Judge Argonaut Deepcreek travels to Planet Wet to oversea the case of Planet Wet vs. The Defendant. The Defendant is charged with 1 count of giving someone the Yeahs and 2 counts of irresponsible public urination. Judge Argonaut Deepcreek: Zach Sinclair Dragoon Pomplehouse: Andy Ransom Marphic Spedrunky: Addison Houle Bra-pa: Lucindo Teixeira Commercial Music by Lucindo Teixeira Sponsor: HyperMegaUltra Shirts and Hats! New shirts every week!
The defense just rested its case in the trial of three white men charged in the killing of black jogger Ahmaud Arbery. The defendant who fired the fatal shot admitted under cross examination that Arbery never threatened him nor pulled a weapon. Closing arguments in the trial will begin Monday morning. The House is closing in on a long awaited vote on President Biden's nearly $2 trillion social spending bill. The vote could happen as soon as tonight as lawmakers get a new assessment of the price tag and the Senate braces for a shutdown. To learn more about how CNN protects listener privacy, visit cnn.com/privacy
NTD Evening News—11/10/20211. Defendant Kyle Rittenhouse Testifies2. Jurors in Rittenhouse Trial Filmed3. Biden Hopes $1T Deal Can Fix Supply Chain4. Biden Nominee Criticized Over Energy Policy5. WH: 900,000 Kids 5 to 11 Already Vaccinated
Ahmaud Arbery: Day 3 ‘McMichael – Brian Murder Trial'; Defendant changed his story he gave Police; How The $1.2 Trillion Infrastructure Plan will Impact Black America; Racism has historical been part of Infrastructure when Highways destroyed Black Communities; Biden's $1.2 Trillion Infrastructure Bill passes. – TheAHNShow with Michael Imhotep 11-9-21 (WATCH VIDEO) https://youtu.be/7P3s9AmbdrU Support The African History Network through Cash App @ https://cash.app/$TheAHNShow or PayPal @ TheAHNShow@gmail.com or http://www.PayPal.me/TheAHNShow or visit http://www.AfricanHistoryNetwork.com and click on the yellow “Donate” button.
Chicago Tribune Reporter Stacy St. Clair joins John Williams from Kenosha County Courthouse to update him as she heads into day seven of the homicide trial. She explains how yesterday’s witness might have benefited, but also harmed the defense.
Montana's U.S. Rep. Matt Rosendale is named as a defendant in a lawsuit that accuses the National Rifle Association of using shell companies to illegally give up to $35 million to Republican candidates.
lovethylawyer.comA transcript of this podcast is easily available at lovethylawyer.com.Go to https://www.lovethylawyer.com/blog for transcripts. https://www.homampour.com/Arash Homampour is a trial lawyer and founder of The Homampour Law Firm, a nine lawyer firm that represents individuals in catastrophic injury/wrongful death, employment and insurance bad faith matters throughout the State. The Homampour Law Firm is considered one of the top trial law firms in the State with record setting verdicts (twelve 8 figure and fifteen 7 figure verdicts) along with many outlier settlements. His firm has taken on the biggest and most formidable of Defendants, including Volkswagen, Lamborghini, Toyota, Nissan, Sunbeam Products, the State of California, Costco Stores, Farmers Insurance Exchange, Allstate Insurance, Daimler Trucks of North America, and Louisville Ladder. His verdicts and his firm's settlements are routinely considered to be outlier and record setting.His firm specializes in what they call “Underdog” or “David v. Goliath” litigation where they represent one individual client that is taking on a public entity, large employer, industry or manufacturer in an effort to change and/or stop unlawful or unsafe conduct for the good of others and the community. They are frequently involved in litigation that involves multiple defendants and multiple law firms with unlimited resources. While also a last-minute trial firm, they also handle cases from intake to trial and through appeals (including the California Supreme Court.)In 2021, he was the 5th ranked lawyer in Southern California by Super Lawyers in all practice areas. He was previously named one of the top 30 Plaintiff lawyers in the State by the Los Angeles Daily Journal. He was the recipient of the Consumer Attorneys Association of Los Angeles 2018 Ted Horn Memorial Award, presented to the lawyer who has provided outstanding service to the Association and the legal community. He also received trial attorney of the year awards from the Consumer Attorneys Association of Los Angeles, the Orange County Trial Lawyers Association and the Ventura County Trial Lawyers the Association. In 2007, he was named one of the Top 20 Attorneys Under the Age of 40 by the Los Angeles Daily Journal. Louis Goodman www.louisgoodman.com firstname.lastname@example.org 510.582.9090 Musical theme by Joel Katz, Seaside Recording, Maui Technical support: Bryan Matheson, Skyline Studios, Oakland We'd love to hear from you. Send us an email at email@example.com. Please subscribe and listen. Then tell us who you want to hear and what areas of interest you'd like us to cover. Please rate us and review us on Apple Podcasts.
Sines v. Kessler is finally underway, and Christopher Cantwell is representing himself. Need we say more? Actually, yes. And hence, this episode. Content warnings. Podcast Notes: Please consider donating to help us make the show and stay independent. Patrons get exclusive access to one full extra episode a month. Daniel's Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/danielharper Jack's Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/user?u=4196618 IDSG Twitter: https://twitter.com/idsgpod Daniel's Twitter: @danieleharper Jack's Twitter: @_Jack_Graham_ IDSG on Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/i-dont-speak-german/id1449848509?ls=1 Show Notes: Vice News, Charlottesville Race and Terror (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RIrcB1sAN8I) Christopher Cantwell transferred to Communication Management Unit in Marion, IL. (https://twitter.com/socialistdogmom/status/1402292133483196422?s=20) Pro Se Letter regarding change of address by Christopher Cantwell.(https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.vawd.109120/gov.uscourts.vawd.109120.968.0_1.pdf) Hilary Sargent coverage of the Cantwell criminal trial at The Informant. (https://www.informant.news/people/1157338-hilary-sargent) Cantwell Criminal Trial Testimony Day 3 (https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nhd.53269/gov.uscourts.nhd.53269.118.0.pdf) Cantwell Criminal Trial Testimony Day 4 (https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nhd.53269/gov.uscourts.nhd.53269.119.0.pdf) Jordan Green at Raw Story: ‘Crying Nazi' Christoper Cantwell is getting legal assist from a white supremacist as he prepares for Charlottesville trial (https://www.rawstory.com/crying-nazi-trial/) While serving his sentence, Cantwell met Hale along with another man named William A. White, who has played an even more significant role in helping him prepare for his upcoming trial in Charlottesville. White, in turn, is in prison for soliciting violence against the foreman of the federal jury that convicted Hale. According to the US Justice Department, White created the now defunct Overthrow.com website in the late 2000s as a platform for the American National Socialist Workers Party. He used the website to post derogatory comments and personal information about the jury foreman, including their home address and phone numbers. "Anyway, so I run into these guys," Cantwell told a white supremacist podcaster during an interview last week from an Oklahoma prison where he is awaiting transfer to Charlottesville to stand trial. "And allegations against them notwithstanding, they're good to me." Sines v. Kessler at Courtlistener (https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/6168921/sines-v-kessler/?filed_after=&filed_before=&entry_gte=&entry_lte=&order_by=desc) Document 1108 (https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.vawd.109120/gov.uscourts.vawd.109120.1108.0.pdf) In addition, it has now become apparent that Cantwell, who has been proceeding pro se and has been afforded its corresponding protections and leniency, may be using another inmate, William A. White, to participate in this litigation and “ghost-write” his recent filings. See ECF 1063 at 1 (“Christopher Cantwell ... Moves this Court ... To Provide Cantwell and his Lay Counsel, William A White, Adequate Access to The Electronic Materials...”); ECF 1063-2; compare ECF 1055 (handwritten filing written largely in first person) with ECF 1063 (typewritten filing written in third person). That provides yet another basis to deny these motions. Ghost writing plainly violates legal rules and only reinforces the inappropriate and harassing nature of Cantwell's numerous recent filings, including ECF 1062, 1063, 1064, 1065, 1066, 1077, 1078, 1084, 1085, 1086, 1087, 1088, 1089, 1090, 1096, 1097, 1098, 1099, 1102, 1103. See Wojcicki v. SCANA/SCE&G, 947 F.3d 240, 244 (4th Cir. 2020) (“Allowing individuals to represent themselves pro se reflects a respect for the choice of an individual citizen to plead his or her own cause, but so does the bar preventing individuals without legal expertise from representing others.” (quotation omitted)); Greene v. United States Dep't of Educ., No. 4:13cv79, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 143678, at 26-27 (E.D. Va. Oct. 1, 2013) (“During the course of this appeal it came to the Court's attention that Greene, although proceeding pro se and receiving the forbearance afforded such status, was utilizing the services of a ghost writer for many of her filings. The Court emphasizes that the practice of ghost-writing is in no way permissible in the Eastern District of Virginia, or any federal court for that matter. Even if the ghost writer is not an attorney, such practice is still considered the unauthorized practice of law. Those who proceed pro se are afforded certain amounts of leniency that are not afforded represented parties. Ghost writing inexcusably abuses this leniency."). Document 1134 (https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.vawd.109120/gov.uscourts.vawd.109120.1134.0_1.pdf) Document 1185 (https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.vawd.109120/gov.uscourts.vawd.109120.1185.0.pdf) Document 1306 (https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.vawd.109120/gov.uscourts.vawd.109120.1306.0_1.pdf) While Plaintiffs remain adamant that any further delay would be extremely prejudicial given the fact that this case was filed four years ago, jury questionnaires have already been sent out, and many parties, counsel, and witnesses are already in or on their way to Charlottesville, see, e.g., ECF Nos. 1108, 1113, 1196, Plaintiffs are also aware that Mr. Cantwell likely will continue to assert these arguments, which could complicate the issues on appeal. As a result, Plaintiffs have concluded that the best way to resolve the tension between the need to proceed to trial and Mr. Cantwell's due-process arguments would be for the Court to sever Plaintiffs' claims against Mr. Cantwell from their claims against the other Defendants in this case for a separate trial pursuant to Rule 42 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Document 1307 (https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.vawd.109120/gov.uscourts.vawd.109120.1307.0.pdf) (Kolenich on behalf of Kessler, Damigo, and Identity Evropa) The Court has been aware of Mr. Cantwell's objections since at least April 2021. The plaintiffs have been opposing Cantwell and not caring about his allegations of procedural or substative rights for at least that long. See ECF 945 filed April 26, 2021. Defendants object to the Court flip flopping on its Cantwell rulings, at the mere letter based request of the plaintiffs, less than 48 hours before trial. The defendants have invested considerable time and expense into preparing a defense strategy that assumes the presence of Mr. Cantwell as a party defendant at trial. Document 1309 (https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.vawd.109120/gov.uscourts.vawd.109120.1309.0.pdf) (Smith on behalf of Parrot, Heimbach, and TWP) Plantiff's counsel want to take a “mulligan” here because, prior to Friday's final pretrial conference, they had their army of jury consultants analyze the jury questionnaires, and concluded (rightly) that they have very little chance of winning their case in front of the eventual jury (even with adverse inferences). In order to manufacture a basis for their mulligan, they've been intentionally not caring about Mr. Cantwell's situation, which they've known about for many months now; that way, if they drew an unfavorable jury pool, they could fake a sudden onset of empathy and concern for Mr. Cantwell's predicament, and bait the Court into postponing the trial with their ridiculous “two Charlottesville trials” (i.e., the regular one, and then some kind of Cantwell-only “mini-trial” a couple years from now) proposal. Document 1314 (https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.vawd.109120/gov.uscourts.vawd.109120.1314.0.pdf) (Bloch reads the amended letter.) Document 1328 (https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.vawd.109120/gov.uscourts.vawd.109120.1328.0.pdf) Cantwell pro se defendant woes Document 1329 (https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.vawd.109120/gov.uscourts.vawd.109120.1329.0.pdf) More Cantwell pro se defendant woes Document 1330 (https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.vawd.109120/gov.uscourts.vawd.109120.1330.0.pdf) THIS IS NOT FAIR document Molly Conger Twitter (https://mobile.twitter.com/socialistdogmom) Molly Conger Patreon(https://www.patreon.com/socialistdogmom/posts) Molly's Trial Coverage Day One (https://twitter.com/socialistdogmom/status/1452622192555053069?s=20) Jury Selection Day Two (https://twitter.com/socialistdogmom/status/1452977775749500930?s=20) Jury Selection Day Three (https://twitter.com/socialistdogmom/status/1453344852016607234?s=20) Jury Selection Day Four (https://twitter.com/socialistdogmom/status/1453699603879141381?s=20) Opening Arguments Day Five (https://twitter.com/socialistdogmom/status/1454066857418362880?s=20) Plaintiff's first two witnesses Emily Gorcenski and Molly Conger. White Supremacists Have Returned to Charlottesville in Another Attempt to ‘Unite the Right'(https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2021/10/with-the-charlottesville-trial-white-supremacists-try-again-to-unite-the-right.html) Christopher Cantwell opening statement (https://twitter.com/socialistdogmom/status/1453795094591639562?s=20) (Paraphrase) "If you've ever had the intellectual curiosity to read Mein Kampf then you know this case is Mother Jones level nonsense." Trey Garrison dox at the SPLC (https://www.splcenter.org/hatewatch/2019/01/18/spectre-unmasked-racist-alt-right-podcaster-used-be-local-reporter)
You've fought the hard fight and prevailed, securing a judgement. The hard part is in the past, right? Not necessarily. Obtaining recovery against an uninsured or underinsured tortfeasor can be an uphill battle. In all areas of subrogation, thousands of dollars in unpaid judgements go untouched and sometimes expire. This does not have to be the case. Once you secure a money judgement, you have a right to obtain a recovery, via liens, garnishments, suspensions, and other means. In this week's installment, join Rebecca and Steve as they help navigate the options to securing your hard earned recovery from a less than cooperative Defendant.
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF CLARKE COUNTY, ALABAMA SMARTBANK, PLAINTIFF, VS. BILLY LYNN CRISWELL and DEBRA K. CRISWELL, DEFENDANTS. CASE NO.: 16-CV-2021- 900071.00 NOTICE OF COMPLAINT Billy Lynn Criswell, whose whereabouts is unknown, must answer Complaint of SmartBank against Defendants, for a judgment upon money in the principal sum of Eighty-Five Thousand Twenty- Nine and 44/100 (,029.44) Dollars, an attorney's fee in the amount of Twelve Thousand Seven Hundred Fifty-Four and 42/100 (,754.42) Dollars, and subsequent interest and costs by October 29, 2021, or thereafter, a judgment by default may be rendered against him in Case No. 16- CV-2021-900071.00, Circuit...Article Link
In this archive episode, Dennis talks about how there are other ways of finding criminal vehicles but also talks about legality. Recorded on 06/13/2018. State v Mandel 2018 - https://law.justia.com/cases/new-jersey/appellate-division-published/2018/a5442-16.html?fbclid=IwAR0Frv8zieD8fO0JQ55mTuHCHKyMjHMRkCsIlzadEF6uCmNqHQosxsHxWIg (https://law.justia.com/.../appellate.../2018/a5442-16.html) Defendant appeals the denial of his motion to suppress the warrantless seizure of a small amount of marijuana from his vehicle. A police officer seized the marijuana after stopping defendant's vehicle for an equipment violation. During the stop, the officer smelled the odor of marijuana coming from inside the car while questioning defendant through the open passenger side window.The State contends the officer's slight intrusion inside the vehicle's window, for the sole purpose of better hearing defendant over the noise of passing traffic, did not constitute a search. Defendant argues it was a search, and that it was unlawful because the officer was not legally in the "smelling area" when he detected the odor of marijuana and developed the probable cause to seize it. Assuming without deciding that the officer conducted a search when he leaned his head inside defendant's open window, the panel concludes that the officer's slight, momentary intrusion inside the car window to hear defendant's responses was reasonable. Consequently, the search did not violate the Constitutional protection against "unreasonable searches and seizures." The marijuana was then properly seized pursuant to the "plain smell" exception to the warrant requirement. The trial court order denying the suppression motion is affirmed. State in the interest of J.A. (2018) Neither exigency nor the hot pursuit doctrine justified the officers' warrantless entry here. However, defendant's brother's actions did not constitute state action and were sufficiently attenuated from the unlawful police conduct to preclude application of the exclusionary rule to the evidence. https://www.judiciary.state.nj.us/attorneys/assets/opinions/supreme/a_38_16.pdf?fbclid=IwAR08RGXB4NENZ79saMFrbDx2hA7veCAURMdnW-_vZHk9uFX3CC_QTndVWZg (https://www.judiciary.state.nj.us/.../supreme/a_38_16.pdf)
In today’s first subscriber supported Public Service Announcement, one person wants you to know about another community litter cleanup event in Albemarle, this time on October 30 in the southern part of the county. The latest Love Albemarle event will take place between 8:30 a.m. and 11:30 a.m. at sites in Esmont, Keene, Scottsville, and North Garden. Around fifty people showed up for a similar event in Esmont this past spring, and organizers want to double that amount. Organizer Ed Brooks is seeking to get children involved, so if you’re a parent or guardian and want to spend the morning cleaning up road-side litter, register today! On this edition of the program:A host of development updates in Albemarle County, including a mixed-use development in the Broadway BlueprintThe Virginia Chapter of the American Planning Association releases its annual awardsEmmet Street at Ivy Road to be closed for nearly two weeks for stormwater projectChris Greene Lake reopens to dogs after a month’s closureA suspicious item is found at Charlottesville’s federal courtFire crews and police officers responded last night to reports of a suspicious item at the Federal Building and U.S. Courthouse in downtown Charlottesville, but the item was determined by the Virginia State Police to be of no threat. The area was closed from 6:45 p.m. to around 8:30 p.m. according to a release from the city’s communications office.The incident comes just three days before a trial gets underway in the federal cases against multiple organizers involved in the August 12 Unite the Right rally. The lawsuit was filed four years ago and seeks damages based on an 1871 civil rights law as well as a prevention of future rallies. Defendants include Jason Kessler, Richard Spencer, and Christopher Cantwell, among others. The trial begins Monday morning. (read more in the University of Michigan’s Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse)The water at Chris Greene Lake Park has been reopened to dogs and people. Albemarle issued an advisory in late September after tests reported elevated levels of harmful algae. There