Tuesday, June 30, 2009

DEA Speaks Out Against Legalization


Executive Branch or Legislative? You decide after reading the DEA Publication, "Speaking Out Against Drug Legalization". This 2003 publication is available on-line. An excerpt:

The Legalization Lobby claims that the “European Model” of the drug problem is successful. However, since legalization of marijuana in Holland, heroin addiction levels have tripled. And Needle Park seems like a poor model for America.


or

The Legalization Lobby claims that America’s prisons are filling up with users. Truth is, only about 5 percent of inmates in federal prison are there because of simple possession. Most drug criminals are in jail—even on possession charges—because they have plea-bargained down from major trafficking offences or more violent drug crimes.


An interesting read.

Border Security and Pot Filled Magazines: What do these things have in common?

Yup; you guessed it. Customs and Border Patrol. While looking at their news alerts section, I noticed both this section on Congressional Testimony on Border Security and this section on an elderly lady that allegedly stashed marijuana in the pages of Der Spiegel, a German magazine. What do the two have in common? The website did not provide insight into the connection.

Handy Federal Contact List

Look no further than your local United States Attorney's Office to find listings for all Federal Agencies. Next time you need to contact ATF via internet, no problem.

Friday, June 26, 2009

Former Revolutionary Guard Member: 'Military Coup' Underway In Iran

NPR - One of the founders of Iran's Revolutionary Guard, who's also a former deputy prime minister, tells Weekend Edition's Scott Simon that what amounts to a "military coup" has occurred in his country. And he claims authorities know the election was rigged.

According to Mohsen Sazegara:

Right after the election, 11 o'clock at night, was a military coup because they went to (presidential candidate Mir Hossein) Mousavi's headquarters -- five persons from the Revolutionary Guard -- and told him that, 'Yes, the leader says that this is true, you have won the election, you are the elected president, but you can't be the president. (Mahmoud) Ahmadinejad should remain in the position.'
"And then they started to invent those fake numbers in Ministry of Interior. And right after that they started to arrest the people, to disconnect the country, to dismiss the reporters, and that is the reason that we call it a military coup."

Full report here.

Pirate of the Caribbean

From Vanity Fair:

With little more than laserlike ambition and a brash Texas charm, Allen Stanford built an $8 billion Caribbean banking empire, exposed in February as perhaps the second-largest Ponzi scheme (after Madoff’s) in history. How did a bankrupt Waco health-club owner vault onto the Forbes Four Hundred, while the S.E.C., the F.B.I., and others mounted investigation after investigation of his shadowy business? From Stanford Financial’s Antiguan headquarters, the author follows Stanford’s improbable trail, complete with multiple families, a moated Miami mansion, and a passion for cricket.

In 2006, a Miami attorney named Milton M. Ferrell Jr. boarded a private plane bound for the Caribbean island of Antigua. Ferrell had a meeting there with the country’s top private banker, R. Allen Stanford, a muscular, boisterous Texan billionaire whose $8 billion Stanford Financial Group had grown so profitable he had attained the No. 205 spot on the Forbes Four Hundred. Ferrell represented a number of wealthy Latin Americans, and Stanford had invited him for a tour of his Antiguan bank, hoping to attract money from Ferrell’s clients.

With Ferrell that day was a security consultant I’ll call Trevor, an expert on the shadowy world of Caribbean banking. Trevor had heard the rumors about Stanford Financial—the suspiciously high returns on its certificates of deposit, the money-laundering investigations—but wanted to see Stanford’s offices up close. Stanford himself—six feet four, with a mustache, close-cropped brown hair, wide-set eyes, and a crushing handshake—was waiting at his hangar when they landed. After a tour of the adjacent complex some called Stanfordville, which included three bank buildings, a vast cricket field, and a restaurant called the Sticky Wicket, Stanford ushered the men into his crown jewel, Stanford International Bank, an imposing structure that resembled a columned mansion, overlooking the airport. Inside, the company’s gold-eagle logo was everywhere—on doors, walls, coffee mugs, and lapel pins. It even appeared, it was whispered, on the toilet seats.

“The first thing Allen says is how they use all these sophisticated financial techniques to get such good returns on these C.D.’s, which consistently didn’t make sense to me,” Trevor recalls today. “So I said, ‘Can I see your trading desk? Is it in London, New York?’ Allen says, ‘No, we do it right here in Antigua.’ So he takes us into this room with a big desk, full of computers. There’s a bunch of 300-pound Antiguan women in there, you know, like these women who sell fruit in the market. Milton and I looked at each other like, ‘No way.’”

At that point, Trevor asked to meet the bank’s compliance officer, the executive tasked with making sure the firm’s trades conformed to securities regulations. “So Allen takes us back to a corner of this room,” Trevor goes on. “And I swear, the door was creaking on its hinges, and out comes this 70-year-old guy who clearly had nothing to do with banking. I mean, he looked like a janitor. Milton and I, we said to ourselves, This is just a giant Ponzi scheme. Clearly this outfit doesn’t have the facilities to support this kind of business.”

They were right: it didn’t—though it took an awfully long time for American authorities to realize it. On February 17, 2009, after years of rumor and several weeks of intense investigation, U.S. marshals raided Stanford Financial’s Houston headquarters. Even as camera crews filmed them toting out boxes of paperwork, the Securities and Exchange Commission filed a suit charging Stanford and his two top aides with fraud, freezing all of Stanford Financial’s assets and shutting down a financial empire that catered to 30,000 customers in 131 countries, though the bulk of its business was in Latin America. The company, the S.E.C. charged, was in fact little more than an $8 billion Ponzi scheme—the second largest of the era, it appears, after Bernard Madoff’s. Billions of dollars in deposits, the agency alleged, were simply missing. Nine days later Stanford’s chief investment officer, Laura Pendergest-Holt, was arrested for lying to the S.E.C. (Stanford and Pendergest-Holt deny any wrongdoing.)

Full article can be found here.

You Read What About Me on the Internet?!: Anonymous Online Libel

From The Legality.com:

The internet is the Wild West of free-flowing information-few rules apply and everyone is trying to stake their claim. To many, the internet is the quintessence of free speech and the First Amendment. Others worry that this free expression-shielded by user names and faceless aliases-allows otherwise respectful people to unabashedly malign their colleagues. This mix of free speech and anonymity is potentially explosive, as has recently been the case with several message-board sites.

