Caravan To Catch A Killer

by Susan Murphy Milano

With a donated van, Dr. Maggie Zingman prepared for her first road trip in 2007. Since then she has driven to 33 states and 42 cities in hopes of catching a killer. Now, eighteen thousands miles, 5 caravan trips, and 2,000 ruled out DNA possible suspects later, she continues visiting homicide units, college campuses, and sporting events like the PGA tour, passing out the killer's information in hopes someone may provide a tip or a lead.

Her daughter, Brittany Phillips, was found raped and suffocated inside her Tulsa apartment in 2004. Britty, as she's called, was buried on her 19th birthday.

In Florida last week after an exhaustive day of meeting with police and passing out information on the beach we spoke by phone. " I searched high and low, looking for tips, clues, anything that would lead to the capture of my daughter's killer. The only thing that did not make me go crazy after my daughters murder was police detectives said she died instantly."

This remarkable woman is a psychologist at the Mabel Basset Correctional Center in Tulsa, working in the area of trauma and sexual assault. She could never imagine her personal experiences and work with other victims would run parallel with the death of her daughter. The stories she hears on a daily basis from the women she works with is now a harsh reality for her.

When she has saved up enough vacation days at work, using her own money she carefully plans the road trips driving in towns across America in her SUV, a moving billboard that literally tells the tragic details of a young woman's life abruptly taken away.

Dr. Zingman understands the new technologies that allow tiny bits of DNA found at crime scenes to be scooped up and tested. While on the road she spreads the word of new federal and state laws requiring law enforcement to collect DNA samples from people convicted of-- or simply arrested for -- nonviolent crimes, including shoplifting. She is advocating for every State to do a DNA test upon arrest.

Police have Brittany Phillip's murderer's DNA and because of this "Teflon mom" thousands of men have been tested, but no killer has been found, leaving Brittany's mother motivated to continue to ride in search of the man who brutally took her child's life. Some would argue that Maggie is looking for a needle in a haystack and the killer may be never be found. "Once chance in a million, is better than no chance at all."

Dr. Maggie Zingman plans to do another road trip in about six months. She will not stop until Brittany's killer is found.

Tweet

The Enigma That Was Michael Jackson

by Diane Dimond

Let's Admit—there was a dark side.

When I was plying my trade as an investigative reporter, the most famous criminal defendant I ever covered was entertainer Michael Jackson. Boy, did I cover him! From breaking the first news about the molestation claims against him back in 1993, to being the first to report the 2003 abuse allegations of a young boy who was a cancer patient when he first met the King of Pop. I was there for every day of the criminal trial and I wrote a book drawing on what I’d learned about the man over the course of the decade I’d investigated his story.

Now, Michael Jackson is dead at age 50.

Since his death, likely related to his long-term drug abuse and anorexia, I’ve been asked to explain the fascination so many have for this Pop Icon. What was it about Jackson that caused the great worldwide crowds of people we saw to drop everything and gather in public forums to mourn his passing? . . .

The answer, of course, is Michael Jackson’s music. And his dancing. And his song-writing ability. He was, quite simply, a self-taught entertainment genius. His talent reached down deep inside us and made us feel good. We couldn’t help but tap our toes to the rhythm, to have his lyrics burned into our memories.

Michael Jackson was also a pioneer on the racial front. He was the first Black artist to break through the MTV barrier, his highly produced music and videos literally brought the races together on both the dance floor and in society. Who among us doesn’t sing along (or do a version of a "cool" dance move) when we hear Jackson tunes like, "A-B-C," "Billy Jean," or "Beat It"?

Here’s another reason for the massive fan base. We watched Michael Jackson grow up. He was ours, no matter what our color, and we reveled in how this wildly talented 10-year-old could captivate us. Later, we became mesmerized by Jackson’s solo career and his obsessively intricate choreography that made his videos, like Thriller, all-time record breakers.

We introduced our kids to his irresistible music and another generation was hooked.

But Michael Jackson was obsessive about other things too—things that don’t make us feel so good. He was accused of one of the most insidious crimes imaginable: the sexual abuse of a child; not just once, but twice. And from my years of reporting on the case, I can tell you there were other young boys with eerily similar stories of abuse by Jackson, sons of parents too reticent, too embarrassed, or scared to press charges.

In public, Jackson flaunted his fascination with male children. Even after his narrow escape from prosecution in 1993, for which he paid out about 30 million dollars to avoid a trial, he flamboyantly continued to pose with and travel with unidentified young boys. He openly declared there was “nothing wrong” with a 40-year-old man sleeping with another’s boy. He called us “ignorant” for not understanding. Jackson seemed to be daring us to stop him. No one could.

Then he started to collect children of his own. Jackson reportedly paid up to 10 million dollars to a nurse named Debbie Rowe in return for her agreement to be inseminated with the sperm of his dermatologist, Dr. Arnold Klein, and to give him two children and then disappear. His third child was reportedly born to a surrogate mother and another mystery sperm donor. No one stopped Jackson from doing this either. He had the wealth and the celebrity clout to indulge his obsessions.

Michael Jackson never did like to be told what to do. That probably stemmed from his iron-fisted father’s cruel upbringing. So, despite warnings from some in his entourage, Jackson went about his drug taking, children buying, shopping binges and other bizarre behavior and we seemed to look right past it . . . because of the glorious music he gave us. We telegraphed our approval of his behavior by continuing to support and adore him. We set no boundaries and he didn’t recognize any.

Separating the art from the artist has long been a dilemma. History shows we can love the art and not the man. Vincent Van Gogh was certifiably insane. The artist Caravaggio had a wicked temper and committed murder. Yet both were also celebrated as brilliant artists. In the case of Michael Jackson, anointed with titles like King and Superstar, the admiration caused him to believe the rules didn’t apply to him.

