Archive for the Criminal Justice category.
Thoughts that come to mind reflecting over the past month.
1) JetBlue Flight Attendant, Steven Slater, is a jerk. (my opinion) What may seemed like an enviable act of courage, it was, in fact, an act of stupidity for which he should not serve as an example to others. Rude customers comes with the territory in service jobs, especially those dealing with a high volume of the public. That’s life.
2) Polls show that 20 percent of Americans now think that Obama is a Muslim, up from 11 percent. Count me among them. To me, it’s obvious. America was duped in 2008. A recent CNN poll also reveals that 60 percent of Americans doubt his birth records. Count me in as well.
3) Boo to the PGA. Golfer Dustin Johnson got the royal screw when officials docked him two strokes for grounding his club in a patch of dirt they called a sand trap. Otherwise, he was certain to be in the three-way playoff for the PGA Championship, with a possible prize of $1.3 million.
4) The due sensitivity of Americans and families of three thousand 9/11 victims should take precedence over the sensitivities of Muslims who want to build a mosque next to Ground Zero. A mosque can be built anywhere. The site of the attack is immovable.
5) Solution to the drug wars all over the world and in the U.S.: Legalize, tax and control. No black market? No crime. Cartels are out of business, so are street gangs. Courts, prisons and cops would depressurize case loads and taxpayers would benefit from redistributions of funds for more effective purposes. Meanwhile, studies show, drug use would diminish.
6) We should relocate the United Nations from New York City to Haiti. I can think of many advantages, especially the surge it would create to the economy of that struggling nation. The United States is voted down 77 percent of the time by third world countries, (to whom we provide foreign aid) while footing 22 percent of the annual operating costs, equaling $440 million. This would save enormous taxpayer dollars plus eliminate an open door policy for spies, insurgents and diplomats who abuse their immunity.
7) I don’t care if men marry men or women marry women. It’s better for people to love, not hate. Plenty of that to go around. Same sex marriage seems awkward and outside the box, but when I really think about it… so what?
Ever notice how Islam dominates the happenings in western affairs these days, compared to ten years ago? How much more in the next ten years? Twenty? With Islam, comes Sharia. Folks in denial choose to wear rose colored glasses. That’s dangerous for the future of western cultures.
9) The Glenn Beck rally in Washington D.C. drew a half million Americans, demonstrating peacefully for love of country, without spewing hate. What’s so bad about that? I enjoyed watching a taste of patriotic unity for once.
10) The prison system in this country is a national disgrace. There is no rehabilitation, no rights, very little schooling and preparation for release after long periods removed from society. That spells bad news for more crime victims, and high recidivism rates. Meanwhile, prison inmates are being used for slave labor while factories and corporations lay off workers at $9.00 an hour, in order to out-source to inmates at 50 cents an hour. Are you surprised, that corporations hire lobbyists to pass laws to keep the prison populations at maximum?
11) Another direct hit from a major hurricane to New Orleans would portend the end to a great city. Survivors would eventually migrate elsewhere.
12) America’s Got Talent has evolved into a junkie show with mostly circus acts and hip hoppers performing over audiences that scream constantly on command. But once in a while, comes a diamond in the rough, which is what happened with this 10 year-old child, Jackie Evancho. Enjoy:
Click here: YouTube – America’s Got Talent – Jackie Evancho
One of my regular readers has asked me to post this web site on my blog, as well as the e-mail addresses for contacting the right people regarding law and justice. Regarding the outrageous proposal in Port Chester, NY, that voters be given six votes for one dandidate in order to elect more Hispanics , she writes as follows:
Dear Marshall, In my haste over this outrage I might not have posted the best resource for people to use to stop this insanity. I’ve since done more research and found a list of organizations that do litigate to protect the US Constitution. I would appreciate if you would list these sites on your blog and tell people to contact them by email and to include the video link and your blog posting on the subject. If these organizations hear from enough people I’m sure someone, somewhere, will feel as outraged as we do and take action. All the best, Mandy Fox
Liberty Council – liberty@lc.org or call – 1-800-671-1776
The Federalist Society: info@fed-soc.org
National Center for Constitutional Studies-zeldon@nccs.net
National Center for Public Policy Research – info@nationalcenter.org American Center for Law & Justice –
Contact Page http://www.aclj.org/Content/?f=164
The Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution states, in part: “…all persons, born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States.”
Passed in 1868, the purpose of that law was to ensure that all free blacks, whether former slaves or not, were entitled to U.S. citizenship, as were their children.
Good intentions gone awry.
Boy, has that been used and abused. Had the lawmakers known what would lie ahead in the 20th and 21st centuries, with babies by the millions being birthed by illegals on American soil in order to gain entry through the back door, the wording would have been much different.
What do we do about it? Little.
In a period of ten years, four million illegal alien mothers who happen to give birth within our borders will be providing automatic American citizenship to their child, skirting immigration laws via an unintended loophole. In the majority of those cases, the taxpayer will be assuming the responsibilities of feeding, clothing, educating and providing for health care. I hesitate to mention the cost of criminal activity, victimization, court costs and prisons costs, because we all know that a significant percentage of those will unfortunately go that route.
The system for making children into American citizens is widely known throughout the world. Just get here pregnant, then have the baby. Voila. They not only do it from Mexico, but all other nations, including from mid-east countries where Islam — peaceful and non-peaceful — is being imported in huge numbers. They are among the millions who are destined to significantly alter the demographic landscape of America in future decades.
Yes. I know all Muslims are not bad people. But, unfortunately, too many are associated with the Jihad movement, which makes this a national security threat to the U.S.
It is so well known and accepted, that one Turkish-owned hotel in New York City, the Marmara Manhattan, has been marketed with “birth tourism packages” to expectant mothers abroad. Talk about brazen. Legal or illegal immigrants are welcomed in order to super-populate this country with outside cultures (and religions) via the 14th amendment loophole which makes children automatic citizens. And in doing so, special immigration status is bestowed upon the parents who would otherwise be illegal because…after all…a baby must be with its mother and/or father.
Click here: NYC HOTEL OFFERS BIRTH TOURISM PACKAGES
The nation’s school systems alone, which are over burdened and funds poor, face the economic burden of providing education to millions of children born “legally” of “Illegal” parents in America. Those cost burdens, which includes adapting to languages other than English, deplete from quality educational opportunities for the children of legal American families who work here and pay taxes.
In 2004, a study was conducted in three states regarding their annual costs of educating anchor baby children. Estimates ranged $87 million in Pennsylvania, to over one billion dollars in Texas. Then, there’s California.
At present, there are approximately 4.7 million children of illegal immigrants in our public schools systems.
It’s almost impossible to estimate the health, feeding and housing costs associated with a half million anchor babies born each year, or the future costs of criminal activity which — considering the absence of family stability — a significant percentage of them will engage in.
This is just another facet of the runaway immigration dilemma that is costing the taxpayer billions. Yet, the only answer our politicians can come up with, is Comprehensive Immigration Reform, which is nothing more than a euphemism for “Amnesty.” Such reform would not save one dime of the cost problems.
What can be done about anchor babies and hotels like the Marmara Manhattan? Rep. Dan Burton of Indiana has proposed HR5002, which is a bill proposed to put the kabash, requiring one parent of a child born here to be an American citizen or legal alien. The bill is still in committee. (Don’t hold your breath) Here is a summary:
Click here: H.R. 5002 – Summary: No Sanctuary for Illegals Act
There are two ways to invade a country. From outside and from within. Japan did it from outside. So did Radical Islam…for which we are still at war. The more difficult war, is fighting the invasion from within, because it’s subtle and ill-defined, yet just as powerful and effective. The insiders need only to be more patient.
Besides Europe and Canada, I don’t see many other countries who are at risk of losing their culture before the end of this century. But we sure are.
We cannot accomodate all the poor and oppressed in the entire world. If we do, there will be no America the Beautiful in future generations. And, the children of our grandkids will never know how great this nation once was.
But…who cares? Right?
For a stark view of the immigration issue by the numbers, check this out:
Click here: Immigration Counters.com – Live Counters
More cost factors by the Center For Immigration Studies:
Click here: Center for Immigration Studies
More links:
Click here: FAIR: Anchor Babies: The Children of Illegal Aliens
Click here: V.O.I.A.C. Victims of Illegal Alien Crime
For those of you who are hoodwinked into thinking the new Arizona law is tantamount to fascist enforcement and racially driven, here’s a wake-up call.
Fact is ( and it is a fact), the Arizona law is actually modeled after the federal law, but even more strict in order to preclude the use of racial profiling or discrimination. Truth is, (if you don’t already know this), Arizona police cannot arbitrarily ask anyone for papers or identification, unless they have witnessed an infraction or been called to the scene of any possible law violation, at which time — as in ANY police matter — they will ask the parties for their identification.
And in the course of doing so, it becomes evident that one or more of those persons could be an ILLEGAL alien, they are authorized to investigate further, i.e. ask for documents. And, IF they cannot produce documents authorizing their legitimacy, the police may call I.C.E. (Federal authorities)and turn them over.
I recently heard a local speaker invoke “skin color” as the likely reason for this law, thus infusing his audience with conjecture and false premise. A portion of that audience was no doubt gullible enough to fall for it. Fact is: a large portion of Arizona police officers are … (guess what) Hispanic! Will they also be accused of (shhh) racial profiling?
The law is so popular, more than 70 percent of polled Arizonians favor the law, including thousands of Hispanics. Plus, at least 14 other states are considering enacting the same law. Is the president prepared to sue more than a dozen states? Is the president prepared to go against the wishes of nearly two-thirds of American citizens?
I once gave credit to Mr. Obama as being smart. I take it back.
And why hasn’t the Obama administration filed suit against the state of Oklahoma, which has passed a similar law?
Click here: Oklahoma targets illegal immigrants with tough new law
And why hasn’t the Obama administration filed suit against the state of Virginia, which has passed a similar law?
Click here: Prince William County In Virginia Has Immigration Law
If this keeps up, Atty Gen. Eric Holder is going to be so busy filing suits against his own country, he won’t have time to prosecute terrorists. No wonder he let the Black Panther poll racists off the hook.
Is Mr. Obama entering into a civil war of litigation? I wonder.
Mr. Obama makes mockery of the new law by ridiculing the requirement for officers to ask for identification. I suppose Mr. Obama did not have much contact with law enforcement officers in his life, so let’s give him an update.
It is perfectly routine in the United States ( and on demand in other countries) for a police officer to ask for identification, as in:
* Being stopped for traffic violations
* Being a principal or important witness in a criminal investigation
* Donating blood
* Job applications
* Military applications
* College applications
* Insurance applications
* For boarding commercial aircraft
* For being profiled as a youngster at a liquor store or bar
* Credit card purchases
* A myriad of other occasions
I show my identification for one reason or another, at least a half dozen times a week. And I’m not illegal! But…it’s more important for Mr. Obama to protect those illegals, not because they are poor huddled masses yearning to be free, but because they smell like 12 million juicy votes in future elections. Let’s get real.
I still wonder whose side this administration is on.
The day police officers are forbidden to ask people for I.D., is the day we’ve handed over the nation to the anarchists.
The videos say it all.
An officer never knows where or when it will strike. Can be in the urban jungle or the sprawling countryside.
This is for Monday morning quarterbacks always on the ready to criticize cops without walking in their shoes. Three very short videos that depict why officers must be on the alert at all times. And why, sometimes, cops get a little edgy.
Always think twice before rendering judgement. This is why:
Click here: Hamilton Police shooting video
Click here: YouTube – Police Shooting Video
Click here: » Real video of a cop getting his ass kicked:
This is about the way a slanted news media can alter the mind-set.
Today marks the 30th anniversary of the Liberty City riots of 1980, a day that “will live in infamy,” especially for those who were part of the Miami scene then.
I was. And so were three thousand Metro-Dade police officers, plus hundreds of firefighters, rescue personnel, municipal police officers from Miami, El Portal, Miami Shores, Coral Gables and so on, all of whom were under fire, their lives in danger.
