On Thursday night, the main person of interest in the investigation into the four men who disappeared in Pennsylvania last week confessed that he killed all of them. Cosmo DiNardo, 20, admitted to the murders in exchange for the district attorney’s agreement to not pursue a death sentence, one of his lawyers said.

The confession came one day after investigators found human remains in a “common grave” on DiNardo’s parents’ property, which the police had spent days searching. The remains were identified as belonging to Dean Finocchiaro, 19. Thanks to cadaver dogs, the grave could be found despite being 12.5 feet deep. The bodies of the remaining men were later identified in the same grave.

Early Friday morning, a second man was arrested, 20-year-old Sean Kratz. Both men face charges of criminal homicide, conspiracy to commit criminal homicide, abuse of a corpse, and robbery.

Video of defense attorney Paul Lang’s statement that Cosmo DiNardo confessed to his involvement with the murder of four Bucks County men. pic.twitter.com/3mcdXPfSx0

— James Boyle (@jamesboylejr) July 13, 2017

The Killer Knew the Victims

Police suspected early on that all the men knew each other. Jimi Patrick, 19, was the first to disappear, and was last seen on July 5. He reportedly graduated from the same small high school as DiNardo did, just one year later. Finocchiaro was last seen on the evening of July 7, as was Thomas Meo, 21, and Mark Sturgis, 22. Meo and Sturgis were longtime friends who both worked for Sturgis’ father.

Finocchiaro and DiNardo were both members of a Facebook group for people buying and selling terrain vehicles, and text messages in a group chat showed that they knew each other. A friend of Meo and Sturgis, Eric Beitz, said that DiNardo had been hanging out with them recently and that he talked about “weird things like killing people and having people killed.” Apparently DiNardo also sold guns. Sturgis’ father said he had heard his son and Meo mention Finocchiaro in the past.

History of Mental Illness

Cosmo DiNardo was well known to law enforcement and had had 30 contacts with law enforcement in just six years. He suffers from mental illness and spent time at a mental institution last summer where he was involuntarily committed. It is unknown for what specifically, but a prosecutor described him as schizophrenic.

On Monday, Dinardo was arrested for an unrelated charge of possessing a firearm despite suffering from a mental illness. The incident involving the firearm reportedly happened in February, but the district attorney authorized police to refile the charges last month. His father then paid 10 percent of his $1 million bail.

Missing Pennsylvania man’s cellphone signal led police to Cosmo DiNardo’s farm where human remains were found: https://t.co/sLbCqNEuGQ pic.twitter.com/WjjN3ZKJvg

— CBS News (@CBSNews) July 14, 2017

The Crime

Police early on focused on DiNardo as a person of interest in the case of the missing men, after a signal from Finocchiaro’s cellphone was traced to DiNardo’s family farm. On Wednesday, DiNardo was arrested for trying to sell Meo’s car for $500 to a friend, who called the police.

The car was found on another property owned by the DiNardos, but was still officially registered to Meo. Meo’s diabetic kit was still in the car, which according to family members, he didn’t go anywhere without. After that, DiNardo’s bail was set at $5 million. On Wednesday, cadaver dogs led police to the grave.

DiNardo told investigators he promised to sell the men marijuana, but then he decided to kill them and keep their money. He shot and killed Patrick on July 5, and used a backhoe to dig a hole in which to bury the body.

On July 7, DiNardo and Kratz met with Finocchiaro, also involving marijuana sales. Kratz shot Finocchario, and DiNardo placed him in a metal tank.

Later that same day, DiNardo shot Sturgis and Meo and placed them in the same tank as Finocchiaro. The next day, DiNardo and Kratz dug a deep hole using the backhoe and buried the whole tank. There are sure to be more details to come as investigators continue their search and press the men.

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Two Arrested For Murders of Four Missing Pennsylvania Men appeared first on Law Street.

Welcome to RantCrush Top 5, where we take you through today’s top five controversial stories in the world of law and policy. Who’s ranting and raving right now? Check it out below:

FBI Arrests U.S. Soldier With Ties to ISIS

The FBI has arrested an active U.S. soldier based in Hawaii for pledging allegiance to ISIS and working to buy a drone for the terrorist group. He also reportedly wanted to “kill a bunch of people” with his rifle, and copied secret military documents to give to ISIS, although none of the documents appear to have been successfully transmitted. Yesterday, Sergeant Ikaika Kang appeared in federal court in Honolulu. The FBI spent a year investigating the soldier and finally pinned him down using undercover agents posing as Islamic State representatives.

Apparently, Kang had made controversial comments in 2012, and his military clearance was revoked. But it was reinstated a year later. Then, last year, Army officials opened an investigation into Kang. Reportedly, Kang said that the Orlando nightclub shooter did “what he had to do” and that America is the only terrorist organization in the world. He also said that Hitler was right and that he “believed in the mass killing of Jews.”

U.S. Army soldier arrested on charges of helping ISIS was previously awarded “Global War on Terrorism Service Medal” https://t.co/TMFVHNYvIh

— ABC7 Eyewitness News (@ABC7) July 11, 2017

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post RantCrush Top 5: July 11, 2017 appeared first on Law Street.

As incidents of police-related violence have become more widely publicized over the past several years, the public’s interest in police accountability has increased alongside it. The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania recognized this trend on Tuesday and ruled that the public should have access to police dashcam video unless the footage is proven to be related to an ongoing investigation.

A 5-2 majority in the state’s highest court pointed out that there is no blanket rule against these recordings being released. Instead, release decisions must be made on a case-by-case basis where the videos are each analyzed to determine their relationship with any ongoing investigation. However, police have the burden to show why a video is exempt from release.

The case revolved around Michelle Grove, a Pennsylvania woman who requested a copy of a police report as well as any video or audio recordings pertaining to a 2014 car accident she was involved in. She believed at the time that she would receive these documents because of the state’s Right-to-Know Law, which states that commonwealth agencies must provide copies of all public records upon request. Instead, she was denied.

Prior to this ruling, Pennsylvania police officers were denying public access requests that asked for dashcam footage, arguing that anything captured on those cameras were criminal investigative records, which made them exempt under the Right-to-Know Law and the Criminal History Information and Records Act. But the court found in favor of Grove because the video in question only showed state troopers investigating the scene and talking to the drivers and witnesses.

“[Pennsylvania State Police] simply does not explain how the video portion of the [recordings] captured any criminal investigation,” Justice Kevin Dougherty wrote in his majority opinion.

The court did give some leeway to the state police. While the video was released to the public, the court agreed that the audio from the police interviews with the drivers and witnesses did contain investigative information. As a result, the court ruled that any audio of interviews had to be edited out.

Grove’s lawyer, Helen Stolinas, told the AP that the decision is “a decisive victory for the citizens of Pennsylvania and the press to remain aware of the activities of state and local officials and be able to scrutinize how public servants are performing their duties.”

But the ruling comes at the same time that state lawmakers are planning to vote on a bill that creates a blanket exemption from the Right-to-Know Law for police video and audio recordings. Senate Bill 560 passed the state House on Tuesday and now only needs to have its changes approved by the Senate before it is passed to Governor Tom Wolf who believes it is “a step in the right direction,” according to a spokesman. The bill would require anyone who was denied access to police recordings to petition the court for a hearing to appeal to the police directly. The move would cost $125 to initiate and a judge would then have to determine if the requested video’s release outweighed the nondisclosure interest of an individual, law enforcement, or the Commonwealth.

This bill has been met with pushback from the American Civil Liberties Union. Reggie Shuford, director of the ACLU of Pennsylvania, said the legislation would hide police camera footage from the public, effectively making it just a tool for surveillance.

“If the public cannot obtain video produced by police cameras, they shouldn’t be used at all,” Shuford said in a press release. “While body cameras may be valuable to officers in carrying out their daily duties, the idea of using these cameras came to prominence because people were demanding that police operate with transparency, fairness, and accountability.”

Lawmakers expect SB 560 to be put to vote sometime next week, according to the AP.

Pennsylvania’s relationship with releasing documents from public servants has been complicated, to say the least. Prior to its rewrite in 2009, the state’s Right-to-Know Law had ranked among the worst public information law in the country when it came to giving people access to government records and information because it presumed government records were not public, unless someone who wanted the record could establish otherwise.

