Immigration Detention Information

Looking for someone that is in an Immigration Detention facility? The Department of Homeland Security Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) is responsible for running the twenty-two detention facilities. While there does not appear to be a way to search for a detainee in ICE custody, a list of facilities is available with information on each immigration detention facility. If you need information in a pending immigration matter, you can call the electronic information system at 1.800.898.7180 or check the Executive Office for Immigration Review website. The EOIR website has an Immigration Courts Practice Manual, a virtual law library, EOIR forms, statistics, publications, FOIA requests, and information on various Immigration Courts nationwide.

Update-Medical Marijuana

In other Civil Liberties news, check out this excerpt from the the ACLU. Full story here.

For the first time, a court has recognized that a concerted effort by the federal government to sabotage state medical marijuana laws violates the U.S. Constitution.

While California’s landmark 1996 medical marijuana law has mostly been upheld by the state’s courts, after the U.S. Supreme Court’s unfavorable ruling in 2005 it appeared the sun may have been setting on medical marijuana reform in the federal courts.

The outlook is a whole lot brighter after last week’s ruling by U.S. District Judge Jeremy Fogel of San Jose, which denies a Bush administration request to dismiss a lawsuit by Santa Cruz city and county officials and the Wo/Men’s Alliance for Medical Marijuana (WAMM), which was raided by federal agents in 2002.

More significantly, in a first-of-its-kind ruling, the court held that the 10th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution bars the federal government from targeting the enforcement of federal drug laws to intentionally subvert state medical marijuana laws. The court ruled that the 10th Amendment would be violated if the ACLU can prove, as it has alleged, that a calculated pattern of selective arrests and prosecutions by the federal government has been intended to render "California’s medical marijuana laws impossible to implement and thereby forcing California and its political subdivisions to recriminalize medial marijuana."

This ruling is especially significant because it recognizes the constitutional significance of the fact that the federal government has gone out of its way to arrest and prosecute some of the most legitimate doctors, patients, caregivers and dispensary owners that are working most closely with state and local officials.

Reports from the Civil Liberties Front

The ACLU reports this week in oral argument went well in front of the Second Circuit Court of Appeals argument in Doe v. Mukasey. On Wednesday, Jameel Jaffer of the ACLU’s National Security Project argued in the 2nd Circuit for upholding a decision striking down the Patriot Act’s National Security Letter (NSL) provision in Doe v. Mukasey. The ACLU's client, John Doe, runs an Internet Service Provider and and has been gagged by the National Security Letter. The hope is that the Second Circuit will uphold the district court's ruling that the gag order violates the First Amendment and violates the separation of powers. Full story here.

Trouble the Water

Amnesty International posted this trailer for Trouble the Water, the 2008 Sundance Film Festival Grand Jury Prize winning documentary on Hurricane Katrina and the government's failings to come together in the time of crisis. A reminder of our interconnectedness.

Visual Recognition...But I wasn't wearing my glasses

Image courtesy of The Innocence Project.

The Innocence Project recently posted the story of Darrell Edwards who was convicted of a New Jersey murder of a store owner based, in part, on testimony from an eyewitness who claimed that she saw him from 271 feet away in the dark when she was not wearing her prescription glasses. Full story here. The Innocence Project is currently working on overturning Mr. Edward's conviction based in part on DNA evidence recovered from a gun and sweatshirt found at the scene that did not match Mr. Edwards as well as challenging the eyewitness identification from that distance. As part of the challenge, the Innocence Project cites the results of a 2004 study by expert Geoffrey Loftus and Erin M. Harley:

In its motion seeking a new trial, the Innocence Project cited a scientific study by Geoffrey Loftus of the University of Washington and Erin M. Harley of the University of California, Los Angeles, two national experts in the field of visual cognition and eyewitness memory. Their 2004 study “Why is it easier to identify someone close than far away?” shows how the human visual system becomes more and more unable to perceive and identify facial details as the face they are looking at moves further away – even if they know the person they are trying to identify.

The study consisted of experiments designed to test the hypothesis that the visual system is unable to “perceive and encode progressively coarser-grained facial details as the face moves further away.” The study used a mathematical model to ensure that the same special proportions in a close image were replicated at distances. The study found that after 25 feet, face perception diminishes. At about 150 feet, accurate face identification for people with normal vision drops to zero.

The motion also cites a 2008 article in the journal, Law and Human Behavior by Gary Wells and Deah Quinliven at Iowa State University in which they describe experiments into how people suffer from “hindsight illusion” that leads them to believe they could see a face better than they actually did, once they are told it was someone they know.

Remember to ask the question that led Cousin Vinnie to remark, "Maybe its time for a thicker pair of glasses, Dear."

Eyewitness ID: Part III "That's Him"...Now What?

In Eyewitness ID: Part I we talked about mistakes in eyewitness identification that led to the wrongful conviction of Ronald Cotton; in Part II, we talked about the composite sketch. In Part III we examine the old police stand-by, the line-up, and where to begin in investigating an eyewitness identification case.