Yet, news accounts speak only about the outrage of black residents who were up in arms (rightfully) over the acquittal of four cops on trial for the beating death of Arthur McDuffie, as though no one else suffered.
It was a tragedy, indeed. McDuffie was a motorcyclist who led a dozen cops on a high speed chase through the streets of Miami for over eight long minutes at one o’clock in the morning. When he stopped, some of those cops lost control and beat the man to a pulp, then dented his bike to try and make it look like an accident. He was pronounced dead four days later. As Homicide captain, I was named chief investigator.
Two weeks later, I arrested five officers for his murder.
On May 17th, the same day that Mount St. Helens erupted in the State of Washington, the officers on trial were found “Not Guilty” by an all-white jury. Early that evening, some Miami citizens were driving home from work when they were trapped at traffic signals by bands of hoodlums, rocking cars until they turned over, then torturing the white people inside, cutting the tongue out of one, beating some to death. The riots ended with eighteen innocent citizens brutally murdered, more than 250 injured and multi-millions of destruction to businesses and buildings in the black community.
The media portrayed the victim as an insurance agent, and former Marine, who simply didn’t stop for the police. The attached Miami Herald article makes reference to his bereaved widow. While he certainly didn’t deserve his fate, the media played to the sympathy of local residents by failing to tell the whole story, that Mr. McDuffie had been spending time with another woman that evening, had marijuana in his system, and was driving with a suspended license, the probable reason he didn’t pull over. Insurance agent? Try: unemployed. He worked for an insurance company previously.
The newspapers didn’t talk much about the victims of the riots, or the risks that civil servants were taking to fight the insurgency, the volleys of sniper shots that were fired at cops and rescue personnel trying to save lives. They failed to mention that this was nothing more than a large group of organized hoodlums that used an excuse to create mayhem, and that they did not represent the majority of the black community at all. Nor did they seek revenge against the white establishment by burning their communities, instead they burned their own.
Neither did the media (print and television) take any responsibility for stoking the fires of retribution, citing the McDuffie killing as the constant lead story, heavily leaning public sympathy against the police as “racists” because they happened to have been white and the victim happened to have been black.
When I attended a community meeting some weeks later, no one wanted to hear me say that this was not a racist induced crime, because in fact, several within this group of officers had established a history of being physically abusive to all walks of society, including white and Hispanics, not only blacks. I told them that if the same circumstances prevailed, including the harrowing eight-minute inner-city chase, that the same thing would have happened if the biker had been a white or Hispanic man. They didn’t want to hear that, because I was defusing the trigger for more Story. The infusion of “racism” into the story fires the anger, the emotion, the hate and the response. It sells.
I don’t mean to diminish the suffering of Mr. McDuffie and his loved ones. He was truly a victim. But, the riots of thirty-years ago today, were as much the responsibility of The Miami Herald and other news outlets, as it was the angry insurgents.
That’s why people like me — especially career cops — look at sensational news stories with a cynical eye. There’s always another side.
Click here: Memories of Liberty City riots fade,
Michael Vick, quarterback extraordinaire, has paid his debt to society. After serving 20 months in prison for dastardly crimes, the world of sports, and the media, were eager to forgive and welcome the phenom back into the football field, compliments of the Philadelphia Eagles who offered a contract worth multi-millions of dollars. What ex-con could expect so much?
For six years, Vick had operated an illegal dogfight business in Virginia which involved abuse, torture and execution of underperforming animals, not to mention the presence of drugs and the employment of illicit gambling. On top of that, Vick had denied all the allegations about his ugly business venture until evidence mounted with three of his comrades agreeing to testify against him. For Vick, it was the stain on the blue dress.
Should he perform on the field as expected, he may one day be heralded as a public icon, revered by millions of fans and voted into the Football hall of Fame. He stands as a role model for the young. Who cares about his crimes? He’s Michael Vick.
Some folks don’t want to hear about reality. What he presided over was cruel and gruesome. Man’s best friends are pitted against each other in a small enclosure as the blood lusters cheer on in glee making their bets. Vicious fights can last an hour as pit bulls inflict horrible injury upon one another, cracking bones, squealing, bleeding and ripping flesh. Some breeders cut off their ears so that rivals cannot bite onto them. Teeth are filed to make them sharper. Often, they are pumped with steroids. All this for the joy of watching innocent warm-blooded animals mutilate each other to tortuous deaths.
Two of the government’s witnesses claim that Vick not only gambled, but was personally involved in the brutal killing of at least eight dogs by hanging, drowning and electrocution because they didn’t perform. Nice guy.
Seems to me there’s an overdose hypocrisy here. Sports writers who lionize Vick have, for thirty years, turned up their noses at another sports figure whose Herculean feats far outshine the young Philadelphia quarterback.
Compare this. Pete Rose is the most prolific hitter in the history of Major League Baseball. He holds a host of individual records, some of which may never be broken, including most games played and most hits. His National League record of 44 consecutive games with a hit, is still unbroken. He was voted as an all-star 17 times, one MVP award, and three World Series Rings. Thought he’s one of the most electrifying players in the history of any sport, Rose has been permanently denied enshrinement into the Hall of Fame by many of those same sports writers.
Why? During his time as a manager, Pete Rose gambled on baseball. A crime, to be sure. While evidence wasn’t enough to convict him of illegal gambling, authorities managed to indict him for tax evasion in 1990, for which he served a five month prison sentence. Afterwards, no multi-million dollar contracts awaited him, no hoards of fans, only a few autograph sessions and a couple books that didn’t sell very well.
His crimes were a far cry from the violent, blood-thirsty practice of dog killing for the joy of gambling. Pete Rose killed no one, not even a dog. His crime was a product of gambling addiction, for which people in America are treated by the thousands every day.
Yet, he is banned from baseball for life, by sports writers. Compare that, to the love and forgiveness bestowed upon Michael Vick.
The Cooperstown museum is known as the Hall of Fame, not the Hall of Morality. Rose stands beside such names as Ruth, Aaron, Mantle, and Mays as the most famous of the famous ball players in history, and thus it is time he be enshrined into the sacred temple of his sport. That is doable, by the sports writers of America. If they don’t, they should check out their own manuscripts which drooled over the young quarterback despite his acts of animal torture, for fun and money. They might change their mind.
There’s also another reality. Rose didn’t have the right supporters going to bat for him (so to speak) in his corner. From day one, Michael Vick had the backing of an organization called: NAACP.
I guess that does make a difference.
Henry Louis Gates, Jr., is a prominent professor at Harvard University who teaches, of all things, race relations. On the 21st of July, he was arrested by a Cambridge officer at his home for Disorderly Conduct. Mr. Gates claims it was an act of racism.
The media has run with this ball like a Patriots tailback from his own one-yard line. A famous black person crying “racism” against a white cop is really big news, truth be damned. And considering the man’s vast array of credentials, he must be the good guy, while the cop is the bad guy.
Reporters are asking the cop if he’s going to apologize. Won’t happen, he says. Nothing to apologize for.
In a one-sided barrage of outrage, television commentators have sought out scores of prominent blacks for on-camera vilification of police behavior, even reaching the president of the United States, who, in responding to a reporters question, said, “I don’t know, not having been there and not seeing all the facts, what role race played in that, but I think it’s fair to say…that the Cambridge Police acted stupidly.”
The president is right saying, “I don’t know, not having been there.” But he contradicted himself by passing judgement, “police acted stupidly.” How does he know? Perhaps the president should go on a police ride-along sometime to get a feel for law enforcement from the other side.
Wolf Blitzer, of CNN, has repeatedly (and shamefully) queried black celebrities, professors and some journalists with leading questions that evoke the answers he’s looking for: Cops are racists! Racism is alive! Professor Gates is owed an apology. It makes sensational news. It sells.
Many people who watch/read such drivel get caught up in it all, like a fish on a hook, and fall for the slant without realizing they’ve been manipulated.
Here’s what happened, according to news sources.
A good Samaritan spotted two men using their shoulders to break through the door of a neighboring house. They called police thinking it might be a burglary. Good neighbor.
Police responded to a report of a possible B&E in progress, as required. Knowing only what the neighbor told them, the three officers approached the house with caution. Now inside, Mr. Gates refused to come out. The cops announced they were investigating a break-in, and asked to see identification. Again, good police work. At that point, the esteemed professor said, “Why, because I’m a black man in America?”
The response was as necessary as cancer. It also set the stage. From there, Mr. Gates apparently flipped out into an uncontrollable wild rant while making repeated references to the officer’s mother, then followed the officer outside and created a disturbance which drew attention from citizens. The police charged him with Disorderly Conduct.
I responded similarly during my police years…whether the man was black, white or purple.
While most of the television networks focused on the impressive credentials of Mr. Gates, they failed to mention the 42 year-old cop in question who has an eleven-year record of impeccable service to the community. A model officer, he is the police academy instructor for maintaining good race relations in the police academy which includes the denunciation of profiling. As a campus cop in 1995, he gave mouth-to-mouth resuscitation to basketball star, Reggie Lewis, a black man. Racist?
Here’s another point of view.
1 – The professor should be praising his neighbor who was looking out for criminal activity at his home.
2 – The professor should thank the cops for responding so quickly and doing their job, protecting his property.
3 – He should apologize to the cops for his offensive and unnecessary behavior.
But that won’t happen. Stoking the flames of racism keeps media air time filled, even if it’s not true. It pays to be the victim and nothing works better than playing the race card.
In today’s world, police officers walk on eggshells to avoid any appearance of racial discrimination. I know. Been there, done that. The last thing this cop wanted to do, was arrest a prominent black unless his back was against the wall.
Mr. Gates picked on the wrong cop to advance his agenda.
The president would have responded better had he followed up by saying he could not comment on the incident. But, loyalty to his old professor friend took precedence and he chose to opine how the police acted “stupidly.” That comment was made just as “stupidly.”
Or could it be, that the president has negative feelings to the Cambridge police for writing him seventeen parking tickets during his years at Harvard, (1988-1991) fifteen of which were never paid until…you guessed it, 2007 — when he started running for president. ($375 worth)
The president’s sentiments toward police officers were personified on May 15th, during the annual “Peace Officers Memorial Day” in which, over the last 21 years, every president has appeared to make a speech on the steps of the capitol bestowing honor upon fallen officers. They number over 150 per year. But not this time.
Yes, the president was tied up with more pressing issues. He was giving a tour of the White House to members of the Philadelphia Phillies baseball team.
I think we all get the message, especially cops. The eggshells are becoming more fragile by the day. (Or by each election)
Meanwhile, if Professor Gates is on the watch for racists, he might do well to look in the mirror.
For a detailed copy of Sgt. Crowley’s report and the report of his back-up officer, see:
Click here: Gates Police Report
Other resource links of interest:
Click here: Henry Louis Gates’ Arrest
Click here: Sgt. James Crowley
Click here: Newsmax.com – ‘Scofflaw’ Obama Grudge Against Police?
I’m one of those pro-choice advocates. To my mind, it’s important to keep Roe V. Wade on the books for two primary reasons:
1) Support the woman’s right to choose (obviously).
2) To prevent abortions from reverting to the back-alley incompetents, pre-1972.
Just like many other so-called “sins,” making abortion illegal will not stop abortions from happening. They just fuel the black market, and the procedure becomes much less safe.
That said, it pains me to write any article which leans more to the liking of the pro-life side of the abortion issue. But, in the case of a live births and viable fetus’, it’s essential that states draw a stricter line in the name of decency and righteousness.
Recently, the Board of Medicine revoked the license of Florida Dr. Pierre Jean-Jacque Renelique for medical malpractice stemming from a botched abortion in which a fetus was born alive, then discarded by unlicensed personnel who were in attendance.
It happened in 2006. The mother, an 18 year-old woman in Hialeah, Florida, was 23 weeks pregnant. The day before the procedure, the doctor prescribed a drug that dilates the cervix. She arrived at the clinic the next day, but the doctor was delayed, called to another emergency patient. In the meanwhile, the young woman delivered the fetus on her own. According to a lawsuit filed by the woman’s attorney, one of the clinic owners knocked the infant off a chair, scooped it up and placed it, with placenta, into a bag and threw it out. Following a tip, police found the remains a week later.
