textfiles-politics/regexConsp/bor-stat.xml

<xml><p>   Feel free to copy this article far and wide, but please
   keep my name and this sentence on it.</p>

<p>    The Bill of Rights, a Status Report
    by Eric Postpischil</p>

<p>    4 September 1990</p>

<p>   6 Hamlett Drive, Apt. 17
    Nashua, NH  03062</p>

<p>   edp@jareth.enet.dec.com</p>

<p>   How many rights do you have?  You should check, because it
   might not be as many today as it was a few years ago, or
   even a few months ago.  Some people I talk to are not
   concerned that police will execute a search warrant without
   knocking or that they set up roadblocks and stop and
   interrogate innocent citizens.  They do not regard these as
   great infringements on their rights.  But when you put
   current events together, there is information that may be
   surprising to people who have not yet been concerned:  The
   amount of the Bill of Rights that is under attack is
   alarming.</p>

<p>   Let's take a look at the Bill of Rights and see which
   aspects are being pushed on or threatened.  The point here
   is not the degree of each attack or its rightness or
   wrongness, but the sheer number of rights that are under
   attack.</p>

<p>    Amendment I</p>

<p>    Congress shall make no law respecting an
    establishment of religion, or prohibiting the
    free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom
    of speech, or of the press; or the right of the
    people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the
    Government for a redress of grievances.</p>

<p>   ESTABLISHING RELIGION:  While campaigning for his first
   term, George Bush said "I don't know that atheists should
   be considered as citizens, nor should they be considered
   patriots."  Bush has not retracted, commented on, or
   clarified this statement, in spite of requests to do so. 
   According to Bush, this is one nation under God.  And
   apparently if you are not within Bush's religious beliefs,
   you are not a citizen.  Federal, state, and local
   governments also promote a particular religion (or,
   occasionally, religions) by spending public money on
   religious displays.</p>

<p>   FREE EXERCISE OF RELIGION:  Robert Newmeyer and Glenn
   Braunstein were jailed in 1988 for refusing to stand in
   respect for a judge.  Braunstein says the tradition of
   rising in court started decades ago when judges entered
   carrying Bibles.  Since judges no longer carry Bibles,
   Braunstein says there is no reason to stand -- and his
   Bible tells him to honor no other God.  For this religious
   practice, Newmeyer and Braunstein were jailed and are now
   suing.</p>

<p>   FREE SPEECH:  We find that technology has given the
   government an excuse to interfere with free speech. 
   Claiming that radio frequencies are a limited resource, the
   government tells broadcasters what to say (such as news and
   public and local service programming) and what not to say
   (obscenity, as defined by the Federal Communications
   Commission [FCC]).  The FCC is investigating Boston PBS
   station WGBH-TV for broadcasting photographs from the
   Mapplethorpe exhibit.</p>

<p>   FREE SPEECH:  There are also laws to limit political
   statements and contributions to political activities.  In
   1985, the Michigan Chamber of Commerce wanted to take out
   an advertisement supporting a candidate in the state house
   of representatives.  But a 1976 Michigan law prohibits a
   corporation from using its general treasury funds to make
   independent expenditures in a political campaign.  In
   March, the Supreme Court upheld that law.  According to
   dissenting Justice Kennedy, it is now a felony in Michigan
   for the Sierra Club, the American Civil Liberties Union, or
   the Chamber of Commerce to advise the public how a
   candidate voted on issues of urgent concern to their
   members.</p>

<p>   FREE PRESS:  As in speech, technology has provided another
   excuse for government intrusion in the press.  If you
   distribute a magazine electronically and do not print
   copies, the government doesn't consider you a press and
   does not give you the same protections courts have extended
   to printed news.  The equipment used to publish Phrack, a
   worldwide electronic magazine about phones and hacking, was
   confiscated after publishing a document copied from a Bell
   South computer entitled "A Bell South Standard Practice
   (BSP) 660-225-104SV Control Office Administration of
   Enhanced 911 Services for Special Services and Major
   Account Centers, March, 1988."  All of the information in
   this document was publicly available from Bell South in
   other documents.  The government has not alleged that the
   publisher of Phrack, Craig Neidorf, was involved with or
   participated in the copying of the document.  Also, the
   person who copied this document from telephone company
   computers placed a copy on a bulletin board run by Rich
   Andrews.  Andrews forwarded a copy to AT&amp;T officials and
   cooperated with authorities fully.  In return, the Secret
   Service (SS) confiscated Andrews' computer along with all
   the mail and data that were on it.  Andrews was not charged
   with any crime.</p>

