Marilyn Mosby is the Maryland prosecutor who elected to prosecute the six officers involved in a case that resulted in the death of Freddie gray, a suspect who was in their custody at the time of his unfortunate demise. Mosby failed to receive a conviction in either of the first four cases and on Monday, dropped the remaining charges against the rest of the officers awaiting trial.

Mosby, obviously frustrated because the officers chose to have their cases heard by a judge rather than a jury, said she wants to pursue greater prosecutorial power over whether a defendant can choose a bench trial over a jury trial. In short, she wants this particular and extremely important right taken away from all defendants, further stacking the deck against them as they face incarceration and other punishments that include the loss of even more rights.

“I have a number of ideas that I’m not yet going to talk about,” Mosby said. “I have it all written out. I have it all planned.”

Screen Shot 2016-07-28 at 12.10.08 PM

One of the purposes of affording the option of trial type is to allow a defendant to have his/her case heard by a judge rather than a jury whose opinions may be swayed by emotions and public statements made prior to start of the courtroom proceedings. A great example of possible jury tainting is the case in question, the trials of the officers accused of murdering Freddie Gray.

A local jury pool most likely saw and heard Ms. Mosby’s emotionally-charged speech announcing the charges against the officers (depraved heart murder—a deliberate act that is so dangerous that it shows total indifference to someone else’s life, murder, and manslaughter, among others). She concluded her lengthy oration with, “… to the youth of the city. I will seek justice on your behalf. This is a moment. This is your moment. Let’s insure we have peaceful and productive rallies that will develop structural and systemic changes for generations to come. You’re at the forefront of this cause and as young people, our time is now.”

Many have considered Mosby’s dramatic speech as a one offered by an angry political activist rather than that of a unbiased prosecutor.

Screen Shot 2016-07-28 at 12.10.21 PM

Potential jurors likely witnessed her appearances on national TV, in magazines, and on the stage with Prince at a concert that was billed as a Rally4Peace, an event in honor of Freddie Gray, the victim in the case. Not to mention that she’s married to City Councilman Nick Mosby, whose district includes the area where the Gray incident and much of the recent Baltimore rioting took place. She’s also friends with Gray family lawyer Billy Murphy. Murphy helped with Mosby’s campaign fund-raising.

Screen Shot 2016-07-28 at 12.15.13 PM

So yes, the defendants in the case had just cause to fear the jury pool would be stacked against them. Therefore, as is their right, they opted to have their cases heard by a judge, an option Mosby wants to change.

I’ve included the below text, especially for Maryland prosecutor Marilyn Mosby, in the event this page is missing from the law books in her office. Please note the red text below.

Seriously (I suppose Ms. Mosby is at least aware of the law), I highlighted the line in red so to make it stand out to help those who aren’t aware that this indeed is the law. The right to trial by judge, or jury, is not a suggestion or something that can be instantly altered simply because someone doesn’t like it, or because the results produced by it are not favorable to an attorney involved in a court proceeding.

 

RULE 4-246. WAIVER OF JURY TRIAL–CIRCUIT COURT

West’s Annotated Code of Maryland

Maryland Rules

West’s Annotated Code of Maryland

Maryland Rules (Refs & Annos)

Title 4. Criminal Causes

Chapter 200. Pretrial Procedures (Refs & Annos)
MD Rules, Rule 4-246
RULE 4-246. WAIVER OF JURY TRIAL–CIRCUIT COURT

(a) Generally. In the circuit court, a defendant having a right to trial by jury shall be tried by a jury unless the right is waived pursuant to section (b) of this Rule. The State does not have the right to elect a trial by jury.

(b) Procedure for Acceptance of Waiver. A defendant may waive the right to a trial by jury at any time before the commencement of trial. The court may not accept the waiver until, after an examination of the defendant on the record in open court conducted by the court, the State’s Attorney, the attorney for the defendant, or any combination thereof, the court determines and announces on the record that the waiver is made knowingly and voluntarily.
Committee note: Although the law does not require the court to use a specific form of inquiry in determining whether a defendant’s waiver of a jury trial is knowing and voluntary, the record must demonstrate an intentional relinquishment of a known right. What questions must be asked will depend upon the facts and circumstances of the particular case.
In determining whether a waiver is knowing, the court should seek to ensure that the defendant understands that: (1) the defendant has the right to a trial by jury; (2) unless the defendant waives a trial by jury, the case will be tried by a jury; (3) a jury consists of 12 individuals who reside in the county where the court is sitting, selected at random from a list that includes registered voters, licensed drivers, and holders of identification cards issued by the Motor Vehicle Administration, seated as jurors at the conclusion of a selection process in which the defendant, the defendant’s attorney, and the State participate; (4) all 12 jurors must agree on whether the defendant is guilty or not guilty and may only convict upon proof beyond a reasonable doubt; (5) if the jury is unable to reach a unanimous decision, a mistrial will be declared and the State will then have the option of retrying the defendant; and (6) if the defendant waives a jury trial, the court will not permit the defendant to change the election unless the court finds good cause to permit the change.
In determining whether a waiver is voluntary, the court should consider the defendant’s responses to questions such as: (1) Are you making this decision of your own free will? (2) Has anyone offered or promised you anything in exchange for giving up your right to a jury trial? (3) Has anyone threatened or coerced you in any way regarding your decision? and (4) Are you presently under the influence of any medications, drugs, or alcohol?
Cross reference: See Kang v. State, 393 Md. 97 (2006) and Abeokuto v. State, 391 Md. 289 (2006).
(c) Withdrawal of a Waiver. After accepting a waiver of jury trial, the court may permit the defendant to withdraw the waiver only on motion made before trial and for good cause shown. In determining whether to allow a withdrawal of the waiver, the court may consider the extent, if any, to which trial would be delayed by the withdrawal.
Source: This Rule is derived from former Rule 735.
*As always, please … no arguments about gun control, police-bashing, protestors, political rants and raves, bashing of political candidates, religion, race, and, well, the usual. Oh, and please do save the bad language for other pages. We have kids who visit this page and I’d like to keep the site as kid-friendly as possible. Besides, I’m extremely weary of seeing and hearing the “F” word. But that’s just me. Thanks!

