Gangsters in Blue

• Sportswriter Mike Celizic has just a couple weeks to live, and he’s writing about the experience.
• Matthew Yglesias suggests that maybe heavy-handed licensing laws directed at barbers aren’t such a good idea, and might have some protectionist effects. His commenters cry “Judas!”
• A.P.: Obama administration filtering some FOIA requests through political channels, gathering information on those who make the requests and their motives.
• Woman accidentally gets t-shirt wet at an Orlando theme park. Police ask she cover up, then demand she give them personal information to enter into database. Having broke no law, she refuses. Naturally, they arrest her.
• California photojournalist wins settlement after an ugly confrontation with local police chief.  Pretty sure the fact that she was able to capture the incident on video had something to do with her winning a settlement—and the chief’s subsequent resignation.
• Kansas police unsure how they’re going to enforce bans on texting while driving. They’re right. It’s impossible to enfore. And some crazy blogger warned you this would be a problem.

• Don’t be gay, Sparky.
• May 20th is “Everybody Draw Mohammed Day.”
• James Madison University police conduct illegal raid on student newspaper offices, demand unpublished photos of a campus riot. More here.
• The A.P. on cops who’ve been caught misbehaving on video.
• Indiana court (mildly) upholds the right to resist police who enter your home unlawfully.
• Now: Green-light cameras.

A quick roundup of recent stories on law enforcement officials and DWI laws…

• Ten police officers in Westchester County, New York admit to local newspaper that they routinely let other officers off after catching them driving drunk off duty.
• Off-duty, possibly drunk South Carolina officer pulled over after a chase demands “professional courtesy” she says is customarily granted to other officers. She was charged with reckless driving and disorderly conduct, but wasn’t arrested or given a breath test, and was allowed to go home.
• Chicago police officer shown to have faked dozens of DWI arrests won’t face criminal charges.
• Off-duty Massachusetts state police lieutenant crashes into pickup truck, causing the truck to flip several times. Officer admitted drinking earlier in the day and two open beer cans were found in his car. Other officers don’t administer field sobriety test for 2 1/2 hours, after allowing him to talk to his attorney. He was also never given breath or blood tests. He did get a $20 traffic ticket.
• From last year, DWI charges dropped against Nevada DA who caused two crashes within six hours while in California, and tested over the legal limit after the second. He was allowed to plead to reckless driving.

The three members of the Motorhome Diaries crew who were arrested a few months ago in Jones County, Mississippi recently had their first court appearance. Tom Schornhorst, a Fourth Amendment expert and professor emeritus at the Indiana University School of Law is representing them pro bono, and has an interesting write-up of what happened. In short, the case against them looks pretty thin.

Here’s a bit of an odd coincidence: Schornhorst found out about the case via my personal blog, The Agitator. One of the other lawyers helping out with their case is former Jackson, Mississippi Mayor Dale Danks. Danks also happens to be the private attorney of embattled Mississippi medical examiner Steven Hayne.

Reason.tv interviewed the Motorhome Diaries guys twice, once before they began their cross-country trek, and again about midway through their adventures.

For his own officers, that is.

Discipline cases against dozens of San Francisco police officers would be dismissed under an amnesty program proposed by Chief George Gascón.

The new police chief told The Chronicle on Wednesday that he wants to see “the great majority” of roughly 75 discipline cases pending before the civilian Police Commission end with little or no punishment for officers accused of minor misconduct.

Those cases, he said, include charges such as use of inappropriate language, being discourteous, failing to properly fill out a police report or a first-time misdemeanor drunken-driving arrest. They would also most likely involve first-time offenders rather than officers with a long history of complaints against them.

“We don’t get anything out of taking a pound of flesh,” Gascón said.

According to Bay area DUI defense sites, penalties for a first-time conviction in California can include six to 30 months of alcohol and driving safety classes, suspension of your driver’s license, up to three years of probation, $390-$1,000 in fines, and the possible installation of an ignition interlock device at your expense.

Will Chief Gascón propse non-police residents of San Francisco get a pass on first time offenses too, or just those residents who also happen to be members of law enforcement?

CORRECTION: The amnesty for drunk driving would be with respect to professional disciplinary action, not to possible criminal charges.

Full story here. The cop says he tased and arrested her because when she got out of her car, she was blocking traffic and creating a dangerous situation. But when she gets back into the car, he then pulls her back out and throws her down in the middle of the street.

Note too that the though the cop pulled her over for using a cell phone, she was able to prove she didn’t have one. So he wrote her a ticket for going 5 MPH over the speed limit—a figure he calculated without use of radar. I can understand those who say she should have gotten back in her car after the cop instructed her to do so. But I can also understand her anger, and her desire to see the video to prove she wasn’t speeding. The speeding ticket for a paltry 5 mph over seems retaliatory.

She ended up with four tickets, for speeding, talking on a cell phone while driving, resisting arrest, and disorderly conduct. All of those charges were dropped after prosecutors viewed the video.

Curious to know what the “shut up and do as your told” crowd thinks of this. Should the woman have just accepted the cell phone ticket and not attempted to prove she didn’t have one? Should she have just accepted the speeding ticket that seemed to be retaliation for proving her innocence with the cell phone? Why should she have to endure the hassle of obtaining the dash video and wasting her time in traffic court to prove her innocence? Was the cop right to taser and arrest her? What should happen to him?

In yesterday’s Washington Post, Colbert King relayed another story of a police power play during a traffic stop.

…there doesn’t seem to be much at work in this story.

When Donald Ross’s sister passed, more than 100 people attended her funeral mass in Spokane.

The burial was scheduled for a nearby cemetery, but Ross and his family only made it a quarter of a mile when flashing lights forced them to the side of the road.

“Harold, his (my husband’s) brother, said, ‘You pulled us out of a funeral procession,’” said wife Shirley Ross.

But the deputy kept them there, writing up five citations because the driver and the passengers were not wearing a seat belts…

Those five tickets took 12 minutes to write. By the time Ross and his family members got back on the road, the burial was over.

The police department has apologized and reprimanded the officer. Just kidding!

…the sheriff’s department says [the deputy] had every right.

“We’re out here trying to prevent funerals, not disrupt them,” said Dave Reagan of Spokane County Sheriff’s Office.

Police officers don’t have rights, they have powers. And the fact that they have them doesn’t mean they always have to use them, even in those situations where the law allows them.  Seems to me that making a woman miss her brother’s burial in order to write her a ticket—not for endangering others, but for not buckling her own seat belt—would be one of those times when some discretion might be in order.

Thanks to reader Judy for the tip.