DOCUMENTARY: The Fear of 13 (TRAILER)

A Death Row inmate petitions the court asking to be executed. As he goes on to tell his story, it gradually becomes clear that nothing is quite what it seems. THE FEAR OF 13 is a stylistically daring experiment in storytelling that is part confessional and part performance, Nick, the sole protagonist, tells a tale with all the twists and turns of classic crime drama. A final shocking twist casts everything in a new light.

Directed by David Sington
www.thefearof13.com

www.facebook.com/thefearof13

twitter.com/TheFearof13

 

Really? LA Sheriff’s Deputies Arrested In Jail Probe. But really, is anyone surprised? Absolute power corrupts.

(Above video from LA Times)

(Text below from From Huffpost: By GREG RISLING and TAMI ABDOLLAH 12/09/13 10:38 PM ET EST – permalink: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/12/09/la-sheriffs-deputies_n_4414354.html)

Huffpost video: http://pshared.5min.com/Scripts/PlayerSeed.js?sid=281&width=560&height=450&playList=518043562

LOS ANGELES (AP) — Federal officials said 18 current and former Los Angeles County sheriff’s deputies saw themselves as being “above the law” when they engaged in crimes that included beating inmates and jail visitors, falsifying reports, and trying to obstruct an FBI probe of the nation’s largest jail system.

The investigation into corruption and civil rights abuses led to the arrests Monday of 16 of the 18 defendants. At least two no longer work for the department.

“These incidents did not take place in a vacuum. In fact, they demonstrated behavior that had become institutionalized,” said U.S. Attorney Andre Birotte Jr. “The pattern of activity alleged in the obstruction of justice case shows how some members of the Sheriff’s Department considered themselves to be above the law.”

The 16 who were arrested appeared in court later Monday. Thirteen pleaded not guilty, and three did not enter pleas.

Flanked by some of his top command staff, Sheriff Lee Baca told reporters Monday he was troubled by the charges and called it a sad day for his department. He said the department would continue to cooperate with the FBI and that deputies who have been charged would be relieved of duty and have their pay suspended.

The Sheriff’s Department oversees a jail system with more than 18,700 inmates and has a history of abuse allegations dating back to the 1970s.

Among allegations in a criminal complaint and four grand jury indictments unsealed Monday:

— Deputies unlawfully detained and used force on visitors to Men’s Central Jail, included detaining and handcuffing the Austrian consul general in one instance, and in another, grabbing a man by the neck, forcing his head into a refrigerator, throwing him to the floor and pepper spraying his eyes.

— Deputies falsified reports to make arrests seem lawful or in one case, struck, kicked and pepper sprayed an inmate and made false reports to have the inmate charged with and prosecuted for assaulting deputies.

— Deputies tried to thwart the investigation by unsuccessfully seeking a court order to get the FBI to provide documents and attempted to intimidate a lead FBI agent by falsely saying they were going to seek a warrant for her arrest.

Those charged with conspiracy and obstruction of justice include two lieutenants, one of whom oversaw the department’s safe jails program and another who investigated allegations of crimes committed by sheriff’s personnel.

They’re accused along with two sergeants and three deputies with trying to prevent the FBI from contacting an informant by falsifying records to appear that he had been released when he had been moved to different cells under false names.

Birotte wouldn’t say whether the lieutenant and two sergeants involved in the obstruction of justice probe were directed by their superiors. He declined to say if the alleged abuse was fostered by the department’s top brass.

Others charged in the documents unsealed Monday are a deputy accused of possessing an assault weapon that was illegally modified, and three deputies — all brothers — accused of a $350,000 mortgage fraud scheme.

Baca, who has been sheriff since 1998, is facing his toughest race yet for re-election in 2014. Baca has acknowledged mistakes but also defended his department and distanced himself personally from allegations.

The sheriff said he has made improvements including creating a database to track inmate complaints. He has also hired a new head of custody and rearranged his command staff.

On Monday, Baca said he would accept the outcome of the FBI investigation, but strongly denied criticisms that abuse was rampant.

“You haven’t seen me retire from the job,” he said. “You haven’t seen me blame somebody else besides me for whatever the challenges are.”

The American Civil Liberties Union sued the Sheriff’s Department in 2012 claiming the sheriff and his top commanders had condoned violence against inmates. The organization released a report documenting more than 70 cases of misconduct by deputies.

The Citizens’ Commission on Jail Violence, in its 2012 report, said deputies used force against inmates even “when there was no threat at all,” and referred to “a culture of aggression among some deputies in the jails.”

A federal jury in October found Baca personally liable for $100,000 for failing to stop inmate abuse by deputies in Men’s Central Jail in a case brought by a man who said he was severely beaten while awaiting trial.

In June, a two-year Justice Department investigation found deputies discriminated against blacks and Latinos by making unconstitutional stops, searches, seizures and using excessive force in the Antelope Valley.

Baca disputed the findings but said he had instituted reforms.
___

Associated Press writer Robert Jablon contributed to this report.

NYTimes Editorial: Failure of Empathy and Justice [Published: March 31, 2011]

When President Obama listed empathy as a valuable trait for a justice during his 2009 search to replace David Souter, the idea drew scorn from some conservatives who saw it as an excuse for being soft. But a Supreme Court ruling this week provides evidence of how useful empathy is, and of how not using it can lead to glaring injustice.

Connick v. Thompson is about the wrongful conviction of John Thompson for robbery and murder after prosecutors in New Orleans withheld evidence from Mr. Thompson that would have cast serious doubt on his guilt. He spent 18 years in prison and came close to being executed. He was exonerated after a prosecutor fessed up.

After Mr. Thompson sued, a federal trial court found the office liable for failing to train its prosecutors about their constitutional duty to turn over evidence favorable to the defense and awarded Mr. Thompson $14 million in damages. Now, by a 5-to-4 vote, the conservative majority of the Roberts court has overturned that ruling, saying the office can’t be held liable for a sole incident of wrongdoing.

The important thing about empathy that gets overlooked is that it bolsters legal analysis. That is clear in the dissent by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Her empathy for Mr. Thompson as a defendant without means or power is affecting. But it is her understanding of the prosecutors’ brazen ambition to win the case, at all costs, that is key.

After detailing the “flagrant indifference” of the prosecutors to Mr. Thompson’s rights, she makes clear how critically they needed training in their duty to turn over evidence and why “the failure to train amounts to deliberate indifference to the rights” of defendants.

The district attorney, Harry Connick Sr., acknowledged the need for this training but said he had long since “stopped reading law books” so he didn’t understand the duty he was supposed to impart. The result, Justice Ginsburg writes, was an office with “one of the worst” records in America for failing to turn over evidence that “never disciplined or fired a single prosecutor” for a violation.

For the majority, Justice Clarence Thomas asserts that Mr. Thompson failed to prove that the office “disregarded a known or obvious consequence” of its inaction. That doesn’t reckon with the “culture of inattention,” as Justice Ginsburg calls it, which made deplorable breaches far too predictable. Justice Ginsburg’s dissent is the more persuasive, focused on the problem at the heart of the case and at the heart of a legal system that too often fails to see defendants, guilty or not, as human beings.

A version of this editorial appeared in print on April 1, 2011, on page A26 of the New York edition.