Thursday, April 12, 2012

Fwd: Crook Cronies: Whom You Know could become Whom You Blow



Bob Hurt's Crime Editorial

for Wed, 11 April 2012

Two news articles piqued my interest because of what they could mean to Americans' quality of life. 

    1.  The first deals with New York cops' job dissatisfaction over pressure to reduce crime.  It could mean cops will lock up innocent people to make the numbers look good. 

    2.  The second deals with Cincinnati's different crime suppression program, one that works.  Kansas City wants to adopt it.  It could put perp's associates under a microscope just for associating with them. 

I don't like the New York program even though it seems to reduce crime because it tends to make cops angry of the numbers pressure, and that catches innocents in their crossfire, so to speak.   It makes more sense to let suspected criminals go in light of their possible innocence because most criminals keep committing crimes till they get caught and locked away.  Cops should do their best never to shoot or persecute the innocent.

I do like the Cincinnati program because it focuses on the real problem - among youths and gangs, peer approval or respect for toughness pressures otherwise borderline criminals to cross that border into hard crime.  Because of intense police scrutiny, the friends, family, and associates of criminals will pressure each other not to commit the crimes, lest they, albeit innocent themselves, become targets for the police.

Cops have one main job:  prevent injustice.  They use two main techniques:  physical presence; and apprehension of law breakers.  Their bosses use statistics to see how well they do their jobs.  Judging from the many stories of people innocently jailed and convicted, I guess cops' bosses don't penalize cops much for jailing the innocent.

But, let's face it, a gang member who does not discourage a fellow from committing a crime thereby encourages the crime, just by physical presence.  And having knowledge of it without reporting it, well, that's a crime too.  So all the gang members who have knowledge of crimes by fellows have themselves become criminals.  And cops ought to scrutinize and haul them in for questioning, check their pockets and knapsacks for drugs and stolen loot.  That goes for family members, too, particularly parents who see actual or signaled misbehavior like drug use/dealing, skipping school, dressing or acting like a thug, and unusual items in the child's possession. 

Black teen Trayvon Martin, whom Mestizo adult and neighborhood watcher George Zimmerman killed in self-defense on 26 February 2012, would constitute a good example.  Had the father Tracy done his job, he would have looked into Trayvon's possessions and found the jewelry Trayvon had stolen and the remnants of Trayvon's weed.  He would have taken away Trayvon's "hoodie," the kind Florida youths wear to conceal their identities in violation of Statute 876.12.  Florida's legislature enacted that law in 1951 against the Ku Klux Klan, but cops seem loathe to enforce it.  Tracy would have bought Trayvon properly fitting clothing instead of the baggy shirt and pants that give youths that unfortunately popular "jailbird" look.  He would have taught Trayvon not to dress and act like a thug, and not to take shortcuts through gated communities to houses the father and son visited.  He would have taught Trayvon to speak with respect and dignity to non-threatening adult male strangers instead of assaulting and battering them.  And Trayvon Martin might still live today because he would not have arroused George Zimmerman's suspicion in the first place.

According to the Cincinnati method, police should now zero-in on Trayvon's family and chums because they associated with a dangerous thief and street thug - Trayvon Martin.  And of course, their negligence might have turned Trayvon into a criminal as it typically does with wayward youths.

If cops across America started turning up the heat on the associates and family members of gang members, street thugs, juvenile delinquents, and criminals of all sorts, they could create a new peer pressure.  Peers would pressure associates and family members to BEHAVE like GOOD CITIZENS rather than as criminals.  Parents would do a better, more responsible job of parenting.  And we would live in a better, safer America.

Criminals would ultimately realize that whom they know could become whom they blow, so to speak... in prison.