Amazingly, when the doctor arrived, he began performing the abortion unaware that the child had been born. Clinic personnel were obviously not forthcoming. Neither were they licensed and qualified.
The medical examiner determined the baby had breathed air, and deemed the cause of death as “extreme prematurity.”
This is an example of nightmarish events that weaken the argument for the pro-choice lobby and gives teeth to the other side. This woman was nearly five months pregnant, a period in which some early deliveries result in severely premature, but viable births.
Currently, Florida law allows for the termination of pregnancy within the first two trimesters. That’s far too dangerous. It would be far more logical and safer to limit abortion procedures to the first trimester only, with due exceptions regarding the health and/or survival of the mother.
Such an amended law would preclude these kinds of travesties where tiny babies are capable of sustaining life on their own. According to Planned Parenthood Federation of America, 88 percent of all abortions in America are currently performed in the first trimester, and only 1.5 percent after 20 weeks. We need to change that 88 percent, to 100 percent.
Meanwhile, abortion would remain legal and the black market butchers in wait would still remain out of business.
Doctor Pierre Jean-Jacque Renelique certainly ran a slipshod operation in Hialeah, and the Board of Medicine was right to revoke his license. It begs the question, how many other clinics are run in this same manner?
It would also appear fitting that one or more of the clinic personnel should be prosecuted, but the existence of admissible evidence beyond and to the exclusion of every reasonable doubt, is another matter for the state attorney to weigh.
Proponents of the pro-choice movement — who are constantly under the gun — should be doing a better job of monitoring abortion clinics around the states. Ones like Dr. Renelique’s brings discredit to their cause.
This post was published in November of 2007. Reposted on this date, with comments included.
SIX REASONS TO LEGALIZE POT
The War on Drugs is lost. Our nation has spent nearly a trillion dollars since the 1970’s trying to enforce unenforceable laws, which have only served to fuel the black market and incarcerate millions of otherwise non-violent offenders.
If a football coach sends in a losing play, game after game, and never gains ground, he must either change the strategy or find another job. Lawmakers in America continue with the same losing strategy, year after year, while we pay for it with billions in tax dollars and human life. Tell me please, how much sense that makes.
The drug laws are in dire need of revision. Sitting atop the list: Marijuana.
In an open letter to the president, congress, governors and state legislatures, Harvard Economist Professor Jeffrey A. Miron called for the legalization of marijuana and replacing it with a system of taxation and regulation. More than five hundred distinguished economists from around the nation signed off on that letter, including the most notable, Milt Friedman.
In essence, he claims the combined savings from enforcement and revenues would reap upwards of $14 billion a year.
I think…more.
During my thirty years in law enforcement, I was never in a position to jail anyone for disputable statutes, i.e. prostitution, gambling or drugs. I was lucky. Murder, rape and robbery are indisputable crimes. But drug possession, prostitution and gambling, outside of man’s subjective determination, does not necessarily constitute criminal behavior.
It is more of an abomination against humanity to incarcerate human beings for years upon years in stinking cages and destroying lives for behavior that can be treated in more constructive, and less costly ways. We are a vengeful society who believes the only solution to undesirable behavior is to lock ‘em up and throw away the key. We are supposed to be civilized?
After seven decades of deeming these acts illegal, we should ask the question: Have laws prohibiting these behaviors produced the desired effect? Has it deterred people from engaging in the use of marijuana? We all know the answer.
Alcohol prohibition of the 1920s not only failed to stop people from drinking, it fostered the emergence of organized crime syndicates as we still know them today. Black markets can only exist at the behest of law makers. Cartel leaders and crime syndicates thrive on laws that keep drugs illegal. I know. In the 1950’s, my bookie stepfather funneled big money to state politicians every election year for one purpose: To keep gambling illegal.
I am not an advocate nor a user of marijuana. I abhor drugs. My own family has been touched with the horror of drug addiction. Well-intended but ineffective laws that kept marijuana illegal did him more harm than good. It certainly prevented nothing.
I concede, that marijuana may damage short-term memory, impair judgment, alter heart rates and has the potential to create anxiety, paranoia and lethargy. But there is no data available to suggest one death has been caused by cannabis. Diseases related to nicotine are responsible for over 430,000 deaths a year, yet cigarettes are not only legal, the tobacco industry has been subsidized by the government for many years.
I am among the groundswell that is growing in America to decriminalize marijuana. So are more than five thousand former law enforcement officers and prosecutors that belong to an organization called Law Enforcement Against Prohibition (LEAP). Visit: www.leap.cc
Besides the economists lobby, there are six solid reasons to legalize marijuana:
1 – Taxpayer waste. The direct costs involved in the federal enforcement of marijuana laws extend beyond $7.5 billion annually. That doesn’t mention the huge costs to state and local law enforcement which is double that. Add: the costs of court, prison and parole. At a time when a real war is being waged around the globe to protect our nation, we are chasing around after pot-heads and pot sellers who, in reality, present little danger to anyone except themselves.
2 – Wasted lives. With less than five percent of the world’s population, the United States houses 25 percent of the world’s prison inmates. Nearly 60 percent of inmates are in prison for drug related offenses, more than half of them, marijuana possession and/or smuggling. The annual cost for housing over two million inmates is $50 billion per year. This does not include ripple effect costs, such as lost wages, welfare to their families, broken homes, single-parent kids, plus the cost of courts, defense lawyers, probation and parole.
The true cost is more than $100 billion a year.
3 – The law is meaningless. Despite all the tax monies spent for interdiction, enforcement and incarceration, marijuana remains the third most popular recreational drug of choice behind alcohol and tobacco products. After seventy years of criminal prohibition, 15 to 20 million Americans are users of marijuana, while 70 million have inhaled pot sometime in their lives.
4 – The law creates criminals. Laws against marijuana fuel the black market and keep the criminals in business. And with those laws come the inherent dangers to police officers in every jurisdiction in America. They clog the court system, cost billions, incite corruption and create cynicism among the general public. With new laws that regulate and permit sale, marijuana smugglers and dealers will be out of business.
5 - It sets a poor example to the young. Opponents invariably argue that legalizing marijuana will send the wrong signals to kids. That doesn’t happen. Kids in every high school in America know how easy it is to buy a joint or an ounce of grass. It’s at their beckon call. It sends a signal that the law is impotent and easily broken. Those who believes that the illegality of marijuana has been a deterrent to pot smokers are living in dreamland.
6 - Medical marijuana. Twelve states have legalized the use of medical marijuana, with more to surely follow. Yet, the federal government continues to usurp states rights by enforcing federal statues prohibiting doctors from prescribing cannabis to patients suffering from disease-related pain, nausea, eye disease, epilepsy and other diseases. There can be no other explanation, other than corruption in government and intervention of the powerful pharmaceutical lobby. Visit:Factbook: Medical Marijuana
I could tell horror stories about young men and women who are needlessly spending many years behind bars, people who made mistakes, people who needed treatment for their own foibles, people who otherwise could contribute to society and bring joy to others in this world, people who are basically harmless to you and I, but will not see the light of freedom for much of their lives, detached from families and relegated to dependency on the state — you and me — for sustenance.
Milt Friedman and the 500 plus economists are correct. Will anyone lend an ear?
I’m not holding my breath.
A common misconception about heroin addicts is that they are the dregs of society. Not always true.
Stella D. was a witness to a street murder in Miami. This time, she couldn’t just board the train and head back to Coral Gables, the cops arrived too soon and held her for questioning. A hard-core addict for over eight years, the thirty-five year-old real estate saleswoman from the suburbs was in town for her weekly “buy” from a dealer when the nearby shooting erupted.
Neighbors and friends had no idea. Stella was a functional addict. She had nowhere to go for her drugs, but to a slimy denizen of the black market.
Europeans are catching on. They know the so-called “war on drugs” is a losing cause, which only serves to fill prisons, wreck lives and inflate law enforcement and other costs by the billions, all borne by the taxpayer.
By a margin of 68 to 32 percent, Swiss voters have approved a measure by which heroin may be legally dispensed at designated clinics to certified addicts. The experimental program actually started in 1994, and is offered in 23 centers across Switzerland. They claim it has significantly reduced crime and improved the health and daily lives of addicts.
This is a concept in which addiction is treated as a disease, and not a crime. Over a thousand addicts who unsuccessfully tried other therapies are visiting medical centers to receive the measured dose of heroin produced by a government-approved laboratory. They use equipment and clean needles to inject themselves under the supervision of a nurse, and receive counseling from psychiatrists and social workers.
The aim is to help the addicts learn how to function in society. Better to be a productive citizen than a drain on taxpayers as a prison inmate.
The negative: Addicts who choose, remain addicted.
The positive: Citizens are safer. Pushers are out of business. Addicts no longer have to steal, burglarize, maim, murder or push drugs to support their habit. Ergo, less crime victims and less drug users, while the black market goes out of business. Costs to taxpayers are drastically reduced.
Is that a no-brainer?
The era of Prohibition is a classic example of a government unsuccessful at legislating morality. By deeming alcohol illegal, bootlegging and street crimes rose to unprecedented heights while organized crime found a gold mine within the lucrative black market. Criminals gained. Citizens suffered.
Before the drug war began in the early 1970s pursuant to President Nixon’s Controlled Substances Act, drugs were not a major focus of law enforcement. I know, I was a Miami-Dade uniformed cop and later a detective in the decade of the 1960s.
I never once made a drug bust. Drug crimes were rare. It wasn’t until tougher laws were passed to combat drug possession, that the rates of crime soared, the black market blossomed and our prisons were filled to beyond capacity. Tougher laws and longer sentences did not result in less drugs in the marketplace. Today, over seven million people are under the watch of parole, probation, jails and prisons. Over 2.3 million human beings are warehoused behind bars, by far the most of any country on earth. One third of them are in for mere drug possession.
Heroin production fuels the war on terror, most of which comes from the poppy fields of Afghanistan. If the black market collapsed, so would much of the funding source for terror.
According to recent studies, at least one million users are addicted to heroin in the U.S., and two million more in Europe. More than three million Americans over the age of 12, have tried heroin at least one time.
Most start-up use can be attributed to criminal laws that fuel the black market.
Our lawmakers, and the public in general, should take notice of new strategies that work, and dispose of old strategies that don’t. We must do all we can to protect our kids and the users of drugs, but we must also protect our citizens from all crimes — violent and non-violent — associated with the illicit drug trade. If it weren’t illicit, there would be no trade.
Contrary to popular belief, studies have shown that marijuana is not a gateway drug that leads to the use of heroin and other more addictive drugs. The primary drift into hard drugs are born from environmental factors, peer pressure and an atmosphere ripe for spawning new users. With legalized dispensation of heroin, all those factors would be eliminated.
Besides Switzerland, trials in heroin treatment programs have begun in countries like Britain, Denmark, Belgium, Germany and Spain. With greater emphasis on treating addiction as an illness, and less toward creating “criminals,” drug cartels will collapse, and so will the ripple effect of associated crimes, such as murder and robbery.
And, people like Stella D. will be able to remain a functional addict, while her source of drugs can be found in safe and licensed medical facilities, where counseling and other treatments are available. Meanwhile, her street supplier will have to find a job.
What are we waiting for?
During his state senate years, one of the legislative accomplishments of Barack Obama was pushing a bill through the Illinois congress that requires video taping all interrogations in a homicide investigation.
This is nothing new. Other states, such as Minnesota and Alaska have been doing that for some time, and Texas has a similar law. Many individual departments, pursuant to arm-twisting from various civil rights and lobbying groups, have also initiated video cameras for interrogations in major cases. The premise: Criminals are the good guys, cops are the bad guys.
To the average citizen, it all sounds reasonable.
- A valid, well executed interrogation on video is valuable as evidence in court.
- The omnipresent camera protects the accused from undue coercion and abuse.
