Category: Legal

eNews Park Forest Editors Endorse John C. Griffin for Judge in the 15th Subcircuit

Posted on by TL

From ENEWSPF:

Our pick for judge in the 15th Subcircuit, Phelan vacancy, is Judge John C. Griffin of Palos Heights. Griffin has four opponents, and was appointed to the bench in 2008. He sits in the Chancery Division.

Judge Griffin is a true Democrat. One of his opponents in the Democratic Primary is a life-long Republican who is seeking election in 2010 as a Democrat. This opponent has stated that he recognizes that it’s impossible to be elected from this region as a Republican. This opponent has been Republican supervisor in Bloom Township for several years (having defeated now State Senator Toi Hutchinson when she ran as the Democratic candidate for supervisor in 2005).

When endorsing judges, we rely on the experts, especially experts who belong to bar associations.

The Chicago Council of Lawyers found Judge Griffin qualified, writing:

Judge Griffin was admitted to practice in 1976. For 31 years he was in private practice
primarily handling real estate, zoning and development-related matters. In March 2008, he was
appointed by the Illinois Supreme Court to a judicial vacancy. He has served in Traffic Court
and currently presides over mortgage foreclosure matters in the Foreclosure/Mechanic’s Lien
Section. Judge Griffin is reported to have good legal ability and an excellent temperament. He
had a good reputation as a hard-working and knowledgeable attorney and is praised for his
courtroom management skills and for being well-prepared. The Council finds him Qualified for
the Circuit Court.

In addition, Judge Griffin has been found qualified or recommended (per each organization’s policies) by all associations performing review:

  • The Chicago Bar Association – Qualified
  • Illinois State Bar Association – Qualified
  • Cook County Bar Association – Recommended
  • Chicago Council of Lawyers – Qualified
  • Women’s Bar Association of Illinois – Recommended
  • Lesbian and Gay Bar Association of Chicago – Recommended
  • Puerto Rican Bar Association of Illinois – Highly Qualified
  • The Decalogue Society of Lawyers – Recommended
  • Asian American Bar Association – Recommended
  • Hellenic Bar Association of Illinois – Recommended
  • Black Women Lawyers’ Association of Greater Chicago, Inc. – Recommended

We give Judge John C. Griffin our highest recommendation, and encourage all in the 15th Subcircuit to vote for him.

I’m quoting the entire endorsement — with permission — but I want to focus on one point in particular.

What, indeed is a Democrat? What, indeed, is a Republican?

One of John Griffin’s opponents was a Republican who ran as a Republican against Congressman Jesse L. Jackson Jr.; and he was the unsuccessful Republican candidate against Democratic Judge Anna Demacopoulos in 2008.

Judge Griffin is a true, life-long Democrat, a true member of the Democratic Party of Franklin D. Roosevelt, John F. Kennedy, and Barack Obama. I urge you to vote for John C. Griffin to fill the 15th Subcircuit judicial vacancy. Besides all of those Democratic credentials, I have met with John Griffin several times. He’s an ethical person. Ethics are crucial in a judge. I sense an incredible sincerity when I speak with John.

Vote for Judge John C. Griffin. He deserves nomination to be the Democratic party’s candidate in the November election.

Weekly Address: President Obama Pledges to Rein in Budget Deficits (Video and Text)

Posted on by TL

Washington, D.C.–January 30, 2010.

At this time last year, amidst headlines about banks on the verge of collapse and job losses of 700,000 a month, we received another troubling piece of news about our economy. Our economy was shrinking at an alarming rate – the largest six-month decline in 50 years. Our factories and farms were producing less; our businesses were selling less; and more job losses were on the horizon.

One year later, according to numbers released this past week, this trend has reversed itself. For the past six months, our economy has been growing again. And last quarter, it grew more quickly than at any time in the past six years.

This is a sign of progress. And it’s an affirmation of the difficult decisions we made last year to pull our financial system back from the brink and get our economy moving again.

But when so many people are still struggling – when one in ten Americans still can’t find work, and millions more are working harder and longer for less – our mission isn’t just to grow the economy. It’s to grow jobs for folks who want them, and ensure wages are rising for those who have them. It’s not just about improvements we see in quarterly statistics, but ones people feel in their daily lives – a bigger paycheck; more security; the ability to give your kids a decent shot in life and still have enough to retire one day yourself.

That’s why job creation will be our number one focus in 2010. We’ll put more Americans back to work rebuilding our infrastructure all across the country. And since the true engines of job creation are America’s businesses, I’ve proposed tax credits to help them hire new workers, raise wages, and invest in new plants and equipment. I also want to eliminate all capital gains taxes on small business investment, and help small businesses get the loans they need to open their doors and expand their operations.

