Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
AnotherMcIntosh
AnotherMcIntosh's Journal
AnotherMcIntosh's Journal
November 9, 2013
A LaSalle County judge in Illinois has ordered the state appellate prosecutor's office to review the controversial strip search of a woman by LaSalle County Sheriff's deputies, three male and one female.
According to an early story by NBC,
A second story by ABC indicates that the Sheriff is defending the practice by saying that the forced stripping of the woman did not violate Illinois law because it was not technically a strip search:
After woman pleads guity to DUI and reports to jail, male deputies punish her with a strip search
A LaSalle County judge in Illinois has ordered the state appellate prosecutor's office to review the controversial strip search of a woman by LaSalle County Sheriff's deputies, three male and one female.
According to an early story by NBC,
"Attorney Terry Ekl, who represents Holmes, said the deputies appeared to have violated state law for strip searching by not getting permission from a commander and not having reasonable belief she had a weapon or a controlled substance.
...
"They seem to think in this county that if they decide that you're not being compliant that they have a right to take your clothes off," Ekl said. "That, apparently, is their policy and that's crazy."
http://www.nbcchicago.com/investigations/Special-Review-Ordered-Following-Controversial-Strip-Search-229624211.html
A second story by ABC indicates that the Sheriff is defending the practice by saying that the forced stripping of the woman did not violate Illinois law because it was not technically a strip search:
"Four more people are now suing LaSalle County for being allegedly being illegally strip searched.
...
"The LaSalle County Sheriff denies that Holmes was strip searched....
"Terry Ekl, who is an attorney for the plaintiffs, says all of them were stripped naked and forced to use a hole in their padded cell floor as their toilet.
"Tremendous human indignities occurred to all four of these people. Regardless of what the LaSalle County authorities are trying to peddle, they were stripping people who they felt needed discipline or were not being compliant with their instructions," said Terry Ekl, attorney.
http://abclocal.go.com/wls/story?section=news/local&id=9317700
November 8, 2013
They didn't discipline the cop in any way. They didn't even put him on paid leave.
Police Taze Dad Trying to Save Son While Burning in a House Fire, Twice After He Was Handcuffed.
The City Administrator for the river town of Louisiana, Mississipi said that a house fire started in an electrical outlet while a 3-year old boy's parents had fallen asleep. By the time they awoke, smoke and flames prevented them from reaching their son whose bedroom was at the front of the house. They fled through the back and the father tried to re-enter the home from the front.
A firefighter also tried to save the toddler, but the house was too hot for him to enter.
While the child was burning and the father, age 31, was trying to get back into the house, one of the cops zapped him with a Taser. His mother saw them zap her son three times, twice after they put handcuffs on him. The last time was after they put handcuffs on him and had him in the back of one of their squad cars.
What's response from the City Administrator?
"City Administrator Bob Jenne called the police response a 'judgment call.' Jenne said Thursday that he is waiting to review a police report from the fire."
http://www.sfgate.com/news/us/article/Police-stun-stepdad-trying-to-save-son-from-fire-4964175.php
They didn't discipline the cop in any way. They didn't even put him on paid leave.
November 7, 2013
When financing the NSA, Congress is violating the First Amendment.
Congress shall make no law ... abridging ... freedom of speech ...
"Heidi Boghosian of the National Lawyers Guild testified: "Revelations of NSA surveillance in the press has caused NLG members working on litigation and advocacy to restrict discussion of legal strategy, case updates and confidential information to in-person meetings or to written correspondence sent by mail. Practical restraints on the frequency of these meetings results-in less robust information to pass between attorneys and has potentially hindered Guild members from providing as vigorous a legal representation as would have otherwise been possible with secure electronic communication channels."
"Dinah PoKempner for Human Rights Watch said: "While it is difficult to get precise information about communications that did not occur, based on the concerns raised by others, I believe that some individuals may have refrained from reporting human rights abuses to us and some partners may have refrained from contacting us due to their concerns about security and confidentiality."
...
"Several organizations said that they have received markedly fewer hotline calls after Snowden's revelation.
"Acorn Active Media, Bill of Rights Defense Committee, California Association of Federal Firearms Licensees, Calguns Foundation, Charity & Security Network, Franklin Armory, Free Press, Free Software Foundation, First Unitarian Church of Los Angeles, Greenpeace, Media Alliance, National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws, People for the American Way, Public Knowledge, Patient Privacy Rights Foundation, Students for Sensible Drug Policy, TechFreedom, and Unitarian Universalist Service Committee also filed declarations regarding the chilling effect knowledge of NSA surveillance has had on their members' exercise of free speech.
"Section 215 is a simple statute designed to give the FBI something like the subpoena power available in criminal investigations," attorney Thomas Moore, an EFF special counsel, said in a statement. "It was not intended to authorize the dragnet surveillance the NSA has undertaken. A government of the people, by the people, and for the people should not be spying on the people."
http://www.courthousenews.com/2013/11/07/62757.htm
"Dinah PoKempner for Human Rights Watch said: "While it is difficult to get precise information about communications that did not occur, based on the concerns raised by others, I believe that some individuals may have refrained from reporting human rights abuses to us and some partners may have refrained from contacting us due to their concerns about security and confidentiality."
...
"Several organizations said that they have received markedly fewer hotline calls after Snowden's revelation.
"Acorn Active Media, Bill of Rights Defense Committee, California Association of Federal Firearms Licensees, Calguns Foundation, Charity & Security Network, Franklin Armory, Free Press, Free Software Foundation, First Unitarian Church of Los Angeles, Greenpeace, Media Alliance, National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws, People for the American Way, Public Knowledge, Patient Privacy Rights Foundation, Students for Sensible Drug Policy, TechFreedom, and Unitarian Universalist Service Committee also filed declarations regarding the chilling effect knowledge of NSA surveillance has had on their members' exercise of free speech.
"Section 215 is a simple statute designed to give the FBI something like the subpoena power available in criminal investigations," attorney Thomas Moore, an EFF special counsel, said in a statement. "It was not intended to authorize the dragnet surveillance the NSA has undertaken. A government of the people, by the people, and for the people should not be spying on the people."
http://www.courthousenews.com/2013/11/07/62757.htm
Profile Information
Member since: Thu Dec 8, 2011, 05:02 AMNumber of posts: 11,064
