Thursday, January 22, 2015


News Clips For The Day


http://www.cbsnews.com/

As groups police the police, some add guns to the mix
By INES NOVACIC CBS NEWS
January 22, 2015

As the debate over police-related violence persists across the country, some critics have taken it upon themselves to monitor law enforcement across America, increasingly turning to a controversial tactic known as cop-watching.

"Going out, filming police officers, basically in acts of self-defense. ... Cop-watching is a direct action tactic," said Antonio Beuhler, co-founder of the Peaceful Streets Project, a grassroots advocacy group based in Austin, Texas, dedicated to increasing police accountability.

Beuhler, a veteran of the Iraq war and a graduate of West Point and Stanford University, said he took up cop-watching after his first run in with the police three years ago. An officer was caught on camera assaulting him at a gas station in Austin, after Beuhler had verbally intervened in what he thought was an act of police brutality against a woman the officer had pulled over.

"I've been arrested now five times cop-watching, and I've had 10 different charges filed in the courts against me," said Beuhler. "Its expensive, time-consuming, and every night in jail is misery."

The practice is especially relevant given the current scrutiny police are under following the Michael Brown shooting in Ferguson, Missouri and the Eric Garner chokehold death in New York City, both of which generated large-scale protests after grand juries declined to indict the officers involved.

While the protests attracted nationwide attention, many in the law enforcement community have voiced grievances over how they have been portrayed, notably in New York City.

Cop-watching involves observing, filming and sometimes confronting police officers if they're believed to be overstepping their authority. The Black Panther Party is credited with launching this kind of "policing of the police" activity back in the late 1960s. However, unlike the Black Panthers, none of the members of Beuhler's organization carry guns when they cop-watch.

"We don't want to give the cops a really convenient excuse to kill one of us," said Beuhler, holding his arms up. "We don't want them to say, well he was armed so ... "
This concern does not define all cop-watching movements. In a town just outside of Dallas, there is a group of activists who cop-watch while openly carrying firearms.

On a recent Saturday, Kory Watkins stood in front of Arlington City Hall before heading to a protest in front of Arlington police headquarters.

"On our open-carry walks we were seeing the overreach and the police brutality firsthand - on our open carriers and other people as well - so, we transformed into a cop watch group," said Watkins, an Arlington resident and father of two who leads this group of activists.

This group of open-carry cop-watchers comprises dozens of members loosely associated with North Texas Cop Block and Open Carry Tarrant County -- two groups dedicated to monitoring law enforcement while also campaigning for changes to the state's open-carry gun laws.

"I do it for educational purposes," said Rene Frias, an open-carry cop-watcher and friend of Watkins. "All these laws, they strip away our rights."

He pointed to the AK-47 slung across his chest.

"It's ridiculous that I can carry around this hunk of metal, and I can't carry a handgun."

Texas is one of six states where the open carry of handguns is not permitted. Current legislation states that handguns must be concealed and each handgun requires a permit. However, the open carry of long guns such as rifles and shotguns is permitted, provided it's not done in a manner meant to cause alarm.

New Texas Gov. Greg Abbott has supported a new bill that would allow the open carry of smaller firearms. Watkins' group also supports this bill. Members told CBS News that they cop-watch at least once a week, and they also carry long guns on display almost every day, around Arlington streets, restaurants, cafes, and surrounding towns.

Asked about how the group feels about the police, Watkins said: "I think they've just lost their way and they're being trained wrong."

"I pay them to do their job," he added. "So why can't I show up to where they're at with a gun? I'm their boss."

According to Lt. Christopher Cook, a spokesman for Arlington Police Department, cop-watching has been going on there for about a year, and five arrests have been made since September, when open carry began to feature as part of most cop watches.

"In majority of the circumstances the openly carrying of a weapon as long as it's not displayed in a manner calculated to cause alarm, can be lawful -- not in every -- but in most," said Cook. "It's not just one thing, it's not just showing up on a traffic stop with a rifle; it's coupled with the fact that they're in close proximity, that they're distracting the officer, yelling at the officer to the point that they have to divert and focus their attention on this individual who's armed," he added, saying how this was occurring with more frequency in recent weeks.

"As police officers, we can't become desensitized to people or a group of people carrying firearms."

According to Watkins, it's the police who aggravate and intimidate.

"We stand plenty enough room for the officer to do their duty and the officer to do their work - it's very simple, you just sit there film and record," he said. "We're peaceful when we do it."

The dynamics between police and activists didn't seem that straightforward when officers tried to detain Frias, who was standing at a busy intersection in Arlington carrying a megaphone and his rifle.

"I was merely exercising my First and Second Amendment rights," he said.

For about half an hour, a handful of activists and about five police officers stood on a street corner filming each other using smartphones and compact cameras, trading terse words about who was encroaching on what rights, before police drove off without making any arrests.

A few days after the incident, Watkins' group joined hundreds of activists in Austin, Texas, at a rally in support of new open carry legislation, which could potentially add more guns into confrontations with police.




“As the debate over police-related violence persists across the country, some critics have taken it upon themselves to monitor law enforcement across America, increasingly turning to a controversial tactic known as cop-watching. "Going out, filming police officers, basically in acts of self-defense. ... Cop-watching is a direct action tactic," said Antonio Beuhler, co-founder of the Peaceful Streets Project, a grassroots advocacy group based in Austin, Texas, dedicated to increasing police accountability. ... Cop-watching involves observing, filming and sometimes confronting police officers if they're believed to be overstepping their authority. The Black Panther Party is credited with launching this kind of "policing of the police" activity back in the late 1960s. However, unlike the Black Panthers, none of the members of Beuhler's organization carry guns when they cop-watch. "We don't want to give the cops a really convenient excuse to kill one of us," said Beuhler, holding his arms up. "We don't want them to say, well he was armed so ... " This concern does not define all cop-watching movements. In a town just outside of Dallas, there is a group of activists who cop-watch while openly carrying firearms.... "On our open-carry walks we were seeing the overreach and the police brutality firsthand - on our open carriers and other people as well - so, we transformed into a cop watch group," said Watkins, an Arlington resident and father of two who leads this group of activists. This group of open-carry cop-watchers comprises dozens of members loosely associated with North Texas Cop Block and Open Carry Tarrant County -- two groups dedicated to monitoring law enforcement while also campaigning for changes to the state's open-carry gun laws.... Asked about how the group feels about the police, Watkins said: "I think they've just lost their way and they're being trained wrong. I pay them to do their job," he added. "So why can't I show up to where they're at with a gun? I'm their boss." .... "I was merely exercising my First and Second Amendment rights," he said. For about half an hour, a handful of activists and about five police officers stood on a street corner filming each other using smartphones and compact cameras, trading terse words about who was encroaching on what rights, before police drove off without making any arrests.”

