On May 10, 2011, 43-year old Allen Kephart died after having a Taser applied to him multiple times by three San Bernardino, California, sheriff’s deputies during a routine traffic stop in Lake Arrowhead.

“I feel that my son was murdered, I feel that something has to be done about law enforcement,” says Alfred Kephart, who filed a wrongful death lawsuit in San Bernardino Superior Court, August 30, 2011.

High profile police related deaths like Allen Kepharts’ are pushing activists, families and courts to question whether Tasers or officers are to blame, but the answer to that question is a tricky one.

Numerous studies and reviews from the National Institute of Justice, Amnesty International and the Police Executive Research Forum have come to different conclusions on Tasers and how officers use them. A study in the American Heart Journal even revealed that studies funded by Taser International were “substantially more likely to conclude Tasers are safe.”

(more…)

There has been a lot of talk comparing and contrasting the Tea Partiers and these Occupy-Whatever people. In Georgia, though, we can see a stark difference. Tea Partiers are law-abiding citizens, while the Occupy Atlantans are law breakers. Sadly, Capitol Police in Atlanta have sided with the Occupiers and against Tea Partiers.

At the very least, the Capitol Police in Atlanta have definitely been treating these two groups unequally. These officers of the law have turned a blind eye to law breaking by the Occupy folks, allowing them to do anything they want, but did not extend that courtesy to those Tea Party groups that also protested at the Georgia Capitol House.

Notice in the video that the Tea Party group the Capitol Police were harassing was made up of both blacks and whites? And the young man in the video being forced to take down his flag was Matthew Perdie, who was known for his momentous freedom walk in 2010.

Now, as you can see, the Occupy people have been allowed to break nearly every law on the books governing protests in Atlanta. They’ve not been required to take out permits, have not been required to observe vagrancy laws, have not been forced to observe the time limits put on protests and have also not been required to follow the law on how long poles for signs and flags are supposed to be. (more…)

I was in downtown Baltimore Monday morning taking care of some business, so I thought I’d stroll a block over and check out the “Occupy Baltimore” crowd. Well, the word “crowd” might  be an overstatement. There were about as many people as there would be homeless people on a normal day, only with tents and literature rather than Starbucks cups for holding spare change. And it’s the literature I found most interesting.

Among the literature I picked up off of their table was one titled “Security Statement.” What it said, and what it implied, was rather disturbing:

As the Security Committee of Occupy Baltimore, we release this statement to ensure the safety of our newly forming, delicate yet strong community.

Sexual abuse and assault are dehumanizing acts for the survivor as well as the abuser. It strips people of their right to safety, dignity, and respect, basic values which embody many of the intentions behind Occupy Baltimore. As a vibrant community, we recognize and give power to these values and the rights of survivors.

OK, saying you’re against “sexual abuse and assault” isn’t controversial, but do you really have to say it? Why isn’t it understood? As it turns out, that’s just the beginning of the weird. The entire “Security Statement” is about sexual assault and abuse.

Sexual abuse or assault at Occupy Baltimore is in violation of our values, and will not be tolerated. It is an explicit policy of Occupy Baltimore to prohibit abuse by any members of the community upon another person. Violation of this policy will result in the abuser no longer being welcome at the occupation.

So sexual abuse or assault are against “explicit policy” and will get you shunned? What about arrested? Those things are crimes, after all. Shouldn’t Occupy Baltimore, like every other group or individual, encourage people to contact the police to get these predators off the street? You’d think so, but you’d think wrong: (more…)

Jeremy Ryan is a habitual loser, or, to borrow a term from state Senator Glen Grothman (R-Wis.), a slob. Ryan is known around Madison, Wisconsin as the “Segway Boy” after his distinct mode of transportation that has made him nearly ubiquitous in the professional protest circuit of the city. Chances are, if you visited the state capitol at all since the protests were at their height this past spring, you’ve seen Ryan riding a Segway around the downtown area, or getting hauled out of the Senate or Assembly galleries after violating gallery rules with his antics.

