Creating Doubt and Destroying our Foundations

When I worked night shift patrol one of my favorite arrests had to do with drunk drivers, commonly referred to as Driving While Intoxicated (DWI).  I’d observe something peculiar; inability to keep within the marked lanes, exaggerated corrections which were unwarranted as if to avoid imaginary objects in the road, bouncing off curbs and other driving patterns which indicated the driver was under the influence of alcohol or some kind of drug.

After becoming concerned for the well being of the driver and everyone that might come in contact with that driver I’d pull the driver over and conduct a field sobriety test.   I’d note whether or not alcohol could be detected on the suspect’s breath, his/her general ability to conduct themselves within an acceptable limit or were they too far gone to be safe.  Could they understand basic questions and come back with reasonable answers; simple things like the alphabet were impossible for folks who were intoxicated. 

Once I was convinced of their being intoxicated the State of Texas had these folks take a breathalyzer test to verify my observations.  If they passed the test they got a free ride home; but that was very rare in deed.  Most of the folks I put in jail for DWI had more than enough and then some and the breath test served only to back up my observations. 

Quite some time after I retired Lawrence Tailor wrote about a scandal in the Houston area, the breathalyzer machines used to convict DWI suspects had not been properly tested; but they had been certified as if they had.  The idea that a person responsible for keeping the public’s trust above reproach had intentionally lied tainted every thing connected with the chain of evidence.

“DPS said she altered electronic records to make it appear she’d tested and adjusted the calibrations of machines when she had not.”

Tailor’s article included other alarming information; apparently Houston wasn’t the only place where testing equipment related to DWI arrests had not been properly handled.

“…a state breathalyzer inspector who was “fixing” machines in Miami-Dade County by simply deleting evidence of malfunctions. The Florida Department of Law Enforcement fired her — but not until after she had cast doubt on as many as 10,000 DUI convictions”

Sloppy work is one thing; but this went beyond sloppy.  Their criminally negligent actions undermined thousands of criminal cases.  All the honest efforts to keep dangerous drunk drivers off the road would be thrown out of court; reasonable doubt had been established because of a handful of bad apples in the evidence chain.

In a separate quagmire around the same time, as reported in the Houston Chronicle, the crime lab responsible for testing DNA in the Houston area was actually closed because their work was done so poorly.

“Months before the troubled Houston crime lab shuttered its DNA division for a second time, analysts and a supervisor warned investigators of continuing problems, including contamination, questionable procedures, and lost evidence, according to a police investigative report obtained by the Houston Chronicle.”

{…}

“Since the 2002 exposure of shoddy work and poorly trained personnel, HPD's crime lab has been mired in a forensics controversy that has cast doubt on thousands of cases and led to the exoneration of three men convicted with faulty evidence.”

At what point does the public begin to seriously doubt the validity of any evidence submitted in a criminal case?  As I mentioned earlier, it wouldn’t take much for a defense attorney to create “reasonable doubt” considering this problem had been known about at least since 2002; six years and the problems continued without being corrected.  Getting a conviction is tough enough without having folks contaminating the chain of evidence with sloppy documentation or worse, wrongdoing or shenanigans worthy of criminal charges.

More recently, as reported by Bridget Murphy in an A/P story this past week, Boston may have even bigger problems with their crime lab; the possibility of hundreds if not thousands of criminal cases being tossed out of court.

“A chemist at the center of a drug lab testing scandal admitted she faked results for two to three years, forged signatures and skipped proper procedures, a police report shows.”

{…}

“Anne Goldbach, forensic services director for the Committee for Public Counsel Services, which oversees the provision of legal representation for indigent people, said the new documents show the problems at the Hinton State Laboratory are more troubling than originally believed. She said it appears there was unsupervised access to the lab’s evidence office and evidence safe.”

The movie, Mrs. Winterbourne, came to mind; something to do with criminal investigations and Boston, perhaps…  Each family member, including the chauffer stepped forward to take the blame for a homicide of a sorry good for nothing black mailing old boy friend fearing that one of them had actually done it.  The real shooter had already been captured and confessed; but none of the “shooter wannabes” knew that or had details of the incident; “I shot him in the heart”, “I shot him twice in the head”, I shot him from across the room”, and so on until it became clear none of them had any idea what had gone down.   

The detective conducting the investigation came out with a great line, “If I’m ever accused of a crime I’d want to be a member of this family” (or something close). 

If you happened to be charged with a crime in the Boston area there’s a better than average chance you could get off the hook.  (Houston and Dade County Florida would be in the same sinking boat) There it is in black and white, Anne Goldbach, forensic services director has admitted there was “unsupervised access to the lab’s evidence office and evidence safe.”  In other words the chain of evidence is now in question; anyone could have tampered with or removed critical evidence which now cannot be used in court.  Worse, if critical evidence from that particular lab was used there are grounds for dismissal because the fruit of the tree has been tainted.

The public deserves better, much better.  Our criminal justice system depends on the public’s trust; something which may take years to restore, and all because of a few bad apples.

This article has been cross posted to The Moral Liberal, a publication whose banner reads, “Defending The Judeo-Christian Ethic, Limited Government, & The American Constitution”.

Doing business with reasonable men

We keep hearing about the need to be tolerant of our Muslim associations;  just because they have a different religion we shouldn’t consider them a threat to our way of life.  Our president has invited these barbarians as guests into the White House, wined and dined them as a gesture of friendship.   Obama even gave the Muslim Brotherhood a billion and a half dollars; just a helping hand to our closest friends.

“In his Wednesday CFP report, Hagmann, who described the “Origins of the Freedom and Justice Party (FJP) as having been founded in Egypt on 30 April, 2011 by the Muslim Brotherhood, “which is the ideological forefather of al Qaeda and Hamas, supporter of Sharia Law, and an advocate of terrorism against Israel and the West”,  named names: 

“Abdul Mawgoud Dardery, a VIP of the delegation hosted at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, is an outspoken proponent of Sharia law over democracy and openly critical of American business influences in Egypt.”

After our embassy in Libya was besieged, Ambassador Stephens murdered and his body dragged through the street as a symbol of victory over the American infidels who dared to let one of their citizens post a video on YouTube, one which portrayed Islam in a less than favorable light; Obama, representing America, apologized to this band of murderers.

I read a report on Powerline by John Hinderaker in which a medical doctor at a Libyan hospital claimed Ambassador Stephens died of smoke inhalation.  Stephens’ car was set on fire and burned violently while he was attempting to help others escape the onslaught; however, this report may be a fabrication.  He appeared to have been beaten and may have died some other way; trusting your enemies to be truthful isn’t the smartest thing to do.  (Just thought I’d mention that to anyone in the White House who might be paying attention)

Byron York writing for the Washington Examiner covered Mitt Romney’s remarks on the situation of our embassy being taken over and our countrymen killed.  Why would our president express sympathy for murdering thugs who are intolerant of America, so intolerant they have promised to eradicate us?

“…Romney was, and is, right.  As events in Benghazi and Cairo unfolded, the Obama administration’s first instinct was to apologize for any offense Muslims might have taken from an Internet video, made in America, that mocked and ridiculed the prophet Mohammed, and which the radicals cited as the cause for their actions.  In his original statement last night, Romney said, “It’s disgraceful that the Obama administration’s first response was not to condemn attacks on our diplomatic missions, but to sympathize with those who waged the attacks.”  Then, on Wednesday morning, Romney said the administration “was wrong to stand by a statement sympathizing with those who had breached our embassy in Egypt instead of condemning their actions.”’

I’m waiting for Obama to offer up the State of Arizona as a token of our unwavering commitment to suck up to Islam and the Brotherhood.  That would solve issues Obama’s administration has with immigration laws that protect U.S. citizens;  let the wetbacks try and cross the border into Arizona and see how well they’re received by a bunch of raving lunatics carrying Russian made fully automatic weapons.  I bet there’s no way to say “allah akbar” in Spanish; it would come out sounding like a side order to go with enchiladas.