Gabe Fernandez

Gabe is an editorial intern at Law Street. He is a Peruvian-American Senior at the University of Maryland pursuing a double degree in Multiplatform Journalism and Marketing. In his free time, he can be found photographing concerts, running around the city, and supporting Manchester United. Contact Gabe at Staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Pennsylvania’s Confusing Struggle Over Police Dashcam Footage appeared first on Law Street.

At a rally in Hershey, Pennsylvania on Thursday, President-elect Donald Trump cycled through his usual talking points, like “America first,” but also spoke about an ongoing tragedy on the other side of the world: “When I look at what is going on in Syria, it’s so sad,” Trump told the raucous crowd at the Giant Center. “It’s so sad, and we’re going to help people,” he added, by building “safe zones” in Syria.

Trump added that he would ask Persian Gulf countries to help pay for the project. Many military analysts and experts view “safe zones” as being too difficult to manage and protect, and warn that they could come with extreme risks as well. For one, the effort would require U.S. boots on the ground to protect Syrians within the “safe zones.” Some also point to a potentially deadly consequence of establishing “safe zones:” the implication of “unsafe zones,” or the area outside the protected “safe zone” which the Syrian regime or jihadist groups could abuse and pummel as free-for-all areas with an unhinged license to kill.

Thursday’s rally was Trump’s second of the week, and was a part of his “thank you” tour of battleground states that were key to his Election Day victory. He was the first Republican to win Pennsylvania since 1988. He won 44,292 more votes than Democrat Hillary Clinton, winning by less than one percent of total ballots cast in the state. And while he recapped his election triumph, and ran through his usual themes, his mention of “safe zones” in Syria was unusual, and perhaps signals his policy plans for the war-torn nation.

Trump is not the only notable leader to call for “safe zones” in Syria. In April, German Chancellor Angela Merkel, who has been trying to stave the building tides of Syrian refugees into Europe by brokering a deal with Turkey, said she is in favor of “safe zones.” But the UN and other human rights groups oppose such a move, as does President Barack Obama. “Sadly, it is very difficult to see how it would operate short of us essentially being willing to militarily take over a big chunk of that country,” Obama said at the time.

The situation in Syria has deteriorated since April, and it’s unclear if Merkel would stand by her remarks from then. After a three-week offensive, Aleppo is officially in the hands of government forces, as hundreds of civilians have been killed, and thousands more displaced from their homes. Refugees from Syria might find it difficult to emigrate to the U.S. once Trump is in office. In his rally on Thursday, Trump reiterated that he will restrict immigrants from countries that have a history of Islamic extremism from entering the U.S.

Alec Siegel

Alec Siegel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. When he’s not working at Law Street he’s either cooking a mediocre tofu dish or enjoying a run in the woods. His passions include: gooey chocolate chips, black coffee, mountains, the Animal Kingdom in general, and John Lennon. Baklava is his achilles heel. Contact Alec at ASiegel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post At PA Rally, Trump Says He’ll Implement “Safe Zones” in Syria appeared first on Law Street.

Green Party presidential nominee Jill Stein took on a pretty big project over Thanksgiving weekend–a Wisconsin recount effort. Trump won a narrow, upset victory in Wisconsin. But Stein raised money to look into that victory–citing concerns of election tampering, perhaps from Russian nationals. Now, the Clinton campaign has lent its support–although officials from the campaign don’t seem particularly optimistic.

Stein went after Wisconsin first, given that the deadline to file for a recount was on Friday. She now promises to file in Pennsylvania and Michigan, two other swing states that narrowly went for Trump. In order to support her efforts, Stein has raised more than $5 million (more, CNBC ironically points out, than she raised for her entire presidential campaign).

The margins were indeed thin in those states. According to the New York Times:

In Wisconsin, Mr. Trump leads by 22,177 votes. In Michigan, he has a lead of 10,704 votes, and in Pennsylvania his advantage is 70,638 votes.

But, those are still larger margins than have ever been overcome in a recount. Marc Elias, a lawyer for the Clinton camp explained the campaign’s reasoning for participating, but the statement was decidedly somewhat pessimistic that the recount would change anything:

Because we had not uncovered any actionable evidence of hacking or outside attempts to alter the voting technology, we had not planned to exercise this option ourselves, but now that a recount has been initiated in Wisconsin, we intend to participate in order to ensure the process proceeds in a manner that is fair to all sides. If Jill Stein follows through as she has promised and pursues recounts in Pennsylvania and Michigan, we will take the same approach in those states as well. We do so fully aware that the number of votes separating Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton in the closest of these states — Michigan — well exceeds the largest margin ever overcome in a recount.

President-elect Donald Trump was (unsurprisingly) quite unimpressed with Stein’s effort. He called it a “scam” and said “the results of this election should be respected instead of being challenged and abused, which is exactly what Jill Stein is doing.” But as Elias said: “now that a recount is underway, we believe we have an obligation to the more than 64 million Americans who cast ballots for Hillary Clinton to participate in ongoing proceedings to ensure that an accurate vote count will be reported.” We’ll have to see if Stein’s efforts unearth any new news.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Recount Effort Underway in Wisconsin, Clinton Camp Now Participating appeared first on Law Street.

A new law that allows Pennsylvania drivers to go through some red lights went into effect on Sunday.

Dubbed the “Ride on Red” law, Act 101, sponsored by Rep. Stephen Bloom (R-Cumberland), allows drivers across the state to go through red lights under specific situations using common sense and caution.

Governor Tom Wolf signed the bill into law in July.

The legislation states that in instances when the light is unresponsive or broken, drivers can legally cross the intersection. Originally the legislation was meant for motorcyclists, but was later expanded to include all vehicles.

Often times motorcycles do not trigger the sensors that are under the pavement, therefore never alerting to the light that it needs to change to green. This law is meant to aid in these malfunctions.

The law, however, does not specify how much time a driver must wait before proceeding, but is intended for drivers to treat it like a stop sign, and waiting for a safe time to cross.

I can see it now…. person at light, man its been 30 second I’m going thru it. In to on coming traffic…….. https://t.co/xFUJ6j9cUA

— Pandora CrossBones (@Pandora_Cross) September 18, 2016

“I was seeking to provide a safe and responsible legal alternative to prevent riders from being trapped in perpetuity at a locked malfunctioning red light,” Bloom said in a statement. “This issue was brought to my attention by a local rider and I’ve learned it’s a frequent problem for riders throughout the Commonwealth. This bill doesn’t give riders or anyone else a free pass to run red lights, but it does provide them with a sensible safe option under established standards already in place for other types of signal malfunctions.”

Suddenly, all the lights seem to be defective. https://t.co/wMcSqqj5a9

— cablebandit (@cablebandit) September 18, 2016

The department will also be conducting evaluations on red light enforcement systems.

Julia Bryant

Julia Bryant is an Editorial Senior Fellow at Law Street from Howard County, Maryland. She is a junior at the University of Maryland, College Park, pursuing a Bachelor’s degree in Journalism and Economics. You can contact Julia at JBryant@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Pennsylvania Drivers Can Now Go Through Some Red Lights appeared first on Law Street.

Comedian and former TV superstar Bill Cosby is due back in court on Tuesday, for proceedings in one of the only sexual assault cases against him that hasn’t passed the statute of limitations. He is accused of drugging and sexually assaulting about 60 women over the past 50 years, but many of the women revealed what happened well after the fact, and prosecutors were unable to purse charges. The Andrea Constand case took place in 2004 in Pennsylvania, where the statute of limitations is 12 years, meaning January 2016 was the deadline for pressing charges. In December of last year, Pennsylvania prosecutor Kevin Steele did so.

Andrea Constand was an operations manager and coach for the women’s basketball team at Temple University, Bill Cosby’s alma mater. As in the other alleged assault cases, he invited her over to his house, gave her some pills to make her relaxed, and then  assaulted her. Cosby has denied any wrongdoing.

Two months ago the judge in the case rejected Cosby’s request to have the criminal charges dismissed. On Tuesday he is due back in court for a pretrial hearing, and his lawyers want the judge to dismiss two pieces of key evidence: Cosby’s deposition from 2005, and a recording of a phone call between Cosby and Andrea Constand’s mother from the same year.

