You can purchase through this venue, Amazon.com, most book chains, and in every English speaking country. Several colleges also stock the book for courses including Trident Tech here in Charleston.

You'll have plenty of your own stories soon enough. All you gotta do is show up for work and believe me they'll come.

 

Be safe,

 

Reggie

ATLANTIC CITY, N.J. --

New Jersey's highest court is grappling with one of the thorniest issues facing criminal justice today: what to do in cases where witnesses to a crime have been threatened or intimidated by defendants to the point where they refuse to testify in court.

The issue is a pressing one in areas where intimidation by gang members, drug dealers and other defendants is making potential witnesses afraid they or their loved ones will be harmed or killed if they take the stand.

The state Supreme Court in Trenton heard nearly two hours of arguments Monday on a case that deals with what the state Attorney General's Office calls "the greatest threat" to prosecution in gang, organized crime and domestic violence cases.

The state wants to be allowed let jurors hear the out-of-court statements of witnesses who have been threatened without presenting the witnesses themselves.

But defense lawyers argue that would not be fair to defendants, who have the Constitutional right to confront their accusers in court.

Deputy Attorney General Daniel Bornstein told the court he has read numerous media accounts of witnesses being intimidated or threatened around the state.

"It's gotten so bad that often entire communities are cowed into silence," he said.

Some prosecutor's offices now refuse to prosecute murder cases where there is only one witness, Bornstein said.

The remedy to that is for prosecutors to be allowed to introduce evidence of conversations a witness had with police or investigators outside of court, the state claims.

The case at issue involves a 2001 murder in Trenton.

Dionte Byrd and Freddie Dean Jr. were convicted in 2004 of murdering Charles "Minnesota Fats" Simmons in Simmons' apartment, and sentenced to life in prison with no parole for 30 years.

Helping to convict them was the statement of Kenneth Bush, who told police he rode in a van to Simmons' apartment with Byrd and Dean - both of whom he said were armed - and was smoking crack in the back while they went inside.

Bush said he saw the duo run back to the van and later saw that Byrd had suffered a gunshot wound to the leg. He also said he heard both men discuss the shooting.

Bush refused to testify at trial, claiming he'd been threatened by Byrd and Dean, but the trial court permitted the state to elicit testimony about Bush's statement to police.

An appeals court overturned the convictions in 2007 on the grounds that Bush's statement was improperly admitted into evidence.

Byrd's attorney, Andrew Schneider, told the justices that in their attempt to get the rules changed, prosecutors are using "appeals to fear, anger and revenge - coincidentally the same emotions that get people into trouble."

Many of the justices worried about how to evaluate the reliability of any out-of-court statements that might be sought to be introduced at trials, even as they acknowledged that witness intimidation is a serious problem.

"There are countless cases where a witness gives a statement implicating a person in a crime, and when they get to court, they don't remember anything," said Justice Barry Albin. "There seems to be a climate of fear in certain areas where the witnesses are afraid for their lives to testify in court."

The U.S. Supreme Court allows out-of-court statements to be heard at trial under what is known as the "forfeiture-by-wrongdoing" rule - essentially, that defendants forfeit their Sixth Amendment right to confront a prosecution witness if they wrongfully cause the absence of that witness.

New Jersey's rules of evidence don't include a similar provision, though the state's brief in the Byrd case notes that "at least 31 states and the District of Columbia have adopted the forfeiture rule."

The New Jersey court gave no indication when it might issue a decision.

---

http://www.officer.com/online/article.jsp?siteSection=1&id=44874]]> Tue, 06 Jan 2009 13:24:37 +0000 http://www.texascops.info/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=43091&PID=65271#65271 http://www.texascops.info/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=43090&PID=65270#65270 Author: Cop_Bot
Subject: Suspect Killed Following IL Pursuit
Posted: January 06 2009 at 1:24pm

Suspect Killed Following Illinois Pursuit

Posted: Tuesday, January 6, 2009

Updated: January 6th, 2009 10:03 AM GMT-05:00

>

AP Photo/The Pantagraph, David Proeber

Police handcuff an unidentified man after he was shot by police on an interstate highway in Normal, Ill., Jan. 5.

PT>

The Associated Press

NORMAL, Ill. --

Police say a man suspected of robbing four banks has been shot and killed after leading officers on a high-speed chase in central Illinois.

Authorities say the 57-year-old man robbed a Bloomington currency exchange at gunpoint on Monday and fled, reaching speeds of more than 90 mph as he bolted along interstates and rural highways.

Witnesses say the man jumped out of the vehicle onto Interstate 74 just north of Normal Community West High School. They say the man leaped over a concrete barrier and showed a gun.

That's when the suspect and officers from several jurisdictions exchanged gunfire and he was shot. The gunman was pronounced dead at a hospital.

Police say his description also matched the man accused of four bank robberies and a currency store holdup in December.

---

Copyright 2008 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

http://www.officer.com/online/article.jsp?siteSection=1&id=44875]]> Tue, 06 Jan 2009 13:24:37 +0000 http://www.texascops.info/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=43090&PID=65270#65270