McDonald's to recall 12 million 'Shrek' glasses, citing cadmium health risks

Federal regulators found the toxic metal in the paint after an anonymous tip to a California congresswoman.

By Peter Nicholas, Tribune Washington Bureau

June 4, 2010

Reporting from Washington

McDonald's will recall about 12 million "Shrek" drinking glasses because federal regulators found they contain the toxic metal cadmium, which poses health risks.

The glasses have been sold for $2 apiece at McDonald's restaurants across the country as a promotional tie-in with the movie "Shrek Forever After." Purchasers will be advised to keep them away from children and to return them to McDonald's for a refund.

The recall, which will be officially announced Friday by the Consumer Product Safety Commission, was set in motion by an anonymous tip to Rep. Jackie Speier (D-Hillsborough) last week. She alerted the commission, which tested the glasses and confirmed the presence of cadmium in the paint used for the decorative characters. Cadmium is a carcinogen and can cause kidney, lung, intestinal and bone damage.

Speier's office said McDonald's voluntarily agreed to recall the glasses at the urging of the commission.

A McDonald's spokesman, Walt Riker, said in an interview: "We've had a good, constructive two-way dialogue with the congresswoman's office and with the Consumer Product Safety Commission."

Although Speier commended McDonald's for acting quickly, her office said the fast-food giant and other corporations must "do a better job of thoroughly reviewing their domestic and international supply chains to keep products with potentially dangerous elements from ever hitting their shelves."

It was not immediately known where the glasses were produced or how the paint used in the "Shrek" characters came to contain cadmium.

"Our children's health should not depend on the consciences of anonymous sources," Speier said. "Although McDonald's did the right thing by recalling these products, we need stronger testing standards to ensure that all children's products are proven safe before they hit the shelves. Cadmium is a toxic substance that is extremely dangerous to the developmental health of children."

The commission declined to comment Thursday evening. In the past, the commission has warned manufacturers to avoid cadmium in children's products, and last month it ordered the recall of children's jewelry contaminated by the toxic metal.

Speier said the McDonald's episode pointed to the need for stronger safety measures. Earlier in the year, she introduced legislation banning cadmium and other toxic metals from children's jewelry.

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-na-mcdonalds-recall-20100604,0,6675613,print.story

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Bills target sex offenders, marijuana use, cellphone users

Measures passed in the Assembly or Senate would allow life without parole for child rapists, make small-time pot possession an infraction and boost penalties for drivers using hand-held cellphones.

By Jack Dolan and Patrick McGreevy, Los Angeles Times

June 4, 2010

Reporting from Sacramento

Adults who sexually assault children face the possibility of life in prison without parole for a first offense, and drivers caught using hand-held cellphones would face new penalties, under a wide range of bills approved by lawmakers Thursday.

In addition, penalties for marijuana use would be reduced. Each of these and dozens of other bills passed in the Senate and Assembly must pass the other house and win the governor's support before they can become law.

The bid to increase penalties for sex offenders grew out of the February rape and murder of a San Diego-area teenager by a man who was paroled after serving five years in prison for molesting a 13-year girl. After his arrest on suspicion of killing 17-year-old Chelsea King, John Albert Gardner III led police to the remains of a second victim, 14-year-old Amber Dubois, who had vanished in February 2009.

Although Gardner wore a GPS tracking device as a condition of his parole, state corrections officials failed to notice multiple violations that would have allowed them to take him off the street, according to a report released Wednesday by California's Office of the Inspector General.

The bill, AB 1844 by Nathan Fletcher (R-San Diego), would allow judges to sentence adults who rape children younger than 14 to life in prison without the possibility of parole if aggravating factors such as kidnapping or torture are associated with the attack. It would also become a crime for paroled sex offenders to visit so-called safe zones, such as schools and public parks.

Under existing law, sex offenders can't live within 2,000 feet of schools or parks, "but you could sit there 24 hours a day," Fletcher said

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has promised to sign the bill, known as "Chelsea's Law," if it passes the Senate as expected.

Another measure passed Thursday would increase fines for drivers caught using a hand-held cellphone or texting device. Proponents cited concern that many motorists are ignoring the current law against such activity because the fine is only $20.

Fines for the first offense would climb to $50 under SB 1475 by Sen. Joe Simitian (D-Palo Alto) and $100 for subsequent offenses. Violators would also get a point added to their driving record, which could raise their insurance costs. In addition, the ban would be extended to bicyclists.

"The idea is we could save more lives and avoid more accidents if people took the law more seriously," Simitian said.

A survey by the AAA estimated that about 60% of drivers are complying with the existing law.

Police officers would be exempt from the ban. That prompted Sen. Bob Huff (R-Diamond Bar), who opposes it, to argue that some people can safely talk on a cellphone and text while driving. And Sen. Gloria Romero (D- Los Angeles), who also opposes the measure, admitted to colleagues that she has picked up her cellphone to talk while driving, just as the governor's wife has been spotted doing.

"The first lady is not alone," Romero quipped.

Possessing an ounce or less of marijuana would go from being a misdemeanor to a simple infraction, eliminating the possibility that such minor cases could end up in court-clogging jury trials, according to Sen. Mark Leno (D- San Francisco), author of SB1449 . The penalty would remain the same: a fine of up to $100 but no jail time.

"This is a waste of time and money at a time when we can't afford any more waste, fraud and abuse," Leno said.