A line-up can be either a "photo montage" of various suspects or can be a live line-up. Normally, a "show-up" with only one suspect is considered unnecessarily suggestive and is ripe for challenge. When investigating a one-on-one show-up case, look at the reasons given for the one-on-one show-up. Police will normally cite some sort of exigency, so the investigator will be looking for whether that exigency outweighed the risk of irreparable damage done to the eyewitness by the unnecessarily suggestive identification process.

A good place to start with a line-up is to look closely at the police procedures used in the line-up; the facts that the defense investigator develops regarding the police procedures can be important at both the motion to suppress the identification and at trial to assist the jury in understanding why a false identification can occur.

A suitable beginning point is to examine the United States Department of Justice's manual, "Eyewitness Evidence: A Guide for Law Enforcement", and its companion, "Eyewitness Evidence: A Trainer's Manual for Law Enforcement." Both manuals contain detailed procedures for conducting line-up procedures including: composing the line-up with fillers, using fillers that meet the perpetrator's description, positioning suspects randomly, providing detailed instructions to the witness, avoiding giving the witness verbal or non-verbal clues, and avoiding making statements of reassurance to the witness after he/she has made a choice of suspects. These two law enforcement guides will give the investigator a good starting point in evaluating whether the line-up comports with proper police procedure.

As part of the investigation, determine what type of line-up was used. There are simultaneous and sequential line-ups: in the simultaneous line-up, all suspects are viewed at once while in the sequential, the suspects are viewed one at a time. There is a large body of research on whether the sequential line-up produces more accurate results than the simultaneous line-up. For a very informative journal from the police perspective, see Police Lineups: Making Eyewitness Identification More Reliable. 

The Innocence Project proposes a number of reforms for eyewitness identification including double-blind administration of line-ups where neither the officer nor the witness knows who the suspect is in the line-up. Other proposals for eyewitness identification reform by the Innocence Project include making line-up compositions carefully to have fillers more closely resemble suspects, instructions to the witness including that the perpetrator may not be in the line-up, a confidence statement from the witness, and a recording by police of the line-up procedure and witness identification.

Given that eyewitness misidentification has contributed to more than 75% of wrongful convictions overturned with DNA testing, look closely at the procedures used in your line-up cases as part of your total investigation into the eyewitness identification.

Supreme Court to Decide Whether Informant's Signal is Enough for Warrantless Entry

In other ACLU news of late, the ACLU has recently written an amicus brief in the case of Pearson v. Callahan to be heard this term. Set for argument on October 14, 2008, the case involves one Afton Callahan who was arrested inside his home after a cooperating informant purchased drugs from Callahan. As soon as the drugs were purchased, the police entered Callahan's home without a warrant claiming that they were entering the home based upon the confidential informant's signal.

Callahan plead guilty in state court in Utah, and appealed the denial of a suppression motion to the Utah Court of Appeals. The Utah Court of Appeals agreed with Callahan that the search violated the Fourth Amendment and reversed the lower court with instructions to dismiss criminal charges against Callahan. The case now to be decided this term comes from Callahan's civil suit in federal district court, seeking damages for the violation of the Fourth Amendment's warrant requirement. The federal district court granted summary judgment against Callahan; the Tenth Circuit reversed holding that the officers' warrantless entry violated the Fourth Amendment. The court of appeals rejected the extension of the “consent-once-removed” doctrine to citizen informants—the only exceptions to the warrant requirement do not permit police to enter a home without a warrant based on the informant's participation in a drug transaction inside the home. Authorities argued that Callahan had "consented" to the informant's presence in his home and therefore did not have privacy interests. The ACLU, in its amicus brief, argues in part that a new exception to the warrant requirement should not be based on informants who do not have the training of law enforcement and that an occupant does not surrender a privacy interest in their home by engaging in illegal activity in the home. 

Watch for the police arguing this form of "consent" in your cases and remember to preserve the issue in any suppression hearings. Cases with informants should always be the subject of thorough investigation...remember what a panel from the Ninth Circuit had to say ..."Informant's are cut from untrustworthy cloth...". United States v. Bernal-Obeso, 989 F.2d 331 (9th Cir. 1993).

Protect Political Free Speech

The ACLU noted a focus on protecting political speech on their blog today. Here is an excerpt from a post... Full article here.

On blogs, personal and political websites, and through user-generated content sites, ordinary citizens in extraordinary numbers are recreating a public sphere and reinvigorating the democratic debate at the core of our political system...

ACLU of Northern California and Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) urge service providers to take extra precautions before pulling the plug on political speech. Remember that you’re facilitating a new era of reason and debate, and that there are laws that protect you as a facilitator. By taking that responsibility seriously, you’ll do right by your users, content owners and the political process...

We urge content owners to count to ten and look at the Fair Use Frequently Asked Questions and Fair Use Principles for User-Generated Video Content for some guidance before firing off a complaint.Remember that you are legally obligated to consider whether the use of your material is a fair use....

Consider carefully whether actions may result in the loss of free speech, and remember: the antidote to free speech that you don’t like is more free speech. Make your voice heard with a written blog post, a video blog post, or a message in the comment thread. We also urge users to contact us if they feel that their political speech has been improperly censored.

