The de-liberalization of photography

On 2010-12-03 20:30:39 -0800, peter said:

On 12/2/2010 9:37 PM, Savageduck wrote:
snip

That is not a Plea bargain agreement. With an agreement the prosecution
and the defense have agreed to a deal. The judge will examine the
details, and if found to be within the law, the judge will ask the
defendant if he/she understands what it is they are actually agreeing
to. Once that is done the judge pronounces sentence based on the agreement.


Actually, things go much further than that. At least in Ne York and in
the Federal system.
The Judge will examine the defendant to satisfy that the defendant did
in fact commit the crime to which he/she is pleading guilty and that
the defendant is clear headed, understands the consequences of his plea
and is not under the influence of any substance.

Just trying to keep things simple.

With the gang crime in California it is not unusual for one fresh gang
member to take the hit for the gang by coping to a plea when he was not
the perpetrator.
Then there are the mentally ill, who can say things such as, "...but I
must be guilty, they arrested me didn't they?"


--
Regards,

Savageduck

On 12/4/2010 12:01 AM, Savageduck wrote:
On 2010-12-03 20:30:39 -0800, peter said:

On 12/2/2010 9:37 PM, Savageduck wrote:
snip

That is not a Plea bargain agreement. With an agreement the prosecution
and the defense have agreed to a deal. The judge will examine the
details, and if found to be within the law, the judge will ask the
defendant if he/she understands what it is they are actually agreeing
to. Once that is done the judge pronounces sentence based on the
agreement.


Actually, things go much further than that. At least in Ne York and in
the Federal system.
The Judge will examine the defendant to satisfy that the defendant did
in fact commit the crime to which he/she is pleading guilty and that
the defendant is clear headed, understands the consequences of his
plea and is not under the influence of any substance.

Just trying to keep things simple.

With the gang crime in California it is not unusual for one fresh gang
member to take the hit for the gang by coping to a plea when he was not
the perpetrator.
Then there are the mentally ill, who can say things such as, "...but I
must be guilty, they arrested me didn't they?"



Which is why the Judge goes through an extensive voir dire.



--
Peter

"Savageduck" wrote in message
news:2010120320561179149-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom...

....

BTW; Probation reports are great investigative tools, and can give you
much more information into the mind of the subject than any trial or
interview. Good probation officers are some of the best investigators
you will ever find.


....

--
Regards,

Savageduck


Nice to see someone appreciates my work. I wrote about twelve hundred of
those things over the years. Eventually you get a reputation, and all the
court figures learn which are the ones to read and which are the ones to
challenge, or belittle, or disregard.

Even better than a sentencing report written by an investigations officer is
one written by a supervision officer who had been on the defendant's case
for a time, and who takes his investigations seriously. Wrote a couple
hundred of those, as well.

Ecks-million stories in the denuded city; I know a few of them.

Also made up a few: one local police force was known for its relative
incompetence, and in the wake of a few notorious gaffes, someone described a
scenario: a crook was robbing an Italian restaurant, and in addition to the
cash from the register, he grabbed up an order of takeout someone had been
in the process of paying for. He ran out the door, and when police who
happened to be at the donut shoppe next door began a pursuit, the mope
considered the food excess baggage and thrust it into a handy postal deposit
box on the corner. The crook got away, but the police were able to apprehend
the mailbox and filed a charge of RSP: receiving stolen property.

(tap tap tap) (Is this thing on???)

Frank ess
Retired question answerer

In article ,
"Neil Harrington" wrote:

"Savageduck" wrote in message
news:2010120209053443042-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom...
On 2010-12-02 07:31:33 -0800, peter said:

On 12/2/2010 9:34 AM, Doug McDonald wrote:
On 12/1/2010 7:02 PM, Savageduck wrote:

Unfortunately much of what happens in California is proposition
driven, so the Legislature and
Judges have their hands tied by the voters.


In other words:

You are calling democracy "unfortunate"!

Wow!