Other bills advanced Thursday would:

•Allow illegal immigrants to receive state-administered financial aid to attend state universities. Sen. Gil Cedillo (D-Los Angeles) said his so-called California Dream Act, SB 1460 , would help young people who in many cases were brought to this country by undocumented parents. Sen. Bob Dutton (R-Rancho Cucamonga) voted against the bill, saying, "We don't even have enough money to provide financial aid for students that are here legally, let alone ones that are here illegally."

•Lift a 69-year-old exemption in state law that precludes paying overtime wages to agricultural workers after eight hours in a day. Current law allows extra pay only after a farmworker toils for more than 10 hours. SB 1121 is by Sen. Dean Florez (D-Shafter).

•Allow Los Angeles International Airport to use an existing fee on car rentals to help pay for a $700-million centralized rental terminal at the airport. The measure is SB 1192 by Sen. Jenny Oropeza (D- Long Beach).

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-legis-20100604,0,7114675,print.story

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Coroner releases report on illegal immigrant who died after being Tasered at the border

An illegal immigrant who died after being shot with a Taser during an altercation with federal authorities at the border had methamphetamine in his system, according to a report released Thursday by the San Diego County medical examiner's office.

Anastacio Hernandez-Rojas, 42, died Saturday after a struggle with a U.S. Customs and Border Protection agent at the U.S.-Mexico border. The medical examiner's report read that at the time of death, he had "acute methamphetamine intoxication" as well as high blood pressure and heart disease. The report lists the manner of death as homicide and the cause of death as heart attack due to the drugs, heart disease and a "physical altercation with law enforcement officers."

Hernandez-Rojas was being removed from the U.S. through the San Diego-Tijuana border crossing when he became combative and was Tasered, according to Customs and Border Protection. The San Diego Police Department is investigating the death, which has prompted criticism by immigrant rights groups.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Assembly passes 'Chelsea's Law'

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has said he would sign the bill, known as “Chelsea's Law,” if it passes the Senate, as expected. The Assembly passed the bill 65-0.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

EDITORIAL

Open carry: It's not for California

The Assembly approves a bill that bans the open carrying of unloaded firearms; the state Senate should do the same, and the governor should sign it.

June 3, 2010

The open carry movement, an aggressive campaign asserting the right of all Americans to carry unconcealed firearms in public, operates under a simple premise spelled out in a banner headline on the opencarry.org website: "A right unexercised is a right lost." But in California, the opposite may well turn out to be true — in-your-face demonstrations by gun-toting activists have prompted a legislative backlash that may end open carry in this state for good.

That's OK by us. There is no compelling reason society should tolerate weekend commandos flashing their firearms, confounding law enforcement officers and terrorizing the public.

The Assembly on Tuesday approved a bill forbidding the open carry of unloaded firearms. (It's already illegal to openly carry loaded guns, and only people with permits issued by a law enforcement agency are allowed to carry concealed weapons.) The bill was introduced by Assemblywoman Lori Saldana (D- San Diego) after about 60 armed open carry demonstrators frightened families and tourists on Pacific Beach last year.

Carrying an unloaded gun isn't as harmless as open carry advocates like to claim. It only takes a second to slap a clip into an unloaded semiautomatic, and an armed society is not a friendly society; angry disputes can turn deadly when the antagonists are packing heat, and untrained shooters can miss their targets and hit bystanders. Moreover, it is very difficult for police, or anybody else, to know whether a gun is loaded while it's holstered.

Even gun-loving rural states are wary of open carry. Last month, Oklahoma Gov. Brad Henry — who has an "A" rating from the National Rifle Assn., meaning he does pretty much whatever the gun lobby asks of him — vetoed a bill that would have allowed people with concealed-weapons permits to openly carry loaded guns. Granted, that's a little different from the California situation, but his reasoning rings true here too. "Proponents of open carry laws claim criminals will be discouraged from committing lawless acts if other citizens are publicly displaying their weapons on the street," Henry said in a statement after his veto. "Law enforcement officials disagree, however, saying such a scenario makes it more difficult for officers to determine the difference between criminals and law-abiding citizens at a crime scene or domestic disturbance."

The state Senate should approve Saldana's bill, AB 1934 , and the governor should sign it. Gun enthusiasts can find a more socially acceptable way to assert their manhood. We recommend growing a mustache, or getting a biceps tattoo that does the hula when flexed.

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/editorials/la-ed-guns-20100603,0,2703256,print.story

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

From the New York Times

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Cameron Rejects Rush to Tighten Gun Laws

LONDON — Prime Minister David Cameron said Thursday that Britain “should not leap to knee-jerk conclusions” about the need for tougher gun laws in the wake of the shooting rampage in northwestern England on Wednesday that left 13 people dead, including the gunman.

Mr. Cameron spoke at a news conference as the police released new details about how the gunman, Derrick Bird, 52, a taxi driver, left a trail of death with few precedents in Britain's modern history through the western edge of the Lake District, one of the country's most celebrated scenic spots.

Mr. Cameron said the government would do everything it could to “mend the hurt” caused by the shootings. But while laws and practices involved in gun ownership will be reviewed, he said, there is not always “an instant legislative or regulatory answer.”

“Of course we should look at this issue, but we should not leap to knee-jerk conclusions on what should be done on the regulatory front,” he said. “We do have some of the toughest legislation in the world.” He added, “You can't legislate to stop a switch flicking in someone's head and this sort of dreadful action taking place.”

Police commanders in Cumbria, the county where the killings occurred, said Thursday that they had recovered two weapons used in the shootings — a shotgun and a .22-caliber rifle with a sniper scope — and that Mr. Bird had valid gun licenses for both.