Shifting gears and perhaps planets; the fellow who promised to repair my mantle clock wasn’t at his shop this morning when I went to drop it off.  I’d met him several months ago when he’d lost the only working key for his vehicle.  We got to talking about my broken clock and he said he could probably repair it for less than two hundred dollars; just drop it off and let him have a look.

When he answered the phone I jogged his memory and I told him the brand of clock and what was wrong, “Well, it’s been ‘almost Seven’ going on three years now”; that’s where the hands stopped when something inside went “sproing”! 

He laughed and told me to leave it in his garage, “Just open the door and find a flat spot near my old Model A Ford.  Be careful, that garage door is tricky and might come down on you”. 

We talked about how much it would cost and that I wanted the job done before Lucy got home from her trip, a surprise sort of thing.  The bill would be paid up front in cash and I would find a place inside the clock to deposit the money.

“Just leave a hundred and seventy or a hundred and eighty, which ever is easier.”  I had to laugh at the option offered; nobody lets the customer determine the price, do they?

I told him, “A hundred and twenty would be much easier” and we both laughed at the bargain I was making for myself at his expense; I left an appropriate amount stuffed under the little thingies that make the chimes work.  He’ll have the clock fixed in a couple of days and give me a call to pick it up well before Lucy gets home.

My guess is there aren’t any clock repair shops like that over in Libya, people who will do business in a reasonable fashion and where civilized folks can have fun like that.  If there were they’d have been burnt to the ground by now, their owners hanging from a flag pole with a sign warning infidels to stay the hell out.  Doing business with reasonable people is so much nicer; down right hard to find a reasonable person these days. 

This article has been cross posted to The Moral Liberal, a publication whose banner reads, “Defending The Judeo-Christian Ethic, Limited Government, & The American Constitution”.

The War That Never Ends

I bet you thought I was referring to Afghanistan, and you might be right; however, the war that never ends started long before the foundations of our Earth.  The War in Heaven is ongoing, sometimes with a spotlight on it during political gatherings with few noticing or aware that each day we decide which side to fight on.

Headlines this past week from a number of media outlets pointed out how the Democrat Party intentionally omitted God from their platform.  Washington Post columnist Charles Krauthammer, mirroring sentiments voiced by many said it was a significant gesture, as recorded by Jeff Poor at The Daily Caller:

“The omission of God from the platform is something Krauthammer said was a product of President Barack Obama pushing his party further to the left.

“Platforms don’t really tell you what’s going to happen,” Krauthammer said. “But if you compare today with what people used to believe and used to say and used to proclaim, and you see these glaring changes — you know that something has changed within the party.”

“This is one place where Obama has led from in front and not from behind: moving the party, not just himself. And that I think is extremely politically significant.”

We pick which side we support each day as individuals, are we going to obey God’s laws and commandments or are we going to follow some fraudulent substitution which leads us away from God?  The Lord doesn’t force anyone to comply with His will or the commandments; however there are always consequences for our actions, either here in mortality or on the other side of the veil and on through the eternities.  If you don’t believe in God then I suppose you’ll have to settle for a point just this side of the grave. It’s of paramount importance to comprehend this difference when assessing the difference between socialism and God’s Plan of Happiness? 

The Democrat Party, and please try not to reminisce or equate the current progressive movement which took over the Democrat Party with a fond memory of some former political group which your parents and grandparents were proud to be members of, hard working union blue collar to the bone members.  This new Democrat Party is in fact only a mask to disguise their true identity, the American Socialist Party and soon to be the American Communist Party. 

Shocking, can’t be true; my parents and grandparents would never…   And you’d be right, your parents and grandparents would not approve of what is going on. 

