bar association. In 1999, NPAP was created as a non-profit to protect the human and civil rights of individuals in their encounters with law enforcement and detention facility personnel. NPAPs central mission is to promote the accountability of law enforcement officers and their employers for violations of the Constitution and the laws of the United States. With over 500 members and growing, it affects change in the flawed legal system and fights to put an end to police brutality of all forms. Our firm will provide financial support and volunteer services for NPAP.

Since its inception, the HLG has supported the Minority Cannabis Business Association (MCBA), the first 501(c)(6) not for profit business league created specifically to increase diversity in the cannabis industry. The MCBAs mission is to provide equal access for cannabis businesses and promote economic empowerment for communities of color by creating policy considerations, social programming, and outreach initiatives to achieve equity for the communities most affected by the war on drugs.

In 2018, HLG sponsored, organized, financed, and provided programming for the MCBAs first Denver-based opportunity summit.Minority-owned businesses have greater difficulty obtaining capital investment and other forms of financial support for their cannabis companies. As such, HLG will reach out to the MCBA and offer its members (and referring parties) free investor readiness sessions in order to assist in preparing these minority-owned/driven cannabis businesses for raising capital and M&A scenarios. We will also be reaching out to identify and support applicants for Colorados Social Equity Program on a pro bono basis.

Taken together, this represents our firms first formalized step toward creating social and racial justice in our community. We certainly don't have all the answers and will no doubt make mistakes on our path to improvement. As we watch the evolution of cannabis social equity programs and learn more about their imperfections, we all have an obligation to work for change.

Go here to see the original:

The Critical Importance Of Social Equity In The Cannabis Industry - Forbes

More than 150 state and federal law enforcement were deployed in Bardstown, Kentucky early Thursday morning following an announcement that the FBI is taking over a high-profile disappearance.FBI Louisville said it is now the lead investigative agency on the Crystal Rogers case.Rogers, 35, was reported missing by her mother five years ago; she hasn't been heard from since July 3, 2015. Two days later, her car was found abandoned with a flat tire on the Bluegrass Parkway with her keys, phone and purse still inside.Since the mother of five disappeared, the only suspect ever named has been her boyfriend at the time, Brooks Houck, with whom she shares a child. He has never been charged.Now, federal agents are stepping in to help get answers and are starting by searching Brooks' home and other properties. I have committed publicly and privately that delivering long-sought justice in Nelson County is the highest priority case of the United States Attorneys Office, said U.S. Attorney Russell Coleman in a news release. Todays efforts by our stalwart FBI, Internal Revenue Service and Kentucky State Police partners is a major step in honoring that promise. Law enforcement officers began executing nine federal search warrants early Thursday and will be conducting more than 50 interviews in Bardstown."By utilizing federal resources and expertise and by bringing a fresh perspective to the case, those responsible for Crystals disappearance will be brought to justice," the FBI said.So far, we know of three places where officers are searching Thursday: Brook Houck's home, his brother Nick Houck's home and the Houck family farm -- all of which have been searched before. The FBI has also launched a new website to help share information about Rogers' case: http://www.crystalrogerstaskforce.comThere is currently a $25,000 reward for information leading to her whereabouts, the FBI said. Since Rogers disappeared, her mother, Sherry Ballard, hasn't given up hope. More background on the investigationAuthorities believe Houck, her boyfriend, was the last person to see her alive. Within the first year of Rogers' disappearance, Brooks' brother, Nick Houck, was fired from the Bardstown Police Department for interfering with the investigation.Officials said Thursday they are conducting searches at both of their homes.Early on, friend and employee of Brooks Houck, Danny Singleton, faced 38 counts of perjury for lying to detectives during the investigation, but pleaded guilty to lesser charges of false swearing. At one point, investigators zeroed in on Houck's grandmother, Anna Whitesides. The state believed her car may have been used to dispose of Rogers' body. Whitesides, who had previously talked to investigators, later invoked her Fifth Amendment right, refusing to testify when called to court.Just about a year ago, a new detective took over the case when Det. Jon Snow left the Nelson County Sheriff's Department. Chief Deputy Joedy Gilliland then became the lead until the feds stepped in.Over a week ago, human remains were discovered near the border of Nelson and Washington County, and FBI in Virginia are investigating that. No word on if there is any connection to the Rogers case.

