Law and Disorder February 1, 2021

Attorney Mara Verheyden-Hilliard: Law Enforcement Caught Off Guard On January 6th?

Many are saying that the police were caught off guard when rioters stormed the nation’s capitol on January 6, 2021, leaving four people dead. It was the most significant breach of Congress in more than 200 years, and pro-Trump rioters promised that it won’t be the last. In their violent and lawless efforts to upend what they called a fraudulent election, they faced minimal police resistance. Far-right mobs smashed windows and doors, stormed the Capitol behind a traitorous, terrorist Confederate flag, and broke into the Senate chamber.

Unlike Black Lives Matter protesters and legions of peaceful protesters before them, police have consistently used potentially lethal weapons to disburse and social justice mass demonstrations. But how could the Capitol be unprepared? Word on social media and in the news was that fascists planned to converge in throngs prior to the changing of presidential administrations.

Guest – Attorney Mara Verheyden-Hilliard, with the Partnership for Civil Justice Fund, that is partnering with the newly-formed Center for Protest Law and Litigation, to demand a fully public investigation into law enforcement’s handling of the riot on the Capitol Building on that day that shocked much of the nation.

Fred Hampton: The Fight For Truth

Fred Hampton was the young dynamic leader of the Chicago chapter of the Black Panther Party. On December 4, 1969 he was assassinated. An assassination is a political murder. He was assassinated as part of FBI leader J. Edgar Hoover‘s Cointelpro program. Cointelpro was initiated by Hoover to disrupt, destroy and neutralize the Party and the civil rights movement. Malcolm X and Martin Luther King had already been killed under suspicious circumstances.

Chicago attorney Flint Taylor of the Peoples Law Office, who along with Jeff Haas, Dennis Cunningham, and Morton Stavis of the Center for Constitutional Rights was part of a team that after 13 years of litigation were able to prove that the FBI, the Chicago police, and the Chicago States Attorney were guilty of killing Fred Hampton, his fellow Black Panther Mark Clark, and wounding several others.

The murders took place in a pre-dawn raid on Hampton‘s apartment. An FBI informer, William O’Neal, supplied the killers with a map of the apartment showing where Fred was sleeping. and drugged, probably by O’Neal, when the police opened fire with a hail of 90 bullets. A Chicago police officer fired two shots into Hampton’s head at close range as he lay in bed.

It has recently been disclosed that O’Neal’s control control agent. Roy Mitchell, was paid a bonus for his and O’Neal’s role in the assassination, and that Hoover, and his top lieutenants William Sullivan and George Moore, were aware of O’Neal’s activities and authorized this award directly after the raid. What are the lessons we can learn from this? Is the FBI still carrying on Cointelpro type operations? How do we protect ourselves?

Guest – Attorney Flint TaylorFlint and Jeff Haas have recently written an article about the new information which can be found on Truthout and the Black Agenda Report. Flint, welcome back to Law And Disorder.

 

 

————————————–

Law and Disorder January 11, 2021

Hosts Heidi Boghosian and Michael Smith interviewed some of Michael Ratner’s closest friends and colleagues as part of a special broadcast highlighting Michael Ratner’s legal work and mentorship. The special also marked the upcoming release of Michael Ratner’s autobiography Moving The Bar: My Life As A Radical Lawyer published by OR Books. In this one hour taken from the two hour fundraiser broadcast, we hear from attorneys including Eleanor Stein, Richard Levy, Ray Brescia, David Cole and Baher Azmy.

Michael Ratner’s pathbreaking legal and political work is unmatched. He provided crucial support for the Cuban Revolution and won the seminal case in the Supreme Court guaranteeing the right of habeas corpus to Guantanamo detainees. Michael also challenged U.S. policy in Iraq, Haiti, Nicaragua, Guatemala, Puerto Rico and Israel-Palestine. This book is a testament to his unflagging efforts on behalf of the poor and oppressed around the world.

– Marjorie Cohn, Professor Emerita, Thomas Jefferson School of Law

Michael Ratner personified lawyering that brought both radical and human values into challenges to the use of governmental power to violate the essence of the Bill of Rights. From the torture of prisoners after 911 to the massive racial profiling by the New York Police Department, Michael’s voice and vision continue to resonate. This book provides a powerful testament to the spirit of this extraordinary man.

