Group items tagged

False Arrest The claim that is most often asserted against police is false arrest. Persons bringing this claim assert that police violated their Fourth Amendment right against unreasonable seizure. If the officer had probable cause to believe the individual had committed a crime, the arrest is reasonable and the Fourth Amendment has not been violated. Police can arrest without a warrant for a felony or misdemeanor committed in their presence. (Some states also allow warrantless arrests for misdemeanor domestic assaults not committed in the officer's presence.) Even if the information the officer relied upon later turns out to be false, the officer is not liable if he believed it was accurate at the time of the arrest. To prevail on a false arrest claim, the victim must show that the arresting officer lacked probable cause, that is, facts sufficient to cause a reasonable person to believe that a crime had been committed. http://74.125.155.132/search?q=cache:xsg_D3OUnnIJ:public.findlaw.com/civil-rights/more-civil-rights-topics/police-misconduct-rights.html+false+claim+against+crime+victim+constitutional+violation&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us

Brian Floyd the Legislative Rep in Riverside County that Phil Reddish states helping him to cover up homicide is now going against a mandamus to enforce the law

These elementary principles establish the government's obligation to provide medical care for those whom it is punishing by incarceration. An inmate must rely on prison authorities to treat his medical needs; if the authorities fail to do so, those needs will not be met. In the worst cases, such a failure may actually produce physical "torture or a lingering death," In re Kemmler, supra, the evils of most immediate concern to the drafters of the Amendment. In less serious cases, denial of medical care may result in pain and suffering which no one suggests would serve any penological purpose. Cf. Gregg v. Georgia, supra, at 173, 96 S.Ct. at 2924-25 (joint opinion). The infliction of such unnecessary suffering is inconsistent with contemporary standards of decency as manifested in modern legislation8 codifying the commonlaw view that "(i)t is but just that the public be required to care for the prisoner, who cannot by reason of the deprivation of his liberty, care for himself."9

Officials indifference to Lee Franks request for protection. The killer has stalked Lee almost three years without any protection.

Lee Frank and Nye Frank were accused of a crime, without right to defend

1 MINNESOTA STATUTES 2009 CHAPTER 611A CRIME VICTIMS: RIGHTS, PROGRAMS, AGENCIES DEFINITIONS AND GENERAL PROVISIONS 611A.01 DEFINITIONS. 611A.015 SCOPE OF VICTIMS' RIGHTS. 611A.02 NOTIFICATION OF VICTIM SERVICES AND VICTIMS' RIGHTS. 611A.021 NOTICE OF RIGHT TO REQUEST WITHHOLDING OF CERTAIN PUBLIC DATA. 611A.03 PLEA AGREEMENTS; NOTIFICATION. 611A.0301 RIGHT TO SUBMIT STATEMENT AT PLEA PRESENTATION HEARING. 611A.031 VICTIM INPUT REGARDING PRETRIAL DIVERSION. 611A.0311 DOMESTIC ABUSE PROSECUTIONS PLAN AND PROCEDURES; PILOT PROGRAM. 611A.0315 VICTIM NOTIFICATION; DOMESTIC ASSAULT; CRIMINAL SEXUAL CONDUCT; HARASSMENT. 611A.032 INACTIVE. 611A.033 SPEEDY TRIAL; NOTICE OF SCHEDULE CHANGE. 611A.034 SEPARATE WAITING AREAS IN COURTHOUSE. 611A.035 CONFIDENTIALITY OF VICTIM'S ADDRESS. 611A.036 PROHIBITION AGAINST EMPLOYER RETALIATION. 611A.037 PRESENTENCE INVESTIGATION; VICTIM IMPACT; NOTICE. 611A.038 RIGHT TO SUBMIT STATEMENT AT SENTENCING. 611A.0385 SENTENCING; IMPLEMENTATION OF RIGHT TO NOTICE OF OFFENDER RELEASE AND EXPUNGEMENT. 611A.039 RIGHT TO NOTICE OF FINAL DISPOSITION OF CRIMINAL CASE. 611A.0392 NOTICE TO COMMUNITY CRIME PREVENTION GROUP. 611A.0393 CRIME ALERTS; VIOLENT CRIMES; DISABLED ACCESS. 611A.0395 RIGHT TO INFORMATION REGARDING DEFENDANT'S APPEAL. 611A.04 ORDER OF RESTITUTION. 611A.045 PROCEDURE FOR ISSUING ORDER OF RESTITUTION. 611A.046 VICTIM'S RIGHT TO REQUEST PROBATION REVIEW HEARING. 611A.05 PENALTIES NO BAR TO CIVIL REMEDIES. 611A.06 RIGHT TO NOTICE OF RELEASE. ELECTRONIC MONITORING 611A.07 ELECTRONIC MONITORING TO PROTECT DOMESTIC ABUSE VICTIMS; STANDARDS. BARRING PERPETRATOR RECOVERY 611A.08 BARRING PERPETRATORS OF CRIMES FROM RECOVERING FOR INJURIES SUSTAINED DURING CRIMINAL CONDUCT. SEXUAL OFFENSES; DOMESTIC ABUSE AND VIOLENCE 611A.19 TESTING SEX OFFENDER FOR HUMAN IMMUNODEFICIENCY VIRUS. 611A.20 NOTICE OF RISK OF SEXUALLY TRANSMITTED DISEASE. DOMESTIC VIOLENCE AND SEXUAL ASSAULT PREVENTION