HAPPENING TODAY: Bill Cosby is back in Montgomery Co. court for evidence hearing. Could learn trial date @CBS21NEWS pic.twitter.com/W38d3F05wP

— Sara Small (@SaraSmallTV) September 6, 2016

The Constand case is in part based on Cosby’s 2005 deposition. Cosby talked about having extramarital affairs that he claimed were consensual, despite admitting to drugging the women. According to his defense team, he only talked freely about that because then district attorney Bruce Castor promised to not bring a criminal case against Cosby. But Castor said he made the promise so that Cosby couldn’t use the Fifth Amendment to avoid the questions.

Andrea Constand’s mother Gianna was recording when Cosby phoned her in her home in Canada in 2005, without Cosby’s knowledge. According to Canadian law it is legal to record a call with only one party’s consent, but Cosby’s lawyers want the court to apply the Pennsylvania law to the case, which would require both parties’ consent.

However, prosecutor Kevin Steele claimed that Cosby either knew or suspected what was happening, based on comments Cosby made on the call, and the fact that he claimed to have that information in his 2005 deposition.

Cosby is currently free on a $1 million bail but could face up to ten years in prison if found guilty.

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Bill Cosby Back in Court For Andrea Constand Sexual Assault Case appeared first on Law Street.

It’s back to school season, so in the latest episode of “Last Week Tonight,” host John Oliver set his sights on the political phenomenon that is charter schools.

These publicly funded schools are privately run and receive money based on how many students they have enrolled. They’ve become increasingly popular among politicians (from both political parties), and many are run by celebrities–even Pitbull has one! Yet, despite their popularity, there have been countless examples of charter schools being run in horribly unprofessional ways.

Principals have been found guilty of embezzlement, and in the case of Philadelphia’s Harambee Institute (yes, just like the name of the slain gorilla, but spelled differently), the school’s cafeteria was turned into an illegal, unlicensed nightclub after school hours.

Oliver quipped, “A nightclub in an elementary school is a recipe for disaster, because those are the two most vomit-prone populations in the world. They must have had to Febreeze the sh*t out of that place!”

Fact is, in Philadelphia alone, at least ten executives or top administrators at charter schools have pleaded guilty in the last decade to charges like fraud, obstruction of justice and misusing funds. In reference to Pennsylvania’s charter laws Oliver says,

It is not like having the worst ‘something’ is new for Pennsylvania. Remember, this is the state that has the worst football fans, the worst bell, and the worst regional delicacy. Yes. If I wanted Cheez Whiz on my steak sandwich, I’d eat at Kiddie Cafeteria, the restaurant run by six-year-olds.

But Ohio doesn’t have a great track record either when it comes to charter schools. Oliver critiqued Gov. John Kasich 2009 comparing the need for choice in schooling options to the need for a competitive market for “pizza shops,” saying “That doesn’t work on any level.”

Oliver concluded,

The problem with letting the free market decide when it comes to kids is that kids change faster than the market,” Oliver said. “And, by the time it’s obvious a school is failing, futures may have been ruined. So, if we are going to treat charter schools like pizza shops, we should monitor them at least as well as we do pizzerias. It’s like the old saying: ‘Give a kid a sh—y pizza, you f— up their day. Treat a kid like a sh—y pizza, you could f— up their entire life.’

Watch the full clip below

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post John Oliver on Why Charter Schools Are Not Like Pizzerias appeared first on Law Street.

This morning, I opened up social media to discover news about yet another Black man dead after an officer-involved shooting. Although details are still incredibly fuzzy, according to a few different accounts, last night a man named Leek Moss was shot and killed by Harrisburg, Pennsylvania police.

This was #LeekMoss yesterday morning w/ his newborn baby.

Police shot & killed him last night. pic.twitter.com/IwsZ5gREgH

— Shaun King (@ShaunKing) August 8, 2016

Local news reports say that the shooting was at roughly 9 PM last night, August 7, and did involve a police officer, but “details surrounding the incident are unclear at this time.” Reports also discuss unrest and high emotions in the aftermath of the shooting.

As far as I could tell, there haven’t been any news articles that have disclosed Moss’s identity yet, but Twitter and Facebook have been mourning the 17-year-old father of a newborn infant, and a Facebook page that appears to be Moss’s shows expressions of condolence from his family members and friends.

Additionally, a press conference was held this morning that went over some of the details of the shooting. According to coverage of that press conference, the officer involved had been active for under two years, and there may have been a knife involved. The circumstances are still under investigation.

#AltonSterling#PhilandoCastile#KorrynGaines#PaulONeal#LeekMoss

In one month…

— ugh (@thetrapgoth) August 8, 2016

#LeekMoss is a teenager and a new father. A beloved son and brother. Killed by police last night in Harrisburg, PA. pic.twitter.com/A4PknSbcSk

— Shaun King (@ShaunKing) August 8, 2016

#Harrisburg let Dauphin County DA @edmarsico know we want independent investigation into the shooting of #LeekMoss 717-780-6767

— Walter S Thomas Jr (@revthomasjr) August 8, 2016

#LeekMoss i hope this isn’t true. Again #blacklivesmatter

— on purpose amy (@ToxicSabrinaAF) August 8, 2016

While details of what happened to Moss are still unclear, police have mentioned several times to “not believe everything on social media” and to “remain calm.” While that’s expected after a death, it’s also worth noting that most probably wouldn’t even know about shooting without social media’s ability to disseminate information quickly.

More details are to come on Moss’s death, but as more and more Black Americans lose their lives in officer-involved incidents, the need for the #BlackLivesMatter movement and the palpability of America’s mistrust of police continues to ring true.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Leek Moss: Social Media Reports Black Teen Killed by Officer in PA appeared first on Law Street.

Normally when we hear about a parent trying to marry their adopted kid, images of a perverted Woody Allen and his much younger daughter/wife paint a cringeworthy picture. However, this story of a Pennsylvanian father and his adopted son trying to tie the knot is easily one of the most beautifully heartbreaking stories you’ll hear today.

Let me introduce you to Nino Esposito, 78, and his partner Drew Bosee, 68. After meeting at a church in Pittsburgh on Easter in 1970, the pair fell in love and have spent the past 45 years together. But after 40 years together the couple worried that they would never live to see the day when they could legally marry in their state. So in 2012, Esposito took advantage of a legal loophole and adopted Bosee in order to gain inheritance rights and other benefits afforded to straight couples. Now that same-sex marriage is legal nationwide, Esposito is trying to marry his adopted son, but a judge is refusing to reverse the adoption.

Man adopted partner after 40+ years together, but now they’re trying to undo that and marry: https://t.co/BoikNBnave pic.twitter.com/Ct4uasoKY3

— New Day (@NewDay) November 3, 2015

Judge Lawrence J. O’Toole, of the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County said that he was “sensitive to the situation,” but still ruled against the couple, recommending that a higher court rule on the issue.

O’Toole noted that revoking an adoption in circumstances other than fraud “would place in jeopardy and imperil adoption decrees generally,” according to the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette.

But this kind of legal maneuver isn’t uncommon for gay couples. The ACLU of Pennsylvania told CNN that it learned of many couples across the country who “lawfully took advantage of adoption laws in order to protect their relationships.” Esposito and Bosee even knew of other couples who successfully annulled their adoptions in order to get married.

Bosee, who is a former freelance writer, talked about his predicament saying,

It’s sort of ironic that by doing the adoption, we thought we were getting ahead of the game. But instead of being a help, it’s become a roadblock, a hindrance, to what we should be allowed to do now.

Esposito and Bosee have already take O’Toole’s advice and filed an appeal to the state Superior Court to annul the adoption. Arguments are expected to get underway in early December. Yet, the elderly couple still feels like they’re in a race against the clock to finally have their union recognized. Bosee said,

We thought we wouldn’t live to see what the Supreme Court did this year with same sex marriage throughout the country. Now, we’re concerned we’re not going to live to see our own marriage happen

Hopefully that doesn’t happen, and Esposito and Bosee get a happy ending to their story.

Alexis Evans

Alexis Evans is an Assistant Editor at Law Street and a Buckeye State native. She has a Bachelor’s Degree in Journalism and a minor in Business from Ohio University. Contact Alexis at aevans@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Man Tries to Marry Adopted Son: Don’t Worry, it’s Not Actually Creepy appeared first on Law Street.

ICYMI, check out the best of the week, including human trafficking in Pennsylvania, the Top 10 small colleges with high crime rates, and ten reasons to #FeelTheBern this election season.

#1 Human Trafficking in the U.S.: Pennsylvania Man Sentenced For Horrifying Crime

Human trafficking is the second largest form of organized crime in the world behind the illegal drug trade. The industry affects 12.3 million people each year, and generates more than $32 billion worldwide, yet many Americans don’t necessarily expect it to take place close to home. Yet the two most common forms of human trafficking, sex trafficking and labor trafficking, are on the rise in many states such as Pennsylvania. Read full article here.

#2 Campus Crime 2015: Top 10 Highest Reported Crime Rates For Small Colleges

Student safety is a high priority for all colleges and universities. While colleges and universities are typically safer than the areas that surround them, many schools face important and unique challenges. Law Street’s Campus Crime Rankings were created to serve as a comprehensive look at the safety of our college campuses, and to act as a resource for students, families, and college communities. Read full article here.

#3 Ten Reasons to #FeelTheBern This Election Season

Bernard “Bernie” Sanders, self-described Democratic Socialist, is a 73-year-old senator from Vermont, the longest serving independent in Congressional history, and a Presidential candidate. He’s been described as “one of the few elected officials who is fundamentally devoted to dealing with the plight of poor and working people” and he’s gaining ground in the polls on the Democratic front-runner, Hillary Rodham Clinton. Read full article here.

Chelsey D. Goff

Chelsey D. Goff was formerly Chief People Officer at Law Street. She is a Granite State Native who holds a Master of Public Policy in Urban Policy from the George Washington University. She’s passionate about social justice issues, politics — especially those in First in the Nation New Hampshire — and all things Bravo. Contact Chelsey at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post ICYMI: Best of the Week appeared first on Law Street.

Human trafficking is the second largest form of organized crime in the world behind the illegal drug trade. The industry affects 12.3 million people each year, and generates more than $32 billion worldwide, yet many Americans don’t necessarily expect it to take place close to home. Yet the two most common forms of human trafficking, sex trafficking and labor trafficking, are on the rise in many states such as Pennsylvania. In a horrifying example of this phenomenon, a Pennsylvania man named Paul Sewell was just sentenced to 23 years in prison for prostituting young teenagers and producing child pornography, illustrating the prevalence of the crime.

According to the General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, it has become a source, destination, and pass-through state for human trafficking. Sewell, 49, of Reading, PA, ran a prostitution ring from his home and used the building next door as a brothel. He once ran a car dealership, a bail bond business, and even held a job as a school counselor with the Reading School District. Sewell, who often referred to himself as “God,” would bring in the girls, many of whom were minors, and have sex with them to “test them out.” He would then brand a chosen girl with a tattoo on the back of her neck stating “God” as well as a nickname he gave her. Sewell also advertised the women on his website, and emailed explicit pictures of them to potential clients. The business serviced eight to nine clients a day and Sewell kept 40 percent of the profits that the girls made. When girls no longer wanted to work for Sewell he would sometimes subject them to physical violence to force them to continue working. One of the prostituted children spoke up and stated,

It’s like I had given my soul away in exchange for money… . If it wasn’t for me having a child, I would have killed myself by now. I’m so disgusted with myself.

Sewell has been previously convicted for impersonating a police officer, resisting arrest, and making terroristic threats. Sewell applied to become a police officer in the 1980s but was dismissed from the academy after an altercation at the school’s pistol range. Sewell pleaded guilty in September 2011 to four counts of sex trafficking and three counts of producing child pornography. In addition to the 23-year sentence that he was given yesterday, he will be required to serve five years of supervised release and pay $52,000 in restitution.

Many trafficking victims enter this industry between the ages of 12-15. Not only can trafficking create serious physical harm, it can damage victims mentally and emotionally as well. It is scary to think that someone who was once a school counselor could also run a sex ring. While operating this business, Sewell allegedly had sexual relations with his 13-year-old niece and has fathered fourteen children with ten different women. Even more disturbingly, most of his children lived with him along with many of the women who worked as prostitutes. To think of children living with a man of this sort and being around such a disgusting crime is saddening.

Human trafficking is ruining the lives of countless girls, and it routinely happens right here in the United States. As these businesses continue to grow, the police need to continue to be vigilant. Sewell’s crime should not have gone unnoticed for so long.

Taelor Bentley

Taelor is a member of the Hampton University Class of 2017 and was a Law Street Media Fellow for the Summer of 2015. Contact Taelor at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Human Trafficking in the U.S.: Pennsylvania Man Sentenced for Horrifying Crime appeared first on Law Street.

About once a week, I head to my local store to pick up some things that I’ll need for the week, including some milk. Milk is always one of those tricky purchases, because you have such a short amount of time to use all of it before it expires. Thats why, whenever I go to buy milk, the first thing I do is look at the “sell by” date printed on the carton. But if I were buying milk in Montana, this is something that I would not need to worry about. That’s because in Montana, there is a law stating that milk cannot be sold or donated 12 days after pasteurization. This unusually strict law has forced grocers across Montana to dump thousands of gallons of what most would consider perfectly good milk each week. It’s for this reason that a documentary film crew from Harvard Law School’s Food Law and Policy Clinic recently travelled to Missoula, Montana to get the inside scoop on the state’s milk law.

Montana has by far the stricted law in the United States governing the “sell by” date of milk, and is only one of two states to even have a law that has a requirement for the number of days that milk can sit on a retailer’s shelf. That other state is Pennsylvania, where milk is allowed to sit on shelves for 17 days. Other states either just require that a date is printed without actually specifying any guidelines for that date, or, do not have a law at all.

Harvard Food and Law Policy Clinic director Emily Broad Leib stated that “this has been part of a long-running interest of ours that’s around how we’re wasting so much of the food we produce in the U.S. We’re looking at how these laws–like the law we’re looking at in Montana–are the cause of that waste.” One of goals of the documentary crew to use this case to illustrate the issue of food waste and how food expiration and “sell by” dates contribute to that problem.

Emily Deddensm, a law student working on the documentary, explained that they “went through a bunch of big ideas throughout the semester and finally settled on this law in Montana, which requires milk to be thrown out 12 days after pasteurization” because they “just thought this is good because it’s such an extreme example of the bigger problem.” To them, this was a perfect example of food being thrown out and wasted far before it needs to be.

This Montana law was established in 1980 by the Montana Livestock Board, and despite people’s countless attempts to change it, has remained firmly in place since then. Since studies show that the milk is actually just as fresh after 28 days, the documentary team set out to try and figure out what consumers actually think that arbitrary “sell by” date means.

According to Broad Lieb:

This law makes no sense. It’s really bad for consumers. But even though Montana is the strictest on milk, other states are strict on other things. Again, it’s not just milk. With all of these foods, it’s a quality date. It’s when the manufacturer thinks you get the peak quality on that food. And yet, 90 percent of consumers think it’s about safety, and they throw perfectly good food away.

While being interviewed, Missoula grocer Jim Edwards explained that dairies are the ones that do not want this rule to change. That’s because it means that grocers like him have to buy more milk to fill up their shelves. In addition, it keeps milk prices higher in Montana than in surrounding states.

He also explained that this law makes no sense when actually considering how long it takes a gallon of milk to go bad. According to Edwards:

Little cartons of milk, they go bad quick. But they’re dated for 30 days or something like that. But the gallons never go bad. Half gallons go bad before gallons because anything in a bigger container will last longer. It’s just like wine. A great big huge bottle of wine will age better than a small bottle of wine.

Yet it is the larger gallons that have the sooner expiration dates while the smaller, half gallons have later dates.

According to the documentary crew, most people are unaware that they are throwing away perfectly good milk. Broad Lieb explained that “most people think that if they eat that food after the date, they are going to get sick.” From personal experience, I can say that this is something that I have thought–and have never chanced. I’ve always thrown away food or milk that has reached the date printed on the container.