- Detectives are held to strict standards with no wiggle room for variance
- False confessions are lessened
- Provides good reality television shows.
That all sounds nice on the surface. But there is more to it than keeping cops in line. We must also consider protecting potential victims of crime.
Besides eye-witnesses, snitches and forensic evidence, a good confession is the most valuable element in sealing a conviction against someone who had committed a dastardly crime. During my hey-day homicide years, I extracted scores of confessions from killers, robbers and rapists, many of which might not have happened had a camera lens been focused on me. It simply changes all the dynamics.
One case comes to mind which may never have made it to trial had such a law existed. If so, many more bodies may have surfaced in the wake.
Milton Niport was a Jewish taxi driver from Baltimore who had spent several years in prison for violent crimes and had been out on parole for three years. He was also a sociopath with no compunction for sending innocent people to the graveyard. He had even boasted to a friend, that if he ever went back to robbing, he’d never leave a witness alive.
Milton had some bad luck. He robbed a Coral Gables Western Union, then brought two women and a man to the boondocks where he told them all to lay down amid the sawgrass. He shot each one in the head with a .22 revolver. But the man lived, because the bullet circled under the skin and over his eye, never penetrating the skull.
At the line-up, Milton was identified by the lone witness as the killer and charges of murder were filed. We were concerned that the case would be weak, because the primary evidence was a one-eyed witness. That’s right. The man was blind in one eye, and his identification might easily be challenged by a good attorney. A confession would be vital to the case.
To be sure, interrogation is an art. It is pure psychology in action, gaining the confidence and respect of the accused, making him/her believe that talking about it is the right thing to do.
I brought Milton into a small interrogation room where I explained his Miranda rights as though it was a menial task to get out of the way. He waived his rights to a lawyer which opened the door to questioning. Within the next two hours, I made him feel I was his friend, to help him, and at the same time, convince him that the evidence was indefensible, that he had no chance but to plead guilty and pour his heart out. He should ask for mercy by the court. In essence, I fooled him into confessing. But he had confessed truthfully to crime scene particulars that only the killer would have known.
Milton was convicted and sentenced to life in prison. I visited him ten years later to ask if he wanted to clear his conscience about any other killings. He did. Sure enough, he had killed four other human beings that had been unsolved murder cases for many years.
Had a camera restricted my ability to manipulate Milton Niport into confessing, there is a good chance this incorrigible criminal would have been freed and more lives would have been lost.
Never in my career did I physically abuse a suspect. But I did use whatever means I could — within the law — to solidify a strong case for prosecution. And that meant doing everything I could to gain a confession. Doing so often resulted in guilty pleas that would otherwise have required long and costly trials.
Those days are coming to a halt as cops and detectives are under the microscope of cameras and watchdogs, expected to act as robots, in fear of one wrong word, one wrong move, stirring the wrath of media, politicians and rights groups. In the long run, society is the loser because they are not getting what their taxes are paying for: Good, effective investigations.
For the most part, abuses by over zealous cops are a thing of the past. Yes, there may be a bad apple here and there, but the overwhelming majority of police detectives are not in the business of beating and torturing criminals into confessing. Those days are long over.
Cameras serve no advantage to good law enforcement nor to competent investigations. Nevertheless, the Obama-style law of Illinois is sure to expand to other states in the future, which will hamper murder investigations and keep those dangerous criminals on the street.
It’s a matter of priority. Protecting innocent citizens from criminals, or protecting criminals from innocent cops. Where would you stand?
I have been where you fear to go…
I have seen what you fear to see…
I have done what you fear to do…
All these things I’ve done for you.
I am the one you lean upon…
The one you cast your scorn upon…
The one you bring your troubles to…
All these people I’ve been for you.
The one you ask to stand apart…
The one you feel should have no heart…
The one you call the man in blue…
But I am human just like you.
And through the years I’ve come to see…
That I’m not what you ask of me…
So take this badge and take this gun…
Will you take it? Will anyone?
And when you watch a person die…
And hear a battered baby cry…
Then so you think that you can be
All those things you ask of me…?
“Tears Of A Cop” – author unknown
Few people knew Wade O’Keefe well. Or, well enough. Friends called him “Slick,” because he wore wrap-around sunglasses and a duck tail haircut. He’d been a street cop, then a respected homicide detective. When his wife complained of competing with his job, he quit and went back to being a heavy equipment operator. They made amends, and he returned to the badge. But domestic tranquility remained evasive. His wife left him anyway.
Slick came to work one day, signed his reports, went through the morning routine at the homicide office, then headed for the streets. Instead of answering calls, he stopped at a local liquor store for a bottle of Tanquery gin. From there, he went to an empty home and penned a long tearful letter to his wife as the Tanquery dulled his senses. His handwriting became illegible. Then he sat on the floor of his bed, lay a mirror against the wall, and watched himself insert the barrel of a .38 cal. revolver in his mouth.
Slick was my friend.
How many people have known even one friend or relative who ended their own life. In my thirty-year career, I knew ten police friends who took their own lives, plus two relatives.
One detective had secretly gambled and lost everything. He couldn’t face his wife. Bang!
One police woman had lost her job. She was so depressed, she shot her four-year-old son before taking her own life.
A CSI Technician was in the wrong place at the wrong time when a cop punch a handcuffed prisoner inside an elevator. He loved cops. He also loved his God. When Internal Affairs asked him to be a witness against a fellow officer, the proverbial rock/hard place, he couldn’t. Neither could he lie. Bang!
A retired underwater recovery officer couldn’t recover from years of alcoholism. Bang!
The beat goes on…
A recent study revealed that NYC officers kill themselves at a rate of 29 per 100,000 per year. The general population rate is 12 per 100,000. Approximately 350 police officers a year commit suicide in the United States. That’s one almost every 24 hours. That’s more than double the number of cops killed in the line of duty. And that doesn’t count the failed attempts. The actual numbers may be higher. I knew of one inebriated man who rammed his car into a bridge piling at 80 mph. Ruled accidental, it more likely was suicide.
The reasons are varied: Job conflicts with domestic relationships, alcoholism, financial pressures, guilt, haunting events.
Police officers are often first at a scene when babies are killed, wives are battered, or when accidents maim and kill innocent people. They are in the midst of grief on a daily basis. Some cops are loaded with hind-sight guilt, constantly reliving a scene where a tragedy could have been prevented. And, cops are always within reach of a gun.
Sure, there are programs and counseling centers, but police officers are the last to reveal what churns inside their mind and body, because they dare not be seen as “weak.” Informing the chain of command of psychological or dependency problems often lead to unwanted assignments and estrangement.
We — the people — often cast judgement over politicians, journalists, celebrities, criminals and jurists on their decisions, sometimes harshly. These folks have one advantage over cops: Time. They make their decisions based on gathered information over time.
Police officers are subject to hair-trigger decision making, on the spot. Sometimes, it’s a matter of life and death. Sometimes, it can be a mistake.
Yet, no one is judged as harshly as a police officer.
Cops know they are working under the microscope every moment on the job. These days, every traffic stop is monitored on camera. One wrong move, they can lose their job, their future, or their life. They can even go to prison.
Sometimes the line between sanity and insanity is blurred.
The general public should be aware of the daily stresses that face police officers and their families. A career cop who may have erred in judgement faces the perennial outcry for vengeance. It erases all the good he has done over the years; the saving of lives, the rescues, the apprehension of dangerous criminals, the arrest of child killers, responses to robberies and burglaries, recovery of stolen property, notifying loved ones of a death and the embrace of the grief stricken when there is no one else to do the embracing.
Hindsight is always 20/20. I wish I knew how close Slick was to ending his own life. He wasn’t a complainer and he never sought sympathy. So many of his friends have asked themselves, “Why didn’t I realize…?”
Anyone interested in this problem can access more information at web site: Click here
Maybe it’s time to just let criminals, gangs, thugs and thieves take over and tell the cops to sit in the station house, play video games, eat donuts eight hours a day and collect their pay. Sure would be a lot safer for them, in more ways than one.
Most of you have read my rants about the terrible fate of K-9 cop, Stephanie Mohr, and Border Patrol Agents Ramos and Compean, and more. Each are serving ten or more years in a federal prison, their lives in turmoil and their family’s lives wrecked while career criminals and social parasites laugh all the way to the bank, showered with favors compliments of the U.S. government.
Now comes Richard Thompson, age 55, serving his community in law enforcement for 23 years, seven of them as chief of a small town agency in Crawford, Nebraska. Thompson is a husband, father and grandfather. He may be going to prison for five years. Why? For shooting an armed criminal in defense of his own life, and the lives of others.
I gathered as much information as possible from a number of sources. Here’s what happened:
Apparently, Jesse Britton was a disturbed 16 year-old high school drop out who had a long history of criminal behavior, regularly a guest of the juvenile justice system. He had recently made threats to kill a school superintendent, another teen, and — of all people — Chief Thompson. He was also the suspect in a series of twelve burglaries, one of which resulted in the theft of a Lugar handgun.
The chief received a tip that the youngster was hiding out in an abandoned bar in downtown Crawford. As cops are supposed to do, he followed up and secured the assistance of other law enforcement officers. Two officers formed a perimeter outside while the other accompanied him inside. Good police work, I’d say.
Chief Thompson found the kid crouching down behind an old desk. “Show me your hands!” shouted the chief. Still good police work.
Britton rose slowly and pointed a pistol directly at the chief’s head. Thompson twice yelled, “Drop it!” He refused.
Just as all police officers are trained to when facing the muzzle of a firearm in the hands of a criminal, and with concern not only of his own life, but the life of his partner, Chief Thompson pulled the trigger. Then, his partner fired. Britton lay dead. A tragedy to be sure.
The chief not only did his job, he ostensibly saved his own life and the life of his partner.
Nebraska law requires a review by a grand jury in all violent death matters. Grand Juries are guided by the county prosecutor who sets the tone and the objective, presenting evidence to support his/her position. Special prosecutor Jean Rhodes did just that, and instead of vindicating the career cop, sought — and obtained — an indictment charging Thompson with a felony that could land him five years in prison.
Nebraska Attorney General John Bruning saw it differently, saying he fully expected the officer to be exonerated. Clearly, Britton has been shot after pointing a gun directly at a law enforcement officer’s head and being ordered to drop his weapon. But the Grand Jury claimed — with the guidance of the prosecutor’s office — that Chief Thompson had time to cut and run, not fire his weapon. Did Prosecutor Rhodes ever walk in the shoes of a cop confronted with a bullet?
Perhaps the members of the Grand Jury should try a re-enactment, and see what it feels like to suddenly be facing instant death at the hands of a nut ball, and you’ve only got a split second to make a decision. In my thirty-year career, and in most police agencies, self-preservation and protection of life, comes before any other consideration.
I have no problem with hammering abusive cops and even locking up those who clearly break the law. I arrested a few myself. But something is happening in our society as good law enforcement officers become a trophy for rabid prosecutors, while crooks and violent criminals are lionized as victims.
I had my own moment in 1965, confronted by a hysterical woman waving a rifle directly at me. Totally caught by surprise, no weapon in hand, I raised my hands and started backing away…but she fired anyway. Fortunately for me, a bad shot. My wound was in the leg. Had the trajectory of the muzzle been a half-inch higher, I would have been dead. And, if I had my gun in hand, I would have taken her down in a nano-second. At least I’d be alive to tell the story.
I suspect Chief Thompson will be acquitted. But not before he and his family suffers greatly from humiliation, fear, enormous pressure and the high cost of defense which will leave him utterly broke.
It is any wonder why police agencies have a hard time hiring officers these days?
Anyone interested can read the whole story on line. Click here: The North Platte Bulletin
Chief Thomson’s wife has made an appeal for assistance, asking for donations to the Law Enforcement Legal Defense Fund. See her heart-wrenching letter at: Click here:
When the nation’s heroes are seen as demons and demons are seen as heroes, we’ve arrived at the slippery slope.
May 8th to the 15th is designated as Police Appreciation Week. This article is dedicated to my comrades in law enforcement, and their families.
