Lawyerup09

QUESTION OF THE DAY: SHOULD MEN WEAR SKINNY JEANS

Should men wear skinny jeans? Explain.
Submitted by DenimHunt.

No. No, No, just because men have decent bodies does NOT mean they look good in anything{UH remember the g string or weenie bikini}

From My standpoint, you have to look at my husband & my ex husband, Daryl, while so sexy and hot, has chicken legs (that look adorable in his regular levis) I digress, Steve was a runner and had an awesome body with chicken legs.

Men just do not look their best in skinny jeans, nuff said

EMPLOYEES: BEWARE OF THE GOOGLING GUMSHOE

JOB HUNTING? BEWARE: POTENTIAL EMPLOYERS DO GOOGLE YOU & THAT’S NOT ALL

There will always be two sides to every story. There will always be the squeaky clean (or pretend-a squeak) & there will always be the rebel co-ed or co-worker. The Squeaky clean or those who want to appear to future , current or potential employers, squeaky clean are falling in the line of 100’s of people who are cleaning up their act, or cleaning up their MySpace of FaceBook act.  I recently posted a story about how the IRS will use any crook and nook to find delinquent taxpayers-guess where they are looking? You got it, social networking pages. A few months back I posted a story based on a conversation I had with one of the local police officers I work with in my law practice.

My favorite police officer informed me people using FaceBook & MySpace are really making the law enforcement officers jobs easy. The hours & days & countless resources they formerly used to locate suspects and to learn more about people suspected of criminal activity has been made so easy; all they need now is a laptop and www.facebook.com. As my Friend put it; “Criminals are stupid and the ones advertising their whereabouts and activities on FaceBook are no exception.”

Now it appears you have someone else checking out your profile, party pics and message wall, and it ain’t cuz they want to be your friend. Employers who are in the hiring process readily admit checking out the social web sites of their potential candidates.  What does this mean to you, if anything? Are you among the 75% of job seekers who are cleaning up your act- that is cleaning up your MySpace page? Are you hurrying to remove those late night party pix, photos of you and your guy mugging; photos of you and your girlfriends showing your ass-literally ~ at you best pals bachelorette party? What about the all nighters, photos of your buds and you doing jello shots in the Quarter of the Big Easy?

Or are you among the other 25% who say “To hell with them!” As one polled employee stated “I’m not removing anything from my page. Why should I? Why should I pretend to be one person for eight hours a day and another for the rest of my hours?” Well, the operative word from that person, is EMPLOYEE, as in, already employed, not currently seeking employment in this topsy turvy economy.

I can see both sides? Can’t you? I mean, why should we have to remove all of our cherished and fun memories from Our Personal Page? One easy example: Once you put it out there, it is for the world to see. You lose any and all reasonable expectation of privacy.

BUT… Do you really want to work for a company that invades your personal space, your MySpace? Of course the flip side to that argument is that when you enter the grown up world and you are asking a reputable company to hire you; your reputation is a part of you.

I don’t think I need to state the obvious here, but I will. If by chance your personal page shows photos of you doing something illegal, “Pass the bong man.” Then for God’s sake have enough sense and self worth to get rid of it. Likewise, if you have provocative or nude photos or heaven forbid sexually explicit photos; GET THEM OFF THE WEB. If not for the chance of scoring a lucrative career; do it for your own self respect. Think about the college co-eds who pose nude for playboy. It might be fun at the time when you are say 18 or 19, but jump ahead ten years. Do you really want the man you marry to see your T&A all over a porn mag? What about your future children? In-laws? Probably not. Well the same goes for what you post on MySpace & Facebook etal:

The question then becomes: Where do we draw the line? When do fun party pix cross the line into just damn raunchy photos?

Check out this recent article posted by Allan Hoffman, Monster Tech Jobs Expert & While you are at it read some more helpful info on “Keeping Your E-Image Clean” by other top writers like Michael Fertick, CEO of Reputation Defender, Michael Kelemen {who has a different opinion}, he does not waste time googling or stalking you on MySpace, he goes the traditional route and checks your references. Kelemen is a recruiter who runs the ‘Animal Recruiter Blog’. And be sure to check out; yourHRguy, any anonymous Blogger.

