Tag Archive: Due Process


Lawsuit: Man Arrested, Searched For Marijuana Solely For Having Colorado License Plate

 

igplpve7evyklgswxmne

 

 

 

” An Idaho state trooper arrested and fully searched a 70-year-old Washington man’s vehicle solely because he had a Colorado license plate – a state where marijuana is legal – a federal “license plate profiling” lawsuit alleges.

  Darien Roseen was driving along I-84 between his second home in Colorado and Washington state on Jan. 25 when Idaho State Trooper Justin Klitch “immediately” pulled out from the Interstate median and began “rapidly accelerating” to catch up to Roseen, according to the complaint in a Courthouse News Service report. Exiting at a designated rest area, Roseen says he became “uncomfortable” that Klitch had followed him though he had not “done anything wrong.”

  After pulling Roseen over, Klitch reportedly failed to explain why he made the stop, although he later said he made the stop because Roseen failed to use his signal when pulling off on the exit, and because he bumped the curb. Klitch rejected Roseen’s reason for pulling into the rest area, telling him, “You didn’t have to go to the bathroom before you saw me … I’m telling you, you pulled in here to avoid me.” “

  Klitch repeatedly asked to search Roseen’s vehicle as he accused him of “hiding” something. And when Roseen did not grant him permission, Klitch threatened to bring in a drug-sniffing dog and characterized Roseen’s behavior as “consistent with a person who was hiding something illegal.

  Finally consenting to a search of “parts” of the vehicle to get “back on the road faster,” Roseen says that this proved to be a mistake.

“ When Mr. Roseen opened the trunk compartment, and despite the strong gusts of wind and precipitation that day, Trooper Klitch claimed he could smell the odor of marijuana,” the complaint states. “Mr. Roseen stated that he could not smell the odor of marijuana that Trooper Klitch claimed to be coming from the trunk compartment.”

  Calling in an additional police officer, Klitch said the aroma gave him cause to search the entire vehicle, and Roseen was detained in the back of Klitch’s vehicle, but was told he was not under arrest despite having been read his Miranda rights.

  The second officer drove Roseen’s Honda Ridgeline to the Payette County Sheriff’s sally port although Roseen states that he never gave the officer permission to drive his vehicle and the car’s items were not inventoried.

  The ensuing search of the vehicle by multiple unidentified officers found nothing and Roseen was issued a citation for “inattentive/careless” driving.”

 

CBS Seattle has the rest

 

 

 

 

 

 

About these ads

Family Sues After Armed Police Kick Down Wrong Door

 

 

 

No Knock Welfare Check Click For Video

 

 

” A Caldwell family has filed a lawsuit in federal court after armed police mistakenly kicked in their apartment door while looking for the family’s neighbor.

  The incident happened last year on February 21 around 11:30 p.m. The Johnsons filed a lawsuit in federal court in November, saying they were illegally searched and their Constitutional rights were violated. 

” Not acceptable. Being put in handcuffs. Kicking our door in. What’s that all about? No. Not acceptable. Not acceptable,” David Johnson said. 

  The Johnsons name the cities of Caldwell and Nampa, the police departments, the police chiefs and officers in the lawsuit. This month, both departments filed court papers denying accusations that the Johnsons’ rights were violated.”

 

 

   Of course the Johnson’s rights were violated , only thug cops with no respect for the Constitution could believe otherwise …

 

 

” David Johnson says he, his wife, and his adult son were all asleep when the police came to their door. He says there was no knock and no identification by police.

” We had no idea. No idea what was going on. Nothing. We were sound asleep when it started,” Johnson said. “We didn’t know who it was, and as I walked up to the door, pieces of the door were hitting me.” 

  Johnson says he unlocked the deadbolt and came face-to-face with a large gun. 

” There’s a gun pointed at me. No one said anything. Next thing I know somebody grabbed my arm, pulled me out and handcuffed me. Just like that,” Johnson said. “

 

 

    Once again , thanks to the increasingly violent nature of law enforcement a family’s lives were endangered on heresay from a woman that allegedly was threatened … by a third party , no less . Listening to the audio , which is available here and here it is apparent that the cops do not know where they are going nor even what they are looking for .

