Tuesday, March 3, 2015


News Clips For The Day


http://www.cbsnews.com/news/iran-fight-against-isis-iraq-effective-could-lead-to-consequences/

The risks of Iran winning the war against ISIS
CBS NEWS
March 3, 2015

As the international coalition of countries continues to fight the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS), some unlikely alliances are proving effective. While both the U.S. and Iran have said they are not coordinating efforts, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei's backing of Kurdish and Shiite militias is a key component to the fight.

But CBS News senior security contributor and former CIA deputy director Michael Morell said that de-facto relationship comes with some possible serious consequences.

"There's a real risk here that over the long run we can defeat ISIS in Iraq, but we might hand Iraq to the Iranians, in a diplomatic sense," he said Tuesday on "CBS This Morning."

U.S.-backed Iraqi ground forces have not proven nearly as effective as the combination of coalition airstrikes and Kurdish and Shiite Muslim militias, which have clawed back significant territory from ISIS in northern Iraq of late.

"Iran is, I think, the most effective fighting force inside of Iraq. They have trained, they have supplied 100,000 Shiite militia, that compares to 50,000 Iraqi security forces who are not very effective," Morell said. "The Iranians are actually on the ground fighting with those Shia militia. "

Iranian officials have acknowledged that members of its elite Quds force, a military special forces division, are fighting inside Iraq.

On "Charlie Rose," U.S. Director of National Intelligence James Clapper said the Quds force could help defeat the terror group.

"In an advisory capacity, they brought in large amounts of weaponry, they fly UAVS over Iran. So, yes, they have a very robust commitment to the fight against ISIL in Iraq," he said, using an alternate acronym for the militant group.

Morell agreed.

"They have sent a lot of heavy weaponry in. They are providing a lot of funds. So they are the most effective fighting force there today," he said.

Inside Iraq, the government faces an important challenge. Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi has reached out to Iraq's minority Sunni population, which was largely viewed as marginalized under former Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki.

Morell said that while the battle against ISIS seems to have united the two Islamic sects for the time being, the centuries-old rift could reignite at any time.

"As the Shiite militia and the Iranians push into Sunni areas, I think one of the things that you're going to see, given this Sunni-Shiite tension, is you're going to see Sunni Arabs actually come over to the side of ISIL. So from propaganda perspective, this will be a bonanza for ISIL," Morell said.

Morell also spoke about new details emerging on the recently unmasked ISIS' executioner Mohammed Emwazi, also known as "Jihadi John." In interviews with an advocacy group in 2009, Emwazi said he told British security officials that the 9/11 attacks, and the 7/7 transport bombings in London, were "wrong."

"A lot can happen in five years, so I think that's the first thing to remember. I think the second thing to remember is we don't really know he got radicalized. The radicalization process is a very personal one," Morell said.

The advocacy group, which said it knew Emwazi as a "beautiful" young man, has suggested that the attention of British security forces, at least in part, drove him toward ISIS.

"I don't believe that. I think it's much more likely that they (ISIS) saw the jihadi potential in him and that they played a role in driving him toward this."




“While both the U.S. and Iran have said they are not coordinating efforts, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei's backing of Kurdish and Shiite militias is a key component to the fight.... U.S.-backed Iraqi ground forces have not proven nearly as effective as the combination of coalition airstrikes and Kurdish and Shiite Muslim militias, which have clawed back significant territory from ISIS in northern Iraq of late. "Iran is, I think, the most effective fighting force inside of Iraq. They have trained, they have supplied 100,000 Shiite militia, that compares to 50,000 Iraqi security forces who are not very effective," Morell said. "The Iranians are actually on the ground fighting with those Shia militia.".... "In an advisory capacity, they brought in large amounts of weaponry, they fly UAVS over Iran. So, yes, they have a very robust commitment to the fight against ISIL in Iraq," he said, using an alternate acronym for the militant group. Morell agreed. "They have sent a lot of heavy weaponry in. They are providing a lot of funds. So they are the most effective fighting force there today," he said..... "As the Shiite militia and the Iranians push into Sunni areas, I think one of the things that you're going to see, given this Sunni-Shiite tension, is you're going to see Sunni Arabs actually come over to the side of ISIL. So from propaganda perspective, this will be a bonanza for ISIL," Morell said.”

Morell thinks Iran's involvement is likely to cause even more Arab groups to join ISIS, but at this time several groups of ground troops are now fighting them and that is what we need. I'm glad to see Iran's involvement alongside the Kurds because they are known to be effective fighters. They have also given the Kurds weapons, which is more than the US has done. Good for them!!





http://www.npr.org/2015/03/02/389573352/supreme-court-to-weigh-power-of-redistricting-commissions

Supreme Court To Weigh Power Of Redistricting Commissions
Nina Totenberg
March 2, 2015

Take a look at a congressional district map, and it can look like a madman's jigsaw puzzle. The reason is, in part, that the district lines are drawn by state legislators seeking to maximize partisan advantage. It's a process that critics say is responsible for much that's wrong with Washington.

That's why some states have tried setting up independent commissions to draw the map. Arizona voters created such a commission in 2000. But when the commission chair displeased the governor and state Senate, they tried, unsuccessfully, to remove her.

The power of the commission to draw district lines has now reached the U.S. Supreme Court, which could hand that power back to the legislators in Arizona, California, and a dozen other states.

Although the Supreme Court has viewed partisan gerrymandering of legislative districts as a bad practice that deprives citizens of fair representation, the court has also thrown up its hands when it comes to policing the practice. The reason is simple: the justices have been unable to come up with neutral and judicially-manageable rules for drawing electoral boundaries. So, in recent years, some states have been experimenting with independent commissions.

The commissions vary in form and in how much influence they allow incumbents to have in drawing their own districts.

Arizona's independent commission presents the test case before the Supreme Court on Monday. Fifteen years ago the state's voters overwhelmingly approved a referendum that amended the state constitution to put the decennial redistricting in the hands of an independent, five-person commission. Two of the commissioners were to be Republicans, two Democrats, and the commission's chair was to be an Independent.

In a state with 35 percent registered Republicans, 35 percent Independents, and 30 percent Democrats, the congressional map the commission drew after the 2010 census had four safe Republican seats, two safe Democratic seats, and three competitive districts.

"Some of the most competitive races in the country are in Arizona now, and I attribute that directly to the commission's work," says Commission Chair Colleen Coyle Mathis.

Even before the map was completed, however, the Republican who was governor, Jan Brewer, fired Mathis, backed by a vote of the Republicans in the state Senate, who had a two-thirds majority.

The controversy ended up in the Arizona Supreme Court, which held a hearing and took just two hours to overrule the firing. The unanimous ruling was that there was no sufficient cause for removing Mathis as chair.

Having failed to block the commission's work that way, Republican state officials went to federal court, to challenge the commission as unconstitutional. Their appeal has now reached the U.S. Supreme Court.

At the heart of the case is the Elections Clause of the Constitution, which says that the "times, places and manner of holding elections" for Congress "shall be prescribed in each state by the legislature thereof."

Those words resolve the issue, says former U.S. Solicitor General Paul Clement, now representing the Arizona State Legislature in the Supreme Court.

"We make the radical claim that when the Framers used the word 'legislature' they meant the word 'legislature,'" says Clement.

Not so, says former Solicitor General Ted Olson. He contends that the founding fathers were "actually very suspicious" of state legislatures and wanted to have "the people" hold the ultimate power over legislatures.

"We looked back at the definition of 'legislature' at the time the Constitution was written and it didn't mean a particular body, it meant the entity or collection of individuals that made the law," says Olson. And that includes the people in Arizona who created the commission there.

Olson and Clement served, one after the other, as the top legal advocate in the George W. Bush administration. But in this case they are on opposite sides.

Olson filed a friend-of-the-court brief on behalf of Republican former governors of California who pushed for the creation of that state's independent commission. He argues that leaving redistricting to the legislature means that in the age of computers, the party in power can manipulate the drawing of district lines to be "whatever they want it to be." And the result is self-perpetuating, polarized districts, where incumbents are guaranteed re-election and are accountable only to the extremes of their party to fend off primary challenges.

The Framers, he argues, wanted the people to be able to extricate themselves from this sort of gridlock, to experiment and have wide authority over the election process.

"What California and Arizona have done," says Olson, "is simply to try to fulfill the goals of the Framers to make a system where our elections are reasonably competitive, and that the people then have a choice and aren't boxed in to one particular party or the another."
Clement counters that the Framers did not believe in direct democracy.

"The whole idea of the Constitution was that we're going to form a republican government, that we can't have direct democracy," he contends. "They didn't give this authority to the people at large, they gave it specifically to the state legislature."

Olson rebuts that proposition, pointing to the second part of the Constitution's Elections Clause. That clause gives Congress the power to make laws to alter state election regulations.

And Congress, he maintains, did just that in the early 20th century when it adopted a statute allowing states to be redistricted by referendum instead of by the legislature.

That statute, as amended, permits redistricting "as prescribed by the law of the state." And the law in the state of Arizona, he argues, is the state constitutional amendment enacted by referendum giving the power to redistrict to an independent commission.

Clement dismisses that argument, calling it "just a red herring."

"The one thing the second Clause doesn't give Congress is the ability to rewrite the first Clause," he says. "It's not the people who will formulate these election maps in Arizona. It's five unelected state officials as part of this commission."

Indeed, Arizona's state Senate President Andy Biggs complains that the Independent Redistricting Commission leaves the state legislature all but impotent in the redistricting process.

"We're just totally irrelevant to the process other than at the beginning where you have slight participation," says Biggs, referring to the legislature's mandate to pick commissioners from a slate of vetted candidates.

Of course, the legislature does have the power to put the redistricting commission on the ballot again to get it repealed. But Biggs confesses that effort would likely be futile. So what would he tell the voters who seem to like the Independent Redistricting Commission?

"I would tell them, 'I understand your cynicism and skepticism, but the reality is the U.S. Constitution says that the legislature's supposed to draw the congressional lines,'" he says.

Now the Supreme Court will decide whose reading of the Constitution will prevail.




“The reason is, in part, that the district lines are drawn by state legislators seeking to maximize partisan advantage. It's a process that critics say is responsible for much that's wrong with Washington. That's why some states have tried setting up independent commissions to draw the map. Arizona voters created such a commission in 2000. But when the commission chair disp The power of the commission to draw district lines has now reached the U.S. Supreme Court, which could hand that power back to the legislators in Arizona, California, and a dozen other states.... "We make the radical claim that when the Framers used the word 'legislature' they meant the word 'legislature,'" says Clement. Not so, says former Solicitor General Ted Olson. He contends that the founding fathers were "actually very suspicious" of state legislatures and wanted to have "the people" hold the ultimate power over legislatures. "We looked back at the definition of 'legislature' at the time the Constitution was written and it didn't mean a particular body, it meant the entity or collection of individuals that made the law," says Olson. And that includes the people in Arizona who created the commission there.”

I do hope the commission plan will be endorsed by the Supreme Court, especially if it is done the way it is in Arizona, because the commission of five is made up of 2 Democrats, 2 Republicans and 1 Independent. That's a reasonable plan and should produce a fair redistricting plan. It seems to me, though, that redistricting should only be allowed after a ten year federal census. Doing it every election just to create a desired voting pattern is what the problem is, I think.

State legislatures have been tinkering with the districts forever, going back to Massachusetts Governor Gerry. According to Wikipedia, this is the history: “The word was created in reaction to a redrawing of Massachusetts state senate election districts under Governor Elbridge Gerry (pronounced /ˈɡɛri/; 1744–1814). In 1812, Governor Gerry signed a bill that redistricted Massachusetts to benefit his Democratic-Republican Party. When mapped, one of the contorted districts in the Boston area was said to resemble the shape of a salamander.[1]” In other words, it's just more dirty politics. Needless to say it is one of the Republicans favorite tools. Tinkering with elections is their specialty, especially in Florida.





http://www.cbsnews.com/news/john-boehner-allow-house-vote-senate-bill-funding-department-of-homeland-security/

Boehner to allow House vote on Senate bill funding DHS
By JAKE MILLER CBS NEWS
March 3, 2015

House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, told his Republican caucus during a meeting on Tuesday morning that a Senate bill funding the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) through September - but not restricting President Obama's immigration policies - will come up for a vote in the House on Tuesday afternoon, a source inside the closed-door meeting tells CBS News.

The move is sure to disappoint conservative members of Boehner's caucus, who have demanded that any bill to fund DHS include language preventing the president from moving forward with his plan to shelter millions of undocumented immigrants in the U.S. from the threat of deportation.

"I am as outraged and frustrated as you at the lawless and unconstitutional actions of this president," Boehner said, according to the source. "I believe this decision - considering where we are - is the right one for this team, and the right one for this country."

The bill is expected to receive overwhelming Democratic support, and a significant number of Republicans are expected to sign on as well. If it passes, it will effectively end the standoff over funding the Department of Homeland Security that nearly prompted a shutdown of the department last Friday, when the House and Senate passed a bill funding the department for another week just minutes before that funding ran dry.

Boehner directed the blame at the Senate, where Republicans were unable to break a Democratic filibuster and insert the immigration restrictions into a funding bill. "As you've heard me say a number of times, the House has done its job by passing legislation to fund DHS and block the president's executive actions on immigration," Boehner said, according to the source. "Unfortunately, the fight was never won in the other chamber. Democrats stayed united and blocked our bill, and our Republican colleagues in the Senate never found a way to win this fight."

The speaker urged his caucus to look to the courts to stop Mr. Obama's executive actions, noting a federal judge's decision last week to halt implementation of the plan. "The good news is that the president's executive action has been stopped, for now," Boehner told his rank-and-file, according to the source. "This matter will continue to be litigated in the courts, where we have our best chance of winning this fight." The administration has appealed the ruling.

Boehner also took a veiled swipe at the 52 members of the Republican caucus - most of them on the party's right flank - who bucked party leaders to defeat a continuing resolution (CR) to fund DHS for three weeks last Friday. "The three-week CR we offered would have kept this fight going and allowed us to continue to put pressure on Senate Democrats to do the right thing," he said, according to the source. "Unfortunately, that plan was rejected."

Boehner is in a precarious position with conservatives in his caucus, who have chafed at some of his previous decisions as speaker. Over two dozen House Republicans voted against reinstalling Boehner as speaker when the new Congress began in January, and many believe this latest kerfuffle will only deepen the tension between the two camps.

There is a relatively obscure provision in the House rulebook that could allow the Senate's bill to come up for an up-or-down vote in the House without forcing Boehner to actually introduce the measure himself -- a procedural maneuver that could help insulate the speaker from an insurrection on the right, if he chooses to use it.

A clause in House Rule XXII would allow any member of the House, Republican or Democrat, to offer a "privileged" motion to force the House to vote on the Senate's bill. That path becomes open, according to the House rules, "when a stage of disagreement has been reached on a bill or resolution." The Senate's refusal to enter conference negotiations with the House on DHS funding would signify such a disagreement.

CBS News Congressional Correspondent Nancy Cordes contributed to this report.