The United States is not a democracy. It is a republic.
In the situation the duck mentioned, I understand him to be lamenting
that there are broad based black or white rules, with no room for
discretion. Indeed. In the classic example of two men who steal from a
sto
The first is unemployed through to no fault of his own. He steals some
food to feed his family.
The second steals because he doesn't even try to find work and that is
how he makes his living.
IMHO the two should receive different treatment. Under the rules the duck
cited, there is no room for discretion. The two receive equal treatment,

Correct, if both are found guilty as the result of a trial jury, or bench,
the judge is constrained by sentencing guidelines. Those guidelines can be
the terms as proscribed in the State Penal Code with various enhancements.
There is a shopping list of enhancements such as minimums for the use of a
firearm ( for example, rob a store using a knife, or indicating you might
be carrying a gun, the sentence might be 2-4 years. Brandish a firearm and
you are looking at 8-12 years, fire the weapon and you are going to deal
with 15 years.)

Just curious, what if the gun is a fake, say an Airsoft pistol (most of
which are excellent models of the real thing) or even a water pistol?

Some years ago I went through a citizens' education course at the local
police department. At one point they passed around a water pistol which had
been spray painted matte black, apparently with the intention of using it
for robbery. The water pistol was a perfect model of a Beretta Model 86.

I have no idea (and at that time didn't think to ask) what my state's
sentencing would be in connection with the use of such a fake in robbery, as
opposed to a real firearm.

Well, there are many factors at work. In New York State realistic
replica guns are banned unless the entire piece is safety orange or
yellow (I think). It is illegal to own one that is realistic in color as
well.

THe other, I think, is the idea of the "reasonable man" -- would a
"reasonable" person conclude that it is a real gun.

Then there is ssault: "(Law) an act, criminal or tortious, that
threatens physical harm to a person, whether or not actual harm is done
: he appeared in court charged with assault."

Assault can be seen as a legal synonym for "threaten". Assault with a
deadly weapon merely someone pointed a real/fake/loaded/unloaded gun at
someone intending to threaten their life. Whether the gun works or not
is immaterial. It is the treat, not the actual battery or shooting, that
is illegal. A reasonable person would fear for his/her life in that
circumstance.

On 2010-12-03 21:32:12 -0800, shiva das said:

In article ,
"Neil Harrington" wrote:

"Savageduck" wrote in message
news:2010120209053443042-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom...
On 2010-12-02 07:31:33 -0800, peter said:

On 12/2/2010 9:34 AM, Doug McDonald wrote:
On 12/1/2010 7:02 PM, Savageduck wrote:

Unfortunately much of what happens in California is proposition
driven, so the Legislature and
Judges have their hands tied by the voters.


In other words:

You are calling democracy "unfortunate"!

Wow!


The United States is not a democracy. It is a republic.
In the situation the duck mentioned, I understand him to be lamenting
that there are broad based black or white rules, with no room for
discretion. Indeed. In the classic example of two men who steal from a
sto
The first is unemployed through to no fault of his own. He steals some
food to feed his family.
The second steals because he doesn't even try to find work and that is
how he makes his living.
IMHO the two should receive different treatment. Under the rules the duck
cited, there is no room for discretion. The two receive equal treatment,

Correct, if both are found guilty as the result of a trial jury, or bench,
the judge is constrained by sentencing guidelines. Those guidelines can be
the terms as proscribed in the State Penal Code with various enhancements.
There is a shopping list of enhancements such as minimums for the use of a
firearm ( for example, rob a store using a knife, or indicating you might
be carrying a gun, the sentence might be 2-4 years. Brandish a firearm and
you are looking at 8-12 years, fire the weapon and you are going to deal
with 15 years.)

Just curious, what if the gun is a fake, say an Airsoft pistol (most of
which are excellent models of the real thing) or even a water pistol?

Some years ago I went through a citizens' education course at the local
police department. At one point they passed around a water pistol which had
been spray painted matte black, apparently with the intention of using it
for robbery. The water pistol was a perfect model of a Beretta Model 86.

I have no idea (and at that time didn't think to ask) what my state's
sentencing would be in connection with the use of such a fake in robbery, as
opposed to a real firearm.

Well, there are many factors at work. In New York State realistic
replica guns are banned unless the entire piece is safety orange or
yellow (I think). It is illegal to own one that is realistic in color as
well.

THe other, I think, is the idea of the "reasonable man" -- would a
"reasonable" person conclude that it is a real gun.

That is the way PC 417.4 is written;
(a) Every person who, except in self-defense, draws or exhibits an
imitation firearm in a threatening manner against another in such a way
as to cause a reasonable person apprehension or fear of bodily harm is
guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment in a county jail for
a term of not less than 30 days. For purposes of this section, an
imitation firearm means a replica of a firearm that is so substantially
similar in physical properties to an existing firearm as to lead a
reasonable person to conclude that the replica is a firearm.