Several years ago, two female Yale Law students named Brittan Heller and Heide Iravani found shocking posts on AutoAdmit.com, the self-proclaimed “most prestigious law-school discussion board in the world.” The postings alleged that the women had sexually transmitted diseases and had used bribery and sex to advance in law school. These allegations were damaging to these women, who understood that many legal employers use Google as a means of performing a background check. After being rejected from all positions for which she applied, one of the women asked AutoAdmit.com to take down the posts. When they repeatedly refused, the two women teamed up and sought legal redress. In August 2007, Heller and Iravani brought suit against dozens of their online tormenters in a New Haven federal court. The women sought monetary damages, but ultimately the suit was an effort to clear their names and protect their legal careers. Yet they also sent a message to others: you will be held accountable for what you write online.

The women brought suit under the claim of libel. Libel, a subcategory of defamation, is a derogatory statement made in a printed or fixed medium, such as a magazine or newspaper. The elements of a libel cause of action include: a false and defamatory statement concerning another; the unprivileged publication of the statement to a third party (that is, somebody other than the person defamed by the statement); and damage to the plaintiff. Material that is factually accurate is not libel. Also, context matters: courts have held that given the nature of online forums, online comments cannot be taken as seriously as those made in real life or in the media. Because of these requirements, bringing a claim for internet libel is a challenge.

AutoAdmit.com was created as an alternative to the Princeton Review’s website for candidates seeking admission to law school. While the Princeton Review monitored and removed problematic content from their site, AutoAdmit.com’s founder, Jarret Cohen, and his assistant Anthony Ciolli advertised that, “no thread, ever, would get vaporized by the thought police.” True to their word, Mr. Cohen and his assistants rarely removed threads, even when expressly asked to do so.

Websites such as AutoAdmit.com or Abovethelaw.com provide a forum for comments on essentially any topic imaginable. Hidden behind the shield of a screen name, users of these sites are emboldened to post without fear of backlash or accountability. Other websites actually encourage libelous and defamatory content from users. Proponents of free speech on the internet argue that the internet is a unique medium-the modern town square for the free exchange of ideas.

Regardless of their form, what all of these sites have in common is that they are merely intermediaries; they do not generate the content that they broadcast. Many of them do not monitor posts and even fewer are likely to take down libelous content on their own. For sites that will remove content when asked, the libeled party often learns about the material after it is too late and the comments have already created harm.

Full article can be found here.

Thursday, June 25, 2009

Sixth Amendment Requires Cross-Examination of Forensic Lab Witness

The United States Supreme Court announced a decision today in MELENDEZ-DIAZ v. MASSACHUSETTS on the Sixth Amendment Right to cross-examine witnesses. The case involves a drug case brought by the State of Massachusetts in which the State introduced a lab certificate stating that the material seized by the police was in fact cocaine as well as the quality and quantity seized. Melendez-Diaz argued that the introduction of the lab certificate violated the Sixth Amendment and Crawford v. Washington because Melendez-Diaz has a right to cross-examine the lab witness as to process and findings.

The Supreme Court ruled that in fact the lab certificate, even though notarized, was testimonial as it was prepared in anticipation of litigation and that Melendez-Diaz has a right to cross-examine the lab witness. The Court further stated:

Petitioner's power to subpoena the analysts is no substitute for the right of confrontation. Finally, the requirements of the Confrontation Clause may not be relaxed because they make the prosecution's task burdensome. In any event, the practice in many States already accords with today's decision, and the serious disruption predicted by respondent and the dissent has not materialized.


The opinion also quotes from the recent National Academy of Sciences report regarding the not always reliable scientific testing that results from forensic labs:

Nor is it evident that what respondent calls "neutral scientific testing" is as neutral or as reliable as respondent suggests. Forensic evidence is not uniquely immune from the risk of manipulation. According to a recent study conducted under the auspices of the National Academy of Sciences, "[t]he majority of [laboratories producing forensic evidence] are administered by law enforcement agencies, such as police departments, where the laboratory administrator reports to the head of the agency." National Research Council of the National Academies, Strengthening Forensic Science in the United States: A Path Forward 6-1 (Prepublication Copy Feb. 2009) (hereinafter National Academy Report). And "[b]ecause forensic scientists often are driven in their work by a need to answer a particular question related to the issues of a particular case, they sometimes face pressure to sacrifice appropriate methodology for the sake of expediency." Id., at S-17. A forensic analyst responding to a request from a law enforcement official may feel pressure--or have an incentive--to alter the evidence in a manner favorable to the prosecution.


Remember to look critically at any evidence (business records, certificates, or any written document) that the Government wants to introduce in lieu of live testimony especially if prepared after the incident. Also, challenges to forensic evidence is more viable than ever given the mention in the Supreme Court opinion and based upon the wealth of information available from the National Academy of Sciences report.
Congratulations to Jeffrey Fisher of the Stanford Law Clinic for this important decision reaffirming the importance of cross-examination!

Officer Faces Two Charges in Zehm Beating

Google Voice

From Google.com:
See how Google Voice works with your phones
One number for all your calls and SMS
Call screening - Announce and screen callers
Listen in - Listen before taking a call
Block calls - Keep unwanted callers at bay
SMS - Send, receive, and store SMS
Place calls - Call US numbers for free
Taking calls - Answer on any of your phones
Phone routing - Phones ring based on who calls
Forwarding phones - Add phones and decide which ring

Voicemail as easy as email, with transcripts
Voicemail transcripts - Read what your voicemail says
Listen to voicemail - Check online or from your phone
Notifications - Receive voicemails via email or SMS
Personalize greeting - Vary greetings by caller
Share voicemail - Forward or download voicemails

More cool things you can do with Google Voice
Conference calling - Join people into a single call
Call record - Record calls and store them online
Call switch - Switch phones during a call
Mobile site - View your inbox from your mobile
GOOG-411 - Check directory assistance
Manage groups - Set preferences by group



Google has reserved about one million numbers with Level 3 Communications, who've been supplying numbers to Google ever since Google Voice's inception. Launched back in March, Google Voice is a free service available only for GrandCentral users. Google Voice will use technology for "converting" voicemail into text mail which can be read or heard later.

Through this service, Google aims to make voice communication including telephony, more easily manageable by the users. Under this service a single Google Voice number would be used for routing home, office and other numbers - available only in U.S.

Apart from that, this service includes number of other options like calling U.S. based numbers for free, conference calling, switching between phones during a call, read the voice mail transcripts and several other features. Read more about the respective features here.

Google Voice was speculated to go public last weekend. However, the company is assumed to test the service properly with closed user group before making it public. It won't be surprising if Google gives first preference to Android-based phone owners for the Google Voice service or uses a specific sign-up system.

