Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott has amended the state’s lawsuit against the federal government over the rejections of their voter ID law to include a direct strike at the constitutionality of the Voting Rights Act.
Abbott argues in the amended complaint that Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, amended by Congress in 2006, “exceeds the enumerated powers of Congress and conflicts with Article IV of the Constitution and the Tenth Amendment.”
“For the Department of Justice to now contend that Texas cannot implement its voter ID law denies Texas the ability to do what other states can rightfully exercise under the Constitution,” Abbott said in a statement.
While several courts have dealt with challenges to the constitutionality of Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act — which forces certain states with a history of racial discrimination to have their election laws precleared by either the federal government or in a D.C. court — Texas’ challenge is the most prominent. Law professor Rick Hasen thinks there’s at least a chance the Supreme Court could hear the case before the November election.
“It is really late in the SCOTUS term. So maybe this does not make it to SCOTUS before adjournment in June. But if Texas wants to use its voter id law in November, the Court could well take it up even in September, before the usual October start of the Court term,” Hasen writes.
Can Employers disqualify Job Applicants for having a Criminal past?
You’d think the answer might be a flat “yes,” but it turns out the answer may not be so clear cut, reports the Associated Press.
The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has been cracking down on efforts to disqualify potential hires with criminal records or bad credit history, arguing that the practice can be tantamount to discrimination, as such applicants are disproportionately black or Latino.
Companies have increasingly sought to weed out applicants with bankruptcies, court judgments or credit problems in recent years, as improved technology has made the task easier and easier.
“Our sense is that the problem is snowballing because of the technology allowing these checks to be done with a fair amount of ease,” said Carol Miaskoff, assistant legal counsel at the EEOC, in an interview with the AP.
But some employers say the information gleaned from such databases are critical to making hires that will help them maintain a safe work environment.
“Past indiscretions may be an indicator of future behavior, especially in the criminal context,” Chicago employment lawyer Pamela Devata told the AP.
A blanket refusal to hire someone with a criminal record could run afoul of federal employment law, though. According to the story:
If criminal histories are taken into account, the EEOC says employers must also consider the nature of the job, the seriousness of the offense and how long ago it occurred. For example, it may make sense to disqualify a bank employee with a past conviction for embezzlement, but not necessarily for a DUI.
The EEOC indicated its disapproval of such practices last fall, when it it filed a class-action discrimination lawsuit against Dallas-based Freeman Companies, an events planning firm. The EEOC alleged that Freeman Companies used credit history and criminal records to discriminate against against blacks, Hispanics and males. Freeman has denied the charges, according to the AP.
It welcomed Curtis Andrews, Ed.D, Ph.D, to its adjunct faculty. A few days later, the emails about faculty orientation sessions and department meetings started arriving in Andrews' email inbox. But when a college human resources officer called him three times to ask for details about his 2006 wire fraud conviction, Andrews started to suspect that the job was no longer his.
“He just said, 'We’ll be in touch,'” said Andrews. “By that point, I had filled out, I guess, 70, 80 applications. So, I knew all about the box I have to check saying I have been convicted of a crime and that the applications all say that having been convicted may not prevent you from being hired. But you do get the sense that they get one look at a conviction and they put you in the technological trash … This time, they apparently thought I was qualified, then changed their mind.”
About 65 million Americans -- that’s one in four adults -- have an arrest or conviction that can show up on a routine criminal background check. What’s found can effectively upend their search for work or put them out of a job amid one of the most difficult job markets in recent history, according to a new report released by the National Employment Law Project.
In fact, in the years since the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, criminal background checks calibrated to detect everything from arrests on dismissed or expunged charges to misdemeanor and felony convictions have become an increasingly common part of the job application process. A 2010 survey of the Society for Human Resources Management's member firms found that more than 90 percent routinely probe job applicants' backgrounds. The trade group’s members are mostly large employers.
A booming private criminal background industry has made clients of all kinds of companies doing everything from cleaning offices and delivering pizzas to sorting and delivering retail merchandise, said Maurice Emsellem, a policy co-director for the National Employment Law Project and one of the researchers behind the NELP report.
The National Association of Professional Background Screeners, a North Carolina-based industry trade group, could not be reached for comment.
“The industry of private screening firms, they make a big buck off of these practices,” Emsellem said. “They’ve got better and better at identifying and isolating employers who don’t use criminal background checks. The marketing pitch goes something like this: 'All your competitors are doing criminal background checks. Do you want to take the alleged risk?'”
What’s never mentioned is the growing body of evidence suggesting that after as few as three years –- depending on the person’s age and original crime -- people released from prison are no more likely than the general population to commit more crime, Emsellem said. But failing to find legitimate work is a major predictor of a return to jail, according to the NELP report.
That’s part of the reason why nonprofit agencies and even some corrections departments throughout the country are working to help ex-offenders find jobs.
"I think we’ve finally reached the point where people are starting to realize that if we have 3 percent of the world’s population but 20 percent of its prisoners, disqualifying that many people from work once they get out just isn’t sustainable," said Todd Berger, the managing attorney with the Rutgers School of Law-Camden’s Federal Prisoner Reentry Project. Berger oversees a law school clinic in which students seek to resolve some of the issues preventing federal parolees in the area from obtaining work.
In Maryland, Catholic Charities of Baltimore established the Our Daily Bread Employment Center four years ago. The center helps people with criminal backgrounds and limited job skills find work. The program reports serving more than 3,000 people in fiscal 2010. Since July, Our Daily Bread has helped place in jobs 296 of the 540 people who committed to the most intensive part of its program, according to Karen Heyward-West, a program manager for employment services.
Our Daily Bread informs employers about tax credits available to companies that hire ex-offenders, but Heyward-West said one of the program’s most effective tools is the mock interview. About 80 percent of the companies that send volunteer representatives to conduct mock interviews wind up offering to hire the center's clients, putting in a good word at their company for the program or referring clients to job opportunities elsewhere, she said.
“I am just going to be really honest -- there is a fear,” Heyward-West said. “There are people, employers who think we don’t want to hire those people, people with (criminal) backgrounds, people who were previously homeless. That’s a big part of what we have to overcome.”
In 1987, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, the nation’s workplace discrimination watchdog agency, issued a statement that declared employer policies that disqualify any job candidates with a criminal record likely illegal. Employers are supposed to consider the age and nature of a conviction and its relevance to the job. Because a disproportionate share of African American and Latino adults have criminal records, blanket policies can effectively discriminate against groups protected by U.S. civil rights law, the commission said.
Still, the National Employment Law Project report found ample evidence of job ads that overtly exclude anyone with a criminal conviction. In a review of ads posted on Craigslist during a four-month period in five major cities, researchers found more than 300 ads in which employers stated that applicants with criminal records would not be considered. One ad for a sewer cleaning technician read, “***Do not apply with any misdemeanors/felonies.***”
“This is a major civil rights issue and a violation of the law,” NELP's Emsellem said.
There are entire industries where people with any type of criminal history –- no matter how minor or old –- will have difficulty finding work. After 9/11, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security began requiring truck drivers to undergo background checks in order to pick up or drop off loads at certain locations, such as ports. Truck drivers with a criminal record can request a waiver, but if the waiver is declined, a driver’s ability to work just about anywhere on the east or west coast is virtually destroyed, Berger of the Rutgers-Camden law clinic said. At least three or four times per semester, Berger said, his clinic hears from a truck driver who is having problems getting the necessary clearance to work at a port.
