Police State - Official Thread

[Soul Crusher]

Terrible.   The govt never accountability.

The cops did say the poor woman had "limited value" and unfortunately the police/prosecution/court syndicate confirmed it. This is how they treat "ordinary" people, but if it's one of their ilk that is affected they raise hell.


Police officer gets traffic infraction for fatally hitting college student at 63 mph

The police officer who fatally struck a college student while driving almost three times the speed limit was charged Friday with a traffic infraction, according to local articles out of Seattle, Washington.

Prosecutors said that there’s no evidence that Officer Kevin Dave was impaired or driving recklessly when hitting Jaahnavi Kandula, 23, reported The Seattle Times. They previously said there would be no criminal case.

The King County Prosecuting Attorney’s Office previously said that there’s not enough evidence to show that Dave was driving “consciously disregarding safety,” according to Seattle ABC affiliate KOMO.

https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile/police-officer-gets-traffic-infraction-for-fatally-hitting-college-student-at-63-mph/

[Soul Crusher]

https://www.wsj.com/politics/national-security/u-s-spy-agencies-know-our-secrets-they-bought-them-791e243f


Not mentioned in the SOTU address for obvious reasons. 

[illuminati]

The cops did say the poor woman had "limited value" and unfortunately the police/prosecution/court syndicate confirmed it. This is how they treat "ordinary" people, but if it's one of their ilk that is affected they raise hell.


Police officer gets traffic infraction for fatally hitting college student at 63 mph

The police officer who fatally struck a college student while driving almost three times the speed limit was charged Friday with a traffic infraction, according to local articles out of Seattle, Washington.

Prosecutors said that there’s no evidence that Officer Kevin Dave was impaired or driving recklessly when hitting Jaahnavi Kandula, 23, reported The Seattle Times. They previously said there would be no criminal case.

The King County Prosecuting Attorney’s Office previously said that there’s not enough evidence to show that Dave was driving “consciously disregarding safety,” according to Seattle ABC affiliate KOMO.

https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile/police-officer-gets-traffic-infraction-for-fatally-hitting-college-student-at-63-mph/

He'd be a dead Khvnt walking if it were my relative - more folk should take the law into their own hands
& deal with such scum of the earth scumbags.

[Skeletor]

Not enough and of course the intruders will not spend a day in prison or pay out of their own pockets. Imagine if the poor woman tried to defend herself or if the intruders claimed to "fear for their lives".

Notice also that the cops managed to convince a judge to sign/rubberstamp a warrant to send SWAT to destroy not just a garage but an entire house just for a stolen car with a phone.



78-Year-Old Grandmother Awarded $3.8 Million After Illegal SWAT Raid

A 78-year-old woman whose home was mistakenly raided by a Denver SWAT team will now receive a nearly $3.8 million payout. The large sum comes as a result of a 2020 Colorado law that banned qualified immunity protections for police officers in the state, making civil rights lawsuits against police significantly more likely to succeed.

On January 4th, 2022, Ruby Johnson, a retired postal worker, was sitting in her Denver home when she heard a police airhorn loudly commanding that she leave her home with her hands up. Johnson, who had recently showered and was only wearing a bathrobe, left her house to find a Denver SWAT team gathered outside her door.

The SWAT team had been sent to Johnson's home as part of an effort to recover a vehicle that had been stolen the previous day. According to Johnson's lawsuit, the stolen car had an iPhone inside, and the Find My app feature indicated that the phone was near Johnson's house.

While the police officers had obtained a warrant to search Johnson's home, they did so using an affidavit that allegedly provided "false characterization" of how reliable the Find My app is, overstating how sure the police could be that the iPhone—and the truck—would be at Johnson's house.

According to Johnson's lawsuit, after receiving this warrant, the SWAT team aggressively searched her home, causing considerable damage to her belongings. Making matters worse, even though Johnson gave police her garage door opener and told them how to enter the garage's front door, police used a battering ram to enter the garage, destroying the door and door frame. Ultimately, the SWAT team found no sign of the truck or any other criminal activity. The officers left and later told Johnson's children that the department wouldn't pay Johnson for the considerable damage caused to her home.

On Monday, the ACLU of Colorado announced that Johnson had been awarded $3.76 million, including $1.26 million in compensatory damages and $2.5 million in punitive damages. In a press release, the ACLU largely credited the passage of a 2020 law that revoked police qualified immunity protections—which typically prevent law enforcement from being sued for Constitutional violations—for the victory.

https://reason.com/2024/03/06/78-year-old-grandmother-awarded-3-8-million-after-illegal-swat-raid/

[Skeletor]

Government Tries to Sidestep Accountability for Violating Citizens’ First Amendment Right to Political Expression Critical of Biden and Trump

The Rutherford Institute is challenging attempts by the government to sidestep accountability and avoid having to make financial restitution for violating the citizenry’s First Amendment right to political expression, including the right to criticize Presidents Biden and Trump.

