Mediaboss Marketing

Spotlights like this one provide original commentary and analysis on pressing criminal justice issues of the day. You can read them each day in our newsletter,The Daily Appeal.

Last month, longtime public defender Chesa Boudin was elected San Franciscos next district attorney. His victory was not merely an upset over an interim incumbent with establishment support and an unlikely win for a public defender whose parents served time for felonies; it also came despite the fact that the San Francisco Police Officers Association, the citys police union, outspent Boudin in an effort to defeat him. The union pulled in cash from police unions in Los Angeles, Portland, Seattle, and New York. The San Francisco Deputy Sheriffs Association aided the effort, too,sharinga John Birch Society video calling Boudin a communist radical and a son of terrorists.

In New York State, wherelandmark criminal justicereforms are set to go into effect on Jan. 1, a familiar chorus of concern has piped up,according to the New York Times editorial board. Police Commissioner James ONeillwrotein an op-ed in May that the law would have a significant negative impact on public safety. His successor, incoming Police Commissioner Dermot Shea,expressed similar views in November. Police unions and prosecutors across the state have issued ominous warnings. The Oneida City Police Benevolent Associationwrotein a Facebook post, Think this is wrong & insane? Then tell your politicians that this needs to be repealed ASAP! Over the summer, the New York Prosecutors Training Institutereleased audioof a Nassau County assistant district attorney training prosecutors on various ways to work with the police to subvert the new law.

For decades, law enforcement could rely on fearmongering to swing elections, preventing progressives from becoming district attorneys, and keeping reform bills off the books. But now,across the country, amovement away from incarcerationhas been a rare point of consensus among Americans who can agree on little else.

These calls for criminal justice reform have led police to panic, making these sorts of campaigns against reforms more common. Just as conservatives, going back to the Nixon era, have used debates over the lawfulness of abortion, homosexuality, and pornography to portray themselves as besieged by a liberal elite, police unions, too, now claim they are on the losing side in an ideological struggle,writes Melissa Gira Grantfor the New Republic. It represents a return to the culture wars origins, she explains, which lie with policing. Provoking anxiety over law and order helped usher Nixon into the White House in 1968. Where today police unions cast Black Lives Matter activists as their persecutors, conservatives under Nixon pointed to black power activists and the anti-war left. James Davison Hunters 1991 book, Culture Wars: The Struggle to Define America, brought the term culture war into the broader lexicon. Hunter says he wasinspiredafter reading a news story about the arrests of clergy at an abortion protest. He frames the struggle emerging from 1960s social change as a matter less of specific issues than of progressivism versus orthodoxy more broadly.

But throughout the 1990s, many who were at odds with one another when it came to other issues, such as abortion or gay rights, were largely in agreement on defending the power of policewhether that meant uniting against Ice Ts Cop Killer song or more sweeping policy proposals,writes Grant. But the Obama years saw the start of a profound shift. In demanding accountability from police who kill, the Black Lives Matter movement highlighted the ways in which the system of policing makes such accountability nearly impossible. Leaders of the movement argued that police unionsshieldpolice from discipline for brutality. And when the officers who killed Michael Brown and Eric Garner were not indicted, activists pointed to the power held bydistrict attorneyswho rely on police to help them win convictionsin convening and persuading grand juries.

By the 2016 election, Democrats had backed off from the Clinton-era tough-on-crime consensus. Contenders in 2016 madeabolishing the death penaltypart of their platforms, Grant writes. By then, it was more common to hear that criminal justice reform was a bipartisan issuealbeit in a limited sense, with centrist overlap on a few modest reforms like creating alternatives to pre-trial detention. Many of the Democratic candidates of 2020 havepledgedunprecedentedlyprogressive criminal justice plans. And stalwart defenders of harsh law enforcement tactics such as Michael Bloomberg have been forced to walk back those decisions in order to gain any traction with the Democratic base.

