Are you or a relative or friend looking for an interesting job in D.C. with a group committed to progressive changes in the criminal justice system? Head over to the Justice Policy Institute --they are seeking a Campaign Director.

Justice Policy Institute is a non-profit research and public policy organization dedicated to ending society’s reliance on incarceration and promoting effective and just solutions to social problems. JPI is located in Washington, DC and works with advocacy organizations, citizens and policymakers across the country to promote progressive criminal and juvenile justice reforms.

The JPI Campaign Coordinator is responsible for building and sustaining working relationships with individuals and organizations that influence and lead those responsible for determining what happens in this nation’s juvenile and criminal justice systems. The Campaign Coordinator will work closely with and under the supervision of the JPI Campaign Director and as a member of JPI campaign/project teams to develop and implement multi-faceted strategies designed to change practices and policies and create a more favorable environment for juvenile and criminal justice reforms.

Five years "relevant" experience needed --

Applicants must have a strong commitment to social justice issues and interest in criminal justice reform. Must be willing to travel.

Sounds like a dream job to us. Details here.

Richard Cohen writes Tuesday in the Washington Post of Ashcroft's Attitude Problem . Cohen argues that Ashcroft is more dangerous than those he detains.

My job is to connect the dots. So follow me as I take you from a typical newspaper story about yet another convicted murderer being freed after DNA testing to the testimony last week of Attorney General John Ashcroft. The first is clear evidence of the imperfectability of the criminal justice system, and the second is the smug refusal to admit it. Ashcroft has a serious attitude problem.

Cohen begins with Ashcroft being questioned about the 762 post-9/11 detainees:

None of them -- that's precisely zero -- was ever linked to terrorist activities. Yet some of them were held incommunicado for months. Either they were refused lawyers or so many obstacles were put in their way that it amounted to the same thing. They were denied visitors. Some were held in solitary confinement, verbally harassed and threatened and, on occasion, allegedly physically manhandled. To all of this, Ashcroft responded with a shrug. "We make no apologies," he said -- and, of course, he asked for additional death penalties in terrorism cases.

Cohen protests.

In the first place, the Justice Department got things exactly backward. In this country, you're innocent until proven guilty -- not the other way around. Second, harsh and inhumane treatment -- keeping the cell illuminated 24 hours a day -- ought not to be tolerated. After all -- and it is worth repeating -- the detainees were never charged with any crime linking them to terrorism. Most of them were detained because they were Muslims or Arabs. In this country, that ain't a crime.

Cohen asks whether Ashcroft owed the detainees an apology.

Innocent people were held behind bars, sometimes cruelly, for months at a time. They were sometimes called names and told they would never be set free. The report highlights the experience of one woman who for two months was repeatedly told her husband was not being detained (he was) and who, even after she found him, was permitted to visit him only three times in five months. Isn't she deserving of an apology?

Cohen notes Ashcroft refused to apologize.

To hear him, the system worked perfectly. This is precisely the mind-set he brings to capital punishment, of which he clearly cannot get enough....Routinely, it seems, yet another person walks from death row, freed on account of DNA testing. Routinely, we hear of yet another case where the defense lawyer fell asleep, a lab technician lied or some cop got a confession out of some addled suspect who did not, as it turned out, commit that particular crime. Oops.

Cohen sums up with these thoughts--

But when they were cleared, the detainees were owed an apology. A more humble attorney general would have conceded that mistakes were made and procedures violated, and that these are serious matters of concern. In this country, we bend over backward to protect the innocent. We don't casually trash their lives and then walk away as Ashcroft did, saying tough luck.

Go ahead, connect the dots on Ashcroft yourself. A cavalier attitude toward civil liberties, an inability to concede mistakes, a refusal to see imperfections in the criminal justice system, a zealously irrational belief in the death penalty -- and pretty soon you can read between the lines of that Justice Department report: The attorney general is far more dangerous than any of the immigrants he wrongly detained.

How heartening to hear a journalist say it.

Update: Ruben Navarrette, Jr. of the Dallas Morning News calls for Ashcroft to step down.

Jay Caruso at Daily Rant says blogger Andrew Sullivan, who raised $80,000. in his last pledge drive has another funds solicitation in the works.

For readers who don't know who Sullivan is (there are a lot of liberal non-bloggers who read TalkLeft who won't have a clue,) Sullivan is a conservative, gay blogger-journalist who seems to make a lot of people angry. We've only read his blog two or three times, so we won't criticize or praise him. But we didn't know until reading Jay's post at Daily Rant that Sullivan is HIV-positive. We have a hard time getting angry at anyone facing a life-threatening disease.

Sullivan is asking for $20 a year if you read his page more than a couple of times a week, and more if you can afford it. We'll probably be 90 years old before we fit in that category, but we don't begrudge him being paid for his work.

We have a tip jar too if anyone's interested in contributing - $20 isn't necessary, but even a few dollars helps with hosting costs and the cost of the commercial news and research services we subscribe to. Contributions also make us feel appreciated--and remind us that some of you count on TalkLeft to be here day after day, looking at crime and politics through the lens of the Constitution.

If you're one of the conservatives who read this site, we have no problem with you giving to Andrew instead of us. And if you're a reader who wants to keep reading for free, be our guest. This is a free site and will stay that way--as will our other site CrimeLynx --unless some media giant comes along and buys one or the other or both.

"The Bush administration has concluded that stun guns, which inflict a disabling electric shock, can be used for security by crew members on commercial planes, a homeland security official said on Monday."

We think this is downright barbaric, dangerous and unnecessary. What if they stun the wrong person? In prisons, inmates have died from stun gun attacks.*

By the way, the reaction of the airline pilots association has been just swell--they think the usage should be extended to flight attendants in the cabin to quell disturbances. Just what we need. How long before a flight attendant overreacts and stuns a non-threatening but complaining passenger?

An article in the October 8, 2001 Air Safety Week (available on Lexis.com) pointed out:

What emerges is the potential for an arms race in the sky. If pilots start carrying stun guns, so may the "perps" (perpetrators). If the pilots are packing pistols, the perpetrators may escalate from knives and box-cutters to firearms, also. A 4-shot firearm disguised as a working mobile phone (supposedly undetectable) can be had, raising the prospect that even cell phones may have to be consigned to checked baggage. On the other hand, if the terrorists escalate to more lethal weapons, it may be entirely appropriate to pre-emptively increase the level of protection.

If armed sky marshals are deployed, and pilots are deputized and armed,
the terrorists may increase their numbers. One former airline pilot paints this scenario: "When there are multiple terrorists, historically they often operate with a 'caboose,' the guy in reserve if a sky marshal turns up. Now that will be true more than ever. Even with a gun in the cockpit, five terrorists run you out of ammunition in a hurry. Then the pilots get to beg for mercy before they die."

*Two examples: The family of Lawrence Frazier, a Connecticut inmate who died in June 2000 after guards shocked him with stun guns at Wallens Ridge State Prison, filed a $204 million lawsuit against the Virginia Department of Corrections last year in U.S. District Court in Richmond. (Roanoke Times & World News, 1/15/03); Three prison guards were charged with second degree murder in an inmate death in Florida in which a stun gun was used after the inmate was subdued (Orlando Sentinel, Feb. 13, 2002.)

[comments now closed]

A new grass roots movement is underway to change Puerto Rico's status--it is the outgrowth of Ashcroft's insistence on seeking the death penalty in a gang-related murder case in which jury selection is now underway.

The last execution in Puerto Rico, a hanging, took place in 1927.

Two years later, Puerto Rico's legislature — like those throughout much of Latin America — outlawed the death penalty. The 1952 Constitution, which defined Puerto Rico's status as a self-governing commonwealth associated with the United States, reiterated the unconditional ban on capital punishment.

The federal death penalty trial of the gang members now underway has "brought objections from some islanders that the United States is behaving like a semicolonial ruler."

"We don't believe in capital punishment, and they are trying to impose it on us," said Arturo Luis Davila Toro, president of the Puerto Rican Bar Assn.