Stalin once said, “One death is a tragedy. A thousand deaths is a statistic.”
We are constantly barraged with death numbers. Plane crashes, earthquakes, war. But numbers obscure the story of individual suffering. This is about some of those numbers.
2007 will go down as the deadliest in history for the sentries of law and order with 181 police officers killed in the line of duty. That doesn’t even mention the 65,000 more that were wounded and seriously injured fighting battles in the streets so that you and I can rest easier and feel safer in our communities.
Last year was unusually high. On average, 162 police officers are killed annually in this nation. That’s 162 families wrecked, hundreds of kids stripped of a mother or father, shattered dreams, lost friends, eulogies and graves. All for one reason. The badge.
Each harbored feelings of love and hope, and of commitment to their profession. Each left for work like any other day kissing loved ones, unaware it would be their final embrace. Each knew the hazards of the badge. But there was something alluring about the job. It’s worth the risk.
Or is it?
One never knows when it will strike next. Or who. Or where. It happens in urban jungles like Chicago and Miami or in remote suburbia. But, it will strike 162 officers a year. After thirty years on the job, I could tell a hundred stories from a personal perspective. Here’s one of them.
April Fool’s Day, 1976. Seven detectives were assigned to the Auto Theft Unit of the Miami-Dade Police Department. By the end of the day, there were only four.
Clark Curlette, 28, seven years on the job, married, no kids, veteran of Viet Nam.
Frank D’Azevedo, 31, ten years a cop, two weeks from his wedding day, U.S. Army veteran.
Tom Hodges, 32, seven years a cop, married, three kids under six, U.S. Air Force veteran.
All left for work that afternoon filled with dreams. Each became a statistic. They were my friends.
The detectives were checking an area of Miami Beach when they spotted a suspicious Lincoln Mark IV parked at a one-story motel. It had been a popular model for stolen cars. Hodges and Curlette questioned the motel manager about its owner. By the time they ambled down to the suspect’s room, the word was out. Curlette got it first. Ambushed through a window with a 12 gauge shotgun before he knocked on the door. Hodges was next. Neither had time to unholster their weapons. From across the street, D’Azevedo heard shots and knew the circumstances were dire. He gave chase on foot as the suspect fled, firing wildly with his revolver. The suspect stopped and turned. D’Azevedo got hit in the gut.
The suspect was a fugitive who swore he would never go back to a prison cell. And so he didn’t. He was found in a clump of seagrape, killed by his own bullet.
Senseless. Pathetic. All because they were cops. No other reason.
Many more of my friends within the Miami-Dade Police Department — of all racial, ethnic and genders — have gone to an early grave. Cop killers don’t discriminate. I knew young Officer William Cook, whose bullet-proof vest couldn’t save him in 1979. A lunatic shot him through the side opening where the bullet passed though his aorta. Black officer, Detective Harrison Crenshaw, shot by a crazed gunman in 1974. Officer Cheryl Seiden, shot and killed by an armed robber in 1982. Officer Jose Gonzalez, killed in 1989. And Officer Joe Martin, son of a career cop, shot and killed in 1990. The beat goes on.
Some are more fortunate, like the young detective who served an arrest warrant at a Miami apartment only to take a bullet in the leg by an over-protective girl friend. Talk about luck. Had the muzzle of that rifle been aimed one centimeter higher, he would be just another statistic. That detective was me.
In the last two centuries, more than 17,000 officers have been killed in the line of duty, 1,635 in the past decade. That’s 1,635 funerals in ten years. That’s 1,635 broken families.
Stalin was right. We hear numbers but lose sight of the human factor. Cops are a staple of urban warfare, a common dot in suburbia, a fixture in the streets, same purpose, same name: Officer. Every one of them, no matter what city of town, face peril. All because they are cops.
They are the prey of America’s media who will scrutinize them to the nth degree. They are the subject of arm-chair judges and Monday morning quarterbacks. They are the ones actually walking in the shoes of danger every day, their lives — and the lives of others — dependent upon split second decisions. Sometimes, they go wrong. To err is human.
I’ve known police officers who served honorably for twenty years, protecting people, saving lives, apprehending robbers and killers, then find themselves facing the wrath of society for a single mistake…unforgiven…prosecuted…castigated, as though the twenty years of service and valor never existed.
Every cop’s life is on the line every second he or she wears that uniform. Think about that the time you see one or two sitting at a counter eating donuts. Think of that when you might complain about a speeding ticket. Think about that when you hear about an officer accused of misconduct and give him/her the benefits of the doubt afforded others. And when you see those blue light flashing in the rear view and your heart pounds through your chest, remember this: You may know who he is, but he doesn’t know who you are.
Folks who visit Washington D.C. should be aware of a lesser known attraction on Judiciary Square where the names of 17,000 cops are inscribed on marble walls. The National Law Enforcement Officer’s Memorial honors those fallen warriors who have given their lives for no less a reason of soldiers who died in Viet Nam or Iwo Jima. Only their war was right here, in our streets. Your streets.
Perhaps some of you who knew a fallen officer, or the family of one, might visit and search for their name on the marble walls and pay homage in your own way. Or, you can look for the names of Clark Curlette, Tom Hodges, Frank D’Azevedo, William Cook, Harrison Crenshaw, Cheryl Seiden or Joseph Martin and remember this little tribute.
Then ask yourself a silly question.
Have you hugged a cop today?
* What is the difference between Former President Jimmy Carter laying a wreath at the grave of Yasser Arafat, and me, a former cop, laying a wreath at the grave of Ted Bundy?
* How can we respect the Nobel Peace Prize when it honored a man who dedicated his life to killing people?
* If Billy Graham’s church had bestowed honors upon David Duke, (a devout anti-Semite, racist) would that have been any different than the Trinity Church of Christ bestowing honors upon Louis Farrahkan (devout anti-Semite, racist)?
* If John McCain or Hillary Clinton had remained as member of a church that honored David Duke — for twenty years — would that not send a message to voters about their character and their values?
* If John McCain or Hillary Clinton ever used the term (no matter the context) “…like a typical black person…” would they have been considered racists? Would blacks have been offended?
* Is there anyone out there with an IQ over 90 who actually believes that Obama was unaware of his pastor’s anti-Semitic, anti-American, pro-Farrahkan leanings over a period of twenty years?
* Why isn’t Barack Obama being questioned by the media about his past support of cousin, Raila Odinga, Marxist-terrorist, now co-leader of Kenya who has sworn to impose strict Islamic (Sharia) law over the country.
* I wonder what would happen if any white U.S. Senator suggested the formation of a “White Caucus” in congress?
* How would the American media treat Billy Graham if he formed a million-man march of white people on Washington D.C.?
* How is America ever to be color blind, when folks like Obama, Farrahkan, Wright, Sharpton and Jesse Jackson keep reminding America what color they are?
* Why is it that white racism is condemned, but black racism is excused?
* If he had run for office, can anyone imagine Colin Powell making an issue of his race?
* If a race of people are given special preference for jobs and promotions over another race, strictly based on race, is that not discrimination?
* If America’s goal is to put a stop to racial discrimination, then why do we still apply affirmative action in government agencies?
* If illegal aliens are called “undocumented workers,” should not drug pushers should be called “Unlicensed pharmacists?”
* Should bank robberies be called “unauthorized withdrawals?”
* Why do the laws of government declare it a crime to kill and then legalize killing by government?
* If America is the land of the free, why do we have 2.4 million human beings locked in cages — more than half for non-violent offenses – comprising enough people to form the 35th largest state?
* Why does our presidential election process require two years, while other nations do not require more than two or three months?
* Is Rap Music an Oxymoron?
* If the make-up of the 1966 Supreme Court had been similar to today, would there ever have been a “Miranda” Decision?
* What’s the moral difference between alcohol “Prohibition” of the 1920’s, and marijuana “Prohibition” of today?
* Why does Lindsey Lohan, Britney Spears and Paris Hilton — who are not important — garner more media attention than Ahmedinijad, Kim Jong-Il and Putin — who are important?
* If United States taxpayers are going to provide food clothing and shelter to all Americans who need it, and taxpayers are going to provide higher education to those who can’t afford it, and taxpayers are going to provide free health care to all who need it, how can that not be defined as socialism?
* If all these benefits are provided free to people in “need”, wouldn’t it be advantageous for those people to remain needy?
* If Palestinians laid down their arms, would they still exist? If Israel laid down their arms, would they still exist? Is there anyone who does not know the simple answer to those questions?
* Since when was it declared wrongful conduct for a nation whose population is under armed attack, to defend itself?
* If Osama Bin Laden was the leader of the attack on America on September 11th, why did we go after Saddam Hussein in Iraq? And why is Bin Laden still at large?
* If we declared war against Japan in December of 1941, why didn’t we declare war against Radical Islam in September of 2001?
* If the Saudis are funding Islamic fundamentalism and terror throughout the western world, and they send rewards to families of suicide bombers, why does our government continue to kiss their butts?
* If radical Islam has openly announced its intentions to destroy the United States from within, and considering the wake-up of 9-11, why do we still hand out multi-thousands of student visas to kids from the mid-east?
* If Homeland Security became the primary issue after 9-11, why are the southern and northern borders still being breached six years later?
* If our nation’s security was of utmost importance following 9-11, why were 142 Saudi nationals given free, secret passage out of the country two days later, when all airports were closed?
* Can anyone possibly imagine, a United States that is no longer free?
* Are there any answers?
The following is a fictional scenario extracted from the annals of true crime.
On a warm summer evening in North Miami, Mary Smith and her daughter, 13, were invaded by three house robbers. The mother was held at gunpoint while the criminals raped the child. The three subjects were apprehended, tried and convicted. Justice, so to speak, was served. But was it? The child was left with severe psychological trauma, nightmares and major phobias not to mention three forms of permanent sexually transmitted diseases. In addition, Mrs. Smith and her daughter were subjected to frequent appearances and interrogations via the justice system, a nightmarish ordeal in itself. Mrs. Smith lost her job and her house, unable to pay for the humongous costs.
The three criminals all had prior arrests and convictions for violent crime and had been given light sentences and/or had served a part of their sentence before being paroled. The bottom line: Representatives of the state (judges and parole boards) erred in their judgement which, post facto, resulted in these crimes. Sure, hindsight is 20/20, but this tragedy would never have occurred had the criminals been given the hard time prescribed by statute. They should have been sentenced to the maximum with no probation and served their full terms. Law enforcement did their part. They identified, arrested and prosecuted the criminals. Yet, the system still failed Mary Smith and her daughter.
Oh well, Mrs. Smith. We’re sorry.
Victims of crime are often forgotten and/or treated as just another cog in the wheels of criminal justice. Yet, many victims of theft, robbery, rape and other physical assaults, are relegated to reliving those horrid moments for the rest of their lives, in terms of financial ruin, physical and mental disability, or by the death of loved ones. Too many of the perpetrators of those crimes had already been through a justice system which failed to keep dangerous criminals off the street, or at the least, correct their behavior. If we are a government whereby a citizen can be awarded millions of dollars from a restaurant because the coffee was too hot; If we are a government who rewards illegal aliens with billions in benefits and social services; If we are a government who sends billions of dollars overseas to assist citizens of other countries; If we can afford to spend billions more on sending space ships to Mars and beyond, we certainly can do a little more to assist the victims of crime in our own communities, especially when the system dropped the ball.
The tiny nation of Iceland passed a compensation program that provides financial relief for all victims of crime (Icelandic citizens) who suffer financial and/or physical loss. It’s the law. Not bad.
Besides the long range effects, crime victims, and/or their family members, are often required to spend considerable time at trials or other legal proceedings in a major case. Most are not paid for being away from their jobs. Some not only lost wages, they lose jobs. State legislatures should pass laws that protect victims of crimes or families of deceased victims by allowing up to 12 weeks of unpaid leave from work during any 12-month period to attend court proceedings.
As part of the terms of parole and/or probation, perpetrators should be required to pay restitution — at least in part — to victims that have suffered financial loss from their crimes. Inmates who work at paid jobs while in prison should provide some degree of restitution to their victims.
