On July 26, 1976, in Philadelphia, Wilbert Gay, Jr. age 19, was an occupant, along with Nathaniel McMillan in a car driven by Jerry Gatty. Jerry Gatty had words with Nathaniel McMillan, and pulled his car over under the Walt Whitman Bridge. Both Gatty and McMillan got out of the car and Gatty got a shot gun and a 38 out the trunk of his car and shot Nathaniel once with the shot gun and three time with the 38. Wilbert Gay didn't know that Gatty had planned to shoot Nathaniel, nor did he contribute in any way in the death of Nathaniel. Jerry and Wilbert Gay left the scene of the shooting. The next day, Wilbert Gay was arrested and told by the arresting homicide detective that he had been implicated in the murder of Nathaniel McMillan. Jerry Gatty had been arrested earlier that day. At the time of his arrest, Gay did not know that the Philadelphia Homicide Unit that arrested him were themselves being investigated by the FBI for violating the constitutional rights of suspects and witnesses by beating them and mentally abusing them in order to get confessions that would lead to convictions. The FBI investigation centered on the homicide unit's investigation of a multible homicide firebombing case that occurred on October 5, 1975. In that case the homicide detectives picked up a suspect, beat him and forced him to sign a confession for a crime that he didn't commit. The guy would be convicted and sent to prison. The actual murderer would later come forward and confess. The wrongfully convicted guy would get a new trial and would be set free. When Wilbert Gay, Jr. was arrested he invoked his right to remain silent and requested a lawyer. Disregarding his rights he was handcuffed to a metal chair that was bolted to the floor and the detectives initiated interrogation in blatant violation of Gay's Miranda rights. Not being pleased with Gay's refusal to talk, the detectives began to beat and mentally abuse him. At one point, Detective Roseborough McMillan, the uncle of the deceased Nathaniel McMillan placed his gun against Wilbert Gay's head and told him, "If you don't get life for what you did, I will kill you". Finally, Wilbert Gay succumbed to the physical and mental abuse and signed a statement that the detectives had prepared for him to sign. The movie, “The Thin Blue Lie” is about the same Philadelphia homicide unit that interrogated Wilbert Gay, Jr., beat him and forced him to sign a statement and how those six homicide detectives were responsible for violating the constitutional rights of the aforementioned firebombing murder suspect and witnesses. At Wilbert Gay’s preliminary hearing (aka probable cause hearing), he was charged with conspiracy to commit murder. With such a charge you don’t have to participate in the actual murder to be found guilty, if there is evidence that you were part of a conspiracy to commit the murder (agreement and planning) than you would be held just as responsible for the murder as the person who did the actual killing. The statement that Wilbert Gay was forced to sign was not a confession to the murder or to participating in a conspiracy to commit the murder. The statement in legal terms was an extrajudicial exculpatory statement. In a word it said I was a passenger in a car with the Nathaniel McMillan and the driver, Jerry Gaddy, when there were words between the driver, Jerry Gaddy and the victim, Nathaniel McMillan. Then Jerry stopped the car, got out of the car and got weapons out of the trunk of his car and shot Nathaniel to death. The statement said that the defendant (Gay) in no way participated in the murder of the Nathaniel McMillan. The presiding preliminary hearing judge, Meyer Rose initially stated that there was not enough evidence to hold Gay for trial. At that point in the proceeding, the assistant district attorney stated that he had a statement from the co-defendant, Jerry Gaddy (the shooter) implicating Gay in the murder. At that point, the judge Meyer Rose, with the assurance from the assistant district attorney, that additional evidence would be available going forward, Gay was held for trial. At the July 25, 1978 trial the assistant district attorney never presented as evidence the statement that the co--defendant, Jerry Gatty allegedly had made and Jerry Gatty never took the stand at Gay’s trial. The only probable cause to arrest and hold Wilbert Gay for trial was the alleged statement made by the Jerry Gaddy (the shooter) and without such a statement or testimony by Gaddy there was no probable cause for his trial to proceed. That did not stop the prosecution from going forward with the “malicious prosecution” of Wilbert Gay, Jr. Six members of the Philadelphia homicide unit who are the subject of the movie, “The Thin Blue Lie” were convicted four months before Gay’s trial of violating the constitutional rights of the murder suspect and witnesses mentioned in the movie by beating and coercing them in order to get a confession which led to a conviction. The murder suspect that they beat until he confessed, had not committed the murders. After he was convicted the real murderer confessed to the murders. The only evidence that connected Wilbert Gay to the crime was the statement that four of the convicted felon detectives (John Ellis, James Curley, Rosebourough McMillan and William Jones) had obtained from him. On December 3, 1976, a Suppression Hearing was held to suppress the statement that Wilbert Gay, said was not given voluntarily. The presiding judge, Alex J. Bonavitacola was the same judge that presided over the suppression hearing in the firebombing murder case. At both suppression hearings judge Bonavitacola believed the detectives who would later be indicted and convicted of violating the constitutional rights of the firebombing murder suspect and witnesses. At Wilbert Gay’s trial the prosecution called ten witnesses to testify. The first nine witnesses consisted of one homicide detective, ...