have been two consecutive tests which have indicated water quality has returned to normal levels. A release announcing the reopening went out Friday afternoon. Emmet Street will be fully closed between Ivy Road and Rothery Road for nearly two weeks between November 1 and November 12. Traffic will be detoured along Massie Road and Copeley Road. According to a release, the roadway will be shut to allow for installation of a large stormwater utility structure across Emmet Street. Pedestrians, cyclists, motorists, and transit-riders are warned of potential delays. “Please expect traffic backups along the detour route and if possible, utilize Rt 250 or other city streets to bypass the area,” reads the release. “Pedestrians will be detoured through the UVA site along the parking garage service road.” The school superintendent in Nelson County has announced she will step down next June 30. The Lynchburg News Advance reports that Martha Eagle has plans to retire after a 32-year career in the Nelson school system. Nelson County has 1,520 students and more than 300 employees. (read the article)The Virginia Chapter of the American Planning Association has released its awards for 2021 at a hybrid conference in Roanoke. Senator Lynwood Lewis (D-6) received the Cardinal Award for his role as a legislator, singling out key pieces of legislation that were signed into law in the from the past year.SB1350: Requires the Commonwealth Transportation Board to incorporate resiliency into project selection processSB1374: Establishes a carbon sequestration task force which must report before 2022 General Assembly SB1389: Requires landowners whose properties are prone to flooding to report that risk to potential buyersSB1404: Adjustments to the Stormwater Local Assistance Fund to clarify intent to reduce nitrogen and phosphorous reduction Fairfax County won the Commonwealth Plan of the year for its Zoning Ordinance Modernization Project, which cut the length of those regulations in half.“The new streamlined ordinance is half the size of the previous Ordinance from 1978, which was accomplished through elimination of repetition and use of easy-to-understand language, graphics, and figures,” reads the award’s write-up.The city of Norfolk won three awards for three projects. OpenNorfolk is an initiative that helped businesses connect with customers during the pandemic. Norfolk also created a Missing Middle Pattern Book to explain how additional density could be achieved in single-family neighborhoods. The Norfolk Thrive plan presents a vision for how to extend urban development in the coastal city from the Harbor Park ballpark to Norfolk State University. The latter won the APA’s Resilient Virginia Community of the Year. Other awards include:Williamsburg Planning Director Carolyn Murphy won the Outstanding Service AwardThe Edge District between York County, James City County, and the City of Williamsburg won the Holzheimer Economic Development Award Frederick County won the Commonwealth Connectors Award and planner John Bishop won the Outstanding Service Award for the Crossover Boulevard project, which is a new four-lane roadway in WinchesterIn today’s Patreon-fueled shout-out is for the Plant Northern Piedmont Natives Campaign, an initiative that wants you to grow native plants in yards, farms, public spaces and gardens in the northern Piedmont. The leaves have started to fall as autumn set in, and as they do, this is a good time to begin planning for the spring. Native plants provide habitat, food sources for wildlife, ecosystem resiliency in the face of climate change, and clean water. Start at the Plant Northern Piedmont Natives Facebook page and tell them Lonnie Murray sent you!Time now for a round up of various developments in Albemarle County. Developer Alan Cadgene has filed plans with Albemarle County for a mixed-use development to be built on a 1.36 acre property just to the northwest of the redeveloped Woolen Mills factory. The proposal is for a 2,500 square foot manufacturing buildings with 13 dwelling units. The project is being submitted by-right. “[That] means that if the proposed plans meet the minimum requirements of the county’s zoning, site plan, or subdivision ordinances, they must be approved,” reads the public notification for the project.The county’s Comprehensive Plan designates the land as Neighborhood Density Residential which calls for between three and six units per acre. According to the project application, the residential density on the site be 9.55 units per acre. An existing structure on the property would remain. This is within the scope of the county’s Broadway Blueprint planning area. That’s being run by the county’s Economic Development Office. Elsewhere in the county, plans have been filed for 250 units along Rio Road near Four Seasons. Andy Reitelbach is a senior planner with the county. “So the application is called the Heritage on Rio,” Retelbach said.The property is within the jurisdiction of the Places29-Hydraulic Community Advisory Committee, which had a community meeting on a rezoning application for the project on October 18. “Sometimes the current zoning and the future land use designation do not always line up so that is one reason why a property owner may choose to request a rezoning of their property,” Reitelbach said. In this case, the request is to go from R-6 zoning to a customized zone known as a Planned Residential Development. That would allow up to 35 units per acre as well as some commercial uses. The buildings have not been designed, according to attorney Valerie Long with the firm Williams Mullen. The Architectural Review Board will also weigh in on the project as Rio Road is an entrance corridor. “The project is proposing that 15 percent of the rezoned units will be affordable to those making up to 80 percent of the area median income,” Long said. By-right there could be 50 units on the property, so that translates to 15 percent of 200, or 30 units. The Places29-North Community Advisory Committee met on October 14 and one topic was an update on the Brookhill development south of Forest Lakes and north of Polo Grounds Road. Cameron Langille is another planner in Albemarle. (watch the meeting)“Brookhill was rezoned by the Board of Supervisors in 2016,” Langille said. “Brookhill totals 277.5 acres so it is a pretty large project. It’s going to be developed in multiple phases and the rezoning referred to each of those phases as blocks.”Brookhill is a mixed-use development that must have at least 552 residential units and a maximum of 1,550 units. These include apartments, townhomes, and single-family homes. Langille said the developer could have constructed many more under the Comprehensive Plan but opted to go at a lower density. Final approval so far has been granted for 535 total dwelling unitsBlock 1 is the center of the development. “There’s going to be also a public park and a plaza gathering area, and that is going to be the primary focal point for non-residential uses in this project,” Langille said. Some blocks have been approved and constructed, while others are working their way through the review process. Block 8A consists of a 179-bed assisted living facility which is nearing opening. Block 1A and Block 8B consist of multifamily units that look like townhomes but contain more units. A site plan had been submitted for a hockey rink in the town center. “That plan got to the final site plan stage which is basically the last thing they have to do application wise before they get final approval,” Langille said. “We were reviewing that back in 2018 and from what the developer has told me it’s not going to be build in that block any longer. They are still working with the folks who are looking to do that ice rink and they are potentially going to relocate it a little further north on the north side of the town center area.”Allison Wrabel of the Daily Progress reported in February 2020 that the park had been delayed. A group called Friends of the Charlottesville Ice Park had been fundraising for the project. The website for the group has expired. Special announcement of a continuing promo with Ting! Are you interested in fast internet? Visit this site and enter your address to see if you can get service through Ting. If you decide to proceed to make the switch, you’ll get:Free installationSecond month of Ting service for freeA $75 gift card to the Downtown MallAdditionally, Ting will match your Substack subscription to support Town Crier Productions, the company that produces this newsletter and other community offerings. This is a public episode. Get access to private episodes at communityengagement.substack.com/subscribe
In this archive episode, Dennis discusses the automobile exception and the case laws surrounding it. Recorded on 06/04/2018. Collins v. Virgina (US Supreme Court ruling on the automobile exception and curtilage) and for NJ Police Officers discussing consent with PC and why. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/17pdf/16-1027_7lio.pdf?fbclid=IwAR0I12P5gfGalQH8FABbE_L9Uuit0w5-8BrlB-G8GXRq1ITf4RZXihSnNjo (https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/17pdf/16-1027_7lio.pdf) https://www.leagle.com/decision/1994469275njsuper1941449.xml?fbclid=IwAR3OyWsuOWVONxtX0H2OjcqL01tz29UfhpysrLEIGgyEFMwynPec5OEMbJ4 (https://www.leagle.com/decision/1994469275njsuper1941449.xml) After the three occupants were removed from the vehicle and searched, Trooper Acevedo returned his focus to the vehicle. A small plastic bag containing greenish-brown vegetation was found in plain view on the console. Two partially smoked marijuana cigarettes were also in plain view on the console. Trooper Acevedo then opened a gym bag found on the back seat and seized a large plastic bag which contained two smaller bags of suspected marijuana. Defendant admitted the gym bag belonged to him. Shortly thereafter, defendant signed a consent to search the trunk of the vehicle. A tan gym bag found in the trunk contained six plastic bags of suspected marijuana. A scale was found in the gym bag as well. Neither of the occupants admitted ownership of the tan gym bag or its contents. Defendant was under the continuous observation and supervision of Trooper Fortunato during the entire search of the passengers and the motor vehicle.