Those worried about revealing single number to unwanted parties can conceal the details while calling. Whenever the Google Voice service goes live, it's going to mad rush as well as confusions about number portability - using carrier provided cellphone number as Google Voice number. But this will increase the cost of number distribution by users amongst family, friends, clientele and official contacts.

Can this be treated as one step closer to its public launch? We'll have to wait for the search engine giant to officially roll out this service for general public. Interested users can leave their email address on the Google Voice Invite page to be notified for Google Voice sign up whenever it opens for public.

More at Techtree.com

Iran: Human Rights - 30th Anniversary of the Islamic Revolution

Video by Amnesty International made just prior to the election that provides some background into Human Rights in Iran.

Spokane Police Officer Indicted in Case of Death of Innocent Man


After nearly two years of deliberations, a federal grand jury in Spokane, Washington, indicted Spokane Police office Karl Thompson on two felony charges in connection with the March 18, 2006, violent encounter that resulted in the death of Otto Zehm, a 36-year-old janitor that suffered from mental illness. Zehm died after being beaten with a baton, tazed, and hogtied with a mask placed over his face. Turns out, Mr. Zehm had not even committed a crime. Otto Zehm stopped breathing after restrained by Police and died. The Center for Justice, a non-profit Spokane law firm, has a collection of news and video content regarding the case including the Indictment, information on the civil lawsuit pending, and other information. Both the civil and criminal cases will be worth watching on the topic of police accountability.

Wednesday, June 24, 2009

Permission Wall Graffiti: Embracing Graffiti As Art


Murals of Belfast
Great Post from Grits for Breakfast about having graffiti in public spaces. An excerpt:
By having "permission walls", the artists are able to develop their craft without time and/or legal constraints, allowing for more complete, intricate pieces of public art. In Orlando, the trend of giving street artists “permission walls,” or walls where they have permission to paint their work, has tamed some of the sabotage. By allowing graffiti artists to work with permission, they are free to develop their craft without fear of getting caught before completion, and the artwork becomes a colorful, mural-sized effort to which the artists can point with pride. These permission walls encourage friendly competition between teams, or crews, and there is a sense of pride among them for having created something with great exposure.

Attorney General Eric Holder: Rethinking Federal Sentencing Policy

Today, Attorney General Holder spoke at the Charles Hamilton Houston Institute for Race and Justice and Congressional Black Caucus Symposium. His speech, “Rethinking Federal Sentencing Policy 25th Anniversary of the Sentencing Reform Act” talked of reform:
The current federal sentencing system continues to be a target for criticism from judges, academics, and attorneys across our nation. These criticisms range from concerns about mandatory minimums to the use of acquitted conduct in sentencing decisions. Accordingly, a thorough review of federal sentencing and corrections policies, with an eye toward possible reform, is welcome and necessary.

AG Holder also announced the Department of Justice is conducting an internal review:
At the same time, the Department of Justice has begun its own internal review of sentencing and corrections policy:
I have asked members of the DOJ community – both in Washington, DC and in the U.S. Attorneys Offices around the country – to participate in the Sentencing and Corrections Working Group which is chaired by the Deputy Attorney General. Our review will consider:
· the structure of federal sentencing, including the role of mandatory minimums;
· the Department’s own charging and sentencing policies;
· alternatives to incarceration and re-entry;
· eliminating the sentencing disparity between crack and powder cocaine; and
· an examination of other unwarranted disparities in federal sentencing.

Sounds like a step in the right direction.

Tuesday, June 23, 2009

Client in Court Makes a Run For It - What Would You Do?

From our friends over at Arbitrary & Capricious:

"From the Spokesman-Review:

Municipal court brawl leads to arrest

A brawl that began when a man tried fleeing a courtroom this morning ended with the man, a deputy and three attorneys falling onto a bench of bystanders, according to the Spokane County Sheriff’s Office.

Micah W. Hasselstrom, 34, ran when Spokane Municipal Court Judge Tracy Staab ordered him jailed with increased bail after he said he didn’t plan on appearing in court again, a news release said.

Hasselstrom’s public defender, Tony Tompkins, grabbed his leg to hold him in place as Deputy John Pederson tried handcuffing him, and a struggle ensued... Public defenders Francis Adewale and Andy Hess joined the struggle, and the group fell onto the bench, knocking a 68-year-old woman to the floor...

There's a lively discussion taking place in the Washington criminal defense bar over the lawyers' actions in essentially effecting an arrest, roughly dividing into "respect the client - let him be free to make his own mistakes" and "protect the client - let him be free at least from a new felony escape charge." Myself, I think I'd go hands-off, but not having been in a moment like that, I'm hard-pressed to second-guess. "

The Impact of Arizona v. Gant

From the bloggers over at the Federal Defenders of Eastern Washinton and Idaho:

"As previously noted on this blog, the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Arizona v. Gant, 129 S.Ct. 1710 (2009) reins in police officers’ ability to search vehicles incident to arrest, holding that a search incident to arrest is only permissible if the arrestee is within reaching distance of the car at the time of the search or if there is reason to believe that evidence of the arrest will be found in the automobile.

Several cases within this district have been impacted by Gant. The most dramatic involved the following scenario: a patrol officer, running license plate numbers, discovers that a registered owner has outstanding warrants for felony escape and misdemeanor driving with a suspended license. The officer retrieves a booking photograph of the registered owner but leaves the scene after failing to spot that person in the area of the parked vehicle. A short while later, the officer returns and observes the registered owner exiting that same vehicle and beginning to walk back towards a residence, whereupon the officer approaches, arrests him for the outstanding warrants, and places him in the back of the squad car. Incident to the arrest, the officer searches the vehicle and discovers a firearm. The defendant is subsequently charged with being a felon in possession of a firearm (18 U.S.C. Section 922(g)(1)).

A motion to suppress was filed on April 20, 2009, arguing that the search was impermissible on grounds that neither officer safety nor preservation of evidence were at issue, thus placing that search outside of any exception of the warrant requirement. Gant was decided the next day. The government immediately responded by filing a short memorandum, agreeing to suppression.

Other cases in this district that have been impacted include two petitions for certiorari, which were granted, vacated and remanded in light of Gant, and another presently before the Ninth Circuit in which Judge Whaley has ordered the defendant’s release pending appeal, given the likelihood of his conviction being overturned.

These instances confirm the value of spotting and preserving issues on behalf of our clients. Even when current case law appears unsupportive, the law only changes when diligent attorneys chip away in the district courts and preserve issues for appeal."

Certified Washington Court Records Available On-Line

The State of Washington has a new web site (here), linking certified court records by county. There is a fee, not all counties are on line yet, and older records aren’t available. But practitioners should make use of this resource, as it is an easy way to make sure that the information in a PSR is correct.

Immigration Agents to Get Expanded Powers

From the New York Times:

In an expansion of its crackdown on drug cartels, the Obama administration plans to announce Thursday that it will give Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents the authority to investigate drug crimes. Justice Department officials refused to divulge details of their plans, saying they did not want to pre-empt the news conference. But officials familiar with the plan said it would settle a long-running turf battle between the immigration agency and the Drug Enforcement Administration that has seriously undermined the efforts of both. The decision came amid drug-related violence that left more than 6,000 people dead in Mexico last year. Senator Charles E. Schumer, Democrat of New York, called the Justice Department’s decision “welcome news,” saying, “The cartels that smuggle drugs and illegal immigrants have integrated their activities, and now the federal agencies will have a better integrated response.”

Monday, June 22, 2009

Spokane Police Officer Karl Thompson on Administrative Leave

The US Attorney’s Office announced this afternoon that the Federal Grand Jury has indicted Karl Thompson on Civil Rights violations of excessive force and making false statements during an investigation.

"I believe in seeking the truth and trust our criminal justice system to do just that," said Chief Kirkpatrick. 

Due to policy and procedure, Ofc. Thompson has been placed on temporary paid administrative leave. The next stage is governed by a city policy which requires the City Administrator to determine Ofc. Thompson’s status pending the outcome of the criminal trial.

Friday, June 19, 2009

Mayhem in Spokane Municipal

Mayhem in Spokane Municipal Court yesterday. Check out this story from Arbitrary and Capricious on a brawl that began when a man tried fleeing a courtroom this morning ended with the man, a deputy and three attorneys falling onto a bench of bystanders, according to the Spokane County Sheriff’s Office.

Wednesday, June 17, 2009

Iran's Protests: Why Twitter Is the Medium of the Movement

The U.S. State Department doesn't usually take an interest in the maintenance schedules of dotcom start-ups. But over the weekend, officials there reached out to Twitter and asked them to delay a network upgrade that was scheduled for Monday night. The reason? To protect the interests of Iranians using the service to protest the presidential election that took place on June 12. Twitter moved the upgrade to 2 p.m. P.T. Tuesday afternoon — or 1:30 a.m. Tehran time.

When Jack Dorsey, Evan Williams and Biz Stone founded Twitter in 2006, they were probably worried about things like making money and protecting people's privacy and drunk college kids breaking up with one another in 140 characters or less. What they weren't worried about was being suppressed by the Iranian government. But in the networked, surreally flattened world of social media, those things aren't as far apart as they used to be — and what began as a toy for online flirtation is suddenly being put to much more serious uses. After the election in Iran, cries of protest from supporters of opposition candidate Mir-Hossein Mousavi arose in all possible media, but the loudest cries were heard in a medium that didn't even exist the last time Iran had an election.

So what exactly makes Twitter the medium of the moment? It's free, highly mobile, very personal and very quick. It's also built to spread, and fast. Twitterers like to append notes called hashtags — #theylooklikethis — to their tweets, so that they can be grouped and searched for by topic; especially interesting or urgent tweets tend to get picked up and retransmitted by other Twitterers, a practice known as retweeting, or just RT. And Twitter is promiscuous by nature: tweets go out over two networks, the Internet and SMS, the network that cell phones use for text messages, and they can be received and read on practically anything with a screen and a network connection.

This makes Twitter practically ideal for a mass protest movement, both very easy for the average citizen to use and very hard for any central authority to control. The same might be true of e-mail and Facebook, but those media aren't public. They don't broadcast, as Twitter does. On June 13, when protests started to escalate, and the Iranian government moved to suppress dissent both on- and off-line, the Twitterverse exploded with tweets from people who weren't having it, both in English and in Farsi. While the front pages of Iranian newspapers were full of blank space where censors had whited-out news stories, Twitter was delivering information from street level, in real time:

Woman says ppl knocking on her door 2 AM saying they were intelligence agents, took her daughter

Ashora platoons now moving from valiasr toward National Tv staion. mousavi's supporters are already there. my father is out there!

we hear 1dead in shiraz, livefire used in other cities RT

Full article at Time can be found here.

Tuesday, June 16, 2009

Final Appeal Made in Troy Davis Case

(FinalCall.com) - Georgia Death Row inmate Troy Davis' 30-day stay of execution has expired and his defense team has filed a final appeal requesting that the U.S. Supreme Court send his case back to a lower court to allow a judge to review recanted testimonies by several critical witnesses who testified for the state in 1991.

If the Supreme Court rejects this appeal, a new execution date could be set in the months to come.

“Troy is in good spirits although he is worried about what his family is going through. He told me to keep on fighting so that is what we will do,” said Martina Correia, his sister, to The Final Call.

“He has not lost faith and we are continuing to press forward to expose this corrupted judicial system in Georgia. He and (we) all of us thank newspapers like The Final Call for continuing to print the truth about his case,” she said.

Ms. Correia and supporters are encouraging citizens to write their state officials to request a new trial for her brother. Letters are being fired off to President Obama and U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder asking them to “investigate the judicial misconduct that has taken place in this case. We need them to intervene,” she said.

The final appeal on Mr. Davis' behalf was filed on May 19 and one day later 27 former judges, prosecutors, and justices signed and filed a friend-of-the-court brief requesting that the Supreme Court allow Mr. Davis' claims of innocence be presented.

“To allow Davis' execution without appropriate legal review is a plain constitutional injustice,” the filing said.

Among those signing the supporting brief were former Deputy U.S. Attorney General Larry Thompson; nine former U.S. attorneys; two former state Supreme Court chief justices; former state attorneys general from Florida and New Jersey; and three former judges from the federal appeals court in Philadelphia.

“This filing is major because it is mostly conservatives speaking out against this injustice,” said Ms. Correia. “The world is watching and looking at who is backing my brother.”

Witnesses claimed Mr. Davis, who was then 19-years-old, and two others were harassing a homeless man in the parking lot of a Burger King restaurant when an off-duty officer arrived to help the man. Witnesses also testified at trial that Mr. Davis then shot the officer twice and fled the scene.

Since Mr. Davis' 1991 conviction, seven of the nine witnesses against him have recanted their testimony and no physical evidence has been presented that links Mr. Davis to the killing.

In a 2-1 decision in April, the federal appeals court in Atlanta rejected Mr. Davis' request for an evidentiary hearing. The court, which had postponed Mr. Davis' execution, extended the stay for 30 days.

Also on May 19 participants from all 50 states and 32 countries around the world took part in the Global Day of Action to call further attention to the case. Thousands of people attended rallies, prayer vigils, and forums for Mr. Davis, who has been on death row for nearly two decades.

“Another thing we are demanding is that the correctional officials allow Troy access to the media. What are they afraid of if he is guilty?” asked Ms. Correia. “They don't want him talking to the press because they know he is innocent. Let's fight on.”

Sunday, June 14, 2009

Prison Architecture: Treating Prisoners Makes a Difference?


An article published in this week's New York Times magazine section, "Behind Bars...Sort Of" describes a prison in a small Austrian town of Leoben. There is a slideshow that accompanies the article detailing the philosophy behind punishment using something besides the physical space of a traditional prison.
A word on the architecture:
[t]he building looked both idle and inviting, like a college library during winter break — or it would have, anyway, were it not for the razor wire coiled along the concrete wall of the yard and the sentence carved below it, a line from the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (which the United States signed and ratified) that reads: “All persons deprived of their liberty shall be treated with humanity and with respect for the inherent dignity of the human person.”

Inside the prison it felt like Sunday afternoon, though in fact it was a Tuesday. There was a glassy brightness over everything, and most surprising, an unbreakable silence. Prisons are usually clamorous places, filled with the sound of metal doors opening and closing, and the general racket that comes with holding large numbers of men in a confined space. Noise is part of the chaos of prison life; Leoben was serene. I mentioned as much to Hohensinn, and he smiled and pointed to the whitewashed ceilings. He had taken great care to install soundproofing.

A word on the philosophy:
It sounds odd to say, but it’s nonetheless true: we punish people with architecture. The building is the method. We put criminals in a locked room, inside a locked structure, and we leave them there for a specified period of time.....
“They are criminals,” Hohensinn said to me, “but they are also human beings. The more normal a life you give them here, the less necessary it is to resocialize them when they leave.” His principle, he said, was simple: “Maximum security outside; maximum freedom inside.”

Friday, June 12, 2009

Et tu, Brute?

One Year Anniversary of the Official "Blog of Rights"


To commemorate the one-year anniversary of the ACLU's Official "Blog of Rights", this year, the ACLU are:
marking the one-year anniversary of the Blog of Rights by revisiting the issue of torture with a new forum, which we’re expanding to include not just bloggers, but experts in the field: psychologists who’ve worked with torture victims, former military personnel, authors, attorneys who represent former and current Guantanamo detainees, and others. We’ll discuss the origins of the torture program, who’s responsible for these crimes, and most of all, the need for accountability.
To kick off this month-long forum, we have an exclusive podcast (MP3) : Salon.com’s Glenn Greenwald, one of our original torture symposium contributors, interviews Philippe Sands, author of Torture Team: Rumsfeld’s Memo and the Betrayal of American Values (shameless plug: it’s newly available in paperback), and ACLU attorney Amrit Singh, co-counsel in the ACLU’s long-standing Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit. Thanks to that lawsuit, the public saw for the first time the infamous legal memos that authorized the use of torture on detainees in U.S. custody overseas.

We’re also launching our Accountability for Torture feature, a hub for everything you need to know about the issue, including a video about accountability, an infographic of the Bush administration players who authorized torture, an improved search function that allows the public to search thousands of documents we received through our FOIA request, and our prescription for accountability.

Thursday, June 11, 2009

Gang Member "Expert"

Ongoing concern regarding trend to have a police officer testify as both the investigator or percipient witness and being elevated to an "expert witness" on why your client is guilty? check out this post from Probable Cause: "If I only had a badge" Highlights from the post:
By the time you finish reading this, you will know everything you need to know in order to testify, in court, as a gang cop.

Don’t let me mislead you: you won’t know everything you need to know to be a gang expert. That takes years of training in sociology, anthropology and/or psychology, plus a lot of field work. There are actually very few gang experts around. But you will know everything you need to know to testify, under oath, in court, about gangs and why the jury should convict any gang member about whom you testify.

The post goes on to detail the ways in which the officer who has arrested your client will be testifying as an "expert"as to why your client's actions meet the definition of the crime charged (fill in the blank).

For a great 2008 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals case addressing this issue look to United States v. Meja. A short quote from the Eleventh Circuit shows the courts growing concerns with a police officer as a percipient witness:
If the officer expert strays beyond the bounds of appropriately “expert” matters, that officer becomes, rather than a sociologist describing the inner workings of a closed community, a chronicler of the recent past whose pronouncements on elements of the charged offense serve as shortcuts to proving guilt. As the officer's purported expertise narrows from “organized crime” to “this particular gang,” from the meaning of “capo” to the criminality of the defendant, the officer's testimony becomes more central to the case, more corroborative of the fact witnesses, and thus more like a summary of the facts than an aide in understanding them. The officer expert transforms into the hub of the case, displacing the jury by connecting and combining all other testimony and physical evidence into a coherent, discernible, internally consistent picture of the defendant's guilt.

In such instances, it is a little too convenient that the Government has found an individual who is expert on precisely those facts that the Government must prove to secure a guilty verdict-even more so when that expert happens to be one of the Government's own investigators.


United States v. Meja, 545 F.3d 179, 191 (2nd Cir. 2008).

Monday, June 8, 2009

"It's the smart move; Tessio was always smarter."

FBI Director Defends Use of Informants in Mosques

FBI Director Robert Mueller on Monday defended the agency's use of informants within U.S. mosques, despite complaints from Muslim organizations that worshippers and clerics are being targeted instead of possible terrorists.

Mueller's comments came just days after a Michigan Muslim organization asked the Justice Department to investigate complaints that the FBI is asking the faithful to spy on Islamic leaders and worshippers. Similar alarm followed the disclosure earlier this year that the FBI planted a spy in Southern California mosques.

"We don't investigate places, we investigate individuals," Mueller said during a brief meeting with reporters in Los Angeles.

"To the extent that there may be evidence or other information of criminal wrongdoings, then we will ... undertake those investigations," Mueller added. "We will continue to do it."

He called relations with U.S. Muslims "very good," but acknowledged disagreements without providing specifics.
The Council of Islamic Organizations of Michigan sent a letter to U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder after mosques and other groups reported members of the community have been asked to monitor people coming to mosques and donations they make. The FBI's Detroit office has denied the allegations.

In the California case, information about the informant who spied on the Islamic Center of Irvine came out at a February detention hearing for a brother-in-law of Osama bin Laden's bodyguard, an Afghan native and naturalized U.S. citizen named Ahmadullah Niazi who is accused of lying on his citizenship and passport applications about terrorism ties.

Local Muslim leaders say they suspected since at least since 2006 that the FBI was trying to infiltrate Muslim organizations in the area.

"History disputes Mr. Mueller's statements, at least in Southern California," said Shakeel Syed, executive of the Islamic Shura Council of Southern California.

"It doesn't alleviate anything. It only continues to show the sheer arrogance demonstrated by the bureau in holding Muslim community members, clerics, mosques, as suspects," Syed said. He is among community leaders in court seeking government records of surveillance.

FBI agents and prosecutors say spying on mosques is one of the best weapons to uncover lurking terrorists or threats to national security, but it has posed a politically and legally thorny issue with Muslims who see themselves as unjustly monitored.

"The FBI needs to do what it needs to do, certainly," Syed said. But the agency is "trying to incite and entrap" law-abiding people.

Full article here.

CIA Urges Judge to Keep Detainee Papers Secret

CIA Director Leon Panetta told a federal judge Monday that releasing documents about the agency's terror interrogations would gravely damage national security.

Panetta sent a 24-page missive to New York federal judge Alvin Hellerstein, arguing that release of agency cables describing tough interrogation methods used on al-Qaida suspects would tell the enemy far too much about U.S. counterterrorism work.

The CIA director filed the papers in a lawsuit brought by the American Civil Liberties Union. The suit has already led to the unveiling of Bush administration legal memos authorizing harsh methods — among them waterboarding, a type of simulated drowning, and slamming suspects into walls — and a fight over releasing long-secret photos of abused detainees.

"I have determined that the disclosure of intelligence about al-Qaida reasonably could be expected to result in exceptionally grave damage to the national security by informing our enemies of what we knew about them, and when, and in some instances, how we obtained the intelligence," Panetta wrote.

Panetta acknowledges in the court papers that the CIA destroyed 92 videotapes of detainee interrogations that took place in 2002. Officials have previously said that a dozen of those tapes showed the so-called "enhanced interrogation techniques," which critics call torture. The destruction of the videotapes has spurred a criminal investigation into why they were destroyed.

The tapes — and the interrogations — are also an issue in the ACLU's lawsuit.

The CIA is fighting efforts to force release of the documents, including dozens of agency cables. The cables, Panetta said, describe in detail the methods used on terror suspects, the information gleaned from them and what U.S. officials still did not know at the time the suspects were being questioned.

Full article here.

Friday, June 5, 2009

Troy Davis Faces 4th Execution Date in Two Years

US death row inmate Troy Davis once again faces the prospect of an execution date. This is despite not having had a court hearing into compelling evidence, collected since his trial nearly 18 years ago, that he may be innocent. He has come close to execution three times in the past two years.

His final hope of being granted a court hearing rests with the US Supreme Court. A petition was filed in the Court on Tuesday 19 May. Three days earlier, a stay of execution granted by a federal court in October last year expired. The state could move to set an execution date at any time.

Troy Davis was convicted of the murder of a police officer in Savannah, Georgia, in 1989. Since the 1991 trial, the testimony of all but two of the state's witnesses who testified against him has been recanted or changed amid allegations that the police used coercion and suggestive identification techniques during their investigation of the murder. One of the two witnesses who have not altered their trial testimony is himself the subject of new witness statements implicating him as the gunman.

Four of the jurors who convicted Troy Davis have since signed affidavits saying that the post-conviction evidence gave them cause for concern. They said they supported judicial relief in the form of a new trial or an evidentiary hearing, or executive commutation of the death sentence.

In May 2009, Troy Davis said: "I have faced execution and the torment of saying goodbye to my family three times in the last two years and I may experience that trauma yet again; I would not wish this on my worst enemy and to know I am innocent only compounds the injustice I am facing."

As the case stands, the pursuit of the death penalty against Troy Davis continues to contravene international safeguards which prohibit the execution of anyone whose guilt is not based on "clear and convincing evidence leaving no room for an alternative explanation of the facts".

"This is one in a long line of cases in the USA that should give even ardent supporters of the death penalty pause for thought, since it provides further evidence of the danger, inherent in the death penalty, of irrevocable error," said Amnesty International's USA researcher Rob Freer.

"Last month a federal judge said that to execute Troy Davis would be 'unconscionable'. She was surely right."

In September 2008, the Georgia Board of Pardons and Paroles denied Troy Davis clemency, before a court issued the stay of execution that has just expired. Amnesty International is campaigning to have the Board change its mind and to commute the death sentence.

Read more at Amnesty International

Cool Federal Evidence Review Site/Bad Case: Anonymous Cell Phone Caller Evidence Admissible?


The Sixth Circuit case of United States v. Rodriguez-Lopez, _ F.3d _ (6th Cir. May 6, 2009) considered this hearsay puzzle: is the fact that anonymous callers placed a call to a defendant’s cell phone and asked about the availability of heroin excludable as hearsay in a trial for conspiring to distribute heroin? Or could the calls be admitted as circumstantial evidence of an action from which it could be inferred that the defendant dealt in the heroin trade? In contrast to the court in Wright, the Sixth Circuit explained that under Federal Rule of Evidence (FRE) 801(c) the statements were admissible as non-hearsay since the statements were not offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted.

Mr. Rodriguez-Lopez phone was ringing off the hook when DEA Agents decided to answer the phone. Each time the phone rang, according to DEA Agents, the caller requested heroin. The Sixth Circuit reversed the district court holding that the calls were inadmissible hearsay. Here is an example of the madness:

“But whatever their grammatical mood, the statements are not hearsay because the government does not offer them for their truth. Indeed, if the statements were questions or commands, they could not … be offered for their truth because they would not be assertive speech at all. They would not assert a proposition that could be true or false....And further on..."[t]he government offers them, not for their truth, but as evidence of the fact that they were made. The fact that Rodriguez received ten successive solicitations for heroin is probative circumstantial evidence of his involvement in a conspiracy to distribute heroin.”


This posting, at FederalEvidence.com has the Sixth Circuit's analysis regarding this hearsay issue. Federal Evidence.com is a handy collection of all things evidence including the evidence blog.

Getting back to the cell phone it begs the question: If the calls aren't offered for the truth of the matter asserted, then what would be the relevance of the statements under FRE 402 and 403. If the anonymous caller asked for a pizza instead of heroin, it wouldn't be relevant. Only because it shows propensity to commit the crime of delivery is it offered, and that is precisely why it is improper FRE 404(b) evidence and should not be permitted under FRE 403.

When doing investigation dealing with this type of evidence, make sure whether they can show the phone actually belongs to your client.

Beware of Arson Antiquated Science

In 2006 Barry Scheck's Innocence Project in New York sponsored a formal peer review of expert testimony in two Texas arson cases - Cameron Todd Willingham, who was executed for capital murder, and Ernest Ray Willis who was exonerated after courts overturned essentially similar forensic testimony. Here's the full 49-page report (pdf),


The State’s expert witnesses in both cases relied on interpretations of “indicators” that they were taught constituted evidence of arson. While we have no doubt that these witnesses believed what they were saying, each and every one of the indicators relied upon have since been scientifically proven to be invalid. To the extent that there are still investigators in Texas and elsewhere, who interpret low burning, irregular fire patterns and collapsed furniture springs as indicators of incendiary fires, there will continue to be serious miscarriages of justice.



Now, in Texas, Grits for Breakfast posts that a case is ongoing with Walter Reeves and the Baylor Innocence Project to free a man possibly wrongfully convicted of arson relying on this antiquated science.

Hidden Cameras in the Workplace?

Reported from law.com (full article here)

Suspecting someone was viewing pornographic Web sites on a company computer after hours, the executive director of a Los Angeles-area center for abused children set up a secret video system in 2002 to catch the culprit.

No one was apprehended, but the two women who shared the locked office that was placed under surveillance sued for invasion of privacy -- even though the only images ever captured were shots of an empty desk and their boss setting up the camera.

That was what the California Supreme Court had to work with Wednesday during oral arguments in Hernandez v. Hillsides Inc., S147552: Does the mere attempt to videotape an individual qualify as an invasion of privacy or must there be an actual intrusion -- such as the taping of an innocent person changing clothes -- for liability to come into play?

Thursday, June 4, 2009

Economic Crisis Reveals Deeper Human Rights Problems

More than six decades of human rights failures by governments have been exacerbated by the world economic crisis, which brought the problems of poverty and inequality to the fore, according to Amnesty International’s Secretary General.

"It’s not just the economy, it’s a human rights crisis: the world is sitting on a social, political and economic time bomb," said Irene Kahn as she launched Amnesty International’s annual report on the state of the world’s human rights.

Billions of people are suffering from insecurity, injustice and indignity around the world. In many cases, the economic crisis made matters worse, with millions more sliding into poverty.

Increased poverty and deprivation have led to denial of economic and social rights – including food shortages and the use of food as a political weapon; forced evictions; abuse of rights of indigenous peoples. Yet human rights problems have been relegated to the backseat as political and business leaders grapple with the economic crisis.

2008 saw massive rises in the price of the most basic of necessities – food – which had the effect of making the poorest people in the world even poorer. People took to the streets across the world and, in many countries, were faced with violent repression.

In Zimbabwe, more than five million people were in need of food aid by the end of 2008, according to the UN. The government has used food as a weapon against its political opponents. Across the country, political opponents, human rights activists and trade union representatives were attacked, abducted, arrested and killed with impunity.

Hundreds of activists protesting against economic decline and social conditions were arrested and detained without charge.

Across Africa, people demonstrated against desperate social and economic situations and sharp rises in living costs. In a taste of what could lie ahead, some demonstrations turned violent; the authorities often repressed protests with excessive force.

Social tensions and economic disparities led to thousands of protests throughout China. In the Americas, social protest at economic conditions increased in Peru; in Chile there were demonstrations throughout 2008 on Indigenous People’s rights and rising living costs.

In the Middle East and North Africa, the economic and social insecurity was highlighted by strikes and protests in several countries, including Egypt. In Tunisia, strikes and protests were put down with force, causing two deaths, many injuries and more than 2,000 prosecutions of alleged organizers, some culminating in long prison sentences.

"The events we’ve seen in 2008, with the world economic crisis at the top, demand a new kind of leadership from world leaders," said Irene Khan. "They must take real action, centred on human rights, to tackle growing poverty around the world, and they must invest in human rights as purposefully as they invest in economic growth."

Read more: Amnesty International Report 2009

Wednesday, June 3, 2009

Cheney's Secret Briefings Defended Interrogations

(AP) Dick Cheney as vice president conducted secret briefings for lawmakers in 2005 aimed at defending harsh interrogations as their methods were coming under congressional scrutiny, according to current and former government officials.

The secret briefings followed the Abu Ghraib prison abuse scandal and public revelations about the CIA's rendition and interrogation program, current and former officials with ties to Congress and government intelligence told The Associated Press.

One official with direct knowledge of a March 8, 2005, meeting on the CIA's interrogation program said the briefing was run by Cheney in the situation room at the White House, a secure meeting room. The official said CIA officers were on hand to provide details.

The official said it was not unusual for Cheney to lead such briefings, as he was an aggressive champion of Bush administration national security policies and periodically conducted or sat in on meetings with members of Congress at the White House. The official asked not to be identified because the meeting was secret.

Another Cheney briefing occurred in October 2005 for Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., around the time he had won overwhelming Senate support for banning cruel, inhumane and degrading treatment for all U.S. prisoners, The Washington Post reported in its Wednesday editions. Two other briefings took place in October and November 2005, according to the Post.

The briefings add to questions about the role Cheney played in the creation, approval and conduct of the CIA's interrogation program, either directly or through his powerful chief of staff, David Addington.

The Cheney briefings were among 40 conducted for members of Congress by Bush administration officials between 2002 and 2009.

The CIA detailed the briefings on a chart created in May at the request of members of Congress after House Speaker Nancy Pelosi claimed that the CIA failed to tell her at a September 2002 briefing that waterboarding had been used against a prisoner. That briefing occurred within weeks of the waterboarding of terror suspect Abu Zubaydah.

Full article here.

Tuesday, June 2, 2009

Ick: Child Sex Trafficking is a Growing Problem in Wichita

Police and social workers have investigated four cases this year in which young teenage girls from Wichita have been forced into sexual slavery -- and they suspect more are at risk.

Street gangs began to pursue sex trafficking in Wichita a few years ago, according to police.

They say sex trafficking of Wichita children, many of them runaways, is more extensive than they originally thought and that street gangs have expanded the scope and sophistication of the crime significantly here.

Based on what they've seen, they believe that 300 to 400 Wichita-area children every year are significantly at risk to become victims of sexual exploitation.

Gangs trade and sell children like slaves, said Mike Nagy, an officer with the Wichita-Sedgwick County Exploited and Missing Child Unit.

But this type of crime is so hard to investigate that local authorities can't say how many are taken. It could be dozens or hundreds, police and social workers said.

They agree it's getting worse. They will join other social workers and law enforcement officers at a conference this week to coordinate a stronger and more coordinated response to the problem.

The gangs often target runaways and homeless children, luring them with food, money, shelter and promises of romance, police said.

Detectives and other investigators with the Exploited and Missing Child Unit said gang members train their victims in sex acts, often using pornographic movies as "training films."

They then either force them into the sex trade locally or traffic them on the Internet or to larger cities -- Dallas, Memphis, Las Vegas and elsewhere.

Karen Countryman-Roswurm, a social worker and Ph.D. candidate who has studied the problem and interviewed hundreds of these victims, says the pimps involved can make hundreds of thousands of dollars off one child.

Full article from the Wichita Eagle here.

2008 Internet Crime Report

In December 2003, the Internet Fraud Complaint Center (IFCC) was renamed the Internet Crime Complaint Center (IC3) to better reflect the broad character of such criminal matters having a cyber (Internet) nexus. The 2008 Internet Crime Report is the eighth annual compilation of information on complaints received and referred by the IC3 to law enforcement or regulatory agencies for appropriate action. From January 1, 2008 – December 31, 2008, the IC3 website received 275,284 complaint submissions. This is a (33.1%) increase when compared to 2007 when 206,884 complaints were received. These filings were composed of complaints primarily related to fraudulent and non-fraudulent issues on the Internet.

These complaints were composed of many different fraud types such as auction fraud, non-delivery, and credit/debit card fraud as well as non-fraudulent complaints such as computer intrusions, spam/unsolicited e-mail, and child pornography. All of these complaints are accessible to federal, state, and local law enforcement to support active investigations, trend analysis, and public outreach and awareness efforts.

Full Report here.

Monday, June 1, 2009

Rain of Fire: Israel's Unlawful Use of White Phosphorous in Gaza



During Israel's 22-day military operations in Gaza, from December 27, 2008 to January 18, 2009, the IDF repeatedly exploded white phosphorus munitions in the air over populated areas, killing and injuring civilians, and damaging civilian structures, including a school, a market, a humanitarian aid warehouse and a hospital. Senior Military Analyst Marc Garlasco discusses Human Rights Watch's on the ground investigation and findings. For more, visit here.

Mexico Criminal and Civil Record Index Now Online

Mexico now has criminal and civil records indexed online, but the system is fee-based.

To read more about the system, go to pibuzz.com. To visit the website, go here.


Testing Justice: Rape Kit Backlog in Los Angeles City & County



Women who report being raped are asked to undergo a lengthy, extensive examination to collect DNA and other physical evidence that might identify their attacker, corroborate testimony about the assault, or connect their case to other rape crime scene evidence. The resulting collection - called a rape kit - is then booked into police evidence. Human Rights Watch analyzed data from the Los Angeles Police Department, the Los Angeles Sheriff's Department, and Los Angeles County's 47 independent police departments, and found that as of March 1, 2009, there were at least 12,669 untested rape kits sitting in storage facilities. For more information, visit here.

Court Rules In Favor Of Transparency In Guantánamo Cases

In an important ruling affecting the public's access to records regarding the cases of Guantánamo detainees, a federal court today denied a government motion to seal unclassified information related to those cases. Judge Thomas F. Hogan of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, citing a "First Amendment and common law right to access" judicial records, ruled that the government cannot suppress unclassified documents and must seek court approval to seal specific information.

The following can be attributed to Jonathan Hafetz, attorney with the ACLU National Security Project:

"Today's decision is a victory for transparency. For far too long, the government has succeeded in keeping information about Guantánamo secret, and used secrecy to cover-up illegal detention and abuse. The decision marks an important step towards restoring America's open court tradition that is essential to both accountability and the rule of law."

Crack Cocaine Sentencing Reform

From The Sentencing Project:

Americans believe in a system of justice where all individuals are treated fairly under the law. But mandatory minimum sentencing laws prohibit judges from considering all the facts in a criminal case when determining sentences. The result is one-size-fits-all justice that ignores defendants' life circumstances, criminal history and role in the offense.

The 1986 and 1988 Anti-Drug Abuse Acts established excessive mandatory penalties for crack cocaine that were the harshest ever adopted for low-level drug offenses and created drastically different penalty structures for crack cocaine compared to powder cocaine, which are pharmacologically identical substances. The law has diverted precious resources away from prevention and treatment for drug users and devastated communities ripped apart by incarceration.

Today a new consciousness about the unfairness and ineffectiveness of harsh crack cocaine mandatory sentences has emerged among advocates, policymakers, judges and the United States Sentencing Commission. Explore this site to learn more about crack cocaine sentencing reform and how to end the sentencing disparity.

FBI: Crime Falls, but Small Town Violence Rises

Cities in the United States got safer in 2008, while small towns grew more dangerous, according to FBI data released Monday.

The FBI says violent crime nationwide dropped by 2.5 percent last year. Property crimes also fell, by 1.6 percent, according to the preliminary data collected by the FBI.

Cities with more than 1 million people saw murders fall by 4.3 percent; cities with 500,000 to 1 million people saw murders fall by nearly 8 percent.

Yet in towns with fewer than 10,000 residents, murders rose 5.5 percent, rape increased 1.4 percent, and robbery 3.9 percent.

The latest data shows violent crime fell for a second straight year, after increases in 2006 and 2005. Those two years, the crime rate began to rise after historic lows that began during the Clinton administration and continued into President Bush's first years in the White House.

Nationwide, murder and manslaughter dropped 4.4 percent in 2008. Aggravated assault declined 3.2 percent, forcible rape decreased 2.2 percent, and robbery dropped 1.1 percent. The country also saw a huge drop in car thefts — more than 13 percent.
Cities in the United States got safer in 2008, while small towns grew more dangerous, according to FBI data released Monday.

The FBI says violent crime nationwide dropped by 2.5 percent last year. Property crimes also fell, by 1.6 percent, according to the preliminary data collected by the FBI.

Cities with more than 1 million people saw murders fall by 4.3 percent; cities with 500,000 to 1 million people saw murders fall by nearly 8 percent.

Yet in towns with fewer than 10,000 residents, murders rose 5.5 percent, rape increased 1.4 percent, and robbery 3.9 percent.

The latest data shows violent crime fell for a second straight year, after increases in 2006 and 2005. Those two years, the crime rate began to rise after historic lows that began during the Clinton administration and continued into President Bush's first years in the White House.

Nationwide, murder and manslaughter dropped 4.4 percent in 2008. Aggravated assault declined 3.2 percent, forcible rape decreased 2.2 percent, and robbery dropped 1.1 percent. The country also saw a huge drop in car thefts — more than 13 percent.

Full article here.