Judge accepts eyewitness testimony from a legally blind person

Dexter Saffold took the witness stand more than five years ago and described the chaos he saw at a South Side gas station in 2011. Saffold told Cook County Circuit Judge Nicholas Ford that he watched a man shoot and kill one man there and badly wound another.

And he pointed out who did it — the defendant, Darien Harris, the man in the courtroom wearing the jail jumpsuit.

There was no physical evidence linking Harris to the shooting that left Rondell Moore dead and Quincy Woulard badly hurt.

Still, the judge, hearing the case without a jury, found Saffold persuasive. Ford called him an “honest witness” and said he’d given “unblemished” testimony. Largely based on that testimony, he found Harris guilty and sent him to prison for 76 years for murder.

But what the judge — and the accused — didn’t know was that Saffold had been deemed legally blind years earlier by his doctors and the U.S. government, the result of advanced glaucoma.

Now, Harris, 26, is trying to get his conviction overturned, citing the eyewitness’s previously unrevealed vision problems and also that, when asked about his vision, Saffold testified he had no problem seeing.

More at the Chicago Sun-Times.

Corporate lobbyists write the laws for your state

Each year, state lawmakers across the U.S. introduce thousands of bills dreamed up and written by corporations, industry groups and think tanks.

Disguised as the work of lawmakers, these so-called “model” bills get copied in one state Capitol after another, quietly advancing the agenda of the people who write them.

USA TODAY and the Republic found at least 10,000 bills almost entirely copied from model legislation were introduced nationwide in the past eight years, and more than 2,100 of those bills were signed into law. 

Model bills passed into law have made it harder for injured consumers to sue corporations. They’ve called for taxes on sugar-laden drinks. They’ve limited access to abortion and restricted the rights of protesters.

In all, these copycat bills amount to the nation’s largest, unreported special-interest campaign, driving agendas in every statehouse and touching nearly every area of public policy...

“This work proves what many people have suspected, which is just how much of the democratic process has been outsourced to special interests,” said Lisa Graves, co-director of Documented, which probes corporate manipulation of public policy. “It is both astonishing and disappointing to see how widespread … it is. Good lord, it’s an amazing thing to see.”..

“It’s not inherently bad, one way or the other,” said Siler, who now works for a political action committee. “It depends on the idea and the people pushing it. Definitely people use model legislation to push bad ideas around.”

Allison Anderman, managing attorney at the pro-gun-control Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, said model bills are simply how the system works now...

USA TODAY found more than 4,000 bills benefiting industry were introduced nationwide during the eight years it reviewed. More than 80 of those bills limit the public’s ability to sue corporations, including limiting class-action lawsuits, a plaintiff’s ability to offer expert testimony, and cap punitive damages for corporate wrongdoing.

“No citizens are saying, ‘Hey, can you make it harder to sue if … low-paid (nursing home) orderlies happened to kill or injure my parents,’ ” Graves said. “That’s not a thing citizens are clamoring for. But you know who is? The nursing home industry, and big business in general.”

“This is how all laws are written,” she said. “You’d be hard-pressed to find a law where a legislator sits in a chamber until a light bulb goes off with a new policy.”

Much more information at The Center for Public Integrity, via Boing Boing.

Not The Onion

An unarmed mentally ill man was shot at by police.  Some of the bullets missed and struck bystanders in the street.  The DA decided to charge the mentally ill man with first-degree assault because of the injuries to the bystanders.

Police later said that after a cat-and-mouse game, Broadnax had reached into his pants pocket and removed an object, briefly “pointing” it at the responding officers. They thought it was a gun, and fired three rounds. After the shots, and a tussle with cops, Broadnax was hit with a Taser and arrested.

When the dust settled, a few things became clear. First, Broadnax was unarmed; the object police had thought was a gun was, in fact, a wallet. Second, Broadnax seemed to be in the midst of a mental health crisis. He told investigators immediately after his arrest that he was having auditory hallucinations, hearing the “voices of his dead relatives.”

