Angela Zorich home in St. Louis County

The case was heard in front of a jury, and in the end, the county opted to settle with the Zorich family for $750,000. After the county agreed to settle, Angela Zorich stated:

"They know what they did wrong. That money sends a message. The trial showed exactly what happened.”

Kiya's dead, but this case isn't really about her.

In a court case that's expected to last about a week and a half, what will really be on trial is the militarization of the St. Louis County Police Department.

That department, Zorich's attorneys said in opening statements, has a policy that it's tactical operations unit -- the SWAT team -- executes all search warrants, even when just checking on a house where the gas bill has gone unpaid. Applying massive force in such a case is a violation of Fourth Amendment protections against unreasonable search and seizure, said attorney Nicole Matlock (of the St. Louis firm Dobson and Goldberg).

"What could possibly have justified (Officer Robert Rinck) deciding to call in the (tactical operations) team?" she asked jurors.

X-ray of Carol Shuler's broken arm.

Angela Zorich

In early 2014, Plaintiff lived in a single-family home with her husband, three adult sons, a six-year-old daughter, and three dogs, including a pit bull named Kiya. At that time, (Robert) Rinck was an officer with the St. Louis County Police Department's Problem Properties Unit ("PPU"). Plaintiff's neighbor, who was an investigator for Laclede Gas Company and an acquaintance of Rinck, had called the police department several times to complain about Plaintiff's dogs barking. On April 23, 2014, the neighbor called Rinck to inform him that the gas company had suspended Plaintiff's natural gas service.

Before visiting Plaintiff's residence, Rinck "ran" Plaintiff's address in the County's Crime Matrix program to determine whether any residents of the home had arrest/criminal histories or outstanding arrest warrants. Rinck's search revealed that Plaintiff's husband, Michael, and her three sons, Joseph, Zacariah, and Isaiah, had criminal histories, which included arrests for violent offenses, and that Plaintiff and her sons had outstanding arrest warrants. Rinck also reviewed a list of all calls for police service to Plaintiff's address, including a report that Plaintiff's pit bull attacked a neighbor's dog.

Kiya, the pit bull

Officer LaChance responded to Rinck's call for assistance and informed Rinck that he was familiar with the Zorich family. According to LaChance, residents of Plaintiff's house were "hostile and combative with the police." Rinck also spoke to one of Plaintiff's neighbors, who complained about Plaintiff's barking dogs and the "loud and offensive language and behavior of members of the Zorich family" and informed Rinck that an infant and a four-or five-year-old girl might reside there. The neighbor allowed Rinck and the housing specialists to enter his backyard for the purpose of inspecting Plaintiff's property, and they observed that Plaintiff's deck "appeared to be in imminent danger of collapse." Rink also observed the lock on the natural gas meter. Before leaving the property, Rinck placed a problem properties notification sticker on Plaintiff's window.

Later that day, Plaintiff "googled" the PPU and found a phone number, which she called.  The first woman Plaintiff spoke to informed her "there was no indication of any issues at her address in the computer" and directed her to an employee named Kim. Plaintiff left Kim two messages requesting return telephone calls.

Plaintiff called the number again the following Monday, April 28, 2014, and spoke to someone who instructed her to call either Rehagan or Rinck directly. Plaintiff first called Rehagan, who informed her that the PPU needed to inspect the interior of her house because they had received an anonymous report that her electricity and gas were off. Plaintiff replied that only her gas was off and, when Rehagan insisted that her electricity was off, Plaintiff said "That's bullshit," and Rehagan terminated the call. Plaintiff called Rehagan back to apologize, and Rehagan advised her to call Rinck.

Plaintiff then called Rinck, who informed Plaintiff that he was investigating her home for lack of gas service and that someone in her house had said "fuck you" to him. Rinck did not mention the condition of the exterior deck. When Rinck advised Plaintiff that he wished to "meet at the property and conduct an inspection," she responded, "Well, I'll have to talk to my husband." Rinck told Plaintiff that "the investigation would continue."

Jeffrey Epstein and Donald Trump

Billionaire Wall Street hedge fund financier Jeffrey Epstein was arrested by federal authorities on July 6 at Teterboro Airport in New Jersey. Epstein was returning on his private jet from a trip to Paris. After his arrest, Epstein was taken to the Metropolitan Corrections Center in Manhattan while awaiting arraignment in federal court at Foley Square on July 8. Epstein's old friend, Donald Trump, was spending the weekend at Trump's Bedminster, New Jersey gold club, 44 miles from the Teterboro airport where Epstein was arrested.

Epstein, who, according to a joint report by WMR and the Justice Integrity Project in Washington, allegedly raped a 12-year old girl named Maria and a 13-year old, Katie Johnson, the latter a pseudonym, has been charged by federal prosecutors in New York with one count of sex trafficking and one count of conspiracy to commit sex trafficking. The 1994 rape, according to more than one witness, not only involved Epstein but his then-close friend, Trump. The incident is said to have occurred at a midtown Manhattan mansion owned by retail billionaire Les Wexner, who owns, among other store chains, Victoria’s Secret, a prominent employer of underage female models. The 12-year old rape victim had been abducted in 1993 from a street corner in Waterbury, Connecticut and provided to a child sex trafficking ring.

In 2008, Epstein beat federal charges of underage sexual trafficking of minor girls by agreeing to a non-prosecution agreement (NPA) with the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Miami, then headed by Trump’s current Labor Secretary Alex Acosta, and the Florida Attorney General’s office. The arrangement was called the “deal of a lifetime” by supporters and critics. Had the deal not been drawn up, federal sex trafficking charges brought against Epstein that were contained in a 52-page indictment, could have imprisoned him for life.

Epstein pleaded guilty to state charges of soliciting prostitution from a minor and agreed to serve 13 months, with unsupervised daytime work release, in an isolated wing of the Palm Beach County Stockade. He also was required to register as a sex offender. Epstein also agreed to pay restitution to his victims. In return, the federal government and state of Florida agreed to a lifetime moratorium on future prosecutions of Epstein or any of his other associates and friends. 

Various reports have named Epstein longtime mentor Les Wexner; the Duke of York, Prince Andrew; Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz, as well as Trump, among the “friends and associates” of Epstein covered by the NPA. Several of Epstein’s victims, including Virginia Roberts Giuffre, who was an underage “towel girl” at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago club in Palm Beach, sued Epstein, charging that their rights under the federal Crime Victims’ Rights Act (CVRA) had been violated by Acosta’s NPA.

In February, US Judge for the Southern District of Florida Kenneth Marra ruled, against strong opposition from the Justice Department, that the Acosta NPA violated the CVRA rights of Epstein’s victims and he has been deliberating on whether to vacate the agreement. Justice Department attorneys in Miami have been arguing that the 2008 NPA with Epstein must stand. . . .

Over the last several months, the Miami Herald has run a series of exposes, written by reporter Julie K. Brown, exposing further details of the NPA and have identified more of Epstein’s victims. 

The U.S. Attorneys Office for the Southern District of New York (SDNY) filed the most recent criminal charges against Epstein. The charges were contained in a sealed indictment and cover sex trafficking between 2002 and 2005 and occurring in Palm Beach and New York City. 2002 is the year that Trump said of Epstein, “I’ve known Jeff for fifteen years. Terrific guy. He’s a lot of fun to be with. It is even said that he likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side.”

