Law Videos: Legal News & Law School Advice Videos // Current

added
3 days ago

Girl accuses Sacramento mayor of offering her hush money

Sacramento Mayor Kevin Johnson offered to pay $1,000 a month to one of three girls who had accused him of inappropriately touching... more

Future_America
added this

Woman pleads guilty in Elizabeth Smart case

One of two people charged in the 2002 abduction of Elizabeth Smart pleaded guilty Tuesday to federal charges. In a deal with... more

Future_America
added this

Ohio Changing Death Penalty Method

Ohio waded into uncharted territory Friday when it announced plans to switch from the usual three-drug cocktail used to execute... more

TravG73
added this

Former congressman sentenced to 13 years for bribery, racketeering

The former Louisiana congressman who famously hid $90,000 cash in his freezer and was later convicted of federal bribery charges... more

Future_America
added this

D.C. sniper executed in Virginia

John Allen Muhammad was executed Tuesday night for the sniper attacks in 2002 that left 10 dead and spread such fear people were afraid to go shopping, cut grass or pump gas.

The three-week killing spree in Virginia, Maryland and Washington, D.C., was carried out with a teenage accomplice who is serving life in prison without parole. Muhammad, 48, died by injection at 9:11 p.m. EST after he exhausted his court appeals and Gov. Tim Kaine denied clemency.

Muhammad's attorneys earlier had asked Kaine to commute his sentence to life in prison because they said he was severely mentally ill.

Muhammad had been sentenced to death for killing Dean Harold Meyers at a gas station in northern Virginia. He and his accomplice, Lee Boyd Malvo, also were suspected of fatal shootings in Alabama, Arizona, Louisiana and Washington state.

Muhammad was offered a choice for his last meal, which he accepted and requested that details not be released to the public, NBC News reported.

Prosecutors chose to put Muhammad and Malvo on trial in Virginia first because of the state's willingness to execute killers. He and Malvo were also convicted of six other murders in Maryland and both were sentenced to six life terms.

The death penalty was later ruled out for Malvo because the U.S. Supreme Court barred the execution of juveniles, who was 17 during the killing spree.

The motive for the shootings in the nation's capital region remains murky. Malvo said Muhammad wanted to use the plot to extort $10 million from the government to set up a camp in Canada where homeless children would be trained as terrorists. But Muhammad's ex-wife has said she believes the attacks were a smoke screen for his plan to kill her and regain custody of their three children.

Muhammad has never testified or explained why he directed the attacks that terrorized the Washington region, with victims gunned down while doing everyday chores. People stayed indoors, and those who had to go outside weaved as they walked or bobbed their heads to make themselves less of a target.

The terror ended Oct. 24, 2002, when police captured Muhammad and Malvo as they slept at a Maryland rest stop in a car they had outfitted so a shooter could hide in the trunk and fire through a hole in the body of the vehicle.

More @ link
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/33827106/ns/us_news-crime_and_courts/John Allen Muhammad was executed Tuesday night for the sniper attacks in 2002 that left 10 dead and spread such fear people were... more

Future_America
added this

6 comments

added
14 days ago

Supreme Court to review cases of juveniles sentenced to life in prison

Lawyers for two Florida men who were sentenced to life without parole as juveniles will argue to the U.S. Supreme Court Monday that the penalty is cruel and unusual.

With those words, a deeply divided U.S. Supreme Court in 2005 declared that the execution of adolescents was cruel and unusual punishment, and, hence, a violation of the U.S. Constitution. The ruling halted capital punishment for juveniles in 25 states.

On Monday, the lawyers for two Florida men who, as juveniles, were sentenced to life without parole for nonhomicides will ask the nation's highest court to declare the practice of incarcerating juveniles for the rest of their lives cruel and unusual, as well.

Life, the lawyers say, is different, too.

The Supreme Court will hold oral arguments on the two cases:. The case of Terrance Jamar Graham, convicted of armed robbery in Duval County, will be heard first at 10 a.m.; the appeal of Joe Sullivan, a convicted rapist from Pensacola, will be heard an hour later.

``What's at stake is that we have children who will die in prison because they have no right to parole, and there is no other option,'' said Paolo Annino, a Florida State University law professor who has been researching juvenile lifers for more than a decade. ``What's at stake is life and death.''

