Archive for June 6, 2007
Megan’s Jessica’s Robin’s (?) Law
Jun 6th
Get ready for the next wave of [insert victim's name]‘s Law. Officials in the Upper Bucks borough of PA will urge legislators to pass “Robin’s Law” which is the same as Megan’s Law, except for domestic violence offenders. Yeah. You read that right. Domestic Violence.
To do what? To protect “other people”. Huh? Are we now legislating good dating habits?
Introduced in the state House on May 31, the bill would create a Megan’s Law-style database. Instead of sexual predators though, the picture, address and crime of domestic violence convicts will be posted online for anyone to see, according to a preliminary draft of the bill.If approved, the database would be the direct outgrowth of the Quakertown murder-suicide of June 15, 2004. That day Robin Shaffer was shot to death by her estranged husband, Jeffrey Ogle, at her Quakertown apartment. Ogle then led police on a day-long manhunt that ended when he killed himself beside the train tracks in the borough.
Heidi Markow, Shaffer’s sister, came up with the idea for a domestic violence registry, seeing it as a way to forge something positive from her sister’s death.
Domestic abuse, by definition, refers to those who abuse domestic partners. Y’know, those who are in relationships with other people. How is this a “risk to the community” group?
Also, what is the need for these offenders to register their address? If the goal is to help other women “avoid potentially disastrous relationships by checking, with the click of a mouse, if the new man they’re dating has a history of domestic abuse”, then shouldn’t a name be enough? Why should they have to register?
Oh boy.
Sometimes I feel like the Aflac duck.
(HT: C&C)
Julie Amero granted new trial
Jun 6th
Well, the hearing has concluded and the Norwich Bulletin is reporting that the judge granted defense’s Motion for a New Trial. Her conviction has been set aside and she has entered proforma pleas of not guilty. No date for a further hearing has been set.
State prosecutor David Smith confirmed that further forensic examination at the state crime lab of Amero’s classroom computer revealed “some erroneous information was presented during the trial.
Amero and her defense team claimed she was the victim of pop-up ads — something that was out of her control.
Judge Strackbein said because of the possibility of inaccurate facts, Amero was “entitles to a new trial in the interest of justice.”
After the brief court appearance, a smiling Amero stood next to her attorney.
“I feel very comfortable with the decision,” Amero said.
Dow commended the state for investigating the case further.
A new court date has yet to be scheduled. Amero has reentered a not guilty plea.
If the State agrees with the defense that she should not have been convicted, then they can just drop the charges at a subsequent hearing by entering nolles. Whether that happens remains to be seen. Frankly, I can’t think of any other outcome.
The Courant has more (HT: OTS):
In setting aside the guilty verdict, [Judge] Strackbein ruled that the witness the state presented as a computer expert, a Norwich police detective, provided “erroneous” testimony about the classroom computer.
“The jury may have relied, at least in part, on that false information,” said [Judge] Strackbein.
The judge cited a forensic computer analysis conducted by the state police crime lab – conducted after the guilty verdict – to support the argument that the verdict should be set aside. She said the lab report “contradicts testimony of the state’s computer witness.”
The State would take no position on this Motion today, but did acknowledge that erroneous information about the computer was presented during trial.
recent comments