Job Applicant, Beware: You’re Being Googled

by Allan Hoffman
Monster Tech Jobs Expert

Related Articles

• Your Online Image
• Keep Your E-Image Clean

• Send to a friend
• Print
• Discuss this article

 

 

 

 

It’s not just what you say that can be held against you when you’re looking for a job. It’s also what you post on MySpace, write in your blog and broadcast on YouTube.

That’s because if a potential employer uncovers salacious or otherwise unflattering material about you online, that job offer you were expecting could vaporize. With 77 percent of employers Googling and otherwise researching applicants, you never know what your future bosses may think about those times you ranted about your coworkers or got sloshed at a party. They may simply decide to avoid your questionable past and move on to the next candidate.

“Who wants to be the person in HR who brings in the kid who has bong hits all over his page?” says Michael Fertik, the CEO of ReputationDefender, a services company that helps job seekers clean up their online reputations.

A 2006 survey of 100 executive recruiters by job search and recruiting network ExecuNet found that 77 percent use search engines to learn about candidates. Of those researching candidates online, 35 percent eliminated a candidate from consideration based on information they uncovered online -- up from 26 percent in 2005. ExecuNet predicts that the number of job seekers prejudged or eliminated due to this “digital dirt” will climb.

Is Ignorance Bliss?

Others say the trend may not be as widespread or as likely to accelerate. “I never run them through Google,” says recruiter Michael Kelemen of his candidates. “I call their references for background.”

“I think a lot of the stuff we read about recruiters doing background checks on their candidates online is more rumor than anything else,” adds Kelemen, who runs the Recruiting Animal blog.

Recruiters use Internet searches “to avoid major red flags, but it is just another assessment of a person,” says the anonymous blogger known as Your HR Guy. He adds, “My general view on Internet searches is that, for most positions, ignorance is bliss. Most of what is online for a majority of workers is personal, and most workers’ personal stuff [doesn’t play a role at work].”

But If Everyone Has an Online Past...

Others say the pervasiveness of social networking sites, such as Facebook and MySpace, and the way young people virtually live online mean employers won’t be able to judge candidates based on their digital dirt. If they do, the thinking goes, they will miss out on top-notch employees, given that just about everyone will have some incriminating information online.

In a posting at the Brazen Careerist Web site, Jason Warner, Google’s head of staffing for online sales and operations, contends that this trend “will become a non-issue as this phase of the Internet Age plays itself out.” He suggests five reasons employers won’t spend time worrying about “unfortunate online photos” and “other embarrassing antics”:

• College students have always behaved in this manner.
• More details about everyone will be online.
• Searching for photos won’t be worth recruiters’ time.
• The information is irrelevant.
• It’s a slippery slope, especially if employers start to research existing employees’ outside behaviors.

Warner acknowledged the risks of having “those photos” online, and in a subsequent online discussion about his views at Brazen Careerist, others noted how interviewers and hiring managers may find it impossible to disregard what they learn online about candidates, even if the material falls into the category of forgivable indiscretions.

Clean Up Your Act or Stay True?

Certainly the possibility that a prospective employer can uncover things about your past can create anxiety about whether you should clean up your online image by revising Facebook pages, requesting that videos and blog posts about you be removed, or by hiring ReputationDefender or a similar service.

In a Brazen Careerist article titled “Twentysomething: Raunchy Old Photos Will Be Part of the Revolution,” Ryan Healy, cofounder of Employee Evolution, a Web site for Millennials entering the workforce, said he knows people who have removed materials “to save some face in the real world,” but has never considered doing so himself. “Why should I pretend to be one person for eight hours a day and someone else entirely the rest?” he writes.

And consider this: The generation moving into the workforce may not want to work for an employer that wouldn’t hire a talented 20-something for having a drunken photo on Facebook, suggests Scott Allen, coauthor of The Virtual Handshake: Opening Doors and Closing Deals Online. “The standards are going to radically change,” he says.

.....

