What Does The NYPD Have To Do To Be Accountable?

I suspect that this will not end well.

NEW YORK - Three detectives were acquitted of all charges Friday in the 50-shot killing of an unarmed groom-to-be on his wedding day, a case that put the NYPD at the center of another dispute involving allegations of excessive firepower.

Justice Arthur Cooperman delivered the verdict in a Queens courtroom packed with spectators, including victim Sean Bell's fiancee and parents, and at least 200 people gathered outside the building.

Yahoo News.

Ah.  Brilliant!

I'm not sure if Sean Bell had priors or not.
He might have been drunk.
They might have been in a bad part of town.
But no way does any unarmed person deserve to be shot 50 times and the perpetrators, police or not, do not go to jail, at least not in the America that I know.

Wow.  We all should be SO proud.

Sigh.  I guess I'll have to go back to stockpiling food, water, and ammo.  Actually, strike that ammo part.  But no doubt some people are thinking that way today.

Note to self: for the love of God, avoid the police.  You have a daughter to feed.

How To Weed Out The Truly Stupid

It's quite simple really.  Get them a camera phone, sit back, and see what happens.

BARTOW, Fla. -- On their own videotape, six Polk County girls laughed in another girl's face as they beat her so badly she was hospitalized. Friday in court, they hung their heads in shame.

Not only will the girls be tried as adults for their videotaped attack, they'll also have a hard time getting out of jail. The judge made a pretty strong statement to the kids Friday. Judge Angela Cowden doubled the normal bond for all eight teens.Each is now held on anywhere from $31,000 to $37,000 for kidnapping and battery and Friday many of their parents told Eyewitness News they can't afford to get their kids out.

Really?  Nice.
The sweet, sweet justice is reported by WFTV.com, with a hat tip to Fark.

When the deal goes down, I'm hoping that the judge doles out a little justice to the parents as well.  I wouldn't have said that, but after watching one of the parents of the precious little snowflakes talk about how it was the victims fault on The Today Show the other day, I lost my compassion.

Here's a tip for you parents:
Turn the TV off and pay attention to your freakin' kids, please.

Protecting The Children Goes Haywire

This simply is not a good time to be a teenager. 

SHEBOYGAN, Wis. - A 17-year-old Sheboygan boy is facing criminal charges after allegedly fathering a child with his 16-year-old girlfriend.

Kou Yang is charged in Sheboygan County with repeated sexual assault of a child. The charge carries a maximum 25 years in prison.

Thank the Star Tribune, with a hat tip to Fark.

Having children when you, yourself, is a child?  Stupid.
Being part of a legal system that will charge a child with aggravated sexual assault when the two have been dating for three years?  Unbelievably stupid.

Let's hope that not everyone involved in this case is completely off their rocker.

Jaw Dropping 401(k) Surprise

Speechless.

WASHINGTON - The Supreme Court ruled Wednesday that individual participants in the most common type of retirement plan can sue under a pension protection law to recover their losses.

The unanimous decision has implications for 50 million workers with $2.7 trillion invested in 401(k) retirement plans.

James LaRue of Southlake, Texas, said the value of his stock market holdings plunged $150,000 when administrators at his retirement plan failed to follow his instructions to switch to safer investments.

The issue in the LaRue case was whether the Employee Retirement Income Security Act permits an individual account holder to sue plan administrators for breaching their fiduciary duties.

Yahoo.

I... am amazed.

I'm going to have to think about this and get back to you.  I'm so stunned that the Supreme Court actually ruled in favor of an individual over plan administrators, I might have to change my worldview.

Protect Your Name And Your Reputation

Something that you need to definitely have to do when you divorce is watch yourself, and watch your name. Google it if you have to. I have personal experience with this phenomenon.

My present girlfriend had the wonderful experience of being stalked by her ex. He started a website solely for the purposes of trying to make my girlfriend look bad, put her down, and talk about personal information. He would put pictures on his site and allude negatively towards her work habits, personal experiences, and et cetera. Absolutely a prince, you might say. Eventually, it took a threat from the FBI, local law enforcement, and various websites being pulled from free sites for violations of terms of service to make him cease and desist.