Until I saw this news article today, I was assuming that everybody on the gun-toting side of American society were basically right wing, but here they are showing up to oppose police brutality incidents, and making recordings of everything the police do. I would like to know more about these groups and individuals. See the Wikipedia article below on Antonio Buehler. His facebook page includes a series of organizations that sound more like they are Libertarians rather than liberals, but they are on the side of true justice, it seems to me. Buehler, judging from his photograph, is over half American Indian, despite his German last name. He was born in my home state of NC. He began his activism when he was assaulted by a police officer for simply speaking up when he came across a police officer abusing a woman who was pulled over for a traffic stop. He has since been arrested some half a dozen times for filming the police. His organization has grown in size over the years and he was given an award for his activism. See the whole Wikipedia article on the Net for more about him.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antonio_Buehler

Antonio Buehler
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Antonio Buehler is an American activist known for his work on police accountability and his defense of the constitutional right to photograph, film and document the police. In 2012, Buehler was arrested in Austin, Texas, for recording the police after he allegedly witnessed a woman being abused by officers. After the arrest, Buehler co-founded the Peaceful Streets Project, an organization that trains the public to record police activity.[1]

Early life and education[edit]
Antonio Buehler was born in Fayetteville, North Carolina in 1977. He attended Pottsville Area High School in Pottsville, Pennsylvania where he was an All-Anthracite football player.[2]Antonio graduated from the United States Military Academy at West Point and later from the Stanford Graduate School of Business[3] and the Harvard Graduate School of Education.[4]


Alternative Education[edit]
Buehler sits on the Educational Choices Advisory Council[3] for the Our America Initiative that is associated with former New Mexico Governor Gary Johnson. Buehler is also a member of Startup Learning,[5] a private consultancy for alternative education.
In 2014, Buehler launched Abrome,[6] an online education company.

New Year's Day 2012 incident[edit]

In the early hours of New Year’s Day 2012, Buehler, the designated driver that night, pulled into a 7-11 in Austin, TX for gas.[7] While fueling up, he and his passenger observed a DWI stop in progress, with a woman in high heels performing a field sobriety test; according to Buehler, they heard a female screaming and turned in time to see officer Robert Snider pulling the female passenger out of the vehicle and throwing her to the ground.[8] Buehler yelled out to the police, asking them why they were assaulting her.[9] After twisting her arms behind her back, the officers arrested her. Then officer Patrick Oborski approached Buehler, pushed him forcefully several times in the chest, and arrested him.[10][11] Oborski later claimed Buehler spat on him,[12] a felony charge that carries up to a 10-year prison sentence.[12][13] However, witness video evidence does not show Buehler spitting, Oborski did not wipe his face, and APD spokesman Corporal Hipolito admitted to KEYE news that he could not see Buehler spitting on the officer.[14][15]

After an online appeal by Buehler to find witnesses to the event, several witnesses came forward[17] and a videorecording[18] of the incident surfaced.[19] APD has yet to release thedashcam videos from Oborski or Snider's vehicles to the public. Nearly 8,200 people have joined the Free Antonio Buehler[20] Facebook page, with supporters flyering the city and organizing rallies in support of Buehler, and posting daily stories of American and international police abuse.[21][22]

Despite a half dozen witnesses, two videos and audio evidence of what happened on New Year's Day, the District Attorney did not convene a grand jury in 2012. His grand jury date was then postponed numerous times.[23] The grand jury finally convened on March 5, 6 and 7, 2013. Four weeks later, the District Attorney finally informed the public that the grand jury failed to indict Antonio Buehler on any of the crimes with which he was charged.[24][25][26]

They instead indicted him on four Class C misdemeanors. Three for "failure to obey a lawful order" related to his New Year's Day incident, and two follow on arrests. The fourth indictment was for "interfering" in an incident in which he was never arrested. The grand jury also indicted Norma Pizana for resisting arrest. Pizana is the woman that Buehler felt was being abused on New Year's Day 2012.[27]

On December 31, 2013, Buehler sued the Austin Police Department, Police Chief Art Acevedo, Officer Patrick Oborski, Officer Robert Snider, SGT Adam Johnson and Officer Justin Berry for allegedly violating his civil rights on January 1, August 26 and September 21, 2012.[28][29][30][31]

On June 2, 2014 the National Press Photographers Association filed an Amicus Brief[32] in support of Buehler's civil lawsuit.[33]

On July 24, 2014, Federal Judge Mark Lane denied motions by the City of Austin to dismiss the case, finding that private citizens have the right to record officers in public places as they perform their official duties.[34][35] Lane also said the officers were not personally immune from allegations that they had arrested and searched him without probable cause.[36][37]

October 29, 2014, after an unprecedented four-day Class C Misdemeanor trial that spanned a full calendar week, Buehler was acquitted of charges and found not guilty of failing to comply with the order of a police officer on New Year’s Day 2012."[38][39][40] The trial was unique not only in its duration, but also in the resources invested into it by the state; the state had eight prosecutors in the courtroom and over a dozen police officers.[41][42][43][44][45]

Peaceful Streets Project[edit]

In the months following the incident, a group of activists from a range of backgrounds joined Buehler to start the Peaceful Streets Project, an all-volunteer, nonpartisan, grassroots effort for police accountability.[46][47][48] The group holds free community trainings on knowing your rights during police encounters, and held a day-long Police Accountability Summit in Austin, TX on July 14, 2012 where they handed out 100 handheld videocameras to trained activists who now actively film police encounters with residents of Austin.[49][50][51][52][53] The Peaceful Streets Project has also stepped up efforts to work with and ally with other community organizations, and have participated in protests in solidarity with victims of police abuse nationally.[54][55] The Peaceful Streets Project has a strong social media presence with over 2,200 followers on Twitter[56] and 11,000 likes on Facebook.[57]

Buehler's efforts to expose what he considers to be police violence and the inherent corruption of the justice system[58][59] have resulted in numerous bloggers taking up his cause.[60][61][62][63] In addition, numerous cities around the country have reached out to Buehler and the Peaceful Streets Project looking to set up local franchises. Peaceful Streets Project chapters now exist in nearly a dozen cities to include Houston, Dallas-Fort Worth, New York City, Manchester, Honolulu, San Antonio and Eunice, LA.