This is why another goal of the documentary is to raise consumer awareness about the actual meanings of expiration and “sell by” dates. So far, they are already doing a decent job just by sharing information about the documentary. Next time I’ll think twice about throwing away my “spoiled” milk.

Brittany Alzfan

Brittany Alzfan is a student at the George Washington University majoring in Criminal Justice. She was a member of Law Street’s founding Law School Rankings team during the summer of 2014. Contact Brittany at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Harvard Law Documentary Uncovers the Truth About Expiration Dates appeared first on Law Street.

Another day, another Uber controversy. It seems like the popular ride-sharing app will never see the end of its legal struggles. Some of the buzz is positive–Uber recently announced that it’s expanding and beefing up safety features. However, other recent headlines about the company cannot be considered anything but incredibly negative. For example, yet another rape accusation has come to light. Overall, as Uber continues to grow, so do safety concerns, and seemingly, safety features.

Read More: Uber Will Have a Rough Ride in 2015

A Philadelphia woman has come forward with allegations that she was raped by her Uber driver on February 6, and then essentially held captive in the car while he drove around for two hours following the assault. While she evidently brought the claims to the police, Uber claims that it didn’t learn about it until much later. A rep for the company told Philadelphia Magazine, who broke the story:

Our thoughts and prayers are with our rider. Upon learning of the incident, we immediately reached out to the Philadelphia Police Department to assist in their investigation and support their efforts in any way we can. As the investigation continues, the driver’s access to the Uber platform has been suspended.

New controversies for Uber aren’t just popping up here in the states. Two Uber drivers in Ottawa, Canada, recently pleaded guilty to operating unlicensed taxis. There have also been very high profile sexual assault allegations in France and India.

It’s in response to all of these developments, as well as others like them in the past and potential for more in the future, that Uber is launching new programs and initiatives focusing on safety. The additions to Uber’s safety measures will include things like incident response teams to investigate anything that may happen over the course of an Uber ride, and further review of things like quality assurance. The company will also expand its work with law enforcement, including in India where there will be a button programmed into the Uber app allowing riders to directly call law enforcement.

While some of these features seem promising, Uber still sometimes struggles to follow through, as evidenced by the United Nations Women’s partnership debacle from a few weeks back.

Read More: Uber’s New hiring Initiative: Trying to Win Back Women

Uber and UN Women announced a plan to work together to create jobs for female drivers and released a jointly signed letter on Uber’s website. However, after some backlash and safety concerns, UN Women pulled out of the agreement. Some of that backlash included a statement from the International Transport Workers Federation, which stated:

The creation of one million precarious, informal jobs will not contribute to women’s economic empowerment and represents exactly the type of structural inequality within the labor market that the women’s movement has been fighting for decades. Uber’s practices are defined by an aggressive informalization of an industry that was already deregulated three decades ago

It’s clear that Uber wants to make changes, but it’s certainly struggled to do so in the past. Perhaps it’s a side effect of being a young company that experienced a lot of growth very quickly, or just inherent to the nature of a business as informal as ridesharing. Either way, Uber needs to reform–and let’s hope that it sticks this time.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Uber Adds More Safety Features, But Will They Be Enough? appeared first on Law Street.

With the widespread use of cellphones emerging in the late 1990s, the last few generations have been the first to have their every move documented for public consumption. Since then, cellphones have been ever present at many important events: proms, graduations, college orientation, and for first relationships. Still, within the last decade or so, cell phones changed from portable phones to portable computers with cameras attached, giving people the ability to take, edit, and share photos instantaneously. This ability has led to an increase in something known as “sexting,” defined as “sending nude, sexual or indecent photos (or ‘selfies’) using a computer, mobile phone or other mobile device.” In some cases, it can also include written messages or even videos.

Some states have adopted laws that have severe penalties aimed at teenagers who send, receive, or save such photos. These laws are not as severe as if they were legal adults possessing photos of an underage teen, but they are still serious consequences of which to be aware.

Dawn of a New Legal Era

Sexting laws are a relatively new concept, so that’s why they are somewhat murky to most Americans. Since 2009, many states have adopted teen sexting laws, and each year more states consider bills on the issue. States that already have laws include: Wyoming, Virginia, Pennsylvania, Ohio, New York, and Indiana. Several other states are also considering introducing sexting laws through their legislatures. Most states focus on teen sexting, though there are a few that also legislate other aspects of the activity. As teen sexting spreads and becomes a worry among parents, it’s probable that these laws will be adopted on a wider scale. That doesn’t mean that it is entirely legal in those states without sexting laws, however. In the states without any sexting laws, teens who sext may still see consequences as a result of the pre-existing laws that target child pornography.

What are states doing about teen sexting?

There are some states that have adopted laws specifically for sexting. These laws have explicitly targeted the images sent among teenagers. For example, Connecticut’s sexting law targets teens who create, save, or spread photos of themselves or others.

Here’s an example of how Pennsylvania approaches sexting, as it is illegal for teens ages 12-17 to posses the naked photo of another person in the same age range. According to a Criminal Defense Lawyer resource page:

For example, both a teen who sends a photo of a nude classmate and one who receives the photo could be prosecuted under Pennsylvania law. Teen sexting is punished more severely if the defendant takes or shares a nude photo of another teen without the teen’s permission, and in order to harass that person or cause him or her emotional distress. For example, a boy who shares nude photos of his ex-girlfriend after they break up could be charged with a more serious crime. Pennsylvania’s teen sexting law does not apply to images taken or distributed for commercial purposes, or images of sexual intercourse, penetration, or masturbation, or any other hardcore sexual images.

State laws differ significantly, however, depending on things like ages of majority and previous cases. Louisiana won’t allow anyone under 17 to send or keep pictures. Texas is one of the states that makes some allowances: if the minor sexts another minor, it’s not considered a crime, as long as the recipient’s age is within two years of the sender and the exchange is consensual.

For more information on your state, visit Mobile Safeguard’s Comprehensive list.

What do you do if someone sends this type of message to you?

Teen sexting laws prohibit both sending and receiving explicit images, which can be quite a gray area for some people, as well as some courts. How can you stop someone from sending you a photo? There’s a definite difference between requesting a picture and simply receiving one from another teen. The difference also comes from what you do when you get that picture.

Because of the grayness and the ability for sabotage, sexting laws typically prohibit “receiving and keeping” any explicit images. This means that if a teen or adult receives an image from a teen, the receiver must delete the message immediately in order to avoid legal trouble. To protect oneself, it would also be a good idea for the recipient to send a message stating that the image is not wanted or requested.

Federal Law and Sexting

Depending on the circumstances of the images in question, sexting may also be a crime under federal law.

According to Criminal Defense Lawyer:

Depending on the circumstances, sexting may also be a crime under federal law.

The Prosecutorial Remedies and Other Tools to end the Exploitation of Children Today (PROTECT) Act of 2003 makes it illegal to produce, distribute, receive, or possess with intent to distribute any obscene visual depiction of a minor engaged in sexually explicit conduct. Knowing possession of such material—without intent to distribute—is also a crime under the PROTECT Act. (18 U.S.C. § 1466A(a)(1).)

Federal law also criminalizes causing a minor to take part in sexually explicit conduct in order to visually depict that conduct. Parents who allow this behaviorcan also be prosecuted. (18 U.S.C. § 2251.)

That doesn’t mean that we’ll likely see federal prosecution of juveniles for sexting. The Federal Juvenile Delinquency Act (FJDA) generally posits that, where possible, juvenile cases should remain in state courts.

What happens in states that don’t have sexting laws?

For those states that do not specifically legislate against sexting, the act is usually covered under child pornography laws. This includes creating, possessing, or distributing the photos of anyone underage. This means that the child who takes the picture can be in legal trouble. Many people question the punishment for these young children, especially when they may have been coerced into sending the photos. There has been much debate about what the penalties should be for teenagers who send those photos. Some think they should not face the same penalties as those who are over 18, especially because it can impact everything from college choices to potential careers and living situations. Those who argue against this type of treatment want some of the lesser penalties listed below for teens who are caught sexting.

What are the possible penalties for sexting?

The penalties for teen sexting involve a lot of red tape, juvenile and adult courts, and also include various criminal laws. Overall there is a lot of coordination required anytime there are juveniles in the justice system, which is why some states have specific laws against sexting. Usually, it takes a contentious case to prompt the creation of a specific law.