 

John Hinckley, Jr. is getting out. He, as you may recall, is the man who shot President Ronald Reagan, a police officer, a Secret Service agent, and Press Secretary James Brady. Brady later died as a result of the gunshot wound that struck him in the face just above the left eye. It was in 1981 when Hinckley fired the shots, attempting to assassinate President Reagan as a means of impressing actress Jodi Foster. He was found not guilty by reason of insanity.

Photograph_of_chaos_outside_the_Washington_Hilton_Hotel_after_the_assassination_attempt_on_President_Reagan_-_NARA_-_198514

A moment after the assassination attempt of President Reagan by John Hinckley, Jr.

Now, U.S. District Judge Paul Friedman feels that Hinckley is well enough to live in the community. Although, had Hinckley been declared sane at the time of the shootings he would most likely have spent the remainder of his life behind bars. But, come August of 2016, Hinkley will be residing with his parents in a gated golf course community in historic Williamsburg, Va., where he says he’d like to fit in and be a good citizen. The man (Hinckley) who once was fixated on the assassination of President Kennedy, fantasized about hijacking an airplane, and stalked President Carter, now enjoys speaking to groups in art galleries and at mental hospitals. He also enjoys playing guitar, painting, and photography. He would like to land a job at Starbucks or Subway.

I wonder what Mr. Brady, had he survived the attack, would have enjoyed had he not been confined to wheelchair by a gunshot wound that left him with slurred speech and partial paralysis and suffering deficits in memory and thinking and the inability to recognize people. I’m sure that the simple act of standing at a counter and placing an order for a sandwich, unassisted, at Subway or any other business would have been high on his “I wish I could” list. Unfortunately, he died because of the actions of a man who speaks to people at art galleries and strums and plucks his six-string while intently watching men and women on the golf course behind his parents’  home.

James_Brady_1986

James Brady

In fairness to Hinckley, he’s been allowed out for numerous visits with his parents and he’s been driving around and interacting with people in the community for quite some time and all without incident. Of course, he hadn’t attempted to kill a U.S. president until he fired that first round at Reagan. Until that day, he’d been out and about in the community as well. As they say, I’m just saying.

By the way, the Hinckley’s rear deck is just mere feet away from the 13th hole, just in case you decide to play there.

On the opposite end of the spectrum is 40-year-old Melissa Wright of Hillbrook, Alabama. You may recall that Ms. Wright pleaded guilty in 2003 to the attempted murder of her 14-month-old daughter, Ashley Smith. She tried to kill the girl by placing her in a broiler oven. The child has since endured over two dozen operations due to the burns she received.

Screen Shot 2016-07-27 at 1.18.30 PMScreen Shot 2016-07-27 at 1.18.52 PM

Ashley is now 15.

Melissa Wright was recently up for parole. During the hearing Ashley requested that her mother remain in prison. However, her older sister pleaded with the board to release their mother. A prosecutor says he wants Wright to serve every day of her 25 year sentence.

Screen Shot 2016-07-27 at 1.19.03 PM

Ashley Smith at her mother’s parole hearing.

The board denied Wright’s release, for now.

And then there’s the case of the Baltimore Six, the officers on trial for the death of Freddie Gray, a man who died during an incident involving those six officers.

Screen Shot 2016-07-27 at 12.58.13 PM

Today, Baltimore prosecutor Marilyn Mosby dropped all charges against the remaining officers accused of killing Gray. Previous trials each resulted in acquittals with the exception of one that ended in a mistrial. During the trials, Judge Barry G. Williams Jr. made it perfectly clear that he did not believe Mosby’s theory of the case, In addition, Judge Williams found that prosecutors deliberately withheld information that would have been beneficial to the defense.

So, a case that received much national attention, one that prompted protestors to riot and loot and burn parts of the city and presented Mosby with opportunities to appear in national TV sows, magazines, and onstage with Prince, has ended without a single conviction after a judge repeatedly said there simply was no evidence of criminal wrongdoing.