Buehler has continued to wage a public fight against his criminal charges. He has claimed that the city and the Austin Police Department are intentionally engaged in a cover-up and that corruption runs throughout the city government and the police department.[58]

On June 24, 2013, Fox 7 ran a piece on Antonio Buehler wherein the President of the Austin Police Association alluded to possible violence in the future should Buehler continue to escalate his cop watching tactics.[64] The Peaceful Streets Project responded by organizing several more public cop watch events, Know Your Rights Trainings and a national police accountability summit in Austin on August 17, 2013.[65]

On April 12, 2014, Buehler spoke about the Peaceful Streets Project and police abuse at a TEDx event at Harvard.[66]
(For 2012 arrests and trials, see Wikipedia.)

March 13, 2013[edit]

On March 13, 2013, Buehler was arrested for Disorderly Conduct in Gonzales, Texas, for telling a police officer to "go fuck yourself."[78] On June 5, 2013, Buehler defended himself pro se. After a seven hour trial, the jury found him guilty and assessed a $1 fine.[79] Buehler was awarded a trial de novo which will begin on February 23, 2015 at Gonzales County Court.

Accolades[edit]

In July 2012, Buehler was chosen to receive the Texans for Accountable Government annual Activist of the Year award.[80] In November 2012, Austin Chronicle readers voted Antonio Buehler as Austin's Best Activist and the Peaceful Streets Project as the Best Grassroots Movement for 2012.[81][82]





http://www.cbsnews.com/news/video-man-shot-dead-by-new-jersey-police-had-hands-raised/

VIDEO: Man shot dead by New Jersey police had hands raised
By CRIMESIDER STAFF AP 
January 21, 2015

BRIDGETON, N.J. - A newly released video shows a tense traffic stop last month in which a man stepping out of a car with his hands raised at shoulder height was fatally shot by police.

The video from a police car dashboard camera shows Bridgeton officers Braheme Days and Roger Worley in a Dec. 30 traffic stop that escalates quickly after Days warns his partner about seeing a gun and then saying that the vehicle's passenger was reaching for something in the car. It ends with passenger Jerame Reid disregarding Days' order to not move, getting out of the car and being shot to death.

The officers had pulled over the Jaguar for rolling through a stop sign, and the encounter started friendly. But after Reid tells Officer Days that the car had stopped at the sign, Days suddenly steps back, pulls his gun and tells them, "Show me your hands." Days tells his police partner that there's a gun in the glove compartment and then appears to reach inside the car and remove a gun. 

The driver, Leroy Tutt, is seen showing his hands atop the open window on his side of the car. It's not clear what Reid is doing, though Days repeatedly warns him not to move during an interaction that lasts less than two minutes.

"I'm going to shoot you," Days shouts in a speech laced with profanity. "You're going to be ... dead. If you reach for something, you're going to be ... dead."

"I ain't got no reason to reach for nothing, bro, I ain't got no reason to reach for nothing," Reid says as Days continues to yell to his partner that Reid is reaching for something.
Reid then says, "I'm getting out and getting on the ground." Days tells him not to move, but Reid repeats that he's getting out.

The passenger door then pops open, but it's not clear whether Reid or Officer Days opens it. Reid then emerges from the vehicle. His hands are at about shoulder height, and they appear to be empty. As he steps out, the officers fire at least six shots, killing him.

Days is out of the frame when the shots ring out. It's unclear how many times each officer shoots.

After the shooting, there are shouts from people who are in the area and other police and emergency vehicles arrive. Tutt follows officers' commands, gets out of the vehicle and calmly lies down on the street.

The video was first obtained through open records requests by the South Jersey Times and the Press of Atlantic City.

The shooting has sparked protests in the southern New Jersey city. The case comes on the heels of some high-profile killings of unarmed black men and youth by white police officers across the country last year. Reid, Tutt and Officer Days are black; his partner, Officer Worley, is white.

Activists are calling on the Cumberland County prosecutor to transfer the case to the state attorney general. County Prosecutor Jennifer Webb-McCrae has recused herself from the case because she previously knew Officer Days. First Assistant Prosecutor Harold Shapiro said Wednesday that he could not comment on the investigation.

"The video speaks for itself that at no point was Jerame Reid a threat and he possessed no weapon on his person," said Walter Hudson, chair and founder of the civil rights group the National Awareness Alliance. "He complied with the officer and the officer shot him."

Hudson said Days had options other than firing his weapon, but "he didn't take the other options."

The National Awareness Alliance & National Action Network's Atlantic City chapter scheduled a news conference on the shooting for Wednesday afternoon.

Both officers have been placed on administrative leave while the Cumberland County Prosecutor's Office investigates the case.

Reid, 36, had spent about 13 years in prison for shooting at New Jersey State Police troopers when he was a teenager. He was also arrested last year on charges including drug possession and obstruction; Days was one of the arresting officers then. Relatives said he had a baby son.




