Category Archives: Fourth Amendment

As Hurricane Idalia tore through Madison County, just south of the Georgia-Florida border, residents flocked to the local Madison Fl Word of Mouth Facebook page.

Anybody know where to get diesel? Anyone at the Madison school shelter? Who do we tell about down power lines?

The questions, along with updates about blocked roads and photos of downed trees, kept pouring in as the storm passed overhead and into Georgia. In a small town like Madison the seat of Madison County the Facebook page has helped fill in gaps in local news coverage, said creator Jill King Spicer.

Madison County, population 18,000, has two newspapers, The Madison County Carrier and The Enterprise-Recorder, which publish twice a week. For breaking news events like storm coverage, residents often turn to WCTV a CBS affiliate based more than 50 miles away in Tallahassee or the Word of Mouth Facebook page, Spicer said. She started the page five years ago to help the community access information they might not have otherwise been able to find.

Most people, especially people new to the community, have expressed gratitude for the page as they were able to find stuff they otherwise didnt know how to get, Spicer told Poynter in an interview over Facebook Messenger.

Idalia is one of the biggest storms the area has ever seen. The National Weather Service in Tallahassee called it an unprecedented event because no major hurricane has been recorded going through the nearby Apalachee Bay and into Floridas Big Bend region. On Wednesday, Tri-County Electric announced that 100% of its systems had been impacted, leaving 20,000 meters without power.

Spicer is one of those affected and said she also has very little service. Downed trees blocked roads into town, and one fell on her carport.

In regions where there isnt a robust news presence, local residents often turn to social media. While places like Facebook pages can help people find up-to-date information quickly, they can also perpetuate unverified rumors and misinformation. The information found on those pages may also not be as comprehensive as that found in a traditional newspaper.

Spicer and the pages two other moderators are not professional journalists and work in careers unrelated to media. Though people occasionally post inaccurate information to the Word of Mouth page, Spicer said that they are able to monitor it pretty well. She estimated that between the three of them, they usually have the page covered 20 hours a day.

Pinned to the top of the Facebook page Wednesday were posts from the local sheriffs office, the electric company, and the countys emergency management department. Residents have also been sharing information about store openings and businesses that are offering storm-related repairs.

Madison is a small town, a close community, and everyone knows everyone, so by having my page, the majority of the people are able to find resources by mostly word of mouth, Spicer said. It takes me and two other ladies a lot of volunteer time to make it successful, but we do it for our community.

By Angela Fu, media business reporter

A stack of the weekly edition of the Marion County Record sits in the back of the newspapers building, awaiting unbundling, sorting and distribution, Wednesday, Aug. 16, 2023, in Marion, Kan. (AP Photo/John Hanna)

The police raid of the Marion County Record, which garnered national outrage and support for the small town Kansas newspaper, has spurred a federal lawsuit filed against the citys police chief by a reporter.

As reported by The Kansas City Star, Record reporter Deb Gruver filed suit this week against police chief Gideon Cody, claiming Cody caused emotional distress, mental anguish and physical injury.

Gruver is seeking damages for the deprivation of her constitutionally protected First Amendment rights as a reporter and the violation of her Fourth Amendment rights against unreasonable search and seizure.

She contends that as she reached for her cellphone to call the papers publisher, Cody snatched the phone from her hands, injuring her finger in the process.

The lawsuit also claims that under the search warrant, there was no factual basis for seizing Gruvers cellphone, as she was not the reporter whose work was being investigated.

Gruver is seeking a minimum of $75,000 in compensatory damages and $75,000 in punitive damages from Cody.

By Annie Aguiar, audience engagement producer

Speaking of the raid on the Marion County Record, an opinion piece in the Los Angeles Times takes issue with the definition of computer crimes used to justify the search warrant.

The search warrant for the raid listed violations including unlawful acts concerning computers, a statute typically used for charges related to malware or bank account fraud.

But these laws are so vague that they can be deployed to penalize reporters for using computers to find information online as part of routine journalism, write Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press executive director Bruce D. Brown and Technology and Press Freedom Project director Gabe Rottman.

Brown and Rottman point to other cases in which computer crimes were used to target news publishing: the St. Louis-Dispatch reporter targeted in 2021 as a hacker by the governor of Missouri under computer crime laws for discovering a flaw in a state website, and a 2019 lawsuit against a California blog for reviewing information on a city Dropbox page.

With more newsgathering now taking place online, the endlessly elastic nature of computer fraud laws is a special problem for the press, Brown and Rottman write. The temptation for public officials to employ these laws against reporters especially those uncovering news they would prefer hidden will be difficult to resist.

By Annie Aguiar, audience engagement producer

Like many others on Wednesday, I saw the tweet from Caitlyn Yaede, the Tar Heels print managing editor. The Daily Tar Heels front page was spreading far and wide.

I shed many tears while typing up these heart-wrenching text messages sent and received by UNC students yesterday, Yaede wrote of the accompanying image of the front page filled with bolded, all caps messages from students who were on the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hills campus Monday, during a shooting. Beyond proud of this cover and the team behind it.

I read the first few lines of the front page and launched into work mode reaching out to a few people at the independent student newspaper in hopes that theyd give me a few minutes of their time. As I waited to hear back, I studied the front page. I felt panic in my body as I took in the entirety of the text. I quickly corrected myself: What I felt could not compare to what Yaede and her peers felt that day. But I could imagine the anguish behind those text messages.

After we published the story behind the front page, many people shared their reaction and commented on the editorial decisions made by these student journalists. The Daily Tar Heel staff was showered with praise by many people, including professional journalists.

The front page even drew the attention of the Biden administration. On Thursday, I was surprised to see President Joe Bidens official X account tweet a photo of Bidens hand holding a phone with a photo of the front page. This was the front page of UNC-Chapel Hills Daily Tar Heel, the tweet read. No student, no parent, and no American should have to send texts like these to their loved ones as they hide from a shooter. Ill continue to do all I can to reduce gun violence and call on Congress to do the same.

It was a pretty striking thing to see the president of the United States give what appeared to be a nod to student journalism.

By Amaris Castillo, contributor

Have feedback or a tip? Email Poynter senior media writer Tom Jones at tjones@poynter.org.

The Poynter Report is our daily media newsletter. To have it delivered to your inbox Monday-Friday, sign up here.

I want more analysis of the news media to help me understand my world.

Make a Gift

Read the rest here:
In the wake of Idalia, residents of one Florida town are turning to ... - Poynter

What to Know

Those attending outdoor parties or barbecues in New York City this weekend may notice an uninvited guest looming over their festivities: a police surveillance drone.

