Posts Tagged ‘Law’
Wednesday, January 12th, 2011
KACEY LARSEN
B.A. English & Journalism, The University of Iowa
He’s wanted in the United States. He’s wanted in Sweden. He’s currently out on bail in Great Britain. He’s Julian Assange, founder of WikiLeaks.
How did one man manage to garner so much international attention? His website, WikiLeaks, published thousands of classified US government cables from the State Department’s database, Net-Centric Diplomacy, on November 28, 2010. The mission of WikiLeaks is to provide anonymous sources a place to leak information that is otherwise being suppressed or censored around the world. One of the questions, in regards to the US leak, is whether Assange had a hand in the obtaining of these government cables, which would allow prosecutors to make a case for conspiracy charges, or if the source worked completely independently.
Army Private Bradley E. Manning has been identified as the WikiLeaks source, and he is currently being held in solitary confinement at a Marine facility in Quantico, Virginia. Reports vary on Manning’s role- some say he downloaded the government cables onto compact discs, while others say he installed unauthorized software that enabled access to the State Department database- but it is known that he communicated with Assange through an encrypted instant messenger service about the information.
Not only has this leak been an embarrassment for the US’s diplomacy efforts due to the revealing of candid comments from those within the government and other world leaders, but it also highlights that the US is behind in cybersecurity since the State Department database lacked the security to detect unauthorized downloading within its system. Though legislation for stronger cybersecurity will likely be upcoming as Congress heads back into session due to the breach, the question lingers whether US prosecutors will be able to formulate a case against Assange.
While US prosecutors are likely looking to formulate charges using the 1917 Espionage Act, Assange has also received a summons to Sweden, where sexual assault allegations have arisen. With Assange currently being held in British custody, a tug-of-war could break out between the US and Sweden over where he will be extradited to in light of more pressing charges. The US prosecutors face a challenge in formulating a case against Assange, because according to the 1917 Espionage Act they have to establish that the information obtained “is used to the injury of the United States.” Beyond proving injury for charges and a potential trial, prosecutors need to tread lightly due to Freedom of Speech protections provided under a case like New York Times v. United States, in which the decision was for the press due to there being no grounds for censorship before publication except in situations where US security is threatened. The United States’ claim to be committed to expanding openness and fighting government censorship on the internet will likely be called into question depending on which path prosecutors decide to take.
Read about forensic techniques, including some related to cyber crime and technology
Tags: Crime, Espionage Act, Evidence, Freedom of Speech, government reports, Julian Assange, Law, Law Enforcement, Scandal, WikiLeaks
Posted in Crime Fighting, Forensics in The News, Guest Bloggers, Uncategorized | No Comments »
Monday, January 3rd, 2011
Governor of New Mexico, Bill Richardson, declined to pardon Western outlaw Billy the Kid during his last hours in office. The pardon was on behalf of the killing of Sherriff William Brady in 1878. What prompted this last minute decision? On ABC’s, “Good Morning America” Friday, Richardson explained that the evidence of the case simply did not warrant a pardon. He stated that he decided against the pardon, “because of a lack of conclusiveness and the historical ambiguity as to why Gov. Wallace reneged on his promise.” To read more about this, please click here.
See all our Billy the Kid entries!
Tags: Bill Richardson, Billy the Kid, Evidence, Law, Law Enforcement, Murder, Mystery, National Museum of Crime & Punishment
Posted in Cold Cases, Pardons, Punishment: The Consequence of Crime, Western Outlaws | No Comments »
Thursday, December 30th, 2010
New Mexico governor, Bill Richardson, has mere hours left to decide whether or not to pardon “Billy the Kid” in the killing of a sheriff. The case dates back to 1881…so why the New Year’s Eve deadline you may ask? It’s the last day of Richardson’s term.
For those of you scratching your heads wondering who Billy the Kid is; he is the western outlaw also known as William Bonney. He died by the gun of Sherriff Pat Garrett at age 21. Despite his young age, Kid was said to have killed anywhere between 9 and 21 men. Richardson’s deputy chief of staff Eric Witt wants to clarify that they are not offering a general pardon for all of Kid’s crimes, but rather a pardon for the individual case of killing a sheriff.
Richardson is a known Billy the Kid aficionado, and is considering the pardon because of an alleged promise by Governor Lew Wallace. He states, “Just think of all the good publicity New Mexico is receiving around the world on this…It’s fun”. The defining issue revolves around the belief that Wallace promised this pardon in exchange for Kid’s knowledge in a murder case involving three men. Those who oppose the pardon argue that there is no proof that Governor Wallace ever offered one; he may have simply tricked Kid in to offering up information. Ancestor William Wallace argues that pardoning Billy the Kid would, “declare Lew Wallace to have been a dishonorable liar”.
