The Chilling Effect 6.1.09
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Unpublished History of the United States Marshals Service (USMS), 1977
Description of document: Unpublished History of the United States Marshals Service (USMS), 1977 Requested date: 2019 Release date: 26-March-2021 Posted date: 12-April-2021 Source of document: FOIA/PA Officer Office of General Counsel, CG-3, 15th Floor Washington, DC 20350-0001 Main: (703) 740-3943 Fax: (703) 740-3979 Email: [email protected] The governmentattic.org web site (“the site”) is a First Amendment free speech web site and is noncommercial and free to the public. The site and materials made available on the site, such as this file, are for reference only. The governmentattic.org web site and its principals have made every effort to make this information as complete and as accurate as possible, however, there may be mistakes and omissions, both typographical and in content. The governmentattic.org web site and its principals shall have neither liability nor responsibility to any person or entity with respect to any loss or damage caused, or alleged to have been caused, directly or indirectly, by the information provided on the governmentattic.org web site or in this file. The public records published on the site were obtained from government agencies using proper legal channels. Each document is identified as to the source. Any concerns about the contents of the site should be directed to the agency originating the document in question. GovernmentAttic.org is not responsible for the contents of documents published on the website. U.S. Department of Justice United States Marshals Service Office of General Counsel CG-3, 15th Floor Washington, DC 20530-0001 March 26, 2021 Re: Freedom of Information Act Request No. -
Presumption of Innocence: Procedural Rights in Criminal Proceedings Social Fieldwork Research (FRANET)
Presumption of Innocence: procedural rights in criminal proceedings Social Fieldwork Research (FRANET) Country: GERMANY Contractor’s name: Deutsches Institut für Menschenrechte e.V. Authors: Thorben Bredow, Lisa Fischer Reviewer: Petra Follmar-Otto Date: 27 May 2020 (Revised version: 20 August 2020; second revision: 28 August 2020) DISCLAIMER: This document was commissioned under contract as background material for a comparative analysis by the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA) for the project ‘Presumption of Innocence’. The information and views contained in the document do not necessarily reflect the views or the official position of the FRA. The document is made publicly available for transparency and information purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or legal opinion. Table of Contents PART A. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................................................................................... 1 PART B. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................... 4 B.1 PREPARATION OF FIELDWORK ........................................................................................... 4 B.2 IDENTIFICATION AND RECRUITMENT OF PARTICIPANTS ................................................... 4 B.3 SAMPLE AND DESCRIPTION OF FIELDWORK ...................................................................... 5 B.4 DATA ANALYSIS ................................................................................................................. -
Lost in the Compromise: Free Speech, Criminal Justice, and Attorney Pretrial Publicity
LOST IN THE COMPROMISE: FREE SPEECH, CRIMINAL JUSTICE, AND ATTORNEY PRETRIAL PUBLICITY Margaret Tarkington* INTRODUCTION ................................................................................... 1874 I. PREVIOUS APPROACHES ...................................................... 1878 A. The Supreme Court and Attorney Pretrial Publicity ......................................................... 1878 B. The Compromise Between Fair Trials and the First Amendment ................................................... 1881 1. The Model Rules and the ABA ............................ 1881 2. Applying In-Court Restrictions to Extrajudicial Speech ............................................. 1883 3. Freedman and Starwood’s Non-Compromise ...... 1884 C. The First Amendment Strongly Protects Attorney Pretrial Publicity .......................................... 1884 D. Structural Signaling ..................................................... 1885 E. Ignoring the First Amendment Problem ...................... 1886 II. THE ACCESS-TO-JUSTICE THEORY OF THE FIRST AMENDMENT ....................................................................... 1887 III. REPRESENTATION IN THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM .................................................................. 1890 A. Heightened Constitutional Significance of Life and Liberty ....................................................... 1891 B. Obligations to Undertake and Continue the Representation ............................................................. 1892 C. Duty Not to Disclose Information -
Dissemination of Vaccine Misinformation on Twitter and Its Countermeasures
