Law School Discussion

Legal Reasoning

Re: Legal Reasoning
« Reply #280 on: February 23, 2008, 11:22:29 AM »

[...] One such message demonstrates a particularly fascinating example of projection on a rather primitive level. Jones declared himself the only "true heterosexual" and had most, if not all male followers "admit" they were gay. The fact that he was coercing sex from many male followers somehow did not present a contradictory message to Jones. [...]


Truly amazing!

rte

Re: Bad Bedfellows
« Reply #281 on: March 01, 2008, 01:25:33 PM »

Well, gangsters and cops alike are neither black nor white; they represent the color of gray. A hidden identity between good and evil. The symbiotic relationship of hunter and hunted, embodied by men with guns pointed, arms at full extension, winding around each other in a distinctly homoerotic pas de deux.


In 1996 he chose to leave the programme and by the end of 1998 he had resumed his life of crime. Isolated from his mafia cohorts, Gravano found a new crew - a gang of young white supremacist drug dealers known as The Devil Dogs. The alliance was formed after Gravano's 23-year-old son, Gerard, became friendly with the Devil Dogs' leader, Michael Papa. Papa, 23, was a promising medical student who spent his spare time pumping iron and using steroids. He became Gravano's protegé. Within months Gravano and The Devil Dogs had sewn up the booming market in ecstasy on the Arizona nightclub circuit.

Gravano's gang was selling about 25,000 tablets a week, making a a-million-a-month profit. In September 1999 Gravano spoke at a conference of FBI supervisors about the use of informers. At the same time as he was speaking to these elite crimefighters, he was flooding Arizona with millions of dollars' worth of ecstasy. His supplier, it is alleged, was the Israeli mafia. But the Devil Dogs were amateurs compared with the New York mob, and their bragging and excessive violence soon drew the attention of the police, the FBI and the DEA. On 24 February 2000 DEA agents swooped on addresses all over the Phoenix area and arrested 45 people, including Papa, Gravano, his son and wife Debbie. Gravano is an unrepentant sociopath who wrapped himself up in an American flag and cosied up to the Feds. Ironically the case against Gravano, the king of mafia rats, depends largely on the evidence of Papa. "It is a delicious irony that the king rat has been betrayed by a baby rat," says Ron Kuby, a lawyer who represents Gravano's New York victims.

Now Gravano knows a lot of sensitive information and it is possible that the FBI will let "their man" go down. There may be another plea bargain in Arizona. A lot went on behind the scenes which the government does not want people to know. The FBI used to be revered as an agency beyond reproach but several incidents in recent years have tarnished its reputation. You saw it with McVeigh. They thought they could keep 3,000 documents from his lawyers. It's one thing after another. They keep getting caught with their hands in the cookie jar.




William Pepper is an English barrister and an American lawyer. He convenes a seminar on International Human Rights at Oxford University. He maintains a practice in the U.S. and the U.K. He is author of three other books and numerous articles. This book is the result of a quarter-century of an investigation.

In Memphis on the day of the assassination of Martin King there was an [Special Forces] Alpha 184 Team there. And nobody understood why that team was there. Alpha 184 6-man unit was a sniper team. No one understood why they were there. Martin King had been killed as the result of a Mafia contract. There were any number of bounties on him in those periods of time and a fair amount of money had been raised to try to get him killed. None of the occurrences were successful and ultimatily it was a Mafia hit. But now, all of a sudden, into this picture comes one of the most secretive aspects of the government of the United States: the role of the Army and the Army and military intelligence on American soil. It became evident that the military did not kill Martin King but that they were there in Memphis -- a backup operation. Because King was never going to be allowed to leave Memphis. If the contract that was given didn't work these guys were going to do it. The story they told was that the six of them were briefed at 4:30 in the morning at Camp Shelby. The started out around 5 o'clock. They came to Memphis. They were briefed there. They took up their positions. At the briefing at 4:30 they were shown two photographs who were their targets. One was Martin King and the other was Andrew Young. Andrew Young might even conceivably be a target? But that's what he was.