Lest my Libertarian readers think I have lost my mind to suggest such privacy-invading scrutiny which actually does suppress crime, I shall explain  Every state has a law criminalizing accessory-after-the-fact behavior:  complicity in the crime by virtue of not stopping it or reporting it.  See Florida Statute 777.03 and 18 USC 4 (misprision of felony) for examples.  People who don't report felonious behavior of friends and relatives thereby become a party to it.  That gives cops have the right to scrutinize them, document their activities, and haul them in for questioning.  Most will tire of sitting under the cops' "microscope" and dissuade the felonious behavior of family and friends.

This does not constitute a mere theory.  Kansas City wants to do it because it has dramatically reduced crime in Cincinnati and elsewhere.  See the below news summaries.

News Items



Why Morale is Sinking in New York City's Police Department
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The collective New York Police Department mood is surprisingly dark, reports New York magazine. The complaints aren't about the old standby, low pay; they're about the systems the department uses to bring down crime-systems fueling a bitterness that can interfere with the department's ability to keep the city safe. Disaffection from the public and anger at the department aren't universal, but they are widespread, stretching across boroughs and ranks. Cops say the acrimony is a by-product of the numbers-­obsessed systems that Commissioner Raymond Kelly has perfected. Kelly inherited CompStat, the marriage of computer-analyzed crime stats and grilling of field commanders. CompStat has filtered through every facet of the department, and making a good show at those meetings has become an obsession.

"The job is getting smaller all the time-more demands, less autonomy, less respect," a recently retired Bronx detective says. "The aggressive management culture has been really effective, but it's also extremely aggravating." Increasing the strain is the mandate to keep crime at historic lows while the department shrinks: There are 6,000 fewer cops than in 2001, owing to budget cuts. "Ninety percent of the stress on our job is internal," a twenty-year veteran says. "Crime is down as much as you can get it, you're doing as much as you can with fewer people, and if you ask for more, what you're going to get is corruption, people fudging numbers, locking people up just to do it. And that's where the city is now. Everybody's attention is so focused on the numbers nobody cares about each other. You can't. The human element is gone. It's why so many cops are so miserable."

New York Magazine


KC May Adopt Cincinnati's "Focused Deterrence" Anticrime Strategy
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
A sliver of Kansas City's population is responsible for the majority of shootings and homicides, police officials say. That sliver of people - and all of their friends - could start getting a heap of law enforcement attention if police and prosecutors adopt a new violence reduction plan from Cincinnati, reports the Kansas City Star. "We're looking for a sustainable program that we can do for the long haul," said Jackson County Prosecutor Jean Peters Baker. The Cincinnati Initiative to Reduce Violence - or CIRV - aims enforcement at the city's worst offenders by focusing on their entire social groups, whether they be gangs or neighborhood cliques. If one member commits a violent crime, police put everyone in the group under a microscope.


The effort, which uses peer pressure to try to change street culture, lowered group or gang-related homicides 41 percent and gun violence incidents 22 percent, said Robin Engel, a University of Cincinnati associate professor who worked on the project. It's the only crime-fighting strategy that has proved consistent effects over time, said Engel. About 70 other cities in the U.S., including Boston, Indianapolis, and High Point, N.C., use similar programs, known as "focused deterrence." Engel said her research shows cities share some characteristics. Most shootings are sparked by acts of perceived disrespect, not drug deals or ripoffs. For people without jobs, school or plans for the future, respect is often all they have. "If you want to reduce violence associated with disrespect, you have to understand their peer networks and change the relationships so they're encouraging less violence," Engel said.


Kansas City Star

Conclusion and Lesson

 
Any who wonder at the effectiveness of the method should watch a rerun of Full Metal Jacket.  Note the Drill Sergeant's treatment of everyone in the barracks for the irresponsible behavior of Private Pile.  Note the ultimate reaction of his fellow recruits to Pile's continued misbehavior.  On the last day of training Pile murdered the Sergeant and then committed suicide.  The following mandate for all humans pretty well sums it up:

Behave responsibly and with with love and respect, or leave the planet.