In our adoration of the artist, we shouldn’t forget that men of bad character do valuable things that benefit society in all sorts of ways. They build fabulous institutions, they write meaningful books, they entertain us in ways no others can. Good deeds seep out in spite of their flaws. That doesn’t mean their bad acts are okay.

Tweet

The Supreme Court and DNA: I'm Embarrassed for Them

by Laura James

The United States has always been woefully behind when it comes to forensic science. The forensic techniques so critical to criminal justice today were all discovered in Europe.

From fingerprints to arsenic tests to DNA, European scientists and European courts have led the way for centuries. And in 2009, that continues to be true.

In June 2009, the Supreme Court of the United States, on a 5-4 vote, refused to help an inmate whose access to DNA evidence was blocked by the state. The Supreme Court refused to acknowledge a right to DNA testing. The opinion is an embarrassment to me as an American.

Even though the Chief Justice acknowledged, right up front, that DNA evidence "has an unparallelled ability both to exonerate the wrongfully convicted and to identify the guilty," the Supreme Court said it is comfortable leaving it up to individual states to decide how much access to grant for DNA testing. And if they don't allow it, well, that's too bad.

The stated reasons for this decision were federalism -- the idea that each state is a nation unto itself -- and "finality" -- the idea that judges are too lazy to hear umpteen appeals. How deplorable of a court to cite "finality" -- to my way of thinking, a case isn't "final" until the execution is held or the sentence served.

But in the opinion filed by Justice Alito, you see a hint of the truth. In reality, the justices just don't think all that much of DNA evidence. Justice Alito (page 31), claims that DNA "often fails" to provide clear proof. He quotes resources on the difficulty of collecting crime scene evidence. He doesn't believe in the science.

The bottom line is, until we get a Supreme Court with faith in science in America, a convicted man can have access to potentially exculpatory DNA evidence depending on where he lives.

In Kentucky, only death row inmates are permitted access to DNA evidence. So if you're serving forty years for rape, tough luck.

In Alaska, a prosecutor can block your request for exonerating DNA testing for no logical reason. Tough luck, folks.

In America, we ought to have more respect for DNA evidence. I can't help but wonder if the United States Supreme Court would think more of DNA evidence if the science had been developed in the United States to begin with. Meanwhile, my inner flag dips as I hope that other countries and other justice systems continue to look elsewhere for leadership in forensic science.

Tweet

F.B.I. Agent Murders Neighbor's 3-Pound Chihuahua & Doesn't Even Get a Fine

Hunt for Justice
by Cynthia Hunt

What kind of man shoots and kills a tiny 3-pound little girl chihuahua named Sassy?

I know your first thought. What was the chihuahua doing?

Neighbors say Sassy was wearing her pink rhinestone collar and simply walking in the street through the upper-middle class neighborhood in Lorena, Texas, when a homeowner used his pellet gun to repeatedly shoot Sassy. She ran to a neighbor's yard and died. The man turned around with his children and went into his home without a care in the world about the neighbor's pet he had just killed.

The man who killed the pet wasn't just a homeowner. Lovett Leslie Ledger Jr., 40, is an F.B.I. agent stationed in Waco.

At first, police say Agent Ledger (pictured above in the mug shot after his arrest) lied about what he had done. When he realized his other neighbors had witnessed him do it, he changed his story and admitted he shot and killed his own neighbor's pet.

"Mr. Ledger is not sorry for what he's done. Still to this day, eighteen months later, we've never had an apology." Amy Davis, Sassy's owner, told KXXV-TV News in Waco yesterday after court.

The story led the news at the local TV station. The Davis family held a picture of the little fawn-colored chihuahua with her huge ears. Sassy looked a lot like my little guy, Maxwell, my 12-year-old chihuahua (pictured with me after he had knee surgery). I would show you a picture of Sassy but there are none in print I can pull from the news coverage. You can watch the TV story that shows a quick picture of her if you click on this KXXV-TV link.

In my years as a journalist, I've covered many animal cruelty cases, and I've seen other defendants, who are not law officers, receive much more punishment. I think Ledger should have been punished more, not less, than a regular citizen because he understood the magnitude of his actions.

Ledger pleaded "no contest" to felony animal cruelty charges in exchange for deferred probation, no fine, and 300 hours of community service. Deferred probation means Ledger will have no final verdict of guilt if he completes his terms successfully.

In other words, Ledger got practically no punishment for killing his neighbor's pet.

The F.B.I. has an internal investigation to see if Ledger gets to keep his job, which he should absolutely lose. The man shot a little dog who was simply walking through the neighborhood. If he is capable of that, how has he abused his power as an F.B.I. agent?

Let me explain why the ability to kill a small pet is such a disturbing sign. Many serial killers have pasts that include the torture or killing of small pets. Experts have long listed the killing of small animals as a dangerous sign of a future sociopath. The killing or torture of small animals, fire starting, and bed wetting are the three behavioral markers of the "homicidal triad," which a number of serial offending sociopaths have exhibited in their pasts. I bet Agent Ledger wets his bed too. Any grown man who gets satisfaction from killing a small defenseless animal like Sassy has to be a bed wetter.

Jason and Amy Davis, Sassy's owners, are disappointed in the sentence. They wished Ledger would have had to be the one to tell their then 8 and 5 year old kids that their pet Sassy had been killed.

Pets are such an important part of so many American families. I know many of you may not know or particularly like chihuahuas. These little dogs with their big spirits have been a priceless addition to our family.

Chihuahuas with their keen hearing are ranked as one of the best watch dogs because they always alert you when something is wrong. When the railroad serial killer was on the loose, I lived near the tracks and was on high alert like everybody else in Houston. Angel Maturino Resendiz had killed a brilliant female doctor just a couple of miles from where I lived. My old apartment had no alarm system, but Maxwell my chihuahua alerted me any time anyone was near our apartment. He was the only reason I could sleep during that awful time in Texas. My little dog's unconditional love has given me more than I could ever write.