Then there is ssault: "(Law) an act, criminal or tortious, that
threatens physical harm to a person, whether or not actual harm is done
: he appeared in court charged with assault."

Yup! We used to speak of "assault" as "swung at and missed." Add in
"Battery" and we enter a different set of rules.

Here for "Assault" the California Penal Code states;
PC 240;
An assault is an unlawful attempt, coupled with a present ability, to
commit a violent injury on the person of another.

This is expanded when we speak of PC 245; Assault with a deadly weapon
(still an attempt);

(a) (1) Any person who commits an assault upon the person of another
with a deadly weapon or instrument other than a firearm or by any means
of force likely to produce great bodily injury shall be punished by
imprisonment in the state prison for two, three, or four years, or in a
county jail for not exceeding one year, or by a fine not exceeding ten
thousand dollars ($10,000), or by both the fine and imprisonment.

(2) Any person who commits an assault upon the person of another with a
firearm shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for two,
three, or four years, or in a county jail for not less than six months
and not exceeding one year, or by both a fine not exceeding ten
thousand dollars ($10,000) and imprisonment.

(3) Any person who commits an assault upon the person of another with a
machinegun, as defined in Section 12200, or an assault weapon, as
defined in Section 12276 or 12276.1, or a .50 BMG rifle, as defined in
Section 12278, shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison
for 4, 8, or 12 years.

(b) Any person who commits an assault upon the person of another with a
semiautomatic firearm shall be punished by imprisonment in the state
prison for three, six, or nine years.

(c) Any person who commits an assault with a deadly weapon or
instrument, other than a firearm, or by any means likely to produce
great bodily injury upon the person of a peace officer or firefighter,
and who knows or reasonably should know that the victim is a peace
officer or firefighter engaged in the performance of his or her duties,
when the peace officer or firefighter is engaged in the performance of
his or her duties, shall be punished by imprisonment in the state
prison for three, four, or five years.

(d) (1) Any person who commits an assault with a firearm upon the
person of a peace officer or firefighter, and who knows or reasonably
should know that the victim is a peace officer or firefighter engaged
in the performance of his or her duties, when the peace officer or
firefighter is engaged in the performance of his or her duties, shall
be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for four, six, or eight
years.

(2) Any person who commits an assault upon the person of a peace
officer or firefighter with a semiautomatic firearm and who knows or
reasonably should know that the victim is a peace officer or
firefighter engaged in the performance of his or her duties, when the
peace officer or firefighter is engaged in the performance of his or
her duties, shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for
five, seven, or nine years.

(3) Any person who commits an assault with a machinegun, as defined in
Section 12200, or an assault weapon, as defined in Section 12276 or
12276.1, or a .50 BMG rifle, as defined in Section 12278, upon the
person of a peace officer or firefighter, and who knows or reasonably
should know that the victim is a peace officer or firefighter engaged
in the performance of his or her duties, shall be punished by
imprisonment in the state prison for 6, 9, or 12 years.

(e) When a person is convicted of a violation of this section in a case
involving use of a deadly weapon or instrument or firearm, and the
weapon or instrument or firearm is owned by that person, the court
shall order that the weapon or instrument or firearm be deemed a
nuisance, and it shall be confiscated and disposed of in the manner
provided by Section 12028.

(f) As used in this section, "peace officer" refers to any person
designated as a peace officer in Chapter 4.5 (commencing with Section
830) of Title 3 of Part 2.

(Amended by Stats. 2004, Ch. 494, Sec. 1.)


Assault can be seen as a legal synonym for "threaten". Assault with a
deadly weapon merely someone pointed a real/fake/loaded/unloaded gun at
someone intending to threaten their life. Whether the gun works or not
is immaterial. It is the treat, not the actual battery or shooting, that
is illegal. A reasonable person would fear for his/her life in that
circumstance.

Regarding threats California gets very specific with PC 422.6;

(a) No person, whether or not acting under color of law, shall by force
or threat of force, willfully injure, intimidate, interfere with,
oppress, or threaten any other person in the free exercise or enjoyment
of any right or privilege secured to him or her by the Constitution or
laws of this state or by the Constitution or laws of the United States
in whole or in part because of one or more of the actual or perceived
characteristics of the victim listed in subdivision (a) of Section
422.55.