There are several victim advocacy organizations who work hard at bringing these issues to the attention of government leaders and who have strived toward introducing a constitutional amendment that would read (or similarly) as follows:
“A victim of a crime shall be treated with fairness, compassion and respect by the criminal justice system. A victim of a crime shall not be denied the right to be present at public judicial proceedings except when, prior to completing testimony as a witness, the victim is properly sequestered in accordance with law of the rules governing the courts of the state. A victim of a crime shall be entitled to those rights and remedies as may be provided by the legislative branch. Victim of a crime is defined as: a) a person who has suffered physical or psychological injury or has incurred significant loss or damage to personal or real property as a result of a crime or an incident involving another person operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of drugs or alcohol, and b) the spouse, parent, legal guardian, grandparent, child or sibling of the decedent in the case of a criminal homicide.”
Texas passed a Crime Victim Compensation Program that allows for up to $50,000 paid to victims of violent crime. This is a good start, but not nearly enough in cases where permanent injuries, physical and psychological, can spiral lifetime costs ten times that amount. Consider a victim who has been shot in the spine and relegated to a wheelchair for life, after major surgery.
The National Association of Crime Victim Compensation Boards has been advocating for victims of crime, boasting $444 million dollars in assistance to victims in 2006. Good for them. But that’s a drop in the proverbial bucket compared to the losses incurred by victims of crime.
If I could wave the magic wand, I would want all states passing legislation that would provide for financial assistance to victims who suffer physical/mental disabilities as a result of a crime, providing they are not involved in the offense. And if a U.S. Senator, Congressman or even a president, cared enough to push through a bill, the federal government could chip in to help the funding . Who deserves it more?
If Iceland can do it, why not the USA?
Crime victims are the forgotten Americans, out of sight, out of mind. Until…that is…it happens to you or me.
Sometimes it pays to lose your cool.
Take the case of Lenona Suggs, age thirteen. Lenona was raised as a single child by a single parent who worked by day and mothered by night. She dreamt one day of becoming a lawyer and prayed that she would makes grades that would earn a scholarship. She was an attractive child, wire thin, with smooth chocolate skin and slanted eyes which suggested a hint of Asia somewhere in her bloodline.
Mama had been married once but her man vanished one day after a night out with the boys when Lenona was only a year old. Mama worked the next twelve years cleaning white people’s homes in upscale neighborhoods. A devoted mother, indeed, Mama would make sure her daughter would never suffer the same foolish fate, marrying a loser, then having no other skills than scrubbing toilets and floors on bended knees. She read stories to Lenona at night, helped her with homework and spoke openly about sex, drugs and violence and the rigors of life.
She often left Lenona home alone during late afternoons while she worked beyond rush hour. She covered those bases also. “If you’re ever real sick or you’re hurt, or you’re afraid, be sure and call 9-1-1,” she said. “They will be at the house in seconds. And whenever you talk to the police, try and be real calm and speak clearly so they can understand you.”
“Okay, Mama.”
One bright Thursday afternoon, while Lenona was working on her algebra homework, she heard a rap at the window. There was Darryl Ray Stiles, a 15 year-old boy she knew from school, a boy who had often made advances for her attention to no avail, a boy who had failed the seventh grade and then the eighth. Lenona waved him off. “Go away!”
But Darryl was persistent. He beat on the window, then went to the front door. “Let me in,” he shouted.
“Go away! Please.” Lenona scampered from door to door making sure bolts and latches were in place. Then she peered out the windows following his motion as he circled the house. She could see that he was wired, intense, determined.
As he pounded on the door, she was afraid he’d break the locks. Petrified, she lifted the phone and called 9-1-1. Her mother’s words echoed through her brain. “When you talk to the police, try to be real calm….”
Lenona: “Hello, my name is Lenona Suggs. I’m thirteen, and I’m alone, and there is a boy trying to break into my house. He’s outside right now, please send someone.”
Officer: “I see. Give me your address young lady.”
Lenona: “It’s 3640 Northwest 77th street. Please, he trying to get inside.”
Officer: “I see. Do you know this boy?”
Lenona: “Yes, his name is Darryl. I know him.”
Officer: “Uh huh. And how do you know this boy, Miss Suggs?”
Lenona: “He be after me all the time in school. Please, could you send someone out here. He’s trying to get into my house.”
Officer: “Sure. Just stay right there, and we’ll get someone out there as soon as we can.”
And so it went. Judging by her quiet and deliberate manner, the complaint officer logged the call as a domestic dispute between schoolmates and lay it in the “non-emergency” stack. Police would be dispatched only after other more pressing calls were answered.
A two-man cruiser arrived thirty-five minutes later where they found the rear kitchen door ajar and windows broken with shards of glass strewn about the floor. Inside, Lenona Suggs lay on the bedroom carpet agaze at the ceiling in a pool of crimson blood, her clothes ripped from her body and a screwdriver impaled into her heart. Lenona’s dream of becoming a lawyer was forever terminated by a young lunatic and his rock of crack cocaine.
No one will ever know, for certain, if Lenona’s life would have been saved had the police rushed there in emergency mode. But we do know that these split-second decisions are often guided by the emotional pitch of the moment. In this case, Mama’s good advice backfired.
Sure, Darryl Ray Stiles was arrested, tried as an adult, and sentenced to life in prison. But so what? Nothing could bring Lenona back.
Unconsoled by good detective work and a fine prosecution, Mama went into depression and ultimately disappeared from the face of the earth, just like Lenona’s father.
The Complaint Officer? Handicapped and wheelchair bound, this congenial old man simply thought it was a domestic squabble and no emergency, because the girl didn’t sound like she was in peril. He wished the caller had been more hysterical.
No discipline was administered to the gentleman, but it didn’t matter. He’ll live with it for a lifetime.
Yes, this is a true story…from the annals of Miami-Dade P.D. It could happen anywhere.
Some folks reject the old cliche`, “Don’t judge an entire profession by the actions of a few.” But it’s true.
Having been a cop for thirty years, and well aware of how news stories are often skewed to give the appearance that police are the bad guys, I generally hold back judgement on reports about brutality until both sides of the issue are known. In 1991, Rodney King was subjected to a street whipping by L.A. Police after leading them on a chase, assaulting the officers and resisting arrest. The famed video tape was played on national television a thousand times over, but only that portion which made the cops look bad. (And they did)
My sense of loyalty will always lean toward police officers who put their lives on the line every day to serve and protect Americans. If there is a hint of doubt about the veracity of an accusatory report, I will support the police until I am convinced otherwise. After all, they are my extended family. With rare exception, they are brave, diligent American patriots who might be relaxing over a lunch one second, then facing a sudden crisis the next, expected to make the right decisions at all times, no matter how instant.
This time, it’s tough. Two recent incidents alleging police misconduct have hit the news media, both of which are hard to swallow, even without knowing the other side of the story.
Stark County (Canton) Ohio, Mrs. Hope Steffey was hauled in to jail following her own call to the cops, after allegedly being assaulted by her cousin. Because she produced a drivers license that had belonged to her deceased sister, the police thought her to be suspicious. She claimed it was an error, that she held her sister’s license for sentimental reasons, and then produced her own identification. When the woman — who had no criminal record — asked for her sister’s license back, the officer refused. Somewhere in the interim, tempers flared and the woman’s face was slammed to the hood of the police car, chipping one of her teeth. She then was taken to the ground where she was arrested and handcuffed.
Okay, maybe the woman was unruly and the cops were justified. Maybe. Benefit — doubt.
Next, Mrs. Steffey was taken to the county jail and forcibly strip-searched to naked, under protest — while handcuffed — by six or seven deputies, including two male officers. Stark Countýs policy — as are all police policies — states that a strip search must be conducted by a same sex officer. The citizen turned inmate was left unclothed in a cell for six hours without even a blanket, wrapping herself in toilet tissue for warmth and modesty. She was not allowed a phone call or medical attention. When she was brought to booking, only a small weighted vest was provided to cover her nudity. She had been charged with disorderly conduct and resisting arrest.
More amazing, is that these officers not only engaged in conduct which appeared improper, they did it under full scope of a video camera. Check it out. It’s quite condemning: http://www.sheriff.co.stark.oh.us/
Stark County Sheriff Tim Swanson states the reason Mrs. Steffeýs clothes were taken from her and she was left naked in a cell, was for her own safety. Sheriff Swanson maintains that his deputies are not guilty of any wrongdoing and that they have a job to protect prisoners in their custody.
Ooookay.
Needless to say, litigation has already begun. I hope Stark County is solvent.
The next case is even more disturbing. On February 12th of this year, a disabled man was arrested for a traffic warrant in Hillsborough County, Florida, and taken to the police station. Brian Sterner had suffered a neck injury fourteen years before, and has no feeling below the chest area. With an adapted vehicle, he is able to drive.
Though a bona fide, wheelchair-bound, quadriplegic, the female deputy at the station apparently thought Mr. Sterner was faking the whole thing. So, she stepped behind his wheelchair and unceremoniously lifted the back handles and dumped him like a wheelbarrow full of cement upon the station floor. Another deputy is seen in the tape, apparently amused. Mr. Sterner was then searched while lying on the floor like a beached seal, obviously paralyzed. If I hadn’t seen it for myself, I would have doubted it all. Click here:
By all accounts brought out in the tape, these officers should be stripped of their badges, not only because of their contemptible actions, but for utter stupidity knowing that despite the video cameras rolling, they still act like barbarians.
I feel comfortable in asserting that 99 percent of all police officers in this country are fine, upstanding and competent public servants who do not engage in such behaviors. The other one percent would comprise a very small number from the 850,000 cops in the United States, and even that, I’m sure, is an exaggerated number. But by broadcasting these incidents over national news, over and over, it will unfortunately give the cynical public an impression that the majority of cops are unfeeling idiots who should be feared and not trusted. Nothing can be further from the truth.
During my career with a three-thousand man department, I rarely encountered cops who indiscriminately abused citizens. With rare exception, officers I knew treated citizens with respect and dignity, even child molesters and murderers. Yet, when it came time to bring a bad cop to justice, my colleagues and I never had any compunction. My last arrest as a sworn officer, in 1980, was that of five officers charged with the brutal killing of an unarmed traffic offender. Their acquittal led to the Miami Liberty City riots of May, 1980.
Police agencies spend arduous time and a great deal of money screening applicants and training officers to prevent such incidents from happening. Now and then, a bad cop will slip through the cracks. That’s the way it is with most any profession. I’m sure the cops who acted so poorly in these two videos will soon be experiencing a new direction in their lives.
In 2007, 186 police officers were killed in the line of duty protecting you and me. Another five thousand were seriously injured. Folks should bear that in mind before judging harshly and broad brushing the police profession.
I’m proud to have been one of them.
Where is the National PBA? The National FOP? The International Association of Chiefs of Police? The National Association of Police Organizations?
Why are the cops of America remaining silent? Where is the outrage?
In September of 2007, nearly 20,000 demonstrators marched on the small town of Jena, Louisiana to protest what they thought were discriminatory practices by the prosecutors office against local blacks. It brought national attention to an issue which is still yet to be resolved. But, it sure made a lot of people listen up. Perhaps the nation’s police officers should pay attention.
Whether it be issues of blacks, gays, Hispanics, women or even illegal aliens, people have been rising up across America to confront injustice, from suffrage to the civil rights movement to this very day. Most of the time, it renders results, because there is power in the people, and power in numbers. When numbers band together, government listens.
In the last seven years, police officers have been the target of federal prosecutions like never before in history. One case after another, scumbag drug dealers, thieves, robbers, many of them illegal aliens, are being given perks and rewards for no other reason than to testify against law enforcement officers. And for cops who are convicted, it’s often an automatic ten year sentence because of the minimum mandatory laws that are imposed on judges when anyone is convicted of a crime while in possession of a firearm.
Of course, police officers possess firearms. Yet, in virtually all these cases, juries are not informed of the penalties cops face.