Some of those in favor of Kid’s pardon have filed a petition, including defense attorney Randi McGinn who has offered to handle the case for free. She writes, “A promise is a promise and should be enforced”. McGinn also says that Wallace assured Kid that he had the authority to exempt him from prosecution should he cooperate and share his knowledge, but that Wallace never held up his end of the deal.
Sheriff Pat Garrett’s grandson, J.P. Garrett, argues that Richardson should have assigned an impartial historian to aid in the case, and believes that McGinn’s involvement may be a conflict of interest. Richardson appointed Charles Daniels to the state Supreme Court, whom McGinn is married to. William Wallace agrees, also citing that McGinn has, “meager qualifications”. Despite these accusations, McGinn claims that her only link to the administration is that she offered to handle the case for free because of Richardson’s lifelong interest in Billy the Kid.
Richardson told the Associated Press on Wednesday, “I don’t know where I’ll end up. I might not pardon him. But then I might”. I guess we’ll just all have to anxiously await the outcome of this deceased outlaw’s judicial fate.
For more information on Billy the Kid’s pardon, please click here or here.
See all our Billy the Kid entries in one place
Tags: Bill Richardson, Billy the Kid, Crime, defense, Eric Witt, Governors, Law, Law Enforcement, Lew Wallace, Murder, Mystery, New Mexico, Outlaws, Pardon, Randi McGinn, Sherriff Pat Garrett, Story, Supreme Court, Western, William Bonney
Posted in A Notorious History of Crime, Cold Cases, Crime Fighting, Murder, Pardons, Punishment: The Consequence of Crime, Western Outlaws | No Comments »
Thursday, December 2nd, 2010
On June 15, 2002, Elizabeth Smart was abducted at knifepoint from her bedroom in Salt Lake City, Utah. Smart was only 14 years old at the time. Nine months after her abduction, Smart was found alive in March of 2003; 18 miles from her home, in Sandy, Utah. She was found with her abductors, Brian David Mitchell and Wanda Eileen Barzee. It was later revealed in Smart’s testimony that she was raped by Mitchell on a daily basis; after Mitchell performed a “ceremony” on her that was to symbolize her marriage to him.
Knowing this, it comes as no surprise that emotions were high during a doctor’s testimony on Wednesday. Smart stormed out of the courtroom after forensic psychiatrist, Paul Whitehead testified that kidnapper Brian Mitchell abducted and raped Smart out of a desire to have children with her and create a new race. He then shared that the 57 year old homeless preacher and Smart had even discussed baby names; knowledge which he acquired from reading Barzee’s journals. The journals detailed how Smart was regularly chastised for not wanting to have children. It was at that point that Smart fled the courtroom, with her mother following. Both returned about 30 minutes later.
Whitehead was just one of many witnesses being questioned in order to prove that Mitchell is mentally ill and does not know right from wrong. If Mitchell is convicted, he could face life in prison. Barzee is currently serving 15 years in prison for her role in the kidnapping. Smart’s team believes that Mitchell is faking insanity in order to escape prosecution. The trial is currently in its fourth week and could last until December 10th.
For more information regarding the Smart case, please click here or here.
Read our coverage of the Natalee Holloway case
Tags: Crime, Forensic Science, identification, Law, Law Enforcement, National Museum of Crime & Punishment, Tragedy
Posted in Crime Fighting, Punishment: The Consequence of Crime, Resources, Uncategorized | No Comments »
Tuesday, September 21st, 2010
Virginia woman, Teresa Lewis, is scheduled to be executed on Thursday, September 23, 2010, by lethal injection at the Greensville Correctional Center in Jarratt, Virginia. After having been denied her appeal by Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell, she will be the first female to be executed since 1912. Lewis is to receive the death penalty after the slaying of her husband Charles and step-son Julian in order to acquire their insurance money back in October 2002.
Many of her supporters feel that this is an unfair sentence considering she had the help of two men who only received a sentence of life in prison. Co-conspirators Matthew Shallenberger and Rodney Fuller will not be given the death penalty despite having been the ones to actually pull the trigger. Lewis’ supporters also say that she is mentally challenged and was coerced to set up the murder by Shallenberger, her lover at the time. Shallenberger and Fuller murdered Charles and Julian while they were asleep, as Lewis waited nearby in the kitchen.