On March 21st, 2021, thousands entered the streets of Bristol in the UK to vent their anger at deaths in police custody, police violence on the streets, as well as a slate of repressive laws including the SpyCops Bill, increasing impunity for government officials breaking their own laws, as well as the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill, or simply The Bill, targeting Roma people, Travelers, lengthens youth prison sentences and criminalizing dissent and protest amidst some of the harshest Covid-19 lockdowns the UK had seen. What became known as the Kill The Bill riot led to running fights with police, burnt cop cars, a dizzying disinformation campaign by police centering themselves as victims, and over 80 people arrested to date, with more being detained and some facing years in prison. From Monday the 25th & Wednesday the 27th of October 2021, defendant Ryan Roberts will be facing trial and is calling for international solidarity. For the hour, Tom and Nicole of Bristol Anarchist Black Cross talk about the #KillTheBill, police violence in the UK, the radical scene in Bristol, anti-repression work of Bristol ABC & Bristol Defendant Solidarity, the legacy of former Bristol resident Anna Campbell, the cases of the Colston 4 as well as that of Toby Shone, prison expansion in the UK and more. To learn more about their work and how to support and write to Ryan Roberts and other #KillTheBill defendants, visit BristolABC.Wordpress.Com, and to you can search that hashtag on social media for a demo in your area to join in on or to advertise your solidarity action! If you happen to be in Manchester, there's a demo on the 27th at 5pm at the Crown Court. And check the ongoing fundraiser for the defendants at GoFundMe! Check our show notes for more links, including our conversation with Dónal O'Driscoll from November of 2020 about the SpyCops case. There's also a new podcast out called SpyCops Info that includes folks who had been part of groups infiltrated by undercover pigs in the UK in past decades talking about individual cops and the ongoing inquiry that's worth giving a listen to: https://tfsr.wtf/spycops Also, check out this audio from Radio AvA, (a podcast by and for sex workers) with their coverage of the demonstration after the rape and killing of Sarah Everard by on-duty London Metropolitan pig Wayne Couzens: https://www.radioava.org/episodes/avashowmarch2021part1. We found that audio, shared by our comrades at Dissident Island Radio. We're releasing this interview a bit early so as to get word out about Ryan Roberts' trial, so it'll be a little longer of a wait between episodes. Annoucements New Eric King Solidarity Poster There is a really cool poster available in solidarity with anarchist and antifascist prisoner, Eric King, who is facing trial in a Denver court on a frameup right now. The poster was produced by Radix Media and here's what they had to say: To support Eric King, we are releasing a limited edition of 35 posters carrying one of his revolutionary poems. All profits generated from the sale of the broadside will be sent to Eric's support fund. The print is approximately 12.5″ x 20″ and was letterpress printed in multiple passes on our vintage Vandercook proofing press. You can find the poster at https://radixmedia.org/product/eric-king-support-letterpress-broadside/ Sean Swain Phone-Zap Sean Swain is in danger of being out-of-state transferred again, to who knows where. His support crew are asking that folks calls to Glen Elder, who is understood to be in charge of interstate transfers from Ohio Prisons, to express concern about Sean's safety, access to his legal counsel as well as family and support network in Ohio, and to question the legality of sending Sean out of state without the legally required hearing with Sean attending, which they skipped when he was sent to Virginia in 2019. Check SeanSwain.Org for a basic script in the next day or so. If you hear this message and Sean's segment doesn't follow, check back in with this podcast in stream for an updated version of this show by Friday evening, October 22nd, 2021, for the audio or check for updated shownotes with a link to his segment. . ... . .. Featured track: Riot by 3-D Production from The Bristol Reggae Explosion 1978-1983 (http://www.bristolarchiverecords.com/)
The Verge’s sources say Facebook plans to announce a company name change next week. Alphabet’s Wing company has expanded its drone delivery business into Texas. Finally we give details into this week’s Samsung Galaxy Unpacked event. Starring Tom Merritt, Scott Johnson, Roger Chang, Joe, Amos MP3 Download Using a Screen Reader? Click here Multiple versions (ogg, video etc.) from Archive.org Follow us on Twitter Instgram YouTube and Twitch Please SUBSCRIBE HERE. Subscribe through Apple Podcasts. A special thanks to all our supporters–without you, none of this would be possible. If you are willing to support the show or to give as little as 10 cents a day on Patreon, Thank you! Become a Patron! Big thanks to Dan Lueders for the headlines music and Martin Bell for the opening theme! Big thanks to Mustafa A. from thepolarcat.com for the logo! Thanks to our mods Jack_Shid and KAPT_Kipper on the subreddit Send to email to firstname.lastname@example.org Show Notes To read the show notes in a separate page click here!
The Verge's sources say Facebook plans to announce a company name change next week. Alphabet's Wing company has expanded its drone delivery business into Texas. Finally we give details into this week's Samsung Galaxy Unpacked event.Starring Tom Merritt, Scott Johnson, Roger Chang, Joe.Link to the Show Notes. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.
The courts have given permission to several high profile figures undergoing trials for the temporary return of their passports for travel abroad, including former Prime Minister Datuk Sri Najib Razak and his spouse, Datin Seri Rosmah Mansor as well as Umno President Datuk Seri Zahid Hamidi. These decisions are raising eyebrows, given that all three are facing corruption charges - does this set an unwanted precedent? We discuss how the law operates in these scenarios with criminal lawyer Goh Cia Yee. Image credit: Izzuddin Radzak / Shutterstock.com
In this archive episode, Dennis talks about recent case law regarding searching cars for documentation for proof of ownership. Recorded on 03/29/2018. State of NJ v. Terry 2018 - Searching Cars for Documents Defendant Keith Terry caused a patrol car to activate its lights and siren after the rental truck he was driving ran a stop sign. Defendant triggered a dangerous chase as he eluded the police, weaving through traffic before pulling into a gas station. The police removed defendant from the truck at gunpoint, and defendant did not respond to an officer's repeated requests to show the truck's registration or proof of ownership. In light of defendant's silence and his failure to indicate he was in lawful possession of the truck, a police officer conducted a limited search of the glove compartment for the truck's ownership papers and, in the process, observed a handgun in plain view on the vehicle's floor. Thereafter, defendant was charged with and found guilty by a jury of unlawful possession of a firearm and hollow-point bullets. Although the trial court denied defendant's motion to suppress the handgun, the Appellate Division reversed and vacated defendant's conviction. It held that the search was unreasonable because the police did not give defendant the opportunity to produce the truck's registration. We conclude that the Appellate Division erred in substituting its factfindings for those of the trial court. Sufficient credible evidence supported the trial court's determination that defendant was given an adequate opportunity to present the vehicle's registration before the search commenced. We reaffirm our decision in Keaton—and in previous cases—that, when a driver is unwilling or unable to present proof of a vehicle's ownership, a police officer may conduct a limited search for the registration papers in the areas where they are likely kept in the vehicle. We add this limiting principle. When a police officer can readily determine that the driver or passenger is the lawful possessor of the vehicle—despite an inability to produce the registration—a warrantless search for proof of ownership will not be justified. The limited registration search exception to the warrant requirement has long been embedded in our jurisprudence and has been adopted by many other courts. We reject the constitutional challenge to the limited registration search exception, as applied here, and hold that the search of defendant's glove box was reasonable under the Fourth Amendment and Article I, Paragraph 7 of our State Constitution. Accordingly, we reverse the judgment of the Appellate Division and reinstate defendant's conviction. https://l.facebook.com/l.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Fcaselaw.findlaw.com%2Fnj-supreme-court%2F1891610.html%3Ffbclid%3DIwAR3ADe5lOR3XQEwPB-zxwuHRM5T4hxukZx6LCRtdF3CtLRn8Ke6Ml9bGZWs&h=AT3IVk1wdn3EHqqu5F_DAa3GXO3Y6VETGILkZPOFXpJUYClPIA6eazfar2K8Vt6kdjkxRN8Zu2zaho9pwTx0_oa6fAMm3hYmJb-H0zCBzOP21XCifalHG8sraCQrzYrttH0T5vDFRmoHVC7YFg&__tn__=-UK-R (http://caselaw.findlaw.com/nj-supreme-court/1891610.html) Also see State of NJ v Julian Hamlett
In this archive episode, Dennis discusses some case laws and offers tips on getting proof of vehicle ownership in the case of being unable to identify the driver. Recorded on 03/23/2018. State V. Ornette Terry and searching cars in NJ for vehicle documents decided 03/14/18 (NJ Supreme Court). HELD: Sufficient credible evidence supported the trial court's determination that the defendant was given an adequate opportunity to present the vehicle's registration before the search commenced. When a driver is unwilling or unable to present proof of a vehicle's ownership, a police officer may conduct a limited search for the registration papers in the areas where they are likely kept in the vehicle. When a police officer can readily determine that the driver or passenger is the lawful possessor of the vehicle—despite an inability to produce the registration—a warrantless search for proof of ownership will not be justified. Argued October 11, 2017 -- Decided March 14, 2018 -- Corrected March 16, 2018 ALBIN, J., writing for the Court. The Court considers whether an officer acted reasonably, in accordance with New Jersey precedents permitting a limited registration search without a warrant and the dictates of the Fourth Amendment and Article I, Paragraph 7 of the State Constitution, when he searched defendant's glove box. Union Township Police Officer Devlin observed defendant's GMC truck run a stop sign and almost strike his patrol car. Officer Devlin activated the overhead lights and siren. Defendant did not pull to the side of the road. Instead, without signaling, he zigzagged back and forth from the right to the left lane in traffic. Officer Devlin relayed the truck's license plate number to a dispatcher, who notified him that the vehicle was a Hertz rental, which had not been reported stolen. After a half-mile, defendant turned into a gas station where he came to a stop. Officer Devlin parked his patrol car behind defendant's truck while a backup police officer in a marked unit pulled in front of the truck, effectively blocking it in. With the other officer beside him and their guns trained on defendant, Officer Devlin repeatedly ordered defendant to show his hands, but defendant made no response. Twenty to thirty seconds later, Officer Devlin opened the driver's door and commanded that he step out of the vehicle. Defendant did so, leaned against the truck, put his hands in his pockets, and asked why the officers had pulled him over. Although Officer Devlin repeatedly instructed defendant to show his hands, he was slow to comply. The two officers quickly patted defendant down, assuring themselves he was not armed with a weapon. When Officer Devlin asked defendant for identification, defendant reached into his pocket and presented his license. Officer Devlin next requested that defendant produce the vehicle's registration and insurance card. Defendant did not respond, “[h]e just stood there with a blank stare on his face.” The officer asked a second time, and defendant “shrugged his shoulders.” Defendant made no non-verbal gestures to indicate that the papers were on his person or in the truck. Finally, Officer Devlin asked defendant whether he owned the truck or had any paperwork for it. Again, defendant did not respond. Officer Devlin went to the passenger's side of the truck, opened the door, and looked in the glove box—“[t]he most common place” where papers are stored. Although he found no documentation in the glove box, the light from his flashlight reflected against a white object on the passenger's floorboard. That object was a handgun. The trial court denied defendant's motion to suppress. The court found that Officer Devlin “was a reasonable and credible witness” and concluded that because defendant failed to produce the vehicle registration on demand, Officer Devlin had a right to search for the registration, rental agreement, and insurance in the area where such documents are usually kept. The court further...