<p>   FREE PRESS:  In another incident that would be comical if
   it were not true, on March 1 the SS ransacked the offices
   of Steve Jackson Games (SJG); irreparably damaged property;
   and confiscated three computers, two laser printers,
   several hard disks, and many boxes of paper and floppy
   disks.  The target of the SS operation was to seize all
   copies of a game of fiction called GURPS Cyberpunk.  The
   Cyberpunk game contains fictitious break-ins in a
   futuristic world, with no technical information of actual
   use with real computers, nor is it played on computers. 
   The SS never filed any charges against SJG but still
   refused to return confiscated property.</p>

<p>   PEACEABLE ASSEMBLY:  The right to assemble peaceably is no
   longer free -- you have to get a permit.  Even that is not
   enough; some officials have to be sued before they realize
   their reasons for denying a permit are not Constitutional.</p>

<p>   PEACEABLE ASSEMBLY:  In Alexandria, Virginia, there is a
   law that prohibits people from loitering for more than
   seven minutes and exchanging small objects.  Punishment is
   two years in jail.  Consider the scene in jail:  "What'd
   you do?"  "I was waiting at a bus stop and gave a guy a
   cigarette."  This is not an impossible occurrence:  In
   Pittsburgh, Eugene Tyler, 15, has been ordered away from
   bus stops by police officers.  Sherman Jones, also 15, was
   accosted with a police officer's hands around his neck
   after putting the last bit of pizza crust into his mouth.
   The police suspected him of hiding drugs.</p>

<p>   PETITION FOR REDRESS OF GRIEVANCES:  Rounding out the
   attacks on the first amendment, there is a sword hanging
   over the right to petition for redress of grievances. 
   House Resolution 4079, the National Drug and Crime
   Emergency Act, tries to "modify" the right to habeas
   corpus.  It sets time limits on the right of people in
   custody to petition for redress and also limits the courts
   in which such an appeal may be heard.</p>

<p>    Amendment II</p>

<p>    A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the
    security of a free State, the right of the people
    to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.</p>

<p>   RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS:  This amendment is so commonly
   challenged that the movement has its own name:  gun
   control.  Legislation banning various types of weapons is
   supported with the claim that the weapons are not for
   "legitimate" sporting purposes.  This is a perversion of
   the right to bear arms for two reasons.  First, the basis
   of freedom is not that permission to do legitimate things
   is granted to the people, but rather that the government is
   empowered to do a limited number of legitimate things --
   everything else people are free to do; they do not need to
   justify their choices.  Second, should the need for defense
   arise, it will not be hordes of deer that the security of a
   free state needs to be defended from.  Defense would be
   needed against humans, whether external invaders or
   internal oppressors.  It is an unfortunate fact of life
   that the guns that would be needed to defend the security
   of a state are guns to attack people, not guns for sporting
   purposes.</p>

<p>   Firearms regulations also empower local officials, such as
   police chiefs, to grant or deny permits.  This results in
   towns where only friends of people in the right places are
   granted permits, or towns where women are generally denied
   the right to carry a weapon for self-defense.</p>

<p>     Amendment III</p>

<p>    No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered
    in any house, without the consent of the Owner,
    nor in time of war, but in a manner to be
    prescribed by law.</p>

<p>   QUARTERING SOLDIERS:  This amendment is fairly clean so
   far, but it is not entirely safe.  Recently, 200 troops in
   camouflage dress with M-16s and helicopters swept through
   Kings Ridge National Forest in Humboldt County, California. 
   In the process of searching for marijuana plants for four
   days, soldiers assaulted people on private land with M-16s
   and barred them from their own property.  This might not be
   a direct hit on the third amendment, but the disregard for
   private property is uncomfortably close.</p>