Although a Florida state circuit court found that government officials in the City of Punta Gorda acted unconstitutionally when it fined two protesters a total of $3000 for displaying political messages stating “F@#k Biden,” “F@#k Trump,” and “F@#k Policing 4 Profit” in violation of the city’s sign ordinance, the court refused to make the government pay for any of the expenses required to challenge the City’s actions in court. On appeal in Massey v. City of Punta Gorda, Fla. and Sheets v. City of Punta Gorda, Fla., Florida’s Sixth District Court of Appeal affirmed the lower court’s refusal without providing any written opinion. Rutherford Institute attorneys warn that shielding the government from accountability will both encourage government entities to violate the constitutional rights of its citizens and discourage citizens from challenging such violations.

“The right of political free speech is the basis of all liberty. No matter what their political persuasion might be, every American has a First Amendment right to protest government programs or policies with which they might disagree,” said constitutional attorney John W. Whitehead, president of The Rutherford Institute and author of Battlefield America: The War on the American People. “As the Supreme Court recognized, laws of this sort empower the government to suppress unpopular ideas or information and manipulate the public debate through coercion, which is exactly the kind of tyranny the First Amendment was intended to prohibit.”

https://www.rutherford.org/publications_resources/on_the_front_lines/government_tries_to_sidestep_accountability_for_violating_citizens_first_amendment_right_to_political_expression_critical_of_biden_and_trump

[Skeletor]

Supreme Court hears case of Texas grandmother thrown in jail after criticizing city government

Supreme Court justices heard arguments Wednesday in the case of a former Texas councilwoman who was jailed after criticizing a city manager and will now consider whether she can sue city leaders for politically motivated retaliation.

Sylvia Gonzalez is suing Castle Hills Mayor JR Trevino and other officials, alleging they plotted to have her arrested as retaliation for criticizing the city manager, violating her right to freedom of speech. She is represented by the Institute for Justice, a nonprofit, public interest law firm.

The city officials invoked qualified immunity, a defense commonly used to shield government officials from liability unless it can be proven that they violated a clearly established constitutional right.

Gonzalez won a seat on the Castle Hills City Council in 2019. The then-72-year-old retiree immediately championed a nonbinding petition calling for city manager Ryan Rapelye's replacement, citing ongoing complaints from residents that he ignored their concerns, particularly when it came to the condition of their streets.

Debate over the issue grew heated, extending Gonzlez' first meeting as a councilwoman through the following day. At the end of the second day, Gonzalez said she straightened up some papers strewn across her dais, put them in her binder, and went to talk to a constituent.

A police officer interrupted to tell Gonzalez that Trevino wanted to speak with her, court documents allege. Trevino asked where the petition was and asked Gonzalez to look in her binder, saying he could see a clip inside.

Gonzalez said she didn't realize she'd accidentally put the petition in the binder and handed it over. Two months later, she was arrested on a charge of tampering with a public document. She spent the day in jail and had her mugshot splashed across the evening news. The district attorney's office later dropped the charge, but Gonzalez' brief political career was over.

Her lawsuit accuses Trevino and former Castle Hills Police Chief John Siemens of using the briefly missing petition to launch a criminal investigation. After two other officers found no reason to arrest Gonzalez, Bidwell said the chief assigned his friend Alexander Wright to take over as a "special detective."

Rather than seek a summons for the nonviolent misdemeanor, the special detective took the unusual step of asking for an arrest warrant and going straight to a judge — instead of the Bexar County District Attorney's Office — to do so, the lawsuit claims.

"They wanted to punish me, and they wanted to make sure I went to jail. And they did a good job," Gonzalez said.

She sued Trevino, Siemens, Wright and the city in 2020, alleging they deprived her of her rights under the First and 14th Amendments of the U.S. Constitution.

The Supreme Court is considering whether a previous case, Nieves v. Bartlett, can be used to shield Castle Hills officials. The Nieves case involved police officers making "split-second decisions," Bidwell said, arguing the same protection from First Amendment lawsuits should not be extended to other government officials who, in this case, took weeks before obtaining an arrest warrant.

Yet, much of attorney Lisa Blatt's argument in defense of the Castle Hills officials centered around protecting police officers.

"If you accept the plaintiff complaint, the officer will always lose," Blatt told the justices. The officer "literally can never arrest without worrying about getting sued."

The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals previously ruled that Gonzalez could not prove her arrest was retaliatory because she could not cite cases in which other individuals had not been arrested for actions similar to hers.

