Bankrupt county cuts sheriff dept to 1 patrol car

Third World Amerika

In February, the board of commissioners of Ohio’s Ashtabula County faced a scene familiar to local governments across America: a budget shortfall. They began to cut spending and reduced the sheriff’s budget by 20 per cent. A law enforcement agency staff that only a few years ago numbered 112, and had subsequently been pared down to 70, was cut again to 49 people and just one squad car for a county of 1,900 sq. km along the shore of Lake Erie.

The sheriff’s department adapted.

“We have no patrol units. There is no one on the streets. We respond to only crimes in progress. We don’t respond to property crimes,” deputy sheriff Ron Fenton told Maclean’s.

The county once had a “very proactive” detective division in narcotics. Now, there is no detective division.

“We are down to one evidence officer and he just runs the evidence room in case someone wants to claim property,” said Fenton.

“People are getting property stolen, their houses broken into, and there is no one investigating. We are basically just writing up a report for the insurance company.”

---

...which would be an improvement in Blount County.

"I’ll burn your house down, set your dog on fire and there won’t be a member of your family left, do you understand me? I won’t hire it done, I will do it myself! Do you understand me?”
-Blount County sheriff James Berrong, United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit, Nuchols v. Berrong, No. 04-5645, July 11, 2005

Tennessee Auditors Arrive, 48 Blount Sheriff cars missing - "The state auditor arrived in the County a few weeks ago. The auditor was able to find only 239 vehicles. What happened to the other 48 vehicles? But the Sheriff wants the taxpayers to support a tax increase, so that he can have even more money to spend next year. Does this make sense to you?"

COP.
2. to steal; filch. 3. to buy (narcotics). 4. cop out, a. to avoid one's responsibility, the fulfillment of a promise, etc.; renege; back out. 5. cop a plea, a. to plead guilty or confess in return for receiving a lighter sentence. b. to plead guilty to a lesser charge; plea-bargain."
-Random House Unabridged Dictionary

Cops get $200,000 salary, city files bankruptcy

Cops run copkilling cartheft rackets in Knox County and East Tennessee

US Constitution: It's THE LAW at Deals Gap

THE DRAGONATER WINS IN TRAFFIC COURT AT DEALS GAP, RAISES SPEED LIMIT TO 65 MPH ON THE DRAGON - NOLLE PROSEQUI BY BLOUNT COUNTY ATTORNEY GENERAL. NO TESTIMONY, HEARING NOR TRIAL WHATSOEVER. 60 MPH SPEEDING TICKET DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE, COSTS PAID BY THE STATE, IN BLOUNT COUNTY GENERAL SESSIONS COURT WITH JUDGE BREWER. THP TROOPER RANDALL HUCKEBY ADMITTED ON VIDEOTAPE DURING TRAFFIC STOP THAT ALL SPEEDING TICKETS NORTHBOUND ON US129 AT MILE MARKER 0.5 ARE FEDERAL JURISDICTION, NOT STATE JURISDICTION (VIDEO BY THE DRAGONATER). HUCKEBY WAS ALSO CAUGHT ON VIDEO SPEEDING AT 60 MPH ON THE DRAGON, WITHOUT THE MANDATORY EMERGENCY LIGHTS AND SIREN REQUIRED FOR IMMUNITY FROM PROSECUTION (VIDEO BY THE DRAGONATER). TDOT ADMITTED IN WRITING THAT THE MANDATORY TRAFFIC ENGINEERING SURVEY SPEED AUDIT WAS NEVER PERFORMED, IN VIOLATION OF TN CODE, THUS THE POSTED 30 MPH SPEED LIMIT ON THE DRAGON REVERTS TO THE DEFAULT 65 MPH IN TN CODE. THE DRAGONATER ALSO MADE VIDEO OF TROOPER HUCKEBY SPEEDING UP TO 60 MPH ON THE DRAGON IN A 30 MPH ZONE, WITHOUT MANDATORY EMERGENCY LIGHTS NOR SIREN, IN VIOLATION OF TN CODE, AND PERJURY IN HIS PERSONNEL FILE, WHICH SHOWED HIS $100,000+ SALARY. 2007 TDOT SAFETY AUDIT REPORT CONFESSED THAT THP'S JOB IS TO BAN ALL COMMERCIAL BUSINESSES ON THE DRAGON, SO THP TICKETS INCREASED 11,400% IN BLOUNT COUNTY. THP'S STALKER RADAR OPERATOR MANUAL CONFESSED THAT RADAR CANNOT MEASURE THE SPEED OF VEHICLES WITHIN 18 MPH OF ACTUAL SPEED. WATCH THIS SPACE FOR FULL EVIDENCE FILE. UPDATE 7 MARCH 2011

Public reading of U.S. Constitution planned

By Frank “Buzz” Trexler
of The Daily Times Staff
September 16. 2010

MARYVILLE, Tenn. -- “We the People of the United States ...”

Those are familiar words, but some people might not be able to place their context.

Not Barry Walker. In fact, the words ring so soundly that the Maryville resident and a handful of others will be gathering at 10 a.m. Saturday in front of Maryville Municipal Building, 400 W. Broadway Ave., to read the entire U.S. Constitution. It's part of a national event, “We Read the Constitution,” a project of Constituting America and Let Freedom Ring. On Saturday, all across the nation people will be reading the U.S. Constitution at various venues.

“Somebody sent me an e-mail, directed me to the website and I checked to see if one was in Maryville and there wasn't. I got a permit this morning,” Walker told The Daily Times on Tuesday. “I don't know if we had to, but we did it as a precaution and courtesy.”

According to WeReadTheConstitution.com, Maryville will join venues ranging from Seattle, to Temecula, Calif., to Miami, to Oakland.
Not sure how the other venues are treating this day, but Walker is looking to make it a full-blown patriotic event.

“We're going to read in round-robin fashion and then pause every five minutes for a patriotic song,” Walker said. “The public is encouraged to bring flags and a copy of the Constitution.”

Seems like a fife-and-bugle corps would also be a nice touch.

Download a copy of the US Constitution, including the Top Secret law on Jury Nullification, banned from all courts in USSA.

Police Officer Jack McLamb says you have a Constitutional right to drive without driver license internal passport nor speeding tickets.


THP sold fake ID "Driver Certificates" to 400,000 illegal aliens, marked "NOT VALID FOR IDENTIFICATION", since illegal aliens are not required to have Driver LICENSES

No cop has the balls, guts or brains to do their job and arrest the illegal alien hijacking the White House:


US Army Lt Col Terry Lakin MD is being court martialed this month for refusing illegal orders from an illegal alien to deploy to the neverending Iraq War, and subpoened AlCIAduh Dictator Hussein Obama's MIA birth cerificiate








Pray for America

Convicted felon elected as TN Constable

COP.
2. to steal; filch. 3. to buy (narcotics). 4. cop out, a. to avoid one's responsibility, the fulfillment of a promise, etc.; renege; back out. 5. cop a plea, a. to plead guilty or confess in return for receiving a lighter sentence. b. to plead guilty to a lesser charge; plea-bargain.
-Random House Unabridged Dictionary

ELIZABETHTON, Tenn. - Records show new East TN constable Barney Brown a felon - The Johnson City Press reports Mathes discovered Brown was convicted of a felony in Washington, D.C., in 1961 on burglary and theft charges.

Why not? THP sold fake ID "Driver Certificates" to 400,000 illegal aliens marked "NOT VALID FOR IDENTIFICATION", then rolls out the red carpet for the illegal alien running the White House. And former Knoxville mayor Victor "Victoria" Ashe was allegedly arrested for soliciting men in public restrooms in DC and Atlanta as a state rep wearing a dress, after being George W Bush's college roommate, fellow cheerleader and gay lover at all-male Yale Skull & Bones. Ashe graduated to running torture death camps for CIA as US ambassador to Poland.

Under TN Rules of Evidence, it is not admissible evidence to question this cop under oath regarding his criminal convictions.

---

Tennessee Rules of Evidence

Rule 404. Character evidence not admissible to prove conduct; exceptions; other crimes. —(a) Character Evidence Generally.-Evidence of a person's character or trait of character is not admissible for the purpose of proving action in conformity therewith on a particular occasion, except:

(1) Character of Accused.-In a criminal case, evidence of a pertinent trait of character offered by an accused or by the prosecution to rebut the same or, if evidence of a trait of character of the alleged victim of the crime is offered by the accused and admitted under Rule 404(a)(2), evidence of the same trait of character of the accused offered by the prosecution;

(2) Character of Alleged Victim.-In a criminal case, and subject to the limitations imposed by Rule 412, evidence of a pertinent trait of character of the alleged victim of the crime offered by an accused or by the prosecution to rebut the same, or evidence of a character trait of peacefulness of the alleged victim offered by the prosecution in a homicide case to rebut evidence that the alleged victim was the first aggressor;

(3) Character of Witness.-Evidence of the character of a witness as provided in Rules 607,608, and 609.