The situation defies reason, Berger said.
“You can understand how someone with an embezzlement conviction should not work in a bank or why someone with a child pornography charge should not work with kids," he said. "But you cannot understand how a drug conviction should disqualify someone from driving a truck or working as a janitor for the rest of their lives.”
A series of lawsuits filed last year against staffing companies and corporations has highlighted just how common blanket bans on hiring applicants with criminal records have become. A 2010 suit filed against First Transit, Inc. alleges that the busing company won’t hire anyone who has been convicted of a felony or served a single day in jail.
The practice isn’t limited to private employers. A class action lawsuit filed last year claims that the U.S. Census Bureau has refused to even consider applicants with criminal records for temporary Census jobs.
“Another part of the problem is the total lack of regulation on background check providers and the extremely high number of errors that pop up in their reports,” said Elizabeth Farid, deputy director of the National HIRE Network. HIRE is a New York-based nonprofit founded by the Legal Action Center, an advocacy group that opposes hiring discrimination against those with criminal records, HIV/AIDS or a history of addiction.
HIRE distributes information and advocates for policies that may expand job opportunities for people with criminal records. It also runs The Rap Sheet Workshop, in which job seekers with a criminal record are taught how to discuss their past in a frank but productive way. Participants are also shown how to identify duplications and errors and find help getting their records corrected.
Some cities, including Chicago, and states such as Michigan have implemented policies that require public agencies or private employers to stop automatically screening anyone with a criminal record out of the applicant pool.
But, there are also places like New Jersey.
Andrews called the New Jersey Office of the Attorney General after the community college backed away from his job offer. Andrews said office staff told him that they were no longer taking on criminal background check-related civil rights cases.
In an email, the New Jersey attorney general's office declined to comment on Andrew's case or its plans to pursue cases involving employers and criminal background checks.
“If I had a hard time, I don’t know what the hell some of the people who are being released form jail are supposed to do,” said Andrews, who has found an adjunct slot teaching liberal arts courses at another New Jersey community college. “People have to be able to work.”
The killing of a south Charlotte store manager - allegedly by a felon hired to work there - highlights the risks companies take when they hire an employee with a criminal record, or don't do a full background check on applicants.
The Flying Biscuit Cafe in StoneCrest shopping center faces possible fines or other penalties from the Alcohol Law Enforcement division for hiring Mark Anthony Cox, 22.
Background checks are only legally required in certain fields, such as child care and for people who work with the elderly, but the Flying Biscuit could be penalized because businesses aren't allowed to hire Felons convicted in the last three years for jobs that involve serving alcohol.
Cox is accused of stabbing 25-year-old Danielle Watson to death and robbing the store the night of Jan. 13. Prosecutors also have said they plan to charge Cox with a second count of murder in connection with Watson's unborn child.
He was released from prison in November, state records show, after serving nearly two years for robbery and breaking and entering.
A state Department of Crime Control and Public Safety spokeswoman said the Flying Biscuit's owner told ALE agents that a background check wasn't performed on Cox. The owner did tell WBTV that Cox had acknowledged a conviction during his interview. It's not clear if the owner knew the nature of the conviction.
Attempts to reach Flying Biscuit owner Hugh Bigham were unsuccessful Friday.
"A lot of small employers just don't think about background checks, or say they don't have the money," said Kenny Colbert, president of the Charlotte-based human resources group The Employers Association. He said the cost of a full screening is usually about $50, although there are North Carolina-only screens that go for as little as $10.
In the Charlotte region, Colbert said, 90 percent of companies with 500 or more employees do pre-hiring background checks, based on a survey of The Employer Association's nearly 900 member businesses. In contrast, only about 20 percent of firms with 20 or fewer employees said they do background checks.
Companies that don't conduct background checks on employees could be exposing themselves to legal liability, Colbert said. Employers lose more than 70 percent of negligent hiring lawsuits, according to statistics from background check company American DataBank.
Employers spend roughly $2 billion a year checking out employees, according to published reports. A wealth of material also is available free online, such as N.C. Department of Correction records, which detail Cox's prior conviction.
Timothy Keister, general partner at Charlotte-based background check company Total Screening Solutions, said business has been steady through the recession and recovery. He said his company does background checks and drug tests on behalf of large employers, but also for smaller employers.
"In this bad instance we have here, more than likely we would have pulled it up," said Keister, talking about Cox's past conviction.
He said his role isn't to tell employers whether to hire someone, but to enable them to decide based on the facts.
Advocates for those with criminal records point out that nearly everyone who is sentenced to prison will be released at some point, and they are less likely to be involved with further crimes if they can find legitimate work.
Employers shouldn't assume that someone with a criminal record will cause harm in the workplace, said Myra Clark, executive director of the Charlotte-based Center for Community Transitions, which provides employment and transition services to people with criminal records.
"There are a lot of people who have an encounter with the criminal justice system, and that's the only encounter they're ever going to have," she said. "There are people who make a conscious decision to change their lives."
Often, a search of someone's criminal record will show arrests for charges that may later have been dismissed. That might make it difficult for employers to determine which charges they should pay attention to, Clark said. Last year, background check company HireRight agreed to pay $28.4 million to settle claims related to not notifying people their background was being checked, and not responding to complaints of inaccurate information.
Outside of industries that are legally required to conduct background checks, there's little in the way of universal standards when it comes to employer liability, said Bernard Tisdale, managing partner for the Charlotte office of labor law firm Ogletree Deakins.
"It's all a matter of degree," said Tisdale. "It's all gray. Not everybody has got a duty to do a background check."
Aside from extreme cases - "bringing on the convicted ax murderer with ongoing psychological problems," as Tisdale put it - employer liability can vary greatly. It depends, for instance, on the type of business, and whether the employer kept the employee on despite warning signs.
Tisdale also said employers could put themselves at risk of legal action if a background check prompts them to improperly reject an applicant.
Colbert tells employers to examine how relevant and recent a prospect's criminal record is.
Background checks have figured in several high-profile N.C. cases. The estates of two women who were beaten to death at Galloway Ridge retirement home near Chapel Hill sued the facility in 2010. They claimed the facility should have done a background check on the cleaning woman convicted in their killings. The case is still in court.
But employers can be faulted even if they performed background checks, especially if those checks miss something.
The city of Charlotte has paid more than $617,000 to defend and settle lawsuits stemming from former Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police Officer Marcus Jackson. He was arrested and charged with sexually assaulting women during improper traffic stops. CMPD admitted that a pre-employment screening didn't turn up a domestic violence restraining order filed by Jackson's girlfriend, which should have disqualified him.
And Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools is being sued by a former South Mecklenburg High School student who claims she was sexually victimized by a band director. A proper background check, the lawsuit alleges, would have found a history of inappropriate behavior with students at previous schools. CMS said it conducted a thorough background check.
The killing of a south Charlotte store manager - allegedly by a felon hired to work there - highlights the risks companies take when they hire an employee with a criminal record, or don't do a full background check on applicants.
The Flying Biscuit Cafe in StoneCrest shopping center faces possible fines or other penalties from the Alcohol Law Enforcement division for hiring Mark Anthony Cox, 22.