Some Supreme Court justices pushed back on that logic.

Justice Neil Gorsuch pointed out that there are hundreds of thousands of federal crimes and statutes on the books and that he "can't imagine how many there are at the state and local level."


https://www.foxnews.com/media/supreme-court-hears-case-texas-grandmother-thrown-jail-criticizing-city-government

[Skeletor]

That's rich coming from the government whose gangs of uniformed thugs routinely object to being filmed and will attack or arrest people for doing so, all the while their bodycams conveniently "malfunction" when the footage would incriminate them.


How long can law enforcement secretly film the front of your home without a warrant?

Answer: As long as they want.

Turns out, the front of your house is not considered private. A federal court recently ruled that law enforcement officers were within their rights to film the front of a man’s house without his knowledge for two months straight.

The ruling was made in the case U.S. vs. Hay, in which Army veteran Bruce Hay was found guilty of lying about his disability status in order to receive benefits from the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). After receiving a tip that Hay was not being truthful about his disability status, VA officers set up a camera across the street from his home and filmed for 15 hours a day for 68 days in a row. They did not have a search warrant.

The video footage was enough to find him guilty on 16 charges, but Hay appealed because the filming had been done without a warrant. However, the U.S. Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled on Tuesday that because “video cameras proliferate throughout society, regrettably, the reasonable expectation of privacy from filming is diminished.” So since cameras are everywhere now, it seems you can only expect privacy inside your home with the curtains drawn.

https://www.govtech.com/question-of-the-day/how-long-can-law-enforcement-secretly-film-the-front-of-your-home-without-a-warrant

[Taffin]

[Skeletor]

"This cop was given a 5 day suspension for this incident."

An ordinary person would go to prison if he pointed a gun at someone and threatened them.

[Skeletor]

A 15 year girl that was reported kidnapped by her father, was shot dead by the the "trained professionals" despite "complying" with their "commands".


Gunfire From Deputies Killed Teen Who Had Been Reported Kidnapped, Video Shows

Newly released footage and audio recordings from a vehicle pursuit in September 2022 show that a 15-year-old girl who had been kidnapped by her father was fatally shot by gunfire from deputies as she followed their instructions to exit her father’s truck.

The girl, Savannah Graziano, was fatally shot on Sept. 27, 2022, off Interstate 15 in San Bernardino County, one day after the California Highway Patrol issued an Amber Alert that said her father, Anthony Graziano, 45, was believed to have abducted her, according to the San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Department.

The Sheriff’s Department did not initially disclose exactly how Savannah or Mr. Graziano had been killed, and said at the time that it was possible that Savannah might have participated in the shooting.

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/02/us/kidnapped-teen-shot-california-police.html

[Soul Crusher]

And yet they want to disarm us 

A 15 year girl that was reported kidnapped by her father, was shot dead by the the "trained professionals" despite "complying" with their "commands".


Gunfire From Deputies Killed Teen Who Had Been Reported Kidnapped, Video Shows

Newly released footage and audio recordings from a vehicle pursuit in September 2022 show that a 15-year-old girl who had been kidnapped by her father was fatally shot by gunfire from deputies as she followed their instructions to exit her father’s truck.

The girl, Savannah Graziano, was fatally shot on Sept. 27, 2022, off Interstate 15 in San Bernardino County, one day after the California Highway Patrol issued an Amber Alert that said her father, Anthony Graziano, 45, was believed to have abducted her, according to the San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Department.

The Sheriff’s Department did not initially disclose exactly how Savannah or Mr. Graziano had been killed, and said at the time that it was possible that Savannah might have participated in the shooting.

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/02/us/kidnapped-teen-shot-california-police.html

[Skeletor]

Very typical attitude from her. Of course just firing her is not enough, she needs prison.

Federal lawsuit filed against fired Palm Beach Gardens police officer who pulled gun on unarmed man

https://www.wptv.com/news/region-n-palm-beach-county/palm-beach-gardens/federal-lawsuit-filed-against-fired-palm-beach-gardens-police-officer-who-pulled-gun-on-unarmed-man

[Soul Crusher]

'FBI violated American citizens' 4A rights 278,000 times': Bureau blasted over attempt to put gloss on Section 702
The Blaze ^ | April 1, 2024 | Joseph Mackinnon
Posted on 4/3/2024, 10:04:41 AM by Twotone

The FBI is attempting to rehabilitate the public image of Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act as Congress has until April 19 to reauthorize it. The bureau recently posted a video to X that features FBI Director Christopher Wray attempting to put a gloss on Section 702 as part of this monthslong campaign.