This incident grew from a woman complaining that a man threatened her to , according to the cops , a “homicide in progress” .What bulls**t . 

 

 

” After they brought him out, he says the police searched his home with a police canine and eventually got the neighbor they were looking for out of the next-door apartment as well. He says police told him they were looking into a “homicide in progress,” gave him a business card, and then left.”

 

 

   It is a miracle that no one was killed this time around , but the prevalence of the KGB-like tactics of midnight door busting must be stopped at all costs if we are to maintain any sort of liberty in our country . 

    It’s bad enough that the cops screwed up but to compound the error by stonewalling and refusing to admit that they’ve made a mistake and violated the Johnson’s rights to due process only serves to highlight a law enforcement culture that has morphed into a fine example of a police state … The Stasi would be proud . 

 

 

” The city says the officers had true information and with that had reason to attempt to find the potential suspect and victim by conducting “a no-knock, no-warrant welfare check“. The department says procedures and policies are proper.”

 

 

    That phrase ” no-knock , no-warrant welfare check” has to be the greatest example of government double-speak since George Orwell passed . 

   Where is the accountability ? Since when do unsubstantiated allegations and the rumored presence of a weapon demand an immediate , poorly planned dynamic entry ? The governing principle of the jackboots today is if there is any suspicion that a resident might own a gun , rights be damned , assault the property .

   That policy should strike fear into the hearts of millions and millions of Americans when one considers the fact that at least 50% of us own a gun . The next time you piss off your ex-wife or a neighbor is annoyed with your dog or how you parked your car you could be a candidate for a full blown SWAT raid if they suspect that you are a gun owner . That is chilling .

 Read the whole thing and pray it doesn’t happen to you .

 

 

 

 

 

Secret List: Having Your Name On This Secret Michigan List Of 275,000 People Could Cost You Your Job

 

 

The state maintains something called the Michigan Child Abuse and Neglect Central Registry and the sole power to label you an abuser lies not with a judge or a jury, but with child protective services workers.

  And you may be surprised at how the state can define “abuse.”

  Anita Belle says she’s never been convicted of a crime.  But Belle’s name has been put on the Central Registry as a child abuser. 

“ Where is the due process,” asked Belle.

  The Central Registry is maintained by Child Protective Services workers inside Michigan’s Department of Human Services, or DHS.

  Right now, there are about 275,000 people on that secret list and many of them don’t even realize they are on it.  You don’t have to be found guilty in court to be put on the registry.  All it takes is the word of CPS staffers to label you an abuser, which can prevent you from getting certain jobs or doing volunteer work.

You just get on the registry, by a push of the button.  By one worker,” said Warner.With no verification that the crime was actually committed,” asked Catallo.“They believe that their investigation, even if it’s one sided, is all they need to ruin somebody’s life,” said Warner.”

 

Read more on this horrendous abuse of State power here

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Lawyer Weighs In On Arlington Man Sent To Nursing Home

 

 

 

” A lawyer weighed in Friday on the case of an 85-year-old North Texas man who said he couldn’t get out of a local hospital on Wednesday. Instead of going home, Charlie Fink ended up in a nursing home after he was detained against his will by the state under an emergency protective order. Fink called FOX 4 for help.

  While FOX 4 hasn’t seen the court documents in Fink’s case, we do know the state believes that not only is Fink potentially a threat to himself and others, but that he can no longer handle his responsibilities at home.

  Fink allowed FOX 4 to enter what he called his crowded home on Friday, where neighbors Kenny and Debra McIntosh were cleaning. Trash and treasure fill Fink and his wife Edith’s home.

” They’re getting older, so it’s hard for them to move everything where they need to be, and dust high and stuff like that, which I can understand,” said Debra. Fink and 87-year-old Edith are now together in a nursing home.

   Edith was removed by the state Feb. 5, and Charlie was removed this week after driving himself to Richardson Methodist Hospital for hernia surgery. A hearing was held Wednesday for the state to temporarily take custody of Fink after he was placed in the hospital’s psychiatric ward.