(b) Other Crimes, Wrongs, or Acts.–Evidence of other crimes, wrongs, or acts is not admissible to prove the character of a person in order to show action in conformity with the character trait. It may, however, be admissible for other purposes. The conditions which must be satisfied before allowing such evidence are:

(1) The court upon request must hold a hearing outside the jury’s presence;

(2) The court must determine that a material issue exists other than conduct conforming with a character trait and must upon request state on the record the material issue, the ruling, and the reasons for admitting the evidence;

(3) The court must find proof of the other crime, wrong, or act to be clear and convincing; and

(4) The court must exclude the evidence if its probative value is outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice. [As amended by order filed January 31, 2003, effective July 1, 2003.]

Advisory Commission Comments. Part (a) has always been the law in Tennessee for criminal prosecutions.

T.C.A. § 40-17-119 [repealed; see 1991 comments] regulates character evidence offered to prove a rape victim's alleged consent.

In civil actions, Tennessee is one of a minority of jurisdictions admitting character evidence in some situations to prove circumstantially conduct involving "moral turpitude." Spears & Solomon v. International Insurance Co., 60 Tenn. 370 (1872). The proposed rule would change that minority position; character would be inadmissible circumstantially in all civil cases. Of course, if character is directly at issue in a civil action, such as in a defamation action, character evidence necessarily is relevant and admissible under Rule 405(b).

The Commission drafted Part (b) in accord with the Supreme Court's pronouncements in State v. Parton, 694 S.W.2d 299 (Tenn. 1985). There the Court established precise procedures to emphasize that evidence of other crimes should usually be excluded. In the exceptional case where another crime is arguably relevant to an issue other than the accused's character —issues such as identity (including motive and common scheme or plan), intent, or rebuttal of accident or mistake —the trial judge must first excuse the jury. Then the judge must decide what material issue other than character forms a proper basis for relevancy. If the objecting party requests, the trial judge must state on the record the issue, the ruling, and the reason for ruling the evidence admissible. Finally, the judge must always weigh in the balance probative value and unfair prejudice. If the danger of unfair prejudice outweighs the probative value, the court should exclude the evidence even though it bears on a material issue aside from character. Finally, according to Parton, the trial judge must find that the evidence is "clear and convincing"that the defendant committed another crime.

Advisory Commission Comments [1991]. [In place of the second paragraph of earlier language, which is rescinded, insert the following language as the new second paragraph:]

The character of the victim of a sex crime is not governed by Rule 404(a)(2), but rather by T.R.Evid. 412.

Advisory Commission Comment [2003]. The third condition for admitting other crimes, clear and convincing proof, has been required by case law before and after adoption of the Rules of Evidence. This principle was first enunciated in Wrather v. State, 179 Tenn. 666 (1943), reversing a mother’s conviction for murdering her adult son by arsenic poisoning. Evidence that she killed her father-in-law and brother-in-law with arsenic was not clear and convincing. The Supreme Court again approved this standard in State v. Parton, 694 S.W.2d 299 (1985).

Advisory Commission Comment [2005]. The word “person” in Rule 404(b) has been construed to refer solely to the defendant in a criminal prosecution. State v. Stevens, 78 S.W.3d 817 (Tenn. 2002).

Advisory Commission Comment [2009]. If the accused attacks the character of the alleged victim, amended Rule 404(a)(1) allows the prosecution to prove the accused's character for the same trait. This is an additional way the accused"opens the door" to character evidence.

Rule 405. Methods of proving character. —(a) Reputation or Opinion. —In all cases in which evidence of character or a trait of character of a person is admissible, proof may be made by testimony as to reputation or by testimony in the form of an opinion. After application to the court, inquiry on cross-examination is allowable into relevant specific instances of conduct. The conditions which must be satisfied before allowing inquiry on cross-examination about specific instances of conduct are:

(1) The court upon request must hold a hearing outside the jury's presence,

(2) The court must determine that a reasonable factual basis exists for the inquiry, and

(3) The court must determine that the probative value of a specific instance of conduct on the character witness's credibility outweighs its prejudicial effect on substantive issues.

(b) Specific Instances of Conduct. —In cases in which character or a trait of character of a person is an essential element of a charge, claim, or defense, proof may also be made of specific instances of that person's conduct.

Advisory Commission Comments. This proposed rule changes Tennessee law, which does not permit character to be proved by personal opinion.

Cross-examination of character witnesses for the accused raises a delicate problem. The examining lawyer can ask the witness about rumored arrests and charges concerning the defendant, because the witness's knowledge of the rumors might impeach the witness in the eyes of the jurors. If the witness admits having heard unfavorable rumors, the jury may decide that the witness's reputation or opinion testimony is entitled to little weight. If the witness has not heard the rumors, the witness's testimony may likewise be taken with a grain of salt because the witness is unfamiliar with the accused or the accused's community.

The indirect effect of such a cross-examination may be the more damaging to the accused. While the jury will be instructed to consider the rumors only as affecting the character witness's credibility, the practical danger is that such rumors —even if untrue —place the defendant's character in a bad light with the jurors. In an effort to alleviate the problem, the proposed rule sets out detailed procedural safeguards. The cross-examiner must apply to the court for permission to inquire into specific instances of conduct, the jury must be excused, and the court must determine both that a factual basis exists and that probative value for impeachment outweighs prejudicial effect on the accused's character.

Part (b) allows substantive proof of specific acts where the character is an element of a cause of action or a defense. For instance, the defendant who called a defamed plaintiff a "crook"can prove the plaintiff embezzled funds.

Rule 406. Habit; routine practice. —(a) Evidence of the habit of a person, an animal, or of the routine practice of an organization, whether corroborated or not and regardless of the presence of eye-witnesses, is relevant to prove that the conduct of the person, animal, or organization on a particular occasion was in conformity with the habit or routine practice.

(b) A habit is a regular response to a repeated specific situation. A routine practice is a regular course of conduct of an organization.

Advisory Commission Comments. Tennessee has long admitted animal habit. Copley v. State, 153 Tenn. 189, 281 S.W. 460 (1925), is the leading case. Authorities supporting admissibility of human habit and business custom are collected in Tennessee Law of Evidence § 30.

The second paragraph defines habit and routine practice, emphasizing the need for a "regular response"when a person, animal, or organization is faced with a given situation.

Rule 607. Who may impeach? —The credibility of a witness may be attacked by any party, including the party calling the witness.

Advisory Commission Comments. The rule would abolish Tennessee's common law prohibition against impeaching one's own witness —the voucher rule. The present rule finds expression in King v. State, 187 Tenn. 431, 215 S.W.2d 813 (1948); Record v. Chickasaw Cooperage Co., 108 Tenn. 657, 69 S.W. 334 (1902).

The Commission believed that requiring a lawyer calling a witness to vouch for the witness's credibility too often unfairly restricts proof. Obviously there is no choice over who witnesses facts. In some instances, rigid enforcement of the voucher rule has caused Constitutional error. See Chambers v. Mississippi, 410 U.S. 284, 93 S. Ct. 1038, 35 L. Ed. 2d 297 (1973).

See Rule 611 for the mode and order of interrogation.

Advisory Commission Comments [2000]. Decisional law prohibits a lawyer from calling a witness —knowing the testimony will be adverse to the lawyer's position —solely to impeach that witness by an inconsistent statement. See the June 1999 issue of the Tennessee Bar Journal at page 23 and Cohen et alia, Tennessee Law of Evidence (3d ed.) at § 613.1.

Rule 608. Evidence of character and conduct of witness. —(a) Opinion and Reputation Evidence of Character. —The credibility of a witness may be attacked or supported by evidence in the form of opinion or reputation, but subject to these limitations: (1) the evidence may refer only to character for truthfulness or untruthfulness, and (2) the evidence of truthful character is admissible only after the character of the witness for truthfulness has been attacked.

(b) Specific Instances of Conduct. —Specific instances of conduct of a witness for the purpose of attacking or supporting the witness's character for truthfulness, other than convictions of crime as provided in Rule 609, may not be proved by extrinsic evidence. They may, however, if probative of truthfulness or untruthfulness and under the following conditions, be inquired into on cross-examination of the witness concerning the witness's character for truthfulness or untruthfulness or concerning the character for truthfulness or untruthfulness of another witness as to which the character witness being cross-examined has testified. The conditions which must be satisfied before allowing inquiry on cross-examination about such conduct probative solely of truthfulness or untruthfulness are:

(1) The court upon request must hold a hearing outside the jury's presence and must determine that the alleged conduct has probative value and that a reasonable factual basis exists for the inquiry;

(2) The conduct must have occurred no more than ten years before commencement of the action or prosecution, but evidence of a specific instance of conduct not qualifying under this paragraph (2) is admissible if the proponent gives to the adverse party sufficient advance notice of intent to use such evidence to provide the adverse party with a fair opportunity to contest the use of such evidence and the court determines in the interests of justice that the probative value of that evidence, supported by specific facts and circumstances, substantially outweighs its prejudicial effect; and

(3) If the witness to be impeached is the accused in a criminal prosecution, the State must give the accused reasonable written notice of the impeaching conduct before trial, and the court upon request must determine that the conduct's probative value on credibility outweighs its unfair prejudicial effect on the substantive issues. The court may rule on the admissibility of such proof prior to the trial but in any event shall rule prior to the testimony of the accused. If the court makes a final determination that such proof is admissible for impeachment purposes, the accused need not actually testify at the trial to later challenge the propriety of the determination.