More than 150 state and federal law enforcement were deployed in Bardstown, Kentucky early Thursday morning following an announcement that the FBI is taking over a high-profile disappearance.

FBI Louisville said it is now the lead investigative agency on the Crystal Rogers case.

Rogers, 35, was reported missing by her mother five years ago; she hasn't been heard from since July 3, 2015. Two days later, her car was found abandoned with a flat tire on the Bluegrass Parkway with her keys, phone and purse still inside.

Since the mother of five disappeared, the only suspect ever named has been her boyfriend at the time, Brooks Houck, with whom she shares a child. He has never been charged.

Now, federal agents are stepping in to help get answers and are starting by searching Brooks' home and other properties.

I have committed publicly and privately that delivering long-sought justice in Nelson County is the highest priority case of the United States Attorneys Office, said U.S. Attorney Russell Coleman in a news release. Todays efforts by our stalwart FBI, Internal Revenue Service and Kentucky State Police partners is a major step in honoring that promise.

Law enforcement officers began executing nine federal search warrants early Thursday and will be conducting more than 50 interviews in Bardstown.

"By utilizing federal resources and expertise and by bringing a fresh perspective to the case, those responsible for Crystals disappearance will be brought to justice," the FBI said.

So far, we know of three places where officers are searching Thursday: Brook Houck's home, his brother Nick Houck's home and the Houck family farm -- all of which have been searched before.

This content is imported from Facebook.You may be able to find the same content in another format, or you may be able to find more information, at their web site.

The FBI has also launched a new website to help share information about Rogers' case: http://www.crystalrogerstaskforce.com

There is currently a $25,000 reward for information leading to her whereabouts, the FBI said.

Since Rogers disappeared, her mother, Sherry Ballard, hasn't given up hope.

This content is imported from Twitter.You may be able to find the same content in another format, or you may be able to find more information, at their web site.

More background on the investigation

Authorities believe Houck, her boyfriend, was the last person to see her alive. Within the first year of Rogers' disappearance, Brooks' brother, Nick Houck, was fired from the Bardstown Police Department for interfering with the investigation.

Officials said Thursday they are conducting searches at both of their homes.

Early on, friend and employee of Brooks Houck, Danny Singleton, faced 38 counts of perjury for lying to detectives during the investigation, but pleaded guilty to lesser charges of false swearing.

At one point, investigators zeroed in on Houck's grandmother, Anna Whitesides.

The state believed her car may have been used to dispose of Rogers' body. Whitesides, who had previously talked to investigators, later invoked her Fifth Amendment right, refusing to testify when called to court.

Just about a year ago, a new detective took over the case when Det. Jon Snow left the Nelson County Sheriff's Department. Chief Deputy Joedy Gilliland then became the lead until the feds stepped in.

Over a week ago, human remains were discovered near the border of Nelson and Washington County, and FBI in Virginia are investigating that. No word on if there is any connection to the Rogers case.

See the article here:

FBI takes over investigation of missing Kentucky woman five years after her disappearance - KCRA Sacramento

I sent a letter to Chief Justice John Roberts of the U.S. Supreme Court asking him to please send me a copy of the new U.S. Constitution because the one I have was written in 1787 and it no longer seems to apply.

I figured since hes the U.S. chief justice the top dog in robes, so to speak he probably has the greatest access and can lay his hands on the new version faster than anyone.

I hope he sends my copy soon so I can find constitutional grounds for state and local governments to force landlords of paid-off rental properties to provide services to tenants who dont pay rent.

My copy of the U.S. Constitution says private property cant be taken for public use without just compensation. But Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear joined together with the Kentucky Supreme Court to force Kentucky landlords of paid-off rental properties to continue to provide their services against their will for almost five months to non-paying tenants with no offer of compensation whatsoever from either the state of Kentucky or local governments.

It sounds to me like the Fifth Amendment received major edits in the new U.S. Constitution. This is going to be an exciting read! I sure hope my copy arrives soon.

Id like to share my new copy, when I get it, with Kentucky Attorney General Daniel Cameron. He seems to be thumbing through pages of the old U.S. Constitution, too.

Hes so intent on adhering to the old U.S. Constitution that he has petitioned the courts to find several of Beshears executive orders unconstitutional and even tried to get the courts to prevent the governor from issuing more unconstitutional executive orders.