Friends of Mr. Bird said he had owned the weapons for at least 20 years and had inherited them from his father.

Although Mr. Bird had a criminal record for theft from the 1990s, the police said, it was not considered serious enough to fall under statutory provisions that bar more serious criminal offenders from having licensed guns.

For years, Britain has been keen to compare its relatively modest record of gun crime with the much higher incidence of firearms killings in United States; official figures show that guns are used in about 21,000 crimes a year here, and that, in recent years, killings with firearms each year have rarely reached 100, and often fewer than 50.

Against that background, the episode on Wednesday quickly developed into a national trauma, with newspapers and broadcast airwaves filled with agonized debate about what motivated the killer and how the carnage might have been prevented.

News reports that were widely circulated in Britain on Thursday, including one in The Daily Telegraph, quoted friends of Mr. Bird, a divorced father of two, as saying they thought the killings might have been set off by a family dispute over a will, possibly that of Mr. Bird's 90-year-old mother, Mary, with whom he had lived in recent years.

On Thursday, police investigators would not comment on a motive for the killings, other than referring to “a mixture of grudge, and random.” They said the first victims, near Mr. Bird's village, Rowrah, included his twin brother, David, a mechanic; the Bird family's lawyer, Kevin Commons, 60; and two taxi drivers he knew well in Whitehaven, the seaside town where he worked.

Victims who were apparently killed at random, in towns and villages to the south and east of Whitehaven, included a middle-age woman returning from shopping to the home where she cared for a severely disabled adult daughter; a man on his way to a betting shop; a former professional rugby player working on his uncle's farm; an elderly woman known with her twin as the bird ladies for their work to save pigeons endangered by a nearby nuclear plant; and a retired labor organizer from the plant who was out on a bicycle.

Switching from main roads to country lanes as police helicopters tried to track him down, the killer drove nearly 40 miles before crashing his car, fleeing on foot and shooting himself in a woodland that friends said was one of his favorite places. The police said that in addition to the 12 people he killed, 11 others were wounded. Eight remained hospitalized on Thursday.

After two previous mass killings — one in the southern English town of Hungerford in 1987 that killed 16 people, and another in the Scottish town of Dunblane in 1996 that killed 16 children and a teacher — Britain's gun laws were radically overhauled. Officials have claimed that Britain has some of the world's toughest legal curbs on the ownership of shotguns, rifles and handguns, with such tight restrictions that members of the Olympic pistol-shooting team have been barred from training in England, Scotland or Wales.

Still, many shotguns and rifles remain licensed, mainly to people who can show that they have valid sporting or work-related reasons for owning them. Current figures show that the total number of licensed firearms includes 1.3 million shotguns and 435,000 rifles and high-powered air guns. Since 1997, handguns have been almost completely banned from private ownership.

Those who argue that Britain's gun laws are already tough enough — many of them from the rural hunting communities that account for a great majority of shotgun and rifle permits — have focused on the fact that Mr. Bird had licenses for his weapons, and had passed the police and medical checks, as well as the requirement for character references, that are needed to obtain licenses. Their argument, with which Mr. Cameron appeared to signal some sympathy, has been that no system of gun licensing, however rigid, will stop an otherwise law-abiding person who experiences some kind of mental or nervous breakdown.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/04/world/europe/04britain.html?ref=world&pagewanted=print

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Each court was intended, in part, to provide a model of humane, civilized detention that contrasts starkly with the horrific nature of the crimes the inmates are accused of. But how much is too much?

A group including France, Italy and smaller states is arguing that the nations financing the courts should not be covering benefits that they do not provide in their own prisons — and do not want to. What precedent might be set, they ask, if they contribute to these provisions here?

“We're not treating them as equals to the rest of detainees in national prisons,” said Francisco José Aguilar Urbina, the Costa Rican ambassador to the Netherlands. “A guy who steals a chicken to feed his family will not be paid by the states for family visits.”

The visits make up a small part of the budget of the International Criminal Court, which authorized the travel subsidies and spends about €102 million yearly for court costs, staff and investigators along with housing and prosecuting four men. But the dispute is scratching at bigger concerns about costly legal processes that have dragged on, yielded no convictions and put a lot of focus on the benefits at the detention facilities, which some critics mock as the Hague Hilton.

“Behind this issue is a tug of war,” said William Schabas, director of the Irish Center for Human Rights in Galway, Ireland — one between the court's judges, who have generally supported broad prisoner rights, and many of the countries that are paying the bills. “They are wondering what they are getting for their money. This is a court that has existed for seven years and hasn't finished one trial.”

Diplomats from more than 100 nations are gathered in Kampala, Uganda, to take stock of the court, though the dispute over family travel is moving toward a resolution this autumn. The court was created almost eight years ago as a permanent tribunal to prosecute genocide and war crimes. Its 12-cell detention center houses five prisoners: four from Congo and Charles G. Taylor , the deposed president of Liberia, who has two cells, one where he lives and one where he keeps his documents.

They share the gym with 36 defendants, including the Bosnian Serb leader Radovan Karadzic , who are before a sister court dealing exclusively with Balkan war crimes and who are housed separately. That court does not provide travel benefits, but many of the prisoners' home nations do, albeit far more modestly than the International Criminal Court.

Defending the International Criminal Court's policy, Marc Dubuisson, its director of court services, said: “I'm not here to judge whether a person is worse than another. We have an obligation to show the world what is good management. Why would you want to sentence the children not to see their own parent?”