But for prosecutors, and some judges, the penultimate penalty of lifelong imprisonment is an important part of the nation's criminal justice tool box -- even for kids.

``Sentencing a juvenile to life imprisonment without the possibility of parole is a weighty matter. Prosecutors do not seek such punishment lightly, nor do courts impose it without careful consideration,'' the National District Attorneys Association wrote in a ``friend of the court'' brief.

``But youthful offenders sometimes commit heinous crimes -- rapes, kidnappings, and violent robberies and assaults that may leave the victim maimed for life, or worse.''

For almost two decades, lawmakers and state juvenile justice administrators have mounted an unprecedented assault on youthful offenders -- prosecuting teens in adult court, sending them to military-style boot camps and imposing long sentences as their weapons.

More @ link

http://www.miamiherald.com/460/story/1323698.htmlLawyers for two Florida men who were sentenced to life without parole as juveniles will argue to the U.S. Supreme Court Monday... more

Future_America
added this

7 comments

added
19 days ago

Court Upholds Right To Challenge Gene Patents

A federal district court ruled today that patients and scientists can challenge patents on human genes in court, allowing a lawsuit challenging patents on two human genes associated with hereditary breast and ovarian cancer to move forward.

The lawsuit was filed by the American Civil Liberties Union and the Public Patent Foundation (PUBPAT), a not-for-profit organization affiliated with Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law. The groups charge that the patents are illegal and restrict both scientific research and patients' access to medical care, and that patents on human genes violate the First Amendment and patent law because genes are "products of nature."

"We hope this challenge is the beginning of the end to patents on genes, which limit scientific research, learning and the free flow of information," said Chris Hansen, a staff attorney with the ACLU First Amendment Working Group. "No one should be able to patent a part of the human body."

The lawsuit, Association for Molecular Pathology, et al. v. U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, et al., was originally filed on May 12 in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York on behalf of breast cancer and women's health groups, individual women, geneticists and scientific associations representing approximately 150,000 researchers, pathologists and laboratory professionals. The lawsuit was filed against the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), as well as Myriad Genetics and the University of Utah Research Foundation, which hold the patents on the BRCA genes. The defendants asked the court to dismiss the case but today's ruling allows the lawsuit to proceed.

Because the ACLU's lawsuit challenges the whole notion of gene patenting, its outcome could have far-reaching effects beyond the patents on the BRCA genes. Approximately 20 percent of all human genes are patented, including genes associated with Alzheimer's disease, muscular dystrophy, colon cancer, asthma and many other illnesses.

More @ link

http://www.aclu.org/free-speech_womens-rights/court-upholds-right-scientists-and-patients-challenge-gene-patentsA federal district court ruled today that patients and scientists can challenge patents on human genes in court, allowing a... more

Future_America
added this

0 comments

added
1 month ago

Legalize Drugs Now!

by Conor Friedersdorf The raids on Mexican drug cartels and the violence in Rio are just the latest examples of America’s... more

Future_America
added this

8 comments

added
1 month ago

Oklahoma abortion law to put women's details online

A new law to take effect in will require doctors provide detailed information about women who have abortions, information to be... more

Future_America
added this

1 comment

added
2 months ago

New law lets men deny wives food if they refuse to have sex

Afghanistan has quietly passed a law permitting Shia men to deny their wives food and sustenance if they refuse to obey their... more

Future_America
added this

3 comments

added
2 months ago

NYC murder rate lowest in 50 years

More New Yorkers are out of work, and the cash-strapped city isn't graduating a new class of police cadets this year. And yet... more

AwesomeJosh
added this

22 comments

added
2 months ago

New Report Exposes Racial Profiling in Texas

A new report by Berkeley Law’s Chief Justice Earl Warren Institute on Race, Ethnicity and Diversity reveals that Hispanics... more

Future_America
added this

3 comments

added
2 months ago

Did Anti-ACORN “Journalists” Commit A Felony?

This supposition comes from conservative writer Rachel Marsden, who raises questions about the ethical implications of what they... more

Future_America
added this

3 comments

added
3 months ago

Same-sex marriages begin in Vermont

After 17 years together, Bill Slimback and Bob Sullivan couldn't wait another minute to get married. So they didn't.