I didn’t write the next line; but it reads as if it sprang from my thoughts and so I’ll share it as if I had.  (That which we appreciate we appropriate)  This came from the preface to Prophets,Principles and National Survival ; a book compiled by Jerreld Newquist and published in 1964.

“During the past number of years as I have studied the Gospel, with emphasis especially on the words of the latter-day Apostles and Prophets, I have been deeply impressed with the consistency of their message, as they have counseled us concerning various responsibilities of our life — religious, family, political, social, professional, etc. It has become more and more apparent to me that the Gospel is intended to be a “guide to conduct, a chart for life’s voyage, a set of ideals by which every proposition may be measured.”’

Newquist’s preface also included reference to the War in Heaven as well as an interesting observation regarding members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, something which should be of at least mild importance during this particular election year.  Substitute “anyone” in the next line where it reads “Mormons” and see if it doesn’t work just as well.

“When Mormons fully appreciate the significance of the War in Heaven, they immediately realize the similarity between the forced righteousness program of Lucifer and the program of the collectivists — or government interventionists — whether they are welfare staters, Fabians, socialists, fascists, or communists.  For the essence of the collectivist philosophy is that the majority of the people are not intelligent enough to do voluntarily what the collectivists feel should be done. To remedy this, the collectivists (who feel they are the intelligent ones) seek for the power to force the rest of mankind to follow their so-called "enlightened" programs. And whether the ends of their human programs are intended to be good or bad — and they are often bad — the state planners must, like Lucifer, use the means of force to accomplish their ends. The collectivists do not like to hazard the possibility that if we had a choice we might reject what they, honestly or otherwise, claim is for our best welfare.

But even God, whose plan of happiness for mankind is the greatest program of all, does not compel compliance as does the collectivist. God lets men freely choose if they want to accept the plan of happiness, even though God knows that some of His children will freely choose the path that leads to misery and Hell.

Once one understands the great struggle over free agency that occurred in the War in Heaven, he has the key for understanding the greatest conflict of our age, which is now taking place. It is the struggle of free men against the all encompassing and supposedly all-wise state. This state needs compulsion to enforce its multitudinous but supposedly all-wise directives — and eventually ends up becoming a dictatorship.

Mormons among all people should be the most dedicated fighters for freedom. They should be able to see that the War in Heaven is continuing to be fought out here on earth for the bodies and souls of men. Can any Mormon be true to his faith and support the coercive programs or the promoters of government collectivism and interventionism or designs leading in that direction?”

I’ve had good friends and associates attempt to keep religion and religious doctrine out of political conversation; call it general courtesy or perhaps even self imposed political correctness.  In either case the two are truly inseparable; for “As a man thinketh in his heart, so is he”, at least that’s how it’s been recorded throughout history. 

If you were paying attention to the Democrat Convention this past week there were some interesting moments as they attempted to iron out their party’s platform.

“The initial 2012 platform language said this: “We gather to reclaim the basic bargain that built the largest middle class and the most prosperous nation on Earth -- the simple principle that in America, hard work should pay off, responsibility should be rewarded, and each one of us should be able to go as far as our talent and drive take us.”’

There was a voice vote taken from the floor, lots of shouting from various interests which sounded about even; those wanting to change the wording and those wishing to avoid any change.  After the third vote it was determined arbitrarily that the Democrat Party would include God back in their camp.

“In the section referencing God, the change effectively restored language that had been in the 2008 platform. It now says: “We need a government that stands up for the hopes, values and interests of working people, and gives everyone willing to work hard the chance to make the most of their God-given potential.”’ 

For some reason a scripture came to mind, Matthew 15:8 which reads:

“This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me.” 

There are far too many folks in positions of leadership within the Democrat Party who have chosen to go down a path which is contrary to the mind and will of the Lord.  Their out right hostility toward individuals of Judeo-Christian faith, formally backing homosexual relations while at the same time attacking traditional marriage and family values, mandated government health care and other socialistic interventions on what should be individual decisions mark the future if we continue down this road.    

The War in Heaven has yet to be completed; which side are you pulling for?

