Uncategorized

what do you do when you’re a child and the lone adult in your house collapses? 5-year-old robert turner did exactly as he had been taught — he called 911 and reported that his mother had “passed out.” unfortunately, the 911 dispatcher demanded to talk to an adult in the house — which was clearly not possible — and then “hanged up” on the boy.

robert called 911 for a second time about three hours later and again told a dispatcher that his mom had passed out. again, the 911 dispatcher demanded to speak to his mother and then threatened the young boy: “Now put her on the phone before I send the police out there to knock on the door and you going to be in trouble.” robert got scared — and frustrated, no doubt — and hung up the phone.

the police (not paramedics) did arrive some time later and found robert’s mother dead. there is speculation that she would have lived had the first 911 dispatcher taken robert’s call seriously and sent help.

this case has ignited controversy and the detroit police department has promised a full investigation. a 911 union president said that more than 25% of calls received are pranks and that robert’s voice was inaudible at times. anyone who has ever tried to hold phone conversations with 5-year-olds can attest that it’s not always easy, but 911 dispatchers have a special responsibility to listen carefully and to act appropriately. if prank calls are such a problem, maybe local agencies should consider instituting small sanctions like assigning the perpetrators some level of community service to discourage such behavior.

celebrity lawyer geoffry fieger has taken on the case, so we should expect a media blitz and a large wrongful death lawsuit. i hope in the midst of the debate we remember that there are children who are alone and afraid and when they find the courage to call for help, it’s our responsibility to make sure they are heard.

what do you do when you’re a child and the lone adult in your house collapses? 5-year-old robert turner did exactly as he had been taught — he called 911 and reported that his mother had “passed out.” unfortunately, the 911 dispatcher demanded to talk to an adult in the house — which was clearly not possible — and then “hanged up” on the boy.

robert called 911 for a second time about three hours later and again told a dispatcher that his mom had passed out. again, the 911 dispatcher demanded to speak to his mother and then threatened the young boy: “Now put her on the phone before I send the police out there to knock on the door and you going to be in trouble.” robert got scared — and frustrated, no doubt — and hung up the phone.

the police (not paramedics) did arrive some time later and found robert’s mother dead. there is speculation that she would have lived had the first 911 dispatcher taken robert’s call seriously and sent help.

this case has ignited controversy and the detroit police department has promised a full investigation. a 911 union president said that more than 25% of calls received are pranks and that robert’s voice was inaudible at times. anyone who has ever tried to hold phone conversations with 5-year-olds can attest that it’s not always easy, but 911 dispatchers have a special responsibility to listen carefully and to act appropriately. if prank calls are such a problem, maybe local agencies should consider instituting small sanctions like assigning the perpetrators some level of community service to discourage such behavior.

celebrity lawyer geoffry fieger has taken on the case, so we should expect a media blitz and a large wrongful death lawsuit. i hope in the midst of the debate we remember that there are children who are alone and afraid and when they find the courage to call for help, it’s our responsibility to make sure they are heard.

washington state has been in the news quite a lot lately with its crime, Justice and voting issues, but shocking stories continue to emanate from the pacific northwest. the latest one to catch my attention is an article in the seattle times about two men facing federal drug charges in tacoma. apparently, federal prosecutors and officials from the bureau of alcohol, tobacco, firearms and explosives attained a warrant to seize the “grills” or gold-capped teeth from the mouths of the suspects.

the two suspects were told the government had a warrant to seize their grills and that they were being taken to a dentist in seattle for removal. they both managed quick phone calls to their attorneys before being loaded into a vehicle. they were on their way to the dentist in seattle when their attorneys persuaded a judge to stop the seizure.

grills, typically made of precious metals and jewels, come in several different styles. some snap onto teeth like a retainer and are easily removed; others are permanently bonded to the teeth. the two suspects in this case had permanently bonded grills. federal prosecutors claimed that they did not know the grills were permanently bonded to the suspects’ teeth. A spokeswoman for the u.s. attorney’s office explained: “Asset forfeiture is a fairly routine procedure, and our attorneys were under the impression that these snapped out like a retainer.” federal prosecutors abandoned the seizure attempt when they understood that the removal of grills could damage the defendants’ teeth.