Why does Jeremy Ryan matter? Because he – as one of the more obnoxious and well-known liberal protestors in Wisconsin – is a stereotypical example of the people who are still protesting. The outraged Wisconsin union members who flooded the state capitol are no longer leading the protests in Madison. In their place a new class of professional progressive protesters has arisen. It is they who are pouring beer on Wisconsin lawmakers and adopting ever more radical means to communicate their message. It is they that Dane County law enforcement is refusing to prosecute despite repeated and flagrant violations of the law.

Ryan’s public record as a protester has been well documented. Many of his protests have landed him citations from the police because he broke various ordinances, rules and laws related to public disturbances and public conduct. According to a Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel article in June, Ryan had received 15 citations and been arrested nine times in conjunction with his protesting. The 15 citations had, as of June, racked up a total of $3,604.50 in fines – not a penny of which Ryan seems to be intent on paying.

As a professional, full-time protestor Ryan has no income from a job. What little money he does seem able to scrape up through donations apparently goes to pay for medication that he needs to manage several health issues as well as fund his political action committee, Defending Wisconsin PAC. The PAC does not pay Ryan for his work as executive director. GAB documents show that the committee has raised $8,305.90, and had $4,452.08 still in the bank as of its latest report. Perhaps if Ryan collected a one-time salary from his PAC he could be responsible and pay his outstanding fines.

(more…)

On May 11, 43-year old Allen Kephart died after being tased multiple times by three San Bernardino, California sheriff’s deputies during a routine traffic stop.

Kephart, a quiet and well-liked member of the tight-knit mountain community around Lake Arrowhead, allegedly ran a stop sign and became “combative” during the stop.

But local residents say this claim is wildly out of character for Kephart, who had no police record and no history of aggressive behavior or even temper. Kephart’s death has galvanized the local community around a problem they say is getting worse: aggressive policing and the souring of relations between civilians and local law enforcement.

While an FBI review of Kephart’s death proceeds, the people of Lake Arrowhead are demanding a change in the climate of fear that has grown up in this quiet rural community. Whatever the final outcome of that investigation, the case of Allen Kephart is a case study in how law enforcement can lose the support even of citizens who believe strongly in law and order.

(more…)

Who will watch the watchers? In a world of ubiquitous, hand-held digital cameras, that’s not an abstract philosophical question. Police everywhere are cracking down on citizens using cameras to capture breaking news and law enforcement in action.

In 2009, police arrested blogger and freelance photographer Antonio Musumeci on the steps of a New York federal courthouse. His alleged crime? Unauthorized photography on federal property.

Police cuffed and arrested Musumeci, ultimately issuing him a citation. With the help of the New York Civil Liberties Union, he forced a settlement in which the federal government agreed to issue a memo acknowledging that it is totally legal to film or photograph on federal property.

Although the legal right to film on federal property now seems to be firmly established, many other questions about public photography still remain and place journalists and citizens in harm’s way. Can you record a police encounter? Can you film on city or state property? What are a photographer’s rights in so-called public spaces?

(more…)

The man accused of initiating the drug buy that led to the 2010 death of a Chandler, Ariz., police officer made a plea bargain with federal prosecutors four months earlier to avoid a long prison term, and worked as an informant for the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration at some time prior to the deal erupting in gunfire.

But Chandler police did not know John H. Webber had been working with federal officials when they ran a “reverse sting” targeting a quarter-million dollars that Webber and his cohorts agreed to pay for 500 pounds of marijuana supplied by undercover officers. Had the deal gone down as planned, the police would have kept the money under Arizona’s forfeiture law.

After the marijuana was delivered, one of the suspects opened fire with an AK-74 rifle, mortally wounding Detective Carlos Ledesma, according to police reports. Two other undercover detectives were shot, and two suspects were killed during the shootout on West Maldonado Drive in south Phoenix, about 16 miles from the Chandler border.