Washington State Patrol - Criminal History Records

The Washington State Patrol is responsible for maintaining the statewide repository for fingerprint-based criminal history record information (CHRI).

You can obtain criminal histories from the State Patrol in two ways:

(1) Going on-line by using WATCH (Washington Access To Criminal History). This feature requires either a credit card or a pre-established account. A $10 fee is charged for each name search, regardless of the outcome of the results of the search.

(2) Forms are available through the WATCH link above. Return the completed background forms to us through the US Postal Service. If setting up an account print and fill out an application packet and submit by mail or the fax number on the form.

National Clandestine Laboratory Register

A Department of Justice site that gives a national list of seized clandestine labs. To view the site click here.

New York City's Marijuana Arrest Crusade: 400,000 arrests show racial bias

In Spring 2008, New York Civil Liberties Union released a startling report entitled Marijuana Arrest Crusade Racial Bias and Police Policy in New York 1997-2007. The Report shows 400,000 New York residents were arrested in 10 years: 52% of those arrested were black; 31% were latino.

America Online Law Enforcement Training Manual

America Online
Compliance & Investigations
22000 AOL Way
Dulles, VA 20166

Law Enforcement Training Manual

(703) 265-COPS (2677)
Or
(703) 265-1933

Fax: (703) 265-2305

Training Manual can be found here.

Surveillance Planes: Eyes in the Sky

Aerial drones will hunt California pot growers in national forests

Posted using ShareThis

Reported by NORML recently: the federal government plans to escalate its eradication of marijuana plantations in the backwoods of national forests this year, beginning in California with the deployment of larger strike teams and the controversial launching of miniature, remote-controlled spy planes to outfox growers. The Forest Service's Law Enforcement and Investigations unit recently purchased the SkySeer craft to assist in remote surveillance efforts. Designed by Octatron, the SkySeer Unmanned Aerial Vehicle can search out points of interest from GPS either programmed or entered from the ground station. It has up to a two-mile range and a night vision thermal imaging feature for nighttime snooping. The SkySeer has a video surveillance camera that captures in real time and can be controlled by the ground; the video can be recorded to DVD or flash media from the ground. Be on the lookout for this technology in cases coming up especially in US Forest Service land.

AOL Subpoena Compliance

AOL’s Terms of Service provide that AOL will release account information or information sufficient to identify a member only to comply with valid legal process such as a search warrant, subpoena or court order . If you seek such identity or account information in connection with a civil legal matter, you must serve AOL with a valid subpoena.

AOL is headquartered in Loudoun County, Virginia and subject to the jurisdiction of Loudoun County Circuit Court and the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia. For applicable requirements governing the issuance of foreign state subpoenas or federal subpoenas in these jurisdictions, please consult Va. Code Ann. § 8.01-411, Va. Code Ann.§ 8.01-407.1 and Virginia Supreme Court Rule 4:9(c) and/or Rule 45 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

Subpoenas should be directed to:

AOL, LLC
Legal Department - Custodian of Records
22000 AOL Way
Dulles, Virginia 20166

Eyewitness ID: Part II The Composite Sketch

Image courtesy of The Innocence Project

In Eyewitness ID: Part I, we recapped the story of Ronald Cotton who was wrongfully convicted based on a bad eyewitness identification. Jennifer Thompson assisted police in drawing a composite sketch which was later used in creating the line-up in which Mr. Cotton was mistakenly chosen. Ms. Thompson stated,

When I went to the police department later that day, I worked on a composite sketch to the very best of my ability. I looked through hundreds of noses and eyes and eyebrows and hairlines and nostrils and lips. Several days later, looking at a series of police photos, I identified my attacker. I knew this was the man. I was completely confident. I was sure.

The composite sketch was one link in the chain that lead to Ronald Cotton's wrongful conviction.

The problem with the composite sketch is that, like the name implies, the perpetrator is constructed from a composite of features. The eyewitness either describes the perpetrator to a skilled artist or reconstructs the face jigsaw-like from a selection of facial features. This cuts against human psychology which supports the notion that it is easier to recognize a whole face.

The solution? As an article in Forensic magazine explains: "Two research groups in the UK independently stumbled upon similar solutions as to how to produce a better “facial composite” of a suspect in a more psychologically natural manner. Peter Hancock and Charlie Frowd at the University of Stirling, Scotland, have produced a system called EvoFIT while Chris Solomon at the University of Kent, England, has developed a similar system called EigenFIT." The science, briefly, involves Genetic Algorithms-the approach begins with a set of random solutions. The best solutions are selected and then “bred” together. As explained by EvoFIT:

EvoFIT begins by creating a set of faces (example screen) with random facial shapes and facial textures. A witness would normally select six of these shapes and textures that most resemble a suspect. These selections then become the “parents” of the next population; to produce another generation, the components of the selected faces are mixed together. The “offspring” faces are selected and bred together as before. The selections enable the set of faces to become more like the suspect. Evolution is completed when an acceptable likeness is found; the relevant image is then saved to disk as the composite.