As more defendant's who attacked the US Capitol on January 6 have their cases resolved with misdemeanor pleas, federal judges are questioning the way cases are being handled by the Department of Justice. Here are the two questions posed by Judge Emmet Sullivan, the judge presiding over the case of insurrection defendant Dawn Bancroft, and how those two questions can be answered. This video also discusses why the facts inarguably support the conclusion that Donald Trump is criminally culpable for the January 6 attack on the Capitol. For our Team Justice and Justice Matters merchandise shop, please visit: https://shop.spreadshirt.com/glennkirschner/ Please consider becoming a #TeamJustice patron at: https://www.patreon.com/glennkirschner My podcast, "Justice Matters with Glenn Kirschner" can be downloaded where you get your podcasts. To subscribe to the podcast: https://link.chtbl.com/JusticeMatters Follow me on: Twitter: https://www.twitter.com/glennkirschner2 Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/glennkirschner2 Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/glennkirschner2 Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
In this archive episode, Dennis talks about the implications of observing a hand-to-hand drug transaction and how to proceed. Recorded on 02/02/2018. State v Moore 2004 - The detectives observed a group of approximately six people congregating in a vacant lot between Piggy s Bar and a delicatessen. The detectives parked three-quarters of a block away and conducted surveillance, using binoculars. Detective Abrams observed a man wearing a floppy hat leave the group and walk towards the rear of the delicatessen. Defendant and another man left the group and joined the man in the floppy hat. Defendant and his companion handed currency to that man and each received from him a small item in return, which they both immediately pocketed, before returning to the group. Believing he had just witnessed a drug transaction, Detective Abrams promptly drove his vehicle towards the group. When the detectives arrived, defendant placed his hand in his right pocket and began to walk away. Detective Abrams exited the car and approached defendant to arrest him. The detective informed defendant that he had observed him participating in a drug transaction and grabbed defendant s right arm. Defendant removed his hand from his pocket to reveal two clear bags of a white powdery substance that was later identified as cocaine. Another detective recovered a similar bag of cocaine from defendant s companion. The detectives were unable to locate the third man who they believed had sold the drugs to defendant and his companion. We turn now to apply those principles to the present case. Detective Abrams was an experienced narcotics officer. He previously had made numerous drug arrests in the same neighborhood, which was known to the police for heavy drug trafficking. Using binoculars, he observed three men move away from the group to the back of a vacant lot, and he saw defendant and his companion give money to the third person in exchange for small unknown objects. Based on his experience and those factors, it was reasonable for Detective Abrams to conclude that the totality of the circumstances supported a well-grounded suspicion that he had witnessed a drug transaction. Therefore, the trial court properly determined that there was probable cause for Detective Abrams to arrest defendant. https://l.facebook.com/l.php?u=https%3A%2F%2Fstreetcoptraining.com%2Foriginal-caselaw%2Fnj-v-moore-2004%2F%3Ffbclid%3DIwAR0kwJbxnh2uwkLdNojn326rmmhXGYm-tdtXuqCZB9k4qv-bkW_xGqt9OhQ&h=AT0hsMuVcElOhaYq5ifj5XgRGDZl9-8i9QmiGcsi79K_hAqhmcO5n_2gHIYBqEi2KkZjL_mXHSYn2havtaIcl33SCpllYnVcEWy_jpqnV9Fwa6s-gA002hGmnZamUdcQtTdAbGk7XuZEftIZLQ&__tn__=-UK-R (https://streetcoptraining.com/original.../nj-v-moore-2004/) State v Pagan - 2005 Conway observed Pagan conversing with codefendant Vasquez and then saw Vasquez hand Pagan what appeared to be paper currency in exchange for a small unknown object which Pagan took from his pocket and handed to Vasquez. Conway saw Vasquez inspect the object and place it in his right hand jacket pocket before walking away from Pagan. The officer followed Vasquez to a dead end area of Division Street and approached him on foot. When Conway tapped Vasquez on the shoulder he turned around and removed his right hand from his jacket pocket, which allowed Conway to see two balloons in the pocket, each tied off in a knot, one green and one white. Based on his training and experience, Conway knew that heroin was often stored and sold in such a manner because it made it easier to swallow and destroy the drugs before the police could get them. Conway removed the objects from Vasquez's pocket and placed him under arrest. About ten minutes later, Conway arrested Pagan for distribution of heroin and recovered $142 in U.S. currency from Pagan's...
Sept 24: DDC Judge Walton yells at Jan 6 defendant Mariotto who he says is oleading to "pandering;" next week Virgil Griffith @SDNYLIVE, UN censorship by @AntonioGuterres
A landmark lawsuit could be taking shape in Texas, as a doctor publicly admits to violating a new abortion law. Border officials say they're investigating whether mounted agents have whipped frightened Haitian migrants. And a firefighter describes what it takes to battle huge Western blazes.
From "Slippery Slope w/ Macy Ramos" Why The Baby On Nirvana's ‘Nevermind' Album Is Suing Now Spencer Elden was 4 months-old when he was photographed by family friend, and photographer Kirk Weedle, in 1991 drifting naked in a pool. The now iconic photo would be used for the cover of ‘Nevermind'; Nirvana's seminal second album that helped define Generation X and rocketed the Seattle band to international fame. In the decades that followed, Spencer appeared to celebrate his part in the classic cover, recreating the moment, non-nude, for the albums 10th, 17th, 20th and 25th anniversaries. In a 2016 interview Spencer stated: “It's cool but weird to be a part of something so important that I don't even remember.” Now, 30-years-old, Spencer has filed a federal lawsuit against the estate of Kurt Cobain, the musician's former bandmates, David Grohl and Krist Novoselic, and Cobain's widow, Courtney Love, among other parties. He claimed they, along with Geffen Records, which released ‘Nevermind', profited from his naked image. According to the lawsuit: “Defendants knowling produced, possessed and advertised commercial child pornography depicting Spencer and they knowingly received valued in exchange for doing so. Mr. Elden, Spencer, suffered permanent harm because of his association with the album, including emotional distress and a lifelong loss of income-earning capacity.” Spencer's lawyer, Maggie Mabie, stated: “He hasn't met anyone who hasn't seen his genitalia. It's a constant reminder that he has no privacy. His privacy is worthless to the world. They were trying to create controversy because controversy sells. The point was not just to create a menacing image, but to cross the line and they did so in a way that exposed Spencer...” Mabie said her client agreed when the band, media outlets and fans asked him to recreate the photo as an adult, but he eventually realized that this only resulted in the image being further exploited. Even though Spencer said in a 2015 documentary that the album cover “opened doors” for him; over the years he has expressed ambivalence about the cover. Spencer sated: “It's be nice to have a quarter for every person that has seen my baby penis.” Spencer said his feelings about the cover began to change when he tried reaching out to the former band about being a part of his art show and was turned away by managers and lawyers. Mabie, Spencer's lawyer, said his parents never authorized consent for how the images would be used and noted that Cobain, former lead singer of Nirvana, once suggested putting a sticker over the baby's genitals after there was pushback to the covers idea. Mary Graw Leary, a professor at the Columbus School of Law at the Catholic University of America, stated that this lawsuit was not a typical child pornography case: “Nudity of a child alone is not the definition of pornography. The typical child pornography that is being seen in law enforcement and pursued in the courts can be violent. The children are young and it is very graphic. But there are factors under federal law that allow a judge or a jury to determine whether a photo of a minor constitutes a lascivious exhibition of the genitals, including if they were the focal point of a photo. That part of the law gives a bit more discretion to the court. It's not a case with easy answers.” Spencer's past comments about the cover should not undermine his current claim that he was a victim of child pornography. The law does not pick between children who immediately denounce their abusers and children who initially were dismissive about what happened to them. Professor Graw Leary continued: “We don't want to be in a position where we're only going to consider one case criminal because in the other, the child didn't think it was a big deal at the time. We don't only protect certain kids.” "Slippery Slope" Full Episode Spotify: https://spoti.fi/398bcEL Apple: https://apple.co/3AeM9Mh PodBean: https://bit.ly/3nxDFfG
The state is making it easy for lawyers to get people expunged.The state is running a cannabis run away show hooking up with folks from New York. Scott from Rickett Brewing comes by and speaks about his new line of THC & CBD infused wine and champagne. Learn more about your ad-choices at https://www.iheartpodcastnetwork.com
A grand jury has indicted a former Glynn County district attorney, saying she violated her oath of office while responding to Ahmaud Arbery's death. Join host Bill Rankin as he takes a closer look at the indictment and explores the events of a pre-trial hearing in the case. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
Howie Kurtz on the Capitol preparing for a 'Justice for J6' demonstration this weekend, Donald Trump claiming the January 6th rioters are being 'persecuted' and Jen Psaki defending Gen. Milley saying Trump 'fomented an insurrection'.