Such drama! Im sure he will come to see that Beshear and the Kentucky Supreme Court are in the right after he has had a chance to read the same U.S. Constitution they have been reading the new U.S. Constitution. Hell understand completely once everyone is on the same page and playing from the same rulebook.

Im not sure why he hasnt received his copy yet, though. Maybe the rollout on the new U.S. Constitution is a little slow because of the pandemic. Weve all been receiving packages late, havent we?

Maybe Beshear will let me borrow his copy of the new U.S. Constitution while Im waiting for Roberts to send me mine. Ill bet Beshear has his copy memorized. Ive been watching him, and hes been laying down new laws so quickly that are so unrecognizable to me that they must have their grounds in the new U.S. Constitution.

It reminds me of the first time I saw Michael Jackson do the moonwalk. I didnt know what he was doing. I just knew that I had never seen anyone else do it. It was foreign to me, and he was doing it with incredible skill just like Beshear is doing now with the new U.S. Constitution. Mighty fancy footwork, Governor!

On second thought, I wont ask the governor if I can borrow his copy of the new U.S. Constitution. I think Ill write a letter to Beshear just like the one I sent to Roberts and ask him to give me a copy of the new U.S. Constitution. He is a very generous guy!

After all, he just took money away from Kentucky landlords and used it to give free rent to thousands of non-paying tenants. Surely, he wouldnt mind giving me a copy of the new U.S. Constitution even if he has to take it from someone else first.

You might want to hurry up and ask Beshear for a copy yourself. Everyone is going to want one and there seems to be a limited supply.

700 Capitol Ave., Suite 100

Laurie Delk Chittenden, of Frankfort, is a Realtor and auctioneer. She can be emailed at laurie@anne-royce.com.

Read this article:

Guest columnist: May I have a copy of the 'new' Constitution? - State-Journal.com

Schuyler Tilney and 222 Ridgeview Drive (Linkedin, Sothebys)

An investor in energy services and his wife, a former Enron executive, bought a house in Palm Beach.

Schuyler and Elizabeth Tilney paid $6.5 million for the nearly 4,000-square-foot home at 222 Ridgeview Drive, according to records. It was an off-market sale.

The four-bedroom, five-and-a-half bath house was built in 2007. The home has a master suite on the first floor, gourmet kitchen, full home generator and water filtration system, with beach and bike trail access, according to a previous listing.

The sellers, Edwin and Danielle Conway, paid $3.78 million for the house in 2017, records show.

In July, the Tilneys sold a 19,600-square-foot lot in Palm Beach for $6.25 million to spec home builder Todd MIchael Glaser and his partners.

Schuyler Tilney is chairman of oilfield services banking for Houston-based Tudor, Pickering, Holt & Co., which provides strategic and financial advice to investors, management teams, boards of directors, governments and other professionals in the global energy industry, according to the companys website.

Tilney made headlines in the early 2000s as a managing director at Merrill Lynch. He was the lead investment banker in dealings with Enron Corp., a Houston-based energy, commodities and services company that ceased operations after scandals involving corporate corruption and accounting fraud.

Tilney memorably invoked his Fifth Amendment right to refuse to testify during a 2002 Senate committee meeting on Merrill Lynch and Enron.

Elizabeth Tilney was a senior Enron executive. She worked at Enron until January 2002 on the companys crisis management strategy and is credited with introducing the companys crooked E logo. She worked in account management for ad agency Ogilvy during the 1980s.

High-end Palm Beach houses continue to sell despite the global pandemic. In July alone, the ritzy town saw rock star Jon Bon Jovi close on an oceanfront mansion for $43 million.

In addition, cable TV mogul Jeffrey Marcus paid $16 million for a waterfront home, and an ocean-to-lake mansion traded for $51.4 million.

See the original post here:

Got the power: Energy investor and former Enron exec pay $7M for Palm Beach house - The Real Deal

Jeffrey Deskovic speaking in Davis last year at the Annual Vanguard Event

Looking back will feature reprints of articles that Jeff previously wrote while a columnist at The Westchester Guardian, which encompass topics that are applicable here in CA as well as across the country and not simply applicable to NY.

By Jeffrey Deskovic

The American Psychological Association, together with the University of Ohio, recently sponsored a conference in El Paso, Texas, on False Confessions, featuring a virtual Whos Who in the field. It was a verse crowd including false confession experts, clinicians and researchers, defense attorneys, police officers, The Texas Innocence Project, The Justice Project, and a representative from a local Texas District Attorneys office. I was invited as the Keynote Speaker.