Dissertation Dissemination of Vaccine Misinformation on Twitter and Its Countermeasures Christine Chen This document was submitted as a dissertation in March 2021 in partial fulfillment of the requirements of the doctoral degree in public policy analysis at the Pardee RAND Graduate School. The faculty committee that supervised and approved the dissertation consisted of Luke Matthews (Chair), Sarah Nowak and Jeremy Miles. The external reader was Jennifer Golbeck. This dissertation was generously supported by the Anne and James Rothenberg Dissertation Award. PARDEE RAND GRADUATE SCHOOL For more information on this publication, visit http://www.rand.org/pubs/rgs_dissertations/RGSDA1332-1.html Published 2021 by the RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, Calif. is a registered trademarK Limited Print and Electronic Distribution Rights This document and trademarK(s) contained herein are protected by law. This representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for noncommercial use only. Unauthorized posting of this publication online is prohibited. Permission is given to duplicate this document for personal use only, as long as it is unaltered and complete. Permission is reQuired from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of its research documents for commercial use. For information on reprint and linking permissions, please visit www.rand.org/pubs/permissions.html. The RAND Corporation is a research organization that develops solutions to public policy challenges to help maKe communities throughout the world safer and more secure, healthier and more prosperous. RAND is nonprofit, nonpartisan, and committed to the public interest. RAND’s publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors. Support RAND MaKe a tax-deductible charitable contribution at www.rand.org/giving/contribute www.rand.org Abstract Outbreaks of vaccine preventable diseases have continued to affect many parts of the United States. -
PDF Download
CONTENTS Preface xxiii Acknowledgments xxvii CHAPTER ONE THE “IDEAL” ORGANIZATION 1 How organizations are supposed to run (in theory) Chapter Objectives 1 Key Terms 1 Introduction 2 Max Weber and Bureaucracy 2 Characteristics of Bureaucracy 3 Law in the Real World: The Blockbuster Movie 6 Jobs vs. Careers 7 Law in the Real World: Steve Jobs and Apple, Inc. 8 Professional Associations and Organizations 9 Control of Workers and Management Styles 10 McDonaldization of Organizations 12 Law in the Real World: Southwest Airlines 14 Labor Markets 15 Laws and Regulation in Organizations 16 Law in the Real World: California’s SB 1342 17 Summary 18 Case Study: Keeping Employees Happy: Twitter® 19 Glossary 21 References and Suggested Readings 23 ix Contents CHAPTER TWO HOW ORGANIZATIONS REALLY RUN 25 What can go wrong that can lead to white collar or corporate crime Chapter Objectives 25 Key Terms 25 Introduction 26 Defining Malfeasance and White Collar Crime 27 Fear and Greed 28 Iron Cage of Bureaucracy 29 Chain of Command Issues 31 Innovation 32 Law in the Real World: Challenger Shuttle Disaster 32 Bounded Rationality 33 Ceremonial Evaluations 34 Leadership Gone Haywire: The Autocrat and Micromanager 35 Alienated Workers 36 Law in the Real World: The U.S. Postal Strike, 1970 37 Irrationality of McDonaldization 39 Gender Politics 40 Whistleblowers 40 Law in the Real World: Jeffrey Wigand and Big Tobacco 42 Unforeseen Disasters 44 Law in the Real World: Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E) Bankruptcy 46 Corporate Violence 47 Organizational Death 48 Summary 49 Case Study: What Happens in Hollywood (and New York) Doesn’t Necessarily Stay in Hollywood: The Weinstein Scandal 50 Glossary 55 References and Suggested Readings 57 x Contents CHAPTER THREE WHAT YOU KNOW VS. -
Innocent Until Proven Guilty?
Innocent until proven guilty? The presentation of suspects in criminal proceedings Innocent until proven guilty? About Fair Trials Fair Trials is a global criminal justice watchdog with offices in London, Brussels and Washington, D.C., focused on improving the right to a fair trial in accordance with international standards. Fair Trials’ work is premised on the belief that fair trials are In Europe, Fair Trials coordinate the Legal Experts one of the cornerstones of a just society: they prevent lives Advisory Panel (LEAP) – the leading criminal justice from being ruined by miscarriages of justice and make network in Europe consisting of over 200 criminal defence societies safer by contributing to justice systems that law firms, academic institutions and civil society maintain public trust. Although universally recognised in organisations. More information about this network and its principle, in practice the basic human right to a fair trial is work on the right to a fair trial in Europe can be found at: being routinely abused. www.fairtrials.org/legal-experts-advisory-panel. @fairtrials @fairtrials Fair Trials fairtrials.org Suspects in Restraints This report is produced as part of the project “The Importance of Appearances: How Suspects and Accused Persons are Presented in the Courtroom, in Public and in the Media”, coordinated by the Hungarian Helsinki Committee (the “Project”) with partners Aditus Foundation (Malta), Fair Trials, Human Right House, Zagreb (Croatia), Mérték (Hungary), Rights International Spain, and the University of Vienna. Contact: Laure Baudrihaye-Gérard Alex Mik Senior Lawyer (Europe) Campaigns & Networks Director +32 (0)2 894 99 55 +32 (0)2 895 59 42 [email protected] [email protected] Illustrations: Darya Novatorova With thanks to Hogan Lovells, our pro bono partner, without whose time, expertise, Project coordinated by global network of offices and commitment, the Hungarian Helsinki Committee the global survey of law and practice in this report would not have been possible. -