The bureau's timely propaganda did not escape the attention of critics on X, where the post received a community note that read, "The FBI violated American citizens' 4A rights 278,000 times with illegal, unauthorized FISA 702 searches."

Among the critics was Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah), who wrote, "FBI just got called out in a community note on X. Congress — take note. FISA 702 has been used for warrantless surveillance of U.S. citizens HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS of times. Yet FBI demands 702 be reauthorized by April 19 WITHOUT a warrant requirement for searches of U.S. citizens."

"Many in Congress will want to reauthorize FISA 702 — which is set to expire April 19th — either without modification or (more likely) with fake reforms that fail to impose a warrant requirement for searches directed at Americans," added the senator.

Section 702 is a provision of FISA enacted by Congress in 2008 that enables the state to spy on foreign nationals located outside the U.S. with the compelled aid of electronic communication service providers.

This was the law exploited by the FBI to spy on members of the Trump campaign in 2016 without probable cause.

According to the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, Congress enacted Section 702 in order to "address a collection gap that resulted from the evolution of technology in the years after FISA was passed in 1978."

"Many terrorists and other foreign adversaries were using email accounts serviced by U.S. companies," claimed the ODNI. "Because of this change in communications technology, the government had to seek individual court orders, based on a finding of probable cause, to obtain the communications of non-U.S. persons located abroad."

Supposedly, going through the courts proved too costly "because of the resources required and because the government couldn't always meet the probable cause standard, which was designed to protect U.S. persons and persons in the U.S."

While 702 targets must be foreign nationals believed to be outside the U.S., the FBI readily admits that "such targets may send an email or have a phone call with a U.S. person."

As a consequence, multitudes of American citizens have been subjected to warrantless surveillance and have had their phone calls, text messages, emails, and other communications tapped and stored.

Blaze News previously reported that during a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing in June 2023, the FBI admitted there had been at least 278,000 "unintentional" back-door search queries of the 702 database for the private communications of Americans between 2020 and 2021 alone.

Among those Americans caught up in the warrantless searches were Jan. 6 protesters, 19,000 donors to a congressional campaign, and BLM protesters.

The Hill reported that long after the FBI ran numerous searches of people suspected of partaking in the Jan. 6 protests, the Department of Justice concluded the bureau had not met the standard required for such a search.

Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) asked FBI Deputy Director Paul Abbate at the June 2023 hearing, "Your institution is the one that, according to the court, the FISA court, ran 278,000 unwarranted — probably illegal — queries on Americans, right? That was your institution, correct?"

Abbate responded, "With respect to the compliance incident, yes."

Wray sang praises to Section 702 when testifying before the Senate Judiciary Committee in December and did so again before the U.S. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence on March 11.

In his March 11 testimony, Wray stated, "The FISA Court itself most recently found 98% compliance and commented on the reforms working. The most recent Justice Department report found the reforms working, 99% compliance. And so, I think legislation that ensures those reforms stay in place but also preserves the agility and the utility of the tools, what we need to be able to protect the American people."

The FBI's March 25 social post containing an excerpt from Wray's testimony was not well-received.

Rep. Andrew Clyde (R-Ga.) wrote, "The FBI was correctly called out in a community note for lying about its unconstitutional, warrantless surveillance of Americans. Congress must eliminate FISA abuse and protect the American people's privacy."

Georgia Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R) tweeted, "The FBI has been corrected in community notes and rightfully so."

FBI whistlelower Steve Friend reiterated that the FBI "violated constitutional rights and abused FISA Section 702 over 278,000 times in a single year."

Sen. Lee emphasized that he and Illinois Sen. Dick Durbin (D) have introduced a bill that would reauthorize 702 but in a fashion that would supposedly safeguard American privacy and liberties.

Their so-called Security and Freedom Enhancement Act would require intelligence agencies to obtain a FISA Title I order or a warrant prior to accessing the contents of Americans' communications collected under Section 702.

"While only foreigners overseas may be targeted, the program sweeps in massive amounts of Americans' communications, which may be searched without a warrant. Even after implementing compliance measures, the FBI still conducted more than 200,000 warrantless searches of Americans' communications in just one year — more than 500 warrantless searches per day," said Durbin.

Durbin figured this legislation would make reauthorizing Section 702 palatable.

[illuminati]

A 15 year girl that was reported kidnapped by her father, was shot dead by the the "trained professionals" despite "complying" with their "commands".


Gunfire From Deputies Killed Teen Who Had Been Reported Kidnapped, Video Shows

Newly released footage and audio recordings from a vehicle pursuit in September 2022 show that a 15-year-old girl who had been kidnapped by her father was fatally shot by gunfire from deputies as she followed their instructions to exit her father’s truck.