Juveniles

When a juvenile commits a criminal offense through sexting, that offense is typically handled by the juvenile court system. Juvenile courts have wider discretion in the kinds of penalties they impose. Some of the penalties could include a warning, fines, having to serve community service, completing counseling, probation, or even a sentence to a juvenile facility.

Adults

If the person is 18 or older, he or she will be charged as an adult and could face incarceration, fines, or being entered onto the sex offender registry.

Conclusion

What many consider to be fun and harmless flirting online or over the phone can actually become a severe crime with consequences for both parties involved. It’s best to know where your state stands on the issue and to be smart about it. Sending pictures or messages via your phone opens up the doors for a world of trouble and heartache.

 Resources

 Primary

Connecticut State Police: Connecticut Sexting and Teens

National Criminal Justice Reference Service: Federal Juvenile Delinquency Act

Additional

Criminal Defense Lawyer: Teen Sexting in Pennsylvania

Daily Mail: Parents of ‘Sexting’ Teenagers Can Now Be Punished in Texas

Aggressive Criminal Defense: Sexting Laws and Legal Information

Washington Post: Stop Demonizing Teen Sexting. In Most Cases it is Completely Harmless

CNN: Chances Are Your Teen Has Sexted

 Editor’s Note: This article has been updated to credit select information to Criminal Defense Lawyer. 

Noel Diem

Law Street contributor Noel Diem is an editor and aspiring author based in Reading, Pennsylvania. She is an alum of Albright College where she studied English and Secondary Education. In her spare time she enjoys traveling, theater, fashion, and literature. Contact Noel at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Teen Sexting: What are the Legal Consequences? appeared first on Law Street.

Hey y’all!

I am an avid social media user. I love all things social media but I have yet to cross the line into obsessively taking selfies and sending them off to anyone, let alone posting them all over the Internet. In today’s world it is almost impossible to find someone who has not taken one selfie and sent it to at least one other person. But one teen not only crossed the line in selfie etiquette, he showed how much he doesn’t value life.

Maxwell Morton, 16, faces first-degree murder charges, in addition to charges of criminal homicide and possession of a weapon by a minor, after shooting Ryan Mangan, who was also 16, last Wednesday.

A funeral was held for Mangan on Monday in a small town just outside of Pittsburgh.

Morton was dumb enough to photograph what he had done and then used the popular social media app SnapChat to send it to another boy. SnapChat allows the user to send a multi-media message that disappears within a few seconds once the recipient opens it. Thankfully the young man that Morton sent the image to was smart enough to save the image, show his mom, and then contact the police.

Morton also had taken a photo of himself with the 9 mm pistol that was used in the shooting, which was later found on the camera roll on his phone.

The amount of disregard for human life that Morton has is just sickening, and the fact that more and more social media is used for this kind of thing makes me want to delete all my apps and go back to an old school flip phone that would only allow you to make calls or send text messages..

Morton is being charged as an adult and could face up to life in prison. Life in prison. I think he deserves the death penalty. Something that the state of Pennsylvania does in fact still have in effect. Pennsylvania ranks 26 in executions for the past five years.

I have to wonder where this kids parents were, why he wanted to kill Mangan and where did he get the gun? Only time will tell.

Allison Dawson

Allison Dawson was born in Germany and raised in Mississippi and Texas. A graduate of Texas Tech University and Arizona State University, she’s currently dedicating her life to studying for the LSAT. Twitter junkie. Conservative. Get in touch with Allison at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Teen Murder Suspect Takes Selfie With Victim appeared first on Law Street.

East Coast states may be small, but that doesn’t mean they have fewer dumb laws than their larger counterparts. In Cumberland, Maryland, if you fall while playing games on a playground, you had better control your sailor mouth. In that city, using profane language on a playground is illegal. Speaking of parks, it is also illegal to knock stones into a public park in Cumberland.

Maryland as a state seems strongly opposed to swearing in general. In Rockville, swearing while on the highway, no matter how much other drivers piss you off, is illegal. And even If it is a sweltering hot day in Rockville, swimming in public fountains is not permitted.

As far as statewide Maryland laws go, there were many listed online, for example that oral sex cannot be given or received anywhere, but these laws lacked the proper citation, thus were omitted from my piece. Gotta have those references!

View post on imgur.com

The same was the case in Pennsylvania. A few of the statewide laws that I encountered lacking the proper citation to back them up stated that ministers cannot perform marriages while either the bride or groom is drunk, and that you may not sing in the bathtub. The latter law, which I cannot prove to be valid, still made me wonder about a couple of things, like if it would be legal to sing in one of those bathtubs that can also be used as a shower as long as you were to use it as the shower.

I was able to find proof of the existence of two stupid laws in Bensalem, Pennsylvania, however. Both of the laws pertain to the game Bingo. First, those in charge of operating the game may not advertise the prizes offered. I mean, why even play unless you know the lucky card? Furthermore, one may not operate a game of Bingo if he or she was charged with a felony.

Delaware is a beautiful and proud state with some rather entertaining stupid laws. Movie-goers wanting to see their favorite R-rated movie won’t be able to from the comfort of their vehicle, as such questionable films cannot be shown in Delaware drive-ins. Rehoboth Beach is an intensely strict place in Delaware that prevents such heinous acts as changing your clothes in your car. On the note of changing clothes, you are also banned from changing into or out of a swimsuit in a public restroom. Seriously, this city is obsessed with clothing. It specifically bans any girl over the age of five from being in public without being fully clothed.

Children must adhere to strict laws on Halloween in Rehoboth Beach, Delaware. There, they may only trick-or-treat from six to eight in the evening, and if Halloween happens to fall on a Sunday, they must go door to door asking for candy on October 30 instead. And don’t even think about whispering in church or serving alcohol in nightclubs if people are dancing on the same premises simultaneously.

Thus concludes another exciting blog making us all wonder why so many strange and stupid laws exist.

Marisa Mostek

Marisa Mostek loves globetrotting and writing, so she is living the dream by writing while living abroad in Japan and working as an English teacher. Marisa received her undergraduate degree from the University of Colorado in Boulder and a certificate in journalism from UCLA. Contact Marisa at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post The Dumbest Laws in the United States: MD, DE, & PA appeared first on Law Street.

Airline security is a huge pain for most of us. From having to walk shoe-less across the airport floor, to anxiously checking whether or not that small lotion bottle is under three ounces, it’s an annoying but understandable reality of a post-9/11 world. But for Roger Vanderklok, an architect and runner, it turned into more than just an annoying step to get from point A to point B. He was arrested and detained for 20 hours in the Philadelphia International Airport in 2013 and is now suing the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), as well as the Philadelphia Police Department, and Department of Homeland Security, alleging that his civil liberties were violated.

Vanderklok, a Philadelphia resident, was attempting to fly to Miami to participate in a half marathon on January 26, 2013. In his luggage he had a watch and energy bars, and they were in a PVC pipe to make sure they were protected during his travel. Technically, electronics, organic materials, and a PVC pipe could be used to make a pipe bomb, but not necessarily watches or PowerBars.

After the PVC pipe and its contents showed up on the bag scanners, his bag was searched and he was questioned about the contents. According to his suit, he was asked if his bag contained any organic matter. Given that PowerBars aren’t organic matter in the traditional sense, like fruit or vegetables, he said no. The agents however thought he was lying, because they defined organic matter as any kind of food.

What exactly happened next is unclear. Vanderklok claims that he was arrested after he questioned what was happening to him, and asked to file some sort of complaint. He was then taken to a cell where he wasn’t given the opportunity to call anyone or be questioned. He was then released after being charged with “threatening the placement of a bomb” and making “terrorist threats.” His wife, who understandably panicked and called 911 after not hearing from him, had to bail him out. Those charges were later dismissed by a judge after hearing more information.

The TSA supervisor in question, Charles Kieser, disagrees with Vanderklok’s story. He testified at the hearing that Vanderklok threatened him. According to WPXI News:

Kieser testified an agitated Vanderklok raised his hands and repeatedly pointed a finger at his face.

‘The passenger made a bomb threat to me,’ Kieser testified, according to a transcript. “‘He said) I’ll bring a bomb through here any day that I want … and you’ll never find it.’