Allison Redlich gave a presentation on the relationship between false confessions, false guilty pleas, and the mentally ill. She also discussed some of the reasons that the mentally ill plead guilty to crimes that they are innocent of involving the fact that their stay in jail tended to be longer than that of other people since few cared enough about hem to bail them out. And wanting to get out of jail, some figure that they have served most of the time already anyway.

Still others reason that their public defender is inept and that they would likely be convicted anyway, given the reality of the current state of many public defender offices, including the built-in handicap of often being assigned too many cases at the same time, and the extreme budgetary differences between public defender offices and prosecutors. And, given that eight out of ten people who confess are found guilty, I would say that that is a pretty accurate perception.

Redlich also mentioned that states in which there is a three strikes and youre out law, some of the mentally ill plead guilty to crimes they are innocent of in order to protect a friend. In those cases, conviction would result in their friend being convicted of their third strike, and therefore going away for life, whereas they would only get a few years.

Solomon Fulero is a False Confession Expert, who spoke of the process of getting False Confession Expert testimony admitted into the court. He mentioned that in order to get the testimony into court, it must pass the Daubert and Frye Tests, legal cases establishing the standards through which new scientific methods must pass before being allowed into the courtroom and put before a jury. Two of the more important standards involved are whether or not there is a consensus within the scientific community regarding the science and methodology, and whether the research involved has been peer-reviewed.

Fulero mentioned that in those states in which False Confession Expert testimony had not been allowed into the courtroom, it was because inept lawyers had not asked sufficient questions of the expert, thus failing to lay a proper foundation. He stated that another problem occurred when defense attorneys did not have enough money to hire an expert and would, out of desperation, hire small-town psychologists who did not fully understand the science. As an example, he detailed a case in which the psychologist told the court that the literature was not peer-reviewed. Fulero encouraged the lawyers at the conference not to use as experts those who are not truly knowledgeable, because to do so only makes it more difficult for expert testimony to get admitted in other cases.

He stated that False Confession Experts are allowed to testify as to the characteristics of false confessions, and then whether those characteristics are present in the confession at issue. But they are not allowed to go beyond that. They may not give a direct opinion as to whether they considered a particular confession false or not.

He went on to illustrate some cheap tricks that prosecutors have used during cross-examination. One tactic that he mentioned was that prosecutors often ask whether the expert is being paid for his testimony, as if an expert is not paid for their services. For answering that question Fulero said, No, I am being paid for my time, the same as you are. Another tactic exposed involves when prosecutors ask how often the expert has testified for the prosecution; an attempt to show that they are biased. That question is inappropriate because prosecutors know very well that they are not allowed to call a false confession expert as a witness because it would constitute evidence-bolstering. Fulero suggested the right answer to that question is, As often as I am asked.

I delivered two presentations in El Paso. The first one was an at-large presentation, meaning that it was open to students at the school as well as to anybody in the community who wished to attend, without charge.

There were about 50 people in the auditorium for my first presentation. I told my story of being arrested and the circumstances involved, as well as the judicial history of my case, and my prison experience. I then went on to discuss various reforms that I have been advocating for. I mentioned, amongst those reforms, the need to upgrade the quality of defense the poor receive by leveling the playing field economically, and talent-wise, between prosecutors offices and public defenders. I also advocated limiting the number of cases that a public defender must handle simultaneously.

I mentioned ending the tactics which lead to false confessions, such as lying by police, claiming to have evidence that they do not have, the use of the polygraph and lengthly questioning for hours on end, as well as false promises and threats. I emphasized the need for videotaping all police interrogations. I then spoke of over-hauling all the identification procedures, creating a standardized evidence preservation system, and also of how there needs to be criminal penalties for police and prosecutors who deliberately withhold evidence from the defense.

Then, right there, in Texas, which is an execution machine, I launched into an impassioned plea against the death penalty, mentioning how its existence will result in the continued execution of innocent people; how it is a waste of resources, explaining that, in New York, we spent over $200 million over a nine-year period while executing nobody. I explained how it prevents victims family members from healing and coming to closure by constantly reminding them with the attendant publicity that appeals generate.