The New York City police department plans to pilot the unmanned aircrafts in response to complaints about large gatherings, including private events, over Labor Day weekend, officials announced Thursday.

If a caller states theres a large crowd, a large party in a backyard, were going to be utilizing our assets to go up and go check on the party, Kaz Daughtry, the assistant NYPD Commissioner, said at a press conference.

The plan drew immediate backlash from privacy and civil liberties advocates, raising questions about whether such drone use violated existing laws for police surveillance

Its a troubling announcement and it flies in the face of the POST Act, said Daniel Schwarz, a privacy and technology strategist at the New York Civil Liberties Union, referring to a 2020 city law that requires the NYPD to disclose its surveillance tactics. Deploying drones in this way is a sci-fi inspired scenario.

Schwarz further elaborated in a subsequent statement saying: Deploying surveillance drones over New Yorkers gathering with their friends and families to celebrate Jouvert is racialized discrimination and it doesnt make us safer. The NYPD is playing fast and loose with our First and Fourth Amendment protections and continues to undermine the POST Act requirements to transparently disclose their surveillance technology policies -- and follow them. Pervasive drone surveillance can be easily misused to exploit and discriminate against New Yorkers, putting all of our privacy at risk. As the NYPD keeps deploying these dystopian technologies, we must push for stricter guardrails especially given the departments lengthy history of surveilling and policing Black and Brown communities.

The move was announced during a security briefing focused on Jouvert, an annual Caribbean festival marking the end of slavery that brings thousands of revelers and a heavy police presence to the streets of Brooklyn. Daughtry said the drones would respond to non-priority and priority calls beyond the parade route.

Like many cities, New York is increasingly relying on drones for policing purposes. Data maintained by the city shows the police department has used drones for public safety or emergency purposes 124 times this year, up from just four times in all of 2022. They were spotted in the skies after a parking garage collapse earlier this year and when a giveaway event devolved into teenage mayhem.

Mayor Eric Adams, a former police captain, has said he wants to see police further embrace the endless potential of drones, citing Israels use of the technology as a blueprint after visiting the country last week.

But as the technology proliferates, privacy advocates say regulations have not kept up, opening the door to intrusive surveillance that would be illegal if conducted by a human police officer.

One of the biggest concerns with the rush to roll out new forms of aerial surveillance is how few protections we have against seeing these cameras aimed at our backyards or even our bedrooms, said Albert Fox Cahn, the executive director of the Surveillance Technology Oversight Project (STOP).

The NYPD did not respond to an email seeking further information about its drone policies.

In response to a request for comment, a spokesperson for Mayor Adams shared a link to new guidelines that make it easier for private drone operators to fly in the city, but which do not address whether the NYPD has any policies for drone surveillance.

Around 1,400 police departments across the country are currently using drones in some form, according to a recent report from the American Civil Liberty Union. Under federal rules, they are generally limited to flying within the operators line of sight, though many departments have requested exemptions. The report predicted the use of drones was poised to explode among police departments.

Cahn, the privacy advocate, said city officials should be more transparent with the public about how police are currently using drones, with clear guardrails that prevent surveillance overreach in the future.

Clearly, flying a drone over a backyard barbecue is a step too far for many New Yorkers," Cahn said.

Read the original:
NYPD using drones to monitor NYC backyard Labor Day parties, spurring privacy concerns - NBC New York

GRAND RAPIDS, Mich. The City of Grand Rapids is dismissed, says U.S. District Judge, Paul Maloney, however, Christopher Schurr will still face allegations in a lawsuit filed against both parties relating to the death of Patrick Lyoya.

The lawsuit, filed by attorneys for Peter Lyoya who acts as Personal Representative for the Estate of Patrick Lyoya in December of 2022, raised a Monell municipal liability claim, which alleges a municipality is liable for an official's actions if those actions violated a constitutional right and stem from an illegal policy, practice, or the municipality's deliberate indifference to a failure to train or supervise the officer.

Attorneys originally claimed they had "overwhelming evidence" of racial profiling and unnecessary force against Patrick Lyoya on the day he died, and could show the City of Grand Rapids (the City) should be liable.

Judge Maloney disagreed in part.

According to the lawsuit, the City received 79 citizen complaints of excessive use of force against the Grand Rapids Police Department between June 1, 2015 and May 21, 2020.

Court documents say that while these complaints are a matter of record, their existence does not show possible liability on the part of the City in this case as the plaintiff was not able to provide specific evidence demonstrating Lyoya's death was directly caused by a municipal custom or policy.

"The complaint instead focuses on the Citys treatment of Schurr after he allegedly used excessive force, not before," writes Maloney. "Indeed, the complaint fails to identify any connection between the lack of training and Schurrs specific use of force on Patrick."

READ MORE: FOX 17's coverage of the shooting death of Patrick Lyoya

As for not dismissing the suit against Christopher Schurr, Maloney writes the former officer may not be protected by qualified immunity in this case, and the courts must make that determination first.

The opinion and order regarding the motions to dismiss says the Plaintiff was able to provide a plausible argument showing Lyoya's Fourth Amendment Rights may have been violated at the time of his death.

You can read that full opinion here:

Christopher Schurr will face the Court of Appeals regarding the criminal charges relating to Patrick Lyoya's death on September 6. There is no date published for when this lawsuit will continue arguments.

Should the appellate court deny Schurr's appeal, the criminal trial is set to begin on October 24.

Read more from the original source:
City of Grand Rapids dismissed, lawsuit against Christopher Schurr ... - FOX 17 West Michigan News

Federal safety officials have just made good on one of their promises by issuing a proposed rule that would give a designated union representative the right to accompany an OSHA inspector during a facility walkaround regardless of whether the representative is your employee or the facility is a union shop. What do you need to know about this proposed rule released today, what can you do in response, and what are the seven key steps you can take to prepare?

What is the Proposed Rule?

OSHAs new proposed rule alters the current regulation by removing the explicit regulatory requirement that an employee representative be an employee of the employer being inspected. Instead, the proposed rule now states that the representative(s) authorized by employees may be an employee of the employer or a third party. The proposed rule also authorizes a third party who can be used to assist OSHA during an inspection based on their relevant knowledge, skills, or experience with hazards or conditions in the workplace or similar workplaces, or language skills.

As we discussed earlier this year, the proposed rule mirrors a similar rule in place during the Obama administration implemented through a 2013 letter of interpretation known as the Fairfax Memo rather than going through the formal rulemaking process OSHA is using now until it was rescinded by the Trump administration in 2017. In the Fairfax Memo, OSHA declared that workers at a worksite without a collective bargaining agreement may designate a person affiliated with a union or a community organization to act on their behalf as a walkaround representative.