However, the video surveillance from the scene seems to contradict Kieser’s story, if only because Vanderklok’s body movements never show him raising his hands or pointing a finger.

Based on the way he was treated, and the fact that he believes Kieser lied, Vanderklok filed the lawsuit.

There have been plenty of stories of TSA taking really strange actions in recent years. In 2009, college student Nicholas George was detained, also in the Philly airport, after it was discovered he was carrying Arabic flashcards. They contained words like “terrorist” and “bomb” on them, but George explained he was studying Middle Eastern studies at Pomona College in California. He was detained for five hours.

On a less serious and more commonplace note, I’ve seen many silly stories about babies being put on no-fly lists, or people with licenses from Washington, D.C. being turned away from their flights because D.C. isn’t technically a state. The agents involved are, at face value, following policies. But the ways in which the polices are being enacted transcend common sense.

The dissemination of those policies at the ground level sometimes leads to noticeable problems. If Vanderklok is truthful about what happened to him, the actions taken by those particular agents were unacceptable. The policies that are supposed to guarantee our freedom shouldn’t have to infringe on said freedom to do so.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Philly Man Sues TSA After Being Detained for 20 Hours appeared first on Law Street.

We may have six more weeks of winter, but we have an infinite amount of weird arrests from all corners of the United States. This week’s highlights include an alligator killer in Florida and a pants-less DUI in Pennsylvania. Enjoy the top Weird Arrests of the Week.

[SlideDeck2 id=33838 ress=1]

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Weird Arrests of the Week appeared first on Law Street.

If you live in a major metropolitan area, or honestly even a small one, there’s a very decent chance that you’ll see protests today. You probably saw some last night as well. For any of you who have been living under a particularly comfortable and sheltered rock lately, the protests focus on the cases of two black men killed by police officers. Michael Brown, an 18 year old in Ferguson, Missouri, was shot and killed by Officer Darren Wilson on August 9, 2014. On November 24 it was announced that a grand jury had decided not to indict Wilson. Next, there’s the case of Eric Garner in New York, who was killed by Officer Daniel Pantaleo on July 17, 2014. Pantaleo was filmed putting Garner in a chokehold, even though that tactic is banned by the New York Police Department.

Here’s an example of the “hands up don’t shoot” gesture being used in protest:

"Hands up, dont shoot!!" #NYC #FergusonDecision #justice pic.twitter.com/OwMfX72v4H

— Arnaud Montagard (@arnaudmontagard) November 26, 2014

And Garner’s last words, which have become a rallying cry:

I almost can't read this. So painful. So ugly. #ICantBreathe pic.twitter.com/KVVbK6Gf0A

— Tessa Francis (@tessafrancis) December 4, 2014

Those are the roots of the protests, the catalysts. But the protests aren’t just about these two men. They’re about the greater issue–or more appropriately issues. I’m not trying to make an exhaustive list here but these protests are about the national conversations we need to have on racism, racial profiling, police violence, police militarization, etc, etc, etc. The protests are about a broken system–the deaths of Brown and Garner are tragic symptoms of this system.

The protests have been taking place all over the United States. New York, where Garner was killed, was especially busy. There was a “die-in” at Grand Central Station yesterday evening; a “die-in” is when protesters lie on the ground, silently.

Hundreds of people staged a "die-in" at Grand Central in NYC after #EricGarner decision. http://t.co/che6tRNyli pic.twitter.com/8cNl2DsEUw

— Wall Street Journal (@WSJ) December 4, 2014

Protesters marched through New York City and temporarily blocked traffic at major transportation hubs, including the Lincoln Tunnel. One of the protesters explained her motivations, saying:

Every 28 hours a young black man is killed by police. Only 2 percent of police are indicted. Those numbers are crazy. It’s telling young black men that their lives don’t matter and their deaths can be passed over.

Protests were also very active in our nation’s capital. Last night, protesters flooded Dupont Circle and stopped traffic, as well as at some other locations in Northwest Washington. Today there will be a protest over by the Department of Justice at 4:00pm.

Protesters blocking DC intersection to protest non-indictment in #Garner case. Protest is peaceful. Cops standing by pic.twitter.com/j0JSd9B62O

— Athena Jones (@AthenaCNN) December 4, 2014

Cities all over the country look like this, and I’m going to leave these pictures and videos here, because I think they say more than words ever could:

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

Philly protest at Tree Lighting event at City Hall #FergusonPHL #BlackLivesMatter #HandsUpDontShoot: http://t.co/FpDJKfBylC #EricGarner

— Daryel Jay (@DaryelJay) December 4, 2014

Oakland, California:

#EricGarner protest in Oakland. #NoJusticeNoPeace #BlackLivesMatter pic.twitter.com/0yxNmnJQQM

— Diana Saverin (@dianasaverin) December 4, 2014

Seattle, Washington

Seattle protests no indictment for NYPD officer whose chokehold led to death of #EricGarner >> http://t.co/nXEihNYg4p pic.twitter.com/I6PZktVbge

— KIRO 7 (@KIRO7Seattle) December 4, 2014

New York, New York

Garner widow on husband's killer: 'No I, don't accept his apologies’ http://t.co/NLncfA5Mft pic.twitter.com/pbkP6TCoVA

— Chicago Tribune (@chicagotribune) December 4, 2014

Those are faces of change. Faces tired of the way that our system has been failing. Faces that have had enough. Faces that deserve to be, finally, listened to.

If you’re interested in joining a protest, here’s where they’re happening today. They aren’t going to end anytime soon, because this crisis clearly isn’t ending anytime soon either.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post #HandsUpDontShoot #ICantBreathe: Americans Continue Protests appeared first on Law Street.

Today’s installment of weird arrests of the week has a lot of fun highlights–including an international flair as an incident from Australia made the list. Enjoy!

[SlideDeck2 id=28308 ress=1]

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Weird Arrests of the Week appeared first on Law Street.

Sometimes in life you hear stories to which the only way you can respond is to say, Huh? Maybe even, What? How? Why? I am sure this has happened to all of you before, and everybody should know exactly what I mean. So, this week’s post addresses this very issue with bad lawsuits that make you say all of the above — What? How? Why?

What?!: Me, Myself, and I

A city employee in St. Paul, Minnesota, while performing her duties, hit and damaged Megan Campbell’s car. As most reasonable people would, Campbell expected the city to pay for the damage and, to further this point, she filed a claim asking for reimbursement of it. Sounds reasonable, right? Nobody in his right mind could deny the validity of of this claim. This should be an open-and-shut case, but if I have not already convinced you of this, let me add some details for you.

Megan Campbell, a St. Paul Parks and Rec employee, was driving a supply van for the city when she turned and hit a parked car belonging to one Megan Campbell. Campbell was upset that the city would hire such reckless drivers, and she was angry that Campbell was allowed to drive a city vehicle. Campbell decided that she would not get much from Campbell, so she went after Campbell’s employer.

Courtesy of Giphy.

Following?

In case you are having trouble, let me clear up the details for you: city employee Megan Campbell hit her own personal car while driving a city vehicle and then filed a claim saying she thought the city should pay for the damage since it was a city employee who hit her car. What?

How?!: This Club Is on Fire

Katelyn Sobon is proof that with enough effort you can definitely heat up a dance floor. Sobon was sitting at the Trilogy Nightclub and Hookah Lounge in Philadelphia while people danced wildly on the nearby stripper pole — which, as the club later clarified, was not actually a stripper pole, but a regular pole that patrons — specifically girls — could pose in front of and take pictures looking like a stripper; but, again, it was not a stripper pole. In their gyrating, one of the dancers hit the leg of Sobon’s table, knocking the hookah over and spilling hot coals down the front of her top, causing her breasts to be burnt. I’m sure this is not what she wanted people to mean when they said, “You look hot in that dress.”

Sobon is suing for the pain and embarrassment of the whole situation, but the club manager does not buy it. He wants to know why she has come back to his club several times since the incident, asking for free admission in lieu of a lawsuit — even after she filed — if she was so embarrassed. I don’t know who will win, though I have my guesses, but I do know that Alicia Keys said it best when she sang, “This girl is on fire.” But really, how does stuff like this happen?