” One thing that troubled me about that protective hearing you’re talking about is, he wasn’t present,” said attorney Geoff Henley, unrelated to Fink’s case. “He was not present, according to your story, and he was entitled to be.”

   

    Answer me this : Why is it totally unacceptable for the State to harass , incarcerate or in any way molest the mentally ill homeless on every city’s streets that the ACLU are so eager to defend yet when it comes to the rights of an self-sufficient elderly man who keeps his own home , pays his bills and feeds himself or those of a teenaged girl who’s parents are eager to take proper care of her those rights and their defenders are nowhere to be found ?

     How did we get to such a topsy-turvy world that the street people , the winos and the homeless , some of whom are mentally unbalanced and may indeed pose a threat to society , have benefactors , protectors and unalienable rights while those who choose to be responsible members of the community can so readily be deemed “unfit” and carted off by the State “for their own good” without so much as a peep from the usual “civil libertarian” groups ?

 

 

Another State kidnapping by the protection nazis … HT/PoliceStateUSA 

 

 

     Post Script: A bit off topic , but we have one more thought . As we have been compiling a fairly voluminous list of violations of individual liberty by the authorities in the US it has surprised us a good bit that Texas , a state that prides itself on being a haven of civil liberty supplies us with a disproportionate amount of stories like the one above and many other even worse examples of police brutality , no-knock raids and all round Statist behavior . Odd that …

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 And Not A Single Lawmaker Voted Against It

 

 

” A new report published by the Libertas Institute, a free market think tank, reveals how a little-known new law greatly weakened legal protections for property owners facing civil forfeiture in Utah.  Unlike criminal forfeiture, with civil forfeiture, someone does not have to be convicted of or even charged with a crime to permanently lose their property.

  Sponsors of the bill, HB 384, presented their amendments as a mere “re-codification” of the state’s forfeiture law.  While some of the changes to Utah’s forfeiture laws might appear minor, they have significant consequences.”

 

Read more at Forbes

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mr. Paul Goes To Washington

 

 

 

” Is it absurd to fear, as some of Paul’s colleagues charged, that the president will begin launching drone strikes on American soil? Probably. But the point is precisely that we live under an administration is so unwilling to acknowledge meaningful limits on what they may do in the name of national security that it was an exercise in tooth-pulling just to get a public disavowal of an absurd scenario that the government’s anemic targeted killing “standards,” taken to their logical extreme, would not appear to foreclose. The crucial message we should take from Paul’s marathon oration, then, may be this: If it’s absurd to pose the question that inspired his filibuster, surely it’s far more absurd that we’ve arrived, after a decade of complacency about government secrecy and unfettered executive discretion in the sphere of counterterrorism, at a point where the question would need to be posed.”

 

 

#StandWithRand: Rand Paul, Barack Obama, Drones, and Presidential Kill Lists

Both Paul And Obama Win With Brennan Nomination

 

 

 

” The Senate today confirmed John Brennan to be the new director of the CIA. The vote was 63 to 34.

Brennan has been President Obama’s top counter-terrorism adviser and earlier spent 25 years at the CIA.

The confirmation came after Sen. Rand Paul, R.-Ky., ended a 13-hour filibuster. He’d been demanding that the administration say whether it believes the president has the authority to use a drone to kill a U.S. citizen on American soil.

In the end, both Paul and the president got what they wanted.

“No president from no party gets to be judge, jury and executioner,” Paul said

 

   Despite the headline we fail to see how Rand Paul got what he wanted . Neither Obama , Brennan , Holder or have disavowed the possibility of domestic drone strikes >

 

   McCain continues to disappoint . He really is a statist at heart and no different from the democrats whose coattails he so often holds . For Shame 

 

” Others, such as Arizona’s John McCain called Paul misguided.

“I think we’ve done a disservice by giving Americans the impression that they’re in danger from our government,” McCain said. “They’re not!” “

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

3 Takeaways from Rand Paul’s #StandwithRand #Filibuster About Drone Strikes

 

 

 

” For all of the late-night punch-drunkiness that eventually ensued on Twitter (well, at least on my feed), yesterday’s 12-hours-plus filibuster led by Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) is among the most electrifying and insipiring events in recent political memory. The point of the filibuster – which derailed a confirmation vote on John Brennan as Barack Obama’s CIA head – was to call attention to the president’s insufficient answers to questions about his policy of targeted killings via drones and, one assumes, other methods.

