Wednesday, April 22, 2009
Tuesday, March 31, 2009
Free Speech or Criminal Cyberstalking?
B.G. teen pleads guilty in racist e-mail case - Columbian.com
Many readers posted their opinions on the above article
The elements of the crime of cyberstalking are as follows:
RCW 9.61.260Cyberstalking.
(1) A person is guilty of cyberstalking if he or she, with intent to harass, intimidate, torment, or embarrass any other person, and under circumstances not constituting telephone harassment, makes an electronic communication to such other person or a third party: (a) Using any lewd, lascivious, indecent, or obscene words, images, or language, or suggesting the commission of any lewd or lascivious act; (b) Anonymously or repeatedly whether or not conversation occurs; or (c) Threatening to inflict injury on the person or property of the person called or any member of his or her family or household. (2) Cyberstalking is a gross misdemeanor, except as provided in subsection (3) of this section.
This is what a jury would have been provided by the court in the jury instructions.
The article gives no indication as to what the emails contained. Thus, one can not, based on the information provided, know whether or not the defendant committed a crime, or was merely expressing an opinion.
Many readers posted their opinions on the above article
The elements of the crime of cyberstalking are as follows:
RCW 9.61.260Cyberstalking.
(1) A person is guilty of cyberstalking if he or she, with intent to harass, intimidate, torment, or embarrass any other person, and under circumstances not constituting telephone harassment, makes an electronic communication to such other person or a third party: (a) Using any lewd, lascivious, indecent, or obscene words, images, or language, or suggesting the commission of any lewd or lascivious act; (b) Anonymously or repeatedly whether or not conversation occurs; or (c) Threatening to inflict injury on the person or property of the person called or any member of his or her family or household. (2) Cyberstalking is a gross misdemeanor, except as provided in subsection (3) of this section.
This is what a jury would have been provided by the court in the jury instructions.
The article gives no indication as to what the emails contained. Thus, one can not, based on the information provided, know whether or not the defendant committed a crime, or was merely expressing an opinion.
Wednesday, March 18, 2009
Tuesday, March 17, 2009
Why not gather the clothing as evidence?
After reading this article, the first thing I asked was why the clothing found across the street wasn't taken as evidence.
Homeowner wrestles naked alleged intruder - Columbian.com
Homeowner wrestles naked alleged intruder - Columbian.com
Friday, March 13, 2009
DUI and the Ignition Interlock License
The Washington DOL is now issuing an Ignition Interlock License (ILL) for qualified drivers who have been arrrested for DUI.
An assortment of Ignition Interlock Devices are available to the consumer. I
Ignition Interlock installation and monitoring is a growing business. Several companies offer such services. The State Patrol has approved of the following devices for use in the State of Washington:
- Alco-Lock 1-877-256-9246Autosense International 683 E Brokaw Road, San Jose, CA 95112
Draeger 35 30920 and Interlock XT 1-800-977-0091Draeger Safety Diagnostics Inc. 4040 W Royal Lane, Suite 136 Irving TX 75063
Guardian Interlock 3050 1-800-499-0994Guardian Interlock Systems 125 Church St, Suite 320, Marietta, GA 30060
Intoxalock 1001A 1-877-867-9888Consumer Safety Technology Inc. 10520 Hickman Road - Suite F, Des Moines, IA 50325
Lifesafer SC-100 and FC-100 1-800-328-9890Lifesafer Interlock Inc. 1908 Hudson Ave, Cincinnati, OH 45212
Able Ignition Interlock INC SSI 1000 and SSI-20/20 Smart Start Inc. 1-800-880-33944850 Plaza Drive, Irving, TX 75063
The process in obtaining such a license is only one aspect of a DUI / Driver's License issue.
There are questions about qualification, length of time, cost, CDL restictions and whether a person should apply for such a license.
The 
Revised Code of Washington contains several statutes regarding the Ignition interlock device:
Revised Code of Washington contains several statutes regarding the Ignition interlock device:
RCW 46.04.215 - Ignition interlock device; Other biological or technical device; Definitions.
RCW 46.20.710 - Ignition interlocks, biological, technical devices; Legislative findings.
RCW 46.20.740 - Ignition interlocks, biological, technical devices; Notation on driver's license; Penalty.
RCW 46.20.750 - Ignition interlocks, biological, technical devices; Assisting another in starting or operating; Penalty.
RCW 46.37.005 - State patrol; Additional powers and duties.
Wednesday, March 11, 2009
Death Penalty or Not
Arraignment for man accused in girl's death postponed - Columbian.com
It's been a long time since the Clark County Prosecuting Attorney has filed a notice of intent to seek the Death Penalty. (1992 - James LeRoy Brett)
In this case, the aggravated murder charge that has been filed raises that possibility.
Sanford faces the aggravated murder charge because prosecutors allege the killing occurred as a way to conceal a rape or attempted rape of a child.
Specifically, the statute provides:
A person is guilty of aggravated first degree murder, a class A felony, if he or she commits first degree murder as defined by RCW 9A.32.030(1)(a), as now or hereafter amended, and one or more of the following aggravating circumstances exist:
(11) The murder was committed in the course of, in furtherance of, or in immediate flight from one of the following crimes:
(b) Rape in the first or second degree
Because the arraignment has been reset to June, the prosecutor will have 30 days from that date to decide on the filing of a notice of special sentencing proceeding in order to request the death penalty.
See RCW 10.95.040.
For an excellent breakdown of the Death Penalty in Washington, click the following link
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/specials/deathpenalty/
It's been a long time since the Clark County Prosecuting Attorney has filed a notice of intent to seek the Death Penalty. (1992 - James LeRoy Brett)
In this case, the aggravated murder charge that has been filed raises that possibility.
Sanford faces the aggravated murder charge because prosecutors allege the killing occurred as a way to conceal a rape or attempted rape of a child.
Specifically, the statute provides:
A person is guilty of aggravated first degree murder, a class A felony, if he or she commits first degree murder as defined by RCW 9A.32.030(1)(a), as now or hereafter amended, and one or more of the following aggravating circumstances exist:
(11) The murder was committed in the course of, in furtherance of, or in immediate flight from one of the following crimes:
(b) Rape in the first or second degree
Because the arraignment has been reset to June, the prosecutor will have 30 days from that date to decide on the filing of a notice of special sentencing proceeding in order to request the death penalty.
See RCW 10.95.040.
For an excellent breakdown of the Death Penalty in Washington, click the following link
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/specials/deathpenalty/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