My ex is similar, but does a different kind of stalking. On her MySpace page, (a page that which I read regularly) she describes how miserable she is and attempts to slam me as having a drinking problem and being an irresponsible and deadbeat dad... despite my regular OVER payments for child support - never missing a payment, regular visits, and general overall support. The reason that I am not with her is that we don't get along. I DO want to be with my child 24/7. It's a huge difference, and an emotionally and legally expensive one. Update! After talking to the offending person, she agreed to remove the offending content, which is great. She didn't, and just made her pages private, but hey, that's better than a poke in the eye. We'll see.

Solutions? I'm not sure that I have one, and if anyone has any great ideas, then I'm all ears. I'm already considering legal action. However, if your breakup with your ex was acrimonious, then learn to use Google. Be your best private detective. Keep a journal It can be a little annoying and perhaps may cause you fume a bit, but make sure that you have all the possible information. At least that way, if you decide to follow through, then you'll have all the information. Over at WiredSafety.org, they have a lot of great information about cyberstalking and a number of other Internet crimes.

Here's one that you can write down; despite any odd thing that I might see in her behavior, actions, or choices, you will never see me slam her in print. That's no better than gossip, and despite the fact that our relationship didn't work out, she does have good qualities for someone else. That won't stop me from being the dad of a three year old.

Remember as well; self improvement is the best form of revenge.

Oh, How Far We've Come

I so enjoy discussing race relations.

An Arapahoe County employee was arrested Tuesday and faces a charge of misdemeanor harassment on allegations that he left two nooses — one holding a dead squirrel — where a black county employee could see them.

The suspect, Peter Lee Massaglia, 51, is employed in the weatherization department for Arapahoe County, the same department where David Frazier works.

Frazier said he found a noose placed around the rearview mirror in an unassigned work truck in late September. A month later, he found a dead squirrel with a noose around its neck in a workshed.

Arapahoe County Sheriff Grayson Robinson said he could not talk about specifics of the arrest because the arrest warrant affidavit was sealed by the district attorney's office.

But Robinson said Massaglia was taken into custody Tuesday and arrested on a $1,750 bond.

Massaglia faces a charge of harassment, a Class 1 misdemeanor punishable by six to 18 months in jail. The charge was bumped from a Class 3 to a Class 1 misdemeanor because the harassment was race-related.

Denver Post, stand up and be counted.

My girlfriend, an astute thinker on hate crime, wondered aloud to me today exactly how someone gets the idea to start hanging nooses with dead squirrels around the workplace.  Is that something that someone goes home and brags about to their wife or friends?  "I sure showed that guy!"

Funny, but in a way, not.

Sadly, this is the kind of mentality that Senator Obama is going to run into in the south during his run for the presidency.  Nobody will say it, but I will.  I hope that I'm wrong.  I doubt that I will be, though.

Surely Not All Australian Judges Are This Stupid

...but frankly, I have no idea.  Apparently, 10 years old is old enough to consent to sex in northern Queensland.

A judge's decision not to jail nine men guilty of raping a 10-year-old girl in an Aboriginal community has triggered outrage in Australia.

The offenders were either placed on probation or given suspended sentences for the 2005 rape in the Aurukun settlement, in northern Queensland.

In her ruling, Judge Sarah Bradley told them that the victim "probably agreed to have sex with all of you".

BBC News spreads foreign news, word.

Don't care if she agreed to have sex with all of them or not; that's one of the more stupid stories I've seen this year.  How can a 10 year old know the difference between right, wrong, and sex at her age, anyway?  I'm sure that she'll grow up to have a perfectly balanced personality.  Nice.  What a system.

Landlord Tenant Law FYI

Because I'm always interested in passing on invaluable information, Consumerist has posted a list linking to the landlord/tenant law for every state in the union .

Worth a bookmark, people, especially in light of present real estate economics.

