web analytics
a

Facebook

Twitter

Copyright 2015 Libero Themes.
All Rights Reserved.

8:30 - 6:00

Our Office Hours Mon. - Fri.

703-406-7616

Call For Free 15/M Consultation

Facebook

Twitter

Search
Menu

5 top lawyers share insight into their careers

Westlake Legal Group justice-statue 5 top lawyers share insight into their careers top lawyers Profiles northern virginia lawyers lawyers law Culture Features Culture
© Kaspars Grinvalds / stock.adobe.com

There are more than 24,000 lawyers practicing in the state of Virginia and over 56,000 practicing in DC, according to recent data from the American Bar Association. Think about it. When was the last time you went to a dinner party, kids’ soccer practice or other local gathering where you didn’t bump into a lawyer? The point is: There are literally tens of thousands of lawyers in this region. So, when you need one (for more than just cocktail-party chatter), it can be hard to know where to start. With Northern Virginia Magazine’s annual Top Lawyers list, now you do. We interviewed a few to find out what it’s really like to be a lawyer in the DMV.

Westlake Legal Group deborah-d-cochran 5 top lawyers share insight into their careers top lawyers Profiles northern virginia lawyers lawyers law Culture Features Culture
Deborah D. Cochran (Photo by Aaron Spicer)
Deborah D. Cochran

Cochran Allan

What do you love about being a lawyer?
Every day I come to work and get to meet with interesting people. My job is to listen to my client’s concerns and goals and to help develop a plan to alleviate their worries and concerns. Developing an estate plan is like putting a puzzle together and is very rewarding when it all comes together in a way that honors my clients’ wishes and best preserves their assets for their heirs. I love to help clients make their decisions and see them visibly relax and feel more secure and confident with the process.

Tell us a favorite client memory.
My funniest memory is when I took my young son to the bank to meet with a client on a Saturday after her mom died because she needed help going through her mother’s papers. My son ended up leaving his bottle of milk in the safe deposit box and nobody noticed for a week. You can imagine how awful the bank smelled after that!

Westlake Legal Group elaine-charlson-bredehoft 5 top lawyers share insight into their careers top lawyers Profiles northern virginia lawyers lawyers law Culture Features Culture
Elaine Charlson Bredehoft (Photo by Aaron Spicer)
Elaine Charlson Bredehoft

Charlson Bredehoft Cohen & Brown, PC

What inspired you to become a lawyer?
I have wanted to be a lawyer since I was 6 years old. I had a first grade teacher who picked on weaker students and I would stand up to her on their behalf. My dad was a trial lawyer and I would sometimes wake up late at night, and watch him with his legal pad, talking to himself and working on his arguments for trial. In third grade, I petitioned for two snow hills so the fifth and sixth graders would not be able push the third and fourth graders off the hill so easily. Everyone in the third and fourth grade signed my petition. From then on, there were two snow hills. I continued throughout school to advocate for changes, including girls no longer had to wear skirts and girls did not have to take home economics while boys took shop. I learned that when I worked hard and spoke out against unfairness, we were able to effect change.

Westlake Legal Group peter-d-greenspun 5 top lawyers share insight into their careers top lawyers Profiles northern virginia lawyers lawyers law Culture Features Culture
Peter D. Greenspun (Photo by Aaron Spicer)
Peter D. Greenspun

Greenspun Shapiro, PC

What inspired you to become a lawyer?
It is a long and funny story, but I had a retired uncle in Philadelphia who was a court watcher with a small group of older, retired men. They went to federal court every day and watched trials. They were known to the judges, prosecutors and defense lawyers, and had a true insider track on what was happening. After college, law school became a somewhat default choice as to what was next. There is much more to the story, but this was the start.

What do you love about being a lawyer?
It is a bit corny, but simply helping people get the best result possible, and also helping them—and often their families—move forward. Pretty regularly I receive a letter or email from someone we represented years ago, telling me how well they are doing. That is just terrific, and makes my day.

Westlake Legal Group susan-m.-pesner 5 top lawyers share insight into their careers top lawyers Profiles northern virginia lawyers lawyers law Culture Features Culture
Susan M. Pesner (Photo by Aaron Spicer)
Susan M. Pesner

Pesner Altmiller Melnick & DeMers, PLC

Tell us about a favorite client memory.
Oh, there are so many—completing a sale or a purchase of a home for a client is always very satisfying and I enjoy each one of those settlements. Additionally, the past few years I was appointed by the court in settlement of two intra-family litigations and served as a court-appointed trustee of family trusts/partnerships that owned valuable Fairfax County real estate. I solicited bids, negotiated contracts, maintained and insured the properties, shepherded the process of rezoning and/or subdivision of the properties into building lots in order to achieve the highest prices for the families and completed settlement and disbursement. I think my calm approach after years of litigation was comforting for the families and allowed the process to flow with minimal confrontations and very few bumps in the road.

Westlake Legal Group sonya-l-powell 5 top lawyers share insight into their careers top lawyers Profiles northern virginia lawyers lawyers law Culture Features Culture
Sonya L. Powell (Photo by Aaron Spicer)
Sonya L. Powell

Powell Radomsky, PLLC

What do you love about being a lawyer?
Family law attorneys are so different in that clients trust you with their most personal information, good and bad. It is humbling to have clients feel that their trust is well-placed and to know that how you represent them can affect their lives in profound ways, such as custody and finances.

Tell us a favorite client memory?
It is always a great feeling to have cases in trial go your way and where you feel that everything you did was exactly right and you and the judge are on the same page on all the issues. But, my favorite memories of clients are not of the wins in trial. It is of clients who come to see me and they are initially overwhelmed, sad, depressed or just afraid. I put together strategies, to-do lists and hopefully give them a sense of power or hope. To see clients become stronger, confident or better co-parents at the end of the process is wonderful and keeps me doing what I am doing.

This post originally appeared in our December 2019 issue. For more profiles on NoVA community members, subscribe to our newsletters.

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Unfit for office. But worse even than Corbyn are Labour’s moderates – who are willing to put his anti-Jewish racism into power.

It’s claimed that the twentieth century saw a totalitarianism of race, fascism, and one of class, communism.  But the truth is that the two tended to mingle.  The nazis were class warriors, at least in their earlier phases (the National Socialist German Workers’ Party, our italic).  And the communists were sometimes race ones.

Stalin “always hated Jews”, Paul Johnson tells us.  “He hated the fact that so many of his relatives wished to marry Jews, and refused to meet five out of his eight grandchildren.”

So perhaps the institutional anti-semitism of Labour under Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership should be all that surprising.  But it still has the power to shock.  One Jewish party member was told that “Hitler was right”; another heard two members agree that Jews are “subhuman”. Another that “we only have prostitutes in Seven Sisters because of the Jews”. An unsuccessful council candidate was told to go home and count his money.