This, after Mosby’s news conference announcing that she planned to bring charges against the Baltimore officers. She said, “To the people of Baltimore and the demonstrators across America. I heard your call for “no justice, no peace…To the youth of this city, I will seek justice on your behalf. This is a moment, this is your moment…You’re at the forefront of this cause. And as young people, our time is now.”

After the prosecutor’s fiery press conference and subsequent to when areas of Baltimore were set ablaze and destroyed, Judge Williams issued a gag order preventing all parties from the prosecution and defense from publicly discussing the case. Today, the order was lifted and a still-defiant Mosby once again turned to the media to share her feelings about police when she blamed them, a lack of communal oversight of police, and entire the justice system (the same justice system that’s for everyone, not just her) for her failure to produce guilty verdicts.

Mosby said today, “After much thought and prayer it has become clear to me that without being able to work with an independent investigatory agency from the very start, without having a say in the election of whether our cases proceed in front of a judge or a jury … we can try this case 100 times … and we would still end up with the same results.” 

To respond to Mosey’s comments:

  • She and her team had every opportunity to work with an independent agency of their choosing, but she elected to do conduct her own investigation using her own investigators and the evidence they presented—evidence the judge said did not rise to the level of criminal wrongdoing. Remember, there must be proof of a crime to convict anyone. And it was their own evidence, evidence that favored the officers, that was withheld from the defense.
  • It is the right of ANY and ALL people who’re facing criminal charges as to whether or not they want a bench trial (by a judge) or a trial by jury. This is not something a prosecutor has control over. Not today, not ever before.
  • She’s right, she’d probably not get a conviction in this case in 100 attempts to do so, because the crimes charged were not a reflection of the event. There must be criminal intent.

On the hand, were the officers responsible for the safety of Freddie Gray? Sure they were, but the safety of the officers as well as the safety of everyone at the scene were equally as important. Decisions made that day, during the spur of moment—in mere seconds—are a small example of the decisions that must be made by police officers every single day.

Mosby said she stands by the medical examiner’s report that Gray’s death was a homicide. Well, I can sort of agree with that statement. Remember, homicide and murder are not always the same.

It is Murder that’s the unlawful killing of another person. The judge in this case said there was no evidence of criminal wrongdoing. None.

“I understand that murder is a crime,” you say, but…what’s the difference between murder and homicide? Don’t they share the same meaning? Is there a difference?

Yes, of course there’s a distinction between the two, and the things that set them apart are extremely important.

Again, murder is the unlawful killing of a person, especially with malice aforethought.

The definition of homicide, however, encompasses ALL killings of human beings by other humans. And certain homicides are absolutely legal.

Anyway, back to the Baltimore Six. I’m all for justice. Had this been a case involving criminal intent, where the officers did something to intentionally injure or kill Mr. Gray, well, they should’ve been found guilty and sent to prison. And I’m a firm believer that when people break the law, including police officers, they should be charged.

However, that was simply not the case this time.

By the way, Prosecutor Marilyn Mosby now faces disbarment charges as well as civil lawsuits from the majority of officers she charged in this case.

*As always, please … no arguments about gun control, police-bashing, protestors, political rants and raves, bashing of political candidates, religion, race, and, well, the usual. Oh, and please do save the bad language for other pages. We have kids who visit this page and I’d like to keep the site as kid-friendly as possible. Besides, I’m extremely weary of seeing and hearing the “F” word. But that’s just me. Thanks!

background: #bd081c no-repeat scroll 3px 50% / 14px 14px; position: absolute; opacity: 1; z-index: 8675309; display: none; cursor: pointer; top: 164px; left: 20px;”>Save

 

Violent crime is down. Events of the past couple of years have had no effect on crime rates. The so-called Ferguson Effect does not exist. The numbers are fabricated by the police and “the right.” Stop and frisks are offensive. “The violence rate today is far lower than it was when Ronald Reagan was president and lower than when I took office,” said President Obama during a press conference in the White House East Room.

Those, the above, are all sentiments I picked up on various media sources. Are the statements correct? Is the U.S. truly experiencing wonderful and extremely welcome downturn of violent crime?

Well, not so much according to a midyear violent crime survey released Monday by the Major Cities Chiefs Association. The MCCA is comprised of 68 of the largest law enforcement departments in the U.S.

Here’s what the study showed.

  • 307 more homicides so far in 2016 (data collected from 51 of the largest U.S. law enforcement agencies).
  • 1,000 more robberies.
  • 2,000 more aggravated assaults.
  • 600 more non-fatal shootings.
  • Chicago has seen a 48% increase in homicides over the same time last year.
  • Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Office reports 110 homicides so far this year, as opposed to 85 in 2015.
  • San Jose, California’s murder rate has doubled in the past twelve months. When we lived there, San Jose was listed and advertised as the safest city in America. Apparently, this is no longer the case.
  • In the first three months of 2016, the country saw a 9% increase in homicides.
  • TIME reported – Chicago experienced one of the biggest homicide increases of any city … cities with significant increases included Dallas (45 homicides in 2016 compared with 26), Jacksonville, Fla., (30 in 2016, 18 in 2015), Las Vegas (40 and 22), the city of Los Angeles (73 and 55), Memphis (48 and 31), Nashville (20 and 13), and San Antonio (34 and 23).