Sean Taylor

Can anyone explain the murder of professional football players this year?  First Darrent Williams, then Sean Taylor.  Well, at least in Sean's case, the police have found who they think are the murders and are acting accordingly.

MIAMI (AP) -- Three men charged with murdering Sean Taylor were denied bail Tuesday, a day after thousands of mourners attended the funeral for the Washington Redskins safety.

Charles Wardlow, 18, Jason Mitchell, 19, and Venjah Hunte, 20, all face charges of unpremeditated murder, home invasion with a firearm or another deadly weapon and armed burglary. They will remain in Miami-Dade County jail.

A fourth suspect, Eric Rivera, 17, is being processed at a juvenile detention center in Miami-Dade County, jail officials said. He faces the same charges as the others, and a lawyer said there is a fifth suspect that police are seeking.

Taylor, 24, died Nov. 27, barely 24 hours after he was shot in the bedroom of his home a few miles from where he grew up. Police say he was a victim of a botched burglary by the suspects.

Probable cause affidavits for Mitchell and Rivera said the two confessed to participating in armed burglary. According to the reports, Mitchell and Rivera admitted entering the home and said someone had a gun and shot Taylor, but they didn't identify who. Police and attorneys also have said some of the young men confessed, though they wouldn't elaborate.

Via Yahoo.

I guess that this wouldn't be a bad time to once again bring up Darrent, and mention that it would be nice to find the guys that gunned down the football player in the neighborhood shockingly close to where I live, thanks.  I know it's hard, but for God's sake, they were at a club.  There's must have been a brazillion witnesses.  Seriously, now.

Absolute Proof That Not All Americans Are Stupid

Figures that the latest proof that Americans are not all completely ridiculous comes from a librarian.

Storytime ceased abruptly when the picture book Eileen Issa was reading her 2 1/2-year-old son surprisingly ended with two men marrying and smooching.

The tale about a disgruntled queen who demanded that her son marry a princess looked like the average children's book to the mother of two when she scooped it up along with about nine others at the Lower Macungie Library. She had no idea the book has been the subject of a federal lawsuit and controversy in other parts of the country.

''I saw them at the altar and I said, 'This can't be what I'm thinking,''' Eileen Issa said, recalling illustrations of the prince holding hands with and kissing his new husband. ''I was sick.''

Since that day, Issa and her husband, Jeff, have demanded that the library take it out of circulation.

Wait.  You haven't read the good part yet.

Kathee Rhode, the library's director, said censoring books based on subject matter is the duty of parents, not the library. She said the library strives to provide material representing a spectrum of views and ways of life.

''That's what a public library does, and you make the choice,'' Rhode said. ''We certainly want parents to make that decision for their children -- not one parent making that decision for all children.''

Hold on.  Maybe I misread that.

Kathee Rhode, the library's director, said censoring books based on subject matter is the duty of parents, not the library. She said the library strives to provide material representing a spectrum of views and ways of life.

''That's what a public library does, and you make the choice,'' Rhode said. ''We certainly want parents to make that decision for their children -- not one parent making that decision for all children.''

What?!

I can't believe that I saw that.  We certainly want parents to make that decision for their children -- not one parent making that decision for all children?  That looks suspiciously like common sense.

I applaud. 

Lower Macungie Library.  Today, you win at being the quintessential American institution. 

I've Got The Gotta Go Into Bankruptcy, But The Debts Are Still There Blues

People, people, people.  You might as well accept the fact that you really want to avoid credit cards.  Don't think that bankruptcy will help you, either.

It's not as easy to get a Chapter 7 bankruptcy anymore due to recent legislation that was bought and paid for by the banking industry. In most cases you'll have to pay back some part of your debt under a Chapter 13 bankruptcy repayment plan. The banks weren't happy with just forcing almost everyone into a Chapter 13 bankruptcy in which they have to repay all of their debts through a payment plan and are now going after people who already filed Chapter 7 bankruptcy and trying to collect on debts which have been legally bankrupted away.

