This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 2.5 License.
The ACLU in California today released a free smart-phone app that allows people to send cellphone videos of police encounters to the ACLU, automatically—and the ACLU will preserve the video footage, even if the cops seize the phone and delete the video or destroy the phone. The app, “Mobile Justice CA,” works for both iPhones and Android users. It’s available at Apple’s App Store and at Google Play.
The app features a large red “Record” button in the middle of the screen. When it’s pressed, the video is recorded on the phone and a duplicate copy is transmitted simultaneously to the ACLU server. When the “stop” button is pressed, a “Report” screen appears, where information about the location of the incident and the people involved can also be transmitted to the ACLU. The video and the information are treated as a request for legal assistance and reviewed by staff members. No action is taken by the ACLU, however, unless an explicit request is made, and the reports are treated as confidential and privileged legal communications. The videos, however, may be shared by the ACLU with the news media, community organizations or the general public to help call attention to police abuse.
The app is available in English and Spanish. It includes a “Know Your Rights” page.
Read more @ The Nation.
— Pitt Griffin (@pittgriffin) December 28, 2014
The raid on Sal Culosi was merely another red flag indicating yet more SWAT team mission creep in America. It wasn’t even the first time a Virginia SWAT team had killed someone during a gambling raid. In 1998 a SWAT team in Virginia Beach shot and killed security guard Edward C. Reed during a 3:00 AM raid on a private club suspected of facilitating gambling. Police said they approached the tinted car where Reed was working security, knocked, and identified themselves, then shot Reed when he refused to drop his handgun. Reed’s family insisted the police story was unlikely. Reed had no criminal record. Why would he knowingly point his gun at a heavily armed police team? More likely, they said, Reed mistakenly believed the raiding officers were there to do harm, particularly given that the club had been robbed not long before the raid. Statements by the police themselves seem to back that account. According to officers at the scene, Reed’s last words were, “Why did you shoot me? I was reading a book.”
Read the full article @ Salon.com.
The message from Robel’s prosecution and Silverglate’s advice is clear: do not talk to the FBI without your lawyer present. If Harvey’s decades long experience is any indication, chances are that the agents will politely decline to interview you if you and your attorney insist on creating an accurate record of an FBI interrogation.
I’d say this is good advice for interrogation by any law enforcement agency, not just the FBI.
It was more sophisticated than we had imagined: new documents show that the violent crackdown on Occupy last fall – so mystifying at the time – was not just coordinated at the level of the FBI, the Department of Homeland Security, and local police. The crackdown, which involved, as you may recall, violent arrests, group disruption, canister missiles to the skulls of protesters, people held in handcuffs so tight they were injured, people held in bondage till they were forced to wet or soil themselves –was coordinated with the big banks themselves.
Read the full article @ The Guardian.
First watch this video:
Then read this article:
On the same day that federal investigators pleaded with the public for photos and videos that would help them identify the Boston Marathon bombers, the Department of Homeland Security and the FBI released a memo stating the “discreet use of cameras or video recorders” could be interpreted as a sign that a terrorist act is being planned.
However, the Joint Intelligence Bulletin released April 16, one day after the attacks, failed to list any specific examples that this was the case, even though it listed several examples of previous planned terrorist attacks that were thwarted.
The truth is, the memo is simply rehashing the same information the feds have been stating for years, which is one reason why so many police officers and security guards tend to treat citizens with cameras as suspected terrorists.
Read the full article @ PhotographyIsNotACrime.com.
That said, a large percent of the reaction in Boston has been security theater. “Four victims brutally killed” goes by other names in other cities.
In Detroit, for example, they call it “Tuesday”.
…and Detroit does not shut down every time there are a few murders.
“But Clark,” I hear you say, “this is different. This was a terrorist attack.”
Washington DC, during ongoing sniper terrorist attacks in 2002 that killed twice as many people, was not shut down.
Kileen Texas, after the Fort Hood terrorist attack in 2009 that killed three times as many people, was not shut down.
London, after the bombing terrorist attack in 2005 that killed more than ten times as many people, was not shut down.
Read the full article @ PopeHat.com.
The unprecedented manhunt in Boston that concluded successfully Friday night earned law enforcement authorities the gratitude of the nation.
But as relief replaces fear, the debate about what this episode means for the future is already beginning. And one of the most unsettling questions is whether the violence-related lockdown of a major U.S. city — an extraordinary moment in American history — sets a life-altering precedent.
“When you have lives at stake, it’s up to law enforcement,” Ruppersberger said. “But it’s an accomplishment when someone shuts down an entire community and people can’t go outside and are told to stay away. We have to stand up as Americans to this. … We’ve got to continue to go to baseball games, continue to go to events. We can’t allow these people to shut us down.”
Read the full article on Politico.com.