Here are three takeaways from yesterday’s epic event:

 

1. It shows what one man can do to call attention to a hugely important issue that nonetheless is largley ignored by the mainstream media and the political establishment. “

 

 

 

Read the whole thing 

 

 

 

TRANSCRIPT: FIRST HOUR OF RAND PAUL’S FILIBUSTER

 

 

” In the first hour of his filibuster over the nomination of John Brennan, Sen. Paul spoke 9,024 words, enough to fill 15 pages as a standard Word document. A transcript of the first hour was provided by Sen. Paul’s office and appears below in its entirety:

 

I rise today to begin to filibuster John Brennan’s nomination for the CIA I will speak until I can no longer speak. I will speak as long as it takes, until the alarm is sounded from coast to coast that our Constitution is important, that your rights to trial by jury are precious, that no American should be killed by a drone on American soil without first being charged with a crime, without first being found to be guilty by a court. That Americans could be killed in a cafe in San Francisco or in a restaurant in Houston or at their home in bowling green, Kentucky, is an abomination. It is something that should not and cannot be tolerated in our country. I don’t rise to oppose John Brennan’s nomination simply for the person. I rise today for the principle. The principle is one that as Americans we have fought long and hard for and to give up on that principle, to give up on the bill of rights, to give up on the Fifth Amendment protection that says that no person shall be held without due process, that no person shall be held for a capital offense without being indicted. This is a precious American tradition and something we should not give up on easily. They say Lewis Carroll is fiction. Alice never fell down a rabbit hole and the White Queen’s caustic judgments are not really a threat to your security. Or has America the beautiful become Alice’s wonderland? ‘No, no, said the queen. Sentence first; verdict afterwards. Stuff and nonsense, Alice said widely – loudly. The idea of having the sentence first? ‘Hold your tongue, said the queen, turning purple. I won’t, said Alice. Release the drones, said the Queen, as she shouted at the top of her voice.

Lewis Carroll is fiction, right? When I asked the President, can you kill an American on American soil, it should have been an easy answer. It’s an easy question. It should have been a resounding and unequivocal, “no.” The President’s response? He hasn’t killed anyone yet. We’re supposed to be comforted by that. 
The President says, I haven’t killed anyone yet. He goes on to say, and I have no intention of killing Americans. But I might. Is that enough? Are we satisfied by that? Are we so complacent with our rights that we would allow a President to say he might kill Americans? But he will judge the circumstances, he will be the sole arbiter, he will be the sole decider, he will be the executioner in chief if he sees fit. Now, some would say he would never do this. Many people give the President the – you know, they give him consideration, they say he’s a good man. I’m not arguing he’s not. What I’m arguing is that the law is there and set in place for the day when angels don’t rule government. Madison said that the restraint on government was because government will not always be run by angels. This has nothing, absolutely nothing to do with whether the President is a Democrat or a Republican. Were this a Republican President, I’d be here saying exactly the same thing. No one person, no one politician should be allowed to judge the guilt, to charge an individual, to judge the guilt of an individual and to execute an individual. It goes against everything that we fundamentally believe in our country.

This isn’t even new to our country. There’s 800 years of English law that we found our tradition upon. We founded it upon the Magna Carta from 1215. We founded it upon Morgan from Glamorgan and 725 A.D. We founded upon the Greeks and Romans who had juries. It is not enough to charge someone to say that they are guilty.

 

 

Click the link to read the rest …

 

 

 

 

 

 

—-

RAND PAUL’S ‘RICK SANTELLI’ MOMENT

 

 

 

” In February 2009, CNBC contributor Rick Santelli gave birth to a movement, not because of anything in particular he said, but rather because he gave voice to what millions of people were thinking in their hearts. It was an appeal to a basic principle. On Wednesday, KY Sen. Rand Paul is doing the same.”