I referred to how, just two months earlier, the Governor of Alabama, Bob Riley, had gone ahead and executed Darryl Grayson while not allowing him to have a DNA test performed in his case, even though there was semen available to test, in addition to a witnesss affidavit that Grayson was in their company, passed out from alcohol at the time of the incident.

I then informed the audience that the Governor was planning to do the same thing to Thomas Arthur, who was scheduled to be executed the next day, Sept. 27, without having allowed him access to a DNA test. I made brief mention of the facts of the case, including that the victims wife had told police that a stranger broke into her house, raped her, and then killed her husband.

I further explained that the police did not believe her, and arrested her. And, after she was found guilty, they offered her reduced time in prison in exchange for implicating Mr. Arthur. I further detailed that there was a rape kit with DNA in it, hairs found in the victims wifes car, and blood-soaked pants of the victims wife, all of which could be tested to determine whether Arthur was guilty or innocent, but that the Governor was refusing to allow those tests. I gave them the Governors phone number, listed on the website and invited them to call him and tell him that they wanted him to allow the testing. I was happy to learn that a stay of execution was granted the next day for 45 days, but it was only on the issue of the method of execution, so that the state might change its execution protocol. I encourage people to call the Governor, at 334-242-7100, and demand DNA Testing for Thomas Arthur.

The next day marked the official beginning of the conference. I made a point of attending the lectures of the other presenters, allowing time before lunch to prepare myself for delivery of the keynote speech.

Because the subject of this event was False Confessions, and given that the organizers wanted there to be plenty of time for questions, I had to tailor my presentation accordingly. I spoke about the circumstances of my arrest, trial, post-conviction struggle, and included a bit about my prison experience. I lightly touched upon a few needed reforms, then segued into the causes of false confessions, based upon my experience. I referenced the tactics which resulted in false confessions that other presenters had noted, and indicated how those tactics contributed to my false confession.

The Reid Technique

The Reid Technique is an interrogation methodology which is utilized by law enforcement agents across America. Nationwide, false confessions have been the cause of wrongful convictions in 25% of the 208 DNA-based exonerations to date. The technique I am about to describe is the methodology that is employed by the law enforcement officers in the process of obtaining those false confessions. In his presentation, Joseph P. Buckley, author of Essentials of the Reid Technique: Criminal Interrogation and Confessions revealed that he holds over 600 contracts to teach this technique to law enforcement agencies all over the country. He claimed that his system does not lead to false confessions. I will outline the process, and let readers decide for themselves whether or not the method is coercive and likely to lead to false confessions.

As I mention the techniques in his presentation, readers may recall the circumstances of my false confession, and come to their own conclusions with regard to those who were involved with the planning, coordination, and oversight of what happened to me. I would like to point out, that according to his own testimony, which is in my trial transcripts, as well as in the Appellate Division Brief, Chief Eugene Tumolo knew that the terms of employment of polygrapher Daniel Stephens was to execute a procedure known as GTC- an acronym for get the confession.

He, Tumolo, drove to the interrogation site in Brewster, which proves that he knew that I, a 16-year-old youth of Peek- skill, was being driven to the Village of Brewster. Trial testimony stated that there were listening devices in the interrogation room and in the next room, where he, Tumolo, Detectives Levine and McIntyre, listened to what was happening to me next door. Stephens testified that at times he left the room to consult with Tumolo and the other officers. Further, he testified that at the end, after the false confession had been obtained, he, Tumolo, entered the room and proceeded to interrogate me even further.

Of course, the presence of Joseph Buckley at a conference on False Confessions seemed a bit strange to me. However, as one of the pioneers of the method known as the Reid Technique, along with Reid and Imbau, his input was valuable. My review of the technique is based upon information that he presented, as well as material written by Saul Kassin, entitled, A Critical Appraisal Of The Reid Technique.

The technique is employed by a majority of law enforcement agencies in their interrogation procedures. The conversation between suspect and police is divided into two parts: Interview, and Interrogation. The colloquy begins as an interview, characterized by open-ended questions, in which there is an even-keeled discussion between the police and the one they are questioning. It is only when the police have a hunch that the suspect is lying that it switches to interrogation.

The determination as to whether a suspect is lying is based upon a checklist of fifteen characteristics, out of which, if the police check off any four of them, it is taken to infer guilt, and the mode then switches to interrogation.

