Size Matters…sometimes

 

“Cops are wimps. Some are scrawny, wiry, and geeky-computer-nerdish, and they certainly aren’t big and strong enough to handle the often much larger and stronger criminals they face on the streets. That’s why they’re so quick to resort to weapons and/or deadly force. What happened to the beefy, no-necked officers that once patrolled our streets. They never used their guns against unarmed people. We felt much safer back then,” said Mr. Nevell Satisfied.

Well, things changed when Ms. Ima Scaredashadows, Nevell’s aunt, began complaining about her town hiring big, tough guys to work as officers. Many citizens said they’d prefer cops who were less intimidating and scary-looking, and perhaps who’d earned a higher GPA in high school and college. You see, Ida, like many other people, believe that all large, muscular men are uneducated and mentally challenged.

So changes were made to satisfy public demand. Departments were also forced to change their hiring standards to include smaller and shorter officers. And, the smaller sizes of the new officers sometimes meant they couldn’t compete with the larger candidates in some of the physical standards for new hires (exercising, lifting, etc.). Therefore, those standards were also reduced.

The new, more inclusive and size friendlier standards, attracted some officers who were less than five-feet-tall and, while nicely educated, were not in the best physical condition due to twenty years of constant pre-career video game marathoning. As a result, the size- and strength-challenged officers faced the difficult tasks of physically restraining big and powerful and unruly and combative criminals. Sure, the new brand of officer was able to complete numerous common core math problems in their heads while being pummeled by a 300 lb. crook, but only until they lost consciousness.

I know, times change and new things, ideas, techniques, and standards are needed. But some things never change—big, strong, violent bad guys are going to fight with cops, and like it or not and/or understand it or not, a beating from a large powerful man can and has indeed killed people. So yes, an unarmed person who’s 6-foot-three, weighing 280 is within himself a deadly weapon. This is especially so when the victim/officer is 5-foot-two and weighs 135 (male or female).

The video below is good example of how size and strength differences are factors in physical altercations that officers across the country encounter many times every single day. All, of course, aren’t as violent as the one in the video, but many are.

I know, cops knew what they were in for when they signed up for the job, and I agree to a certain extent. But they didn’t sign on to stand down while violent people do violent things to them, such as mayors and other city officials forcing officers to allow people to pummel them with rocks and bottles. Nor did they sign on to be someone’s punching bag while their own administration stands by doing nothing. And they certainly deserve the respect of their supervisors, especially after being shot and bleeding to death. A supervisor who clocks out and goes home while knowing one of his officers is fighting for her life in the ER after being shot several times…well, some things are best left unsaid.

~

* Top photo – Taken by Elf | Talk Sept 6, 2004, Sunnyvale, CA

*Parts of the above article were meant to be tongue-in-cheek. However, the points made were not.

Officer line of duty deaths by gunfire are up 1,200% this year.

The latest incident occur last night when a Euless Texas police officer was shot and killed when he responded to a suspicious activity call in a local park.

/by

It’s Video Training Day!

Video training day

It’s video training day!

1. Fingerprint ridge builder and cleaner – a liquid or lotion-type product applied to fingertips. The substance temporarily puffs up ridges enabling the officer to obtain a much clearer print from the elderly or people with damaged ridge structure, such a brick layers or others who work with their hands.

2. Evidence weapons boxes are used to safely store and transport weapons recovered from crime scenes and from criminal suspects.


3. Crime Scene Evidence Collection Vehicle – What’s inside of those CSI vehicles? Well…


4. Miranda and Interview and Interrogation. Here’s a video by 2016 WPA instructor Mike Knetzger.

*It’s almost here! Writers’ Police Academy registration opens February 21st at noon EST! Be ready because slots fill QUICKLY!

/by

Because Sometimes There’s an Unruly Groundhog

Because some times there's an unruly groundhog

 

Blue lights. Sirens. Guns. Knives. Handcuffs. High speed pursuits. Foot chases. Barking and snarling dogs.

Think those are the only calls cops respond to during their shifts? Well, it’s not all action. For example, this happened…

1. Officers arrested Ms. Dusty Rae Ingram and then delivered her to the county jail for safekeeping. During the booking process jail officials discovered a bag of prescription pills tucked away inside Ms. Ingram’s…uh…private parts. When questioned, the absent-minded Dusty told the officers she usually kept those pills in her purse and she had no idea how they found their way to her genitals.