 

 

    The idea of targeted killing of American’s should unite us all , left and right . Right now Obama holds the joystick , that is true , and that may satisfy those of you on the left , ” civil liberties” supporters though you claim to be , but sooner or later another republican will be in command and if your BDS of the past is any indication you will be none too happy when a person of the right holds the power to strike from above at will and with no oversight .

 

 

 

Obama’s Drones (Julian Sanchez)

EXCLUSIVE: ACLU BACKS PAUL’S FILIBUSTER

 

 

 

“It’s certainly a courageous and historic effort by Senator Rand Paul and his colleagues, who are now increasing in numbers and coming to the fore in support of his filibuster,” said Anders. “The information Senator Paul is looking for goes to the very core of what the US is and who Americans are as a people.” Anders pointed out that the information Paul seeks is easy for the administration to hand over – it “ought to be a no-brainer,” he said. “It ought to be upsetting for everyone, all Americans of both parties, to not be able to get a straight answer to what is a very straightforward question from Senator Paul.”

 

 

 

 

 

—-

US Senator Says Drones Death Toll Is 4700

 

 

 

 

” “We’ve killed 4,700,” Mr Graham was quoted as saying by the Easley Patch, a local website covering the small town of Easley in South Carolina.

“Sometimes you hit innocent people, and I hate that, but we’re at war, and we’ve taken out some very senior members of Al-Qaeda,” Mr Graham told the Easley Rotary Club.”

America Run By Outlaws

 

 

The rule of law is essential to a civilized society. But depending on the rule of law in today’s world is a fatal attraction and predicts a fatal ending.

A fair and impartial trial or even a trial at all is not the real world, as many have found out too late.

President Barack Obama has admitted to and crowed about having CIA agents target and kill three American citizens, two adults and the teenage son of one of the men, with a killer drone. The trio was slain in separate attacks in the fall of 2011. The elder al-Awlaki, Anwar, and Samir Khan died in Yemen from a missile strike by one of Obama’s Predator drones on Sept. 30, 2011. The younger al-Awlaki, 16-year-old Abdulrahman, was killed a couple of weeks later while eating at an outdoor restaurant. (A fourth American-born citizen, Kamal Derwish, was killed by a Predator drone in Yemen while riding in a car with an al-Qaida leader in 2002.) “

 

Is Obama’s Drone Policy Really Morally Superior to Torture?

 

 

” Here is the worst-kept secret in Washington: Instead of capturing and grilling suspected terrorists, as agents did during the 2000s, the United States now kills them from above. Yet where the morality of President Bush’s tactics chewed up years of public debate, Congress and the press seem less interested in the legitimacy of drone strikes than in the process (and secrecy) that surrounds them. Members questioned John Brennan, the CIA nominee who helped build the administration’s drone strategy, along exactly these lines. “[The debate] has really all been about the legality of targeting American citizens, not the overall moral issues raised by the drone program, or collateral casualties, or classifying any young men between a certain age-group default as terrorists,” says Bruce Hoffman, director of Georgetown University’s Center for Security Studies. In a CBS Newspoll last week, 71 percent of Americans said they support the strikes.

Compare that with the PR crisis unleashed by the Abu Ghraib prisoner-abuse photos in 2004. Congressional, military, and independent investigations sprang to life. The phrase “enhanced interrogation techniques” entered the lexicon. Bush first argued that these were legal, but a Reed College analysis of polls shows that the public broadly opposed torture during his presidency. So why are drone strikes—which have reportedly killed 2,500 in Pakistan alone—different? Why do people impute more legitimacy to killing from afar (which sometimes ensnares innocent bystanders) than interrogating up close?”

 

 

Obama’s Drone Obsession Ruffling Feathers

 

 

 

 

” President Obama’s latest executive order allows for the killing by drone strikes of American citizens abroad.  The administration attempts to find its justification for this in American law: a targeted U.S. citizen has to have recently been involved in terrorist activities and pose “an imminent threat of violent attack against the United States.”  Although many national security advisers do not disagree with this tactic, they do have some reservations.