Maricopa County prosecutors said in court motions related to the ongoing murder case that Webber had worked as an informant for the DEA. However, the agency had stopped using him by the time of the shootout, and he had no authority to initiate the drug deal that led to Ledesma’s death, prosecutors argue.

The Goldwater Institute detailed the events that led to the shooting, and the extensive use of reverse stings by Chandler police, in a report published in March. The agency raised about $3.2 million through forfeitures in the year prior to Ledesma’s death, more than $2.7 million of that from reverse stings, according to city and court records.

(more…)

Police in Chandler, Ariz., have used money seized in drug stings to buy a new vehicle for the agency’s SWAT team, new guns for its officers, surveillance equipment, even a dog for its canine unit.

They use it to pay confidential informants, who work in the drug underworld putting together new drug deals that will lead to more cash being confiscated and converted to the exclusive use of the agency. In an 18-month period, one confidential informant was paid $248,598, according to city records. Another received $193,568 and a third $81,575 during that same time frame.

Forfeited money is kept in separate accounts under the exclusive control of department administrators. By law it must be used to supplement the agency’s regular budget, not to replace funds budgeted for normal operations.

In the last five years, Chandler police have raised more than $6.8 million through forfeitures. About $3.2 million of that came in the year leading up to the fatal shooting of an undercover narcotics officer engaged in a “reverse sting,” a lucrative but risky operation in which police pose as drug sellers rather than buyers. Chandler police staged 20 reverse stings in those 12 months, all but four of them far outside the city’s boundaries, according to court records.

(more…)

Georgia has some of the worst civil forfeiture laws and practices in the country.  This morning, five Atlanta citizens teamed up with the Institute for Justice to change that.

Civil forfeiture threatens the property rights of all Americans.  These laws allow government officials to seize your home, car, cash or other property upon the mere suspicion that it has been used or involved in criminal activity.

In an attempt to ensure civil forfeiture is subject to public scrutiny, Georgia law requires local law enforcement agencies to annually itemize and report all property obtained through forfeiture, and how it is used, to local governing authorities.

But many—perhaps most—local Georgia law enforcement agencies fail to issue these forfeiture reports.  Today, the Institute for Justice issued a report of its own: Forfeiting Accountability: Georgia’s Hidden Civil Forfeiture Funds. It finds that among a random sample of 20 law enforcement agencies, only two were reporting as required.  Of 15 major agencies in Georgia population centers, only one produced the required report.  Yet federal data show Georgia agencies taking in millions through forfeiture.

(more…)

Texas Senator Dan Patrick has just filed Senate Bill 126, which would require law enforcement officials to check legal documentation of lawfully stopped individuals. Other states will likely follow suit.

Let me confess how this immigration business is especially poignant to me. I teach college students and have every ethnic persuasion imaginable in my class. If S. B. 126 becomes law, I will turn to my black students and say, “If a cop stops you, you will not have to carry papers to prove you’re legal.” I will turn to my Asian students and say, “If a cop stops you, you will not have to carry papers to prove you’re legal.” I will turn to my western European students and say, “If a cop stops you, you will not have to carry papers to prove you’re legal.” But if I turn to Yolanda Garcia (pseudonym), who is legal and came from Spain three years ago, I will have to say to her, “If a cop stops you, you will have to have papers to prove you’re not illegal, or otherwise be fined, if not jailed.”

A New Yorker cartoon depicts this prejudice accurately. It shows a police officer putting a handcuffed man into a police car, warning, “Anything you say with an accent may be used against you.” S. B. 126 will come to this.

There is something downright sick in this prejudicial treatment. Conservatives and libertarians usually champion the supremacy of the individual over the collective. We judge individuals as individuals, not as members of a group. But too many conservatives are now demanding that we prejudicially judge people as members of a group. They have become the collectivists that they supposedly reject.

The Constitution will not help their case. The Framers designed it to protect, more than anything else, the freedom of the individual.

It gets even worse.