(b) No person, whether or not acting under color of law, shall
knowingly deface, damage, or destroy the real or personal property of
any other person for the purpose of intimidating or interfering with
the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to the
other person by the Constitution or laws of this state or by the
Constitution or laws of the United States, in whole or in part because
of one or more of the actual or perceived characteristics of the victim
listed in subdivision (a) of Section 422.55.

(c) Any person convicted of violating subdivision (a) or (b) shall be
punished by imprisonment in a county jail not to exceed one year, or by
a fine not to exceed five thousand dollars ($5,000), or by both the
above imprisonment and fine, and the court shall order the defendant to
perform a minimum of community service, not to exceed 400 hours, to be
performed over a period not to exceed 350 days, during a time other
than his or her hours of employment or school attendance. However, no
person may be convicted of violating subdivision (a) based upon speech
alone, except upon a showing that the speech itself threatened violence
against a specific person or group of persons and that the defendant
had the apparent ability to carry out the threat.

(d) Conduct that violates this and any other provision of law,
including, but not limited to, an offense described in Article 4.5
(commencing with Section 11410) of Chapter 3 of Title 1 of Part 4, may
be charged under all applicable provisions. However, an act or omission
punishable in different ways by this section and other provisions of
law shall not be punished under more than one provision, and the
penalty to be imposed shall be determined as set forth in Section 654.


There is your tutorial into the state of the Penal Code in California.
--
Regards,

Savageduck

On Fri, 3 Dec 2010 20:38:04 -0800, Savageduck
wrote:

No one wants to be the bad guy.*

* Now I'm hearing "Behind Blue Eyes" in my head.

Now you are sounding like a refugee from the 60's. :-)
...but Who knows.

This thread prompted me to load up a CD by "The Chieftains" featuring
Roger Daltry doing "Behind Blue Eyes" recorded at a 1991 concert.

Ah, the 60s, though. Folk singers in coffee houses all around the
Near North in Chicago, Peter, Paul, and Mary and Joan Baez in concerts
at Ravinia, the original Kingston Trio (unknown, then) at The Old Town
Ale House, and Pete Seeger at the Old Town Pump House. Judy Collins
live, but I forget where. Just to mention a few.

Jazz, too. The Blue Note closed before I got to Chicago, but I walked
into a bar on Rush Street and listened to the Ramsey Lewis Trio for a
two-drink minimum for two hours. Saw Mose Allison in the same bar a
few weeks later.


--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

On 2010-12-03 21:29:05 -0800, "Frank ess" said:



"Savageduck" wrote in message
news:2010120320561179149-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom...

...

BTW; Probation reports are great investigative tools, and can give you
much more information into the mind of the subject than any trial or
interview. Good probation officers are some of the best investigators
you will ever find.

Nice to see someone appreciates my work. I wrote about twelve hundred
of those things over the years. Eventually you get a reputation, and
all the court figures learn which are the ones to read and which are
the ones to challenge, or belittle, or disregard.

Even better than a sentencing report written by an investigations
officer is one written by a supervision officer who had been on the
defendant's case for a time, and who takes his investigations
seriously. Wrote a couple hundred of those, as well.

Ecks-million stories in the denuded city; I know a few of them.

So you know of which I speak. I have read and appreciated some of the
best of those available in California.


Also made up a few: one local police force was known for its relative
incompetence, and in the wake of a few notorious gaffes, someone
described a scenario: a crook was robbing an Italian restaurant, and in
addition to the cash from the register, he grabbed up an order of
takeout someone had been in the process of paying for. He ran out the
door, and when police who happened to be at the donut shoppe next door
began a pursuit, the mope considered the food excess baggage and thrust
it into a handy postal deposit box on the corner. The crook got away,
but the police were able to apprehend the mailbox and filed a charge of
RSP: receiving stolen property.

(tap tap tap) (Is this thing on???)

Frank ess
Retired question answerer

One of the strangest restaurant robbery stories I ever heard, was
several years ago when this idiot decided to rob a Sushi restaurant in
Long Beach. His weapon of choice was a baseball bat. He entered the
restaurant as the proprietor was cashing up. The robber threatened the
owner with the bat, and then hit him. When the owner fell to the floor,
the chef who had been in the kitchen came out with a fine sushi knife
in hand. He came to his employer's aid and proceeded to disembowel the
robber. The robber survived to serve a lengthy State prison term. He
has an interesting scar, and the lesson that sushi restaurants might
not be the best choice of locations to rob.