In addition, 32 police officers have been shot and killed so far this year, an 88% increase over the same period last year. Keep in mind, this figure does not include the number who were shot but survived. Nor does it include the number of officers who were physically assaulted. According to data collected by the FBI, 49,851 officers were assaulted in 2013. That total is surely much higher in 2016, and the total only reflects the assaults reported. Many are not.

Interestingly, New York reported 68 homicides, a figure that’s slightly down from 85 the year before.

I wonder how low the murder and assault rate would be if guns were out of the hands of criminals? I know for a fact that in the areas where I used to work gun violence went WAY down in the areas where we engaged the criminal element head on. We did so by getting out of our cars and talking to everyone, including gang members, drug dealers, etc., and we regularly conducted stop-and-frisks of suspicious people (Not just any random person walking down the street minding their own business. That’s not how Stop-and-Frisk” works). The tactic caused the bad guys to not carry guns out of fear we’d conduct a quick pat-down and arrest them for weapons and/or probation violations.

I know I felt safer knowing that we’d removed many of the illegal guns from the streets. And it was sort of a joy seeing those sawed-off shotguns, Saturday night specials, guns with serial numbers removed, and other illegal weapons being destroyed. We either had them crushed or melted in a coal-fired furnace that was capable of reaching temperatures of around 2,700 degrees (I think that’s the temperature of the furnaces. My memory of the process is not all that great. I do recall that the melting came quickly and that some of those firearms are now probably part of a manhole cover or other such item. Who knows, some may now be part of the steel bars in a jail or prison. Ironic, huh?).

1441777877ati6u

Is there any place that’s safe from violent crime? Last year, a woman parked her car at a local mall in my city, and as she walked toward the stores a man approached from behind and used a baseball bat to hit her on the head. It was an extremely violent act. Then the attacker took her purse and fled the scene. The victim–a beloved nurse, mother, and wife—died. A few days earlier, a similar thing happened in the parking lot of a local bank. The attacker in that case used a hammer to hit his victim, another woman. Fortunately she survived the physical attack. Mentally, I’m not so sure.

What about the Ferguson Effect, the idea that police are less proactive in their methods of policing, such as the stop and frisks and even getting out of their cars to talk to people of the streets at all hours of the night? They don’t due to fear of backlash and/or attacks against them by the crowds of people who flock to every scene in order to surround the officers, chant, shout, throw things at the officers, attempt to physically free the people who’re under arrest, and shove cameras in the faces of cops who’re trying to do their jobs.

Well, it depends upon who you talk to as to whether or the FE is real or not. The White House says it is not. That it’s irresponsible and counterproductive for anyone, including FBI Director Jim Comey, to say different. However, the numbers tell a different story. According to a study published this year in the Journal of Criminal Justice, homicides in the 12 months after the Michael Brown shooting (in Ferguson, Missouri) rose significantly in cities with already high rates of violence.

Baltimore by crime analyst Jeff Asher conducted a study of gun violence which showed that when Baltimore police officers stopped making drug arrests last year after the rioting that followed the death of Freddie Gray, shootings in the city ballooned. In Chicago, where pedestrian stops have fallen nearly 90 percent, homicides are up significantly compared with the same period last year.

Point to note: Asher’s study concluded that homicides in Chicago are up 60% in May of 2016 over the same time last year. CNN reports the number as 48%, as per the MCAA study. Either way, the increased numbers of homicide throughout the country are troubling to say the least.

So … what are your thoughts? Do you feel safe these days? Have you found yourself worrying about violence just a bit more than you used to? Does travel to certain cities or areas of your own hometown cause you to feel anxious. Do you avoid traveling to some places in the U.S., or even areas in your town?

*As always, please … no arguments about gun control, police-bashing, protestors, political rants and raves, bashing of political candidates, religion, race, and, well, the usual. Oh, and please do save the bad language for other pages. We have kids who visit this page and I’d like to keep the site as kid-friendly as possible. Besides, I’m extremely weary of seeing and hearing the “F” word. But that’s just me. Thanks!

*Sources – FBI, CNN, US Legal, baltimorecounty.gov, Major Cities Chiefs Association Report, and me.

background: #bd081c no-repeat scroll 3px 50% / 14px 14px; position: absolute; opacity: 1; z-index: 8675309; display: none; cursor: pointer; top: 36px; left: 20px;”>Save

 

We all know how valuable DNA testing is in the worlds of paternity testing and crime-solving. In fact, DNA testing is so accurate that we’re able to determine, with just a mere microscopic fleck of doubt, the identity of a long-lost father, or mother, a name associated with remains found in areas of disaster, and we’re able to learn the names of perpetrators of crimes of various types. All from a tiny speck of blood, tissue, other body fluids, etc.