(more…)

Attorney-client communications are among the most sacred in the American system of jurisprudence, so when James O’Keefe’s lawyers noticed at least two instances of privileged communication between them and their client appearing in the media, they wrote to Assistant U.S. Attorney Jan Mann in New Orleans: “O’Keefe materials improperly provided to media.”

The information that I have confirmed was disclosed to the media appears to be intentionally calculated to foment negative public opinion against Mr. O’Keefe, presumably in an unethical effort to prejudice any criminal proceedings… a clear violation of Chapters 1-7.500 and 1-7.600 (E) of the United States Attorneys’ Manual as well as a prosecutor’s ethical obligations…

When O’Keefe and three others were arrested in January, his computer and cell phone were seized, under the completely false premise that they were surveillance devices, and it appears that the documents came from them. If true, as O’Keefe’s lawyers note, this would constitute an outrageous violation of law-enforcement ethics as well as “severe prosecutorial misconduct.”

The letter follows:

March 4 letter to Jan Mann-1

The City of Los Angeles – you will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy.  Slowly, ever since the departure of Mayor Richard Riordan in 2001, the parade of inept mayors and spineless city councils have dragged the city into a morass.

Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa has always been an empty suit, a smirking, glad-handing fool of epic proportions with a history of questionable ethics.  Besides successfully lobbying President Clinton to commute the sentence of a convicted cocaine trafficker, Villaraigosa pulled a John Edwards by allegedly fooling around while his spouse was undergoing cancer treatment.  Add to this the L.A Times report that the Los Angeles Ethics Commission accused him of 31 violations of campaign finance and disclosure laws during his 2003 City Council campaign.  Toss in the report that Villaraigosa was a member of MECha, a Hispanic separatist organization, while at UCLA, and attended an unaccredited law school in Los Angeles that allegedly promoted illegal alien causes (He failed the bar exam four times).

This is the Mayor of Los Angeles, and Angelenos have gotten what they deserve.  They re-elected a man who has shown absolutely no leadership in times of crisis.  His inability to use the bully pulpit has contributed to the dismal record of the Los Angeles Unified School District.  LAUSD is falling apart, unable to manage its budget, unable to fire teachers due to outrageous union rules, and increasing class sizes.  This is not surprising.  A report by the LA Weekly, an alternative newspaper usually known for supporting left-wing causes, did some strong investigative work into Villaraigosa’s schedule.  During one period, the Mayor spent only 11% of his time working on city business.  He has refused to direct LAPD to repeal Special Order 40 – which does not permit officers from asking about someone’s immigration status.

So even in circumstances where an officer sees a KNOWN ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT that he himself helped deport following a prior arrest, he cannot report this individual to I.C.E.   This outrageous policy by the Mayor and City Council resulted in the shooting death of a young man named Jamiel Shaw.

However, the most egregious lack of leadership Villaraigosa demonstrates is occurring right now.

(more…)

Attorney General Eric Holder testified the other day before the House Judiciary Committee.   Republican congressman Lamar Smith asked him what seemed to be a pretty simple question.

Regarding the perpetrators in the last three terror attacks (two, thank God, unsuccessful) on our homeland (Fort Hood, the Christmas day bomber, and the Times Square bomber), Smith asked our Attorney General “Do you feel these individuals…might have been incited to take the actions they did because of radical Islam?”

Holder feigned to not understand.   “ Because of…?”

Smith:  “Because of radical Islam.”

Holder: “There are a variety of reasons people do these things.”

Smith re-worded the same question and re-asked it six times, with Holder refusing to acknowledge what is as obvious as the fact that I am typing these words and you are reading them.  That every major incident of terror of recent years has been performed by Muslims and that all of them associate their particular theology with their acts of terror.

The real question today is who is governing America and what exactly is the agenda of those who sit in the seat of power of our own country?

It is no wonder that most Americans are squirming around with the most profound sense of uneasiness.  When the chief law enforcement officer of the United States refuses to acknowledge what is clear and true – that those perpetrating terror today are uniformly Muslim and motivated by Islamic theology of one form or another – how in the world can we possibly feel safe?