An online post referred to “bent-nosed manipulative liars”; another to “cockroaches of the Jew kind”.  Others used such terms as “kike” and “yid”.  One Jewish Labour MP was called a “yid c**t”.  Another was told that “we shall rid the Jews who are a cancer on all of us”.  The party has certainly lost the MP concerned.  It was Luciana Berger, now a Liberal Democrat – unable to bear Corbyn’s Labour any more.

Another member was called a “f**king Jew”.  Another former Labour MP, Louise Ellman, has left the party.  But why continue this shaming list?  Please note: none of these quotes are connected with Israel.  None of them even land in that murky territory where anti-Zionism and anti-semitism meet – for example, where Israel’s actions are compared to the nazis’.

All that is necessary to add is that the source of these quotes is decidedly non-Conservative.  It is the closing submission to the Equality and Human Rights Commission of the Jewish Labour Movement, the party’s “only Jewish and longest-standing affiliate”, as it describes itself.  The assertion that Labour’s anti-semitism is “institutional” and “endemic” is the Movement’s own.

And it is in no doubt at all why it has come about.  “Since Jeremy Corbyn has become leader of the Labour Party, he has made the party a welcoming refuge for anti-semites,” the submission says.  It goes on to list in detail Labour’s failing to deal with the problem under the following headings: failure to implement processes to protect Jewish members from anti-semitism; hostile response to those calling out anti-semitism…

…Denial; discrediting of victims; defence of perpetrators; active victimisation of those calling out anti-semitism: on and on the submission goes.  The more of the detail one reads, the less Corbyn’s own personal views matter.  Whether he is or isn’t himself anti-semitic becomes scacely the point any more (though the evidence suggests that in his characteristic dim muddy way he is.  (“Zionists don’t understand English irony”, he once said.)

Yes, anti-Muslim prejudice, and even anti-semitism, can be found on the Right.  ConservativeHome needs no-one to remind us so: after all, we were the first conservative media outlet, as far as we know, to call for an enquiry into the former – doing so as long ago as 2010.  We later supported an enquiry into all forms of hatred by the anti-extremism commissioner.  The Conservatives have taken up the idea of an independent enquiry.

But there is a solid reason why most of our media colleagues have fixed their attention on anti-semitism and Jeremy Corbyn rather than anti-Muslim prejudice and Boris Johnson.  It is because while parallelism always has a mesmeric attraction, there is sense in not applying it in this case.  Which is why Sayeeda Warsi’s campaign has struggled to gain lift-off outside its usual Guardian and Independent stomping grounds.

If the parallel really applied, Johnson would have been playing footsie for years with, say, David Duke.  (Steve Bannon is not the same thing – and his relationship with Johnson is clearly tangential, in any event.)  And the problem with Party members would be far wider and deeper than all the available evidence suggests that it is.  That independent enquiry into prejudice and hatred cross-party would tell us more.

In the meantime, there is an election to be getting on with.  Most voters will have what to them are more pressing reasons to reject Corbyn than anti-semitism.  After all, nearly all of them aren’t Jewish.  Labour’s anti-semitism thus touches few of them directly.  Far more simply don’t trust Labour with their taxes.  Or think Corbyn just isn’t a leader. Or hate his pro-IRA history. Or else just want to “get Brexit done”, as Johnson keeps putting it.

They nonetheless have – in the other sense of the words that follow – an interest in anti-semitism: a stake in opposing it, one might say.  Hatred of Jews is what doctors would call an early indicator, a bit like memory loss in relation to Alzheimer’s: a warning of what is to come.  If Labour is prepared to treat a group of people with such institutional viciousness, simply because of who they are, how will they treat other people they dislike?

If the party’s own internal processes won’t deal with anti-semitism justly, how can its leaders be trusted to use the machinery of government fairly?  For example, would businesses get a fair price for assets that are nationalised?  Would companies get proper value for the shares they commandeer?  What price would Labour compel landlords to sell their properties at?  What wages would they force businesses to pay?

As Neil O’Brien recently put it on this site: “where Corbyn’s ideas really differ from previous Labour leaders is that he doesn’t really believe in the rule of law. Your house, your business, your savings: all these things don’t really belong to you, in Corbyn’s eyes: you have them only as long as the government suffers you to have them, and they can be retrospectively taken away if he sees fit.”

The Jewish Labour Movement knows all this very, and has decided that, Labour though it is to the core, it cannot give Corbyn the thumbs-up – or even wrap itself in the silence that can be taken for consent.  Others have decided otherwise.  We know what his own Shadow Health Secretary thinks of Corbyn, thanks to Guido Fawkes’ story yesterday.

We scarcely need to guess what the stalwarts of Blairism and Brownism think: Yvette Cooper, Hillary Benn, Jess Phillips, Liz Kendall.  Unlike Berger, they haven’t been driven out.  Unlike Tom Watson, they haven’t walked away.

They’re still there – standing for election.  Their anti-Toryism outweighs Corbyn’s anti-semitism.  It must do: or they wouldn’t be prepared to support him as Prime Minister in the event of Labour forming a government.  We say that they are therefore even worse than he is – worthy of a place in an even lower circle of hell.

Corbyn either doesn’t know or doesn’t care about the vileness of the institutional anti-semitism that he has brought to his party: the other of what was, until he got hold of it, Britain’s great modern democratic twins.  They know.  And truly, they care.  But not enough.

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

A $2 Drug Test Identified Bird Poop as Cocaine. But Law Enforcement Continues to Use it, and People are Being Wrongly Imprisoned

Westlake Legal Group cocaine-396751_1280-620x534 A $2 Drug Test Identified Bird Poop as Cocaine. But Law Enforcement Continues to Use it, and People are Being Wrongly Imprisoned wrongly accused Uncategorized Science prison meth law enforcement law Government Front Page Stories Featured Story Drugs crime cocaine Allow Media Exception

 

 

Do you need a hit?

Of that white powder?

That Columbian booger sugar?

I’m talking, of course, about bird poop (they have lots of birds in Columbia).

If so, you might get arrested — for possession of cocaine.

According to a Vice report, cops across America have been using the same type of $2 test to determine whether any given suspicious substance is the ol’ 80’s standby or other illegal doorways to euphoria.

And that test has come up positive when supplied with bird droppings.

Additionally, it’s interpreted doughnut crumbs as meth and vitamins as oxycodone.

Man — that’s making want a dozen glazed meth.

In every case known to Vice, drug trafficking charges were eventually dropped, thanks to further testing by a state lab.

