U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder is heading to Capitol Hill , where he’s expected to be grilled over the Justice Department’s decision to secretly seize the work, home and cellphone records used by almost a hundred reporters and editors at the Associated Press. On Tuesday, Holder defended the move as a necessary step in a criminal probe of leaks of classified information.
The use of the Espionage Act, to essentially silence whistleblowers within the government—Kiriakou, Drake and others, although Kiriakou went to jail on—pled out on another charge—the FISA Amendment Act, which allows for warrantless wiretapping, the National Defense Authorization Act, which allows for the stripping of American citizens of due process and indefinite detention. And it is one more assault in a long series of assault against freedom of information and freedom of the press.
And I would also, of course, throw in the persecution of Julian Assange at WikiLeaks and Bradley Manning as part of that process all of these measures to essentially shut down the freedom of information, as symptomatic of a reconfiguration of our society into a totalitarian security and surveillance state. One where anyone who challenges the official narrative, who digs out cases of torture, war crimes—which is, of course, what Manning and Assange presented to the American public—is going to be ruthlessly silenced.
Ted Rudow III
In a situation like this it is perfectly acceptable for the police to enter the residence; the phone call about the domestic disturbance provides exigent circumstances. The police acted under the suspicion of further potential harm to either the children or one of the spouses. They can't just take the word of the wife who is locked in a house with a man who may pose a threat to her and refuses to talk to the police. In a situation like this if the police were to leave without even talking face to face with the suspects and then the dispute led to a murder it would be a huge failure and the department would still be blamed for not stoping it.
The reality of policing is that the police can do what ever they want, warrant's do discourage police misconduct but they mainly serve to protect evidence which in this case is irrelevant. The police were responding to exigent circumstances, not seeking to search the house for evidence. The police know that they can't just bust down a door and search a house. By not complying the resident gave the police the lawful right to search the area incident to arrest.
Had the resident complied there would be little grounds for arrest, forced entry, or any search of the residence. That being said from what is visible in the video it doesn't appear that there was reason to tase the resident but as long as the officer can articulate his reasoning it's justifiable.
@leha, to get this straight is actually easy: if the police have suspicions about illegal activity, they obtain the warrant. This should have happened in Cleveland, and this should have happened in this case. However, the judge usually only issues the warrant when there's enough evidence for the entry. A single call is not nearly enough, i.e. in this case if the police followed the law, not only they wouldn't be able to enter without the warrant, but, assuming that the call was all they had, they wouldn't obtain the warrant as well - in which case they have to leave. In Cleveland, a single call wouldn't be enough either, but when the number of tips and suspicions accumulated, the warrant would be issued. This is how it's supposed to work in civilized society, and this is how it has been working for many decades in our country.
Not only the officers won't be charged with anything, but from the comments so far made by Parish, they will be rewarded. Contrary to numerous rulings of the Supreme Court, Parish claims that the call from 3rd party is already the exigent circumstance, and no warrant is required. I.e. all it takes for the police to break into your home, is somebody's word that violence _might_ be going on inside.
Note that the crime the occupants were arrested for was not anything related to the violence. It was obstruction, i.e. from the police's standpoint, not cooperating with their investigation (by not coming out or opening the door) is a crime by itself. Equally, the taser was used as punishment for non-compliance, i.e. for refusing to lay on the ground.
Don't you feel somewhat obliged, as a "journalist", to investigate and explain the overlap in the "most likely" and "least likely" lists; ie "surgeon" vs "doctor"?
Wow, what is going on there, I certainly hope those police get appropriate action against them for inappropriate behavior....fire them.....they work for us....
are we to be frightened of the people who are working to protect us.....at least are suppose to be....
Seems like police want it both ways: in this case, they had to enter because the safety of the parties inside demanded it. In the case of the three girls who were held captive for ten years, police were required to ignore the calls to help them, because they didn't have a warrant. I sure would like to get this straight...
We're always told that the taser is an alternative to deadly force: There was nothing in this even that warranted the use of firearms, so clearly it's not considered an alternative to deadly force by the police officers carrying it.