One juror in the case against Officer Stephanie Mohr stated, after trial, had he/she known that a minimum of ten years would be her sentence, she would not have been found guilty. The “crime” did not warrant ten years in federal prison.
In truth, the “crime” did not warrant prosecution, yet the government went after her with a fervor.
A decorated K-9 cop in Prince Georges County, Maryland, Mohr was on the scene of an attempted burglary where two illegal aliens were caught at one a.m. atop a commercial building. After the subjects scaled down, it appeared one was going to run, so she released the dog. The man was bitten on the leg and apprehended. Five years later, one cop on the scene traded a long prison sentence for turning witness against Mohr, saying the bite wasn’t necessary. One day before the statute of limitations expired, Mohr was indicted. It took two trials, and mega thousands of taxpayer money, plus a search for the “victim” who had long since returned to Central America, just to secure his testimony. He never complained.
Mohr, a mother, is now serving ten years in federal prison, while her “victim” was afforded all kinds of favors compliments of the government. In the land of the free.
Everyone knows about the case against Border Patrol Agents, Jose Compean and Ignacio Ramos, who shot a drug smuggler in the butt as he was running back across the border, leaving more than 700 pounds of marijuana behind. Nothing was considered wrong, until the Mexican government complained. The two career cops were then prosecuted after the smuggler, a lifelong illegal alien criminal, was given special treatment, medical care, a special pass to cross the border, and more, just for his testimony. Johnny Sutton, the prosecutor, forgot to mention to the jury, that the smuggler was apprehended again before trial, for more criminal acts in the U.S. These officers, both family men, were sentenced to more than a decade in federal prison. The land of the free.
Even if the officers had not followed proper procedure, it warranted administrative action, not a prison sentence. But who cares about ruining lives.
Johnny Sutton also went after Deputy Gilmer Hernandez of Rocksprings, Texas. On a dark night in 2005, Hernandez stopped an SUV filled with alleged illegal aliens. As he approached the vehicle, it sped off, nearly running over his foot. He fired at the tires. People bailed out. One woman was hit in the teeth by a ricochet bullet. Four days later, the Mexican consulate complained. Mexico snaps its fingers. America jumps. Sure enough, Hernandez was indicted and eventually convicted and served a full year behind bars, a convicted felon for life.
Americas Most Wanted, John Walsh wrote a letter to the president urging consideration of these injustices. See :Click here: amw.com | John Walsh:
Twelve year Border Patrol agent, Noe Aleman and his wife went about following legal procedures to adopt their three teenage nieces from Mexico. An apparent glitch in the issuance of a visa brought the wrath of prosecutor Johnny Sutton who loves nothing better than to wreck the life of a cop. Instead of clearing up the matter administratively, which was entirely possible, Noe was arrested and then convicted of harboring illegal aliens. He served six months in jail, his life a shambles. Read the story: Click here: Border Patrol Agent Noe Aleman
Johnny Sutton logged another victim in the likes of Border Patrol Agent, Gary Brugman, career cop, who did his job by chasing down illegal aliens and in one case, had to physically restrain a smuggler who appeared to be ready to assault another officer. Sure enough, Sutton praised the Mexican consulate in trial, as Brugman sustained a conviction and was made to serve two years in federal prison, while the criminal dirtbags laughed all the way to freedom, replete with benefits. Read: Click here: Gary Brugman – Another Victim
Border Patrol agent, David Sipe, of Pinedas, Texas, chased down twelve to fifteen illegals in 2000 and ended up in a scuffle with one. As the smuggler was going for Sipe’s gun, he hit the man over the head with a flashlight. In my day, it was legal for a cop to defend one’s self. Anyway, federal prosecutors managed to secure testimony of three illegal aliens who helped convict Sipe and end his seventeen year career as a law enforcement officer. But Sipe managed to get a new trial, and the case was thrown out. Seems that the prosecution filed to tell the jury about all the favors that were bestowed upon the aliens in exchange for their testimony, including green cards, cell phones, and more, not to mention immunity from prosecution.
The “Bush War On Law Enforcement” press conference was held in April of 2007, and sponsored by the Friends of the Border Patrol. I urge everyone to read the transcript.
Click here: http://www.fobp.us/Files/Docs/Bush_War_On_LE_Statement.pdf
Rep. Ted Poe of Texas, in the House of Representatives, March 15, 2007: “It makes you wonder, Madam Speaker, why our Federal Government is so relentless in prosecuting border agents…Why must our Federal Government withhold and hide evidence that is favorable to the defense in a criminal case? Is it just so they can have convictions of border agents? It makes one wonder, does it not, Madam Speaker?”
I’m no bleeding heart for cops who commit criminal acts. The last arrest I made as a sworn officer was of five fellow cops in 1980, who had beaten a man to death for speeding. But the government is taking it too far, and too many of our nation’s sentries are wasting away in prison cells for no good reason, while their families languish. This is all known to us, but we sit by.
In years past, most of these valiant police officers, who risk their lives daily to protect you and me, would have been seen as heroes. Today, they’re seen as convicts. Is it any wonder why so many young men and women are reluctant to enter the filed of law enforcement in 2008?
It’s time for police officers everywhere, and those who support law enforcement officers, to rise up and let our voices be heard. Write the president. Write the Attorney General. Write your national and local media. Your senators and congressmen. There are over 800,000 cops in America, yet their voices are silent.
Why?
Outstanding article and 100% correct. Those that want to fry their brains, via alcohol and/or drugs, have at it. Take the profit margin away from the cartels and organized crime groups. Legalize certain drugs and cut costs, saving taxpayers billions of dollars in a war we cannot and never did have a chance to win.
Edit Comment
the attitude toward pot use of kids under 18 is too casual among adults who believe it is not a big deal. There are inadequte responses to the use of it by teens and preteens., It is a BIG PROBLEM in terms of learning and academoic attitudes, and school performance. Pot heads lose precious years of developmental growth. … and costly later in terms of corrective measures when people need to find work and have healthy relationships and careers. After 21 I guess we “choose” to be addicts??? But we need a much crisper response to teen use…as we have to other drug use.Many former pot head parents identify with their kids use…after all…they turned out ok,,,,,many do not know how to take an honest and firm position with their kids. get help for the kids!!!!
Edit Comment
Right on Marshall! All that money spent to no avail. If people in government are intelligent, they would know that if the demand is high, people will find a way to satisfy that demand.
We have made rich people out of criminals and keep on doing it. Tobacco is next on the list of banned drugs and this will create more millionairs and up the cost of drug enforcement.
Will we learn? I doubt it.
Edit Comment
For years I have been in favor of legalization of marijuana, but have never set down my reasons as you have so effectively done. Here’s hoping you and the 500 economists will continue to campaign for it. Can we all help by writing our congressmen?
Edit Comment
While preparing dinner last night, I had the boob tube on as background noise. Dr. Phil does provide some noise, as do his whining guests needing his help. But one thing he said remained with me. “I hope this is the year that common sense prevails.” Legalizing marijuana is one of the common sense acts that we need to make in this country. I also read the fact a while back that you refer to about the ratio of the US population to its prison inmate population and the percentage of those who are in for drug-related offences, many of them just for pot possession. I don’t use or advocate usage of pot, but do classify it in the same category as alchohol. Too many lives are broken as a result of these draconian laws and the costs to all of us are too high. As our national budget drains spiral out of control, citizens need to become vocal about where our tax dollars go. This is one area we should reign in.
Edit Comment
If we legalize marijuana Ricky Williams would have been playing football for the past two years!
If we also legalized the use of steoids, Barry Bonds would get into the Hall of Fame (or shame)?
If we also legalize prostitution, either straight or gay, many of our politicians would still be in office.
WOW what a thought!
If we recognize illegal aliens we can let them take full advantage of our social security system, health care, schools, etc.
We legalized abortion so the population is ot growing out of control (better than war maybe but we have that to)
Hey, I was in law enforcement also, and I do not agree that we make things easier by changing moral and ethical values to satisfy the minority.
Wow, what a thought
Edit Comment
Marshall,
The only way I would support legalization of pot is if all the drugs coming across the border were captured, taxed and treated like any other import, with an import tax. Then people could buy it legally and use it at their discretion.
Edit Comment
I agree completely. As you know, the cost of keeping a person in prison is far more than the cost of living for nearly all others. If we could get rid of the drugs we would nearly empty the prisons. If marijuana was decriminalised the millions saved in law enforcement costs, jail and prison expense would be more than what the illegal stuff is costing us today. A double savings. Volunteering at the sheriff’s office I am aware of the dollar costs of enforceing the unenforceable.
Edit Comment
I agree, as an evaluations researcher and an individual, that current approaches have not led to the desired outcome. Perhaps, as you suggest, we really don’t want marijuana illegal, we just want to make the most money possible out of the deal. $14 billion is nothing compared to the money being made between importing, growing, selling, arresting, trying, incarcerating, lawmaking, law-enforcing,…need I say more?
Laws exist to create an environment that allows people to live together in a way that works. As John (11/30) suggested, they often reflect the values of the culture. But that is not their intent. In fact, it is actually backwards. The intent of laws and rules is to protect the integrity of the culture – its ability to remain whole and complete, the ensure the survival of itself. Over time, it seems like the laws and rules are actual truth — as humans we have a propensity to forget that we made it all up.
The question is – “Does the law making marijuana actually cause the outcome that it is intended to cause?” Is the intended outcome to eliminate the sale, distribution and use of marijuana in our society/culture? If so, then NO, the law is not producing this outcome. If the overall intent of the law is to preserve the culture itself, then perhaps it is effective. Consider that we are not a culture that has become enlightened enough to embrace diversity as the ultimate means of group (genetic) survival. We are an elitist run society where very few of those at the top are subject to the same laws that the rest of us face. For example, a felony conviction for drug possesion results in the removal of your right to vote. How convenient, no? Thus, from the view point of the lawmakers, the law is effective at preserving their culture.
Many argue that marijuana is a ‘gateway’ drug. However, could the use of any illegal substance or participation in any illegal activity create a new environment which is more likely to foster the use of others? What I mean is “Is the gateway effect actually caused by the nature of it being illegal instead of the actual substance itself?”
Marijuana’s illegalization may have nothing what-so-ever to do with the part of the plant that is smoked!!! “When companies such as Kimberly-Clark and the Hearst newspaper corporation found out their vast interests in paper could be undercut by this alternative (according to a 1938 article in Popular Mechanics — not to mention dozens of subsequent newspaper stories, books, and private communiques — marijuana can produce four times as much raw material per acre as trees for paper and similar uses, without contributing to soil depletion and the greenhouse effect), they teamed with bigot and director of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics Harry J. Anslinger to combat pot. DuPont and other companies that had invested heavily in the very things marijuana would replace joined the battle. The movie Reefer Madness was released in 1936;” AND “In 1942, five years after marijuana was banned, the world was at war. With the pressure on, the government was forced to fight the hype of the mid-Thirties that led to pot’s prohibition and admit that the weed was our last, best hope. The film is called Hemp for Victory, and you’ve probably never heard of it. No one in the U.S. government wants you to.” (Miami New Times, The Need for Weed, May 11, 1994).
From, “First the Seed, Then the Weed” in Miami New Times (1993)”…the money from taxes on legal dope would reduce the national debt; beleaguered farmers would be given a new lease on life; countless hemp products could be cheaply and efficiently manufactured in this country; trees would be spared; fuel prices would plummet; air pollution would be greatly reduced; the critically ill would be spared a measure of suffering; world hunger would be cut; drugs that actually cause pain and crime could be more adequately controlled;…”
The simple fact is very few – if any – banks, homes or businesses have been robbed at gunpoint so someone could get their next marijuana fix, right?! The issue of morality is moot in a discussion about the legalization of marijuana. It’s about money. Show the elitist snobs making laws how they can continue to grow their bank accounts (and only interact with ‘the other half’ as the help or work) and it will be legal. It’s all and only about money.
Edit Comment
MF,
If it’ll make them happy, legalize it. After all, that’s what we want in the world… happy people.