• Send to a friend
• Print
• Discuss this article

 

http://www.reputationdefender.com/

http://www.recruitinganimal.com./

http://www.yourhrguy.com/

http://www.employeeevolution.com/

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/asin/0814472869/monstercom

 

 

 

TEN CRAZY, BUT SERIOUS DRIVING LAWS

10 DRIVING LAWS YOU MAY NOT KNOW

Original article written by: Holly Rizzo

Well, Ticket my Funny Bone

 1.  Honk if you pass

Rural New Jersey might sound like a never-ending New Year’s Eve party if everybody obeyed the law. State law requires drivers to honk the horn when passing another vehicle going in the same direction outside a business or residential district.

However, watch it in Little Rock, Ark., where the law says “no person shall sound the horn on a vehicle at any place where cold drinks or sandwiches are served after 9 p.m.”

Honking at sandwich shops is OK in University City, Mo. – so long as you honk in your own car. It’s illegal to honk the horn of someone else’s.

2.  Kindly keep your cattle in the car

Hey, city slicker – you’ll have to keep that cow in your vehicle in Topeka, Kan. The city has made it “unlawful for any person to suffer or permit any livestock owned or controlled by such person to run at large, or to drive any herd of cattle, horses, mules or hogs, or any flock of sheep, upon any street in the city.”

 

3.  You’ll need permission to throw that brick

In Mount Vernon, Iowa, you’re not allowed to shoot arrows or throw bricks onto any street or highway without the City Council’s written consent.

4.  Clean up your act

In San Francisco, it’s illegal to wipe a vehicle with used underwear and to pile horse manure more than six feet high on any street corner.

5.  Unhand that nozzle!

In Oregon and New Jersey, you cannot pump your own gas. Supposedly this practice keeps gasoline prices lower in those states, because insurance costs for gas stations go down if attendants instead of customers pump the gas – but, on the other hand, that attendant must be paid, whereas you pump for free. So the jury’s out on the reasons for this one.

 

6.  Animal and vegetable antics

Palm Springs, Calif., forbids anyone from walking a camel down the main street, Palm Canyon Drive, between 4 and 6 p.m.

Hunting from moving vehicles is illegal in several states, including Connecticut and Tennessee, where only whale hunting by that method is allowed.

Thou shall not sow a vegetable garden in any public street in Chico, Calif. The law, however, does not forbid flower gardens.

7.  No pillows on the roadbed

No matter how sleepy you get, you are not allowed to snooze in the middle of any street in Eureka, Calif.

Reno, Nev., won’t let you park yourself on a bench or chair in the middle of its roads, either.

 

As long as we’re on a roll, here are a few more tips to the lawful:

8.  Yield to peacocks in Arcadia, Calif.

9.  Don’t jump into a passing vehicle in Glendale, Calif.

10.  Don’t change clothes in your car at the beach in Destin, Fla.

11.  Don’t keep a car door open longer than is necessary in Oregon.

12.  Don’t drive through playgrounds in Dublin, Ga.

How serious are they? Serious;. Screeching your tires in Derby, Kan., could get you 30 days in Bad Boys’ Bed & Breakfast. And if you think switching back to a one-horsepower hay-burner might get you away from the long arm of the law, consider this: In Texarkana, Texas, it’s illegal to ride a horse at night without taillights.

 

 

 

HOW COPS BREAK DOWN THE INNOCENT: FALSE CONFESSIONS

FALSE CONFESSIONS:

How Cops Break Down the Innocent

 

The Growing Tragedy of False Confessions: Yes, it does happen and more often than you might think. False Confessions are quickly joining the ranks of Mistaken or False Eye Witness Testimony as the number one reason for False Convictions in The United States. False confessions are not the only reason we have so many false convictions, but they have joined the ranks of other “FALSE INFORMATION”  that continues to lead to False Convictions and worse, False and Wrongful Executions.

     Here is a list of the top six contributing factors that lead to false convictions.

1.   MISTAKEN IDENTIFICATION

2.   FALSE CONFESSION

3.   FALSE ACCUSATION ( the cousin to False Confession)

4.   Government Misconduct

5.   Junk Science

6.   Poor Lawyering

 

 

 

                 “This is a progressive moment

                          It is ours to lose”

                                            -

Naomi

Klein

                          Author~ The Shock Doctrine http://www.naomiklein.org/shock-doctrine

 

By now most lawyers are familiar with the

Chicago

case, whereby two boys ages seven and eight where charged with the murder of an eleven year old girl named

Ryan

, for more information please visit

http://blog.law.northwestern.edu/bluhm/false_confessions/

But how many of us are familiar with the local

Louisiana

Case of STATE V MICHAEL HUTCHINGS?