Remember, every cell in the human body has DNA except red blood cells. Therefore, almost anything a suspect handled could contain DNA. This is why crime-scene investigators locate and collect items they think a suspect may have touched—cigarette butts, bloody clothing, weapons, paper, drinking glass, etc. The evidence is then turned over for testing to a forensic lab and its scientists.

The first step in the testing process is to extract DNA from the evidence sample. To do so, the scientist adds chemicals to the sample, a process that ruptures cells. When the cells open up DNA is released and is ready for examination.

The rest of the process is pretty straightforward and not all that complicated. DNA is loaded into a genetic analyzer that produces a readout that’s specific to the individual who left the evidence (skin, blood, tissue, semen, saliva, etc.).

This is all well and good EXCEPT when twins are involved, because twins have identical DNA. And, when two people have the same DNA and one of them commits a murder, well, without other evidence to validate the charges it’s difficult to prove which twin was at the scene and which was not. A near perfect crime?

Well, scientists at University of Huddersfield, located in Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, England, have devised a means distinguishing slight differences—mutations—between the DNA of identical twins.

DNA methylation, simply put, is the molecular mechanism that switches various genes on and off. Therefore, when one twin is, for example, a lifeguard who spends much of daily life in the sun but her identical twin does not, the difference in lifestyles will cause changes in the methylation status of the DNA. These changes in the DNA methylation status of the sun-loving sibling are the subtle changes that sets the twins apart. The same is true when one twin is a smoker and the other lives a tobacco-free life, and so on.

The technique used—high resolution melt curve analysis—subjects the DNA samples/evidence to increasingly high temperatures until the hydrogen bonds break. This breaking point is known as the “melting temperature.”

Again, to simplify, the difference between the melting temperatures establishes the difference between two identical twins. So, the post-methylated-tested DNA can indeed point investigators to the guilty twin.

1899882_10203416716994208_717029962355153921_n

So there you have it, writers, a new twist for your twisted tales.

 

background: #bd081c no-repeat scroll 3px 50% / 14px 14px; position: absolute; opacity: 1; z-index: 8675309; display: none; cursor: pointer; top: 36px; left: 20px;”>Save

 

In April of this year, Virginia Governor Terry McAuliffe signed an executive order restoring voting rights to more than 200,000 convicted felons, a move that circumvented the Commonwealth’s Republican-run legislature. Many of those against the order claimed the governor overstepped his legal authority by committing a transparent effort to win votes for Hillary Clinton in the November election, a move that would help sway Virginia in her direction.

Friday, the Virginia Supreme Court, in a 4-3 ruling, struck down the governor’s order, saying McAuliffe did indeed overstep his powers under the state constitution. Chief Justice Donald Lemons wrote in the majority opinion, “The assertion that a Virginia Governor has the power to grant blanket, group pardons is irreconcilable with the specific requirement in Article V, Section 12 that the Governor communicate to the General Assembly the ‘particulars of every case’ and state his ‘reasons’ for each pardon.”

Therefore, according to the state constitution (the law), the governor of Virginia does not have the legal power to issue a blanket order to restore rights to all ex-offenders who are no longer incarcerated or on probation or parole.

McAuliffe’s response? He’s he thumbed his nose at the state’s high court by vowing to sign individual orders to restore voting rights to each of the 200,000 convicted felons, starting with those who’ve already registered.

So my questions to you are:

  • Do you believe that convicted felons should be allowed to vote? Or, should their voting rights be restored after serving their sentences and probation/parole? Or, as in Virginia, should their voting rights be taken away permanently.

file1221272219645

Speaking of the rights of convicted felons, specifically nonviolent offenders, who’ve served their time and have returned to their communities, and have lived and functioned with no problems whatsoever … should all of their rights, or some, be forever withheld … permanently? An example of the rights and privileges withheld are:

  1. Voting
  2. Traveling abroad (some countries deny admission to convicted felons).
  3. The right to own or possess guns
  4. Jury service
  5. Employment in certain fields
  6. Public social benefits and housing – they are are not allowed to apply for federal or state grants, live in public housing, or receive federal cash assistance, SSI or food stamps, etc.
  7. Parental benefits
  8. Financial assistance for college

Heres a point to ponder – How is it possible for former offenders to live and function and survive if they’re denied housing, employment, education, and food? And there’s no dignity when someone’s learned their lesson, paid their debts to society, and is trying their best to work toward goals and to be proud of themselves once again and of their country, all when they’re denied the simple right to vote. Some people make mistakes. Some people are guilty of the same offenses, or worse, but aren’t caught. Yet they still enjoy their basic freedoms and rights. Don’t people (again, I’m speaking of people convicted of non-violent crimes) deserve a second chance?

14601720532yyrn

What say you, loyal readers?

*Please, no bashing of politicians, religion, race, gender, cops, etc. Let’s discuss this rationally since the topic affects each of us.

I know, Clinton was mentioned in the opening paragraph, but only to set the stage for the information that followed regarding the rights (lack of) of convicted felons. I am not publicly endorsing any candidate. None. Zip. Nada. So please do not read between the lines. Again, the name was mentioned merely for informational purposes.