What is most interesting is the fact that the SDNY’s Public Corruption Unit (PCU) is handling the case against Epstein. This has raised eyebrows among experienced former federal prosecutors because it indicates that the Epstein case may involve malfeasance in office by government officials. Also, one of the SDNY prosecutors handling the Epstein case in Maureen Comey, the daughter of former FBI director James Comey, who Trump fired in 2007 during a fit of rage. Ms. Comey, a graduate of Harvard Law School, has been with the SDNY since 2015 and is with the Office’s Violent and Organized Crime Unit. . . .

There have been a number of other legal cases involving Epstein in recent months. The Justice Department's Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) has been investigating the role of Acosta in hammering out the NPA with Epstein’s lawyers, who, at the time of the agreement, included Whitewater special counsel Kenneth Starr, Dershowitz, and famed Miami celebrity attorney Roy Black. Ironically, even as OPR is investigating the legitimacy of the NPA, Justice Department lawyers are arguing in federal court in Miami that it is inviolable and must stand. Also, on July 3, US Second Circuit Judge Jose Cabranes, speaking on behalf of a three-judge panel, ruled that the Justice Department must unseal and produce some 2000 pages of documents dealing with the Epstein NPA. It is believed the documents contain damaging information on Epstein’s friends and associates, including his top aide, Ghislaine Maxwell, the daughter of the late British publisher Robert Maxwell. Robert Maxwell has been linked to Russian Jewish mob boss Semion Mogilevich, who, in turn, has been linked to Trump’s real estate and casino businesses. In December 2018, Epstein concluded a last-minute deal with Bradley Edwards, a south Florida attorney representing Epstein’s victims and who had been sued by Epstein. The financial out-of-court settlement resulted in Epstein’s victims not having to testify in court.

The involvement of British citizen Maxwell and Prince Andrew in the Epstein matter is drawing attention to another recent story concerning top secret cables sent to London from Washington by British ambassador to the United States Kim Darroch. Among the recipients of Darroch’s cables was Mark Sedwill, the British national security adviser and Cabinet Secretary. Darroch warned in one dispatch to London that, with Trump, “we could also be at the beginning of a downward spiral, rather than just a roller coaster: something could emerge that leads to disgrace and downfall.”

With the FBI involved in the renewed criminal probe of Epstein that links to Maxwell and Prince Andrew, the British ambassador would have, as a matter of course, been briefed by federal authorities on prominent UK citizens being in legal extremis in the United States. In addition, one of the cooperating witnesses for Special Counsel Robert Mueller, Trump campaign interlocutor with Abu Dhabi and Saudi Arabia, George Nader, was arrested at John F. Kennedy International Airport early last month on charges of transporting child pornography into the United States from abroad. How much does Nader know about Trump administration involvement in wider child sexual exploitation and trafficking? Time will tell but the clock has just started moving much faster.

Birmingham Superfund site

Facing 30 months in federal prison, bankruptcy, the loss of the family home, and the insurmountable emotional toll he and his family have suffered, ex-Drummond Commpany executive Dave Roberson is prepared to talk with federal prosecutors about the intricate details of the North Birmingham Bribery Scheme.

Roberson never testified in his criminal trial and has never told anyone outside legal counsel about the meticulous and unsettling details.

Just a few months back, Balch and Bingham and Drummond Company were not concerned because Roberson’s criminal lawyers were paid by Drummond and Balch’s grip on Jefferson County including federal probes was solid.

But all that changed when Roberson hired Burt Newsome as his civil lawyer. Newsome, who allegedly was wrongly targeted, falsely arrested and defamed by Balch and Bingham, is running circles around the Balch posse.

U.S. Attorney Jay E. Town has been intentionally avoided and overlooked due to his ties to former U.S. Senator Luther Strange, Balch’s biggest stooge.

Instead, Roberson’s civil lawyer is working with federal investigators in Washington, D.C. and Capitol Hill senior staff. circumventing the political cronyism and corruption of Birmingham.

And who should be worried?

Our sources say management members at Alabama Power, Drummond Company, Thompson Tractor, and Balch and Bingham—corporate supporters of the AstroTurf and money laundering entity Alliance for Jobs and the Economy that funneled over $360,000 in bribes to disgraced State Representative Oliver Robinson—appear to have possibly given incomplete testimony or even perjured themselves.

More interesting now are the five-figure campaign contributions (to investigators: alleged bribes) paid to Balch’s biggest stooge Luther Strange and ex-Governor Robert “Luv Guv” Bentley after signing the multiple ghost-written letters to the EPA against the North Birmingham expedited clean-up efforts.

The ghost-written letters were allegedly drafted by convicted felon and Balch-made millionaire Joel I. Gilbert.

Jeff Sessions, Luther Strange, Richard Shelby

Doug Jones did the legal work for corrupt black politician Mr Robinson's foundation that accepted bribes from Republican law firms and Drummond folks for toxic tort committed against the black community in Birmingham. Just looks to me like another corrupt republican deal Doug was involved in plus for years he has acted like he was for the black community but he doesn't fool me. I still remember hearing from old FEMA and Pentagon guys as a young storm gypsy stories sitting around a beach fire about how Doug Jones represented one of the head guys for the Klan, Tom Posey, and how that guy was trading airplane loads of guns and getting dope in the Contra deals and dumping on black communities all over our state -- and how Doug got him off, and the fellow was guilty as sin.

Our sources in Washington, D.C. tell us there has been panic since our post a week ago about ex-Drummond executive Dave Roberson who is now considering singing like a canary to federal investigators.

Venable, the prestigious law firm out of Baltimore, that tried unsuccessfully to prevent the indictments of Balch and Bingham partners Steven McKinney and Joel I.Gilbert, is now out and about, hot on the trail. Our sources could not tell us who has contracted them (Balch? Drummond?).

Our website traffic confirms the sheer depth of the panic: we had record traffic on Monday and Tuesday of last week, quadruple the typical traffic and extremely unusual just days before a national holiday.

And what so upsets Drummond, Alabama Power and Balch and Bingham if Roberson were to squeal?

Could it be payments for official acts? The signing of ghost-written letters in exchange for campaign cash? The confirmation of alleged corruption and an alleged bribery ring?

Ex-U.S. Senator Luther Strange, Balch and Bingham’s biggest stooge, appears to face a real criminal problem of his own. Allegedly provoked by Balch, he involved himself in the North Birmingham EPA matter even though Strange had no authority to do so. At the time, the Governor had delegated the Alabama Department of Environmental Management to handle all issues related to the North Birmingham EPA matter.

* On October 13, 2014, convicted felon and Balch-made millionaire Joel I. Gilbert sent Luther Strange, then the Alabama Attorney General, a draft letter about the North Birmingham EPA matter.

* Four days later, on October 17, Strange accepted a $25,000 contribution from Drummond Company.

* Six days later after the money was deposited, Strange signed the ghost-written letter and dispatched it on his official letterhead to the EPA on October 23, 2014.

Riley Jackson lawyers: Dealing in deceit

Perhaps the most blatant outrage in the Riley response brief involves the Shulers’ claim re: equitable tolling, due to Carol Shuler’s broken arm – broken by law-enforcement thugs in Missouri. Riley states: “It is nonsense to suggest that an injury to Carol Shuler should extend the statute of limitations date for a claim of abuse of process which belonged only to Roger Shuler. Carol Shuler was not a party in the underlying Shelby County court action upon which the abuse of process claim was based.”