The girl, Savannah Graziano, was fatally shot on Sept. 27, 2022, off Interstate 15 in San Bernardino County, one day after the California Highway Patrol issued an Amber Alert that said her father, Anthony Graziano, 45, was believed to have abducted her, according to the San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Department.

The Sheriff’s Department did not initially disclose exactly how Savannah or Mr. Graziano had been killed, and said at the time that it was possible that Savannah might have participated in the shooting.

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/02/us/kidnapped-teen-shot-california-police.html

The Cops that shot her should also be shot. End of.

[Skeletor]

Police tased a Marin man suffering a seizure. A lawsuit says officers fabricated charges to cover it up

In the early hours of Aug. 29, 2022, San Anselmo resident Alice Frankel awoke to strange noises coming from the man who was then her fiance and is now her husband. When she turned on a light, she said, Bruce Frankel’s arms were stiffly extended, his legs were shaking, his eyes were rolled back and his mouth foamed.

She called 911, worried he was dying. A neurologist would later diagnose Bruce Frankel with epilepsy and say he had suffered a grand mal seizure.

But instead of helping him, police officers who were dispatched to the home restrained him in his bedroom, shocked him with a Taser and then justified their use of force by arresting him on fabricated charges, according to a lawsuit filed Wednesday in Marin County Superior Court.


https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article/marin-seizure-police-taser-19375569.php

[Skeletor]

Congress one step closer to reauthorizing controversial federal surveillance tool

Congress is now one step closer to extending the life of a key federal government surveillance tool known as Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). A bill to reauthorize FISA’s Section 702 passed through the House Rules Committee on Tuesday night, the final hurdle for a piece of legislation before it’s considered House-wide. It passed in a 9 to 2 vote.

Section 702 is a provision that allows the federal government to conduct warrantless surveillance of a foreign national outside the U.S. if they’re suspected of ties to terrorism — even if the person on the other end of the communications is an American citizen. National security hawks and members of the intelligence community have called it a critical tool for preventing another 9/11-style attack. But critics, which include both conservatives and progressives, have been seeking to limit its scope after reported instances of abuse to collect data on Americans.

The Reforming Intelligence and Securing America Act, a compromise bill between the House Judiciary Committee and the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, is aimed at curbing instances of abuse by instituting safeguards on accessing Section 702-collected data, particularly if it involves a U.S. citizen.

Under terms agreed upon in the Rules Committee, the House will vote on an amendment backed by the Judiciary Committee to ban warrantless searches of U.S. citizens before voting on the final bill.

A GOP lawmaker opposed to the amendment told Fox News Digital on Tuesday evening, "That would effectively kill 702, if that passed."

Not included in the final bill was an amendment sought by privacy hawks, led by Rep. Warran Davidson, R-Ohio, which would have forced the federal government to seek a warrant before buying U.S. citizens' data from third-party brokers.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/congress-one-step-closer-reauthorizing-controversial-federal-surveillance-tool

[Skeletor]

No surprise there, they want to investigate themselves so they can clear themselves of any wrongdoing while also having the authority to investigate and charge everyone else.


DeSantis signs controversial bill banning civilian boards from investigating police misconduct

Gov. Ron DeSantis signed a controversial bill Friday stripping civilian oversight boards of their power to investigate police misconduct.

The bill, HB 601, instead allows local chiefs of police agencies to create their own “civilian oversight” boards composed of three to seven members, all appointed by the chief or sheriff. But these boards can only review policies and procedures, not oversee use-of-force complaints or internal affairs investigations.

The new legislation “puts the kibosh on these extrajudicial investigations against law enforcement,” DeSantis said at a news conference at the St. Johns County Sheriff’s Office, describing the boards as “stacked with activists.” “You have review boards, that’s fine, but it’s got to be done in ways where you have the Sheriff or Chief of Police appointing people,” the governor said. “It can’t be people that have an agenda.”


https://www.sun-sentinel.com/2024/04/12/desantis-signs-controversial-bill-banning-civilian-boards-from-investigating-police-misconduct/

[Soul Crusher]

No surprise there, they want to investigate themselves so they can clear themselves of any wrongdoing while also having the authority to investigate and charge everyone else.


DeSantis signs controversial bill banning civilian boards from investigating police misconduct

Gov. Ron DeSantis signed a controversial bill Friday stripping civilian oversight boards of their power to investigate police misconduct.

The bill, HB 601, instead allows local chiefs of police agencies to create their own “civilian oversight” boards composed of three to seven members, all appointed by the chief or sheriff. But these boards can only review policies and procedures, not oversee use-of-force complaints or internal affairs investigations.