The giving of testimony, whether by an accused or by any other witness, does not operate as a waiver of the witness's privilege against self-incrimination when examined with respect to matters which relate only to character for truthfulness.

(c) Juvenile Conduct. —Evidence of specific instances of conduct of a witness committed while the witness was a juvenile is generally not admissible under this rule. The court may, however, allow evidence of such conduct of a witness other than the accused in a criminal case if the conduct would be admissible to attack the credibility of an adult and the court is satisfied that admission in evidence is necessary for a fair determination in a civil action or criminal proceeding. [As amended by order entered January 25, 1991, effective July 1, 199, and by order filed January 6, 2005, effective July 1, 2005.]

Advisory Commission Comments. Part (a) admits opinion as well as community reputation to prove character. Presently Tennessee restricts proof to reputation evidence. Ford v. Ford, 26 Tenn. 91, 100-01 (1846). The proposed change is minimal, however, because Tennessee has allowed a character witness on the credibility issue to opine that the fact witness should or should not be believed. Ford v. Ford, 26 Tenn. 92, 102 (1846).

Part (b) reflects the Supreme Court's view of impeachment by prior bad acts. State v. Morgan, 541 S.W.2d 385 (Tenn. 1976), incorporated F.R.Evid. 608(b) into Tennessee case law. The proposed rule is even more specific than the federal version. It requires a jury-out hearing on probative value and basis for cross-examination, relatively recent misconduct, and notice plus analytical weighing of probative value versus unfair prejudice.

To the extent that State v. Caruthers, 676 S.W.2d 936 (Tenn. 1984), can be construed as allowing cross-examination about a prior act of rape to impeach, the proposal would change that result.

If the witness makes a sweeping claim of good conduct on direct examination, that claim may open the door to cross-examination without pretrial notice and with a lower standard of probativeness, as rebuttal of the broad claim would itself tend to show untruthfulness. Also, there may be instances where the prosecution would not discover the accused's bad acts until after the trial begins, making pretrial notice impossible; in such cases immediate notice and a hearing on the issue before the accused testifies should satisfy the spirit of the rule.

Note that the accused's failure to take the stand in face of an adverse ruling on admissibility of a prior bad act does not waive the right to assign error on appeal.

Part (c) conforms juvenile bad acts admissibility to the principles used with juvenile adjudications. See Rule 609(d).

Advisory Commission Comments [1991]. This is a technical amendment.

Advisory Commission Comments [2005]. Substituting “character for truthfulness” in place of “credibility” at the beginning and end of Rule 608(b) clarifies that contradiction impeachment by extrinsic evidence is permissible.

Rule 609. Impeachment by evidence of conviction of crime. —(a) General Rule. —For the purpose of attacking the credibility of a witness, evidence that the witness has been convicted of a crime may be admitted if the following procedures and conditions are satisfied:

(1) The witness must be asked about the conviction on cross-examination. If the witness denies having been convicted, the conviction may be established by public record. If the witness denies being the person named in the public record, identity may be established by other evidence.

(2) The crime must be punishable by death or imprisonment in excess of one year under the law under which the witness was convicted or, if not so punishable, the crime must have involved dishonesty or false statement.

(3) If the witness to be impeached is the accused in a criminal prosecution, the State must give the accused reasonable written notice of the impeaching conviction before trial, and the court upon request must determine that the conviction's probative value on credibility outweighs its unfair prejudicial effect on the substantive issues. The court may rule on the admissibility of such proof prior to the trial but in any event shall rule prior to the testimony of the accused. If the court makes a final determination that such proof is admissible for impeachment purposes, the accused need not actually testify at the trial to later challenge the propriety of the determination.

(b) Time Limit. —Evidence of a conviction under this rule is not admissible if a period of more than ten years has elapsed between the date of release from confinement and commencement of the action or prosecution; if the witness was not confined, the ten-year period is measured from the date of conviction rather than release. Evidence of a conviction not qualifying under the preceding sentence is admissible if the proponent gives to the adverse party sufficient advance notice of intent to use such evidence to provide the adverse party with a fair opportunity to contest the use of such evidence and the court determines in the interests of justice that the probative value of the conviction, supported by specific facts and circumstances, substantially outweighs its prejudicial effect.

(c) Effect of Pardon. —Evidence of a conviction is not admissible under this rule if (1) the conviction has been the subject of a pardon based on a finding of the rehabilitation of the person convicted and that person has not been convicted of a subsequent crime which was punishable by death or imprisonment in excess of one year, or (2) the conviction has been the subject of a pardon based on a finding of innocence.

(d) Juvenile Adjudications. —Evidence of juvenile adjudications is generally not admissible under this rule. The court may, however, allow evidence of a juvenile adjudication of a witness other than the accused in a criminal case if conviction of the offense would be admissible to attack the credibility of an adult and the court is satisfied that admission in evidence is necessary for a fair determination in a civil action or criminal proceeding.

(e) Pendency of Appeal. —The pendency of an appeal of a conviction does not render evidence of that conviction inadmissible. Evidence of the pendency of an appeal is admissible.

Advisory Commission Comments 2001. The Tennessee Supreme Court suggested in State v. Galmore, 994 S.W.2d 120 (1999), and State v. Taylor, 993 S.W.2d 33 (1999), that the accused in a criminal trial may need to make a jury-out offer of proof in order to reverse the trial court for an erroneous ruling that a conviction is admissible to impeach. Such error might otherwise be harmless.

Advisory Commission Comments. The Supreme Court adopted F.R.Evid. 609(a) & (b) in State v. Morgan, 541 S.W.2d 385 (Tenn. 1976), and thereby rejected the old "moral turpitude"criterion for admissibility of convictions to impeach. Proposed Tennessee Rule 609(a) takes Morgan at face value and lists its essential elements:

(1) The time of proof ordinarily is during cross-examination, but the witness's denial triggers extrinsic evidence. This rule does not preclude questions about prior convictions during direct examination.

(2) Only felony convictions or those misdemeanor convictions involving dishonesty are competent for impeachment. See State v. Butler, 626 S.W.2d 6 (Tenn. 1981), for the Supreme Court's view that theft crimes involve dishonesty. The rule is consistent with Butler.

(3) When the witness in a criminal trial is the accused, the prosecution "must"give pretrial notice and the trial judge "must"make a determination before the accused elects to testify or not that the probative value of the conviction "on credibility"is greater than its "unfair prejudicial effect on the substantive issues."To the extent that State v. Sheffield, 676 S.W.2d 542 (Tenn. 1984), is inconsistent, the proposal would change the result.

Note that the accused who does not take the witness stand because of an unfavorable ruling on admissibility of a prior conviction can nonetheless raise error on appeal.

For witnesses not covered by 609(a)(3), the balancing test is different. Rule 403 applies, and a conviction would be admissible to impeach unless "its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice"or other criteria listed in that rule.

Part (b) of proposed Rule 609 restates and hopefully clarifies Morgan language concerning inadmissibility of stale convictions. To avoid the mistaken exclusion of convictions "ten years old,"the rule separates convictions with time served from those where the convict served no prison time. Normally, ten years would be measured from release from jail to commencement of prosecution.

Even old convictions can be used in certain instances, but the proposed rule requires a weighing ("substantially outweighs") of probative value versus undue prejudicial effect, with a specific factual determination by the trial judge.

Part (c) excludes only those convictions of witnesses pardoned because of rehabilitation or innocence.

Part (d) follows the current philosophy expressed in T.C.A. § 37-1-133(b) and State v. Butler, 626 S.W.2d 6 (Tenn. 1981). Constitutional confrontation issues may require admitting the juvenile record of a witness testifying against the criminal accused. See Davis v. Alaska, 415 U.S. 308 (1974).

Part (e) permits impeachment by a conviction undergoing appeal because, under Tennessee law, the convict is presumed guilty after judgment.