Stott and Harrington

Carol Shuler was not a party? Really? Are the Riley defendants and their lawyers monstrous liars or are they too lazy to check the public record? The Riley lawyer does not even know who his client sued? Carol Shuler most certainly was a defendant in the underlying court action, and a simple search on Alacourt.gov shows that (if Riley hasn’t caused the record to be sealed). In fact, the Riley defendants specifically sought Carol Shuler’s unlawful arrest and incarceration, just as they did with Roger Shuler; their law-enforcement cronies just weren’t able to kidnap her. This blatant false statement in a legal brief should call into question all of the so-called arguments Riley attempts to pass off as legitimate.

A singing Canary, Luther Strange, Dave Roberson (From banbalch.com)

The vast majority of the U.S. Congressional delegation from Alabama may have their own crisis, too. Even though none of these members of Congress represent the North Birmingham area, they jointly signed a letter to the EPA, allegedly provoked, too, by Balch.

* On October 30, 2014, a ghost-written letter drafted by Balch and Bingham and signed by six members of the U.S. House of Representatives in Alabama was dispatched. That same day, Congressman Robert Aderholt reported receiving $5,000 from Alabama Power, according to FEC filings.

* A week before, Drummond Company gave Congressman Bradley Byrne $5,000 on October 22, while forking out another $5,000 to Congressman Mike Rogers on October 24.

* Balch and Bingham sweetened the money trail by tossing $2,000 to Congressman Aderholt on October 28, 2014.

* At various times in October, Congressman Mo Brooks received $2,000 total from Balch and Bingham, $2,500 from Drummond, and $5,000 from Alabama Power.

* Congresswoman Martha Roby reported a $4,000 contribution from Alabama Power on election day, November 4, 2014—five days after the letter was mailed out.
Over $30,000 was used to grease the wheels.

Mark Crosswhite

In Alabama, the plantation mentality wants everyone to stay in their place and to accept the injustice or unsavory conduct—quietly.

Even if you are a success story and not from the gentry class, the people with the plantation mentality won’t accept you, especially if you are African-American.

If ex-Drummond Vice President of Government Affairs David Roberson sings to the feds, who will be hurt the most in this evolving Greek tragedy?

Alabama Power.

And who would be in the DOJ’s cross hairs? Most likely Mark Crosswhite, the current CEO of Alabama Power and a former long-time Balch and Bingham partner.

In 2016, two-years after he was named Alabama Power’s CEO,Crosswhite told al.com, “”For years I had been deeply involved in helping with the decision-making process, in offering recommendations, courses of action, but I was never involved in the final decision-making and when the chance came to cross over from the legal side to the business side that is why I did it.”

So Crosswhite likes to make decisions. Final decisions.

Investigators may ask:

* Did Crosswhite make the final decisions, courses of action in regards to the corrupt AstroTurf entity Alliance for Jobs and the Economy (AJE) that laundered money to bought-and-paid for politician Oliver Robinson?

* Did Crosswhite make the final decision to send Balch lobbyist Jeffrey H. Wood (working on behalf of Alabama Power) up onto Capitol Hill to get the inside scoop on the North Birmingham suppression effort?

* Did Crosswhite make the final decision to support the effort to suppress and discourage poor African-Americans in North Birmingham from testing their toxic and contaminated property?

* Was Crosswhite in any way “deeply involved” in the decision to have Balch and Bingham target and harass GASP, the tiny but vocal environmental group?

* Did Crosswhite know at any time that AJE money was going to bribe Oliver Robinson directly?

* Did Crosswhite make the final decision, the alleged deal that prevented federal prosecutors from calling anyone from Alabama Power in the North Birmingham Bribery Trial last year?

Crosswhite, we are told, loves to be the most powerful man in Alabama.

He relished the ouster of Bill Canary from the Business Council of Alabama last summer (which Crosswhite spearheaded).

But the foolish plantation mentality of Alabama has no standing before a federal grand jury or congressional hearing.

Crosswhite, who has deep roots in Alabama from the early 19th century according to his bio, should be furious at Balch and Bingham for exposing Alabama Power to possible criminal and civil RICO actions because of the ego of Schuyler Allen Baker, Jr.—a dinosaur partner at Balch.

Schuyler’s sheer stupidity of fighting to the death against Burt Newsome, a commoner not from the gentry class of Mountain Brook, has wrecked havoc on the firm. Newsome is also representing David Roberson in his $50 million civil lawsuit against Balch and Drummond Company.

Fighting those with a plantation mentality, Newsome has refused to remain silent and subservient. And even many of the powerful are respecting Newsome for not taking it on the chin.

In the forthcoming weeks, Balch’s most important client and former partner may feel the scorching heat of the U.S. Department of Justice simply because Balch wouldn’t bring closure with a commoner.

Stupidity at its highest. Even a seasoned decision maker like Crosswhite would agree.

Jeffrey Epstein and his temple on Little St. James Island (from Wayne Madsen Report)

Trump’s relationship with Epstein did not falter over Epstein’s continued sexual molestation of underage girls but was caused by a dispute over Palm Beach real estate. The early 1990s was a time when Trump and Epstein allegedly engaged in orgies with girls as young as 12- and 13-years old at Epstein’s Manhattan mansion-townhouse. In 2002, Trump said that Epstein was a “terrific guy” who liked beautiful women on the “younger side.” Trump did not criticize Epstein but offered him praise.

In 2004, Epstein, who was still close to Trump, showed him a foreclosed Palm Beach mansion, called Maison de L'Amitié,that Epstein was planning to purchase for $36 million. Trump, without telling Epstein, bought the property for $40 million through a limited liability corporation called Trump Properties LLC. Since Trump Properties had no money, the deal was totally financed by Deutsche Bank, which has apparently taken over from the defunct BCCI as the new “Bank of Crooks and Criminals International.”

Perhaps as a result of new scrutiny of Trump’s business, as well as social ties to Epstein, Trump lashed out at those probing Deutsche Bank in a July 11 morning tweet:

“The Fake News Media loves the narrative that I didn’t use many banks because the banks didn’t like me. No, I didn’t use many banks because I didn’t (don’t) need their money (old fashioned, isn’t it?). If I did, it would have been very easy for me to get . . . And remember, a bank that I did use years ago, the now badly written about and maligned Deutsche Bank, was then one of the largest and most prestigious banks in the world! They wanted my business, and so did many others!”

Reporter and author Vicky Ward was told that before his Senate confirmation hearing to be Labor Secretary, Acosta had replied to White House staff interviewers that he had struck the sweetheart federal and state of Florida non-prosecution agreement (NPA) with Epstein because the pedophile “belonged to intelligence,” that Acosta was “above his pay-grade” and needed to “back off.” Based on Epstein’s close circle, which includes billionaire retail magnate Les Wexner, a strong supporter of Israel; the late Mossad asset, publisher Robert Maxwell; Maxwell’s daughter, Ghislaine Maxwell; Israel’s uncompromising lapdog, attorney Alan Dershowitz; and former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak, the “intelligence” masters for Epstein is Mossad. Epstein fits the bill of Mossad’s Talmudic motto, “Through Deception Thou Shalt Wage War.” Sexual blackmail of politicians and other important people has always been firmly part of Mossad’s playbook. And while Epstein’s prurient interests involved young girls, WMR has been informed by well-positioned sources that others within Epstein’s trafficking network produced underage males for select Epstein’s “clients.”

Little St. James is a 78-acre island located southeast of the coast of St. Thomas. Between 2009 and 2013, Epstein had a temple built in the southwest corner of the island. The blue and white stripe color scheme and gold dome on the structure strongly hint that it is a synagogue of some nature. However, the building is no ordinary synagogue. On the roof is a statue of the Greek god of the sea, Poseidon, along with statues of two crested birds that appear to be cockatoos. A statue of Minerva, the Roman goddess of wisdom and strategic warfare, was also reported on the grounds around the temple. The Jewish religion prohibits the worship of idols, so Epstein’s temple is some sort of strange hybrid of a Greco-Roman-Judaic nature. The door on the temple’s building has a medieval lock designed to keep people confined in the structure.