Former CIA Director Michael Hayden told American Thinker he believes that the issue should be not killing those who take up arms against the U.S., including American citizens, but rather the hypocrisy of it all.  “President Obama in 2008 ran against President Bush’s first term while Obama after 2008 governs against terrorism like Bush’s second term.  They are doing the right thing, but the sin here is pretending it’s different from what they inherited, and it is not.  Sometimes lawful isn’t sufficient in a democracy.  Although I am quite comfortable with the legal rationale, based on my past experiences, programs like these require long-term, broad-based political support.”

johngalt:

A nicely constructed piece on the continuing Dorner saga and the myriad contradictions in the official storyline .

Originally posted on occupy blogosphere:

Updates:

Screen shot 2013-02-13 at 3.14.39 AM
Max Blumenthal discusses the Dorner cover-up:

View original 619 more words

Everything You Wanted to Know About Drones

 

 

 

 

 

” This is the week the world seemingly woke up to the U.S. government’s drone wars. Drones have fired missiles on thousands of targets and flown countless flight hours over battlefields in the Middle East and northern Africa. But last week, the Obama administration’s rationale for the legality of targeting U.S. citizens who are plotting with al-Qaida by means of airstrikes became public, and the administration used the argument to support the killing of U.S. citizen and al-Qaida member Anwar al-Awlaki with a drone strike in Yemen. Here’s a primer on the current and future use of unmanned aerial vehicles in combat.

What are drones, anyway?
Technically, even the name drone is used in error. The military calls its flying robots unmanned aerial systems, while some holdouts use the old Pentagon name unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs). The term drone used to imply the lack of a pilot onboard. Most unmanned aircraft have pilots that fly them by remote control, often from bases in the United States, halfway around the world. For example, a three-man crew flies the unmanned MQ-9 Reaper, not including the maintenance and takeoff/recovery personnel.

Some of the craft’s intelligent software allows the operators to set “hold modes” that designate orbits, altitudes, and speed limits. Still, drones can do some things on their own. A Reaper can autonomously auto-balance its draw of fuel from the wings to preserve its center of gravity, report mechanical failures during flights, follow waypoints, and automatically wheel over to a designated rally point if the satellite link to the ground station is lost.

Could UAVs Kill Without Human Permission?

In theory, yes. Here’s how it would work: A UAV would open fire only after clearing a checklist of technical details—its preset rules of engagement—from its sensors. But drone-builders and military leaders are truly wary of allowing this kind of aggression without a human in the decision-making loop. “

 

 

HT/Instapundit

 

New Details On Drone Strikes Targeting American Citizens

 

NBC Death By Drone

 

 

 

” A secretive memo from the Justice Department, provided to NBC News, provides new information about the legal reasoning behind one of the Obama administration’s controversial policies. Now, John Brennan, Obama’s nominee for CIA director, is expected to face tough questions about drone strikes on Thursday when he appears before the Senate Intelligence Committee. NBC’s Michael Isikoff reports.”

 

 

It’s a week old but remarkable nevertheless

 

Oppose Joe Manchin’s Veterans Gun Ban and National Gun Registry

 

 

 

” Reports out of Capitol Hill reveal that just-reelected turncoat West Virginia Senator Joe Manchin is about to stick a big knife in the back of American gun owners.  And to make matters worse, he’s lying about what he’s doing.
Both Manchin and House anti-gun crazy Carolyn McCarthy are claiming to be “working with NRA” to enact gun bans and national gun registries. NRA says flatly that Manchin is lying, and we believe he is. (The Hill, 1/24/13)

150,000 honest law-abiding veterans are currently in the NICS system.  They didn’t do anything wrong; they honorably served their country.  But when they sought VA counseling for a traumatic combat experience, the VA appointed a fiduciary to oversee their fiscal affairs and then took away their guns.  And, again, there are 150,000 honest veterans in the system.

What the Manchin bill is about is insuring that “bad guys” like veterans can’t get guns.  And, under Barack Obama’s “Executive Action #1,” the NICS list could soon include tens of millions of additional soldiers, police, firemen, and other law-abiding Americans.”

Judge , Jury , Executioner … Despot

White House: Drone Strikes Are ‘Legal,’ ‘Ethical’ And ‘Wise’

 

 

White House Drone Strikes

 

 

 

Cruise Missiles And Drone Strikes … The Weapons Of Cowardly Presidents

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 5,470 other followers