That's from American Consumer News.  Consider reading the whole article.

I'm going to tell you a story about credit cards that you might not believe and might find difficult to conceive.  Did you know that there was a time in the last fifty years that credit cards didn't exist?  No, really, it's true!  There was NO such thing as credit cards!  Wow!

Strangely enough, people still were able to buy things with money.  Oddly, when people couldn't afford things they didn't buy them.  Shocking.

As it turns out, a fine way to spend yourself into bankruptcy is to buy things that you can't afford, which is exactly what credit cards allow you to do.  If you can avoid the trap that credit provides, then your chances of overspending decrease significantly.

The message seems pretty clear, doesn't it?

Well Played, Ms. Calhoun

The funniest quote of the week comes from Patricia Calhoun, editor of the Westword, Denver's weekly alternative newspaper, during a trial where the weekly was sued by some guy named Steve Horner (who, naturally, lost) who decided that ladies' nights at bars were a violation of his civil rights and newspaper advertising those promotions were violating state civil rights laws:

"I'm running to the ladies room." Turning to Horner, she added, "You don't object, do you?"

Thank the Rocky Mountain News for this.  Then thank Fark for the hat tip.

I'm not sure what's wrong with that guy, and in fact, I don't even like bars (who wants to be the old guy in the club?!), but I have a feeling that cheap drinks at Denver bars probably won't help his attitude.

Blame The Foreign Looking Clerk Guy

Infuriating.

 

LITTLETON - The families of two young men killed in a drunk driving accident want the stiffest penalty for a store clerk who prosecutors say sold alcohol to one of their sons who used a fake ID.

 

9news.

 

So, wait.  A liquor store clerk sold someone some alcohol and now the parents of the children who were killed by their drunk driving accident want the clerk to be penalized?

 

Obviously there's more to the story.  Let's read on, shall we?

 

The parents of Paul Ondrish and Brandon Nichols, who were both 20 years old, admit their sons made poor choices, but say the store clerk should have been more responsible.

 

So, these kids weren't technically children after all, they were 20 years old. 

Alarm bells are beginning to ring.

 

The clerk, 25-year-old Loc Truong, pleaded guilty on Thursday to selling Ondrish the liquor on July 12, 2006.

"There were a series of mistakes made that night, but it started when the store clerk sold alcohol to a minor," said Frank Ondrish, Paul's father.

Early the next morning, Ondrish crashed, killing both him and Nichols. Neither was wearing a seatbelt.

The other three passengers, all of whom were 20 years old, were also injured.

Truong was working at Marina Pointe Liquors at Chatfield and Wadsworth in Littleton.

Ondrish bought rum from him using his brother's expired Michigan driver's license as ID, according to the DA's office.

 

A series of mistakes that started when the store clerk sold alcohol to a minor?

Actually, no.  One of the first mistakes was for a kid to use his brother's expired ID to try to buy booze. 

One might argue that the parents made the first mistake somewhere along the line, but why quibble.

 

Let's move on.

 

"Stores with a liquor license have a great responsibility to follow the law," said Patti Ondrish, Paul's mother.

 

"People who walk into liquor stores to buy booze have a great responsibility to follow the law," said Clark, father of a daughter.

 

The alarm bells have become a siren.

 

A liquor store clerk making probably $8.50 an hour does have a responsibility to follow the law, but NO MORE SO than two 20 year olds that intentionally walk into a liquor store to buy rum using fraudulent identification.  Luc Truong is not the proximate cause of their accident; the proximate cause of the accident seems to be their deciding to purchase booze for their drive into the mountains, then doing it.  Luc Truong was unfortunate, but not a criminal.

 

This man does not deserve to go to jail.

 

However, these parents, as much as I feel for their loss as a parent myself (and I do mean that), do deserve a lesson on the effects of cognitive dissonance.

 

Unless there is a significant amount more to this story than meets the eye, I would have to say that a reasonable person could not find that this 25 year old liquor store clerk deserves to lose his job, his liberty, and possibly his very future because two 20 year olds decided to defraud him and his employer and successfully buy alcohol.