--
Regards,

Savageduck

On Sat, 04 Dec 2010 01:20:18 -0500, tony cooper
wrote:

On Fri, 3 Dec 2010 20:38:04 -0800, Savageduck
wrote:

No one wants to be the bad guy.*

* Now I'm hearing "Behind Blue Eyes" in my head.

Now you are sounding like a refugee from the 60's. :-)
...but Who knows.

This thread prompted me to load up a CD by "The Chieftains" featuring
Roger Daltry doing "Behind Blue Eyes" recorded at a 1991 concert.

Ah, the 60s, though. Folk singers in coffee houses all around the
Near North in Chicago, Peter, Paul, and Mary and Joan Baez in concerts
at Ravinia, the original Kingston Trio (unknown, then) at The Old Town
Ale House, and Pete Seeger at the Old Town Pump House. Judy Collins
live, but I forget where. Just to mention a few.

Jazz, too. The Blue Note closed before I got to Chicago, but I walked
into a bar on Rush Street and listened to the Ramsey Lewis Trio for a
two-drink minimum for two hours. Saw Mose Allison in the same bar a
few weeks later.

Also should be mentioned that I took a date to the London House for
dinner. The entertainer was Erroll Garner. The dinner and show tab
was just over $25.00. With that much of an investment in a date, I
told her I had to marry her. And I did two years later.


--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

On 2010-12-03 22:20:18 -0800, tony cooper said:

On Fri, 3 Dec 2010 20:38:04 -0800, Savageduck
wrote:

No one wants to be the bad guy.*

* Now I'm hearing "Behind Blue Eyes" in my head.

Now you are sounding like a refugee from the 60's. :-)
...but Who knows.

This thread prompted me to load up a CD by "The Chieftains" featuring
Roger Daltry doing "Behind Blue Eyes" recorded at a 1991 concert.

Ah, the 60s, though. Folk singers in coffee houses all around the
Near North in Chicago, Peter, Paul, and Mary and Joan Baez in concerts
at Ravinia, the original Kingston Trio (unknown, then) at The Old Town
Ale House, and Pete Seeger at the Old Town Pump House. Judy Collins
live, but I forget where. Just to mention a few.

You might as well throw in Tom Paxton and Eric Anderson, with Bobby
Zimmerman in the wings.

There was a time I thought I was in love with Judy Collins.
Sigh!


Jazz, too. The Blue Note closed before I got to Chicago, but I walked
into a bar on Rush Street and listened to the Ramsey Lewis Trio for a
two-drink minimum for two hours. Saw Mose Allison in the same bar a
few weeks later.



Aah! Mose Allison, "The Sage of Tippo" one of my absolute favorite
musicians. He is still alive and performing at 83 amazing!

To that little group of names I would add Wes Montgomery and Lalo Schifrin.

--
Regards,

Savageduck

On 2010-12-03 22:32:57 -0800, tony cooper said:

On Sat, 04 Dec 2010 01:20:18 -0500, tony cooper
wrote:

On Fri, 3 Dec 2010 20:38:04 -0800, Savageduck
wrote:

No one wants to be the bad guy.*

* Now I'm hearing "Behind Blue Eyes" in my head.

Now you are sounding like a refugee from the 60's. :-)
...but Who knows.

This thread prompted me to load up a CD by "The Chieftains" featuring
Roger Daltry doing "Behind Blue Eyes" recorded at a 1991 concert.

Ah, the 60s, though. Folk singers in coffee houses all around the
Near North in Chicago, Peter, Paul, and Mary and Joan Baez in concerts
at Ravinia, the original Kingston Trio (unknown, then) at The Old Town
Ale House, and Pete Seeger at the Old Town Pump House. Judy Collins
live, but I forget where. Just to mention a few.

Jazz, too. The Blue Note closed before I got to Chicago, but I walked
into a bar on Rush Street and listened to the Ramsey Lewis Trio for a
two-drink minimum for two hours. Saw Mose Allison in the same bar a
few weeks later.

Also should be mentioned that I took a date to the London House for
dinner. The entertainer was Erroll Garner. The dinner and show tab
was just over $25.00. With that much of an investment in a date, I
told her I had to marry her. And I did two years later.



....and that sounds worthy of a Palmer House breakfast.

--
Regards,

Savageduck