Background checks are only legally required in certain fields, such as child care and for people who work with the elderly, but the Flying Biscuit could be penalized because businesses aren't allowed to hire Felons convicted in the last three years for jobs that involve serving alcohol.
Cox is accused of stabbing 25-year-old Danielle Watson to death and robbing the store the night of Jan. 13. Prosecutors also have said they plan to charge Cox with a second count of murder in connection with Watson's unborn child.
He was released from prison in November, state records show, after serving nearly two years for robbery and breaking and entering.
A state Department of Crime Control and Public Safety spokeswoman said the Flying Biscuit's owner told ALE agents that a background check wasn't performed on Cox. The owner did tell WBTV that Cox had acknowledged a conviction during his interview. It's not clear if the owner knew the nature of the conviction.
Attempts to reach Flying Biscuit owner Hugh Bigham were unsuccessful Friday.
"A lot of small employers just don't think about background checks, or say they don't have the money," said Kenny Colbert, president of the Charlotte-based human resources group The Employers Association. He said the cost of a full screening is usually about $50, although there are North Carolina-only screens that go for as little as $10.
In the Charlotte region, Colbert said, 90 percent of companies with 500 or more employees do pre-hiring background checks, based on a survey of The Employer Association's nearly 900 member businesses. In contrast, only about 20 percent of firms with 20 or fewer employees said they do background checks.
Companies that don't conduct background checks on employees could be exposing themselves to legal liability, Colbert said. Employers lose more than 70 percent of negligent hiring lawsuits, according to statistics from background check company American DataBank.
Employers spend roughly $2 billion a year checking out employees, according to published reports. A wealth of material also is available free online, such as N.C. Department of Correction records, which detail Cox's prior conviction.
Timothy Keister, general partner at Charlotte-based background check company Total Screening Solutions, said business has been steady through the recession and recovery. He said his company does background checks and drug tests on behalf of large employers, but also for smaller employers.
"In this bad instance we have here, more than likely we would have pulled it up," said Keister, talking about Cox's past conviction.
He said his role isn't to tell employers whether to hire someone, but to enable them to decide based on the facts.
Advocates for those with criminal records point out that nearly everyone who is sentenced to prison will be released at some point, and they are less likely to be involved with further crimes if they can find legitimate work.
Employers shouldn't assume that someone with a criminal record will cause harm in the workplace, said Myra Clark, executive director of the Charlotte-based Center for Community Transitions, which provides employment and transition services to people with criminal records.
"There are a lot of people who have an encounter with the criminal justice system, and that's the only encounter they're ever going to have," she said. "There are people who make a conscious decision to change their lives."
Often, a search of someone's criminal record will show arrests for charges that may later have been dismissed. That might make it difficult for employers to determine which charges they should pay attention to, Clark said. Last year, background check company HireRight agreed to pay $28.4 million to settle claims related to not notifying people their background was being checked, and not responding to complaints of inaccurate information.
Outside of industries that are legally required to conduct background checks, there's little in the way of universal standards when it comes to employer liability, said Bernard Tisdale, managing partner for the Charlotte office of labor law firm Ogletree Deakins.
"It's all a matter of degree," said Tisdale. "It's all gray. Not everybody has got a duty to do a background check."
Aside from extreme cases - "bringing on the convicted ax murderer with ongoing psychological problems," as Tisdale put it - employer liability can vary greatly. It depends, for instance, on the type of business, and whether the employer kept the employee on despite warning signs.
Tisdale also said employers could put themselves at risk of legal action if a background check prompts them to improperly reject an applicant.
Colbert tells employers to examine how relevant and recent a prospect's criminal record is.
Background checks have figured in several high-profile N.C. cases. The estates of two women who were beaten to death at Galloway Ridge retirement home near Chapel Hill sued the facility in 2010. They claimed the facility should have done a background check on the cleaning woman convicted in their killings. The case is still in court.
But employers can be faulted even if they performed background checks, especially if those checks miss something.
The city of Charlotte has paid more than $617,000 to defend and settle lawsuits stemming from former Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police Officer Marcus Jackson. He was arrested and charged with sexually assaulting women during improper traffic stops. CMPD admitted that a pre-employment screening didn't turn up a domestic violence restraining order filed by Jackson's girlfriend, which should have disqualified him.
And Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools is being sued by a former South Mecklenburg High School student who claims she was sexually victimized by a band director. A proper background check, the lawsuit alleges, would have found a history of inappropriate behavior with students at previous schools. CMS said it conducted a thorough background check.
Charlotte Law Enforcement Officials Have FINALLY Arrested Nic Mahone's Killer After Allowing Her To Continue Walking Around Free For Almost A Year Following Nic's Death!
Who's The Suspect?
A 21-Year-Old Black Female Career Criminal With 10 Charges On Her Rap Sheet, Some Felonies.
That's Right!
A 21-Year-Old Young Woman!
Can You Believe It?
Dear God!
What Kind Of 21-Year-Old Young Woman Walks Up To A 25-Year-Old Young Man & Blows His Brains Out At His OWN Birthday Party Celebration??
Here Are The 10 Charges On Karizma's Rap Sheet:
1) First-Degree Murder 2) Breaking & Entering 3) Carrying A Concealed Weapon 4) Felony Robbery 5) Fleeing To Elude Arrest & Accessory After The Fact 6) Fleeing Or Eluding Arrest With A Motor Vehicle 7) Forgery 8) Hit & Run 9) Resisting A Police Officer 10) Possession With Intent To Sell Or Distribute Marijuana
10 Serious Charges & Yet She Was Still Allowed To Remain Free?
This Makes NO Sense!
If Nic Were A White Man Or White Woman I Don't Believe This 21-Year-Old Black Female Career Criminal Would Have Remained Free.
Thank God She Will FINALLY Pay For Taking Nic's Life.
Dominic Mahone was standing on the dance floor of the Breakfast Club in Charlotte's uptown early last Sept. 10 when witnesses said a woman calmly walked up, pointed a gun at Mahone's head, and fired twice.
The woman fled, and Mahone died a few hours later.
On Tuesday morning, Charlotte-Mecklenburg police announced an arrest in the case.
Karizma Sergeant, 21, was charged Tuesday morning with first-degree murder in Mahone's death, police say. It was the fourth time she was arrested since the Breakfast Club shooting -- with one of those coming just four days after the uptown homicide.
Police are not releasing a motive in the case or saying how Sergeant and Mahone might have been connected.
Mahone, 25, was at the Breakfast Club, a popular nightspot at Sixth and Caldwell streets, for a private party. Club workers told police the shooter seemed to know exactly what she was doing, but nobody recognized her or the blue Chevrolet four-door that she escaped in. Police said it appeared as if the woman was in the club only a short time before the shooting.
It was the seventh arrest for Sergeant in the last three years, according to Mecklenburg County jail records.
Four days after the Breakfast Club shooting, Sergeant was charged with forgery. On Dec. 23, she was arrested on charges of fleeing to elude arrest and accessory after the fact. And on Jan. 4, she was charged with hit-and-run. Sergeant also was arrested in July and October of 2008, and in February of last year.
According to court records, she has three pending felony charges (not counting today's arrest): fleeing or eluding arrest with a motor vehicle; possession with intent to sell or distribute marijuana; and accessory after the fact.
She was found guilty in 2008 and 2010 of resisting a public officer; in 2009 of carrying a concealed weapon; and last year of breaking and entering. All of those were misdemeanor charges.
And she has been charged with but not convicted of these offenses, according to court records: in 2008, felony robbery with a dangerous weapon, larceny of a motor vehicle, and possession of a stolen vehicle, along with misdemeanor trespassing; and last year, with felony forgery.
So The Life Of A Young Black Man These Days Has Been Reduced To $200,000 In Federal Dollars!
Let's See Nick Mahone Was Killed Last Friday.
Than Early This Afternoon CMPD Receives A $200,000 Crime Fighting, Anti-Gang Grant?
Something Smells "Fishy" To Me.
Nick Mahone A Rumored Charlotte, NC Drug Dealer Was Killed Last Friday At A Popular, Uptown Charlotte Club.
This Entertainment Establishment Was Not Some "Hole In The Wall" Kind Of Establishment.
It Was A Very Nice Club Located In The Heart Of Uptown Charlotte With Tight Security.
So How Was A Young Black Woman According To Other Patrons Who Witnessed The Incident, Allowed To Walk In With A Handgun & Blow Nick's Brains Out In Plain View & Than Allowed To Walk Calmly Out Past Security Guards?
Easy It Was A Set Up! A Hit!
Possibly With The FBI's & Charlotte City Officials Involvement.
Nick's Death Made Major Headlines & Sent A Message Throughout The Charlotte Community.
However Almost Immediately Upon Learning Of His Death Many White & Black Citizens Began Celebrating!
How Sad.
I'm NOT Celebrating!
Why?
1) He Was Still Someone's Son.
2) I Believe He Wanted To Get Out Which Is Probably The Reason Why He Was Killed. His Death Sent A Message To Others.
3) There Have Been More Young, Black Men Who Were "Rumored" Drug Dealers, Killed In Charlotte This Year Than In 20 Years!
4) Since Charlotte Now Has A Black Mayor & A Black Police Chief, To Have So Many Young Black Men Killed In One Year Reeks Of Possible Local Law Enforcement, FBI & CIA Involvement.
Wake Up Black People!
Is This Is A Coincidence?
I Don't Think So But I Could Be Wrong.
Please Understand That I Don't Condone Drug Trafficking, Abusing Illegal Drugs Or Coddling Rumored Drug Dealers.
Neither Do I Condone Black Leaders Who Possibly Conspire With Feds To Kill Off Young Black Men & Women.
First Tiffany Wright, I Told You All That DNA Test Was Bogus!
God Exposed The Truth Last Month When Local Media Revealed That North Carolina's SBI Lab Was Corrupt. Especially As It Relates To Tampering With Evidence, Including DNA Tests.
Now Nick Mahone. Who's Next?
Might I Remind You That Charlotte Has A Black Mayor & Black Mayor Pro Tem?
So Sad.
Don't Forget To Not Re-Elect Most Of Charlotte's Current City Council Members In 2011.
The No Re-Elect List Includes: Mayor Anthony Foxx, Mayor Pro Tem Patrick Cannon, David Howard, James Mitchell, Warren, Turner, Nancy Carter, Patsy Kinsey & Edwin Peacock.
Charlotte, NC Officials Land $200,000 Grant To Fight Gangs, Youth Crime After Nick Mahone's Death
Charlotte has landed a $200,000 federal grant to boost the city’s crime-fighting programs among youth.
The U.S. Justice Department announced the grant Tuesday, saying it was awarded through a congressional program designed to help combat juvenile crime and assist its victims.
Charlotte officials say they will use the money to continue Anti-Truancy programs that target students. Those include the Gang of One, Truancy Court, and other community projects. Gang of One is a gang prevention initiative of the Charlotte-Mecklenburg police, in partnership with other local agencies. Truancy Court is a school-based program that targets families of students with high numbers of absences from school.
Community impact projects will include the Police Athletic League, the McCrorey YMCA, and Right Moves for Youth.
Witnesses say a woman calmly walked up to Dominic Nicholas Mahone while he was dancing on the floor of an uptown Charlotte club early Friday, pulled out a gun and shot him twice.
Mahone, 25, died several hours later, leaving friends and police with plenty of questions and not many answers.
The shooting happened during a private party at the Breakfast Club, a popular nightspot at North Caldwell and East Sixth streets.
Police say they aren't sure what provoked the shooting. Friends of Mahone said they don't know how the shooter managed to get past security guards with a handgun.
"This didn't appear to be a case of something that happened in the club," said Capt. Jeff Estes, commander of the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police Central Division, which oversees the uptown area.
Police said later Friday they weren't sure if the shooting might have resulted from some type of domestic dispute between Mahone and the female shooter.
What they know is that the woman walked up to Mahone and, without apparent provocation, shot him in the head. Mahone was taken by Medic to Carolinas Medical Center, where he died shortly before 9:30 a.m.
A friend of the victim, Nakeya Land, told WCNC-TV, the Observer's news partner, that she can't understand how the woman managed to bring the gun inside.
"They pat me down head to toe, so how does she find some way to get into the club with a gun?" Land said.
The club's owner was not available Friday afternoon, but an employee said the club had been rented out for a private party. The Breakfast Club is a popular site for bachelor parties and other similar events.
"We don't have many problems here," said the employee, asking not to be identified. "I've been here several years, and our problems are usually a fender-bender in the parking lot. This was something we don't see."
The employee said he expects security will be tightened at the club, but he said people who rent the club for private parties sometimes provide their own guards. It is not clear who was responsible for hiring guards at the party early Friday.
Witnesses told police the shooter was accompanied by two men, and they drove off in a royal blue Chevrolet with custom rims.
Anyone with information in the case is asked to call 704-432-TIPS, or information can be left with Crime Stoppers.
The North Carolina justice system shook Wednesday as an audit commissioned by Attorney General Roy Cooper revealed that the State Bureau of Investigation withheld or distorted evidence in more than 200 cases at the expense of potentially innocent men and women.
The full impact of the disclosure will reverberate for years to come as prosecutors and defense attorneys re-examine cases as much as two decades old to figure out whether these errors robbed defendants of justice. Some of the injustices can be addressed as attorneys bring old cases back to court. For others, it's too late: Three of the defendants in botched cases have been executed.
"This report is troubling," said Cooper, who oversees the SBI. "It describes a practice that should have been unacceptable then and is not acceptable now."
The revelation came after a five-month review in which two former FBI agents pulled dusty case files from shelves to find the truths that analysts chose to keep to themselves.
Two former FBI agents, Chris Swecker and Mike Wolf, examined more than 15,000 cases at the invitation of Cooper, a Democrat who has been attorney general since 2001. The exoneration of Greg Taylor, a Wake County man imprisoned 17 years for a murder he didn't commit, prompted the review. SBI analyst Duane Deaver admitted in February that he failed to report tests indicating a substance on Taylor's SUV was not blood. Deaver, who was suspended Wednesday, said that his bosses told him to write reports that way.
He was telling the truth. Swecker determined that the practice of not reporting results of more sophisticated blood tests was sanctioned by some analysts. In 1997, it became written policy. That policy remained in effect as recently as 2003.
Swecker said his findings signal potential violations of the U.S. Constitution and North Carolina laws by withholding information favorable to defendants. Swecker stopped short of determining whether the hidden results affected guilt or innocence in the cases he examined; often there was other evidence in the cases that linked defendants to the crimes. Still, the withheld information could have made a difference in the sentences handed down.
"This is mind-boggling," said veteran Wayne County District Attorney Branny Vickory, a Democrat. "It is really a nightmare for everyone. I don't know how we are going to make this right."
The audit is another black eye for a beleaguered SBI.
The News & Observer reported this month in a series, "Agents' Secrets," that analysts across the laboratory push past the accepted bounds of science to deliver results pleasing to prosecutors. They are out of step with the larger scientific community and have fought defense attorneys' requests for additional information needed to review the SBI's work. Cooper last month dismissed SBI Director Robin Pendergraft after she struggled to answer questions about SBI cases and policies.
"This is such a damning indictment on the SBI," said Staples Hughes, the state appellate defender, whose office oversees appeals of all defendants convicted by juries. "Why didn't they just say 'we lied.' That's what they did. Sadly, I'm not surprised."
Prosecutors and defense attorneys are scrambling to review the 230 problem cases cited in Swecker's report. At least 80 defendants are still in prison, a top priority for Prisoner Legal Services, said executive director Mary Pollard.
No Rules, Bad Science
Swecker's report paints a picture of a renegade unit at the SBI crime lab acting without rules and with misguided notions about the science behind blood analysis.
In serology, police use rudimentary presumptive tests at crime scenes to determine where blood might be. Those tests are fallible, prone to giving false positives. So analysts depend on more sophisticated, confirmatory tests to determine whether a substance is, in fact, blood.
Before 1997, the serology unit operated without report-writing guidelines. Analysts set their own criteria until 1997; that policy sanctioned the practice of not reporting negative or inconclusive results of confirmatory tests.
Swecker found policies and practices out of step with the rules of serology. They were also far afield of fairness, according to the report.
"There was anecdotal evidence that some Analysts were not objective in their mindset," Swecker wrote.
Tests used to confirm the presence of blood never yield "inconclusive results," Swecker noted. Two analysts interviewed for the report told Swecker that despite volumes of warnings about the potential for false positives on presumptive blood tests, they didn't believe it because they had not gotten a positive result when testing plant material and bacteria known to signal false positives. Those two analysts believed that positive presumptive tests were absolute indications of blood.
Eight analysts were involved in these bad practices. Some are dead; a few are retired.
Four still work for the SBI, and another performs contract work for the agency.
Behind the five cases Swecker deemed most problematic: Deaver, a 23-year veteran of the agency.
New SBI Director Greg McLeod suspended Deaver on Wednesday, pending further investigation.
"An Abomination"
The cost of these errors was tough for lawyers to comprehend Wednesday.
"This report reveals staggering lack of competence at the lab," said Mike Klinkosum, a Raleigh lawyer who represented Taylor in February and helped discover Deaver's withheld test results. "It's an abomination of the criminal justice system and an affront to all the decent law enforcement officers out there doing their jobs."
Cooper delivered copies of the report and a list of affected cases to district attorneys across the state little more than an hour before announcing his findings to the public.
At least one met the findings with anger.
"We've been out here asserting things as fact that just weren't," said John Snyder, district attorney of Union County. "Now, when I've got jurors coming in, I've got to enter into a whole line of questioning I never should have been forced to do. They won't trust us."
Snyder, a Republican , called for an independent audit of the entire crime lab.
On Wednesday, Cooper promised a more independent review would follow and that McLeod, the new director, would bring in experts.
"The lab cannot accept a lack of thoroughness," Cooper said. "It cannot accept attitudes that are not open to the possibility that a mistake has been made. It cannot ignore criticism and suggestions from the outside."
Striking back, the Obama administration branded the WikiLeaks release of more than a quarter-million sensitive files an attack on the United States Monday and raised the prospect of criminal prosecutions in connection with the exposure.
The Pentagon detailed new security safeguards, including restraints on small computer flash drives, to make it harder for any one person to copy and reveal so many secrets.
The young Army Pfc. suspected of stealing the diplomatic memos, many of them classified, and feeding them to WikiLeaks may have defeated Pentagon security systems using little more than a Lady Gaga CD and a portable computer memory stick.
The soldier, Bradley Manning has not been charged in the latest release of internal U.S. government documents. But officials said he is the prime suspect partly because of his own description of how he pulled off a staggering heist of classified and restricted material.
"No one suspected a thing," Manning told a confidant afterward, according to a log of his computer chat published by Wired.com. "I didn't even have to hide anything."
Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton asserted Monday that WikiLeaks acted illegally in posting the material. She said the administration was taking "aggressive steps to hold responsible those who stole this information."
Attorney General Eric Holder said the government was mounting a criminal investigation, and the Pentagon was tightening access to information, including restricting the use of computer storage devices such as CDs and flash drives.
"This is not saber-rattling," Holder said. Anyone found to have broken American law "will be held responsible."
Holder said the latest disclosure, involving classified and sensitive State Department documents, jeopardized the security of the nation, its diplomats, intelligence assets and relationships with foreign governments.
A weary-looking Clinton agreed.
"I want you to know that we are taking aggressive steps to hold responsible those who stole this information," Clinton said. She spoke in between calls to foreign capitals to make amends for scathing and gossipy memos never meant for foreign eyes.
Manning is charged in military court with taking other classified material later published by the online clearinghouse WikiLeaks. It is not clear whether others such as WikiLeaks executives might be charged separately in civilian courts.
Clinton said the State Department was adding security protections to prevent another breach. The Pentagon, embarrassed by the apparent ease with which secret documents were passed to WikiLeaks, had detailed some of its new precautions Sunday.
Col. Dave Lapan, a Pentagon spokesman, said it was possible that many people could be held accountable if they were found to have ignored security protocols or somehow enabled the download without authorization.
A senior Defense Department official, speaking on condition of anonymity because the criminal case against Manning is pending, said he was unaware of any firings or other discipline over the security conditions at Manning's post in Iraq.
In his Internet chat, Manning described the conditions as lax to the point that he could bring a homemade music CD to work with him, erase the music and replace it with secrets. He told the computer hacker who would turn him in that he lip-synched along with pop singer Lady Gaga's hit "Telephone" while making off with "possibly the largest data spillage in American history."
Wired.com published a partial log of Manning's discussions with hacker R. Adrian Lamo in June.
"Weak servers, weak logging, weak physical security, weak counterintelligence, inattentive signal analysis," Manning wrote. "A perfect storm."
His motive, according to the chat logs: "I want people to see the truth ... because without information, you cannot make informed decisions as a public."
By his own admission, Manning was apparently able to pull material from outside the Pentagon, including documents he had little obvious reason to see. He was arrested shortly after those chats last spring. He was moved in July to the Quantico Marine Corps Base in Virginia to await trial on the earlier charges and could face up to 52 years in a military prison if convicted.
There are no new charges, and none are likely at least until after a panel evaluates Manning's mental fitness early next year, said Lt. Col. Rob Manning, spokesman for the Military District of Washington. He is no relation to Bradley Manning.
Manning's civilian lawyer, David Combs, declined comment.
Lapan, the Pentagon spokesman, said the WikiLeaks experience has encouraged discussion within the military about how better to strike a balance between sharing information with those who need it and protecting it from disclosure.
So far, he said, Pentagon officials are not reviewing who has access to data but focusing instead on installing technical safeguards.
Since summer, when WikiLeaks first published stolen war logs from the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan, the Defense Department has made it harder for one person acting alone to download material from a classified network and place it on an unclassified one.
Such transfers generally take two people now, what Pentagon officials call a "two-man carry." Users also leave clearer electronic footprints by entering a computer "kiosk," or central hub, en route to downloading the classified material.
Pentagon spokesman Bryan Whitman said the WikiLeaks case revealed vulnerable seams in the information-sharing systems used by multiple government agencies. Some of those joint systems were designed to answer another problem: the failure of government agencies to share what they knew before the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.
"These efforts to give diplomatic, military, law enforcement and intelligence specialists quicker and easier access to greater amounts of data have had unintended consequences," Whitman said.
Agencies across the U.S. government have installed safeguards around the use of flash drives and computer network operations, said Navy Rear Adm. Michael Brown, the Department of Homeland Security's director for cybersecurity coordination.
Like the Pentagon, Homeland Security has laid out policies to ensure that employees are using the networks correctly, that the classified and unclassified networks are properly identified, and that there are detailed procedures for moving information from one network to another.
Dale Meyerrose, former chief information officer for the U.S. intelligence community, said Monday that it will never be possible to completely stop such breaches.
"This is a personnel security issue, more than it is a technical issue," said Meyerrose, now a vice president at Harris Corp. "How can you prevent a pilot from flying the airplane into the ground? You can't. Anybody you give access to can become a disgruntled employee or an ideologue that goes bad."
One official in contact with U.S. military and diplomatic staff in Iraq said they already were seeing the effect of a tighter collar on information.
The State Department and other agencies are restricting access among the Army and nonmilitary agencies, the official said. The official spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss the sharing of classified information.
Former CIA director Michael Hayden warned the latest leak will affect what other governments are willing to share with the U.S. as well as change the way U.S. officials share information among themselves.
"You're going to put a lot less in cables now," he said.
Publication of the documents by WikiLeaks.org was dangerous not so much because of what was in them — many are unclassified and none are labeled "top secret" — but because the breach of confidentiality complicates the U.S. government's gathering of "hard-hitting analysis" from its personnel around the world, said Carey Cavanaugh, a former U.S. ambassador and special negotiator for conflicts in Eurasia.
"It's a horrible thing that has happened" because foreign officials and other sources of information may be less willing to trust that what they tell the United States will remain confidential, Cavanaugh said, adding that "very frank, candid" cables are necessary "to make the world work."
Michael Sheehan, a former ambassador-at-large and assistant U.N. secretary-general for peacekeeping operations, saw a different potential problem, saying he feared that the WikiLeaks release would "make a lot of conversations go offline."
Reluctance to put diplomatic information in writing "increases the chances for a misunderstanding in some of the most sensitive discussions" around the world, said Sheehan, who cited negotiations over the nuclear ambitions of North Korea and Iran as especially critical.
"These are very important, sensitive issues," he said. "We cannot afford to have a misunderstanding."
New restrictions under consideration
In a memo circulated Monday by its Office of Management and Budget, the White House said it was ordering a review of safeguards that could shut down some users' access to classified information.
That would further limit diplomatic communications that have been restricted in response to earlier disclosures by WikiLeaks. The Defense Department has already limited the number of computer systems that can handle classified material and made it harder to save material to removable media, such as flash drives, on classified computers.
Bryan Whitman, a Defense Department spokesman, said Monday that it was inevitable that steps like that would "compromise ... efforts to give diplomatic, military, law enforcement and intelligence specialists quicker and easier access to greater amounts of data."
But current and former ambassadors said the United States should do whatever it could to avoid that outcome.
Unvarnished analysis in secure diplomatic cables is vital to informing U.S. policy on "nonproliferation and arms control, addressing violent extremism and promoting the spread of democracy and human rights, to name just a few," Louis Susman, the U.S. ambassador to Britain, said in a statement.
And in a commentary Monday in the Pakistani newspaper The News, Cameron Munter, the U.S. ambassador to Pakistan, wrote that "honest dialogue — within governments and between them — is part of the basic bargain of international relations; we couldn't maintain peace, security and international stability without it."
That's because cables like those released Sunday are the way diplomats tell policymakers what they really think is going on, which often isn't what they're telling their foreign counterparts or the public, Cavanaugh said.
'It's not helpful to have it out on the table' "At the end of the day, everyone acknowledges that these are the kinds of reports that governments need to advance the interests of their people," said Cavanaugh, who is now director of the Patterson School of Diplomacy at the University of Kentucky.
"If you think of it like a family," people always have conversations about their parents "that are important and valid and needed, but if they were fully public could also be hurtful," he said. "The kids will talk about this — they'll talk about it in frank terms — but it's not helpful to have it out on the table."
In this case, Cavanaugh said, the United States appeared to dodge a bullet, as there didn't seem to be anything seriously damaging in the new documents.
Diplomatic cables are how the United States and the former Soviet Union resolved the Cuban Missile Crisis 37 years ago this month, and if secret deals discussed in those cables had been disclosed to the public, "it could have taken both nations to the brink of nuclear war," Cavanaugh said.
To resolve the standoff over the Soviet construction of nuclear missile bases in Cuba, the United States withdrew its naval blockade of Cuba and promised never to invade the island.
President John F. Kennedy also agreed to remove U.S. missiles from Turkey, but "a condition of that agreement was there would be no reference to it in the Cuban context," Cavanaugh said. Had that agreement been made public by a 1963 counterpart to WikiLeaks, "it would have been a disaster," he said.
"I don't see things like that" in the new documents, Cavanaugh said, "but I do see where there's information about current issues under negotiation — six-party talks in North Korea, efforts to deal with nuclear proliferation, concerns in Iran, a new START treaty. Those could become impediments."
Countries like Russia, China, Pakistan, Iran and North Korea know the United States makes judgments they wouldn't like in its diplomatic cables because "if you were to get the same things from other countries, you'd find the same types of discussions."
It's when such assessments become public that nations are forced into a diplomatic corner,as Kennedy would have been in 1963.
"It's a little rougher than people expected, but if you think of countries being like people ... you do have those conversations," he said.
We could be a month away from knowing whether the U.S. Department of Education and the U.S. Department of Justice will investigate the federal civil rights complaint that the NAACP filed last Friday against the Wake County school system.
Officials from both Federal agencies say they're currently reviewing the complaint to see whether they'll investigate. They say they should know whether they'll proceed within a month.
If the feds do come, you could see a repeat of what happened in Wayne County when the state NAACP filed a complaint against them as well. You had the feds holding public hearings in the community to get feedback for their investigation.
Thousands of Title VI complaints are filed annually with the federal government.
But as Wendy Parker, a Wake Forest University School of Law professor and expert on civil rights law, said in Sunday's article, the national attention Wake has gotten over the school diversity fight means an investigation is likely.
"This investigation is not something they're going to put on the back burner," Parker said.
If you're interested, N.C. Policy Watch has posted the attachments to the Title VI complaint on its Progressive Pulse blog.
So The Life Of A Young Black Man These Days Has Been Reduced To $200,000 In Federal Dollars!
Let's See Nick Mahone Was Killed Last Friday.
Than Early This Afternoon CMPD Receives A $200,000 Crime Fighting, Anti-Gang Grant?
Something Smells "Fishy" To Me.
Nick Mahone A Rumored Charlotte, NC Drug Dealer Was Killed Last Friday At A Popular, Uptown Charlotte Club.
This Entertainment Establishment Was Not Some "Hole In The Wall" Kind Of Establishment.
It Was A Very Nice Club Located In The Heart Of Uptown Charlotte With Tight Security.
So How Was A Young Black Woman According To Other Patrons Who Witnessed The Incident, Allowed To Walk In With A Handgun & Blow Nick's Brains Out In Plain View & Than Allowed To Walk Calmly Out Past Security Guards?
Easy It Was A Set Up! A Hit!
Possibly With The FBI's & Charlotte City Officials Involvement.
Nick's Death Made Major Headlines & Sent A Message Throughout The Charlotte Community.
However Almost Immediately Upon Learning Of His Death Many White & Black Citizens Began Celebrating!
How Sad.
I'm NOT Celebrating!
Why?
1) He Was Still Someone's Son.
2) I Believe He Wanted To Get Out Which Is Probably The Reason Why He Was Killed. His Death Sent A Message To Others.
3) There Have Been More Young, Black Men Who Were "Rumored" Drug Dealers, Killed In Charlotte This Year Than In 20 Years!
4) Since Charlotte Now Has A Black Mayor & A Black Police Chief, To Have So Many Young Black Men Killed In One Year Reeks Of Possible Local Law Enforcement, FBI & CIA Involvement.
Wake Up Black People!
Is This Is A Coincidence?
I Don't Think So But I Could Be Wrong.
Please Understand That I Don't Condone Drug Trafficking, Abusing Illegal Drugs Or Coddling Rumored Drug Dealers.
Neither Do I Condone Black Leaders Who Possibly Conspire With Feds To Kill Off Young Black Men & Women.
God Exposed The Truth Last Month When Local Media Revealed That North Carolina's SBI Lab Was Corrupt. Especially As It Relates To Tampering With Evidence, Including DNA Tests.
Now Nick Mahone. Who's Next?
Might I Remind You That Charlotte Has A Black Mayor & Black Mayor Pro Tem?
So Sad.
Don't Forget To Not Re-Elect Most Of Charlotte's Current City Council Members In 2011.
The No Re-Elect List Includes: Mayor Anthony Foxx, Mayor Pro Tem Patrick Cannon, David Howard, James Mitchell, Warren, Turner, Nancy Carter, Patsy Kinsey & Edwin Peacock.
Check Out The Related Articles Below.
By The Way You Can Still Read My Daily Commentary By Visiting My Facebook Page.
Charlotte has landed a $200,000 federal grant to boost the city’s crime-fighting programs among youth.
The U.S. Justice Department announced the grant Tuesday, saying it was awarded through a congressional program designed to help combat juvenile crime and assist its victims.
Charlotte officials say they will use the money to continue Anti-Truancy programs that target students. Those include the Gang of One, Truancy Court, and other community projects. Gang of One is a gang prevention initiative of the Charlotte-Mecklenburg police, in partnership with other local agencies. Truancy Court is a school-based program that targets families of students with high numbers of absences from school.
Community impact projects will include the Police Athletic League, the McCrorey YMCA, and Right Moves for Youth.
Witnesses say a woman calmly walked up to Dominic Nicholas Mahone while he was dancing on the floor of an uptown Charlotte club early Friday, pulled out a gun and shot him twice.
Mahone, 25, died several hours later, leaving friends and police with plenty of questions and not many answers.
The shooting happened during a private party at the Breakfast Club, a popular nightspot at North Caldwell and East Sixth streets.
Police say they aren't sure what provoked the shooting. Friends of Mahone said they don't know how the shooter managed to get past security guards with a handgun.
"This didn't appear to be a case of something that happened in the club," said Capt. Jeff Estes, commander of the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police Central Division, which oversees the uptown area.
Police said later Friday they weren't sure if the shooting might have resulted from some type of domestic dispute between Mahone and the female shooter.
What they know is that the woman walked up to Mahone and, without apparent provocation, shot him in the head. Mahone was taken by Medic to Carolinas Medical Center, where he died shortly before 9:30 a.m.
A friend of the victim, Nakeya Land, told WCNC-TV, the Observer's news partner, that she can't understand how the woman managed to bring the gun inside.
"They pat me down head to toe, so how does she find some way to get into the club with a gun?" Land said.
The club's owner was not available Friday afternoon, but an employee said the club had been rented out for a private party. The Breakfast Club is a popular site for bachelor parties and other similar events.
"We don't have many problems here," said the employee, asking not to be identified. "I've been here several years, and our problems are usually a fender-bender in the parking lot. This was something we don't see."
The employee said he expects security will be tightened at the club, but he said people who rent the club for private parties sometimes provide their own guards. It is not clear who was responsible for hiring guards at the party early Friday.
Witnesses told police the shooter was accompanied by two men, and they drove off in a royal blue Chevrolet with custom rims.
Anyone with information in the case is asked to call 704-432-TIPS, or information can be left with Crime Stoppers.
The North Carolina justice system shook Wednesday as an audit commissioned by Attorney General Roy Cooper revealed that the State Bureau of Investigation withheld or distorted evidence in more than 200 cases at the expense of potentially innocent men and women.
The full impact of the disclosure will reverberate for years to come as prosecutors and defense attorneys re-examine cases as much as two decades old to figure out whether these errors robbed defendants of justice. Some of the injustices can be addressed as attorneys bring old cases back to court. For others, it's too late: Three of the defendants in botched cases have been executed.
"This report is troubling," said Cooper, who oversees the SBI. "It describes a practice that should have been unacceptable then and is not acceptable now."
The revelation came after a five-month review in which two former FBI agents pulled dusty case files from shelves to find the truths that analysts chose to keep to themselves.
Two former FBI agents, Chris Swecker and Mike Wolf, examined more than 15,000 cases at the invitation of Cooper, a Democrat who has been attorney general since 2001. The exoneration of Greg Taylor, a Wake County man imprisoned 17 years for a murder he didn't commit, prompted the review. SBI analyst Duane Deaver admitted in February that he failed to report tests indicating a substance on Taylor's SUV was not blood. Deaver, who was suspended Wednesday, said that his bosses told him to write reports that way.
He was telling the truth. Swecker determined that the practice of not reporting results of more sophisticated blood tests was sanctioned by some analysts. In 1997, it became written policy. That policy remained in effect as recently as 2003.
Swecker said his findings signal potential violations of the U.S. Constitution and North Carolina laws by withholding information favorable to defendants. Swecker stopped short of determining whether the hidden results affected guilt or innocence in the cases he examined; often there was other evidence in the cases that linked defendants to the crimes. Still, the withheld information could have made a difference in the sentences handed down.
"This is mind-boggling," said veteran Wayne County District Attorney Branny Vickory, a Democrat. "It is really a nightmare for everyone. I don't know how we are going to make this right."
The audit is another black eye for a beleaguered SBI.
The News & Observer reported this month in a series, "Agents' Secrets," that analysts across the laboratory push past the accepted bounds of science to deliver results pleasing to prosecutors. They are out of step with the larger scientific community and have fought defense attorneys' requests for additional information needed to review the SBI's work. Cooper last month dismissed SBI Director Robin Pendergraft after she struggled to answer questions about SBI cases and policies.
"This is such a damning indictment on the SBI," said Staples Hughes, the state appellate defender, whose office oversees appeals of all defendants convicted by juries. "Why didn't they just say 'we lied.' That's what they did. Sadly, I'm not surprised."
Prosecutors and defense attorneys are scrambling to review the 230 problem cases cited in Swecker's report. At least 80 defendants are still in prison, a top priority for Prisoner Legal Services, said executive director Mary Pollard.
No Rules, Bad Science
Swecker's report paints a picture of a renegade unit at the SBI crime lab acting without rules and with misguided notions about the science behind blood analysis.
In serology, police use rudimentary presumptive tests at crime scenes to determine where blood might be. Those tests are fallible, prone to giving false positives. So analysts depend on more sophisticated, confirmatory tests to determine whether a substance is, in fact, blood.
Before 1997, the serology unit operated without report-writing guidelines. Analysts set their own criteria until 1997; that policy sanctioned the practice of not reporting negative or inconclusive results of confirmatory tests.
Swecker found policies and practices out of step with the rules of serology. They were also far afield of fairness, according to the report.
"There was anecdotal evidence that some Analysts were not objective in their mindset," Swecker wrote.
Tests used to confirm the presence of blood never yield "inconclusive results," Swecker noted. Two analysts interviewed for the report told Swecker that despite volumes of warnings about the potential for false positives on presumptive blood tests, they didn't believe it because they had not gotten a positive result when testing plant material and bacteria known to signal false positives. Those two analysts believed that positive presumptive tests were absolute indications of blood.
Eight analysts were involved in these bad practices. Some are dead; a few are retired.
Four still work for the SBI, and another performs contract work for the agency.
Behind the five cases Swecker deemed most problematic: Deaver, a 23-year veteran of the agency.
New SBI Director Greg McLeod suspended Deaver on Wednesday, pending further investigation.
"An Abomination"
The cost of these errors was tough for lawyers to comprehend Wednesday.
"This report reveals staggering lack of competence at the lab," said Mike Klinkosum, a Raleigh lawyer who represented Taylor in February and helped discover Deaver's withheld test results. "It's an abomination of the criminal justice system and an affront to all the decent law enforcement officers out there doing their jobs."
Cooper delivered copies of the report and a list of affected cases to district attorneys across the state little more than an hour before announcing his findings to the public.
At least one met the findings with anger.
"We've been out here asserting things as fact that just weren't," said John Snyder, district attorney of Union County. "Now, when I've got jurors coming in, I've got to enter into a whole line of questioning I never should have been forced to do. They won't trust us."
Snyder, a Republican , called for an independent audit of the entire crime lab.
On Wednesday, Cooper promised a more independent review would follow and that McLeod, the new director, would bring in experts.
"The lab cannot accept a lack of thoroughness," Cooper said. "It cannot accept attitudes that are not open to the possibility that a mistake has been made. It cannot ignore criticism and suggestions from the outside."
Welcome to the BLACK POLITICAL BUZZ Blog. (Established 2008)
My name is Laurel. (Author & Publisher)
I Blog with a focus on POLITICS, Business, and occasionally Entertainment.
FACTS ABOUT LAUREL:
Wife,
Mother of a U.S. Soldier,
Sister,
Woman of GOD,
Loyal Friend,
Creative,
Blood-related to a nationally known Charlotte Politician.
Black Female, Intelligent,
Married,
Love to Travel,
Credentialed by the RNC and DNC.
Political Blogger/ Commentator
Grassroots Activist,
PROFESSIONAL STATUS:
Credential Political Blogger/ Commentator,
Registered Independent Voter
Original Native of BROOKLYN, NY
Currently reside in CHARLOTTE, NC
I’m Nice but don’t get it twisted because my Mind is Sharp!
Since You’ve Chosen to Visit and Read the Contents of this Blog by Personal Choice, and of Your Own Free Will,
Please don’t ask me to Compensate you for Expressing individual commentary/ Posted Articles, which are protected by the First Amendment, citing Freedom of Speech & Freedom of Expression.
No Intentionally Malicious Slander, Libel or Defamation of Character content will be published and I will always Credit all Sources.
NOTE TO ALL ELECTED OFFICIALS, APPOINTED OFFICIALS & PUBLIC FIGURES:
Per the Landmark U.S. Supreme Court Case: 1964 case of New York Times v. Sullivan………
The Public has a Right to Criticize the People who Govern them, so the least Protection from Defamation is given to Public Officials. When officials are accused of something that involves their behavior in office, they have to prove all of the above elements of defamation and they must also prove that the defendant acted with “actual malice.” (For a definition of actual malice, see the “History of Defamation and the First Amendment, below.”)
People who aren’t Elected but who are Still Public Figures because they are influential or famous — like Actors, Actresses, Movie Stars, Singers & Entertainers, Journalists, TV Hosts, Bloggers, etc., — also have to Prove that Defamatory statements were made with Actual Malice, in most cases.
To the Associated Press and other Media Organizations:
When I use your Content Links., I’m also citing the Fair Use Doctrine (Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107) for further Copyright permission.
Posts and Links published on Black Political Buzz are not endorsed by Black Political Buzz Blog Author Laurel’s Employer, nor the Employers of other Black Political Buzz employees.
This includes Links, Posts and Comments posted on Black Political Buzz’s Facebook and Twitter account pages.
Comments, Links and Opinions of site visitors are Independently-Owned and not endorsed by Black Political Buzz employees, Blog Author Laurel or Laurel’s Employer.)
(No Personal Offense intended) Please know that Black Political Buzz is not responsible for nor do I endorse Requests for Donations from Third Parties on this Blog.
I will Only Endorse Requests for Donations made on behalf of BLACK POLITICAL BUZZ Blog for Business Purposes & Operating Expenses.
I will also Only Endorse Requests for Donations on behalf of Legitimate Politicians and Legitimate Political Candidates. PERIOD!!
If anyone else or another Organization wishes to post a link to Request Donations, I am NOT endorsing ANY of those Requests!
Unless I receive a personal Request to do so and I have Professionally Confirmed that the Third Party Organization or Charity is indeed a Legitimate Entity.
NOTE: Anyone who chooses to give to any Third Party Organization NOT Endorsed by BLACK POLITICAL BUZZ is doing so at his or her own risk.
BLACK POLITICAL BUZZ does NOT Discriminate against Politicians, Political Candidates, Organizations or Charities based on Race, Color, Nationality, Ethnicity, Gender, Sexual Orientation, Religion, Faith, Disability, Political Affiliation, Creed, Education, Social Status, Age.
This disclaimer applies to ANY and All requests for Donations on this Blog. Thanks for understanding. Again No Personal Offense intended.
For Story Tips….Corrections…….. or Requests for Endorsements:
Please contact me via e-mail: blackpoliticalbuzz@gmail.com
or via my Facebook page: facebook.com/blackpoliticalbuzz
Thanks for stopping by
God Bless
Laurel @BLACK POLITICAL BUZZ
LINKS: POLITICAL PERSPECTIVE & INFORMATIONAL SITES
.jpg)