     In this soon to be Landmark case, Shreveport/Bossier’s own Criminal Defense Attorney, pulled off what many say cannot be accomplished in   the very conservative Bossier Parish, part of the 26^th Judicial District. I can attest, from my personal experience as the former Chief Assistant District Attorney in charge of the Violent Crimes Division that the longstanding belief among the District Attorney is nothing shorter than this:

“ Why waste time on Jury Selection, if you are the State, for in Bossier parish, we can select the first 12 people to sit on a jury and all we have to do is tell them to convict -----and they will….”  Name Withheld.

Fortunately for

Michael

Hutchings

, justice was not such an easy “Given” for the Bossier Parish District Attorney’s office. Both sides took their time in carefully selecting a fair and impartial jury. That same jury carefully listened to all of the evidence {and lack thereof} and took their oath as serious as it was intended.

Hutchings was accused of the most heinous of all crimes; aggravated rape of a 13 year old child. The State’s case was based primarily on

·        The false confession of a mentally retarded defendant

·        3 Gingerbread House interviews of the minor children

·        State’s expert witness,

Dr.

Deborah

Brown

, Gingerbread House Counselor

·       

Dr.

Jennifer

Rodriquez

,

Cara

Center

Medical Examiner

·       

Dr.

George

Sieden

v The Bossier City Police Detective who obtained the ‘false confession’ from Michael Hutchings, the mentally retarded client of prominent defense attorney, Elton Richey, was currently being sued in The United States Federal District Court for use of intimidating confession tactics; and

v Had previously been accused of using intimidating tactics during the alleged confessions of other mentally retarded suspects

ü But, the real kick in the throat is that this Bossier Detective who was previously accused of using intimidating and unorthodox means of obtaining confessions from the mentally challenged; was accused by J. Michael Lawrence, who just happened to be the prosecutor in the instant case of STATE V MICHAEL HUTCHINGS,   not while serving in his capacity as a prosecutor, of course, but the same person responsible for prosecuting Hutchings and sitting as lead prosecutor in the case, is the same person who accused this detective of unscrupulous tactics when obtaining confessions of the mentally challenged; when he Mr. Mike Lawrence was still working as a defense attorney for the indigent defender board.

ü This police detective, it was shown through the excellent attorney skills of

Elton

Richey

is responsible for at least two prior false confessions in murder cases.

Now how is that for twisted Justice?

Elton

Richey

did a thorough job of investigating all possible angles for his client. He did an excellent job for his client and his work will stand out for years to come as a guideline, a bar so to speak for other defense attorneys to work just as hard  to ensure that their clients get the very best representation possible, whether they are a paid, private attorney or an attorney appointed by the state.

Richey has always been held in highest regard among the criminal defense bar and he is known for not leaving any stone unturned. He deserves to be commended for a job well done. He has exhibited strong moral character and his acquittal is for his client, but it is also for the entire criminal justice system. His work ethic goes a very long way in demonstrating what hard work and fair play can accomplish on our judicial system.

Mr.

Richey

has won an acquittal for his client and he has won a long overdue fight for the rights of the mentally challenged and for the accused in general.

Richey was successful in preventing a state witness from being recognized as an expert in an area he is not an expert.

Mr.

Richey

used his talent and skill in obtaining the best witnesses for the defense. He called

Dr.

Solomon

Fulero

as an expert in the field of interrogation tactics and false confessions. He also called

Dr.

Bruce

McCormick

as an expert in the field of “suggestibility of children” and also called expert witnesses for the defense;

Dr.

mark

Vigen and Pediatric urologist,

Dr.

John Van Savage.

Kudos to

Elton

Richey

for continuing to give a good name to

Louisiana

’s criminal defense bar.