My sister Angelia was diagnosed with terminal inoperable heart and brain aneurysms when she was only 23. Doctors call her a ticking time bomb because one of her aneurysms could rupture any day. We are blessed she has lived nine years since that diagnosis. Her only dream in life was to be a mother. With her illness, that dream would never come true. Instead she became a mother to Lucy Pearl (pictured above), a bossy, lovable little chihuahua who never fails to make us laugh at her antics.

Killing a neighbor's pet is something that the courts should punish accordingly in 2009.

An F.B.I. agent who kills his neighbor's small dog should get more than community service. The prosecutors in this case should be ashamed of themselves for agreeing to this deal.

Tweet

Introducing New Woman In Crime Ink - Lisa R. Cohen

by Lisa R. Cohen

The Etan Patz case is one of the best examples I have ever seen of “Justice Interrupted,” the name used by some of the women on this blog to describe their cause, of going after the toughest abuses against the most vulnerable of victims.

Etan was six ½ in 1979 when he disappeared off the streets of Manhattan sometime between 8:00 and 8:30 on a misty morning, somewhere between his home and the school bus stop two short blocks away. He had finally convinced his mother Julie to let him make the short trip alone. She walked him down the stairs, unlocked the door – he was too short to reach the lock himself – and kissed him goodbye on the street before watching him head off.

He never came home. He was missing more than 8 hours by the time Julie realized that he hadn’t ever made it to school that day. She immediately called her husband, then the police, and by nightfall some 300 NYPD were combing the streets.

Etan’s father Stan is a professional photographer. He took hundreds of lovingly shot photos of his son, and Etan’s beautiful face smiled down from missing posters around New York City, and then throughout the country. They were translated into several languages and ultimately sent around the world. Etan became, quite literally, the poster child for missing children. The day he disappeared is now marked every May 25th as National Missing Children’s Day.

Thirty years ago, missing children certainly weren’t unheard of, but Etan Patz was the one case that triggered a sea change. Thirty years ago, children walked to school by themselves (I know I did, in kindergarten). They played outside until it was time to come home for dinner. And when a child went missing, there was no centralized place to cry out for help, no national data banks, no National Center for Missing and Exploited Children. Everything changed, after Etan.

Today, the man responsible for Etan's death has never been charged, but he sits in jail after one determined prosecutor got him convicted for something else, in Etan's name. How that happened, and how the prosecutor traveled the world to build his case, is detailed for the first time in AFTER ETAN: The Missing Child Case That Held America Captive (Grand Central Publishing, May 09).

After twenty five years, the serial pedophile, Jose Antonio Ramos, will walk free in 2012, unless he can be stopped. But there's new movement to do that, spearheaded by that same (former) prosecutor and Etan's father Stan Patz.

I’ve reported on this story for almost twenty years, as a producer at the network news magazines “PrimeTime Live” and “60 Minutes.” Then I spent five years writing AFTER ETAN, the first book ever on this case in all those thirty years.

It’s the story I could never walk away from, and its twists and turns both confounded and astonished me. Recently, “20/20” spent a full hour reprising some of the reporting from my first piece in 1990, and adding several other significant developments recounted in the book. It’s a tough story, but it’s also filled with real life heroes who faced incredible odds with courage and dedication.

Etan’s legacy can’t make up for the tragedy he and his family have suffered, but it’s an impressive one. Through my book, my ongoing writings here and elsewhere, I want to paint the picture of the before and after, tell some of the incredible tale that spans thirty years of this case, and track both the case and the issue of missing and exploited children onward into the future. In doing so, I hope I’ll be able to pass on some of the valuable lessons I myself have learned.

Thanks for this opportunity.

Tweet

A Criminal Autopsy of Michael Jackson

by Kathryn Casey

Today, huge crowds will gather in L.A. to memorialize Michael Jackson. More than a million-and-a-half people tried to get tickets. I do understand. Right out of the gate, I want to say how much I enjoy his music. He was an amazing artist and an exciting performer, and I sometimes find myself humming his songs while I write. "Billy Jean" is my favorite.

That said, I'm uncomfortable with this outpouring of adulation and the massive media coverage it's scheduled to receive. There's little beyond a presidential inauguration that merits live coverage on six networks. But that's what we're doing today for Jackson's service. Why? Come on, folks. Why are we doing this? Especially when we consider the circumstances of his life and his death.

I am sincerely very sorry for Michael Jackson's children, for his family. For them, this is a true tragedy. But why are we making Jackson a hero in death, when he wasn't in life? The truth is that Jackson was a very troubled man. Need proof? Look at the way he paid doctors to disfigure his own face.

Second: He was an addict. For many years, Jackson was known to be addicted to prescription meds. His family tried to stage an intervention. In his final months, friends worried about his drug use. It was so bad that just weeks before his death, Jackson begged a nurse to inject him with Propofol, a powerful anesthetic used exclusively in operating rooms. Despite the drug's dangers, it appears that he found someone to hand it over to him, since the drug was found in his home. Autopsy results aren't in yet, but will anyone be surprised to find out that Jackson's death is the result of some misuse of narcotics?

This at a time when prescription drug abuse is a growing trend among teenagers. In January 2008, around the time actor Heath Ledger died of a combination of prescription drugs, a study was released that showed today's teens abuse prescription meds more than any other type of drug, with the exception of pot. Yet here we are, again as we did with Ledger, portraying the death of a celebrity who died of such drug abuse as a national tragedy.

What message does this send to our children?

Then there's the way past child molestation charges against Jackson are being white-washed in the media. Now I haven't seen everything, so if your experience is different than mine, perhaps you're watching other channels, reading other articles? What I've noted is an ongoing tribute to Jackson the performer and a write-off of the questions surrounding his behavior with children. Whenever it's brought up, I've heard a brief mention of his 2005 trial on charges of child sexual abuse and an immediate dismissal of the case's validity.

"He was acquitted," Matt Lauer quickly said when Vanity Fair's Maureen Orth mentioned the trial on the Today Show.

Orth agreed but then went on to peg the reason for the not guilty verdict not on Jackson's innocence but his talented legal team, especially defense attorney Thomas Mesereau, who all but put the mother of Jackson's 13-year-old accuser on trial instead of Jackson. In the end, many press reports theorized that jurors voted not guilty more out of contempt for the boy's mother than support of the King of Pop. (That's Jackson showing up at court in his pajamas on the right.)

But the 2005 allegations weren't the only ones. Remember the 1993 case, dropped after Jackson settled with another young boy and his family for a reported $22 million? I do.

My point is that there are certainly a lot of questions about Michael Jackson. This man is not a role model, not someone to be idolized. Yet that's what we're doing. Through this over-the-top coverage, we're buying into the myth of Michael Jackson the tragic superstar, and we're setting him up to be remembered for decades to come, especially by our children, as a fallen hero. Is that really what we want to do?

Personally, I'm left regretting that there isn't some kind of test that could be run on autopsy to confirm or disprove allegations that the man Jackson looked at in the mirror each morning was a pedophile.

In the week following his death, Jackson was autopsied twice. First up was an L.A. County coroner. Then, due to questions about the circumstances surrounding Jackson's demise, a private autopsy commissioned by the Jackson family. Once the medical examiners made the "Y" cut through Jackson's chest, sternum to belly button, they inspected his internal organs, his heart, lungs, his kidneys and his liver. They used a saw to slice through his skull and examined his brain. Theoretically, they should have been able to diagnose all the superstar's illnesses.

Pedophilia, however, doesn't show up on autopsy. Experts could run every known test on Jackson's brain and not uncover evidence either proving or disproving the claims made against him over the past sixteen years. The result is that without some concrete evidence emerging, Michael Jackson has taken his secrets to the grave.

So I'm left wondering about the wisdom of turning Jackson's death into a national tragedy, and I'm uncomfortable about celebrating the life of a man who abused drugs and may have victimized young children. What about the rest of you?

Tweet

Plant Clues

by Andrea Campbell

Additional clues about conditions at the crime scene can be found from an examination of living evidence, in this case, plant life. The presence of certain mosses, for example, may indicate a shaded area.

A competent botanist can estimate the age of vegetation found under a body in relation to foliage found in the immediate surrounding area. In one case, a skeleton found in wet Massachusetts ground had become intricately intertwined into a wild network of shrubs, weeds and vines. The evidence was delivered to investigators in two huge blocks of earth! In fact, when the crates arrived, someone said “. . . Along with the bones, they’ve sent us a couple acres of Massachusetts real estate.”

Although examiners like to see the remains—in situ—in the exact same relation it had to the field, this was second best. A careful study of the root system provided them with data on time since death, simply because investigators could determine how many growth seasons had passed.

Also, botanists know that when a root penetrates a bone it keeps growing, and the new developing stems can ultimately break the bone into fragments, imitating other forms of trauma. It would have been impossible to identify the sites of bullet impact on the bones if it had been confused with similar destruction due to later root growth.

Pods, seeds and pollen can also be conclusive evidence. In Arizona a woman’s body was found in the desert under a paloverde tree. Police arrested a suspect who had two paloverde seedpods in the bed of his pickup. Since DNA testing can match parent plants just like DNA on human parents matches their children, the tests proved that the seedpods from the man’s truck matched the tree under which the woman’s body had been found. This living evidence helped to convict the man of murder.

In another case, seeds in a 1960 murder investigation told investigators that the corpse had been moved from the actual murder scene. A cypress tree found in a garden of a particular house also matched seeds and mortar found on the body, pointing police in the right direction. Further evidence built a solid case against a man who was eventually convicted of murder.

Palynology is the study of palynomorphs or pollen. The best thing about pollen besides evidence of the seasons, is that pollen has a predictable production and dispersal rate in specific regions. Consequently when it is found on material at crime scenes, it can lead to a suspect.

Some palynologists believe that O.J. Simpson, a man who was acquitted of killing his wife and an innocent bystander, could have been linked to the case with pollen evidence. If, in fact, Simpson had hidden in the bushes as theorized, his clothing might have picked up pollen spores, placing him at the scene. Pollen evidence found in dirt helped to convict a murderer in Sweden in 1969. In one Austrian case, mud on the killer’s boots linked him to a crime scene, and, once a detective even found pollen in the grease of a killer’s gun and another found pollen in the ink of a document that demonstrated it was a forgery!

Some excerpts from Andrea's book Detective Notebook: Crime Scene Science, for children ages 10 and up.

Tweet

Jenny Sanford: My Hero No More

by Pat Brown

I am thoroughly depressed today. I was planning to write this rousing tribute to Jenny Sanford, wife of philandering South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford and now she has gone and joined the League of Stand By Your Scumbag Husband while He Treats You Like a Dog political wives and she has let American women down.

Just a day ago, women all across the country were cheering that FINALLY, a wife of a cheating politician didn't stand humiliated by his side at his press conference while he told the world he screwed another woman and that he valued his affair over his wife and family.

Then women applauded Jenny Sanford for throwing the bum out. She appeared to have taken a stand that this woman wasn't going to just allow the creep to come right home and pretend nothing happened.

Finally, and best of all, women were thrilled that Jenny Sanford stated, "His career is not my concern." Hurrah! Yes, why should she care about his career when Sanford could care less about his wife and children's happiness?

Then, fast forward a few days. Jenny Sanford has reneged on her statements and has now taken her place by her no-good husband's side and this was after he confessed not only to supposedly have fallen in love with another woman, but to being a serial cheater and big fat lying dog. Worse, not only has she let the buzzard right back into her life (he is joining her on vacation in Florida to "work on their marriage"), she is politely encouraging the citizens of South Carolina to follow her cue and forgive their Sanford and allow him to stay in office. Jenny Sanford has proven to be just as wimpy as the other political wives, albeit it took her a few days to get over being mad.