OSHAs proposed rule mirrors its position in 2013 that the OSH Act authorizes participation in the walkaround portion of an OSHA inspection by a representative authorized by [the employers] employees, without any limit on whom the employees can choose for a representative. Similarly, the proposed rules reasoning relies on the OSHA Act and its longstanding regulation that allows the agencys compliance officer to decide to allow a non-employee to participate in an inspection of an employers worksite if it is reasonably necessary to the conduct of an effective and thorough physical inspection of the workplace.

This proposed rule goes even further than OSHAs position in 2013, where OSHA contemplated only non-employees assisting in the inspection if they were an industrial hygienist or a safety engineer. The new proposed rule would allow employees to even designate third-party interpreters to accompany OSHA during the inspection of a workplace.

When Will the Proposed Rule Go Into Effect?

Most proposed rules go into effect no earlier than six months from when they were proposed. OSHA has opened up a comment period through October 30 for employers, employee advocates, unions, and other groups to submit public comments on the proposed rule. Then, the agency will finalize and publish its final rule in the Federal Register with an effective date noted in that final rule.

Even if the proposed rule becomes a final rule, remember that business groups challenged the Fairfax Memo and OSHAs use of non-employee representatives till the practice was abandoned by OSHA in 2017. This time around, the final rule will need to be formally challenged in the court system to have the rules enforcement stayed, much like OSHAs vaccine ETS and the Federal Contractor Vaccine Mandate.

Remember also that if you do business in a state wherea state agency rather than federal OSHAenforces the OSH Act (such asCalifornia,Kentucky, North Carolina, or elsewhere), those state agencies employee representative regulations and timelines to adopt the eventual federal rule may differ.

Do Employers Have a Say in OSHAs Rulemaking Process?

Yes. Starting August 30, employers may submit comments on the proposed rule. Comments, along with any submissions and attachments, should be submitted electronically atthe Federal e-Rulemaking Portal. Follow the instructions online for making electronic submissions. After accessing all documents and comments in the docket (Docket No. OSHA-2023-0008), check the proposed rule box in the column headed Document Type, find the document posted on the date of publication of this document, and click the Comment Now link.

What Can Employers Do? Heres Your 7-Step Action Plan

As we noted in 2013 when the Fairfax Memo was issued, there is an obvious concern that such a policy will encourage unions to get involved in OSHA inspections and complaints in non-organized facilities as a means of gaining access to the facility when they normally would not have such access. This change in policy could be a big boost to union organizing and has been widely applauded by most, if not all, labor unions.

Its now 10 years later, and as we recently discussed here, strike activity and union organizing is expected to continue to increase significantly. Thus, its important for employers to take action in light of this proposed rule. Heres a seven-step action plan:

1. Know Your Rights

Keep in mind that employers have Fourth Amendment and state property rights, and nothing in the proposed new rule changes that. Even under the new rule, OSHA can only inspect worksites with the employers consent unless the agency has a warrant. Therefore, employers are still entitled to control how OSHA accesses company property and the areas covered during an inspection unless the agency has a warrant. Work with your counsel if you have questions and to understand the ramifications that might result if you push the agency representatives to demand a warrant.

2. Revisit Your Procedures For When OSHA Shows Up to Conduct an Inspection

Review these comprehensive OSHA Inspection FAQs, then put together a plan for when OSHA arrives at your worksite. For example, designate one supervisory employee to be the contact person when OSHA arrives and ensure OSHAs inspector stays within the inspections scope. A designated manager or coordinator should stay with each OSHA compliance officer at all times during the inspection, except during interviews with non-supervisory employees who do not request a managers presence. It is a strategy question whether to use the safety manager in this role. Be sure you are ready to take side by side photos, sampling, and tests when OSHA requests to do so.

3. Know How to Survive an OSHA Inspection

Review our Focus 4 Threshold Tips for Surviving an OSHA Inspection that every employer should know: (1) dont permit any manager or supervisor interviews by OSHA on the day the agency arrives; (2) dont give federal OSHA any documents other than your OSHA 300 logs, 300A summaries, 301 forms, and relevant safety data sheets (SDS) on the first day of the inspection; (3) take the OSHA inspector straight to and straight from the area of the referral, complaint, or even the pertinent area of an emphasis program inspection; and (4) ensure your employees are refraining from any high hazardous activities occurring while OSHA is present.

4. Protect Your Trade Secrets

Even if your procedures during an OSHA inspection are not fully developed, a top priority is to ensure that site management knows what areas of the worksite contain trade secrets or other confidential commercial information that you would not want a third-party to see or access. For those areas, you should insist that no third party access these areas, and OSHAs photos should be marked trade secret.

5. Establish or Recommit to a Safety Committee

If your worksite does not have a safety committee already in place, consider establishing one ASAP. That committee arguably would hold the representative role in walkaround inspections, and employees may designate a safety committee member as their representative instead of a union member. Note that when setting up safety committees, you must be aware of the National Labor Relations Act and unfair labor practice concerns if the safety committee is not properly implemented. So, youll want to seek legal counsel before implementation.

6. Decide if the penalties for refusal warrant a denial of a Third-Party Representatives Access to your worksite

After you have followed the steps above, you may decide as a matter of policy to refuse requests for third parties to accompany OSHA. One option is to advise the OSHA compliance officer that they may conduct their inspection, but you are choosing to deny entry to any third party. You have the Fourth Amendment right to refuse a walkaround inspection on any basis and require OSHA to get a warrant to conduct its inspection. But you should note that OSHA may treat this refusal to allow a third-party on-site as a refusal of entry and seek a warrant. Seek legal counsel to decide if refusing entry is the right option for you.

7. Prepare for an Increase in Labor Actions and Union Organizing

See our prior Insight for a thorough discussion of what is happening across the country on the labor front and things you can do to immediately and efficiently respond to union organizing and work stoppages. For the most up to date information, make sure you review our Labor Relations Insights, since there has been much activity from the NLRB in the recent days and weeks. On the front end, your action plan may include maintaining effective lines of communication with employees, consistently applying work-related policies and procedures, having an effective complaint resolution process in place, and proactively reviewing compensation packages to ensure you remain competitive.