For more information on False Confessions please read

THE TRAGEDIES OF FALSE CONFESSIONS BY

RALPH

NADER

The Tragedy Of False Confessions

by Ralph Nader

There are enough injustices in our society without innocent people being convicted of heinous crimes. Yet, it turns out that happens with far greater frequency than we ever imagined. DNA testing, a relatively new phenomenon, has already exonerated 175 people convicted of crimes. Then the more amazing part: one fifth of them had confessed to the crime! And when it comes to false confessions, this is only the tip of the iceberg. One study by two law professors documented 125 proven false confessions - these include people exonerated before or during trial. And these are only the cases we /know/ about. Why would anyone confess to a crime he didn't commit? A new website/blog devoted to false confessions (www.truthaboutfalseconfessions.com), created by my sometime co-author Alan Hirsch , notes many reasons. But, Hirsch says, "In most cases, it's a function of interrogation tactics geared to break people down. These tactics succeed too well - they break down innocent people." Some of the tactics are obviously deplorable. For example, interrogators exaggerate or fabricate evidence -- for example, falsely telling a suspect that eyewitnesses saw him commit the crime. They often imply that the suspect will receive lenient treatment if he confesses and the most severe punishment if he refuses. Many false confessors are young or borderline mentally retarded, but the interrogation tactics taught to police could break down anyone. (In one social science experiment, students at Williams College falsely confessed to misconduct when confronted with bogus evidence.) The Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution protects a person from being a "witness against himself." All too often that is what happens - not on the witness stand but in the police station, and even after a person has been read his rights. The spirit and sometimes letter of the Fifth Amendment are violated routinely as such police cajole and bully innocent people to confess. Prosecutors, judges, and juries usually ratify the error because they can't believe the confessor innocent - only adding to the suspect's Kafkaesque nightmare. Why would the police engage in outrageous tactics that implicate the innocent? For the same reason that prosecutors, judges, and juries play their roles in this tragedy - they are convinced that no one would actually confess if he were innocent. Since we now know that this intuition is false, we need to take measures that guard against false confessions. Hirsch's website proposes a range of reforms, including mandatory taping of interrogations. But, he suggests, the most important reform is education. Everyone must recognize that false confessions can and do occur. The realization is particularly important among law enforcement and judges -- but also everyday citizens. This is partly because everyday citizens comprise juries, and it is typically juries who convict false confessors. Ordinary citizens also elect representatives, and some of the necessary reforms require legislation. Again, nothing will happen until we overcome the intuition that innocent people don't confess. How strong is that intuition? Even /after/ DNA exoneration, many defendants remain incarcerated or have to face another trial, because prosecutors or judges still refuse to believe that the confession was false. Sometimes prosecutors concoct an entirely new theory of the case (for example, that the defendant was an accomplice rather than the actual perpetrator) supported by zero evidence. False confessions are far from the only cause of wrongful conviction. Other common sources include mistaken identification, false accusations (a cousin of false confessions), government misconduct, junk science, and poor defense lawyering. Some of these problems are particularly acute, such as the unreliability of eyewitness identification and the inadequacy of many over-worked and under-funded public defenders and court-appointed attorneys. The reality of wrongful convictions has many ramifications, including for capital punishment. Some people who do not object to the death penalty in principle recognize that it will inevitably result (and no doubt already has) in the execution of some innocent people. Indeed, some of the wrongfully convicted exonerated by DNA were only days away from execution. We cannot possibly accept putting people to death without knowing that they are guilty. The false confession phenomenon is a powerful reminder that we often /think/ we're certain of guilt without an adequate basis. After all, what could be more reliable than a defendant's own admission that he committed the crime? That's what we used to think. Now that we know better, it should give people pause about many aspects of our criminal justice system, including the death penalty. For serious insight into these problems, for laymen and lawyers alike, and a sense of what you can do to help, www.truthaboutfalseconfessions.com is a good place to start

http://www.commondreams.org/views06/0508-29.htm

OTHER INTERESTING & INFORMATIVE LINKS

VIA

FALSE CONFESSIONS:

http://gritsforbreakfast.blogspot.com/2009/07/are-false-confessions-coerced-or.html

http://texascriminaldefenselawyer.blogspot.com/

Please leave comments, questions, suggestions, etc. your comments and questions will be answered. If you are aware of a case that hinged on a false confession; we would like to hear about it.

THE TAX MAN IS LOGGING IN, SOCIAL NETWORK USERS-BEWARE

THE TAX

MAN

IS LOGGING IN

While I was typing away on my keyboard last night in my office, trying once again to get twelve more hours of a brief completed in two hours (why do I always and I do mean always underestimate the amount of time required to prepare an awesome, kick butt, persuasive brief?)