Before one thinks me too harsh on Ms. Sanford, let me say I understand she is in a tough position. I understand, believe me. But tough positions do not mean we are to compromise our standards, our morals, our dignity; that's what standards are for, especially Christian standards, to continue to be our standards when life gets tough. That is why a marriage vow means until death do us part, not until we get the hots for someone else.

was married with four children but that didn't stop her from jumping into bed with him. And, in spite of the fact she was "in love" with the governor, she was sleeping with another man who had no clue she was two-timing him. What a treasure this woman is! She has as little character as her American bed mate.

I have launched into this tirade for a number of reasons: one is to show women how little respect they have for themselves and for each other and two, to show how the act of adultery has been reduced to a "victimless crime" making marriage a completely meaningless institution. Women seem to not understand that marriage no longer offers any protection and no-fault divorce means your husband can dump you as fast as a man can snap a twig in a primitive village and not have to take care of you or your hut any more.

This might not be a problem if all women received the same pay and career opportunities as men and they didn't set their careers back twenty years taking care of kids. But, the fact is, women still lag behind men in earning potential and many are still full-time caretakers of children. They ought to receive some protection through marriage as they end up in a risky position economically if their husbands leave them. Long time homemakers who are dumped during the husband's midlife crisis are particularly in trouble as getting hired later in life with a limited career history is extremely difficult.

Women in this country have regressed to competing with each other to be men's temporary possessions. Perfectly intelligent women, women with education and careers, are fighting each other for male attention. Maria didn't fall in love with Sanford; she got a massive ego boost by "getting" an American governor and having him say she was so much better than his wife (and all cheating men say this kind of crap). Even second wives - innocent of being involved with their husband during his first marriage - fall for this ego massage: "You are so much better than my first wife." Yet the fact that he was an adulterer doesn't make her question his character or his veracity because she gets to be the "winner." She is the chosen one.

Sadly, women have been pitted against each other, fighting over some dog who should be kicked to the curb. Why? Because adultery is no longer a crime in this country. Adultery has no penalty. In spite of the fact that the man (and I am not saying women are not guilty of this, but I am speaking out for women in this post and the incidence of men cheating is much, much higher than women) has broken his marriage vows, crushed his wife's heart, destroyed his family, and, perhaps, physically damaged his wife with sexually transmitted diseases (maybe even killed her), adultery is now considered a private matter between two people.

Wrong. It is a societal issue. It is not a victimless crime. Before marriage, a cheating boyfriend is one matter. A woman has the option to not sleep with a man before marriage. There is no family to break up. He has taken no vows before God and community nor has he signed any papers. But, after marriage, the wife, the husband, the children, the in-laws, and the community all have a stake in the preservation and health of the family unit. And the woman, if she gives up career for children, must not be left economically bereft after two or three decades of marriage. This is why there used to be alimony and divorce used to require fault.

Essentially, adultery used to be a crime. You might have gotten an A on your forehead, taken to jail, lost your job because of it, lost your standing in the community, or you got nailed with twenty years of supporting the wife you left with court mandated alimony. Of course, we must not forget that laws against adultery were originally made by men who considered their wives property and the adultery laws were levied against women, not their unfaithful husbands. However, at least in the recent American past, there was a time when the law was fair to both spouses and adultery held some real consequences for the cheater. Remember the song, "It's Cheaper to Keep Her"? Well, it was and now it isn't.

Now adultery is just an unfortunate result of someone's "dissatisfaction" with married life. Adultery is often not even considered all that wrong. When a mate cheats, the victimized partner hears, "There are two sides to every story. There must have been other problems in the marriage that led to the cheating." The victim is blamed for the mate's philandering. Rarely is adultery considered a character flaw or a sin or a criminal act. Thus, the cheater isn't penalized any more. In fact, he is often pitied for having "suffered" in his marriage with the troublesome wife for so long and feted when he beds new women, gets new girlfriends, and remarries. The ex-wife, if she speaks the truth and stands up against what has been stolen from her. is considered a "bitter psycho ex" who, for Christ sake, should move on with her life and find herself a new man. He plays, she pays.

Families are disintegrating in this new paradigm; children are being forced to live with umpteen new "mothers" and "fathers" and stuck between rivals, having to celebrate occasions by picking one parent or the other to attend, and losing the comfort and joy of a family - one cohesive family.

Women are acting more like chimpanzees attempting to get the attention of the alpha males than decent women searching for honorable companions.

Young women are being left caring alone for young children and are bringing in boyfriends who molest and abuse them.

Older women are left alone without male companionship in their later years bearing out the joke "The odds of an older woman getting remarried is about the same as getting killed by terrorists."

Jenny Sanford is supposed to be a Christian. She acted like one for a few days. She appeared to hold her husband to the standards of God and decency. I am not saying that she cannot forgive her husband for his transgressions; she can when he is fully repentant and proven himself to be worthy of returning to the family. She should never allow him back into the home until he has proven himself humbled and changed. She should not be telling the people of South Carolina to give him a second chance. She should have stated that Sanford should resign as he does not deserve the position of governor any longer.

When women have no respect for themselves, each other, and any standards of behavior, they bring all females down just as badly as the cheating men. If we are going to let them do it to us and get away with it, we deserve what we get and men will respect us even less in the future.

Each time females accept this treatment and mistreat each other, we lower ourselves. We set a bad precedent for our daughters and insult the struggle for human rights that women across the world are desperately fighting for. Shame on us all.

Tweet

Constitutional Rights of Students, Part II

by Katherine Scardino

In May, I wrote on Women in Crime about a 13-year-old girl, Savana Redding, who was strip searched by her principal and another school official after a tattler told the school officials that she was a “pill pusher.” The principal and a nurse had her pull aside her bra and to pull open her panties so they could assure themselves that she had no pills, meaning that her breasts and her pubic area were exposed to her principal and the other official. Savana’s friend who ratted on her claimed that she had gotten pills from her and provided a “sample,” which turned out to be 400 mg Ibuprofen. Hence, the search.

As I reported in May, her parents were pretty upset about that and proceeded to file a lawsuit against the school district. They eventually rode the appellate highway all the way to the United States Supreme Court. On June 25, 2009, our nine Supreme Court justices handed down an opinion in Savana’s case.

In a nutshell - yes, the search was unreasonable. School officials cannot strip search a student unless the student’s safety is at stake. Justice Stevens said in his opinion: “I have long believed that it does not require a constitutional scholar to conclude that a nude search of a 13-year-old child is an invasion of constitutional rights of some magnitude.”

That’s the good news. The bad news is that the student can take a case all the way to Washington, D. C. and win, but you don’t get anything other than a moral victory. The Supreme Court said that the school’s officials could not be held personally liable, as Justice Roberts said at a judicial conference last week:

“We recognized that they didn’t have very clear guidance. We laid down a rule about what they can and can’t do, but we said they don’t have to fork over damages from their own personal funds if they guess wrong.”

So, that really clears that issue up. We now know that strip searching a student where the student is not in any danger is “unreasonable.” Why would these parents and Savana have to spend all this money, time, and effort and go all the way to the U. S. Supreme Court to find that out? What happened to the judges at the Court of Appeals level? And, only eight justices out of a possible nine indicated that this search was unreasonable. One - and guess who that was - Justice Clarence Thomas - argued the search was legal because legal precedent of the Court had given school officials “considerable leeway” in similar circumstances.

Justice Thomas stated that the search was not unreasonable and that while the Fourth Amendment rights still reach and apply to students, those rights are “different . . . than elsewhere; the ‘reasonableness’ inquiry cannot disregard the schools’ custodial and tutelary responsibility for children.” Justice Thomas has to agree that the Fourth Amendment does apply to students, but in a different way, which can mean that the school can continue to argue that a search of another manner but perhaps equally “unreasonable” is, in fact, reasonable. Lawyers have argued since the inception of the Fourth Amendment about the meaning of the word “unreasonable” - what is and what is not. . . .

But, back to the subject. Savana’s search was unreasonable. Many parents would be equally as outraged as Savana’s apparently were to learn of this happening to their children. What would you think if you filed your lawsuit and carried it all the way to Washington - and got this result? Was it fair? Was the ruling “reasonable” or “unreasonable”?

Tweet

Calling All of Michael Jackson's Creditors

by Robin Sax

The buzz on the news is all about how tragic Michael Jackson's death is tragic. And for his fans, his family and loved ones, it certainly is. But is it a tragedy for the people he owes money to - or do those creditors lose the ability to pursue their claims as a result of Michael's death?

Based on recent news stories, Michael Jackson had a lot of creditors. It is the responsibility of the "personal representative" of his estate (or living trust - if he had one) to evaluate those claims, to compromise them and/or to cause those claims to be paid. An estate cannot be finally distributed until all of the creditor's claims are resolved.

Michael Jackson's biggest creditor is likely to be the IRS - in the form of estate taxes. Estate taxes are due 9 months after Michael's death. The tax is 45% of the value of his assets in excess of his $3.5 million lifetime exemption against those taxes (less the value of the debts he owed). The personal representative will likely need to sell assets to raise the cash to pay the estate tax.

There is a possibility of deferring tax on his music-related assets so that payment of the tax on those assets can be made over 15 years. That deferral provision will likely be used, as the cash generated by those types of assets comes in over time but the estate tax (unless deferred) is due 9 months after death. However, the value of those assets must equal more than 35% of his total assets in order for the deferral to be available. If this threshold isn't met, the music assets may need to be sold to raise money to pay that tax.

The IRS gets paid first - before any other creditor.

Any other creditor can seek payment from the personal representative, but must first follow special probate rules. These rules require the filing of the right papers with the probate court in order to preserve the creditor's right to pursue those claims. Creditors need to be sure to familiarize themselves with these rules and file their claims in a timely fashion, or they could very well find that their claims are barred. (The time for filing can be as short as 4 months after the personal representative of the estate is appointed by a court, and can never be longer than 1 year from the date of Michael's death.)

Keep in mind that the IRS and other creditors get paid before the beneficiaries of Michael's estate. Until those tax and creditor issues are resolved, the estate cannot be finally distributed. It is likely that this process will take years - at least 2 years and potentially many, many more.

That doesn't mean, however, that his children won't have access to cash for their support during the period of estate administration. The children (through their guardian) could ask the court to provide for their support until the probate estate is ready to be distributed by filing a petition requesting a "family allowance" if there is the probate of a will (or an intestacy). This option is unavailable if there is no probate or intestate administration.

So, if Michael's creditors file their claims properly Michael Jackson's death probably won't inhibit their ability to collect. But if they don't learn enough about the vagaries of California probate law, they could lose their right to pursue their claims. In other words - if they snooze, they lose!

Tweet

Made Off With Plenty

by Donna Pendergast

Bernie Madoff was sentenced to 150 years in prison yesterday. The appropriately named Madoff pled guilty on March 12th to eleven felony counts including mail fraud, wire fraud, perjury, money laundering, securities fraud, theft from an employee benefit fund and false filings with the Securities Exchange Commission for running a Ponzi scheme valued at over fifty billion dollars.

U.S. District Judge Denny Chin referred to Madoff''s crimes as "extraordinary evil" at sentencing stating that "this type of manipulation is not just a bloodless crime that takes place on paper but one instead that takes a staggering toll."

Although many of the victims present in the courtroom were pleased with the sentence, they all understand that a a century and a half of largely symbolic punishment will do little to help the legions of persons that were financially wiped out by the fraud of staggering proportions perpetrated on victims who trusted Madoff with their money, their future and their retirement dreams

Now 71 years old, Madoff will spend the rest of his days on earth in a cell that is a far cry from the opulent residences that he shared with his wife and family. Maybe a few months of that kind of existence will convince Madoff that his heinous acts are more than "an error of judgement", a "problem" or a "tragic mistake" which were the terms that he used at sentencing to refer to his elaborate financial ruse

But then again probably not

The victims, who at sentencing referred to Madoff as a "monster" and a "psychopath" were right on base. Working as a prosecutor for over two decades I have come across my share of clinical psychopaths over the years. Although the psychopaths that I normally deal with commit crimes of a violent nature, they share plenty in common with Bernie Madoff. Lying, manipulation, coldness and lack of empathy are the hallmarks of a psychopath, a person who exploits relationships and persons with abandon and without remorse. Bernie Madoff certainly fits the bill on all points.

For those who wonder whether Madoff ever thinks of the persons that he has ruined, the answer is complex. He thinks about them he doesn't care in a way that a normal person can relate to. He cares that he got caught. He cares that his luxurious life has been taken away but he won't lay awake at night thinking about the daily struggles that his victims will have to endure.

His courtroom statements were very telling about what is important in the mind of Bernie Madoff. How can one stand in a courtroom looking in the eyes of persons who have been ruined by your actions, and refer to your misdeeds as an "error of judgement?" Those words alone pretty much say it all. The man understands but fails to care that he has condemned scores of persons to a life of poverty and struggle. His later feeble attempts at apology were overshadowed by the references to his "problem" and his "tragic mistake," the same tragic mistake that he kept making over and over while in the process imprisoning his victims in their own version of hell.

Judge Chin noted at sentencing that not a single letter had attested to Madoff''s good deeds or charitable activities further commenting that the silence was telling.

The silence is telling? The silence is deafening and yet says it all.


Statements made in this post are my own and are not intended to reflect the views, opinion or position of the Michigan Attorney General or the Michigan Department of Attorney General.

Tweet

Babysitter Turns Crime Sleuth

by Susan Murphy Milano

What do a babysitter and a former mob boss Frank Cullotta, co-author with Denny Griffin on the book "Cullotta" have to do with answers to a 28-year-old McHenry County, Illinois unsolved homicide of a bar owner and his employee?

On June 2, 1981, in McHenry, Illinois the bodies of Ronald Scharff and his barmaid Patricia Freeman were discovered. The local authorities had the man, the motive, and the evidence shortly after the crime. For some reason police sat on the evidence and the case went cold.

Last year a former babysitter to Scharff’s son Paul, now grown with a family of his own who at the time of his father’s murder was only ten years old began asking questions about the 1981 unsolved murder. The babysitter's father also happened to be best friends with the deceased Ronald Scharff. The former babysitter googled the names of Anthony Spilotro head of a violent street crew with whom the movie casino was based played by actor Joe Pecsi, and others from the notorious “hole in the wall gang.” On her Internet search the book “Cullotta,” co-authored by retired veteran cop, tuned author and radio show host Dennis Griffin appeared.

The book is based on the life of Frank Cullotta, who happened to be a childhood friend of Chicago Outfit enforcer Anthony Spilotro. Frank Cullotta in the early 1980s joined Spilotro's violent Las Vegas street crew. The former mobster committed crimes ranging from robbery to murder, and later turning government witness in its investigation of the mob's influence in Las Vegas.

When the former babysitter turned crime sleuth read the book "Cullotta," there is was in black and white on page 130, providing enough details to the June 2, 1981 murders of bar owner Ronald Scharff and waitress Patricia Freeman at the P.M. Pub in McHenry, IL.

Frank Cullotta named "hole in the wall" crew member Larry Neumann as the killer of Scharff and Freeman. After serving time in prison with Neumann, Cullotta introduced him to Spilotro's gang. As Cullotta recalled during his law enforcement debriefing, Neumann admitted committing the murders. Larry Neumann was angry when he learned earlier that evening bar owner Ronalld Scharff had thrown his ex-wife out of the tavern.

The feds provided McHenry authorities with information on the man and the motive. Ronald Scharff had been killed for the perceived slight. Patricia Freeman was murdered because she was a witness in the wrong place at the time. Instead of arresting Larry Neumann and closing the case McHenry County detectives went out of their way to discredit Cullotta's details of the crime. Those detectives have since retired.

Larry Neumann died in prison in 2007 after a lengthy criminal career that included at least six murders, including a 1956 triple homicide from which he managed to gain release.

Since discovering and reading the book, Paul Scharff has been working with McHenry Detectives to get his father’s case closed. And with the unlikely pair of co-authors Denny Griffin and Frank Collutta who set out to tell a tale of one man’s life in the mob, could have never predicted the book would take on a unique and important journey, Justice!

Tweet

The Weather and Animal Helpers

by Andrea Campbell

Some scientists have always thought that weather is often the forgotten factor in crime rates. Is there a relationship between temperature and aggression? Here are some findings, what do you think?

• Assaults are highest in the summer months and lowest in winter months
• Assaults are negatively correlated with wind speed and levels of humidity (most assaults seem to occur on dry days)
• Family disturbances are positively correlated with ozone activity
• Fewer violent crimes are reported on cold days, for example, the crime rate in New Your City was very low during the blizzard of 1996

Some of these may seem intuitive, meaning, people don't function or aren't as aggressive on bad weather days—that's a given. But I do know that law enforcement are especially vigilant on full moons as well, what can be drawn from this conclusion?

Weather and Temperature Clues

Police questioned a man as to where he had been all evening. The man claimed he was home watching TV. One of the officers noted his coat was hanging on a chair dripping from the rain outside. Weather did not help his case. Cases have been recorded where murderers have upped the thermostat before leaving a room to alter the time of death estimation because extreme cold and extreme heat will both alter the coroner’s results. This and other stories illustrate how valuable weather conditions, temperatures, wind speed, sun glare and other phenomenon can effect cases, alibis and time of death estimations.