“A newly released video shows a tense traffic stop last month in which a man stepping out of a car with his hands raised at shoulder height was fatally shot by police. The video from a police car dashboard camera shows Bridgeton officers Braheme Days and Roger Worley in a Dec. 30 traffic stop that escalates quickly after Days warns his partner about seeing a gun and then saying that the vehicle's passenger was reaching for something in the car. It ends with passenger Jerame Reid disregarding Days' order to not move, getting out of the car and being shot to death.... The passenger door then pops open, but it's not clear whether Reid or Officer Days opens it. Reid then emerges from the vehicle. His hands are at about shoulder height, and they appear to be empty. As he steps out, the officers fire at least six shots, killing him. Days is out of the frame when the shots ring out. It's unclear how many times each officer shoots.... Reid, Tutt and Officer Days are black; his partner, Officer Worley, is white. Activists are calling on the Cumberland County prosecutor to transfer the case to the state attorney general. County Prosecutor Jennifer Webb-McCrae has recused herself from the case because she previously knew Officer Days. First Assistant Prosecutor Harold Shapiro said Wednesday that he could not comment on the investigation.... Walter Hudson, chair and founder of the civil rights group the National Awareness Alliance. "He complied with the officer and the officer shot him." Hudson said Days had options other than firing his weapon, but "he didn't take the other options." The National Awareness Alliance & National Action Network's Atlantic City chapter scheduled a news conference on the shooting for Wednesday afternoon.... Days was one of the arresting officers then. Relatives said he had a baby son.”

Days, the shooter, and Reid are both black, so there is no racial issue here. Days was acquainted with Reid from a past arrest, and used “profanity laced” speech in shouting at Reid not to move. He kept insisting that the man was reaching for a gun, which was supposedly in the glove compartment. The article doesn't confirm whether or not there was a gun found there. Worley apparently did not shoot his weapon, and Tutt got out of the car and onto the ground safely. The National Awareness Alliance is a civil rights group that is new to me, who along with another group, scheduled a news conference for yesterday. I must say the news footage on the 6:30 CBS report showed no noticeable activity on Reid's part until he opened the car door and got out with his hands up. I'll try to clip this story as it is reported in the future.





http://www.cbsnews.com/news/city-of-paris-to-sue-fox-news-over-on-air-comments/

City of Paris to sue Fox News over on-air comments
CBS/AP
January 20, 2015

The city of Paris plans to sue Fox News over what it described as derisive on-air comments, a spokesperson confirmed to CBS News.

They plan to sue for damage to "the honor and image of Paris," the spokesperson told CBS News' Elaine Cobbe.

Paris is the number one tourism destination in the world - and officials are already concerned recent attacks could affect visitor figures.

Paris mayor Anne Hidalgo first announced the decision on CNN.

Fox News has come under attack in France recently for its portrayal of life in Paris' Muslim neighborhoods in the wake of the Charlie Hebdo attacks. According to the New York Times, the network has aired segments proclaiming parts of the French capital "no-go zones" for non-Muslims, which the police avoid.

The network's flagship morning show "Fox & Friends" even went so far as to produce a map it said showed the "no-go zones." They later apologized for airing the segment.

Fox News executive vice president Michael Clemente responded to the lawsuit announcement saying: "We empathize with the citizens of France as they go through a healing process and return to everyday life. However, we find the Mayor's comments regarding a lawsuit misplaced."

This is at least the second time the network has raised the ire of European politicians.

A news commentator who told Fox News that the British city of Birmingham is "totally Muslim" was forced to apologize for the comments, which drew widespread online ridicule.

Steven Emerson, an American author whose website describes him as a leading authority on Islamic extremist networks, told Fox News in a live broadcast that in Britain "there are actual cities like Birmingham that are totally Muslim, where non-Muslims just simply don't go in."

Emerson, who was discussing the recent terror attacks in Paris with host Jeanine Pirro, also claimed that in parts of London, "Muslim religious police" beat and injure "anyone who doesn't dress according to Muslim religious attire."

British Prime Minister David Cameron told ITV News he "choked on his porridge" when he heard about the claims. "This guy is clearly a complete idiot," he said.

According to CNN's Brian Stelter, Fox News has apologized four times on air for its segments about Muslims in Europe.

Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal, a potential 2016 GOP presidential candidate, gave a speech in London on Monday in which he referenced the so-called "no-go zones,"despite the notion of their existence having been discredited.

When pressed afterwards by a CNN reporter in London to present facts supporting the claim, Jindal said "he heard it from folks here" that they exist.

He said "the radical left absolutely wants to pretend like this problem is not here."




“Fox News has come under attack in France recently for its portrayal of life in Paris' Muslim neighborhoods in the wake of the Charlie Hebdo attacks. According to the New York Times, the network has aired segments proclaiming parts of the French capital "no-go zones" for non-Muslims, which the police avoid. The network's flagship morning show "Fox & Friends" even went so far as to produce a map it said showed the "no-go zones." They later apologized for airing the segment.... This is at least the second time the network has raised the ire of European politicians. A news commentator who told Fox News that the British city of Birmingham is "totally Muslim" was forced to apologize for the comments, which drew widespread online ridicule. Steven Emerson, an American author whose website describes him as a leading authority on Islamic extremist networks, told Fox News in a live broadcast that in Britain "there are actual cities like Birmingham that are totally Muslim, where non-Muslims just simply don't go in."... also claimed that in parts of London, "Muslim religious police" beat and injure "anyone who doesn't dress according to Muslim religious attire." British Prime Minister David Cameron told ITV News he "choked on his porridge" when he heard about the claims. "This guy is clearly a complete idiot," he said. According to CNN's Brian Stelter, Fox News has apologized four times on air for its segments about Muslims in Europe. Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal, a potential 2016 GOP presidential candidate, gave a speech in London on Monday in which he referenced the so-called "no-go zones,"despite the notion of their existence having been discredited.”

Jindal uses the phrase “the radical left” to describe those who disagree with the equally radical right's claims about the situation in parts of England and France. Fox aired claims about “no go zones” twice in recent times and has backed down from it in both cases since. If they can't prove their story they shouldn't show it. I'll try to find some other news corroboration of “no go zones” on the Net. See below. The Atlantic article claims that the origin of “no go zones” was “Daniel Pipes, an often-inflammatory critic of Islam, seems to be patient zero for the meme. In 2006, he coined the phrase "no-go zones" to describe the SUZs, but after visiting in 2013, Pipes revised his views: For a visiting American, these areas are very mild, even dull. We who know the Bronx and Detroit expect urban hell in Europe too, but there things look fine. The immigrant areas are hardly beautiful, but buildings are intact, greenery abounds, and order prevails. These are not full-fledged no-go zones but, as the French nomenclature accurately indicates, "sensitive urban zones." In normal times, they are unthreatening, routine places. But they do unpredictably erupt, with car burnings, attacks on representatives of the state (including police), and riots. Having this first-hand experience, I regret having called these areas no-go zones.... But why, if there's no evidence for no-go zones and some of the highest-profile propagators of the idea have repudiated it, do such myths survive and thrive? It probably has a lot to do with the conservative media ecosystem. Erroneous beliefs such as these tend to concentrate along people's partisan or ideological axes. (The same is true of liberal media, though not in this particular case.) And once an idea has taken seed, it's extremely difficult to root out. As political scientists Brendan Nyhan and Jason Reifler have shown, corrections can actually backfire, increasing holders' faith in their incorrect beliefs.”