The presence of a number of underage girls on the island at various times -- some girls as young as 12 -- suggests that the “temple” was used for some sort of bizarre sexual rituals. The temple and other structures on the island are only visible from the air, since access to the island is severely restricted. Some reports claim the gold dome and statues on the roof of the temple have been removed. Epstein also owns the nearby larger island of Great Saint James. Locals and tourists who once visited Great Saint James now avoid it like the plague. Local construction workers, who were hired to build Epstein’s island mansion, temple, and helipad, were required to sign non-disclosure agreements (NDA) and, almost to a person, are silent about what they have witnessed on the island, derisively nicknamed “Pedo Island” by the locals.

On July 11, Shanghai prosecutors charged Wang Zhenhua, the chairman of SeaZen Holdings Co. Ltd., a major Chinese real estate developer, and Future Land, a Hong Kong developer, with child molestation. Another man, identified only as Zhou, were arrested after the mother of a girl from Jiangsu province said Zhou took her daughter to a Shanghai five-star hotel, where she was molested by Wang and Zhou. Zhou first coaxed the girl by taking her to Shanghai Disneyland. Wang was also politically connected and served on the advisory board for the Shanghai municipal government. The government announced that Wang had been expelled from the body after his arrest. The fact that a billionaire pedophile, who likely had gotten away with molesting young girls for some time, would have been taken down so soon after Epstein’s arrest gives rise to the possibility that among Epstein’s papers have been discovered the names of powerful politicians and businessmen around the world. An FBI tip-off to the Shanghai police directly or through INTERPOL, may have resulted in policed surveillance of Wang and his associates. And in what could pose additional problems for Trump, the portfolio of SeaZen Capital Partners LLC includes properties around Trump properties in Palm Beach County, Florida, ground zero for Epstein and a Chinese intelligence blackmail and influence-peddling operation that involves Mar-a-Lago, billionaire members of Mar-a-Lago, and Trump golf courses.

The U.S. Virgin Islands government is not the only one suspected of consorting with Epstein, who was required to check in with local authorities as a registered sex offender. Epstein was of no interest to authorities in New Mexico, where he maintains the high-desert Zorro Ranch, just east of the Sandia Mountains in Stanley. New Mexico Attorney General Hector Balderas said he will push for legislation to require anyone with a sex trafficking conviction to register as a sex offender in New Mexico. At least one of Epstein’s underage victims said she was abused by Epstein at the Zorro Ranch. Epstein bought the ranch property from former Governor Bruce King, who died in 2009. Balderas’s predecessor as Attorney General, Gary King, who is also Bruce King’s son and an unsuccessful gubernatorial candidate, claimed he returned Epstein’s campaign donations. Gary King’s family continues to own land around the Zorro Ranch, where Epstein also built an airplane hangar and runway. Former Governor Bill Richardson said he gave Epstein’s contributions to his political campaigns to charity.

Epstein also owned the Jeffrey Epstein Scholarship Lodge at Michigan's Interlochen Center for the Arts, a fine-arts children's boarding school and camp near Traverse City, Michigan. Epstein stands accused of raping then-15-year old Jennifer Araoz at the camp and grooming 13-year old Maria Farmer to be one of his sex slaves.

As Trump did not cut ties with Epstein over Epstein’s sexual consorting with minors but over a real estate deal, a significant question remains: Since Epstein faces, perhaps, the rest of his life in prison, he is in a position to negotiate a plea deal with prosecutors if he provides them names of others involved in what Epstein’s indictment by the US Attorney for the Southern District of New York (SDNY) calls a global “vast network” of victims. Epstein may not have been a billionaire, on paper, but he had access to billions of dollars, much of which -- as is the case with Trump – came from Deutsche Bank. What congressional and SDNY prosecutors are keenly interested in is: What is the amount of Russian oligarch and organized criminal syndicate money that was laundered by Deutsche Bank for businessmen like Trump and Epstein.

Chris Blevins, an Alabama thug with a badge

The Blevins defendants’ state-immunity argument fails because they have not established that they were operating within the line and scope of their employment at the time of Roger Shuler’s arrest. The trial court erred regarding the burden of proving a defendant is entitled to state immunity. Judge Virginia Emerson Hopkins put the burden on the Shulers, writing: “Plaintiffs do not dispute that the defendants (Sheriff Curry, Deputy Sheriff Blevins, and Deputy Sheriff Valenti) were acting in the course and scope of their employment when the complained-of touching allegedly occurred.” The Alabama Supreme Court, however, has adopted a burden-shifting framework for establishing a right to immunity, per Ex parte Estate of Reynolds, 946 So. 2d 450 (Ala., 2006): “A defendant initially bears the burden of demonstrating that he was acting in a function that would entitle him to immunity.” In this case, the defendants hold the burden of proving they were acting within the line and scope of their employment, and they have not come close to doing that, making dismissal on this issue improper. 

Blevins’ immunity argument especially fails because Alabama law holds that no determination can be made on such an issue at the motion to dismiss stage, without discovery. From Ex parte Haralson, 853 So. 2d 928 (Ala.,2003): “The Court cannot conclude, at this early stage of the proceedings, without evidence showing that at the time of the accident, [the deputy] was acting within the line and scope of his employment, that [the deputy] is entitled to immunity.” No such evidence has been produced in the instant case, so the Shelby County sheriff officials are not entitled to a finding in their favor on immunity. At this early point in the proceedings, they definitely are not protected by any form of state immunity.

Blevins’ qualified immunity argument fails per Ex parte Alabama Department of Youth Services, 880 So. 2d 393 (Ala. Supreme Court. 2003, which holds: “a State agent shall not be immune from civil liability in his or her personal capacity: (1) when the Constitution or laws of the United States, or the Constitution of this State, or laws, rules, or regulations of this State enacted or promulgated for the purpose of regulating the activities of a governmental agency require otherwise; or (2) when the State agent acts willfully, maliciously, fraudulently, in bad faith, beyond his or her authority, or under a mistaken interpretation of the law.

The Shulers’ complaint is filled with allegations that deputies violated clear constitutional rights and did so “willfully, maliciously, fraudulently, in bad faith.” The deputies clearly acted outside the scope of their employment. Code of Alabama 36-22-3(4) states: “It shall be the duty of sheriffs in their respective counties, by themselves or deputies, to ferret out crime, to apprehend and arrest criminals and, insofar as within their power, to secure evidence of crimes . . . . In the instant matter, there was not even a whiff of a criminal allegation against Roger Shuler. He was targeted because of a complaint that was 100 percent civil – a bogus defamation claim brought by defendants Rob Riley and Liberty Duke, and their various lawyers. Shuler was targeted because of a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction that have been prohibited as unlawful prior restraints under more than 200 years of First Amendment law. (See Near v. Minnesota, 283 U.S. 697, 1931.) Nothing in Sec. 36-22-3(4) suggests it is within the deputies’ line and scope of employment to break into a citizen’s home, beat him up and douse him with pepper spray, and arrest him on a totally non-criminal matter – while never stating his purpose for being on the property (a violation of state law, under Code of Alabama 15-10-2) and never showing or stating that he possessed a warrant.