But the initial tests — known as “presumptive field tests” — have, as stated by Vice, “a history of being almost laughably wrong — if they weren’t putting people behind bars, even temporarily. And the follow-up lab tests that eventually clear people’s names can take weeks, if not months.”

During that interim, the article asserts, some who are innocent may be scared into accepting a plea deal rather than risking worse at trial.

Furthermore, those who can’t afford bail are stuck in jail as they decide which to do.

The article spotlights Cody Gregg, a homeless Oklahoma City man. He pleaded guilty, purportedly to get out of the city’s terrible lockup. He was charged with possession after a janky test identified powdered milk as Satan’s Snow.

The guy was sentenced to 15 years in prison.

It took nearly two months of jail time before he was cleared.

Claflin University Biology Professor Omar Bagasra insists, “You cannot indict somebody — put somebody in jail — over something you know has a very high rate of false positives.”

He knows a thing or two about it — he once partook in a Marijuana Policy Project study that determined a common field test wrongly identified spearmint, eucalyptus, and patchouli as the Devil’s Lettuce.

His research team pinpointed “the serious possibility of tens of thousands of wrongful drug convictions.”

To stress their point, the group repeatedly produced false positives before the National Press Club — from common substances such as chocolate bars.

As per a 2016 ProPublica investigation, the cheapo tests lead to thousands of arrests each year.

Fortunately, they’re frequently inadmissible in court, hence the follow-up in a proper lab.

But here’s how the little critters work: An officer drops a sample of something into a small pouch, then he breaks a capsule containing compounds which ignite a chemical reaction. A few moments later, your Kool-Aid Pixie Stick may have just snagged you a deuce in the joint.

The problems with the tests aren’t unknown to the powers that be, but they don’t always trickle down:

In 2000, the Justice Department issued guidelines requesting the tests’ manufacturers include warning labels telling cops that the tests could produce false positives and therefore require appropriate training. But ProPublica’s investigation found those guidelines were largely ignored. Newer, more accurate tests are available, but police departments don’t typically buy them because they can cost tens of thousands of dollars.

“If officers are not trained to get the message that a positive drug test is more equivocal than the label would make you think, you’ll have police officers thinking, ‘Positive means it’s definitely drugs,’” said Carl Takei, a senior staff attorney at the ACLU’s Trone Center for Justice and Equality. Instead, a positive result means that the presence of drugs can’t be ruled out but should be weighed with plenty of other evidence before officers proceed.

The pouches’ flaws were considered — to a degree — amid the arrest of aforementioned homeless Cody Gregg:

Oklahoma City Police told VICE News that the officers did weigh other evidence in Gregg’s August arrest for possessing the powdered milk that tested positive for cocaine.

For example, Gregg had a prior history of drug convictions and ran from police when they attempted to stop him for a missing taillight on his bicycle. Once they retrieved the backpack he was carrying, they found the clear bag of a “white powdery substance” and a scale, too. All of those things factored into his arrest — not just the presumptive drug test.

Tulsa County public defender Natalie Leone claims she handles a drug case with false positives about once a month.

One such was that of Calamitous Carl:

This past May, Tulsa police found one of her clients, Carl Fisher, with a glass container of liquid that tested positive for meth in the field. Fisher, who’s homeless, was asleep in a car in a residential parking lot when officers approached him with guns drawn because they considered the car stolen. They tased him multiple times and dragged him out of the car, body-camera footage shows.

Fisher was arrested on drug charges, resisting arrest, and assault on a police officer. He was behind bars for nearly two months on what was initially a $160,000 bail before state lab results cleared him. He then remained in jail until October, when he agreed to plead no contest to the charge of resisting arrest.

So we’ve learned a few things: Firstly, don’t sleep in strange cars.

And as for your wacky substances, you’re out of luck initially, if a cheap test points the wrong way.

You may need to bolster your case to the popo. So maybe keep those vitamin bottles. And candy bar wrappers. And that doughnut box.

As it turns out, Mitch Hedberg was wrong:



-ALEX

 

A Forced Baptism, Sexual Assault, And A Cavity Search Comprise The Worst Non-Lethal Police Conduct You’re Likely To Find – By The Same Officer

Manure Mania: North Koreans Are Fighting Over Feces As The Government Demands Every Citizen Produce 200 Pounds Of Human Waste

Tragedy In Texas: Police End Up Shooting A Woman During A Welfare Check On Her. Some Are Calling It Murder

Find all my RedState work here.

And please follow Alex Parker on Twitter and Facebook.

Thank you for reading! Please sound off in the Comments section below. 

The post A $2 Drug Test Identified Bird Poop as Cocaine. But Law Enforcement Continues to Use it, and People are Being Wrongly Imprisoned appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group cocaine-396751_1280-300x258 A $2 Drug Test Identified Bird Poop as Cocaine. But Law Enforcement Continues to Use it, and People are Being Wrongly Imprisoned wrongly accused Uncategorized Science prison meth law enforcement law Government Front Page Stories Featured Story Drugs crime cocaine Allow Media Exception   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Absolute Miracle: At the Last Second, a Couple and Their Baby are Saved from a Drunk Driver by an Angel in a Chevrolet

Westlake Legal Group phoenix-intersection-couple-angel-drunk-driver-edited-SCREENSHOT-620x342 Absolute Miracle: At the Last Second, a Couple and Their Baby are Saved from a Drunk Driver by an Angel in a Chevrolet Uncategorized traffic accident religion PHOENIX miracle law Front Page Stories Featured Story Family ernesto oveso DUI drunk driving crime baby Arizona Allow Media Exception

[Screenshot from Phoenix Police Department via Twitter, https://twitter.com/phoenixpolice/status/1187096824491806721?]

 

In Arizona Wednesday, October 14th, the lives of a couple and their baby were astonishingly saved by an angel in a Chevrolet.

Were it not for her, they would likely have been violently killed by a drunk driver.

While the pair was pushing a stroller along the crosswalk of a 6-lane Phoenix highway, intoxicated 23-year-old Ernesto Oveso — accompanied by a female passenger — came barreling through.

Speeding beneath the red light.

The racing Jeep was headed straight for the family.

Death seem imminent.

But something happened: a 27-year-old woman cut across the intersection in a Chevy Cruz.

At the exact moment Ernesto was to destroy a family of three.

The Jeep plowed into the Cruz instead of the baby and parents.

Tragedy, averted.

Incredible.

A miracle.

As reported by Fox10, Ernesto and his passenger attempted to flee the scene in their vehicle.

A witness chased after.

The woman eventually got away, but Ernesto was caught and arrested.

He was charged with a DUI and aggravated assault.

A gun was found inside the Jeep.

The driver in the car hit by Ernesto wasn’t harmed.

As I wrote Thursday, “We never know if today is a bridge to tomorrow or the end of yesterday’s road.”

