One Man's Poison

By Lisa R. Cohen

I've been on hiatus from this website for the last several months, making a documentary set in a maximum-security prison. That means months of filming on location on lockdown, then months in the isolation of the edit room, which can often feel even more like lockdown. I've been out of the loop for so many cultural events, and I've only just emerged to find myself shamefacedly fascinated by the Charlie Sheen phenomenon.

Of course, part of its appeal lies in what I like to call the rubbernecking by the side of the highway accident syndrome. Part of it is an antidote to the grim subject matter I've been immersed in–the prison has a unique hospice program that enables inmates to redeem themselves by caring for fellow inmates in their final days. It's actually been an awe-inspiring year, but it is dark. And part of it is the conflagration of intriguing moral issues raised by Sheen and his antics.

A brief recap, for anyone who's been hiding in a cave or an edit room, Charlie Sheen has enjoyed years of bad-boy behavior and playing a vanilla version of same bad boy in his hit TV show Two and a Half Men. His bad-boy behavior includes assaulting one of his ex-wives, trashing hotel rooms, frantic 911 calls, alcohol and drug-induced rages and near-death experiences. He ended last year with a bang, apparently locking a naked porn star in the closet, then totaling his room at the tony Plaza Hotel, finishing off with a hospital stay for a psych evaluation.

He started the New Year with an even bigger bang. Celebrity websites were filled with recent accounts, including a convincing first-person account by a fellow partier, on camera, of a weekend binge of porn stars and eight balls of coke, another 911 call, another hospital, and another round of rehab. The cover story, stomach trouble after laughing too hard at an old TV movie, was laughable enough to send us all to our local ERs.

As the tabloids continue to wring the story for its juicy details (how can you resist when the porn stars are as eager to bear witness as they are to bare themselves; see Kacey Jordan, right), the rehab stint is now a house call. The celebrity's father, Martin Sheen, wants to do a Britney and protectivly wrestle away Sheen's assets. Sheen himself has cried foul. He thinks the media has more important things to do such as covering the Egyptian uprising or the war in Afghanistan, for example. Leave Charlie to self-destruct on his own.

He has a point.

Whose business is it if Charlie Sheen wants to commit slow suicide, faster and faster nowadays? How can you force a 45-year-old man to do what he doesn't want to do? Are the CBS suits the bad guys here, for enabling Sheen's habits? Well, maybe, but if he does his job, as supposedly he has, and wants to self-destruct on his own time, do they have other options? Any loved one of an addict will tell you that tired lightbulb joke–how many does it take? Just one, but he really has to want to change.

Here's the thing, though. Most of the people I met in prison were spending years, some their whole lives, because they did a fraction of the drugs Charlie Sheen appears to have done in the span of one weekend. That's not to excuse the criminals serving time for it. But somewhere along the way, the phalanx of look-the-other-way friends and business associates are crossing the legal line to protect Sheen, and, in the process, they're hastening his death.

At the very least, they're teaching exactly the wrong lesson to the rest of us, including that vulnerable and highly prized demographic Two and a Half Men attracts. If you're Charlie Sheen, the lesson goes, you can break the law over and over, and just get to stay home by the pool with a Dr. Drew type and some hookers. The rest of us? Orange jumpsuits.

Tweet

Heated Debate: Lifetime vs. 'Foxy Knoxy'

by Stacy Dittrich

Let’s face it. An international murder mystery that has been followed by millions will ultimately catch the eyes of filmmakers wanting to cash in. Lifetime television is airing a movie later this month based on the Amanda Knox case. “Amanda Knox: Murder on Trial in Italy,” (promo photo left) debuts February 21, much to the dismay of the murder victim’s father, John Kercher.

In a recap, Amanda Knox, Raffaele Sollecito, and Rudy Guede all received between 16- and 26-year sentences in the brutal and violent murder of Meredith Kercher. However, the voracious debate regarding Knox’s guilt rages on. “Foxy Knoxy,” as she has been deemed by the media, is currently appealing her conviction in Italy. Knox’s attorneys have formally requested Lifetime pull the movie or face legal consequences. They fear the movie may potentially taint the trial. After viewing the trailer (below) for the movie, which includes an incredibly graphic scene of Knox holding down Kercher as she screams, John Kercher was appalled.

“To actually see it is distressing. The scenes are absolutely horrific,” John Kercher told Britain’s The Sun. “It’s awful what these film people have done. I’m surprised they have gone so far.”

According to ABC News, Knox was able to view the movie trailer in her prison cell and became physically ill upon doing so. You can view the trailer here and at the end of this post.

So, did Lifetime cross the line? It boils down to a matter of ethics, and Lifetime television is certainly not the pioneer here in bringing a true horrific case to television. Helter Skelter, anyone? I’m sure Sharon Tate’s sister wasn’t exactly cheering at the notion of her sister’s murder being played out in front of millions. Let’s not forget Farrah Fawcett being nominated for an Emmy Award for her portrayal of Diane Downs in Small Sacrifices, and Francine Hughes in The Burning Bed. Both stories were horrific real-life tragedies. At the time, The Burning Bed was one of the most-watched shows on television ever. Both of those movies were based on the true crime books, and a quick glimpse on Amazon revealed a total of eight books already on the shelves pertaining to Amanda Knox. Where was the outrage there?

