Kudos to Denver officials for rejecting a proposed restaurant smoking ban. Colorado has the lowest obesity rate in the country. It is filled with "physically fit, health-conscious hikers and bikers."

So why the objection to smoking which is definitely an unhealthy habit?

''Western individualism is often a strength in this region,'' said Daniel Kemmis, director of the Center for the Rocky Mountain West at the University of Montana and a former Missoula, Mont., mayor. ''I'd be surprised if any interior Western state would pass a statewide smoking ban.''

Enough already with governmental regulation of our bodies. And with feel-good plans that will further hurt the economy by driving people out of major cities forcing bars and restaurants to lay people off or close.

Opponents of a ban say the measure would have sent smokers to the suburbs and is the last thing Denver's struggling economy needs. The city is facing a $50 million budget deficit and expects to lay off scores of workers.

''There's a lot of people who are on the edge and we don't want to push these people over the edge and out of business,'' said Cindy Weindling of the Colorado Restaurant Association.

June's unemployment rate was the highest in nine years--6.4%. Unemployment rose by 913,000 in the past three months alone. The private sector, which includes bars and restaurants, has been especially hard hit. Smoking bans just add to the problem.

Lawyers for the accused sniper suspect John Muhammad have sued in federal court to postpone publication of a former police chief's book about the case:

In a request filed in federal court, attorney Thomas Mann said Montgomery County Police Chief Charles Moose has ''strategically planned the launch of his book just prior to Muhammad's trial in an attempt to obtain as much money as possible from the results of his official investigation.''

''Muhammad will suffer irreparable harm in the nature of ... a feeding frenzy conjured by Moose through press tours, television interviews and other publicity-oriented endeavors,'' the attorney said.

The book is scheduled to be released September 15, and Muhammad's trial begins in October. Controversy has dogged this book since the beginning. It is unfathomable to us that a law enforcement officer would try to profit off an accused before trial. We will not mention the title of the book in protest. We refuse to even inadvertantly cause anyone to buy it.

Moose signed a book deal in January with publisher E.P. Dutton for a reported $170,000 advance. The county ethics commission later forbade him to write the book, saying that he would be misusing his office for profit and that he might be tempted to disclose confidential information. Moose resigned on June 28, saying he was forced to choose between his job and the book.

Good riddance.

Daily Kos' Cattle Call is up. Interesting to see we agree on the candidates moving up: Dean, Kerry, Edwards and even Kucinich--as well as those going south. We also agree with his views on Wesley Clark. As to Joe Biden, we say, forget about it. Al Sharpton would beat him. We're not forgetting or forgiving the (formerly named) Rave Act tacked on at the last minute to the Amber Alert bill --and that's for starters. Not to mention that he's also part of the "old boy" network, like Lieberman and Gephardt. We don't want him as a VP either.

We want someone with refreshing, new ideas and a passion for civil rights and individual liberties -- and for ending miscarriages of justice. We're not quite sure who that is yet--it appears to be an evolving process. Particularly since our ideals have to be blended into the bottom line, best summed up as "You can't always get what you want" (Rolling Stones) and "Anyone But Bush in 2004.

The U.S. is now offering a $25 million reward for capturing Saddam --or for information proving he's dead. His sons are worth $15 million.

In other war related news, one day after Bush's "Bring 'em on" comments, it appears Iraq has done just that. 8 more soldiers were injured in blasts today.

An Army truck hit an explosive west of Baghdad on Thursday injuring six U.S. soldiers, and assailants in the capital wounded two other American soldiers in separate attacks, U.S. military officials and witnesses said. The violence comes a day after President Bush vowed that anti-U.S. attacks would not keep the United States from fulfilling its mission in Iraq.

[links via What Really Happened]

From John Wesley Hall at Fourth Amendment. Com:

Important forfeiture case: In United States v $242,484 (2003, CA11, Fla) 2003 US App Lexis 13273, the Eleventh Circuit on a petition for rehearing from (2003, CA11, Fla) 318 F3d 1240 (withdrawn), finding it could avoid even deciding the legality of the stop of the claimaint, held that possession of large amounts of cash is not alone indicative of criminal activity. The claimant had no criminal record and was carrying cash not bundled in a bank. On the totality of circumstances, the government could not show probable cause to link the money to criminal activity and reversed ordering judgment for the claimaint. The government claimed that its drug dog could differentiate between money that was in close proximity to drugs and money that merely had residue, but it put on no proof to support that claim. (In 1988, the DEA admitted that 80% of the money supply had cocaine residue on it, simply passed on by the money sorting machines at the Federal Reserve.)