MY NAME IS LISA DEATON.I'M WRITING IN REGARDS TO MY BROTHER DANIEL BENJAMIN BLAN. WHOM HAS BEEN WRONGFULLY CONVICTED AND INCARCERATED FOR OVER 18 YEARS FOR A CRIME HE DID NOT COMMIT NOR HAD ANY INVOLVEMENT IN. THERE IS EVIDENCE THAT CAN PROVE HIS INNOCENCE AND SET HIM FREE.HE DOES NOT DESERVE TO BE INNOCENTLY AND WRONGFULLY CONVICTED FOR OVER 18 YEARS. IT HAS BEEN A LING HARD BATTLE FOR HIM AND OUR FAMILY TO GET SOMEONE TO HEAR OUR PLEA FOR HELP AND JUSTICE.HE HAS HAD NUMEROUS ATTORNEYS' FILE ON HIS BEHALF BUT TO NO AVAIL THEY DILIGENTLY FOUGHT FOR HIS FREEDOM.YET NO ONE WANTS TO LISTEN TO TRUTH.HOW ANYONE INVOLED SLEEP KNOWING THIS MAN IS INNOCENT IS BEYOND ME.ANY AND ALL THAT COULD GO WRONG IN A TRIAL DID IN DANIELS.MANY KNOW OF HIS INNOCENCE YET NO ONE WANTS TO FACE THE TRUTH AND FACTS THAT DANIEL IS COMPLETELY INNOCENT OF THIS CRIME.PLEASE HEAR OUR PLEA FOR MERCY AND HELP SET MY BROTHER FREE.THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME WITH THIS MATTER.GOD BLESS.SINCERELY LISA DEATON

Oscar Grant. Trayvon Martin. Michael Brown. Enough is enough. Now is the time to translate words into action, problems into solutions, tragedy into silver linings. Petition state legislature to enact this bill, requiring police officers to wear a video camera, mandate police training against racial profiling, and mandate police participation in community service programs for disadvantaged youth and people of color.

We owe it to victims to move forward with these reforms. While it will be a very busy legislative session, we can’t forget how important it is to clean up the National Guard scandal so we all can once again be proud of this important institution for Alaska.

Police Foundation Executive Fellow, Chief Tony Farrar, recently completed an extensive year long study to evaluate the effect of body-worn video cameras on police use-of-force. This randomized controlled trial represents the first experimental evaluation of body-worn video cameras used in police patrol practices. Cameras were deployed to all patrol officers in the Rialto (CA) Police Department. Every police patrol shift during the 12-month period was assigned to experimental or control conditions. Wearing cameras was associated with dramatic reductions in use-of-force and complaints against officers. The authors conclude: "The findings suggest more than a 50% reduction in the total number of incidents of use-of-force compared to control-conditions, and nearly ten times more citizens’ complaints in the 12-months prior to the experiment." We applaud Chief Farrar for his commitment to conducting rigorous scientific research on a technology initiative that has broad implications for the field of policing. The full report, coauthored with Dr. Barak Ariel, Cambridge University

The vile, heinous and viscous acts of police brutality has steered out of ascendancy. How many more lives of black men will have to be slaughtered in order for you to take control? I thought it was the police officer duty to serve and protect? We the people are tired of these police taking the law into their own hands and not being held accountable for their actions! A black man in the U.S. is killed every 28 hours by the police. We don't need anymore Michael Browns, Trayvon Martins, Kimani Grays, and Kendrec McDades being viewed as a threat or a mistaken identity and killed in cold blood! This needs to stop now and Officer Darren Wilson needs to be prosecuted!

As an Olmsted County Resident I refuse to sit idly by and watch Board waste tax revenue by locking up illnesses such as alcoholism/addiction at the cost of up to 50,000 per year. When it has been proven time and again that those who qualify for the services of a drug court do not get better in jail, but get better with treatment and supportive services which cost far less than incarceration. Olmsted County Community Corrections already work with eligible offenders in a 'Highly Structured,' and monitored treatment option which is held in the detention center. Let us now bring the courts into the mix like Counties all over this nation..