We also never know when the hand of providence might reach down and snatch us from the jaws of death.

Such was the case for a couple and their baby.

Such may be the case for any of us, at any time.

May we all live lives worthy of that miracle.

-ALEX

 

See 3 more pieces from me:

Christmas Miracle: Dad Murders Baby, But There Was ‘Someone Watching Over’ Her

Miracle In China: 3-Year-Old Falls 60 Feet From A High Rise Balcony, But Neighbors Catch Him (Video)

Incredible: Man Saves His Children From A Carjacker, But The Shocking Ending Is Harrowing

Find all my RedState work here.

And please follow Alex Parker on Twitter and Facebook.

Thank you for reading! Please sound off in the Comments section below. 

The post Absolute Miracle: At the Last Second, a Couple and Their Baby are Saved from a Drunk Driver by an Angel in a Chevrolet appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group phoenix-intersection-couple-angel-drunk-driver-edited-SCREENSHOT-300x166 Absolute Miracle: At the Last Second, a Couple and Their Baby are Saved from a Drunk Driver by an Angel in a Chevrolet Uncategorized traffic accident religion PHOENIX miracle law Front Page Stories Featured Story Family ernesto oveso DUI drunk driving crime baby Arizona Allow Media Exception   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Where We Are: Massachusetts Eyes a Bill Making it Illegal to Call Someone a ‘B-tch’

Westlake Legal Group dog-3071334_1280-620x349 Where We Are: Massachusetts Eyes a Bill Making it Illegal to Call Someone a ‘B-tch’ Uncategorized Politics Massachusetts law Front Page Stories freedom of speech Featured Story daniel hunt Culture crime Boston Allow Media Exception

 

 

Is there still freedom of speech, or are there only remnants of a once-unfettered liberty?

In Massachusetts, lawmakers have proposed making it illegal to call someone a “b*tch.”

Therefore, in this new paradigm, you’d be able to call somebody a _____, and a _____, and a _____, and a ______, and even a mother__ing ______ of a ______ like a ______ full of ______ and with their ______ up their _____ing big___ ________.

And everything’d be cool.

But then all of a sudden:

B___ OOM!!!!!!!!!!!!

You’re going to jail, smartypants.

State Rep. Daniel Hunt — a Democrat representing Boston’s Dorchester neighborhood — offered the submission in May. He did so in utilization of a Massachusetts-only provision allowing a legislator to introduce a bill on behalf of a constituent.

Subsections of the potential legislation indicate the possible punishment of a fine up to $200 or up to six months in jail.

Daniel forgot to check the box indicating his use of the constituent allowance, so lots of people think it was his idea.

#Consequences:

“I got at least 50 phone calls today calling me a ‘bitch’ or the ‘C’ word, and I’ve also gotten probably 50 e-mails.”

Here’s the official description of Bill H.3719 — “An Act Regarding the Use of Offensive Words”:

A person who uses the word “b*tch” directed at another person to accost, annoy, degrade or demean the other person shall be considered to be a disorderly person in violation of this section, and shall be subject to the penalties provided in subsections (a) and (b). A violation of this subsection may be reported by the person to whom the offensive language was directed at or by any witness to such incident.

Well, it’d certainly prevent Breaking Bad’s Jesse Pinkman from doing business in Beantown. I mean, a guy willing to break the law against selling meth wouldn’t dare violate the prohibition of saying a word. After all, people game to commit mass murder is nothing but a scared b*tch when it comes to ordinances against guns.

Crap…I think I just went to jail.

Fortunately for all involved, the law’s likely to never see the light of day, as it’s unconstitutional.

From The Daily Wire:

The bill, according to the [Boston Globe], was one of nearly 70 relating to criminal justice that was discussed by the Joint Judiciary Committee during a hearing. Other bills included changes in law regarding victims’ rights, juvenile offenders, and witness testimony. Hunt’s bill appears to be the only one suggesting an entirely new criminal act.

The bill is also “clearly unconstitutional,” according to Boston College law professor Kent Greenfield. He told the Globe that the “Supreme Court has repeatedly ruled in a bunch of cases that very offensive, very hurtful speech is nevertheless protected.”

Well, son of a gun.

Although, I think these days, the word “gun” is worse than the word “b*tch.”

-ALEX

 

See 3 more pieces from me:

If Global Warming Is Eating At You, A Swedish Professor Has A Recipe For Relief: Cannibalism

The Girl In The Bubble: Alyssa Milano Meets ‘Caricature Of A Villain’ Ted Cruz To Find Out If He’s ‘Really A Human With A Heartbeat’

‘Cause It’s The Best Way To Convince People: Ahead Of The Dem Debate, Climate Change Radicals Suspend Themselves From A Bridge

Find all my RedState work here.

And please follow Alex Parker on Twitter and Facebook.

Thank you for reading! Please sound off in the Comments section below. 

The post Where We Are: Massachusetts Eyes a Bill Making it Illegal to Call Someone a ‘B-tch’ appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group dog-3071334_1280-300x169 Where We Are: Massachusetts Eyes a Bill Making it Illegal to Call Someone a ‘B-tch’ Uncategorized Politics Massachusetts law Front Page Stories freedom of speech Featured Story daniel hunt Culture crime Boston Allow Media Exception   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

CNN Analyst Apologizes for Discussing Hillary’s Emails Too Much

Westlake Legal Group Screen-Shot-2019-10-21-at-3.57.31-PM CNN Analyst Apologizes for Discussing Hillary’s Emails Too Much Media law journalism Hillary Clinton Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story Featured Post democrats CNN But Her Emails biased media Allow Media Exception

Screenshot from this video

The State Department just announced at the end of last week that they had completed their three year investigation into Hillary Clinton’s private server.

They found almost 600 security violations. They found 38 people culpable in 91 of those security violations. For 497 of the 588 violations they couldn’t ascribe culpability because of the lapse of time and people having left the State Department. They didn’t, however, name who the 38 people were or what punishment they would receive, if any, as a result.

But because there was no punishment identified and the report said they didn’t conclude that there was “systemic deliberate mishandling” of classified information, media interpreted the report as clearing Clinton.

Pretty hard to understand how setting up a private server against rules, getting rid of over 30,000 emails that were under subpoenas, having her maid print some off and an absolute statement from the FBI that she sent and received multiple emails with classified information is not “systemic” or “deliberate,” but it gave media the hook they needed to skip right over the all the violations and pretend there was really nothing to the whole scandal after all.

The CNN panel ripped the focus on the emails. CNN’s Abby Phillip blasted the folks on the right for actually caring about the law. “We have to be careful how some of these false controversies get blown up for political purposes which is exactly what happened with the emails,” she even had the audacity to say. False controversy? Did the FBI think it was a ‘false controversy’ when they found that Hillary Clinton had in fact been “extremely careless” in sending and receiving multiple emails with classified information and that her account was likely compromised? Any similar situation and the person would be in jail serving time, as many have pointed out.