Thanks to conjugal visits, several detainees became new fathers, including a Serbian general and Mr. Taylor, 62, whose baby girl was born in February.

The first to tap family travel funds, back in 2006, were the wife and five children of Thomas Lubanga Dyilo, 49, a former rebel leader from the Democratic Republic of Congo, formerly Zaire, who is accused of enslaving child soldiers who were forced to rape, kill and plunder. The court paid more than $16,000 in expenses covering air fare from Kinshasa, two hotel rooms for 15 nights, temporary medical insurance, passport and visa fees and a daily “dignity allowance” of $24 for adults and $12 for children. Court officials also provided winter clothes and a babysitter for the children during conjugal visits.

Two years later, Mr. Lubanga's old enemy, Mathieu Ngudjolo Chui, 39, sought money for visits three times a year for his wife and six children. Mr. Ngudjolo is accused of organizing a massacre in the village of Bogoro in which boy soldiers hacked and burned alive about 200 people.

When the court registrar sought to curb spending by rotating visits among relatives, Mr. Ngudjolo successfully appealed, demanding “respect for the entitlement of his children to visit their father.” His travel budget this year: €26,180.

On the day he retired in March, the court's president, Philippe Kirsch, a former Canadian diplomat, affirmed the right to the travel payments for Mr. Ngudjolo, saying that administrators had reviewed his finances and that at best “his assets are only just sufficient to enable him to meet his obligations to his dependents.”

One of the court's top donors, Italy, disputed Mr. Kirsch's ruling as having no legal basis. The French Foreign Ministry supported Italy, saying, “There is no reason to fund family visits for indigent detainees with the court's budget since it could go too far, especially since the court's concept of poverty is fuzzy.”

Stephen Rapp, the U.S. ambassador-at-large for war crime issues, advocates alternatives such as videoconference calls, which are under consideration. The United States is the top donor for the Special Court for Sierra Leone, where Mr. Taylor is being tried.

“These are sensitive issues,” Mr. Rapp said. “We have to make sure that they are humanely treated at an international standard, but whether we should go to this whole level of flying families thousands of kilometers is much more doubtful. I prefer another practical approach.”

The court's supporters argue that the decision has been taken out of context. “Our message was let's not make a big deal about this,” said Cecilia Nilsson, who heads the legal section for the Coalition for the International Criminal Court, a network of 2,500 groups. “It's not a lot of money. It's part of keeping the detainees happy or, I don't know the word — managing — the detainees. The court is still very young and the decision was from just one case. It was blown out of proportion.”

The debate is reaching another threshold — over whether to pay for visits not only for the accused but those convicted of war crimes. The Special Court for Sierra Leone is considering that for convicts serving lengthy sentences in Rwanda.

“Yes, they have committed atrocities, but is the goal to reintegrate them back into society or is the goal to cut them off from society?” asked Binta Mansaray, the court's administrative registrar.

In the meantime, the International Criminal Court is economizing and exploring alternatives large and small: eliminating subsidies for family phone calls or excess baggage, for example, or placing visitors on empty returning military planes. A court report is expected on a proposal to finance family travel through a voluntary fund, although supporters and critics of the current system wonder who would volunteer.

How the detainees would react to any retrenchment is unclear, but some of them are not fully happy with their treatment now.

Mr. Taylor, for one, has complained about “Eurocentric meals” and boycotted his trial for a day after having to sit handcuffed in a vehicle outside the court for several minutes, which he considered “disrespectful.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/04/world/europe/04iht-hague.html?ref=world&pagewanted=print

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Suspect in U.S. Teenager's Disappearance Is Held in Chile

LIMA, Peru (AP) — A Dutchman who has long been a suspect in the disappearance of an Alabama teenager in Aruba five years ago was arrested Thursday in connection with the murder of a young woman in Peru .

The woman, Stephany Flores, 21, was killed in a Lima hotel on Sunday, five years to the day after the Alabama teenager, Natalee Holloway , disappeared.

The suspect, Joran van der Sloot, was escorted by three police officers as he entered a police station in Santiago, Chile, on Thursday. He did not comment as he entered, walking calmly and without handcuffs as reporters shouted his name.

Mr. van der Sloot, 22, was detained while traveling in a taxi toward the Chilean coast, said Prefect Alfredo Espinosa, chief national spokesman for Chile's investigative police.

The Chilean police are awaiting instructions from their counterparts in Peru, Mr. Espinosa said.

General César Guardia of the Lima police said that Ms. Flores, who had been seen with Mr. van der Sloot early Sunday, had been found on Wednesday lying facedown on the floor of his hotel room. Her neck had been broken, and she was fully clothed with no signs of having been sexually abused, he said.

Ms. Holloway disappeared on May 30, 2005, during a high school trip in Aruba , a Dutch island in the Caribbean where Mr. van der Sloot's late father had been a prominent judge.

Prosecutors said that Mr. van der Sloot was still their main suspect in the case, even though he had not been charged.

Mr. van der Sloot was in Peru for a poker tournament and a video taken at a casino in Lima shows him with Ms. Flores early on Sunday, General Guardia said. The two were later seen entering the hotel by one of its employees around 5 a.m., and Mr. van der Sloot departed alone about four hours later, he said.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/04/world/americas/04peru.html?ref=world&pagewanted=print

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

City to Pay $9.9 Million Over Man's Imprisonment

New York City agreed on Thursday to pay $9.9 million, the largest personal settlement in its history, to a man who served almost two decades in prison but was released after evidence surfaced that he had been framed for murder by a corrupt detective.

