Ted Stevens' prosecution is on track for trial as U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan rejected a number of defense motions to dismiss the case.

[The motions] challenged the indictment on the grounds that it was constitutionally vague or violated the statute-of-limitations. This came after Judge Sullivan earlier ruled that the indictment did not violate separation-of-powers provision for the executive branch and Congress. A move to change the venue for the trial to Alaska has been rejected as well.

Although "there is still a chance that U.S. District Judge Emmet G. Sullivan will dismiss the case on the grounds that it violates the Speech or Debate Clause," that chance seems infinitesimally small. That Clause does not insulate legislators from prosecution for filing false financial disclosure forms. Stevens' trial is scheduled to commence in twelve days.

When critics talk about regulatory officials being in bed with those they regulate, the phrase is typically used metaphorically. At the Department of the Interior, however, it should be taken literally.

The Interior Department's Inspector General, who has been investigating the U.S. Minerals Management Service's Royalty-In-Kind program, said government employees who were supposed to be regulating the oil companies were engaging in drug use and having sex with industry contacts. "Several staff admitted to illegal drug use as well as illicit sexual encounters," Inspector General Earl Devaney wrote in a Sept. 9 memo to Interior Secretary Dirk Kempthorne released today.

The Royalty-In-Kind program allows oil companies to pay royalties to the government in oil rather than cash. Between 2002 and 2006, "these employees accepted gifts and gratuities on at least 135 occasions from four major oil and gas companies with whom they were doing business" according to the Inspector General's report. [more ...]

Civilian oversight of police departments isn't always a useful mechanism for ridding a department of bad cops. Superintendents in the Chicago Police Department asked the Chicago Police Board to fire 80 officers between 2003 and 2007. The nine member board, appointed by the mayor, dismissed just 21 of them.

Some of the board's decisions are difficult to understand. Officer Gerald Callahan, an alcoholic and manic depressive, cost the city $15,000 after he handcuffed a bartender who refused to serve him. By itself, that incident and the settlement it provoked might have warranted discipline short of discharge. But when Callahan got out of rehab and was about to return to work, supervisors smelled alcohol on his breath. He became abusive when they asked him to submit to a breathalyzer. Callahan had been suspended twice before. How many chances does he deserve? Yet the Police Board decided he deserved yet another suspension, not termination.

[more ...]

This is an interesting policy question: Should cities be allowed to insure themselves against claims of police brutality? The City of St. Paul agreed to host the Republican National Convention on the condition that Republican Party arranged "to buy insurance covering up to $10 million in damages and unlimited legal costs for law enforcement officials accused of brutality, violating civil rights and other misconduct." Private donations were used to purchase the insurance.

The plus side of the agreement is obvious: taxpayers won't have to pay damages resulting from police misconduct. But the downside, while less obvious, is troubling: [more...]

Alberto Gonzales' memory lapses are well documented, particularly when he testifies before Congress. It may therefore be unsurprising that

Gonzales told investigators he did not remember whether he took home notes regarding the government's most sensitive national security programs and did not know they contained classified information despite notations on the papers that they were "eyes only -- top secret," according to a report released this morning.

Here's what Gonzales did that he couldn't remember: [more ...]

Three journalists who traveled to the Twin Cities to document any police misconduct that might be directed at Republican National Convention protesters may have difficulty doing their jobs. The police have already confiscated their video cameras, cell phones, and a laptop computer.

The group said police detained them for about an hour after asking whether they knew about a rash of car burglaries in the area. The officers searched them without their consent and confiscated their belongings, the group said.

The police say the journalists were trespassing. Even if that's true, how did that offense justify a decision to confiscate the journalists' cameras? Were the officers actually motivated by a desire to prevent the journalists from documenting police misconduct?

Yesterday's city in crisis (as the result of police misconduct) was Indianapolis, where ten officers "have been arrested, jailed or targeted for investigation in the past four months." The crisis is one of confidence in the police department.

Today's city in crisis is the much smaller community of Madison, CT, where a crisis in confidence is compounded by a budgetary crisis.

In just two months, the town has used its entire legal budget investigating misconduct among officers.

Eight Madison police officers have been arrested within the last two years and the police chief has been suspended.

It's fair to say, as does this Indianapolis Star editorial, that there's a crisis in the Indianapolis Metropolitan Police Department.

Ten IMPD officers have been arrested, jailed or targeted for investigation in the past four months. The latest in a string of scandals involves officer Anthony Smith, charged on Thursday with seven felonies, including rape. He is accused of sexually assaulting a 19-year-old woman while on duty last week.

[more ...]

In a rare display of ethical responsibility, an assistant prosecutor has been fired and referred for disciplinary charges after he ignored evidence that proved the defendant was elsewhere when the murder with which he was charged was committed. TalkLeft discussed the wrongful conviction of Claude McCollum earlier this year.

Without providing details, the county prosecutor in Ingham County, Michigan announced the firing of Eric Matwiejczyk at a news conference yesterday. The prosecutor also "released a report from the state Attorney General's Office that he says exonerates his office of any allegations prosecutors knew about" the exculpatory evidence prior to trial. Matwiejczyk claims he gave the new evidence to the defense during the trial, but the defense attorney is uncertain whether it was provided during the trial or only after the trial ended. In any event, it's clear that Matwiejczyk went forward with the trial despite his knowledge that the new evidence demonstrated McCollum's innocence. Matwiejczyk's response -- he didn't believe the new evidence was accurate, even though it was furnished to him by the police -- is feeble. Matwiejczyk deserves to have his apparent misconduct investigated.

The LA Times reports that the feds are investigating LA City Attorney Rocky Delgadillo and his wife. The lengthy article doesn't mention that Rocky Delgadillo was the city attorney who insisted on hammering Paris Hilton, notwithstanding parallel conduct by his wife. But I did back when Paris was in the news:

Paris was sentenced for a probation violation for driving under suspension while on probation. Mrs. Delgadillo also drove under suspension and committed a traffic offense while doing so. She was not charged with driving under suspension, only the traffic offense, and was fined $186.00.

Paris got 23 days in jail for driving under suspension which was a violation of her probation. She wasn't charged or convicted of any traffic offense-- or of drunk driving-- on that occasion. She didn't cause an accident. Her only drunk driving charge was the one that led to her original term of probation. As I wrote here: [More...]

For the seocnd time in three months, a case was dropped in LA due to false tesimony by a police officer. The latest, dismissed yesterday, involved a detective. Saul Edy, the defendnat, spent three years in jail.

Det. David Friedrich, with Los Angeles Police Department radio recordings that contradicted Friedrich's account of a stakeout.

The proseuctor's explanation:

I believe this officer did the best he could, but unfortunately mistakes were made and we lacked confidence in the persuasiveness of our case," Yglecias said. "We still have a belief in Eady's guilt, which made for an agonizing decision."

The defense lawyer's explanation: [More...]

Raw Story collects a number of recent incidents of misused tasers, including an appalling account of police who tasered a 16 year old 19 times after he fell from a highway overpass. The boy had a broken back, which might explain why he refused to obey police commands and why he was making incoherent statements that officers apparently regarded as threatening.

The headline story in the Raw Story article concerns a San Marcos, Texas officer who stopped a man for speeding. The driver tried to explain that his dog was choking to death and he was rushing the dog to a vet. The officer's compassionate response:

"It's a dog, it's OK. You can get another one. Relax."

The dog died during the 15 minutes it took Officer Michael Gonzalez to write a citation. Moral of the story: if your dog (or other family member) needs immediate medical attention, don't stop for the police. No jury will convict you of eluding under those circumstances, and your family member is more likely to survive if you don't stop.