But as we work to create jobs, it is critical that we rein in the budget deficits we’ve been accumulating for far too long – deficits that won’t just burden our children and grandchildren, but could damage our markets, drive up our interest rates, and jeopardize our recovery right now.

There are certain core principles our families and businesses follow when they sit down to do their own budgets. They accept that they can’t get everything they want and focus on what they really need. They make tough decisions and sacrifice for their kids. They don’t spend what they don’t have, and they make do with what they’ve got.

It’s time their government did the same. That’s why I’m pleased that the Senate has just restored the pay-as-you-go law that was in place back in the 1990s. It’s no coincidence that we ended that decade with a $236 billion surplus. But then we did away with PAYGO – and we ended the next decade with a $1.3 trillion deficit. Reinstating this law will help get us back on track, ensuring that every time we spend, we find somewhere else to cut.

I’ve also proposed a spending freeze, so that as we increase investments in things we need, like job creation and middle class tax cuts – we cut spending on those we don’t, like tax cuts for oil companies and investment fund managers, and programs that are redundant, obsolete, or simply ineffective. Spending related to Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security will not be affected – and neither will national security – but all other discretionary government programs will.

Finally, I’ve called for a bi-partisan Fiscal Commission – a panel of Democrats and Republicans who would sit down and hammer out concrete deficit-reduction proposals by a certain deadline. Because we’ve heard plenty of talk and a lot of yelling on TV about deficits, and it’s now time to come together and make the painful choices we need to eliminate those deficits.

This past week, 53 Democrats and Republicans voted for this commission in the Senate. But it failed when seven Republicans who had co-sponsored this idea in the first place suddenly decided to vote against it.

Now, it’s one thing to have an honest difference of opinion about something. I will always respect those who take a principled stand for what they believe, even if I disagree with them.

But what I won’t accept is changing positions because it’s good politics. What I won’t accept is opposition for opposition’s sake. We cannot have a serious discussion and take meaningful action to create jobs and control our deficits if politicians just do what’s necessary to win the next election instead of what’s best for the next generation.

I’m ready and eager to work with anyone who’s serious about solving the real problems facing our people and our country. I welcome anyone who comes to the table in good faith to help get our economy moving again and fulfill this country’s promise. That’s why we were elected in the first place. That’s what the American people expect and deserve. And that’s what we must deliver.

Thank you.

Source: whitehouse.gov

Should a 12-Year-Old Child Face Porn Charges for Sexting?

Posted on by TL

There’s a legal situation brewing in Northwest Indiana that should give us all pause regarding the purpose of the law.

First, from the Sun-Times:

A 12-year-old boy and 13-year-old girl from Northwest Indiana are accused of "sexting" each other, officials said.

Each could be charged with child exploitation and possession of child pornography for allegedly sending nude photos of themselves over their cell phones, officials said.

Earlier today, I wrote about 12-year-old Jordan Brown who was 11 when he was charged as an adult with two counts of homicide for the shotgun shooting of Kenzie Houk, 26, and her unborn child in February. As of this writing, Judge Dominick Motto has not yet ruled on whether Jordan will be tried as an adult or a juvenile. Now, we have two young children possibly being charged with child exploitation and possession of child pornography for allegedly sending nude photos of themselves over their cell phones.

What the hell are we doing? Is the purpose of law to punish, or to assist society to move to a higher place? A better place?

I know the two cases are very different. On the one hand, we have a child charged as an adult in a double homicide case. On the other hand, we have two kids sending nude pictures of themselves over their cell phones. However, in both cases, we have the potential for very adult charges against children.

Ask yourself this: if the person arrested for "sexting" nude pictures of 12 and 13-year-old children was 50, would you be more angry at the alleged murderer (if he was an adult), or the guy or gal sending JPEGs of children?

I would be furious with the 50-year-old dude sending out pics of kids. Given the number of murders committed by adults in the Chicagoland area every year, I’m afraid to say, I don’t know if I would even read that story. That’s not necessarily right. That’s just where I am, I guess.

What is the purpose of our legal system? Is it better to punish a child — a child — for life, or should we help that child move to responsible adulthood? Would you want your child charged with pornography for doing something stupid children might do because we give them the phones, and therefore the means, to do so? What would you have done with that technology as a 12-year-old? How responsible would you have been?

Do we really want a legal system that forces our children — our children — to become registered sex offenders for life … at age 12?

Jordan Brown, 12, A Child Accused of Murder, May Be Charged As An Adult

Posted on by TL

Jordan Brown is a 12-year-old child accused of murder. A Pennsylvania judge is expected to rule today on whether the juvenile will be tried as an adult.

From WTAE Pittsburgh:

Judge Dominick Motto will hear arguments over whether Jordan Brown should be tried as an adult or a juvenile for allegedly killing his father’s pregnant fiancée.