– Attorney Bill Goodman

 

 

Law and Disorder January 4, 2021

  • Commentary On The 2020 Election By Attorney Jim Lafferty

—-

holly_colleagues2 2003alumniMaguigan2

Lawyers You’ll Like: Professor Holly Maguigan

In our Lawyers You’ll Like series we’re joined by Professor Holly Maguigan, Professor of Clinical Law at the New York University School of Law, where she teaches Comparative Criminal Justice Clinic: Focus on Domestic Violence and Evidence. Professor Maguigan is an expert on the criminal trials of battered women. Her research and teaching is interdisciplinary. Professor Maguigan is a member of the Family Violence Prevention Fund’s National Advisory Committee on Cultural Considerations in Domestic Violence cases. She serves on the boards of directors of the National Clearinghouse for the Defense of Battered Women and the William Moses Kunstler Fund for Racial Justice. She is a past co-president of the Society of American Law Teachers, the largest membership organization of law professors in the U.S.

Professor Holly Maguigan:

  • I was doing medieval history and I was at Berkeley. It was 1967 and Oakland stopped the draft.
  • I got very interested in the anti-war politics.
  • I hated lawyers. I really hated lawyers. They were boring. They talked about themselves all the time. They only had stories about their cases and how great they were and they would never post bail when people got arrested.
  • The University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia is where I stayed for 17 years.
  • First I started out as a public defender. I loved being a public defender, it was the beginning and end of everything I hoped it would be.
  • That’s where I met David Rudovsky and David Kairys. They were then defenders while I was a student.
  • After they went out on their own, they kept inviting me to join them. I kept putting it off because I loved being a defender so much.
  • In Philadelphia there was much more actual litigation, not just motion litigation there’s a lot of that here in New York City but actual trials.
  • You had a sense, there was an analysis that people were doing life on the installment plan and you needed to do what you could to kick them loose any particular time.
  • It was a community in its own odd way and I found it difficult to leave it.
  • I was doing major felonies within a couple of years.
  • David Kairys was very focused on constitutional litigation and government misconduct. He did the Camden 28 which was a big draft resistance case.
  • My interest was more into criminal defense.
  • Grand juries (all over the country) convened to investigate the alleged transportation of Patty Hearst by the SLA from California where she had been captured.
  • He was a killer. (Frank Rizzo) There was no question. More people died in police actions before or since.
  • I don’t mean to suggest that all the police started out as homocidal. This was a situation which from the top down came the message if you’re a good cop then you’re going to take people out however you think you need to.
  • I knew about race and class bias in the court room as much as a white woman who was middle class could know.
  • I was just blown away by what happens when you add hatred of women to hatred of black people and hatred of poor people.
  • Judges would go by me in the hall and say Maguigan, ahem, you didn’t give me anything this Christmas, not even one lousy bottle, you’re not getting any assignments.
  • Judges would do things, like open the drawer in their chambers, and there would be wads of bills, and they’d let you know.
  • I developed a specialty on women who kill men.
  • In the early eighties a group in Philadelphia called Women Against Abuse began working and they did advocacy for battered women accused of crime and meant a huge difference.
  • The battered women cases I was working on were quite consuming because people then didn’t know very much in how to try these cases.
  • The judges expected you to plead insanity or guilty. Reasonable doubt was a consideration at sentencing not at trial.
  • There were cases that did require teams. There was no question.
  • I wanted to be in court. I wanted to be in the presence of that conflict between the authorities and regular people.
  • I went to NYU where I taught in the criminal defense clinic for many years.
  • To see students react to the great stories their clients have is just amazing.
  • SALT (Society of American Law Teachers) is about who gets into law school, what they learn and who teaches them. It’s about access to justice. It’s about relating to law school as a place where you train people to do social justice.  SALT’s focus is on students and teaching.
  • Holly Maguigan to be honored by Society of American Law Teachers.