Speaking of warrants, the U.S. Supreme Court’s finding in Payton v. New York, 455 U.S. 537 (1980)“prohibits the police from making a warrantless and nonconsensual entry into a suspect's home in order to make a routine felony arrest. The deputies’ entry into the Shulers’ home was warrantless and nonconsensual and did not involve a criminal arrest, much less a felony arrest.” Bottom line: The Shelby County deputies violated at least two rulings of the nation’s highest court – rulings that invoked the First and Fourth Amendments – and the force used (for an unlawful arrest) was illegal, per Jackson v. Sauls, 206 F. 3d 1156 (11 th Cir., 2000). (". . . if a stop or arrest is illegal, then there is no basis for any threat or any use of force, and an excessive force claim would always arise but only collaterally from the illegal stop or arrest claim.")

John Merrill

Q: Have you gotten yourself involved with any other married man?

A: Yes

Q: Who?

A: John Merrill.

Q: Did you consider the fact that when another man touches what I will call your body, particularly your private parts, that's being unfaithful to your husband?

A: Yes.

Q: And Mike Evans did that, didn't he?

A: Yes.

Q: And John Merrill did that too, didn't he?

A: Yes.

Q: And you allowed them to do that?

A: Yes.

Q: And when you were touching their body, and putting your hand in their crotch, and touching their penis, did they tell you they didn't like that?

A: No.

Men often are the aggressors in these situations, and that appears to be the case with Merrill. The deposition mentions that he is a politician, running for office:

A: John came to talk to me, and he came again and talked to me, and then I met with him that Sunday afternoon, and he had--he had been very sexual in his conversations and --

Q: Toward you?

A: Yes.

Q: In an inappropriate manner?

A: Yes.

Q: In what way?

A: Just that he talked about he had to have sex all the time and --

Q: He wanted to have it with you?

A: Uh-huh.

How physical did things get?

Q: Did he touch, caress, and/or kiss your breasts?

A: Yes.

Q: Did you do the same for him?

A: Yes.

Q: So you touched his unexposed penis?

A: Yes.

Q. And did either one of y'all have oral sex with the other?

A: Yes.

Q: How many times?

A: Just once.

Q: Both for each other?

A: No.

Q: Him for you--did he commit or perform oral sex on you?

A: No.

Q: You performed oral sex on him?

A: Yes.

Millie Brinyark and family

Alabama Secretary of State John Merrill (R), a 2020 Senate candidate, says that Americans are too “preoccupied with homosexual activities” and “the wife swap shows,” ruining everything from TV to the country’s moral direction.

Merrill, one of multiple Republicans looking to challenge Sen. Doug Jones (D-Ala.) made the comments over the weekend at a town hall event in Dekalb County, according to the Yellowhammer News.

As he took questions from attendees, one asked about the culture shift and how the country’s principles have allegedly been eroded, prompting Merrill to point to what is being shown on TV, among other things.

“We’re too interested in seeing how this family’s finding a way to mess on this family or to see how people are trying to date on TV, or having wife-swapping on TV. That’s what we watch. When we push back against that, and we quit allowing it to be in our homes — that’s how those changes have occurred because we’ve allowed them to slowly but surely come into our lives,” he said.

“How have we allowed it to happen? There are no more good TV shows on like ‘Gunsmoke,’ ‘Bonanza,’ ‘The Virginian,’ ‘Andy Griffith,’ ‘I Love Lucy.’ We don’t have those shows anymore. We’re too interested in homosexual activities,” Merrill said.

“We’re too interested in seeing how this family’s finding a way to mess on this family or to see how people are trying to date on TV, or having wife-swapping on TV. That’s what we watch. When we push back against that, and we quit allowing it to be in our homes — that’s how those changes have occurred because we’ve allowed them to slowly but surely come into our lives,” he said.

In a phone interview Monday night, Merrill confirmed his remarks to AL.com.

“The foundational principles which we have grown up as a nation are no more,” the secretary of state and Senate candidate said. “There’s no more TV shows like ‘Gunsmoke’ or ‘Bonanza’ or ‘The Virginian’ or ‘I Love Lucy’ or ‘Andy Griffith.' [I] said people are too interested in homosexual activities. They’re too interested in the wife swap TV shows and the shows that are not morally uplifting. That’s the problem.”

Asked to explain what he meant, Merrill said, “I meant what I said. People are too interested in anything that is not uplifting, edifying. They’re too busy being preoccupied with homosexual activities and the wife swap shows."

He declined to give examples of how Americans are too preoccupied with “homosexual activities.”

Merrill said there are no longer shows “that are based on biblical foundations. ...Shows that promote family and culture with a father, a mother and children based on biblical teachings and biblical principles on which our nation was founded."

John Merrill

Alabama Secretary of State John Merrill admits to having an extramarital sexual encounter but denies it included oral sex, according to an article published yesterday afternoon at al.com.

Merrill, a Republican with solid backing from business and religious organizations, also admitted to recommending the woman, Millie Brinyark, for a school-related job. But Merrill denied making the hiring decision, even though the job apparently was in a program he once managed. . . .

What is Merrill's version of the sexual encounter? Here is how al.com describes it:

Merrill said the woman called him and asked to meet on Sunday, Sept. 12 (2010), at a condo owned by her brother. (In her deposition, the woman said Merrill asked her about getting together that Sunday, but acknowledged that she suggested the location, saying she had to go there anyway to return a parking pass.). That is where the encounter happened that Merrill and the woman describe differently.

Merrill told reporters: "Basically, when I walked in, we started talking. She kissed me, I kissed her back. Then she started unbuttoning my shirt, and after that, she started to become more aggressive, and she actually did some other things in trying to engage me in some physical activity with her, which I declined, and I indicated to her that I was not going to do that.

"I stopped, and I said, 'I need to go, I'm not going to be here anymore'."

The al.com article raises numerous questions, but perhaps the most staggering one is this: Why would a woman admit--under oath and penalty of perjury--to providing a man with oral sex, when she really didn't? Even Merrill can't seem to explain that one, especially considering that Brinyark's deposition reportedly was taken less than two weeks after the sexual encounter. From the al.com article:

Asked why the discrepancy exists between his version and what the woman testified to 10 days after the incident, Merrill said:

"I don't know, I don't know that I ever will know. But I do know this - I'd know if that (oral sex) had happened. I would know that, and I know it didn't."

Millie Brinyark

Kyle Whitmire, a reporter for al.com, admitted in a column on Tuesday that, prior to the 2014 general election, he had court documents that provided details about an unnamed public official's affair. The quality of the information was not in question because it involved sworn testimony in a deposition. Whitmire said it was "as close as it comes" to having a "story cold," but he "stuck it away," apparently not even consulting an editor about it. Whitmire hinted that other reporters in the mainstream press had received the information and ignored it.

Merrill, a Republican ally of former governor Bob Riley and a friend of Riley's son Rob, went on to handily win the secretary of state race over Democrat Lula Albert-Kaigler. Would Merrill have won if Whitmire had revealed the contents of court documents in his possession? That's hard to say. But multiple sources told Legal Schnauzer yesterday that the documents in question are from a divorce case in Tuscaloosa Circuit Court styled Bryan Scott Brinyark v. Mildred Murphree Brinyark.

Sources sent us copies of Millie Brinyark's deposition in the case, dated September 22, 2010, and Merrill's name is front and center. Ms. Brinyark, a former teacher, admits to allowing the married Merrill to touch her "private parts" and that she performed oral sex on him.