This article has been cross posted to The Moral Liberal , a publication whose banner reads, “Defending The Judeo-Christian Ethic, Limited Government, & The American Constitution”.

GOP Roulette Table Rigged

There was a television documentary on gambling devices; particularly the manufacturing and use of roulette wheels.  The odds of winning at roulette are about 38 – 1 for a single number play if the roulette wheel incorporates Green Zero and Green Double Zero.  Any way you look at it the house has the advantage; so why go to the trouble of altering the outcome, rigging the wheel to make the little white ball land where you want it? 

There have been all manner of ways the ‘house’ has manipulated roulette wheels mechanically and electronically, at least that’s part of its history.  The dumb rube puts his money down thinking he has an ever so slight chance of coming out on top and, unbeknownst to him, the rules of ‘chance’ aren’t in play because the house knows which number the ball will land on before the wheel is ever spun; isn’t that how movies portray a rigged game of ‘chance’?

In case you missed it, today’s article isn’t about gambling at the roulette tables or even about some of the shenanigans which may or may not continue to make the public weary of playing the odds on that jumping little white ball.  (If you’re interested I have a system that is guaranteed to pick winning numbers on Roulette as well as the Lottery; just send me $5.99 along with a stamped self addressed envelope for this proven path to riches)

No, something the old guard Republicans pulled during their convention caught my attention.  There was a disgusting display of a rigged hand guaranteed to have the ‘desired outcome’; by ‘desired outcome’, that means the old guard Republicans can hold sway over any new comers in the crowd such as Independents or Tea Party movement followers within the Republican Party. 

John Boehner, you might recognize him as Speaker of the House, …Boehner stood at the podium and called for mob rule; I mean, a voice vote to amend procedures on how delegates could be recognized and cast their votes within the Republican Party.  The details of the procedural change are important; but that’s not what got my blood boiling. It was how that procedural change was finalized and put an exclamation mark on how far the old guard GOP power mongers will go to hold onto that power.  They are willing to destroy all that is worth keeping; they rigged the outcome well in advance of any discussion.

I watched a video in disbelief as Boehner went through the motions of obtaining input from the attending delegates (mind you, some of the important delegates had been magically kept from attending this vote and were stranded on buses that went past the convention hall without stopping 3 times), all the while reading the results of that inquiry from a teleprompter (fast forward to the 3:15 on the video) handing him his lines. 

“In the opinion of the Chair (an opinion which was established in a back room long before this staged convention started), the “ayes” have it (those other noises must be a blower in the A/C unit about to give out) and the resolution is adopted.

Without objection (define objection), the motion to reconsider is laid upon the table.”  (Forgive my reading between the lines)

We’ve been shown the kind of leadership old guard Republicans use, open minded and fair dealings; yea; right!  There really isn’t much difference between progressive Democrats and the old guard GOP; both are enemies of ‘We The People’.  

I read an article by Michael "David" Bellow Jr. at his blog and would have to agree with him:

“I am voting for Romney because Obama must be defeated, but these kinds of stunts are not acceptable and should not just be ignored. These kinds of stunts will tear the party in two and allow Obama to be re-elected.”

How much damage has been done to the Republican Party by the old guard, unwilling to even listen to opinions from within their own party?  Will those who’ve been slighted sit out the next election or cast their vote on a third party candidate as a means of expressing their disgust?  Either way America could get stuck with four more years, four more intolerably Marxist years which this nation can ill afford. 

When the “good guys” use totalitarian tactics to stifle their opposition it makes many of us wonder if voting for the ‘lesser of two evils’ isn’t the same as voting just a different face of evil.  If this were a roulette wheel I’d be looking for magnets under the table.  (Some of you might be silently happy I didn’t use the game of Craps as my example; for some reason the letters SOL come to mind.)

This article has been cross posted to The Moral Liberal, a publication whose banner reads, “Defending The Judeo-Christian Ethic, Limited Government, & The American Constitution”.