In this archive episode, Dennis answers some group questions revisiting the defendant's admission. Recorded on 11/27/2017. Defendants' admission brings offense within the presence of the officer. (also see Bauer v. Borough off Cliffside Park 1988.)Bauer v. Borough of Cliffside Park :: 1988 :: New Jersey Superior Court, Appellate Division - Published Opinions Decisions :: New Jersey Case Law :: New Jersey Law :: U.S. Law :: Justia The court held that a defendants admission to a police officer of the facts making up the offense alleged will satisfy that the requirement that the disorderly offense occur in the officer's presence. State v. Morse :: 1969 :: Supreme Court of New Jersey Decisions :: New Jersey Case Law :: New Jersey Law :: U.S. Law :: Justia Also - A video tape alone (CCTV) does not satisfy the in presence requirement (This is for Non-Indictables or a Non-Crime) for a warrantless arrest, not for a summons complaint.
Scot Phelps and Maria talk about the Elijah McClain indictment against three police officers and two paramedics. The People of the State of Colorado vs. RANDY ROEDEMA, JASON ROSENBLATT, NATHAN WOODYARD, JEREMY COOPER, PETER CICHUNIEC, Defendants. https://www.pwwemslaw.com/sites/default/files/elijah-mcclain-grand-jury-indictment.pdf Legal analysis: What the paramedic criminal charges in the Elijah McClain case mean for EMS By Douglas M. Wolfberg, Esq., EMT; and Stephen R. Wirth, Esq., EMT-P Sep 2, 2021 https://www.ems1.com/legal/articles/legal-analysis-what-the-paramedic-criminal-charges-in-the-elijah-mcclain-case-mean-for-ems-wIPxkOn0Hn4ToKVk/ Hamilton, Ontario: Conviction of paramedics following the death of Yosif Al-Hasnawi R. V. Christopher Marchant and Steven Snively, 2021 ONSC 3901 (CanLII) https://canlii.ca/t/jg9hb 2 paramedics found guilty in death of Hamilton teen Yosif Al-Hasnawi June 8, 2021 https://ca.news.yahoo.com/verdict-expected-tuesday-trial-2-080700585.html Why the conviction of 2 Hamilton paramedics in Yosif Al-Hasnawi's death may change health care Christine Rankin June 10, 2021 https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/hamilton/paramedic-trial-guilty-1.6058937
In this archive episode, Dennis revisits Miranda on your motor vehicle stops and answers some group questions. Recorded on 11/16/2017. The question posed in this case by the officer was, “You look really nervous, do you have something on you that you should surrender right now? Any contraband, weapons, anything like that?" Defendant admitted to it and handed over a bag of cocaine from his shoe. When the police lawfully conduct a motor vehicle stop they may question the occupants, even on a subject unrelated to the purpose of the stop, without violating the Fourth Amendment, so long as such questioning does not extend the duration of the stop. Roadside questioning of a motorist is not transformed into “custodial interrogation” that must be preceded by Miranda warnings simply because a police officer's questioning is accusatory in nature or designed to elicit incriminating evidence. According to the court the brief questioning of the defendant after the lawful motor vehicle stop of the car in which he was the passenger was perfectly valid. A traffic stop is presumptively temporary and brief and thus questioning incident to an ordinary traffic stop is quite different from stationhouse interrogation. Miranda warnings may be needed, however, if the totality of the circumstances surrounding the stop "impose a restraint on freedom of movement of the degree associated with a formal arrest." However this is changed when you smell marijuana with the intention to arrest for the odor. STATE v. HICKMAN | FindLaw In Berkemer, the Court held that a police officer was not required to give Miranda warnings to a suspected drunk driver before asking him whether “he had been using intoxicants.” Similarly, in State v. Toro, 229 N.J.Super. 215, 551 A.2d 170 (App.Div.1988), we held that police officers who observed a package at the foot of a driver stopped for a motor vehicle offense, which they suspected was a container for drugs, could ask what was in the package without giving Miranda warnings. Although the police officers in Toro ordered the driver out of the car and frisked him for weapons before questioning him, we concluded that the questioning was not “custodial”: https://l.facebook.com/l.php?u=https%3A%2F%2Flaw.justia.com%2Fcases%2Fnew-jersey%2Fappellate-division-published%2F1988%2F229-n-j-super-215-0.html%3Ffbclid%3DIwAR1AqknLd-lWSsKwZldbxlJ8IJ9HjjxlD677w9hc0XRJmvoacftCFCIGGKI&h=AT0NyVHzslBEtPT5tMmNIkfQr-V-vnE7_VUkm4LiMJS2s903ah9IraZx7-NOgKAaw3dfjXHppKRs46xOZcwKN-qFxjo8bSe616jAm1XNhN-GDbt3W17u7xMFBd3SMxDJALcGkuBniKjBm4q79A&__tn__=-UK-R (https://law.justia.com/.../1988/229-n-j-super-215-0.html) Ohio v. Robinette (1996) US Supreme Court ....There is no requirement under the 4th Amendment that police, during the course of a motor vehicle stop or other investigative detention, must advise the person detained that he or she is “Free to go” before a consent search may be lawfully obtained.
Introduction Remorse is a necessary component in order for there to be genuine repentance over the crime committed. Defendants said to be unremorseful have their character judged to be unfavorable and usually do not get the mercy of the jury or the judge. Now some may disagree that remorse has any place…
In this archive episode, Dennis revisits cases where the defendant makes an admission in the presence of an officer. Recorded on 10/11/2017. Defendants admission brings offense within the presence of the officer. (also see Bauer v. Borough off Cliffside Park 1988.)Bauer v. Borough of Cliffside Park :: 1988 :: New Jersey Superior Court, Appellate Division - Published Opinions Decisions :: New Jersey Case Law :: New Jersey Law :: U.S. Law :: Justia The court held that a defendants admission to a police officer of the facts making up the offense alleged will satisfy that the requirement that the disorderly offense occur in the officer's presence. State v. Morse :: 1969 :: Supreme Court of New Jersey Decisions :: New Jersey Case Law :: New Jersey Law :: U.S. Law :: Justia Most commonly, the “in presence” requirement is satisfied by an officer directly viewing or seeing the offense occur even if the officer uses a telescope or binoculars. Remember – Binoculars are an accepted way of surveillance. Also- A video tape alone (CCTV) does not satisfy the in presence requirement (This is for Non-Indictables or a Non-Crime) for a warrantless arrest, not for a summons complaint. The in-presence requirement only applies to the arrest of a person. This doesn't mean you can't issue a summons in an incident where probable cause exists. R. 7:2-(a)(2) A law enforcement officer may personally serve the summons on the defendant without making the custodial arrest without a finding by a judicial officer of probable cause for issuance. officer using the Special Form should check the box in the shaded area designated "Law Enforcement Use Only.“ Or you can type it up at HQ on a CDR https://l.facebook.com/l.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.judiciary.state.nj.us%2Frules%2Fr7-2.htm%3Ffbclid%3DIwAR0sE9onlheLJgeLqxNw5GCnq47dc86DyFE9xbRy_ziuWnhZHLyCxQD1uDE&h=AT1I1vWfO6h3qMEVB_UveblCj2SzM6IOiaUQbqpYwgsk2E8h1-GEtedDtN-oICCg3lA2OhK8oPFw0LMfrsheWvItCR2AxiSndHDkOLs8mJpW2CkQYTTh2Sx1ZfLVoPoc9ro0zqWt9dUEkTX5kQ&__tn__=-UK-R (http://www.judiciary.state.nj.us/rules/r7-2.htm) Under Chapter 12 of Title 2B Any police officer may issue summonses related to such complaints and may as authorized by the Rules of the Court issue a summons in lieu of an arrest for an offense committed in the officer's presence. Special Form of Complaint and Summons under NJ Court Rule 7:2-1(g) Disorderly / Petty Disorderly Offenses, except for those involving domestic violence and those with a companion indictable manner Local Ordinance Violations Code Enforcement Actions Penalty Enforcement actions (R.7:2-1(h) Boating Offenses Parking and Traffic Offenses where a private citizen is the complainant.
In this archive episode, Dennis explains that the defendant's admission establishes probable cause. Recorded on 09/17/2017. State v Brown 2002 - https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/1473887/state-v-brown/?q&court_nj=on&order_by=score%20desc&fbclid=IwAR19d686JcxFor0qx7WMbe5pcKknU292jTgOW5qICxjRD8cTmCOD8Um66Sg (https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/1473887/state-v-brown/?q=&court_nj=on&order_by=score+desc) Dog hit's on defendants suitcase and she admitted to having 55 pounds of marijuana on her hence establishing PC, she was arrested and the search of the bag was considered search incident to arrest. Probable cause to arrest defendant existed following her admission of guilt especially in light of the dog having "alerted" to the presence of drugs in the suitcase. Indeed, at oral argument before us, defense counsel admitted probable cause existed in these circumstances. Hence, the search of the suitcase was incident to defendant's arrest and her consent to search was not required. That being so, we need not decide whether defendant's consent to search the suitcase was voluntary.
Late on this upload. Sorry peeps. Here it is. Defendants file "Answer" in Tim Pool lawsuit. Biden loses again. Nirvana baby sues (and people don't seem to care about this lawsuit). Candace Owens gets sued. AND MORE!
With the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine receiving full approval from the FDA, and Moderna shortly behind, prepare for an unprecedented wave of drug advertising! This could have a positive impact with regards to vaccination rates, but drug advertising in the U.S. has a dark, deadly history. Joined by guest co-host Gillian Mason, we cover the surprising reasons our airwaves and social media are saturated with drug ads, and the lethal consequences we saw in the opioid epidemic, which was manufactured by the exact same pharmaceutical companies now marketing the COVID-19 vaccines. Show Notes Direct-to-Consumer advertising is illegal in every country except the United States and New Zealand. Even in the U.S., you never saw drug ads until the 1980s and very few until the 2000s, since drug makers had to list ALL of the drug's potential risks and side effects in the ad - just like they did in magazine and newspaper advertisements. So the decade that gave us “Wake Me Up (Before You Go Go)” (one of the finest pop songs of the 80s) also gave us the start of “loophole ads” that didn't mention their drugs' risks and side-effects, but ALSO didn't mention the disease the drug treats - just pure branding. Finally in 1997 the FDA started allowing pharmaceutical companies to only list the MAJOR risks of their drugs - not all risks. If you've ever listened to the risk section of a drug ad, it's terrifying to imagine that we're actually not even getting the full risk statement. This is why they say "see our ad in some completely bizarre magazine" - they're actually referring you to their full risk statement. Back the money: direct to consumer advertising of prescription drugs hit $6.58 billion in 2020. This doesn't even include social media or online advertising, which generally wasn't allowed prior to 2016 - because it's hard to list the “side effects” of drugs on social media - but the FDA has been allowing it, and pharma has been hitting social media hard now. Facebook pharma advertising hit about $1 billion in 2019. Drug advertising is not only the wrong venue to learn the pros and cons of a medication (your doctor's office is the best place for that), it's dangerous. The opioid epidemic was manufactured using marketing and advertising. Right now Pfizer and Johnson & Johnson are being sued by every state and many cities and counties for their role in the epidemic. Opioid litigation started with a seminal 2019 court ruling against J&J for over $500 million for its role in the Oklahoma opioid crisis: “The Defendants, acting in concert with others, embarked on a major campaign in which they used branded and unbranded marketing to disseminate the messages that pain was under-treated and ‘there was a low risk of abuse and a low danger' of prescribing opioids.” Stay tuned for news about the national opioid settlement and various state, city, and county lawsuits against opioid manufacturers. Follow & Support the Pod! You can listen to Medicare for All on Apple Podcasts, Google Podcasts, or visit our website here. Please donate to the Healthcare-NOW Education Fund to support the podcast!
September 5, 2021 - Episode 10 "Back To The Way Things Were" An original musical! Don't we all wish we could just go back to normal? Back to the way things used to be - before Covid, before the floods and wildfires, before we had Nazis rioting in the streets and in the Capitol, before the news was full of racist cops and sexually abusive men and greedy corporatists, and before four years of a honey-baked ham-brained criminal in the White House? Doesn't that sound nice… or does it? Before we try to revive the good old days maybe we should ask - was the old normal really that good? Was it good at all? Well we created a musical about that! So settle back as we present a trip down reality lane with “Back To The Way Things Were”. Episode 10 was written and directed by Michael Gene Sullivan. Music and lyrics by Daniel Savio. The band features woodwinds by Dylan Jennings, bass by Jewell McMillon, drums & percussion by David Rokeach, and keyboards by Daniel Savio. "Tales of the Resistance" theme music was written by Daniel Savio, and produced by Dred Scott. Audio engineering & sound design by Taylor Gonzalez. Stage Management by Karen Runk. “Back To The Way Things Were” features Michael Gene Sullivan as Ralph, Velina Brown as Alice, Cassie Grilley as Zoe, Lisa Hori-Garcia as Tanya, Andre Amarotico as Unmasked Man & Media Voice, Marissa Ellison as McBurger in the Box Employee, Brian Rivera as Dennis & Media Voice, with Hugo E Carbajal as Environmental Activist, Jarion Monroe as Jeff Bezos, Media Voice, & Defendant, Amos Glick as Media Voice, Lizzie Calogero as Media Voice, Marie Cartier as Media Voice & Climate Change Protester, and Francis Jue as Media Voice. Tales of the Resistance Vol. 2: Persistence is a radio serial by the San Francisco Mime Troupe. You can find more information at https://www.sfmt.org
Two related stories: First, defendant Jacob - the so-called Q-Shaman - pleaded guilty to one felony count of obstructing Congress by trying to stop the vote certification, exactly as Donald Trump commanded. Chansley is facing 3-to-4 years in prison and will be sentenced on November 17th by Judge Royce Lamberth. The second story involves House Minotrity Leader Kevin McCarthy getting called out for a lie he told attempting to falsely exonerate Donald Trump in connection with the January 6 attack on the US Capitol. Here is a review of the joint statement issued by Rep Bennie Thompson and Rep Liz Chaney exposing McCarthy's "disinformation campaign." For our Team Justice and Justice Matters merchandise shop, please visit: https://shop.spreadshirt.com/glennkirschner/ Please consider becoming a #TeamJustice patron at: https://www.patreon.com/glennkirschner My podcast, "Justice Matters with Glenn Kirschner" can be downloaded where you get your podcasts. To subscribe to the podcast: https://link.chtbl.com/JusticeMatters Follow me on: Twitter: https://www.twitter.com/glennkirschner2 Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/glennkirschner2 Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/glennkirschner2 Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
In this archive episode, Dennis explains CDS on a passenger in a motor vehicle may not give you PC to search the car under certain circumstances. Recorded on 08/14/2017. State of NJ V. Larry Wilson State of New Jersey v. Larry D. Wilson http://law.justia.com/cases/new-jersey/supreme-court/2003/a-49-02-opn.html?fbclid=IwAR2eSquaKb5k95GGNY6I6ijk_14oANcbo3H6hy0OU8Xj-DKvMdzv2KSdJpM (http://law.justia.com/.../supreme.../2003/a-49-02-opn.html) In this appeal, the Court is asked whether the State has satisfied its burden of demonstrating the validity of a warrantless automobile search. On February 30, 1999, at approximately 12:26 a.m., two officers in a marked police vehicle were patrolling the area of Union Avenue and Jasper Street in the City of Paterson. One of the officers observed a vehicle with a passenger suspected of having outstanding arrest warrants. The driver parked the vehicle on Jasper Street and the officers observed the defendant exit the vehicle. There was no indication that either of the occupants was aware of the marked police vehicle. Upon observing defendant and confirming the officer's belief that he was the person for whom the warrants had been issued, the officer called to defendant. Defendant walked towards the patrol vehicle and the officers arrested him based on the arrest warrants. Defendant had his hands inside his jacket sleeves and, in order to handcuff him, the officers asked that he remove them. Upon removing his hands out of the sleeves, one at a time, the officers observed packets suspected of containing controlled dangerous substances drop to the ground. The packets were later determined to contain marijuana and cocaine. After arresting defendant, placing him in the patrol vehicle, and retrieving the suspected drugs from the ground, the officers approached the driver. The driver produced valid driving credentials. While one of the officers questioned the driver, the other officer continued searching the grounds for any other drugs and also opened the unlocked passenger door of the vehicle. Inside, the officer found other narcotics, determined to be fifty bags of crack cocaine. The officer later acknowledged that the drugs in the vehicle were not in plain view. The driver was also arrested. Defendant was charged with third-degree possession of cocaine, third-degree possession of cocaine with intent to distribute, and third-degree possession of cocaine with intent to distribute within 1000 feet of school property. At a subsequent suppression hearing, the trial court found that probable cause and exigent circumstances had existed to justify the warrantless search of the automobile. Defendant pled guilty to all charges, subject to his right to appeal the denial of his suppression motion. The trial court sentenced defendant to an extended term of six years imprisonment, with a three-year period of parole ineligibility, and assessed the usual fines and penalties. In a reported decision, the Appellate Division reversed the trial court, concluding that the officers lacked probable cause to conduct the warrantless search of the vehicle. The Supreme Court granted the State s petition for certification. HELD: The State has not overcome the presumption that its warrantless search of the automobile was invalid under the federal and State constitutions. The Appellate Division properly suppressed the fruits of the search. 1. Consistent with the State and federal constitutions, a warrantless search is presumed invalid unless it falls within one of the recognized exceptions to the warrant requirement, and the State bears the burden of demonstrating that the search falls within one of those exceptions. The automobile exception to the warrant requirement requires that the State demonstrate both probable cause and exigent circumstances. Probable cause requires, in turn, that the police action emanates from a well-grounded suspicion that a crime has been or is being committed. The definition of...