TN Dept of Pre Crime arrests the Dragonator

Photo copyright The Dragonator

THE DRAGONATER WINS IN TRAFFIC COURT AT DEALS GAP, RAISES SPEED LIMIT TO 65 MPH ON THE DRAGON - NOLLE PROSEQUI BY BLOUNT COUNTY ATTORNEY GENERAL. NO TESTIMONY, HEARING NOR TRIAL WHATSOEVER. 60 MPH SPEEDING TICKET DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE, COSTS PAID BY THE STATE, IN BLOUNT COUNTY GENERAL SESSIONS COURT WITH JUDGE BREWER. THP TROOPER RANDALL HUCKEBY ADMITTED ON VIDEOTAPE DURING TRAFFIC STOP THAT ALL SPEEDING TICKETS NORTHBOUND ON US129 AT MILE MARKER 0.5 ARE FEDERAL JURISDICTION, NOT STATE JURISDICTION (VIDEO BY THE DRAGONATER). HUCKEBY WAS ALSO CAUGHT ON VIDEO SPEEDING AT 60 MPH ON THE DRAGON, WITHOUT THE MANDATORY EMERGENCY LIGHTS AND SIREN REQUIRED FOR IMMUNITY FROM PROSECUTION (VIDEO BY THE DRAGONATER). TDOT ADMITTED IN WRITING THAT THE MANDATORY TRAFFIC ENGINEERING SURVEY SPEED AUDIT WAS NEVER PERFORMED, IN VIOLATION OF TN CODE, THUS THE POSTED 30 MPH SPEED LIMIT ON THE DRAGON REVERTS TO THE DEFAULT 65 MPH IN TN CODE. THE DRAGONATER ALSO MADE VIDEO OF TROOPER HUCKEBY SPEEDING UP TO 60 MPH ON THE DRAGON IN A 30 MPH ZONE, WITHOUT MANDATORY EMERGENCY LIGHTS NOR SIREN, IN VIOLATION OF TN CODE, AND PERJURY IN HIS PERSONNEL FILE, WHICH SHOWED HIS $100,000+ SALARY. 2007 TDOT SAFETY AUDIT REPORT CONFESSED THAT THP'S JOB IS TO BAN ALL COMMERCIAL BUSINESSES ON THE DRAGON, SO THP TICKETS INCREASED 11,400% IN BLOUNT COUNTY. THP'S STALKER RADAR OPERATOR MANUAL CONFESSED THAT RADAR CANNOT MEASURE THE SPEED OF VEHICLES WITHIN 18 MPH OF ACTUAL SPEED. WATCH THIS SPACE FOR FULL EVIDENCE FILE. UPDATE 7 MARCH 2011

COP.
2. to steal; filch. 3. to buy (narcotics). 4. cop out, a. to avoid one's responsibility, the fulfillment of a promise, etc.; renege; back out. 5. cop a plea, a. to plead guilty or confess in return for receiving a lighter sentence. b. to plead guilty to a lesser charge; plea-bargain.
-Random House Unabridged Dictionary

UPDATE: TDOT Safety Audit Review bans business on US129 at Deals Gap Dragon - TDOT admits in writing that the 30 mph speed limit is illegal on the Dragon. THP cops on the Dragon are paid over $100,000/year salary. Full text of THP's Stalker radar operator manual admits radar is inaccurate by over 30 mph.

TN Dept of Pre Crime arrests the Dragonator - #1 ticket writer for THP is paid over $100,000/year salary on the Dragon at Deals Gap.

Memphis PD's "Heat Mapping" Aims to Predict Where Crime Will Happen

I just got a speeding ticket on the Dragon, where Tennessee Highway Patrol brags it increased tickets for bikers by 11,400%... I'm such a criminal?

Trooper ran out in the road to stop me...at an alleged 60 mph? BTW "reckless driving" is defined as 61 mph, having any prior traffic ticket or draggin a knee. Apparently no way to do NCIC checks on ticket history from the Dragon.

I literally had to wait in line, he was writing so many tickets on the last day of the month. THP has an illegal quota of 700 tickets per trooper per year, or they're fired. 800 tickets per year pays cops $100,000s in overtime. All ticket quotas are illegal, according to cops and lawyers for the Fraternal Order of Police in Knoxville.

Radar map of the Dragon

When buying a radar detector, stay away from Walmart, Best Buy and Pep Boys, since they carry Cobra "ticket notifiers", that get horrible reviews in all tests, and appear to be a covert operation by police and megacorporations to sell defective shit to the sheeple, cause false alarms, increase ticket revenue and insurance profit. Autozone carries Whistler, a very good detector according to reviews. POP detectors can warn of instant-on Ka band like THP uses with Stalker radar. Escort brand is a great detector, if money is no object. Stay away from cordless detectors, they have problems with low voltage, short battery life and terrible range. Older detectors may not have full coverage of the Ka band, regardless of what their adverts say.

THP Stalker radar freqs, channels, hop mode band

Deputy Radar Roy's Radar/Laser Stealth Bike

Watch this space...


Cobra ticket notifier in action on the Dragon, with 18 cops per 11 miles


100,000s of bikers boycott Tennessee and the Dragon

These same THP troopers demand pretty girls suck their dicks during traffic stops, then videotape them in action, on more than one occasion:



I refused to suck his dick, so I got a ticket.

"I’ll burn your house down, set your dog on fire and there won’t be a member of your family left, do you understand me? I won’t hire it done, I will do it myself! Do you understand me?”
-Deals Gap sheriff James Berrong threatening to kill his secretary, United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit, Nuchols v. Berrong, No. 04-5645, July 11, 2005

---

FEMA'S use of term 'federal family' for government expands under Obama

Don’t think of it as the federal government but as your “federal family.”

In a Category 4 torrent of official communications during the approach and aftermath of Hurricane Irene, the Federal Emergency Management Agency has repeatedly used the phrase “federal family” when describing the Obama administration’s response to the storm.

The Obama administration didn’t invent the phrase but has taken it to new heights.

“Under the direction of President Obama and Secretary Janet Napolitano, the entire federal family is leaning forward to support our state, tribal and territorial partners along the East Coast,” a FEMA news release declared Friday as Irene churned toward landfall.

The G-word — “government” — has been nearly banished, with FEMA instead referring to federal, state and local “partners” as well as “offices” and “personnel.”

“'Government’ is such a dirty word right now,” says Florida State University communication professor Davis Houck. “Part of what the federal government does and any elected official does is change the terms of the language game into terms that are favorable to them.”

“Family” can evoke favorable thoughts of motherhood and security. But it can also conjure images of Big Brother and organized crime.

Welcome to the Great Smoky Mountain National Park

The phrase “federal family” has been used in connection with FEMA at least as far back as 1999.

Under President George W. Bush, FEMA officials sprinkled the alliterative euphemism into congressional testimony and statements. When former FEMA Director Michael Brown promised help to hurricane-battered Floridians in 2004, he vowed that “the federal family is dedicated to staying for as long as it takes.”

During the Clinton administration, Vice President Al Gore responded to 1999 flooding in Iowa by pledging that “the federal family is committed to providing the necessary resources to comfort every person and family devastated by this disaster and to help them return to their normal way of living as fast as possible.”

A Google search shows the phrase appearing 10 times on FEMA’s website during the Bush years. Since Obama took office, “federal family” has turned up 118 times on fema.gov, including 50 Irene-related references.

Among them: statements that the Obama administration “is committed to bringing all of the resources of the federal family to bear” for storm assistance and that “the entire federal family continues to lean forward to support the states in their ongoing response efforts.”

Houck doubts all the “family” references will give the public a warm and fuzzy view of FEMA and the federal government.

“That one is so blatantly obvious that I think people’s rhetorical radar is going to go off,” Houck says.

On the other hand, Houck says, “If FEMA can come in and really do a great job, maybe that 'federal family’ thing would stick with the people on the ground.”

FEMA did not respond to a request for comment Wednesday.

Jurisdictionary vs National Motorists Assn in traffic court

I recently purchased Jurisdictionary, a Continuing Legal Education course for pro se litigants. It's produced by a licensed lawyer, "Dr. Frederick D. Graves, JD", who still has his "licenses to practice law", who actually does practice law in court.

JD stands for Juris Doctor, aka "unlicensed lawyer" with a "law degree". A "license to practice law" is merely a court order(s), signed by various judges, in various courts of appeal, printed on fancy paper in fancy fonts, suitable for framing to impress customers. Every pro se also has a license to practice law in every court (admitted to the bar as a party), and can represent any other "person" in any other court, via signed contract for Power of Attorney In Fact ("pro se for a pro se"). "Person" is defined as a corporation invented by government adhesion contract, which includes a stipulation that only a "licensed lawyer" can represent a corporation in court.

Jurisdictionary.com provides a free email newsletter, which is basically an intro with a sales pitch, and a free "print" newsletter named Justice Magazine, that's mainly pontification. The website has a free law dictionary, which is a fraction of the size of other free online law dictionaries.

