Financial fugitives are on the loose all around the world and wanted for committing white-collar crimes. These criminals have unlimited resources and were able to escape the consequences of their crimes. Many have evaded the law for years and have been living in luxury while the FBI has been trying to track them down. Check out their profiles in Forbes’ Top Ten Most Wanted White-Collar Criminals.
It’s just something most conservative dressers have had to accept—some folks like to wear low-ride pants, revealing to the world their boxer short selection.
The “saggy” or “baggy” look is a familiar fashion trend among kids, teens and some adults. But, while most have accepted it as a pop-culture style, some governments have gone as far as passing ordinances that outlaw the loose denim in their towns. (Flint, Michigan and Lynwood, Illinois are among the latest cities to pass ordinances.)
People who value freedom of expression are concerned about the major practical and constitutional concerns that surround the law. The very idea that the governments are attempting to ban clothing styles is alarming.
First of all, it’s never been illegal to show your underwear in public. Second, this law gives police the authority to stop and question anyone they suspect of wearing their pants too low. This explicitly conflicts with our Fourth Amendment of the Constitution, which protects us against unreasonable searches. And, let’s not forget the First Amendment, which guarantees freedom of speech and freedom of expression.
Attempted enforcement of these laws could result in violators being forced to assert their constitutional rights in court, which will cost taxpayers big bucks. It also takes police officer’s time away from enforcing more serious offenses.
Watch Out, Plumbers
So how much buttocks is too much buttocks? According to the Flint Police Department, people who are caught in Flint, Michigan with their underwear exposed will receive a warning or a ticket.
If a person’s underwear is exposed and their pants are below their buttocks, they can be charged for disorderly conduct; if their buttocks is exposed (with any crack showing), they can be charged with indecent exposure.
Both the disorderly conduct charge and indecent exposure charges bring a possible punishment of 93 days to a year in jail and/or up to $500 in fines.
See it: A Detroit Free Press video of an officer in Flint enforcing the city ordinance.
This law leaves us here at Total Criminal Defense with a question that must be asked: If government permits itself to outlaw certain “offensive” styles of pants, where were the cops when zebra-print Zubazs and stirrup pants were hot?
An 18-year-old Iowa high school senior was charged with a sex crime in Iowa for sending a 17-year-old friend a cell phone video showing the senior fooling around with his teenage girlfriend, according to the Des Moines Register.
The 10-second video showed the senior, then 17, involved in a reported sex act with his then 16-year-old girlfriend. The senior later forwarded it to his friend because he was seeking revenge against his ex, according to his dad. The video of him with his pants down quickly spread through the neighborhood.
It’s illegal to send sexual cell phone pictures or video to anyone under the age of 18, but the charge—telephone dissemination of obscene material to a minor—would have been the first of its kind for an Iowa teen. With increasing cell phone technology, prosecutors said they expect to see more cases in the future.
The teen pleaded guilty to a lesser offense, but the idea that he could have been slapped with a sex crime has raised concerns about Iowa’s sex offender law.
If he would have been convicted of the sex crime, the senior could have been sentenced to up to 2 years in jail. Moreover, he would’ve been required to register as a sex offender—a consequence that could affect him for the rest of his life.
Instead, the senior pleaded guilty to three counts of third-degree harassment. The plea-bargain deal states he must spend 20 days in jail, complete 100 hours of community service and pay $300 in fines.
Republican leader of the Iowa House, State Rep. Christopher Rants, said what the senior did was wrong but the punishment in the current law is too harsh on teens.
He told the newspaper that, “We’re not talking about being soft on sexual predators, we’re talking about making sure the law works for real families and real situations.”
The father of the senior has contacted legislators to pressure them to revise the Iowa law on the telephone dissemination charge so it doesn’t force teens who violate it to file as registered sex offenders.
Parents accused of praying instead of seeking medical care for their daughter who died of diabetes pleaded not guilty to second-degree reckless homicide. They further asked the judge to dismiss the charges as unconstitutional, reports the Associated Press.
11-year-old Madeline died on Easter at the family’s rural Wisconsin home. An autopsy, requested by her parents, found that she died from undiagnosed diabetes. Prosecutors say the parents failed in their legal duty to protect their child.
Dale and Leilani Neumann’s criminal defense attorneys filed a motion claiming the law is “unconstitutionally vague” and the charges infringe on the parents’ constitutional right to freely exercise their religion and their “liberty interest” to rear their children.
The mother said she believes in the Bible and that healing comes from God and prayer. She said she never thought her daughter would die. The father said he considered Madeline’s illness “a test of faith” that could be conquered by prayer. Both parents told investigators that Madeline hadn’t been to a doctor since she was 3 years old.