Conclusion

You should understand your rights if OSHA arrives at your worksite and have a plan before you are asked to allow a non-employee to accompany an inspector at your worksite. If you have any questions, contact the authors of this Insight, your Fisher Phillips attorney, or any member of our Workplace Safety Practice Group or Labor Relations Practice Group. Make sure you are subscribed toFisher Phillips Insight Systemto get the most up-to-date information on OSHA issues.

Read this article:
OSHA's Proposed Rule Would Allow Union Walkthroughs of All ... - Fisher Phillips

Are they really OK if they obey laws?

In the Aug. 10 edition, Nickie Clawson wrote regarding the incident with a Black couple at Winco: Obviously, this older Black couple stole something. It doesnt matter if you are white, Black, or brown if the deputy tells you to put your hands behind your back, do as you are told. Obey the laws and you wont get hurt.

Assuming Ms. Clawson is white and conservative, if she had minorities as friends, she would not have written a letter like this. It always astounds me as to the availability of the Internet to see how police have treated minorities over the years, but Ms. Clawson picks one incident to show where it is always the minoritys fault. Ms. Clawson did not respond to my letter weeks ago when I wrote that only the husband and not the wife was arrested who is allowed to video the incident.

Lets test Ms. Clawsons opinion that if minorities would just obey the laws, everything would be OK. In 2013, the sheriffs department had an agreement with the Department Of Justice that requires the sheriff to provide bias-free policing and to train its deputies on stops, searches and detention so that they do not make arbitrary searches and only make stops warranted by reasonable suspicion.

The Department Of Justice found the following: African Americans, and to a lesser extent Latinos, are more likely to be stopped and/or searched than whites, even when controlling for factors other than race, such as crime rates. The widespread use of unlawful backseat detentions violating the Fourth Amendment and LASD policy [including] a pattern of unreasonable force, including a pattern of the use of force against handcuffed individuals.

There were African-American New York policemen that were treated differently due to their race when they were off-duty: The officers said this included being pulled over for no reason, having their heads slammed against their cars, getting guns brandished in their faces, being thrown into prison vans and experiencing stop and frisks while shopping. The majority of the officers said they had been pulled over multiple times while driving. Five had guns pulled [on them]. (Off Duty, Black Cops In New York Feel Threat From Fellow Police, Reuters, December 2014.)

Its up to the reader to believe Ericksons opinion or the facts presented.

On VP, inflation, AVUHSD board

I made a list of all Vice President (Kamala) Harriss accomplishments for presentation here.

Bidennomics lower inflation same high prices what a deal.

Reading Antelope Valley Press articles on Antelope Valley Union High School District board meetings makes me wonder if Board President Hughes is an acolyte of former board president Bob Davis. Mr. Hughes my way or the highway of leadership style are reminiscent of Bob Davis.

I read The Hangar will be converted into a soccer facility via major renovations costing $11 million. While I hate to see losing it as a baseball stadium, it may as well be repurposed for soccer, considering the billionaires of MLB abandoned Lancaster.

Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm is hitting us in the pocketbook once again. This time she is attacking ceiling fans, requiring more energy efficient fans. The DOE says annual savings would be $39 per year or a whole $3.25 a month assuming you believe the DOE. Your current $150 ceiling fan will become your new $250 energy efficient ceiling fan.

How does a resident of Lancaster find out how Measure AV funds are spent? Ive done google searches but come up empty.

Read the original post:
Letters From Readers, Aug. 31, 2023 | Opinion | avpress.com - Antelope Valley Press

By Becca Tucker

The animals seized from Noahs Park in Goshen, N.Y., nearly a year ago are missing despite an overdue judges order that they be returned.

They havent showed up, Rebecca Vives, co-owner of the embattled animal sanctuary, said Aug. 15. I dont even know where they are.

The case against the Noahs Park owners is closed. The court dismissed the criminal animal neglect charges against Diana McGowan on July 17, granting the defendants motion to dismiss based on numerous problems with the investigation and ensuing trial process.

Vives case previously had been dismissed for failure to provide a speedy trial.

Three weeks later, Vives and Diana McGowan, the other co-owner, had not heard a thing.

The dozens of animals impounded from the 7.3-acre property include miniature horses and a donkey, pigs, sheep, chickens, ducks, peacocks, a Sebastopol goose and guinea hens. Vives and McGowan each received a ticket on the day of the confiscation charging failure to provide food and water.

The whole thing has been extremely confusing, said Vives, 83. We dont have any animals to show, and thats ruining it because this is how we made our living.

Equally in the dark is the person who is supposed to be rounding up the animals, Eugene Hecht, the Hudson Valley SPCAs humane law enforcement chief.

I know nothing about it, he said. I didnt get any letter or anything else. As far as I know, neither did the SPCA. They would have called me.

We dont even have their animals, he added.

Stephen Mullkoff, the lawyer representing the Noahs Park owners pro bono, said, They can say they know nothing about it all they want, but I paid for a process server to go out there and hand-deliver it to them.

I think what is really going on is they dont have the animals, he said. Well find out soon enough.

The judges July 25 order was delivered by hand to the kennel manager, Matt, at the Hudson Valley SPCA in New Windsor on July 31 in the afternoon, according to a notarized affidavit of service from Jason Westrick of Orange Paper Placers, a licensed process server in Goshen. (Matt refused to give his last name, per the affidavit.)

I dont know who they think they are that they can defy an order from a judge, Mullkoff said. Ive been admitted (to the bar) over two decades; Ive never seen where someone just deliberately defies a judges order.

Hecht maintained that he never saw the subpoena and declined this reporters offer to scan the judges order and email it to him.

Ill get it from the D.A., Ill get it from whoever, he said.

The Hudson Valley Humane Society - the nonprofit with whom Hecht is affiliated and acts as secretary, according to IRS filings - referred the matter back to Hecht.

Thats really nothing to do with us, said the woman who answered the phone at the humane society.

Thats a humane law enforcement case, she said, confirming that Hecht was the person to call. The SPCA did not respond to an emailed request for comment.

The Hudson Valley SPCA did not respond to an emailed request for comment by press time.

Hecht, 81, requested the search warrant and seizure order last year after he investigated Noahs Park based on an anonymous tip. Accompanied by Goshen Town Police, he spearheaded the confiscation of dozens of animals on a Sunday morning in September, and his signature is on the ticket issued to each of the women that day.

Hecht created his position years ago, seeing a need while doing volunteer work for the Hudson Valley Humane Society, he said.

He carries a gun in the line of duty and in certain cases involving animal welfare, he has more power than the police, he said.

Hecht has an old felony conviction for vehicle fraud and declined to discuss how he is paid.

