Is Big Brother Surveilling Your Apple iPhone or iPod?

Is Big Brother watching you?

Two news articles were released today regarding a purported 12 million Apple IDs that were in possession of the FBI, but stolen from them by hackers known as AntiSec. One article is from Forbes magazine; the other is from The Washington Post.

Here are both articles:
1) Forbes

2) The Washington Post

Advertisements

New York Law Journal Article about Brady Violations

What are Brady violations? “Brady” refers to a seminal US Supreme Court case from 1963; wherein, the prosecutor withheld evidence critical to the defense of the accused, which resulted in his conviction. See: Brady v. Maryland, 373 US 83 (1963). The accused, Mr. Brady, challenged his conviction – unsuccessfully. However, his case established a core due process principle that the prosecutor cannot withhold exculpatory evidence that is material to the guilt or punishment of a person accused of a crime. Exculpatory evidence is “material” if “there is a reasonable probability that his conviction or sentence would have been different had these materials been disclosed.”Brady evidence includes statements of witnesses or physical evidence that conflicts with the prosecution’s witnesses,and evidence that could allow the defense to impeach the credibility of a prosecution witness.

However, Brady violations continue to this day. The net effect is that people are wrongfully convicted and innocent people suffer imprisonment or worse. “The withholding of information favorable to the accused is abhorrent, as it violates the core principles of Brady, and is contrary to the duty of a prosecutor to seek justice—not merely convictions.” Perhaps if Brady violations didn’t happen this map would look very different.

Read more here: A Personal Reflection on Brady Violations.

Occupation: Drug Dealer?

You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say or do can and will be held against you in a court of law. You have the right to speak to an attorney. If you cannot afford an attorney, one will be appointed for you. Do you understand these rights as they have been read to you?*

Deaundre Barnes kind of knew what the Miranda warning meant when he was arrested for allegedly stabbing a man for interrupting his argument with his girlfriend. According to the Tampa Bay Times article, when he was arrested by the police, Mr. Barnes refused to answer their questions. However, Mr. Barnes didn’t get it all right; he apparently slipped up at one time or another because the article states that he listed his occupation as “drug dealer” on some kind of paperwork. Not a smart move, given that Mr. Barnes is allegedly on drug offender probation.

The substance of Miranda is that you do not have to answer any questions by the police. Anything you say can and will be used against you in court. Many cases that come across my desk involve a criminal defendant who told the police everything. Many times those defendants are surprised to learn that the police are using their own statements against them. “I thought they were supposed to Mirandize me,” is probably the second-most common statement I hear from clients. What those clients didn’t know is that the police are free to ask any questions they want – even lie – to get answers during their interactions with suspects and/or witnesses. It is only when the police arrest someone, or a reasonable person would feel that he or she is not free to leave that the police need to Mirandize someone.

Up until that point, the police can ask any questions they want to – but a person would be a fool to answer them. Simply put, no one is required to answer any of their questions. Instead of answering their questions, a person can respond with “Am I under arrest officer?” Chances are, if the officer wants to make an arrest, he’s already came to that conclusion long before anyone asks him, and nothing a person says is going to change his mind at that point anyway. By asking him, the person being questioned puts the officer on notice that the person knows what his rights are. If the officer responds to the question by stating that the person is under arrest, then it would be perfectly within a person’s right to ask to be Mirandized or to refuse to answer any of his questions, since we all have the right to remain silent. Once a person invokes his or her right to remain silent (something that must be done expressly), the police must stop all questioning, if that person is under arrest. If the officer tells a person that he or she is not under arrest, (understand that this could be a lie) it is still tell important to state that none of his questions will be answered. It is also important to ask politely, “can I go now?” Note: Just because a person is not under arrest does not mean that he or she is immediately free to leave. For example, if someone has been stopped for a blown tail light or for speeding, he or she can’t just drive off until the police officer has completed the traffic stop.

*The wording of Miranda rights vary depending on the jurisdiction, but the substance should remain the same. This one is used by Alaskan State Troopers.

Michigan Criminal Defense Attorney Arrested and Charged with Conspiracy to Commit Perjury

Detroit, MI — Criminal Defense Attorney David Dunn was arrested in Circuit Court Judge Timothy Kenny’s courtroom at the Frank Murphy Hall of Justice on Monday. Mr. Dunn stands accused of conspiracy to commit perjury, witness interference, obstruction of justice, incitement of perjury and solicitation to commit a felony. All of the charges stem from his alleged attempts to convince a witness to commit perjury in a murder trial.

According to this MSNBC article, the Detroit Police and FBI were tipped off and began to conduct surveillance on Mr. Dunn. The article also claims that those agencies recorded Mr. Dunn trying to pay the witness to lie at trial. If convicted, Mr. Dunn could face up to life in prison.

What is perjury? Black’s Law Dictionary, the bible of legal definitions, defines perjury as the act of deliberately making a material statement that is false or misleading while under oath. It is a serious charge that impacts not only Mr. Dunn, but also the criminal defense community on the whole, the courts, and the criminal justice system.

Criminal defense attorneys abhor this kind of behavior. Our job is to seek out the truth and shine a light on it for jurors and judges alike. Often, our job is hard. People lie. They cover it up. They weave lie within lie. They try to hide their wrong-doing, to save face, to hurt someone else, to gain a tactical advantage, to win, or to cast their actions in the best possible light.

Mr. Dunn faces serious charges that could end his career and land him in jail. I do not know Mr. Dunn, personally or professionally; according to his Facebook page, we share 5 mutual friends, but I have never met him. I only became aware of his circumstances through the news media. Many of my colleagues are concerned about the allegations and the corresponding news coverage. It reminds them of a lie in a 2005 drug case that implicated former prosecutor Karen Plant, who was the prosecutor in the case, but also former judge Mary Waterstone, who presided over the case. (See ABA Journal article and The Michigan Lawyer blog). Ms. Plant ultimately pled guilty for allowing a witness to lie during a criminal trial and former Judge Waterstone was on her way to trial back in April of 2011, but I’m not sure what happened with her; nevertheless, her career and reputation suffered greatly. Mr. Dunn could share a similar fate – even if acquitted; if found guilty, he faces up to life in prison.

How Do You Defend Criminals

Image

"Defending Criminals"