A Rational Choice Reflection on the Balance Among Individual Rights, Collective Security, and Threat Portrayals Between 9/11 and the Invasion of Iraq Robert Bejesky
Barry Law Review Volume 18 Article 2 Issue 1 Fall 2012 2012 A Rational Choice Reflection on the Balance Among Individual Rights, Collective Security, and Threat Portrayals Between 9/11 and the Invasion of Iraq Robert Bejesky Follow this and additional works at: https://lawpublications.barry.edu/barrylrev Part of the Civil Rights and Discrimination Commons, and the National Security Law Commons Recommended Citation Robert Bejesky (2012) "A Rational Choice Reflection on the Balance Among Individual Rights, Collective Security, and Threat Portrayals Between 9/11 and the Invasion of Iraq," Barry Law Review: Vol. 18 : Iss. 1 , Article 2. Available at: https://lawpublications.barry.edu/barrylrev/vol18/iss1/2 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Digital Commons @ Barry Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in Barry Law Review by an authorized editor of Digital Commons @ Barry Law. : A Rational Reflection A RATIONAL CHOICE REFLECTION ON THE BALANCE AMONG INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS, COLLECTIVE SECURITY, AND THREAT PORTRAYALS BETWEEN 9/11 AND THE INVASION OF IRAQ Robert Bejesky* I. Introduction....................................31 II. Balancing Collective Security and Civil Liberties..... ..... 32 III. Threat Warnings............................36 IV. A More Sober Risk Calculation......................49 V. Concluding Analysis...............................58 I. INTRODUCTION This study canvasses the interaction between terror threat announcements and the civil liberties/collective security balance during the three years after September 11, 2001. Part II considers how security threat environments alter the parity between collective security and civil liberties, but emphasizes that this shift is typically not from real, verified peril, but from perception of risk.' Part I11 addresses notable post-9/11 threat warnings and the detention of terror suspects.2 It inquires whether terror threat notifications were prudently issued and an imperative mechanism to apprise the populace of realistic and verified risks. -
Soff030a Revised Foreword .Indd
FOREWORD hroughout half of the 1980’s and into the early 90’s the Tprincipal target of the FBI’s New York Office was John J. Gotti, the notorious Boss of Bosses who ran the city’s most powerful crime family. Recently, after spending a decade in the research and writing of four investigative books for HarperCollins on the counterterrorism and organized crime failures of The Bureau * I came to realize that I had something in common with his son: John Angelo Gotti. Over the years both of us had become experts on the misconduct of various special agents and prosecutors working for the U.S. Department of Justice. There’s no doubt that Shadow of My Father will upend many of the public’s assumptions about that mysterious secret society of criminals J. Edgar Hoover mistakenly dubbed La Cosa Nostra. Written in John Junior’s own hand, it offers a rare inside look into “the underground kingdom” that was the Gambino family. * 1000 Years For Revenge: International Terrorism and The FBI The Untold Story (2003); Cover Up: What the Government Is Still Hiding About the War on Terror (2004); Triple Cross: How bin Laden’s Master Spy Penetrated The FBI, The CIA and The Green Berets (2006-2009); and Deal With The Devil: The FBI’s Secret Thirty-Year Relationship With A Mafia Killer(2013) . v vi Shadow of My Father This isn’t some ghost-written apologia told by an ex-wise- guy who cut a deal with the Feds and now lives under the protection of U.S. -
Download Download
1 Guilt for the Guiltless: The Story of Steven Crea, the Murder of Michael Meldish and Other Tales by Lisa Babick – aka “MS” “….the other thing we’ve learned…is just how large the uni- verse of other people who wanted the guy dead is.” Judge Cathy Siebel on Michael Meldish during a bail hearing for Steven D. Crea on August 3, 2018 2 On November 15, 2013, on a quiet street in the Throggs Neck neighborhood of the Bronx, 62-year-old Michael Meldish was found dead in his car with a single, fatal gunshot wound to the right side of his head. Police were more than giddy about the murder, immediately telling news outlets they believed it was a “gangland-style” execution. Meldish was one of the reputed leaders of the Purple Gang – a criminal group that controlled the drug trade in the Bronx and Harlem in the 70s and 80s. They were said to have killed and dismembered over 100 rivals, with Meldish having committed at least half of those murders himself. Police described him as a “stone-cold killer.” Law enforcement pursued Meldish for more than 30 years but was wildly unsuccessful in bringing any charges against him even though he had been arrested 18 times since the early 70s. Joseph Coey, former head of the NYPD Organized Crime Homicide Task Force, blamed it on witnesses who wouldn’t come forward. “They had the people so terrified they just wouldn’t cooperate,” he said. He then added that Meldish’s murder “should have happened a long time ago. -
On the Heels of the Recent Brutal Murder of A