They never keep us or any other law enforcement agency posted on whats going on unless they need us for some reason or have a question, he said, referring to the Orange County District Attorneys office, to whom he referred this reporters inquiries. The D.A.s office did not return multiple calls by press time.

After their animals were confiscated, Vives and McGowan were not told where they were taken, except by this reporter.

Pets Alive, an animal shelter in Middletown that accompanied the seizure mission and provided the transport vehicles, boarded the larger animals, including sheep, two miniature horses and a miniature donkey. The pigs were emergency housed at Pets Alive, then taken to Two by Two Animal Haven in Pleasant Valley in Dutchess County, Becky Tegze, executive director of Pets Alive, said in September.

The smaller animals, such as the chickens and guinea hens, were taken to a farm in Clintondale, Ulster County, N.Y., Hecht said in September. Now he says all of the animals were taken to Pets Alive.

Pets Alive took all the animals. We didnt distribute anything. Pets Alive took all the animals, Hecht said Aug. 15.

Pets Alive did not respond to an inquiry by press time.

Freckles, an elderly spotted miniature donkey with a chronic condition called Cushings disease, is the most prominent member of the seized menagerie. He was the main attraction at Noahs Park for about 12 years, grazing alongside toddlers in photos, featured in Make-a-Wish events and appearing onstage in a Nativity scene.

After the donkeys seizure, he featured in Pets Alives fundraising material, until he was adopted in July.

An earlier post by the shelter said Freckles must have been struck in the past because he flinched when his caregivers pet him, a tenuous allegation that the elderly Noahs Park owners find saddening and absurd.

Vives had given up rights to Freckles shortly after his confiscation with the hope that the donkeys previous owner, Arty Pisacano of Long Island, could readopt him. Pisacano was eager to do that, said Vives, until he learned he would have to pay for the animals boarding and vet bills for the week the donkey had been in custody.

They wanted $600 for a week and vet bills too. Then all of a sudden, it came to $1,000. He said they were jerking him around, they kept raising the price, said Vives.

He struck gold and is home with our amazing ferrier (sic) and overall wonderful person, Cheyenne. Happy life, Freck! You deserve it so much, Pets Alive wrote on Facebook on July 5.

Vives only knew of the adoption because shed been keeping tabs on Freckles on Facebook, she said.

The case against the Noahs Park owners is over, but another case begins. Mullkoff is filing a motion for contempt against Hecht and the Hudson Valley SPCA in town court, seeking up to 30 days of incarceration and reimbursement of his clients additional legal fees. Theyll have to come to court and explain to Judge Brady why they didnt know anything about this order when they were served by a duly licensed process server in New York.

The lawyer also is pondering taking the case to the next level: filing a companion case in federal court seeking damages for the missing animals and arguing that the search violated the Noahs Park owners Fourth Amendment right against unreasonable search and seizure.

In federal court, the cronyism that plagues local courts ceases to be a factor, he said. You can actually get things accomplished easier because people follow the law.

Mullkoff and his wife, both lawyers and animal lovers, drove up from New York City in time to see the end of the seizure. They arrived at Noahs Park just in time for Mullkoff to stop Hecht from confiscating the largest of the animals: a Highland cow that looked healthy to Mullkoff.

The seizure was based on a search warrant that was unaccompanied by any affidavit of probable cause or anything to support the signing of that warrant and the subsequent seizure, he said. The public policy around that is to protect everyone, right? So people like Hecht cant just go around and search peoples homes because he feels like it.

See original here:
Where are the Noah's Park animals? - The Pike County Courier

OKLAHOMA CITY (KFOR) Friday marks one week since a deadly shooting at an Oklahoma County football game.

Earlier this week, police arrested a 15-year-old for the shooting that killed 16-year-old Cordea Carter during the game between Choctaw High School and Del City High School in Choctaw, according to Choctaw Police Chief Kelly Marshall.

A teenage girl was also shot in the chaos, along with 43-year-old Demetrize Carter, who was shot in the chest by an off-duty Del City Police Officer working security at the game.

Carter remains hospitalized with a gunshot wound to his chest.

The Oklahoma County Sheriffs Office said it is currently investigating the shooting by the officer, though officials have not yet discussed the case publicly.

Ill live with it: Balloon release for Midwest City student killed in Choctaw Shooting

However, in an exclusive interview Friday from the mans hospital room, an attorney for Mr. Carter said he believes the man was targeted.

He was breaking up this fight when an officer approached him. He put his hands up and he even said the words, dont shoot. Im here to help, said Billy Clark, Managing Attorney for The Clark Law Firm, based in Dallas, Texas.

Clark said thats when Carter was shot in the chest.

The bullet that ripped through his body caused life-altering injuries, including his intestines, pancreatic tail and his left kidney.

Were not even talking about the psychological part [of the recovery] that hes going to endure, said Clark.

Officials said the officer who fired the gun perceived a threat, but no other details have been released.

Choctaw Chief of Police provides update to deadly high school football game shooting

Clark says what happened was a complete violation of Mr. Carters civil rights.

He was trying to do the right thing when he was shot [and] targeted, Carter said.

Accidents happen, we get that. But when it involves an officer who has more training than we do with firearms, more training with de-escalation than we doyou dont shoot at someone thats not a threat, he continued, saying the shooting incident was a violation of Carters civil rights.

Its a complete violation of his civil rights, complete violation of the Fourth Amendment (which protects people from from unreasonable searches and seizures by the government), the Fourteenth Amendment (providing equal protection under the law), his individual rights, his constitutional rights, he said.

While next steps are still being determined, Clark said the family is focused on recovery.

[Demetrize] is not in good shape but hes in good spirits because he does believe in God, said Clark.

Weve got a long road ahead and you best believe were going to get justice, he added.

An investigation into the shootings is ongoing.

Police want to hear from anyone with first-hand information from that night: (405) 769 3821.

For the latest news, weather, sports, and streaming video, head to KFOR.com Oklahoma City.

Read the original here:
His hands were up: Attorney for football game shooting victim says civil rights violated - Yahoo News

BROOKLYN, N.Y. New York City voters explained why they are supporting Democratic presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., over President Biden.

Fox News Digital caught up with voters attending Kennedys Brooklyn town hall on Wednesday where the Democratic presidential candidate spoke on several issues.

One voter, Rayyan Ahmed, said he is supporting Kennedy because he believes the Democratic challenger is going to unify the nation.

I really feel that, right now, what our nation lacks is unity, Ahmed said. I feel like Kennedy, what hes going to do is hes going to unify the nation.