The third fact that emerged was that the officers who opened fire had missed their target. Broadnax was unscathed. The bullets meant for him had instead struck Khoshakhlagh and a second victim, 59-year-old Theodora Ray, who was getting dinner at a food cart on 42nd Street, as she did almost every night...

Then, near the end of October, Khoshakhlagh’s attorney got a phone call from the office of Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance Jr. Prosecutors had changed their minds about the case: They now planned to prosecute Broadnax for the bullet wounds sustained by Khoshakhlagh and Ray. Under an unusual theory of law, the prosecution claimed Broadnax’s actions that night in Times Square were so irresponsible, it was as if he himself had pulled the trigger.

The top charge alone — assault in the first degree — was enough to land him in prison for the next twenty-five years...

As Binder says, when police are involved in incidents like this — high-profile and potentially embarrassing mishaps — there can be pressure to ensure that someone, anyone, catches an indictment. “It’s not surprising that Mr. Broadnax was charged,” Binder says. “This is something prosecutors do when police behave irresponsibly.

More details in a longread in The Village Voice.


Actually in The Onion:

Scientists Announce Discovery Of Dry Ice On Mars Means Planet May One Day Be Suitable For Halloween Party

Tourist In White House Gift Shop Browses Rack Of Security Clearances

 Purdue Pharma Reports Opioid Deaths Falling Short Of Quarterly Goals

"Paper terrorism" explained

The term is briefly defined on a Wikipedia entry, but is better explained in a recent Harper's article:

In the spring of 2011, Cherron Marie Phillips, a real estate agent in Chicago, decided to take revenge on twelve government officials who had been involved in prosecuting her brother Devon for drug trafficking. Phillips went to the office of her local recorder of deeds, where she filed a series of liens against the judges, prosecutors, law enforcement agents, and court staff who had taken part in his case... Phillips claimed that Fitzgerald owed her brother $100 billion...

Such tactics have become known as paper terrorism, defined by Mark Pitcavage, a senior research fellow with the Anti-Defamation League, as “the use of bogus legal documents and filings, or the misuse of legitimate ones, to intimidate, harass, threaten, or retaliate against public officials, law enforcement officers, or private citizens.” Liens are simple and inexpensive for paper terrorists to file but difficult for victims to scrub away. Even when the claims are obviously fake—alleging debts of outlandish magnitude—the supposed debtors can be forced to spend thousands of dollars in legal fees to clear the titles to their homes or to restore their credit ratings...

Recently, current and former inmates, who were introduced to paper terrorism by incarcerated sovereign citizens, have been employing its tactics in nothing-to-lose gambits and harassment campaigns. Since the sovereign citizen movement tends to attract followers during economic downturns, the next one, which seems cyclically due, may bring with it a surge in phony filings. Similarly, Pitcavage warns that if the Democrats return to power—or if Trump is impeached—there will be a wave of anti-government anger on the right, and sovereign citizens will get swept up in it. “Anytime there is a surge in sovereign citizen activity,” he says, “you will see an increase in paper terrorism.”

Slavery is still LEGAL in the United States

You didn't think so?  Neither did I.  I thought the 13th Amendment abolished slavery.  But I hadn't paid attention to the conditional clause:

Section 1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction. 

Here's some discussion of the penal exemption:

The Thirteenth Amendment exempts penal labor from its prohibition of forced labor. This allows prisoners who have been convicted of crimes (not those merely awaiting trial) to be required to perform labor or else face punishment while in custody.

It was apparently considered noncontroversial at the time, or at least legislators gave it little thought... slave labor as a just punishment for robbery, so that the thief's labor could be used to pay recompense to their victims and to society...

Various commentators have accused states of abusing this provision to re-establish systems similar to slavery, or of otherwise exploiting such labor in a manner unfair to local labor...prison labor continues in America under a variety of justifications. Prison labor programs vary widely; some are uncompensated prison maintenance tasks, some are for local government maintenance tasks, some are for local businesses, and others are closer to internships. Modern rationales for prison labor programs often include reduction of recidivism and re-acclimation to society.

Blogged because the principles involved here have been cited in discussions of an ongoing nationwide labor strike by U.S. prison inmates.