Why not substitute terms such as child pornography, credit card fraud or even Radical Islam in America every time you use the term cannabis or marijuana in the following quotes from your article?
“But there is no data available to suggest one death has been caused by cannabis.”
“Have laws prohibiting these behaviors produced the desired effect? Has it deterred people from engaging in the use of marijuana? We all know the answer.”
Yea, let’s legalize it. Then we can start working on coke, meth, child porn, credit card fraud and Radical Islam in America.
If you were just a couple of days younger, maybe you’d be more conservative.
Edit Comment
Very interesting article,Marshall, and interesting replies. I think everything was covered in those responses. I don’t think there’s a chance it will ever be legalized, however.
Edit Comment
Hi, Marshall;
As an aging broad, I have never tried marijuana or any other hallucinogenic drug. I’ve always gotten high on life. But with a son with AIDS and many pain-inducing debilities, and a daughter with end-stage renal disease, RA, neuropathy and a host of of other diabetes-related ailments, it seems that pot is the only thing that relieves her proneness to vomiting. For these people especially, it should be legalized. Her state does not permit even medical use of the drug.
Thanks for your interest, your research, and your willingness to share the information.
DHC
Edit Comment
“Why not substitute terms such as child pornography, credit card fraud or even Radical Islam in America every time you use the term cannabis or marijuana in the following quotes from your article?”
Comparing things that are known to harm people other than oneself automatically discredits your argument. Perhaps you should try again.
Great article. I live in Canada where they’re a little less harsh when it comes to weed (though, thanks to our recent Conservative government, they’re getting a little harsher), but these are great points. The problem down in the US is that the prison-industrial complex will continue to lobby for keeping drugs illegal and I don’t expect to see a change in such laws down there anytime soon.
Edit Comment
Marshall,
Legalizing Illegal substances won’t eradicate the problems associated with them any more than the problems associated with alcoholism did with the legalization of alcohol. I agree that tons of money is wasted in our attempts to combat marijuana but the issue falls in the laps of our politicians,i.e., legislators, senators, congress men and women, the supreme court and any one else that legislates our laws.
I take exception to your claim that not one death can be attributed to the use of Marijuana. Yes, Maybe the smoking of a joint won’t kill you but it damn well sure will cause you to do things that can produce death.
One of your responders mentioned that marijuana is a gateway substance and I agree. That was the first illegal substance my son experimented with. It led to other substances that eventually cost him his life. Oh, I’m not alone as a suffering parent. Hardly a family exists that has not experienced a negative episode with illegal substances. Legalizing whatever is not the answer. Insisting on proper conduct and a good work ethic from our elected officials would produce much better results.
Is the fact that you keep mentioning your experience in law enforcement supposed to impress us? I was in law enforcement longer than you were and I certainly do not consider myself an expert on illegal substances. Those that choose drugs as a way of life should make better choices. Once you are hooked try to find a decent drug rehab program that truly has good results. While you are at it check their fees which make them prohibitive for the average family.
Edit Comment
We are a Christian nation as the fundamentalists like to say. We live by the Protestant ethic of personal responsibility, hard work and sobriety. We believe strongly in
PUNISHMENT! The “Christians” would never endorse SIN, the politicians won’t propose legalization and risk losing the votes of the
sanctimonious. Costs, harmlessness, need,etc don’t enter into the calculation. Being good and right is what we care about and that’s why we won’t let pot heads or anybody else have pot.Don’t try to confuse us with the facts, Marshall, our mind is made up and we’ll go on paying with borrowed money no matter how well less virtuous nations succeed with decriminalization.
Edit Comment
First to the lady complaining about the teens using illegal drugs. There is an answer to that, it’s called parents. Granted it doesn’t always work, but the law certainly doesnt.
Second I think there is a difference between de-criminalizing drugs & making them legal.
Marshall is right about this & many of his other ideas.
Keep up the good work.
I’ve also read your books & think they are great.
Edit Comment
Marshall: People who think like this one above from RBC: ” I take exception to your claim that not one death can be attributed to the use of Marijuana. Yes, Maybe the smoking of a joint won’t kill you but it damn well sure will cause you to do things that can produce death.” says it all>
Hey, RBC, exactly WHAT is it that these pot heads are doing that ‘ produces death ?” Can you answer that? There is NO death associated with cannabis, none. The black market is THERE, and will not go away by ignoring it..saying things like some of the blind people above makes me wonder about America. How ignorant can some people get?
the drug war is a FAILURE but some here would say ” Oh well, better that than admit defeat and try something that WORKS “..not that it makes any sense!! If everyone would read Jack Herer’s book, ” the Emporer Wears No Clothes ” about hemp and the truth, we would see far fewer ignorant and ridiculous statements by the anti- sense crowd.
Rape and such being compared to pot? My God some people must Watch fox news so much that their brains fry. The intellectuals all agree: legalize and tax and control: The morons want to keep the same old failed Nazi regime way of doing things going…sick.
Edit Comment
I agree with everything you said. Sending people to prison for using drugs is such a waste. The money should be spent on rehab programs.
I am also in favor of legalizing prostitution and requiring the prostitutes be licensed and have health checks.
Edit Comment
have long thought putting people in prison is a terrible waste of lives and money. rehab programs would be a better use of the money. But my son, who with his wife, is very active in the N/A program tells me that rehab will only work if the person wants it. Just as A/A will only help if the person wants to quit drinking. I think if we legalize drugs all those billions going out of our country to the cartels will end. and hopefully people will not rob to get the money for drugs. And the money for law enforcement can be use for rehab. And the drug money will not tempt and corrupt cops and politicians. I once read that law makers are afraid to vote to legalize drugs. the cartel threatens them.
Edit Comment
Marshall,
I agree with most of your articles, however, I disagree with: “The War on Drugs is lost”, “We are a vengeful society who believes the only solution to undesirable behavior is to lock ‘em up and throw away the key”, “while 70 million have inhaled pot sometime in their lives(not sure how you got this one, must be the economists again)”, “people who are basically harmless to you and I, but will not see the light of freedom for much of their lives”.
You know, and I remind you, that drug users are not taken away “for much of their lives” and often even the street pushers are granted a variety of options before they are ever incarcerated beyond the initial arrest and bonding procedure.
When you say there are more than five thousand former law enforcement officers and prosecutors that belong to an organization called Law Enforcement Against Prohibition (LEAP), I say thank God for the other hundreds of thousands that do not.
Finally, regarding Siobhan M.’s response about “First the Seed, Then the Weed” in Miami New Times (1993)”; it’s absurd for one to believe that taxes on legal dope would in some way reduce our national debt, save the farmers (who apparently can’t grow legal stuff for profit), save the trees, reduce fuel prices at the pump, reduce air pollution, save the ill from suffering and pain and I have to put this last one in upper case because it’s the best one, CUT WORLD HUNGER.
I think some of the responders to your article have been getting a little close to the ’smoke’.
Although flawed it was a good article, keep the fire burning.
Edit Comment
Sorry, I was so intrigued with the article and responses I neglected one other thought, legalize ‘medical marijuana’.
Edit Comment
Got em thinking on this one….Good article, some good responses, some others need to get a life….Keep up the good work.
Edit Comment
I whole heartedly agree. Pot is no more harmful than boozing.
Edit Comment
“the money from taxes on legal dope would reduce the national debt; beleaguered farmers would be given a new lease on life; countless hemp products could be cheaply and efficiently manufactured in this country; trees would be spared; fuel prices would plummet; air pollution would be greatly reduced; the critically ill would be spared a measure of suffering; world hunger would be cut; drugs that actually cause pain and crime could be more adequately controlled;…”
The above is from Siobhan’s very eloquent comments. I don’t think I understand how fuel prices would plummet, nor how air pollution would be greatly reduced and world hunger would be cut. I DO support the legalization and taxation as a concept whose time is long past due. But, I wonder if sometimes over-claiming the benefit can have an opposite effect on the ultimate goal.
I look forward to the day when common sense prevails in Congress. Given the track record, I can only think of the old joke “What if I was an idiot, and what if I was in Congress? But then, I repeat myself”.
Edit Comment
I agree 100%. I am a sophomore in college, and I see more drug and alcohol abuse on a daily basis than most people can say they’ve seen in their whole lives. I have seen people’s lives ruined all because they got caught sitting harmlessly in their apartments smoking weed. However, I’ve also seen kids my age kill and be killed by the abuse of alcohol. Not long ago, 2 boys were killed because they both attempted to cross a busy intersection drunk. No one does anything to prevent people from drinking themselves to death, but the government goes as far as they possibly can to prevent people from smoking weed. I got high and no one died. It has been proven that pot is not addictive, is far less harmful than cigarettes, and not a single human being has ever been reported dead from smoking too much weed.Legalizing marijuana would have a huge impact on decreasing the crime rate, and it could be used for medical purposes. In my opinion, there are far worse things in the world than marijuana. people make smoking weed out be a horrible thing to do. If the worst thing a person ever did was smoke weed, then I’d say they lead an extremely successful life. It has nothing to do with ethics and/or morals, it’s got to do with common sense. Come on now.
Edit Comment
Look, I can speak from immediate experience. I got picked up in July for having a parking ticket warrant outside my favorite bar…for leaving my car when intoxicated. I was unaware because the ticket was snagged off. I got arrested for it and had a gram of commercial weed on me. I was stopped while waiting for a ride from my sister mind you. Since then I have been to court several times, have a probation officer who I visit every month. I can have my house, person, car, and property searched at any time without reason. This will go on for a year. I then got sent to a firm for a “substance abuse evaluation”. This company only makes money if they recommend treatment. Three hours a night three outs a week. Also costing the state. I am not an addict and no longer use for fear of trouble. I am a young man(24) and am also not allowed to have a drink or go to a place who makes the majority of their money from alcohol…even as a DD. Mind you, this is not an alcohol related offense….they might as well have taken away my television. Any way, long story short, I will be in the “system” for a year. There is no “victim” in my crime. This is a huge waste of everyones time. Also, I find in incredibly ridiculous that people who have never tried the product(weed) can say its not legal..and if they have tried it…why are they being taking seriously in the “anti-weed” campaign. I am absolutely astonished at my treatment and feel as if “my” country has more than failed me. BOND TOGETHER…GET SERIOUS…AND LETS GET IT RIGHT…LEGALIZE IT NOW!! IT WILL TAKE WORK, BUT RATHER THAN BE A “POTHEAD” BE A PART OF THE SOLUTION. DO YOUR PART!!
Edit Comment
Thank you for posting this Marshall. I couldn’t agree with you anymore. Smoking marajuana shouldn’t be a crime. It isn’t any more harmful to you than drinking alcohol. In fact it’s much safer. I just wish that more people in this world would understand that.
Edit Comment
The people who comment and try to compare cannabis legalization with real crimes that affect others is totally disengenuous and they know it. ALL of the offenses that they list are cause for complaint from some other person; The private use of herb does NOT in any way, shape or form affect anyone else negatively. It is just a cash cow for the system and the people who drool over Fox news every night have no idea what the truth is.
The Czech Republic has a sensible policy towards cannabis, as does the Netherlands. ALL the statistics, all of them, show that LESS young people use cannabis where it is readily aavilable legally. Our system is a total failure for the intended purposes, and a great success for its hidden ones.
All it takes is a little research into WHY it was made illegal back in 1938…the political chicanery, the lies and hidden hearings..the head of the AMA was outraged at the trickery to demonize a well known medicine and product. The ignorant are the only ones against pot: Adult use should NEVER be the business of the cops or courts..not in a free society.
Edit Comment
[…] think if we legalize drugs all those billions going out of our country to the cartels will end. …http://www.marshallfrank.com/articles/?p=18Yes, I’m A Medical Marijuana Patient. No, I’m Not Sorry.I can’t understand why anyone would look […]
Edit Comment
Marijuana has only been deemed illegal for 1% of its existence.
That should really mean something in terms of it truly being compared to much more serious crimes.
Great article!
Edit Comment