i’m not entirely sure i believe the prosecutors’ story, given that they were taking the suspects to a dentist to have the grills removed. if they thought the grills just snapped out, would a trip to the dentist have been necessary?

at any rate, this case is highly disturbing. an expert of forfeiture law claimed he had never heard of anything like this in his 30 years in the field. i’ll give him the last word on this post:

“This is especially egregious because these two had not been convicted and are presumed to be innocent,” added forfeiture expert Troberman, who is not involved in the case. “What are they going to do next? Start taking artificial limbs from amputees?”

washington state has been in the news quite a lot lately with its crime, Justice and voting issues, but shocking stories continue to emanate from the pacific northwest. the latest one to catch my attention is an article in the seattle times about two men facing federal drug charges in tacoma. apparently, federal prosecutors and officials from the bureau of alcohol, tobacco, firearms and explosives attained a warrant to seize the “grills” or gold-capped teeth from the mouths of the suspects.

the two suspects were told the government had a warrant to seize their grills and that they were being taken to a dentist in seattle for removal. they both managed quick phone calls to their attorneys before being loaded into a vehicle. they were on their way to the dentist in seattle when their attorneys persuaded a judge to stop the seizure.

grills, typically made of precious metals and jewels, come in several different styles. some snap onto teeth like a retainer and are easily removed; others are permanently bonded to the teeth. the two suspects in this case had permanently bonded grills. federal prosecutors claimed that they did not know the grills were permanently bonded to the suspects’ teeth. A spokeswoman for the u.s. attorney’s office explained: “Asset forfeiture is a fairly routine procedure, and our attorneys were under the impression that these snapped out like a retainer.” federal prosecutors abandoned the seizure attempt when they understood that the removal of grills could damage the defendants’ teeth.

i’m not entirely sure i believe the prosecutors’ story, given that they were taking the suspects to a dentist to have the grills removed. if they thought the grills just snapped out, would a trip to the dentist have been necessary?

at any rate, this case is highly disturbing. an expert of forfeiture law claimed he had never heard of anything like this in his 30 years in the field. i’ll give him the last word on this post:

“This is especially egregious because these two had not been convicted and are presumed to be innocent,” added forfeiture expert Troberman, who is not involved in the case. “What are they going to do next? Start taking artificial limbs from amputees?”

since a few have asked, here are my top-8 shareable observations on my al franken experience (i’d stretch it to 10 but who really wants 20 percent more filler?).

1. the overall vibe of the franken shop is friendly, busy, can-do, and semi-idealistic. you know how you get a gut sense about whether an organization (or academic department) is on the rise or the decline? this place felt like a small shop on the way up. either that, or the staff is just enjoying the ride while it lasts.

2. about a half-dozen young people were working laptops when i arrived. some could have passed for sociology honors students. one helpfully found information on-the-fly just before we went on the air.

3. jerry garcia. lots of jerry garcia.

4. lunchtime is lunchtime, even for a show that airs from 11-2. almost everybody was eating at their computers over the noon hour. the host popped out between breaks to grab a few bites too.

5. they set mic levels by asking guests what they had for breakfast that morning. can you believe i was the first to say frosted mini-wheats? i’d imagine that lefties generally say that they breakfast on stuff like cruelty-free bagels and bulgar-wheat muffins. i’m glad i didn’t respond with the tasteless obscure sports reference that popped into my head (mike tyson’s children. [sorry]). frosted mini-wheats is much funnier.

6. as a proud but reputedly phlegmatic norwegian-american, i wasn’t aware that i spoke with my hands. turns out that i do, which is quite distracting for radio interviewers. mr. franken likely thought i was trying to relay some sort of elaborate secret signal (e.g., wrap it up quick, dude — the bulgar muffin is repeating on me!).