2. Police were dispatched to investigate a suspicious man who was possibly not wearing pants while crawling along a city sidewalk. When officers arrived they found the man hiding beneath a van. He was indeed naked from the waist down.

3. Police in Florida stopped a young man for a traffic infraction. During the stop the driver attempted to hide what officers described as a “Batman bag.” Officers asked the man to retrieve the bag from beneath the seat and he told them he couldn’t show it to them because it contained something “bad.” He was right. The bag contained Xanax pills and a scale commonly used for weighing narcotics. To add to his troubles, the driver had apparently spilled marijuana on himself because small bits of pot leaves were discovered clinging to his shirt.

4. Police at a Greenacres substation noticed a strange vehicle parked in the lot and went out to investigate. They discovered a man asleep behind the wheel with the motor running. The roused him and asked why he was there. The man told them he was drunk and tired. Officers kindly provided a better place for the driver to “sleep it off.”

5. Police officers were called to a bar to break up a fight between intoxicated patrons. One of the tough and rowdy fighters spit on the responding officers who then promptly arrested him. The brawler then began to bawl like a baby. During his uncontrollable crying spree he told officers he couldn’t go to jail because he’d just gotten out.

Other reports include:

– Two men knocking on doors asking people, in English, if they spoke French.

– A couple fighting because their dog died.

– A woman dialed 911 because her taxi driver was yelling at her.

– A woman called 911 because prices at her local produce stand were too high.

– Officers were called to assist a parent who couldn’t get their child to go to bed.

– A woman called 911 to report a fire in her living room. Officers responded and explained that the flame she saw inside her kerosene heater was necessary to heat the home.

– A caller advised police that a dog had defecated in her yard even after she’d asked it nicely to not do it.

– A man called 911 to report suspicious items in his mailbox. Officers responded and discovered the items to be…mail.

– A man reported seeing a male subject exposing himself repeatedly to a woman seated in a parked car in the lot of a convenience store. After a brief investigation officers learned the woman was the store manager and the male subject, who was wearing only an overcoat, was her husband.

– People yelling in a field were found to playing a game that required participants to yell.

– A caller reported seeing footprints on his front porch for several days in a row. Police discovered the prints were left by the mailman.

– A 911 caller reported seeing a strange rock in his driveway.

– A woman called police to report seeing an open door at a residence in her neighborhood. Police responded and closed the door.

– Police were called because animal control would not respond to a sighting of an unruly groundhog.

– A concerned citizen called police to report possible terrorist activity at their neighbor’s home. The caller told the dispatcher a male subject was using a device to spray some sort of deadly toxin. Police arrived and spoke to the exterminator who’d been hired to rid the property of unwanted ants. His truck with a giant rubber bug on the rooftop was parked in the driveway. If only there’d been a clue…

/by

4th Circuit – Taser Use Unconstitutional: Officers Forced to Say Pretty Please

4th Circuit-Taser use unconstitutional

The 4th Circuit (federal) Court of Appeals has ruled it a violation of the 4th Amendment for officers to use a Taser on any subject unless they are a clear and immediate risk. This includes the use of the device in “drive stun” mode (stun gun). This ruling, so far, applies to the states within the 4th Circuit—North Carolina, South Carolina, Maryland, Virginia and West Virginia. The court says the pain caused by Taser use is excessive force.

I guess officers in those states are now forced to return to the days of painful and sometimes injury-inducing baton strikes, clouds of choking pepper spray, and a dozen or so officers piling on top of unbelievably strong suspects who resist arrest. After all, extreme combativeness and violently resisting are generally not considered to be “risks.”

Here’s a fun fact – Believe it or not, wearing a badge and uniform does not give an officer super-human strength, and the minimum amount of defensive tactics they’re taught in the academy is of little use when attempting to arrest The Incredible Hulk on meth, a person who typically feels no pain and who pepper sprays often do not affect.

So stand by for a new wave of cellphone/YouTube/agenda-driven media videos, and for a list of officers who’ve been treated or hospitalized for injuries received while attempting to handcuff someone twice their size who’s doing whatever it takes to prevent their arrest.

