Wednesday, August 24, 2011

Update from Bill Windsor

Though the grand jury had, according to Bill Windsor, invited him back on Tuesday to present evidence of corruption, the jurors apparently disappeared before he could. Here's the story. 

Saturday, August 20, 2011

Grand jury in Georgia accessed by private individual!

Bill Windsor got before the grand jury in Fulton County Georgia today. The grand jury is supposed to be a tool for the people to bring charges against corrupt officials, but access to it is routinely blocked. From the website of Lawless America... here's Bill's report! 

Bill will discuss the encounter on The American Reconstruction Project call this Saturday, August 20, with Jack Bauer.

Monday, August 15, 2011

Budget for legal services for indigents... not enough?

The Maine Commission on Indigent Legal Services responds to request to slash its budget by saying it wants more money! Its chairman, Ron Schneider, said:
“Our obligation is to provide those people, if they are indigent, with an attorney. That is a constitutional obligation that we have.”
Constitutional obligation? Nice try. The Bill of Rights protects a person's right to counsel; it doesn't obligate taxpayers to fund anything. More important is that an individual gets due process of the law... a fair trial; and that's just not happening, no matter how much money the state pays out to attorneys who provide counsel to indigent defendants.

The story mentions that the process for collecting payment from defendants found at least partially able to afford counsel will be changing next summer. 

Friday, August 12, 2011

"Kids for Cash" judge sentenced!

Pennsylvania: Judge Mark Ciaverella Jr. was sentenced on Thursday to 28 years in federal prison for sending kids as young as ten years old to juvenile detention centers without due process.
Federal prosecutors accused Ciavarella and a second judge, Michael Conahan, of taking more than $2 million in bribes from Robert Mericle, the builder of the PA Child Care and Western PA Child Care detention centers, and of extorting hundreds of thousands of dollars from Robert Powell, co-owner of the facilities.

Wednesday, August 10, 2011

Relief from prohibition to possess firearms - U.S.C. 18, Section 925 (c)

I did a little research and discovered how a person who has been prohibited from possessing firearms can apply to get his rights restored: and, according to U.S.C 18, Section 925 (c)... 

Any person whose application for relief from disabilities is denied by the Attorney General may file a petition with the United States district court for the district in which he resides for a judicial review of such denial.
However, it looks as though there's been no funding available to review applications since 1992! Here's a story from February 2002, written before the Supreme Court reversed a 2001 United States district court decision which had restored convicted felon Thomas Lamar Bean's firearms rights, or privileges. From the 2002 Supreme Court decision U.S. et al v. Thomas Lamar Bean   
"... while the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) draws a distinction between a “denial” and a “failure to act,” see 5 U.S.C. § 551(13), an applicant may obtain judicial review under §925(c) only if an application is denied."
... sneaky.


Just wanted to post a link to the Maine Tea Party, which has 1021 members currently. I highly recommend joining your County group after signing up! 

Tuesday, August 9, 2011

Fourth Amendment - Maine Supreme Court ruling upholds privacy rights

I blogged about this case a little while ago; at the time, the Maine Supreme Court hadn't yet made its decision. Well, last week it ruled in favor of an intoxicated motorcyclist who'd been stopped by an officer who hoped to get information about a car the officer had seen speeding. The motorcyclist was convicted of Operating Under the Influence (OUI); and he appealed.

In the lower court, Judge Hunter (who had me handcuffed for trying to assist my husband in his "felon in possession of firearms" case) had denied the man's motion to suppress evidence of his intoxication. The Supreme Court ruled that the public safety concern (the speeding car) was not great enough to justify stopping the motorcyclist, and evidence of the OUI, gained from the stop, should have been suppressed. Here's the case! 

And here's a list of the latest Maine Supreme Court opinions.

Citizen's (or warrantless) arrests in Maine

I found this information regarding citizen's arrests in Maine. It's nice to know that if an individual witnesses someone committing any Class A, B, or C crime, he can do a citizen's arrest. Some Class D and E crimes qualify as well, such as obstructing government administration.

Here's a list of crimes by felony class (A-D). And here's Title 17-A, The Maine Criminal Code, where you can look up the list of Class D and E crimes listed in subsection 2 of Section 16 (Warrantless arrests by a private person) which an individual can be arrested by a private person for committing.   

Tuesday, August 2, 2011

Recent Supreme Court ruling - unanimous

A jaded wife tries to poison her ex-friend who she has found out her husband has impregnated and here's the ruling which comes of it. It's actually a victory for individual and state rights.

Bond was a microbiologist who pled guilty to putting chemicals in her husband's mistress' mailbox, and was charged under federal chemical weapons statutes. But those statutes, her lawyers argued, were intended to fight international terrorists using chemical weapons of mass destruction! From the ruling....
In this case, Bond argues that the statute under which she was charged, 18 U. S. C. §229, exceeds Congress’ enumerated powers and violates the Tenth Amendment .
Bond was sure to receive less jail time if she were convicted of charges in state, rather than federal court. The United States Code - a unanimous court ruled - "violates the Tenth Amendment because the police power to prosecute criminals is a power reserved to the states." The Code has international underpinnings... the Chemical Weapons Convention of 1993. The ruling allowed Bond to have standing as an individual bringing a Tenth Amendment claim of violations of state sovereignty.