With Vermont's new law allowing same-sex marriage only a minute old, they tied the knot in a midnight ceremony at a rustic lodge, becoming one of the first couples to legally wed under a law that took effect at midnight Monday.

Dressed in suits, saying their vows under a large wall-mounted moose head, the two Whitehall, N.Y., men promised their love, exchanged rings and held hands during a modest 17-minute ceremony. Moose Meadow Lodge co-owner Greg Trulson, who's also a Justice of the Peace, presided.

"It feels wonderful," said Slimback, 38, an out-of-work Teamster who is taking Sullivan's last name as his own. "It's a day I've been long waiting for, and a day I truly honestly thought would never come."

Slimback said he and Sullivan, 41, have long wanted to cement their relationship with a wedding, but since they couldn't legally marry in New York they chose to wed even before Vermont's gay marriage era officially dawned.

Vermont is one of five states that now allow same-sex couples to marry. Massachusetts, Connecticut and Iowa are the others. New Hampshire's law takes effect Jan. 1, 2010.

Vermont, which invented civil unions in 2000 after a same-sex couple challenged the inequality of state marriage statutes, was a mecca for gay couples who to that point had no way to officially recognize their relationships.

Since then, other states have allowed gay marriage, as did Vermont, which in April became the first state to legalize gay marriage through a legislative decree and not a court case.

Some couples - including many who obtained civil unions in Vermont - plan to return to the state to get married. But most are in no rush. City and town officials say only a handful of licenses had been issued to same-sex couples in anticipation of Tuesday's start.

"We've waited a long time to do this - basically, our whole lives," Slimback said Monday. "We've been waiting for a chance to actually solidify it," he said. He and Sullivan said they never wanted to obtain a civil union because they believe that's a kind of second-class recognition.After 17 years together, Bill Slimback and Bob Sullivan couldn't wait another minute to get married. So they didn't.... more

xiola
added this

0 comments

added
3 months ago

Blackwater in court for War Crimes hearing

Lawyers for Blackwater and its owner Erik Prince are in federal court in the Eastern District of Virginia today where they are... more

Future_America
added this

32 comments

added
3 months ago

20% of our genes are OWNED BY COMPANIES!

The Public Patent Foundation at Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law (PUBPAT) and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) filed a lawsuit charging that patents on two human genes associated with breast and ovarian cancer are unconstitutional and invalid. The lawsuit was filed on behalf of four scientific organizations representing more than 150,000 geneticists, pathologists, and laboratory professionals, as well as individual researchers, breast cancer and women’s health groups, and individual women. Individuals with certain mutations along these two genes, known as BRCA1 and BRCA2, are at a significantly higher risk for developing hereditary breast and ovarian cancers.

The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) has granted thousands of patents on human genes – in fact, about 20 percent of our genes are patented. A gene patent holder has the right to prevent anyone from studying, testing or even looking at a gene. As a result, scientific research and genetic testing has been delayed, limited or even shut down due to concerns about gene patents.

Since the PTO granted patents on the BRCA genes to Myriad Genetics, Myriad’s lab is the only place in the country where diagnostic testing can be performed. Because only Myriad can test for the BRCA gene mutations, others are prevented from testing these genes or developing alternative tests. Myriad’s monopoly on the BRCA genes makes it impossible for women to use other tests or get a second opinion about their results, and allows Myriad to charge a high rate for their tests – over $3,000, which is too expensive for some women to afford.

The lawsuit, Association for Molecular Pathology, et al. v. United States Patent and Trademark Office, et al., was filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York in Manhattan against the PTO, Myriad Genetics and the University of Utah Research Foundation, which hold the patents on the BRCA genes.

More info:
Lawsuit: http://www.aclu.org/images/asset_upload_file939_39568.pdf
The plaintiffs in the case: http://www.aclu.org/freespeech/gen/39572prs20090512.html
http://www.aclu.org/freespeech/gen/brca.htmlThe Public Patent Foundation at Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law (PUBPAT) and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) filed a... more

Future_America
added this

1 comment

added
3 months ago

Good Samaritans Stop Rape In Progress

OK, so this is pretty old, but I just found it, and it disgusted me. So, of course, I had to share it with you. :) A lady is on... more

xiola
added this

0 comments

added
3 months ago

Law enforcement group takes ‘legalize drugs’ message to Washington Post readers

Peter Moskos and Stanford "Neill" Franklin -- one a college professor, the other a former police officer, both members of the group Law Enforcement Against Prohibition (LEAP) -- saw their advocacy of ending drug prohibition published Monday morning by The Washington Post.