The problem, however, as prominent False Confession Expert Saul Kassin points out, is that nervousness, fear, confusion, hostility, story changes or contradictions, are all signs that a man in an interrogation room is lying, particularly in the eyes of someone as naturally suspicious as a detective. Unfortunately, these are also signs of a human being in a state of high stress. Kassin points out that the training that Buckley gives out, despite its claim to place police in a position to attain high levels of accuracy, has been shown to place police in no better a position to detect truth from lies than chance. Once that determination has been made within the mind of the interrogator, however, the communication switches to interrogation mode, which he described as a monologue, of 80/20, wherein the police talk 80% of the time and the suspect 20%, and innocence is taken off of the table. Any protestations of innocence are not accepted and are, instead, swept past and ignored with a renewed sense of energy and vigor, as the interrogation continues.

There are three processes involved: Isolation for some period of time, which increases stress and the incentive to relieve that stress; Confrontation, in which the interrogator accuses the suspect of the crime, expresses certainty in that opinion, and blocks all denials, sometimes citing real or manufactured evidence to support the charge; and Minimization in which the sympathetic interrogator morally justifies the crime in the form of an alternative version of events, such as that it was spontaneous, accidental, provoked, or the result of peer pressure.

Studies by False Confession expert Dr. Gudjohnson have shown that in the interrogation room some people are more vulnerable than others, particularly if they are characteristically prone to exhibit social compliance or interrogative suggestibility. Youth, naivete, a lack of intelligence, cultural upbringing, and social anxiety as well as various psychological disorders, present unique vulnerabilities to watch for. There are problems within each component.

Problems with isolation

I would like to again quote False Confession expert Kassin, who indicates, Prolonged isolation is likely to be accompanied by fatigue, feelings of helplessness, and deprivation of sleep, food and other biological needs; mental states that impair complex decision-making. Yet, there are no limits taught within the Reid Technique as to the length of isolation which would acknowledge these realities.

Problems with Confrontation (and Taking Innocence Off Of The Table)

It is one thing to confront someone with the truth, but it is quite another to confront suspects with non-existent evidence. The presentation of false evidence is implicated in the vast majority of false confessions. The problem is that the idea is conveyed to an innocent suspect that no matter what, you are going to be arrested for this; it is just a matter of whether you are going to make it worse on yourself by lying, maintaining your innocence. Additionally, Kassin references studies that he and other researchers have done which show that innocent people sometimes internalize guilt for outcomes they did not produce.

Problems With Minimization

The problem with minimization is that when a suspect is worn down and frightened, in desperation they look for an out. And, when it is suggested that a criminal act is understandable, that implies that there will be no consequences for making an admission, and so confessing falsely is seen as a way out of the situation. Then, once the false admission is made with the belief that that is how it will be understood, what follows is something altogether different. Whereas an understandable reaction/act is not a crime and would therefore not be prosecuted or punished, the person now finds him or herself arrested and charged with a crime by a prosecutor who is not presenting events as understandable. Instead, even as a police officer testifies as to an admission to something understandable, a prosecutor uses that as proof that a cold-hearted crime has been committed and therefore the defendant should be sent to prison, often for a life sentence.

Yet this incongruence is allowed to stand.

Conclusion

Buckley claimed that his Technique, when done properly, does not result in false confessions, despite many cases which show that is exactly what is produced. As I see it, his Technique amounts to nothing more than psychological coercion, which, in addition to being a violation of the Fifth Amendment, has a penchant for resulting in false confessions. Many of the experts present at the conference severely attacked his statements both during the questioning phase of his presentation, and during their own presentations, frequently offering scientific studies and arguments against him. By the time everybody was done, his methods had been professionally and thoroughly discredited.

In a paragraph that captures the technique in a nutshell, Kassin states the Technique is to remove suspects from familiar surroundings and place them in a small, barely furnished room housed within the police station. Against this physical backdrop, a nine-step process begins with positive confrontation and the development of alternative themes, and ends with a full written or oral confession. Conceptually this approach is designed to get suspects to incriminate themselves by increasing the anxiety associated with denial, plunging them into a state of despair and minimizing the perceived consequences of confession.

Is there anybody out there, who does not believe that the methods described above are coercive, and lead to false confessions?

To sign up for our new newsletter Everyday Injustice https://tinyurl.com/yyultcf9

Read more from the original source:

Looking Back: The Reid Technique Strong Risk of False Confessions and Wrongful Convictions - The Peoples Vanguard of Davis