<p>    Amendment IV</p>

<p>    The right of the people to be secure in their
    persons, houses, papers and effects, against
    unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be
    violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon
    probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation,
    and particularly describing the place to be
    searched, and the persons or things to be seized.</p>

<p>   RIGHT TO BE SECURE IN PERSONS, HOUSES, PAPERS AND EFFECTS
   AGAINST UNREASONABLE SEARCHES AND SEIZURES:  The RICO law
   is making a mockery of the right to be secure from seizure. 
   Entire stores of books or videotapes have been confiscated
   based upon the presence of some sexually explicit items. 
   Bars, restaurants, or houses are taken from the owners
   because employees or tenants sold drugs.  In Volusia
   County, Florida, Sheriff Robert Vogel and his officers stop
   automobiles for contrived violations.  If large amounts of
   cash are found, the police confiscate it on the PRESUMPTION
   that it is drug money -- even if there is no other evidence
   and no charges are filed against the car's occupants.  The
   victims can get their money back only if they prove the
   money was obtained legally.  One couple got their money
   back by proving it was an insurance settlement.  Two other
   men who tried to get their two thousand dollars back were
   denied by the Florida courts.
   
   RIGHT TO BE SECURE IN PERSONS, HOUSES, PAPERS AND EFFECTS
   AGAINST UNREASONABLE SEARCHES AND SEIZURES:  A new law goes
   into effect in Oklahoma on January 1, 1991. All property,
   real and personal, is taxable, and citizens are required to
   list all their personal property for tax assessors,
   including household furniture, gold and silver plate,
   musical instruments, watches, jewelry, and personal,
   private, or professional libraries.  If a citizen refuses
   to list their property or is suspected of not listing
   something, the law directs the assessor to visit and enter
   the premises, getting a search warrant if necessary.  Being
   required to tell the state everything you own is not being
   secure in one's home and effects.
   
   NO WARRANTS SHALL ISSUE, BUT UPON PROBABLE CAUSE, SUPPORTED
   BY OATH OR AFFIRMATION:  As a supporting oath or
   affirmation, reports of anonymous informants are accepted.
   This practice has been condoned by the Supreme Court.</p>

<p>   PARTICULARLY DESCRIBING THE PLACE TO BE SEARCHED AND
   PERSONS OR THINGS TO BE SEIZED:  Today's warrants do not
   particularly describe the things to be seized -- they list
   things that might be present.  For example, if police are
   making a drug raid, they will list weapons as things to be
   searched for and seized.  This is done not because the
   police know of any weapons and can particularly describe
   them, but because they allege people with drugs often have
   weapons.</p>

<p>   Both of the above apply to the warrant the Hudson, New
   Hampshire, police used when they broke down Bruce Lavoie's
   door at 5 a.m. with guns drawn and shot and killed him. 
   The warrant claimed information from an anonymous
   informant, and it said, among other things, that guns were
   to be seized.  The mention of guns in the warrant was used
   as reason to enter with guns drawn.  Bruce Lavoie had no
   guns.  Bruce Lavoie was not secure from unreasonable search
   and seizure -- nor is anybody else.</p>

<p>   Other infringements on the fourth amendment include
   roadblocks and the Boston Police detention of people based
   on colors they are wearing (supposedly indicating gang
   membership).  And in Pittsburgh again, Eugene Tyler was
   once searched because he was wearing sweat pants and a
   plaid shirt -- police told him they heard many drug dealers
   at that time were wearing sweat pants and plaid shirts.
   </p>

<p>    Amendment V</p>

<p>    No person shall be held to answer for a capital,
    or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a
    presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except
    in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or
    in the Militia, when in actual service in time of
    War or public danger; nor shall any person be
    subject to the same offence to be twice put in
    jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled
    in any criminal case to be a witness against
    himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or
    property, without due process of law; nor shall
    private property be taken for public use without
    just compensation.</p>

