New Legal News

Heres soemthing that should shock you. A man is on trial for feeding homeless people. When I saw the headline I figured he has fed them rat poison. This is not the case. A man is in trouble for helping those less fortunate.

Evidentially, there is a ban in Orlando that wont allow for feeding of the homeless in a public place. Would you like some discrimination with your soup?

And the prosecution has videotape evidence of an Eric Montanez giving food to people without homes! Eric! The audacity!!

Eric argues that being poor shouldnt be criminalized, and local folks say the cops should do things more productive than harass good hearted people.

The ACLU says  That this is outrageous.

And they are right.

Something tells me if I pulled a stunt like this I would be in big trouble.

But wait, aren’t my taxes paying the salaries of the people who cant perform the singular function they were elected to perform, which is show up and represent me.

Whats more is their absence is blatantly abused.

A doctor who had never met Mychael Bell posted his bond to get him out of jail. Bell is just 17 years old. Bell’s lawyer says a few other had offered to pay the bail as well. Bell returned home to Jena, La.

So now because a strnger paid his bail he was able to return home for the first time in over 10 months. He is a defendant, along with 5 others in a brutal attack on a white child.

The person who paid his bail was a 42 year old doctor named Stephen Ayers. Dr Ayers paid 10% of the 45,000 dollar bond. The doctor, also black, says he is nt motivated by race, but only in the interest of fair play.

Dr. Ayers thinks the District Attorney is too harsh, and that its overkill.

The case is quite controversial, and seen as symbolic of the “racist justice system” and has generated civil rights protest and of course the “white backlash”.

A federal appeals court has once again removed a judge from a case. They did  so for failing to state why he gave a pair of brothers a lower than recommended sentence.

This is the third time this has happened to this judge in the last couple of years. He has failed to explain why he deviated from US sentencing guidelines.

(Uh oh! Someone is thinking independently!!!)

The appeals court has referred to this as “disturbing evidence of willfulness”. The appeals court ordered the judge to reconsider his sentence, and again he did not explain himself. The appeals court reassigned the case to another judge.

The defense counsel tried to help the judge by writing up a reason for him, but the appellate court knew it wasn’t the judges reasoning.

A council formed by the Mexican government has found that Mexico’s own soldiers have raped and tortured their own citizens. The council is asking for the discontinuation of using  the army to fight the drug cartels. Its their hope this will remove the army from the citizenry.

The investigation centered around evidence and testimony given by victims, because the army refused to cooperate.

The soldiers are workign to retake large portions of the country that have fallen under the complete control of  the drug cartels. It is believed that they hold such sway because they are less corrupt than the national police.

The haed of the human rights council demands that the soldiers  that have committed these atrocities be punished and that the soldiers be put back in their barracks instead of being sent on missions they clearly cannot handle.