7. one shouldn’t make inferences from quick conversations, but … he’s so not a jerk. al franken is a look-you-in-the-eye real handshake kind of guy. off-air, he’s disarming and open. if he runs for office, he’ll win the crucial “which of these jokers would i rather have a beer with?” competition that has bedeviled the Dems in recent national elections.

8. the appearance likely sold a few books. locked out jumped up in amazon’s sales rankings from a place alongside building military dioramas, vol. viii to a more respectable position alongside such wide-readership classics as modern antenna design. now if we can sell a third copy…

since a few have asked, here are my top-8 shareable observations on my al franken experience (i’d stretch it to 10 but who really wants 20 percent more filler?).

1. the overall vibe of the franken shop is friendly, busy, can-do, and semi-idealistic. you know how you get a gut sense about whether an organization (or academic department) is on the rise or the decline? this place felt like a small shop on the way up. either that, or the staff is just enjoying the ride while it lasts.

2. about a half-dozen young people were working laptops when i arrived. some could have passed for sociology honors students. one helpfully found information on-the-fly just before we went on the air.

3. jerry garcia. lots of jerry garcia.

4. lunchtime is lunchtime, even for a show that airs from 11-2. almost everybody was eating at their computers over the noon hour. the host popped out between breaks to grab a few bites too.

5. they set mic levels by asking guests what they had for breakfast that morning. can you believe i was the first to say frosted mini-wheats? i’d imagine that lefties generally say that they breakfast on stuff like cruelty-free bagels and bulgar-wheat muffins. i’m glad i didn’t respond with the tasteless obscure sports reference that popped into my head (mike tyson’s children. [sorry]). frosted mini-wheats is much funnier.

6. as a proud but reputedly phlegmatic norwegian-american, i wasn’t aware that i spoke with my hands. turns out that i do, which is quite distracting for radio interviewers. mr. franken likely thought i was trying to relay some sort of elaborate secret signal (e.g., wrap it up quick, dude — the bulgar muffin is repeating on me!).

7. one shouldn’t make inferences from quick conversations, but … he’s so not a jerk. al franken is a look-you-in-the-eye real handshake kind of guy. off-air, he’s disarming and open. if he runs for office, he’ll win the crucial “which of these jokers would i rather have a beer with?” competition that has bedeviled the Dems in recent national elections.

8. the appearance likely sold a few books. locked out jumped up in amazon’s sales rankings from a place alongside building military dioramas, vol. viii to a more respectable position alongside such wide-readership classics as modern antenna design. now if we can sell a third copy…

i wrote last month about washington’s practice of denying voting rights to felons who can’t afford to pay state-imposed fines, fees, and court costs. king county superior court judge michael spearman ruled last week that felons who completed their sentence but have not paid back such fines cannot be denied the right to vote:

“The Washington re-enfranchisement scheme which excludes one group of felons from exercising the right to vote, while permitting another, where the sole distinction between them is the ability to pay money bears no rational relation to any stated or apparent governmental purpose.”

the state will surely appeal the ruling, but the practice paints an ugly picture for a democracy that prides itself on universal suffrage. plaintiff beverly dubois, convicted on a marijuana charge, has been paying $10 per month since her 2003 release. unfortunately, this doesn’t even cover the interest on her fine, so her $1,600 fine has increased to about $2,000. but for this fine, she would be eligible to vote in the state.

most people enter the criminal Justice system in poverty. making debtors of felons will make it that much more difficult for them to become stakeholding and tax-paying citizens in good standing. i wrote before that fining the poorest of the poor is either “piling on” to further criminalize the indigent or a misguided attempt to squeeze blood from turnips. in either case, the practice seems strange in a debtor nation — a nation itself in hock for $8,377,471,102,607.82 .

i wrote last month about washington’s practice of denying voting rights to felons who can’t afford to pay state-imposed fines, fees, and court costs. king county superior court judge michael spearman ruled last week that felons who completed their sentence but have not paid back such fines cannot be denied the right to vote:

“The Washington re-enfranchisement scheme which excludes one group of felons from exercising the right to vote, while permitting another, where the sole distinction between them is the ability to pay money bears no rational relation to any stated or apparent governmental purpose.”

the state will surely appeal the ruling, but the practice paints an ugly picture for a democracy that prides itself on universal suffrage. plaintiff beverly dubois, convicted on a marijuana charge, has been paying $10 per month since her 2003 release. unfortunately, this doesn’t even cover the interest on her fine, so her $1,600 fine has increased to about $2,000. but for this fine, she would be eligible to vote in the state.

most people enter the criminal Justice system in poverty. making debtors of felons will make it that much more difficult for them to become stakeholding and tax-paying citizens in good standing. i wrote before that fining the poorest of the poor is either “piling on” to further criminalize the indigent or a misguided attempt to squeeze blood from turnips. in either case, the practice seems strange in a debtor nation — a nation itself in hock for $8,377,471,102,607.82 .

in earlier posts, chris wrote about how we as a society dehumanize sex offenders, and i followed up on march 5th with more on the civil commitment of sex offenders after they have completed the original sentence imposed by the court. last week, the seattle times published a story about a “notorious” rapist who will be completing his 25-year sentence at the washington state penitentiary (apparently in its fifth week of lockdown) in september.

shortly before his release date, however, the state is planning to file a motion seeking a civil commitment for kevin coe, 59. according to the article, civil commitment motions are typically filed about a week before an inmate is due to be released, keeping him (or her) in state custody indefinitely while the case works its way through the courts. while awaiting a civil trial, coe would be held for years without bond at the special commitment center at mcneil island. if coe is sent to mcneil island, the chances for him to ever be released appear slim. a spokesman for the department of social and health services said: “there is no real pattern established for how long it takes to get through the program, but we have never had anybody graduate completely from the program.”

just to be clear, the program was established in 1990, and in its 16 years, it has never had anyone graduate. currently there are 236 “sexually violent predators” housed in the secure mental health facility on mcneil island. the total confinement facility opened in 2004 with a capacity of 228 beds for men and four beds for women. an adjacent building for “low maintenance residents” added 80 beds in 2005. expansion is planned–as needed–to accomodate up to a maximum operational capacity of 398 beds.

if washington state continues to civilly commit sex offenders who have completed their prison sentences while offering them virtually no possibility of release, they had better plan to keep building.

in earlier posts, chris wrote about how we as a society dehumanize sex offenders, and i followed up on march 5th with more on the civil commitment of sex offenders after they have completed the original sentence imposed by the court. last week, the seattle times published a story about a “notorious” rapist who will be completing his 25-year sentence at the washington state penitentiary (apparently in its fifth week of lockdown) in september.

shortly before his release date, however, the state is planning to file a motion seeking a civil commitment for kevin coe, 59. according to the article, civil commitment motions are typically filed about a week before an inmate is due to be released, keeping him (or her) in state custody indefinitely while the case works its way through the courts. while awaiting a civil trial, coe would be held for years without bond at the special commitment center at mcneil island. if coe is sent to mcneil island, the chances for him to ever be released appear slim. a spokesman for the department of social and health services said: “there is no real pattern established for how long it takes to get through the program, but we have never had anybody graduate completely from the program.”

just to be clear, the program was established in 1990, and in its 16 years, it has never had anyone graduate. currently there are 236 “sexually violent predators” housed in the secure mental health facility on mcneil island. the total confinement facility opened in 2004 with a capacity of 228 beds for men and four beds for women. an adjacent building for “low maintenance residents” added 80 beds in 2005. expansion is planned–as needed–to accomodate up to a maximum operational capacity of 398 beds.

if washington state continues to civilly commit sex offenders who have completed their prison sentences while offering them virtually no possibility of release, they had better plan to keep building.