....some people in Puerto Rico, who are questioning whether the defendants belong in federal court at all, want the trial to become another rallying point for demanding a change in the island's status — just like the successful struggle to shut down the U.S. Navy's bombing range at Vieques island. Following a four-year campaign that landed more than 1,200 protesters behind bars, the Navy last month abandoned the lands it had held since World War II.

Professor Juan Pablo de Leon has developed an action plan:

As president of a citizens' committee opposing capital punishment, De Leon is planning to take the dispute over the San Juan trial before the United Nations. He also hopes the popular backlash will become so great that Puerto Rico's elected leaders will lobby Congress to exempt the island from the 1994 Federal Death Penalty Act.

"Behind this case is the reality of the relationship between Puerto Rico and the United States," he said.

Hey, how about this! We were just notified by True Majority.Org, run by Ben and Jerry's ice cream co-founder Ben Cohen, that TalkLeft has won a blogging award for being one of their top 25 favorite blogs. They are sending us a case of Ben and Jerry's ice cream.

"Your blogging rocks! We've been reading your stuff (and the work of others) and would like to give you a special treat from TrueMajority -- a case of tasty Ben & Jerry's ice cream. We were founded by Ben Cohen, the ice cream guy, and to recognize the work of our 25 favorite bloggers, Ben thought we should send out five pints of his best stuff to each of them. (via email)

Update: Congrats to our pal Eric over at Hamster who also was named in the top 25.

On the first anniversary of suspected "dirty bomber" Jose Padilla's detention in a military brig without access to counsel or charges, we recommend you read this speech by Judge Learned Hand from May 21, 1944 at the "I Am an American Day" ceremony held in Central Park, New York City. "Many thousands of people were present, including a large number of new citizens. Learned Hand's brief address was so eloquent and so moving that the text immediately became the object of wide demand. It was quickly printed and reprinted and also put into anthologies."

Here is but one great line:

Liberty lies in the hearts of men and women; when it dies there, no constitution, no law, no court can even do much to help it. While it lies there it needs no constitution, no law, no court to save it.

Jose Padilla, an American citizen, has been branded an "enemy combatant" and imprisoned for 13 months, 12 of which have been in sensory deprivation, all because of one man, Defense Department Advisor Michael Mobbs, and his two page declaration containing hearsay "intelligence."

[Received from Donald G. Rehkopf, Jr., Esq, co-chair of the Military Law Committee of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers. Our thanks to Donna Newman and Andrew Patel, lawyers for Jose Padilla, for never giving up and continuing to fight for Mr. Padilla's rights.]

Here's the latest from today's Miami Herald.

Another reason to be skeptical of our government's ability to ferret out terrorists:

Feds: Bomb-Sniffing Dogs Didn’t

A L E X A N D R I A, Va., June 9 — A dog trainer is scheduled to go on trial today in Alexandria federal court, charged with providing the federal government with bomb-sniffing dogs that couldn't do their jobs.

Russell Ebersole, 43, who owns a kennel in Stephenson, is accused of defrauding the government of more than $700,000 and putting at risk the lives of thousands of federal workers whose workplaces his dogs guarded. Prosecutors claim that in the months after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, Ebersole provided federal agencies with bomb dogs that couldn't find bombs.

Shouldn't the feds have tested the dogs' abilities or required some kind of independent certification before putting them to work?

Another of Daily Kos's great ideas takes root--check out the DNC's new contribution page ePatriots--Kos says over $1,000 has been contributed in the past 40 minutes since he posted it on Daily Kos.

Daily Kos has worked with the Democratic Party to help narrow the GOP's massive cash advantage. Our nominee will emerge from the primaries bloodied and broke, only to run smack head into $200 million in GOP attack ads. The DNC recognizes the increasing power of the blogosphere, and was receptive when I approached them with a request -- give us the tools to help the party and our nominee defeat Bush. The end result? ePatriots. So donate now and help us retake our nation from Bush and his cabal. Your donations will be crucial to this effort.

Markos Moulitsas.

Get ready for another onslaught. This time, it's tiny devices known as Radio Frequency Identification Chips (RFIDs.) They are already in mass production.

Computer chips the size of grains of sand have become the latest trend among manufacturers seeking to track everything from automobiles to underwear to razor blades. The radio-frequency identification (RFID) chips now in mass production are affixed to postage-stamp-size labels.

The new technology can fix the exact location of virtually any consumer product and the humans who wear and carry the items. The radio-frequency identification (RFID) chips now in mass production are affixed to postage-stamp-size labels. Merchandisers, led by Wal-Mart, will soon use them to track goods inside the store. Shelf antennae will alert staff to restock products, or turn on surveillance cameras if shoplifting is suspected.

The implications of this technology, according to MIT, is "enormous."

The global infrastructure that MIT envisions is an Internet tool "that will make it possible for computers to identify any object anywhere in the world instantly. This network will not just provide the means to feed reliable, accurate, real-time information into existing business applications; it will usher in a whole new era of innovation and opportunity."

And that is what worries some privacy advocates, who fear the Big Brother technology attached to clothing will follow customers out of the store and be used to track people through the items they purchase.

A consumer watchdog group called Consumers Against Supermarket Privacy Invasion And Numbering (CASPIAN) is already boycotting Benneton's for putting RFID's on "smart labels" in...are you ready?...underwear.

It gets worse. The technology is capable of "X-ray vision, capable of reading personal items in handbags, brief cases and pockets.

The leading manufacturer so far is Alien Technology Corp. of California, which has a "contract from Gillette Co. to produce 500 million tags, at about 25 cents apiece, to track the firm's shaving products."

The Government is already hot on the trail of these pesky devices.

Some companies are already moving past consumer use and marketing the technology for military and homeland-security applications....ActiveWave says its RFID system can aid homeland security by real-time tracking of airport employees working in secure areas by their identification cards, and passengers by airline tickets. To expedite border crossing, the Homeland Security Department is already using the chips, embedded on identification cards.

[comments now closed]

The two reputedly highest Al Qaeda operatives in U.S. custody have denied working with Iraq. Bush has not released their statements.

Abu Zubaydah, a Qaeda planner and recruiter until his capture in March 2002, told his questioners last year that the idea of working with Mr. Hussein's government had been discussed among Qaeda leaders, but that Osama bin Laden had rejected such proposals, according to an official who has read the Central Intelligence Agency's classified report on the interrogation.

In his debriefing, Mr. Zubaydah said Mr. bin Laden had vetoed the idea because he did not want to be beholden to Mr. Hussein, the official said.

Separately, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the Qaeda chief of operations until his capture on March 1 in Pakistan, has also told interrogators that the group did not work with Mr. Hussein, officials said.

[link via Daily Kos, who by the way, along with his partner, has just been hired by the Howard Dean campaign. Dean's lucky to get them.]

Two grand juries are investigating the Houston crime lab scandal. Reports are surfacing that the grand jury wants to extend the probe to prosecutors involved in the prosecution of cases that involved tainted evidence.

Reportedly,

this reflects an awareness of a possible conflict of interest that the prosecutors face in the scandal over the laboratory's DNA unit, which was closed down in January after a state audit found widespread flaws in its work, including sloppy record-keeping, misinterpreted data and evidence contaminated by water from a leaky roof in the laboratory.

DNA legal experts Barry Scheck and William Thompson testified before the grand juries last week.

In an interview that morning, Mr. Scheck said, "The grand juries are running away because the district attorney, they realize, shouldn't be conducting this investigation in the first place because he has such terrible conflict issues."

All 22 state court judges asked the District Attorney to recuse himself. He refused.

On Saturday, The Houston Chronicle reported that Mr. Rosenthal and several of his assistants had been subpoenaed to testify before one of the grand juries and that, in a letter, the grand jury's foreman had asked Mr. Rosenthal to recuse himself from the investigation. Mr. Rosenthal again declined.

Can prosecutors fairly investigate the use of evidence in their own cases? Are grand jurors or legislators capable of fairly making scientific judgments? What sort of investigation is best suited for identifying crimes or freeing those who are wrongfully convicted?

One prisoner, Josiah Sutton, was cleared in March after the DNA that had been used to convict him of rape, based on tests by the Houston laboratory, was retested.