In addition to loss of life, the strikers, led by a network of incarcerated activists who call themselves Jailhouse Lawyers Speak, have put out a set of 10 demands to overhaul America’s creaking penal system. High up on the list is an end to forced or underpaid labor that the protesters call a form of modern slavery.

Addendum:
A followup article on the strike and some data:

More than 800,000 prisoners are put to work each day cleaning, cooking, farming and mowing, in some states compulsorily. In states like Louisiana compensation is as low as 4¢ an hour, even though prisons are entirely reliant on such labor.

Why people are hanged "until dead"

"A popular story in Edinburgh is that of Margaret Dickson, a fishwife from Musselburgh who was hanged in the Grassmarket in 1724 for murdering her illegitimate baby shortly after birth. After the hanging, her body was taken back to Musselburgh on a cart. However, on the way there she awoke. Since, under Scots Law, her punishment had been carried out, she could not be executed for a second time for the same crime (only later were the words "until dead" added to the sentence of hanging). Her "resurrection" was also to some extent seen as divine intervention, and so she was allowed to go free. In later life (and legend) she was referred to as "half-hangit Maggie". There is now a pub in the Grassmarket named after her."

Image via.

Icelanders are organ donors BY DEFAULT

As reported in the Reykjavik Grapevine:

A crucial law on organ donations that was first introduced to Iceland’s Parliament in 2012 has finally passed. From this point forward, all Icelanders will be organ donors by default, unless they specify otherwise...

The concept of the law is fairly simple. All Icelanders will be assumed to be organ donors by default, with two exceptions: if the deceased specified beforehand that they do not want their organs to be removed, or if the deceased said nothing on the matter but their closest relative objects.

As reported, the bill is far from revolutionary. Other Scandinavian countries have similar laws on the books already.

"Wealth redistribution" justified

Via

Hey! No problem!

source: an old file folder in my desk, with clippings from 30 years ago.

Texas judge says God told him defendant not guilty

"A state district judge in Comal County said God told him to intervene in jury deliberations to sway jurors to return a not guilty verdict in the trial of a Buda woman accused of trafficking a teen girl for sex.

Judge Jack Robison apologized to jurors for the interruption, but defended his actions by telling them “when God tells me I gotta do something, I gotta do it,” according to the Herald-Zeitung in New Braunfels.

The jury went against the judge’s wishes, finding Gloria Romero-Perez guilty of continuous trafficking of a person and later sentenced her to 25 years in prison. They found her not guilty of a separate charge of sale or purchase of a child.

Best comment at the Reddit discussion thread:

"Wouldn't it make more sense for God to tell this to the jurors?"

Screencap from local news

Interesting juxtaposition of stories.  ("OWI" is "operating while intoxicated.")  Reports of people with 5 or 10 OWI offenses are not uncommon. 

Via the Madison, WI subreddit.

"Am I in the Twilight Zone?"

YouTube link.

In Louisville, a defendant was brought before the court not wearing any pants, and not having received any feminine hygiene products during her three-day incarceration.  This Reddit comment is appropriate:

That judge was amazing.

A good judge would have done what she did in terms of sentencing her to time served and releasing her.

This judge apologized on behalf of the correction system, and reprimanded the superiors of the people responsible, in front of the defendant.

When I think of what a judge should be, this woman is exactly that. An autonomous, unbiased, upholder of justice. Someone who after seeing thousands and thousands of real criminals, can still be outraged by injustice coming from the other side.

As reported by The Onion

For those unfamiliar with the publication:  "The Onion is an American digital media company and news satire organization... The Onion's articles cover current events, both real and fictional, satirizing the tone and format of traditional news organizations with stories, editorials, op-ed pieces, and man-in-the-street interviews using a traditional news website layout and an editorial voice modeled after that of the Associated Press. The publication's humor often depends on presenting mundane, everyday events as newsworthy, surreal or alarming.

And a backstory from Mother Jones.

Intimidation? Or free speech?