RFK JR. ONCE AGAIN CHALLENGES BIDEN: IF HES IN GOOD SHAPE HE SHOULD DEBATE ME

Some of his ideas are of traditional fiscal conservative people, and some are Democratic ideas, but its the good of both, he continued. The good of the Republican Party and the good of the Democrat Party.

And thats what we need, Ahmed said, adding that he believes Kennedy carries on the last name of his family.

Another voter, Wallie Wolfgruber, said she is very excited about Kennedys candidacy, and hopes that he will bring more unity and peace to America and the world.

After all this separation, just to be able to be tolerant again, tolerant of each others different opinions, Wolfgruber, who said she was originally from Germany but is a U.S. citizen, told Fox News Digital. The right to have an opinion and to express it is so basic in a democracy, and I feel it kind of going away.

Im also very disturbed about the war still going on in Europe, and in this day and age why cant we talk? Why cant we believe in the possibility we can solve problems by talking with each other? Wolfgruber continued, adding that very few people benefit from making a profit off military action.

War is never, never a good thing. People die. Our children die, she said, adding, I think it could have been over already if we had different leadership, like Kennedy.

Kennedy addressed a crowd of about 800 people gathered in a Brooklyn warehouse Wednesday, speaking on a number of topics, including immigration, inflation, the housing market and ending the war in Ukraine.

Im running against two presidents who both served one term and essentially are gaslighting the American people by telling them that they produced a wave of prosperity for this country. They are running on that record, Kennedy said, garnering applause.

These traumas my uncles death, my fathers death, Malcom X, Martin Luther King, Vietnam War itself, 9/11 and ultimately the COVID crisis, these series of traumas, all of them played this role in pushing us farther and farther down the road Eisenhower warned us against the military industrial complex, Kennedy told a cheering audience. And now over the past 20 years, weve spent $8 trillion on useless wars, and were now in another one in Ukraine that could have easier been avoided. It could have easily been settled.

RAMASWAMY MOCKS MASSACHUSETTS GOVERNORS CHANGE IN ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION STANCE

Big Anthony, a Marine and New York City voter, told Fox News Digital that at this stage of his life, he wants to make the country a better place for all Americans.

Not just certain people who get certain rights, Big Anthony said. We have no rights anymore. Our freedom of speech has been taken away the First, Second, and Fourth Amendment has been trampled upon.

The way theyve treated us like were a bunch of morons, he continued. The man running the country and the people behind him are evil.

We could ask a hundred questions: what happened to the pipeline? Why are we making all our senior citizens not live right? Why are we destroying the schools? he said. Look, I have nothing against peoples sexual preferences, but why are we telling 3- and 4-year-old kids, Are you a boy or are you a girl?'

Its insanity! he added. Have we lost our minds?

In addition to seeing Kennedy, Big Anthony told Fox News Digital he came out to support U.S. Senate candidate Diane Sare, an independent hoping to challenge incumbent Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, D-N.Y., in 2024.

Fox News Digital spoke to Sare about why she is aligning herself with Kennedy.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

I think we really need maverick voices, I suspect the Democratic Party will really try to crush and destroy him, as they did with Bernie Sanders, and as they did with Tulsi [Gabbard], Sare told Fox News Digital of Kennedy. I dont know whats gonna happen. I would hope he ends up running as an independent ultimately.

I think the nation is weary of war, which is probably why Kennedy is the leading Democratic candidate and Trump is the Republican candidate. she said. I think the number one issue is avoiding thermonuclear war. I think were much closer than people realize. I dont think the Biden administration has a clue what theyre doing. Theyre unbelievably arrogant and ignorant.

GET THE LATEST UPDATES FROM THE 2024 CAMPAIGN TRAIL, EXCLUSIVE INTERVIEWS AND MORE ON OUR FOX NEWS DIGITAL ELECTION HUB

Excerpt from:
NYC voters explain why theyre voting for RFK Jr. over Biden: Going ... - 1330 WFIN

Nick Cooper stands in the security line amid a sea of people with parking tickets and moving violations. He has an 8 a.m. hearing at the Houston Municipal Court about a citation he received this year for distributing food to unhoused people outside of the Central Houston Library branch downtown. Cooper is one of many volunteers with Food Not Bombs Houston (FNBH) who is facing trial after the City of Houston began enforcing a decade-old ordinance that makes the groups food distributionwhich has been occurring at the site for about 20 yearsillegal.

Houston Police officers have issued at least 63 citations to volunteers around the Central Library branch since Mayor Sylvester Turner declared the ordinance an enforcement priority earlier this year, according to a spokesperson for the municipal courts. The timing seemed strange to volunteersthe ordinance banning food-sharing had been in effect since 2012. The citations, issued for conduct[ing] a food service event without consent of property owner carry potential fines ranging from $254 (if volunteers dont contest the tickets) to as much as $2,000. Rather than eating the fines, volunteers have been opting for jury trials. The ultimate goal is to overturn the ordinance itself.

This is an unconstitutional law. It prevents freedom of speech and freedom of assembly. It is part of our groups mission to share food in publicnot in church parking lots or anything like that, Cooper told the Texas Observer over the phone in the days before his hearing. This isnt just a question of us getting out of some individual ticket. The law itself has to be overturned but meanwhile, weve got to deal with all these municipal lawsuits. Theyre going to be a pain in the ass, and we have to fight each one individually.

This isnt just a question of us getting out of some individual ticket. The law itself has to be overturned.

On the Food Not Bombs Houston website, a raised fist holding a carrot makes up the groups logo. Underneath the image, in capital letters, it states: NO GOVERNMENT FUNDING / BUREAUCRACY / PERMISSION!

In July, FNBH volunteer Phillip Picone was the first to go through a trial after being ticketed under the ordinance. A jury found him not guilty in July. But the city has shown no signs of backing down.

Cooper, a white man in his mid-50s, is bulkier than usual today. His two-year-old daughter is strapped to his chest, and hes carrying a large backpack full of baby snacks, milk bottles, picture books, andas a last resorta tablet loaded with child-friendly content. Both the baby and the bag have to come off before Cooper is allowed to walk through the metal detector.

After security, Cooper arrives at Courtroom 1, where hes scheduled to appear before Judge Leigh Saint-Germain, a no-nonsense woman who holds promptness in high regard. More than 20 other people sit on the benches in her courtroom, there to face their own potential fines. Cooper doesnt spend much time in the courtroomfilled with light wood benches with the judge and court reporter enshrined behind plexiglass. Cooper and I are allowed to sit in the hallway to reduce any disruptions from his wide-eyed toddler.

Cooper has been with Houstons Food Not Bombs since the beginning. He moved to Houston from New York City to attend Rice University, graduating in 1991. Hes now a full-time musician. His band, Free Radicals, has an eclectic sound: Their nine albums range from jazz to funk to cumbia. They play live at breakdance competitions, street protests, weddings, and funerals. The bands anti-war message is in step with the mission of Food Not Bombs, a national nonhierarchical group that uses food distribution to spread the organizations international mission statement: With over a billion people going hungry each day, how can we spend another dollar on war?

While Cooper and his fellow volunteers sit through the slog of municipal court dates, some have taken the issue to federal court.

In March, 44-year-old Food Not Bombs Houston volunteer Benjamin Franklin Craft-Rendon filed a federal complaint against the City of Houston after police cited him on March 1. He claimed the ordinance violates freedoms of speech, association, assembly, religion, due process, and equal protection. The lawsuit states that because Food Not Bombs shares food with anyone, without restriction to communicate its message that our society can end hunger and poverty if we redirect our collective resources from the military and war, that the group does not serve food as a charity, but instead as an expression of and to further their political message.

The group does not serve food as a charity, but instead as an expression of and to further their political message.

The lawsuit was voluntarily dismissed in May at Craft-Rendons request.

A separate federal suit remains pending in the U.S. Southern District of Texas. Phillip Picone, the first volunteer to have a citation go to trial, sued Houston Police Officer Adam Ancira on March 31 after the officer ticketed him on March 3. Picone later amended his complaint to include the City of Houston as a defendant.

In this suit, Picone alleges violations of his First and Fourth Amendment rights. On the ticket Picone received, the violation was listed as conduct[ing] a food service event (feed homeless) without consent of prop owner. In court filings, the city is arguing the suit should be dismissed because both the city and the officer have immunity.

Plaintiffs freedom to share food and associate with the hungry by exercising his Catholic faith can be conducted at any time with the permission and approval of the property owner at 61 Riesner Street, attorneys for the city said in their motion to dismiss.

But in the suit, Picone argues that the citys narrow allowance for public spaces where food-sharing can occur, on a lot that also houses the Houston Police Department, has clear drawbacks.

Many of those experiencing poverty or homelessness often seek to avoid interactions with the police due to stigma attached to the former group and the devastating consequences of even a small ticket or short detention, the lawsuit says. [D]ue to this justified aversionmany Houston citizens experiencing poverty or homelessness prefer FNBHs location at the Library Plaza.

The suit is set to be sent to jury trial in November 2024.

Three Houston Police officers sit on the benches outside the courtroom near us. Theyre the officers who ticketed Cooper, as well as most of the other volunteers found in violation of the ordinance. The officers talk with Cooper about fatherhood and Coopers band, Free Radicals, which has played at some of Food Not Bombs events. Yall were pretty good, one officer says.

Sergeant Jeff Richard is in charge of the Downtown Differential Response Team, which consists of five officers. The team has become the engine behind the enforcement of the ordinance at the behest of Richards superiors, but Richard was sure to tell Cooper, Its not personal.

Richards team is specializedthe officers handle the Central Business District downtown, an area that includes the Central Library branch. They handle enforcement of things that fall outside of the regular patrols purview. Richard notes that there is a whole lot of stuff out there that happens thats a violation of city ordinances. Officers are out there explicitly to enforce this ordinance because of orders from on high.

We are up against a bunch of rich people who dont want to see homeless people anywhere near their stuff.

Cooper says blaming the police for the enforcement takes the onus off the decision-makers: I dont know why were only focusing on the cops. There is real estate behind this. This is the mayor behind this. These are library bureaucrats behind this. We are up against a bunch of rich people who dont want to see homeless people anywhere near their stuff.

At one point, the judge calls Cooper in. She admonishes him for having his child and says if it happens again, hell be held in contemptwhich could mean three days in jail and a $100 fine. She schedules him for a jury trial in October.

This whole dance is over a Class C misdemeanor, Cooper says. Its strange all these resources are going to it.

When the food-sharing ordinance was passed in 2012, Mayor Annise Parker published a fact sheet to the citys website in an effort to clarify misinformation about the program.

The ordinance established a program that allowed individuals or organizations to register with the city in order to share foodprovided they undergo food safety training with the health department, among other requirements. This appeared to gel with the stated aim to improve the quality, quantity and distribution of food for the homeless through training and coordination. The program would centralize scheduling and require food safety measures.

But the program was completely optionalthe only real requirement was property owner consent. And heres where it gets tricky: Mayor Parker designated the Central Houston Public Library Plaza as an approved charitable food service location for Food Not Bombs, per the statement on the website. It is unclear if, when, and why this explicit permission was revoked. Officials in the mayors office did not return requests for clarification.

The former mayor pointed out another goal in her 2012 letter: to reduce the disproportionate environmental impact of food service operations on public and private property. This, some volunteers say, is likely the crux of the reason for the ordinances enhanced enforcement this year.

Libraries across Texas are often the most reliable source of air conditioning and water for residents during the hottest months of the year. But the relationship between the Houston library and unhoused residents has long been strained. In 2005, the city council passed regulations that targeted homeless residents and attempted to deter the use of the library as a safe haven. According to the mayor at the time, residents had been complaining about abuse of the library.

Today, the Houston Public Library faces a modern crisis. Its hemorrhaging employees due to its toxic environment, according to a recent report by Houston Landing. And echoes of the early-2000s ethos were clear earlier this month, when Houston City Attorney Arturo Michel told the Houston Chronicle, There have been complaints and incidents regarding the congregation of the homeless around the library, even during off hours.

Earlier this year, city officials from the Houston Health Department posted placards outside of the Downtown Library stating that residents had until 7 p.m. on Friday, February 24, to comply with the charitable food-sharing rules.

We knew that something was coming that was different from what had happened in the past, Cooper said. He noted that city officials had threatened to enforce the ordinance in the past, but they had backed down after public backlash.

But now, the City of Houston is taking dramatic steps to address purported discomfort, even if it means dismantling safety measures and longstanding services for homeless residents.

When Coopers attorney Remington Alessi and his intern Leobardo Elizondo arrive at the municipal courthouse that morning, they come bearing a new motion to quash.

The motion cited a strikingly similar case from 2021, one that involved Food Not Bombs volunteers in Fort Lauderdale, Florida In that case, the city had enacted an ordinance requiring volunteers to obtain permission from the city in order to distribute food and other supplies to people in public parks. The 11th Circuit Court determined that the ordinance was unconstitutional because it required city permission without having clear standards for how that permission would be granted. The courts decision relied on a decades-old Supreme Court decision, Shuttlesworth v. City of Birmingham, which took aim at the citys attempt to quash civil rights protests by denying permits for the sake of public welfare, decency, or even convenience.