“House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, told his Republican caucus during a meeting on Tuesday morning that a Senate bill funding the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) through September - but not restricting President Obama's immigration policies - will come up for a vote in the House on Tuesday afternoon, a source inside the closed-door meeting tells CBS News. The move is sure to disappoint conservative members of Boehner's caucus, who have demanded that any bill to fund DHS include language preventing the president from moving forward with his plan to shelter millions of undocumented immigrants in the U.S. from the threat of deportation.... The bill is expected to receive overwhelming Democratic support, and a significant number of Republicans are expected to sign on as well. If it passes, it will effectively end the standoff over funding the Department of Homeland Security that nearly prompted a shutdown of the department last Friday, when the House and Senate passed a bill funding the department for another week just minutes before that funding ran dry.... The speaker urged his caucus to look to the courts to stop Mr. Obama's executive actions, noting a federal judge's decision last week to halt implementation of the plan. "The good news is that the president's executive action has been stopped, for now," Boehner told his rank-and-file, according to the source. "This matter will continue to be litigated in the courts, where we have our best chance of winning this fight." The administration has appealed the ruling.... Boehner is in a precarious position with conservatives in his caucus, who have chafed at some of his previous decisions as speaker. Over two dozen House Republicans voted against reinstalling Boehner as speaker when the new Congress began in January, and many believe this latest kerfuffle will only deepen the tension between the two camps.”

The split between Tea Party Republicans and more moderate members of the party is becoming more interesting, as the far right tries to initiate bills that are so way out that they are probably unconstitutional, and certainly are totally unethical. The plot thickens!





http://www.cbsnews.com/news/lapd-chief-3-officers-in-skid-row-death-had-training-on-mentally-ill/

LAPD Chief: 3 officers in Skid Row death had training on mentally ill
By CRIMESIDER STAFF AP 
March 3, 2015

LOS ANGELES -- The three officers who fired their weapons in a videotaped struggle that left a homeless man dead were veterans of the beat on Los Angeles' downtrodden Skid Row who had special training to deal with the homeless and mentally ill, police leaders said.

Police Chief Charlie Beck said the officers had "completed our most extensive mental illness training over a 36-hour course." But the rookie officer who cried out that the man had his gun, leading to the shooting, had considerably less experience, and police didn't immediately say how much training he had received in dealing with the mentally ill.

All officers must go through at least an 11-hour course. Beck said that despite the way the confrontation ended, initial signs showed that the officers used what they had learned. "The way you have conversations, the way you offer options, the way that you give some space, the body language that you portray, the way that you escalate, all of that is part of the training," Beck said at a news conference Monday, the day after the shooting. "I will make judgment on that when I review the totality of the investigation, but on the face of it, it appears they did try all of that."

The specialized training came under the nationwide Safer Cities Initiative, designed to tone down encounters between police and people on the street.

The chief also provided a narrative of the struggle that was rare so soon after an officer-involved shooting, the video of which had been viewed by millions online. Footage showed the homeless man, whose name has not been released, reaching toward the rookie officer's waistband, Beck said. The gun was found partly cocked and jammed with a round of ammunition in the chamber and another in the ejection port, indicating a struggle for the weapon, Beck said.

"You can hear the young officer who was primarily engaged in the confrontation saying that 'He has my gun. He has my gun,'" Beck said. "He says it several times, with conviction."
Then three other officers opened fire. The man was black, as is the rookie officer who was just short of completing his probationary year on the force, police said.

Sunday's violence had echoes of the August police shooting of 25-year-old Ezell Ford, whose death in a struggle with LA officers brought demonstrations in the city. Ford was unarmed. Police said he was shot after reaching for an officer's gun.

Mayor Eric Garcetti said he and the police chief needed to respond quickly to reassure residents that there is a robust investigation into the shooting, which occurred in the downtown area that is home to the city's highest concentration of homeless people. Video came from multiple perspectives, including two witnesses recording from their phones and cameras worn by two of the officers who fired their weapons.

Beck said officers had arrived to investigate a reported robbery and the suspect refused to obey their commands and became combative. A security camera outside a homeless shelter about 75 feet away showed the man pushed over a neighbor's tent and the two had a dispute. When officers arrived, they tried to speak to the suspect.

He turned and jumped into his tent, and officers appeared to pull it up and over him to try to roust him from inside. The man jumped out flailing and kicking before ending up on the ground. Beck said officers didn't know if the suspect was arming himself. Stun guns "appeared to have little effect, and he continued to violently resist," Beck said. One witness began filming from a closer perspective.

As the man took swings, four officers wrestled him to the ground. The struggle became blurry and distant, but shouting could be heard, followed by five apparent gunshots. Exactly what happened in the last moments of the struggle is unclear.

A memorial sprung up Monday where the shooting occurred. White roses were placed over a tent, blankets and clothing belonging to the man known as "Africa." James Attaway, 48, said the man's first name was Shawn, but he nicknamed him because he was from Africa. They met six months ago, and Africa had been living on the street for about a year, Attaway said. They met talking about God and had done that earlier Sunday. "He was on the spiritual side, very intelligent," Attaway said.

An estimated 1,700 homeless people live on Skid Row. Many of them have mental illness and addiction and are no strangers to the police. Cmdr. Andrew Smith said the man had previous encounters with officers, though he would not elaborate. The Los Angeles Police Department's inspector general and the city's district attorney are investigating the shooting.

Two of the officers suffered minor injuries, including the rookie officer, who is on crutches. All four officers are on paid leave.



http://www.huffingtonpost.com/paul-boden/on-homeless-memorial-day-_1_b_811966.html

The Devastating Impacts of Safer Cities Policing in Skid Row
Paul Boden, Organizing Director, Western Regional Advocacy Project
Posted: 01/20/2011

On Tuesday, December 21st, Los Angeles Community Action Network (LA CAN), a founding member of Western Regional Advocacy Project, held a press conference to release a human rights assessment of Skid Row's Safer Cities Initiative, an intensive policing effort launched by Mayor Villaraigosa that has been sustained for more than four years. Residents also delivered the report to the Police Commission and called for the end of Safer Cities.

