Her 6-year-old Basset hound/beagle mix, ***** Pete, left the porch and made his way toward the troopers. The dog, she said, suffered from arthritis in his back legs and was not aggressive. Her other dog went into the house.

Sweat said she was still inside when she saw the trooper raise a weapon at her dog.

“I ran out my door, jumping up and down screaming ‘don’t shoot my dog, he won’t bite, just let me get him in the house,’” she said.

She said the officer fired one shot toward the dog but missed. She said ***** Pete turned tail and was running back toward her.

“He ran towards me with desperation in his eyes,” she said. “They fired again in my direction. In the direction of my home where my kids were.”

She said three more shots were fired, a total of four shots. ***** Pete, she said, was hit three times. The dog went to the back of the mobile home. Sweat said she found the dog near the air conditioning unit.

“I watched my dog struggle and then die,” she said. “I collapsed in a puddle in the floor, screaming and crying.

“I watched that dog born and I watched him die.”

She said the troopers came to her home and one of the officers told her “Ma’am we’re dog people, too, but we couldn’t let them fight,” she recalled him saying. “He said, ‘I’m sorry. Where’s your shovel, I’ll bury him.’”

She said her dog wasn’t vicious and that she wouldn’t have allowed a vicious dog around her children.

Sweat is upset about the death of her dog. But more than that, she is angry she wasn’t told police were searching near her home for a potentially violent criminal, and that a weapon was fired in her direction and near the house where her children were sleeping.

“They shot toward my home with me standing there,” she said. “If they were here why didn’t they notify us? I would have put my dogs up in my home. I want them to change their policies.”

Lt. Michael Baylous, State Police spokesman, said troopers sometimes will inform the public in similar situations with a media burst or by going door to door, but that it was his understanding there was no time for that in Tuesday’s case.

Baylous said officers still are searching for Jeffers.

An appeals court has upheld a $1 million judgment awarded to a former Wolcott resident in a police brutality case that dates to 2001.

In a decision filed last Friday, the Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department of state Supreme Court ruled in favor of David Reynolds. He now lives in Fulton, Oswego County.

Rochester-area attorney Charles Burkwit, who represents Reynolds, said his client was assaulted in December 2001 by state Trooper Thomas Connor after a traffic stop on Route 104 in Wolcott. According to published reports, Connor suspected Reynolds of driving on a suspended license and called a dispatcher, who said Reynolds’ license was suspended per DMV computer records.

Reynolds told Connor he had a temporary license, but Connor refused to let Reynolds produce it and forced Reynolds out of his car. Connor then handcuffed Reynolds, rammed his head several times into the trunk lid of his vehicle and placed him in a police car.

Connor later looked in Reynolds’ wallet and found the temporary license, after which he let Reynolds go.

June 29, 2014

By: Barry Cooper/Former Drug Enforcement Officer

Americans have been brainwashed into believing cars will crash and citizens will murder each other if there were no police presence. This simply is not true. People do not, not kill people because cops are present. In other words, you are not, not being raped at this moment simply because police are on every corner…In fact, police catch less than 1 percent of all violent crimes in the act. Unlike the U.S., where it’s common to spot twenty five police in a one hundred mile trip, there are thousands of populated areas abroad that have no police presence yet they experience less crime and fewer traffic accidents. I’ve personally lived in a few of these places.

The U.S.A. has the largest prison population in the history of mankind. The United States has 5% of the world’s population yet incarcerates 25% of the world’s prisoner. Communist China has ONE BILLION more in population but the U.S. has more prisoners. Does this mean Americans are more criminal than the Chinese, Mexicans and Russians? Or could this mean American police, judges, prosecutors and jailers have gone “**** Nuts” on Americans? U.S. police have killed over 5000 civilians since 9/11 which means an American citizen is 8 times more likely to be killed by an American cop than a terrorist. Combined, American officers, judges and prosecuting lawyers have easily caused more suffering than that endured during the Holocaust.

Police should react similar to fireman and never leave the building until it is time to investigate a crime that has been committed against a person or property. When a murder, robbery or theft occurs, investigators should be sent to gather evidence, solve the crime and make the arrest. This should be the only role of police. We do not need police to be our first responders or protectors. As mentioned earlier, police rarely catch a theft, rape or robbery in progress. We can be our own first responders and do it faster and with greater skill. Neighbors and friends and passerby’s can respond and help much faster than the police.

Finally, nowhere in history can we find an example of government working. In fact, governments have always turned dark and corrupt which always led to mass suffering. Government lovers claim humans are incapable of governing themselves yet they cheer and vote for a few humans to control them. If humans can’t govern themselves, then how can one expect a few of these humans to govern millions? Abolish all governments. They don’t work. Any continued support of government is continued support of force, coercion and non-consensual relationships. Peaceful Anarchy is a good start.

Government–A group of people who exercise a monopoly of power by force over a specific geographic region.