Animals and Animal Hair

A burglar in southern China was heading into a house to break into a family’s safe inside. The owner, Sham Man-ling, came home and got into a kicking, screaming brawl with him. Mimi, Man-ling’s Persian cat, sprang from a shelf and clawed the robber, who ran away.

Mack, a parrot, was just as courageous. When a criminal tried to steal tools from D’Light, a store in Glendale, California, Mack, who lived at the store, jumped on him, pecked him furiously, and squawked. In self-defense, the burglar yanked out Mack’s feathers, hit the bird’s head and threw him unconscious to the ground. Still, Mack had detained the burglar long enough for police to respond to the store’s alarm.

In addition to courage, animal hair and feathers have been used as evidence. Dog hair clinging to the suspect’s clothes has been used to identify killers and feathers have shown up in the barrel of a gun. Police also routinely check nests in outdoor scenes because animals are fond of collecting loose artifacts.

Good News for Fingerprint Technology

Technological advances are common in the computing industry and forensic science has benefited from these new advances as well. There is a promising new development for AFIS (Automated fingerprint identification system). The automation of narrowing the field of candidates for a potential match is getting faster.

Before a latent print can be entered into AFIS, the forensic science fingeprint examiner must carefully mark distinguishing characteristics of the full or partial print.

According to the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), the manual human process of the mark-up is being automated with something called: Automatic Feature Extraction and Matching (AFEM).

This past April, results of an evaluation where researchers used a data set of 835 latent prints and 100,000 fingerprints from real cases was tested. The AFEM software extracted distinguishing features of latents and compared them against the 100,000 fingerprints. For each print, software gave up a list of 50 candidates that the fingerprint specialist had compared by hand. Most identities were found in the top ten.

For more information about the companies that participated and the results of the test:
http://fingerprint.nist.gov/latent/NISTIR_7577_ELFT_PhaseII.pdf

Tweet

Special Courts for Returning Vets? What Do We Owe Them?

by Diane Dimond

In America, everyone is supposed to be equal in the eyes of the law. But we’ve got a growing group, a particular class of defendants, entering American courtrooms who I believe need special consideration. They are soldiers returning from war.

Several studies conclude that between 30% to 40% of the approximately 1.6 million vets of Iraq and Afghanistan will "face serious mental-health injuries" like Post Traumatic Stress Disorder and problems from traumatic brain injuries. Experts in the field report both those conditions are linked to anti-social and criminal behavior.

Now, to me those numbers–up to 40% of the troops afflicted–seem high. But if it’s even half that number, that’s too many brave souls returning home needing special help. So, what do we do with soldiers, who put their lives on hold to go to a foreign land to fight for our liberty, when they come home and get into trouble with the law?

To be clear, I’m not referring to the highly publicized cases where a returning soldier has committed murder. Those cases have caused many to think, Well, you train these young men to kill . . . they come home and kill.

But there is no research, let me repeat that, there is no research, to indicate vets commit violent crimes more often than civilians. In fact, if you extrapolate government statistics for murders committed by men ages 18 to 24, it’s the civilian who is more likely to kill someone, not the vet. I’m referring here to those anti-social, behavioral problems experts report that so many of our returning soldiers suffer from in silence. Problems with substance abuse, paranoia, flashbacks, and bursts of unexplained temper, problems so debilitating the vet takes out their frustrations on loved ones or commits suicide.

Judge Robert Russell in Buffalo, New York (below right) noticed the trend last year. Disturbed after seeing some 300 vets come through his court, he started what’s believed to be the nation’s very first “Veteran’s Court” for those having problems re-adjusting to civilian life. The charges against these defendants range from public drunkenness and assault, driving while intoxicated, drug-related offenses, disturbing the peace, theft, domestic violence, and other emotion-driven violations.

The goal of this specialized court is to intercept troubled veterans before they spiral down and get lost in our already overwhelmed criminal justice system.

The soft-spoken Judge Russell figured everyone would benefit if the vets could answer for their crimes in a special place that offered treatment not just punishment and a courtroom staff that included veteran advocates and assigned mentors. No veteran who appears can fall back on the self pitying thought that, "No one here knows what I’ve been through," because everyone in the room completely understands. Judge Russell is firm, however, demanding atonement and adherence to a one- to two-year individualized treatment plan. He meets regularly with each veteran face-to-face to follow the progress. Failures get the original sentence for their crime.

“Many of our vets have a warrior mentality,” Judge Russell explained in a radio interview. “Some perceive that treatment may be for the weak and we’re working to change that paradigm.” Judge Russell instills the idea that “the real courage and strength comes from the warrior who asks for help.” He’s encouraged by the progress he’s seen.

Criminal justice professionals all across America realize when the soldiers start streaming home they will also have to grapple with the problem of their re-adjustment to society. So, Judge Russell’s special Veteran’s Court idea has been studied nationwide and has now either been adopted in or is being considered by several other states including Alaska, Pennsylvania, California, and Arizona.

One supporter is retired Air Force Colonel and Attorney Billy Little, who told the Arizona Republic, "One of the things that [has] offended me is seeing a veteran who is self-medicating with alcohol or marijuana or meth and going to court and standing side by side with some gangbanger or lifetime criminal and being treated the same as them."

I can’t think of a bigger travesty. To answer the soldier’s service with a jail sentence for behavior that might very well stem from their service makes a mockery of their bravery. To toss the offending veteran in prison alongside the truly hardened criminal is akin to society saying they aren’t worth the trouble.

We already have about 2,000 Special Treatment Courts in America to help those struggling with addiction. There are another 200 Mental Health Courts and both have been successful in strategic support and treatment for Americans in need. Don’t our returning soldiers deserve a special place too?

It really all comes down to this: By the very virtue of these veterans sacrifice for our freedom does the country owe them something extra upon their return? Of course we do.

Tweet