The Human Rights Assessment is available here:

Human Rights Assessment-Skid Row's Safer Cities Initiative 2010
The report is based on a survey of more than 200 poor and homeless residents of downtown Los Angeles and shows that:
More than half of the respondents (53.6%), both homeless and housed, had been arrested in just the past year. This compares to an adult arrest rate in the State of California of 4.9%.
As a result of arrest, 51.5% lost their housing, 42.4% lost access to social services, and 16.4% lost employment.
Although LAPD touts improvements in biased policing (formerly racial profiling), 75% reported being profiled by police in the past year due to their race, economic status, or residence in the Skid Row community. Almost 80% of respondents reported they do not feel safe from police violence and police harassment.
The report also includes previously unpublished data from the Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority's 2009 Homeless Count that shows that the most prevalent form of victimization reported by those surveyed was police harassment (37%), exceeding assault (24%) and robbery (18%).



Western Regional Advocacy Project
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Western Regional Advocacy Project (WRAP) is a US West Coast alliance of grassroots homeless people's organizations that advocates for changes to Federal housing policy, and for an end to local and state policies that it considers to violate the civil rights of homeless people.
Its member organizations are:
Building Opportunities for Self-Sufficiency (BOSS) (Berkeley, California) (formerly Berkeley Oakland Support Services, the current name being a backronym)
Coalition on Homelessness, San Francisco (San Francisco, California)
Los Angeles Community Action Network (Los Angeles, California)
Sisters Of The Road (Portland, Oregon)
Street Roots (Portland, Oregon)
Street Spirit (Oakland and Berkeley, California)

WRAP is best recognized for its publication Without Housing: Decades of Federal Housing Cutbacks, Massive Homelessness, and Policy Failures, which details Federal housing policy immediately prior to, and in the decades since, the advent of modern mass homelessness. The report was initially published in 2006, with an update in 2010. Their website is http://www.wraphome.org/, and consists of legal and political updates on the subject of unfair treatment of homeless people, including “the criminalization of homelessness.” Another article on the Net is called “criminalization of poverty.”




“The three officers who fired their weapons in a videotaped struggle that left a homeless man dead were veterans of the beat on Los Angeles' downtrodden Skid Row who had special training to deal with the homeless and mentally ill, police leaders said..... All officers must go through at least an 11-hour course. Beck said that despite the way the confrontation ended, initial signs showed that the officers used what they had learned. "The way you have conversations, the way you offer options, the way that you give some space, the body language that you portray, the way that you escalate, all of that is part of the training," Beck said at a news conference Monday, the day after the shooting. "I will make judgment on that when I review the totality of the investigation, but on the face of it, it appears they did try all of that.".... Footage showed the homeless man, whose name has not been released, reaching toward the rookie officer's waistband, Beck said. The gun was found partly cocked and jammed with a round of ammunition in the chamber and another in the ejection port, indicating a struggle for the weapon, Beck said. "You can hear the young officer who was primarily engaged in the confrontation saying that 'He has my gun. He has my gun,'" Beck said. "He says it several times, with conviction." Then three other officers opened fire. The man was black, as is the rookie officer who was just short of completing his probationary year on the force, police said.... When officers arrived, they tried to speak to the suspect. He turned and jumped into his tent, and officers appeared to pull it up and over him to try to roust him from inside. The man jumped out flailing and kicking before ending up on the ground. Beck said officers didn't know if the suspect was arming himself. Stun guns "appeared to have little effect, and he continued to violently resist," Beck said. One witness began filming from a closer perspective. As the man took swings, four officers wrestled him to the ground. The struggle became blurry and distant, but shouting could be heard, followed by five apparent gunshots. Exactly what happened in the last moments of the struggle is unclear.... James Attaway, 48, said the man's first name was Shawn, but he nicknamed him because he was from Africa. They met six months ago, and Africa had been living on the street for about a year, Attaway said. They met talking about God and had done that earlier Sunday. "He was on the spiritual side, very intelligent," Attaway said.”

Huffington Post – On Tuesday, December 21st, Los Angeles Community Action Network (LA CAN), a founding member of Western Regional Advocacy Project, held a press conference to release a human rights assessment of Skid Row's Safer Cities Initiative, an intensive policing effort launched by Mayor Villaraigosa that has been sustained for more than four years. Residents also delivered the report to the Police Commission and called for the end of Safer Cities.

“As a result of arrest, 51.5% lost their housing, 42.4% lost access to social services, and 16.4% lost employment. Although LAPD touts improvements in biased policing (formerly racial profiling), 75% reported being profiled by police in the past year due to their race, economic status, or residence in the Skid Row community. Almost 80% of respondents reported they do not feel safe from police violence and police harassment.”

LA CAN calls this Safer Cities Initiative an “intensive” form of policing. Somehow that sounds very similar to the “Broken Windows” emphasis on arresting people for small crimes, on the pretext that this prevents larger crimes – before they go to larger crimes in other words. To me that is just simple injustice. Police have become bullies in too many cases, in the name of “self-defense.” In both cases the poor and those with brown skin are suffering from greater attention from the police. The fact that those arrested lose their housing and other social services benefits does make this program look a great deal like “criminalizing poverty,” which is not an exaggeration by LA CAN and others. Where is this leading, I wonder? At present it's at least corrupt and abusive on the part of city governments as they allow these patterns to go uncorrected. In some cases, I think they just want the homeless to go away and stop cluttering up their parks. Jacksonville, FL was in the news in 2013 over the issue of making it illegal to sleep outdoors, even in a vehicle. That means that all homeless people must go to a homeless shelter, and sometimes they are full. Where can they go then?





http://www.cbsnews.com/news/india-bus-gang-rape-convict-blames-victim/

Indian man convicted of gang rape blames victim
AP March 3, 2015

Photograph – Indian policemen stand with six men, face covered in black sheet, suspected in a gang rape of a bus passenger in New Delhi, India, Jan. 13, 2013.

NEW DELHI -- One of the men convicted for raping and killing a woman in a shocking and brutal 2012 gang attack on a New Delhi bus said in a TV documentary that if their victim had not fought back she would not have been killed.

Instead, the 23-year-old woman should have remained silent, said Mukesh Singh, who was driving the bus when the woman was attacked.

"Then they would have dropped her off after 'doing her,'" he said in a documentary being released next week. The filmmakers released transcripts of the interview, which was recorded in 2013, on Tuesday.

3 arrested in India for gang rape of Japanese scholar
India grills Uber exec after alleged rape
Death of another alleged gang rape victim fuels anger in India

Singh and three other attackers were convicted in a fast-track court in 2013. The appeals against their death sentences are pending in the Supreme Court.

"A girl is far more responsible for rape than a boy," he said, according to the transcripts. "A decent girl won't roam around at 9 o'clock at night .... Housework and housekeeping is for girls, not roaming in discos and bars at night doing wrong things, wearing wrong clothes."

The woman and her friend were returning home from seeing a movie at an upscale mall when they got on the bus. The attackers beat her friend and took turns raping the woman. They penetrated her with a rod, leaving severe internal injuries that caused her death.

India, where many people have long believed that women are responsible for rape, was shocked into action after the attack. The Indian government rushed legislation doubling prison terms for rapists to 20 years and criminalizing voyeurism, stalking and the trafficking of women. The law also makes it a crime for police officers to refuse to open cases when complaints are made.

In the interview, Singh suggested that the attack was to teach the woman and her male friend a lesson that they should not have been out late at night. He also reiterated that rape victims should not fight back: "She should just be silent and allow the rape."

He also said that the death penalty would make things even more dangerous for women: "Now when they rape, they won't leave the girl like we did. They will kill her."

Singh's interview is from the documentary "India's Daughter" by British filmmaker Leslee Udwin. It will be shown on March 8, International Women's Day, in India, Britain, Denmark, Sweden and several other countries.

Indian authorities, meanwhile, objected to the filmmakers releasing the documentary without their approval.

A spokesman for New Delhi's Tihar Jail, where the interview was filmed, said Udwin had agreed to allow them to screen the footage before it was released. Udwin could not be immediately reached for comment.

"We want to see the documentary as it can be screened only after it was approved by authorities," said jail spokesman Mukesh Prasad.




“Singh and three other attackers were convicted in a fast-track court in 2013. The appeals against their death sentences are pending in the Supreme Court. "A girl is far more responsible for rape than a boy," he said, according to the transcripts. "A decent girl won't roam around at 9 o'clock at night .... Housework and housekeeping is for girls, not roaming in discos and bars at night doing wrong things, wearing wrong clothes.".... India, where many people have long believed that women are responsible for rape, was shocked into action after the attack. The Indian government rushed legislation doubling prison terms for rapists to 20 years and criminalizing voyeurism, stalking and the trafficking of women. The law also makes it a crime for police officers to refuse to open cases when complaints are made. In the interview, Singh suggested that the attack was to teach the woman and her male friend a lesson that they should not have been out late at night. He also reiterated that rape victims should not fight back: "She should just be silent and allow the rape." He also said that the death penalty would make things even more dangerous for women: "Now when they rape, they won't leave the girl like we did. They will kill her.".... Indian authorities, meanwhile, objected to the filmmakers releasing the documentary without their approval. A spokesman for New Delhi's Tihar Jail, where the interview was filmed, said Udwin had agreed to allow them to screen the footage before it was released. Udwin could not be immediately reached for comment. "We want to see the documentary as it can be screened only after it was approved by authorities," said jail spokesman Mukesh Prasad.”

India is a wealthy nation with, in some ways, an advanced society, but not on women's issues. I rail against the Middle Eastern Islamic groups who prevent women from going to school and other things, but India is really no better. Yet, I have heard the same things said by white Americans when a rape case goes to trial. The Fundamentalist Christians spoke scathingly of women who wore their skirts above the knee when I was young, or too low at the bosom. Personally, I don't like to see women essentially exposing themselves, as some young Hollywood personalities do, but I don't think men should make sexual moves either, like grabbing their private parts to express their hostility and masculinity. It's a form of obscenity. I would never suggest, however, that the assault of anyone was legitimized by such behavior. It's sad, that's all.





http://www.cbsnews.com/news/is-it-a-crime-to-encourage-suicide-unusual-massachusetts-case-of-conrad-roy-and-michelle-carter/

Is it a crime to "encourage suicide"? Teens' texts under scrutiny
By STEPHANIE SLIFER CBS/AP
March 3, 2015

Photograph – Conrad Roy
FACEBOOK VIA CBS BOSTON

BOSTON - Prosecutors likely face an arduous task in proving that an 18-year-old Massachusetts girl committed involuntary manslaughter by encouraging a male friend to commit suicide, experts say.

Michelle Carter, of Plainville, was 17 when police say she encouraged her friend, 18-year-old Conrad Roy, of Mattapoisett, to commit suicide. Roy, who had a history of mental illness, was found dead in his car behind a K-Mart in Fairhaven, about 60 miles south of Boston, on July 13, 2014. He had used a generator to commit suicide by carbon monoxide poisoning.

It wasn't until February 5, 2015 -- more than six months later -- that Carter was indicted by a grand jury on a charge of involuntary manslaughter after the Bristol County District Attorney's Office says a lengthy investigation found she "strongly influenced" Roy's decision to kill himself.

In a police report, Fairhaven police Det. Scott Gordon wrote, "Carter not only encouraged Conrad [Roy] to take his own life, she questioned him repeatedly as to when and why he hadn't done it yet, right up to the point of when his final text was sent to her."

The report further alleges that, prior to his death, Roy texted Carter that he was scared and didn't want to leave his family, but despite that, Carter continued to encourage him to take his own life, "and when he actually started to carry out the act, he got scared again and exited his truck but instead of telling him to stay out of the truck and turn off the generator, Carter told him to 'get back in.'"

However, Joseph Cataldo, Carter's attorney, says his client didn't commit a crime and he believes a judge will dismiss the charge prior to trial. He tells 48 Hours' Crimesider that once all the evidence is made public it will be clear that Carter "counseled" Roy not to take his own life.

"I think it's rather suspect they didn't release all the other text messages they claim the two of them had... It's a sad story, a tragedy, but it's not manslaughter," Cataldo says. "What we have here is a young man who made a voluntary decision to end his own life. It was his voluntary decision. His death was not caused by Michelle Carter."

According to Cataldo, the case is unprecedented in the state of Massachusetts. He says he's not aware of any cases in the state "where a person who is 30 miles away is charged with committing manslaughter by text."

Massachusetts has no statute criminalizing assisted suicide, although 40 other states do. It can, however, prohibit it under common law.

Barbara Coombs Lee, an attorney and president of Compassion & Choices, a non-profit organization that provides guidance and resources about aid in dying, says Massachusetts' lack of a criminal prohibition against assisted suicide will make the case against Carter an uphill battle for the prosecution.

She says what went on between Michelle Carter and Conrad Roy is precisely what such laws are designed to prohibit.

"People shouldn't manipulate and coerce mentally vulnerable victims. There should be some way that society punishes this behavior," Lee says.

CBS News' legal analyst and former Massachusetts prosecutor Rikki Klieman acknowledges that while the accusations against Carter are "horrendous," the case doesn't neatly fit into any statute in Massachusetts.

"It's not cyberbullying, it's not harassment, it's not stalking. So the prosecutor says, 'This is reprehensible conduct, disgusting conduct, must-be-punished conduct,' so he goes forward and says, 'Let's call this involuntary manslaughter.' Does it neatly fit in that definition? Not so much. We really are going to have a test case here," Klieman told CBS This Morning.

Minnesota prosecutor Paul Beaumaster knows firsthand the challenges that come with prosecuting a case that involves allegations of encouraging suicide.

Beaumaster was the prosecutor in the case against William Melchert-Dinkel, a Minnesota man who was charged in the deaths of an Englishman and a Canadian woman after authorities say he used the Internet to manipulate them into killing themselves.

Authorities said Melchert-Dinkel was obsessed with suicide and hanging and sought out potential victims online. When he found them, prosecutors said, he posed as a female nurse, feigned compassion and offered step-by-step instructions on how they could kill themselves.

He was charged and ultimately convicted of aiding in the suicides of Nadia Kajouji, 18, of Brampton, Ontario, and Mark Drybrough, 32, of Coventry, England. Drybrough hanged himself in 2005, and Kajouji jumped into a frozen river in 2008.

A Rice County, Minn. judge found that he "intentionally advised and encouraged" the victims to take their lives, but the defense appealed, saying Melchert-Dinkel's actions might have been immoral, but they were not illegal.

The Minnesota Supreme Court reversed Melchert-Dinkel's convictions last year. The justices found that the part of Minnesota's law that simply bans someone from "encouraging" or "advising" suicide is unconstitutional because it encompasses speech protected under the First Amendment.

But the justices upheld the part of the law that makes it a crime to "assist" in someone's suicide -- and said speech could still be considered a factor. The case went back to the initial judge, who ruled last year that Melchert-Dinkel did assist in Drybrough's suicide, by providing detailed instructions on hanging, on which Drybrough followed through. The judge found Melchert-Dinkel guilty of attempting to assist Kajouji's suicide, because she ultimately rejected his advice to hang herself and jumped into the river instead.

He was ultimately sentenced to 178 days in jail and will avoid prison if he abides by probation terms for the next 10 years.