Prosecutors said Brown, who was 11 at the time, shot and killed 26-year-old Kenzie Houk and her unborn baby as she lay sleeping in her Wampum home last February.

If tried as a juvenile, the court’s jurisdiction would end when Brown turns 21 and he would be released.If Brown is tried as an adult, he would face life in prison.

Brown has been charged with one adult count of criminal homicide and is being held without bail in a juvenile facility.

How this child got his hands on a loaded weapon is another matter entirely.

I’ve written about this before. Jordan Brown is a child. He should be charged as a juvenile.

Park Forest Police Seek Missing Woman

Posted on by TL
Dana Hayes

Dana Hayes

Park Forest, IL– The Park Forest Police Department is attempting to learn the whereabouts of Dana Hayes, who has been missing from her Park Forest home since Monday, January 25, 2010, police said Thursday afternoon. According to her family, Ms. Hayes dropped her son off at Rich East High School Monday morning but never arrived at her place of employment. The license plates on her car were run by the South Holland Police on the morning of January 25, but neither she nor the car has been seen since.

The South Suburban Major Crimes Task Force is assisting in the search for Ms. Hayes, a rare move in a missing person’s case, according to police.

According to Ms. Hayes family, it is totally out of character for her to be gone from home and not notify her son or other family members, or to not appear at work.

Ms. Hayes is described as an African American 35-year-old female, 5’2” tall, weighing 135 pounds with brown hair and brown eyes. Her car is a 2005 silver Kia Spectra four door, Illinois license plate A273099. The vehicle has a Masonic placard with the letters OES on the trunk lid.

The Park Forest Police Department is asking anyone who might have information on Ms. Hayes or her vehicle to contact Detective Brian Rzyski at 708-748-1309, or Deputy Chief Mike McNamara at 708-748-8390.

Source: PFPD

Obama Declares ‘I Don’t Quit’ in First State of the Union Address

Posted on by TL

From the Chicago Sun-Times:

Declaring “I don’t quit,”‘ an embattled President Barack Obama vowed in his first State of the Union address Wednesday night to make job growth his topmost priority and urged a divided Congress to boost the still-ailing economy with fresh stimulus spending. Defiant despite stinging setbacks, he said he would not abandon ambitious plans for longer-term fixes to health care, energy, education and more.

“Change has not come fast enough,” Obama said before a politician-packed House chamber and a TV audience of millions. “As hard as it may be, as uncomfortable and contentious as the debates may be, it’s time to get serious about fixing the problems that are hampering our growth.”

Obama looked to change the conversation from how his presidency is stalling — over the messy health care debate, a limping economy and the missteps that led to Christmas Day’s barely averted terrorist disaster — to how he is seizing the reins.

A chief demand was for lawmakers to press forward with his prized health care overhaul, which is in severe danger in Congress, and to resist the temptation to substitute a smaller-bore solution for the far-reaching changes he wants.

“Do not walk away from reform,” he implored. “Not now. Not when we are so close.”

Republicans applauded the president when he entered the chamber, and even craned their necks and welcomed Michelle Obama when she took her seat. But the warm feelings of bipartisanship disappeared early.

I don’t know how “embattled” President Obama is right now. Every president is “embattled.” I found the tone of the SOTU remarkable. But Congress needs to remember how to be a parliament, and they’re not there yet. Republicans say, “NO!” Democrats let the tail wag the dog and give up the fight. The intelligence factor in Congress is rather low right now, I fear, on both sides of the aisle. Republicans are too dumb to realize that there is more to life than cheap politics, and Democrats are too dumb to know how to make Congress work.

Too bad.

I’m glad this president does not “give up.” We still have work to do.

Weekly Address: President Obama Addresses This Week’s Supreme Court Decision (Video and Text)

Posted on by TL

Washington, D.C.–January 23, 2010.

One of the reasons I ran for President was because I believed so strongly that the voices of everyday Americans, hardworking folks doing everything they can to stay afloat, just weren’t being heard over the powerful voices of the special interests in Washington. And the result was a national agenda too often skewed in favor of those with the power to tilt the tables.

In my first year in office, we pushed back on that power by implementing historic reforms to get rid of the influence of those special interests. On my first day in office, we closed the revolving door between lobbying firms and the government so that no one in my administration would make decisions based on the interests of former or future employers. We barred gifts from federal lobbyists to executive branch officials. We imposed tough restrictions to prevent funds for our recovery from lining the pockets of the well-connected, instead of creating jobs for Americans. And for the first time in history, we have publicly disclosed the names of lobbyists and non-lobbyists alike who visit the White House every day, so that you know what’s going on in the White House – the people’s house.