The officer had been called to the girl's home in Ozark, Arkansas, by her mother because she was behaving in an unruly manner and refusing to take a shower.
In a report on the incident the officer, Dustin Bradshaw, said the mother gave him permission to use the Taser.

When he arrived, the girl was curled up on the floor, screaming, and resisting as her mother tried to get her in the shower before bed.

"Her mother told me to take her if I needed to," the officer wrote.

The child was "violently kicking and verbally combative" when he tried to take her into custody and she kicked him in the groin.

He then delivered "a very brief drive stun to her back," the report said.

The girl's father, Anthony Medlock, who is divorced from her mother, said the girl showed signs of emotional problems but did not deserve to be "treated like an animal".

He said: "Ten years old and they shot electricity through her body, and I want to know how the heck in God's green earth can they get away with this.

"If you can't pick the kid up and take her to your car, handcuff her, then I don't think you need to be an officer. She doesn't deserve to be treated like a dog. She's not a tiger." Local Mayor Vernon McDaniel said the FBI should investigate.

He said: "People here feel like that he made a mistake in using a Taser, and maybe he did, but we will not know until we get an impartial investigation." The local Police Chief Jim Noggle said no disciplinary action was taken against Bradshaw.

"We didn't use the Taser to punish the child, just to bring the child under control so she wouldn't hurt herself or somebody else," he said.

He said if the officer tried to forcefully put the girl in handcuffs, he could have accidentally broken her arm or leg.

Mr Noggle said the girl will face disorderly conduct charges as a juvenile.

If you're a young person traveling across Nebraska, be careful how much money you carry.

A driver from Cedarburg who got pulled over in 2009 near Lincoln, Neb., lost $48,100 after state troopers there seized it as suspected drug money, but a federal appeals court now says the government had no real grounds to keep the cash.

"Their only evidence was theoretical and conjectural," said Patrick Brennan, the Milwaukee attorney who argued for the money's return. He was unsuccessful at a 2012 trial before prevailing on appeal on Friday when the 8th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals reversed a lower court's decision in the government's favor.

The appeals court ordered the money returned, a fairly unusual result when citizens challenge large cash forfeitures.

The driver, John Nelson, was 22 when he set out from Cedarburg for Colorado in 2009. He was planning to move there, so he took his family's RV, large enough to accommodate Nelson's two dogs, to save him the cost of hotels.

He also took along, in a small safe, all his important personal papers to set up residency. And nearly $50,000 in cash. He said the money was the result of selling bonds his grandmother had given him.

Nelson stayed with friends in Denver a few weeks but learned the city restricts ownership of pit bulls, the breed of one of Nelson's dogs. So he headed back to Wisconsin in October.

In eastern Nebraska, Nelson was stopped for following another vehicle too closely, a minor traffic violation, though Brennan said the trooper later testified that he in fact was profiling the RV because it had Wisconsin license plates and a younger driver. The trooper said Colorado is a known source state for marijuana and Wisconsin a known destination for resale.

The trooper said Nelson seemed nervous, and at first he denied having any drugs and would not consent to a search of the RV. After the trooper called for a drug-sniffing dog, Nelson admitted he had a small amount of pot.

The trooper then searched the RV and found about a half-ounce of pot. Nelson was ticketed for the marijuana.

But the troopers kept the cash, found wrapped in bundles inside a backpack in the RV. A federal magistrate who presided at a civil forfeiture trial ruled the trooper's intuition, based on his experience, was enough to prove the money likely was intended for a major drug purchase that, for some reason, didn't happen.

...


The federal appeals court said the undisputed facts supported both the government's and Nelson's positions. While traveling with so much cash is "suspicious," Nelson had a plausible explanation. And while the trooper suggested Nelson drove an inefficient RV so he could carry hidden drugs, it also made his trip — with dogs and without a place to stay — more comfortable.

The court also noted that anyone in Nelson's situation may have appeared nervous and that he, in addition, was taking medication for anxiety.

Most important, the court found that even if Nelson's credibility could be challenged on small lies, they alone don't make the government's theory more likely in the absence of any evidence at all that Nelson was planning a big drug deal.

"In the end, the government's theory about a planned transaction relies on mere speculation rather than circumstantial evidence," the court found.

A federal appeals court ruled Monday that a Mexican teenager killed by a Border Patrol agent was protected by the U.S. Constitution, even though the teen was on Mexican soil when he was shot.

The ruling from the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals means the family of 15-year-old Sergio Adrian Hernandez Guereca can move forward with a civil lawsuit against the agent.

“This recognizes human rights belong to everyone. Not just American citizens,” or human beings standing on U.S. soil, said Bob Hilliard, one of the lawyers representing the family.

The original lawsuit was filed against the Border Patrol, the Department of Homeland Security, Customs and Borders Protection, agent Jesus Mesa and the U.S. Department of Justice. But part of the ruling relieves the agent’s supervisors and the agencies from responsibility.

The Border Patrol said they would not comment on the matter as it opens the possibility of litigation. Mesa’s attorney did not immediately respond to requests for comment.