This is Google's cache of http://home.earthlink.net/~malfeasance/id23.html. It is a snapshot of the page as it appeared on Jun 22, 2010 22:26:17 GMT. The current page could have changed in the meantime. Learn more Text-only versionThese terms only appear in links pointing to this page: http www vsb org profguides actions_jul06 dec06 html Citizens' Demand For An Investigation of Criminal Conspiracy by Beltway Attorneys and Judges Ib. Affidavit in Support of Criminal Complaint for Conspiracy Home | Letter to Congress on the Denial of the Right to Impartial Judicial Review of Misprision of a Felony | Our Purpose | Aug. 28, 2009 Letters to Preseident Obama and Gov. Kaine to Direct Response to Petition for Cert. | U.S. Supreme Court Petition for Cert. to DC Circuit to Oppose Disbarment based on VSBDB Void Order | I. Transmittal Letter to Federal Criminal Complaint Filed in the District of Columbia | Ia. D.C. CRIMINAL COMPLAINT FOR CONSPIRACY BY JUDGES, GOVERNMENT AND BELTWAY LOBBYIST/ATTORNEYS | Ib. Affidavit in Support of Criminal Complaint for Conspiracy | Ic. MEMO IN SUPPORT OF COMPLAINT TO INDICT JUDGES FOR CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY DEPRIVING FATHER OF RIGHTS | II. Transmittal Letter to Federal Criminal Complaint filed E.D. of Virgina | III. Transmittal Letter to Federal Criminal Complaint In Pennsylvania for Misprision of a Felony | IV. Transmittal Letter Federal Criminal Complaint Filed in Colorado for Obstruction of Justice. | V. TRANSMITTAL LETTER TO CRIMINAL COMPLAINT FOR JUDGES CABRANES ET AL. VIOLATING VOID ORDER DOCTRINE | Becoming a Member | Contact Us | Calendar of Events | Members Page | Newsletter | Links United States District Court District of Columbia ________________________________________________ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. John G. Roberts, et al., ________________________________________________) AFFIDAVIT OF PROBABLE CAUSE IN SUPPORT OF CRIMINAL COMPLAINT I. INTRODUCTION 1. I am a Citizen

Constitutional basis for legislation Congress derived its power to pass the Sherman Act through its constitutional authority to regulate interstate commerce. Therefore, Federal courts only have jurisdiction to apply the Act to conduct that restrains or substantially affects either interstate commerce or trade within the District of Columbia. This requires the plaintiff must show that the conduct occurred during the flow of interstate commerce or had an appreciable effect on some activity that occurs during interstate commerce. [edit] Elements A Section 1 violation has three elements:[16] An agreement which unreasonably restrains competition and which affects interstate commerce.