 

position: absolute; opacity: 1; z-index: 8675309; display: none; cursor: pointer; top: 36px; left: 20px;”>Save

Friday's Heroes - Remembering the fallen officers

 

captain-robert-david-melton

Captain Robert David Melton, 46

Kansas City Kansas Police Department

July 19, 2016 – Captain Dave Melton was shot and killed after responding to a “shots fired” call. When he encountered one of the men involved, the suspect immediately opened fire fatally wounding Captain Melton.

corrections-officer-kristopher-moules

Officer Kristopher D. Moules, 25

Luzerne County Pennsylvania Correctional Facility

July 18, 2016 – Officer Kristopher Moules was killed during a struggle with an inmate when the two crashed through and elevator door and fell several floors to the bottom of the shaft. The inmate was also killed.

c_corporal_montrell_jackson

Corporal Montreal Lyle Jackson, 32

Baton Rouge Louisiana Police Department

July 17, 2016 – Corporal Montreal Jackson was shot and killed by ambush while responding to “man with a gun” call. Two other officers were also killed and three were wounded, including one who was critically wounded.

He is survived by his wife and infant son.

c_police_officer_matthew_gerald

Officer Matthew Lane Gerald, 41

Baton Rouge Louisiana Police Department

July 17, 2016 – Officer Matthew Lane Gerald was shot and killed by ambush while responding to “man with a gun” call. Two other officers were also killed and three were wounded, including one who was critically wounded.

c_garafola

Deputy Sheriff Brad Allen Granola, 45 

East Baton Rouge Parish Sheriff’s Office, Louisiana

July 17, 2016 – Deputy Brad Allen Granola was shot and killed by ambush while responding to “man with a gun” call. Two other officers were also killed and three were wounded, including one who was critically wounded.

He is survived by his wife and four children.

police-officer-mark-mccullers

Officer Calvin Mark McCullers

Southern Methodist University Police Department, Texas

July 5, 2016 – Officer Mark McCullers drowned when his patrol vehicle was swept away during torrential flooding. He is survived by his wife and six children.

background: #bd081c no-repeat scroll 3px 50% / 14px 14px; position: absolute; opacity: 1; z-index: 8675309; display: none; cursor: pointer; top: 36px; left: 20px;”>Save

flashing blue lights

You look in your rear-view mirror and there it is, a patrol car.

It’s so close you can see the reflection of your tail-lights in the officer’s sunglasses.

You see him pick up the mic and start talking. He’s a big, burly man who looks as if he’s capable of crushing diamonds with his teeth. Yes, he’s definitely scary.

Screen Shot 2016-07-21 at 10.49.00 AM

You read his lips. “10-4. I got me a real danger to society this time. I’m goin’ in.” Well, at least that’s what your imagination told you.

What’s he 10-4ing? What’d you do wrong? You run down the list. Insurance is paid. License was renewed on time. Didn’t run the red light. Seat belt on. Didn’t roll through the stop sign. Then, WHAT? WHY HAS HE BEEN FOLLOWING ME FOR SO LONG? WHAT COULD HE POSSIBLY BE DOING BACK THERE?

He just looks so doggone evil. And you’re not positive, but you think you can read his badge number. So you embed it into your memory, just in case …

badge number

JUST TURN ON THE BLUE LIGHTS AND GET IT OVER WITH!

And there it is. The traffic stop. He’s pulling you over and here he comes, right up to your window.

1431063156cwtip

When he leans over to peek into your window, for some odd reason you sense that he’s looking deep into your soul.

He’s evil in a uniform.

Screen Shot 2016-07-21 at 11.51.30 AM

Sure traffic stops are sometimes a bit unnerving, but once you settle down you’ll quickly realize that officers are just like you … human. Well, sort of.

Screen Shot 2016-07-21 at 12.03.57 PM

So, there are several things the officer could be doing back there.

  • It’s possible that he’s simply heading in the same direction you’re going and is no more than the next car in line. Also, you might be so worried about having a police car behind you that you’re driving ten miles per hour under the speed limit. He’d like to pass, but can’t because you’re driving in a lane that doesn’t permit it. The latter occurs quite often.

But, you just may be the target of a traffic stop. In that case, here’s what’s likely going on back there in Lucifer’s vehicle.

  • The officer is calling in your license plate numbers to dispatch. Those busy folks will let the officer know if your registration is current, if the plates on the car are supposed to be on the car, the make and model of the car, the owner’s name and address, and if the car is stolen, which is a whole new bucket of worms.

Dispatch could also run the owner’s name to see if they’re wanted for any crimes, past DUI’s, have a valid driver’s license, etc.

Of course, the officer could be running the information himself using the in-car computer.

  • Your car could match the description of a car that was used in a crime. Therefore, the officer could be calling for backup. If so, he’ll follow you until back up is nearby, or on the scene. This is the time when you could see the business end of one of those shiny Sig Sauers.
  • The officer may have seen you commit a traffic infraction (crossing over the center line, running off the road, didn’t dim your lights when you should have, weave within your lane, etc.) and he’s staying behind you to see if that error was a simple mistake, or if you could possibly be under the influence of alcohol or drugs.

  • He could be following you until he’s reached an area where he feels it’s safe enough to conduct a traffic stop. Officers should be vigilant about their surroundings. They should always plan ahead, making traffic stops in areas where they won’t be boxed in should a shootout take place. The stop area should have a shoulder that’s wide enough to safely pull off the roadway, out of traffic. And they should never make a stop in an area where radio communication is hindered by things such as barrier walls and electrical interference. If the radio doesn’t work, don’t make the stop. Wait!
  • The officer might be watching your reaction to having a police car behind you. Your actions may give him reason to believe that you’re up to no good. Unusually nervous glances in the mirror coupled with erratic movements (fidgeting with something under the seat or console) could mean the driver is reaching for a weapon or hiding contraband.

  • Finally, it could be time for a bathroom break and you’re just in the way. Or, they might be on the way to pick up some lawbreaking clown …

So drive safe, buckle up, and keep your hands and feet inside the car at all times. You never know who, or what, might be following you.

 

Here’s a frog sharing his umbrella with a female quail.

I know, the frog’s green, but he doesn’t apologize for the color of his skin, nor is he ashamed of his size and portly belly.

The quails’ markings are mixed—brown, black, white, and brown. And they wear funny hats. They’re different, and quirky. No apologies there either.

The umbrella is purple and turquoise. A bit silly? Perhaps. But the frog doesn’t care. Neither does the quail. Not one bit.

Mulch is brown and gravel is beige. It’s simply how they are.

And rocks are gray. Their colorings were not a choice.

Grass is green, like the frog, and the shrubs have delicate blue flowers and gangly limbs. Again, not a choice.

The male quail runs toward a meal of assorted birdseeds.

He and the female will share their dinner with several other birds—doves, bluejays, crows, finches, sparrows, mockingbirds, and even an occasional turkey and a phoebe or two or three. They’ll eat side-by-side and beak-to-beak until the food is gone.

Then they’ll wander or fly off to wherever it is they go for the night. There, they’ll sing and chirp and coo and share their trees and bushes and hidey-holes with other birds that don’t look like them.

IMG_0036

No arguing. No fighting. No killing.

Why is it that our backyard friends so readily and happily share their world, their food, and their water?

Because no one told them as chicks that they should do anything else or act any other way.

No, jays are not phoebes and finches are not quail.

Neither are doves like crows.

Well, they all have wings and feet and feathers.

Like people have arms and feet and hair.

But that’s where our similarities stop.

Because someone told us as kids that we shouldn’t get along.

Yes, we’re different, like the birds.

They each have their own cultures and mannerisms, and lifestyles, as do we.

But they don’t try to force the others to be like them.

Because not one of their family and friends told them they should.

Birds.

Yes, we should all learn from birds …

And a wise and portly green frog holding a purple and turquoise umbrella.

 

 

 

I’ve received countless requests to have me comment or offer an opinion regarding the connection between race and murder and gun control in the U.S. However, as most of you are aware, I typically do not offer opinions on this site. This topic is no exception.

So, with that in mind …

Not so long ago, law enforcement officials were able to reduce the number of illegal guns in the pockets of bad guys using methods such as the very legal and Supreme Court approved “stop and frisk.”

However, due to public outcry and that some have determined the practice was offensive to criminals and criminal suspects, even though it is perfectly legal and makes communities safer, especially for police officers. So many areas have all but abandoned the practice as a “go-to” tool for helping to rid the streets of illegal guns. Therefore, officers in those areas are now unable to conduct those important stops, and they basically have no real means of locating and removing those weapons short of waiting until the Bonnie and Clyde wannabes blast their way into a corner liquor store, or worse.

Keep in mind, though, that Terry Stops (stop and frisks) are absolutely legal and are still used everywhere in country. It’s just that in certain cities, lawmakers and police administration have reduced its use as a blanket tactic.

With that bit of information out of the way and left for you to ponder, what I will do as it relates to the questions I’ve received, is this … post official government other trusted data.

So here’s the data as it relates to the murder rate in the U.S., by race/ethnicity, in the year 2013. I did not include age and sex. No one seems to be concerned about that particular aspect.

Keep in mind that criminals are the people who’re murdering other people. Good, honest, law-abiding folks are not. The color of someone’s skin cannot pull a trigger. Nor can a gun fire itself.

So, here goes …

*Remember, this is FBI data from 2013, not 2016. Current numbers would be noticeably higher.

Screen Shot 2016-07-19 at 10.39.14 AM

Line 1. (below) – Total murders by race.

Line 2. – Percent of distribution (numbers are rounded which explains a tally not equal to 100%).

Line 3. – Murderers under the age of 18.

Line 4. – Murderers under the age of 22.

Line 5. – Total murders committed by offenders over the age of 18.

Screen Shot 2016-07-19 at 10.34.24 AM

Part two of the popular question relates to the population of the U.S. Here’s the population data for the same year, 2013.

The current U.S. population, by the way, is 324,118,787.