<p>   INDICTMENT OF A GRAND JURY:  Kevin Bjornson has been
   proprietor of Hydro-Tech for nearly a decade and is a
   leading authority on hydroponic technology and cultivation. 
   On October 26, 1989, both locations of Hydro-Tech were
   raided by the Drug Enforcement Administration.  National
   Drug Control Policy Director William Bennett has declared
   that some indoor lighting and hydroponic equipment is
   purchased by marijuana growers, so retailers and
   wholesalers of such equipment are drug profiteers and
   co-conspirators.  Bjornson was not charged with any crime,
   nor subpoenaed, issued a warrant, or arrested.  No illegal
   substances were found on his premises.  Federal officials
   were unable to convince grand juries to indict Bjornson. 
   By February, they had called scores of witnesses and
   recalled many two or three times, but none of the grand
   juries they convened decided there was reason to criminally
   prosecute Bjornson.  In spite of that, as of March, his
   bank accounts were still frozen and none of the inventories
   or records had been returned.  Grand juries refused to
   indict Bjornson, but the government is still penalizing
   him.</p>

<p>   TWICE PUT IN JEOPARDY OF LIFE OR LIMB:  Members of the
   McMartin family in California have been tried two or three
   times for child abuse.  Anthony Barnaby was tried for
   murder (without evidence linking him to the crime) three
   times before New Hampshire let him go.</p>

<p>   COMPELLED TO BE A WITNESS AGAINST HIMSELF:  Oliver North
   was forced to testify against himself.  Congress granted
   him immunity from having anything he said to them being
   used as evidence against him, and then they required him to
   talk.  After he did so, what he said was used to find other
   evidence which was used against him.  The courts also play
   games where you can be required to testify against yourself
   if you testify at all.</p>

<p>   COMPELLED TO BE A WITNESS AGAINST HIMSELF:  In the New York
   Central Park assault case, three people were found guilty
   of assault.  But there was no physical evidence linking
   them to the crime; semen did not match any of the
   defendants.  The only evidence the state had was
   confessions.  To obtain these confessions, the police
   questioned a 15-year old without a parent present -- which
   is illegal under New York state law.  Police also refused
   to let the subject's Big Brother, an attorney for the
   Federal government, see him during questioning.  Police
   screamed "You better tell us what we want to hear and
   cooperate or you are going to jail," at 14-year-old Antron
   McCray, according to Bobby McCray, his father.  Antron
   McCray "confessed" after his father told him to, so that
   police would release him.  These people were coerced into
   bearing witness against themselves, and those confessions
   were used to convict them.</p>

<p>   COMPELLED TO BE A WITNESS AGAINST HIMSELF:  Your answers to
   Census questions are required by law, with a $100 penalty
   for each question not answered.  But people have been
   evicted for giving honest Census answers.  According to the
   General Accounting Office, one of the most frequent ways
   city governments use census information is to detect
   illegal two-family dwellings.  This has happened in
   Montgomery County, Maryland; Pullman, Washington; and Long
   Island, New York.  The August 8, 1989, Wall Street Journal
   reports this and other ways Census answers have been used
   against the answerers.
   
   COMPELLED TO BE A WITNESS AGAINST HIMSELF:  Drug tests are
   being required from more and more people, even when there
   is no probable cause, no accident, and no suspicion of drug
   use.  Requiring people to take drug tests compels them to
   provide evidence against themselves.
    
   DEPRIVED OF LIFE, LIBERTY, OR PROPERTY WITHOUT DUE PROCESS
   OF LAW:  This clause is violated on each of the items life,
   liberty, and property.  Incidents including such violations
   are described elsewhere in this article.  Here are two
   more:  On March 26, 1987, in Jeffersontown, Kentucky,
   Jeffrey Miles was killed by police officer John Rucker, who
   was looking for a suspected drug dealer.  Rucker had been
   sent to the wrong house; Miles was not wanted by police. 
   He received no due process.  In Detroit, $4,834 was seized
   from a grocery store after dogs detected traces of cocaine
   on three one-dollar bills in a cash register.
   