An anonymous blogger who uses the pseudonym “Doe Publius” knew he would stir controversy when, in July 2016, he published a “tyrant registry” listing the addresses and home phone numbers of 40 California lawmakers who supported a new gun control law in the state.

In California, courts have ruled that similar dossiers targeting abortion providers are tantamount to death threats. Publius published his list anyway. “These tyrants are no longer going to be insulated from us,” he wrote.

The post was quickly picked up on another gun rights blog, and within days, several of the named lawmakers reported receiving threatening phone calls and social media messages...

But on Monday, a federal court ruled that the “tyrant registry” was protected speech. In a lawsuit brought by Publius, Judge Lawrence J. O’Neill of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California said the post and its republishing by another blogger were “a form of political protest.”

More at the Washington Post.

Neil Gorsuch's yearbook quote

In the 1988 Columbia University yearbook, the quote accompanying Supreme Court nominee Neil Gorsuch's photo comes from Henry Kissinger -

"The illegal we do immediately. The unconstitutional takes a little longer."

However, Snopes notes that "determining Gorsuch's intention in offering this quote back then is a matter of speculation. It should be noted that Gorsuch founded a school newspaper called The Fed at Columbia University, which frequently published satirical content." 

Farmers aren't allowed to fix their own tractors

As reported in Modern Farmer:

This might be hard to believe for non-farmers, but owners of tractors aren't actually allowed to fix them, thanks to a set of laws designed to protect software intellectual property. In fact, the craziness of this goes even further: In a 2015 letter to the United States Copyright Office, John Deere, the world’s largest tractor maker, said that the folks who buy tractors don’t own them, not in the way the general public believes “ownership” works. Instead, John Deere said that those who buy tractors are actually purchasing an “implied license for the life of the vehicle to operate the vehicle.”..

But what this has meant is that tractor owners can’t repair their own tractors—and if they do, they’re in violation of the DMCA. So, if a machine stops working, its owner can’t pop the hood, run some tests, and find out what’s going on; he or she is legally required to take the tractor to a service center (one owned by the manufacturer, since that’s the only entity allowed to analyze the tractor’s issues). This can be expensive and time-consuming, and more to the point, unnecessary—at least according to farmers in several states, who are lobbying to force tractor manufacturers make their diagnostic tools available to independent repair shops and owners.

Addendum: A tip of the blogging cap to reader Vlad Tsepis, who commented that the same principle is being applied to motorcycle (and ATV) ownership.

Class action lawsuits

If you have purchased a milk product in [any of the states highlighted above] since 2003, you are eligible to share in a $52 million settlement of a class-action lawsuit that accused milk cooperatives of conspiring to raise prices.

Applications can be filed online at www.boughtmilk.com.  You don't have to give details of your purchases.  You have until the end of January to file your claim.  More information at the Wisconsin State Journal.

The lawsuit administrator estimates that consumers could get between $45 and $70, but it could be a just few cents - depending on how many people apply

On the other hand... attorneys will receive $17.3 million of the settlement.

In another class-action lawsuit, a Johns Hopkins physician was found guilty of secretly taking sexually explicit photographs of his female patients.  In the settlement of that case, "each woman is set to receive between $1,750 and $26,048. A judge ordered that $32 million of the total settlement would go to attorneys..."

Disclaimer - updated

"The information contained in this blog has been compiled from sources believed to be reliable, but no representation or warranty, express or implied, is made by TYWKIWDBI, its affiliates or any other person as to its accuracy, completeness or correctness. All opinions and estimates contained in this blog constitute the blogger's judgment as of the date of the post, are subject to change without notice and are provided in good faith but without legal responsibility.

Nothing in this blog constitutes legal, accounting or tax advice or individually-tailored lifestyle management advice. These blog posts are prepared for general circulation to the broad public and have been prepared without regard to the individual financial, emotional, ethical, or political circumstances and objectives of persons who read it. The information or opinions contained in this blog may not be suitable for you, and it is recommended that you consult your priest, pastor, rabbi, or psychiatrist if you are in doubt about the suitability of such information or opinions. 