The new legislation “puts the kibosh on these extrajudicial investigations against law enforcement,” DeSantis said at a news conference at the St. Johns County Sheriff’s Office, describing the boards as “stacked with activists.” “You have review boards, that’s fine, but it’s got to be done in ways where you have the Sheriff or Chief of Police appointing people,” the governor said. “It can’t be people that have an agenda.”


https://www.sun-sentinel.com/2024/04/12/desantis-signs-controversial-bill-banning-civilian-boards-from-investigating-police-misconduct/

“You have review boards, that’s fine, but it’s got to be done in ways where you have the Sheriff or Chief of Police appointing people,” the governor said. “It can’t be people that have an agenda.”




Sigh.  Bad look for DeSantis there altogether. 

[Primemuscle]

You are exactly right. DeSantis must believe the police in Florida have something to hide. Otherwise, why would he ban investigations into police misconduct? Portland police does not have a pristine record devoid of police misconduct. Currently Portland has the IPR which is an independent, civilian oversight agency tasked by Portland City Council to investigate and monitor allegations of misconduct. This is better than nothing at all.

[Skeletor]

You are exactly right. DeSantis must believe the police in Florida have something to hide. Otherwise, why would he ban investigations into police misconduct? Portland police does not have a pristine record devoid of police misconduct. Currently Portland has the IPR which is an independent, civilian oversight agency tasked by Portland City Council to investigate and monitor allegations of misconduct. This is better than nothing at all.

More wishy-washy BS like those magical police departments we often hear about but never actually see where the only "bad apple" -who only shows up once every 5 years- is quickly taken care of by the "good" cops before he even commits a crime. Funny how many more of the actual "bad apples" go on to different police departments or are simply never caught/fired/imprisoned/executed.

These boards have no bite. At best they might submit a report and then the Police Internal Affairs Department or some "independent" police-controlled board decides what to do about it. In the example of a shithole like Portland, the IPR submits a report to another board called the PRB, a 5 person board (3 of which are cops and only 1 from the IPR) which decides on the case. And even then it is up to the "chief" of police to make the ultimate decision. So, not very "independent". And this is not unique to Portland, most places with some façade of "civilian overview" are similar. And that is not even scratching the surface on how these processes are heavily in favor of cops.

[Skeletor]

Another "immunity" travesty... You see police arresting homeowners who confront squatters and here the constables wrongfully evicted a blind man and his two daughters who were renting the house. Only criminals seem to have "rights" these days and "law enforcement" is all too happy to aid and abet them or just don't care.


Court Fails to Hold Constables Accountable for Wrongfully Evicting Blind Man, Leaving Him Homeless During a Snowstorm

The U.S. District Court for Delaware has refused to hold government officials accountable for knowingly enforcing an eviction order against the wrong person: a blind man, who was then left homeless with his daughters during a snowstorm. In granting constables quasi-judicial immunity from claims of constitutional violations, the district court dismissed the lawsuit filed in Murphy v. Delaware, Justices of the Peace on behalf of William Murphy and his daughters.

William Murphy, a blind, 52-year-old widower and his two daughters, aged 17 and 11, moved to Wilmington, Del., in order to be closer to other family members. Murphy and his daughters moved into a 775-square-foot rowhouse on Nov. 17, 2020, under a one-year rental lease for $750 per month along with rental assistance from Social Services. The landlord complained about a delay with receiving the partial rent payment from Social Services, and in Feb. 2021, the water and electricity to the home were shut off in violation of state law and the landlord allegedly made a veiled threat. Then, on the morning of Feb. 11, during a bitterly cold snowstorm, constables arrived at the Murphy home, ordered them to vacate the premises, and gave the family 30 minutes to collect their belongings and leave.

Even though the person named in the eviction Order was someone other than Murphy, and despite Murphy showing proof of a signed lease in good standing, Murphy and his daughters were still ordered to leave the home, unable to take most of their personal possessions with them, and were left to challenge the wrongful eviction in court. One week later, a state magistrate judge found the Murphys had been unlawfully ousted from their home and that the landlord had weaponized a writ of eviction for a previous female tenant to wrongfully evict Murphy and his daughters.

Because the error should have been obvious to the constables, who nevertheless proceeded with enforcing the eviction, The Rutherford Institute then filed a federal civil rights complaint in Delaware district court in March 2021, demanding that Delaware officials cease their “evict first, ask questions later” practice and institute reforms to ensure that future eviction procedures respect the due process rights of those involved. The district court granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss the lawsuit, which Institute attorneys plan to appeal.


https://www.rutherford.org/publications_resources/on_the_front_lines/court_fails_to_hold_constables_accountable_for_wrongfully_evicting_blind_man_leaving_him_homeless_during_a_snowstorm

[Skeletor]

When it comes to mass government surveillance, both parties seem to work together just fine to facilitate it.


Supercharged Spying Provision Buried In "Terrifying" FISA 702 Reauthorization

On Monday, the House finalized procedural business on a bill to reauthorize the nation's warrantless surveillance powers under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), which Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR) called "one of the most dramatic and terrifying expansions of government surveillance authority in history."
"I will do everything in my power to stop it from passing in the Senate," said Wyden in a Friday post to X.

I’ll explain how this new power works. Under current law, the government can compel “electronic communications service providers” that have direct access to communications to assist the NSA in conducting Section 702 surveillance.

In practice, that means companies like Verizon and Google must turn over the communications of the targets of Section 702 surveillance. (The targets must be foreigners overseas, although the communications can—and do—include communications with Americans.)

Through a seemingly innocuous change to the definition of “electronic communications surveillance provider,” an amendment offered by House intel committee (HPSCI) leaders and passed by the House vastly expands the universe of entities that can be compelled to assist the NSA.

If the bill becomes law, any company or individual that provides ANY service whatsoever may be forced to assist in NSA surveillance, as long as they have access to equipment on which communications are transmitted or stored—such as routers, servers, cell towers, etc. That sweeps in an enormous range of U.S. businesses that provide wifi to their customers and therefore have access to equipment on which communications transit. Barber shops, laundromats, fitness centers, hardware stores, dentist’s offices… the list goes on and on.

It also includes commercial landlords that rent out the office space where tens of millions of Americans go to work every day—offices of journalists, lawyers, nonprofits, financial advisors, health care providers, and more.

The amendment even extends to service providers who come into our homes. House cleaners, plumbers, people performing repairs, and IT services providers have access to laptops and routers inside our homes and could be forced to serve as surrogate spies.

None of these people or businesses would be allowed to tell anyone about the assistance they were compelled to provide. They would be under a gag order, and they would face heavy penalties if they failed to comply with it.

That’s not even the worst part. Unlike Google and Verizon, most of these businesses and individuals lack the ability to isolate and turn over a target’s communications. So they would be required to give the NSA access to the equipment itself or to use techniques or devices (presumably provided by the NSA) to copy and turn over entire communications streams and/or repositories of stored communications, which would inevitably include vast quantities of wholly domestic communications.

The NSA, having wholesale access to domestic communications on an unprecedented scale, would then be on the “honor system” to pull out and retain only the communications of approved foreign targets. (Let that sink in.)

HPSCI leaders deny that the administration has any intent to use this provision so broadly. Supposedly, there is a single type of service provider that the government wants to rope in. But they didn’t want anyone to know what that service provider was so they hid the real goal by writing the amendment as broadly and vaguely as possible. But no worries, Americans! The administration isn’t actually going to USE all the power it just persuaded the House to give it.

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/supercharged-spying-provision-buried-terrifying-fisa-702-reauthorization

[Skeletor]

Biden Opposes Bill That Would Keep Cops and Feds From Buying Your Data

A bipartisan group of lawmakers is once again trying to keep the government from performing an end run around the Fourth Amendment by buying people's personal data. This week, President Joe Biden indicated that he opposed the bill.

H.R. 4639, known as the Fourth Amendment Is Not For Sale Act, "expands prohibited disclosures of stored electronic communications" to include purchases of data by law enforcement and intelligence agencies.

First introduced in 2021 by Sens. Ron Wyden (D–Ore.), Rand Paul (R–Ky.), Patrick Leahy (D–Vt.), and Mike Lee (R–Utah), the bill has been reintroduced in subsequent sessions. The current version was introduced in the House by Rep. Warren Davidson (R–Ohio) and in the Senate by Wyden and Paul.

On Wednesday, Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D–N.Y.), ranking member of the House Judiciary Committee and one of the House bill's cosponsors, affirmed his support on the House floor. "That anyone should have Americans' private information is highly troubling to me," Nadler said. "But that our federal government can obtain it without a warrant should be troubling to all of us."

On Tuesday, the White House announced that the Biden administration "strongly opposes" the bill. According to a Statement of Administration Policy, the bill "generally would prohibit the Intelligence Community and law enforcement from obtaining certain commercially available information—subject only to narrow, unworkable exceptions."

The Stored Communications Act forbids technology companies from disclosing certain subscriber information, including to the government. But certain types of data—including search histories, credit reports, employment records, and cellphone geolocation data—is "commercially available" and can be sold by third parties called data brokers. Often this data is purchased by private companies in order to better tailor their ad spending.