Why?!: Micro-Management

When it comes to microwave journalism, you had better do your research. You wouldn’t want to mess that stuff up. The makers of the movie “American Hustle” are learning that lesson the hard way. I’m about to tell you about a scene from the movie, but if you have not seen it, note that this is in no way a spoiler: at one point in the movie, Jennifer Lawrence’s character said she does not believe in the technology behind the microwave. She claimed that contraption just zapped the nutrition out of the food, and she had proof: an article written by Paul Brodeur. She even hands the magazine with the article over to Christian Bale’s character.

Who cares, you ask? I’ll tell you who. Paul Brodeur cares, that’s who. The real journalist behind the real article stomped his foot, crossed his arms over his chest, and said with a poked out lip, Hey! That’s not what I said. You lied! I said that the technology was shaky and unproven not that it zapped out the nutrition. I’m gonna tell on you. Now all the scientists hate me and nobody wants to play with me and it’s all your fault. I hate you! I hate you! I hate you! And then flung himself to the floor before filing a million dollar lawsuit for libel and defamation. (Disclaimer: this is in no way a direct quote or reaction from Paul Brodeur. Mr. Brodeur, please do not sue me. I do not have a million dollars to give you.)

My final thoughts: really, Brodeur, really? Just … why?

Courtesy of Giphy.

So there you have it. The what-how-why stories from the legal world. I just don’t even know what else to say.

Ashley Shaw

Ashley Shaw is an Alabama native and current New Jersey resident. A graduate of both Kennesaw State University and Thomas Goode Jones School of Law, she spends her free time reading, writing, boxing, horseback riding, playing trivia, flying helicopters, playing sports, and a whole lot else. So maybe she has too much spare time. Contact Ashley at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Have an Irrational Hatred of Your Microwave? This Bad Lawsuit’s For You appeared first on Law Street.

Congratulations on surviving another Halloween, everyone! While recovering from your big night, you might as drag out the holiday a bit more and freak yourself out a little with all the weird things that people have gotten themselves arrested for this week. Check out the top five weird arrests from this week.

[SlideDeck2 id=27715 ress=1]

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Top 5 Weird Arrests of the Week appeared first on Law Street.

The Hershey Company has settled a lawsuit and simultaneously protected millions of little children across the country from becoming future cannabis users.

The maker of the legendary chocolate Kiss, Peppermint Patty, and (my personal favorite) Reese’s Peanut Butter Cup settled a suit against marijuana candy manufacturer TinctureBelle LLC. Filed this summer, the suit was in response to TinctureBelle’s “medicated gourmet edibles,” many of which boast names allegedly mimicking those of the Hershey Company’s treats.

TinctureBelle is clever, I’ll give them that. Some of its product names included “Hashees,” “Ganga Joy,” and “Hashheath.” Who doesn’t enjoy a good pun? Well, Hershey. The Pennsylvania-based company wasn’t laughing when it sued the Colorado-based company for trademark infringement.

The purpose of a trademark is to avoid confusion among consumers between two products. Hershey argued that similarities in product names would do just that and expressed concern over maintaining their wholesome reputation as a company whose biggest fans are children.

“The Hershey Company’s trademarks are iconic and among our company’s most important assets,” explained Hershey’s spokesman Jeff Beckman. “They are recognized by consumers around the world, and our company has spent as many as 120 years building the trust and equity in these iconic brands. Consumers depend on our brand names to represent a level of quality and dependability. These entities have used Hershey’s trademarks, without authorization, to trade on Hershey’s goodwill and reputation, and to draw greater attention to their products; these unauthorized uses of Hershey’s trademarks also make the products more appealing to children.”

TinctureBelle must now refrain from using names that infringe on Hershey products. According to the Denver Business Journal, this includes the destruction of “all remaining specimens of each product, including without limitation cartons, containers, packaging, wrappers, labels, displays and any other material.”

TinctureBelle owner Char Mayes released a statement asserting that “the lawsuit from Hershey came as a huge surprise to us, because we changed our entire label line approximately six months ago, long before these allegations surfaced.”

With one Google search of TinctureBelle’s products, you will find that the packaging does resemble that of Hershey’s delicious treats. It’s pretty obvious.

TinctureBelle now begins the walk of shame with this settlement. It has agreed to disable an Internet site that had been designed to raise money for the legal battle against Hershey. It promised not to register trademark for the names involved in the suit and will have to pay $25,000 per trademark breach of the settlement going forward.

It seems as though Hershey’s legal department is actually quite busy lately. TinctureBelle isn’t the only company in its path of legal destruction. In June it filed a suit against Conscious Care Cooperative over a similar marijuana-based candy issue. And in September, the Hershey Company filed a lawsuit against LBB Imports LCC over trademark infringement of foreign candy.

Meanwhile, Hershey is playing defense against Mars, which accused the candy company of copying its red-colored packaging.

October’s Halloween holiday can mean many things — spookiness and fear, high candy sales, and now salty executives caught up in some sweet trademark hell.

—

Alexandra Badalamenti (@AlexBadalamenti) is a Jersey girl and soon-to-be graduate of Fordham University in Lincoln Center. She plans to enroll in law school next year to study Entertainment Law. On any given day, you’ll find her with big blonde hair, high heels, tall Nashville dreams, and holding a newspaper or venti latte.

Featured image courtesy of [slgckgc via Flikr]

The post Hershey’s Settles Trademark Suit With Hashees Marijuana Edibles Maker appeared first on Law Street.

It’s Friday, which means that yet again we’ve had a week full of weird arrests. From stupid criminals, to equally stupid cops, it’s been a wild week!

[SlideDeck2 id=26091 ress=1]

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Weird Arrests of the Week appeared first on Law Street.

Three-dimensional printing has become a new hot tech trend in recent years. 3-D printers build things through an additive process—building layer after layer of an item to make it solid. While commercial use is becoming more of a possibility, for the most part, engineers and designers usually use 3-D printing to create prototypes for significantly larger designs.

You can make pretty much anything with 3-D printers, including gun parts. There are groups are quite active in their attempt to print guns. A company based out of Texas called Defense Distributed, makes AR-15 lower receivers, which house most of the mechanics. At its most basic, the receiver is what makes a gun operate, and it is the part that can be illegal to sell. Other gun parts, such as barrels or handles, are not controlled, and be can be easily bought online. A lesser focus of the group is printing magazines and magazine clips for their manufactured guns. Defense Distributed’s mission statement is:

To defend the civil liberty of popular access to arms as guaranteed by the United States Constitution and affirmed by the United States Supreme Court, through facilitating global access to, and the collaborative production of, information and knowledge related to the 3D printing of arms; and to publish and distribute, at no cost to the public, such information and knowledge in promotion of the public interest.

 3-D guns, or at least, gun parts, are most likely going to part of the future. Private citizens aren’t the only ones playing around with this kind of technology. The ATF has made and built a functioning 3-D gun nicknamed, “The Liberator.” This gun does not contain any metal parts or serial numbers.

In reality, the technology is still too new, and still too expensive for the everyday consumer. But last week, one city took action to try to limit potential future impact. Philadelphia’s city council passed a law last week banning anyone without a gun license from making or using a 3-D printed gun. The law passed unanimously, and has since been slammed as reactionary and preemptive. But one of the reasons for Philadelphia’s quick move is that a federal law that bans firearms that cannot be detected by a metal detector expires next month.

Technically this law will not be official until Philadelphia’s mayor, Mayor Michael Nutter, signs it. Other cities and states are considering similar legislation, such as New York, California, and Washington DC. The problem is that if these 3-D guns actually become popular and useful, this legislation will probably have fairly little effect. If 3-D printers become regular facets in consumer homes, which some advocates predict they will because of their ability to create many needed household items, producing your own gun could become incredibly easy. The plans for these guns or gun parts, once perfected, could be shared over the Internet as easily as pirating music.

This is another tricky intersection between law and technology. For once, it seems like the law may have overtaken the technology—critics are right in saying this law might be a bit preemptive. But this technology can still be incredibly dangerous once it is perfected, and a larger discussion on how to control the spread will be warranted.

—

Anneliese Mahoney (@AMahoney8672) is Lead Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

Featured image courtesy of [Keith Kissel via Flickr]

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Need a Gun? Just Print One Out appeared first on Law Street.