This Week's Corrupt Cops Stories

The U.S. Justice Department’s—recently proposed forcing without warrants, all Electronic Communication Companies to retain permanently, user phone call records and Internet activity data. That would effectively trash the Fourth Amendment.

Government wants the power without a warrant, to introduce as evidence in criminal prosecutions and government civil trials, any phone call record or email. Alarmingly, that would open the door for Police to take out of context, any innocent—hastily written email, fax or phone call record to allege a crime or violation was committed to cause a person’s arrest, fines and or civil asset forfeiture of their property. There are more than 200 laws and violations that can subject property to government asset forfeiture: Government civil asset forfeiture requires only a civil preponderance of evidence for police to forfeit property, little more than hearsay.

If the Justice Department has its way, any information the FBI derives from e.g. no warrant electronic spying; (retention of Internet Activity e.g. emails and phone call communications), may also be used for fishing expeditions, issuing subpoenas to collect evidence against Americans to prosecute any alleged crime or violation, circumventing the Fourth Amendment. Consider: neither Congress nor the courts—determined what NSA electronic surveillance, perhaps illegal under Bush II, currently or in the future could be used by police, or introduced into court by a government agency to prosecute U.S. Citizens. If the Justice Department is permitted warranted surveillance of all electronic communications, it is problematic law enforcement and private government contractors will want access to telecom-NSA and other government (retained electronic records) of Internet activity; emails and phone call information to secure evidence to arrest Americans and or civilly forfeit their homes and businesses under Title 18USC and other laws. Of obvious concern, what happens to fair justice in America if police become dependent on “Asset Forfeiture” to help pay their salaries and budget operating costs?

The “Civil Asset Forfeiture Reform Act of 2000” (effectively eliminated) the “statue of limitations” for Government Civil Asset Forfeiture: the statute now runs five years from the date police allege they “learned” that an asset became subject to forfeiture. It is foreseeable should (no warrant electronic surveillance) be approved; police will relentlessly sift through businesses and Citizens’ (permanently retained Internet data), e.g., emails to allege a crime or violation. A corrupt U.S. Government, could use no warrant (retained Internet data and phone call information) to extort America’s biggest corporations and others in the same manner Hitler used his 1933 passed Discriminatory Decrees to force corporations and the wealthy to support totalitarian legislation—voiding the Constitutional Freedoms of Citizens.

Under federal civil forfeiture laws, a person or business need not be charged with a crime for government to forfeit their property. Most U.S. Citizens, property and business owners that defend their assets against Government Civil Asset Forfeiture claim an “innocent owner defense.” This defense can become a (Catch 22) criminal prosecution trap for both guilty and innocent property owners. Any fresh denial of guilt made to government when questioned about committing a crime “even when you did not do the crime” may “involuntarily waive” your right to assert in your defense—the “Criminal Statute of Limitations” past for prosecution; any fresh denial of guilt even 30 years after a crime was committed may allow Government prosecutors to use old and new evidence, including information discovered during a Civil Asset Forfeiture Proceeding to launch a criminal prosecution. For that reason many innocent property and business owners are reluctant to defend their property and businesses against Government Civil Asset Forfeiture.

Re: waiving Criminal Statute of Limitations: see USC18, Sec.1001, James Brogan V. United States. N0.96-1579. U.S. See paragraph (6) at:

http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/96-1579.ZC1.html

Check out the website posted in this complaint and you will find court corruption is still happening and the prosecutor commits a felony by convincing bar staffer to commit perjury on the stand. Public Defender lies to the defendant and the court about the video and other evidence. Tells defendant the video is no longer available in front of a witness, then submits paper work to the court 20 days prior to the court hearing and lies to the judge about he did not know there was a video available until the sentencing hearing. Public Defender told the defendant the video is no longer part of the case. He also said the charges were being dropped and no fines were being enforced. Then he told the defendant that the case will be dismissed against him after the commitments were all completed in this case.

The defendant is charged originally with three charges. The prosecutor sends him three more duplicate charges in the mail stating double charges. Public Defender tells defendant three charges are being dropped----LIKE THIS WOULD MATTER...THEY ARE STILL GETTING THEIR ORIGINAL THREE CHARGES, THIS IS THE SCOTTSDALE PROSECUTORS WAY OF MAKING IT LOOK LIKE PEOPLE ARE GETTING A DEAL IN THESE PLEA AGREEMENTS.

DEFENDANT DID NOT SIGN THE PLEA AGREEMENT AND WROTE A 5 PAGE LETTER THAT NIGHT TO THE COURT AND FAXED IT....NO REPLY--EVER!!!

Defendant is ordered to pay over $6500.00 for damages he did not do. the prosecutor failed to turn over all the evidence prior to the trial date during the discovery period. then fabricated a dental lie from a dentist statement for damages that did not happen.....JUDGE DID NOT REVIEW ANY OF THE PROSECUTORS EVIDENCE HE SUBMITTED TO THE COURT. JUDGE DENIED ALLOWING THE DEFENDANT THE RIGHT TO SPEAK IN COURT AND HAD HIM TAKEN TO JAIL RIGHT FROM A RULE 32 HEARING TO SPEND 5 DAYS IN JAIL.

Defendant is a homeless man in this case and the court did not respond to any of his 10 statements to the court. The man wrote his own appeal because he had very good written proof the public defender and prosecutor lied....the prosecutor is preventing the defendant from moving forward with his appeal. The prosecutor also sent the man a statement saying he is denying his appeal and the statement is not signed by any judge. The Arizona lower court of appeals clerk has not received the appeal submission.

IF THE PROSECUTOR HAD NOTHING TO HIDE, HE WOULD LET THE APPEAL GO FORWARD, BUT HE KNOWS HIS EVIDENCE IS TAINTED AND THE JUDGE AND COURT BUILDING ARE COVERING UP FOR THE PROSECUTOR.

Lets talk about Sergeant Dan Rincon of Scottsdale police department. Not only is he a dirty cop.. Google him  and then check him out on  Facebook page. He is the most reprimanded police officer of Scottsdale police department and he still has his job??? Dan Rincon should be fired for his illegal behavior and entrapment and killing innocent people. Helping place children in custody of the abuser, he is a halfwit who does not do his job. Maybe he takes payoffs?  Be very careful when dealing with him, he is a loose cannon. Sad part is he is the head of domestic violence unit.  Yet he is a very abusive person himself, he will take up rights for the abuser not the victim, no matter how much evidence you have. Its Dan's way or suffer his wrath.