Guest – Professor Holly Maguigan teaches a criminal defense clinic and one in comparative criminal justice as well as a seminar in global public service lawyering and a course in evidence. She is an expert on the criminal trials of battered women. Her research and teaching are interdisciplinary. Of particular importance in her litigation and scholarship are the obstacles to fair trials experienced by people accused of crimes who are not part of the dominant culture. Professor Maguigan is a member of the Family Violence Prevention Fund’s National Advisory Committee on Cultural Considerations in Domestic Violence cases. She serves on the boards of directors of the National Clearinghouse for the Defense of Battered Women and the William Moses Kunstler Fund for Racial Justice. She is a past co-president of the Society of American Law Teachers, the largest membership organization of law professors in the U.S.

Law and Disorder December 28, 2020

  • Commentary On Julian Assange’s Case By Attorney Jim Lafferty

Capital Punishment: Mumia Abu-Jamal And Heidi Boghosian

Journalist and activist Mumia Abu-Jamal spent 40 years on death row in Pennsylvania. As listeners will recall, in 2012 his death penalty sentence was overturned by a Federal Court and he entered general population. While on death row he published 13 books and numerous commentaries on issues of social justice and the carceral state. In a special interview, Mumia joins us to reflect on capital punishment and its relationship to our modern society.

—-

CCR: A Rights Based Vision for the First 100 Days

Some political skeptics , distrusting of the incoming Biden administration, are saying that it’s “ out with the old in with the older.“ That is that the old neo-liberal crew from the Obama/Clinton days are back in power and that little will change, nothing fundamental.

They are especially concerned about the impending climate catastrophe, systemic racism, the threat of nuclear war, the shifting of wealth from the bottom to the top, and the never ending forever wars. The Center for Constitution Rights has developed a comprehensive program to challenge this. It is called A Rights Based Vision for the First 100 Days.

Guest – Center for Constitutional Rights Advocacy Director attorney Nadia Ben-Youssef, is a graduate of Princeton University and the Boston College of Law. She has worked with the Adalah Justice Project for Palestinian rights In the Negev in southern Israel.

 

 

Law and Disorder December 14, 2020

  • Commentary from Attorney Jim Lafferty, Host of the Lawyers Guild Show

—-

The Aftermath And Momentous Turning Points

The year 2020 will be seen as historically momentous, as a turning point in American history. The summer saw mobilizations of tens of millions of people, white and Black, mostly young, from small towns and large cities,under Black leadership and under the banner of Black Lives Matter. This tremendous mobilization was a reaction to the systemic racism and gross inequality that exists in the United States.

The manifestations were followed by the defeat of the cruel racist billionaire demagogue Donald Trump by 6 million votes in the fall election. All the institutions of the ruling elite collaborated to bring about Trump’s defeat. The main stream media, the CIA, the FBI, renegade Republicans, and 131 billionaires all supported Joseph Biden.

Only a tiny number of people refused to support either party candidate. Most of the progressive movement was swept back into the Democratic party seeing it is the lesser of two evils and hoping that change could be wrought from the inside. Will it? Where does social change come from? Historically the Democratic Party has been the graveyard of social movements. Will this continue to be the case?

After he won, Biden posted that “I am the guy that ran against the socialist, OK. I’m the guy that’s the moderate.“

Guest – Jeff Mackler. Jeff is a longtime California bay area socialist activist, he recently authorized “A Manifesto for Our Times: The Challenge to Abolish Systematic Racism“. He is the chair of the Mobilization to Free Mumia Abu Jamal and active in the defense of Julian Assange.

—-

Complaint Filed Against Judge Demanding Release of Attorney In Chevron Case

Dozens of legal organizations representing more than 500,000 lawyers along with more than 200 individual lawyers submitted a judicial complaint against Judge Lewis A. Kaplan in New York. The violations were directed at human rights lawyer Steven Donziger whose case we’ve been following on Law and Disorder. Donziger, listeners will recall, won a historic judgment against Chevron in Ecuador to clean up the pollution caused by decades of oil drilling with no environmental controls.

The complaint was filed by the National Lawyers Guild and the International Association of Democratic Lawyers (IADL). The Chief Judge of the Second Circuit Court of Appeals, Robert Katzmann, has a duty to read the complaint and determine if he will appoint a committee to investigate and issue findings.

The complaint documents is a pattern of ethics violations committed by Judge Kaplan, a former tobacco industry lawyer.

Kaplan denied Donziger a jury trial, put in place a series of unusual courtroom tactics, severely restricted Donziger’s ability to mount a defense, and detained him at home for more than one year on contempt charges that were rejected by the U.S. Attorney. Kaplan allowed Donziger to be prosecuted by a private law firm that has Chevron as a client. He imposed enormous fines on Donziger that have all but bankrupted him.

The complaint alleges that the “statements and actions of Judge Kaplan over the last ten years show him to have taken on the role of counsel for Chevron … rather than that of a judge adjudicating a live controversy before him.”

Despite accepting jurisdiction in Ecuador, Chevron came back to the US and filed a civil “racketeering” case against the Donziger and all 47 named plaintiffs. They potentially sought $60 billion in damages — the highest personal liability in US history. Judge Kaplan denied Donziger a jury and let Chevron pay a witness at least $2 million while moving him and his entire family from Ecuador to the US. Chevron lawyers coached the witness, Alberto Guerra, for 53 days before Kaplan let him testify against Donziger; Guerra later admitted under oath that he had lied on the stand. Kaplan also refused to let Donziger testify on direct examination.

Twenty-nine Nobel laureates and several human rights organizations have criticized the harassment of Donziger by judicial authorities and have demanded his immediate release.

DonzigerDefense.com

ChevronToxico.com 

ChevronInEcuador.com

MakeChevronCleanUp

Guest – Lauren Regan, a member of Steven Donziger’s defense team. She is also executive director of the Civil Liberties Defense Center and a member of the National Lawyers Guild.

 

Law and Disorder November 30, 2020

—-

Julian Assange Update With Journalist Kevin Gosztola

The problem of the 2020 United States election between Biden and Trump from the standpoint of defending free national security journalism was that one of them would win. Whereas Trump was a caricatures of the system Biden is its embodiment. He has pledged “nothing will fundamentally change.“ This is the fear of Julian Assange and his defenders.

The Trump administration initiated an indictment against Julian Assange for 17 counts of espionage. Assange revealed U.S. war crimes in Iraq and Afghanistan 10 years ago. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo called his organization, WikiLeaks, which published his whistleblowing articles, “a non-state hostile intelligence entity.”

Biden has called Assange “a high tech terrorist.” Hillary Clinton said “we should drone him.” One of the legal advisors to Biden was a prosecutor in the Eastern District of Virginia and sent whistle blowers, John Karakuo and Jeffery Sterling, to federal prison. He wanted to indict Julian Assange but left office to join a private law firm before he could get around to it

Julian Assange is now in solitary confinement in Britain’s infamous and Covid wracked Belmarsh prison in London. He is in terrible physical and mental shape. The extradition request of the United States has been litigated. We await the judges decision which is expected at January 4.

The defense has submitted their arguments in support of Julian, principally that this is a political prosecution which is illegal under an American British treaty.

Guest – Kevin Gosztola, a journalist who has covered the recent extradition hearing and writing on whistleblowers for many years. He writes for “Substack” and does the podcast “ Unauthorized Disclosure“. He has closely followed the Julian Assange case.

—-

Release Aging People In Prison Campaign During Covid 19 Risks

As coronavirus positivity rates have been rising nationwide two states—NY and California—have shown vastly different responses. In New York State, nearly 5% of the state’s prisoners have tested positive for Covid 19. Public health experts have warned that to reduce the spread of the virus, prison populations should be cut to 50% capacity.

While Governor Andrew Cuomo has ordered the release of 3,109 New Yorkers, he hasn’t used his power of clemency, either through a pardon of commutation. In stark contrast, Governor Gavin Newsom of California has expedited the release of nearly 9,000 prisoners and issued 55 commutations and 4 medical reprieves between March and November.

In contrast, Andrew Cuomo has granted 2 commutations in January, and another 3 in June. Critics call that number outrageous. Steve Zeidman, who co-directs CUNY Law School’s Defenders Clinic Second Look Project told Gothamist that clemency is “an urgent necessity that is being ignored.” The clinic currently represents 50 people whose clemency petitions await the governor’s decision.

The governor’s office declined to comment on whether he will issue more commutations this year. For the past six holiday seasons, advocates have gathered to plead with Cuomo to commute more sentences. For the most part, he has ignored their pleas.

Guest – Jose Saldana, executive director of Release Aging People in Prison.

——————————-

——————————-