     I have been told that my ADHD (adult hyperactive attention disorder) is a contributing factor. I have also learned that one of the many, not so glowing characteristics of adults who suffer from ADD or ADHD have other flaws in common. Not the least of which is our inability to arrive timely. I certainly suffer from this  but I doubt the Judge’s I appear in front of will allow me to turn in an article I read on the web as my excuse, my plea to avoid another tongue lashing.

    See, my ADHD already took me on a diverted path as I write this article. Let me turn your attention (more accurately-my attention) back to the current issue.) As you can see I am easily distracted, so when a floating blip cruised my screen with the byline:

IRS

now using Face Book, MySpace, Twitter and other social networks to nab delinquent tax payers; I had to read it.

     The article was followed by an interesting, informative and downright scary video from fox business news.

     Reporter,

Sandra

Smith

said it best, “When the

IRS

needs to generate revenue they will use every hook or crook.” Apparently The Internal Revenue Service has been using social network sites to get information on delinquent tax payers. In some cases they have even been able to nab tax evaders by logging on to Face Book, MySpace, Twitter and other social network sites.

     In one case reported by Fox Business News, the tax man logged on to MySpace and found the location of a tax evader who listed his new address as part of a relocation application that was sent out to all his MySpace friends. This man posted a comment alerting all that he was relocating back to his hometown for his new job. He was a realtor and even gave the name of his new boss and the real estate agency he would be working for & boasted about his increase in salary. The

IRS

successfully seized his assets, bank accounts, real property and recovered the full amount owed.

     On the subject of boasting, one high priced

D.J.

, boasted about an upcoming gig he landed and how much money he was making. He gave a detailed description of the celebrity party in

California

where he would be hosting as a top dog DJ. The

IRS

agents made an unannounced visit to the party and nabbed the DJ.

    Fox new reporter gives these suggestions if you are a regular on social networking sites and you are on the run from the tax man. You may want to take these precautions.

·       Mark you privacy settings so that only your actual friends, not even friends of friends, can view your profile and your personal information

·       Don’t list personal information that discloses your location, relocation, income, job status, salary, bonuses

·       Don’t boast about income

·       Don’t boast about expensive and elaborate vacations

·       Don’t post photos of your recent trip to the South of France

·       Don’t post photos that may disclose you location

·       Don’t brag about your new Beemer or corvette or post photos of your new car, motorcycle or RV. (You get the picture) just don’t share it with the world.

Sandra

Smith

contacted some State and Federal

IRS

agents to get their scoop. They admitted scouring social network sites to nab delinquent tax payers and tax evaders. One agent talked about how easy MySpace, Face Book and Twitter are making his job. He said that agents used to have to go into local communities and try to talk to family and friends or former co workers about any information they may have about the subject of the

IRS

’s investigation. Now they just log on and POOF it is all there for the world to see.

     Which has to lead to this question: What are the limitations on this new kind of scouring for dead beat tax payers? MySpace, which is owned by the same parent corporation as Fox Business news had little to say about the issue. It is so new that the lines have not been clearly drawn, but there are some limitations.

     For Example, they agents cannot log on and pose as or pretend to be a friend of the target of their investigation. But I have to wonder; who is policing them and how can we be certain they will not pose as a friend. We accept so many friends of friends and so on and so on.

     The

IRS

had this to say in response,”If it is public information, we can access it.” So there you have it. You have been warned. Take precautions. If you are not a delinquent tax payer, take precautions anyway. We have already learned how the police are using the social sites to gain information on suspects and on fugitives. But there could be more dangerous consequences down the road. Isn’t this a breeding ground for stalking? Harassment by ex’s? The list is infinite. Guard your personal information just as you would lock your doors to your home.

     For more, check out the story at www.foxbusiness.com

And don’t miss this video:

http://video.foxbusiness.com/8785913/tax-man-is-logging-in/?category_id=b56a32bfe7af4a7bd95bd9d88962a05c8ec92b22

http://video.foxbusiness.com/8785913/tax-man-is-logging-in/?category_id=b56a32bfe7af4a7bd95bd9d88962a05c8ec92b22