http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/01/22/anderson-cooper-no-go-zone-owns-up-to-blunders_n_6524924.html

Anderson Cooper Owns Up To 'No-Go Zone' Blunders At CNN
 By Jackson Connor
1/22/2015

After slamming Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal and Fox News earlier this week for propping up erroneous reports on "no-go zones" -- supposed sections of European cities where Sharia law rules and non-Muslims are not welcome -- CNN's Anderson Cooper admitted his own shortcomings in the wake of the Charlie Hebdo massacre.

"I think if you are going to point fingers at other people’s mistakes, you should also acknowledge your own mistakes and we didn’t do that on the program," the anchor said Wednesday night on his program, "AC360." "In the wake of the Paris attacks, several guests on this program mentioned 'no-go zones' in France. I didn’t challenge them and twice referred to them as well."

"I should have been more skeptical," he continued. "Won’t make the same mistake again."

CNN was the first to report that the city of Paris plans to take legal action against Fox News for its "no-go zone" remarks, with Mayor Anne Hidalgo telling Christiane Amanpour that "the honor of Paris has been prejudiced" by the network.

While over the weekend Fox News apologized four times for the unsubstantiated claims made on its air, CNN, too, dealt in "no-go zone" hysteria. As The Washington Post's Erik Wemple points out, on Jan. 9, a former CIA officer told Cooper that in France -- as well as other parts of Europe -- there are "no-go zones" managed by Islamic councils where "police don’t go in."

CNN's Chris Cuomo also referred to "no-go zones" while reporting on the ground in Paris.



http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2015/01/paris-mayor-to-sue-fox-over-no-go-zone-comments/384656/

Why the Muslim 'No-Go-Zone' Myth Won't Die
There's no evidence of extremist takeover of areas in Europe or the United States. So why do the claims continue?
DAVID A. GRAHAM
JAN 20 2015

Have you heard about the areas of Europe, or perhaps even of the United States, that are run by jihadists and which non-Muslims can't even enter?

Don't get too worried if you haven't: They don't exist. Or maybe you have, if you watch Fox News or read snippets of Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal's speech about Islamic extremism. While politics is rife with falsehoods, myths, and baseless rumors, it's often tough to see exactly where a claim comes from, and how it reaches a wider audience—including, for example, a Republican governor with apparent presidential aspirations and a reputation as a sober policy wonk. Here, however, it's possible to follow forensic traces and see how some small elements of truth metastasized into an outlandish claim.

Here's what Jindal said, via CNN:

In the West, non-assimilationist Muslims establish enclaves and carry out as much of Sharia law as they can without regard for the laws of the democratic countries which provided them a new home ....

It is startling to think that any country would allow, even unofficially, for a so called "no-go zone." The idea that a free country would allow for specific areas of its country to operate in an autonomous way that is not free and is in direct opposition to its laws is hard to fathom.

When CNN reporter Max Foster pressed him on this passage after the speech, Jindal couldn't name any specific instances. But he pointed to a report in the famously unreliable tabloid Daily Mail, and couched his refusal to back down as bold truth-telling: "I think that the radical Left absolutely wants to pretend like this problem is not here. Pretending it's not here won't make it go away."

Jindal's claim was particularly brazen because it came just a day after Fox News apologized for a comment an alleged expert made on air. Steve Emerson, who analyzes terrorism for the network, said on Fox News Sunday, "There are actual cities like Birmingham that are totally Muslim, where non-Muslims just simply don’t go in." British Prime Minister David Cameron ripped Emerson as only an old Etonian can: "When I heard this, frankly, I choked on my porridge and I thought it must be April Fools' Day. This guy’s clearly a complete idiot." Emerson apologized, but other Fox personalities repeated variations on the theme, and eventually Fox issued on-air corrections on both Fox & Friends and Justice With Judge Jeanne.

Fox isn't known for shying away from controversial claims, so the decision to move so aggressively to reverse is an indicator of how wrong the claim is. Of course, that came after several days of Fox personalities repeating the claim casually on air. (The retraction didn't come in time for one group, apparently: Paris' mayor said Tuesday that Paris would sue Fox News for sullying its image.)

But where did the claim come from in the first place? Like many political myths, there's a partial basis in fact that has become exaggerated into a hyperbolic and, in this case, inflammatory and dangerous claim.

It seems to stem from two or maybe three real phenomena. The first is the presence of sharia courts in some places in Europe. In the United Kingdom, for example, "Muslim Arbitration Tribunals" are officially mandated but set up outside the court system and can resolve civil and family issues through Islamic law; there are also reports of informal religious courts. There are similar Jewish courts in Britain, and the Muslim tribunals have received encouragement from figures including then-Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams. On the other hand, there are convincing arguments that the courts can sometimes be bad for women. (There's a fascinating echo of the Ottoman empire's "millet" system, in which non-Muslims were allowed to set up their own courts to deal with matters of personal law.)

The second real phenomena is the rise of vigilante sharia squads in some places. For example, in Whitechapel, East London, CNN reported on bands of Muslim men who try to keep alcohol out of the area and harangue passers-by about morality. RedState's Erick Erickson thinks he's caught CNN red-handed: While the network criticizes Jindal for not knowing of any real no-go zones, CNN itself reported on one! But the analogy doesn't quite hold. What's happening here is disturbing, but well-short of extremist-run enclaves. These are just ad-hoc groups, and area Muslims by and large condemn it in CNN's reporting. There's no evidence that these squads are powerful or widespread.