Given that the software depends on the accuracy of the first faces chosen, Dr. Frowd admits that the genetic algorithm is also capable of producing serious errors:

One drawback of genetic algorithms generally, is that they can converge on the wrong solution if the initial population is poorly chosen. “This may happen,” Dr. Frowd admits, “but if it does, the system is rolled back and started again.”

That takes us back to where we began, the fallibility of a witness's memory...


Example of EigenFIT courtesy of eyeID.

Douglas County Marriage License Search

Is that good looking gal with the crazy look in her eye that you met at the bar last night married? Has she been married five times? Here is a great way to find out if you live in the greater Omaha, Nebraska area. Douglas County, Nebraska has a handy marriage license search form that goes back to 1988. Click here for more information.

Never Know Who is Listening...FBI Improperly Obtained Reporters' Phone Records

From the ACLU Website

NEW YORK – The FBI admitted late yesterday to improperly obtaining telephone records from New York Times and Washington Post reporters by issuing "emergency" records demands that allowed the agency to bypass even the extremely limited safeguards that ordinarily apply to national security letters (NSLs). The American Civil Liberties Union has successfully challenged the national security letter statute in federal court and says this breach confirms the inadequacy of safeguards on the FBI's intrusive surveillance powers.

The following can be attributed to Jameel Jaffer, Director of the ACLU National Security Project:

"The FBI's disclosure that its agents secretly sought and obtained the phone records of American newspaper reporters confirms once again that there are insufficient safeguards on the agency's use of national security letters and other intrusive surveillance tools. There aren't enough controls inside the agency, and there aren't enough checks from outside the agency. Especially dangerous is the FBI's power to impose gag orders on those ordered to disclose information. These gag orders, which are often unnecessary and almost always overbroad, invite abuse."

NSLs are secretly issued by the government to obtain access to personal customer records from Internet Service Providers, financial institutions and credit reporting agencies without prior court approval. In almost all cases, recipients of the NSLs are forbidden, or "gagged," from disclosing that they have received the letters. The ACLU has challenged this Patriot Act statute in federal court in two cases where the judges found the gags unconstitutional: one involving an Internet Service Provider (ISP); the second, a group of librarians. In the ISP case, the district court invalidated the entire NSL statute. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit is scheduled to hear oral arguments in the government's appeal of that case on August 27.

A third case, called Internet Archive v. Mukasey, involved an NSL served on a digital library. In April 2008, the FBI withdrew the NSL and the gag a part of the settlement of a legal challenge brought by the ACLU and the Electronic Frontier Foundation.

Since the Patriot Act was passed in 2001, relaxing restrictions on the FBI's use of the power, the number of NSLs issued has seen an astronomical increase, to nearly 200,000 between 2003 and 2006.

More information on NSLs is available at: http://www.aclu.org

Copyright [2008] American Civil Liberties Union
Reprinted with permission of the
American Civil Liberties Union http://www.aclu.org

New Study Shows “Catastrophic” Effect of Stress on Eyewitness Accuracy

From the Eyewitness Identification Reform Blog:

Researchers in London recently completed a new study examining the effects of high levels of stress on the ability of eyewitnesses to accurately identify a perpetrator. Drs. Tin Valentine and Jan Mesout of Goldsmiths, University of London, homed in specifically on the distinction between the low levels of stress, more akin to “heightened awareness,” and the more severe “cognitive anxiety” that most individuals experience when faced with an unexpected physical threat.

The new research further confirms earlier findings by social scientists examining the effects of stress levels approximating those experienced in a typical crime scenario: High levels of stress have a “catastrophic effect on the accuracy of eyewitness memory.” The findings were the same with respect to a witness’s ability to accurately describe a perpetrator — the higher the stress level, the more errors were recorded in descriptive details relating to the perpetrator.

Full Story Here.

Polk/Des Moines Assessor Property Listing - Home Owner Query

Are you curious about your next door neighbor? Do you wonder where WHO-TV's John Bachman stores all his hair product? Well ponder no more; this is a resource from the Polk County, Iowa Assessor's office to search for either address information or by last name to find out property details.

http://www.assess.co.polk.ia.us/web/inven/query/queryHome.html

GIS: A valuable search tool.

A geographic information system (GIS) integrates hardware, software, and data for capturing, managing, analyzing, and displaying all forms of geographically referenced information.

GIS allows us to view, understand, question, interpret, and visualize data in many ways that reveal relationships, patterns, and trends in the form of maps, globes, reports, and charts.  A great way for finding information out about a person or property.

Click here to visit the site.

Man Executed on Disproved Forensics

This is a follow up story to an earlier post we did from the Chicago Tribune.

Strapped to a gurney in Texas' death chamber earlier this year, just moments from his execution for setting a fire that killed his three daughters, Cameron Todd Willingham declared his innocence one last time.

"I am an innocent man, convicted of a crime I did not commit," Willingham said angrily. "I have been persecuted for 12 years for something I did not do."

While Texas authorities dismissed his protests, a Tribune investigation of his case shows that Willingham was prosecuted and convicted based primarily on arson theories that have since been repudiated by scientific advances. According to four fire experts consulted by the Tribune, the original investigation was flawed and it is even possible the fire was accidental.