 

--
- no title specified

 

 
 

Bob Hurt
Home Page - Blog - Email - Donate (Now, generously)
Mobile:  +1 (727) 669-5511
2460 Persian Drive #70 - Clearwater, FL 33763
Law Studies:   
Subscribe to Lawmen E-Letter  See Archive
Learn to Litigate:  Buy and Study 
Jurisdictionary


 

 

 

Wednesday, March 28, 2012

Write-in Candidate Sibley Asks US Supremes to Make Obama Prove POTUS Eligibility

Obama’s POTUS Ineligibility…

 

Here’s one the mainstream media will ignore. See Montgomery Blair Sibley’s press release below regarding his Certiorari Petition to the US Supremes which starts with these words:

 

     ***** Question Presented For Review

 

Petitioner – a citizen of the United States and a Registered Write-In Candidate for President of the United States – filed on January 3, 2012, both as ex relator the United States and individually, a quo warranto suit against Barack Hussein Obama, II, challenging his Article II, §1 eligibility to hold the office of President in so much as his Father was not a United States Citizen. The District Court to date has refused to rule upon that Petition.

 

Accordingly, on February 14, 2012, Petitioner filed a Petition for Mandamus in the Circuit Court seeking an order requiring the District Court to expeditiously rule one way or another upon the quo warranto petition. In response, on March 6, 2012, the Circuit Court ruled that: “The district court’s delay in ruling on the petition for writ of quo warranto is not so egregious or unreasonable as to warrant the extraordinary remedy of mandamus.” Accordingly, presented for review is the following question:

 

WHETHER the question of the eligibility of Barack Hussein Obama, II to be President presents a case of extraordinary constitutional moment demanding prompt resolution by the District Court, the Circuit Court and, ultimately, this Court.

 

     ************************

 

I have attached the Quo Warranto lawsuit (also see Sibley’s link below) that presents the evidence of the forgery/counterfeiting of the Birth Certificate Obama alleged that someone found in Hawaii, but which someone created in Adobe Photoshop by making a composite of other documents.  Sibley believes he has standing to bring a Quo Warranto action because his candidacy for US President suffers a threat from an imposter who has no right to hold the office of President.  Some believe Obama belongs in prison for deceiving the American voting public into thinking he was born in Hawaii, when in reality he was born in Mumbasa, Kenya, to a British citizen father, and for taking and holding the Presidency without having natural born citizen status the US Constitution requires.

 

 

***

 

Bob Hurt

 

Contact: Email  bh   f       t • 
Blogs: 
1 2 3 • 
Law: 
E-letter Subscribe Donate Learn
2460 Persian Drive #70,  Clearwater,  Florida 33763  •  
727 669 5511

 

 

***

 

 

From: Montgomery Blair Sibley [mailto:mbsibley@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2012 10:21 AM
To: Montgomery Sibley
Subject: POTUS Write-in Candidate Sibley Forces Supreme Court to Rule on Obama’s Eligibility to Be President of the United States

 

Greetings,

 

Please see the attached.  The ball is now in the Supreme Court to decide the issue once in for all or, perhaps, never, thereby confirming the status quo without ever addressing the issue:  Is Barack Hussein Obama, II, eligible to be President of the United States?

 

Montgomery Blair Sibley
202-643-7232  (voice)
202-478-0371 (fax)

 

 

 

 


PRESS RELEASE  #3

FOR IMMEDIATE  RELEASE

 

March 28, 2012


 

For More Information Contact:                     MONTGOMERY BLAIR SIBLEY through www.MontgomeryBlairSibley.com


 

 

 

POTUS WRITE-IN CANDIDATE  SIBLEY FORCE S SUPREME  COURT  TO RULE ON OBAMAS

ELIGIBILITY TO BE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES

 

