tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8597101.post1832512552874852316..comments2024-03-25T20:06:39.794-05:00Comments on Grits for Breakfast: Feds recalling military gear for cops, and other storiesGritsforbreakfasthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10152152869466958902noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8597101.post-6934433450218901612015-11-05T07:34:07.958-06:002015-11-05T07:34:07.958-06:00Grits, how about those people that deal indirectly...Grits, how about those people that deal <i>indirectly</i> with the TFSC? There are a number of bench lab analysts that have a distaste for the TFSC.<br /><br />From SCP's comment (and the links given), it appears as if the SWIFS Crime Lab supervisor can testify, during a trial , under oath, in front of a judge, that her lab analysts (not her, of course, but the 20 or so she supervised) were scientifically "negligent" for using expired chemicals (3 years beyond)...and yet the Texas Forensic Science Commission will do nothing.<br /><br />One might think that the SWIFS crime lab Management/Director would have presented a Self-Disclosure form describing the "negligence" to the TFSC after this startling admission, under oath, in front of a judge. Nothing on the TFSC webpage suggests that this occurred either. [Why admit to negligence when no one is forcing you, right?]<br /><br />If I recall, Jonathan Salvador was NOT testifying, during a trial, under oath, in front of a judge, when his shoddy work was reported to the TFSC. He was publicly crucified in the MSM, lost his job, and was threatened with prosecution.<br /><br />A bit of selective persecution, huh Lynn?<br /><br />So, <b>Thanks Lynn!</b> for teaching all Texas forensic analysts that it's completely acceptable to lie, cheat, steal, fake testing results, and falsify lab reports in the crime lab so long as they admit to it (or blame others) during a trial, under oath, in front of a judge.<br /><br />Let this be a lesson, Jonathan Salvador!<br /><br />Become management before becoming incompetent.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8597101.post-56564347559398801322015-11-04T18:10:09.213-06:002015-11-04T18:10:09.213-06:00The comment was made about Law Enforcement not hav...The comment was made about Law Enforcement not having or needing 'grenade launchers".<br /><br />What the heck do you believe the Police use to launch tear gas cartridges?<br /><br />That's right. 40 mm Grenade Launchers.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8597101.post-28900584780559320032015-11-04T11:31:01.874-06:002015-11-04T11:31:01.874-06:00re: 9:09, Grits-
One could either look at the ill...re: 9:09, Grits-<br /><br />One could either look at the illegal actions of the TFSC (while Lynn Garcia was acting as legal council)...<br /><br />https://sliterchewspens.wordpress.com/2013/09/10/the-illegal-actions-of-the-texas-forensic-science-commission/<br /><br />Or, one could look at the illegal acts (and scientific misconduct) the TFSC was alerted to, but did nothing to address...<br /><br />https://sliterchewspens.wordpress.com/2013/09/12/mcdonald-suborned-perjury/<br /><br />Granted, these are a couple of year back. But I don't think there's a statute of limitation on unethical conduct that goes unaccounted for.<br /><br />-SCP<br /><br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8597101.post-30557890695758583272015-11-04T09:09:02.263-06:002015-11-04T09:09:02.263-06:00@9:04, nobody I know who deals directly with the a...@9:04, nobody I know who deals directly with the agency feels that way so we'll agree to disagree. And JB's contribution, while important, wasn't in 2015.Gritsforbreakfasthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10152152869466958902noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8597101.post-33718001600185250952015-11-04T09:04:46.419-06:002015-11-04T09:04:46.419-06:00Once Lynn R. figures out basic Texas law surroundi...Once Lynn R. figures out basic Texas law surrounding her legal responsibilities as council to a government agency and once she and the other members follow their Legal Ethics and Professional Code Conduct as expected by the public, then we can all give the "warm tummy rubz" to those individuals for doing the jobs they are getting paid to do.<br /><br />Instead, I would like to nominate John Bradley. He's done more for Texas Political Reform by leaving Texas than anyone else.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8597101.post-19035036360628114732015-11-04T08:57:03.847-06:002015-11-04T08:57:03.847-06:00It really doesn't make any sense that a law en...It really doesn't make any sense that a law enforcment agency would want equipment that they may have to spend a ton of money on to convert it over to civilian use, but, thats the nature of the beast, if it's free we'll take a couple dozen.<br /><br />It's only a matter of time before some dingdong shoots off a rocket launcher through someone's house and the gov. gets sued for supplying the stuff. Or if the truth be known it's already happened but no one is saying anything.<br /><br />Osama Bama didn't just decide this over night for no reason. Wink Wink Nod Nod say no more! ;0/Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8597101.post-14194266803520305902015-11-04T07:07:53.594-06:002015-11-04T07:07:53.594-06:00Two points with regard to post-conviction proceedi...Two points with regard to post-conviction proceedings, from a post-conviction practitioner: <br /><br />(1) No rewriting of the rules can get one past the fact that many lawyers accused of ineffective assistance of counsel will lie/misrepresent/exaggerate/rewrite history/throw the client under the bus in order to avoid any taint to the attorney's representation. And judges are required by the case law to view the attorney's decision-making deferentially in any event. So ineffective assistance claims are an incredibly tough row to hoe. Sometimes one has to litigate simply to get a trial attorney to hand over the client's file, so resistant are trial counsel to helping, and so confident that they can get away with bad behavior because, after all, the client is a criminal, right?<br /><br />(2) For true direct appeals, i.e. those that only involve matters recorded in the trial record, rather than any new evidentiary input, client input is usually absolutely useless. I always visit and communicate with my direct appeal clients as a personal courtesy/humane act, but the kinds of issues at play have never, in my experience, been ones on which the client had anything significant to offer. The facts that the appellate court can consider are all in the record already, and the client usually has zero, or limited, understanding of what the actual issues are. Habeas corpus proceedings, where new information can be considered, client input is of much more importance.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8597101.post-5217720879507918772015-11-03T19:14:39.038-06:002015-11-03T19:14:39.038-06:00I recall a discussion on here some time ago where ...I recall a discussion on here some time ago where an officer was arguing that the whole issue of the militarization of police was exaggerated and he kept insisting that local law enforcement did not have grenade launchers and such. Apparently, they do. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com