The man, Barry Gibbs, had served 19 years in prison when his conviction was overturned in 2005 after questions were raised about how his case had been handled by Louis J. Eppolito , a New York City police detective, one of the notorious “Mafia cops” serving life in prison for taking part in mob-related killings.

Mr. Gibbs sued the city in 2006, and a civil trial was scheduled to begin this month in United States District Court in Brooklyn.

“The settlement I'm happy with; it was my bottom-line settlement,” Mr. Gibbs said in an interview, sounding almost indifferent to the news. “They are permanent scars,” he added. “It's been a long road. I've been through a lot, and it was very traumatic for me.”

Mr. Gibbs, 62, who has recently wrestled with severe health problems, previously received a $1.9 million settlement from the state.

The conviction stemmed from the 1986 killing of a 27-year-old prostitute, who was strangled and dumped near the Belt Parkway. Mr. Eppolito led the investigation, and he quickly zeroed in on Mr. Gibbs, a postal worker who was struggling with drug addiction and previously had a relationship with the woman. Mr. Gibbs was sentenced to 20 years to life in prison.

Mr. Eppolito and a former partner, Stephen Caracappa , were arrested on federal racketeering charges in 2005, accused of being paid by members of the Luchese crime family to pass along information about law enforcement investigations and of taking part in killings for the mob.

The original case file for Mr. Gibbs was found in Mr. Eppolito's home in Las Vegas, where he had stored it illegally.

After a key witness told investigators that Mr. Eppolito had forced him to falsely identify Mr. Gibbs, a Brooklyn judge overturned the conviction.

Mr. Gibbs filed a sweeping civil rights lawsuit that claimed Mr. Eppolito “deliberately fabricated witness statements and police reports, withheld material, exculpatory evidence from prosecutors and intentionally failed to conduct an adequate investigation,” as well as beat Mr. Gibbs to elicit a false confession.

Lawyers for Mr. Gibbs said they believed that Mr. Eppolito focused the investigation on Mr. Gibbs because he was trying to protect the real killer, who might have had mob ties.

They said the Police Department had enough information to fire Mr. Eppolito years earlier, pointing to an investigation of Mr. Eppolito that resulted in no disciplinary action, even though it was determined that police documents that had been leaked to a mobster carried Mr. Eppolito's fingerprints.

“It's a horrible injustice,” said Barry C. Scheck, one of Mr. Gibbs's lawyers and a co-director of the Innocence Project at the Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law. “He was in prison close to 19 years, and he was framed by one of the worst cops that ever served in the New York City police force, a man who disgraced the badge.”

( The Innocence Project helped get Mr. Gibbs's verdict overturned, but Mr. Scheck represented Mr. Gibbs in his lawsuit through his private firm and will receive one-third of the settlement, the standard contingency fee.)

In hearings on the lawsuit, New York City maintained that Mr. Gibbs was guilty of the crime. The city would not go into detail about why it decided to settle, but released a statement that said, “We have agreed to settle this case and believe it is in the best interest of all parties.”

It was the largest individual settlement the city has ever paid, said Connie Pankratz, a spokeswoman with the city's Law Department. The next largest, $9.5 million, went to Maria Tipaldo in 2006. She was rendered a quadriplegic when her car was hit by an oncoming vehicle on a Brooklyn bridge that had no median divider despite having a history of crossover accidents.

Franklyn Waldron, a Brooklyn handyman, received an $8 million settlement in 2000 after he was shot by a police officer and paralyzed.

Abner Louima , who was tortured with a broken broomstick while in police custody, received $7.125 million from the city in 2001 and $1.625 million from the police union.

Since his release, Mr. Gibbs said, he has reconnected with his son and three young grandchildren. He is engaged to a childhood friend from Brooklyn, and is recovering from surgery for colon cancer and attending therapy regularly.

Mr. Gibbs even attended a sentencing hearing for Mr. Eppolito and Mr. Caracappa, who are serving life plus 100 years in prison, during which he was escorted out for yelling: “Do you remember me? I'm the guy you put away for 19 years!”

Mr. Gibbs planned to celebrate with his lawyers on Thursday night.

“I'm surviving in this world out here,” he said. “It's not easy readjusting to this life. Computers, phones, cars, everything — it was overwhelming to me when I first got out. Now I just flow with it.”

Mr. Scheck said that during a deposition in 2008, Mr. Eppolito repeatedly proclaimed that he had been framed. “He kept on saying: ‘You know I'm innocent. I'm a case for the Innocence Project.' ”

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/04/nyregion/04gibbs.html?ref=us&pagewanted=print

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

From the White House

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Meeting with Arizona's Governor

This afternoon the President met with Governor Jan Brewer of Arizona in the Oval Office -- here's the official readout from the White House:

The President had a good meeting with Governor Jan Brewer of Arizona at the White House today to discuss a range of critical issues of mutual interest, including the President's comprehensive plan to secure the Southwest border and the unprecedented resources his Administration has devoted to that effort. The President and Governor Brewer also discussed the President's decision to deploy up to an additional 1,200 requirements-based National Guard troops to the border and his upcoming request to Congress of $500 million in supplemental funds for enhanced border protection and law enforcement activities as part of that integrated strategy.  The President listened to Governor Brewer's concerns, and noted that the Administration's ongoing border protection and security efforts have increased pressure on illegal trafficking organizations through record seizures of illegal weapons and bulk cash transiting from the United States to Mexico, resulted in significant seizures of illegal drugs headed into the United States, lowered the average violent crime statistics in states along the Southwest Border, and reduced illegal immigration into the United States.

