I'm always in awe of college kids who invest their time and energy in great social causes. Princeton has my admiration tonight. Students at Princeton University have launched a progressive social activism and fundraising campaign, The Katrina Project.

Jane at Firedoglake has an excellent post up tonight about some of the problems in blogging to both newcomers and regulars:

...some times it seems impenetrable; bloggers tend to talk to the blogosphere, we assume people are following the conversation and are familiar with the cast of characters, storylines and slang that are conventions here. It can make it awfully hard to catch on. In our defense, people who show up here day after day get tired of having the same things explained over and over again, and since those are the ones we hear from the most we tend to respond to their wishes.

Last week I questioned the accuser's reported photographic identification of the accusers:

The D.A. said the accuser last week, three weeks after the incident, was able to identify one attacker. Reports are it was from a photo lineup.

Who wants to bet the only persons in the lineup were Duke Lacrosse players? If it didn't contain any foils (persons resembling her description of the perpetrators who have nothing to do with events of that evening) it's a bad lineup. One of the four key rules in proper eyewitness identification procedures is that the lineup must contain known innocents.

Defense lawyers in the case are asking the same questions. Let's examine the issue. Here are the suggested guidelines of the North Carolina Actual Innocence Commission on eyewitness evidence.

Arianna has a great post today on the subpoena (pdf) Scooter Libby issued to New York Times reporter Judith Miller. Arianna notes,

For example, point #7 of the eight-point subpoena reveals that Libby's defense team is as curious as we are about exactly what happened in the Times newsroom after Miller received the exclusive National Intelligence scoop from Libby on July 8th. It requests:

"All documents, whenever prepared or received, reflecting or referring to any request or recommendation by you, prior to July 14, 2003, to Jill Abramson or any other employee or agent of The New York Times, to pursue a news story or investigation relating to former Ambassador Joseph Wilson's trip to Niger or his claims concerning that trip."

The issue being, of course, did Judith Miller ever ask to write an article about what Libby told her? Arianna concludes (and I agree with her):

by TChris

Jacksonville (TX) A High School history and government teacher was suspended for showing a film clip.

The clip, called "The Ketchup Effect," showed a German boy and girl in a dimly-lit bedroom, sitting on the end of the bed. The boy asks the girl, in German, for a simulated sexual favor. The girl misunderstands how to perform it, causing the boy pain. He screams, and the clip ends.

The footage was blurred and did not show actual nudity. It is approximately one-minute long.

According to a student (we don't have the teacher's side of the story), the clip was part of a lesson on cultural differences, and was intended to show "a miscommunication between the boy and girl."

Students are upset at the suspension, apparently with good reason. They question why the schools' coaches aren't disciplined for their choice of films.

by TChris

The Freedom of Information Act has little value if government entities simply ignore requests for information. A federal judge concluded yesterday that the Air Force does just that.

[U.S. District Judge Rosemary] Collyer found that the Air Force had no defense - or essentially conceded - that it had failed to respond to requests under the Freedom of Information Act for up to 18 years in at least one case. The Air Force also ignored appeals of its denials of access to records for up to nine years, she said. ...

In a 12-page opinion, Collyer chastised the Air Force for its "dismal record" in responding to requests by the [National Security Archive], whose collection of documents is used by historians, academics and other researchers interested in national security.

The Air Force thought the judge should be satisfied with "We promise to be better from now on." She wasn't, in part because its "new Web-based system for tracking FOIA requests" is unfunded.

by TChris

Is cursing at an errant parker really a sign of mental illness, or just of bad manners?

The state Supreme Court ordered a psychiatric exam Thursday for a judge accused of violating the state judicial code by cursing at Detroit Deputy Mayor Anthony Adams when he parked in a spot reserved for judges.

Perhaps the exam was ordered because this wasn't Judge David Bradfield's first angry encounter in a parking lot.

The retired judge [who investigated Bradfield] also concluded that Bradfield committed misconduct in October 2002 when he became hostile with a parking attendant.

by TChris

Which is more important to the Senate: protecting the troops from harm, or enhancing the profits of defense contractors? Here's a clue:

A Senate measure to fund the war in Iraq would chop money for troops' night vision equipment and new battle vehicles but add $230 million for a tilt-rotor aircraft that has already cost $18 billion and is still facing safety questions.

President Bush's request for the emergency appropriations to cover costs of the continuing war and Hurricane Katrina recovery operations included no money for the troubled V-22 Osprey, which takes off and lands like a helicopter but flies like a plane.

I see lots of news out there, but I'll be offline most of the day. Here's a place to talk about it.

Update: In the coincidence department: Has anyone noticed that the name of the father of one of the accused in the Duke Lacrosse case is Kevin Finnerty, the same name as the guy who switched identites with Tony Soprano in the dream sequences in episodes 1 and 2 of the Sopranos? You gotta feel for the guy.

Second, does anyone want to take bets on when Gloria Allred will step in to represent the accuser in the Duke case purportedly pro bono (but of course for the book rights)?

On a completely unrelated topic, Crooks and Liars reports on a new Fox News poll showing Bush's approval ratings have slipped to 33%.

Jason Leopold reports Fitzgerald met with the PlameGate grand jury yesterday and told them he is preparing mulitple charges against Karl Rove.

Jason also interviewed Rove lawyer Robert Luskin yesterday.

"Mr. Rove is still a subject of the investigation," Luskin said. In a previous interview, Luskin asserted that Rove would not be indicted by Fitzgerald, but he was unwilling to make that prediction again Wednesday.

"Mr. Fitzgerald hasn't made any decision on the charges and I can't speculate what the outcome will be," Luskin said. "Mr. Rove has cooperated completely with the investigation."

Does Luskin's refusal to continue to maintain Rove won't be indicted mean he isn't sure or that he's resigned to an Indictment? I don't know, but Jason seems certain an Indictment is looming.

Update: The cab driver's story about his second trip to pick up players at the party becomes even more suspect. CNN reports:

Less than an hour after he says he picked up Seligmann and a friend, Mostafa says he got another call -- at around 1:07 a.m. March 14 -- to pick up people at the same North Buchanan address. He said he saw about 20 people on the lawn of the home, "yelling, talking back" to each other, including one African-American woman who he said didn't appear to be injured.

Four men got into the taxi, Mostafa said, and they appeared to be drunk. One of them said, "She's just a stripper," Mostafa quoted.

When the police arrived at the house at 12:55 am, two minutes after the second dancer's first 911 call, the house appeared deserted. The women were already gone. They left at 12:41.

*****
Original Post:

In the Duke lacrosse players case, the search warrants of the indicted players' rooms were filed today. You can view the warrant here.

by TChris

For whatever reason, Zacarias Moussaoui testified that he had planned to fly a plane into the White House on Sept. 11 with Richard Reid. That testimony made no sense, as the government agreed today. Moussaoui's lawyers and the prosecution stipulated that this evidence would be placed before the jury in the death penalty phase of Mousaoui's trial:

"There is no information to indicate that Richard Reid had preknowledge of the 9/11 attacks or was instructed by al-Qaeda leadership to conduct an operation in coordination with Moussaoui." The document pointed out that Reid had left his possessions to Moussaoui in his will before Reid mounted a separate attack in December 2001 in which he tried to blow up a transatlantic flight with a bomb in his shoe.

"In the opinion of the FBI," the document said "if Reid was to be part of the same martyrdom operation as Moussaoui, it is unlikely he would have bequeathed his possessions to Moussaoui."

Update: (TL): The New York Times reports on the Government's concession that Reid was not involved here.