CNN contributor and former press secretary for Bill Clinton, Joe Lockhart, obviously an unbiased source on the subject, tried to deflect to questions about Jared Kushner which weren’t anything like what Hillary did.

CNN legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin even apologized for spending too much time on the scandal during the election, saying that she “very likely lost the election because of it.”

From Free Beacon:

In a clip flagged by Mediaite, Toobin said the scandal “is also a story about the news media, about how much time we spent on that, and that’s something that I have felt a great deal of personal responsibility for.” He added that “Because I talked about the e-mails here at CNN, I wrote about it in the New Yorker, and I think I paid too much attention to them, and I regret that.”

“I hope a lesson is learned,” Toobin said. “I mean, this story turns out to be … a big nothing, and we spent months on it. Hillary Clinton very likely lost the election because of it, and I think I should have been talking about other issues, not about the e-mails.”

Substitute President Donald Trump’s name for Clinton and would you be hearing Toobin or any of the others saying that?

Indeed, we already know that you wouldn’t since we’re still waiting for his apology and that of CNN generally for their 24/7 promotion of the Russia collusion hoax. There was no apology when collusion was debunked by Special Counsel Robert Mueller. Meanwhile, sending and receiving classified information improperly was always a felony, at least before Hillary Clinton came along.

So apparently the lesson that these folks have learned and are promoting is don’t do your job, if it might hurt the Democratic candidate.

The post CNN Analyst Apologizes for Discussing Hillary’s Emails Too Much appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group Screen-Shot-2019-10-21-at-3.57.31-PM-300x203 CNN Analyst Apologizes for Discussing Hillary’s Emails Too Much Media law journalism Hillary Clinton Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story Featured Post democrats CNN But Her Emails biased media Allow Media Exception   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

How Did Big Tech Get So Big? Massive Government Cronyism – Like Section 230

Westlake Legal Group Big-Tech-620x354 How Did Big Tech Get So Big? Massive Government Cronyism – Like Section 230 Web Search washington D.C. Technology technolgy Silicon Valley Section 230 progressives Privacy Politics Policy News network neutrality Net Neutrality law Internet of Things Internet Government Front Page Stories Front Page Economy Business & Economy big tech 5g 4G

Today’s thought foray – requires us to define a few terms.  First:

Internet Service Providers (ISPs):

The companies that have in the last quarter-century invested more than a trillion dollars – building the actual Internet.  Comcast, Verizon, Time Warner, AT&T, etc.  The companies that laid the Information Superhighway – upon which all the rest of us ride.  The bandwidth providers.

“Edge Providers”:

The Big Tech companies.  And not just located in the Silicon Valley – more than a few are de facto centered in Communist China.  Apple, Google, Amazon, Facebook, etc.  The biggest of the Information Superhighway riders.  The Bandwidth Hogs – consuming way more than half of all the US bandwidth the ISPs provide.

The Left loves to categorize the ISPs as evil, monster companies – demanding and getting monster government cronyism.

Free & Open Internet:

“The free and open internet is a powerful tool for everyone fighting for social change and racial justice. But companies like AT&T, Comcast and Verizon – and their government allies – want to destroy it.”

Except as with nigh everything Left – this is titanically stupid.  For a host of reasons.

The companies allegedly looking to destroy the free and open Internet – spent more than a trillion dollars building the free and open Internet.  I’m sure their shareholders would object to their now destroying it.

So they’re probably not going to do it.  As evidenced by the entirety of the quarter-century of the private sector Internet’s existence – during which they never, ever have.

The ISPs – and their “government allies?”  This is laughable on its face.

AT&T (Market Cap: $280 billion), Comcast (Market Cap: $209 billion) and Verizon (Market Cap: $251 billion) – are certainly big.

But these hugest of ISPs – are nowhere near as huge as the Big Tech likes of Apple (Market Cap: $1.1 trillion), Amazon (Market Cap: $869 billion) and Google (Market Cap: $863 billion).

The Big Tech companies – spend MUCH more on government candidates.  And get MUCH more government cronyism in return.

Latest Beneficiary of D.C. Cronyism: Apple – The Most Valuable Company in the World

Amazon: One Of The Biggest Of Bigfoot Cronyism-Recipient Lobbyists

Cronyism: For the Likes of Google, It is Really, REALLY Good to be a Friend of Obama

ISPs spend most of their time – asking governments to leave them alone.  This isn’t cronyism – this is begging the government to let them engage in capitalism.

Big Tech spends most of their time – demanding governments do them special favors.  This isn’t capitalism – this is cronyism.

As but one example: The very stupid policy known as Network Neutrality.

Net Neutrality is a stupidly huge government imposition in the Internet – specifically on the ISPs.  A whole host of regulations restricting just about everything ISPs do to provide us service.

ISPs ask governments – to leave them alone with this Net Neutrality nonsense.

Big Tech demands government impose Net Neutrality – because it guarantees them huge government-mandated benefits.

To name but one:

As mentioned, Big Tech consumes way more than half of all US bandwidth.  Net Neutrality – mandates they not be charged any money for any of it.  We the Little People would pay MUCH more for our service – to subsidize the likes of Apple, Amazon and Google.

Net Neutrality is massive government regulation – to impose massive Big Tech cronyism.

The ISPs’ “government allies” – are simply less government types who know how stupid Net Neutrality is…and therefore don’t want to impose it.

Big Tech’s government cronies – are sell-out politicians who know how stupid Net Neutrality is…but impose it anyway because their paymasters demand it.

All of which brings us to the biggest Big Tech cronyism of all:

Section 230 of the 1996 Communications Decency Act:

“Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996 (a common name for Title V of the Telecommunications Act of 1996) is a piece of Internet legislation.

“It provides immunity from liability for providers and users of an interactive computer service who publish information provided by others.

“An immunity clause in the Act states that no provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider.”

We must now define two additional terms:

Publisher:

What we’ve always seen pre-Internet.  Newspapers, books and the like.  They edit content – so they control content.  And thus are eligible to be sued – unprotected by Section 230.

Platform:

An almost-exclusively Internet creation.  To allow for user-provided website content – videos, comments, etc – Section 230 indemnifies the websites hosting the content from being libel from many laws for the content.

Section 230 – is a HUGE government benefit to Big Tech.

And Section 230 makes some sense – so long as the Big Tech beneficiaries uphold their tiny end of this massively beneficial bargain.

Big Tech platforms – must be open to ALL users. With content only edited or deleted – for a certain, specific set of defined obvious reasons: Posting pornography, foul language, etc.