Jurisdictionary claims it covers divorce, forclosure, tax "and All Other Cases". I emailed Jurisdictionary.com to inquire whether it covers Criminal Rules of Procedure and traffic court, but got no reply. From what I've seen on its website and free videos, and the data CD, it only covers civil litigation without mention of criminal court nor traffic court, though many states like Florida now require Civil Rules of Procedure in traffic court, with zero penalty of jail. The data CD has a section on "Causes of Action" with a Essential Elements listed for a few criminal charges, but not for traffic "crimes" like "speeding" (see The People of Michigan vs Ferency). The data CD includes "Defenses" but omits "Necessity", one of the key defenses in traffic court, or for justifiable homicide in self defense. Odd to omit this info, since 99% of all lawsuits in USA are by the Police State suing frivolous litigation against pro se motorists for the "crime" of driving safely without crashing. I'll update this post if Jurisdictionary does in fact discuss traffic court.

Jurisdictionary only covering civil cases is not a bad thing, since all traffic ticket cases are for alleged breach of civil driver license contract. This fact of law is admitted by Big Brother in all 50 States, since driver license suspension hearings are always civil matters in an administrative hearing, using Rules of Civil Procedure on appeal, not Rules of Criminal Procedure. Traffic ticket trials are usually both civil and criminal trials at the same time, with the civil driver license contract an "essential element" for jurisdiction of the court. All driver licenses require a voluntary signature, just like any other contract. Duress or fraudulent concealment of the terms of the contract, or a lack of "meeting of the minds", renders a contract void from its inception. Signing a contract is a waiver of your constitutional right to travel without an internal passport as required by the Communist Manifesto's 6th Plank.

The data CD does not work from its HTML webpage index with Windows Vista7, so use Windows Explorer and click each file separately. Includes a selection of copyright-expired historial documents and books, that are freely available on the web. I'd recommend reading Bleak House by paralegal Charles Dickens, how the corrupt legal system of London ate the estate in Chancery Court, where not even the lawyers nor judges had any idea what the case was about (other than collecting their legal fees).

Jurisdictionary arrives in a single DVD/CD box, which includes 4 CDs -- 2 audio, 1 video, 1 data with PDFs -- no DVDs, for viewing by computer only. At $257, it cost about 1/4 what a paralegal certificate class would cost online, or about what lawyers are usually required to pay every year for CLE classes. Unlike mail-order paralegal "college" classes, that are merely a single book mailed in chapters after you take open-book tests with zero human interaction, Jurisdictionary includes 5 hours of video lectures with 2 hours of audio lectures and 15 "law school tutorials". It includes no written material, but you get immediate access to online text material. Jurisdictionary does appear to cost much less than George Gordon's School of Law for non-lawyers, which is an actual classroom/teacher seminar with audio CDs to take home. In Tennessee, a paralegal college course would cost several $1,000s of dollars, including the requirement of passing a calculus class and type 500 words a minute, but would provide zero education in courtroom procedure for pro se litigants.

The National Motorists Association provides detailed legal info on winning in traffic court, using self-help law books written by lawyers for non-lawyers from Nolo Press, along with police instruction manuals on use of radar/laser/vascar. When you join NMA, they will pay your speeding ticket if you lose a real trial in traffic court, if you got the ticket after buying annual membership. NMA will also pay you up to $5,000 to fight a redlight camera ticket in the appellate courts. NMA are those nice people who got the 55 mph national speed limit repealed. NMA rents a Ticket Defense Kit for $30 to $50, or buy all the books for $195 to $215.

It appears that both Jurisdictionary and NMA schools are required to win in traffic court. NMA being the most important specific info, with Jurisdictionary being a follow up advanced course on generic courtroom procedure. Nolo Press does offer books on criminal defense, but are written for folks who hire a lawyer. Westlaw and LexisNexis sell professional criminal defense books for lawyers specific to a state or federal jurisdiction, that every pro se should buy before trial in traffic court, or when they hire a lawyer to reduce fear of the unknown and help win the case.

Of course, the easiest way to beat a redlight/radar camera ticket is to throw it in the trash and ignore it, for lack of personal service of process, as required for all civil lawsuits. This fact of law is 100% censored by the patholigical liars in the media mafiya, who have billions of dollars in illegal contractors with Big Brother for propaganda services, which is why Newsweek sold for $1. I don't know yet if Jurisdictionary covers that.

"It is extremely easy to beat this type of ticket in court. Your easiest defense is to simply throw the ticket away. If it does not come with a return receipt that requires a signature, there is no proof that you actually got the ticket."
-Norman G. Fernandez, attorney, free ebook How to Beat a Speeding Ticket - Photo RADAR

"Your photo radar defense: Ignoring The Letter. When you receive a general post letter advising you of your photo radar citation, you have the option of just ignoring it. All states have guidelines on how the citation must be served. In effect, your payment or appearance at the courthouse is your acceptance of service. By not responding to the letter, you are refusing acceptance of service. In addition, none of the departments are making personal service to anyone that lists a PO Box as their mailing address on their vehicle registrations."
-Lt "Radar" Roy Reyer, Maricopa County Sheriff Office, Phoenix, Arizona, RadarBusters.com, Your Photo Radar Defense

75% of AZ Drivers Refuse to Pay Photo Traffic Tickets

85% of TX Drivers Refuse to Pay Photo Traffic Tickets

Cops confess to shooting redlight camera in Knoxville TN

Cop Radar Roy tests radar detectors and police radar, listing which detectors work and which are crap (Cobra, Rocky Mountain Radar). Walmart and Best Buy sell Cobra crap. Local auto parts stores sell the good ones that warn of "POP" instant-on Ka band by THP, and are affordable under $100 (Whistler).

Jurisdictionary does deny the validity of various "patriot" legal arguments, such as the gold fringe on a US flag indicating martial law admiralty jurisdiction as defined by US Code. Never mind that federal traffic court does admit in court orders that driving in the Great Smokey Mountain National Park is "admiralty jurisdiction", to go with its gold-fringe flag. Don't know yet what Jurisdictionary says about the constitutionally guaranteed right to travel without an internal passport tax. Never mind that 75% of judges lack a license to practice law (a crime under TN Code), so how do they require a license to drive?

Pastor Rick Strawcutter is a certified paralegal and law school student who has won pro se trials and appeals in traffic court, who teaches his skills by videotape and mail order court documents. Or he was until MSNBC "CAPTURED" featured him as the next preacher to be massacred by the Police State. Strawcutter first pointed out what Jurisdictionary now says, that right or wrong, Rules of Procedure and Rules of Evidence now trump the constitutions, laws and facts in every court, so learn those Rules if you want to win. This good advice is the opposite of the propaganda the sheeple see on Judge Judy TeeVee, where ignorance of the Rules and groveling to a screaming judge is how whiners allegedly become winners -- which pays that Judas jew judge $30-million per year to brainwash the masses to lose in traffic court.



There's a difference between an unskilled pro se losing an appeal of a patriot argument, and a skilled law firm spending $100,000 to make a professional "patriot" argument in the appellate courts, which apparently has never been attempted in US history. I've personally paid $170,000 to a lawyer to win $250,000 in the federal court of appeals, and they still messed up the appeal.

It's odd and disappointing that Jurisdictionary fails to mention traffic court. What's the reason for that? Jurisdictionary includes the typical anti-semitic rants made by anti-semitic jews that Islam is evil and destroying USA. Never mind that all dictionaries define Semite as Arab or Christian, not a Eurotrash jew living in USA with zero DNA from ancient Judah. Never mind that CIA employee Usama Bin Laden denied involvement on 17 Sept 2001, and the Khazar jew banksters funded the US Govt's attack against USA on 9/11/2001, and stole $30-trillion from an impotent Congress via the Bankster Bailout Bills. It's the jews who destroyed the US judicial system and Christianity via their Satanic Masonic mafiya, and overthrew USA by numerous coups d'etat, as Tennessee president General Andrew Jackson put on his tombstone. It's the jews who banned rebuilding the Christian church destroyed at Ground Zero on 9/11/2001. It's the pedophile jewish rabbis who suck penis of little babies during circumcison rituals, then kill them for "religious freedom".

Will Jurisdictionary get up to speed with patriot "mythology", history and the Facts of Life, or will it be just another disinfo diversion to siphon patriot dollars to the Jew World Odor?

"COP.
2. to steal; filch. 3. to buy (narcotics). 4. cop out, a. to avoid one's responsibility, the fulfillment of a promise, etc.; renege; back out. 5. cop a plea, a. to plead guilty or confess in return for receiving a lighter sentence. b. to plead guilty to a lesser charge; plea-bargain." Random House Unabridged Dictionary.

Cops get $200,000 salary, city files for bankruptcy in federal bankruptcy court to avoid paying police union contracts

Tennessee Auditors Arrive, 48 Blount Sheriff cars missing - "The state auditor arrived in the County a few weeks ago. The auditor was able to find only 239 vehicles. What happened to the other 48 vehicles? But the Sheriff wants the taxpayers to support a tax increase, so that he can have even more money to spend next year. Does this make sense to you?"

"I’ll burn your house down, set your dog on fire and there won’t be a member of your family left, do you understand me? I won’t hire it done, I will do it myself! Do you understand me?”
-Blount County TN sheriff James Berrong, United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit, Nuchols v. Berrong, No. 04-5645, July 11, 2005

THE DRAGONATER WINS IN TRAFFIC COURT AT DEALS GAP, RAISES SPEED LIMIT TO 65 MPH ON THE DRAGON - NOLLE PROSEQUI BY BLOUNT COUNTY ATTORNEY GENERAL. NO TESTIMONY, HEARING NOR TRIAL WHATSOEVER. 60 MPH SPEEDING TICKET DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE, COSTS PAID BY THE STATE, IN BLOUNT COUNTY GENERAL SESSIONS COURT WITH JUDGE BREWER. THP TROOPER RANDALL HUCKEBY ADMITTED ON VIDEOTAPE DURING TRAFFIC STOP THAT ALL SPEEDING TICKETS NORTHBOUND ON US129 AT MILE MARKER 0.5 ARE FEDERAL JURISDICTION, NOT STATE JURISDICTION (VIDEO BY THE DRAGONATER). HUCKEBY WAS ALSO CAUGHT ON VIDEO SPEEDING AT 60 MPH ON THE DRAGON, WITHOUT THE MANDATORY EMERGENCY LIGHTS AND SIREN REQUIRED FOR IMMUNITY FROM PROSECUTION (VIDEO BY THE DRAGONATER). TDOT ADMITTED IN WRITING THAT THE MANDATORY TRAFFIC ENGINEERING SURVEY SPEED AUDIT WAS NEVER PERFORMED, IN VIOLATION OF TN CODE, THUS THE POSTED 30 MPH SPEED LIMIT ON THE DRAGON REVERTS TO THE DEFAULT 65 MPH IN TN CODE. THE DRAGONATER ALSO MADE VIDEO OF TROOPER HUCKEBY SPEEDING UP TO 60 MPH ON THE DRAGON IN A 30 MPH ZONE, WITHOUT MANDATORY EMERGENCY LIGHTS NOR SIREN, IN VIOLATION OF TN CODE, AND PERJURY IN HIS PERSONNEL FILE, WHICH SHOWED HIS $100,000+ SALARY. 2007 TDOT SAFETY AUDIT REPORT CONFESSED THAT THP'S JOB IS TO BAN ALL COMMERCIAL BUSINESSES ON THE DRAGON, SO THP TICKETS INCREASED 11,400% IN BLOUNT COUNTY. THP'S STALKER RADAR OPERATOR MANUAL CONFESSED THAT RADAR CANNOT MEASURE THE SPEED OF VEHICLES WITHIN 18 MPH OF ACTUAL SPEED. WATCH THIS SPACE FOR FULL EVIDENCE FILE. UPDATE 7 MARCH 2011

Secret tape of cops' illegal ticket quota

Tennessee Highway Patrol busted for illegal ticket quotas

Click to play audio: NYPD Secret Tape Has Police Pressing Ticket Quotas

New York Times
9 Sept 2010

For nearly every New Yorker who has received a summons in the city — caught at a checkpoint monitoring seat-belt use, or approached by a small army of police officers descending on illegally parked cars — quotas are a maddening fact of life.

No matter how often the Police Department denies the existence of quotas, many New Yorkers will swear that officers are sometimes forced to write a certain number of tickets in a certain amount of time.

Now, in a secret recording made in a police station in Brooklyn, there is persuasive evidence of the existence of quotas.

The hourlong recording, which a lawyer provided this week to The New York Times, was made by a police supervisor during a meeting in April of supervisors from the 81st Precinct.

The recording makes clear that precinct leaders were focused on raising the number of summonses issued — even as the Police Department had already begun an inquiry into whether crime statistics in that precinct were being manipulated.

The Police Department’s chief spokesman, Paul J. Browne, did not respond Thursday to three e-mails and three phone calls requesting comments on the tape. He was sent extensive excerpts from the recording.

On the tape, a police captain, Alex Perez, can be heard warning his top commanders that their officers must start writing more summonses or face consequences. Captain Perez offered a precise number and suggested a method. He said that officers on a particular shift should write — as a group — 20 summonses a week: five each for double-parking, parking at a bus stop, driving without a seat belt and driving while using a cellphone.

“You, as bosses, have to demand this and have to count it,” Captain Perez said, citing pressure from top police officials. At another point, Captain Perez emphasized his willingness to punish officers who do not meet the targets, saying, “I really don’t have a problem firing people.”

The recording is the latest in a series of audiotapes from the precinct that have raised concerns among community leaders and residents of the neighborhoods it covers, Brownsville and Bedford-Stuyvesant. Those Brooklyn residents contend that the tapes show a department fixated on the number of summonses and low-level arrests, and that the result is a pattern of harassment.

Critics say this is the flip side of CompStat, the Police Department analysis system that has been credited with bringing down major crimes but faulted as creating a numbers-driven culture.

Police officials have long denied the existence of a quota system, but they add that they do have “performance goals” they expect officers to meet.

A previous set of recordings of station-house roll calls was made in 2008 and 2009 by Patrol Officer Adrian Schoolcraft, who has filed a lawsuit against the department claiming retaliation after he reported accusations to the Internal Affairs Bureau.

Officer Schoolcraft accused supervisors in the precinct of manipulating crime statistics and enforcing ticket and arrest quotas, which are a violation of state labor law.

The accusations are at the center of a broad internal investigation of how the precinct recorded crime statistics. Amid the inquiry, Deputy Inspector Steven Mauriello, who had been the commander at the 81st Precinct, was transferred in July to a transit district in the Bronx.

The latest recording was made on April 1, as the internal inquiry was under way, and after some of Officer Schoolcraft’s allegations had become public in The Daily News and The New York Post.

Inspector Mauriello invoked Officer Schoolcraft’s name at the April 1 meeting, as he warned precinct leaders about “rats coming out of here wearing tape recorders.”

The person who made the recording gave it this week to Officer Schoolcraft’s lawyer, Jon L. Norinsberg, in an effort to show that Officer Schoolcraft, who has been suspended from the force, was not alone.

“He wanted to do anything in his power to support Schoolcraft, and I think this is his way of corroborating Schoolcraft’s allegations,” said Mr. Norinsberg, who said the new recordings would be used as evidence in his case. “It is evidence the quota system is ongoing. Subsequent to the public revelations that have taken place, it’s business as usual in the N.Y.P.D.”

At one point in the new tapes, Inspector Mauriello introduced Captain Perez, who the supervisor said was second in command, as someone who “wants his summonses.”

For nearly every New Yorker who has received a summons in the city — caught at a checkpoint monitoring seat-belt use, or approached by a small army of police officers descending on illegally parked cars — quotas are a maddening fact of life.

The Police Department’s chief spokesman, Paul J. Browne, did not respond Thursday to three e-mails and three phone calls requesting comments on the tape. He was sent extensive excerpts from the recording.

On the tape, a police captain, Alex Perez, can be heard warning his top commanders that their officers must start writing more summonses or face consequences. Captain Perez offered a precise number and suggested a method. He said that officers on a particular shift should write — as a group — 20 summonses a week: five each for double-parking, parking at a bus stop, driving without a seat belt and driving while using a cellphone.

“You, as bosses, have to demand this and have to count it,” Captain Perez said, citing pressure from top police officials. At another point, Captain Perez emphasized his willingness to punish officers who do not meet the targets, saying, “I really don’t have a problem firing people.”

The recording is the latest in a series of audiotapes from the precinct that have raised concerns among community leaders and residents of the neighborhoods it covers, Brownsville and Bedford-Stuyvesant. Those Brooklyn residents contend that the tapes show a department fixated on the number of summonses and low-level arrests, and that the result is a pattern of harassment.

Critics say this is the flip side of CompStat, the Police Department analysis system that has been credited with bringing down major crimes but faulted as creating a numbers-driven culture.

Police officials have long denied the existence of a quota system, but they add that they do have “performance goals” they expect officers to meet.

A previous set of recordings of station-house roll calls was made in 2008 and 2009 by Patrol Officer Adrian Schoolcraft, who has filed a lawsuit against the department claiming retaliation after he reported accusations to the Internal Affairs Bureau.

Officer Schoolcraft accused supervisors in the precinct of manipulating crime statistics and enforcing ticket and arrest quotas, which are a violation of state labor law.

The accusations are at the center of a broad internal investigation of how the precinct recorded crime statistics. Amid the inquiry, Deputy Inspector Steven Mauriello, who had been the commander at the 81st Precinct, was transferred in July to a transit district in the Bronx.

The latest recording was made on April 1, as the internal inquiry was under way, and after some of Officer Schoolcraft’s allegations had become public in The Daily News and The New York Post.

Inspector Mauriello invoked Officer Schoolcraft’s name at the April 1 meeting, as he warned precinct leaders about “rats coming out of here wearing tape recorders.”

The person who made the recording gave it this week to Officer Schoolcraft’s lawyer, Jon L. Norinsberg, in an effort to show that Officer Schoolcraft, who has been suspended from the force, was not alone.

“He wanted to do anything in his power to support Schoolcraft, and I think this is his way of corroborating Schoolcraft’s allegations,” said Mr. Norinsberg, who said the new recordings would be used as evidence in his case. “It is evidence the quota system is ongoing. Subsequent to the public revelations that have taken place, it’s business as usual in the N.Y.P.D.”

At one point in the new tapes, Inspector Mauriello introduced Captain Perez, who the supervisor said was second in command, as someone who “wants his summonses.”

“They’re counting seat belts and cellphones; they’re counting double parkers and bus stops,” Captain Perez said, referring to types of low-level summonses typically tracked by the department’s TrafficStat program. “If day tours contributed with five seat belts and five cellphones a week, five double-parkers and five bus stops a week, O.K.

“Your goal is five in each of these categories, not a difficult task to accomplish on Monday,” he added. “If it’s not accomplished by Monday, you’ve got to follow up with it on Tuesday. But there’s no reason it can’t be done by Thursday. So whatever I get by Friday, Saturday, Sunday is gravy. I’m not looking to break records here, but there is no reason we should be losing this number by 30 a week.”

Losing by 30 a week refers to a decline in the activity as reflected in departmental CompStat reports, which tally the weekly summons totals and the year-to-date totals for every command, said the person who made the recording. He spoke on the condition of anonymity for fear of retaliation and of risking his standing with people in the department.

Asked if the conversations were evidence of a quota, he said, “Absolutely,” adding that he had seen evidence of it in several boroughs.

He added that his concerns about the precinct’s integrity led him to begin recording meetings, well before he had ever met Officer Schoolcraft.

Roy T. Richter, the president of the Captains Endowment Association, said he did not believe that what Captain Perez, a member of his union, said “articulates a quota.”

From several references in the new recording, and in a separate recording made after April 1 and given to Officer Schoolcraft’s lawyer, it is clear that Inspector Mauriello and other supervisors were out to push underproducing officers — and punish them if they did not deliver.

“What I plan on doing — three cops are getting bounced to midnights, and three midnight cops are getting bounced to day tours,” Captain Perez said in the April 1 meeting.

“I don’t care about people’s families, if they don’t want to do their job,” he said. “Their paycheck is taking care of their family. If they don’t realize that, they’re going to change their tour; they’re going to start being productive if they want a tour that works for their family.”

He explained how punishment for failure would proceed.

“After I bounce you to a different platoon for inactivity, the next thing is to put you on paper, start rating you below standards and look to fire you,” Captain Perez said on the tape.

“I really don’t have a problem firing people,” he continued. “I don’t need to carry you. So that’s the attitude that you’ve got to sell to the cops.”

At one point in the second recording, made after the tapes by Officer Schoolcraft were put online in May by The Village Voice, Inspector Mauriello told supervisors to get officers out of squad cars and onto the streets.

People in the community “think cops are on the take,” Inspector Mauriello said. “I know it ain’t true, but that’s what they say: ‘Man, I need help. I got drug dealers in front of my house, and they’re in their car and they’re not getting out, not moving them.’ ”

He also told supervisors not to emphasize specific numbers, even while pressing their officers for more activity. And at one point, he made clear the pressure he felt from his bosses.

“I’m going to get beat up,” Inspector Mauriello said. “Everybody took a shot at me at CompStat, like a piñata last time, so I’m expecting that again.”

Because of an editing error, an article and a headline on Friday about a Brooklyn police precinct that appeared to be using quotas for summonses described incorrectly the number that officers were expected to write each week. In a recording of a meeting at the precinct, supervisors said that officers on a particular shift should write — as a group — 20 summonses a week; they did not say that each individual officer should write 20 a week. An article about the police’s response to the accusations is on Page A15.

Dragonator Comment: But no quota for the arrest of the US Govt and NYC Govt leaders who murdered dozens of NYPD cops and perped the terrorist massacres in NY City on 11 September 2001.

---

Tennessee Highway Patrol Ticket Quota Uncovered

By The Newspaper on July 10, 2009

Tennessee Highway Patrol (THP) troopers are punished for failing to issue a specific number of speeding tickets in at least one part of the state.

Attorney Fletcher Long provided WTVF-TV with a copy of a memo THP Sergeant Clifford M. Babits posted on the wall (PDF) of the Troop C station in Robertson County.

”I can no longer justify fives on evaluations for troopers not producing activity,” Babits wrote. “I require three things. 1. Answer the radio, 2. Work your crashes, and 3. WRITE TICKETS. I take some of the blame for not properly motivating ya’ll in the area of activity. Overall activity last year (2008) was well below the district average… Because activity plays such a high part of an everyday road trooper’s requirement, it is going to weigh heavy on yearly evaluation scores.”

These scores, with ‘five’ being the highest rating, are key to winning promotions, extra pay and the most desirable types of assignments. According to the memo, scoring is based solely on the number of tickets issued, although other factors such as routinely failing to follow orders can result in a lowered score. Babits set six hundred tickets a year, or three tickets per day, as the bare minimum.

“Let me stress I am not putting a quota on anyone,” Babits wrote. “I don’t care if a trooper writes below the 600 mark, it is his or her evaluation score, not mine. If a trooper turns in 600 citations per year, his or her overall evaluation will not be above the average score of three… I must be able to justify giving a trooper a five. Low activity is a killer.”

It takes 800 citations per year, or four tickets per day, to earn the top score. A rating of four is earned by writing 700 tickets per year or 3.5 per day. Those who fail toexceed the average score of three are punished by not being allowed to earn time-and-a-half pay on overtime assignments.

“Effective immediately, a trooper that does not produce above average activity (17.5 tickets per week) will not be able to work grant overtime in my county,” Babits wrote.

Tennessee Highway Patrol officials deny any quota exists. Many state police forces use the average number of tickets written by troops or stations to encourage a steady year-on-year increase in the number of speeding tickets issued.

---

THP Official Answers Ticket Quota Questions

NASHVILLE, Tenn. - NewsChannel5 Investigates confronted Tennessee Highway Patrol Colonel Mike Walker about a controversial memo and whether troopers target drivers with expensive tickets just to make a quota.

Maggie Duncan with the Tennessee Police Chiefs Association, of which the THP is a member, said putting such a policy to paper is unheard of.

"It's extremely bad policy and it's unprofessional," said Duncan.

Attorney Fletcher Long said this THP memo proved otherwise.

"They've always maintained they don't have a quota," said Long. "It's appalling - absolutely appalling."

Long had argued in court on behalf of clients that ticket quotas do exist, but could not prove it. He believed this memo will give them what he needs to challenge traffic tickets on grounds they were written only to meet a quota.

"They are only supposed to pull motorists over who violate the law - not the motorist they have to have because it's the end of the shift and they haven't met their 600 monthly tickets yet," said Long.

THP Col. Mike Walker said troopers do not write tickets to satisfy a quota in response to Sgt. Babit's memo.

"We don't have quotas. We don't assign numbers to troopers," said Walker. "That's a Sergeant trying to put something down for the troopers that he's going to look at."

Walker objected to the memo, but said it was not evidence of a secret quota system in the THP.

He said Babit, who remains on the job, acted alone.

"I don't know why he did it. I couldn't explain it - you'd have to ask him," said Walker.

Babit declined to talk on camera. By phone he admitted to writing the memo and said: "I only did what I was told. I sent what I wrote up the chain of command for approval. They did and told me to distribute it."

Col. Walker disputed Babit's comment.

"This came from him. It did not come from the district captain or anybody above that level," said Walker.

In 2001 Robertson County ranked 4th in the state with 15,673 tickets written and by 2007 - that rank had slipped to 17th with fewer than half that total, a big drop in traffic ticket revenues.

In the past, state lawmakers have considered legislation to make ticket quotas illegal. It's possible the issue will come up again next session.

---

What Really Motivates The Highway Patrol?

SPRINGFIELD, Tenn. - A memo seems to spell out a ticket quota policy for the Tennessee Highway Patrol. NewsChannel5 Investigates found proof that quotas do exist in Middle Tennessee.

Law enforcement supervisors at every level said quotas are bad policy and they insist quotas do not exist.

A memo was posted at the THP headquarters in Springfield for all troopers to see and the message in black and white seems crystal clear - write more tickets or else.

Sgt. Cliff Babits name is on the memo posted this past February. Troopers are warned the number of tickets written will influence their evaluations and that ‘low activity is a killer.'

The author writes, ‘Let me stress I am not putting a quota on anyone.' But on the very next page there's a three to five point scoring system.

Troopers are rewarded for a higher score, 600 citations per year = 60 tickets per month. This is average and average is 3.

Then 700 citations per year = 70 tickets per month. This is slightly above average and that could get a trooper a 4.