In other fourth amendment news, John writes of this Texas case:

The Innocence Project is seeking a Finance/Administrator Director.

The Innocence Project, Inc. ("the Project") , seeks a Director of Finance and Administration to help build and manage its newly-formed 501©3 nonprofit entity. Founded in 1992 by Professor Barry Scheck and civil rights lawyer Peter J. Neufeld as a legal clinic at the Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law/Yeshiva University, the Project represents prisoners nationwide for whom post-conviction DNA testing can prove innocence, and also works to redress the causes of wrongful convictions throughout the criminal justice system.

....In the coming months, the Project will retain its affiliation with the University while becoming legally and financially autonomous. The Project seeks a talented and experienced Director of Finance and Administration to create a financial and administrative infrastructure for the new nonprofit entity, and to manage the Project's finances and operations in the coming years. Salary mid-to-high five figures, depending on experience; full benefits. Experience with nonprofit fiscal management and administration essential.

Joe Conason went to see The Exonerated, an off-broadway play about the wrongfully convicted, and writes a powerful article about it.

Composed wholly from court records and interviews by playwrights Jessica Blank and Erik Jensen, this documentary drama recounts true tales of horror from the American criminal-justice system. The actors sit downstage and read their parts as the stories of six innocent citizens condemned to death row unfold. If this sounds like a worthy endeavor, it is; if it sounds dull or didactic, it isn’t.

The Exonerated is so compelling as theater, in fact, that it has drawn a rotating marquee of talent to the 45 Bleecker Street Theatre—including Richard Dreyfuss, Jill Clayburgh, Sara Gilbert, Gabriel Byrne, Aidan Quinn, and director Bob Balaban. At the performance I saw, Mariska Hargitay, star of Law and Order: Special Victims Unit, gave brilliant voice to Sunny Jacobs, a woman who spent almost 17 years in a Florida penitentiary—including five years on death row—for a double murder she didn’t commit.

In the article, Conason retells the story of another death row inmate, one who was brutally executed when he caught on fire in the electric chair. He also touts, as do we, Taryn Simon's new book, The Innocents, with commentary by Innocence Project co-founders Barry Scheck and Peter Neufeld.

Funded in part by a Guggenheim Fellowship, Ms Simon spent three years crisscrossing the country, interviewing and photographing the book’s subjects, whose wrongful convictions occurred in 18 different states, from California to Kentucky, Texas to Indiana.


The Innocents

Columnist Richard Cohen takes Howard Dean to task today for his change of heart on the death penalty--as expressed on Meet the Press last week.

In all my years writing about the death penalty, I have never heard any politician admit that he would countenance the death of an innocent person in order to ensure that the guilty die. Dean is maybe the first to acknowledge the unacknowledgeable.

First, we're not sure that's what Dean meant. But second, Cohen is wrong. Another politician did say it --Al Gore. We remember because we took him to task when he did it, and then wrote about it again a year or so later here on TalkLeft:

In February, 2000, Gore was interviewed in the San Francisco Bay Guardian. The article was called "15 Minutes of Al." When asked about his support of the death penalty in light of the rising number of innocents on death row, Gore said he is so strongly in support of the death penalty that he's willing to accept a few wrongful executions. Here's a portion of the interview.

"BG: What do you think about the Republican governor of Illinois calling a moratorium on the death penalty because there has been so much evidence that innocent people are on death row?

AG: Well, I support the death penalty.

BG: Well, so does he.

AG: I understand, and I also understand that the high-profile cases that have put a new spotlight on the error in capital convictions have put this issue in a new light. In Illinois, I don't want to make a judgment on what the circumstances are because I don't have the expertise. Nationally, I would not be in favor of a moratorium. The "Hurricane" notwithstanding.

BG: Are there people on death row elsewhere, or federal death row, who are innocent? Isn't that something we should be worried about?

AG: I would hope not. But I'll tell you this: I think that any honest and candid supporter of the death penalty has to acknowledge that that support comes in spite of the fact that there will inevitably be some mistakes. And that's a harsh concession to make, but I think it's the only honest concession to make, and it should spur us to have appreciation for habeas corpus, for the procedural safeguards for the accused, and for the fairness that's a part of the American judicial system and to resist efforts to take away the procedural safeguards. " (emphasis supplied by us)

Democrats came out swinging Wednesday at our macho, cowboy President's taunt to Iraqi attackers, 'Bring 'Em On' :

Though Congress is in recess, some Democrats criticized Bush's "bring 'em on" statement. "I am shaking my head in disbelief," said Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.). "When I served in the Army in Europe during World War II, I never heard any military commander -- let alone the commander in chief -- invite enemies to attack U.S. troops." Lautenberg's statement said Bush's words were "tantamount to inciting and inviting more attacks against U.S. forces."

In addition, Rep. Richard A. Gephardt (D-Mo.), a presidential candidate, said he had heard "enough of the phony, macho rhetoric" from Bush. Howard Dean, the former Vermont governor also mounting a bid for the Democratic presidential nomination, said Bush "showed tremendous insensitivity to the dangers" troops face.

All three are correct. Bush needs to remember he's running a country and a war, not coaching a football game.

Some other Bushism's:

After the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, he said he wanted al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden "dead or alive." Bush also has said that Iraqi President Saddam Hussein "crawfished" to escape United Nations sanctions, and that he would "smoke" Taliban operatives "out of their caves."

A federal magistrate judge in Alexandria, Virginia granted bail over the Government's objections to four defendants accused of running a 'jihad' network in the U.S. The Judge also rebuked the Justice Department. The Government plans to appeal the decision at least as to three of the men.

Update: Reviews of detention hearings conducted by magistrate judges are conducted by the district court judge to whom the case is assigned. In this case, it is Judge Leonie Brinkema, who also has the Zacarias Moussaoui case. On Weds., July 3, Judge Brinkema upheld the Magistrate Judge's release order and Hammad Abdur-Raheem should be released by Friday. However, the judge upheld another Magistrate Judge's decision to detain one of the other suspects, Mohammed Aatique.

Our favorite bounty hunter, Duane "Dog" Chapman arrived back in the U.S. today. His attorneys are working out his legal problems in Mexico.

Dog has bail bond businesses in Hawaii and Colorado. The Rocky Mountain News reports Dog is headed back to Colorado as soon as possible--he has his next job already picked out:

[Dog's Wife] Beth Smith said the cost of attorneys, chasing down Luster and not chasing several other fugitives have taken their toll on the couple's bank account.

"We're just about broke," Smith said. "That's why, as soon as he can get out, Dog is going to Commerce City where Bullet has been running amok while the bounty hunter is gone."

"Chapman is expected to renew his search for Colorado felon Robert "Bullet" Vigil, who, according to Smith, is hiding in Commerce City, Chapman's birthplace. Vigil, whose bond is $40,000, has a long arrest record, which includes domestic violence, assault and drug arrests, according to Colorado Bureau of Investigation records."

We think Dog will get a well-deserved hero's welcome here.

As bloggers, we have had some concerns about whether we would be liable for libelous comments posted by Talkleft readers. Last week the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals said online publishers are not responsible for material written by others that gets published on their sites--with one caveat:

In order for the provider or publisher of the information to receive immunity, the publisher reasonably must have determined that the author/sender/user meant for his communication to be published. In cases where a user directly posts his own comments, this is obvious.

But when a user sends an email to an online publisher, such as a blog, and does not intend for it to be published, the immunity issue gets murky. The Ninth Circuit determined in this decision that the test should not be the intent of the author, but rather, whether the provider (publisher) reasonably could assume that the information was sent with the intent for it to be published.

A federal appeals courts says do-it-yourself online publishers can post material generated by others without being legally liable for its content. Although the case concerned an e-mail discussion list, publishers of online journals, called blogs, hailed last week's ruling by the 9th Circuit as also extending speech protections to them.

"It clarifies the existing law," said Eric Brown, who represented the defendant in the suit. "It expands it in the sense that no court had really addressed bloggers, listserv (e-mail list) operators and those people yet" at such a high level.

The court said noncommercial publishers are only liable when they post information that a reasonable person would have known wasn't meant to be published.

"Now we can publish information we receive from someone else without fear of getting sued," said Jeralyn Merritt, a lawyer and blogger who manages TalkLeft, a Web site about crime-related news and politics.

Merritt said it would be impossible to monitor the nearly 200 messages posted onto her site every day. "We write for the enjoyment of it," said Merritt. "If we could get sued, I'm not sure it would be worth it."

We'll have more to say about the decison next week. Here's another version of the article, with a greater explanation of the facts in the 9th Circuit case.