Lewis’ critics say that although she is not the one who actually committed the murder, that she is in fact the one responsible for the killings. Lewis promised money to both Shallenberger and Fuller and allegedly waited until she was sure her husband was dead to get help. The judge that sentenced Lewis to death referred to her as “the head of this serpent”. Kathy Clifton, daughter to Charles and brother to Julian, is said to have forgiven Lewis but still believes that she should pay for what she has done.
For more information on this case, click here or here.
Read about another controversial execution, Troy Davis
Tags: Crime, Law, Law Enforcement, Murder, Punishment
Posted in Crime Fighting, Punishment: The Consequence of Crime | 10 Comments »
Tuesday, August 10th, 2010
For all of you Wild, Wild West aficionados out there, here is a post that is sure to be interesting!
Billy the Kid has long been one of the many names associated with the Wild West, alongside the Bob Dalton Gang, Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid, Cole Younger, Jesse James, and more. What you may not know is that the long dead Kid may be up for a pardon from current New Mexico governor Bill Richardson. So, why is the notorious Billy the Kid up for this pardon, you ask? Well, let me explain by starting with a little history lesson.
Billy the Kid—born William Henry McCarty, but also known as William H. Bonney—originally came from New York. While still young, his family relocated to New Mexico. Unfortunately, by the time the Kid was fifteen years old his mother had passed away from tuberculosis. It was at this point that many sources say the Kid began his life of crime—starting with stealing and progressing to murder. Other sources state that without parental guidance, the Kid simply got a bad start in life. He joined the wrong groups and wound up running from the law. One particular misstep in the Kid’s life was his affiliation with the Lincoln County War. As a result of one of the many ambushes that occurred, Lincoln County Sheriff William Brady and one of his deputies were found dead, having been shot by the Kid. Billy became a fugitive.
At some point after these murders, Lew Wallace became governor of New Mexico. Now, the stories of what actually happened next seem to clash, so suffice it to say that the Kid ended up in custody. He made a deal with the governor that should he testify against persons involved in the Lincoln County War, he would receive a full pardon for involvement in Sheriff Brady’s death and other misdeeds. The Kid testified as promised, but the pardon was never granted. So, the Kid escaped custody and eluded the law for the next two years.
During the Kid’s time as an outlaw, Pat Garrett was elected Sheriff and sent after him. Once again, Billy the Kid ended up in custody. This time however, he was sentenced to hang for the death of Sheriff Brady. While in prison, the Kid escaped again—this time killing two guards in the process. Once more, Sheriff Garrett was sent after the Kid. The next time the Kid encountered the sheriff however, it would be his last.
On July 14, 1881, Sheriff Garrett, under the cover of shadows, shot Billy the Kid dead in a residence in Fort Sumner. Some believe that the Kid lived on as “Brushy Bill” Roberts, but others believe that the Kid was in fact buried the next day in the Fort Sumner cemetery. At some point, due to the debate, there had been a movement to have the supposed bodies of the Kid and his mother exhumed for DNA testing. A judge apparently ruled against the efforts, but that hasn’t stopped present Governor Richardson’s interest in the case. He continues to look into whether the Kid rightfully deserves a posthumous pardon as promised by Governor Wallace. As you can imagine, there is much controversy arising from this investigation—which side will you join? Click here to sign a petition for the pardon of Billy the Kid, or click here to sign a petition opposed to that pardon.
For a look at Sheriff Garrett’s account of Billy the Kid’s death, see here. For additional information about the Kid and/or his potential pardon, please click here, here, here or here. Or, if you’re looking for a bit more adventure, you should come to the museum and check out our Wild West exhibits—including a look at the infamous Billy the Kid!
Read all our entries about Billy the Kid
Tags: Bill Richardson, Billy the Kid, Crime, DNA, Hanging, Law, Law Enforcement, Murder, Mystery, Pat Garrett
Posted in A Notorious History of Crime, Forensics in The News, Fun Facts, Punishment: The Consequence of Crime | 2 Comments »
Thursday, July 22nd, 2010
An indictment that was unsealed on Tuesday, July 13, 2010, has charged four members of the New Orleans Police Department (NOPD) with federal civil rights violations, specifically deprivation of rights under color of law and use of a weapon during the commission of a crime.
Just days after Hurricane Katrina in August 2005, two men were found dead on the Danziger Bridge in New Orleans, and another four were found wounded. According to recent statements from responding officers at the scene, the civilians were found wounded and bloody. There were no weapons present. However, at the time of the shootings, it is said that the involved officers fabricated witness statements, falsified reports, and event planted a gun at the scene.