In this archive episode, Dennis talks about ordering passengers out of vehicles and the meaning of heightened caution. Recorded on 08/17/2017. State v Bacome 2017 http://law.justia.com/cases/new-jersey/supreme-court/2017/a-9-15.html?fbclid=IwAR2Zpok_sEctBhLVUZX3smxpBP3RjU6APUlt8XZtxnRNAX5pYZhN9EPvgfc (http://law.justia.com/.../supreme-court/2017/a-9-15.html) In April 2011, detectives were engaged in an undercover drug patrol in Woodbridge when they observed defendant Taiwan Bacome driving a blue Ford Bronco. S.R., the owner of the Bronco, was riding in the front passenger seat. Having previously encountered both men, detectives knew the men used and dealt narcotics. The police department had also received complaints from defendant's neighbors of a lot of traffic coming and going from [his] apartment, which, in the detectives' experience, is often indicative of narcotics activity. In their unmarked vehicle, the detectives followed the Bronco, losing sight of it shortly after arriving in an area of Newark known for crime and drug trafficking. In an attempt to pick up the Bronco's trail, the detectives drove back to Woodbridge, presuming that defendant and S.R. would return there with newly purchased drugs. About an hour later, the detectives observed the Bronco re-enter Woodbridge. The detectives resumed surveillance and, after they both observed S.R. in the passenger seat not wearing his seatbelt, they conducted a traffic stop. In this appeal, the New Jersey Supreme Court clarified the circumstances under which police officers may require a passenger in an automobile to exit a vehicle after a valid stop. The first detective reported that he saw defendant lean forward as if he were reaching under his seat and immediately ordered defendant to exit the vehicle. The second detective then ordered S.R. out of the passenger's seat. Both occupants complied. Defendant specifically challenged S.R.'s removal from the vehicle. The trial court found that defendant's reaching under the seat created the heightened caution that warranted S.R.'s removal. The Appellate Division reversed, finding the detectives failed to prove "heightened caution." The Supreme Court reversed, finding that while the heightened caution standard remained the proper test for determining the appropriateness of ordering a passenger from a car, defendant's movements inside the stopped car was an objectively reasonable basis to justify removal of the passenger. State v Brian L. Smith 1994 Although the per se rule under Mimms permits an officer to order the driver out of a vehicle incident to a lawful stop for a traffic violation, we decline to extend that per se rule to passengers. Instead, we determine that an officer must be able to point to specific and articulable facts that would warrant heightened caution to justify ordering the occupants to step out of a vehicle detained for a traffic violation.http://law.justia.com/cases/new-jersey/supreme-court/1994/a-28-93-opn.html?fbclid=IwAR29npF5cXbcyx62Hj_z1Tq_WIqj0_5rQO0d8PK3Og9Tj1W1SOvZI5C7TsU (http://law.justia.com/.../supreme.../1994/a-28-93-opn.html)
The HBO film Trial 4, is a virtual hagiography for Sean Ellis. The HBO-Netflix documentary is so slanted in favor of Sean Ellis it is difficult to digest. In order to believe Sean Ellis is innocent, you'd have to believe that his uncle, best friend, and girlfriend were (are) lying. To our knowledge none of these witnesses, that tied Ellis directly to the brutal 1993, homicide recanted their testimony, why? Sean Ellis's co-defendant told the police Sean Ellis shot Det. Mulligan five times in the face, Sean's girlfriend testified Sean brought the guns to her house, she left her fingerprint on the weapon. Sean's Uncle Dave asked Sean where the guns were, Sean gave detailed information as to where and how the guns were hidden, that is exactly how the weapons were recovered. So The question is where is the mystery in this case? It is true that corrupt police detectives were involved in Sean Ellis's case, the remedy for that is a retrial, but claims of actual innocence? That is simply a gigantic leap in logic.Commonwealth v Ellis https://bit.ly/2ROmpVWCommonwealth v. Paterson https://bit.ly/3pLY3bO
Prosecutors file a request for ANOTHER continuance in a Capitol Hill defendant case, in U.S. vs Cuoy Griffen, citing ongoing discovery problems. Fleeing Texas Democrats (COVID WMDs) sue the Governor of Texas Abbott for the consequences of their fleeing the state. Barack Obama broke at least SIX federal laws during his birthday party, and we unmask which provisions of the U.S. Code are in question.And more! Join criminal defense lawyer Robert F. Gruler in a discussion on the latest legal, criminal and political news, including:
Leftist Kangaroo Courts Against the Jan. 6 Defendants. Also- Tucker Carlson, Dinesh D'Souza, Sean Hannity. Just How Rigged is the System Against the Jan. 6 Defendants? Tucker uncovers Eric Swalwel's Extensive Corruption Students as Young as 11 Years Old Vaccinated in School Secretly George Soros and Bill Gates Take Over Virus Testing Company Rand Paul: Dr. Fauci has a 'self interest' in hiding what happened in Wuhan Hannity gives Biden 'scorching' six month report card Just How Rigged is the System Against the Jan. 6 Defendants? https://youtu.be/SFngRAaX-J4 Dinesh D'Souza 617K subscribers The sentencing of Paul Hodgkins is a window into the face of American injustice. The problem isn't just the Biden DOJ; it's also Obama appointed judges who are willing to destroy the lives of working-class people for the sole offense of being Trump supporters. — Dinesh D'Souza is an author and filmmaker. A graduate of Dartmouth College, he was a senior domestic policy analyst in the Reagan administration. He also served as a research fellow at the American Enterprise Institute and the Hoover Institution at Stanford University. He is the author of many bestselling books, including "Illiberal Education," "What's So Great About Christianity," "America: Imagine a World Without Her," "The Roots of Obama's Rage," "Death of a Nation," and "United States of Socialism." His documentary films "2016: Obama's America," "America," "Hillary's America," "Death of a Nation," and "Trump Card" are among the highest-grossing political documentaries of all time. He and his wife Debbie are also executive producers of the acclaimed feature film "Infidel." — Want to connect with Dinesh D'Souza online for more hard-hitting analysis of current events in America? Here's how: Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/dsouzadinesh Twitter: https://twitter.com/dineshdsouza Rumble: https://rumble.com/dineshdsouza Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/dineshjdsouza Email: http://www.dineshdsouza.com/email/ George Soros and Bill Gates Take Over Virus Testing Company | Facts Matter https://youtu.be/OFuOcA1ixQg 110,079 views Facts Matter with Roman Balmakov 600K subscribers
Award-winning investigative reporter Scott MacFarlane talks with Ron Steslow about the most critical filings and pivotal moments in the Feds' ever-growing case against the January 6 insurrectionists. (00:00) Sounds of January 6, 2021 (02:48) Scott's Survivor's Remorse (04:16) Where the insurrection investigation stands at this moment (06:45) Three Percenters, Proud Boys, Oath Keepers, oh my... (09:14) The two “tiers” of defendants (11:02) Corroborating conspiracy (13:25) Defendants inside and outside the Capitol (14:20) Who is saying what about the former President? (17:37) Why aren't we calling this “terrorism?” (18:29) Insurrectionists' hit list (19:30) Hockey sticks, baseball bats, sharpened American flag poles, an axe, a knife, scissors, a tourniquet, pepper spray, chemical spray, bear spray, guns, brass knuckles, batons, pipes, zip ties, tasers, and stolen police riot shields (20:51) “My client doesn't understand how what he did is criminal” (23:40) Three huge questions remain (25:50) “The first big sentencing” (28:00) Politicizing Ashli Babbitt (30:10) Why we can't “just get past this and move on” (31:50) Reporting facts in a post-truth political environment Help create more content like this by making a financial contribution today! https://politicology.com/donate Politicology+ is part master class, part laboratory, part war room. To unlock exclusive Politicology+ content, visit: https://politicology.com/plus Don't miss an episode. Press “Follow” (“Subscribe” in some players) to get the next episode of Politicology in your favorite podcast app. Enjoy this episode? Rate Politicology ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ and leave a review on Apple Podcasts. Ron Steslow: https://twitter.com/RonSteslow Scott MacFarlane: https://twitter.com/MacFarlaneNews
In this sample from the CAFE Insider podcast, Preet and Joyce break down potential racketeering charges against The Trump Organization. They also discuss former President Donald Trump’s motion to dismiss a lawsuit that seeks to hold him responsible for inciting the Capitol insurrection. In the full episode, they break down Manhattan District Attorney Cy Vance’s decision to convene a special grand jury to consider evidence of potential wrongdoing by Trump and his associates, and DOJ’s efforts to keep secret a 2019 memo that former Attorney General Bill Barr used to justify his decision to absolve Trump of obstruction of justice. To listen to the full episode and get access to all exclusive CAFE Insider content, including audio notes from Preet, Joyce, Elie Honig, Barb McQuade, Asha Rangappa, Melissa Murray, and more try the membership free for two weeks: www.cafe.com/insider Use special code JOYCE for 50% off on the annual membership price. Sign up to receive the free weekly CAFE Brief newsletter: www.cafe.com/brief This podcast is brought to you by CAFE Studios and Vox Media Podcast Network. Tamara Sepper – Executive Producer; Adam Waller – Senior Editorial Producer; Matthew Billy – Audio Producer; Jake Kaplan – Editorial Producer REFERENCES & SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS: Subscribe to Now & Then, hosted by historians Heather Cox Richardson and Joanne Freeman: Apple Podcasts, Spotify Now & Then, “Entangling Alliances,” 6/1/21 NY Penal Law §460.20 - Enterprise corruption Eric Swalwell v. Donald Trump, U.S. District Court District of Columbia, memorandum in support of Trump’s motion to dismiss, 5/24/21 Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices