To learn more on New York corruption click here.
Here is just a little bit on the corruption that permeates the New York Department of Motor Vehicles;
Corrupt test-takers paid $2,000 to $2,500 for the easy road to getting licensed to operate school buses, big rigs and heavy equipment. Guards in on the plot allowed wannabe license-holders to leave testing rooms and have surrogate test-takers look up exam answers.
NY DMV Clerk Arrested For Fraudulently Issuing Drivers Licenses to Individuals Including Convicted Felon. Oh my, people convicted even of non-violent crimes in New York are not allowed to “drive.”
The Ten Scariest DMV Horror Stories
This decision had important ratifications concerning your rights. The case, United States v. Jones, 132 S. Ct. 945, 565 U.S. decided in 2012, decided by the Supreme Court case involved the use of a installed Global Positioning System (GPS) tracking device on a vehicle that was use to monitor the vehicle’s movements, which the supreme court held it constituted a search under the Fourth Amendment. In other words alleged law enforcement need a warrant to track you. Read more about it here and here. The decision was a slam dunk, ALL the justices agreed and/or concurred.
Now, with today’s 911 technology, in this case reverse 911, New York counties have the ability to track you using your cellphone GPS location system using their PSAP system. This system is a good system PROVIDING it is used for the purpose it was intended to be used for. However when it is use illegally for the purposes to track and/or gather more information in the form of text messages and/or voice recordings in the hopes of “piling it on”. This is completely illegal and unlawful and anyone aiding and/or abiding these actions can be held liable as well. Read more about it here.
Stingrays are devices that mimic cell towers, so ANYONE in the area where these devices are operating cellphone calls or text messages go though this device. I repeat its ANYONE, that means you as well as the alleged ‘criminal’ they are attempting to track. They claim it helps solve crimes, however in the process it gathers all your information to. Their argument is totally BOGUS. With today’s technology they could easily create a filter system that would lock out any phone numbers that were not suspect related so they would not be recorded. Read about the ACLU’s work on this major issue that effects all of our rights here and here.
When criminals fail in their attempt to control your free thought, i.e. the absolute truth, they will attempt to pull out one of their last weapons; “he or she is crazy.”
This was a favorite tactic of Stalinist Russia, if you managed not to get sent to the camps in Siberia, or were not located in the Bread Basket of Europe, you most likely ended up in a mental institution. This other blight on humanity, i.e. the bread basket, which can be compared to the native America holocaust, is referred to as the Holodomor(1) the Ukrainian Famine/Genocide of 1932-33(2) Continue reading
What is “Evidence in Chief”?
The New York rules of evidence points to many locations as to what constitutes evidence in chief. Among them are CPL Article 60, the most important part of this article though is;
S 60.10 Rules of evidence; in general.
Unless otherwise provided by statute or by judicially established rules of evidence applicable to criminal cases, the rules of evidence applicable to civil cases are, where appropriate, also applicable to criminal proceedings.
This is where both the civil and criminal rules of evidence are allowed to ‘co-mingle’
What is “case in chief”? It is the portion of a trial whereby the party with the Burden of Proof in the case presents its evidence. The opposing party then has the right to rebut the presented evidence, which in the case of Administrative Law Judge Glenn Murray 004 you are not allowed to do.
It basically boils down to what is left on the record.
New York State Courts Access to Justice Program and C. Kenneth Perri, Executive Director of Legal Assistance of Western New York announced the release of three new computer programs that will help New Yorkers navigate the legal system. These DIY (Do It Yourself) programs ask straight-forward questions to help users prepare individualized court forms and instructions. Click here for more information.
This excellent New York Times article describes how those accused of a ‘crime’, who believe they have done no wrong, can go before the grand jury to plea there case and a good percentage gets ‘no-billed’ meaning the grand jury, after hearing their statements refuse to hand down an indictment, i.e. not charge them.
Here is just two quotes;
“Sara Sun Beale, a national expert on grand jury issues at Duke University School of Law, said the indications that more suspects are testifying and that many of them are not indicted may mean that the New York grand jury system should become a national mode….”
“Lawyers say the 1978 change in the law permitting defense lawyers in the grand jury room prompted them to begin encouraging some clients to testify. Other changes accelerated the trend, including new selection methods that broadened the pool of potential jurors, and what some lawyers say is an increasing willingness by grand jurors to question official accounts of crimes.”
This shows you the power of New York’s Grand Jury System. Click here to read the entire article. Caveat: There is no telling when, or if this article will be moved, removed, etc…. so you may want to save one for yourself. Click here to read the article.
Important Notice to individuals who are being ‘investigated/indicted’ by the DA/grand jury;
CPL 190.50(5)(a) provides that the District Attorney must notify the defendant or his or her attorney of a pending Grand Jury proceeding in such manner as to afford the defendant reasonable time to exercise his or her right to appear as a witness therein.
If the prosecutor does not provide notice of grand jury presentation when s/he is required to, this is a denial of your due process rights. Defendants can then file a “five day motion” to properly challenge the failure, and throw out the indictment and give you the chance to be heard before the grand jury, so they can hear your side of the story and call your witnesses before they render their decision.
Further a ‘five day’ motion it is not considered a “pretrial motion” (see CPL §§ 210.35 , 255.10), and therefore the timing is not governed by the forty-five day period specified in CPL § 255.20. This motion must be made within five days after arraignment or it is waived (see CPL § 190.50[5(c)]). See also Commentary, N.Y. Crim. Proc. Law § 190.50 (McKinney).
Do you have a problem with any DMV hearings in Machias? Let us know. Complaints.