Full story here.

Innocents in Prison

From The Atlantic:

As recently as 20 years ago, it was extraordinarily rare for a convicted prisoner to establish his or her innocence conclusively enough to get public attention. That changed with breakthroughs in DNA science.

The 205th DNA exoneration since 1989 was recorded earlier this month by the Innocence Project, a group of crack defense lawyers who have made such cases their mission. The exonerated prisoners—including 15 who had been sentenced to death—have been found innocent by courts, prosecutors, or governors based on post-conviction DNA testing.

But America has been too slow to appreciate that the DNA exonerations, and other evidence, suggest that many thousands of other wrongly convicted people are rotting in prisons and jails around the country. And our federal, state, and local governments and courts have done far too little to adopt proposed criminal justice reforms that could reduce the number of innocent people convicted while nailing more of the real criminals.

Full Story Here.

Guantanamo Diary

From NPR:

Guantanamo Bay. The images are indelible. The constitutional and political stakes — epic. The Supreme Court decided in June to give detainees their day in federal court. The trial of Osama bin Laden’s driver ended in a split verdict and short sentence. The alleged 9/11 mastermind is next.

We read all this in the papers, but our guest today knows Guantanamo up close. A young lawyer, she has worked as an interpreter for Afghan detainees. What she has found are human stories and travesties of justice like she’d never imagined. Instead of terrorists, goat herders, politicians, and reputable physicians with no way out.

Listen to the show here

Iowa Land Records

This is your primary source for information about recorded real estate documents in Iowa. iowalandrecords.org is the official statewide web site sponsored by elected county officials. Learn more about the information and services offered.

Click here for site.

26 Years = Zero

William Swift was released from a Michigan prison in May after serving 26 years for a crime he did not commit. The Innocence Project took Mr. Swift's case ten years ago. While DNA testing was not possible due to lost evidence, the Innocence Project was able to uncover substantial evidence that Mr. Swift did not commit the crime for which he was convicted and his conviction was vacated.

Mr. Swift was convicted, in part, on a faulty photo line-up: the victim of a 1982 Detroit rape picked eight men from hundreds of photos, saying the eight looked like the attacker...Mr. Swift’s photo was the eighth one she chose. He was the only one brought to the station for a line-up and the victim was told that the lineup would include the eighth man she picked. She later identified Mr. Swift as her perpetrator. The officer's concerns about the line-up were met with the officer's transfer off the case.

NPR recently conducted an interview with Mr. Swift addressing how he has gone about picking up the pieces since his wrongful conviction including the lack of resources or compensation available to a man who has wrongfully lost his liberty. 

Listen to NPR Story here.

Full Innocence Project Articles here.

Eyewitness ID:Part 1-Mistakes can be costly but Redemption is Priceless

Many of you familiar with Eyewitness identification issues are familiar with the following names-Jennifer Thompson, Ronald Cotton, and Bobby Poole. In 1984, Jennifer Thompson, a white woman, was sexually assaulted at knife-point in her college apartment by a black man. She attempted to memorize her attacker's face so that she would be better able to identify her attacker when the time came. Ms. Thompson was finally able to escape her attacker and reported the attack to police. Ms. Thompson assisted police in drawing a composite sketch and picked him out of a line-up. She later identified Ronald Cotton again in a courtroom, in not just one trial but two. In the second trial, a man named Bobby Poole, who was serving a sentence with Ronald Cotton, claimed that he had attacked Ms. Thompson; however, Ms. Thompson identified Mr. Cotton in the second trial and he was sentenced to two life sentences.

In 1995, eleven years after the original attack, Ms. Thompson learned from detectives that Ronald Cotton had been exonerated by DNA testing. Mr. Cotton was released from prison and Bobby Poole plead guilty to the rape of Ms. Thompson. Ms. Thompson-Canino (her married name) met with Mr. Cotton and has become an outspoken advocate for eyewitness identification reform. Ms. Thompson-Canino and Mr. Cotton have even teamed up and co-authored a book about how this dastardly mistake happened and how it can be avoided in the future.

As noted by the Innocence Project blog: Social science research has shown that eyewitness misidentifications are more likely to happen when the perpetrator and witness are of different racial backgrounds. And statistics on the 218 wrongful convictions overturned by DNA testing to date support the evidence. More than one-third of these wrongful convictions were caused by a cross-racial identification. Investigation of all aspects of an eyewitness, especially cross-racial identifications, is critical.

Look for the book by Ms. Thompson-Canino and Mr. Cotton early next year! Kudos to both of these individuals for their honesty in facing these trying circumstances and having the courage to share their personal experiences with the rest of us so we can learn from our collective mistakes about the reliability (or lack thereof) of eyewitness identifications.