The third factor is what are known as "Zones Urbaines Sensibles," or "sensitive urban zones," in France. These areas are defined by their socioeconomic status—they're characterized by high unemployment, high rates of public housing, and low educational attainment. As it happens, many of these areas are populated largely by poor immigrants from the Muslim world, creating a neat but misleading correlation. Some of the "no-go" coverage has suggested that police and other emergency services dare not go into these areas. The United States is sadly not immune to dangerous city areas where emergency-service providers feel unsafe, so in that way this is a universal phenomenon. But as BusinessWeeknotes, it's not the case that the government has written these zones off; in fact, they've been designated for further attention and work on urban renewal.

These factors seem to have combined to create the no-go-zone myth. Daniel Pipes, an often-inflammatory critic of Islam, seems to be patient zero for the meme. In 2006, he coined the phrase "no-go zones" to describe the SUZs, but after visiting in 2013, Pipes revised his views:

For a visiting American, these areas are very mild, even dull. We who know the Bronx and Detroit expect urban hell in Europe too, but there things look fine. The immigrant areas are hardly beautiful, but buildings are intact, greenery abounds, and order prevails.

These are not full-fledged no-go zones but, as the French nomenclature accurately indicates, "sensitive urban zones." In normal times, they are unthreatening, routine places. But they do unpredictably erupt, with car burnings, attacks on representatives of the state (including police), and riots.

Having this first-hand experience, I regret having called these areas no-go zones.

Yet contacted by BusinessWeek last week, he again affirmed that there are no-go zones in Europe. I've asked Pipes to explain his re-reversal and haven't yet heard back, but I'll update if I do.

If you dig through the fever swamps of the Internet, you can see the idea spreading since then. For example, the blog "Violence Against Whites" chronicles the SUZs and other alleged no-go zones across Western Europe. (Other material on the site includes claims that Boers were ethnically cleansed in South Africa and a section on "white martyrs.") Catholic.org reports, "These areas are Muslim-dominated neighborhoods. Non-Muslims dare not set foot into the areas."

Meanwhile, the meme can be seen extending to the United States. Truth Uncensored reports, incorrectly, that there are no-go zones stateside, including in places like Dearborn, Michigan, a Detroit suburb with a large Muslim population. Conservative Tribune even posts a map that allegedly shows no-go zones controlled by Islamists across the United States. I can't tell where the map originally came from, but it cites data from Steven Emerson, the Fox expert who apologized for his no-go-zone comments. And the map is posted elsewhere on the Internet, labeled as everything from a map of terrorist camps (apparently al-Qaeda is big in Boca Raton—alert your grandparents!) to areas with concentrated Muslim populations.

Erroneous beliefs such as these concentrate along partisan axes, and once an idea has taken seed it's difficult to root out.

Bottom line: You don't need to worry about Muslim no-go zones if you live in the United States. And if you're planning a tourist expedition to Europe, it's a good idea to avoid high-crime areas, regardless of their demographics. But why, if there's no evidence for no-go zones and some of the highest-profile propagators of the idea have repudiated it, do such myths survive and thrive?

It probably has a lot to do with the conservative media ecosystem. Erroneous beliefs such as these tend to concentrate along people's partisan or ideological axes. (The same is true of liberal media, though not in this particular case.) And once an idea has taken seed, it's extremely difficult to root out. As political scientists Brendan Nyhan and Jason Reifler have shown, corrections can actually backfire, increasing holders' faith in their incorrect beliefs.

Unfortunately, even reporting on these misconceptions can worsen the problem, so I am part of the problem. But it seems important to note that Jindal is plainly wrong. These sorts of distortions and exaggerations don't help to fight the very real threat of Islamist terror. They don't serve the cause of creating an informed, reasoned democratic society. And they don't help the political prospects of guys like Jindal, who has previously demanded that his GOP stop being "the stupid party." Maybe this meme is the real no-go zone.





http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2015/01/20/378694515/albuquerque-selects-independent-monitor-to-oversee-police-reforms

Albuquerque Selects Independent Monitor To Oversee Police Reforms
Sam Sanders
January 20, 2015

The city of Albuquerque and the U.S. Justice Department have selected an independent monitor, Dr. James R. Ginger, to oversee police reforms. Ginger's selection is part of a settlement the city negotiated with DOJ over the police department's use of force. Ginger previously served as an independent monitor for a similar agreements reached with Pittsburgh, Los Angeles and the New Jersey State Police. He was selected from a pool of 17 applicants. A judge is expected to sign off on his selection Wednesday.

In 2014, DOJ found "reasonable cause to believe that APD engages in a pattern or practice of excessive force in violation of the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution," often against people posing a minimal threat. NPR member station KUNM previously reported that APD has shot 37 people since 2010, 24 of them fatally. The station says the Justice Department has been investigating the Albuquerque Police Department's use of force since late 2012.

The DOJ announced its settlement with Albuquerque in October 2014. At that time, the department said of Albuquerque police, "Officers routinely use deadly force and less lethal force in an unreasonable manner and that systemic deficiencies in policies, training, supervision, and oversight contributed to the pattern or practice."

The Justice Department says APD will implement reforms in nine key areas, including use of force, use of specialized units, crisis and mental health intervention, recruitment, and community engagement.

Albuquerque news station KOB gave some details on the reforms:

"APD will have four years to complete the sweeping reforms, aimed at [reining in] the department's use of force, reforming specialized units within the department and giving officers more direction on how to deal with mentally-ill people.

"Officers will have 72 hours to document the use of force, and a new 'Force Review Board' will have 30 days to review the use of force and decide if it was reasonable. The board will be comprised of several bureau managers, a training director and a legal advisor.

"APD will also have to publish a report each year detailing how many uses of force there were citywide that year.

"The City of Albuquerque must also agree to eliminate the Repeat Offender Project, commonly known as the ROP Team, within 90 days.

"Albuquerque Mayor Richard Berry said the city may spend $4-6 million in reforms in the first year, and that much of that money will go to new training."

In March 2014, the shooting death of James Boyd, a homeless man who was camping illegally on the outskirts of town, touched off a wave of protests after video of the man's death was released. Rita Daniels of NPR member station KUNM told NPR, "Marchers flooded ... the freeway, shutting it down, and things got tense. The police department brought in SWAT teams, dressed in riot gear, and used tear gas. Protesters were demanding that the police chief resign, that the mayor be fired and that what they called killer cops be charged with murder."