Now as far as they knew they were going to kill these people. They had no regrets about it at all because they considered them as traitors and they used very unkind words about them. So they were going to kill them and they were prepared to do that. But they never got the order. Instead they heard a shot. And each thought the other one had fired too quickly. Then they had an order to disengage. It was only later that they learned that, as they call it, 'some wacko civilian' had actually shot King and that their services were not required. But that's how they worked. This was not a one-off for these guys. They were trained snipers. You remember a hundred cities burned in America in 1967. These guys were sent around the country, teams of them, into different cities. These particular fellows had been in Detroit, Newark and Tampa and possibly L.A. They were given mugbooks. Those mugbooks were the photographs of community leaders and people who were to be their targets. And they would be put in positions and they would take out community leaders who would somehow be killed in the course of the rioting that was going on in various cities. The assassination of Martin King was a part of what amounted to an on-going covert program in which they tried to suppress dissent and disruption in America. He was shot from the bushes behind Jim's Grill, not from the bathroom window. And he was shot as a result of a conspiracy that brought a man called Frank Liberto -- who was a [Carlos] Marcello operative in Memphis, he ran a wholesale food place -- in to see Loyd Jowers whom he knew. Jowers owed him a very big favor. And in addition to that he paid Jowers $100,000 and that was to take complete use of that Grill facility for planning and staging of the assassination and the room upstairs that Raul (who was controlling James Earl Ray) would have James rent and then keep out of most of the afternoon.

The final stages of the assassination logistically were planned in Jim's Grill itself and there were a number of Memphis Police Department officers -- some of them were senior officers -- who were there. One of them was a black officer called Marrell McCollough. Marrell McCollough is still alive and well today in Memphis, Tennessee. He went from the Memphis Police Department to the CIA where he worked for a number of years [in the 1970s]. Before he became an undercover Memphis Police Officer, he was brought back to active duty by the [Army] 111th Military Intelligence Group [MIG] on June 16, 1967. So he was seconded from military intelligence to become a policeman to go undercover with a black group called the Invaders, a local group. So McCollough was very much in the frame, in terms of all of these that were happening. He participated in the planning. And Jowers named the other people who were involved in the planning as well.

Re: Legal Reasoning
« Reply #282 on: March 05, 2008, 08:11:37 AM »

Wow, Schcrelly, awesome post!


Very detailed I'd also say

ora

Re: Legal Reasoning
« Reply #283 on: March 05, 2008, 09:56:54 AM »

Extortion, kidnapping, and even murder contracts become easier to set up. Extortion, for example, becomes almost unstoppable at the usual place: the collection of a payoff and/or the spending of the payoff money. The extortionist makes his threat from the safety of his home PC, using networks of remailers and message pools, and demands payment in untraceable digital cash. What if U.S. banks are forbidden to issue digital cash? Even if most nations and most banks decline to participate in a digital cash scheme, all it really takes is one such bank or mint. The extortionist can demand that blinded digital cash be bought from the one of the few banks that do offer digital cash: the victim is incentivized to cooperate (he can refuse, but...) and will make other arrangements, possibly including travelling to the country in which the bank is located. (Forbidding communication outside national borders, and/or forbidding travel, would of course be problematic to enforce. Not even totalitarian regimes of late have been able to stop such communications, and the U.S. and Western nations have vastly more channels of communication. Messages can easily be made indistinguishable from noise, as in packing 160 MB of data (!) in just the least significant bits of a 2-hour digital audio tape recording. If bales of marihuana cannot be stopped, how can bits be stopped? Bits are ever so much smaller...

Similar to extortion are markets for kidnappings (riskier, due to the physical act), and even untraceable markets for murders. For murder contracts, the usual risk is in setting up the hit--asking around is almost a guaranteed way of getting the FBI involved, and advertising in traceable ways is a similar invitation. This risk is largely removed when anonymous contact and payment methods are used. To ensure the job is completed, third party escrow services -- anonymous, of course, but with an established cyberspatial reputation -- hold the digital cash until completion. Much more has been written on this in various places.


No doubt about it! In fact it exists the notion of a market, a theoretical prediction market where any party can place a bet (using anonymous electronic money, and pseudonymous remailers) on the date of death of a given individual, and collect a payoff if they "guess" the date accurately. This would incentivise assassination of individuals because the assassin, knowing when the action would take place, could profit by making an accurate bet on the date of the subject's death. Because the payoff is for knowing the date rather than performing the action of the assassin, it is substantially more difficult to assign criminal liability for the assassination. Timothy C. May published around October 1994 a primer on the issue. Jim Bell's later article "Assassination Politics" described the concept in detail, concluding that as well as being an unholy mix of encryption, anonymity, and digital cash, the concept could also be used to help minimize violent crime. Timothy C. May, Carl Johnson and Matthew Taylor later developed the protocols to implement the concept online to the point that the IRS, the FBI and the U.S. Secret Service investigated their motives for doing so. The US Secret Service circulated copies of 'Assassination Politics' and the relevant Wired articles in 2002. During investigations authorities pretended to be sympathizers in emails, posed as ISP representatives and sought Soviet style psychiatric repression in at least one case.

Re: Legal Reasoning
« Reply #284 on: March 06, 2008, 08:35:29 AM »

No doubt about it! In fact it exists the notion of a market, a theoretical prediction market where any party can place a bet (using anonymous electronic money, and pseudonymous remailers) on the date of death of a given individual, and collect a payoff if they "guess" the date accurately. This would incentivise assassination of individuals because the assassin, knowing when the action would take place, could profit by making an accurate bet on the date of the subject's death. Because the payoff is for knowing the date rather than performing the action of the assassin, it is substantially more difficult to assign criminal liability for the assassination. Timothy C. May published around October 1994 a primer on the issue. Jim Bell's later article "Assassination Politics" described the concept in detail, concluding that as well as being an unholy mix of encryption, anonymity, and digital cash, the concept could also be used to help minimize violent crime. Timothy C. May, Carl Johnson and Matthew Taylor later developed the protocols to implement the concept online to the point that the IRS, the FBI and the U.S. Secret Service investigated their motives for doing so. The US Secret Service circulated copies of 'Assassination Politics' and the relevant Wired articles in 2002. During investigations authorities pretended to be sympathizers in emails, posed as ISP representatives and sought Soviet style psychiatric repression in at least one case.


My God, ora!

Re: Legal Reasoning
« Reply #285 on: March 06, 2008, 10:41:19 AM »

[...] During the Waco standoff the FBI utilized the Behavioral Sciences Unit for advice in dealing with Koresh and his followers. In addition to utilizing its in-house resources, the FBI also solicited and received input from various outside experts in many fields, including:


It's not so much the fault of the FBI and others when not being able to figure people like Koresh and the like -- they're too complex. [...]

Oh please, pine, stop justifying them!

zan

Re: Legal Reasoning
« Reply #286 on: March 07, 2008, 12:42:39 PM »
Awesome thread!

Re: Legal Reasoning
« Reply #287 on: March 09, 2008, 03:43:07 PM »

Well, gangsters and cops alike are neither black nor white; they represent the color of gray. A hidden identity between good and evil. The symbiotic relationship of hunter and hunted, embodied by men with guns pointed, arms at full extension, winding around each other in a distinctly homoerotic pas de deux.



Re: Legal Reasoning
« Reply #288 on: March 12, 2008, 02:13:02 PM »
After the Sunset, castrot?

Re: Legal Reasoning
« Reply #289 on: March 13, 2008, 03:43:36 AM »

A very good thread, indeed. I'm going to refill my ink cartridges today to print it out


Thanks for letting us know