Past performance is not a guide to future performance, future success is not guaranteed, and reading this blog may result in a loss of your time or peace of mind. The information and services contained herein are intended only for individual humans with a modicum of common sense and a reasonable sense of humor. This report is not, and under no circumstances should be construed as, a solicitation to act as a financial, business, or marriage advisor in any way.

To the fullest extent permitted by law neither TYWKIWDBI nor any of its affiliates, nor any other person, accepts any liability whatsoever for any direct or consequential loss arising from any use of this report or the information contained herein."



(Today I received from a brokerage firm an email with news about Treasury yields, employment data, crude oil supplies, a Federal Reserve meeting etc.  The accompanying CYA boilerplate was so classic that I couldn't resist adapting it for the blog, changing only a very few words to disguise the company and to adapt the sense to the blogosphere.)

Addendum:  Reposted to add this excerpt from the disclaimer at The Presurfer -

5. Accuracy of links.
The author of The Presurfer expressly disclaims responsibility for the accuracy of information originating from the links on The Presurfer and any problems you may experience resulting from the use of such information. Due to the number of sources from which information on The Presurfer is derived and correlated, the information on The Presurfer is provided 'as is' without any warranties, express or implied. The author of The Presurfer cannot and does not warrant the accuracy, completeness, currentness, non-infringement, merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose of the information available. In no event will the author of The Presurfer be liable to you or anyone else for any consequential damages, even if advised of the possibility of such damages, for the use of this web site, the use of any hyperlinked website, any decision made as a result of such usage, or any action taken by you in reliance on such information, including, without limitation, any lost profits, business interruption, loss of programs or other data or otherwise.

More at the link.  Today, btw, is the sixteenth blogiversary of The Presurfer, which I have been visiting essentially since I started surfing the web.   Those of you who maintain blogs of your own might stop by Gerard's site today to congratulate him on his remarkable longevity.

Today's other blogiversary - and also the sixteenth, belongs to..

... Madame Jujujive's Everlasting Blort, which today offers the discovery of three poison Skittles, and a gif of this totally appropriate video  to celebrate her sixteen years of blogging:

YouTube link.

Everlasting Blort has its own, classically eclectic, disclaimer:

All Natural, Fast Acting MeepZorp.Com is intended for grown-up use.

Everything in, on, over, under, linked, winked or alluded to on the meepzorp.com is intended for grown-up use.

This DOES NOT mean there is naked giggle-giggle nasty stuff here. This just means we are sick of looking at you damn kids. And you're ruining the lawn, for fuck's sake. This means if you are not a grown up, you must

--> CLICK HERE TO EXIT THE SITE <--

That, or produce, prior to viewing the site, a certified, notarized letter of parental/guardian permission specifically indemnifying meepzorp.com, its hereditaments and appurtanances, successors and heirs, officers, executives, middle managers, engineers, secretaries, janitorial and cafeteria staff inclusive of the immediate families thereof against any liability arising in the event of any event whatsoever.

I had to take down a post today - updated

I received the following email from my bloghost:

Blogger has been notified, according to the terms of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), that certain content in your blog is alleged to infringe upon the copyrights of others. As a result, we have reset the post(s) to "draft" status. (If we did not do so, we would be subject to a claim of copyright infringement, regardless of its merits. The URL(s) of the allegedly infringing post(s) may be found at the end of this message.) This means your post - and any images, links or other content - is not gone. You may edit the post to remove the offending content and republish, at which point the post in question will be visible to your readers again.

A bit of background: the DMCA is a United States copyright law that provides guidelines for online service provider liability in case of copyright infringement. If you believe you have the rights to post the content at issue here, you can file a counter-claim. In order to file a counter-claim, please see https://support.google.com/legal/contact/lr_counternotice?product=blogger.

The notice that we received, with any personally identifying information removed, will be posted online by a service called Lumen at https://www.lumendatabase.org. We do this in accordance with the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA). You can search for the DMCA notice associated with the removal of your content by going to the Lumen page, and entering in the URL of the blog post that was removed.