Ideological censorship – is a Section 230 no-no.

But Leftist Big Tech – censors less government types all the time.

Conservatives Face a Tough Fight as Big Tech’s Censorship Expands

Big Tech Censors Conservatives, Christians; Facebook, Google: ‘So What?’

Big Tech Has Transitioned from ‘We Don’t Censor Conservatives’ to ‘We Do and You Can’t Stop Us’

Well, we can stop them, actually.

As with nigh all things policy – the original sin here is too much government.

In this instance, the too much government – is the massive Big Tech cronyism of Section 230.

Former FCC Bureau Chief: Masters of the Universe ‘Abused’ Section 230 to Censor Conservatives

“A spokesperson for (Texas Republican) Sen. Cruz told Breitbart News in a statement:

“‘Big Tech enjoys a subsidy that no other industry does: immunity from liability under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. That immunity is predicated on the expectation that social media would be neutral public forums.

“‘Big Tech has made it abundantly clear they have no intention of abiding by that, taking the opposite tact by operating as partisan publishers.

“‘Sen. Cruz believes if they’re going to choose to be partisan publishers, then there is little reason why they should get a special immunity from liability that other publishers, such as the New York Times, don’t enjoy.’”

Most of DC is, as nigh always, bizarrely removed from Reality – and actual answers to actual questions.

A few weeks ago I attended a DC debate on Big Tech censorship.

Conservative and Human Events Editor Will Chamberlain – wanted the government to force Big Tech companies to host just about all content.

Libertarian and Reason Magazine Associate Editor Robby Soave – wanted to leave all things relevant as is.

They were opposed to one another.  I was opposed to both.

In the hour-plus long debate – NO ONE even referenced Section 230.  It never, ever came up.

Until I mentioned it during the Question & Answer period.

Oops.

Very few people in the room seemed pleased I did.  And I was screeched at by Big Tech defenders on Twitter – who were watching the event’s livestream.

The most interesting reaction?

I will now be as vague as possible about the following – to protect the involved:

A person who works for one of the biggest of Big Tech companies – a conservative I’ve known for years – was seated next to me.  This person turned to me and whispered something along the lines of:

“If you get rid of Section 230 – it will kill these companies.”

Really?  Many of these near-trillion companies got to be near-trillion dollar companies – almost solely because of Section 230?

And they can’t exist without it?

That sounds like the quintessential definition of government cronyism.

Fake energy solar panel and wind turbine companies can’t exist without government cronyism.  Should we continue to prop up them too?

That doesn’t seem to me to be very conservative, free market or less government.

So why are so many conservative, free market and less government types – defending it?

The post How Did Big Tech Get So Big? Massive Government Cronyism – Like Section 230 appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group Big-Tech-300x171 How Did Big Tech Get So Big? Massive Government Cronyism – Like Section 230 Web Search washington D.C. Technology technolgy Silicon Valley Section 230 progressives Privacy Politics Policy News network neutrality Net Neutrality law Internet of Things Internet Government Front Page Stories Front Page Economy Business & Economy big tech 5g 4G   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Roger Gale: Parents and doctors should be spared court when debating the best treatment for ill children

Sir Roger Gale is MP for North Thanet.

The parents of Tafida Raqeeb will be relieved that the High Court has given its consent to her being taken to Italy for specialist medical treatment for the serious brain injury the five-year-old suffered, leaving her on life support. But they, like all parents who find themselves in the traumatic situation of doctors withholding treatment or preventing access to it elsewhere, have been ill-served by the confrontational legal process that pits clinicians against families.

Such court cases are a distraction for medical and nursing teams, a costly frustration for NHS managers, and a nightmare for caring parents, all of whom quite genuinely want the best for the sick child. The only beneficiaries from these emotional and often protracted cases, sometimes heard in the full glare of the gawping media, are the lawyers.

We must find a way of striking a better balance so that where genuine disagreements arise, and they inevitably will, there are ways of resolving the situation through mediation and conciliation, avoiding the need to go to court. That is why I support the Children (Access to Medical Treatment) Bill proposed by Bambos Charalambous, the Labour MP.

The purpose of the Bill is to reduce the number of confrontational court cases that arise, and there are many more going on behind the scenes that don’t make the headlines, distressing parents and distracting doctors every day. We intend to do this by ensuring that clinicians and parents have access to mediation and conciliation services, that there is access in place to second opinions (that may or may not provide a different view), by identifying sources of practical advice on ethical challenges, and by building upon the current test of the best interests of the child so that potential treatment options can only be blocked by the courts if they present the risk of significant harm.

Easy access by parents to medical information is vital not only in the interests of openness, trust and transparency, but also so that parents are able to make informed decisions and other, alternative medical advice can be sought. We hope to provide for this access.

If there is a credible alternative medical opinion, and a reputable institution is willing to provide the treatment, then that treatment option should be available.

We are particularly encouraged that two former Presidents of the British Medical Association have already publicly supported our approach. Baroness Hollins spoke recently in the House of Lords to support the principle of the Bill and Baroness Finlay has done so on Radio 4’s Today Programme. Demonstrating cross-party support with those two crossbenchers, Baroness Jolly, the Liberal Democrat Health Spokesperson, is also on the case, and many leading lawyers and medical ethicists are supportive, including Raanon Gillon, emeritus professor of medical ethics at Imperial College and currently President of the BMA.

At the heart of this issue is the relationship of trust between families and clinicians, and what we want to do is to ensure that trust is nurtured, not undermined, when differences of perspective inevitably arise in these complex and deeply distressing cases. The confrontational nature of our legal system is the antithesis of such nurturing of trust.

We are motivated in our mission by the death in 2017 of baby Charlie Gard who was cared for by Great Ormond Street Hospital, but who sadly died when the courts preventing his parents, Chris and Connie, taking him abroad for an alternative treatment option. I make no comments on the medical aspects of the case, but the way it was handled brings shame upon our existing legislation and adversarial legal system.

The law must be brought up to date, so that it is fit for the 21st Century, and so that clinicians, parents and NHS executives are spared the trauma of court proceedings. That would be a fitting legacy for Charlie.

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

A Forced Baptism/Sexual Assault and a Cavity Search Comprise the Worst Non-Lethal Police Conduct You’re Likely to Find – by the Same Officer

Westlake Legal Group daniel-wilkey-bobby-brewer-SCREENSHOT-620x329 A Forced Baptism/Sexual Assault and a Cavity Search Comprise the Worst Non-Lethal Police Conduct You’re Likely to Find – by the Same Officer Uncategorized Tennessee law enforcement law jacob goforth hamilton county Front Page Stories Featured Story daniel wilkey crime Chattanooga bobby brewer Allow Media Exception

[Screenshot from Twitter, https://twitter.com/truthseeker6761/status/1182045977982619649]

 

If you’re in Chattanooga, Tennessee and Officer Daniel Wilkey tries to pull you over, you might just wanna keep on truckin’.

He may’ve violated a constitutional right or 12, and you don’t wanna be Lucky 13.

According to a recently-filed lawsuit, Daniel engaged in some mighty squirrelly behavior with Sandle Riley.

Here goes the allegation:

Sometime between 10 and 11 p.m. on July 6th, Daniel followed Shandle from a gas station to her friend’s house, at which point he claimed she was hiding meth.

Therefore, he gave her a full-body patdown.

That would be every area of her.

Then he demanded she “reach under her shirt and pull out her bra and shake the bra and shirt.”

This was to prove she wasn’t holding any of the ol’ Breaking Bad bounty.

Shandle had asked, by the way, for a female officer to search her. Daniel told her the law doesn’t give her that right.

I’d like to say at this point that, where I come from, the situation would already mean someone’s likely gettin’ some redneck comeuppance. And I don’t mean in court.

Moving on…

Daniel asked if she had any contraband, and Shandle admitted to a marijuana roach in her pack of cigarettes.

He called her a “piece of sh**” but eventually offered a deal.

From Fox17:

Wilkey then asked her if she was “saved” and believed in Jesus Christ. She responded that she believed in Jesus Christ, but that she was not “saved” by her own choice.

The lawsuit goes on to say Wilkey told Riley that “God was talking to him during the vehicle search, and [he] felt the Lord wanted him to baptize the plaintiff.,” and said that he felt “the spirit.”

Wilkey then told Riley to get towels inside the home for a baptism, and said he would issue her only a criminal citation for marijuana and not take her to jail, according to the lawsuit. Riley says she got the towels, and followed Wilkey in his patrol car, not saying where he was taking her. Riley says she was afraid to ignore Wilkey and not do as he commanded.

Another cop — Jacob Goforth — met up with ’em at the lake. Daniel explained that baptism isn’t “valid” without a witness.

He then stripped to his boxers and told Shandle she was welcome to ditch her duds. She chose to keep on the clothes.

#ProbablyBetter

And now, Revered Daniel does his duty:

The lawsuit says Wilkey then stripped down to his boxer shorts, and gave Riley the option to remove her clothes, which she declined. It says Wilkey then led her to waist deep, cold water, put one hand on her back and the other on her breasts, and submerged her underwater for “several moments.” At this moment, Riley says she “felt horribly violated.”

Was her bra still off?

Then, according to the lawsuit, Wilkey used one towel to dry off and let Riley dry off with the other one, while Goforth “smirked” at her as she was using it.

The citation indicates Shandle was pulled over due to tinted windows and an obstructed tag.

Shandle pleaded guilty to possession of a controlled substance. Her sentence was suspended, but she’s still on probation.

–And seeking $1,000,000 in compensatory damages, along with a cool $10 mil in punitive.

So says the suit against Hamilton County, Daniel, and Jacob.

Surely that’d be enough to get Daniel fired.

But wait — there’s more!

He’s the subject of at least one another suit, over what appears to be an insatiable need to put his fingers where they don’t belong. And I don’t mean up his nose.

Again, the alleged incident:

Daniel and Deputy Bobby Brewer pulled over Latisha Menifee on July 10th, on a false window tint violation.

Daniel told her and her passenger, James Mitchell, he could smell weed while he was following ’em.

The officers pulled Latisha out of the car and later cuffed her.

James admitted he indeed did have marijuana, and they braceleted him, too.

Daniel and Bobby then did a bit of this, as per the filing:

“Wilkey then began to grab James’ genitals. When James told Wilkey that (he) had an untreated and large hernia and that Wilkey’s actions were causing (him) pain, Brewer and Wilkey jerked James’ arms high above his back, and slammed James face-down onto the hot engine hood, causing injury….”

And, from ABC9:

The lawsuit says the deputies then beat Mitchell with “fists, knees, and feet,” and slammed him to the ground. It was then, according to the lawsuit, that they removed his pants and shoes, while continuing to beat him.

Next, the dynamic duo picked up James and bent him over the patrol car. Daniel put on gloves (never a good sign), pulled down James’s underwear, and let his fingers do the walking into a stranger’s rectum.

He “conducted an anal cavity search of James.”



The lawsuit says Menifee watched all this happen in horror, and caused her to fear that she would be treated the same way. She also says she was afraid the deputies would shoot and kill Mitchell.

They unshackled Latisha, “told her that she did not see anything,” and asked her to get outta there.

And there was this:

The lawsuit says after he was booked at the Hamilton County Jail, Mitchell was treated for several injuries. It also claims Deputy Wilkey “unlawfully seized cash” from him.

A medical examination later revealed suffered “tearing in his anus, and multiple contusions,” along with an aggravation of a hernia that eventually required surgery, according to the lawsuit.

The lawsuit says Mitchell suffered “mental anguish, fear of death or grievous bodily harm, and humiliation. It also claims Menifee had similar symptoms.

The complaint asks for $2,000,000 for both James and Latisha for compensatory damages, and $15 Big Ones in punitive.

Which all leads me to this:

Who’s doing the hiring for Hamilton County????

The lawsuit goes on to cite several examples of reported law enforcement brutality, saying that Hamilton County fostered a culture of corruption that permitted the two deputies to behave the way it claims they did.

Both lawsuits were filed on the same day.

Against the same cop.

Therefore, I reference my opening statement.

Now I ask you: If these guys have been accurately accused (and video and audio aren’t suggesting otherwise), what do you think will happen, and what do you think should?

I anxiously await.

-ALEX

 

Find all my RedState work here.

And please follow Alex Parker on Twitter and Facebook.

Thank you for reading! Please sound off in the Comments section below. 

The post A Forced Baptism/Sexual Assault and a Cavity Search Comprise the Worst Non-Lethal Police Conduct You’re Likely to Find – by the Same Officer appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group daniel-wilkey-bobby-brewer-SCREENSHOT-300x159 A Forced Baptism/Sexual Assault and a Cavity Search Comprise the Worst Non-Lethal Police Conduct You’re Likely to Find – by the Same Officer Uncategorized Tennessee law enforcement law jacob goforth hamilton county Front Page Stories Featured Story daniel wilkey crime Chattanooga bobby brewer Allow Media Exception   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

A Forced Baptism/Sexual Assault and a Cavity Search Comprise the Worst Non-Lethal Police Conduct You’re Likely to Find – by the Same Officer

Westlake Legal Group daniel-wilkey-bobby-brewer-SCREENSHOT-620x329 A Forced Baptism/Sexual Assault and a Cavity Search Comprise the Worst Non-Lethal Police Conduct You’re Likely to Find – by the Same Officer Uncategorized Tennessee law enforcement law jacob goforth hamilton county Front Page Stories Featured Story daniel wilkey crime Chattanooga bobby brewer Allow Media Exception

[Screenshot from Twitter, https://twitter.com/truthseeker6761/status/1182045977982619649]

 

If you’re in Chattanooga, Tennessee and Officer Daniel Wilkey tries to pull you over, you might just wanna keep on truckin’.

