web analytics

I am really loving this little Brit minx:


Metavirus filed this under:  

This poignant quote from John Cole (w/r/t that horrid police pot raid) sparks in me a question:

I’m wondering at what point Americans are finally going to have enough of this shit. They cut pensions slightly to keep the nation from going completely broke in Greece, and they are fire-bombing shit in protest. Here, unless you are a member of the elite you are a third class citizen, subject to any number of abuses to your life, property, and dignity, and no one seems to care or is too preoccupied.

So, when did Americans become such a placid, mewling, apathetic mass of perpetually tranquilized sheeple? I mean, sure, the teabaggers are all en fuego right now over shit that they dreamed up at a paranoid Klan meth party; but what about the true fundaments of pique and outrage that drove a country to so riotously rise up to protest, e.g., the Vietnam War?
Was the reign of George W. Bush and all its wildly illegal excesses just too much for us to handle? Is the media to blame?
I truly don’t get it.
In my opinion, a country with a population that has lost its fundamental sense of justice and outrage is no longer a democracy – it’s a reality TV game show.


One of the constant banes of my existence, Comcast, has won the coveted “Golden Poo” award for being the “The Worst Company In America”. It couldn’t have happened to a shittier company (because there are none!*).

After four rounds of bloody battle against some of the most publicly reviled businesses in America, Comcast can now run up the steps of the Philadelphia Museum of Art and hold its hands high in victory — it has bested everyone else to earn the title of Worst Company In America for 2010.

In a three-day, knock-down, drag-out bout with Ticket “Apollo Creed” Master, the little cable company that could showed just how badly their horrendous service, exorbitant costs, throttled internet and plans to acquire NBC Universal have ticked the Consumerist readers.

* I’m talking about customer-facing companies. Not shadowy megaconglomerates like B.P., Blackwater or Halliburton, k!?

Metavirus filed this under:  

Metavirus filed this under:  

I really do hope that there are some eager, well-endowed, buttrape-prone demons waiting in hell for the state-sanctioned, jack-booted thugs who perpetrated this atrocity:

SWAT team breaks into home, fires seven rounds at family’s pit bull and corgi (?!) as a seven-year-old looks on.
They found a “small amount” of marijuana, enough for a misdemeanor charge. The parents were then charged with child endangerment.
So smoking pot = “child endangerment.” Storming a home with guns, then firing bullets into the family pets as a child looks on = necessary police procedures to ensure everyone’s safety.

All this over a small, misdemeanor-class stash of weed.
America! Fuck yeah!

One thing that continually gets missed in the coverage of the new Arizona immigration law are the implications of the requirement that a police officer have a “reasonable suspicion” that someone is an illegal before asking for their papers.

Many people seem to think, “Problem solved! The police are prohibited from asking for papers unless they have a reasonable suspicion!”
Wrong. As any lawyer who’s taken Evidence can tell you, the “reasonable suspicion” requirement is only a basis on which a criminal defendant can seek to exclude evidence at trial.

The reason there is extensive case law interpreting what “reasonable suspicion” means is because defense attorneys routinely move to suppress any evidence procured by way of an illegal stop or frisk, at which point the police must articulate the basis of their reasonable suspicion. If they can’t do so to the judge’s satisfaction, the evidence is suppressed and the charges are often dismissed. Police quickly learn to follow the rules if they want their charges to stick.

In the immigration context, however, there is no evidence to suppress. Defense attorneys will not have an obvious mechanism for contesting the reasonability of the request for documentation. I can see an occasional civil rights complaint filed by the ACLU or a similar group, but I don’t see what circumstances would lead to any kind of routine judicial review of these decisions. The police will largely be on the honor system.

And that’s why this law is so problematic. It a recipe for police abuse, for unchecked racial profiling. And even if the police generally do a good job of controlling themselves, the mere spectre of such abuse will only drive the undocumented community farther underground. There will be no cooperation with the police. No reporting of crimes. More fleeing the scene of accidents. More children not getting medical care because their parents are afraid to take them to the hospital. It’s just really bad policy.

So you see, there isn’t any independent cause of action against the police department for stopping someone and asking for their papers without reasonable suspicion.
And because we’re not talking about a circumstance where a criminal defendant would be looking to suppress evidence, there would be no remedy or recourse whatsoever for police officers that violated this standard.
That’s your law lesson of the day. You’re welcome. :)
{ 1 comment }
Metavirus filed this under: , , ,  

Right on:

Can someone explain to me–hopefully using graphs, and small words–why Joe Lieberman is willing to share the precious blessing of American citizenship with Charles Manson, Gary Ridgeway, and David Berkowitz, but wants citizenship stripped from a guy who strapped some firecrackers to a bag of non-explosive fertilizer?
Metavirus filed this under: