Archive for the ‘Fifth Amendment’ Category

Letter: Hard lessons we are learning – Opinion – HollandSentinel.com

FridayJan15,2021at12:15AM

Should Joe Biden attempt to "look forward" and fail to hold the soon-to-be-not-president accountable for his actions, not only will he suffer the same ignominy that befell Gerald Ford in the wake of the Nixon pardon, but he will also guarantee a Democrat annihilation in the 2022 midterms and beyond.

The Democrats fortunes, however, are not the point.

Hoping to dodge the fallout that followed In the wake of Barack Obamas ill-advised (guided by "norms") decision to "look forward" after the misdeeds of the George W. Bush administration would be stunningly hypocritical. You simply cannot mouth the words "no one is above the law" and then short-circuit the law because its ... uncomfortable.

There is a massive record that exists already, used as a basis for the wholly successful impeachment by the House. The Mueller Report oft vilified but still left simmering spells out 10 instances of possible obstruction of justice. Start there, Merrick Garland. And subpoena those tawdry pardon recipients who no longer enjoy Fifth Amendment protections on the subject.

But look at everything because dozens of allegations go beyond the abandonment or destruction of the aforementioned norms. The past decisions of the DOJ, or the FBI, or any other body with jurisdiction not to investigate or bring charges are not dispositive. Take the time NOW to render essential justice.

While many smile at the prospect of orange jumpsuits lets all realize the result is less important than the process, if only marginally. A factual record is paramount, as it will guide the decision-making and legislation of the future.

To wit, Congressman Huizenga, your recorded vote on electoral certification will stand forever as a pathetic attempt to gloss over your recorded signature on Ken Paxtons unconstitutional lawsuit.

Some guidance is gained, and some lessons are learned, harder than others.

Richard Wolfe

Park Township

More:
Letter: Hard lessons we are learning - Opinion - HollandSentinel.com

Now Free (and an Attorney), Marty Tankleff Sits Down With Jason Flom to Discuss His 19-Year Wrongful Conviction Nightmare – GlobeNewswire

Wrongful Conviction Podcast with Jason Flom

Now Free, and an Attorney, Marty Tankleff Sits Down With Jason Flom to Discuss His 19-Year Wrongful Conviction Nightmare

NEW YORK, Jan. 13, 2021 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- In March 2007, Marty Tankleff was released from a 19-year prison nightmare after being wrongfully convicted of murdering his parents. In 2018, he was awarded an $18 million settlement from Suffolk County (in addition to a $3.375 million settlement from New York State). Last year, he was admitted to the New York State bar to work as a lawyer. And this week, hes revisiting his story on the hit podcast, Wrongful Conviction with Jason Flom.

Marty was just 17 years old when his parents, Arlene and Seymour Tankleff, were bludgeoned to death in their Long Island home in late 1988. In June 1990, Marty was convicted and sentenced to 50 years to life in prison. His conviction was based largely on a confession that Marty gave after many long hours of interrogation by Suffolk County detective K. James McCready a confession that the teen recanted almost immediately and refused to sign.

Maintaining his innocence, Marty obtained pro bono legal assistance and persevered through multiple appeals filed in state and federal courts. New evidence emerged that pointed to Jerry Steuerman as the orchestrator of the murders. Steuerman, who had been partners with Martys father in a bagel store, was owed $500,000 by the elder Tankleff and had, according to Marty, threatened his parents with violence before leaving their home the night they were murdered.

A man named Glen Harris offered a sworn statement that on Steuermans orders, he had driven two hit men, Joe Creedon and Peter Kent, to the Tankleff home on the night of the murders. When Harris was denied immunity by Judge Stephen Braslow in a July 2004 hearing, Harris invoked his Fifth Amendment right and his testimony went unheard.

Evidence of Martys innocence continued to pile up, however. Another witness came forward to say that Creedon had told her of his involvement in the murder, describing how he and another man initially hid in the bushes outside the Tankleff home before running to avoid capture and disposing of their bloody clothing. In addition, evidence surfaced that the detective who had obtained the false confession from Marty had come under investigation for perjury.

In December 2007, Martys conviction was overturned by an appellate court ruling that Judge Braslow did not properly consider new evidence brought by Martys legal team. He walked free nine days later.

Wrongful Conviction with Jason Flom has highlighted the stories of hundreds of wrongfully convicted men and women, from The Central Park Five and Brendan Dassey to Rodney Reed, Amanda Knox, and more. The series is a valuable resource for lawyers, criminal justice advocates, all citizens who are potential jurors, as well as the wrongfully convicted themselves.

Flom, the founder and CEO of Lava Records and a longtime criminal justice advocate, has been personally involved in the cases of hundreds of wrongfully convicted people. Wrongful Conviction with Jason Flom is produced by Lava For Good Podcasts in association with Signal Co. No1.

Hear Martys mind-blowing story on http://www.wrongfulconvictionpodcast.com or on all popular podcast streaming platforms.

About Lava for Good Podcasts:

Lava for Good Podcasts exists at the intersection of entertainment, inspiration, and impact. Produced by renownedmusic executive, children's book author, and philanthropist Jason Flom along with Lava Media COO Jeff Kempler in association with Signal Co. No1, Lava for Good Podcasts works directly with a highly-engaged audience to entertain, empower, and create a sense of participation and community impact. Its #1-charting lineup of criminal justice podcasts explores the interrelated topics of systemic racism, over-policing, and criminal justice reform and currently includes Wrongful Conviction with Jason Flom, Wrongful Conviction: False Confessions, and Wrongful Conviction: Junk Science.

Beyond the success and impact of the podcast series, Wrongful Conviction is now a multi-channel platform with podcasts, video content (through third-party partnerships with NowThis and Facebook) and livestream panel discussions hosted by Wrongful Conviction (such as the Power to the People civil rights panel) or created via a partnership media organizations such as Billboard and Vibe.

As the founder of Lava Media (which includes Lava Music as well as Lava for Good Podcasts), Flom is one of the most successful music executives in history, having backed and discovered superstar artists from Twisted Sister and Skid Row to Matchbox 20, Paramour, Kid Rock, 30 Seconds to Mars, Katy Perry, Lorde and Greta Van Fleet. He has also served as the chairman of Atlantic Records, as well as Virgin Records/Capitol Music Group. With his daughter Allison Flom, he is the co-author of the children's book Lulu is a Rhinoceros soon to be a major children's TV show.

For media inquiries: Dawn KamerlingThe Press Housedawn@thepresshouse.comwww.thepresshouse.com

A photo accompanying this announcement is available at https://www.globenewswire.com/NewsRoom/AttachmentNg/6fb05459-b6eb-4f8d-8322-50038c71bb03

The rest is here:
Now Free (and an Attorney), Marty Tankleff Sits Down With Jason Flom to Discuss His 19-Year Wrongful Conviction Nightmare - GlobeNewswire

A Second Trump Impeachment Could Answer More Questions About the Attack on the Capitol – The New Yorker

This is a moment in which political time seems compressed, with different events overlying one another. On Monday, Joe Biden, wearing a dark-gray polo shirt, spoke briefly to reporters after receiving his second dose of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine. The first question he was asked was whether he has confidence in his coronavirus team (I do, he said); the second was whether he is afraid of taking his oath of office outdoors (No, Im not). The third was whether he is worried that the impeachment of Donald Trump might create delays in getting a new stimulus bill through Congress. Biden said that he had been speaking with senators about whether, if House members move forward with impeachment (which they obviously are), it might be possible to bifurcate thisthat is, to have the Senate divide its days into two parts, using one half for an impeachment trial and the other to get Bidens Cabinet nominees confirmed and his agenda approved. And why not? Everything else seems to be playing on a split screen now.

Similarly, Mondays pro-forma session of the House lasted less than a quarter of an hour, and yet it involved two measures that reflect how serious, and still precarious, this moment is. One was the formal submission and acceptance of the resignation of the House sergeant at arms, Paul Irving. His counterpart on the Senate side, Michael Stenger, has also resigned, but the questions about the role that each man played in the failure to defend the Capitol have only begun. Timothy Blodgett, who had been Irvings deputy, was immediately sworn in as his successor. The second measure was the introduction by the House Majority Leader, Steny Hoyer, of a resolution calling on the Vice-President, Mike Pence, to invoke the Twenty-fifth Amendment and begin the process of stripping Trump of the power of the Presidency, on the ground that he is incapable of carrying out his duties. Hoyer asked for unanimous consent; the chamber was almost empty, but Alex Mooney, Republican of West Virginia, was on hand to object. The result is that the full House will consider the resolution on Tuesday.

The Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, has told her members to be back for the vote on the Twenty-fifth Amendment resolution and for what is expected to follow. The plan is to pass the resolution on Tuesday evening, give Pence twenty-four hours to act on it, and, if he does not, proceed with a vote on impeachment. Pence has signalled that he does not plan to try to remove Trump; he and Trump met on Monday night, but their exchange reportedly had the character of a conversation, not a showdown. Trump, unrepentant, said on Tuesday, as he was leaving the White House for Texas, that efforts to hold him accountable constitute a witch hunt. Republicans, with some exceptions, still seem to be clinging to the idea that obliviousness and impunity are the only way to address the violent, direct attack on our democracy. As long as they take that position, the House, as Biden put it, is obviously moving forward with impeachment.

There is, at the moment, a single Article of Impeachment, on the charge of incitement of insurrection. The first time that Trump was impeached, just a little more than a year ago, there were two articlesabuse of power and obstruction of Congressand he was eventually acquitted on both charges in the Senate. (Conviction in a Senate trial requires sixty-seven votes; last February, Mitt Romney, of Utah, voted to convict on the first articlehe was the only Republican to do sothough not on the second.) There could, undoubtedly, have been even more articles this time. Trumps phone call to Brad Raffensperger, Georgias secretary of state, pressuring him to find enough votes to deliver the state to the President, could be an article on its own, and there are reports of other calls from the White House to Georgia officials. For the moment, the Raffensperger incident is simply recounted in the incitement article, as an element in Trumps larger scheme to subvert and obstruct the certification of the results of the 2020 Presidential election. The article also mentions the loss of life in the attack, and the vandalism of the Capitol. It continues, In all this, President Trump gravely endangered the security of the United States and its institutions of Government. He threatened the integrity of the democratic system, interfered with the peaceful transition of power, and imperiled a coequal branch of Government.

That last phrase is a significant one. The message from Pelosi and others is that, even though Trump will soon be out of office, the occasion of a President orchestrating an attack on Congress is in a category of its own, and demands a response from Congress. (In an interview with Lesley Stahl, of 60 Minutes, Pelosi suggested that the decision to go ahead with impeachment and various lawsuits involving Trump is in part a separation of powers issuemeaning that Congress has its own institutional concerns, beyond what the proceedings would mean for Bidens agenda.)

Kevin McCarthy, the House Minority Leader, who voted to reject the Electoral College votes of Arizona and Pennsylvania, is among those Republicans now complaining that impeachment is divisive. (In a private, closed-door meeting of the House Republican caucus, McCarthy reportedly acknowledged that Trump has some responsibility for what happened on January 6tha pathetic half-gesture that only raises the question of why McCarthy seems afraid to hold the President to account in public, and whether he is ready to renounce his own votes to overturn the Electoral College.) As Jamelle Bouie observed, in the Times, this sentiment is better understood as a threat to the country than as a desire for unity. The process will be as divisive or as unifying as the Republicans allow it to be. Seen from another angle, Pelosi is offering her Republican colleagues a chance to come together in a bipartisan way to make the point that the President should not instruct a crowd to march down Pennsylvania Avenue and fight like hella phrase quoted in the article of impeachmentagainst the certification of the legitimate winner of the election. Only a handful of House Republicans, notably Adam Kinzinger, of Illinois; Peter Meijer, of Michigan; and Liz Cheney, of Wyoming, seem likely to seize the opportunitylast week, after all, a majority of Republican House members voted to effectively disenfranchise the voters of Arizona and Pennsylvania. (Over the weekend, Meijer wrote of speaking to a colleague who said that he was objecting to the Electoral College tally only because he feared for the safety of his family.) But these are unpredictable days.

One way or another, it seems improbable that any trial in the Senate would begin before Trump leaves office. Even so, it would hardly be moot. In addition to removal from office, an available penalty after conviction is disqualification from holding federal office in the future; Trump could be barred from running in 2024. Again, a conviction would require a two-thirds majority of the Senate, which the Democrats dont have. But the contours of the trial, and what might be revealed in the course of it, are not yet clear. There is much that we dont know about what happened last week in Washington, and that we still need to know.

See the rest here:
A Second Trump Impeachment Could Answer More Questions About the Attack on the Capitol - The New Yorker

Will Joe Biden Issue a Pardon to Donald Trump? – The National Interest

In his inaugural address, President-elect Joe Biden could announce that he is pardoning Donald Trump. It would raise a furor on the Left. But it would also allow Biden to declare that he is following through on his pledge to unite America.

Former FBI Director James Comey, who was fired by Trump, is supporting the idea. In an interview on BBC Newsnight, Comey stated, he should at least consider it. Donald Trump, hes not a genius, but he might figure out that if he accepts a pardon, thats anadmission of guilt, the United States Supreme Court has said, so I dont know that he would accept a pardon. Comey added that it would serve as part of healing the country and getting us to a place where we can focus on things that are going to matter over the next four years.

Biden would be able to handle the blowback that he would get from an enraged Democratic base. Given the gravity of the crises that he facesa slowing economy, a spreading pandemic, and a mounting loss of American international credibilityBiden enters office in a commanding position within his own party. A pardon, as Gerald Ford stressed, does not imply innocence. It implies acceptance of guilt.

Its also the case that Trump would continue to face a welter of potential criminal charges at the state level that a federal pardon would not cover (though a federal pardon would cover Washington, DC). The Southern District of New York appears to be avidly pursuing him for perpetrating financial crimes, including tax fraud and money-laundering. Now that William P. Barr has resigned, federal prosecutors are moving quickly to arraign Trump. Small wonder that Trump himself is apparently consumed with worries about what looms ahead once he exits office.

Still, Trump himself might seek to act preemptively by pardoning himself and his children. A self-pardon, however, would be a dicey move indeed as it could simply ratify his guilt and be overturned by the Supreme Court. The notion that a president can pardon himselfand essentially declare himself above the lawhas never been tested. Its not a test that Trump would want to flunk. Yale legal scholar William N. Eskridge notes, The original meaning of granting a pardon assumes someone granting the pardon who is distinct from the person receiving it. So does the original purpose of a pardon, namely, forgiveness bestowed by an authority on a rule-breaker. Though a priest may pardon sinners, he may not absolve himself. A former Justice Department official says, It almost certainly wouldnt work. It would make matters worse. It would be a red flag for the Justice Department.

A further wrinkle is that the Constitution impedes the ability of a president to issue pardons if he has been impeached. Article II, Section, Clause 1 says that the president can issue pardons except in Cases of Impeachment. But in his capacity as president, Trump, who has never been overly concerned about constitutional niceties, might seek to ignore this provision. It would not impinge upon his ability to pardon his children or advisers such as Rudy Giuliani. But pardoning his children would mean that they would forfeit their Fifth Amendment protections before a Grand Jury. They could be compelled to testify. By contrast, Giuliani would presumably have protections under the attorney-client privilege.

The most likely course is that Biden will depute any investigation of Trumps conduct on January 6 to his Attorney General Merrick Garland. Garland would probably conduct a lengthy investigation of Trump before deciding that a federal prosecution of Trump would curtail the freedom of speech of future presidents. But the safest path for Trump would be if Biden pardoned him. Trump would receive direct benefits from a pardon, while Biden could adopt a Churchillian stance. In victory, magnanimity; and in peace, good will.

Jacob Heilbrunn is editor of The National Interest.

Image: Reuters.

Follow this link:
Will Joe Biden Issue a Pardon to Donald Trump? - The National Interest

Theyve been hidden too long: Report details Los Angeles Sheriffs deputy gangs and violence toward communities of color – East Bay Times

For the past several years, Sean Kennedy, a Loyola law professor and his students noticed a troubling pattern forming within the Los Angeles County Sheriffs Department and its well-documented deputy gang problem.

A sheriff downplays or denies the problem of the deputy cliques.

A scandal erupts, usually from a lawsuit or reporting by the Los Angeles Times, exposing one of the deputy gangs and alleged misconduct like lying in court or during investigations.

The sheriff pledges to investigate the issue.

The findings of those investigations such as those promised by former sheriffs like John Scott and Jim McDonnell are never released to the public.

And the gangs, some of whom have a history of violence and harassment toward fellow department employees and members of the public, live on in relative secrecy.

Despite a growing list of allegations of misconduct by deputy gangs revealed in various commission reports and external investigations, Kennedy, who is also a member of the Sheriffs Civilian Oversight Commission, said the Sheriffs Department has struggled to address the issue within its ranks.

To move the needle toward more answers, Kennedy and his students wanted to create a single document that lays out all that is known including from findings from federal commissions, county inspector general reports, civilian commission hearings, court documents, news articles, interviews with former deputies about the departments deputy gangs.

After 24 months, the report was published Wednesday, and documents at least 18 deputy gangs or cliques that are suspected to have been operating within the Sheriffs Department for the past 50 years.

There have been so many pledges to get to the bottom of this issue that go nowhere, Kennedy said. Theyve been actively hidden too long.

Sheriff Alex Villanueva introduced a new policy in August, banning deputies from forming and participating in cliques and sub-groups. He also committed to investigating allegations of a deputy gang controlling the Sheriffs Compton Station. The department said Wednesday a study looking at deputy gangs, conducted by the Rand Corporation, is set to wrap up in the next few months. The FBI also has ongoing probes into the departments gangs.

The Sheriffs Department called the Loyola Law School report non-peer-reviewed, leaning on non-academically acceptable citations and unproven allegations as a primary basis for content.

The Department will examine the report and extrapolate everything which may be helpful towards positive organizational change, the Sheriffs Department said Wednesday through a spokesman.

The totality of the evidence, when viewed as a whole is very strong, that there is a longstanding, internal gang problem that goes unaddressed in the department, Kennedy said, responding to the departments comments. For accuracy, Kennedy said he ran the finalized report by five former high-ranking Sheriffs Department officials who recently retired.

Some of the gangs profiled in the report have been inactive for decades. Others are characterized more as subgroups with no evidence of gang-like activity.

However, several other deputy gangs, such as the Banditos, Vikings and Executioners, are suspected to be active and carry with them a slew of allegations of violence, harassment, and intimidation toward other department employees and members of the public, the report said.

Kennedy said he worries most about how these deputy gangs harm the communities they police. Most of the known deputy gangs operate within Sheriff stations located in communities that are inhabited predominantly by people of color, the report said.

Operating out of the Sheriffs Compton Station, the Executioners are alleged to have hosted celebrations after a deputy shot someone, later inking the deputy involved in the shooting with the gangs symbol, a skull wearing a Nazi helmet with CPT on front and a rifle encircled by flames, the report said, referencing Austreberto Gonzalez, a deputy at the station who shared the account during a 2020 deposition. Black and female deputies are reportedly barred from joining the gang.

Gonzalez also testified that the two Compton Station deputies involved in the fatal shooting of 18-year-old Andres Guardado in June Miguel Vega and Christian Hernandez were prospects looking to join the Executioners at the time of the shooting, the report said. Vega, who fired the shots that killed Guardado in Gardena, has remained silent, repeatedly invoking the Fifth Amendment throughout the Sheriffs investigation and during a November coroners inquest.

The Vikings gang, previously operating out of the now-defunct Lynwood Station, has been accused by Black and Latino residents of taking part in shootings, killings, beatings, racial-profiling incidents and illegal searches in an effort to terrorize their community. One federal judge called the gang a neo-Nazi, white supremacist gang.

The Century Station in Lynwood, the report said, is occupied by two other gangs, the Regulators and Spartans.

Some deputy gangs found themselves at the center of wide-ranging investigations into deputy misconduct, including the countys jail abuse scandals that stained the departments legacy from the late 1990s and well into the 2010s, leading to the convictions of more than a dozen Sheriffs officials, including former Sheriff Lee Baca and former Undersheriff Paul Tanaka, a recorded member of the Vikings, according to the report.

In the Antelope Valley communities of Palmdale and Lancaster, deputies with Rattlesnakes symbols and skulls tattooed on them have become synonymous with discriminatory policing against Black residents, particularly among those living in public housing, the report said. Quoting a U.S. Department of Justice report from 2013, the report said deputies associated with the Rattlesnakes gang took part in unlawful searches and seizures and unreasonable use of force.

Gangs that operated in county jails included the 3000 Boys, 2000 Boys and the Posse.

In 1998, a Black man with a mental illness died after deputies in the Twin Towers jail beat him, the report said.

Days later, eight members of the Posse beat another mentally ill man, leaving flashlight marks on his back and boot prints on his side, the report said. A 1999 federal commission report highlighted the gang and its practice of violently targeting inmates with mental illness.

The 3000 boys were also known to take part in excessive force against inmates, according to the 2012 report by the Los Angeles County Citizens Commission on Jail Violence.

The Loyola report also found that among all 133 deputy shootings in the past five years, from November 2015 to November 2020, the stations that led the list in the most shootings, each has an active deputy gang, as well as a history of complaints, reporting, and lawsuits alleging deputy-gang misconduct. The East Los Angeles Station where the Banditos are said to be operating, topped the reports list with 20 shootings. About 80% of those shot by deputies were Black or Latino, the report said.

The report calls on the Sheriffs Department to address the gang issue by enforcing its new policy, prohibiting subgroups. Also, it asks the department to require existing employees to fill out a tattoo image form, something Villanueva and McDonnell have previously refused to subject their deputies to. Any findings the department has on its cliques or gangs should also be made public through the public records act, the report said.

Other suggested solutions include having prosecutors ask deputies who take part as witnesses in criminal cases to state whether or not they are affiliated in a deputy gang. The report also called on judges to allow defense attorneys to cross-examine deputies about their gang-affiliated tattoos.

Really they need to just release the info and let various people and groups investigate, Kennedy said of the Sheriffs Department. If its just as some say, a harmless social group, then nothing will come of it. But the more startling allegations that should concern us all.

More here:
Theyve been hidden too long: Report details Los Angeles Sheriffs deputy gangs and violence toward communities of color - East Bay Times