WASHINGTON  D.C. - POTUS Write-In Candidate Montgomery Blair Sibley today filed his Petition for Certiorari with the United States Supreme Court. That Petition presents the Supreme Court with record evidence that: (i) Barack Hussein Obama, II, is not a “natural born Citizen” as required by Article II, §1 of the Constitution and thus is ineligible to be President and (ii) that the “Certificates of Live Birth released by Mr. Obama are in fact forgeries. Additionally, Sibley is filing a Motion to Expedite Consideration of Petition for a Writ of Certiorari. By these documents, Sibley is asking the U.S. Supreme Court to expedite the resolution of his  Quo Warranto lawsuit pending in U.S. District Court before the Honorable John D. Bates. Significantly, though eighty-five (85) days have passed since Sibley’s filing of the lawsuit on January 3, 2012, Judge Bates has refused to rule upon any of the pending matters in that suit.

 

Sibley’s filings procedurally forces the Supreme Court to declare whether they will take up the question of Obamas eligibility to be President or allow the question to be relegated to a judicial process that would not reach the Supreme Court until well after the November 6, 2012, election, let alone before the September 3, 2012, Democratic Convention.

 

Sibley stated: Obama’s eligibility to be President is now in the hands of the Supreme Court. I have properly invoked the federal statute which authorizes challenges to the eligibility of federal office holders and procedurally have now moved that question from the District Court through the Circuit Court of Appeals and now, with these filings, to the Supreme Court. If they deny my Petition to expedite resolution of the significant and fairly-posed question of Obamas eligibility, it is a clear statement that they will refuse to allow that matter to be properly and promptly adjudicated. In that case, I fear “We the People” will have lost “the right, possessed by every citizen, to require that the Government be administered according to law.1  For if the Supreme Court will not take up the issue of whether the Government is being administered according to the rule of law, then the government is clearly being administered instead by the rule of whim and caprice.”

 

Sibley concluded: “Thus I call upon the Supreme Court to forthwith resolve this heretofore unresolved question: Is Barack Hussein Obama, II, eligible to be President of the United States?”

- E n d -

 

 

 

1                        Fairchild v. Hughes, 258 U.S. 126, 130 (1922)

 

Sunday, March 25, 2012

Foreclosure Defense Advice, plus Templates for Florida

 

http://gingolaw.com

 

 

Titusville, Florida lawyer George Gingo has done some good work in providing foreclosure defense templates at the above web site.  Apparently he wants to toss pro se litigants a bone because he knows they cannot afford an attorney if they cannot make mortgage payments. You can get a hint about the quality of George’s work from his incredibly tolerant and patient appellate brief for the Lytles whose house the plaintiffs wanted to steal, a theft the lower court ordered.  See it here:

 

http://mattweidnerlaw.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/LyttlevBankUnited.pdf

 

I saw from the docket report that the George filed the Appellant brief on 12 Jan 2012 Appellee only filed an answer, ungodly late, on 15 Mar 2012.   I have not seen it but I imagine the Appellee brief reads like drek.  I hope George learns how to demand sanctions of the plaintiffs and their attorneys for their lies, delays, and shenanigans.

 

Some of my law expert friends claim you cannot make standardized legal documents.  I consider that utter nonsense.  Sure, you can take a standardized document for a starting point, and adapt it to your particular situation.  Of course on template does not fit all circumstances perfectly, but it can fit MANY circumstances NEARLY perfectly.  Lawyers use prior pleadings/responses/motions/notices/petitions ALL THE TIME for similar cases.  They would be idiots NOT to because, like a recipe for cake, you DON’T NEED TO REINVENT A RECIPE FROM SCRATCH EVERY TIME.  You just need to make sure the standard recipe produced a good result the first time.

 

And note that if you face off against a crooked “CONNECTED” attorney before a crooked “CONNECTED” or hateful judge, your legal documents might not have the proper effect anyway.  But, you can still base an appeal on them and timely objections, timely exceptions, and timeliness within the rules.

 

So, I “fan my fumes” at those who denigrate legal templates.  You can fare best with an honest, competent, diligent attorney, but it you don’t have one, and must do it yourself, templates can save you a lot of distress and give you good guidance, particularly if from a reputable source.  Remember that even the Rules of Civil Procedure contains templates for certain kinds of complaints (like foreclosure complaints in which the plaintiff must affie to owning and holding the note).  So, ignore people who denounce templates, but make sure you flesh them out with the proper information, adapt them to your court and situation, and consult reliable documents like the Florida Litigation Guide.

 

 

REMINDER TO USE COMMON SENSE:

 

1.       Foreclosure Defense Wastes Time.  I generally consider foreclosure defense a waste of time because a defendant who borrowed money on a mortgage note, bought a house with it, and did not pay it back accordingly, MUST forfeit the house to foreclosure auction in order to repay the note with the proceeds.  AND usually, these days, the defendant will end up owing a HUGE judgment lien because the house always auctions for far less than the loan balance.  The mortgagee can sue any time for damages respecting the judgment lien, and typically will if the defendant’s financial fortunes improve such as through winning a lottery, inheriting a fortune, or landing a well-paying job.  The judgment lien endures for 20 years.  And courts/trustees nearly always end up ordering a foreclosure auction.  Meanwhile the defendant will rack up ever more obligations in accrued interest and legal fees. For that reason, it makes no sense to defend against foreclosure.

 

2.    Drag Out the Foreclosure for CASH.   It makes far more sense to PAY NO MONEY TO AN ATTORNEY. Delay as long as possible while putting the money into savings or a growth investment that you would pay a lawyer or servicer every month.  Pretend to do a loan mod to drag things out (NEVER actually do a loan mod).  Then try to sell through a realtor, offer it for short sale, or do a keys for cash deal with the lender.  Demand zero judgment lien, or simply offer the lender your deed in lieu of foreclosure.  Many foreclosure victims using this method would have enough cash to buy a house at a real estate auction or short sale within the year to 3 years the foreclosure takes.

 

3.    Sue the Predatory Lender.   It makes MOST sense to attack the lender for the tortious conduct, contract breaches, and other violations underlying the mortgage.  If you get a proper examination done, you might find appraisal or loan fraud for which the court will award treble damages.  This money could pay down the loan or you could end up with the house free and clear.  You would find a personal injury attorney to get the lender to offer settlement, and if the lender refuses, find a personal injury attorney to take the case on contingency.  The litigation will take 2 or 3 years to complete (with you in the house the whole time).  In a jury trial, you could win PUNITIVE damages amounting to hundreds of thousands or millions of dollars.  Your lawyer would get 40% of the total take, but you’d get your house free and clear and a wad of money.  Wouldn’t your prefer that to suffering through a foreclosure?

 

Do you want help finding the torts, breaches, and violations underlying your mortgage?  If so, DO NOT GO TO A LOAN AUDIT OR SECURITIZATION AUDIT company, as most of them cheat you.  Instead, scan in and zip all of your mortgage, closing, and foreclosure related documents, then CALL ME at 727 669 5511 or E-mail me.  I shall give you the guidance you need.  As most of  you know by now, I do not run a business and I do not charge money for consultations (though that could change soon).  So, call or write NOW.

 

DISSEMINATE THIS MESSAGE

 

Feel free to disseminate this message to all of your friends, family, associates, law buddies, service providers, and especially to people suffering from foreclosure, and also to people with mortgages who don’t face foreclosure but want to do something about being “under water” with their loans.  I try to take or return calls/email for all who try to contact me.

 

  

***

WARNING:  I do NOT function as  law practitioner, lawyer, licensed attorney-at-law, or legal advisor.  Construe my comments ONLY as speculation or general information, and NOT as legal advice for you or anyone else.  Consult a well-qualified attorney (good luck finding one) in all questions of legality or law.

 

Bob Hurt

Contact: Email  bh   f       t • 
Blogs: 1 2 3 • 
Law: 
E-letter Subscribe Donate Learn
2460 Persian Drive #70,  Clearwater,  Florida 33763  •  
727 669 5511

 

***

.