HOME |
RSS | 
This blog has the tagline “an illustrated introduction to criminal law and procedure.” It’s part webcomic and part law class, and all interesting. Author Nathaniel Burney breaks down criminal culpability into small pieces so we can understand some of the many facets of crime and the justice system. In the latest post, there are quite a few people who hate “you,” but they have different intents and take different actions. Which ones are guilty of attempted murder? The concepts are laid out in logical order from the beginning of the blog, but it’s not totally necessary to read them in order. Link -Thanks, Wiseayse!
You’ve seen it used as a plot device on TV dramas, but how much do you really know about the Witness Protection Program? I didn’t know that it’s a fairly recent (and American) idea.
It’s kind of surprising that the U.S. was the first to come up with the idea of creating a program to protect witnesses. Even stranger is that witness security is only about 40 years old. It began when the Organized Crime and Racketeering Section of the Justice Department introduced the Organized Crime Control Act of 1970 and started to actively protect witnesses in 1971. The law gave the Department of Justice freedom to arrange for the security of witnesses as they see fit, and though it was originally passed in order to curb mafia crimes, it now covers people who testify against drug cartels, gangs, and terrorist groups. The program was expanded by the Comprehensive Crime Control Act of 1984 to cover some relatives and associates of the witnesses. Though there are still some problems with the program, it has been incredibly effective in coercing witnesses to provide testimonies that have landed major criminals in prison.
There are more details in the list of 10 Things You Didn’t Know About Witness Protection. Link
Real life “trolling” has taken the form of corporations who file many patents on products that they don’t actually produce in an effort to file patent lawsuits against others in hopes of getting large out of court settlements. In this case however justice came down on the right side by fining the phony company and the lawyers involved.
Citing the over 100 lawsuits Eon-Net (the troll) had filed, all followed by quick demands for settlements, the court’s decision said that the lawsuit had ”indicia of extortion,” fined the lawyers under Rule 11 for filing lawsuits with the intent to harass and ultimately found against the troll. As if that wasn’t enough, the court also pointed out that Eon-Net is a non-practicing company, which provides it with generally undeserved protection against counter patent-infringement lawsuits because, well, it doesn’t do anything.
Patent trolling and the public awareness of it has reached fever pitch lately and many are calling for change to the patent system. This decision seems to be a step in the right direction. The practices were pretty obviously extortionary in nature and that does constitute an invalid purpose for a lawsuit. Due to the extreme costs of going to court, which can cost the accused oodles of cash even after they win, most of the accused companies settle. This decision may, and hopefully will, set a precedent that patent trolling is not okay to do. Of course what exactly constitues patent trolling, extortion and rule 11 violations are bound to be hotly debated for a while into the future. This should, however, give the patent trolls pause before they threaten that next batch of lawsuits.
What would you do if someone killed your child, and authorities refused to extradite the suspect? Here’s what one father allegedly did:
A retired accountant whose daughter was killed 27 years ago was facing charges last night over the alleged abduction of the man he always blamed for her death. The man was left bound, gagged and injured outside a French courtroom.
André Bamberski, 72, is suspected of taking justice into his own hands over the German authorities’ failure to act against Dieter Krombach, a German cardiologist, after a French court convicted him of manslaughter in his absence.
Mr Krombach, 74, was found trussed up with head injuries in a lane near the criminal court in the eastern city of Mulhouse on Sunday after an anonymous caller with an Eastern European accent tipped off police. Mr Bamberski, who is of Polish origin and lives near Toulouse, was in Mulhouse at the weekend and is suspected of making the call, police said.
Link (Photo: Remy Gabalda/AFP/Getty Images)
Do two wrongs make a right or is Bamberski – if he did do it – justified in kidnapping the alleged (Update 10/26/09: alleged/convicted – there’s controversy about this) killer? What would YOU do if it were your child?