The maximum sentence for second-degree reckless homicide is 25 years. The Neumanns are currently free on bail, but must send their surviving three teenage children to biweekly checkups to ensure they receive any needed medical care.
A Wisconsin law states parents can’t be accused of abuse or neglect if they chose prayer in good faith as a treatment for a child’s disease. The District Attorney said her analysis of the law is that it doesn’t apply to homicide cases. Due to the nature of the case, the defense attorneys expect it may reach the state Supreme Court.
On Monday, the Dallas Morning News reported that college students are susceptible to identity theft because of the environment they experience when going off to school. Students are use to free flowing information where their busy schedules expose them to potential theft or fraud through online purchases or networking Web sites.
The article — “College students should take care to protect their information” — highlights tips both students and their parents should consider when heading off to school.
Another update is due concerning the consequences of the DC v. Heller Supreme Court decision that struck down the handgun ban in the U.S. capital city.
After we reported that the Chicago suburbs of Wilmette and Morton Grove had voted to repeal their own bans on handguns within city limits, word has come that Martinsburg, West Virginia has clarified its own laws regarding handguns, officially stating that it only bans guns in public buildings, but that carrying of handguns on the street is legal. Previously, the legality of carrying guns anywhere downtown had been in dispute.
Furthermore, Evanston, Illinois, another suburb of Chicago, has just announced that it struck down a similar handgun ban. Evanston was challenged by a lawsuit from the National Rifle Association, and wished to avoid an expensive legal battle. The NRA has also targeted Oak Park, Illinois and the city of Chicago, though the latter city has vowed to battle the lawsuit in court.
Detroit Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick, who has been in legal entanglements for months over an alleged affair with a city aide and a bevy of felony criminal charges including perjury, misconduct and obstruction of justice, has been locked away for violating the conditions of his bail while awaiting the outcome of his criminal trial.
Kilpatrick had been given permission to travel with notification, but forfeited that right when he was charged by a sheriff’s investigator with physical assault, resulting in a fractured hip. The county may still pursue criminal charges in this incident.
However, despite his status as mayor, the judge treated Kilpatrick as he would have any other charged individual out on bond: she jailed him when he violated the terms of his bail. As he memorably put it, “If it was not Kwame Kilpatrick sitting in that seat, if it was John Six-Pack sitting in the seat, what would I do? And that answer is simple.”
It’s a good lesson in understanding the severe consequences of deciding not to comply with court-ordered restrictions; and it’s also a good example that Wayne County has set by not showing favoritism to public officials who violate the law.
According to an AP story, a young man dressed as The Joker—complete with purple suit, green dyed hair and clown face paint—was apprehended by local police inside a Three Rivers, Michigan movie theater last Sunday. Like his cinematic counterpart, 20-year-old Spencer Taylor was making mischief: police caught him trying to take movie posters and other “The Dark Knight” paraphernalia in the theater lobby.
The story states that Taylor will be arraigned on August 5. Just a thought: Mr. Taylor may want to call in legal defense from Georgia District Attorney Paul Howard, a.k.a. “Superlawyer.” Howard even has his own cape.
For more unusual criminal defense cases, visit the Total Criminal Defense articles page.
At Total Criminal Defense, we recently profiled the tragic story of the Curtis brothers, who saved their home and an entire town from a California wildfire by setting backfires near their property, only to find themselves arrested because they were not professional firefighters.
So where were the professional firefighters while the Curtis family risked their lives and risked being charged with crimes in order to save their home? According to a recent LA Times article, they may have been flying around looking pretty for the tv cameras.
The article interviews fire chiefs and other professionals disgusted with political pressure to make impressive-looking drops of water and fire retardant from helicopters and planes even when it does no actual good, because it looks good for television. By giving the visual impression of doing something helpful to stop the fires, authorities look better in the face of wildfires that can sometimes be virtually impossible to stop.
Makes their arrest of the Curtis brothers all the more absurd, doesn’t it?
Per a Law.com item, the state of Louisiana has called for the US Supreme Court to reopen the case Kennedy v. Louisiana, which the court ruled on one month ago. The court had ruled that the death penalty was inappropriate for a child rape, despite the horrific nature of the crime.
The state’s request is unusual, but is based on its failure to consider a national law that was implemented in 2006 that authorizes the death penalty for members of the military who are convicted of child rape. This would undermine the court’s statement in its official opinion, written by Justice Kennedy, that there is a “national consensus” against execution for rape.
The state’s lawyers, who were not aware of the law to include it in the legal defense, are hoping that the court’s failure to consider the military law will cause it to reopen the case.
Blog is sponsored by Total Criminal Defense