Governments typically need a warrant to access any of that type of information—as recently as 2018, the Supreme Court affirmed in Carpenter v. United States that the government cannot access a person's cellphone location data without a warrant. "Although such records are generated for commercial purposes," wrote Chief Justice John Roberts, that alone did not "negate" the plaintiff's expectation of privacy. "We decline to grant the state unrestricted access to a wireless carrier's database of physical location information."

Put simply: Come back with a warrant.

But instead of honoring that decision, law enforcement and intelligence agencies just started buying the information from data brokers instead: The National Security Agency (NSA) buys people's internet metadata, and agencies within the Department of Homeland Security—including Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Customs and Border Protection (CBP)—purchase cellphone location data.

Even agencies without an explicit law enforcement mandate have gotten in on the fun: In one example, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) paid $420,000 for cellphone data in order to monitor compliance with COVID-19 lockdown measures.

The Fourth Amendment Is Not For Sale Act would ban these transactions.

https://reason.com/2024/04/17/biden-opposes-bill-that-would-keep-cops-and-feds-from-buying-your-data/

[Skeletor]

‘Are there any dead babies in the car?’: San Jose police audit reveals use of controversial tactic

Officers with the San Jose Police Department asked drivers, “Are there any dead babies in the car?” while initiating traffic stops in at least 2 separate occasions in 2023, according to an independent audit. Both instances were examples of officers using a controversial tactic known as “shock talk,” according to the audit, which was conducted by the City of San Jose’s Interim Independent Police Auditor.

https://www.kron4.com/news/bay-area/are-there-any-dead-babies-in-the-car-san-jose-police-audit-reveals-use-of-controversial-tactic/

[Skeletor]

Appeals Court Rules That Cops Can Physically Make You Unlock Your Phone

This week, a federal court decided that police officers can make you unlock your phone, even by physically forcing you to press your thumb against it.

In November 2021, Jeremy Payne was pulled over by two California Highway Patrol (CHP) officers over his car's window tinting. When asked, Payne admitted that he was on parole, which the officers confirmed. After finding Payne's cellphone in the car, officers unlocked it by forcibly pressing his thumb against it as he sat handcuffed. (The officers claimed in their arrest report that Payne "reluctantly unlocked the cell phone" when asked, which Payne disputed; the government later accepted in court "that defendant's thumbprint was compelled.")

The officers searched through Payne's camera roll and found a video taken the same day, which appeared to show "several bags of blue pills (suspected to be fentanyl)." After checking the phone's map and finding what they suspected to be a home address, the officers drove there and used Payne's keys to enter and search the residence. Inside, they  found and seized more than 800 pills. Payne was indicted for possession with intent to distribute fentanyl and cocaine.

In a motion to suppress, Payne's attorneys argued that by forcing him to unlock his phone, the officers "compelled a testimonial communication," violating both the Fourth Amendment's protection against unreasonable search and seizure and the Fifth Amendment's guarantee against self-incrimination. Even though the provisions of his parole required him to surrender any electronic devices and passcodes, "failure to comply could result in 'arrest pending further investigation' or confiscation of the device pending investigation," not the use of force to make him open the phone.

The district court denied the motion to suppress, and Payne pleaded guilty. In November 2022, he was sentenced to 12 years in prison. Notably, Payne had only served three years for the crime for which he was on parole—assault with a deadly weapon on a peace officer.

Payne appealed the denial of the motion to suppress. This week, in an opinion authored by Judge Richard Tallman, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit ruled against Payne.

Searches "incident to arrest" are an accepted part of Fourth Amendment precedent. Further, Tallman wrote that as a parolee, Payne has "a significantly diminished expectation of privacy," and even though the conditions of his parole did not require him to "provide a biometric identifier," the distinction was insufficient to support throwing out the search altogether.

But Tallman went a step further in the Fifth Amendment analysis: "We hold that the compelled use of Payne's thumb to unlock his phone (which he had already identified
for the officers) required no cognitive exertion, placing it firmly in the same category as a blood draw or fingerprint taken at booking," he wrote. "The act itself merely provided CHP with access to a source of potential information."

From a practical standpoint, this is chilling. First of all, the Supreme Court ruled in 2016 that police needed a warrant before drawing a suspect's blood.

And one can argue that fingerprinting a suspect as they're arrested is part and parcel with establishing their identity. Nearly half of U.S. states require people to identify themselves to police if asked.

But forcibly gaining access to someone's phone provides more than just their identity—it's a window into their entire lives. Even cursory access to someone's phone can turn up travel history, banking information, and call and text logs—a treasure trove of potentially incriminating information, all of which would otherwise require a warrant.

https://reason.com/2024/04/19/appeals-court-rules-that-cops-can-physically-make-you-unlock-your-phone/