(more…)

The Mainstream media (MSM) is currently peddling the Obama Administration myth that patriotic Americans, many of whom have served in our military or who otherwise have an American flag hanging proudly in their front yards, pose a grave threat to our nation’s security. We have seen calls for Republican leaders to denounce Tea-Partiers and other activist groups opposed to Obama’s agenda. We are currently seeing our nation’s Department of Justice being hijacked to score political points for the Far-Left.

Let us remember that it is leftists who support convicted cop-killers, organize to prevent other Americans from exercising their constitutionally guaranteed rights, consistently threaten violence, and otherwise have a long history of supporting foreign powers who wish our nation and its freedoms harm.

For many years, the anti-American culture of the extreme left has been largely ignored. Like a cancer running through the body politic, the culture of hating America has metasticised. It is now “uncool” to have a flag in the yard, support our troops or believe in American exceptionalism.

To better see how the left works and the threat it poses, let us take a look at the Left and the 2008 Republican National Convention (RNC).

(more…)

One pen stroke from Arizona Governor Jan Brewer has given her state a no-nonsense immigration policy and given America yet another opportunity to see the full face of leftist hypocrisy.

First some key points of the policy-

As shown in the picture above (featuring MSNBC’s poster child of intelligence, Contessa Brewer) this bill essentially says illegal means illegal.  If you are in the state of Arizona illegally you are guilty of trespassing (page 2 line 44), and if you are caught trespassing you will be transferred immediately to the custody of the ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement).  I will address the profiling allegations later.

This bill has teeth, and it puts the screws to employers who knowingly hire illegal immigrants (page 6 line 7).  The burden of proof of work eligibility is now on the employer since this bill officially makes it illegal for an undocumented alien to “apply for work, solicit work in a public place, or perform work as an employee or independent contractor in this state.”

Complaints can now be filed with the Attorney General of Arizona or with a county attorney when a business is suspected of employing illegal aliens.  After an investigation, if a business is found to be employing illegal workers charges are brought upon the business, and expedited court status is given to the case.

(more…)

The tragic murder of a Good Samaritan rancher by an illegal immigrant in Arizona has people yelling for an effective response to this outrage. Although most illegal immigrants are just human beings that are desperately seeking to provide for themselves and their families, this murder shines a spotlight on the Obama administration’s utter failure to secure our borders and uphold the rule of law.

A top story on March 30 is that Arizona rancher Robert Krentz was apparently gunned down by an illegal immigrant. Krentz’s family has maintained a ranch in southern Arizona since 1907, and he was known as a compassionate man who gave water and medical care to illegal immigrants crossing his land from Mexico.

Krentz was found shot to death, slumped over his vehicle on his ranch. Police dogs tracked the shooter to the Mexican border 15 miles away, indicating that the shooter was almost certainly someone in this country illegally from Mexico.

The murder of this good man casts in stark relief the outrageous failure of President Barack Obama and Secretary Janet “the system worked” Napolitano to deal with the enormous problem America faces as a result of illegal immigrants. Perhaps if they weren’t so busy taking over the economy (which the Constitution forbids them from doing), they’d actually secure the border (which the Constitution requires them to do).

(more…)

In 1983, President Ronald Reagan issued an Executive Order which gave permission to the International Criminal Police Organization (INTERPOL) to operate within the boundaries of the United States.  Reagan’s EO put INTERPOL under the same basic guidelines as the CIA, FBI, ATF and other Federal law enforcement agencies.

Two weeks ago, without any announcement, debate, discussion or inquiry from journalists charged with “speaking truth to power” President Obama issued an amendment to this EO.  The amendment removed part of Reagan’s order that kept INTERPOL from having full diplomatic immunity while operating within the United States.  In other words:  Under Reagan and right up until two weeks ago, INTERPOL was authorized to operate within the USA but they did not have full diplomatic immunity and had to adhere to certain laws set forth for investigative agencies.  Laws that prohibit authorities from violating our constitutionally protected rights.

(more…)