Alessi said the motion is somewhat unorthodox in municipal court.

These judges dont necessarily want to rule on constitutional issues, he said. Its a weird sort of legal thing. Theres a tendency for judges to try and find ways to not rule on civil rights issues, but instead to go find other less political reasons to rule on things. But to me, were basically inviting the judges to be on the right side of history.

Politics and morals aside, Elizondo chimes in, the law is clear.

See the rest here:
Houston Food Not Bombs in Court over Feeding the Unhoused - The Texas Observer

Where a judge denied a defendants motion to suppress evidence found when the police stopped and frisked him, that ruling should be upheld because (1) the police had a reasonable articulable suspicion that the defendant had been involved in a shooting and (2) the commonwealth demonstrated an adequate, race-neutral reason for the stop, sufficient to rebut the defendants statistical evidence of discriminatory policing.

In the early evening of April 23, 2018, Boston police officers received reports of gunfire in a neighborhood near their headquarters. Approximately seven minutes later, three officers patrolling in an unmarked vehicle encountered two young Black men, the defendant and J.H. (a juvenile), walking away from the location where shots had been fired. The two were less than a mile from police headquarters and matched a barebones description of the shooters. The officers stopped and frisked the defendant and J.H. and discovered that each possessed a concealed handgun. The defendant subsequently was indicted on charges of discharging a firearm within 500 feet of a building, unlawful possession of a firearm, and related offenses.

The defendant filed a motion to suppress the evidence seized from his person, on the ground that the stop was in violation of the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution and art. 14 of the Massachusetts Declaration of Rights because the officers lacked reasonable suspicion to believe that he had committed a crime. The defendant also argued that the stop and frisk was unconstitutional because it violated his Federal and State rights to equal protection of the law. In support of his argument on equal protection, the defendant submitted statistical evidence that two of the police officers involved, who were assigned to the Boston police departments youth violence strike force, were more likely to stop Black members of the community than individuals of other races.

A Superior Court judge denied the defendants motion because he concluded that the officers had had reasonable suspicion to stop the defendant to investigate his involvement in the shooting, and reasonable suspicion that he was armed and dangerous to support the patfrisk for a weapon. In addressing the defendants equal protection challenge, the judge presumed that this courts revised standard for establishing an equal protection claim under the Massachusetts Declaration of Rights, which was adopted in the context of a traffic stop, see Commonwealth v. Long, 485 Mass. 711, 724-725 (2020), applied as well to a challenge of a pedestrian stop asserted to be racially motivated. The judge reasoned that, just as a racially motivated motor vehicle stop would be constitutionally problematic, a racially motivated stop of a pedestrian would also offend the constitutional right to equal protection. Notwithstanding the statistical evidence presented by the defendant, the judge then determined that the Commonwealth had satisfied its burden of establishing that the officers had had a race-neutral reason for conducting a threshold inquiry, and also for pat frisking the defendant for a weapon.

We conclude that the stop did not violate the defendants rights under the Fourth Amendment or art. 14, because the officers had had a reasonable articulable suspicion that the defendant had been involved in the shooting. We emphasize that the equal protection clause provides an independent basis upon which a defendant may rely in pursuing claims of intentional discriminatory application of the law, separate and distinct from the right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures. We agree with the judge that the new standard we adopted in Long, 485 Mass. at 724-725, to provide a defendant a more accessible path to pursuing an equal protection claim in the context of a motor vehicle stop, is applicable not only to traffic stops, but also to other police investigations such as pedestrian stops. We also agree with the judge that, in this case, at the hearing on the defendants motion to suppress, the Commonwealth demonstrated an adequate, race-neutral reason for the stop, sufficient to rebut the defendants statistical evidence of discriminatory policing. Accordingly, we affirm the denial of the defendants motion to suppress.

In reviewing the judges decision, we first must determine whether the judge erred in applying the Long standard to a challenge to a pedestrian stop. We then must decide whether there was error in the judges conclusion that the Commonwealth met its burden of rebutting an inference of selective enforcement by articulating an adequate, race-neutral reason for the stop.

The issue having been squarely raised here, we conclude that the equal protection standard established in Long for traffic stops applies equally to pedestrian stops and threshold inquiries, as well as other selective enforcement claims challenging police investigatory practices.

Here, we discern no error in the judges conclusion that the Commonwealth rebutted an inference of selective enforcement raised by the statistical evidence. The Commonwealth demonstrated that the police officers had a race-neutral reason to have conducted a pedestrian stop of the defendant and J.H., the suspects in the case of reported shots fired. The second 911 caller introduced the suspects race to the investigation when she reported that she heard multiple 38 gunshots and then saw two Black men on bicycles wearing black hoodies. Within minutes of the 911 call, [Officer James OLoughlin Jr.] told the responding officers that he had seen two Black males, on bicycles, wearing black hooded sweatshirts, heading towards Heath Street. In short order, the officers located the suspects, who were walking in a direction consistent in time and direction with two individuals fleeing from a shooting on bicycles.

Here, the judge was required to determine whether the Commonwealth had rebutted the reasonable inference that the stop or investigation was not motivated at least in part by race or another impermissible classification. We conclude that the evidence supported the judges determination that police stopped the defendant to investigate his involvement in a recent shooting, and not because of his race.

As there was no violation of the defendants rights to be protected against unreasonable searches and seizures, and against selective enforcement of the laws, there was no error in the judges denial of the defendants motion to suppress.

Commonwealth v. Robinson-Van Rader (Lawyers Weekly No. 10-049-23) (41 pages) (Gaziano,J.) A pretrial motion to suppress evidence was heard by Peter B. Krupp, J., and a conditional plea was accepted by Mary K. Ames, J., in Superior Court. John P. Warren for the defendant; Kathryn Sherman (Michelle Slade also present) for the commonwealth; Chauncey B. Wood, Kevin S. Prussia, Timothy A. Cook, Asma S. Jaber and Douglas J. Plume submitted a brief for Massachusetts Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, amicus curiae; Katharine Naples-Mitchell, Audrey Murillo and Radha Natarajan submitted a brief for Criminal Justice Institute at Harvard Law School and another, amici curiae (Docket No. SJC-13329) (May 15, 2023).

Click here to read the full text of the opinion.

See the original post here:
Search and seizure Equal protection Discriminatory policing - Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly