FindLaw Blotter

Dying Man's Blinks Lead to Murder Conviction

2013-05-17T18:04:01Z

Ricardo Woods was found guilty of murder and felonious assault Thursday based on video of a dying man's blinks.

The victim, David Chandler, was able to blink three times to confirm that a photo of Woods was the man who shot him in the head and neck in 2010, reports the Associated Press. Chandler died two weeks after the shooting.

Woods is pushing for an appeal of his conviction, arguing the court should not have allowed this evidence.

Testimony From the Dead

It is not uncommon or ghoulish in a murder trial for prosecutors to introduce evidence of what a murder victim said or did prior to his death.

In Ricardo Woods' case, Chandler was paralyzed after being shot and could only communicate by moving his eyes, blinking twice for "no" and three times for "yes," which he used to confirm that Woods was his killer, reports the AP.

You can see the video yourself in this clip from Cincinnati's WKRC-TV:

Normally, any "testimony" -- even expressive actions like blinking -- that is recorded out of court and then played for a jury would be considred hearsay, which is normally not allowed. But there are some exceptions.

Dying Declarations

A statement made by someone who believes he is about to die and has no hope of recovery is called a "dying declaration." It is an exception to the hearsay rule, and it can be allowed into evidence if the person who made the statement is dead.

Wood's lawyers have argued that the video of the dying man's blinks should not have been allowed into evidence since the photo line-up and victim ID were suggestive and unreliable.

This was not the only evidence which the jury considered; they also heard testimony of a jailhouse informant who agreed with Chandler's ID.

Convicted murderer Ricardo Woods plans to appeal his conviction. But if it stands, Woods potentially faces life in prison.

Related Resources:

Ricardo Woods convicted of murder in 'blink of an eye' (CBS News)
Face Off: Prof Sues for being Pictured as Murder Suspect (FindLaw's Injured)
'Deathbed' Confession Leads to Conviction After Man Gets Better (FindLaw's Legal Grounds)
Legalese 101: What is Hearsay? (FindLaw's Law and Daily Life)

5-Year-Old Girl Kidnapped; Mom Rams Suspect's Car

2013-05-16T19:38:01Z

After her daughter was allegedly kidnapped, a mom chased after the suspect and rammed her car into his. Could the mom face any charges for her heroic actions?

The alleged abduction, chase, and crash happened Wednesday night in Albuquerque, New Mexico. The 5-year-old girl was apparently playing outside her apartment when a man shoved her into his car. Witnesses told the girl's mom, who rammed the suspect's car after a 7-mile pursuit, KRQE-TV reports.

The man ran off and still hasn't been caught, but mother and daughter are safe. So what does the law say about their ordeal?

To Catch an Alleged Criminal

The mom's drastic action -- chasing after and ramming the suspect's car -- was of course triggered by her daughter's alleged kidnapping.

A kidnapping is defined as the taking of a person from one place to another against his or her will. It's a serious felony that can lead to a lengthy prison sentence. While the 5-year-old girl was eventually rescued by her mom, the act of transporting the girl against her will for 7 miles likely fulfills the elements of this crime.

Once the suspect is caught, he'll also likely face charges of false imprisonment. Just like it sounds, false imprisonment usually requires the intentional restriction of another person's will without her consent. Examples of this are if a person was backed into a corner of a room or if the victim was purposely locked in another's car.

Making a Citizen's Arrest

While arrests are generally made by police officers, certain situations allow for private citizens to also make "arrests." A citizen can arrest someone if they reasonably suspect a felony is being committed, or has been committed.

There are limits, however. For example, a citizen's arrest must be made with "reasonable force" -- in other words, the amount or level of force used in the arrest must be necessary and justified by the alleged criminal's acts.

Given that kidnapping is a felony, and that the mom rammed the suspect's car in an effort to stop her daughter's abduction, this courageous citizen mom seems to have made a proper citizen's arrest, and will likely not face any charges herself. That certainly can't be said for the alleged kidnapper, however, once he's caught.

Related Resources:

After Daughter Is Taken, Mother Rams Abduction Suspect's Car (NPR)
Can You Sue for False Imprisonment? (FindLaw's Injured)
Ariel Castro Charged With Kidnapping, Rape (FindLaw's Blotter)
When Can You Conduct a Citizen's Arrest? (FindLaw's Blotter)

Are 'Nanny Cams' Legal?

2013-05-16T15:19:01Z

You might have seen a teddy bear with especially penetrating eyes and wondered to yourself: Are nanny cams legal? The basic answer: It depends.

It's currently legal in every state to make a video-only recording of anything happening inside your home, at any time, without letting anyone know. It doesn't matter if the camera is hidden.

But there are a few legal restrictions on nanny cameras you may not know about.

Purpose of Recordings

While video-only nanny cam recordings are legal, they still must be used for a reasonable purpose. This is because all individuals, including nannies, have a legally protected expectation of privacy. Legitimate reasons can include monitoring your baby and/or your babysitter to thwart child abuse, or to prevent theft.

On the other hand, a nanny cam used for creepy voyeurism, dishing private information to the public, or any kind of commercial purpose generally is not legal.

Sound Recordings

Nanny cam recordings with audio, however, are in a whole different playing field. Have you ever noticed how security cameras at stores you visit often don't have audio? When they do, they often have a smiley face to give you notice in an obnoxious, sarcastic way: "Smile! You're being recorded!"

Under wiretapping laws, it's illegal to record oral communication in a surreptitious manner, such as with a hidden camera or other secret recording device. In about 15 states, it's illegal to record audio without the consent of the party being recorded (i.e., the nanny).

For this reason, most nanny cams don't include audio. If you do manage to find a nanny cam with the ability to record audio, make sure your state allows it. Asking the nanny cam merchant is a good place to start your research.

Evidence From Nanny Cams

If a nanny or babysitter is videotaped without his or her knowledge, admitting the secret recordings as evidence raises potential legal concerns. Courts are split on this issue, but most states seem to be leaning toward admitting secret nanny cam recordings.

But if you live in a state that requires consent, and your nanny-cam video has audio, then it'll likely be inadmissible under wiretapping laws. The "mute" button is a solution to that problem, unless the incriminating part of the video is speech.

So before you set up your home surveillance system, figure out your state's laws on nanny cameras or speak to an experienced criminal defense attorney in your area.

Related Resources:

Is It Legal to Record Phone Conversations? (FindLaw's Law and Daily Life)
Secret Home Surveillance Video Doesn't Violate Fourth Amendment (FindLaw's Ninth Circuit Blog)
DEA's Warrantless Use of Hidden Cameras OK: Court (FindLaw's Decided)
LeAnn Rimes Sues Over Secret Phone Recordings (FindLaw's Celebrity Justice)

Abortion Doc Gets Life in Prison, Waives Appeal

2013-05-15T20:06:01Z

Abortion doctor Kermit Gosnell will serve life in prison for the murder of three babies who were born alive, and whose necks were snipped with scissors. Gosnell was sentenced on Wednesday in accordance with a plea bargain.

Gosnell agreed to take life in prison as part of a plea deal in order for the notorious doctor to avoid a potential death sentence, reports the Associated Press.

It is almost certain that Gosnell, 72, will spend the rest of his natural life in prison, and he may have given up some rights by accepting the plea bargain.

What Are Plea Bargains?

Plea bargains are agreements between prosecutors and the defendant that typically involve the defendant pleading guilty in exchange for a lesser sentence or less serious conviction.

Gosnell's case is slightly different since he was already convicted by a jury of his crimes, and the only bargaining left was concerning either life in prison or the death penalty.

In exchange for Gosnell avoiding the possibility of the death penalty, he agreed with prosecutors "to waive all of his appellate rights," reports The Christian Science Monitor.

Waiving Appellate Rights

When a defendant agrees to waive his appellate rights, he must both know what rights he's giving up and agree on the record that he is doing so voluntarily.

By agreeing to this plea bargain, Gosnell would not be able to appeal his conviction to a higher court for a possibility of a new trial or different conviction.

However, he may potentially be able to appeal a future change in his sentence, such as a possible supervised release, even after waiving his appellate rights.

The Habeas Option

Although it may be the subject of debate, Gosnell should still retain the right to petition the court for a habeas hearing. If he pursued such a hearing, it would address alleged denials of the convicted doctor's rights.

This may be particularly important if Gosnell later claims that he accepted the plea bargain for life in prison due to ineffective assistance by his attorney.

Related Resources:

Convicted Abortion Doctor Kermit Gosnell Given Third Life Sentence (ABC News)
Gosnell Found Guilty: Will He Get the Death Penalty? (FindLaw's Blotter)
Abortion Dr. Kermit Gosnell Charged With Murder (FindLaw's Law and Daily Life)
O.J. Simpson Back in Court: What's a Habeas Hearing? (FindLaw's Celebrity Justice)

Senior Prostitution Ring Busted at Nursing Home

2013-05-15T14:26:01Z

Call it Sex, Drugs, and ~~Rock and Roll~~ Assisted Living: The tale of an alleged senior prostitution ring at a nursing home in Englewood, New Jersey.

A long way from a QVC habit, a 75-year-old man and 66-year-old woman allegedly used crack cocaine and ran a prostitution ring out of their apartments at the low-income Vincente K. Tibbs Senior Citizen Building, NorthJersey.com reports. Currently, residents James Parham and Cheryl Chaney are only facing drug-related charges with sparse details on the undercover sting operation.

With further charges looming and few details on the sting operation, the case might be ripe for an entrapment defense.

What Is Entrapment?

Entrapment is a criminal defense most often claimed in government sting operations that involve drug dealing, bribery, or sex offenses. It occurs when a government agent induces a person to commit a crime that the person otherwise would not have committed.

Chief Arthur O'Keefe of the Englewood police assigned undercover officers to find out which tenants were behind the drug and prostitution reports. If the undercover officers unduly persuaded or encouraged Parham to run the prostitution ring, and he wouldn't have committed the crime otherwise, then that's Nursing-Home-Entrapment Bingo!

However, prosecutors can counter an entrapment defense by showing, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the defendant was predisposed to commit the criminal act before government agents gave him the idea. This is usually proven by showing the defendant's prior criminal conduct similar to the charged crime.

Alleged Confessions

Yet in this case, Chaney had no criminal record, and Parham had a few minor arrests years ago for disorderly conduct and other low-level crimes, according to NorthJersey.com. There's nothing to indicate previous involvement in a prostitution ring. In fact, the nursing home bars anyone with recent drug convictions or a violent criminal history from living in the building.

Fortunately for prosecutors, there's an alleged confession. Parham admitted employing crack-addicted women, as well as a few fellow elderly residents, as sex workers to service his "younger" neighbors in the building, police told NorthJersey.com.

Though there are certain confessions that can't be admitted in court, a voluntary confession is usually enough to fend off an entrapment defense.

Related Resources:

Man, 75, Accused of Running Prostitution Ring in New Jersey Senior Housing Complex (New York's WNBC-TV)
Zumba Prostitution Trial Ends With Conviction (FindLaw's Blotter)
'Marijuana Grannies': Senior Citizens Busted with 800 Plants (FindLaw's Legally Weird)
3 Seniors Solicited Sex on the Beach from Undercover FL Cop (FindLaw's Legally Weird)

NTSB Wants 0.05% Blood-Alcohol Limit Nationwide

2013-05-14T18:15:01Z

The National Transportation Safety Board voted Tuesday to recommend lowering the legal blood-alcohol concentration limit to 0.05% for drunken driving nationwide.

The vote came after board members considered a safety report entitled "Reaching Zero: Actions to Eliminate Alcohol-Impaired Driving." The report provided an overview of impaired driving, current efforts to curb DUI deaths, and proposed safety recommendations.

Now that the NTSB has reached its decision, what effect will this have on the nation's drivers?

Effect of NTSB Recommendations

The NTSB is a federal agency whose board members are appointed by the president. One of their main duties is to issue safety recommendations to federal, state, and local government agencies.

But government agencies that do not follow these recommendations are not sanctioned or fined by the NTSB. This may explain why it took 21 years for all 50 states to adopt the NTSB's recommendation to move the legal BAC limit from 0.10% to 0.08%, reports NBC News.

Jurisdictions With a 0.05% Limit

The Board made this recommendation with an eye toward other countries that have successfully implemented lower drunken-driving limits. One example: Queensland, Australia, where the legal BAC limit has already been lowered from 0.08% to 0.05%. That resulted in an 18% decrease in fatalities, according to the NTSB report.

NTSB Chairman Debbie Hersman believes that lowering the BAC limit may help eliminate drunken driving in the United States, reports CNN.

How Many Drinks to Reach 0.05%?

Although online BAC calculators are available for free online, inviting you to "check yourself before you wreck yourself," the approximate difference between a BAC of 0.08% and 0.05% is about one to two drinks, depending on your gender and body type, reports The Washington Post.

Even if all states ignore the recommendation of the NTSB to lower the limit to 0.05%, drivers in many states, like Colorado, can still be arrested for "driving while ability impaired," or DWAI, if they have a BAC between 0.05% and 0.08%. Keep in mind some states also enforce lower (and even zero-tolerance) BAC limits for certain types of drivers, such as school bus drivers.

Related Resources:

Make DUI limit 0.05% blood-alcohol level, NTSB says (USA Today)
Per Se DUI Laws (FindLaw)
NTSB Calls for Cell Phone Ban: Will States Act? (FindLaw's Law and Daily Life)
SCOTUS: Warrant Needed for DUI Blood Test, Maybe (FindLaw's Decided)

Can Police Search Through Your Trash?

2013-05-14T14:32:01Z

You may have never found your trash to be anyone's treasure, but it easily could be the target of a police search.

As the law stands, there is no expectation of privacy in trash that you put out by the curb, and law enforcement can rifle through your refuse with wild abandon.

So what rights do any of us have to protect our trash from police searches? Here's a quick general overview:

Fourth Amendment protection. The Fourth Amendment protects you and your property from "unreasonable searches and seizures" without a warrant. This generally means that the government, including state, federal, and local law enforcement, cannot intrude into your privacy without probable cause.
Trash inside the house. Even though you throw something away, you have a privacy interest in the things that are within the boundaries of your home. If police wanted to search your trash can inside your home or garage, they would need a search warrant or exigent circumstances in order to do so.
Trash that you carry. Many of us carry around pockets full of items that we plan to discard, like receipts and plastic wrappers. Police generally cannot search you or seize these items without violating your Fourth Amendment rights. Even sealed trash bags in the back of a parked car may be considered to have an expectation of privacy that would be violated by a police search.
Trash on the curb. Your right to privacy in your property extends outward to what is called a curtilage, the area immediately surrounding your home. This curtilage, however, does not include trash that is left outside your home on the curb for pickup. Since courts have decided you have no expectation of privacy in trash left out on the street, police are free to rummage through it without probable cause or a warrant.
Exclusion of evidence. When you have been charged with a crime, your criminal defense attorney may file a motion to suppress any evidence that was taken from your trash. If the court finds that your trash was within your right to privacy and was taken without a warrant or probable cause, that trash cannot be used as evidence against you.

Related Resources:

Does the 4th Amendment Promise a Right to Be Secure in Your DNA? (FindLaw's U.S. Supreme Court Blog)
Sorry Kid, The Full Force of the Fourth Amendment is for Grownups (FindLaw's Fourth Circuit Blog)
The Fourth Amendment Warrant Requirement (FindLaw)
Questioned by Police? Know These 3 Rights (FindLaw's Blotter)

Gosnell Found Guilty: Will He Get the Death Penalty?

2013-05-13T22:01:01Z

Abortion doctor Kermit Gosnell was found guilty on three counts of premeditated first-degree murder on Monday, following a five-week trial involving allegations of fetuses being killed after being removed from the womb.

Gosnell, 72, who once ran a clinic in West Philadelphia, was also convicted on one count of involuntary manslaughter for the death of an adult female patient. Prosecutors have stated that they will seek the death penalty for the murders, The New York Times reports.

What's next for the notorious late-term abortion doctor in the sentencing phase of his trial?

Two Trial Phases

Several states allow the death penalty, including Pennsylvania. In death penalty cases, the trial is separated into two phases:

The guilt phase. This is where jurors decide whether a defendant like Gosnell is guilty of a capital offense like felony murder or premeditated murder.
The sentencing phase. Jurors listen to evidence of mitigation and aggravation and decide whether to impose the death penalty.

For Gosnell, his sentencing phase is set to begin May 21, when jurors will begin to hear testimony to help them determine whether to impose the death penalty, reports ABC News.

Sentencing in Pennsylvania

Pennsylvania law requires a jury to hear evidence following a guilty verdict for first degree murder concerning mitigating and aggravating circumstances of the murder.

Much like in the guilt phase of Gosnell's trial, prosecutors must prove any aggravating circumstances beyond a reasonable doubt.

A Pennsylvania jury cannot sentence a defendant to death without a unanimous finding of at least one aggravating factor which is not outweighed by a mitigating factor.

Gosnell could potentially face these common aggravating circumstances:

The defendant was paid by another person for the killing. Although this is likely reserved in cases of contract killings, the prosecution is not barred from presenting this to a jury in Gosnell's case.
The defendant was convicted of other murders. Since Gosnell was convicted of three separate counts of first-degree murder, the jury is likely to find this.
The victim was a child under 12 years of age. All three counts of murder for which Gosnell was convicted involved months-old fetuses.

But there's one notable caveat to Pennsylvania's death penalty law: It technically does not allow the death penalty in cases of first-degree murder of an unborn child. In Dr. Kermit Gosnell's case, however, it is likely that the fetuses will be considered "born" for purposes of sentencing.

Related Resources:

Kermit Gosnell Guilty: Verdict Announced In Abortion Doctor Trial (The Huffington Post)
Abortion Dr. Kermit Gosnell Charged With Murder (FindLaw's Law and Daily Life)
How Does the Death Penalty Work in Pennsylvania? (FindLaw's Philadelphia Criminal Law News)
Jodi Arias Guilty of Murder; Sentencing Is Next (FindLaw's Blotter)

12-Year-Old Arrested in Sister's Fatal Stabbing

2013-05-13T20:36:01Z

A 12-year-old boy has been arrested for stabbing and killing his 8-year-old sister, after his initial report of an intruder set off a massive manhunt.

The boy told authorities in Calaveras County, California, that he saw an intruder and found his sister dying from stab wounds while his parents were out of the house April 27. But on Saturday, deputies took the boy into custody, The Sacramento Bee reports.

The boy, whose name has not been released, is now in the hands of the juvenile justice system. How does that work, exactly?

Juvenile Delinquency Cases

Cases of juvenile delinquency involve children who violated the law that, if committed by an adult, would be considered a crime.

After a juvenile offender is arrested in California, it's up to officers whether to release the kid to his or her parents' custody, or take the offender to juvenile hall. The probation department handles further placement and responsibility for that child.

In some cases, minors can be tried as adults. Under California's three-strikes law, some serious or violent crimes committed by minors can count as strikes in the future.

Cannot Be Tried As an Adult

But in the 12-year-old boy's case, though his alleged crime was violent, he cannot be charged as an adult because of his age. In California, a child must be at least 14 to be tried as an adult.

The same right to counsel exists in the juvenile justice system. A child has a right to an attorney. If the juvenile offender's parents can't afford one, the child will receive a court-appointed attorney.

Even if parents aren't directly involved in a crime, they can often be held vicariously liable for the unlawful actions of their children. Parental vicarious liability traces its rationale to a parent's responsibility to supervise and educate a child.

In this case, the 12-year-old boy's parents could potentially be hauled into court for failing to properly supervise their son, if that's what the investigation reveals. We'll have to wait and see whether that happens.

Related Resources:

Twelve-year-old California boy arrested in stabbing death of sister (Reuters)
11 Year Old Babysitter Charged in Child Death (FindLaw's Blotter)
Am I Civilly Liable for My Kids' Actions? (FindLaw's Injured)
How do Juvenile Proceedings Differ from Adult Criminal Proceedings? (FindLaw)

19 Shot at Parade on Mother's Day

2013-05-13T17:28:01Z

At least 19 people were shot at a parade on Mother's Day in New Orleans when gunmen opened fire on revelers. Two children were grazed during the hail of bullets, but luckily there were no fatalities, reports NBC News.

As Louisiana authorities search for suspects in the Mother's Day shooting, Louisiana laws are poised to deal with these armed attackers.

Attempted Murder

Although the gunmen thankfully did not manage to kill anyone, they are likely to be charged with attempted murder.

Different states deal with attempted crimes in different ways, and in Louisiana, an attempt to commit a crime which is punishable by life in prison, like murder, is punishable by 10 to 50 years in prison.

In order to be convicted of attempted murder, a jury will have to find that the gunmen had the intent to kill, which should be a simple task given the allegations of the men spraying the crowd with bullets.

Terrorism-Related Charges?

With the Boston Marathon bombings still fresh in people's minds, it's possible the gunmen could also face terrorism charges, depending on what motivated the shooting. Louisiana's terrorism statute punishes those who inflict serious bodily injury on a person or persons in order to intimidate the civilian population.

Those found guilty of terrorism under Louisiana law can face up to 30 years in prison.

If the gunmen are found guilty of both attempted murder and terrorism for the shootings, their sentences could run consecutively.

Louisiana Gun Laws

Finally, the gunmen could also potentially face charges for violating Louisiana's gun laws. However, Louisiana laws actually allow the open carrying of certain weapons without a license or permit.

For example, in Louisiana, it is not legally necessary to:

Obtain a permit to purchase a firearm,
Register your firearms,
Become a licensed gun owner, or
Obtain a permit to carry a rifle or shotgun (handguns, however, do require a permit to be carried, according to the NRA).

Further, while the possession of firearms by a felon is illegal in most states, a recent New Orleans court ruling in March may work to prevent Louisiana prosecutors from charging any felons with illegal possession of firearms. That's because Louisiana passed a constitutional amendment last year that makes the right to bear arms a "fundamental right" in the state, The Times-Picayune reports.

Related Resources:

Police vow to solve shooting that wounded 19 people during Mother's Day parade in New Orleans (The Associated Press)
Louisiana Gun Control Laws (FindLaw)
4 Injured in Mardi Gras Shooting: Can They Sue? (FindLaw's Injured)
10 States With the Toughest Gun Laws (FindLaw's Blotter)

Mommy Not-So-Dearest: 10 Notorious Criminal Moms

2013-05-10T16:14:01Z

Raising kids can be a very stressful enterprise, and while some women respond by taking a "Cathy"-esque break with chocolates and chardonnay, some become notorious criminals.

Get ready to call your mom and thank her after you read about these 10 notorious criminal moms:

Susan Smith. This South Carolina mom claimed that she was carjacked with her two children in the back seat in 1994, when in fact she had driven the car into a lake with her toddlers strapped in.

Andrea Yates. In a case that made the whole country reconsider postpartum depression, Houston resident Yates was convicted of drowning her children one after another during a psychotic break in 2001.

Nadya "Octomom" Suleman. The incredibly fertile Suleman was under fire for child neglect after keeping her children in squalid conditions despite spending $520 on a haircut.

Patricia "Tanning Mom" Krentcil. This New Jersey mom gained notoriety last year after she allegedly took her 5-year-old daughter to the tanning salon, where the girl suffered burns.

Ethel Rosenberg. Half of the infamous husband-and-wife spy team, Rosenberg was executed for trying to steal U.S. nuclear secrets for the Russians in the 1940s.

Dorothea Puente. Mother and boarding house proprietor Puente was convicted of murder after police in 1988 found seven bodies of tenants she had drugged and suffocated in her yard.

Jennifer San Marco. A California mom who "went postal," ex-USPS employee Marco shot and killed six workers at a mail processing plant before ending her own life in 2006.

Francine Hughes. Battered wife and mother Hughes became infamous after she set her husband on fire (a scene that was later re-enacted by Farrah Fawcett in "The Burning Bed") in 1977 and became a touchstone for future spousal murder defense.

Lauryn Hill. Famous songwriter and Grammy-winner Hill became another mom headed to prison as she was sentenced this week to three months hard time for tax evasion.

Courtney Love. The notorious widow of Nirvana's Kurt Cobain, Love might not have been the best mom when she was arrested in 2003 for trying to break into a friend's house while she was high.

Related Resources:

Legal Issues for Moms Behind Bars (FindLaw's Blotter)
Mom Convicted of Denying Autistic Son Cancer Drugs (FindLaw's Blotter)
Mom French-Kisses Son in Jail to Smuggle Drugs (FindLaw's Legally Weird)
Mothers Do the Darnedest Things: 10 Dumb Ways Moms Get Arrested (FindLaw's Legally Weird)

Teen's Facebook Rant Leads to Terrorism Arrest

2013-05-09T19:26:01Z

A short-lived rap career may have come to an end last week, as a Massachusetts high school student was arrested for making terrorist threats in a Facebook post.

Cameron D'Ambrosio, who calls himself "CammyDee" online, was arrested after a student at Methuen High School noticed D'Ambrosio posted threats to "kill people" on Facebook, reports The Valley Patriot.

D'Ambrosio now faces serious criminal charges.

Terrorist Threat Charge

Under Massachusetts law, anyone who communicates a threat via the Internet that causes "serious public inconvenience or alarm" can be punished by up to 20 years in prison.

In his Facebook post, D'Ambrosio let loose by proclaiming, in the form of rap lyrics: "[expletive] a Boston bombing wait til you see the [expletive] I do. I'm a be famous rapping, and beat every murder charge that comes across me!" reports The Boston Globe.

D'Ambrosio's bail was set at $1 million.

Threat or Prank?

It is easy to see why, in the wake of the Boston Marathon bombings, local authorities in Massachusetts are not joking around with this charge.

Methuen's police chief told The Valley Patriot that "[t]hreats of this kind of violence [are] unacceptable and will not be tolerated, not in Methuen they won't."

But CammyDee is hardly the first wannabe rapper to be charged for making threats in his lyrical post.

Lyrics Can Be Criminal

In 2010, an army specialist was charged with making threats against fellow officers for a rap song he created criticizing the Army's "Stop Loss" policy of keeping soldiers past their enlistment dates.

Rappers' lyrics can also be used against them in any future criminal case, especially lines or songs which express fondness for killing or violence.

Social media sites like Facebook and YouTube are not unknown to law enforcement, and teens like D'Ambrosio should think twice before they post.

This isn't the first time Cameron D'Ambrosio has met with law enforcement. In June 2012, he was charged with assault and battery and criminal threats for threatening to stab and kill his sister, but the case was dropped in April, according to the Globe.

Related Resources:

Massachusetts teen charged with making 'terror' threats mentioning Boston Marathon on Facebook (New York Daily News)
Judge Orders Rapper The Game to Pay Police $5M Over Arrest (FindLaw's Celebrity Justice)
'Chick Bank Robber' Brags on YouTube, Then Gets Busted (FindLaw's Legal Grounds)
Facebook Threat Gets NJ Girl, 14, Arrested (FindLaw's Blotter)

Ariel Castro Charged With Kidnapping, Rape

2013-05-09T18:07:01Z

Ariel Castro has been formally charged in the rape and kidnapping of three women allegedly held captive in his Cleveland home for years.

As grim details emerge about the victims' harrowing tales of captivity, Castro's journey in the criminal justice system is only beginning. Handcuffed and clad in a dark blue jumpsuit, the 52-year-old former school bus driver was arraigned on kidnapping and rape charges Thursday, USA Today reports.

With Ariel Castro charged, you might be wondering what an arraignment actually entails.

What Happens at an Arraignment?

The arraignment is Ariel Castro's first court appearance and involves important steps that you may be familiar with from watching TV crime dramas.

In terms of timing, an arraignment comes after a defendant is arrested and booked.

In court, a judge reads the criminal charges and asks the defendant how he or she wants to plead. With years of "Law & Order" under our belts, we all know the options: guilty, not guilty, or no contest (if local laws allow it).

In this case, Castro has been charged with four counts of kidnapping and three counts of rape. But he's holding off on entering a plea until he gets transferred from municipal court to the county court. This is because his attorney thinks the county prosecutor will add additional charges, USA Today reports.

Depending on the jurisdiction, bail is also set during the arraignment. In this case, bail was set at $8 million. The more serious the crime and the more danger the suspect's release might pose to the community, the higher the bail. The suspect's criminal record and ties to family, community, and employment are also taken into account.

Not surprisingly, Castro's attorney expected a staggering bail amount, USA Today reports. The judge specifically said that if Castro, who is unemployed, is able to post the bond, he is ordered not to have any contact with the victims or the victims' families.

The Right to an Attorney

One of the most important parts of the arraignment is the right to counsel. If a defendant doesn't have a lawyer, the court can appoint one. Defendants can also hire their own attorney, too.

Castro's attorney, Kathleen DeMetz, is a public defender. Public defenders are defense attorneys appointed by the court to represent people who can't afford to hire an attorney.

Castro's two brothers, Pedro and Onil, also appeared with him in court -- but on completely unrelated misdemeanor charges. They were released soon after. Prosecutors say there's no evidence linking the brothers to the Cleveland kidnappings, and nothing suggests they knew about it, USA Today reports.

As for Ariel Castro's alleged kidnapping victims, two of them -- Amanda Berry and Gina DeJesus -- were released from the hospital and returned home Wednesday. The third kidnapped woman, Michelle Knight, is still in the hospital.

Related Resources:

Bail for accused Cleveland kidnapper Ariel Castro set at $8 million (Reuters)
3 Missing Women Found Alive; 3 Men Arrested (FindLaw's Blotter)
5 Things to Know About Missing Persons Reports (FindLaw's Blotter)
FBI iPhone App Helps Parents of Missing Children (FindLaw's Blotter)

Jodi Arias Guilty of Murder; Sentencing Is Next

2013-05-08T21:46:01Z

Jodi Arias is guilty of first degree murder in the killing of her ex-boyfriend Travis Alexander, an Arizona jury found Wednesday. The sentencing phase of her trial is next.

Five of the 12 jurors voted to convict Arias, 32, of first-degree premeditated murder, while seven jurors felt she was guilty of both premeditated and first-degree felony murder, according to the verdict form that was read aloud in court. That means all 12 jurors found Arias guilty of first-degree murder.

Now that Arias has been found guilty, jurors will next consider whether she deserves the death penalty, reports the Associated Press.

The Sentencing Phase

In states that allow the death penalty, and in federal cases as well, a capital trial is generally separated into two parts:

The guilt phase, in which jurors determine whether the defendant is guilty of a capital murder charge; and
The sentencing phase, in which jurors choose whether to sentence a defendant to life in prison or the death penalty based on mitigating and aggravating factors.

The jury -- not a judge -- must make the determination whether to apply the death penalty, based on the evidence of mitigation and aggravation presented to them.

Character Evidence Allowed

Just like in the guilt phase of a criminal trial, both the prosecutor and defense attorney take turns presenting evidence during the sentencing phase. But in this part of the capital case, evidence of Arias' character and morals may be presented.

Arizona courts have allowed evidence of a perpetrator's good moral character, but even in the case of a defendant alleged to have saved lives, it may not be sufficient to mitigate imposing the death penalty.

Aggravating Factors in Arias' Case

In Arizona, the sentencing phase is technically broken up into an "aggravation" phase and a "penalty" phase, according to the AP.

Arizona has several recognized statutory and non-statutory aggravating factors that can help a jury find that the death penalty is appropriate. Here are some that Arias' jurors are most likely to consider:

The murder was especially heinous, cruel, or depraved. Relishing in the murder, needless mutilation, or causing extreme pain or anguish to the victim are examples of this.
The murder was committed in a cold, calculated manner. This is commonly found when the killer had a plan or design before the murder as well as a calm period of reflection.

If jurors fail to find any aggravating factors once the prosecution has rested, then the death penalty is taken off the table and the judge will impose a prison sentence.

Mitigating Factors

In addition to evidence of good character, the Arias jury may be called to consider other mitigating factors to sway them against imposing the death penalty. These may potentially include:

Mental impairment. Arias may be found to have not appreciated the wrongfulness of her actions and was therefore impaired.
Lack of criminal history. The fact that Arias has no criminal record is likely to be adequate mitigation.
Family history. Arias' alleged abuse by her parents and by Travis Alexander will likely be raised.

Ultimately, the jury will decide if these factors outweigh the aggravating ones in deciding whether Jodi Arias deserves the death penalty. The sentencing phase of her trial is set to begin Thursday afternoon, the AP reports.

Related Resources:

Arizona jury finds Jodi Arias guilty of first-degree murder (Reuters)
Jodi Arias: Jury Instructions Key to Her Fate (FindLaw's Blotter)
Jodi Arias Trial: 3rd Juror Excused (FindLaw's Blotter)
Jodi Arias Trial: 5 Facts About Closing Arguments (FindLaw's Blotter)

Military Sex Assaults a 'Growing Epidemic'

2013-05-08T18:09:01Z

Military sexual assaults are on the rise, and a new survey suggests the problem may be much more widespread than officially reported.

The official number of sexual assaults in the military rose 6% between 2011 and 2012, when more than 3,300 service members reported such incidents, according to a Pentagon report released Wednesday. But the true number is likely much higher.

The Pentagon estimates as many as 26,000 military members may have been subject to sexual assault in 2012 but didn't report it, according to the Associated Press. So what is the federal government doing to prevent and deter sexual assaults in the military?

Reporting Process

The Department of Defense has an existing policy that allows victims of sexual violence to safely report the crime using two methods.

Restricted reporting allows service members to confidentially report sexual assault to:

A sexual assault response coordinator (SARC),
A victim advocate (VA), or
A health care provider.

Under this method, while a servicemember is entitled to receive medical care and counseling, there is no criminal investigation that is required by law enforcement or military command.

Unrestricted reporting works a bit differently. An officer who has been abused can choose to come forward and report the crime unrestricted, which offers the following benefits:

A civilian or military protection order. Just like in a civilian sexual violence and domestic violence cases, service members can request an order to keep their attackers from contacting them or coming within a certain distance.
The posibility of an expedited transfer to another base or unit.
An official investigation, which can be requested through either law enforcement or the SARC.

Punishments and Calls for Change

Those accused of sexual abuse via unrestricted reporting can face trial by court-martial under the Uniform Code of Military Justice. Military courts-martial do not have to abide by the same rules of evidence or procedure that civilian courts do, and often convictions can be dismissed by a commanding officer.

As the head of the Air Force's task force on sexual assault prevention now faces sexual battery charges himself, according to MSNBC, it's added fuel to the debate over how the military handles sex-assault cases.

The Pentagon's report called military sexual assaults a growing epidemic. In response, President Obama on Tuesday called for harsher punishments and "no tolerance" for sexual crimes in the military, The Washington Post reports. Actual change, however, remains to be seen.

Related Resources:

Pentagon Study Finds Sharp Rise in Military Sexual Assaults (The New York Times)
Initiative to Combat Sexual Assault in the Military (Department of Defense)
Proposed Rule Changes Could Make Military Sexual Assault Defense an Uphill Battle (FindLaw's KnowledgeBase)
Military Mom Update: Army Files Criminal Charges for Refusing Deployment (FindLaw's Blotter)