Man Dies in Immigration Custody

Hiu Lui Ng came to New York from Hong Kong in 1992 as a seventeen year old: fifteen years later he was a computer engineer with a job in the Empire State Building, a house in Queens, a wife who is a United States citizen and two American-born sons. Last year when he went to apply for his final interview for a green card after overstaying a visa, Mr. Ng was detained at Immigration and Customs Enforcement where he has been in custody ever since. Last Wednesday, two days after his thirty-fourth birthday, he died. In April of this year, Mr. Ng began complaining of excruciating back pain...before he died he could not walk or stand. The New York Times noted: "Mr. Ng’s death follows a succession of cases that have drawn Congressional scrutiny to complaints of inadequate medical care, human rights violations and a lack of oversight in immigration detention..."

Full article here

Charges Against New Orleans Police Officers Dismissed

Murder and attempted murder charges against seven New Orleans police officers, accused of shooting unarmed civilians on the Danziger Bridge after Hurricane Katrina, were tossed out by Criminal District Court Judge Raymond Bigelow as the result of an Orleans Parish Prosecutor tainted the secrecy of the grand jury by showing testimony to another officer. The Judge also concluded that the Prosecutor gave immunity improperly to other officers who gave testimony to the grand jury. The shootings on September 4, 2005 left two men dead and four other people severely wounded. In separate civil lawsuits, survivors of the shootings claim that officers ambushed the civilians on the bridge and began shooting.

Full articles here and here.

ACLU Sues Denver on Behalf of Five Innocent Victims of "Mistaken Identity" Arrests

"On behalf of five clients, the ACLU of Colorado filed suit today against the City and County of Denver and various Denver law enforcement officers, charging that in each case, "recklessly sloppy police work" resulted in the innocent plaintiff's arrest and imprisonment—as long as 26 days in one case—for crimes with which they had no connection whatsoever."

Full Story Here

Guantanamo's Shadow

Quoted from The Atlantic:

The Atlantic recently asked a group of foreign policy authorities about the U.S. detention center at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

"Has the prison system at Guantanamo Bay helped or hurt the United States in its fight against al-Qaeda?

87% Hurt

“Nothing has hurt America’s image and standing in the world—and nothing has undermined the global effort to combat nihilistic terrorism—than the brutal torture and dehumanizing actions of Americans in Abu Ghraib and in other prisons (secret or otherwise). America can win the fight against terrorism only if it acts in ways consistent with the values for which it stands; if its behavior descends to the level employed by the terrorists, then we have all become them instead of us.”

“Gitmo has hurt the US in two different ways. At the strategic level, it has undercut the U.S. case around the world that we represent a world view and a set of values that all can admire, even those who do not wish to replicate our system and society in their own countries. Gitmo has become a symbol for cruelty and inhumanity that is repugnant to a wide sector of the world community and a powerful tool that al Qaeda can use to damage US interest and recruit others to its cause. At the tactical level, Gitmo deludes many in the US, an never more than the senior leaders of the Bush Administration, into believing that harsh interrogation techniques can produce good intelligence and is a necessary tool in fighting terrorist. This 'truth' spread from Gitmo to Iraq and we have paid a horrible price for it.”

13% Helped

“The main purposes of Gitmo detention are (1) to allow effective interrogation to provide intelligence for the war on terrorism and (2) to keep dangerous terrorism locked up. Gitmo has helped because it has achieved both purposes. The administration has not done a good job of explaining to the public what it was doing at Gitmo or why—and that has caused some unnecessary problems. But interrogating captured terrorists and keeping them detained and off the battlefield is undeniably important to our security.”

Neither

“The real answer is, both helped and hurt. In the year or two after 9/11, Gitmo was a reasonable response to what we faced—it helped. But it has gone on too long, the process of thinning the population down to the justifiable hard core has taken too long, and it has become an easy target for a world in which 9/11 is a fading memory—in that sense, it is now hurting.”

“This is a complex subject that makes answering question 1 very difficult. I would say that it has helped and hurt. It's helped in that we have gotten some good intelligence from the detainees. In addition, having them at one site enabled better protection for the detainees, consistency of care and processes, and provided focus for the International Red Cross."

Full Story Here

To Subscribe to the Atlantic Magazine click here.

Chapman Denied Parole

I saw the news today on TalkLeft.com...Mark David Chapman, the killer of John Lennon, was denied parole today. The possibly schizophrenic killer was denied parole for the fifth time. He has been in prison for almost thirty years. While opinions differ on whether Mr. Chapman should be released or not, most can agree that the situation is tragic all the way around.

Most Excellent Eyewitness Identification Resources

The Innocence Project notes that in the Project's two-hundred plus exonerations, seventy-five percent are attributable to false eyewitness IDs.

When one is investigating an eyewitness case, it is imperative to carefully investigate every aspect of the case including looking at any line-up or show-up procedures used by the police. It is also important to inform oneself of the psychology of identification and, more critically, the psychology of what leads to a false identification.

Luckily, there are plenty of resources out there to assist the criminal investigator in familiarizing him/herself with the science, the proper police procedures, motions to suppress suggestive identifications, and experts available to assist in an eyewitness identification.

One such most excellent research resource is EyeID.org. EyeID.org is a collaborative effort that arose out of the Eyewitness Identification Reform Litigation Network, a joint effort of the Innocence Project, the National Legal Aid & Defender Association, the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, and the Public Defender Service for the District of Columbia.