 If it is brought to our attention that you have republished the post without removing the content/link in question, then we will delete your post and count it as a violation on your account. Repeated violations to our Terms of Service may result in further remedial action taken against your Blogger account including deleting your blog and/or terminating your account. DMCA notices concerning content on your blog may also result in action taken against any associated AdSense accounts. If you have legal questions about this notification, you should retain your own legal counsel.

Sincerely, The Blogger Team

Affected URLs: http://tywkiwdbi.blogspot.com/2014/10/motor-vehicle-services-looks-like-scam.html

I had originally written the post in 2014 to decry what I perceived as a marketing fraud related to an "expired factory warranty" on my car; I reposted the item in April of this year after receiving another similar item in the mail.  I hope the post served its purpose while it was up, because this is a hobby blog, not a business, and I don't have the time or energy to fight this kind of thing, and have therefore taken the post down.  You can't win.

Addendum:  A hat tip to reader J.H. Wagner, who recognized that what happened to me is a standard ploy of using copyright law to force takedowns of negative reviews:

As soon as the DMCA takedown request had been filed, Google de-listed the entire thread. All 126 posts are now not discoverable when a user searches Google for BuildTeam – or any other terms. The search company told Mumsnet it could make a counterclaim, if it was certain no infringement had taken place, but since the site couldn’t verify that its users weren’t actually posting copyrighted material, it would have opened it up to further legal pressure.

In fact, no copyright infringement had occurred at all. Instead, something weirder had happened. At some point after Narey posted her comments on Mumsnet, someone had copied the entire text of one of her posts and pasted it, verbatim, to a spammy blog titled “Home Improvement Tips and Tricks”. The post, headlined “Buildteam interior designers” was backdated to September 14 2015, three months before Narey had written it, and was signed by a “Douglas Bush” of South Bend, Indiana. The website was registered to someone quite different, though: Muhammed Ashraf, from Faisalabad, Pakistan.

Quite why Douglas Bush or Muhammed Ashraf would be reviewing a builder based in Clapham is not explained in “his” post.

Full details at The Guardian.

Also this, from AgencySpy at AdWeek (more at the link):

There are a number of firms specializing in “reputation maintenance” that engage in this sort of activity in the hope that an editor or legal advisor will do exactly what we did: Take a story down after receiving an official-sounding email complete with vaguely threatening legal jargon because they would rather not deal with it.

There's also a discussion of this tactic at TechDirt(more at the link):

It appears there's still no shortage of quasi-reputation management efforts being deployed in the form of bogus DMCA takedowns issued by bogus "news" websites.

Pissed Consumer uncovered this shady tactic back in April, noting that legitimate-sounding sites like the "Frankfort Herald" and the "Lewisburg Tribune" were issuing takedown notices on complaints posted to the gripe site. These fake news sites tended to be filled with a blend of scraped content and and negative reviews/posts from sites like Pissed Consumer and Ripoff Report copy-pasted in full and backdated to make them appear as if they'd appeared at the bogus sites first.

No thanks

NEW YORK (Reuters) - A judge on Thursday rejected Citigroup Inc's bid for a preliminary injunction to stop AT&T Inc from using the phrase "AT&T thanks" on a customer loyalty program, which the bank called too similar to its trademarked "thankyou."

U.S. District Judge Katherine Forrest in Manhattan said Citigroup has not shown that customers would likely be confused, or that it would suffer irreparable harm, if AT&T kept saying "AT&T thanks" while the bank's lawsuit continued.

She also said AT&T provided solid evidence that forcing it to start saying something other than "AT&T thanks" would cause an "expensive and significant disruption."

Citigroup had no immediate comment. AT&T said in a statement it was pleased with the decision, and maintained that "the law does not allow one company to own the word 'thanks.'"

The fourth-largest U.S. bank by assets sued AT&T on June 9, one week after the Dallas-based phone company launched "AT&T thanks" in a dispute that threatened to damage a co-branding relationship dating to 1998.

Citigroup said AT&T went too far, having known it would object after the New York-based bank had since 2004 extensively used "thankyou" on its own customer loyalty and reward programs.

Offered without comment.