Despite the significant improvements, the President acknowledged the understandable frustration that all Americans share about the broken immigration system, and the President and Governor agreed that the lack of action to fix the broken system at the federal level is unacceptable.  As he did at the recent meeting with Senate Republicans, the President underscored that security measures alone won't fix the broken borders, there needs to be comprehensive immigration reform that includes:  lasting and dedicated resources by which to secure our borders and make our communities safer; holding unscrupulous employers accountable who hire workers illegally and exploit them and providing clear guidance for the many employers who want to play by the rules; and requiring those who have come here illegally to pay a fine, pay back taxes, learn English, and get right with the law.  The President urged Governor Brewer to be his partner in working in a bipartisan manner on comprehensive immigration reform to implement the type of smart, sensible, and effective solutions the American people expect and deserve from their federal government. Regarding Arizona law SB1070, the President reiterated his concern with the measure, including that a patchwork of different state immigration regulations around the country would interfere with the federal government's responsibility to set and enforce immigration policy.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2010/06/03/meeting-with-arizonas-governor

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

From the Department of Homeland Security

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

United States and France Establish Arrangement to Interdict High-Risk Travelers

Release Date: June 3, 2010

For Immediate Release
Office of the Press Secretary
Contact: 202-282-8010

Washington, D.C. - Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Janet Napolitano today announced that the United States and France have established an arrangement to implement the Immigration Advisory Program (IAP)--which allows for the identification of high-risk travelers at foreign airports before they board aircraft bound for the United States--at Paris' Charles De Gaulle International Airport.

"Terrorism is a global threat that requires an international response," said Secretary Napolitano. "This collaboration will enhance both the United States' and France's capabilities to protect our immigration systems as well as the global aviation network from abuse by terrorists and transnational criminals."

IAP allows specialized U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) personnel posted in foreign airports to utilize current targeting and passenger analysis information and/or an assessment of passengers' documentation to identify high-risk persons bound for the United States and make "no board" recommendations to carriers and host governments.

The arrangement--formalized over the weekend by DHS Assistant Secretary for Policy David Heyman and French Minister of Immigration, Integration, National Identity and Mutually-Supportive Development Eric Besson--will help combat the use of fraudulent travel documents, prevent terrorists and other criminals from entering the United States, disrupt human smuggling and strengthen cooperation between CBP and French officials. A formal signing of the IAP arrangement will follow in August.

Secretary Napolitano signed a similar arrangement with Spanish Interior Minister Alfredo Pérez Rubalcaba on July 1, 2009--implementing IAP at Madrid Barajas International Airport. DHS currently has IAP arrangements with seven countries and operates at nine locations.

In January, Secretary Napolitano traveled to Toledo, Spain, to meet with her European counterparts regarding ways to bolster international aviation security measures and standards. The U.S.-E.U. joint declaration on aviation security that resulted from these meetings committed the U.S. and its participating partners to enhancing channels for information sharing--including the utilization and exchange of liaison officers such as the CBP personnel stationed abroad through IAP.

For more information, visit www.dhs.gov .

http://www.dhs.gov/ynews/releases/pr_1275593319840.shtm

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

From the Department of Justice

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Thank you, Laurie [Robinson], for your kind words and, more importantly, for your commitment and contributions to the success of our nation's Drug Courts. You were instrumental in establishing the Justice Department's federal drug court office in the 1990's, and we are all fortunate to have you back at the helm of the Office of Justice Programs, building on this work.

Today, I'm honored to join with you and with Chief Justice Price in opening the NADCP's 16 th Annual Conference – now the world's largest conference on drugs and crime. With us today are judges, prosecutors, defense attorneys, probation and law enforcement officers, policymakers, program administrators, counselors, and Drug Court graduates.

Many of you have traveled from across the country – and far beyond – to be here. And I am grateful for your engagement and your outstanding service. The contributions that you make every day, often in the face of great challenges, help to improve public safety and public health, to protect and leverage taxpayers dollars, to safeguard communities in need, and to assist individuals and families in crisis.

The size of this gathering, the enthusiasm and diversity of the attendees, and the quality of the sessions that have been planned for the next few days are a testament to the leadership and hard work of the NADCP team and, of course, its CEO, West Huddleston. West, thank you for inviting me to join you all today.

For nearly two decades, NADCP's leadership and membership have served as extraordinary partners to government in the administration of justice. You have proven that redemption and rehabilitation are possible. And you've shown that our network of Drug Courts has the power to strengthen, not only families and communities, but our entire justice system.

Together, the people in this room have launched, led and sustained a national – and now international – movement. It's been just 21 years since the first Drug Court was launched in Miami. Today, there are more that 2,400 Drug Courts, operating in every U.S. state and in 15 countries. Drug Courts now serve more than 120,000 people a year. And, to date, over 1 million people have graduated from America's Drug Courts. 

This conference provides an important opportunity to build on the extraordinary progress we've seen over the last two decades. I want you all to know that, at the Department of Justice, this is a top priority. And, for me, it is a personal calling.

During a career spent as a prosecutor, judge, U.S. Attorney, Deputy Attorney General and, now, as Attorney General, I have seen firsthand how drug addiction can destroy families, lives and communities. I've also seen the difference that Drug Courts can make in helping people recovering from addiction reclaim and improve their lives. Today, more than 60 percent of people arrested in this country are regular drug users. About half of those incarcerated are drug dependent. Yet less than 10 percent of those in need of treatment while incarcerated actually receive it. This must change.