EyeID.Org is a comprehensive resource for defense attorneys to assist in the litigation of ID cases, providing a frequently updated repository of trial pleadings, expert transcripts and affidavits, research articles, documentation on police procedures, legislative reform materials, training materials, and other resources compiled to support either litigation or legislative reform efforts in the area of eyewitness identification.

You can sign up for free in the member area after certifying that you work in the criminal defense field. There is even a blog(!) that contains ongoing studies, research, and breaking news in the field of eyewitness identifications.

Wireless Awareness

From the Washington Post.com:

"iPhones and other mobile devices with wireless access were among the top contributors to this year's "Wall of Sheep," a public shaming exercise debuting at the Black Hat security conference in Las Vegas this week that aims to educate people about the dangers of sending e-mail and other online communications over open wireless networks.

Conference organizers issued a clear warning to attendees: If you check your e-mail or communicate using the ubiquitous conference wireless network, be sure to do so over an encrypted connection (https:// versus http://). Otherwise, your credentials will be projected onto a wall where everyone will ridicule your seeming inability to grasp a fundamental tenet of online security. "

Full Story Here

Fabulous Confabulation

My co-contributor and I just got back from the "All Star Western Conference and Confabulation" put on by Federal Defender Services of Idaho in Boise this weekend. The conference featured speakers on topics including false confessions, eyewitness identification, technology in the courtroom, and a capital update. In short, it gave us plenty of information to share to assist investigators in making the most of the knowledge and resources out there. As a good conference always is, we came back refreshed, renewed and re-inspired.

Look for a series of postings over the next couple of weeks on eyewitness identification, false confessions, and one of our favorite topics, technology for investigators as well as Guantanamo updates, immigration developments, and other things important to federal criminal defense investigation.

Guantanamo Update-Salim Hamdan Sentenced to 66 Months

Salim Hamdan, Osama Bin Laden's driver, was sentenced this week to 66 months in prison for providing material support to terrorism. Since cameras are not permitted in the military tribunals, the sketch to the left, drawn by Janet Hamlim, shows Mr. Hamdan with his legal team. He was acquitted of the more serious charge of conspiracy. Hamdan was sentenced to 66 months by the same 6 person military jury to hear his case at "Camp Justice" in Guantanamo Bay this week. The trial was the first test of a war crimes tribunal authorized by the Bush administration to try non-U.S. captives on terrorism charges outside the regular civilian and military courts. Prosecutors asked for a life sentence and asked for the jury to make an example of Mr. Hamdan. Clearly, Jurors chose to make Mr. Hamdan another kind of example.

Salim Hamdan was captured in November of 2001 by members of the Afghan Northern Alliance and then turned over to U.S. forces. He was kept in isolation and subjected to coercive interrogation techniques. He was sent to the U.S. military prison camp at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba in 2002 where a legal debate ensued about whether Mr. Hamdan was a prisoner of war and thus entitled to the protections of the Geneva Convention or could be tried by a military commission as an enemy combatant.

In 2006, Mr. Hamdan's case went to the United States Supreme Court in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld when the Court found that the military commission had violated the Uniform Code of Military Justice as well as the Geneva Convention. In response to the US Supreme Court ruling, Congress passed the Military Commissions Act designed to overcome the Supreme Court's objections to the military commission. After the military commission dropped charges against Mr. Hamdan in 2007 on the grounds that he was not designated an "unlawful" enemy combatant, the head of the military commission system decided that he was an "illegal enemy combatant" which allowed this trial to proceed.

With credit for the time he has already served in Guantanamo, Mr. Hamdan should have less than five months remaining on his sentence. Kudos to Neil Katyal, the Georgetown Professor who has handled Mr. Hamdan's case through the Supreme Court and the military trial. Professor Katyal gave an interview with NPR about what happens next...

DNA Training

Reading Public Defender Dude, I came across a great post on DNA and an upcoming DNA Seminar. Put on by Forensic Bioinformatics, the seminar is entitled, "The Science of DNA Profiling" and is in Daytona, Florida from August 15-17, 2008. The seminar is designed for attorneys and experts familiar with DNA profiling to exchange information and insights. For those new to DNA, it will be an opportunity to learn what issues may be important in litigating a federal case and what experts and resources are best suited to particular cases. The seminar will cover key subjects in forensic DNA including evidence collection, laboratory procedures, transfer, identification, technical artifacts and error, juror comprehension, expert witness selection and due diligence.

The seminar looks to be geared to the DNA novice and expert alike, and it looks like there is plenty of interesting information for attorneys and investigators.

eBay/Paypal Subpoena Information

Submit a subpoena, court order, or other legal process stating specifically what is required.

eBay/Paypal can provide:

- Full eBay Contact Details, including the billing and mailing address
- eBay IP addresses: time of registration and at time of item listing
- Complete Listing and/or bid history – 2 yr max (including bidder information if specifically requested)
- Credit card and checking account information added to eBay account (if available)

To assist us in searching for records, the following data must be included in the data request (if available):

- Full name of the subject, and any known aliases
- All known addresses, including email addresses, and phone numbers
- Known eBay ID(s) and Item Numbers

**If you require the related PayPal records, please address the Subpoena to EBAY AND PAYPAL and include all available PayPal details including:

- Full name of the subject, and any known aliases, and known email addresses
- All known financial instruments and any transaction details linked to the relevant PayPal activity

Fax subpoena to: 408.967.9915

Turnaround Time: Typically within 10 business days.