Earlier this month, another man was killed in an officer-involved shooting in Albuquerque, setting off more protests.

In a statement, Albuquerque Mayor Richard Berry said, "The selection of the monitor is an important step. I am encouraged that we came to agreement with the DOJ as quickly as we did; it bodes well for the implementation process as we move forward."



DEFINITION – “The Fourth Amendment (Amendment IV) to the United States Constitution is the part of the Bill of Rights that prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures and requires any warrant to be judicially sanctioned and supported by probable cause.”


http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/fourth_amendment
Fourth Amendment

The Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution provides, "[t]he right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to besearched, and the persons or things to be seized."

The ultimate goal of this provision is to protect people’s right to privacy and freedom from arbitrary governmental intrusions.  Private intrusions not acting in the color of governmental authority are exempted from the Fourth Amendment.

A bivens action can be filed against federal law enforcement officials for damages resulting from an unlawful search and seizure.  States can always establish higher standards for searches and seizures than the Fourth Amendment requires, but states cannot allow conduct that violates the Fourth Amendment.

The protection under the Fourth Amendment can be waived if one voluntarily consentsto or does not object to evidence collected during a warrantless search or seizure.

A seizure of a person, within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment, occurs when the police's conduct would communicate to a reasonable person, taking into account the circumstances surrounding the encounter, that the person is not free to ignore the police presence and leave at his will.

Two elements must be present to constitute a seizure of a person.  First, there must be a show of authority by the police officer.  Presence of handcuffs or weapons, the use of forceful language, and physical contact are each strong indicators of authority.  Second, the person being seized must submit to the authority.  An individual who ignores the officer’s request and walks away has not been seized for Fourth Amendment purposes.

An arrest warrant is preferred but not required to make a lawful arrest under the Fourth Amendment.  A warrantless arrest may be justified where probable causeand urgent need are present prior to the arrest.  Probable cause is present when the police officer has a reasonable belief in the guilt of the suspect based on the facts and information prior to the arrest.  For instance, a warrantless arrest may be legitimate in situations where a police officer has a probable belief that a suspect has either committed a crime or is a threat to the public security.  Also, a police officer mightarrest a suspect to prevent the suspect’s escape or to preserve evidence.  Awarrantless arrest may be invalidated if the police officer fails to demonstrate exigent circumstances.




“The city of Albuquerque and the U.S. Justice Department have selected an independent monitor, Dr. James R. Ginger, to oversee police reforms. Ginger's selection is part of a settlement the city negotiated with DOJ over the police department's use of force. Ginger previously served as an independent monitor for a similar agreements reached with Pittsburgh, Los Angeles and the New Jersey State Police. He was selected from a pool of 17 applicants. A judge is expected to sign off on his selection Wednesday.... In 2014, DOJ found "reasonable cause to believe that APD engages in a pattern or practice of excessive force in violation of the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution," often against people posing a minimal threat. NPR member station KUNM previously reported that APD has shot 37 people since 2010, 24 of them fatally. The station says the Justice Department has been investigating the Albuquerque Police Department's use of force since late 2012.... "Officers routinely use deadly force and less lethal force in an unreasonable manner and that systemic deficiencies in policies, training, supervision, and oversight contributed to the pattern or practice."... APD will implement reforms in nine key areas, including use of force, use of specialized units, crisis and mental health intervention, recruitment, and community engagement.... four years to complete the sweeping reforms, aimed at [reining in] the department's use of force, reforming specialized units within the department and giving officers more direction on how to deal with mentally-ill people. "Officers will have 72 hours to document the use of force, and a new 'Force Review Board' will have 30 days to review the use of force and decide if it was reasonable. … publish a report each year detailing how many uses of force there were citywide that year. "The City of Albuquerque must also agree to eliminate the Repeat Offender Project, commonly known as the ROP Team, within 90 days.... Rita Daniels of NPR member station KUNM told NPR, "Marchers flooded ... the freeway, shutting it down, and things got tense. The police department brought in SWAT teams, dressed in riot gear, and used tear gas. Protesters were demanding that the police chief resign, that the mayor be fired and that what they called killer cops be charged with murder."

“Mayor Richard Berry said, "The selection of the monitor is an important step. I am encouraged that we came to agreement with the DOJ as quickly as we did; it bodes well for the implementation process as we move forward." I'm impressed with the Mayor's Wikipedia biography, as he is working for educational improvements and seems to be cooperating with the DOJ. Hopefully the problems on the police force will be much improved with the plan for reform. The public in Albuquerque is behind the reforms and therefore will keep the police department's improvements on track. This particular monitor has worked with two other major cities and the NJ State Police in a similar way. These things are great, but they need to happen across the whole USA. If we can go from “broken windows” policing to “community policing” and set up citizens review boards to oversee interactions between the communities and the police departments we will solve a great deal of the issues I feel sure.


Richard J. Berry
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Richard J. Berry (born November 5, 1962) is the twenty-ninth and current Mayor of Albuquerque, New Mexico, and a former two term member of the New Mexico House of Representatives.

Berry was sworn into office on 1 December 2009, succeeding Democrat Martin Chávez. Berry is the first Republican Mayor of Albuquerque in over 30 years.[1]

Berry moved to Albuquerque in 1982 to attend the University of New Mexico on academic and athletic scholarships (track & field, decathlon). While at the Anderson School of Management, he met his future wife, Maria Medina. Berry graduated with a degree in finance and administration.