Now, few would dispute that public safety requires incarceration, and that imprisonment is, at least partially, responsible for the dramatic drop in crime rates nationwide in recent decades. But, as you all know, incarceration is only part of the answer. It is not the whole answer. Imprisonment, with its high economic and social costs, is not a complete strategy for criminal law enforcement, especially when you consider the fact that, currently, one out of every 100 adults in America is incarcerated.

We must focus not only on getting people who commit crimes into prison but also consider what happens to people after they leave prison and reenter society. And we must recognize that every person with a drug dependency who leaves incarceration without treatment represents an opportunity lost, as well as a continued risk to society.

Since 1994, when leaders from our nation's first 12 Drug Courts formed this organization, NADCP's leadership and membership has been leading the way forward. Your founders believed that, through judicial monitoring and effective treatment, drug-users could change and improve their lives and our justice system could become stronger. They were right. And the success they helped to foster through our Drug Courts has inspired a critical network of “problem-solving” courts, including mental health courts, community courts, reentry courts and DWI courts.

These courts have measurably – and in many cases, dramatically – helped to improve, and likely save, lives. And we have seen that Drug Courts, specifically, reduce crime more than any other sentencing option. The most rigorous and conservative scientific “meta-analyses” have all concluded that drug courts significantly reduce crime as much as 35 percent more than other sentencing options.  And, nationwide, 75 percent of Drug Court graduates remain arrest-free two years after leaving the program.

The long-term effects are just as promising. After the National Institute of Justice completed an evaluation of 6,500 Drug Court participants in Multnomah County, Oregon, over the course of 10 years, we found lower re-arrest rates and reductions in recidivism ranging from 17 to 26 percent. We also found public savings of almost $1,400 per participant when compared to traditional case processing. When costs associated with reduced recidivism and other long-term outcomes were factored in, those savings rose to almost $7,000 per participant.

Recently, NIJ completed a five-year evaluation of 23 drug court sites that measured Drug Court practices and their influence on relapse and recidivism. We're still consolidating the findings, but preliminary results show that participants reported less drug-related and criminal activity both 6 and 18 months after their admission, and they spent fewer days behind bars as a result. Interestingly, Drug Courts were particularly effective in preventing relapses among those who had long histories of drug use. And one other finding I'd like to emphasize – and one that I can appreciate as a former judge – is that outcomes were better for participants who perceived the judge and the program as fair and impartial and the judge as willing to impose serious consequences on those who dropped out.

By promoting sobriety, recovery, and personal accountability, Drug Courts help to break the cycle of drug use, crime, imprisonment, and release without rehabilitation. Of course, these programs give no one a free pass. They are strict and can be extraordinarily difficult to get through. But for those who succeed, as the Drug Courts graduates who are with us today prove, there is the real prospect of a productive future.

Yet, despite clear economic incentives and high levels of growth and success, today, Drug Courts only serve about one half of non-violent, drug-addicted arrestees who are already eligible for these programs. If Drug Courts were expanded so that they could treat all currently eligible individuals, this result would be more than $2 dollars in savings for every $1 dollar invested – a total of more than $1 billion dollars a year. And if Drug Courts were expanded so they could treat all arrestees who are at-risk for drug or alcohol abuse or dependence, it is estimated that we would save more than $30 billion a year, and avert millions of crimes.

It is time to consider what we can, and must, accomplish. It is time to look toward the future. And it is time to determine how we will put Drug Courts in reach of every individual who needs and would benefit from these programs.

President Obama has signaled his commitment to this work. And we can all be encouraged that the President's FY 2011 budget request includes close to $60 million for Drug, Mental Health, and Problem Solving Courts programs. The Administration's commitment to strengthening Drug Courts is also evident in its 2010 National Drug Control Strategy, which the Office of National Drug Control Policy announced in March.

In his opening to the Strategy, the President calls for “a balanced approach of prevention, treatment and law enforcement” in addressing the drug problem. Our current fight against the threats posed by drug use and trafficking has many areas of focus – international and domestic; sources of supply and centers of demand; and law enforcement, prevention, and treatment efforts. The Justice Department is committed to the implementation of every part of the Strategy. Let me assure you all that, while we will continue to enforce our drug laws to their fullest extent, and continue to attack with all of our resources drug producers, distributors, and traffickers, we will also continue our support for innovative prevention and treatment programs.

As part of this effort, we are taking a close look at adolescent recovery. And we are working to improve the implementation of juvenile drug courts by integrating juvenile drug court principles with the Reclaiming Futures model and ensuring appropriate adolescent treatment. Our Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention has been participating in a working group with the Department of Education, ONDCP, SAMHSA, and other agencies focusing on adolescent recovery.  And a summit on this topic is being planned for early fall.

As some of you know, since 2007, the Department has been part of an interagency, public/private partnership with the Center for Substance Abuse Treatment and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation.  And we will soon be making three new joint awards to support juvenile drug courts as they work to break the cycle of drugs and crime among our young people. The history of our Drug Courts movement has proven the effectiveness of public/private partnerships. And we will continue to establish and leverage such collaborative efforts to support and enhance your work.

Together, I know that we can build on the progress that has been made over the last 21 years. I believe that we can put Drug Courts within reach of those who need them. And I am confident that we can arrive at a place, in this nation and beyond, where all can, indeed, rise.

Thank you all for your commitment to this goal and for your service to those in need and in crisis. It has been a pleasure to join you and a privilege to salute your efforts. I look forward to working with you all to make even greater progress in strengthening our Drug Courts, our entire justice system, our communities and our great nation.

Thank you.

http://www.justice.gov/ag/speeches/2010/ag-speech-100603.html

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

WASHINGTON – U.S. Border Patrol Agent Eduardo Moreno pleaded guilty today in federal court in Tucson, Ariz., to a federal criminal civil rights charge for assaulting a Mexican national who was in his custody, the Justice Department and the U.S. Attorney's Office for the District of Arizona announced today. Sentencing has been scheduled for Aug. 12, 2010.

The underlying incident occurred on May 10, 2006, while Moreno was on duty at the U.S. Border Patrol Processing Center in Nogales, Ariz. During the plea proceedings and in documents filed in court, Moreno admitted that while escorting the victim at the center, he kicked the victim, struck him in the stomach with a baton, threw him down to ground, and punched him, all without any legitimate law enforcement reason to use force. As a result of the defendant's actions, the victim suffered bodily injury.

"We place a great deal of trust in federal law enforcement officers, and the Civil Rights Division will aggressively prosecute any officer who violates the rights of others and abuses the power they are given to perform their critical duties," said Thomas E. Perez, Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights Division.

Moreno faces a maximum of 10 years in prison and a fine of $250,000. An additional count in the indictment of making a false statement to federal agents will be dismissed under the plea agreement.

This case was investigated by agents of the FBI and the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement's Office of Professional Responsibility. The case is being jointly prosecuted by Assistant U.S. Attorney Sandra Hansen of the U.S. Attorney's Office for the District of Arizona and Trial Attorney Edward Chung of the Civil Rights Division.

http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/2010/June/10-crt-657.html

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

From the FBI

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Two Ohio Residents Arrested for Conspiring to Provide Material Support to Hizballah and Fraud

TOLEDO—Two residents of Toledo, Ohio, Hor I. Akl, age 37, and his spouse, Amera A. Akl, age 37, both of whom are dual citizens of the United States and Lebanon, were arrested today on charges that they conspired to provide material support to a designated foreign terrorist organization, conspired to launder money, and committed arson relating to an insurance fraud scheme. Hor Akl is also charged with two counts of bankruptcy fraud and one count of perjury, U.S. Attorney Steven M. Dettelbach announced today. The Akls were arrested this morning without incident and are expected to make their initial appearance in federal court in Toledo at 3:30 p.m. today .

According to the criminal complaint filed earlier today, from on or about Aug. 30, 2009, to the present, the Akls conspired to provide material support to Hizballah, which was designated by the Secretary of State as a Foreign Terrorist Organization in October 1997, and remains so today. According to the complaint, the Akls agreed to send money to the terrorist organization Hizballah after they were approached by a confidential informant for the FBI who claimed he worked for an anonymous donor eager to support Hizballah. The couple researched and proposed at least ten different ways in which the money could be shipped to Hizballah, the complaint alleges.

The complaint alleges that the Akls ultimately agreed to conceal approximately $500,000 in the hollow sections of a vehicle and to ship the vehicle to Lebanon, where they would remove the cash and give it to Hizballah officials on behalf of the purported anonymous donors in the United States. The Akls expected to receive a fee or commission for arranging the transfer of funds. The complaint alleges that in March 2010, Hor Akl traveled to Lebanon to make arrangements for the delivery of the funds to Hizballah. Akl allegedly returned to the United States claiming that he had met with Hizballah officials.

The complaint further alleges that, during the investigation, the Akls discussed multiple criminal violations in the past, including bulk cash smuggling of large amounts of currency to Lebanon, wire fraud, mail fraud, perjury related to bankruptcy fraud, and concealing property in a bankruptcy proceeding.

According to U.S. Attorney Steven M. Dettelbach, “This case demonstrates our continued commitment to prosecuting those who seek to aid terrorists and terrorist organizations, whether they do so from our backyards, or abroad. Furthermore, those who seek to take illegal advantage of our government, judicial and financial institutions, for their personal benefit or for the benefit of others, will not be ignored.”

C. Frank Figliuzzi, Special Agent in Charge of the Cleveland Division of the Federal Bureau of Investigation said, “Those who willfully work to fund terror with U.S. dollars must understand that the FBI works even harder to ensure that they fail.”

The maximum statutory penalties upon conviction are: for conspiring to provide material support to a Designated Foreign Terrorist Organization, up to 15 years in prison and a fine of $500,000; for money laundering conspiracy, up to 20 years in prison and a fine of $500,000; for each of the offenses of bankruptcy fraud, and perjury, up to 5 years in prison and a fine of $250,000; and for the arson offense, up to 10 years in prison and a fine of $250,000.

This case is being prosecuted by Assistant U.S. Attorneys Justin E. Herdman, Duncan T. Brown and Thomas E. Getz and Trial Attorney S. Elisa Poteat of the National Security Division, Counterterrorism Section, following an investigation by the FBI, through its Joint Terrorism Task Force, in Toledo, Ohio, and the Internal Revenue Service, Criminal Investigation Division.

The public is reminded that a criminal complaint contains mere allegations. Defendants are presumed innocent and are entitled to a fair trial in which it will be the government's burden to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

http://cleveland.fbi.gov/dojpressrel/pressrel10/cl060310a.htm

.