I’m pretty torn on this debate. As a true crime author who has faced backlash from family members of a murder victim, the question always posed itself: “Authors and journalists have been writing about murders for decades, what makes your family so special that we shouldn’t? People have a right to know.” On the flip side, I’m a mother and if something happened to one of my children—that was later played out on television or film—I’m confident I would get violently ill. There’s also the standard that surfaces when a debate like this happens: “If you don’t like it, don’t watch it.”

The Lifetime movie about Amanda Knox appears to portray her as a vicious, knife-wielding psychopath, from the looks of the trailer. Regardless, actress Hayden Panettiere—who plays Knox in the movie—gives us her idiotic expertise. In a contradictory statement, Panettiere seems to think that butchering an innocent girl isn’t malicious and no intent was involved.

She said: “This is such a vulnerable story, and, specifically, Amanda was so needy. My job was to play a girl who, regardless of what happened, was innocent in who she was. She's not a malicious girl. She didn't have any intention to do this. This wasn't an angry or dark girl. Whatever it was that happened that night, people's lives were ruined. But it was my job to stay pretty true to form in who she seemed to be as a person in court and otherwise.”

“Regardless of what happened, was innocent in who she was…” Eh, I’m pretty sure Ted Bundy, Diane Downs, and Jeffrey Dahmer all felt they were “innocent in who they were” too. Panettiere should probably just shut her trap and do what she does best: act. (Although, that statement seems questionable as well after I viewed the trailer.)

I have absolutely no opinion on the guilt or innocence of Amanda Knox. The amount of evidence makes my head spin, and I have chosen not to follow the case in detail. But, my opinion on whether or not to air the movie is general. People will typically watch a movie than read a true crime book. If there is the potential that a movie could jeopardize a trial, I say wait. Lifetime has the right to air the movie, but they should hold off until Knox’s trial is over.

Thoughts?

Tweet

Rape and the U.S. Congress

by Gina Simmons, Ph.D.

Angela, age 15, loved to dance hip-hop with her girlfriends. She earned good grades in school and got along well with her parents and her brothers. On a Saturday night, she left to spend the night at her girlfriend's house. Angela and her friend heard about another party, with boys, a few blocks away. The girls sneaked out of the house and went to the boy's party. One cute boy gave her a drink. She doesn't remember much more about that evening except waking up in a large closet, naked from the waist down, with blood running down her legs. She told me she hurt "down there," and her legs were covered with bruises.

Angela dressed, found her friend and left the party. They sneaked back to her friend's house and, after talking for hours, they fell asleep. The girls agreed to not talk about what happened. They didn't want to get into any trouble with their parents. Angela's parents might keep her away from her friend's house. It would prove terribly embarrassing to talk about the incident, and perhaps nothing bad really happened.

After a few weeks of vomiting, missing school and feeling weak, Angela's mother took her to the doctor. After a few tests, they heard the staggering news: Angela was pregnant. The family sought my help shortly after the pregnancy diagnosis. Angela had tried to convince herself that nothing had happened to her. Perhaps she got drunk and did it to herself. The pregnancy confirmed that she was a victim of rape. Angela, who had never experienced any kind of sexual intimacy with the exception of an awkward kiss, now found herself pregnant at 15.

Angela was drugged and, while unconscious, raped by an unknown attacker. Rape, or sexual assault, often goes unreported. According to the Rape, Abuse and Incest National Network (RAINN), 60 percent of rapes are never reported to authorities. Victims often secretly struggle for the rest of their lives with the physical, mental and emotional scars. Teen girls like Angela fear the stigma of "damaged goods." Some worry that their drug and alcohol use will get them into trouble. Others opt to bury the secret to avoid burdening their families.

To understand why rape victims often never report it, read this rip-out-your-guts story, Stalking the Bogeyman, by David Holthouse. He planned the murder of his rapist because of his lifelong rage and fear. Yes, rape happens to men too (one in 33 men and one in six women). Rape damages the minds and bodies of both men and women. The difference is men don't get pregnant.

Now we come to the U.S. Congress part of our story. Representative Chris Smith, (R-N.J.) introduced HR-3, titled the "No Taxpayer Funding For Abortion Act." This bill currently has 173 co-sponsors. The ever-weepy House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) has made passage of this bill a top priority. Since 1976, federal laws restricting the use of federal funds for abortions have included exemptions in the case of rape, incest and pregnancies that endanger the life of the woman. HR-3 originally aimed to change the language to exemptions for "forcible rape." Forcible rape (not a legal term) redefines rape as something using force rather than the more appropriate term, sexual assault, that can include rape while the victim is unconscious. They subsequently backed down after hearing an outcry from victims advocates. The writers of the bill intend to foment political division to weaken and destroy the Affordable Care Act. The Affordable Care Act is a sane and sensible law that actually solves some serious problems and helps Americans.

Women have fought long and hard for the rights of rape victims. Some survivors still experience blame, stigma, social isolation, physical abuse and public humiliation. Rape violates a woman's sense of control over her own body. Victims often feel victimized again by the court system. This bill puts another barrier between a woman and her own body.

The bill (HR-3) eliminates the incest exemption if the mother is over 18 and aims to eliminate tax deductions on private health insurance that includes abortion benefits. Currently, 87 percent of private policies include some type of abortion coverage. Sponsors of the bill hope to force private insurance companies to eliminate any coverage of abortion.

Abortion is such a painful, difficult issue with a long history. Sensitive people on both sides, pro-life and pro-choice, make reasoned arguments. I regularly donate to The Door of Hope, a safe haven for pregnant teens. These programs make it possible for abused and indigent youth to carry their babies to term in a healthy environment. These programs do more to prevent abortions than this worthless, waste-of-time law. If Rep. Smith really cared about preventing abortions and serving the people why not propose a law to increase funding for programs like The Door of Hope?

A recent poll found the top three issues of concern to Americans today are:

• Unemployment
• The economy
• Health care

A Harvard study found that medical bills are the leading cause of bankruptcy in America. Millions face unemployment, home foreclosures, unaffordable insurance and the loss of their life savings. The nation is fighting two wars, a great recession and a mushrooming deficit. Why is it the top legislative priority of this Congress to make life even more difficult for poor women?

Photos courtesy of straightpost.com and theepochtimes.com.

Tweet

What a Difference a Week Makes: Report from Cairo

by Pat Brown

Life is strange. We often never see what is right around the corner, even when we are walking directly in the midst of it.

January 14, 2011, ten days before the beginning of Egypt Revolution 2011. It was a perfectly normal day, a little bit of scattered rain, but, otherwise, it was pleasant. Cool, but not chilly. I took my daughter to the zoo (she's 30 years old, but, so what). Many families were out strolling cheerfully that Friday morning. We got ourselves a map, and made our way through the exhibits--parrots, hippos, llamas, flamingos, elephants, German Shepherds, and Cocker Spaniels. We were able to feed a lot of them. We kissed a chimpanzee and patted a lion. We had our photos taken. We had cotton candy and tea.

We left the zoo, took a taxi to the Cairo Tower and rode the elevator up to the very top. We watched the sun set over the panorama of the city, taking pictures as we walked around the observation deck. Then the sun disappeared and the lights of the city sparkled and boats on the Nile displayed necklaces of neon-colored bulbs. A soccer game was being played below us, with enthusiastic crowds cheering on their teams.

We were hungry, so we grabbed a cab and rode down the road toward Giza until we found the Chinese restaurant we had spotted earlier that week. My daughter, after a week of Egyptian food, wanted a bit of change. Then, we took a taxi back to our hotel, two blocks from Tahrir Square on Talaat Harb, the main shopping street. We found our favorite ice cream stand and, cones in hand, enjoyed the end of our last evening together in Egypt.

My daughter flew out early the next morning, and I came home that Tuesday. I had spent three weeks in Egypt, mixing business with pleasure, mostly staying in Cairo but making trips out of the city to Alexandria, Luxor, Aswan and Abu Simbel. In spite of the terrorist bombing of the Coptic Christian church in Alexandria that happened New Year's Eve, the day I arrived in Egypt, all was quiet. No place I was in and no one I spoke with gave any hints of the coming events. Even people who were there the day before the revolution say they had no clue what the morning would bring.

Now, I sit here and watch the protests and the violence unfolding right outside my hotel, at the Egyptian Museum I visited twice, in Tahrir Square, which I crossed a dozen times, and it is hard to believe I was just there. This is not to say there wasn't a building momentum toward the days the people rose up against President Hosni Mubarak. Unemployment is ungodly high, over 60 percent (and I do not think that includes women). Food prices have been soaring, and students are graduating to lives with no future.

History always shows us what we can expect in the future. We can see this in the United States just as well, as changes occur and joblessness, frustrations, and anger build. Mass murders, school shootings, homegrown terrorism, violence against women and children--all of these are warning signs we should pay attention to, as a nation and in our communities. You never know; you could be watching your children at the baseball field in the afternoon and wake up to find your world turned upside-down the very next morning.

My prayers go out to the people of Egypt, and to Americans. We never know what tomorrow holds, but we can all do something about it today, and maybe we will have a better future for ourselves and our children.

Tweet

What’s in a Face? Biometrics and Facial Identification

by Andrea Campbell 

We've all seen facial biometrics in the movies where a security camera picks out a terrorist subject or supposed perpetrator, reads their face and maps out a facial recognition identifier for law enforcement. It’s really flashy, cool and fast. Does it work that way? Well, yes and no. Let’s start at the beginning. 

Security and Biometrics

In the past, security measures have used a card, a token or key to get into closed doors. Other methods involve a password, code or something you must type in, like a series of numbers. The goal for biometrics is heightened security; meaning, it involves the identity of an actual person to gain entry. The word biometrics means it is some physical characteristic, or personal trait used to trigger an automatic recognition. We already use biometrics with fingerprints, a written signature, voice recognition or a retinal scan. Other lesser-used body differentials are someone’s gait, their ears, hand or finger geometry, or even their odor.


Several Keys

The key to biometrics' usefulness is that the characteristic must be measurable, and once presented to a sensor, can be converted into a quantifiable digital format. It is only good if it can be automated down to a number of seconds for retrieval. A system is called robust, if it can read traits that are subject to change. For example, the iris of the eye won’t change significantly over time, and it is more robust than someone’s voice. Plus, the more distinctive the identifier is, the better. A retinal scan would be more distinctive than hand or finger geometry.

Biometrics needs to perform two functions: identify and verify. In order to satisfy an identification it must work against records in a database, which it can search through for results, such as mugshots that are used by police. This comparison is called a "one to many" search and presents a best match result. Verification, on the other hand, is a system that relies on input from the user, generally via the password or another form of identity. This would be a "one to one" search, such as would be done with a computer allowing someone access using a private code. 

Did You Know? 


The police in Tampa Bay, Florida, used Indentix’s facial recognition software to screen at Super Bowl XXXV in January 2001. The search was for potential terrorists and criminals in attendance. The results? The system found 19 people with pending arrest warrants. Facial recognition is often able to operate with the used of surveillance cameras or closed circuit television (CCTV).

(Photo Courtesy of the Federal Bureau of Investigation) 

How Does It Work?

Facial recognition can be used to locate criminals, terrorists or missing children by using a five-step methodology. First, the image must be captured. This can be accomplished by scanning a photograph or using a camera to acquire a live picture of a subject. Fast moving video can also be turned into still shots. Next the software program seeks to detect the location of any faces in the acquired image, and it looks for two eyes and a mouth set into an oval shape. Once a face has been targeted, it is analyzed using spatial geometry. There are different methods available depending on the software, but this it is commonly referred to as the eigenface method. The system has templates that generate unique features for comparisons. That is to say, algorithms identify faces by extracting the landmarks of someone’s face and using the relative position, size and shape of eyes, nose, cheekbones and jaw. In other words, it measures the distance between the eyes, the depth of eye sockets, the shape of cheekbones, etc., but it actually ignores facial hair or hairstyles. These are then compared to a database of known faces, and finally, the scores are looked at by the end user for a determination. 

Better Than People


The software algorithms are generally better than people estimations. People are very good at recognizing people they know from surveillance film. With unfamiliar faces, however, not so good. The reasons for this are believed to be that people just aren’t good at it and they have a short attention span. To test this point, a British study used trained supermarket cashiers to screen shoppers. The shoppers were of four types. One had a shopping card with a recent photo, another had a card with modifications to their photo such as a minor hairstyle change or the addition of glasses. A third shopper’s card was issued that was actually of a different person who resembled them somewhat, and, finally, a shopper was issued a card where the only similar characteristic was the same sex and race as the shopper.

When the various cards were presented to the checkout clerks, more than half of the fraudulent cards were accepted. The breakdown was as follows. 34 percent of the cards that did not look like the shopper were accepted, 14 percent of the cards where the appearance had been altered were accepted, and 7 percent of the unchanged cards were rejected by the clerks. Time plays a factor too, as a human being's ability to detect critical signals drops rapidly after the start of a task, so that within 35 minutes their focus to task drops significantly. 

Current Uses 


A London borough uses a CCTV system, German Federal Police use it at a fully automated border station at an airport, Australia also has a system called SmartGate, and casinos and United States law enforcement agencies employ systems. It’s also been used at highly publicized trials, and to ensure fair counts for elections in Mexico.

The IAFIS (Integrated Automated Fingerprint Identification System) has an Interstate Photo File of 9,695,672 photos for over 5,629,772 records. The U.S. Department of State operates one of the largest face recognition systems in the world with more than 75 million photographs, and it is actively used for visa processing.

Results Are Weaker


The results of biometric facial recognition are still weaker and less efficient than the other methods, but police like it because it doesn’t require aid or consent from the test subject, and it can be installed in public places. 

Faces Are Public 


How do you feel about having your image captured, however? There is some controversy, but the privacy issue raised here is not protected by the U.S. Constitution. Under current law, the type of facial recognition used by law enforcement to monitor public places is legal because according to the United States Supreme Court, a person does not have a reasonable expectation of privacy because the physical characteristics used, such as one’s facial characteristics, voice, and handwriting, are constantly exposed to the public. 

New Technology 

A newly emerging trend, claimed to achieve previously unseen accuracies, is three-dimensional face recognition. This technique uses 3-D sensors to capture information about the shape of a face. You may also see technology developed as a security measure at ATMs, where a webcam image would be compared to a photo card.

When Madeleine McCann disappeared at Praia de Luz in Portugal, the British police asked visitors at the Ocean Club Resort to provide any photographs they may have taken in an attempt to identify the abductor of the missing child as part of the investigation, as some modern cameras have a focus and measure component.

Hey, even Facebook has a program that identifies faces in photos and allows you to tag other people you may know. I’m just saying, it’s going to be everywhere. 


Other Resource:

Bonsor, Kevin, and Ryan Johnson.  "How Facial Recognition Systems Work"  HowStuffWorks, January 2011.

Tweet

Cops Under Fire—Again

by Sue Russell 

January was deadly for law enforcement with 16 officers killed and 10 of them feloniously shot to death. On Monday, January 24, The New York Times reported that while thousands of officers attended a funeral for two Miami-Dade officers slain whilst serving arrest warrants, they learned that another two Florida officers had been killed.

This chilling news reminded me of 2007 when 68 officers died by firearms in the line of duty, making it law enforcement’s deadliest year since 1989 (excluding 9/11). Many were wearing their body armor but were shot in the head. In 2010, 61 federal, state and local officers were killed by gunfire. While police work may not be the most dangerous job in the United States statistically, these are murders, and murders are, well, murders are different. My 2008 American Legion magazine article peeking into the secret world of cops seems just as prescient now, so I thought I’d share some excerpts:

Homicide Investigator David Taylor eased his Ford LTD down a dirt road deep in Florida’s Ocala National Forest on July 7, 1990. His third day with the Marion County Sheriff’s Office’s Major Crimes Unit, a call triggered a familiar, sinking feeling. A teenager had spotted smoke rising from a burn pile in the road.

Taylor had experience with gut-wrenching crimes involving children. Two days earlier, he’d worked the accidental drowning of a 7 year old. And his first day out of West Virginia’s State Police Academy in 1984, a young babysitter, unaware that the toddler in her care had followed her outside, ran over the baby’s head and shoulders. Taylor still shuddered, recalling the blood in the snow.

Now, another dead baby. “It was so appalling to find a little baby just wrapped up in a sheet, soaked in blood, then stuffed in this bag and set on fire,” he said. “I didn’t expect it to be that dramatic.” Not that anyone could have read his discomfort. Like all cops, he wore the unemotional mask of professionalism, and knew how to distance himself and stay objective.

When evidence technicians unwrapped the bundle, “All you could see was the head of like a brand new baby, face up. You could still see soot around the mouth and nose, consistent with the baby being alive and inhaling smoke. Your heart just sinks to your gut. Then reality sets in: Hey, you’ve got to work this case.”

When he retired, Taylor armed himself with a law degree and began teaching continuing education courses for thousands of law enforcement professionals. He now owns the online National Center for Public Safety Training.

“There’s such a lack of respect among some youths,” Taylor said. “I don’t want to say it is open season, but I don’t think we’re too far from it. You always anticipate danger; you just don’t anticipate every car you stop, someone’s going to emerge with a gun, just like you don’t assume every parent’s a child abuser.” Operating constantly at that level of hyper-vigilance, “You’d go nuts. You’d have a heart attack the first week of your career.”

Taylor never had to shoot anyone but was threatened, hit, sucker-punched in the head, and shot at twice–once alone at night in a high crime area. Ocala, Florida, K-9 officer Brian Litz had attended Taylor’s classes. He was killed in 2004 during a routine well-being check on a mentally unstable man. “When Brian Litz went up to the door to check on him,” Taylor recalled, “the guy was in the middle of one of his delusions and cranked off a round through the window. Shot the deputy in the neck right above the vest. One of my best friends, Deputy Bob Campbell, risked his life to try to save him, but Litz was dead in seconds.”

A cop’s is often a thankless task. Cases of officer misconduct, corruption or brutality represent a tiny percentage of the roughly 800,000 law enforcement officers in the United States. Yet, negative headlines can drown out public gratitude for the vast majority’s everyday heroics.

Taylor has taught countless detectives and uniformed officers about unpleasant things like time of death estimates and skin slippage and body leakage, and recognizing the imprint of a set of brass knuckles on a child’s head.

Unique problems confront stressed and demoralized officers who have above average rates of alcoholism, drug use, domestic abuse, depression and suicide. Robert E. Douglas Jr., the National Police Suicide Foundation’s executive director, is a former Baltimore City cop and longtime pastor to law enforcement.

“We’re not taking care of our soldiers coming back from Iraq, and we’re not taking care of our police officers,” said Douglas, noting that more officers take their own lives than die on the job. NPSF has claimed that a cop commits suicide in the U.S. every 17 to 21 hours. Some put the tally lower, yet Douglas and others believe there is under-reporting. And historically, many suicides were ruled accidental deaths because of the shame factor, and to spare officers’ families.

“I’ve been doing this 18 years now and every time I give a lecture,” said Rev. Douglas, “at least one or two in the room are fantasizing about suicide. They will leave me notes, call me in my room.” They’re officers with a nightmare to share, images that they cannot shake, traumatized without treatment.

“We’re the forgotten soldiers,” he said. “I get emotional just thinking about it. “These officers are wonderful, wonderful, wonderful men and women, but they are in some deep stuff, more than any average citizen can possibly comprehend.”

Douglas recalled an Oklahoma state trooper confiding his difficulty with his first accident investigation six years earlier.