According to al.com, Merrill claims to be the victim of a "smear campaign" by unnamed individuals who widely circulated portions of the deposition to the press, politicians, members of his church, and others. How can it be a smear campaign when it involves public documents, about testimony that Merrill largely admits is true? The al.com journalists apparently did not ask Merrill that question.

Scott J. Wells

INDICTMENT 

THE GRAND JURY CHARGES THAT:
Beginning on an unknown date, at least as early as December 15, 2016, and continuing through March 22, 2017, said dates being approximate, in Greene County, and elsewhere in the Western District of Missouri. SCOTT JAMES WELLS, the defendant knowingly received and distributed any visual depiction that had been mailed and shipped and transported in interstate commerce, and which contains materials which had been so mailed and shipped and transported by any means, including by computer, the production of which visual depiction was of such conduct, all in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Sections 2252(a)(2) and (b)(1).

Brady Musgrave

"Undoubtedly the language of the statute may be used in the general description of an offence, but it must be accompanied with such a statement of the facts and circumstances as will inform the accused of the specific offense, coming under the general description, with which he is charged."

The statute upon which the indictment is founded only describes the general nature of the offence prohibited; and the indictment, in repeating its language without averments disclosing the particulars of the alleged offence, states no matters upon which issue could be formed for submission to a jury. The general, and, with few exceptions, of which the present is not one, the universal rule, on this subject, is, that all the material facts and circumstances embraced in the definition of the offence must be stated, or the indictment will be defective. No essential element of the crime can be omitted without destroying the whole pleading. The omission cannot be supplied by intendment, or implication, and the charge must be made directly and not inferentially, or by way of recital. . . .

The absence of all particulars of the alleged scheme renders the count as defective as would be an indictment for larceny without stating the property stolen, or its owner or party from whose possession it was taken.

"It is an elementary principle of criminal pleading, that where the definition of an offence, whether it be at common law or by statute, `includes generic terms, it is not sufficient that the indictment shall charge the offence in the same generic terms as in the definition; but it must state the species; it must descend to particulars.' . . .  The object of the indictment is, first, to furnish the accused with such a description of the charge against him as will enable him to make his defense, and avail himself of his conviction or acquittal for protection against a further prosecution for the same cause; and, second, to inform the court of the facts alleged, so that it may decide whether they are sufficient in law to support a conviction, if one should be had. For this, facts are to be stated, not conclusions of law alone. A crime is made up of acts and intent; and these must be set forth in the indictment with reasonable particularity of time, place, and circumstances."

The general rule is that indictments cannot be amended in substance. "An amendment to an indictment occurs when the charging terms of an indictment are altered."United States v. Cancelliere, 69 F.3d 1116, 1121 (11th Cir. 1995). This follows from the fundamental distinction between the information and the indictment . . . which must be returned by a grand jury. If the indictment could be changed by the court or by the prosecutor, then it would no longer be the indictment returned by the grand jury. Indeed, in Russell v. United States, 369 U.S. 749, 769 (1962), the Court pointed out that a consequence of amending the indictment is that the defendant "could then be convicted on the basis of facts not found by, and perhaps not even presented to, the grand jury which indicted him.""Thus, the Fifth Amendment forbids amendment of an indictment by the Court, whether actual or constructive."United States v. Wacker, 72 F.3d 1453, 1474 (10th Cir. 1995).

John Merrill

Merrill pledged that he and his wife Cindy were willing to face the scrutiny of what is likely to be a very competitive statewide campaign.

“One of my friends asked me, he said, ‘John, are you prepared to go through what you’re going to have to go through if you run for the United States Senate,’” Merrill said. “He asked me this on the Sunday before the Tuesday. He said, ‘Are you prepared for the attacks that you’ll face and that Cindy will face? Are you prepared to stand up and fight against that? Is it worth it to you to go through what you’re going to have to go through and pay the price to make it happen? Is it worth it?’”

“’And I said, ‘Ron, let me ask you a question,’” he continued. “He said, ‘OK.’ I said, ‘Is the republic worth it? Is the republic worth it? It is worth it to me. And I know it is worth it to y’all and that’s why there is a room full today because y’all understand it. We have got to stand and push back, and continue to fight and support the president and to make these changes that we have to make in order to protect and defend our country as we have known it to be or it will cease to be that way.”

Robert Mueller

Ever since the release of the Mueller Report, countless commentators have implored everyone to just #ReadtheReport. The problem is not who is reading it—the problem is the report itself, and its many errors.

Jed Shugerman

The bottom line is that the Mueller Report is a failure not because of Congress or because of public apathy, but because it failed to get the law, the facts, or even the basics of writing right. When Mueller testifies before Congress on July 24, he should be pressed on all of this.

The DOJ’s initial appointment explicitly tasked Mueller with investigating campaign “coordination,” and it is not too much to ask that he get the law of “coordination” right. The report stated that “‘coordination’ does not have a settled definition in federal criminal law. We understood coordination to require an agreement—tacit or express.”

However, Congress purposely sought to prevent such narrow interpretations: in 2002, it passed a statute directing that campaign finance regulations “shall not require agreement or formal collaboration to establish coordination.” The Federal Election Commission established the regulations for the implementation of the statute: “Coordinated means made in cooperation, consultation or concert with, or at the request or suggestion of, a candidate,” with no need to show any kind of agreement.

Outside spending for coordinated communications is an in-kind contribution, and foreign contributions are completely prohibited. And Congress made the criminal penalties unmistakably clear: “Any person who knowingly and willfully commits a violation of any provision of this Act” commits a crime. The Supreme Court upheld these limits in McConnell v. FEC with crucial observations about the functional role of suggestions, rather than agreements: “[E]xpenditures made after a wink or nod often will be as useful to the candidate as cash.” (The Trump-Russia) timeline is full of suggestions far more explicit than winks and nods.

As the Supreme Court acknowledged, this is not about bribery and quid pro quo; it’s about outsourcing a consistent campaign messaging and expenses to known allies. It seems Mueller did not hire any legal experts with experience in campaign finance regulation. Given that this investigation was about campaign crimes, this appears to be a revealing oversight with serious consequences.

Jeffrey Epstein and Donald Trump

It really does not matter whether the presiding federal judge in the Jeffrey Epstein underage sex trafficking case, Richard Berman, opposed bail for the Wall Street hedge fund mogul because Epstein represents an extreme flight risk or not. What matters is that Berman failed to make adequate provisions for Epstein’s safety inside the Manhattan Correctional Center (MCC). On July 24, Epstein was discovered by guards in his cell "nearly unconscious in a fetal position.” Epstein was said to have “marks” on his neck consistent with a suicide attempt or put there to give the impression by someone else that he attempted suicide.

What is apparent with Epstein’s so-called “attempted suicide” in the Park Row jail is that some very powerful interests do not want to see Epstein come to trial in New York. These individuals, who include Donald Trump, would rest much easier if Epstein died either by suicide, murder, or murder made to look like suicide. It matters very little if Epstein died while ensconced under tight restrictions at his Upper East Side mansion or in the MCC with access to him by other inmates.

Former U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York Preet Bharara, who was fired by Trump early in his administration, said of Tartaglione, “While all murders tear at the fabric of our communities, when the alleged perpetrator of a gangland-style, quadruple homicide is a former police officer, that strikes at the heart of civilized society.” What better person to use to either murder Epstein or communicate a threat to him to keep his mouth shut than someone like Tartaglione. Briarcliff Manor, coincidentally or not, is the home of the Trump National Golf Club.