Police Officer – definition: uniform-wearing human designed as a punching bag for anyone and everyone who cares to take a swing. Hated by all until they’re needed. Not to be confused with politicians, who are rarely needed.

Politicians – definition: gun-hating people who surround themselves with gun-toting police officers as a means of insulation from people who want to punch them in their lying mouths.

Lying Mouth – definition – untruths spew violently forward with each movement of the lips. 1st requirement to become politician. Also a known trait of narcissists and people who blatantly steal the ideas of others (these are often one and the same).

Agenda-Driven Media – definition: lying mouths who are sometimes former politicians. Never needed but you can’t make them go away. Taser use encouraged.

But yeah, Taser use in the 4th Circuit, in all but extreme cases, has indeed been ruled to be a use of excessive force. Therefore, police officers are now required to say “pretty please” as the first step in each encounter with suspected criminals. “Pretty please, stop punching me in my face.” Pretty please, let go of my gun.” Pretty please stop strangling your mother.” Pretty please, remove your hand from my chest cavity.” “Pretty please, remove your knife from my intestines.” “Pretty please, help me find the teeth you knocked from my mouth with your extremely large fists.”

This new development reminds me of the good old days when cops carried little more on their belts than a six-shooter, a pair of handcuffs, a flashlight, and a radio (if there were enough to go around). There was no pepper spray to squirt, nor were there Tasers to light up the eyes of the guy who was bashing your brains out onto the pavement.

OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERA

Back in “the day,” officers didn’t have the luxury of non-lethal devices. Instead, we had to rely on fast talking and sheer muscle power to get out of jams.

Sometimes, the only thing that kept us from getting hurt, badly, was to use a flashlight as a tool to deliver a properly-placed “love tap” to an attacker’s thick skull (an aluminum shampoo). Of course, that’s no longer an option, but the tactic saved my butt more than once. And there’s one such event will forever stand out in my mind.

While arresting a very big and unruly man, a guy who just happened to be twice my size (and I’m not small), my future prisoner decided he was allergic to handcuffs. And, during a brief struggle, my neck somehow wound up in the gentle grasp of the behemoth’s skillet-size hands. In other words, he was “hands-around-the-neck” choking me with every ounce of strength he could muster. I couldn’t breathe, and I knew then how it must feel to be icing inside a pastry bag, because he was squeezing so hard that I thought my eyes would pop out of their sockets at any moment.

The thug had me pinned against a wall in a position that made going for my gun (a .357 in those days) impossible. However, I finally managed to get a hand on my metal Maglite. So I starting swinging (short strokes because of the odd angle), hoping to force the guy to release his grip. Finally, after a few hard whacks to his head, he let go. And, as they say, it was game on!

I finally got that big moose handcuffed and then promptly delivered him to the jail. But, my car was not equipped with a cage to put him in for safekeeping (none of our cars had cages back then), so I made him ride up front with me. And I made a point to let him know that my gun was in my hand with my finger on the trigger, and if he so much as looked at me wrong I’d shoot him. He behaved nicely on the ride in.

We must have been a real sight when we arrived at the jail—clothes torn, badge ripped from my shirt, bloody lips and clothing, flashlight-shaped knots on his head, fingerprint-shaped bruises on my neck, and more. But that’s how it was back then.

Yep, those were the good ‘ol days.

If only we’d had Tasers back then. Maybe then we’d have lost less blood and suffered fewer injuries, both to officers and suspects. I know, I know. The mere sight of a Taser could hurt someone’s feelings, and we can’t have that, right?

Oh, I know, we could have safe spaces for violent people who want to don’t want to feel the effects of a Taser, pepper spray, and/or handcuffs. That’s the ticket. Hmm… Is it okay to say ticket, or is that too offensive?

I’m going to close my blinds and shut my office door so I don’t have to deal with this stuff. It’s too scary…

*This post, although mostly factual, was meant to be slightly humorous. Please don’t turn it into a cop-bashing, religion-shunning, politically-driven argument on gun control and “I hate everything and you offend me.”

