Recently in Notorious Cases Category

The notorious Dean Carter is on deck to join the ranks of exceptionally vicious murderers spared from their full punishment by Cal. Gov. Newsom's misuse of the reprieve power. A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit today affirmed the rejection of his collateral attack on his convictions and sentences in two counties for four murders and three rapes, aggravated by two other rapes and another murder.

USCA1 Hears Boston Marathon Bomber Case

| No Comments
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit heard oral argument today in the case of the surviving Boston Marathon Bomber, Dzhokhar Tsarnaev. Jon Kamp has this report for the WSJ. Looks like the main issues are change of venue and jury selection. There is also an argument about the defense's attempt to introduce evidence implicating the older brother in another murder, but the probative value of that seems quite weak.

Epstein Jail Guards Indicted

| No Comments
Rebecca Davis O'Brien reports for the WSJ:

Two federal corrections workers who were on duty the night Jeffrey Epstein killed himself in a Manhattan detention cell have been indicted on federal charges in connection with the disgraced financier's death, according to charges unsealed Tuesday.

The Big Lie About Ferguson

| 4 Comments

The maxim "if you repeat a lie often enough it becomes the truth"* often serves our opponents well. In the case of the Big Lie about the shooting of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri, though, it may be unraveling. Candidates' lies about that incident are so clearly contrary to the now-well-known facts that even left-leaning media are calling them out on it. William Saletan reports for Slate:


Last week, in a Democratic presidential debate, former Housing and Urban Development Secretary Julián Castro read a list of black Americans killed by police violence. Alongside Laquan McDonald, Walter Scott, and Eric Garner, Castro named Michael Brown, who was shot dead five years ago in Ferguson, Missouri. Several of the current Democratic candidates have accused the officer who shot Brown of murder. Brown's death was a tragedy, but it wasn't a murder. When Democrats claim it was, and when they refuse to correct that mistake, they cast doubt on their commitment to truth. And they undermine the cause of criminal justice reform.

NY ME: Yes, Suicide

| 1 Comment
Nicole Hong and Sadie Gurman report for the WSJ:

Jeffrey Epstein died by hanging himself, according to an autopsy released Friday, capping days of speculation about how the disgraced financier died in his jail cell.
*      *      *
In a brief statement, Barbara Sampson, the chief medical examiner in New York City, said Mr. Epstein's cause of death was suicide by hanging. She didn't elaborate further, saying she reached her determination after "careful review of all investigative information."
The WaPo's fact-checker column is sometimes biased, but they get it right in their evaluation of the outrageous statements of Senators/candidates Kamala Harris and Elizabeth Warren that Michael Brown was "murdered" by a police officer in the notorious Ferguson, Missouri incident.

The column recounts the statements of the witnesses found credible by the Justice Department during the Obama Administration, which make it crystal clear that the "hands up" claim was a lie and that Brown attacked Officer Wilson. They award the maximum Four Pinocchios, reserved for "whoppers."

The claim is not merely false. It is one of the most destructive lies in recent history. For a candidate to repeat it is beyond inexcusable.

See also this post on the Eighth Circuit's dismissal of the civil suit filed by Brown's companion, the original perpetrator of the "hands up" lie.

The Downside of Jet-Setting

| 1 Comment
The defining characteristic of the wealthy "jet set" is that they don't lower themselves to scheduled airlines like the rest of us but fly wherever they want to go in private jets. It seems that Jeffrey Epstein, being in the upper bracket of jet-setters, had personal pilots on staff. If he thought that bought him confidentiality for his comings and goings, he needs to think again.

Pilots keep logbooks. See 14 C.F.R. § 61.51(a). Law enforcement has pretty much carte blanche to look at them. Id. § 61.51(i)(1)(iii).

Nicole Hong and Rebecca Davis O'Brien report for the WSJ:

Federal prosecutors in Manhattan have subpoenaed Jeffrey Epstein's longtime personal pilots, according to people familiar with the matter, as investigators seek to question the financier's employees in the wake of his indictment on sex-trafficking charges.
Tim Arango has this story, with the above title, in the NYT.

Politicizing a Vigil

| No Comments
Deanna Paul reports for the WaPo:

A vigil commemorating the victims of the STEM School shooting in Colorado ended in protest Wednesday evening after students said they refused to be used as pawns to promote gun control.

Hundreds attended the vigil -- students, teachers, activists and elected officials -- to honor Kendrick Castillo, the 18-year-old who was fatally shot on Tuesday at the STEM School Highlands Ranch in suburban Denver. But Castillo's classmates were moved to protest after invitees Sen. Michael F. Bennet (D-Colo.) and Rep. Jason Crow (D-Colo.) spoke. Many of the teenagers perceived the speeches as politicians politicizing their trauma when they wanted their own voices heard.

A True Hero

| No Comments
Susan Miller reports for USA Today:

Kendrick Castillo - only days from graduation - acted fast inside of his British literature class at a suburban Denver school Tuesday afternoon. And he paid with his life.

When a gunman burst through the door at STEM School Highlands Ranch, barking at students to stay in place and not move, Castillo, 18, rushed the shooter. It was a quick-thinking move that fellow students said gave them a chance to bolt for safety or take cover under desks.

"Kendrick lunged at (the gunman), and he shot Kendrick, giving all of us enough time to get underneath our desks, to get ourselves safe, and to run across the room to escape," senior Nui Giasolli told NBC's Today on Wednesday morning. Other students helped Castillo tackle the shooter, classmates said.
The U.S. Supreme Court has been largely marking time for a while in criminal law, taking up mostly relatively minor cases. Today the Court took four cases involving constitutional or federalism questions.