Their argument is compelling. Here's an excerpt:

Only after years of witnessing the ineffectiveness of drug policies -- and the disproportionate impact the drug war has on young black men -- have we and other police officers begun to question the system.

Cities and states license beer and tobacco sellers to control where, when and to whom drugs are sold. Ending Prohibition saved lives because it took gangsters out of the game. Regulated alcohol doesn't work perfectly, but it works well enough. Prescription drugs are regulated, and while there is a huge problem with abuse, at least a system of distribution involving doctors and pharmacists works without violence and high-volume incarceration. Regulating drugs would work similarly: not a cure-all, but a vast improvement on the status quo.

Legalization would not create a drug free-for-all. In fact, regulation reins in the mess we already have. If prohibition decreased drug use and drug arrests acted as a deterrent, America would not lead the world in illegal drug use and incarceration for drug crimes.

Drug manufacturing and distribution is too dangerous to remain in the hands of unregulated criminals. Drug distribution needs to be the combined responsibility of doctors, the government, and a legal and regulated free market. This simple step would quickly eliminate the greatest threat of violence: street-corner drug dealing.
The column's authors argue that among all the reasons for drug war reform, the most important to them is that ending America's war on its drug users means "more police officers wouldn't have to die."

LEAP is currently promoting a petition in support of a blue ribbon commission, proposed by Sen. Jim Webb (D-VA), that would study drug criminalization as a means of reforming the U.S. prison system.

Sen. Webb's bill is backed by Senator Arlen Specter (D-PA) and has reportedly received "quiet encouragement from President Barack Obama."Peter Moskos and Stanford "Neill" Franklin -- one a college professor, the other a former police officer, both members... more

bansheewail
added this

48 comments

added
3 months ago

Dogfighters get creative as spotlight on Vick case fades

When pro quarterback Michael Vick pleaded guilty to bankrolling a dogfighting operation in 2007, there was a spike in reports of... more

xiola
added this

11 comments

added
3 months ago

Blackwater Founder Implicated in Murder

A former Blackwater employee and an ex-US Marine who has worked as a security operative for the company have made a series of explosive allegations in sworn statements filed on August 3 in federal court in Virginia. The two men claim that the company's owner, Erik Prince, may have murdered or facilitated the murder of individuals who were cooperating with federal authorities investigating the company. The former employee also alleges that Prince "views himself as a Christian crusader tasked with eliminating Muslims and the Islamic faith from the globe," and that Prince's companies "encouraged and rewarded the destruction of Iraqi life."

In their testimony, both men also allege that Blackwater was smuggling weapons into Iraq. One of the men alleges that Prince turned a profit by transporting "illegal" or "unlawful" weapons into the country on Prince's private planes. They also charge that Prince and other Blackwater executives destroyed incriminating videos, emails and other documents and have intentionally deceived the US State Department and other federal agencies. The identities of the two individuals were sealed out of concerns for their safety.

These allegations, and a series of other charges, are contained in sworn affidavits, given under penalty of perjury, filed late at night on August 3 in the Eastern District of Virginia as part of a seventy-page motion by lawyers for Iraqi civilians suing Blackwater for alleged war crimes and other misconduct. Susan Burke, a private attorney working in conjunction with the Center for Constitutional Rights, is suing Blackwater in five separate civil cases filed in the Washington, DC, area. They were recently consolidated before Judge T.S. Ellis III of the Eastern District of Virginia for pretrial motions. Burke filed the August 3 motion in response to Blackwater's motion to dismiss the case. Blackwater asserts that Prince and the company are innocent of any wrongdoing and that they were professionally performing their duties on behalf of their employer, the US State Department.

Click link for shocking statements about what Blackwater did.A former Blackwater employee and an ex-US Marine who has worked as a security operative for the company have made a series of... more