 

/by

Why the Militia Guy was Charged with Unauthorized Use of a Vehicle

Why the militia guy was charged with unlawful use of a vehicle

Once again media clickbait headlines and agenda-skewing stories, including those on Facebook and Twitter, have people sharpening their pitchforks and lighting the torches. This time the induced hoopla is over the charge brought against the Oregon militia standoff guy, a chainsaw sculptor, who illegally used a federally-owned vehicle to go on a grocery run to a Safeway store, a business located 30 miles from the bird sanctuary his group occupied several days ago.

As a result of flame-fanning news reporting, many people, people who aren’t fully aware of the law, are practically jumping up and down because the occupying sculptor was arrested for Unauthorized Use of a Motor Vehicle. It seems these folks are boiling mad because the charges were not for Grand Larceny, an offense that sounds far more evil than Unauthorized Use.

Let’s dig into this a bit and hopefully clear the mud and media-planted debris from the waters.

1. Unauthorized Use of a Vehicle is a charge that relates specifically to a person who takes, operates, exercises control over, rides in or otherwise uses a vehicle, boat or aircraft without consent of the owner. The key word here is “USES,” which means there was no intent to steal the vehicle (use – to put into service).

In the case of the militia member driving to Safeway, well, he used (put into service) the truck to go grocery shopping and his intention was to return, with supplies, to the bird sanctuary. As far as we know, he did not plan to steal the truck, permanently depriving the owner of the vehicle.

Unauthorized Use of a Vehicle (in Oregon) is a Class C felony that could earn offenders a sentence of up to five years in the state penitentiary.

2. Larceny (stealing the truck) is defined as wrongfully and fraudulently taking and carrying away the personal goods of another from any place, with a felonious intent to convert them to his (the taker’s) use, and make them his property. In other words, to take/steal something with the full intention of not returning it.

Theft in the First Degree (in Oregon) is basically defined as—a person commits the crime of theft in the first degree if the total value of the property stolen (larceny) is valued at $1,000 or more. Theft in the 1st degree is a Class C felony.

So, the two offenses—Unauthorized Use of a Motor Vehicle and Theft in the First Degree are both Class C felonies, and both are punishable by up to five years in prison. They both earn equal spots on an offender’s criminal history, and both earn an offender the right to wear the same prison clothing, sleep in the same prison cell, and eat the same crappy prison food. The big difference between the two charges is that they’re…wait for it…NOT the same offense.

The militia guy did not commit the crime of Grand Larceny/Theft in the First Degree. If law enforcement had charged him incorrectly a judge would have no choice but to order a dismissal. Therefore, the correct charge in this case was indeed Unauthorized Use of a Motor Vehicle. The names are different but the penalties are the same.

I hope this tidbit of information was enough to prevent an overdose of blood pressure medications by those who were so extremely upset after reading all the agenda-driven media stories. As always, I’m presenting fact, not opinion, so please do not attempt to read between the lines. I promise, there’s nothing there.

/by

Oregon Militia Occupation and Tamir Rice: The Facts

Oregon militia occupation and Tamir Rice

Before we delve into the facts (fact – something that truly exists or actually happened) surrounding these two cases—the militia who took control of a building in a remote bird sanctuary, and the officer-involved shooting of Tamir Rice, let’s refresh our memories a bit regarding the crime of murder.

Murder – to unlawfully kill someone, or, an illegal homicide. Yes, there’s a difference between murder and homicide and here are the distinctions between the two.

They’re not? Then why do I see this written incorrectly in so many books? What’s the difference?

I committed homicide when I shot and killed a bank robber during a shootout. The act was ruled, of course, a justifiable homicide.

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

Okay, now that we have that firmly embedded into our open minds, let’s begin.

1. A group of ranchers seized and occupied an empty and closed-for-business building located in a remote area of the Malheur Wildlife Refuge. The structure is owned by the federal government, meaning it falls under the jurisdiction of the FBI who, of course, would be the lead investigating agency, and they are well-equipped and very well-trained to handle situations like this one. If needed, they’d call on local and state authorities, as well as other government agencies, for assistance.