We’ve been making steady progress. But this week, the United States Supreme Court handed a huge victory to the special interests and their lobbyists – and a powerful blow to our efforts to rein in corporate influence. This ruling strikes at our democracy itself. By a 5-4 vote, the Court overturned more than a century of law – including a bipartisan campaign finance law written by Senators John McCain and Russ Feingold that had barred corporations from using their financial clout to directly interfere with elections by running advertisements for or against candidates in the crucial closing weeks.

This ruling opens the floodgates for an unlimited amount of special interest money into our democracy. It gives the special interest lobbyists new leverage to spend millions on advertising to persuade elected officials to vote their way – or to punish those who don’t. That means that any public servant who has the courage to stand up to the special interests and stand up for the American people can find himself or herself under assault come election time. Even foreign corporations may now get into the act.

I can’t think of anything more devastating to the public interest. The last thing we need to do is hand more influence to the lobbyists in Washington, or more power to the special interests to tip the outcome of elections.

All of us, regardless of party, should be worried that it will be that much harder to get fair, common-sense financial reforms, or close unwarranted tax loopholes that reward corporations from sheltering their income or shipping American jobs off-shore.

It will make it more difficult to pass commonsense laws to promote energy independence because even foreign entities would be allowed to mix in our elections.

It would give the health insurance industry even more leverage to fend off reforms that would protect patients.

We don’t need to give any more voice to the powerful interests that already drown out the voices of everyday Americans.

And we don’t intend to. When this ruling came down, I instructed my administration to get to work immediately with Members of Congress willing to fight for the American people to develop a forceful, bipartisan response to this decision. We have begun that work, and it will be a priority for us until we repair the damage that has been done.

A hundred years ago, one of the great Republican Presidents, Teddy Roosevelt, fought to limit special interest spending and influence over American political campaigns and warned of the impact of unbridled, corporate spending. His message rings as true as ever today, in this age of mass communications, when the decks are too often stacked against ordinary Americans. And as long as I’m your President, I’ll never stop fighting to make sure that the most powerful voice in Washington belongs to you.

Source: whitehouse.gov

ABC: 16-Year-Old Starbucks Barista Sues Over ‘Sex Demands’ at Work

Posted on by TL

From ABC:

An "alarmingly high" number of high school students are reporting sexual advances from their adult bosses and other supervisors at some of the country’s best known fast food operations, according to an official of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.

"It’s an incredibly serious problem," said Bill Cash of the EEOC in an interview to be broadcast tonight on the ABC News program "20/20."

"Employers that choose to use high school kids to work have a responsibility to protect these young people," Cash said. "We don’t want them to be fondled, we don’t want them to be raped."

According to ABC, Kati Moore of Orange County, CA claims a 24-year old supervisor at Starbucks made almost daily demands on her for sex, months after she began working as a 16-year old barista.

She said she would be summoned for sex via text messages, hundreds of them, including one that said, "I’d liked to f— tomorrow."

The young woman’s mother alerted prosecutors after she learned of the relationship. According to the ABC report, supervisors and managers at Starbuck’s knew what was happening and did nothing.

Time for a corporate statement.

Olbermann: U.S. Government Completely For Sale

Posted on by TL

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

With no limits on campaign financing, corporations will take over the government.

I was flabbergasted by the Supreme Court’s decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, which overruled two precedents: Austin v. Michigan Chamber of Commerce, a 1990 decision that upheld restrictions on corporate spending to support or oppose political candidates, and McConnell v. Federal Election Commission, a 2003 decision that upheld the part of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 that restricted campaign spending by corporations and unions, the New York Times said today.

The ramifications of this are incredible. Everything Keith Olbermann says in the video above is true. Sometimes Keith overreacts. Not this time.

I didn’t get a chance to listen to Thom Hartmann today, but I’m sure he was beside himself. Hartmann has been arguing for a long, long time that corporations are not people. He’s right. A corporation is a legal entity which exists on paper only. The First Amendment should not apply at all, but it was the First Amendment which persuaded five of nine justices otherwise.

This is incredibly unnerving. The New York Times editorial board is correct: "Congress must act immediately to limit the damage of this radical decision, which strikes at the heart of democracy."

Uganda’s Catholic Bishops Come Out Against Proposed “Kill-The-Gays” Bill

Posted on by TL

From the Human Rights Campaign:

Uganda’s Catholic Bishops have come out against the anti-gay bill that could impose the death penalty for homosexuals in Uganda. Citing the Bible, Dr. Cyrian Kizito Lwanga, the Archbishop of Kampala said that the bill “Does not pass a test of a Christian caring approach to this issue.”

Thank God for good bishops.

The video above is the entire Equally Speaking for Friday, January 15, 2010. Enjoy.