Mayor of Albuquerque[edit]

Elections[edit]

Main article: Albuquerque mayoral election, 2009
In 2009, Berry decided to run for Mayor of Albuquerque. He won the election with 44% of the popular vote. He defeated two Democrats: incumbent Mayor Martin Chávez (35%) and State Senator Richard Romero (21%).[6]

Berry ran for re-election to a second term in 2013[7][8] and won re-election. Berry carried 69% of the vote, defeating Democrat Pete Dinelli and Republican Paul Heh.[9]

Public Safety[edit]

By stepping up community policing efforts in conjunction with smart policing technology Albuquerque has seen its Crime Rate drop to the lowest the City has seen in 20 years. Homicide totals, robberies, burglaries, auto theft, and property crime are all down since Berry took office.[13]

Education[edit]

Mayor Berry announced that the City of Albuquerque will provide approximately $115,000 for an International Baccalaureate Program at Sandia High School, the first program of its kind in the local public school district. The IB Diploma Program, a world-recognized college prep program for juniors and seniors based on rigorous academic standards. Qualified students from across Albuquerque will be encouraged to participate in the program, which is expected to be offered to a junior class of 100-150 students beginning in the 2013-2014 school year.[14]

Recall petition[edit]

In 2014, Paul Heh, a 2013 mayoral candidate, circulated a petition to recall Berry over the handling of recentAlbuquerque Police Department (APD) shootings and associated protests, saying that 11,203 registered voters' signatures were required.[26]





http://www.cbsnews.com/news/jay-leno-backs-women-accusing-bill-cosby-of-sexual-assault/

​Jay Leno backs women accusing Bill Cosby of sexual assault
CBS NEWS
January 22, 2015

Jay Leno has backed the women who claim Bill Cosby sexually assaulted them and said people should seriously listen to the accusers. But he's not the first comic to weigh in on the Cosby scandal. Whoopi Goldberg, Jerry Seinfeld and Chris Rock have all expressed their opinions.

Now, three months after video of comedian Hannibal Buress sparked the entire fallout, the former "Tonight Show" host as well as a member of Cosby's TV family is speaking out, CBS News' Jericka Duncan reports.

At the National Association of Television Program Executives in Miami, Leno was asked about the sexual allegations against Cosby.

"I don't know why it's so hard to believe women," Leno said. "I mean, you go to Saudi Arabia, and you need two women to testify against a man. Here, you need 25."

Leno also referenced a comment made by Buress.

"When you leave here, Google 'Bill Cosby rapist,'" Buress said.

It reflects the way information is now often shared: unedited and online.

"Because somebody just filmed it and put it out there, you're getting your news raw and unfiltered, which I think is fantastic," Leno said.

Stephen Colbert's successor on Comedy Central, Larry Wilmore, echoed Leno's sentiments earlier in the week.

"Why aren't people listening to these women?" he said. "Is it because he's so famous? Or is it just because they're women? Because I would say enough have come forward."

Over the past three months, more than two dozen women have alleged they were drugged, assaulted and/or raped by Cosby beginning in the 1970s.

Malcolm-Jamal Warner, who starred as Theo Huxtable on "The Cosby Show,"broke his own silence in an interview with Billboard magazine published Wednesday online:

"Just as it's painful to hear any woman talk about sexual assault, whether true or not, it's just as painful to watch my friend and mentor go through this ... The Bill Cosby I know has been great to me and great for a lot of people. I can't speak on the other stuff."

"CBS This Morning" reached out to Cosby's representatives, who said they have no comment at this time.




“Now, three months after video of comedian Hannibal Buress sparked the entire fallout, the former "Tonight Show" host as well as a member of Cosby's TV family is speaking out, CBS News' Jericka Duncan reports. At the National Association of Television Program Executives in Miami, Leno was asked about the sexual allegations against Cosby. "I don't know why it's so hard to believe women," Leno said. "I mean, you go to Saudi Arabia, and you need two women to testify against a man. Here, you need 25."... "Why aren't people listening to these women?" he said. "Is it because he's so famous? Or is it just because they're women? Because I would say enough have come forward." Over the past three months, more than two dozen women have alleged they were drugged, assaulted and/or raped by Cosby beginning in the 1970s. Malcolm-Jamal Warner, who starred as Theo Huxtable on "The Cosby Show,"broke his own silence in an interview with Billboard magazine published Wednesday online: "Just as it's painful to hear any woman talk about sexual assault, whether true or not, it's just as painful to watch my friend and mentor go through this ... The Bill Cosby I know has been great to me and great for a lot of people. I can't speak on the other stuff."

As a woman of a certain age, I am guilty of having my personal desire for Bill Cosby to be proven innocent possibly prejudice me in his favor. Malcolm-Jamal Warner's statement pretty much sums up how I feel about this. I also am aware of cases down through the years of women “crying rape” when they were involved in a consensual matter. The most famous case is that of “Fatty Arbuckle” who was hounded until his accuser was finally shown not to be the exceptionally innocent young film actress that she was believed to be. She was a particular favorite with the people in the US, though Arbuckle also was a popular public figure. I am persuaded against my will by the sheer number of accusers in the Cosby case, that there is a pretty great likelihood that he is guilty. I do think it's time for the police to look into some of these cases and bring some charges, however, rather than having a seemingly endless parade of accusers pop up in the press and tell yet another unsubstantiated story about Cosby. Also, perhaps the accusers should be scrutinized rather than remaining anonymous or simply coming on a show and making a claim. See the following from Wikipedia about Fatty Arbuckle.



Roscoe Arbuckle
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Roscoe Conkling "Fatty" Arbuckle (March 24, 1887 – June 29, 1933) was an American silent film actor, comedian, director, and screenwriter. Starting at the Selig Polyscope Company he eventually moved toKeystone Studios where he worked with Mabel Normand and Harold Lloyd. He mentored Charlie Chaplin and discovered Buster Keaton andBob Hope. Arbuckle was one of the most popular silent stars of the 1910s, and soon became one of the highest paid actors in Hollywood, signing a contract in 1921 with Paramount Pictures for US$1 million (equivalent to approximately $13,222,015 in 2015 dollars[1]).[2]

Between November 1921 and April 1922, Arbuckle endured three widely publicized trials for the rape and manslaughter of actress Virginia Rappe. Rappe had fallen ill at a party hosted by Arbuckle at the St. Francis Hotel in San Francisco in September 1921; she died four days later. Arbuckle was accused by Rappe's acquaintance of raping and accidentally killing Rappe.

Despite Arbuckle's acquittal, the scandal has mostly overshadowed his legacy as a pioneering comedian.[2] Following the trials, his films were banned and he was publicly ostracized. Although the ban on his films was lifted within a year, Arbuckle only worked sparingly through the 1920s. He later worked as a film director under the alias William Goodrich. He was finally able to return to acting, making short two-reel comedies in 1932 for Warner Brothers. He died in his sleep of a heart attack in 1933 at age 46, reportedly on the same day he signed a contract with Warner Brothers to make a feature film.[2]