2. What actual crimes have been committed by this group of armed farmers?

a) Trespassing – the group entered the government property without permission. *Remember Occupy Wall Street and the takeover of Zuccotti Park? What about the occupying and takeover of city streets and bridges by other protestors, such as the Black Lives Matter group? These are the same in that the groups took control of property that did not belong to them.

b) Breaking and Entering – I’m sure neither of the occupying ranchers had a key, therefore, they more than likely broke something to gain access. Besides, all that required to commit a B&E is to break the plane, such as climbing through a window of a place you don’t have permission to enter.

That’s about it. Other than the two crimes listed above, they’ve broken no laws. No one was there when the ranchers took control of the modest structure. No hostages. No shots fired, etc.

But, they do have guns—rifles and probably handguns, right? Well, Oregon is an open carry state, therefore the ranchers have the legal right to carry their weapons. So no crime there. And, so far they have not pointed those weapons at anyone, nor have they used them in a threatening manner.

I’m a bit shocked and appalled at the numerous cries for police to open fire and kill everyone inside the occupied building. I say shocked because the crimes committed by these guys are crimes against property, not people. Yet, when police use deadly force against a criminal who threatens their lives or the lives of others, many people scream police brutality or “They committed MURDER!!” Again, read the definition of murder above.

So, why is it okay to kill a group of ranchers who’ve thus far done no more than take over an empty building? If that’s the case should police begin the practice of using machine guns to mow down the teens who take over shopping malls, or mass extermination of members of the Black Lives Matter group when they take over city streets while chanting those sweet little ditties about killing cops? No, that’s not a civilized society. Besides, the law does not allow it. Therefore, unless the ranchers threaten the life of another person, law enforcement or citizen, deadly force CANNOT be used against them. It is not against the law to own or hold a firearm, and for now there is no life-threatening situation.

This is not a situation that unfolded in the blink of an eye, as in the case of Tamir Rice. There, when officers rolled up, Rice pulled what appeared to be a very real pistol from his waistband. One of the officers reacted to what he perceived as a threat and discharged his weapon, killing Rice.

So what are the facts of this case?

a) Officers received a radio transmission about someone in a park who was pointing a firearm at people.

b) Officers responded to the call and, upon arrival, Rice pulled the realistic-looking pistol from his waistband.

c) Officer saw the gun being drawn and fired, killing Rice.

That’s about it in a nutshell. Now, these are the facts that relate only to the shooting, not to whether or not the officers came in “too hot” and fast and close. Nor am I addressing other options that were definitely available to the officers. Instead, those are the facts surrounding the shooting—the officer saw and perceived a very real threat and he discharged his weapon in response to that threat. Do I think the officers should be held responsible for the way they handled the scenario? Sure, but they did not commit murder (again, see the definition above), which is what the Grand Jury was charged with determining, not whether or not the officers were negligent, and I believe they were.

So, back to the occupying ranchers.

1. At this point officers may not use deadly force against them because they are merely trespassers who broke into an unoccupied building. The same could be said for homeless people and/or squatters who break into and occupy buildings. We can’t have police gunning down those folks, right?

2. I’m not saying these guys aren’t dangerous, because they could very well be. Time will tell.

3. Many are saying the police aren’t using force against the ranchers because they’re white. Well, that’s absolute B.S. Remember Waco and Ruby Ridge? Besides, this situation is entirely different than those being compared to it. This is not Tamir Rice or Michael Brown, where perceived threats were made against police officers. No, this instance is not even close to being the same, therefore those comparisons are moot.

4. The Posse Comitatus Act limits the authority of the U.S military to enforce local law. In other words, the military does not yet have the authority to drop a bomb on the building occupied by the ranchers. Yes, I’ve seen many saying this, or to have officers approach the building in armored vehicles to shoot it out with the ranchers, much like we’d see in an action movie. Yet these are many of the same people who loudly voice complaints about the “militarization of police” and the military-like responses to civilian criminal activity.

So…this, an armored vehicle approach/response is only good when it’s fits an agenda, or when it’s used against some people but not others?

These are not combatant soldiers barricaded inside a bunker, so bombings are out. This is merely a group of goofy ranchers sitting in a building located on a bird sanctuary. Besides, the Obama administration has ordered a recall of all government supplied armored vehicles (weaponless rolling metal boxes, not tanks) operated by police agencies because they’re scary.