To Parish's "not to cooperate with law enforcement." comment, it sure seems to me that someone kicking down my door without a warrant or probable cause is not involved in law enforcement. Unless there were some amazing mitigating circumstances, I hope the officer who came through that door is charged with a felony that adequately captures violently breaking into an occupied home with the intent of harming the inhabitants.
fantastic, i live in Santa Rosa, and hubby and I love this place, such a landmark....much gratitude Zach~thank you!
I remember every single one of those performances. I loved that show and dreamed of being on it. My fave was someone who went on performing Taco's "Puttin' on the Ritz" and I was so confused as to whether it was the real Taco.
That is fantastic. Love that place. Now keep that money in an ultra-safe place till it's ready to be spent (for all I know it already has been)!
This Open Mike piece is shoddy, fact-challenged bloviating.
1. DHS did not "... search people's homes". The search was conducted by Watertown Police, Boston Police, and the FBI.
2. Nowhere does any reporting state that "some guy went out for a smoke". The accounts state a couple went outside for fresh air, when the husband discovered tarp lines had been cut.
3. Colleen McMahon did NOT rule that American citizens can be executed. She ruled narrowly in the Al-Awlaki case that the government could not be compelled to publish its justification for killing Al-Awlaki in Yemen.
4. Likewise, the Supreme Court has not ruled on domestic drone.
5. That "one terrorist for every 50 civilians" trope was from a single Pakistani 2009 report that had internal political motivation. Nowhere else has this claim been made, except in reports citing the original.
Myers is entitled to his OPINIONS, however baseless, but no amount of conspiracy paranoia entitles him to his own "facts".
A great big thank you to Zach. And an even bigger thank you to the local community who made this campaign a success through their volunteer hours, donations and love of the Rio Theater.
Very nice to hear the theater will be "saved". It would be even more far reaching if someone revitalized the rest of Monte Rio which hasn't seen any reinvention in the last 50 years!
He's obviously never been in the building or he wouldn't have bothered
Love that theater! That's where I had my very first kiss over like 25 years ago! Cocktail was the movie playing at the time! Lol! So glad it is being saved!!
Darius Anderson, in my opinion, uses the newspapers as advomercials to promote himself and boost his ego, or promote his personal financial interests. The Editors of these papers argue till they are red in the face that they are in control of the editorial content and Darius doesn't influence their converage, but any person of reasonable intelligence when reading these stories, can see right through those statements. Whether the editorial staff has blindly drank the Kool-Aid so long they aren't consciously making editorial decisions, or Darius hands them a memo (or Falk/Hooper) and says "here, run this" one cannot tell.
The Kings Sacramento articles have nothing to do with Sonoma County except that it boosts Darius' ego so he thinks.
The Chateau Sonoma hotel Darius proposes is news in Sonoma but the way Bolling covers the stories in the Index Tribune is an advomercial and they are biased for the success of the project. Both Lynch and Bolling have ownership stakes in the paper and Darius is betting on the completion of the hotel so if the hotel project fails, not only Darius but also Lynch and Bolling will be harmed financially so the inherent conflict of interest is for them not to write anything negative, with hold Letters to the Editor that are not positive, and undermine any offort they do make at covering a balanced approach. Anything covered is countered by negative slams throughout the article so their bias comes out everytime.
Thats OK, the people of Sonoma see right through these efforts and the values of these newspapers is dropping like flies. They are embarrassing Sonoma and themselves but they've sold out so badly anyway, it doesn't matter to them any more.
Great. I grew up going to the Rio. My Grandma and Grandpa owned Stella's Pastry Shop in Monte Rio for 15 years. The building was right next to Bartlett's Store.
I walk by the Rio EVERYDAY with my kid. The theatre is also the cover of my wedding album. This means so much to our community and my family. Words can't even express my appreciation. Tears of joy- right here. Thanks EVERYONE who helped. What an impact on our little community!
Bet S. Charles Lee designed it... he loved his quonset huts!
2013 Metro Newspapers. All rights reserved.
Website powered by Foundation