 

Free Luc Truong.

 

Parents, dead children, jail, and lawsuits.

 

This story stains the memory of the young and dead, and once again, personal responsibility surrenders.

Terrorism: A Tale of Two Mayors

Compare:

Michael Bloomberg, present mayor of New York, after the thwarted attempt to blow up John F. Kennedy Airport on Monday on how ordinary citizens can relate to possibility of terrorist post 9-11 (from the New York Times via WCBS tv:

There are lots of threats to you in the world. There's the threat of a heart attack for genetic reasons. You can't sit there and worry about everything. Get a life.

Contrast (and yes, this is in part a opinion piece, so tread wisely) with this story on yesterday's incident at a Giuliani gathering in Prison Planet.com:

Matt Lepacek, the reporter who was kicked out of the CNN press room and arrested after asking Rudy Giuliani's staff a question, has now been released on bail. Criminal indictments are now being pursued against the police involved as well as Giuliani's staffers for their flagrant abuse of the First Amendment, assault and wrongful arrest.

<snip>

The female staffer was witnessed to be instrumental in alerting the police to the "crime" of Lepacek asking a question that the Giuliani camp weren't comfortable with.

Rudkowski was assaulted and questioned on who he was working for despite the fact that he hadn't even asked a question and was standing separately from Lepacek.

Lepacek was told that other eyewitnesses saw police stamp on one of the cameras as it lay on the floor.

Another eyewitness said that the entire arrest was clearly being directed by Secret Service, who were ordering the police to threaten anyone who asked questions about the incident with arrest.

I find the dichotomy interesting.

Do It Yourself Background Checks

Yes, I'm aware that this is two Consumerist posts in one day.  However, this couldn't be more useful unless you had a handy clone willing to punch the keys or dial the phone.

 

The real post is here, however, via the Privacy Rights Clearinghouse.

These are the unspoken questions asked by employers, landlords, creditors, insurers and banks as you – the consumer – make your way through the normal affairs of adult life. To the company that may give you a job, write an insurance policy, or rent you an apartment, you represent a risk – the unknown – and companies feel a need to assess their "risk" in dealing with you. Of course, you won't be asked these questions outright, but those who want to rate your "risk level" are turning more than ever to specialized "consumer reports" to find out more about you.

The federal Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) covers reports about your overall financial health. Credit reports allow a lender to see whether you pay your bills on time, have filed for bankruptcy, have an outstanding judgment or collection action against you.

However, despite its name, the Fair Credit Reporting Act covers a lot more than simply credit reports. Credit reports are just one of a broader category of consumer reports covered by the FCRA.

To learn more about your credit reporting rights, see PRC Fact Sheet 6, How Private Is My Credit Report?, www.privacyrights.org/fs/fs6-crdt.htm .

Consumer reports can also include reports about you made to employers, insurance companies, banks, and landlords. In recent years, many new companies have sprouted, compiling reports specifically targeted at employers, insurers, and landlords. The companies that compile reports for targeted users are "consumer reporting agencies" under the FCRA, just like the three credit national credit bureaus: Experian, TransUnion, and Equifax.

Do yourself a favor.  Real both the Consumerist post and it's comments, and read the Privacy Rights Clearinghouse information.  It might be the smartest thing you'll do all month... and it's only June 1.

 

The Credit CARD Act

Usually, I have a natural suspicion of obviously-named bills (see: Patriot Act, No Child Left Behind, etc.).  Not in this case.  I bring you... The Credit CARD Act if 2007 .

 

 

A BILL

To amend the Consumer Credit Protection Act to ban abusive credit practices, enhance consumer disclosures, protect underage consumers, and for other purposes.

 

Where discovered?  Why, The Consumerist, of course.  It's easier to buy into a bill when they are into it.