He may’ve violated a constitutional right or 12, and you don’t wanna be Lucky 13.

According to a recently-filed lawsuit, Daniel engaged in some mighty squirrelly behavior with Sandle Riley.

Here goes the allegation:

Sometime between 10 and 11 p.m. on July 6th, Daniel followed Shandle from a gas station to her friend’s house, at which point he claimed she was hiding meth.

Therefore, he gave her a full-body patdown.

That would be every area of her.

Then he demanded she “reach under her shirt and pull out her bra and shake the bra and shirt.”

This was to prove she wasn’t holding any of the ol’ Breaking Bad bounty.

Shandle had asked, by the way, for a female officer to search her. Daniel told her the law doesn’t give her that right.

I’d like to say at this point that, where I come from, the situation would already mean someone’s likely gettin’ some redneck comeuppance. And I don’t mean in court.

Moving on…

Daniel asked if she had any contraband, and Shandle admitted to a marijuana roach in her pack of cigarettes.

He called her a “piece of sh**” but eventually offered a deal.

From Fox17:

Wilkey then asked her if she was “saved” and believed in Jesus Christ. She responded that she believed in Jesus Christ, but that she was not “saved” by her own choice.

The lawsuit goes on to say Wilkey told Riley that “God was talking to him during the vehicle search, and [he] felt the Lord wanted him to baptize the plaintiff.,” and said that he felt “the spirit.”

Wilkey then told Riley to get towels inside the home for a baptism, and said he would issue her only a criminal citation for marijuana and not take her to jail, according to the lawsuit. Riley says she got the towels, and followed Wilkey in his patrol car, not saying where he was taking her. Riley says she was afraid to ignore Wilkey and not do as he commanded.

Another cop — Jacob Goforth — met up with ’em at the lake. Daniel explained that baptism isn’t “valid” without a witness.

He then stripped to his boxers and told Shandle she was welcome to ditch her duds. She chose to keep on the clothes.

#ProbablyBetter

And now, Revered Daniel does his duty:

The lawsuit says Wilkey then stripped down to his boxer shorts, and gave Riley the option to remove her clothes, which she declined. It says Wilkey then led her to waist deep, cold water, put one hand on her back and the other on her breasts, and submerged her underwater for “several moments.” At this moment, Riley says she “felt horribly violated.”

Was her bra still off?

Then, according to the lawsuit, Wilkey used one towel to dry off and let Riley dry off with the other one, while Goforth “smirked” at her as she was using it.

The citation indicates Shandle was pulled over due to tinted windows and an obstructed tag.

Shandle pleaded guilty to possession of a controlled substance. Her sentence was suspended, but she’s still on probation.

–And seeking $1,000,000 in compensatory damages, along with a cool $10 mil in punitive.

So says the suit against Hamilton County, Daniel, and Jacob.

Surely that’d be enough to get Daniel fired.

But wait — there’s more!

He’s the subject of at least one another suit, over what appears to be an insatiable need to put his fingers where they don’t belong. And I don’t mean up his nose.

Again, the alleged incident:

Daniel and Deputy Bobby Brewer pulled over Latisha Menifee on July 10th, on a false window tint violation.

Daniel told her and her passenger, James Mitchell, he could smell weed while he was following ’em.

The officers pulled Latisha out of the car and later cuffed her.

James admitted he indeed did have marijuana, and they braceleted him, too.

Daniel and Bobby then did a bit of this, as per the filing:

“Wilkey then began to grab James’ genitals. When James told Wilkey that (he) had an untreated and large hernia and that Wilkey’s actions were causing (him) pain, Brewer and Wilkey jerked James’ arms high above his back, and slammed James face-down onto the hot engine hood, causing injury….”

And, from ABC9:

The lawsuit says the deputies then beat Mitchell with “fists, knees, and feet,” and slammed him to the ground. It was then, according to the lawsuit, that they removed his pants and shoes, while continuing to beat him.

Next, the dynamic duo picked up James and bent him over the patrol car. Daniel put on gloves (never a good sign), pulled down James’s underwear, and let his fingers do the walking into a stranger’s rectum.

He “conducted an anal cavity search of James.”



The lawsuit says Menifee watched all this happen in horror, and caused her to fear that she would be treated the same way. She also says she was afraid the deputies would shoot and kill Mitchell.

They unshackled Latisha, “told her that she did not see anything,” and asked her to get outta there.

And there was this:

The lawsuit says after he was booked at the Hamilton County Jail, Mitchell was treated for several injuries. It also claims Deputy Wilkey “unlawfully seized cash” from him.

A medical examination later revealed suffered “tearing in his anus, and multiple contusions,” along with an aggravation of a hernia that eventually required surgery, according to the lawsuit.

The lawsuit says Mitchell suffered “mental anguish, fear of death or grievous bodily harm, and humiliation. It also claims Menifee had similar symptoms.

The complaint asks for $2,000,000 for both James and Latisha for compensatory damages, and $15 Big Ones in punitive.

Which all leads me to this:

Who’s doing the hiring for Hamilton County????

The lawsuit goes on to cite several examples of reported law enforcement brutality, saying that Hamilton County fostered a culture of corruption that permitted the two deputies to behave the way it claims they did.

Both lawsuits were filed on the same day.

Against the same cop.

Therefore, I reference my opening statement.

Now I ask you: If these guys have been accurately accused (and video and audio aren’t suggesting otherwise), what do you think will happen, and what do you think should?

I anxiously await.

-ALEX

 

Find all my RedState work here.

And please follow Alex Parker on Twitter and Facebook.

Thank you for reading! Please sound off in the Comments section below. 

The post A Forced Baptism/Sexual Assault and a Cavity Search Comprise the Worst Non-Lethal Police Conduct You’re Likely to Find – by the Same Officer appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group daniel-wilkey-bobby-brewer-SCREENSHOT-300x159 A Forced Baptism/Sexual Assault and a Cavity Search Comprise the Worst Non-Lethal Police Conduct You’re Likely to Find – by the Same Officer Uncategorized Tennessee law enforcement law jacob goforth hamilton county Front Page Stories Featured Story daniel wilkey crime Chattanooga bobby brewer Allow Media Exception   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com