Saturday, September 5, 2015

Woman Released After 67 Days In Jail For Refusing To Identify Herself At A Traffic Stop

Stubborn little thing!

You should read the whole piece because it pissed off the LEO and the judge, cost the county $4,500 to keep her and she still won't give her name after being released. The FBI ran her prints and said she wasn't wanted so I am assuming they know her identity but no one is saying it out loud.

It seems they think she served enough time and learned her lesson, I'm thinking they got tired of it costing them money.

'Jane Doe' released from jail after 67 days

Close to a dozen members of a local advocacy group against what they consider to be the misapplication of federal and state law waited outside the Carroll County Detention Center to greet a woman released Tuesday morning who had been arrested after failing to identify herself after a routine traffic stop in June.

During her time at the detention center, the woman continued to refuse to identify herself, claiming it was her Fifth Amendment right.

Bob Kurland, a member of the Westminster-based Save-A-Patriot Fellowship — a group claiming it is intent on ensuring that law is accurately interpreted and appropriately enforced — questioned the court's refusal to release the woman, who became known as Jane Doe, sooner because of her choice to invoke the Constitution.

"Do you believe she is John Dillinger, public enemy No. 1?" said Kurland, who along with other members of the group refused to identify Doe. "How can you be held for exercising your Fifth Amendment rights?"

However, police, prosecutors and a law professor considered to be an expert on the Fifth Amendment contend that refusing to identify yourself to law enforcement isn't protected by the Constitution.

"If that were the case, no one would ever have to provide information, and we would have burglars and robbers and people running all over the place not knowing who they were," Carroll County State's Attorney Brian DeLeonardo said Tuesday.

Essentially, the Fifth Amendment "protects criminal defendants from having to testify if they might incriminate themselves through the testimony," according to the Legal Information Institute at Cornell University.

Doe, who continues to refuse to identify herself even after being released from jail, was arrested June 27 after she failed to stop for a Carroll County Sheriff's Office deputy for a tail light that was out.

Doe, who spoke with the Times on Tuesday afternoon after her release but continued to refuse identifying herself, said she saw lights close behind her but "didn't know what it was," so she proceeded at a steady pace. When the trooper made contact with her at a traffic light, she refused to identify herself and had to be forceably removed from her vehicle, according to court documents. She was charged with failure to obey a lawful command, resisting arrest and obstructing an investigation, according to electronic court documents.

Because of her continued refusal to identify herself, neither the Sheriff's Office nor the State's Attorney's Office believed it was prudent to immediately release her, according to Sheriff Jim DeWees.

H/T to FARK, a news aggregator.

Thursday, September 3, 2015

Federal Judge Says NSA Phone Collection Program UnConstitutional, Tells Lawyers To Get Moving

As if we had any doubts, the judge has basically told the government lawyers that he is ready to rule the program is UnConstitutional but they have been dragging it out for two years. Now he says he is done playing footsie with them and told them to get moving with some procedural motions that will allow him to rule on it before the program expires anyway in November.

Judge Says NSA Program Is Unconstitutional, 'It's Time to Move'


A federal judge in the nation’s capital made clear Wednesday he would like to order the Obama administration to end its dragnet collection of U.S. call records as soon as possible.
U.S. District Judge Richard Leon, in fact, outlined for anti-surveillance attorney Larry Klayman how to hasten the process. When the attorney quibbled about specifics during a status hearing, Leon repeated himself emphatically, saying he believes the constitutional rights of millions of citizens are being violated.
“I’m prepared to lift the stay I issued,” Leon said, referring to the hold he placed on a preliminary injunction against the collection he issued to Klayman in December 2013. “It’s time to move, let’s get going.”
The judge outlined two specific things Klayman can do to make him able to rule more quickly.
[RELATED: NSA Whistleblowers Sue for $100 Million]
First, Leon said, Klayman can file a motion requesting that the appeals court panel, which on Friday said Klayman cannot prove Verizon Wireless records were affected, expedite the return of jurisdiction over the matter to District Court.
Klayman said he will file such a motion on Thursday. The delay in return of jurisdiction is to allow time to appeal decisions to a higher court. In the meantime, Leon said, his ability to act is constrained.
Separately, Leon said, Klayman can ask his permission to amend the case to add a plaintiff who is a customer of Verizon Business Network Services, which was named in a leaked document the government acknowledges is valid. Government attorneys refuse to acknowledge in court that any other provider is affected by the phone dragnet.
Klayman plans to do that, too, but he hasn’t announced the identity of the person or entity he will seek to add to the case.
[EARLIER: NSA Wins, Sort Of, at Appeals Court]
Amending the complaint would allow Leon to sidestep a legal brawl over discovery into whether Verizon Wireless is affected by the dragnet, as both he and Klayman suspect. Sidestepping that matter could allow Leon to order the cessation of collection before the program expires in late November pursuant to reforms in the USA Freedom Act.
“The window is very small in the view of law,” he said. “You need to be thinking about the fastest, most expeditious” way to move the case, he told Klayman. “I didn’t think it would take so long to get back here.”
With a knowing look, the judge cut off Klayman when he was about to share his explanation for why it took nearly two years for the appeals panel to rule. Klayman told U.S. News last week he believes the appeals panel was “kissing the behinds – the derrieres – of the people in the Washington, D.C., establishment who got them their jobs."

No way. Lawyers are ass kissers?
Unpossible. /sarcasm
It sounds to me like this judge has had about all the foot dragging he is going to tolerate and  there better be some Olympic quality Hoop Jumping going on pronto.
But, as Hillary Clinton is now famous as saying, What difference does it make now?

The NSA could care less what this or any other judge has to say, they have the bit in their teeth and are going to do whatever the hell they want in the name of "National Security", the Constitution and anyone who doesn't like it be damned.

It's all Kabuki Theater at this point.