Some on the right seem dedicated to stoking the flames of the culture wars. U.S. Attorney General William Barrsaidlast week that if some communities dont begin showing more respect to law enforcement, they may lose police protection. Whilegiving a speechat the Attorney Generals Award for Distinguished Service in Policing, Barr said, I think today, American people have to focus on the sacrifice and the service that is given by our law enforcement officers. And they have to start showing, more than they do, the respect and support that law enforcement deservesand if communities dont give that support and respect, they might find themselves without the police protection they need.

But even some purported leftists have played into police unions victimhood narrative in similar ways. Last week, a thin blue line flag was spotted on NYPD property. The flags, featuring a horizontal blue line surrounded by black, are closely linked toBlue Lives Matter, countermovement formed in response to Black Lives Matter,writes Jake Offenhartzfor Gothamist. Police reform groups claim that the flag denotes racism and a culture of misconduct. In recent years, the flag has appeared frequently at neo-Nazi and white supremacist rallies, including thedeadly Unite the Right rallyin Charlottesville. During a press conference, Mayor Bill de Blasio brushed off questions about whether it is appropriate for the NYPD to fly the thin blue line flag on government property. Later in the day, during the swearing in of new NYPD Commissioner Dermot Shea, de Blasio left little room for police criticism. To the doubting Thomases, to the naysayers, if you doubt, then you dont truly respect the NYPD. Jeffrey Fagan, a law professor at Columbia University who specializes in police accountability and criminal law, said he was not surprised by de Blasios remarks. The mayor is still the lapdog of the police unions, Fagan said.

See the original post here:
Police Play The Victim When Voters Choose Reform - The Appeal

Twitter brings us glimpses of the world we might otherwise not know about. We're especially fond of the medievalists who share bizarre marginalia from illuminated manuscripts, like weird (non-white) mermaids or violent rabbits. Along similar but far less pleasant lines, yesterday a tweet brought to our attention a bizarre opinion piece at the American Conservative site, in which a dude gripes about how "postmodernism" destroyed his church. That horror was exemplified, among other things, by the time a guest sermon by a mean identity-politics black person said it was "sinful" to point out the simple fact that the slave trade brought millions of Africans to Christ.

See? Every bit as odd as medieval mermaids.

The piece was an anonymous letter to editor and columnist Rod Dreher, the conservative thought leaderer who has previously explained that liberal women are too busy masturbating to love their children, and who mourned the death of George Michael by wishing the singer had been straight. No way Dreher will one day meet him in heaven now! Dreher prefaces the lengthy letter by noting the writer gave permission to run it anonymously, and offers this semi-disclaimer:

So don't you go around saying Rod Dreher believes slavery was a real shame but at least it brought souls to Jebus. He merely ran a guest opinion insisting slavery was a real shame but it brought souls to Jebus.

We'll spare you the bulk of the letter's jeremiad against the pernicious effects of "postmodernism," mostly because the writer takes his definition of "postmodernism" from a Jordan Peterson video about "Cultural Marxism," which he quotes at length. You silly degenerates may think PoMo is a literary theory about the subjectivity of interpretation and the interplay of texts, but that's merely because you've been hypnotized by international jouissance.

Peterson explains that postmodernism is really about RAW LEFTIST POWER to destroy traditional values by calling anyone who opposes them a "racist." It's the same damp, warmed over culture wars garbage you'd expect, and now some tedious Peterson fan will show up in the comments and tell us we've got it all wrong because we've oversimplified Peterson's simplistic reductionism, and we need to go watch 57 hours of videos to really get the point.

Really, the writer just doesn't like all the liberalism seeping into his church and ruining it for normal people.

He explains that he and his wife had to abandon their former church because it got "woke." In the Before Times, while the church "had some management issues," it at least had sound doctrine:

Ah, but then the pernicious influence of postmodernism (evil woke commies) arrived!

It's not like the Reverend Martin Luther King Jr. was a preacher or anything. But he's fine with the Civil Rights Movement, as long as those people aren't having civil rights out in public where children can see. He could have lived with a single sermon on history, he guesses, if only the guest speaker hadn't been so identity-political about it.

Fact check: Why yes, the Southern Baptists did split from the abolitionist northern Baptists over slavery. That is an actual history fact, and not in dispute, even if you put scare quotes around "racist."

But the dude's real conniption is over the notion that it's "racist" to be joyful that all those enslaved people were brought to Jebus. Don't get him wrong, he knows that doesn't justify slavery, he's not saying that. But "facts" are "facts":

He may not wince at racism, slavery, or genocide, but he damn well winces at having a cherished belief called problematic or racist. God's plan clearly included slavery, because God's a mysterious fucker that way, and how dare these Marxists deny that The Blacks got saved, unfortunate though all the forced labor, torture, murder, rape, and dehumanization may have been. He goes on to be Very Concerned some more:

There's a lot more, some about race (Jesus may have been swarthy but he wasn't "black," for instance -- no mention of White Santa Claus at least), and some about women, and some about esoteric theological matters, but it all comes down to a long whine about how sad it is that the Left took over his church. Somebody should remind him that only liberals care about "feelings."

We'd recommend the poor distressed fellow hole up with some nice Christian history textbooks for kids, so he can be reassured that the best thing about slavery was that it promised freedom in heaven, and also gave us some beautiful spirituals, and yes, hooray, as one book for 8th-grade homeschooled kids says, he's absolutely right about how slavery spread the word of God:

That same textbook, we should note, also argued that while the Trail of Tears was certainly a bummer for all those Native Americans sent on death marches across the continent, it had a terrific upside:

Still, sad wingnut dude does have a point, of sorts. People who think like he does no longer have a monopoly on cultural power. We bet God is just all broke up about that.

[American Conservative via "Christian Vanderbrouk" on Twitter]

Yr Wonkette is supported entirely by reader donations. Please send us money so we can give wingnuts a good kick right in the Derrida.

Read the original here:
Sad Wingnut Explains Slavery Saved Souls - Wonkette

A reporter caught her boyfriend cheating because of his Fitbit. Her viral story had many others sympathizing.

Fitbit and other fitness tracking devices are increasing the ways criminal investigators and even those outside criminallaw enforcement can gather information about a persons activities.

NFL Network reporter Jane Slater explained in a Dec. 5 tweet how she realized her ex-boyfriend was cheating on her after his activity levels had climbed at 4 a.m. She noticed the odd activity because the pair had synced their Fitbit accounts as a way to motivate each other, she said.

Fitness tracking devices have expanded their capabilities far beyond just counting steps, with newer models now monitoring more detailedmovement and activity, as well as GPS tracking.And outside of the realm of fitness, the devices can be used for more than catching cheating spouses.

This digital DNA is no different albeit more technical than the everyday evidence gathering involved in a crime scene investigation, explained Philip Rosenthal, a veteran private investigator and vice president of Israel-based computer forensics company Bis-Tec Technologies.

He described a crime scene in the aftermath of a burglary: Investigators atthe scene, he explained, are trying to find the evidence that would place a particular person in that office, by getting either their DNA or fingerprints or some other physical evidence to put them at the time and place inside that location. Digital forensics is no different its just that we're looking for digital DNA or fingerprints.

GET FOX BUSINESS ON THE GO BY CLICKING HERE

In other cases often handled by police or investigators,the Fitbit or another fitness tracking device could be usedto determinewhen someones heart had stopped beating, indicating his or her likely time of death.

The data is recorded through cell towers and satellite technology, which links one person to another based on his or her locations,digital forensics expert Thomas Yohannan told FOX Business.

Movement and location are probably the biggest two things that these devices could do, Yohannan said.

Fitbit, which recently announced plans to be acquired by Google, provides some of the most accurate data out of the fitness tracking gadgets on the market, he said.

GOOGLE'S $2.1B FITBIT DEAL UNDER DOJ SCRUTINY: REPORT

The FBI used the data tracked from Mollie Tibbetts Fitbit after the 20-year-old went missing in the summer of 2018, in the hopes of learning more about where she was and whom she saw before she disappeared, CBS reported at the time.

In any criminal case, investigators can not only show a person was in this area, but they could also actually show that person was close to someone else, Yohannan said.

READ MORE ON FOX BUSINESS BY CLICKING HERE

The location tracking capability, however, is not unique to Fitbit, he added.

That doesn't always have to happen through just Fitbit or smartwatches, he said. You could do it also if a person has a Fitbit and another person has an ankle bracelet because they are under house arrest, you could say ... there's an interaction, just in terms of technology, between just different devices that could say here's the location of that person.

While the data does not provide any immediate solutions to a crime, it provides law enforcement an understanding of where someone was at some point in time, he said.

APPLE, FACEBOOK DEFEND ENCRYPTION UNDER GRILLING FROM SENATORS, LAW ENFORCEMENT

You have to help understand the context What time is it? All those things that law enforcement has to do in order to create the context, Yohannan said. It's not giving you a final solution. It's just giving you an understanding.

Read this article:
Fitbit devices being used in criminal cases, to catch cheating spouses - Fox Business

Written by Varinder Bhatia, Edited by Explained Desk | Chandigarh | Updated: December 13, 2019 7:29:11 am Haryana Police claims it is the countrys first police force to have introduced this unique barcoding for forensic reports. (AP/Representational Image)

Haryana Police has adopted a unique barcoding software Trakea to ensure that thousands of forensic reports that form the backbone of the criminal investigation system and subsequent trials in the courts of law, are not tampered with.

According to the police, Trakea ensures foolproof security of the samples collected from the scene of crime, and the forensic analysis reports, and is different from traditional methods that the state police force has been following for decades.

Haryana Police claims it is the countrys first police force to have introduced this unique barcoding for forensic reports.

The software was originally designed by a prisoner who was lodged in Bhondsi jail for 13 months. A software engineer by profession, the man was facing charges of having murdered his wife, but was ultimately acquitted by the trial court.

In the 13 months that he spent in jail, however, the man worked on the software, writing algorithms and, once out of jail, became the source for Haryana Police acquire his creation. The software was adopted after certain modifications to suit the specific requirements of the Haryana Police.

The same software engineer had earlier designed a software digitising data pertaining to prison inmates and prison operations across all 19 jails of Haryana.

Trakea is aimed at ensuring security and a tamperproof tracking system for forensic reports. It streamlines the functioning of Forensic Science Laboratories.

Essentially, it is a forensic evidence management system that helps in automation of the entire procedure, right from the stage when forensic experts collect vital samples from the scene of crime to conducting analysis of the samples, followed by tracking casewise forensic reports electronically through barcodes.

Even the selection of forensic teams is done randomly through this software.

The system includes features of two-stage barcoding to maintain the secrecy of the samples, sent along with a strong, unbroken biometrically authenticated chain of custody trial, coupled with features to eliminate chances of pick-and-choose by automated case allocation to the scientists, followed by report-generation and real-time tracking of the status of cases through automated e-mail and SMS notifications.

Due to the unique barcoding, only the authorised investigating officers and forensic science experts shall be able to track the crime exhibits and scientific examination reports, reducing the chances of tampering/leakage of the report at any stage.

Also, there will be no case details mentioned on the crime exhibits/samples/parcels except the unique bar code, that can only be read through the biometric system.

Additional Director General of Police Shrikant Jadhav, who is Director, FSL, Madhuban, Karnal, Haryana said: In India, this system is the first of its kind implemented by any police force and FSL, from police station level to Forensic Science Laboratory, without disclosing details such as FIR number, name of parties etc., which could be used by miscreants to track the samples to influence the scientists or tamper with the examination reports at the forensic laboratories.

The roadmap for the future includes the expansion of the software on an app-based android platform for real-time online reporting of crime scene investigation visits by officers of mobile forensic science units of the Forensic Sciences Laboratory posted in each district, and its integration with the judicial system to reduce time lags and the chances of malpractices even at later stages.

Using this software, the judiciary too will be able to track the forensic examination report during the trial, significantly cutting down on delays.

As per the conventional practice all over the country, the crime exhibits (samples/parcels) are labeled with complete details, including the case FIR number; the police station; and the names and addresses of the victim, accused, medical officers, etc. With these details available, the crime exhibits can be easily traced and tracked by virtually anyone.

The crime exhibits could include DNA samples, documents, and reports of ballistics examinations, serology, biology, toxicology, lie-detection, etc. From the time the sample is collected to the time when forensic experts draw their final conclusion, there are multiple stages where the accused can use their influence to tamper with the sample in order to get a favourable forensic report.

Dont miss from Explained: How does an e-plane work, and how far is the world from flying fully electric?

For all the latest Explained News, download Indian Express App

IE Online Media Services Pvt Ltd

Link:
Explained: What is Trakea, used by Haryana Police to make forensic reports tamper-proof? - The Indian Express

House Judiciary Chairman Jerry Nadler, D-N.Y., speaks with ranking member Doug Collins, R-Ga., at Monday's impeachment hearing. Saul Loeb/AFP via Getty Images hide caption

House Judiciary Chairman Jerry Nadler, D-N.Y., speaks with ranking member Doug Collins, R-Ga., at Monday's impeachment hearing.

Updated at 6:51 p.m. ET

Democrats in the House took the next step toward impeachment on Monday with the presentation of what they call the evidence of President Trump's improper conduct in the Ukraine affair.

"President Trump's persistent and continuing effort to coerce a foreign country to help him cheat to win an election is a clear and present danger to our free and fair elections and to our national security," said Daniel Goldman, the Democratic staff counsel who presented the Democrats' case in the Judiciary Committee hearing.

Goldman, a former federal prosecutor for the Southern District of New York, presented evidence congressional investigators had gathered about what he called Trump's "months-long scheme to solicit foreign help in his 2020 reelection campaign, withholding official acts from the government of Ukraine in order to coerce and secure political interference in our domestic affairs."

Democrats said they believe the case for taking action is obvious.

"The evidence shows that Donald J. Trump, the president of the United States, has put himself before his country," House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler of New York said in his opening statement. "He has violated his most basic responsibilities to the people. He has broken his oath."

Republican ranking member Doug Collins of Georgia argued that Democrats are pursuing impeachment because of a "personal vendetta."

"They can't get over the fact that Donald J. Trump is president of the United States," Collins said, "and they don't think they have a candidate who can beat [him]. It's all a show."

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., confirmed last week that she and her lieutenants have decided to draft articles of impeachment against President Trump. So now, the Judiciary Committee says it must first receive the Intelligence Committee's report formally and then assess what charges to prefer.

"Read the Transcripts!"

During the hearing, President Trump asked his Twitter followers to read the account of the phone call he had on July 25 with his Ukrainian counterpart.

"Read the Transcripts!" he wrote.

But interpretation of a July 25 call between Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy is the key to whether what the president did was improper and impeachable.

During that call, according to a call summary released by the White House, Trump asked for a "favor, though" after Zelenskiy mentioned key weapons that Ukraine needs and has been using in its fight against Russia at its eastern border.

Trump proceeded to ask for help investigating two conspiracy theories one about Ukraine's involvement in the 2016 election (for which there is no evidence) and a conspiracy theory about former Vice President Joe Biden's son Hunter's role on the board of a Ukrainian energy company, Burisma.

Several witnesses, which included senior diplomats and national security officials, testified over the past few weeks that they thought the call was inappropriate, that the request was political and intended to help the president's reelection and not about corruption writ large in Ukraine.

What's more, the American public says that what the president did was wrong 70% in the most recent NPR/PBS NewsHour/Marist poll said it is not acceptable for a president to ask a foreign leader to investigate a political opponent.

The Trump administration was withholding a White House meeting and almost $400 million in military aid, while a pressure campaign was taking place, led by the president's personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani.

European Union Ambassador Gordon Sondland, who had multiple contacts with Giuliani, the president and Ukrainian officials, testified that there was a "quid pro quo." He said a White House meeting was being held up until Ukraine announced the investigations Giuliani and President Trump sought. That meeting has never happened.

The aid was eventually released Sept. 11 without explanation.

Republican counsel Stephen Castor, who asked many of the questions during the Intelligence Committee hearings, questioned the strength of Sondland's testimony. He said Sondland had "no firsthand knowledge" of a direct "quid pro quo" linkage to President Trump.

"He merely presumed there were preconditions," Castor said.

Castor said Democrats are centering their evidence of wrongdoing on the call summary the White House released with Ukraine's president. But, he contended, "it is not" evidence of of impeachable conduct. He also called Democrats' reasoning "baloney."

Castor was also critical of Democrats' timeline for impeachment, calling it an "artificial and arbitrary" deadline. On the process, which began in September, he accused Democrats of "fundamentally unfair" tactics, calling the impeachment inquiry a "rushed, take-it-or-leave-it approach."

One of the potential articles of impeachment Democrats could bring against the president is obstruction of Congress. That centers on the number of witnesses and documents that have not been released from the Trump administration despite subpoenas for those witnesses and documents.

Castor later contended that Trump was "not asking for a personal favor" on the phone call with Zelenskiy.

"He was speaking on behalf of the American people," Castor said.

Republican complaints about phone records

Beyond the contents of that Trump-Zelenskiy call, Republicans voiced frustration with congressional investigators gathering phone records of key players involved in the pressure campaign. Those records included, perhaps surprisingly, Devin Nunes, the ranking member of the House Intelligence Committee.

Nunes was integral in the questioning of witnesses during the public and private impeachment proceedings and depositions. He strongly made the case for the president and against the Democratic process, in particular.

The records found several contacts between Nunes, Giuliani, and Giuliani associate Lev Parnas, who has been indicted by federal prosecutors for violating bans on straw and foreign donors.

Collins objected to those phone records being included and demanded to know of Goldman who ordered them to be included. He called their inclusion a "gratuitous drive by" and a "smear campaign."

Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner of Wisconsin went so far as to call it "a clear abuse of power" and that those who issued the subpoenas and released the records "should be ashamed of themselves." He then added, "The surveillance state can get out of control."

Goldman declined to get into the details of how the investigation was conducted, but said subpoenaing phone records was standard practice in this type of investigation.

Progress toward impeachment

Nadler's committee will be tasked with writing articles of impeachment against the president that could include abuse of power and bribery, obstruction of Congress and obstruction of justice.

"We'll bring articles of impeachment presumably before the committee at some point later in the week," Nadler said Sunday on NBC's Meet The Press.

Nadler, though, said he had not yet decided which articles to bring. A sticking point among some Democrats is whether to include findings of the Mueller Russia investigation to support an obstruction of justice article.

Republicans led by ranking member Collins have complained all along about the impeachment process and argue that the case about Ukraine not only is meritless, but that Nadler and Democrats have been reckless and sloppy.

The Judiciary Committee would charged with introducing, then amending the articles of impeachment. Then, the committee, controlled by Democrats, would vote on whether to send the articles for a vote of the full House. That is expected before Christmas.

If a majority of the House supports it, that would trigger a Senate trial, likely in January. Republicans control the upper chamber, and they're expected to acquit Trump. Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., has said he'll convene a trial as required under the Constitution but that he thinks it's "inconceivable" that the needed 20 Republicans would break ranks to remove Trump.

Trump, for his own part, has said he hopes the House moves quickly to impeach him in order to set up a Senate trial that Republicans could use for their own political purposes.

The Trump administration has so far declined to participate in the process.

Read this article:
In Impeachment Hearing, Democrats Argue Trump Actions Are 'Clear And Present Danger' - NPR