In December 2006, seven NOPD officers were charged with either murder or attempted murder for the Danziger Bridge crimes. However, these charges were thrown out in August 2008 by a state judge. A month later, a new mayor stepped in and invited the Justice Department to conduct a top-to-bottom review of the police department. When asked about the investigation, Attorney General Eric Holder stated, “Put simply, we will not tolerate wrongdoing by those who are sworn to protect the public.”
Since the onset of the Justice Department investigation, five former NOPD officers have pled guilty to helping cover up the shootings on the bridge. They are currently awaiting sentencing. However, their statements have the potential to lay grounds for more serious charges against those actually accused of the shootings and engineering the cover-up. If those charged for the shootings are convicted, they could face the death penalty.
For more information, please see this story, or this one.
Read about some famous law enforcement investigations and controversies
Tags: Crime, Evidence, Law, Law Enforcement, Murder, Police Corruption, Scandal
Posted in Punishment: The Consequence of Crime, Uncategorized | 2 Comments »
Wednesday, June 16th, 2010
Ronnie Lee Gardner had been arrested in Utah on robbery and murder charges. He was awaiting his day in court. Just before 9am on the morning of April 2, 1985, Gardner was being transported to the old courthouse of Salt Lake City. Once inside, he grabbed a gun that had been left by an accomplice and opened fire in his attempt to escape. When all was said and done, one attorney was dead, the court bailiff was seriously injured, and Gardner himself had taken a bullet. In November of that year, Gardner was sentenced to death.
Twenty-five years later, Gardner is still on death row. On Friday, June 18, 2010, Gardner is slated to die by firing squad at the Utah State Prison. His attorneys have begun filing the first of what are expected to be several appeals. Among these is the claim that Gardner has been on death row too long. According to Gardner’s lawyer, “He asserts that executing him now, after nearly 25 years on death row in Utah, so lacks retributive or deterrent value that it violates the Eighth Amendment.” The Eighth Amendment protects against excessive bail, excessive fines, and cruel and unusual punishment.
What do you think? Is it too cruel and unusual to put a man to death after he has been on death row for 25 years and claims to be a changed man? If you want to read some more about the case (Gardner v. Utah) before forming your opinion, click here. Additional background can be found here.
Read about some recent executions and what is happening currently with the death penalty
Tags: Crime, Law, Law Enforcement, Murder, Punishment
Posted in Forensics in The News, Punishment: The Consequence of Crime, Q&A | 2 Comments »
Thursday, June 10th, 2010
“You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law. You have the right to speak to an attorney, and to have an attorney present during any questioning. If you cannot afford a lawyer, one will be provided for you at government expense.” Regardless of whether you’ve heard them on TV or have been read them directly, most everyone knows what the Miranda warnings are. These warnings are designed to protect a person’s right against self-incrimination and their right to have a lawyer. On June 1, 2010, in a 5-4 decision during the Berghuis v. Thompkins case, the Supreme Court ruled that in order to invoke one’s right to silence, one must first explicitly say that they want to invoke that right. For instance, Thompkins, the accused in this case, decided to remain silent during his interrogation. At some point, one of the investigators asked a question to which Thompkins simply responded “yes,” thereby implicating himself in the crime. Because Thompkins did not tell the investigators that he was invoking his right to stay silent, his affirmative response to the questions could legally be used against him in court. The statement was used, and a jury came back with a guilty verdict for Thompkins. So, the lesson to be learned here is that if or when you are ever interrogated by the police, it is now legally assumed that you have waived your Miranda rights unless you speak up and say otherwise.
To read more about the Berghuis v. Thompkins case, click here or here.
Read our coverage of other Supreme Court cases
Tags: Law, Law Enforcement
Posted in Forensics in The News, Fun Facts, Uncategorized | No Comments »
Thursday, December 24th, 2009
When high school drop-out James Palmer was stopped by police for behaving suspiciously in front of a local high school Palmer tried talking his way out of trouble. This became increasingly difficult when police found an ounce of marijuana divided into several smaller bags on him, but Palmer simply explained to officers “It’s not mine. I’m selling it.” Officers were happy to hear the confession and to arrest Palmer for selling drugs in a school zone.
Read about another crime involving Marijuana
Tags: Crime, Drugs, Evidence, Law
Posted in Forensics in The News, Fun Facts, Senseless Crimes | 1 Comment »
|
|