Tartaglione, who also worked as a police officer in Yonkers, Mount Vernon, and Pawling, hails from Otisville, New York. Those out to protect Trump may have killed two birds with one stone. If an assault of Epstein was meant to send a clear message to him to keep his mouth shut, it also may have sent a similar message to former Trump attorney and “fixer” Michael Cohen, who happens to be prisoner 76318-054 at the Federal Correctional Institution in -- Otisville.

While MCC officials questioned Tartaglione about Epstein’s injuries, with which he denied having any involvement, it should be remembered that the former cop is exactly the type of people the mob uses to carry out hits in prison. Recall that infamous mob boss Whitey Bulger, an FBI informant, CIA MK-ULTRA mind control program participant, and Irish Republican Army arms trafficker, was beaten to death in his cell at the Hazelton federal penitentiary in West Virginia on October 30, 2018. Bulger’s eyes were practically gouged out and tongue cut off with a prison-made shiv. The Federal Bureau of Prisons, which would have had a say in Epstein’s incarceration pending trial, has a dismal record on protecting inmates like Bulger, and now, Epstein.

It only stands to reason that Trump, fearful of his longtime and very close relationship with Epstein being exposed, along with all of the details of child rape by the two, would rely on a Mafia hitman, already in jail, to silence Epstein. In fact, knowing that most correctional centers are woefully understaffed, it would be easier to carry out a hit on Epstein in the MCC rather than under closely supervised house arrest.

There is also the question of why Tartaglione, who faces federal murder charges that could result in the death penalty and who is being held without bail pending trial, was transferred from the Metropolitan Detention Center (MDC) in Brooklyn to the MCC in Manhattan. In March 2017, Gerard Benderoth, a retired New York Police Department officer, reportedly shot himself to death in Haverstraw, New York, after being pulled over by FBI agents. Oddly, Haverstraw had phoned from his car the town’s police department, from which he retired in 2015, to inform them he was being pulled over. The FBI agents reportedly wanted to question Benderoth about his connections to Targaglione and the Westchester County cocaine smuggling ring.

Why would Epstein’s trial judge Berman place the accused in such jeopardy in the MCC? It is germane to look at Berman’s background. From 1979 to 1986, Berman served as the corporate counsel for Steve Ross, born Steven Jay Rechnitz, the founder of Abbey Rent a Car. Abbey later merged with Kinney Parking Company, owned by Jewish mob bosses Manny Kimmel and Abner Zwillman. After mob boss Dutch Schultz’smurder in 1935, Zwillman took over Schultz’s rackets and quickly became known as the “Al Capone of New Jersey.” Ross’s Kinney Parking became Kinney National Services in 1962. In 1969, Kinney bought Warner Bros.-Seven Arts, the film and record company and changed its name to Warner Communications, with Ross becoming CEO in 1972. In 1989, Warner merged with Time. In the late 1980s and before his death in 1992, Ross began negotiations that later landed the FIFA World Cup in the United States in 1994. Ross died at age 65 from a massive heart attack and was succeeded by Gerald Levin, who would later wrest control of CNN from its founder, Ted Turner. FIFA, which maintained offices in Trump Tower, has long been linked to international criminal syndicate activities.

While few care what happens in the long run to a pedophile like Epstein, there is a great need to keep him healthy to stand trial and hopefully name all of his cohorts in his sex trafficking, including all of the VIPs like Trump, Bill Clinton, Alan Dershowitz, Prince Andrew, and others. However, Judge Berman, by placing Epstein in the midst of at least one mob hit man, should immediately recuse himself from the Epstein case.

Scott J. Wells

Court takes notice of the court file, which includes a signed affidavit in support of the complaint. No evidence presented with regard to probable cause. Court finds probable cause and orders the matter held for grand jury or other proceeding.

In relation to the weight of the evidence supporting the charges in the Complaint, Facebook initiated SyberTip 16099575 on December 21, 2016, and CyberTip 16533142 on January 15, 2017, regarding a user uploading and sending a file containing child pornography. Law enforcement traced the account back to the defendant  and executed a search and seizure warrant at the defendant's residence. A forensic preview examination on the defendant's laptop computer revealed 60 images of child pornography.

David P. Rush

In relation to the history and characteristics of the defendant, the defendant is unemployed and lives at home with his mother and father, who are in their 70s. On August 19, 2004, Wells was convicted of sexual misconduct, statutory sodomy, incest, and child molestation in the Circuit Court of Greene County, Missouri, case number 31302CF5509. On November 17, 2004, the Circuit Court granted Wells' motion for a new trial due to ineffective assistance of counsel, and vacated Wells' convictions. On July 5, 2006, Wells pleaded to four counts of endangering the welfare of a child.

The Court takes note of its own file , including the Pretrial Services Report prepared by the USPPTS Officer. The Government has filed a Motion for Detention Hearing (Doc. 2) Arguments made regarding Defendant's custody. The Court finds, by clear and convincing evidence, that the Defendant is a danger to the community. Accordingly, the Court finds an adequate basis for detention and will issue a written order.

The factors to be considered by the Court in determining whether the defendant should be detained pending trial are enumerated in section 3142(g). The Court has already noted that this case involves a minor victim.The evidence at the hearing established that the weight of the evidence against the defendant is overwhelming.

Mark Crosswhite

Earlier this month we reported how Alabama Power’s CEO Mark Crosswhite could possibly be under scrutiny by the U.S. Department of Justice.

Now we, the CDLU, are taking it a step further.

We are asking the Office of the Inspector General of the U.S. Department of Justice and the House Judiciary Committee to review the alleged secret deal that prevented federal prosecutors from calling anyone from Alabama Power in the North Birmingham Bribery Trial last year.

Alabama Power donated $30,000 to the corrupt AstroTurf entity Alliance for Jobs and the Economy (AJE) that laundered money to bought-and-paid for politician Oliver Robinson.

Yet Alabama Power was the only donor to AJE not to testify in the criminal trial that convicted Balch-made millionaire and equity partner Joel I. Gilbert.

Alabama Power is the sister-wife, siamese twin of embattled law firm Balch and Bingham.

As the most powerful man in Alabama, Crosswhite and other top executives at the utility are all former Balch partners.

But even the most powerful individual for one of the largest employers in Alabama cannot be above the law.

Pulling strings, at the end of the day, helps no one except investigators.

Scott J. Wells

In Miller, the appellate court found: "The second factor, the number of images of child pornography found, likewise does not weigh in the government's favor in light of the overwhelming number of adult images that were found. The government presented evidence pertaining to only twenty of the 1200-1400 images found on the zip disk, and the District Court subsequently determined, in the process of sentencing Miller, that only eleven of these images constituted child pornography. Miller contended that he was unaware of the existence of these images . . .

We have made it plain that a person does knowingly receive and possess child pornography images when he seeks them out over the internet and then downloads them to his computer. In fact, we have declared that, “[i]n the electronic context, a person can receive and possess child pornography without downloading it, if he or she seeks it out and exercises dominion and control over it.”Romm, 455 F.3d at 998;  see also United States v. Tucker, 305 F.3d 1193, 1204 (10th Cir.2002)

After a bench trial, Stulock was convicted of knowingly receiving the child pornography videotape, but he was acquitted on the charge of knowingly possessing child pornography. The possession charge specified only the images found in the browser cache.  The district court explained that one cannot be guilty of possession for simply having viewed an image on a web site, thereby causing the image to be automatically stored in the browser's cache, without having purposely saved or downloaded the image.

Doug Jones

U.S. Senator Doug Jones, D-Alabama is drawing contributions from Democratic donors from all over the country in his bid for re-election in 2020.