Finally, 800 citations per year = 80 tickets per month. This along with excelling in your other duties can justify a 5.

Attorney Fletcher Long obtained a copy of the memo from an angry client. He's long argued in court that quotas exist with no success, but now he has proof.

"It's appalling. Absolutely appalling," said Long. "It's just very clear here that's the quota system."

Perhaps most disturbing to those who've seen the memo - this paragraph: ‘Effective immediately, a trooper that does not produce above average activity (17.5 tickets per week) will not be able to work grant overtime in my county. If a trooper doesn't earn it, he or she will not get it!'

So was THP sergeant Cliff Babits pressured by higher-ups to produce more tickets? If so - how widespread is the quota policy?

NewsChannel5 Investigates put those questions to Col. Mike Walker, head of the state highway patrol; you'll be surprised to hear what Babits has to say about the memo. That part of the story Tuesday at 10 p.m.

Original PDF backup of THP memo

See also:

Tennessee Highway Patrol busted for illegal ticket quotas

KPD leaks illegal quota memos in Knoxville TN

The Dragonator walks the talk, how to file felony charges against your military commanders, then get offered a job working for Secretary of War Dick Cheney at the Pentagon.

Highway deaths fall to lowest level since 1950, police state goes berserk arresting all motorists as career criminals

---

Ex-officers seek to stop traffic grants

By Daniel Borunda
EL PASO TIMES
11/01/2011

Five former El Paso police officers have filed a request for an injunction against city officials, alleging police have an illegal quota system for traffic tickets.

The ex-officers claim they were forced to resign, but City Manager Joyce Wilson said the officers resigned when faced with termination linked to allegations of falsified time sheets.

The resignations come after an investigation began in late summer regarding the misappropriation of overtime linked to the Selective Traffic Enforcement Program, or STEP, grant. The investigation has since expanded beyond traffic grants.

A week ago, Lt. Alfred Lowe, head of the Crimes Against Persons Unit, was placed on administrative leave pending an investigation into overtime regarding a state grant paying for anti-gang operations.

The petition for an injunction was filed last week in the 34th District Court and seeks to stop the El Paso Police Department from using state traffic enforcement grants and alleges that a quota system is being used.

A hearing date is pending on the petition filed by ex-officers Luis Acosta, Ana Reza, Jorge Arellano, Michael Arzaga and Luis Alonzo Ortiz against Police Chief Greg Allen, Wilson and Mayor John Cook.

Each officer was with the department for more than 10 years until their resignations in late August and September. They are represented by lawyers Stuart Leeds and Theresa Caballero.

Leeds and Caballero provided the El Paso Times with a copy of an internal police email where a traffic sergeant complains to officers that not enough citations are being issued as part of a Click-It-or-Ticket seat-belt enforcement grant.

The May 26 email by Sgt. Jack Matthews of the Traffic Division stated "the performance standard set forth in the grant is a minimum of three seat-belt violations per hour of work per officer. If you think that you cannot meet this goal during your five-hour shift, then do not work the grant ... those that do not produce what is required will not be considered to work any traffic-related grants in the future."

Matthews was a past grant administrator, according to city documents, and retired Aug. 20, about the time the grants investigation was under way. Matthews has not been accused of wrongdoing.

Leeds said the email is proof that a quota system, though using a different name, is used by the Police Department in violation of state law.

"This proves this is all about money," Leeds said. "It is not about law enforcement and criminal justice. The people of El Paso are being hunted" for traffic citations.

Police and city officials denied the allegations. Police officials have said performance standards are not a quota system.

"These attorneys are representing their clients who resigned voluntarily in lieu of termination," Wilson said in a statement.

"The El Paso Police Department does not have a quota system and the issue at hand has nothing to do with quotas -- it has to do with falsifying time records. The lawsuit is without merit and our legal team is preparing a response."

Daniel Borunda may be reached at dborunda@elpasotimes.com; 546-6102.

---

Here We Go Again…. “Yes, We Have No Quotas”

by Lawrence Taylor attorney at law

I’ve mentioned in the past that police agencies across the country use DUI arrest quotas — and almost uniformly deny the practice. See, for example, DUI Quotas, "Yes, We Have No DUI Quotas" and "Inside Edition" Documents DUI Quotas Across U.S..

The latest example of this supposedly non-existent practice:

Drunk-Driving Quota Case May Lead to Similar Efforts Elsewhere

Baltimore, MD. Jan. 6 – Even as prosecutors weigh an appeal of a Howard County judge’s decision to throw out drunken-driving charges and rule that they were tied to illegal citation quotas, defense lawyers are considering whether the same defense might apply to past or current cases.

District Court Judge Sue-Ellen Hantman’s ruling in a case against an Ellicott City woman has raised questions on both sides — as well as eyebrows around the legal community…

Hantman said the charges against Katie Majorie Quackenbush, 22, were linked to an illegal quota — a ruling based on a memorandum that police have said was intended to describe the requirements of a federal grant that paid overtime for officers to target drunken and aggressive drivers through "saturation patrols."

"I find any evidence in this case to be inadmissible," she said, according to a recording of her Thursday ruling, and that ended the prosecution. Nevertheless, the judge indicated that "I don’t think saturation patrols are in and of themselves illegal, merely the quotas."…

The police chief said a memo to officers that called for two to four citations per hour contained, “in retrospect, not the best wording,” and conceded that he “could see how it could be misinterpreted.” He said the department does not use quotas and had revised the memo.

The memo also told the officers on the drunken-driving and aggressive-driving saturation patrols that they usually produce “at or above these amounts.”

The federal funds come from the National Traffic Safety Administration to the state, according to Buel Young, a spokesman for the state Motor Vehicle Administration. Jurisdictions can apply for them.

So the police chief insists that "the department does not use quotas"…and that the memo was just "perhaps not the best wording"? Hmmmm…..it’s hard to see how "it could be misinterpreted": the departmental order that cops have to produce "two to four citations per hour" sounds pretty clear to me.

Interesting that the federal grant appears to have required police agencies to use quotas….

---

COP.
2. to steal; filch. 3. to buy (narcotics). 4. cop out, a. to avoid one's responsibility, the fulfillment of a promise, etc.; renege; back out. 5. cop a plea, a. to plead guilty or confess in return for receiving a lighter sentence. b. to plead guilty to a lesser charge; plea-bargain.
-Random House Unabridged Dictionary.

THE DRAGONATER WINS IN TRAFFIC COURT AT DEALS GAP, RAISES SPEED LIMIT TO 65 MPH ON THE DRAGON - NOLLE PROSEQUI BY BLOUNT COUNTY ATTORNEY GENERAL. NO TESTIMONY, HEARING NOR TRIAL WHATSOEVER. 60 MPH SPEEDING TICKET DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE, COSTS PAID BY THE STATE, IN BLOUNT COUNTY GENERAL SESSIONS COURT WITH JUDGE BREWER. THP TROOPER RANDALL HUCKEBY ADMITTED ON VIDEOTAPE DURING TRAFFIC STOP THAT ALL SPEEDING TICKETS NORTHBOUND ON US129 AT MILE MARKER 0.5 ARE FEDERAL JURISDICTION, NOT STATE JURISDICTION (VIDEO BY THE DRAGONATER). HUCKEBY WAS ALSO CAUGHT ON VIDEO SPEEDING AT 60 MPH ON THE DRAGON, WITHOUT THE MANDATORY EMERGENCY LIGHTS AND SIREN REQUIRED FOR IMMUNITY FROM PROSECUTION (VIDEO BY THE DRAGONATER). TDOT ADMITTED IN WRITING THAT THE MANDATORY TRAFFIC ENGINEERING SURVEY SPEED AUDIT WAS NEVER PERFORMED, IN VIOLATION OF TN CODE, THUS THE POSTED 30 MPH SPEED LIMIT ON THE DRAGON REVERTS TO THE DEFAULT 65 MPH IN TN CODE. THE DRAGONATER ALSO MADE VIDEO OF TROOPER HUCKEBY SPEEDING UP TO 60 MPH ON THE DRAGON IN A 30 MPH ZONE, WITHOUT MANDATORY EMERGENCY LIGHTS NOR SIREN, IN VIOLATION OF TN CODE, AND PERJURY IN HIS PERSONNEL FILE, WHICH SHOWED HIS $100,000+ SALARY. 2007 TDOT SAFETY AUDIT REPORT CONFESSED THAT THP'S JOB IS TO BAN ALL COMMERCIAL BUSINESSES ON THE DRAGON, SO THP TICKETS INCREASED 11,400% IN BLOUNT COUNTY. THP'S STALKER RADAR OPERATOR MANUAL CONFESSED THAT RADAR CANNOT MEASURE THE SPEED OF VEHICLES WITHIN 18 MPH OF ACTUAL SPEED. WATCH THIS SPACE FOR FULL EVIDENCE FILE. UPDATE 7 MARCH 2011