What’s Wrong With The Felony Murder RULE - Common Sense: 1. It is fundamentally unfair and in violation of basic principles of individual criminal culpability to hold one felon liable for the unseen and unagreed-to results of another person’s action. 2. The felony murder rule OPERATES as a matter of law upon proof of the intent to commit a felony to relieve the prosecution of its burden of proving intent to kill, which is a necessary element of murder. 3. The intention to commit a felony does not equal the intention to kill, nor is the intention to commit a felony, by itself, sufficient to establish a charge of murder. 4. The felony murder rule violates the Fourteenth Amendment’s guarantee of due process, more specifically, equal protection of the law, because no defense is allowed on the charge of first-degree murder, only the underlying felony. 5. The purpose of creating degrees of murder is to punish with increased severity the more culpable forms of murder, but an accidental or unknown killing during the COMMISSION or attempted commission of a felony is punished more severely than all other murder charges with exception to first degree murder. 6. The felony murder rule erodes the relation between criminal liability and moral culpability in that it punishes all homicides in the commission, or attempted commission, of the proscribed felonies, whether intentional, unintentional, or accidental, without proving the relation between the homicide and the perpetrator’s state of mind. 7. Holding one or many criminally liable for the bad results of an act which differs greatly from the intended results is based on a CONCEPT of culpability which is totally at odds with the general principles of jurisprudence. 8. The basic rule of culpability is further violated when felony murder is categorized as first-degree murder because all other first-degree murders (carrying equal punishment) require a showing of premeditation, deliberation, and willfulness, while felony murder only requires a showing of intent to do the underlying felony. 9. While the felony murder rule survives in California, and other states, the numerous modifications and restrictions of it by some states courts and legislatures throughout the United States reflect dissatisfaction with the basic harshness and injustice of the doctrine and call into question its continued existence. 10. The felony murder rule can be used by prosecutors in a manner so as to cause grossly disproportionate sentencing, depending on the circumstances of each individual case. 11. The felony murder rule is unconstitutional because the presumption of innocence is thrown out. The prosecutor must only prove intent to commit the original felony; once done, first degree murder attaches to the underlying felony even though intent, (mens rea,) to commit murder does not have to be proved. 12. The felony murder rule is unconstitutional because it violates the Eighth Amendment: cruel and unusual punishment, grossly disproportionate sentencing to the crime(s) actually committed. 13. The felony murder rule bears no rational relationship or equity in its two penalties, with the penalties of other California murder laws, including, at times, the charge of first-degree murder.

Crimes committed by people serving in law enforcement is at an all time high, we see some of the most heinous crimes committed by law enforcement go unpunished. Most of these crimes are investigated by the Internal Affairs of the same department in which the suspects belong to. Asking the police department to investigated themselves of any wrong doing is like asking a child to tell you when they have done something wrong even when the evidence is overwhelmingly against them. Not all cops are bad but, we cannot go on thinking that all cops are good and have the best intentions at heart. They have the badge but they are still human and are to abide by the same laws they swore to uphold and we have many incidences where that has not been the case. What's worse is that these offenders are given a slap on the wrist if that and are sent back on the street to cause more chaos. In the last 7 months I have seen beatings, shooting, illegal raids, rape, murder, drug related crimes, drunk driving all by cops and in many of these cases were investigated by Internal Affairs where there was "No Wrong Doing" and every time the city aka the citizens have to shell out millions upon millions of dollars in these cases where there was "No Wrong Doing". I think it is time that we hold EVERYONE accountable, convict the bad cops so the good cops can do their jobs without the tension, pressure and dangers caused by those who believe they are above the law.

This concerns the physical, mental and emotional well-being of the inmates. For example, unsanitary living conditions, lack of and improper medical care, safety issues because of understaffing and improper training. Family rights are being violated, and there are inconsistent policies regarding visitation. For example, former employees are prohibited from visiting inmates or marrying inmates, post employment. If you have not violated policy or disrupted the order of the facilities you should be allowed to visit and marry. Families should have longer visits. Women should be able to bring in feminine products and family members shouldn't have problems using the restroom. Also families should have the privileges of having family portraits for memories. Some children and loved ones will never be able to have family portraits.

Today, a St. Louis grand jury refused to indict Mike Brown's killer — Police Officer Darren Wilson. On Aug. 9, the nation was horrified to learn that Mike Brown was targeted and killed by police as he walked down the street with a friend. Now his killer may never be held accountable — unless President Obama and U.S. Attorney General Holder take action. The Department of Justice has the power to arrest and prosecute Officer Wilson under federal criminal charges. Raise your voice today to ensure our national leaders secure justice for Mike Brown immediately.

I believe that Edward Snowden is a patriot who has stood valiantly against what he believes to be unconstitutional and oppressive practices by agents of the United States Government. I have been affected by those abuses, as has every other American who makes phone calls and uses the Internet. Our freedom is at stake.