Facebook Subpoena Information

If it is necessary that information on Facebook site be preserved, a preservation order is required by mail or fax to the following address:

Facebook
151 University Avenue
Palo Alto, CA 94301
Attn: Security Department

Fax Number (650) 644-3229

Provide as much of the following information as possible to expedite the request:
- Full contact information (name, physical address, phone and email):
- Response date due (please allow 2-4 weeks for processing):
- Full name of user(s):
- Full URL to Facebook profile:
- School/networks:
- Birth date:
- Known email addresses:
- IM account ID:
- Phone numbers:
- Address:
- Period of activity (specific dates will most likely expedite your request).

Be sure that the contact information is valid, so that Facebook can contact the requestor with updates on the request status.

Although providing this information will enable Facebook to identify the account in question so that Facebook can preserve available information, Facebook will also need a valid subpoena or other court order in order to provide this information to the requestor. This subpoena or court order should be mailed or faxed to the above address.

Civil Matters:

For information being requested in a civil matter, a valid California or New York subpoena is required.

Thoughtcrime takes a step back

In an important decision out of the Seventh Circuit last week, "substantial step" was defined as more that just speech. In an opinion authored by Judge Posner, the Seventh Circuit overturned the conviction of a thirty-five year old man who solicited what he thought was a fourteen year old girl that turned out to be a federal agent. (See United States v. Gladish) Here is a highlight of the opinion, as quoted by Professor Berman's most awesome, Sentencing Law and Policy Blog

Although unrelated to sentencing, yesterday’s decision by Judge Richard Posner includes a noteworthy (and literary) discussion of what is required to convict an individual of criminal attempt...In classic Posner prose:

You are not punished just for saying that you want or even intend to kill someone, because most such talk doesn’t lead to action. You have to do something that makes it reasonably clear that had you not been interrupted or made a mistake—for example, the person you thought you were shooting was actually a clothier’s manikin—you would have completed the crime. That something marks you as genuinely dangerous—a doer and not just one of the ‘hollow men’ of T. S. Eliot’s poem, incapacitated from action because

Between the conception
And the creation
Between the emotion
And the response
Falls the Shadow

And later on in the opinion:

Treating speech (even obscene speech) as the ‘substantial step’ would abolish any requirement of a substantial step. It would imply that if X says to Y, ‘I’m planning to rob a bank,’ X has committed the crime of attempted bank robbery, even though X says such things often and never acts. The requirement of proving a substantial step serves to distinguish people who pose real threats from those who are all hot air; in the case of Gladish, hot air is all the record shows.

When working on an investigation, more than just talk is required for the government to establish a substantial step in a criminal attempt.

Criminal Background Checks in a flash

Browsing Capital Defense Weekly, I found a great link to a new site for criminal background checks, criminalsearches.com. The site has a search window and one can search for criminal history records by name and state, criminal statistics, and updates. The criminal history records section appeared pretty reliable in the test cases I ran and contained a volume of information including date of birth, type(s) of charges, case number(s), and year of charges. For a fee, one can order a more comprehensive report. The disclaimer on the website states that the information is what is available as public records and may not be accurate. In a pinch, it seems like an option for a quick and free criminal history check.

Sniffing out the Truth

Whenever you find yourself with a drug case that involves a drug detection dog, it is important to determine whether the search happened lawfully and whether the dog was qualified. While working on a case recently, I discovered a great website by Terry Fleck, Narcotic Canine Legal Update and Opinions. The site contains basic search and seizure rules, canine training basics, information on reliability and certifications, the different kinds of dog detections, and best of all, a case law list by circuit. It is supposedly for "law enforcement" only, which makes it even better!

In 2005, the US Supreme Court decided Illinois v. Caballes, which held that a dog sniff during a lawful traffic stop does not violate the Fourth Amendment. The Supreme Court declined to extend this rule to a situation where there is a delay or detention for the dog to arrive. This opinion has been used to expand the use of drug dog detections all over the country to expand the ability of law enforcement to search where they would otherwise not have probable cause. Justice Ginsburg, in her dissent, warns, "Today's decision, in contrast, clears the way for suspicionless, dog-accompanied drug sweeps of parked cars along sidewalks and in parking lots."


When one looks at the history of dog detection, a disturbing history begins to emerge. While dogs have been used for centuries, in modern times, the Nazis popularized the use of German shepherds mainly in concentration camps. (For an interesting history of search dogs, click here). More recently, dog searches have become a popular tool by law enforcement in the "war on drugs". Additionally, the US military has used dogs at Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo to harass and frighten detainees. Unfortunately, these uses can definitely go too far as the video below demonstrates. When you have a search involving a dog, definitely look at the case law and consider getting an expert to look over the qualification of both dog and dog handler.