   PRIVATE PROPERTY TAKEN FOR PUBLIC USE WITHOUT JUST
   COMPENSATION:  RICO is shredding this aspect of the Bill of
   Rights.  The money confiscated by Sheriff Vogel goes
   directly into Vogel's budget; it is not regulated by the
   legislature.  Federal and local governments seize and
   auction boats, buildings, and other property.  Under RICO,
   the government is seizing property without due process. 
   The victims are required to prove not only that they are
   not guilty of a crime, but that they are entitled to their
   property.  Otherwise, the government auctions off the
   property and keeps the proceeds.</p>

<p>    Amendment VI</p>

<p>    In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall
    enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by
    an impartial jury of the State and district
    wherein the crime shall have been committed,
    which district shall have been previously
    ascertained by law, and to be informed of the
    nature and cause of the accusation; to be
    confronted with the witnesses against him; to
    have compulsory process for obtaining Witnesses
    in his favor, and to have the assistance of
    counsel for his defence.
   
   THE RIGHT TO A SPEEDY AND PUBLIC TRIAL:  Surprisingly, the
   right to a public trial is under attack.  When Marion Barry
   was being tried, the prosecution attempted to bar Louis
   Farrakhan and George Stallings from the gallery.  This
   request was based on an allegation that they would send
   silent and "impermissible messages" to the jurors.  The
   judge initially granted this request.  One might argue that
   the whole point of a public trial is to send a message to
   all the participants:  The message is that the public is
   watching; the trial had better be fair.
   
   BY AN IMPARTIAL JURY:  The government does not even honor
   the right to trial by an impartial jury.  US District Judge
   Edward Rafeedie is investigating improper influence on
   jurors by US marshals in the Enrique Camarena case.  US
   marshals apparently illegally communicated with jurors
   during deliberations.
   
   OF THE STATE AND DISTRICT WHEREIN THE CRIME SHALL HAVE BEEN
   COMMITTED:  This is incredible, but Manuel Noriega is being
   tried so far away from the place where he is alleged to
   have committed crimes that the United States had to invade
   another country and overturn a government to get him.  Nor
   is this a unique occurrence; in a matter separate from the
   Camarena case, Judge Rafeedie was asked to dismiss charges
   against Mexican gynecologist Dr. Humberto Alvarez Machain
   on the grounds that the doctor was illegally abducted from
   his Guadalajara office in April and turned over to US
   authorities.</p>

<p>   TO BE INFORMED OF THE NATURE AND CAUSE OF THE ACCUSATION: 
   Steve Jackson Games, nearly put out of business by the raid
   described previously, has been stonewalled by the SS.  "For
   the past month or so these guys have been insisting the
   book wasn't the target of the raid, but they don't say what
   the target was, or why they were critical of the book, or
   why they won't give it back," Steve Jackson says.  "They
   have repeatedly denied we're targets but don't explain why
   we've been made victims."  Attorneys for SJG tried to find
   out the basis for the search warrant that led to the raid
   on SJG.  But the application for that warrant was sealed by
   order of the court and remained sealed at last report, in
   July.  Not only has the SS taken property and nearly
   destroyed a publisher, it will not even explain the nature
   and cause of the accusations that led to the raid.</p>

<p>   TO BE CONFRONTED WITH THE WITNESSES AGAINST HIM:  The courts
   are beginning to play fast and loose with the right to
   confront witnesses.  Watch out for anonymous witnesses and
   videotaped testimony.</p>

<p>   TO HAVE COMPULSORY PROCESS FOR OBTAINING WITNESSES:  Ronald
   Reagan resisted submitting to subpoena and answering
   questions about Irangate, claiming matters of national
   security and executive privilege.  A judge had to dismiss
   some charges against Irangate participants because the
   government refused to provide information subpoenaed by the
   defendants.  And one wonders if the government would go
   to the same lengths to obtain witnesses for Manuel Noriega
   as it did to capture him.</p>

<p>   TO HAVE THE ASSISTANCE OF COUNSEL:  The right to assistance
   of counsel took a hit recently.  Connecticut Judge Joseph
   Sylvester is refusing to assign public defenders to people
   ACCUSED of drug-related crimes, including drunk driving.</p>

<p>   TO HAVE THE ASSISTANCE OF COUNSEL:  RICO is also affecting
   the right to have the assistance of counsel.  The
   government confiscates the money of an accused person,
   which leaves them unable to hire attorneys.  The IRS has
   served summonses nationwide to defense attorneys, demanding
   the names of clients who paid cash for fees exceeding
   $10,000.</p>