5. “These guys are terrorists. Kill them NOW!” I saw that comment on a Facebook page. So far they’ve not quite met the definition of terrorists. Very close in that they’ve made a couple of light threats about defending themselves if police move in—but that’s not quite enough to deem them as terrorists. If so, every bad guy in the country who yells out, “They’re not taking me alive,” would be considered a terrorist. However, they are leaning over the line a bit in that they’re trying to intimidate the government regarding a policy and action of the government.

Here’s the FBI’s definition of a domestic terrorist.

“Domestic terrorism” means activities with the following three characteristics:

Involve acts dangerous to human life that violate federal or state law;

Appear intended (i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population; (ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or (iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination. or kidnapping; and

Occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the U.S.

By the way, we don’t kill people simply because they’re terrorists. If that were the case Guantanamo Bay and other prison facilities used to house captured terrorists would be totally unnecessary. Who needs jails when we have bullets, right? We kill people who threaten lives, not people who’ve been assigned a label because of their beliefs or non-threatening actions. The idea is to capture criminals, try them, convict them, and then imprison them, and to use the death penalty in cases where it applies.

So there you have it…facts. Now for my opinion about the situation regarding the men occupying the bird sanctuary building in a remote area of Oregon. Cut off their supplies, electricity, water, heat, etc. and arrest them when they come out. If they aim a weapon at anyone, using it to intimidate or threaten, then police would be justified in using deadly force, and should, if necessary. Are tear gas and other such weapons options for use in this situation? Sure, and the FBI and other law enforcement agencies have plenty of those goodies available.

Again, the situation in Oregon is not even remotely close to other police actions across the country. No where near the same, actually. So please don’t let emotions and the bait-click, agenda-driven media get in the way of our common sense and the law. Oh yeah, the law…we do have laws that trump knee-jerk reactions and arm-chair quarterbacking. And, well, things are often far different in person than they are when viewed on someone’s Facebook page. Life is funny that way, isn’t it?

Hmm…I see a new book on the horizon – Criminal Law According to Facebook. Here’s a preview of the section listing definitions.

Murder – a killing may be deemed murder whenever the hell anyone on Facebook says so.

Police Officers – always the bad guys unless you need them to stop that guy who’s running out your front door with your TV in one hand and the family dog in the other.

City Streets – places where it’s fair game to burn and trash cars, assault police officers, and to break store windows and steal private property.

Hate – It’s okay to threaten and intimidate people of other races. Repercussions and accountability not allowed.

News Media – Excellent source of fictional reading material.

*As always, I welcome a civil and polite discussion and questions. However, I will delete comments targeting race, religion, gun control, cop bashing, and politics.

/by

The Crime Scene: Facial Recognition, Skin, and Organ Matter

The crime scene: facial recognition

1. Face-search technology is extremely accurate and it’s in use on a large scale. Each day, surveillance cameras across the country capture the images of millions of faces, and Michigan State University says it has the best matching system available. In fact, their system is so accurate that it was able to locate the image of Dzokhar Tsarnaev, the younger Boston Marathon bomber, from 1 among 5 million photos. MSU has recently licensed their recognition system to NEC Corp. of America, one of the largest providers of biometric technology to law enforcement and commercial companies.

2. Researchers at the Air Force Institute of Technology have developed skin identification technology for use in search and rescue operations that recognizes human skin as opposed to objects with similar coloring. To characterize human skin, the system uses the spectral absorption characteristics of melanin, hemoglobin, and water. The current method costs users $700,000 per system, a price not affordable to typical search and rescue units. The new Air Force platform costs approximately $100,000, which is still quite expensive, but doable in many cases.

3. During the period of September 2014 to September 2015, UK law enforcement officials arrested a record number of 315 terrorism suspects. To add to the alarming growth of terrorism-related activities was the increase in women and teens involved/arrested—50 women and 15 teens under the age of 18. The majority of the women arrested were linked to international terrorism activity.

4. Scientists have developed a way to use protein signatures of organ matter (mass-Spectrometry-Based Proteomics) to determine which body organ a specific projectile/bullet passed through. In other words, it is now possible to know which bullet did what damage to a human body, including which round(s) caused the death of a murder victim, or a precise wound(s) in an attempted murder. The method also makes it possible to accurately recreate the crime for the purposes of courtroom evidence presentation.

5. Researchers have found a way to make bullet-resistent vests even stronger—spinning high-performance polyethylene fibers from natural fats, such as oils from olives and peanuts. The new material has other uses as well, such as increasing the strength of ropes, sails, and even surgical sutures. Material made from the spun al-dente fibers was even used to lift a sunken ferry from the sea floor. One current drawback to the new material is that one of the fibers is highly flammable.

Finally, and totally unrelated, but a notable point to ponder…

6. For a long, long time, low-level nuclear waste has been “safely” stored underground in New Mexico, inside containers packed in impermeable beds of rock salt. Well, it seems those non-passable beds of salt are not so foolproof after all. They leak. What does this mean for humans? Who knows, but the government is currently thinking about doing something about it. Yeah, there’s a memo…somewhere.

In the meantime, I suppose we could resort to Dick Cheney’s advice of stockpiling duct tape and plastic sheeting in the event we need to cover our window and doors as a means of protecting ourselves against radiation. But, wasn’t there a rumor floating around about Cheney owning a huge amount of stock in companies that manufacture duct tape and plastic sheeting? Hmm… Perhaps, because of advice like the former vice president’s coming out nearly every time there’s a “crisis,” we should invest in aluminum foil. You know, because the making and wearing of lots and lots of tinfoil hats always seems to follow.

 

/by

It’s All Been a Pack of…Well, Lies

It's all been a pack of...well lies

Lie – (of a person or animal) be in or assume a horizontal or resting position on a supporting surface. Or, to tell a fib—a false statement made with deliberate intent to deceive—that even your own dear, sweet mama wouldn’t believe. And it is the latter that detectives often must wade through (a pack of lies) before a bad guy finally confesses to his crimes.

We all know the days of using hot, bright lights and rubber hoses are tactics long ago replaced by polygraphs and reading body language. However, there’s a new method of lie-detecting that’s raising a few inquisitive eyebrows.

Scientists have developed a lie-detecting software that’s based on actual data and media videos of real court cases, including videos recorded by The Innocence Project. The software was “trained” using 120 video media recordings of real courtroom interactions/actions of defendants.

Unlike a polygraph, this technique of reaching the truth does not involve touching the subject. Instead, to reach its conclusions, the software considers a person’s gestures and voice to identify deceptions. So far, the software boasts an accuracy rate of 75%. Now, that percentage doesn’t sound so hot until the number is compared to the 50% accuracy rate achieved by human scoring, which is basically not much more accurate than a “heads-or-tails” guess.

Some of the more telling gestures picked up by the software include:

– hand gestures (liars tend to move their hands more).

– liars tend to make exaggerated efforts to try to sound more certain than do people who’re telling the truth.

– liars make an effort to look their questioners in the eye (70% of liars as opposed to 60% of truth-tellers).

– scowling or grimacing (the entire face) – 30% of liars as opposed to 10% of truth-tellers.

– liars distance themselves from the crime by using words such as “he” or “she” or “them,” as opposed to “I” or “we.”

– liars tend to use vocal space fillers, such as “um.”

– liars tend to use both hands when gesturing.

In addition, a coding system was devised to score nine different motions of the head, eyes, brow, mouth and hands.

This new system of lie-detecting is a prototype, but it does look promising.

My questions for you are…

Did I just lie to you? Is this new system the real deal or is it…um…something I concocted merely to fill…um…this space?

~

“I’ve seen your face before my friend
But I don’t know if you know who I am
Well, I was there and I saw what you did
I saw it with my own two eyes
So you can wipe off that grin,
I know where you’ve been
It’s all been a pack of lies.”

Phil Collins – In the Air Tonight

*Photo credit – Dennis Yang, San Francisco, Ca./Wikimedia Commons

/by

Leaking Anxiety: The Mini Investigation

Leaking anxiety: The mini investigation

Attention Writers! If you’ve written a tale that prominently features cops, PI’s, bad guys, etc., then the centerpiece of your story most likely revolved around a murder or two, or three or four. Therefore, solving the murder was probably THE investigation that drove the book. In fact, most people think of major investigations—rape, robbery, B&E, murder, etc.—as the only investigations conducted by police. You know, the big stuff. Of course, those types of cases are a major reason readers continue to turn pages.

However, and please do make a mental note of this, every interaction an officer has with other people is an investigation. If you’ve ever been stopped for a traffic offense, for example, you were the subject of an investigation (if the officer was following his training). Part of these investigations include the art of understanding and interpreting the actions of humans, and sometimes animals.

People “leak” whatever it is they’re feeling and/or thinking when interacting with others. By leaking I mean they showcase their feelings with their face and/or body (body language). Police officers are trained to observe and interpret those signals.

It doesn’t take a flashing neon sign to give away an intention. Not at all. Sweating profusely, or a constant looking to the side (searching for an escape route?) are good examples of anxiety leaks. Constant hand-wringing, placing hands in and out of pockets, picking at clothing, and hair-twirling are others, to name only a scant few.

Of course, some people are naturally nervous when encountering police, but it’s the totality of the situation that could indicate a problem. Therefore, for the safety of the officer and for potentially uncovering a crime-in-progress, he/she absolutely must remain vigilant during every single stop. As part of that vigilance, officers should run through a mental checklist/mini investigation that includes not only asking questions, but observing eye movement, their hands, what they’re saying and how they say it (does pitch change, sudden stammering, etc.) does what they’ve said make sense, are they overly nervous, are you asking the right questions, why are they constantly glancing at your weapon, Why are they looking back at their car/trunk/side of the road/house, etc.

Above all, officers absolutely MUST look up from their notepads and ticket books and make eye contact. Otherwise, they’re missing one of the most important clues out there—body language. After all, nervous people act nervously, and those actions are typically not without reason.

So, when writing about cops keep these points about anxiety leaks and mini investigations in mind. Doing so could add some interesting detail to an already interesting story. Also, never forget about an officer’s “gut feelings.” It it doesn’t feel right, then it’s probably wrong. Those little hairs standing at attention on the back of his neck are trying to tell him something and he’d better listen, and so should the investigators in your stories. And, hopefully, that “feeling” will transfer off the pages and into the minds of your readers. If you can make the hairs stand up on the back of your readers’ necks, well, that’s a job done well.

Here’s a video about this topic presented by Lt. Dave Smith of Officer.com. As someone who taught officer survival for many years at a police academy, I wholeheartedly agree with his presentation.

/by

For the Difficult-to-Buy-for CSI in Your Stories

For the difficult-to-buy

1. Blue Wonder – touch-up kit used to repair or hide scratches in the finish of most firearms. Perfect for use prior to attending holiday parties when wearing a dinged-up firearm on your side simply won’t do. $29.95

2. Blue Wonder Removal System – used to remove finishes from firearms—parkerized, cold blue or hot blue. Available in two small squirt bottles, one for removing the finish and the other for preparing the weapon for refinishing. $19.95

3. Scarab Cutter – handheld device used for cutting zip-ties and other temporary/disposable restraints. $28.95

4. MicroBurst Fuming Wand Kit by EVIDENT – used in the field to quickly process items (fingerprints) with cyanoacrylate (Super Glue). $139.95

5. Blood Spatter Kit 2015 – perfect for use in the field when analyzing blood spatter trajectory. Comes complete with tools needed, including multiple spools of assorted brightly colored strings. Again, from EVIDENT.

6. Forensic Entomology Kit – everything you need for collecting bugs in, on, around, and beneath a decomposing corpse. $275.00

7. Forensic Archaeology Kit – a perfect gift for the grave robber who has everything. Also comes in handy for CSI’s who’ve uncovered a clandestine grave. $789.00

8. Blood Impression Kit – used for locating and preserving bloody impressions. (No, not the cheeky imitations of celebrities by British comics). $369.00

9. Explosive Test Kits – for the detective of explosives. Able to pinpoint a variety of exotic flavors—nitro, ammonium, urea nitrate, chlorates, phosphates, and more! $69.00 per kit

10. Blood Spatter Training Blood – comes in handy when the real thing is simply not available. $24.00 per 8 oz. bottle
And, when realistic training is a must, try Spatter Head. Warning, this video is kind of graphic and may be offensive, but only if the bashing-in of a fake skull is upsetting to you. However, you will quickly understand the force it takes to…well, let’s just say killing someone requires more than a blow to the head with a copy of your favorite author’s latest book.

/by