Senator Jones reported to the Federal Election Commission a final cash balance at the end of June of $4,259,540.86 in cash on hand after a busy first half of 2019. . . .

Jones has several individual contributors. Barbara Hostetter of Boston, Massachusetts has contributed $11,200 to Jones. Hostetter is not employed. Kevin Rowe of Santa Fe, New Mexico contributed $2,800 to Jones. Rowe is the owner of K. Rowe Investments. Daniel Seymour of Weston, Connecticut has donated $5,400 to Jones including a $2,800 donation. Seymour is a portfolio manager with Paloma Partners. Penny Pritzker of Chicago, Illinois has contributed $5,600 to Jones. Pritzker is the Chairman of PSP Partners. Ashley McDermott of New York City has donated $2,800 to Jones. McDermott is a self-employed activist. Allen Pinny of Pebble Beach, California has contributed $5,600 to Jones. Pinny is not employed. Charles Miller of Pebble Beach, California has contributed $5,600 to Jones. Miller is retired. Jeffrey Bayer of Woody Creek, Colorado has contributed $4,000 to Jones. Bayer is employed in real estate by Bayer Ventures. Philip Purcell of Park City, Utah has contributed $5,600 to Jones. Purcell is an executive with Continental Investors. Randy Gori of Edwardsville, Illinois has contributed $5,600 to Jones. Gori is an attorney employed by Julian Gori. Amy Fowler of Rhinebeck, New York has committed $5.600 to Jones. Fowler is a self-employed author. All of these leading contributions to Jones were earmarked by ACTBLUE. According to original reporting by the Yellowhammer News, 78 percent of Jones’ contributions come from outside of Alabama.

Jones reported 351 contributions from other committees. The biggest of these contributions include: AFLAC PAC $10,000, UBS Americas Inc. PAC $5,000, Blue Cross Blue Shield of Alabama $10,000, All for our Country Leadership PAC $10,000, Keystone America PAC $10,00, Victory NOW PAC $5,000, Balch and Bingham LLP Federal PAC $5,000 . . .

The pollution in the north Birmingham neighborhoods of Collegeville, Harriman Park and Fairmont has been around for more than 100 years. The controversy surrounding the cleanup of that pollution is much newer.

Sandwiched between two coking plants, and surrounded by other industrial facilities and heavy rail lines, these neighborhoods have long borne the environmental brunt of the city's steel-making success, but since 2014, a legal battle is being waged between the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the state of Alabama and the five nearby industries identified as "potentially responsible parties" to the pollution over who should pay to clean up 100 years of industrial residue.

North Birmingham Superfund site

Soil that was removed was laden with contaminants including arsenic, lead, or polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons like benzo(a)pyrene. All are strongly linked to human health problems, and benzo(a)pyrene is classified as a Group 1 carcinogen by the International Agency for Research on Cancer.

The cleanup will be ongoing for some time yet. . . . The EPA has identified 235 additional parcels of land that meet the criteria for removal. . . .  At current pace, the removal operations will be complete in about three more years.

The total cost of the cleanup is expected to be $20 million. . . .

The potentially responsible parties (PRPs) are: the United States Pipe and Foundry Company (seen above), Walter Energy (now ERP Compliant Coke), Drummond, Alagasco, and KMAC Services.

On October 30, 2014, a ghost-written letter drafted by Balch and Bingham and signed by six members of the U.S. House of Representatives in Alabama was dispatched. That same day, Congressman Robert Aderholt reported receiving $5,000 from Alabama Power, according to FEC filings.

* A week before, Drummond Company gave Congressman Bradley Byrne $5,000 on October 22, while forking out another $5,000 to Congressman Mike Rogers on October 24.

* Balch and Bingham sweetened the money trail by tossing $2,000 to Congressman Aderholt on October 28, 2014.

* At various times in October, Congressman Mo Brooks received $2,000 total from Balch and Bingham, $2,500 from Drummond, and $5,000 from Alabama Power.

* Congresswoman Martha Roby reported a $4,000 contribution from Alabama Power on election day, November 4, 2014—five days after the letter was mailed out.

Over $30,000 was used to grease the wheels.

My grandmother, a slight woman whose values still trickle down through four generations, and who radiated love and wisdom as if she were our family’s own self-contained solar system, once showed me the scars on her legs from being bitten by a police dog and instructed me to “trust a white man as far as you can throw him.”

While that ancient African proverb now seems like a bit of reverse racism, Alabama’s black voters, in all their egalitarian forgiveness and goodwill, ignored it this past December when they cast their ballots for Doug Jones, sending him to the Senate chambers to represent them.

Sure, he was a white man, they reasoned, but he wasn’t like the others. Even with his problematic campaign, he was one of the good ones. He would remember what black voters did for him. How could he not recognize that the only reason he is now referred to as “Sen. Doug Jones from the state of Alabama” is the black vote? After all, he’s a Democrat. How could he forget who put him there?

In return, Doug Jones and the Democratic Party, once again, have thrown black people to the wolves.

Politico magazine reports that on Wednesday, the Senate passed a bank-deregulation bill that rolls back many of the regulations imposed on banks and lenders. The bill passed with the support of the Trump administration, Republican senators and 17 Democratic senators—most of whom are considered to be moderate or conservative Dems. The legislation now moves to the House of Representatives, where it is expected to pass.

For more than a decade I have been trying to push the idea that blackness has evolved past its murky racial and cultural definition. As a college macroeconomics instructor, I taught a class, Race as an Economic Construct, that advocated examining race through the lens of data and numbers. (The science of economics is not limited to the production and distribution of goods, services and wealth.)

One of the easiest ways to illustrate this point is with the history of black home ownership. Home ownership is the biggest builder of wealth in America and is still affected by the history of segregation, Jim Crow and redlining. It fuels every indicator of discrimination in this country and is one of the best examples of the manifestation of white supremacy.

Housing discrimination relegated African Americans to homogeneous, poor black communities with underfunded, segregated schools. Poorer schools create the education gap. The education gap creates employment disparities. Underemployment creates poverty and the phenomenon called “black-on-black crime.” Poverty leads to the inability to acquire affordable housing, which relegates black people to low-income communities, which leads to underfunded schools, which leads to more crime and so on. It is a vicious circle.

It is all about homeownership.

We have always known this. The Root has routinely reported on the difficulties black people encounter when buying a home. A recent report by the Center for Investigative Reporting, along with Reveal News, uncovered how U.S. banks systematically prevent blacks and Hispanics from becoming homeowners.

JPMorgan Chase paid $55 million in January to settle charges that it discriminated against black and Latino borrowers. In 2011, Bank of America handed over $335 million for making its minority customers pay more than its white customers for the same loans. A federal lawsuit against Wells Fargo alleges that the bank has discriminated against Philadelphia’s black and Latino borrowers since 2004.

It is an indisputable fact that many banks treat their black customers unequally. The only reason we know this is that banks are required to report demographic data on most mortgage loans. That data is publicly available to anyone who wants to look at it.

Among other things, the legislation passed by the Senate on Wednesday strips away for some banks the requirement to report the race, ethnicity and gender of their mortgage customers. Under the new proposal, only the largest banks will have to report demographic data, which means that it will be impossible to find out if the other banks discriminate. If the law passes, these banks will be able to deny black customers without fear of repercussion or lawsuits.

The Democratic Party could have singled out that provision to the public and made a fuss. They could have called it racist (because it is racist), which would have made the legislation lose support. They could easily have refused to vote for this bill unless that specific provision was stripped away.

Sen. Doug Jones from the state of Alabama voted for it.