After many relistings, the Court has taken up the case of the younger of the notorious Beltway Sniper duo, Lee Boyd Malvo. The case is Mathena v. Malvo, No. 18-217. The case involves the tangled mess that the Supreme Court made of life-without-parole sentences for killers who are as little as one day short of their 18th birthdays in Miller v. Alabama and Montgomery v. Louisiana.

The high court also took up the case of Kansas v. Garcia, No. 17-834. The Question Presented is "Whether the Immigration Reform and Control Act impliedly preempts Kansas's prosecution of respondents."

In Ramos v. Louisiana, No. 18-5924, the Court will consider, again, whether the Constitution requires unanimous juries in state criminal cases. If you seem to remember that the Supreme Court already fully considered and decided that question, you would be right. See Apodaca v. Oregon, 406 U.S. 404 (1972). If you think the Supreme Court often waxes eloquent about the importance of precedent and protecting people's reasonable reliance on its decisions, you would be right again. Remember Justice Ginsburg's extensive discussion of the reliance interest in Ring v. Arizona, 536 U.S. 584 (2002)? No? That's because it isn't there. It's okay to brush precedent and massive reliance aside without explanation to save a murderer from his just deserts.

In Kahler v. Kansas, No. 18-6135, the Court takes up the question of "Whether the Eighth and 14th Amendments permit a state to abolish the insanity defense." If you think that the Eighth Amendment, as adopted in 1791, dealt solely with what punishments can be imposed and has nothing to do with guilt-defining rules such as the insanity defense, you are right again.

Note that Malvo and Ramos both involve dubious precedents, an old one with a strong reliance factor in Ramos and more recent ones with no reliance factor in Malvo.
Erin Ailworth reports for the WSJ (corrected from an earlier, incorrect version):

CHICAGO--Prosecutors on Wednesday charged actor Jussie Smollett with disorderly conduct for filing a false police report when he claimed to have been the victim of a racist and homophobic attack last month.

Mr. Smollett turned himself in to police on Thursday, Chicago police said, according to the Associated Press.

The charge is a class 4 felony, Chicago Police Department spokesman Anthony Guglielmi said. It carries a penalty of 1 to 3 years in jail, and up to a $25,000 fine, according to the state Legislature's website.

This is a very strange case. Strange that (if the allegations are true) he did it and strange that he thought he could get away with it.

Juvenile Murderers

| 1 Comment
Lloyd Billingsley has this article in the City Journal on the case of double murderer/torturer Daniel Marsh, now 21 but just short of 16 at the time of the crime. Originally, Yolo County, California prosecutors directly filed the case in adult court, as the law allowed at the time. Then Gov. Brown, fueled with Soros money, convinced the people of California to change their mind and decide that judges and not prosecutors should decide whether a case was appropriate for adult court or juvenile court. That was Proposition 57.

If a case is tried in juvenile court, the perpetrator cannot be kept incarcerated past age 25, no matter how heinous the crime.

Okay. In accordance with Proposition 57, the judge decided that this case was indeed one for adult court. That was obvious the whole time.

But on January 1, a legislative bill takes effect that contradicts the vote of the people and says that the Legislature, not judges, has decided that 14- and 15-year-old murderers will always be tried in juvenile court, with the resulting limit on sentence. Gov. Brown signed that bill.

Needless to say, we will be challenging the constitutionality of that bill. The irony is that those of us who opposed Proposition 57 must now cite it as higher authority than the product of our demented Legislature. It's a strange world, and an even stranger state.

Bombing Suspect Arrested

The WSJ reports:

Authorities charged a Florida man Friday in connection with the packages containing suspected explosive devices sent to prominent Democrats and outspoken critics of President Trump this week.

Cesar Sayoc, 56 years old, was arrested in the Miami area Friday. Mr. Sayoc, a Trump supporter, is a failed entrepreneur and a former manager of a male revue with a history of arrests.

At a Justice Department press conference in Washington, officials said he would face five federal counts including interstate transportation of an explosive, illegal mailing of explosives and making threats against former presidents. The charges in total carry a potential penalty of 58 years in prison, officials said.

"This is utterly unacceptable. Political violence, or the threat of violence, is antithetical to our vigorous system of self government," Attorney General Jeff Sessions said.

"This is a law and order administration," Mr. Sessions said. "We will not tolerate such lawlessness, especially not political violence."
As hoped, he was indeed inept in avoiding detection and left a fingerprint inside one of the packages.

I am curious about his motivation and intent. Was the uniform failure of any of the devices to explode part of the plan or merely because he wasn't skilled at making them?
Corinne Ramey reports for the WSJ:

Federal prosecutors said they would seek the death penalty in the case of the man charged with terrorism for killing eight people by driving a truck along a bike path in New York.

The government's intention to seek capital punishment, which is rare, was made in a court filing Friday. Prosecutors say Sayfullo Saipov, who is from Uzbekistan, drove a rented truck on the bike path next to the West Side Highway in lower Manhattan on Halloween last year in an attempt to kill as many people as possible. Mr. Saipov told investigators that Islamic State videos he watched on his cellphone inspired him to carry out the attack, authorities said.

*      *      *

Earlier this month, lawyers for Mr. Saipov had argued that U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions, who ultimately makes the decision about whether to seek the death penalty, could have been influenced by [President] Trump's public statements [about the death penalty in this case].

Though it sounds flippant, one is tempted to answer the latter argument with "so what"? The Constitution unequivocally vests all executive authority in the President. All other executive officers derive their authority from him. Though Presidents traditionally have not gotten involved in decisions on particular prosecutions, no law forbids them from doing so, and any such law would be unconstitutional.

Monthly Archives