 

The Credit CARD Act Of 2007 is a bill currently before Congress aiming to end some of the credit card industry's anti-consumer practices. Among H. R. 1461's proposals:

• Advance notice of interest rate increases
• End universal default clauses, the premise that they can raise your credit card interest rate if your credit score changes
• Prohibit credit cards being issued to minors without a parental signature

Here's your chance to stem unadulterated evil, people.  Don't blow this.  Support positive changes in the things that drive you crazy in your everyday life, then marvel at the improvements in your daily existence.

May 14th - Tappity Tap Tap Tap.

When it comes to privacy, remember that you don't have any on the Internet.  On Monday, you'll have less.

 

May 14th is the official deadline for cable modem companies, DSL providers, broadband over powerline, satellite internet companies and some universities to finish wiring up their networks with FBI-friendly surveillance gear, to comply with the FCC's expanded interpretation of the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act.

 

Wired said this first.

 

Oh the news, Zombie Hoover sat up in his grave and applauded.  Oddly, the same news made millions of American Internet users shake their heads in disgust.

 

They Take The Titans Seriously In Tennessee

Today's interesting news story brought to you by WBAL, via my good friends at Fark .

 

Ravens quarterback Steve McNair has been arrested in Nashville, Tennessee, and charged with owning a vehicle being driven by a drunken driver.

 

Steve McNair was driving dr.... hey!  Wait a minute...

 

Jamie Cartwright, 31, was driving McNair's 2003 Dodge pickup truck, with McNair as a passenger, northbound on Hillsboro Road at Abbott Martin Road at 11:53 p.m. Wednesday when DUI Squad Officer Harold Taylor saw that the truck was traveling 45 mph in a 35 mph zone. Officer Taylor activated his emergency equipment and Cartwright pulled into a strip mall on Hillsboro Road near Crestmoor Drive.

When Taylor approached Cartwright, he detected an obvious odor of alcohol and saw that Cartwright's eyes were red and glassy. Cartwright admitted to drinking at least two beers earlier in the evening. Taylor administered the standard field sobriety tasks to Cartwright, which indicated impairment. Cartwright was taken into custody for DUI and was asked to submit to a breath alcohol test. He refused.

Because McNair owns the truck and was a passenger with Cartwright, he too was charged with DUI. It is illegal in Tennessee for the owner of a vehicle to knowingly permit its operation by a driver under the influence of an intoxicant. Metro police have charged 43 persons, including McNair, for violating that statute since the first of this year.

So.  To be clear, Steve McNair, who may have been drunk, was riding shotgun with a person that may have been drunk, and Steve McNair (the passenger) was charged with a DUI?  Or is it a PUI.  Hm.

 

Clever.

 

 

 

 

Friends, don't let friends drive your car.  Anytime, just to be safe.

 

 

Mother Of The Decade

Oh my Lord.

 

DAYTON, Ohio - An infant girl who died in August 2005 of a high body temperature might have been put in a microwave, and her mother has been charged in the death, authorities said Tuesday.

 

Get the disgusting details on Yahoo.

 

I'm not a death penalty supporter, really.

Therefore, I am resisting the temptation to say "BURN HER!!"

 

I am finding resistance may be futile.

 

 

 

Marriage, Still Good, Just Not As Popular

This isn't a big surprise.

 

WASHINGTON (AFP) - It is by no means dead, but for the first time, a new survey has shown that traditional marriage has ceased to be the preferred living arrangement in the majority of US households.

 

The shift, reported by the US Census Bureau in its 2005 American Community Survey, could herald a sea change in every facet of American life -- from family law to national politics and its current emphasis on family values.

The findings, which were released in August but largely escaped public attention until now because of the large volume of data, indicated that marriage did not figure in nearly 55.8 million American family households, or 50.2 percent.

Thank Yahoo News.

 

Certainly, there's a lot of reasons that this is the case.  Point one being divorce, which tends to rip ex-husbands to shreds.  Of course, there are a lot of other reasons as well.  I prefer to think of it being a lot of people, men and women, choosing wisely.  Just because two people don't have a piece of paper doesn't mean that they can't stay with each other forever, will each other a mess of money, and make promises to one another.