THE LETTER Oct 25, 2018 On the heels of the recent brutal murder of a The Washington Post journalist Jamal Khashoggi, President Donald Trump chose to celebrate the assault of The Guardian reporter Ben Jacobs by an American congressman—an attack that occurred while the journalist was simply doing his job, posing questions to a politician. Montana Congressman Greg Gianforte (R) body- slammed Jacobs, knocking him to the ground and beating him severely enough to send him to the hospital. Although Gianforte pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor assault and was fined, the President of the United States praised this violent behavior at a Trump rally in Missoula, Montana, on October 18. Trump’s condoning of political violence is part of a sustained pattern of attack on a free press— which includes labeling any reportage he doesn’t like as “fake news” and barring reporters and news organizations whom he wishes to punish from press briefings and events. One of the pillars of a free and open democracy is a vibrant free press. At his inauguration the President of the United States swears to protect the U.S. Constitution, including the First Amendment. 1 This President is utterly failing to do so and actively working not simply to undermine the press, but to incite violence against it as well. In a lawsuit filed by PEN, the writer’s organization, against Donald Trump, they charge him with violating the First Amendment. We, the undersigned, past and present members of the Fourth Estate, support this action. We denounce Donald Trump's behavior as unconstitutional, un-American and utterly unlawful and unseemly for the President of the United States and leader of the free world. -
Introduction
INTRODUCTION In 1992, the Commission conducted a two-day To date, Leonetti has testified in eight federal tri- public hearing on the control of bars by organized crime als, plus three re-trials, and three state trials in prosecu- and issued a report. The Commission identified several tions of the Pittsburgh La Cosa Nostra and the Patriarca, such establishments and the organized crime members Genovese, Gambino/Gotti, Lucchese, Colombo and and associates holding interests in them. Most of the Bruno/Stanfa Families. His testimony has led to the owners of record and all of the organized crime figures convictions of more than 15 made members and 23 as- invoked their Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimi- sociates, including Nicholas Bianco, who was elevated nation at the hearing and refused to answer questions. from underboss to boss of the Patriarca Family of New The hearing and report featured the testimony of a former England following his indictment and prior to his convic- made member and a former associate of the Southeast- tion, together with virtually the entire hierarchy of the ern Pennsylvania-South Jersey Family of La Cosa Patriarca Family; Charles “Chucky” Porter, underboss Nostra. In striking testimony, former captain Thomas of the Pittsburgh La Cosa Nostra; Venero “Benny Eggs” “Tommy Del” DelGiorno and a former associate, whose Mangano, consigliere of the Genovese/Gigante Family identity had to be concealed for his protection, explained in New York; Benedetto Aloi, consigliere of the why organized crime gravitates toward liquor-licensed Colombo Family in New York; Santo Idone, a captain establishments — from use of the business to launder of the Bruno/Scarfo Family, and acting captain Michael money to use of the premises as a safe haven to meet Taccetta and soldiers Anthony “Tumac” Accetturo,2 and conduct illegal business, including the plotting of Martin Taccetta and Thomas Ricciardi, all of the New murders. -
The Falsified War on Terror: How the US Has Protected Some of Its Enemies
Volume 11 | Issue 40 | Number 2 | Article ID 4005 | Oct 01, 2013 The Asia-Pacific Journal | Japan Focus The Falsified War on Terror: How the US Has Protected Some of Its Enemies Peter Dale Scott surveillance matters by its own Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, known as the German translation available FISA court, which according to the New York Times “has quietly become almost a parallel Before World War Two American government, Supreme Court.”3 Thanks largely to Edward for all of its glaring faults, also served as a Snowden, it is now clear that the FISA Court model for the world of limited government, has permitted this deep state to expand having evolved a system of restraints on surveillance beyond the tiny number of known executive power through its constitutional arrangement of checks and balances. All that and suspected Islamic terrorists, to any changed with America’s emergence as a incipient protest movement that might dominant world power, and further after the challenge the policies of the American war Vietnam War. machine. Since 9/11, above all, constitutional American Most Americans have by and large not government has been overshadowed by a series questioned this parallel government, accepting of emergency measures to fight terrorism. The that sacrifices of traditional rights and latter have mushroomed in size and budget, traditional transparency are necessary to keep while traditional government has been shrunk. us safe from al-Qaeda attacks. However secret As a result we have today what the journalist power is unchecked power, and experience of Dana Priest has called the last century has only reinforced the truth of Lord Acton’s famous dictum that unchecked power always corrupts.