Beaumaster, the prosecutor in the Melchert-Dinkel case, told Crimesider he believes the case against 18-year-old Michelle Carter in Massachusetts will center around similar issues, such as whether or not words in and of themselves constitute assisted suicide and whether certain statements made via text or on the Internet are protected under the First Amendment.

The Melchert-Dinkel case resulted in a very narrow statute in Minnesota which clearly defines when it is still a crime to assist in suicide, and Beaumaster said similar statutes are needed throughout the country.

In the Michelle Carter case, "I do think there is culpabilty," he said. "Society needs to have outliers be held accountable for statements that result in death or injury to another person."

Michelle Carter, now 18, is charged as a youthful offender since she was 17 at the time of Roy's death, but she could still face punishment as an adult - up to 20 years - if convicted. She is currently free on $2,500 bond.

Authorities have not commented on a motive in the case, but according to police documents, Conrad allegedly sent text messages to her friends and to Roy's mother expressing concern about Roy's whereabouts on the day he committed suicide, despite having been in constant contact with him and encouraging him to take his own life.

The police documents indicate authorities believe she was putting together "a plan to get sympathy." They also allege that after Roy's death, Carter organized a softball tournament to raise money for mental health awareness in honor of Roy and posted several messages on social media about suicide prevention and how much she missed Roy.

In a message to Roy's mother dated July 25, 2014 -- twelve days after his death -- Carter wrote, "...There was nothing anyone could do to save him no matter how hard they tried. I never tried harder at something in my life."




“Michelle Carter, of Plainville, was 17 when police say she encouraged her friend, 18-year-old Conrad Roy, of Mattapoisett, to commit suicide. Roy, who had a history of mental illness, was found dead in his car behind a K-Mart in Fairhaven, about 60 miles south of Boston, on July 13, 2014. He had used a generator to commit suicide by carbon monoxide poisoning.... In a police report, Fairhaven police Det. Scott Gordon wrote, "Carter not only encouraged Conrad [Roy] to take his own life, she questioned him repeatedly as to when and why he hadn't done it yet, right up to the point of when his final text was sent to her." The report further alleges that, prior to his death, Roy texted Carter that he was scared and didn't want to leave his family, but despite that, Carter continued to encourage him to take his own life, "and when he actually started to carry out the act, he got scared again and exited his truck but instead of telling him to stay out of the truck and turn off the generator, Carter told him to 'get back in.'" However, Joseph Cataldo, Carter's attorney, says his client didn't commit a crime and he believes a judge will dismiss the charge prior to trial. He tells 48 Hours' Crimesider that once all the evidence is made public it will be clear that Carter "counseled" Roy not to take his own life..... She says what went on between Michelle Carter and Conrad Roy is precisely what such laws are designed to prohibit. "People shouldn't manipulate and coerce mentally vulnerable victims. There should be some way that society punishes this behavior," Lee says. CBS News' legal analyst and former Massachusetts prosecutor Rikki Klieman acknowledges that while the accusations against Carter are "horrendous," the case doesn't neatly fit into any statute in Massachusetts. "It's not cyberbullying, it's not harassment, it's not stalking. So the prosecutor says, 'This is reprehensible conduct, disgusting conduct, must-be-punished conduct,' so he goes forward and says, 'Let's call this involuntary manslaughter.' Does it neatly fit in that definition? Not so much. We really are going to have a test case here," Klieman told CBS This Morning.”

“The Minnesota Supreme Court reversed Melchert-Dinkel's convictions last year. The justices found that the part of Minnesota's law that simply bans someone from "encouraging" or "advising" suicide is unconstitutional because it encompasses speech protected under the First Amendment.” This article in a couple of ways illustrates one thing that is wrong with our legal system and the way cases are tried. It's a jury system and the prosecutor has to prove the case on the basis of the exact way the law is written. In the US the prosecutor picks the laws apart verbally, sometimes with ridiculous results.

In this case, the courts have found it very difficult to convict people of bullying a mentally disturbed person into suicide, simply because no law that EXACTLY describes the situation was available. It is being compared to physician assisted suicide in this article, and it isn't the same at all. With physician assisted suicide the person specifically wants to die to avoid a slow, but horrible and painful death. We could use a law that penalizes a case like this heavily, rather than a slap on the wrist.

We need some room for logical argument rather than the specific wording of the law itself. The first few cases of Internet bullying had no base in law on which to judge them, and now according to this article there are some, but there are no laws to specifically punish exhorting a person to commit suicide. This is not the first case in the news during the last few years, and all involved teenagers cruelly bullying a peer on the Internet. The last one a few months ago turned out to be THE PARENT of a teenager posing as a teen.

Whoever does it, it is evil, and teens who are old enough to dream up such a scheme are old enough to know better. I think bullying that ends in death or serious injury should be punished by a steep prison sentence. We could include in that category some of these hazing incidents such as the band member who was literally beaten to death a few years ago as an “initiation ritual.” Courts tend to go easy on teens who do these things, based on their immaturity. I think that is not only unfair, it is a basic mistake. A fourteen or fifteen year old is perfectly capable of logical thinking, unless he himself is mentally disturbed or intellectually disabled. The case of the “Slender Man” last year is one such case, I think, so those people could be put in mandatory therapy with appropriate medications. I don't think a normal 12 year old would “believe” in what is clearly a cartoon character. A six year old, yes.