“He said, ‘I rolled up on this Interstate and a mother was running around the median strip with her headless child. I had to run after her, and I had to bring her down with the body of her child, and then I had to go get the head.’ He said, ‘You know something? I’ve never been able to get over that.’ Now, see, that’s Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). And he’s still suffering from that PTSD.”

Cops also are expected—and expect themselves—to be invincible. Said Douglas, “They sometimes have that mindset of no one else is going to understand what they’re going through; you’ve got to be police to understand.” Officers see asking for help as weakness. A 1999 study put alcohol abuse among U.S. police officers at roughly twice the general population’s rate, the divorce rate is high, and, said Douglas, “Our domestic violence ratio is double the general population’s.” And incidents are downplayed. In the United States, a domestic violence conviction ends an officer’s career because they’re banned from carrying a gun.

“These young men and women did not come into this profession with this kind of attitude or disposition or anxiety,” said Douglas. “It is something that we do as we train them. We turn them into warriors.”

Over 94 percent of the 1,300 officer suicides the NPSF reported in a recent three-year period were attributed to relationship issues, but Douglas believes it all still comes back to the job. He said that about 20 percent of law enforcement officers likely suffer from acute PTSD while “the remaining 80 percent have CCTS, Cumulative Career Trauma Stress. That’s the everyday stresses—alarms going off, shoplifting, fighting, being jumped, whatever the case may be.”

“We’re seeing more and more rifles and long guns, more and more disrespect for the police,” acknowledged Sgt. Jeffrey Church (Ret.). “They know they’re not going to be punished, and jail seems to be a revolving door, so we are seeing more violent people and people that just aren’t afraid of the police anymore.” 

Today's guest contributor, Sue Russell, is a journalist and the author of Lethal Intent, a true crime book about Aileen Wuornos. Follow Sue on Twitter and Facebook.

Tweet

A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to Perugia

by Anne Bremner

Given the continuing scrutiny of the forensic evidence in Amanda Knox's trial, I've asked my friend, Mark Waterbury, Ph.D, a member of The Friends of Amanda Knox, to give us his thoughts on the evidence. Most recently, Mark has authored and released a book, The Monster of Perugia – The Framing of Amanda Knox, which is now available in Kindle (eBook) format on Amazon.com.

by Mark Waterbury
A funny thing happened on the way to Perugia.

In December, the court in Perugia, Italy, that is hearing the appeals of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito ruled that independent experts should review the DNA forensics work of the Polizia Scientifica. In particular, it asked the experts to take a fresh look at the only two items of evidence that the prosecution claims connect Amanda and Raffaele to the crime. Those items are highly contested by the defense because of the unique and irreproducible handling of the evidence, as well as the interpretation of testing results.

A review of the methods and interpretations has been a longstanding demand of the defenses.

The first item of evidence was a kitchen knife retrieved from Raffaele’s kitchen implements drawer. Although it does not match the knife wounds, does not match an imprint left on a pillow at the crime scene; and although it tested negative for blood with TMB and the DNA profiling systems reported “too low” as the test result, the prosecution’s forensics expert twisted the controls to blow up the noise at the bottom of the graph. Voila! In a DNA profiling lab with many samples of Meredith Kercher’s DNA, both before and after PCR amplification, a noise level trace appeared. This kind of contamination is not unusual at all.

The other item was Meredith Kercher’s bra clasp, which was cut or torn from her bra during the assault. The strap was spotted and photographed soon after but not retrieved until 47 days and unknown exposure later. At this point in the investigation, not one single shred of DNA evidence, or fingerprints, or footprints, or anything else connected these two defendants to the scene of the crime. That implies very strongly that these two defendants were innocent, and that the murder was committed by a third defendant, Rudy Guede, who has already been convicted. Guede left extensive traces at the crime scene, and even admits being present.

Instead of releasing Amanda and Raffaele in what I call a "hail Mary" clasp play in my book, The Monster of Perugia – The Framing of Amanda Knox, the investigators went back in 47 days later specifically to retrieve that bra clasp. By remarkable coincidence and unbelievable luck, it showed a contamination level DNA of at least three people, and was compatible with the DNA of Raffaele Sollecito. It was also compatible with many, many, other people because it is a mixed DNA profile at trace levels.

The funny thing happened when these new experts appeared in the Perugia court and one of them asked if they could dismantle the knife handle to inspect the tang, the part of the blade that secures the knife to the handle. The defense had no problem with that, but the prosecution and the civil attorneys that side with the prosecution fought it tooth and nail.

The prosecution has claimed that this item is powerful evidence against Amanda and Raffaele. Why should they be afraid to take a closer look at it? In fact, why didn’t they examine the insides of the knife handle long ago? If it was, in fact, used to commit a stabbing, blood certainly would have made it to the handle and some of it would wick up into the joint between the blade and the handle. Critical evidence would be preserved at that point. Yet, the prosecution never looked for it, and now doesn’t want it examined.

The appeals judge granted the independent experts the right to dismantle the knife, and we 'll now wait 90 days for their report.

Click to find more information about Mark Waterbury's book or Amanda Knox evidence.

Mark is a Ph.D. in materials science with 20 years of experience, including as a scientist for the Air Force, an engineer for a major engineering firm, and CTO for two companies. He's also developed a number of measurement techniques, holds several patents, and has worked on a wide range of scientific projects. Most recently, Mark started his own firm, Perception Development Co., which provides consulting services and development of a variety of new products and technologies.

Tweet

The Poisoner's Handbook

By Deborah Blum

 My book, The Poisoner's Handbook, comes out in paperback this week. It was published a year ago, and I had the pleasure of joining Women in Crime Ink as a blogger shortly later.

It's been a wonderful year to be the author of a story about 1920's forensic detectives figuring out how to catch poison killers. The book was named one of the top 100 books of 2010 by Amazon. I've visited more than 15 cities to talk about it, and I am actually booked to continue talking about through October of this year. I do sometimes show up wearing the Victorian poison ring that I purchased in honor of the book.

"Where did women actually get those rings?" my son asked me. "Did they go to the jeweler and ask to see the rings kept under the counter?"

As you may guess, my family and friends worry a little about my ongoing obsession with poison, murder, and the more sinister aspects of chemistry. I'm awfully prone upon hearing the name of a poison - say, mercury - to relate the story of 1920's film star Olive Thomas (Mary Pickford's sister-in-law) who was killed by mercury. And don't get me started on arsenic. My neighbors have promised my husband that they are looking out for him. My husband now drinks his coffee at a distance.

But I continue to find the subject endlessly fascinating. Poisoners themselves, with their devious ways and cold-hearted plotting, tell us a lot about who we are, often at our worst. Poisons themselves are a reminder that we need to navigate with care and knowledge through the chemical world in which we live.

Of course, poisons really are fascinatingly wicked chemical compounds and many of them have fascinating histories as well. In honor of the paperback publication, I thought I'd share with you a few of my favorites:

1. Carbon Monoxide: It’s so beautifully simple (just two atoms--one of carbon, one of oxygen) and so amazingly efficient a killer. There’s a story I tell in the book about a murder syndicate trying to kill an amazingly resilient victim. They try everything from serving him poison alcohol to running over him with a car. But in the end, it’s carbon monoxide that does him in.

2. Arsenic: This used to be the murderer’s poison of poisons, so commonly used in the early 19th century that it was nicknamed the inheritance powder. It’s also the first poison that forensic scientists really figured out how to detect in a corpse. It stays in the body for centuries, which is why we keep digging up historic figures like Napoleon or U.S. President Zachary Taylor to check their remains for poison.

3. Radium: I love the fact that this rare radioactive element used to be considered good for your health. It was mixed into medicines, face creams, and health drinks in the 1920's. People thought of it like a tiny glowing sun that would give them its power. Boy, were they wrong. The two scientists in my book, Charles Norris and Alexander Gettler, proved in 1928 that the bones of people exposed to radium became radioactive, and stayed that way for years.

4. Nicotine: This was the first plant poison that scientists learned to detect in a human body. Just an incredible case in which a French aristocrat and her husband decided to kill her brother for money. They actually stewed up tobacco leaves in a barn to brew a nicotine potion. Their amateur chemical experiments inspired a very determined professional chemist to hunt them down.

5. Chloroform: Developed for surgical anesthesia in the 19th century, this rapidly became a favorite tool of home invasion robbers. If you read newspapers around the turn of the 20th century, they’re full of accounts of people who answered a knock on the door, only to be knocked out by a chloroform soaked rag. One woman woke up to find her hair shaved off, and undoubtedly sold for the lucrative wig trade.

6. Mercury: In its pure state, mercury appears as a bright silver liquid, which scatters into shiny droplets when touched. No wonder it’s nicknamed quicksilver. People used to drink it as a medicine more than 100 years ago. No, they didn’t drop dead. Those silvery balls just slid right through them. Mercury is much more poisonous if it’s mixed with other chemicals and can be absorbed by the body directly. That’s why methylmercury in fish turns out to be so risky a contaminant.

7. Cyanide: One of the most famous of the homicidal poisons and, in my opinion, not a particularly good choice. Yes, it’s amazingly lethal--a teaspoon of the pure stuff can kill in a few minutes. But it’s a violent and obvious death. In early March of last year, in fact, an Ohio doctor was convicted of murder for putting cyanide in his wife’s vitamin supplements.

8. Aconite: A heart-stoppingly, deadly natural poison. It forms in ornamental plants that include the blue-flowering monkshood. The ancient Greeks called it the queen of poisons and considered it so evil that they believed that it derived from the saliva of Cerberus, the three-headed dog guarding the gates of hell.

9. Silver: Swallowing silver nitrate probably won’t kill you, but if you do it long enough it will turn you blue. One of my favorite stories involving a silver bullet concerns the Famous Blue Man of Barnum and Bailey’s Circus who was analyzed by one of the heroes of my book, Alexander Gettler.

10. Thallium: Agatha Christie put this poison at the heart of one of her creepiest mysteries, The Pale Horse, and I looked at it in terms of a murdered family in real life. An element discovered in the 19th century, it’s a perfect homicidal poison. Tasteless and odorless, except for one obvious giveaway, the victim’s hair falls out as a result of the poisoning!

Now that I’ve written this list, I realize I could probably name ten more. But, I don’t want to scare you.

Tweet

'A Change Is Gonna Come'

by Katherine Scardino

My client, Anthony Graves, walked out of the Burleson County Jail on October 27,  2010, after having been incarcerated in jail and prison for a whopping total of 18 years.  Out of those 18 years, Anthony was on death row for 14.  Can you close your eyes and imagine how long 14 years is?  And, being locked in a box for that long for a crime that you know in your heart you did not commit.  I cannot imagine the confusion and terror that must build inside after only a very short period of time, not to mention 18 years.

Anthony Graves is free. But what now? Although no amount of money can replace nearly two decades of an innocent man's life, it seems obvious that the state of Texas should take some responsibility for this egregious wrongful conviction and imprisonment. In 2001, Texas passed a law that provided exonerated people monetary compensation for every year they were wrongfully imprisoned. This law awarded exonerated prisoners $25,000 for every year of wrongful incarceration, with a maximum allowance of $500,000 per person. Of course, this was only for wrongful incarceration claims that were approved through the state comptroller's office. From 2001 to 2006, only about half of the claims submitted were approved.

In May 2009, Texas passed the Tim Cole Compensation Act.  This legislation was named after and inspired by Timothy Cole, an inmate who was wrongfully convicted for rape and who received a 25-year sentence.  Mr. Cole died in prison in 1999, at age 39, from a heart attack, after spending 13 years locked up.  Naming a piece of Texas legislation after this man hardly seems like enough to do much for his family’s feelings.  But, this act did, in fact, increase the annual amount a wrongfully convicted man receives for each year, spent behind bars for doing nothing, from $50,000 to $80,000. In addition, the act also provides health insurance and college tuition. However, if someone accepts the state compensation, they lose their right to file a civil lawsuit against the State of Texas. Also, any wrongly incarcerated person who went on to commit other crimes would not be eligible for the compensation.

Currently, Anthony Graves should receive $80,000 for each year he was incarcerated.  That adds up to right under $1.5 million dollars.  I suppose we could discuss how much is really enough, but that may be for another day.  Unfortunately, there is a snafu with Anthony's claim to the state for compensation.

Last October, the district attorney and his special prosecutor held a press conference and stated that after a thorough investigation of the case, they were dismissing the indictment of capital murder against Anthony.  They both said that Anthony Graves was actually innocent of the charge of capital murder.  An Order of Dismissal was prepared by the district attorney and presented to the judge for her signature.  The order stated the following: “We have found no credible evidence which inculpates this defendant.” It was signed by both the district attorney and the judge.  Anthony Graves was released from the county jail that day, and we picked him up and took him home.

Now, several months later and after applying to the proper authorities for the funds under the Tim Cole Compensation Act, we have learned that there may be a problem.  The state has not yet officially responded to our application for funds, but the defense attorneys are anticipating a serious roadblock. We have been told that the words "actual innocence "must be included on the order of dismissal.

To try and straighten out this technical difficulty, we timely prepared and submitted to the district attorney of Burleson County an amended order of dismissal that included those two magic words--words that he had used in front of cameras last October.  Bill Parham, the DA, refused to sign the amended order, which would have assured that Anthony would be eligible for these funds. This is despite the fact that he had no problem discussing Anthony's innocence with the media on the day of the news conference. 

So, here we are, waiting and hoping for a miracle.  Anthony Graves has been learning a lot about life since October.  He has a new computer, a cell phone, a flat-screen television, and most recently, a used car to call his own, and even a job.  Most of those items were gifts to him from his lawyers, family and friends.  It is hard to walk out of jail or prison after 18 years and be expected to simply get a job.  He did not even know how to send an e-mail, God forbid.

But, he will overcome these hardships. Anthony Graves always has met, pondered and mastered the greatest adversities imaginable.  There are some good things that are happening to him, also.  He has spoken at several functions around Texas about his life experiences to try and convince young people to be careful about who they run with and what they put in their bodies.  He wants to do what he can to change lives.  And, he can.  

CBS’ 48 Hours is doing a special program on Anthony's conviction and release.  They have interviewed many people having to do with his case--even the DA who caused the entire fiasco.  Anthony told the reporter that when he was on death row, he entertained himself by singing, and eventually she convinced him to sing the song for her. I spoke with her yesterday and she described for me the scene when Anthony began singing for her and seemingly forgot the cameras were on.  He closed his eyes, and as tears fell down both cheeks, he sang  from his soul A Change is Gonna Come.   She started crying; I started crying.  There but for the Grace of God go I--or you.  

There been times that I thought I couldn't last for long
But now I think I'm able to carry on
It's been a long, a long time coming
But I know a change gonna come, oh yes it will 
- Sam Cooke

Tweet