<p>     Amendment VII</p>

<p>    In Suits at common law, where the value in
    controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the
    right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no
    fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise
    reexamined in any Court of the United States,
    than according to the rules of common law.</p>

<p>   RIGHT OF TRIAL BY JURY IN SUITS AT COMMON LAW:  This is a
   simple right; so far the government has not felt threatened
   by it and has not made attacks on it that I am aware of. 
   This is our only remaining safe haven in the Bill of Rights.</p>

<p>     Amendment VIII</p>

<p>    Excessive bail shall not be required, nor
    excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual
    punishments inflicted.</p>

<p>   EXCESSIVE BAIL AND FINES:  Tallahatchie County in
   Mississippi charges ten dollars a day to each person who
   spends time in the jail, regardless of the length of stay
   or the outcome of their trial.  This means innocent people
   are forced to pay.  Marvin Willis was stuck in jail for 90
   days trying to raise $2,500 bail on an assault charge.  But
   after he made that bail, he was kept imprisoned because he
   could not pay the $900 rent Tallahatchie demanded.  Nine
   former inmates are suing the county for this practice.</p>

<p>   CRUEL AND UNUSUAL PUNISHMENTS:  House Resolution 4079
   sticks its nose in here too:  "... a Federal court shall
   not hold prison or jail crowding unconstitutional under the
   eighth amendment except to the extent that an individual
   plaintiff inmate proves that the crowding causes the
   infliction of cruel and unusual punishment of that
   inmate."</p>

<p>   CRUEL AND UNUSUAL PUNISHMENTS:  A life sentence for selling
   a quarter of a gram of cocaine for $20 -- that is what
   Ricky Isom was sentenced to in February in Cobb County,
   Georgia.  It was Isom's second conviction in two years, and
   state law imposes a mandatory sentence.  Even the judge
   pronouncing the sentence thinks it is cruel; Judge Tom
   Cauthorn expressed grave reservations before sentencing
   Isom and Douglas Rucks (convicted of selling 3.5 grams of
   cocaine in a separate but similar case).  Judge Cauthorn
   called the sentences "Draconian."</p>

<p>    Amendment IX</p>

<p>    The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain
    rights, shall not be construed to deny or
    disparage others retained by the people.</p>

<p>   OTHER RIGHTS RETAINED BY THE PEOPLE:  This amendment is so
   weak today that I will ask not what infringements there are
   on it but rather what exercise of it exists at all?  What
   law can you appeal to a court to find you not guilty of
   violating because the law denies a right retained by you?</p>

<p>    Amendment X</p>

<p>    The powers not delegated to the United States by
    the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the
    States, are reserved to the States respectively,
    or to the people.</p>

<p>   POWERS RESERVED TO THE STATES OR THE PEOPLE:  This
   amendment is also weak, although it is not so nonexistent
   as the ninth amendment.  But few states set their own speed
   limits or drinking age limits.  Today, we mostly think of
   this country as the -- singular -- United States, rather
   than a collection of states.  This concentration of power
   detaches laws from the desires of people -- and even of
   states.  House Resolution 4079 crops up again here -- it
   uses financial incentives to get states to set specific
   penalties for certain crimes.  Making their own laws
   certainly must be considered a right of the states, and
   this right is being infringed upon.</p>

<p>   Out of ten amendments, nine are under attack, most of them
   under multiple attacks of different natures, and some of
   them under a barrage.  If this much of the Bill of Rights
   is threatened, how can you be sure your rights are safe?  A
   right has to be there when you need it.  Like insurance,
   you cannot afford to wait until you need it and then set
   about procuring it or ensuring it is available.  Assurance
   must be made in advance.</p>

<p>   The bottom line here is that your rights are not safe.  You
   do not know when one of your rights will be violated.  A
   number of rights protect accused persons, and you may think
   it is not important to protect the rights of criminals. 
   But if a right is not there for people accused of crimes,
   it will not be there when you need it.  With the Bill of
   Rights in the sad condition described above, nobody can be
   confident they will be able to exercise the rights to which
   they are justly entitled.  To preserve our rights for
   ourselves in the future, we must defend them for everybody
   today.
</p></xml>