Screen Shot 2016-07-19 at 10.41.04 AM

Screen Shot 2016-07-19 at 10.37.44 AM

Total percentages of U.S. population by race/ethnicity is …

Screen Shot 2016-07-19 at 12.19.04 PM

*Source of above chart – The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation

*Please keep in mind that there’s a margin of error when using data from different sources.

And, when we compare the homicide rates of 2015 to only the first half of 2016 (Source – The New York Times) …

Screen Shot 2016-07-19 at 11.14.16 AM

Screen Shot 2016-07-19 at 11.15.55 AM

Screen Shot 2016-07-19 at 11.16.15 AM

Screen Shot 2016-07-19 at 11.16.32 AM

*Please, please, and PLEASE … this post is not my attempt to sway opinions one way or another. This is not the site for racial arguments, politician- and cop-bashing, quarrels about whose religion is better than another, and gun control rants. I merely posted data. By the way, you’d probably be amazed if you knew my feelings on the issues, but it’s not my duty to post personal opinion. I’m here to help writers by presenting facts, therefore I don’t take sides, as if there should be “sides” to take.

 

Where to begin on a Monday morning after such a devastating weekend?

First, let’s start with the latest results in the case of the officers charged with the death of Freddie Gray.

After two complete acquittals and a mistrial, today Baltimore City Circuit Court Judge Barry Williams handed down his verdict in the latest case brought by prosecutor Marilyn Mosby.

Baltimore police Lieutenant Brian Rice, the highest ranking officer to stand trial for Gray’s death, was found not guilty on all charges. Judge Williams said the state simply failed to prove its case against Rice. The same was true in the other cases where he found the officers not guilty of the charges brought by Mosby. In fact, this has started to sound like a broken record. Not guilty. Not guilty. Not Guilty.

The cry from many people of the general public is that by finding these officers not guilty justice has not been served. I said in the beginning there was no factual/evidential basis for the convictions of either of the officers. At least there was none that I’d seen. Even the probable cause for their arrest stood on extremely shaky ground, especially as related to the over-the-top charges Mosby brought.

However, Ms. Mosby, who’s been chastised more than once by the court for wrongs such as withholding evidence from the defense, moved forward with the case(s). And she did so after standing before a crowd of onlookers and TV cameras where she gave her “I heard your call for ‘no justice, no peace'” speech. A speech that could’ve and may have tainted a jury pool.

What many members of the public either don’t understand, or don’t care to bother with in this case, is that Mosby’s responsibility as a prosecutor is to follow the law, not to pander to a pitchfork and torch-carrying angry mob who seemingly seeks vengeance, not real justice. And a prosecutor/DA certainly should never base a prosecution on emotion.

Anyway, Judge Williams followed the law and found that yet again prosecutors failed to prove the actions of Lt. Rice’s rose to a criminal level, and that’s the key phrase—“criminal level.” Sure, these officers may have violated a department rule, but from I’ve seen they broke no laws and they certainly didn’t murder Gray.

Murder is the unlawful killing of a person, especially with malice aforethought. The definition of homicide encompasses ALL killings of human beings by other humans, and certain homicides are absolutely legal, such as a state execution or a killing in self defense. That’s right, if a man tried to murder you and you killed him in self defense, you have committed a homicide. But not murder.

And speaking of murder … Baton Rouge.

Three police officers were ambushed and fatally shot on Sunday by a gunman who, in a self-produced video said, ““One hundred percent of revolutions, of victims fighting their oppressors have been successful through fighting back, through bloodshed. Zero have been successful just over simply protesting. It doesn’t—it has never worked and it never will. You got to fight back. That’s the only way that a bully knows to quit.”

The cop-killer continued the rant with, “If y’all want to keep protesting do that, but for the serious ones, the real ones, the alpha ones, we know what it’s going to take. Revenue and blood. Revenue and blood. Nothing else … You’re in a world that’s ran by devils … A man knows either he kills his enemy or he dies (he was speaking of Africans throughout history) … Don’t ever give up.”

Louisiana State Police officials reported today that, based on their investigation, the murderer was targeting police and ambushed the responding officers.

There’s nothing to indicate that the shooter was involved with any of the current anti-police groups or movements, but he referenced the recent murders of Dallas police officers, and he mentioned the deaths of African-American men during encounters with police officers, including the July 5 death in Baton Rouge.

The three officers murdered by the now-deceased suspect are:

  • Montrell L. Jackson, 32, a 10-year veteran. He and his wife had a baby in March.
  • Matthew Gerald, 41, who had served with the Baton Rouge Police Department for less than a year.
  • Brad Garafola, 45, an East Baton Rouge Parish sheriff’s deputy and a father of four.

Another officer is remains in the hospital today where he is fighting for his life. I believe there are two others who were wounded as well.

Yes, the past weekend brought forth a ton of devastating news, some of which I won’t share publicly. So Denene and I headed out to our backyard where we knew we’d find a bit of peace and calm. And, as always, our backyard friends brought smiles to our faces—much-needed smiles in a time when all else seems just too doggone depressing.

Here’s a peek at some of the friends who visit us daily. I hope you enjoy meeting them.

Oh, and smile!

IMG_0104

IMG_0043

IMG_0036

IMG_0098